There
is a word which has become very common as an appellation of our race and
our religion. The word "Hindu" requires a little explanation in
connection with what I mean by Vedantism. This word "Hindu" was
the name that the ancient Persians used to apply to the river Sindhu.
Whenever in Sanskrit there is an "s", in ancient Persian it
changes into "h", so that "Sindhu" became
"Hindu"; and you are all aware how the Greeks found it hard to
pronounce "h" and dropped it altogether, so that we became known
as Indians. Now this word "Hindu" as applied to the inhabitants
of the other side of the Indus, whatever might have been its meaning in
ancient times has lost all its force in modern times; for all the people
that live on this side of the Indus no longer belong to one religion.
There are the Hindus proper, the Mohammedans, the Parsees, the Christians,
the Buddhists, and Jains. The word "Hindu" in its literal sense
ought to include all these; but as signifying the religion, it would not
be proper to call all these Hindus. It is very hard, therefore, to find
any common name for our religion, seeing that this religion is a
collection, so to speak, of various religions, of various ideas, of
various ceremonials and forms, all gathered together almost without a
name, and without a church, and without an organisation. The only point
where, perhaps, all our sects agree is that we all believe in the
scriptures — the Vedas. This perhaps is certain that no man can have a
right to be called a Hindu who does not admit the supreme authority of the
Vedas. All these Vedas, as you are aware, are divided into two portions
— the Karma Kânda and the Jnâna Kânda. The Karma Kanda includes
hardly
be found in the Shrutis. On the other hand, other schools take refuge more
and more in the Smritis and less and less in the Shrutis; and as we go to
the more and more dualistic sects, we find a proportionate quantity of the
Smritis quoted, which is out of all proportion to what we should expect
from a Vedantist. It is, perhaps, because these gave such predominance to
the Paurânika authorities that the Advaitist came to be considered as the
Vedantist par excellence, if I may say so.
However it might
have been, the word Vedanta must cover the whole ground of Indian
religious life, and being part of the Vedas, by all acceptance it is the
most ancient literature that we have; for whatever might be the idea of
modern scholars, the Hindus are not ready to admit that parts of the Vedas
were written at one time and parts were written at another time. They of
course still hold on to their belief that the Vedas as a whole were
produced at the same time, rather if I may say so, that they were never
produced, but that they always existed in the mind of the Lord. This is
what I mean by the word Vedanta, that it covers the ground of dualism, of
qualified monism, and Advaitism in India. Perhaps we may even take in
parts of Buddhism, and of Jainism too, if they would come in — for our
hearts are sufficiently large. But it is they that will not come in, we
are ready for upon severe analysis you will always find that the essence
of Buddhism was all borrowed from the same Upanishads; even the ethics,
the so-called great and wonderful ethics of Buddhism, were there word for
word, in some one or other of the Upanishads; and so all the good
doctrines of the Jains were there, minus their vagaries. In the
Upanishads, also, we find the germs of all the subsequent development of
Indian religious thought. Sometimes it has been urged without any ground
whatsoever that there is no ideal of Bhakti in the Upanishads. Those that
have been students of the Upanishads know
that
that is not true at all. There is enough of Bhakti in every Upanishad if
you will only seek for it; but many of these ideas which are found so
fully developed in later times in the Puranas and other Smritis are only
in the germ in the Upanishads. The sketch, the skeleton, was there as it
were. It was filled in in some of the Puranas. But there is not one
full-grown Indian ideal that cannot be traced back to the same source —
the Upanishads. Certain ludicrous attempts have been made by persons
without much Upanishadic scholarship to trace Bhakti to some foreign
source; but as you know, these have all been proved to be failures, and
all that you want of Bhakti is there, even in the Samhitas, not to speak
of the Upanishads — it is there, worship and love and all the rest of
it; only the ideals of Bhakti are becoming higher and higher. In the
Samhita portions, now and then, you find traces of a religion of fear and
tribulation; in the Samhitas now and then you find a worshipper quaking
before a Varuna, or some other god. Now and then you will find they are
very much tortured by the idea of sin, but the Upanishads have no place
for the delineation of these things. There is no religion of fear in the
Upanishads; it is one of Love and one of Knowledge.
These Upanishads are
our scriptures. They have been differently explained, and, as I have told
you already, whenever there is a difference between subsequent Pauranika
literature and the Vedas, the Puranas must give way. But it is at the same
time true that, as a practical result, we find ourselves ninety per cent
Pauranika and ten per cent Vaidika — even if so much as that. And we all
find the most contradictory usages prevailing in our midst and also
religious opinions prevailing in our society which scarcely have any
authority in the scriptures of the Hindus; and in many cases we read in
books, and see with astonishment, customs of the country that neither have
their authority in the Vedas nor in the Smritis or
less
mass of confusion which we call our religion. Otherwise it could not have
stood so long, it could not have endured so long.
