THE
RELIGION WE ARE BORN IN
At
an
open-air meeting convened at Dacca, on the 31st March, 1901, the Swamiji
spoke in English for two hours on the above subject before a vast
audience. The following is a translation of the lecture from a Bengali
report of a disciple:
In the
remote past, our country made gigantic advances in spiritual ideas. Let
us, today, bring before our mind's eye that ancient history. But the one
great danger in meditating over long-past greatness is that we cease to
exert ourselves for new things, and content ourselves with vegetating upon
that by-gone ancestral glory and priding ourselves upon it. We should
guard against that. In ancient times there were, no doubt, many Rishis and
Maharshis who came face to face with Truth. But if this recalling of our
ancient greatness is to be of real benefit, we too must become Rishis like
them. Ay, not only that, but it is my firm conviction that we shall be
even greater Rishis than any that our history presents to us. In the past,
signal were our attainments — I glory in them, and I feel proud in
thinking of them. I am not even in despair at seeing the present
degradation, and I am full of hope in picturing to my mind what is to come
in the future. Why? Because I know the seed undergoes a complete
transformation, ay, the seed as seed is seemingly destroyed before it
develops into a tree. In the same way, in the midst of our present
degradation lies, only dormant for a time, the potentiality of the future
greatness of our religion, ready to spring up again, perhaps more mighty
and glorious than ever before.
Now let us consider what
are the common grounds of agreement in the religion we are born in. At
first sight we undeniably find various differences among our sects. Some
are Advaitists, some are Vishishtâdvaitists, and others are
Dvaitists. Some believe in Incarnations of God, some in image-worship,
while others are upholders of the doctrine of the Formless. Then as to
customs also, various differences are known to exist. The Jâts are not
outcasted even if they marry among the Mohammedans and Christians. They
can enter into any Hindu temple without hindrance. In many villages in the
Punjab, one who does not eat swine will hardly be considered a Hindu. In
Nepal, a Brâhmin can marry in the four Varnas; while in Bengal, a Brahmin
cannot marry even among the subdivisions of his own caste. So on and so
forth. But in the midst of all these differences we note one point of
unity among all Hindus, and it is this, that no Hindu eats beef. In the
same way, there is a great common ground of unity underlying the various
forms and sects of our religion.
First, in discussing the
scriptures, one fact stands out prominently — that only those religions
which had one or many scriptures of their own as their basis advanced by
leaps and bounds and survive to the present day notwithstanding all the
persecution and repression hurled against them. The Greek religion, with
all its beauty, died out in the absence of any scripture to support it;
but the religion of the Jews stands undiminished in its power, being based
upon the authority of the Old Testament. The same is the case with the
Hindu religion, with its scripture, the Vedas, the oldest in the world.
The Vedas are divided into the Karma Kânda and the Jnâna Kânda. Whether
for good or for evil, the Karma Kanda has fallen into disuse in India,
though there are some Brahmins in the Deccan who still perform Yajnas now
and then with the sacrifice of goats; and also we find here and there,
traces of the Vedic Kriyâ Kânda in the Mantras used in connection with our
marriage and Shrâddha ceremonies etc. But there is no chance of its being
rehabilitated on its original footing.
Kumârila Bhatta once tried to do so, but he was not
successful in his attempt.
The Jnana Kanda of the
Vedas comprises the Upanishads and is known by the name of Vedanta, the
pinnacle of the Shrutis, as it is called. Wherever you find the Âchâryas
quoting a passage from the Shrutis, it is invariably from the Upanishads.
The Vedanta is now the religion of the Hindus. If any sect in India wants
to have its ideas established with a firm hold on the people it must base
them on the authority of the Vedanta. They all have to do it, whether they
are Dvaitists or Advaitists. Even the Vaishnavas have to go to
Gopâlatâpini Upanishad to prove the truth of their own theories. If a new
sect does not find anything in the Shrutis in confirmation of its ideas,
it will go even to the length of manufacturing a new Upanishad, and making
it pass current as one of the old original productions. There have been
many such in the past.
Now as to the Vedas, the
Hindus believe that they are not mere books composed by men in some remote
age. They hold them to be an accumulated mass of endless divine wisdom,
which is sometimes manifested and at other times remains unmanifested.
