Preface
I am a great admirer of Mahatma Gandhiji, who deserves the title
‘Mahatma’ in every respect. Regardless of criticism by a few against his words and acts, he stands tall amongst the Indians of all time. He was truly a larger than life personality.
After reading his autobiography, it has been my long time ambition to read
The Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi. Seeing as it is one hundred volumes, I postponed my ambitious project for a long time. In 2011, thanks to my mother whose presence at the ashram (Krupavan Gurukulam) compelled me to not travel or go out much, I began to read it. I never expected that it would be such a rewarding sadhana.
Reading Gandhiji’s writings was not merely a project, a pleasure, or for the purpose of gathering information about him, but rather to learn from this MAHATMA, as part of my sadhana. I feel very proud to have been born in India for various reasons; now the top among them is that I was born in the land that also bore MAHATMA. I find comfort that somehow I too was his contemporary, as his passing was only a few years before my birth. This is important for me, because as Gandhiji’s influence among the Indians is slowly fading away—thanks to the politicians in general and the Congress party in particular—future generations may not read and learn from the writings of Gandhiji. The sad fact is that the majority of educated Indians have never even read An Autobiography by Gandhiji. This being true, there is little chance of the present generation, and future generations, reading the 100 volumes of his collected works. Of course there are some exceptions to this (I have heard that Sri Arun Shouri has read all the 100 volumes.). However, as I am reading The Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi [CWG], I am impressed not only by his writings and thoughts, but by his life and ideals, which he followed with deep conviction. Of course, as a human being, he slowly emerged from a human to Mahatma. Rarely can such a consistency be seen between a person’s life and their ideals as we find in the life of Mahatma Gandhiji.
I do not want to keep it a personal sadhana, but want to share this experience with others. There is not much for me to comment on or write beyond what one can infer from the writings and life of Mahatmaji; only occasionally will I share the inspiration I have drawn from his writings and his life. I first thought of completing all of the 100 volumes and then arranging the notes from each volume under various topics. However, as I advanced from volume one to five and six, I realized that it would not be an easy task. Therefore, I have decided to share my notes from these collected works of Gandhiji volume by volume. Once I complete all of the volumes, if God allows me to live that long, then I can re-organize all of the materials in a different way.
This blog is the best place to share, as it will be there for anyone to read and also easy for me to refer to. Though I would like someone to edit my English, considering the time constraint, it will be too much for anyone to help me. Not minding the limitation of my English, I have decided to post them, as the reader has to focus only on what Mahatma wrote and not on my rare comments.
I feel blessed not only to read, but also to have the opportunity to take notes and share them with others. In my life as an unmarried person, I have received different kinds of blessings that are not common to all; I can say with much satisfaction that this is the best among them—not only the time but also the interest to read Mahatmaji’s writings. My hope and prayer is that Indians who cannot read the entire CWG will not miss the opportunity to read some of the SELECTED NOTES FROM THE COLLECTED WORKS OF MAHATMA GANDHIJI.
I read the first four volumes of CWG from printed books [Publications Division Ministry of Information and Broadcasting. Govt. of India. (1958), Third ed. Reprint. 1994.]. However, typing notes consumed too much time. I searched on the Internet and found many sites with the complete 100 volumes of CWG, which I am able to download. I am downloading from www.gandhiserve.org/cwmgn site and all the page numbers are as the volumes are listed on the website. If any of my notes are incomplete or not inclusive of the whole text or context, one can go to the website and read the entire text. I took notes as per my interest; therefore my selection of notes may not convey the complete ideals and mind of Mahatmaji. As the entire volume is available on the website, those who want to know further can research there.
I FEEL BLESSED TO BE BORN AN INDIAN. I FEEL DOUBLY BLESSED TO BE BORN THE INDIAN SON OF MAHATMA GANDHIJI, AS HE IS RIGHTLY CALLED THE “FATHER OF OUR NATION.” IF WORLD HISTORY IS DIVIDED BEFORE AND AFTER BY THE BIRTH OF THE LORD JESUS CHRIST, THEN INDIAN HISTORY SHOULD BE DIVIDED BEFORE AND AFTER THE BIRTH OF MPreface
I am a great admirer of Mahatma Gandhiji, who deserves the title
‘Mahatma’ in every respect. Regardless of criticism by a few against his words and acts, he stands tall amongst the Indians of all time. He was truly a larger than life personality.
After reading his autobiography, it has been my long time ambition to read
The Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi. Seeing as it is one hundred volumes, I postponed my ambitious project for a long time. In 2011, thanks to my mother whose presence at the ashram (Krupavan Gurukulam) compelled me to not travel or go out much, I began to read it. I never expected that it would be such a rewarding sadhana.
Reading Gandhiji’s writings was not merely a project, a pleasure, or for the purpose of gathering information about him, but rather to learn from this MAHATMA, as part of my sadhana. I feel very proud to have been born in India for various reasons; now the top among them is that I was born in the land that also bore MAHATMA. I find comfort that somehow I too was his contemporary, as his passing was only a few years before my birth. This is important for me, because as Gandhiji’s influence among the Indians is slowly fading away—thanks to the politicians in general and the Congress party in particular—future generations may not read and learn from the writings of Gandhiji. The sad fact is that the majority of educated Indians have never even read An Autobiography by Gandhiji. This being true, there is little chance of the present generation, and future generations, reading the 100 volumes of his collected works. Of course there are some exceptions to this (I have heard that Sri Arun Shouri has read all the 100 volumes.). However, as I am reading The Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi [CWG], I am impressed not only by his writings and thoughts, but by his life and ideals, which he followed with deep conviction. Of course, as a human being, he slowly emerged from a human to Mahatma. Rarely can such a consistency be seen between a person’s life and their ideals as we find in the life of Mahatma Gandhiji.
I do not want to keep it a personal sadhana, but want to share this experience with others. There is not much for me to comment on or write beyond what one can infer from the writings and life of Mahatmaji; only occasionally will I share the inspiration I have drawn from his writings and his life. I first thought of completing all of the 100 volumes and then arranging the notes from each volume under various topics. However, as I advanced from volume one to five and six, I realized that it would not be an easy task. Therefore, I have decided to share my notes from these collected works of Gandhiji volume by volume. Once I complete all of the volumes, if God allows me to live that long, then I can re-organize all of the materials in a different way.
This blog is the best place to share, as it will be there for anyone to read and also easy for me to refer to. Though I would like someone to edit my English, considering the time constraint, it will be too much for anyone to help me. Not minding the limitation of my English, I have decided to post them, as the reader has to focus only on what Mahatma wrote and not on my rare comments.
I feel blessed not only to read, but also to have the opportunity to take notes and share them with others. In my life as an unmarried person, I have received different kinds of blessings that are not common to all; I can say with much satisfaction that this is the best among them—not only the time but also the interest to read Mahatmaji’s writings. My hope and prayer is that Indians who cannot read the entire CWG will not miss the opportunity to read some of the SELECTED NOTES FROM THE COLLECTED WORKS OF MAHATMA GANDHIJI.
I read the first four volumes of CWG from printed books [Publications Division Ministry of Information and Broadcasting. Govt. of India. (1958), Third ed. Reprint. 1994.]. However, typing notes consumed too much time. I searched on the Internet and found many sites with the complete 100 volumes of CWG, which I am able to download. I am downloading from www.gandhiserve.org/cwmgn site and all the page numbers are as the volumes are listed on the website. If any of my notes are incomplete or not inclusive of the whole text or context, one can go to the website and read the entire text. I took notes as per my interest; therefore my selection of notes may not convey the complete ideals and mind of Mahatmaji. As the entire volume is available on the website, those who want to know further can research there.
I FEEL BLESSED TO BE BORN AN INDIAN. I FEEL DOUBLY BLESSED TO BE BORN THE INDIAN SON OF MAHATMA GANDHIJI, AS HE IS RIGHTLY CALLED THE “FATHER OF OUR NATION.” IF WORLD HISTORY IS DIVIDED BEFORE AND AFTER BY THE BIRTH OF THE LORD JESUS CHRIST, THEN INDIAN HISTORY SHOULD BE DIVIDED BEFORE AND AFTER THE BIRTH OF MAHATMAJI. I FEEL BLESSED MANIFOLD TO BE BORN IN MAHATMA’S NATION, TO INHERIT SOME OF HIS BLESSINGS THROUGH HIS LIFE AND TEACHING. Dayanand Bharati, Gurukulam, September 20, 2011.AHATMAJI. I FEEL BLESSED MANIFOLD TO BE BORN IN MAHATMA’S NATION, TO INHERIT SOME OF HIS BLESSINGS THROUGH HIS LIFE AND TEACHING. Dayanand Bharati, Gurukulam, September 20, 2011.
Wednesday, October 12, 2011
Thursday, October 6, 2011
The Vedaanta
A Study of
The Brahma-Suutras with the Bhaasyas of
Samkara, Raamaanuja, Nimbaarka, Madhva, and Vallabha.
by V.S.Ghate.
Bhankarkar Oriental Research Institute, Poona, (Third Edition), 1981.
Trying to give a particular definition to Hinduism is impossible and try to reduce it even to one system is nothing but a joke. Though the present day scholars on Hinduism, (thanks to the Indological studies as well as political awakening based on Hindutva) in general agree with this point, yet in the last century and even in the early part of this century Hinduism is considered noting but Vedaanta 1 and that too of advaidic Vedaanta of Sri Samkara school. Though several Indian scholars (like P.V.Kane—yet to be documented) may not agree on such point, yet that was the thought commonly prevailed among the Westerners. But to our surprise even in the early part of this century people like Dr. Ghate boldly refuted such idea and this book is one such an attempt. Though the premature death of Dr.Ghate deprived a scholar on Indological studies, yet this thesis which he submitted in 1918 as a thesis for the Doctorate of the Paris University on the doctrine contained in the Brahmasuutras of Baadaraayana not only an interesting but useful work.
First of all we are thankful to Sri V.G.Paranjpe who brought forth this book based on the original draft of this thesis by Dr.Ghate in English which he care fully edited (with some liberties, as he himself acknowledges in his preface to the first edition). This book is of great help for any one to understand the very doctrine of Vedaanta which is impossible without the help of commentaries. Though bulk works on Brahmasuutras and their Principal Commentaries are available (e.g. Dr. B.N.K. Sharma, three volumes), yet Dr. Ghate's work helps a lay man to have a basic understanding of Brahmasuutra particularly with a critical analysis on the principle commentaries of the great acharyas of the school of Vedannta (Sri Samkara, Sri Ramanja, Nimbaarka, Sri Madhva, and Sri Vallabha).
After giving a brief but useful introduction to the three periods of Sanskrit philosophy (of Vedic, Upanisadic and Post-Vedic, pp.4-20) the author gives a helpful summary of the five major school of Vedanta (pp.21-37), which really helps one to understand their respective commentaries on the Brahmasuutras. Particularly the points on which these five schools of Vedaanta agree and wherein Samkara's doctrine is distinguished from the rest as well as the common futures of the four Visnuite schools along with Madhva's school which stands apart from the rest of the four of Visnuite schools is very helpful to remember precisely on this most difficult subject.