Coming to our
commentators again, we find another difficulty. The Advaitic commentator,
whenever an Advaitic text comes, preserves it just as it is; but the same
commentator, as soon as a dualistic text presents itself, tortures it if
he can, and brings the most queer meaning out of it. Sometimes the
"Unborn" becomes a "goat", such are the wonderful
changes effected. To suit the commentator, "Ajâ" the Unborn is
explained as "Aja" a she-goat. In the same way, if not in a
still worse fashion, the texts are handled by the dualistic commentator.
Every dualistic text is preserved, and every text that speaks of
non-dualistic philosophy is tortured in any fashion he likes. This
Sanskrit language is so intricate, the Sanskrit of the Vedas is so
ancient, and the Sanskrit philology so perfect, that any amount of
discussion can be carried on for ages in regard to the meaning of one
word. If a Pandit takes it into his head, he can render anybody's prattle
into correct Sanskrit by force of argument and quotation of texts and
rules. These are the difficulties in our way of understanding the
Upanishads. It was given to me to live with a man who was as ardent a
dualist, as ardent an Advaitist, as ardent a Bhakta, as a Jnani. And
living with this man first put it into my head to understand the
Upanishads and the texts of the scriptures from an independent and better
basis than by blindly following the commentators; and in my opinion and in
my researches, I came to the conclusion that these texts are not at all
contradictory. So we need have no fear of text-torturing at all! The texts
are beautiful, ay, they are most wonderful; and they are not
contradictory, but wonderfully harmonious, one idea leading up to the
other. But the one fact I found is that in all the Upanishads, they begin
with dualistic ideas, with worship
and
all that, and end with a grand flourish of Advaitic ideas.
Therefore I now find
in the light of this man's life that the dualist and the Advaitist need
not fight each other. Each has a place, and a great place in the national
life. The dualist must remain, for he is as much part and parcel of the
national religious life as the Advaitist. One cannot exist without the
other; one is the fulfilment of the other; one is the building, the other
is the top; the one the root, the other the fruit, and so on. Therefore
any attempt to torture the texts of the Upanishads appears to me very
ridiculous. I begin to find out that the language is wonderful. Apart from
all its merits as the greatest philosophy, apart from its wonderful merit
as theology, as showing the path of salvation to mankind, the Upanishadic
literature is the most wonderful painting of sublimity that the world has.
Here comes out in full force that individuality of the human mind, that
introspective, intuitive Hindu mind. We have paintings of sublimity
elsewhere in all nations, but almost without exception you will find that
their ideal is to grasp the sublime in the muscles. Take for instance,
Milton, Dante, Homer, or any of the Western poets. There are wonderfully
sublime passages in them; but there it is always a grasping at infinity
through the senses, the muscles, getting the ideal of infinite expansion,
the infinite of space. We find the same attempts made in the Samhita
portion. You know some of those wonderful Riks where creation is
described; the very heights of expression of the sublime in expansion and
the infinite in space are attained. But they found out very soon that the
Infinite cannot be reached in that way, that even infinite space, and
expansion, and infinite external nature could not express the ideas that
were struggling to find expression in their minds, and so they fell back
upon other explanations. The language became new in the Upanishads; it is
almost negative, it is some
times,
chaotic, sometimes taking you beyond the senses, pointing out to you
something which you cannot grasp, which you cannot sense, and at the same
time you feel certain that it is there. What passage in the world can
compare with this? —

— There the sun
cannot illumine, nor the moon nor the stars, the flash of lightning cannot
illumine the place, what to speak of this mortal fire." Again, where
can you find a more perfect expression of the whole philosophy of the
world, the gist of what the Hindus ever thought, the whole dream of human
salvation, painted in language more wonderful, in figure more marvellous
than this?

