Home : About Us : Leader Bios : Adhitin Ratrija

Adhitin Ratrija

(Adhitin Ratrija has been a member of ADF since 1998 and is the Director of Aus Dhwer, the Eastern Indo-European Kin in ADF. This interview was originally published in Oak Leaves 27.)

Oak Leaves: How did you come to polytheism?

Adhitin Ratrija: Like so many others, I was raised as your standard garden-variety Protestant. In early adolescence—as many people do—I started questioning the various philosophies I'd always taken for granted. Thus, I began examining religions outside Christianity.

After a while, I started to feel a very strong affinity for Zen, and spent many years after focusing on Ch'an Buddhism (the Chinese precursor to Zen). The Ch'an form of Buddhism focussed its energy for centuries expounding and developing many of the more epistemological philosophies of Mahayana Buddhism. However, it did not yet encompass the ceremonial or martial aspects that later were to be incorporated into Zen by the Japanese.

The Ch'an philosophies, while important, do have a tendency to become more a way of explaining reality than an actual religion, though. Indeed, many of those philosophies are compatible with almost any religion, and it is hard for me to view them as a religion in itself. I finally came to that conclusion while in university. It seemed to me then that I had a very detailed view of the way reality did, or could, work. I didn't feel this in itself was a religion, however, and for a long time after I termed myself as an Agnostic.

Being a 'hardcore' Agnostic really isn't really much fun, though. I mean, how many times can you nullify a religious argument with a statement such as: "I don't know. You don't know. Nobody really knows until they're dead. And those people aren't talking." After several years of beating that drum, I was really starting to get tedious.

Long before, I had learned that it was possible to literally negate everything from one's belief system. In fact, at the time I was practically living in a somewhat 'tabula rasa' state. I had invalidated nearly every one of my core beliefs, and had steadfastly refused to replace them with anything concrete whatsoever. Eventually, I made the conscious choice that I wanted to start replacing some of them with things that I could actually believe in.

I had always had an interest in the esoteric, and it felt comfortable to begin dabbling with things along those lines again. Eventually, I drifted toward Ceremonial Magic. In particular, I found myself practicing a lot within the Enochian tradition, after having picked up the Schuller books and some translations of John Dee's original manuscripts. Eventually, I flashed onto Chaos Magic, and went on to do a nice bit of work using those techniques. One of the techniques in Chaos Magic is for one to "try on" different belief systems. The nice thing about that particular technique is that it validates the concept that we are in control of what we choose to believe.

At that time I found myself drawn somewhat to traditional Paganism. This was because it was much more visceral, and, rather than merely being a school of philosophical thought, it actually felt like a system of beliefs. The mind can play games with philosophy and logic for years on end. After all, the brain secretes thought in the same manner that any other gland secretes vital fluids. But, eventually, you've got to give the heart equal time.

As a result, I spent some brief time studying Wicca—merely because it was the most common form of modern Pagan religion that I tripped over. I felt absolutely no affinity for that religion, though. I still don't, for what it's worth, so I abandoned that path pretty quickly. Afterwards, I drifted toward "true" polytheism, Druidry, and eventually I discovered Vedism.

OL: Could you briefly explain what Vedism is?

Vedism is the religion practiced by the ancient Indo-European peoples who moved East into the areas which are now Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Northern India around 2000-1700 BCE. It was a religion that flourished in the area for almost two thousand years, and later spawned off other offshoot religions such as Buddhism, Jainism, and Sanatana Dharma (better known as Hinduism). Eventually, starting around 200 BCE, it was supplanted and finally wiped out by Hinduism. Today, it is practiced as a living religion only by a handful of reconstructionists.

OL: When did you first discover ADF?

I discovered ADF via its web presence, while I was doing research on Druidry in general. There were a couple of the core tenets that really struck a chord with me. In particular, I was impressed by the fact that ADF embraces belief in "true" polytheism—that the Gods are each real and distinct, rather than just a manifestation of some other power. I was also attracted to the fact that it's focused on reconstructing the beliefs of all the various Indo-European cultures, not just the Celts.

OL: What is it that you currently do in ADF?