But the more interesting as well as difficult part both to read and understand is the analysis (Ch. III, pp. 53-155) in which the author skillfully analysis the various interpretations by the five great acharyas. With out some real interest as well with some basic Sanskrit knowledge one will find it difficult to understand this analysis itself. This difficult task bring home to our mind the Herculian task of reading all the five major commentaries as well as to understand the Sutra itself.
All the major orthodox schools in Indian Philosophical as well religious system wrote commentaries on Prasthaanattryi (refer the exact word and document the meaning of this word from Tilak's Gita) viz., Upanisads, Brahmasuutras and Bhavadgita. But the major difficulty in it is that each acharya try to read his own system in them to prove that his school of thought alone has the authority of the canon viz. The three prasthaanas. And among the three, Upanisads being considered the old "and to say that idealism represents the real teaching of the Upanisads because it is contained in a certain Upanisad which is relatively old and that the Upanisad is relatively old because it contains a view of things with which philosophy should commence, is nothing, but a logical see-saw" (p.9) Because, "the Upanisads are nothing but free and bold attempts to find out the truth without the slightest idea of a system; and to say that any one particular doctrine is taught in the Upanisads is unjustifiable in the face of the fact that in one and the same section of an Upanisad, we find passages one following the other, which are quite opposed in their purport. (p.9).
And now Brahmasuutra, which forms one among the six orthodox systems in post-Veidc period along with Saamkhya alone "are the only ones of strictly metaphysical importance" (p.12) to the philosophical part of Hinduism. Even here "It is the Vedaanta alone that has appropriated to itself the name `Anupanisada' doctrine, since it is the only system which seriously concerns itself with explaining and reconciling the various divergent metaphysical portions of the Upanisads and since it alone regards the Upanisads as the highest authority, not only in theory but in practice" (p.12) But "the suutra literature2 in India presents a phenomenon met nowhere else. The desire to express as much meaning as possible in as few words as possible and to provide most convenient and compressed manuals, which could be easily committed to memory and, at the same time, which could easily bring to the mind a complete sense by applying to them as it were certain keys of interpretation, was sometimes carried too are, so that instead of attaining the intended purpose it often produced the contrary results. Thus, for instance, we have a number of unintelligible, apparently meaningless word-groups, which cannot be understood at all without the help of a voluminous commentary, which, after all may not represent properly what was really meant by the writer of the sutras." (p.41)
This being the difficult task to understand the Upanisad and Vedanta, try to reduce to one's own particular system confuses one who tries to understand the major teaching of Hinduism. Though there is a long tradition of interpretation on every Indian Scripture, yet they remained popular within a particular sampradaya. And most of the followers of the respective sampradayas might be knowing the other schools of thought which claim the same Vedic authority, but only from the point of their own respective acharyas who founded their sampradaya. Though we thankfully acknowledge the Western Indological studies which broke certain boundaries even among the Indian scholars to understand the doctrine of the other schools of thought with which they are not agreeing in their own respective setting, yet the Western scholarship also several time remained blind while try to give one common title to Hinduism. And Dr. Ghate in his Author's preface clearly says the main reason for writing this thesis as, "If this venture of mine succeeds in arousing some interest in Sanskrit philosophy, and more particularly in removing the idea which is now current in Europe that the sum of the Vedaanta is to be found in the system of Samkara, I shall consider that my labour will not in vain".
After reading this valuable work one has to accept with Dr. Ghate that "It may be true that if one insists on drawing a system from the Upanisads, replete as they are with contradictions and divergences, Samkara has succeeded the best, because his distinction of esoteric and exoteric doctrines like a sword with two edges can easily reconcile all opposites such as unity and plurality, assertion of attributes and their negation, in connection with one and the same being; but this is one thing and to say that the Upanisads taught Samkara's doctrine is quite another thing." (p.9) and the same is applicable to Samkara's commentary on Brahmasutras. But Dr. Ghate is careful in pointing out that "the method followed in the treatment of the subject (of this thesis) would appear to be reasonable and in strict conformity with the rules of western criticism" (p.vii), as he knows that though the traditional Indian criticism may acknowledge the difference of opinion but won't dare to refute any acharya as they are considered by common people as beyond reproach by virtue of their knowledge and devotion to their sampradaya.
(This point is to be added in a relevant place )The general outline (pp.38-52) "regarding the nature, the contents, the arrangement, and the method of treatment of the Sutras" (p.52) helps us to have a brief understanding of the obscure Sutra literature in general and Brahmasuutra in particular.
The climax of this book is the conclusion (pp. 156-70) which release one's mind after reading the analysis. It is surprising to note that not remaining a product of his own time as well as place (Mahaaraastrian) as "Many eminent scholars, along with the orthodox people especially about Mahaaraastra, hold that the Vedaanta of Samkara represents the true teaching of the Upanisads; and that the other so called orthodox systems as well as the other schools of Vedaanta, while they lay claim to be based on the Upanisads, are all so many developments by a kind of degeneration of the original doctrine (of the Upanisads) [p.7], Dr. Ghate boldly says that "Thus we are quite justified in arriving at the conclusion that Samkara's doctrine is out of count so far as the sutras are concerned, whatever be its value as a philosophical system, and whatever be its merit as an attempt to draw a system from the Upanisads. "(p.162). This he can say authoritatively as he takes all pain to analysis Samkara's commentaries not only with other commentaries, but even pointing out several efforts undertaken by the acharya to read his own system in the Sutras. For example after analysing Adhyaaya II, Paada 3, Suutra 43 (sutras 43-53) the author points out, "Whenever there is an opposition like this between passages asserting difference and those asserting non-difference, he (Samkara) always cuts the gordian knot by saying that the passages asserting non-difference represent the truth and are to be understood literally; whereas those asserting difference only refer to the popular notions of things and they are there only to be refuted and to make room for the passages asserting non-difference. This all plurality is delusion; while unity is the only reality...Thus Samkara finds himself in a dilemma" (p.94)3
Though the author after fulfilling his major task of proving that Samkara's system is not THE VEDAANTA based on Brahmasuutras, refuse to give his own conclusion as which School of Vedanta is the correct one. But after giving thireen "very probably formed part of the Suutrakaara's doctrine" (p.166) places the school of Nimbaarka as the first system close in their race and concludes, "All these instances of the employment by the Suutrakaara of vague and general words, not capable of being explicitly defined, lead us to believe that the suutras, though they were in the first instance intended to formulate a system from the Upanisads, reconciling the contradictions which meet us at every step, represent a stage of transition from the freedom and absolute want of systems of the Upanisads to the cut and dry systematisation of the commentaries....The further formulation of the particular dogmas found in the later Vedaanta is absolutely unknown to the suutras." (p.169)
Though the last few lines Dr. Ghate are made in the context of Brahmasuutras on which different Vedaanta schools of the later times enunciated their particular dogma, yet it is applicable to any system which tries to read its own dogma on any given Scripture under any religious system because, "It needs hardly to be remarked that the more advanced a system is in the degree of systematisation and the elimination of contradiction, the farther removed it is from the system of the suutras (or scriptures) whatever that be" (p.170)
Dayanand Bharati, December 5, 1996, Varanasi.
Notes
1.The Uttara-miimaamsaa .... more popularly known as the Vedaanta, is the only system of philosophy properly so called, which has excercised the greatest influence over Hindu thought; and even at the present day, if it is possible to describe the philosophic thought of Hindus in general by one name, it is Vedaanta. It is to be remembered, however, that the name Vedaanta does not signify one system only.... It comprehends several systems differing from each other essentially in points of metaphysical doctrine, ranging from absolute idealism down to dualism, at the same time having some important features which are common and which may be the reason of their being designated by a common name, besides the fact of their professing to be based on the Vedaanta or Upanisads." (p.17)
2. A Sutra-collection as the source and authority of a philosophical doctrine is not peculiar to the Vedaanta alone; for we know that the other five orthodox schools also, all of them, claim to be based upon Sutra-collections attributed to some sage of mythical fame, supposed to be the originator of the doctrine in question"-p.41
3. It is difficult to quote even few here as almost in his analysis of every Adhikarana, the author points out very clearly the dilemma and inconsistency of Samkara.
A Study of
The Brahma-Suutras with the Bhaasyas of
Samkara, Raamaanuja, Nimbaarka, Madhva, and Vallabha.
by V.S.Ghate.
Bhankarkar Oriental Research Institute, Poona, (Third Edition), 1981.
Trying to give a particular definition to Hinduism is impossible and try to reduce it even to one system is nothing but a joke. Though the present day scholars on Hinduism, (thanks to the Indological studies as well as political awakening based on Hindutva) in general agree with this point, yet in the last century and even in the early part of this century Hinduism is considered noting but Vedaanta 1 and that too of advaidic Vedaanta of Sri Samkara school. Though several Indian scholars (like P.V.Kane—yet to be documented) may not agree on such point, yet that was the thought commonly prevailed among the Westerners. But to our surprise even in the early part of this century people like Dr. Ghate boldly refuted such idea and this book is one such an attempt. Though the premature death of Dr.Ghate deprived a scholar on Indological studies, yet this thesis which he submitted in 1918 as a thesis for the Doctorate of the Paris University on the doctrine contained in the Brahmasuutras of Baadaraayana not only an interesting but useful work.
First of all we are thankful to Sri V.G.Paranjpe who brought forth this book based on the original draft of this thesis by Dr.Ghate in English which he care fully edited (with some liberties, as he himself acknowledges in his preface to the first edition). This book is of great help for any one to understand the very doctrine of Vedaanta which is impossible without the help of commentaries. Though bulk works on Brahmasuutras and their Principal Commentaries are available (e.g. Dr. B.N.K. Sharma, three volumes), yet Dr. Ghate's work helps a lay man to have a basic understanding of Brahmasuutra particularly with a critical analysis on the principle commentaries of the great acharyas of the school of Vedannta (Sri Samkara, Sri Ramanja, Nimbaarka, Sri Madhva, and Sri Vallabha).
After giving a brief but useful introduction to the three periods of Sanskrit philosophy (of Vedic, Upanisadic and Post-Vedic, pp.4-20) the author gives a helpful summary of the five major school of Vedanta (pp.21-37), which really helps one to understand their respective commentaries on the Brahmasuutras. Particularly the points on which these five schools of Vedaanta agree and wherein Samkara's doctrine is distinguished from the rest as well as the common futures of the four Visnuite schools along with Madhva's school which stands apart from the rest of the four of Visnuite schools is very helpful to remember precisely on this most difficult subject.
But the more interesting as well as difficult part both to read and understand is the analysis (Ch. III, pp. 53-155) in which the author skillfully analysis the various interpretations by the five great acharyas. With out some real interest as well with some basic Sanskrit knowledge one will find it difficult to understand this analysis itself. This difficult task bring home to our mind the Herculian task of reading all the five major commentaries as well as to understand the Sutra itself.