Upon the same tree
there are two birds of beautiful plumage, most friendly to each other, one
eating the fruits, the other sitting there calm and silent without eating
— the one on the lower branch eating sweet and bitter fruits in turn and
becoming happy and unhappy, but the other one on the top, calm and
majestic; he eats neither sweet nor bitter fruits, cares neither for
happiness nor misery, immersed in his own glory. This is the picture of
the human soul. Man is eating the sweet and bitter fruits of this life,
pursuing gold, pursuing his senses, pursuing the vanities of life —
hopelessly, madly careering he goes. In other places the Upanishads have
compared the human soul to the charioteer, and the senses to the mad
horses unrestrained. Such is the career of men pursuing the vanities of
life, children dreaming golden dreams only to find that they are but vain,
and old men chewing the cud of their past deeds, and yet not knowing how
to get out of this network. This is the world. Yet in the life of every
one there come golden moments; in the midst of the deepest sorrows,
nay,
of the deepest joys, there come moments when a part of the cloud that
hides the sunlight moves away as it were, and we catch a glimpse, in spite
of ourselves of something beyond — away, away beyond the life of the
senses; away, away beyond its vanities, its joys, and its sorrows; away,
away beyond nature, or our imaginations of happiness here or hereafter;
away beyond all thirst for gold, or for fame, or for name, or for
posterity. Man stops for a moment at this glimpse and sees the other bird
calm and majestic, eating neither sweet nor bitter fruits, but immersed in
his own glory, Self-content, Self-satisfied. As the Gita says,

— "He whose
devotion is to the Atman, he who does not want anything beyond Atman, he
who has become satisfied in the Atman, what work is there for him to
do?" Why should he drudge? Man catches a glimpse, then again he
forgets and goes on eating the sweet and bitter fruits of life; perhaps
after a time he catches another glimpse, and the lower bird goes nearer
and nearer to the higher bird as blows after blows are received. If he be
fortunate to receive hard knocks, then he comes nearer and nearer to his
companion, the other bird, his life, his friend; and as he approaches him,
he finds that the light from the higher bird is playing round his own
plumage; and as he comes nearer and nearer, lo! the transformation is
going on. The nearer and nearer he comes, he finds himself melting away,
as it were, until he has entirely disappeared. He did not really exist; it
was but the reflection of the other bird who was there calm and majestic
amidst the moving leaves. It was all his glory, that upper bird's. He then
becomes fearless, perfectly satisfied, calmly serene. In this figure, the
Upanishads take you from the dualistic to the utmost Advaitic conception.
Endless examples can
be cited, but we have no time in this lecture to do that or to show the
marvellous poetry
of
the Upanishads, the painting of the sublime, the grand conceptions. But
one other idea I must note, that the language and the thought and
everything come direct, they fall upon you like a sword-blade, strong as
the blows of a hammer they come. There is no mistaking their meanings.
Every tone of that music is firm and produces its full effect; no
gyrations, no mad words, no intricacies in which the brain is lost. No
signs of degradation are there — no attempts at too much allegorising,
too much piling of adjectives after adjectives, making it more and more
intricate, till the whole of the sense is lost, and the brain becomes
giddy, and man does not know his way out from the maze of that literature.
There was none of that yet. If it be human literature, it must be the
production of a race which had not yet lost any of its national vigour.
Strength, strength
is what the Upanishads speak to me from every page. This is the one great
thing to remember, it has been the one great lesson I have been taught in
my life; strength, it says, strength, O man, be not weak. Are there no
human weaknesses? — says man. There are, say the Upanishads, but will
more weakness heal them, would you try to wash dirt with dirt? Will sin
cure sin, weakness cure weakness? Strength, O man, strength, say the
Upanishads, stand up and be strong. Ay, it is the only literature in the
world where you find the word "Abhih", "fearless",
used again and again; in no other scripture in the world is this adjective
applied either to God or to man. Abhih, fearless! And in my mind rises
from the past the vision of the great Emperor of the West, Alexander the
Great, and I see, as it were in a picture, the great monarch standing on
the bank of the Indus, talking to one of our Sannyâsins in the forest;
the old man he was talking to, perhaps naked, stark naked, sitting upon a
block of stone, and the Emperor, astonished at his wisdom, tempting him
with gold and honour to come over to Greece. And this man smiles at his
gold, and smiles at his temptations, and
the
modern law? The modern law says, the body itself is healthy; it cures
diseases of its own nature. Medicine can at the best but help the storing
up of the best in the body. What says it of criminals? It takes for
granted that however low a criminal may be, there is still the divinity
within, which does not change, and we must treat criminals accordingly.
All these things are now changing, and reformatories and penitentiaries
are established. So with everything. Consciously or unconsciously that
Indian idea of the divinity within every one is expressing itself even in
other countries. And in your books is the explanation which other nations
have to accept. The treatment of one man to another will be entirely
revolutionized, and these old, old ideas of pointing to the weakness of
mankind will have to go. They will have received their death-blow within
this century. Now people may stand up and criticise us. I have been
criticised, from one end of the world to the other, as one who preaches
the diabolical idea that there is no sin! Very good. The descendants of
these very men will bless me as the preacher of virtue, and not of sin. I
am the teacher of virtue, not of sin. I glory in being the preacher of
light, and not of darkness.