Currently, I am Director of Aus Dhwer, ADF's Eastern Kin. We're committed on focussing attention on the IE cultures that moved East from the Proto-Indo-European homeland into the Middle East and Asia. This includes the Indo-Aryans, or Vedics, as well as the Indo- Iranians, Hittites, and Anatolians, amongst others, and some smaller cultures about which we know very little, like the Tocharians.

OL: What goals do you wish to accomplish within this position?

We're there to act as a resource for anyone interested in those cultures. We provide information for those who might feel a calling to the worship of those Gods, as well as a community with which to network. We also act as a sort of 'reality check' within ADF as a whole, in respect to making certain that our religion is backed up by sound scholarship. For instance, we make certain that Hindu or other non-IE Gods are not being passed off as Indo- European.

We have also passed members through the Dedicant Program in order to establish areas of the program which could possibly be considered contrary—or even insulting—to those practicing the faith of the Eastern Indo-Europeans. In the future, our goal is to work with the Preceptor to compose alternate versions of the DP specifically for those following an Eastern IE path.

On a larger scale, we participate within ADF's system of Kins. For instance, the Cape Cod Accords outlined a process by which individuals and groves could be certified to practice in a manner much closer to that practiced by the actual original cultures within ADF. This is something that all the Kins should be championing.

While the Kin system itself is a bit fragmented right now, it's my belief that we should still be offering up our support to anyone who wishes to worship as the ancients did. I think the Kins in general, and Aus Dhwer in particular, can be extremely valuable in disseminating scholarly information to the membership of as a whole, as well as making certain that all individuals feel they have a place within ADF.

OL: We have established that Vedism is not the same thing as Hinduism in the previous issue of Oak Leaves. Why is it that you are Vedic as opposed to being a follower of one of the various Hindu faiths?

In displacing Vedism, the Hindus discarded some very core beliefs that are extremely important to me. First, Hinduism is monistic, believing that all Gods are merely aspects or incarnations of a single "God." Instead, I am a polytheist, and believe that each God exists and is distinct all upon their own. Next, Hinduism is centered around the individual, whereas Vedism is very community-focused.

Also, Hinduism is judgmental, locking one into a wheel of reincarnated lifetimes based on the supposed value of their actions in each life. In Vedism, one's actions are judged primarily by the reaction they bring directly, not by an elusive moral code which is tallied up in the afterlife.

Finally, I have been to India myself. The Vedics were supposedly supplanted and replaced because they had become corrupted by two millennia of power. Yet the Hindu priests I saw were every bit as corrupt as the Vedics they replaced two thousand years before. Why should I take up a religion that is as rotted now as any of which it is supposed to be the better?

OL: What is it that you do in your own personal practices?

I try to be as faithful to history in my own personal practices as is possible in a modern context. We cannot maintain a full firepit for our daily oblations, for example, in an urban apartment; however, we can still perform those oblations in a slightly modified form. We regularly give homage to Vastos Pati, the protector of the home, and my wife performs daily Agnihotra rituals for the household, just as the Vedics themselves did. We celebrate the seasons of our land, and the cycles of the Earth.

We try to emulate those ancient practices as best as we possibly can. Of course, it's tough when some of the Vedic rituals require four Priests at a minimum, plus their assistants, plus about a year to complete the rite, and a horse, and an army to follow it around the entire time.... While rituals like the Asvamedha—or Horse Sacrifice—aren't performed very often at all, they still give you some idea how complex these rituals can become. A

As I mentioned before, many of the tenets of my religion are ones that I have intentionally chosen. One of these is that the Gods—my Gods, at least, since I can't really speak for anyone else's—are inherently good and worthy of worship. If I accept that tenet, then I must accept that ritual and praise in their honor is a worthwhile act, without consideration of any other consequence that may come as a result of that act. As go the Gods, so goes the act which honors them.

That is the essence of Faith: you trust that your fate rests in the hands of Gods that are, in their own manner, benevolent. Why bother with worship at all then, if the Gods are indeed kind? Because that act itself is also right and well; because it helps maintain Rta, or the order of the universe.

It's my thought that the "gift for a gift" metaphor is based in human society, rather than the conceptions of the Gods. It began more or less as a courtesy custom between some of our ancestors. In relation to keeping people civil, it does have value.