All the major orthodox schools in Indian Philosophical as well religious system wrote commentaries on Prasthaanattryi (refer the exact word and document the meaning of this word from Tilak's Gita) viz., Upanisads, Brahmasuutras and Bhavadgita. But the major difficulty in it is that each acharya try to read his own system in them to prove that his school of thought alone has the authority of the canon viz. The three prasthaanas. And among the three, Upanisads being considered the old "and to say that idealism represents the real teaching of the Upanisads because it is contained in a certain Upanisad which is relatively old and that the Upanisad is relatively old because it contains a view of things with which philosophy should commence, is nothing, but a logical see-saw" (p.9) Because, "the Upanisads are nothing but free and bold attempts to find out the truth without the slightest idea of a system; and to say that any one particular doctrine is taught in the Upanisads is unjustifiable in the face of the fact that in one and the same section of an Upanisad, we find passages one following the other, which are quite opposed in their purport. (p.9).
And now Brahmasuutra, which forms one among the six orthodox systems in post-Veidc period along with Saamkhya alone "are the only ones of strictly metaphysical importance" (p.12) to the philosophical part of Hinduism. Even here "It is the Vedaanta alone that has appropriated to itself the name `Anupanisada' doctrine, since it is the only system which seriously concerns itself with explaining and reconciling the various divergent metaphysical portions of the Upanisads and since it alone regards the Upanisads as the highest authority, not only in theory but in practice" (p.12) But "the suutra literature2 in India presents a phenomenon met nowhere else. The desire to express as much meaning as possible in as few words as possible and to provide most convenient and compressed manuals, which could be easily committed to memory and, at the same time, which could easily bring to the mind a complete sense by applying to them as it were certain keys of interpretation, was sometimes carried too are, so that instead of attaining the intended purpose it often produced the contrary results. Thus, for instance, we have a number of unintelligible, apparently meaningless word-groups, which cannot be understood at all without the help of a voluminous commentary, which, after all may not represent properly what was really meant by the writer of the sutras." (p.41)
This being the difficult task to understand the Upanisad and Vedanta, try to reduce to one's own particular system confuses one who tries to understand the major teaching of Hinduism. Though there is a long tradition of interpretation on every Indian Scripture, yet they remained popular within a particular sampradaya. And most of the followers of the respective sampradayas might be knowing the other schools of thought which claim the same Vedic authority, but only from the point of their own respective acharyas who founded their sampradaya. Though we thankfully acknowledge the Western Indological studies which broke certain boundaries even among the Indian scholars to understand the doctrine of the other schools of thought with which they are not agreeing in their own respective setting, yet the Western scholarship also several time remained blind while try to give one common title to Hinduism. And Dr. Ghate in his Author's preface clearly says the main reason for writing this thesis as, "If this venture of mine succeeds in arousing some interest in Sanskrit philosophy, and more particularly in removing the idea which is now current in Europe that the sum of the Vedaanta is to be found in the system of Samkara, I shall consider that my labour will not in vain".
After reading this valuable work one has to accept with Dr. Ghate that "It may be true that if one insists on drawing a system from the Upanisads, replete as they are with contradictions and divergences, Samkara has succeeded the best, because his distinction of esoteric and exoteric doctrines like a sword with two edges can easily reconcile all opposites such as unity and plurality, assertion of attributes and their negation, in connection with one and the same being; but this is one thing and to say that the Upanisads taught Samkara's doctrine is quite another thing." (p.9) and the same is applicable to Samkara's commentary on Brahmasutras. But Dr. Ghate is careful in pointing out that "the method followed in the treatment of the subject (of this thesis) would appear to be reasonable and in strict conformity with the rules of western criticism" (p.vii), as he knows that though the traditional Indian criticism may acknowledge the difference of opinion but won't dare to refute any acharya as they are considered by common people as beyond reproach by virtue of their knowledge and devotion to their sampradaya.
(This point is to be added in a relevant place )The general outline (pp.38-52) "regarding the nature, the contents, the arrangement, and the method of treatment of the Sutras" (p.52) helps us to have a brief understanding of the obscure Sutra literature in general and Brahmasuutra in particular.
The climax of this book is the conclusion (pp. 156-70) which release one's mind after reading the analysis. It is surprising to note that not remaining a product of his own time as well as place (Mahaaraastrian) as "Many eminent scholars, along with the orthodox people especially about Mahaaraastra, hold that the Vedaanta of Samkara represents the true teaching of the Upanisads; and that the other so called orthodox systems as well as the other schools of Vedaanta, while they lay claim to be based on the Upanisads, are all so many developments by a kind of degeneration of the original doctrine (of the Upanisads) [p.7], Dr. Ghate boldly says that "Thus we are quite justified in arriving at the conclusion that Samkara's doctrine is out of count so far as the sutras are concerned, whatever be its value as a philosophical system, and whatever be its merit as an attempt to draw a system from the Upanisads. "(p.162). This he can say authoritatively as he takes all pain to analysis Samkara's commentaries not only with other commentaries, but even pointing out several efforts undertaken by the acharya to read his own system in the Sutras. For example after analysing Adhyaaya II, Paada 3, Suutra 43 (sutras 43-53) the author points out, "Whenever there is an opposition like this between passages asserting difference and those asserting non-difference, he (Samkara) always cuts the gordian knot by saying that the passages asserting non-difference represent the truth and are to be understood literally; whereas those asserting difference only refer to the popular notions of things and they are there only to be refuted and to make room for the passages asserting non-difference. This all plurality is delusion; while unity is the only reality...Thus Samkara finds himself in a dilemma" (p.94)3
Though the author after fulfilling his major task of proving that Samkara's system is not THE VEDAANTA based on Brahmasuutras, refuse to give his own conclusion as which School of Vedanta is the correct one. But after giving thireen "very probably formed part of the Suutrakaara's doctrine" (p.166) places the school of Nimbaarka as the first system close in their race and concludes, "All these instances of the employment by the Suutrakaara of vague and general words, not capable of being explicitly defined, lead us to believe that the suutras, though they were in the first instance intended to formulate a system from the Upanisads, reconciling the contradictions which meet us at every step, represent a stage of transition from the freedom and absolute want of systems of the Upanisads to the cut and dry systematisation of the commentaries....The further formulation of the particular dogmas found in the later Vedaanta is absolutely unknown to the suutras." (p.169)
Though the last few lines Dr. Ghate are made in the context of Brahmasuutras on which different Vedaanta schools of the later times enunciated their particular dogma, yet it is applicable to any system which tries to read its own dogma on any given Scripture under any religious system because, "It needs hardly to be remarked that the more advanced a system is in the degree of systematisation and the elimination of contradiction, the farther removed it is from the system of the suutras (or scriptures) whatever that be" (p.170)
Dayanand Bharati, December 5, 1996, Varanasi.
Notes
1.The Uttara-miimaamsaa .... more popularly known as the Vedaanta, is the only system of philosophy properly so called, which has excercised the greatest influence over Hindu thought; and even at the present day, if it is possible to describe the philosophic thought of Hindus in general by one name, it is Vedaanta. It is to be remembered, however, that the name Vedaanta does not signify one system only.... It comprehends several systems differing from each other essentially in points of metaphysical doctrine, ranging from absolute idealism down to dualism, at the same time having some important features which are common and which may be the reason of their being designated by a common name, besides the fact of their professing to be based on the Vedaanta or Upanisads." (p.17)
2. A Sutra-collection as the source and authority of a philosophical doctrine is not peculiar to the Vedaanta alone; for we know that the other five orthodox schools also, all of them, claim to be based upon Sutra-collections attributed to some sage of mythical fame, supposed to be the originator of the doctrine in question"-p.41
3. It is difficult to quote even few here as almost in his analysis of every Adhikarana, the author points out very clearly the dilemma and inconsistency of Samkara.
Book Review
Religious Hinduism
(Fourth Revised Edition, R. De Smet and J. Neuner, Editors,
St. Paul’s Publications, 1997)
Reviewed by Dayanand Bharati
This is a volume of outstanding merit and one can only hope that it will be widely read. These 29 essays contributed by scholars who have authority in their own respective fields truly amount to a mini encyclopaedia on Hinduism. Beginning from Vedic times and ending in the present situation this book covers all essential topics on religious Hinduism.
One may well argue that Hinduism is dharma, not religion in a strict academic sense; but this dharma not only includes religious aspects but is also centered on what in English we call ‘religion’. Hence while a proper study on Hinduism must include sociological, anthropological, cultural, historical, etc., aspects, a separate study on Hinduism in its religious aspects gives a microcosmic view of the faith and beliefs on which the rest of the life of a Hindu revolves.1 So this book by Jesuit scholars will help non-Hindus to understand theoretically about the religious standpoints of various types of Hindus, and Hindus themselves will find it useful to comprehend a ‘theological’ basis for the practical life which is centered on their religious faith.
Having so highly recommended the book, the merits of various essays and approaches will not be listed in detail. Rather, some weaknesses that are present should be brought to the notice of those who act on the recommendation to read and study the book. These weaknesses are found both in the overall approach and then in numerous details.
Considering the broad agenda of the book, its stated aim is to ‘help Christian teachers in schools and colleges to understand and rightly appreciate the religious background of their Hindu students’ (p. 23). This is so that they can teach ethics and basic principles of spiritual life with reference to the religious beliefs and practices of those students. Yet the aim is not merely ‘to help (italics original) them to deepen their understanding of their ancient tradition and weigh its value in truth, holiness and universality’ (p.24), but also to prepare teachers for dialogue as ‘the essays offered in this book did arise from their authors’ “dialogical” practice…’. Hence the value of this book increases as each topic ends with a ‘Conclusion’, which of course is written based on their Catholic faith.
Now the main question that arises is ‘does this book achieve its purpose?’ The editors believe that it has, as they boast that ‘many Christian social workers in daily association with Hindu collaborators have also benefited from this book’ (p. 23). Above all ‘the dialogical attitude of the authors of Religious Hinduism has already been emulated by many Christian teachers and has also influenced even Hindu university teachers who found this book a great help for their teaching’ (italics added) (p. 24). In light of this last statement it should be noted that in the present day ideology of religious pluralism the very purpose and even meaning of ‘dialogue’ has undergone various changes, and this is powerfully illustrated in this fourth revised edition. Here the final chapter (‘The Present Situation’) says absolutely nothing about evangelism, whereas this was a if not the major point of this same chapter in the third edition from 1968. Hence a cloud covers the aim and understanding of ‘dialogical practice’.2 And readers need to be alert to these presuppositions which underlie almost every chapter in the book.
Moving to more specific problems the following points should be noted, starting with errors in interpretation. In a number of places speculation seems to reign above fact. For example, in the attempt to trace out some ‘Religious Discoveries’ (chapter 3) of ancient Aryans related to radical questions of life, R. de Smet says that ‘they [Vedic Indians] did not make wild guesses nor opted for simple animistic or naturalistic solutions but thought they should conceive the unknown on the basis of the known’. He proceeds to suggest that they developed their theology from their own social paradigm based on the jaati (caste) system. Even if we agree with this speculative theory it must be said that not jaati but only varna was the existing social pattern.