The second great
idea which the world is waiting to receive from our Upanishads is the
solidarity of this universe. The old lines of demarcation and
differentiation are vanishing rapidly. Electricity and steam-power are
placing the different parts of the world in intercommunication with each
other, and, as a result, we Hindus no longer say that every country beyond
our own land is peopled with demons and hobgoblins, nor do the people of
Christian countries say that India is only peopled by cannibals and
savages. When we go out of our country, we find the same brother-man, with
the same strong hand to help, with the same lips to say godspeed; and
sometimes they are better than in the country in which we are born. When
they come here, they find the same brotherhood, the same
cheer,
the same godspeed. Our Upanishads say that the cause of all misery is
ignorance; and that is perfectly true when applied to every state of life,
either social or spiritual. It is ignorance that makes us hate each other,
it is through ignorance that we do not know and do not love each other. As
soon as we come to know each other, love comes, must come, for are we not
ones. Thus we find solidarity coming in spite of itself. Even in politics
and sociology, problems that were only national twenty years ago can no
more be solved on national grounds only. They are assuming huge
proportions, gigantic shapes. They can only be solved when looked at in
the broader light of international grounds. International organizations,
international combinations, international laws are the cry of the day.
That shows the solidarity. In science, every day they are coming to a
similar broad view of matter. You speak of matter, the whole universe as
one mass, one ocean of matter, in which you and I, the sun and the moon,
and everything else are but the names of different little whirlpools and
nothing more. Mentally speaking, it is one universal ocean of thought in
which you and I are similar little whirlpools; and as spirit it moveth
not, it changeth not. It is the One Unchangeable, Unbroken, Homogeneous
Atman. The cry for morality is coming also, and that is to be found in our
books. The explanation of morality, the fountain of ethics, that also the
world wants; and that it will get here.
What do we want in
India? If foreigners want these things, we want them twenty times more.
Because, in spite of the greatness of the Upanishads, in spite of our
boasted ancestry of sages, compared to many other races, I must tell you
that we are weak, very weak. First of all is our physical weakness. That
physical weakness is the cause of at least one-third of our miseries. We
are lazy, we cannot work; we cannot combine, we do not love each other; we
are intensely selfish, not three of us
They
should be knocked on the head. If you teach Vedanta to the fisherman, he
will say, I am as good a man as you; I am a fisherman, you are a
philosopher, but I have the same God in me as you have in you. And that is
what we want, no privilege for any one, equal chances for all; let every
one be taught that the divine is within, and every one will work out his
own salvation.
Liberty is the first
condition of growth. It is wrong, a thousand times wrong, if any of you
dares to say, "I will work out the salvation of this woman or
child." I am asked again and again, what I think of the widow problem
and what I think of the woman question. Let me answer once for all — am
I a widow that you ask me that nonsense? Am I a woman that you ask me that
question again and again? Who are you to solve women's problems? Are you
the Lord God that you should rule over every widow and every woman? Hands
off! They will solve their own problems. O tyrants, attempting to think
that you can do anything for any one! Hands off! The Divine will look
after all. Who are you to assume that you know everything? How dare you
think, O blasphemers, that you have the right over God? For don't you know
that every soul is the Soul of God? Mind your own Karma; a load of Karma
is there in you to work out. Your nation may put you upon a pedestal, your
society may cheer you up to the skies, and fools may praise you: but He
sleeps not, and retribution will be sure to follow, here or hereafter.
Look upon every man,
woman, and every one as God. You cannot help anyone, you can only serve:
serve the children of the Lord, serve the Lord Himself, if you have the
privilege. If the Lord grants that you can help any one of His children,
blessed you are; do not think too much of yourselves. Blessed you are that
that privilege was given to you when others had it not. Do it only as a
worship. I should see God in the poor, and it is for my
salvation
that I go and worship them. The poor and the miserable are for our
salvation, so that we may serve the Lord, coming in the shape of the
diseased, coming in the shape of the lunatic, the leper, and the sinner!
Bold are my words; and let me repeat that it is the greatest privilege in
our life that we are allowed to serve the Lord in all these shapes. Give
up the idea that by ruling over others you can do any good to them. But
you can do just as much as you can in the case of the plant; you can
supply the growing seed with the materials for the making up of its body,
bringing to it the earth, the water, the air, that it wants. It will take
all that it wants by its own nature. It will assimilate and grow by its
own nature.
Bring all light into
the world. Light, bring light! Let light come unto every one; the task
will not be finished till every one has reached the Lord. Bring light to
the poor and bring more light to the rich, for they require it more than
the poor. Bring light to the ignorant, and more light to the educated, for
the vanities of the education of our time are tremendous! Thus bring light
to all and leave the rest unto the Lord, for in the words of the same Lord
"To work you have the right and not to the fruits thereof."
"Let not your work produce results for you, and at the same
time may you never be without work."
May
He who taught such grand ideas to our forefathers ages ago help us to get
strength to carry into practice His commands!