Commentator Sâyanâchârya says somewhere in his works
— "Who created the whole
universe out of the knowledge of the Vedas". No one has ever seen the
composer of the Vedas, and it is impossible to imagine one. The Rishis
were only the discoverers of the Mantras or Eternal Laws; they merely came
face to face with the Vedas, the infinite mine of knowledge, which has
been there from time without beginning.
Who are these Rishis?
Vâtsyâyana says, "He who has attained through proper means the direct
realisation of Dharma, he alone can be a Rishi even if he is a Mlechchha
by birth." Thus it is that in ancient times, Vasishtha, born of an
illegitimate union, Vyâsa, the son of a fisherwoman, Narada, the son of a
maidservant with uncertain parentage,
and many others of like nature attained to Rishihood. Truly
speaking, it comes to this then, that no distinction should be made with
one who has realised the Truth. If the persons just named all became
Rishis, then, O ye Kulin Brahmins of the present day, how much greater
Rishis you can become! Strive after that Rishihood, stop not till you have
attained the goal, and the whole world will of itself bow at your feet! Be
a Rishi — that is the secret of power.
This Veda is our only
authority, and everyone has the right to it.
— Thus says the Shukla
Yajur Veda (XXVI. 2). Can you show any authority from this Veda of ours
that everyone has not the right to it? The Purânas, no doubt, say that a
certain caste has the right to such and such a recension of the Vedas, or
a certain caste has no right to study them, or that this portion of the
Vedas is for the Satya Yuga and that portion is for the Kali Yuga. But,
mark you, the Veda does not say so; it is only your Puranas that do so.
But can the servant dictate to the master? The Smritis, Puranas, Tantras —
all these are acceptable only so far as they agree with the Vedas; and
wherever they are contradictory, they are to be rejected as unreliable.
But nowadays we have put the Puranas on even a higher pedestal than the
Vedas! The study of the Vedas has almost disappeared from Bengal. How I
wish that day will soon come when in every home the Veda will be
worshipped together with Shâlagrâma, the household Deity, when the young,
the old, and the women will inaugurate the worship of the Veda!
I have no faith in the
theories advanced by Western savants with regard to the Vedas. They are
today fixing the antiquity of the Vedas at a certain period, and again
tomorrow upsetting it and bringing it one thousand years
existence of three things — three entities — Ishvara, Atman,
and the Jagat. Ishvara is He who is eternally creating, preserving and
destroying the whole universe. Excepting the Sânkhyas, all the others
believe in this. Then the doctrine of the Atman and the reincarnation of
the soul; it maintains that innumerable individual souls, having taken
body after body again and again, go round and round in the wheel of birth
and death according to their respective Karmas; this is Samsâravâda, or as
it is commonly called the doctrine of rebirth. Then there is the Jagat or
universe without beginning and without end. Though some hold these three
as different phases of one only, and some others as three distinctly
different entities, and others again in various other ways, yet they are
all unanimous in believing in these three.
Here I should ask you to
remember that Hindus, from time immemorial, knew the Atman as separate
from Manas, mind. But the Occidentals could never soar beyond the mind.
The West knows the universe to be full of happiness, and as such, it is to
them a place where they can enjoy the most; but the East is born with the
conviction that this Samsara, this ever-changing existence, is full of
misery, and as such, it is nothing, nothing but unreal, not worth
bartering the soul for its ephemeral joys and possessions. For this very
reason, the West is ever especially adroit in organised action, and so
also the East is ever bold in search of the mysteries of the internal
world.
Let us, however, turn now
to one or two other aspects of Hinduism. There is the doctrine of the
Incarnations of God. In the Vedas we find mention of Matsya Avatâra, the
Fish Incarnation only. Whether all believe in this doctrine or not is not
the point; the real meaning, however, of this Avatâravâda is the worship
of Man — to see God in man is the real God-vision. The Hindu does not go
through nature to nature's God — he goes to the God of man through
Man.