Surely all will agree that this speculative hypothesis is carried too far when it is applied to the question of whether men can help the devaas to maintain the rta (cosmic order) (p.67). De Smet suggests that
Again the answer was found from what happened in their society. Just as they fed their servants well and praised them to keep them happy in their service, they would feed (through fire offerings and libations) and praise (through hymns) the cosmic servants. This would be the yajna, the Vedic sacrifice. (Emphasis in original.)
Our common experience even today shows that no servants are well fed or praised by their masters, particularly in Oriental countries (cf. Lk.17: 7-9). Above all, comparing the hymns of the Veda with human appreciation (if at all the servants are appreciated) is a poor comparison and an outright degradation of the sacred scriptures of the Hindus. While the samhitas (hymns) are considered sacred the praise of a master is nothing more than flattery.
Truly there is need for critical analysis and constructive criticism of Hindu scriptures and values, and the stated purpose for such is commendable indeed (‘not meant to encourage controversy but to render our Hindu-Christian dialogue fully sincere and truthful’, p. 29). But when such critical analyses are done based on mere assumption one must protest. For example, on Hindu ethics, the author (R.Antoine) says, ‘In the context of bhakti, morality seems to acquire more substance. Yet, even here, the ambiguity is not totally dispelled.’ For this he quotes Gita 18:61-61 and continues,
If in those verses the term maayaa means ‘magical’ rather than “wonderful power”, then how am I to be sure that my supreme act of
surrender is not the final trick of the divine magician? For all I know, that supreme act instead of giving full meaning to my life may be as meaningless as all my other actions. (p. 157).
No commentator on the Gita nor any ordinary bhakta who totally surrenders will ever take maayaa as meaning ‘magical trick’ by God, and even if so a sincere bhakta would merely accept it without question. But the beautiful irony here is that while to this author the words of the Gita are empty ‘magic’, to another they are a source of grace! (As J. Neuner says in his conclusion, ‘Those who are able to pray in the words of the Gita are certainly touched by the grace of God and have set out, in deep earnestness and resolve, on the path of the greatest deed man can do, his surrender to God’. (Pg. 290))
Genuine dialogue demands mutual respect, however we may disagree with each other. This seems lacking when Fr. R. Antoine says that the claims of modern Hindu reformers are ‘irritating’ to Christians. If there is validity in his pointing out an element of ‘self-complacency’ in Hindu reformers’ claims that ‘all the new moral values were in fact contained in the old tradition’, a counter point that irritates Hindus can be made about the triumphalistic Christian claim that all the modern reforms in Hinduism are the result of ‘contact with Christianity, either in its religious form or through the medium of a secularism which offers diluted Christian values’. Especially objectionable is his conclusion that ‘we can rejoice because the true ethical values are proclaimed and some good is done, even though not in the name of the Gospel’ (p.168). Not only will this ‘irritate’ the modern Reformers, the Fundamentalists will react strongly to the claim of credit to the gospel for all the ethical values and good works done by modern Hindus. My objection is theological: the gospel is good news, not ethical values nor good works. Ethical and moral teachings are universal, present in every religious system.* The gospel is the good news of redemption, not just another social reformation. It is regeneration bringing new values not just restoration of ethical norms, which are forgotten but always revived again.
True dialogue also requires the acceptance of our own mistakes and failures, especially from those whose Lord spoke as recorded in Mat. 7:3-5. Yet we have the following statements: ‘If the untouchables and depressed classes, becoming more conscious of their social importance, decided to leave Hinduism for Christianity or Buddhism, where they would no longer suffer from the disabilities of caste distinctions….In spite of their official and ritualistic integration into Hinduism, the depressed classes have not yet gained religious and social equality with caste-Hindus’ (italics added, p.166). Wonderful statements and we wish it should become real in practice at least within Christianity (including Roman Catholics). The terrible fact is that conversion, particularly to Christianity, never gave religious and social equality between low and high caste Christians (yes, even high caste Catholics). The regular clashes between the dalit Catholics and caste Catholics during their annual local festivals are common phenomena in Tamilnadu.
Protestant readers will struggle with some distinctly Roman Catholic discussions and comparisons, as in the distinction between doulia (worship of angels and saints) as distinguished by the Catholic Church from latria (worship of adoration reserved to God alone). This is especially striking in comparing devas and devis (semi-divine subordinate beings) with angels and archangels in the Catholic universe. And we are told that ‘the life of the Trinity [is] communicated to us and unfolded before our eyes’ not only ‘in the Person of Christ’, but also ‘in the lives of Mary and the Saints.’ (p. 129).
Finally, some other minor errors can be pointed out, without suggesting that this list is exhaustive. A few passages from Hindu scriptures are quoted without giving the references on pp. 110, 111 and 118. At Tanjore Siva is called as ‘Brhadiisvarer’ not as ‘Vrhadiisvar’ (p.119) (south is not like north India where the letter ‘B’ and ‘V’ are always interchangeable, as ‘Vishnu’ is sometimes ‘Bishnu’ and ‘Veerender’ as ‘Beerender’, etc.) As far as my knowledge goes Jyesthaa (for Sitalaa) is not in Tamilnadu (p. 125). Sad-mukha is not seven heads (p.142). Sad in Sanskrit means six and Sad-mukha is called in Tamil as ‘Shanmukam’ which is also ‘Aarumugam’ (Aaru-six; mugam-face) and all these mean six-headed. Aaruur is not Tiruvallur in the Tanjore District (p. 321) but rather is Tiruvaaruur in that district; Tiruvallur is in Chengalpet district near Chennai. On page 358 ‘religious dramas’ are called as ‘yaatraa’ which is doubtful as yaatraa means travel or better pilgrimage. And finally no reference is given for the verse of Vyasa Dharmaad arthas-ca Kaamas-ca so dharmah kim na sevayate: From religion are obtained both wealth and delights, Then why not practice religion since it is such? p. 400). And note that the word ‘Dharma’ is translated as ‘Religion’, of which Vyasa surely would never have approved.
These problems in mind, this remains a book eminently worthy of study.
Notes
1. This point is well illustrated by the last two topics (on Gandhiji and on the present situation) which give a glimpse of how even a political or social reformation is impossible without a proper appraisal of religious aspects of Hinduism:
2. Related to this is the fact that this book is not for a ‘proselytizer’ but for an ‘evangelizer’. Evangelization is defined as including an understanding that ‘for the majority of human beings it is within and through the helps provided by their religions that under God’s grace they live as pilgrims of eternity and reach the blissful intuition of the absolute God which is the end willed by Him for all his rational creatures’ (p. 26, italics original).
* But Blamires insists that the battle for civilization is not the same thing as the battle for the kingdom of God and warns against identifying the two:
Desperate as we Christians are to stem the tide of immorality and degeneracy; we must not pretend that it is simply qua [as] Christians that we man the barricades. It is an insult to paganism to suggest that it is only by virtue of our Christian conscience that we are offended by the collapse of morlity and public decency. It is not just St.Paul, St.Augustine, John Bunyan, or John Wesley who would be horrified at what we have come to acquiesce in the way of legalized embryonicide and pornography Surely Virgil and Seneca, Plato and Plotinus would be horrified too (Harry Blamires, Where Do We Stand? An Examination of the Christian's Position in the Modern World [Ann Arbor, Mich.:Servant, 1980], p.17)
Power Religion, The Selling Out Of The Evangelical Church? Michael Scott Horton, Editor, Moody Press, Chicago,1992, p.56
Religious Hinduism
(Fourth Revised Edition, R. De Smet and J. Neuner, Editors,
St. Paul’s Publications, 1997)
Reviewed by Dayanand Bharati
This is a volume of outstanding merit and one can only hope that it will be widely read. These 29 essays contributed by scholars who have authority in their own respective fields truly amount to a mini encyclopaedia on Hinduism. Beginning from Vedic times and ending in the present situation this book covers all essential topics on religious Hinduism.
One may well argue that Hinduism is dharma, not religion in a strict academic sense; but this dharma not only includes religious aspects but is also centered on what in English we call ‘religion’. Hence while a proper study on Hinduism must include sociological, anthropological, cultural, historical, etc., aspects, a separate study on Hinduism in its religious aspects gives a microcosmic view of the faith and beliefs on which the rest of the life of a Hindu revolves.1 So this book by Jesuit scholars will help non-Hindus to understand theoretically about the religious standpoints of various types of Hindus, and Hindus themselves will find it useful to comprehend a ‘theological’ basis for the practical life which is centered on their religious faith.
Having so highly recommended the book, the merits of various essays and approaches will not be listed in detail. Rather, some weaknesses that are present should be brought to the notice of those who act on the recommendation to read and study the book. These weaknesses are found both in the overall approach and then in numerous details.
Considering the broad agenda of the book, its stated aim is to ‘help Christian teachers in schools and colleges to understand and rightly appreciate the religious background of their Hindu students’ (p. 23). This is so that they can teach ethics and basic principles of spiritual life with reference to the religious beliefs and practices of those students. Yet the aim is not merely ‘to help (italics original) them to deepen their understanding of their ancient tradition and weigh its value in truth, holiness and universality’ (p.24), but also to prepare teachers for dialogue as ‘the essays offered in this book did arise from their authors’ “dialogical” practice…’. Hence the value of this book increases as each topic ends with a ‘Conclusion’, which of course is written based on their Catholic faith.
Now the main question that arises is ‘does this book achieve its purpose?’ The editors believe that it has, as they boast that ‘many Christian social workers in daily association with Hindu collaborators have also benefited from this book’ (p. 23). Above all ‘the dialogical attitude of the authors of Religious Hinduism has already been emulated by many Christian teachers and has also influenced even Hindu university teachers who found this book a great help for their teaching’ (italics added) (p. 24). In light of this last statement it should be noted that in the present day ideology of religious pluralism the very purpose and even meaning of ‘dialogue’ has undergone various changes, and this is powerfully illustrated in this fourth revised edition. Here the final chapter (‘The Present Situation’) says absolutely nothing about evangelism, whereas this was a if not the major point of this same chapter in the third edition from 1968. Hence a cloud covers the aim and understanding of ‘dialogical practice’.2 And readers need to be alert to these presuppositions which underlie almost every chapter in the book.
Moving to more specific problems the following points should be noted, starting with errors in interpretation. In a number of places speculation seems to reign above fact. For example, in the attempt to trace out some ‘Religious Discoveries’ (chapter 3) of ancient Aryans related to radical questions of life, R. de Smet says that ‘they [Vedic Indians] did not make wild guesses nor opted for simple animistic or naturalistic solutions but thought they should conceive the unknown on the basis of the known’. He proceeds to suggest that they developed their theology from their own social paradigm based on the jaati (caste) system. Even if we agree with this speculative theory it must be said that not jaati but only varna was the existing social pattern.
Surely all will agree that this speculative hypothesis is carried too far when it is applied to the question of whether men can help the devaas to maintain the rta (cosmic order) (p.67). De Smet suggests that
Again the answer was found from what happened in their society. Just as they fed their servants well and praised them to keep them happy in their service, they would feed (through fire offerings and libations) and praise (through hymns) the cosmic servants. This would be the yajna, the Vedic sacrifice. (Emphasis in original.)