But also viable is the concept that this custom is based even more in our own modern society. Here in the United States, we currently exist in one of the most unabashedly hyper-Capitalist states the world has ever known. Every item and act is inherently reduced to a transaction. Each gesture or deed is judged and valued solely in relation to what return we receive from them. We have been so indoctrinated into this model that we are no longer even consciously aware of it. Soap is sold, marriages are counseled, counseled, and Gods are worshipped solely based on terms of barter: "What is it worth to me?"

This value-system is ingrained into our modern character. We emulate this in our religion, and frequently reduce our worship to a mere utilitarian device. We pay the Gods, and they deliver on our payment. This is no longer an act of Faith or Love. This is a transaction, an insurance policy. And it's at that point that I have to ask if such an outlook is really worthy of everything to which we aspire the Gods to be. Is it even worthy of what we ourselves aspire to be? While pleading our case to the Gods does have its proper time and place, it sometimes seems as if that is all modern religion has become.

Some would state that there can be no Yin without a Yang, but I would likewise argue that we ourselves are the ones who define 'Yin' and 'Yang' to begin with. They can be whatever we want them to be, or they can be nothing at all.

So, in this environment, does that make me a heretic that I wish to offer up a "gift" with no expectation, or even a concern, for anything whatsoever in return? Would rather I be Yin, erasing Yang?

OL: What exactly is a Brahmin?

A Brahmin is a type of Vedic Priest.

OL: How does a Brahmin differ from a brahmin, Brahman, Brahmanas and Brahma?

Well, in particular, the Brahmin is the head priest during Vedic ritual. There are four priests in total: the Brahmin, the Advarhyu, the Hotr, and the Udgatr. It is the role of the Brahmin to preside over the other three, and to make up for any shortcomings that may arise in the course of the ritual.

A brahmin (with a small 'b') is merely a generic term for any Vedic priest.

And Brahman is the term that Hindus use to refer to the one monistic power from which all others derive their existence. You can think of Brahman as the Hindu name for God.

The Brahmanas are a set of texts that provide commentary on the Vedas. They act somewhat like extra instructions for the verses set forth in those four holy books.

Finally, Brahma is the name of a Hindu God which is one portion of a Hindu concept known as Trimurti. In this construct, Brahma is the creator, Vishnu the sustainer, and Siva the destroyer. However, this is a wholly Hindu creation. Neither Brahma nor Siva are ever found in the Vedas, and are not Vedic in the least. They were created after Sanatana Dharma had supplanted Vedism. And while Vishnu is indeed found in the Vedas, he is so different from the Hindu conception as to be a completely different God which merely bears the same name.

OL: In the past, people have questioned what authority you have to use the term Brahmin. What response do you normally give?

Well, the quick answer is that I'm practicing a religion that died two thousand years ago. If I don't have the authority to use the term, I don't know anyone alive who could possibly bestow it upon me.

Many 'gurus' would have you believe that it is impossible to obtain any sort of meaningful insight without outside help. Unfortunately, in a majority of these cases, what they're usually referring to is their personal help, and what they're usually asking in return is most of the contents of your wallet.

Altruistic or otherwise, I think the argument these individuals bring up gets back to the question of whether one can actually be 'self-taught'. For example, during the first millennia, Chinese monks wrestled with this same question, and referred to it as the problem of 'Transmission of Mind'. Essentially, how does one teach the unteachable, or something which may only be experienced individually?

They developed two differing schools of thought on the subject. The Northern School overcame this problem by composing a complicated set of teachings that culminated in a single act at a single extremely-well-timed moment. This one act at this precise moment was designed to push the student over the threshold, where he could experience for himself that which could not be taught. The Northern School obviously relied heavily on the teacher to monitor and guide the student, and to pick the particular moment when years of teaching would finally reach its culmination.

The Southern School, however, believed that this teaching was a gradual process. The teaching built upon itself, and eventually resulted in a series of smaller revelations. In other words, it relied upon constructing an environment and making the information available to the student. Each student would reach the culmination of the teachings at their own pace, and that culmination would be an ongoing process rather than a single stroke.