Then there is
image-worship. Except the five Devatâs who are to be worshipped in every
auspicious Karma as enjoined in our Shastras, all the other Devatas are
merely the names of certain states held by them. But again, these five
Devatas are nothing but the different names of the one God Only. This
external worship of images has, however, been described in all our
Shastras as the lowest of all the low forms of worship. But that does not
mean that it is a wrong thing to do. Despite the many iniquities that have
found entrance into the practices of image-worship as it is in vogue now,
I do not condemn it. Ay, where would I have been if I had not been blessed
with the dust of the holy feet of that orthodox, image-worshipping
Brahmin!
Those reformers who preach
against image-worship, or what they denounce as idolatry — to them I say
"Brothers, if you are fit to worship God-without-form discarding all
external help, do so, but why do you condemn others who cannot do the
same? A beautiful, large edifice, the glorious relic of a hoary antiquity
has, out of neglect or disuse, fallen into a dilapidated condition;
accumulations of dirt and dust may be lying everywhere within it, maybe,
some portions are tumbling down to the ground. What will you do to it?
Will you take in hand the necessary cleansing and repairs and thus restore
the old, or will you pull the whole edifice down to the ground and seek to
build another in its place, after a sordid modern plan whose permanence
has yet to be established? We have to reform it, which truly means to make
ready or perfect by necessary cleansing and repairs, not by demolishing
the whole thing. There the function of reform ends. When the work of
renovating the old is finished, what further necessity does it serve? Do
that if you can, if not, hands off!" The band of reformers in our country
want, on the contrary, to build up a separate sect of their own. They
have, however, done good work; may the
blessings of God be showered on their heads! But why should
you, Hindus, want to separate yourselves from the great common fold? Why
should you feel ashamed to take the name of Hindu, which is your greatest
and most glorious possession? This national ship of ours, ye children of
the Immortals, my countrymen, has been plying for ages, carrying
civilisation and enriching the whole world with its inestimable treasures.
For scores of shining centuries this national ship of ours has been
ferrying across the ocean of life, and has taken millions of souls to the
other shore, beyond all misery. But today it may have sprung a leak and
got damaged, through your own fault or whatever cause it matters not. What
would you, who have placed yourselves in it, do now? Would you go about
cursing it and quarrelling among yourselves! Would you not all unite
together and put your best efforts to stop the holes? Let us all gladly
give our hearts' blood to do this; and if we fail in the attempt, let us
all sink and die together, with blessings and not curses on our
lips.
And to the
Brahmins I say, "Vain is your pride of birth and ancestry. Shake it off.
Brahminhood, according to your Shastras, you have no more now, because you
have for so long lived under Mlechchha kings. If you at all believe in the
words of your own ancestors, then go this very moment and make expiation
by entering into the slow fire kindled by Tusha (husks), like that old
Kumarila Bhatta, who with the purpose of ousting the Buddhists first
became a disciple of the Buddhists and then defeating them in argument
became the cause of death to many, and subsequently entered the Tushânala
to expiate his sins. If you are not bold enough to do that, then admit
your weakness and stretch forth a helping hand, and open the gates of
knowledge to one and all, and give the downtrodden masses once more their
just and legitimate rights and privileges."
— "Man lives indeed a hundred years."
Which are we to accept in this case? Certainly the Vedas. Notwithstanding
statements like these, I do not depreciate the Puranas. They contain many
beautiful and illuminating teachings and words of wisdom on Yoga, Bhakti,
Jnâna, and Karma; those, of course, we should accept. Then there are the
Tantras. The real meaning of the word Tantra is Shâstra, as for example,
Kâpila Tantra. But the word Tantra is generally used in a limited sense.
Under the sway of kings who took up Buddhism and preached broadcast the
doctrine of Ahimsâ, the performances of the Vedic Yâga-Yajnas became a
thing of the past, and no one could kill any animal in sacrifice for fear
of the king. But subsequently amongst the Buddhists themselves — who were
converts from Hinduism — the best parts of these Yaga-Yajnas were taken
up, and practiced in secret. From these sprang up the Tantras. Barring
some of the abominable things in the Tantras, such as the Vâmâchâra etc.,
the Tantras are not so bad as people are inclined to think. There are many
high and sublime Vedantic thoughts in them. In fact, the Brâhmana portions
of the Vedas were modified a little and incorporated into the body of the
Tantras. All the forms of our worship and the ceremonials of the present
day, comprising the Karma Kanda, are observed in accordance with the
Tantras.