PAPER
ON HINDUISM
Read at the Parliament on 19th September, 1893
Three
religions now stand in the world which have come down to us from time
prehistoric — Hinduism, Zoroastrianism and Judaism. They have
all received tremendous shocks and all of them prove by their survival
their internal strength. But while Judaism failed to absorb Christianity
and was driven out of its place of birth by its all-conquering daughter,
and a handful of Parsees is all that remains to tell the tale of their
grand religion, sect after sect arose in India and seemed to shake the
religion of the Vedas to its very foundations, but like the waters of
the seashore in a tremendous earthquake it receded only for a while,
only to return in an all-absorbing flood, a thousand times more
vigorous, and when the tumult of the rush was over, these sects were all
sucked in, absorbed, and assimilated into the immense body of the mother
faith.
From the high spiritual flights of the Vedanta philosophy, of which the
latest discoveries of science seem like echoes, to the low ideas of
idolatry with its multifarious mythology, the agnosticism of the
Buddhists, and the atheism of the Jains, each and all have a place in
the Hindu's religion.
Where then, the question arises, where is the common centre to which all
these widely diverging radii converge? Where is the common basis upon
which all these seemingly hopeless contradictions rest? And this is the
question I shall attempt to answer.
The Hindus have received their religion through revelation, the Vedas.
They hold that the Vedas are without beginning and without end. It may
sound ludicrous to this audience, how a book can be without beginning or
end. But by the Vedas no books are meant. They mean the accumulated
treasury of spiritual laws discovered
by
different persons in different times. Just as the law of gravitation
existed before its discovery, and would exist if all humanity forgot it,
so is it with the laws that govern the spiritual world. The moral,
ethical, and spiritual relations between soul and soul and between
individual spirits and the Father of all spirits, were there before
their discovery, and would remain even if we forgot them.
The discoverers of
these laws are called Rishis, and we honour them as perfected beings. I
am glad to tell this audience that some of the very greatest of them
were women. Here it may be said that these laws as laws may be without
end, but they must have had a beginning. The Vedas teach us that
creation is without beginning or end. Science is said to have proved
that the sum total of cosmic energy is always the same. Then, if there
was a time when nothing existed, where was all this manifested energy?
Some say it was in a potential form in God. In that case God is
sometimes potential and sometimes kinetic, which would make Him mutable.
Everything mutable is a compound, and everything compound must undergo
that change which is called destruction. So God would die, which is
absurd. Therefore there never was a time when there was no creation.
If I may be allowed to use a simile, creation and creator are two
lines, without beginning and without end, running parallel to each
other. God is the ever active providence, by whose power systems after
systems are being evolved out of chaos, made to run for a time and again
destroyed. This is what the Brâhmin boy repeats every day: "The
sun and the moon, the Lord created like the suns and moons of previous
cycles." And this agrees with modern science.
Here I stand and if I shut my eyes, and try to conceive my existence,
"I", "I", "I", what is the idea before me?
The idea of a body. Am I, then, nothing but a combination of
material substances? The Vedas declare,
nor
the moon, nor the stars, the lightning cannot express Him, nor what we
speak of as fire; through Him they shine." But he does not
abuse any one's idol or call its worship sin. He recognises in it a
necessary stage of life. "The child is father of the man."
Would it be right for an old man to say that childhood is a sin or youth
a sin?
If
a man can realise his divine nature with the help of an image, would it
be right to call that a sin? Nor even when he has passed that stage,
should he call it an error. To the Hindu, man is not travelling from
error to truth, but from truth to truth, from lower to higher truth. To
him all the religions, from the lowest fetishism to the highest
absolutism, mean so many attempts of the human soul to grasp and realise
the Infinite, each determined by the conditions of its birth and
association, and each of these marks a stage of progress; and every soul
is a young eagle soaring higher and higher, gathering more and more
strength, till it reaches the Glorious Sun.
Unity in variety is the plan of nature, and the Hindu has recognised it.
Every other religion lays down certain fixed dogmas, and tries to force
society to adopt them. It places before society only one coat which must
fit Jack and John and Henry, all alike. If it does not fit John or
Henry, he must go without a coat to cover his body. The Hindus have
discovered that the absolute can only be realised, or thought of, or
stated, through the relative, and the images, crosses, and crescents are
simply so many symbols — so many pegs to hang the spiritual ideas on.
It is not that this help is necessary for every one, but those that do
not need it have no right to say that it is wrong. Nor is it compulsory
in Hinduism.
One thing I must tell you. Idolatry in India does not mean anything
horrible. It is not the mother of harlots. On the other hand, it is the
attempt of