Bringing this back to the subject at hand, while both Schools relied upon teachers to guide the student, the Northern School made the teacher indispensable. This would roughly match the 'guru' philosophy which claims that it is impossible for one to be taught without a human guide. I reject this philosophy as absolutist. Rather, the history of the Southern School shows that it is possible for one to gradually collect all the 'puzzle pieces' and put them together on their own.

So, in my belief, given the right source material and a lot of persistence, it is absolutely possible for one to be selftaught. This form of transmission is every bit as valid as one would receive from a guru or 'lineage'.

OL: What advice would you give to an individual new to Vedism?

First, learn the source material. Start looking for complete translations of the four Vedas: the Rg Veda, the Sama Veda, the Yajur Veda, and the Atharva Veda. I'm not saying you have to go through every one of them first thing, but it's going to take a bit of time to actually track down good and complete translations of each of these. If you start early, you might actually have them all in hand by the time you're really ready to use them. Look for names like Macdonnell, Keith, Whitney, or Griffith.

Next, grab a copy of A. A. Macdonnell's, Vedic Mythology and A. B. Keith's, The Religion of the Veda and the Upanisads. Those should get you a firm footing to build from.

At the outset, be suspicious of books written by authors from South Asia, in particular India and Pakistan. The reason for this is that literally 99% of the Indian authors out there are Hindu and write from a Hindu—rather than Vedic—perspective. Thus, you're probably already dealing with tainted source material, and you probably don't yet know enough to filter the Vedic teachings out from what the Hindus later twisted them into. Similarly, stay away from the Wendy Doniger O'Flaherty version of the Rg Veda from Penguin books, unless you're merely a dilettante looking for pretty words to add to a ritual. And, for the record, there actually are some very good South Asian authors out there, but as a beginner you won't yet be able to distinguish them from the huge amount of dross that's been published.

It's unfortunate, but the best translations you'll run into predominantly come from stodgy Western anthropologists or linguists who lived almost a hundred years ago, and those who later built on their work. Why is that? Because these men were academics merely trying to translate the words on the page. They're not trying to interpret the material, nor force it into a religious paradigm based on two thousand years of Sanatana Dharma baggage. As human beings go they're not perfect, but they are about as neutral a source as you're likely to find.

Finally, keep in mind that many followers of Hinduism frequently refer to themselves using the term 'Vedic'. They often appropriate the term because it gives them the appearance of a heritage dating back another two millennia older than their religion would be otherwise. These particular followers like to claim their religion as being almost 5000 years old, when in fact it is only a couple hundred years older than Christianity. Just because they attempt to use the term, however, it does not mean they're actually Vedic.

OL: What is the one thing you wish everyone knew about Vedism?

These Gods are real. They're real and they're still out there, but for the most part they've been buried, discarded, or malformed by the religions that replaced them. They are still there, however. They're beautiful, they're powerful, and they're merely waiting for us to rediscover them.

OL: How do you balance your religion with the rest of your life?

In this respect, I agree with the Sufis. They teach that while one is learning and practicing their religion, it is still essential for them to be a part of the world-at-large. Shutting oneself away "on a mountaintop" only serves to separate them from the world in which they must ultimately exist. This denies the reality and—in some sense—the vitality of everyday life. It shuts one's religion away into a single compartment of one's life, a box. This, when religion should be as normal and commonplace as breathing. Rather, religion should express itself transparently with every casual motion of the individual...in every footstep, every sigh, every laugh.

OL: How do your beliefs work within ADF?

Unfortunately, they can be sometimes be a bit of a rough fit. There are a lot of differences from the standard ADF paradigms. For instance, there is no analog to the "Well, Tree, Fire" construct. In Vedism, it's more of a "Fire, Fire, Fire" situation. Agni, God of Fire, is the messenger—or portal, if you will—to Heaven, the Realm of the Gods. That much is the same with ADF ritual. However, there is no Vedic Underworld and the Ancestors reside in Heaven with the Gods. So the Well is meaningless, as the Fire also fulfills that function. Likewise, there is no Axis Mundi supporting the three Realms, so that negates most of the Tree's function.