Our common experience even today shows that no servants are well fed or praised by their masters, particularly in Oriental countries (cf. Lk.17: 7-9). Above all, comparing the hymns of the Veda with human appreciation (if at all the servants are appreciated) is a poor comparison and an outright degradation of the sacred scriptures of the Hindus. While the samhitas (hymns) are considered sacred the praise of a master is nothing more than flattery.
Truly there is need for critical analysis and constructive criticism of Hindu scriptures and values, and the stated purpose for such is commendable indeed (‘not meant to encourage controversy but to render our Hindu-Christian dialogue fully sincere and truthful’, p. 29). But when such critical analyses are done based on mere assumption one must protest. For example, on Hindu ethics, the author (R.Antoine) says, ‘In the context of bhakti, morality seems to acquire more substance. Yet, even here, the ambiguity is not totally dispelled.’ For this he quotes Gita 18:61-61 and continues,
If in those verses the term maayaa means ‘magical’ rather than “wonderful power”, then how am I to be sure that my supreme act of
surrender is not the final trick of the divine magician? For all I know, that supreme act instead of giving full meaning to my life may be as meaningless as all my other actions. (p. 157).
No commentator on the Gita nor any ordinary bhakta who totally surrenders will ever take maayaa as meaning ‘magical trick’ by God, and even if so a sincere bhakta would merely accept it without question. But the beautiful irony here is that while to this author the words of the Gita are empty ‘magic’, to another they are a source of grace! (As J. Neuner says in his conclusion, ‘Those who are able to pray in the words of the Gita are certainly touched by the grace of God and have set out, in deep earnestness and resolve, on the path of the greatest deed man can do, his surrender to God’. (Pg. 290))
Genuine dialogue demands mutual respect, however we may disagree with each other. This seems lacking when Fr. R. Antoine says that the claims of modern Hindu reformers are ‘irritating’ to Christians. If there is validity in his pointing out an element of ‘self-complacency’ in Hindu reformers’ claims that ‘all the new moral values were in fact contained in the old tradition’, a counter point that irritates Hindus can be made about the triumphalistic Christian claim that all the modern reforms in Hinduism are the result of ‘contact with Christianity, either in its religious form or through the medium of a secularism which offers diluted Christian values’. Especially objectionable is his conclusion that ‘we can rejoice because the true ethical values are proclaimed and some good is done, even though not in the name of the Gospel’ (p.168). Not only will this ‘irritate’ the modern Reformers, the Fundamentalists will react strongly to the claim of credit to the gospel for all the ethical values and good works done by modern Hindus. My objection is theological: the gospel is good news, not ethical values nor good works. Ethical and moral teachings are universal, present in every religious system.* The gospel is the good news of redemption, not just another social reformation. It is regeneration bringing new values not just restoration of ethical norms, which are forgotten but always revived again.
True dialogue also requires the acceptance of our own mistakes and failures, especially from those whose Lord spoke as recorded in Mat. 7:3-5. Yet we have the following statements: ‘If the untouchables and depressed classes, becoming more conscious of their social importance, decided to leave Hinduism for Christianity or Buddhism, where they would no longer suffer from the disabilities of caste distinctions….In spite of their official and ritualistic integration into Hinduism, the depressed classes have not yet gained religious and social equality with caste-Hindus’ (italics added, p.166). Wonderful statements and we wish it should become real in practice at least within Christianity (including Roman Catholics). The terrible fact is that conversion, particularly to Christianity, never gave religious and social equality between low and high caste Christians (yes, even high caste Catholics). The regular clashes between the dalit Catholics and caste Catholics during their annual local festivals are common phenomena in Tamilnadu.
Protestant readers will struggle with some distinctly Roman Catholic discussions and comparisons, as in the distinction between doulia (worship of angels and saints) as distinguished by the Catholic Church from latria (worship of adoration reserved to God alone). This is especially striking in comparing devas and devis (semi-divine subordinate beings) with angels and archangels in the Catholic universe. And we are told that ‘the life of the Trinity [is] communicated to us and unfolded before our eyes’ not only ‘in the Person of Christ’, but also ‘in the lives of Mary and the Saints.’ (p. 129).
Finally, some other minor errors can be pointed out, without suggesting that this list is exhaustive. A few passages from Hindu scriptures are quoted without giving the references on pp. 110, 111 and 118. At Tanjore Siva is called as ‘Brhadiisvarer’ not as ‘Vrhadiisvar’ (p.119) (south is not like north India where the letter ‘B’ and ‘V’ are always interchangeable, as ‘Vishnu’ is sometimes ‘Bishnu’ and ‘Veerender’ as ‘Beerender’, etc.) As far as my knowledge goes Jyesthaa (for Sitalaa) is not in Tamilnadu (p. 125). Sad-mukha is not seven heads (p.142). Sad in Sanskrit means six and Sad-mukha is called in Tamil as ‘Shanmukam’ which is also ‘Aarumugam’ (Aaru-six; mugam-face) and all these mean six-headed. Aaruur is not Tiruvallur in the Tanjore District (p. 321) but rather is Tiruvaaruur in that district; Tiruvallur is in Chengalpet district near Chennai. On page 358 ‘religious dramas’ are called as ‘yaatraa’ which is doubtful as yaatraa means travel or better pilgrimage. And finally no reference is given for the verse of Vyasa Dharmaad arthas-ca Kaamas-ca so dharmah kim na sevayate: From religion are obtained both wealth and delights, Then why not practice religion since it is such? p. 400). And note that the word ‘Dharma’ is translated as ‘Religion’, of which Vyasa surely would never have approved.
These problems in mind, this remains a book eminently worthy of study.
Notes
1. This point is well illustrated by the last two topics (on Gandhiji and on the present situation) which give a glimpse of how even a political or social reformation is impossible without a proper appraisal of religious aspects of Hinduism:
2. Related to this is the fact that this book is not for a ‘proselytizer’ but for an ‘evangelizer’. Evangelization is defined as including an understanding that ‘for the majority of human beings it is within and through the helps provided by their religions that under God’s grace they live as pilgrims of eternity and reach the blissful intuition of the absolute God which is the end willed by Him for all his rational creatures’ (p. 26, italics original).
* But Blamires insists that the battle for civilization is not the same thing as the battle for the kingdom of God and warns against identifying the two:
Desperate as we Christians are to stem the tide of immorality and degeneracy; we must not pretend that it is simply qua [as] Christians that we man the barricades. It is an insult to paganism to suggest that it is only by virtue of our Christian conscience that we are offended by the collapse of morlity and public decency. It is not just St.Paul, St.Augustine, John Bunyan, or John Wesley who would be horrified at what we have come to acquiesce in the way of legalized embryonicide and pornography Surely Virgil and Seneca, Plato and Plotinus would be horrified too (Harry Blamires, Where Do We Stand? An Examination of the Christian's Position in the Modern World [Ann Arbor, Mich.:Servant, 1980], p.17)
Power Religion, The Selling Out Of The Evangelical Church? Michael Scott Horton, Editor, Moody Press, Chicago,1992, p.56
Book Review
The Bhagavadgita As A Synthesis
(by M.R.Yardi, Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Poona, 1991)
reviewed by Dayanand Bharati
One man's blessing becomes another man's problem. This is especially true in the field of academic scholarly works on scriptures. Scholars may be a blessing to society in some ways, but their scholarship at other times becomes a problem to the layman who tries to practice his faith in day to day life with less intellectual but more experiential (or existential) understanding. The subtle problems that scholars can create for the lay people are due to the fact that they can write with pre-conceived ideas (even with some prejudice) and yet impose their views on the layman as the Truth about the Scripture which exercises great influence in the latter's life. Thanks be to God that in most cases the lay people (of every faith under the sun) pay more attention to the brahmajnanis not to the brahmavadins.
Here is one more book on a scholarly level on the Gita, about which the writing of books is never going to end. M. R. Yardi has two major divisions, the first (Introduction) dealing with the topic of the book (the Gita as a synthesis) and the second giving the Gita in Sanskrit text and English translation. As this book has been published by Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute of Poona we assume that Yardi is a profound scholar. But the largest of a number of problems with the book is that for Yardi to say what he wants to say on his theme he could have written an article alone on the subject. Though it is granted that extra information about the subject in discussion will help the reader, yet on the Gita in particular there is already volumious information widely disseminated.
Regarding the subject of his book, "Gita As A Synthesis", Yardi gives little helpful insight in the meager eleven pages devoted to this point. He gives the usual delineation of influences seen in the Gita, i.e. Vedanta philosophy, Sankhya with its allied system Yoga, the Pancaratra religion and the Lokayata system. Regarding the teaching of the Gita no two scholars are going to agree with each other, as Yardi himself says: "The illustrious commentators of the Gita, however, lost sight of this syncretic approach and tried to prove that it fully endorsed only the philosophical doctrines held by them" (p.74). Yardi comes very close to agreeing with Tilak's karmayoga as the central teaching of the Gita, while boldly refuting Sri Sankara's views on several points ("It is true that in order to bolster up his case, Sri Sankara interprets certain words in a manner which one may find it difficult to accept..." p. 121). Yet one suspects that Yardi at times is himself guilty of what he has said about the "illustrous commentators", i.e. has himself tried a bit too hard to prove his preconceived thought that the Gita is a synthesis.
An objection must also be raised to Yardi's yielding to speculation regarding the date and authorship of the Gita. Yardi goes against standard theories and suggests that Krishna was indeed a historical figure who is responsible for the Gita; Krishna passed it to Sauti who is the inscriber. That this suggestion will not win approval from a consensus of scholars goes without saying; why do scholars commit themselves to impossible theories? This can set a trend for lesser mortals also to engage in insubstantiable guess work.
Just this is evident again from a new ministry ("Let's Reason Together") in south India, in which Dr. Alexander Harris is writing some tracts with a completely negative approach and in an unreasonable way, which is going to help no one including himself to harvest anything. The main problem in such writings is that they are clearly propaganda, obviously influenced by prejudice. The vision for ministry among high caste and educated people (for example in the tract "Brahmins Awake") embarrass others in sincere encounters with these caste and educated people. Dr.Harris has read Nirad C. Chaudhuri's highly speculative thesis regarding the late date of the Gita and other Sanskrit literature, and without noting the fact that few if any scholars agree with Chaudhuri he puts forth his views as undeniable facts.
Now Yardi gives another extreme from Chaudhuri; he quite definitively dates the Gita at 450 B. C., based on evidence that was soundly refuted by P. V. Kane decades ago. (Kane's study raises serious questions about aspects of Yardi's synthesis thesis as well; one would expect at least a footnote reference to other opinions and an effort at demonstrating why earlier esteemed scholars were wrong.) The point here is, one should not impose his own ideas on lay people based on mere assumptions, intellectual guess work or tentative accounts, when there is no strong historical proofs; and particularly this is the case in comparing one religious scripture with another as by Christians.
So though this book gives a lot of valuable information about the Gita and subjects related to it, it deserves not serious attention except from scholars who may use it as one more pearl added in the crown of the Gita.
The Bhagavadgita As A Synthesis
(by M.R.Yardi, Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Poona, 1991)
reviewed by Dayanand Bharati
One man's blessing becomes another man's problem. This is especially true in the field of academic scholarly works on scriptures. Scholars may be a blessing to society in some ways, but their scholarship at other times becomes a problem to the layman who tries to practice his faith in day to day life with less intellectual but more experiential (or existential) understanding. The subtle problems that scholars can create for the lay people are due to the fact that they can write with pre-conceived ideas (even with some prejudice) and yet impose their views on the layman as the Truth about the Scripture which exercises great influence in the latter's life. Thanks be to God that in most cases the lay people (of every faith under the sun) pay more attention to the brahmajnanis not to the brahmavadins.
Here is one more book on a scholarly level on the Gita, about which the writing of books is never going to end. M. R. Yardi has two major divisions, the first (Introduction) dealing with the topic of the book (the Gita as a synthesis) and the second giving the Gita in Sanskrit text and English translation. As this book has been published by Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute of Poona we assume that Yardi is a profound scholar. But the largest of a number of problems with the book is that for Yardi to say what he wants to say on his theme he could have written an article alone on the subject. Though it is granted that extra information about the subject in discussion will help the reader, yet on the Gita in particular there is already volumious information widely disseminated.
Regarding the subject of his book, "Gita As A Synthesis", Yardi gives little helpful insight in the meager eleven pages devoted to this point. He gives the usual delineation of influences seen in the Gita, i.e. Vedanta philosophy, Sankhya with its allied system Yoga, the Pancaratra religion and the Lokayata system. Regarding the teaching of the Gita no two scholars are going to agree with each other, as Yardi himself says: "The illustrious commentators of the Gita, however, lost sight of this syncretic approach and tried to prove that it fully endorsed only the philosophical doctrines held by them" (p.74). Yardi comes very close to agreeing with Tilak's karmayoga as the central teaching of the Gita, while boldly refuting Sri Sankara's views on several points ("It is true that in order to bolster up his case, Sri Sankara interprets certain words in a manner which one may find it difficult to accept..." p. 121). Yet one suspects that Yardi at times is himself guilty of what he has said about the "illustrous commentators", i.e. has himself tried a bit too hard to prove his preconceived thought that the Gita is a synthesis.
An objection must also be raised to Yardi's yielding to speculation regarding the date and authorship of the Gita. Yardi goes against standard theories and suggests that Krishna was indeed a historical figure who is responsible for the Gita; Krishna passed it to Sauti who is the inscriber. That this suggestion will not win approval from a consensus of scholars goes without saying; why do scholars commit themselves to impossible theories? This can set a trend for lesser mortals also to engage in insubstantiable guess work.
Just this is evident again from a new ministry ("Let's Reason Together") in south India, in which Dr. Alexander Harris is writing some tracts with a completely negative approach and in an unreasonable way, which is going to help no one including himself to harvest anything. The main problem in such writings is that they are clearly propaganda, obviously influenced by prejudice. The vision for ministry among high caste and educated people (for example in the tract "Brahmins Awake") embarrass others in sincere encounters with these caste and educated people. Dr.Harris has read Nirad C. Chaudhuri's highly speculative thesis regarding the late date of the Gita and other Sanskrit literature, and without noting the fact that few if any scholars agree with Chaudhuri he puts forth his views as undeniable facts.
Now Yardi gives another extreme from Chaudhuri; he quite definitively dates the Gita at 450 B. C., based on evidence that was soundly refuted by P. V. Kane decades ago. (Kane's study raises serious questions about aspects of Yardi's synthesis thesis as well; one would expect at least a footnote reference to other opinions and an effort at demonstrating why earlier esteemed scholars were wrong.) The point here is, one should not impose his own ideas on lay people based on mere assumptions, intellectual guess work or tentative accounts, when there is no strong historical proofs; and particularly this is the case in comparing one religious scripture with another as by Christians.
So though this book gives a lot of valuable information about the Gita and subjects related to it, it deserves not serious attention except from scholars who may use it as one more pearl added in the crown of the Gita.
Rethinking Caste
by Dayanand Bharati
Caste is too often presented simplistically, distorting the complex reality of Indian life. New sociological studies are demonstrating the complexity and diversity of caste as experienced by different caste communities in different parts of India. A recent compilation of works by various scholars points in the right direction for clear thinking on this important topic. The volume, Caste in Question: Identity or Hierarchy? (Sage Publications, New Delhi, 2004) is edited by Dipankar Gupta, sociology professor at Jawaharla Nehru University in Delhi.
Asking the right question, this book also gives the correct answer about caste, which is more an identity and not merely about hierarchy. This question is relevant on various levels, since "the idea of caste has been very deeply embedded in the modern Indian self-image" (Jodka, p. 187). Of course, "This is partly because, to a large extent, the Indian self-image is itself a mirror reflection of the orientalist and colonial images of India" (ibid.). This self-image (based on Orientalist and colonial constructions) is important for understanding the very complex questions about caste in India.
Any study of India primarily based on texts, at the expense of sociological contexts, will only mislead, and particularly this is true in regard to caste. Challenging the traditional view of a caste as a "single all-encompassing hierarchy" (Gupta, p. vii), the authors of the articles in this book do not give mere theoretical conclusions based on some scripture or text, but present the results of their field research. This research was carried on at a pan-Indian level among various castes and religious communities. It clearly portrays a different picture from what is usually accumulated from ancient texts.
Change and continuity mark every living civilization. Particularly Indian civilization survived because of its adaptability and flexibility, and this is clearly reflected in the area of caste. Though caste has now become a question of "identity," yet it has not completely lost all aspects of "hierarchy." Dipankar Gupta points out that
No doubt our undue dependence on literary texts has obscured from our view the true nature of caste. If caste identities are today visible everywhere to the naked eye it is not because this is a new attribute but because our obsession with the pure hierarchy did not allow us to see this phenomenon in its true colours. If caste and politics now dominate power calculations in India, this should not be taken to mean that caste was impervious to politics in the past. What has happened instead is that castes today have a different context in which they can express their identity-driven politics. As the context has undergone major modifications (such as through urbanization, adult franchise, etc.), caste identities are expressing themselves differently from the ways they did before.
In this sense it would be incorrect to rush to the conclusion that castes have changed in contemporary India. What we should acknowledge instead is that contemporary transparencies have brought to light aspects of caste that were previously darkened by imperfect lenses. Caste has not changed, but the potentialities that were always there within this stratificatory system are now out in the open, and in full view. True, contemporary contexts should be congratulated for allowing us to see these "certitudes" in caste….Castes cannot change intrinsically as long as they are fundamentally founded on identities that draw their sustenance from a rhetoric of natural differences that are imbued with notions of purity and impurity: as the saying goes, the more things change the more they are the same. (pp. xix-xx)
This review will draw out various themes about caste that are developed in this fine collection of articles. Right from editor Gupta's introduction it is clear that the traditional Brahminical hierarchical view of caste does not stand up to the contextual studies presented in this book:
The articles in this volume begin with the assumption of assertive caste identities that are in no way embarrassed by Brahmanical renditions. In fact, none of the contributions in this selection could have been imagined if the Brahman notion of hierarchy were really as definitive as scholars and members of the literati often tend to assume. (p. xii)
This traditional position of a Brahmanical hierarchy, which was the single paradigm to understand caste, was promoted in Dumont's recent study.1 This view, "biased towards the Brahminical interpretation…did not take into account other points of view;" particularly
The origin tales make it quite clear that most of the castes in the villages associate themselves with the Kshatriya varna category, and none of them with the Shudra category. Such a position taken by castes, including those belonging to the "Scheduled Caste" category, should not be construed as a case of "Sanskritisation" guided by an all-encompassing ideology based on the religious principle of purity and pollution….All castes in the villages, including the depressed lower castes, consider themselves pure in religious terms. (Sahay, pp. 119, 120)2
It is important to note, as Gaurang Sahay shows, that the
hierarchy that actually gets to work its will on others in a caste society is the hierarchy of the economically and politically powerful. This does not mean, however, that other hierarchies are not there, waiting in the wings, as it were, to claim their rightful place in the sun. A single hierarchy, whether Brahmin or Kshatriya, is a bit too parlous to accommodate the multiple nodes along which castes can, and do, operate. (Ibid. p. 115)
It is now clear that instead of a "single all-encompassing hierarchy" (Gupta, p. vii.), it is rather the case that "assertive caste identities articulate alternative hierarchies" (ibid., p. x.), of course with "hardly any unanimity on ranking between jatis." (ibid.).
This, of course, does not negate the fact that
the castes that are depressed in the villages, such as the "Scheduled Castes" and many "Backward Castes," believe that their present condition is an outcome either of misdeeds committed by their forefathers or of elite caste (such as Brahmin) chicanery. They maintain that those who consider them less pure or impure impose on them certain rules, ideologies, ritual practices and styles of life. (Sahay, p. 120)
Though this is true, yet "in fact, each caste has a notion of caste hierarchy which is constantly contested by other castes" (ibid., p. 124). Sahay points out that
Gupta argues that overemphasis on any single hierarchy, whether Brahmin or Kshatriya, ignores the fact that there is no caste that is not proud of its legacy, beliefs and practices. It is for this reason, he urges, that castes should first be apprehended in terms of "discrete categories," attentive to what each caste considers to be its intrinsic worth. (Ibid. p.115)
Sahay's essay casts serious doubt on the dominance of the Sanskritization phenomena (i.e., that lower castes seek to make cultural and ritual adjustments to the higher (Brahminical) norms so as to rise in social status):
The concept of Sanskritisation is based on the understanding that in the caste hierarchy, lower or "non-twice born" castes do not value their own customs, rituals, ideologies and styles of life. That is why they always try to give them up by imitating the customs, rituals, ideology and way of life of a higher "twice born" caste.
Regardless of what may have happened in the past, castes with economic and political power do not think of Sanskritising their style of life but instead re-emphasise their discrete character by highlighting the superiority of their own ideologies, customs, rituals and styles of life. They are not at all ashamed of their identities, but on the contrary, feel proud of them. (Ibid. p. 121)
The reality of vertical mobility to improve caste status must also be noted. John E. Cort discusses various aspects of this in his study on "Jains, Caste and Hierarchy in North Gujarat." First he shows how the Patels in their rise up the caste hierarchy did not emulate Brahmins, but rather Vaisyas:
When the Patels started to achieve economics success in the mid-19th century as successful farmers, and then as successful industrialists and merchants, the caste-grouping they chose to emulate in order to raise their status was not the Brahmans or the Rajputs, but the Vaaniyaas….the highest status Brahmans in Gujarat have been the Naagar Brahmans, not because of any ritual or scholarly qualifications, but because they are the one jaati of Brahmans that has been able to compete successfully with the Vaaniyaas as merchants. (Cort, pp. 80-81.)