In fact, while there are three Realms present in Vedism they are re-ordered. Standard ADF cosmology consists of an Underworld at the bottom, with the Earthly plane above, and finally ascending to the Realm of the Gods at the top. Instead, Vedism places our Terrestrial Plane at the bottom. As one ascends, the next plane is the Atmosphere—the space the sky inhabits between the Earth and Heaven. Finally, just as one expects, Heaven is the highest Realm, where many of the Gods as well as the Ancestors make their home.

For ritual, the Vedic paradigms just don't work within the ADF Standard Ritual—there are just too many differences. However, for all the small differences, the Vedics did come from the same roots as the other IE people. As a result, we find that if one tosses the Standard Ritual and instead goes back to the individual elements presented in the ADF Standard Outline, it is possible to compose a liturgy that is satisfying to ADF while still maintaining the integrity of the Vedic belief system. It's not an easy job, but, for a great part, it is possible to reconcile the Vedic beliefs within ADF ritual if one strips down the structure far enough.

OL: You are hosting an Eastern Indo-European conference in October. Why did you decide to do this and what do you hope to accomplish with it?

The conference you're speaking of is Walking With Fire, and detailed information can be found at www.walkingwithfire.org. What we wanted to do was to generate interest in the Eastern IE cultures accepted within ADF.

The format we chose was more like what you would find in an academic colloquium, rather than the typical festival atmosphere in which you find most ADF events. We did this for a few reasons. For instance, we knew the target audience was going to be more focused than something aimed at all levels of the entire ADF membership.

Since we knew attendee interest was going to be limited, this gave us an excuse to use a much more intimate environment. This seminar is occurring in a conference facility next to the Catskill Mountains in New York State, rather than a camping environment. We've also intentionally limited the number of attendees so that we could create a more intimate atmosphere. We wanted to bring ADF's scholars together in an environment where they felt comfortable discussing this aspect of our religion face-to-face. It gives us three days during which these individuals have the opportunity to focus specifically on these cultures in a comfortable environment, without the typical distractions you find at most ADF gatherings.

Aus Dhwer is doing this in collaboration with ADF's Slavic Kin, as well as the Order of the Perfumed Scorpion, a Vedic Reconstructionist organization which I also helped found. Of course, we're not screening the attendees, so anyone—ADF or otherwise—with any interest in the subject is welcome to attend.

OL: Do you recall your first ADF ritual?

Yes. It was the first public Beltaine ritual in which I participated, with Little Acorn Grove in Virginia.

OL: What was it like for you?

Interesting. I was moving from practicing solitary magical experiments to actually functioning in a group setting. At the same time, I was intentionally turning loose of the cerebral (i.e. constructing a magical system and testing it) and embracing the visceral (giving up personal control to the group dynamic, and seeing where that ride would lead). While I typically have a tough time feeling anything from stock ADF rituals, the individuals participating in this one made it hard not to get caught up in the spirit of it. I guess you could say that the enthusiasm was infectious, which was a little different than most of the workings I'd done up to that point.

OL: What do you see as your greatest accomplishment, thus far, as a member of ADF?

Helping to bring an entire set of cultures to light which were previously underrepresented within the organization.

OL: What would you advise people to do in order to see the ADF community in action?

Simple: start. To a great extent, there is some truth in that old phrase, "it's easier to ask for forgiveness than permission." ADF does have a tendency to tie any idea up in endless discussion, not to mention inter-organizational politics. In fact, we've often been criticized of having too many leaders. For some reason, ADF tends to attract a lot of people with the burning desire to lead. However, what it really requires are people who are willing to simply roll up their sleeves and do what's needed for the best of all in the organization.

If you have an idea which you know in your heart is good for everyone, then start implementing it. There will be plenty of time for talk about it later (and, trust me, there will be plenty of talk). Don't let discussion paralyze a good initiative. Get to work.

OL: What is your fondest memory of an ADF event?

The morning I crawled out of my tent at ADF's encampment during Starwood, and stood face-to-face for the first time being introduced to the woman who would later become my wife.

Home : About Us : Leader Bios : Adhitin Ratrija

© 2008 Ár nDraíocht Féin: A Druid Fellowship, Inc.
Contact / Donate / Privacy / Legal / Updates