The Jain perspective demonstrates varying meanings behind common activities. "For the Jains, purity as defined by the Brahmans is a secondary, social (saamaajik) value, without any ultimate soteriological importance (ibid., p. 83). Jains will accept food cooked by Brahmins, but not because they consider Brahmins to be pure:
Both Jains and Brahmans accept the food because it is cooked by a Brahman; but the Jains accept it for the additional reason that it is Jain food cooked according to the laws of ahimsa….The underlying ideology of purity here is not a Brahmanical one, but rather a Jain one of ahimsa. (Ibid. pp. 84-85)
Note that Jain mythology "derided Brahman claims to superiority" (ibid. p. 101), even showing that since "a Brahman is unworthy of bearing a Jina, Mahavir’s embryo was then transferred to the womb of a Ksatriya woman at the intervention of several deities" (ibid. p. 101).
Surinder Jodhka's field research in Punjab focused on the Dalit caste of Ad-Dharmis. Despite Sikh egalitarian principles and the general weakness of Brahmanical ideology in Punjab, still it remained true that "different servicing castes were tied to the landowning cultivators within the framework of the jajmani system" (p. 175). "While the Sikh reformers attacked caste, the Sikh leadership, having become aware of the significance of numbers, did not deny the existence of caste among the Sikhs or that the low castes among the Sikhs faced disabilities due to their birth" (ibid. p. 179).3 Resisting this, the Ad-Dharmis "insisted they be listed as a separate religious community and not be clubbed with the Hindus. After independence, the Ad-Dharmis were listed as one of the Scheduled Castes of the Punjab and were clubbed with the Hindus once again" (ibid. pp. 180-81).
These case studies from other religious communities demonstrate the "need to abandon the attempt to locate a single ideology behind the practice of caste throughout the subcontinent" (Cort, p. 102). However Jodhka, quoting Gupta, accepts the fact that "the underlying assumption of it [caste] being a pan-Indian reality is rarely questioned….when it comes to theorising about the caste system it is the book-view that tends to dominate."4 One of the main reasons for this is the acceptance of "colonial and orientalist notions of Indian civilization" (Jodhka, p. 187).5
The most complex and contested area in caste study relates to the Dalits (formerly "untouchables"). G.K. Karnath particularly looked at the replication of high caste ways (Sanskritization) by low castes in Karnataka. He suggests that
By drawing on empirical evidence from a Karnataka village, this article attempts to refute the idea of a passive acceptance of a low and subordinate status by the former Untouchable castes. It aims to show that the apparent replication may also be viewed as one of the ways of articulating an independent cultural identity, besides demonstrating dissent against the hegemonic social order. In the process, the article makes an attempt to refocus the Dumontian discourse from "replication and consensus" to "hegemony and dissent." (Karnath, p. 137)
This he shows in the case of the Madigas:
The Madigas wanted to carry on with their traditional practice of buffalo sacrifice regardless of its supposed opposition to Hindu values according to the definition of the dominant social order. This is not a replication resulting from exclusion from the dominant order or consensus with it, but a reaffirmation of a distinct cultural identity. (Ibid. p. 157)
Yet, as Jodhka points out, the Dalit movement tends to share the traditional Brahminical hierarchical perspective on caste:
Caste has been seen to represent the continuity and unity of Indian culture and its social structure. Interestingly, it is not only the nationalist/Hindu ideologue, or sometimes the professional anthropologist, who makes such claims; even the contemporary dalit movement in India is mostly informed by a similar Brahmin-centric notion of caste. (Jodhka, pp. 187-88)
Further on this point, Badri Narayan shows that
The caste histories of many lower castes were written during the colonial period not by scholars of their own caste, but by Arya Samaji activists and scholars who tried to give the middle and lower castes an identity and create a space for them within the Brahminical social system. Many books were published enumerating the qualities of persons belonging to the Brahmin or Kshatriya castes. While the books that were composed by Sanatanis tried to restrict the entry of backward classes into the hallowed ranks of Brahmins and Kshatriyas, those written by Arya Samajis gave space to the lower and backward classes to claim Brahmin or Kshatriya status. Thus upper-caste characteristics were appropriated into the histories of the backward castes. (Narayan, p. 197)
But once awakened to the reality of gaining political power through caste vote-banks, leaders and scholars among the backward and low caste people "sought to win acceptance from the wider society by creating and legitimizing a space for themselves within the nationalist narratives" (ibid., pp. 200-01). This they had to do by creating a new history, by acquiring a double identity "both as members of a specific caste reiterating their caste pride, and as an important dalit-Bahujan community that had made sacrifices for the nation" (ibid. p. 216).
This double identity of the dalit caste required a new history different from, and sometimes subversive to, the sanskritic model of caste history writing that had emerged during the colonial period. They needed to create caste histories that could provide self-respect to the caste, like the gaurav gathas, which glorified dalit socio-cultural locations. These gaurav gathas mostly shifted away from Brahminical symbols, although there are still traces of the sanskritisation process. Progress towards the glorification of dalit status is quite visible in these contemporary history writings. (ibid. p. 216)
But no caste can be safe from the conniving of politicians, as they know how to politicize religion and communalize politics:
Nonetheless, some of the residual sanskritising features of the caste histories have paved the way for political forces like the BJP, who are then using the lower-caste origin myths associated with Rishis and Sants belonging to the Great Traditions to enter into the dalit space….reinterpreting dalit myths, histories and symbols in their own politically correct version, projecting the dalits as defenders of Hindu dharma and “nationalists” (rashtravadi).6 (Ibid., p. 216)
But it is not only the new Hindu right (BJP), but every political party wants to gain their own pound of flesh:
The social equations in the electoral market are apparent in the framing and re-telling of the stories by the different political parties. Through these caste histories, political parties channelise the dalit sense of identity in their own favour while at the same time swaying them against their political rivals. The use of the myth of Uda Devi, who is a part of the Pasi gaurav gatha, can be cited as an example of how various parties like the BSP, BJP, Lok Janshakti and Samajwadi Party are interpreting it in their own way to bring dalit communities, especially the Pasis, into their own fold. (Ibid. p. 219)
While these caste communities have to fight to create their own space in politics and power with the politicians, they also have to fight with other groups within their fold to keep the unity of a dalit-Bahujan collective identity. While Chamars assert that the Pasis oppressed the dalit castes on behalf of the colonial overlords, under the new political regime, the Pasis seem to be eager to minimize these contradictions by writing that Chamar interests were safeguarded by the Pasis.
There is always a struggle between ideology and reality. While "assertive caste identities articulate alternative hierarchies" (Gupta, p. x) and try to work out their own salvation by vertical mobility to improve their social status, yet, when it comes to practical life, "in ideological matters, one is not concerned with actual facts" (Narayan, p. 235). This is demonstrated by the field research done by Anuja Agrawal among the Beidas ("a 'denotified' community which lives off the prostitution of its own women," p. 221). Agrawal points out that "While the inclination of community members is to pass off as belonging to an upper caste, eligibility for state benefits requires an acceptance of their lower-caste origins" (ibid. p. 241).
Finally, the truth about caste in India is that "caste identities too undergo change," and they have never functioned as "pure ideological systems" (Jodhka, p. 189). "While ideologically it is dead, or nearly so, caste survives and thrives as a source of identity" (ibid.).
Notes
1. Dumont, Louis. 1970. Homo Hierarchicus: The Caste System and Its Implications. London: Paladin. According to Dumont, caste ranking is based on purity and impurity, and levels of purity are defined and maintained by strict control over formal ritual transactions.
2. Regarding the origin tales, Gupta rightly remarks that "Like the Brahman who must go back to the original division in the Purusasukta, each caste has its own theory explaining its origin" (in "Continuous Hierarchies and Discrete Castes", Dipandar Gupta (ed.), Social Stratification, pp. 110-41, Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1991:121). On the basis of their origin tales, the villagers claim that they have descended from one or another of the Hindu gods (pp. 116-117). This point is seen in claims of Yadavas to be descendants from Krishna; "The unifying myth of Krishna not only tells of the origins of the entire Yadav community, but also nullifies the hierarchy and ‘cultural’ differences existing within the community." Still further, modern politicians "Mulayam Singh Yadav and Laloo Prasad Yadav are at times described by their caste supporters as avataras (incarnations) of Krishna sent to earth to protect ‘the oppressed’ and promote social justice…" (Lucia Michelutti, pp. 60-61).
3. "While the gurudwara management formally invited all the others, dalits were not even informed about special programmes and festivities. Rarely were they allowed to participate in the cooking and serving of the langar in local gurudwaras" (ibid., p. 184).
4. The mainstream anthropological/sociological discourse on caste usually conceives it as a unified system that worked in more or less similar ways everywhere in India; it has invariably tended to emphasise the underlying cultural/ideological consensus across castes on its governing normative order. However, as scholars have repeatedly pointed out, Dumont constructed his theory of caste on the basis of some Hindu scriptural sources and did not care to look at the lived reality of caste
5. "Caste was the major pillar of Indology through which European-trained writers "essentialised" Indian peoples. The dissemination of these imagined essences not only denied Indians agency, but also justified European intervention in India" (ibid., p. 198).
6. Vinay Katiyar, President of the UP state unit of the BJP, has launched a campaign to propagate the BJP’s version of cultural nationalism by projecting Dr Ambedkar as anti-Muslim (Amar Ujala, 31 January 2003). (fn. 9, p. 217)
by Dayanand Bharati
Caste is too often presented simplistically, distorting the complex reality of Indian life. New sociological studies are demonstrating the complexity and diversity of caste as experienced by different caste communities in different parts of India. A recent compilation of works by various scholars points in the right direction for clear thinking on this important topic. The volume, Caste in Question: Identity or Hierarchy? (Sage Publications, New Delhi, 2004) is edited by Dipankar Gupta, sociology professor at Jawaharla Nehru University in Delhi.
Asking the right question, this book also gives the correct answer about caste, which is more an identity and not merely about hierarchy. This question is relevant on various levels, since "the idea of caste has been very deeply embedded in the modern Indian self-image" (Jodka, p. 187). Of course, "This is partly because, to a large extent, the Indian self-image is itself a mirror reflection of the orientalist and colonial images of India" (ibid.). This self-image (based on Orientalist and colonial constructions) is important for understanding the very complex questions about caste in India.
Any study of India primarily based on texts, at the expense of sociological contexts, will only mislead, and particularly this is true in regard to caste. Challenging the traditional view of a caste as a "single all-encompassing hierarchy" (Gupta, p. vii), the authors of the articles in this book do not give mere theoretical conclusions based on some scripture or text, but present the results of their field research. This research was carried on at a pan-Indian level among various castes and religious communities. It clearly portrays a different picture from what is usually accumulated from ancient texts.
Change and continuity mark every living civilization. Particularly Indian civilization survived because of its adaptability and flexibility, and this is clearly reflected in the area of caste. Though caste has now become a question of "identity," yet it has not completely lost all aspects of "hierarchy." Dipankar Gupta points out that
No doubt our undue dependence on literary texts has obscured from our view the true nature of caste. If caste identities are today visible everywhere to the naked eye it is not because this is a new attribute but because our obsession with the pure hierarchy did not allow us to see this phenomenon in its true colours. If caste and politics now dominate power calculations in India, this should not be taken to mean that caste was impervious to politics in the past. What has happened instead is that castes today have a different context in which they can express their identity-driven politics. As the context has undergone major modifications (such as through urbanization, adult franchise, etc.), caste identities are expressing themselves differently from the ways they did before.
In this sense it would be incorrect to rush to the conclusion that castes have changed in contemporary India. What we should acknowledge instead is that contemporary transparencies have brought to light aspects of caste that were previously darkened by imperfect lenses. Caste has not changed, but the potentialities that were always there within this stratificatory system are now out in the open, and in full view. True, contemporary contexts should be congratulated for allowing us to see these "certitudes" in caste….Castes cannot change intrinsically as long as they are fundamentally founded on identities that draw their sustenance from a rhetoric of natural differences that are imbued with notions of purity and impurity: as the saying goes, the more things change the more they are the same. (pp. xix-xx)
This review will draw out various themes about caste that are developed in this fine collection of articles. Right from editor Gupta's introduction it is clear that the traditional Brahminical hierarchical view of caste does not stand up to the contextual studies presented in this book:
The articles in this volume begin with the assumption of assertive caste identities that are in no way embarrassed by Brahmanical renditions. In fact, none of the contributions in this selection could have been imagined if the Brahman notion of hierarchy were really as definitive as scholars and members of the literati often tend to assume. (p. xii)
This traditional position of a Brahmanical hierarchy, which was the single paradigm to understand caste, was promoted in Dumont's recent study.1 This view, "biased towards the Brahminical interpretation…did not take into account other points of view;" particularly
The origin tales make it quite clear that most of the castes in the villages associate themselves with the Kshatriya varna category, and none of them with the Shudra category. Such a position taken by castes, including those belonging to the "Scheduled Caste" category, should not be construed as a case of "Sanskritisation" guided by an all-encompassing ideology based on the religious principle of purity and pollution….All castes in the villages, including the depressed lower castes, consider themselves pure in religious terms. (Sahay, pp. 119, 120)2
It is important to note, as Gaurang Sahay shows, that the
hierarchy that actually gets to work its will on others in a caste society is the hierarchy of the economically and politically powerful. This does not mean, however, that other hierarchies are not there, waiting in the wings, as it were, to claim their rightful place in the sun. A single hierarchy, whether Brahmin or Kshatriya, is a bit too parlous to accommodate the multiple nodes along which castes can, and do, operate. (Ibid. p. 115)
It is now clear that instead of a "single all-encompassing hierarchy" (Gupta, p. vii.), it is rather the case that "assertive caste identities articulate alternative hierarchies" (ibid., p. x.), of course with "hardly any unanimity on ranking between jatis." (ibid.).
This, of course, does not negate the fact that
the castes that are depressed in the villages, such as the "Scheduled Castes" and many "Backward Castes," believe that their present condition is an outcome either of misdeeds committed by their forefathers or of elite caste (such as Brahmin) chicanery. They maintain that those who consider them less pure or impure impose on them certain rules, ideologies, ritual practices and styles of life. (Sahay, p. 120)
Though this is true, yet "in fact, each caste has a notion of caste hierarchy which is constantly contested by other castes" (ibid., p. 124). Sahay points out that
Gupta argues that overemphasis on any single hierarchy, whether Brahmin or Kshatriya, ignores the fact that there is no caste that is not proud of its legacy, beliefs and practices. It is for this reason, he urges, that castes should first be apprehended in terms of "discrete categories," attentive to what each caste considers to be its intrinsic worth. (Ibid. p.115)
Sahay's essay casts serious doubt on the dominance of the Sanskritization phenomena (i.e., that lower castes seek to make cultural and ritual adjustments to the higher (Brahminical) norms so as to rise in social status):
The concept of Sanskritisation is based on the understanding that in the caste hierarchy, lower or "non-twice born" castes do not value their own customs, rituals, ideologies and styles of life. That is why they always try to give them up by imitating the customs, rituals, ideology and way of life of a higher "twice born" caste.
Regardless of what may have happened in the past, castes with economic and political power do not think of Sanskritising their style of life but instead re-emphasise their discrete character by highlighting the superiority of their own ideologies, customs, rituals and styles of life. They are not at all ashamed of their identities, but on the contrary, feel proud of them. (Ibid. p. 121)
The reality of vertical mobility to improve caste status must also be noted. John E. Cort discusses various aspects of this in his study on "Jains, Caste and Hierarchy in North Gujarat." First he shows how the Patels in their rise up the caste hierarchy did not emulate Brahmins, but rather Vaisyas:
When the Patels started to achieve economics success in the mid-19th century as successful farmers, and then as successful industrialists and merchants, the caste-grouping they chose to emulate in order to raise their status was not the Brahmans or the Rajputs, but the Vaaniyaas….the highest status Brahmans in Gujarat have been the Naagar Brahmans, not because of any ritual or scholarly qualifications, but because they are the one jaati of Brahmans that has been able to compete successfully with the Vaaniyaas as merchants. (Cort, pp. 80-81.)
The Jain perspective demonstrates varying meanings behind common activities. "For the Jains, purity as defined by the Brahmans is a secondary, social (saamaajik) value, without any ultimate soteriological importance (ibid., p. 83). Jains will accept food cooked by Brahmins, but not because they consider Brahmins to be pure:
Both Jains and Brahmans accept the food because it is cooked by a Brahman; but the Jains accept it for the additional reason that it is Jain food cooked according to the laws of ahimsa….The underlying ideology of purity here is not a Brahmanical one, but rather a Jain one of ahimsa. (Ibid. pp. 84-85)
Note that Jain mythology "derided Brahman claims to superiority" (ibid. p. 101), even showing that since "a Brahman is unworthy of bearing a Jina, Mahavir’s embryo was then transferred to the womb of a Ksatriya woman at the intervention of several deities" (ibid. p. 101).
Surinder Jodhka's field research in Punjab focused on the Dalit caste of Ad-Dharmis. Despite Sikh egalitarian principles and the general weakness of Brahmanical ideology in Punjab, still it remained true that "different servicing castes were tied to the landowning cultivators within the framework of the jajmani system" (p. 175). "While the Sikh reformers attacked caste, the Sikh leadership, having become aware of the significance of numbers, did not deny the existence of caste among the Sikhs or that the low castes among the Sikhs faced disabilities due to their birth" (ibid. p. 179).3 Resisting this, the Ad-Dharmis "insisted they be listed as a separate religious community and not be clubbed with the Hindus. After independence, the Ad-Dharmis were listed as one of the Scheduled Castes of the Punjab and were clubbed with the Hindus once again" (ibid. pp. 180-81).
These case studies from other religious communities demonstrate the "need to abandon the attempt to locate a single ideology behind the practice of caste throughout the subcontinent" (Cort, p. 102). However Jodhka, quoting Gupta, accepts the fact that "the underlying assumption of it [caste] being a pan-Indian reality is rarely questioned….when it comes to theorising about the caste system it is the book-view that tends to dominate."4 One of the main reasons for this is the acceptance of "colonial and orientalist notions of Indian civilization" (Jodhka, p. 187).5
The most complex and contested area in caste study relates to the Dalits (formerly "untouchables"). G.K. Karnath particularly looked at the replication of high caste ways (Sanskritization) by low castes in Karnataka. He suggests that
By drawing on empirical evidence from a Karnataka village, this article attempts to refute the idea of a passive acceptance of a low and subordinate status by the former Untouchable castes. It aims to show that the apparent replication may also be viewed as one of the ways of articulating an independent cultural identity, besides demonstrating dissent against the hegemonic social order. In the process, the article makes an attempt to refocus the Dumontian discourse from "replication and consensus" to "hegemony and dissent." (Karnath, p. 137)
This he shows in the case of the Madigas:
The Madigas wanted to carry on with their traditional practice of buffalo sacrifice regardless of its supposed opposition to Hindu values according to the definition of the dominant social order. This is not a replication resulting from exclusion from the dominant order or consensus with it, but a reaffirmation of a distinct cultural identity. (Ibid. p. 157)
Yet, as Jodhka points out, the Dalit movement tends to share the traditional Brahminical hierarchical perspective on caste:
Caste has been seen to represent the continuity and unity of Indian culture and its social structure. Interestingly, it is not only the nationalist/Hindu ideologue, or sometimes the professional anthropologist, who makes such claims; even the contemporary dalit movement in India is mostly informed by a similar Brahmin-centric notion of caste. (Jodhka, pp. 187-88)
Further on this point, Badri Narayan shows that
The caste histories of many lower castes were written during the colonial period not by scholars of their own caste, but by Arya Samaji activists and scholars who tried to give the middle and lower castes an identity and create a space for them within the Brahminical social system. Many books were published enumerating the qualities of persons belonging to the Brahmin or Kshatriya castes. While the books that were composed by Sanatanis tried to restrict the entry of backward classes into the hallowed ranks of Brahmins and Kshatriyas, those written by Arya Samajis gave space to the lower and backward classes to claim Brahmin or Kshatriya status. Thus upper-caste characteristics were appropriated into the histories of the backward castes. (Narayan, p. 197)
But once awakened to the reality of gaining political power through caste vote-banks, leaders and scholars among the backward and low caste people "sought to win acceptance from the wider society by creating and legitimizing a space for themselves within the nationalist narratives" (ibid., pp. 200-01). This they had to do by creating a new history, by acquiring a double identity "both as members of a specific caste reiterating their caste pride, and as an important dalit-Bahujan community that had made sacrifices for the nation" (ibid. p. 216).
This double identity of the dalit caste required a new history different from, and sometimes subversive to, the sanskritic model of caste history writing that had emerged during the colonial period. They needed to create caste histories that could provide self-respect to the caste, like the gaurav gathas, which glorified dalit socio-cultural locations. These gaurav gathas mostly shifted away from Brahminical symbols, although there are still traces of the sanskritisation process. Progress towards the glorification of dalit status is quite visible in these contemporary history writings. (ibid. p. 216)
But no caste can be safe from the conniving of politicians, as they know how to politicize religion and communalize politics:
Nonetheless, some of the residual sanskritising features of the caste histories have paved the way for political forces like the BJP, who are then using the lower-caste origin myths associated with Rishis and Sants belonging to the Great Traditions to enter into the dalit space….reinterpreting dalit myths, histories and symbols in their own politically correct version, projecting the dalits as defenders of Hindu dharma and “nationalists” (rashtravadi).6 (Ibid., p. 216)
But it is not only the new Hindu right (BJP), but every political party wants to gain their own pound of flesh:
The social equations in the electoral market are apparent in the framing and re-telling of the stories by the different political parties. Through these caste histories, political parties channelise the dalit sense of identity in their own favour while at the same time swaying them against their political rivals. The use of the myth of Uda Devi, who is a part of the Pasi gaurav gatha, can be cited as an example of how various parties like the BSP, BJP, Lok Janshakti and Samajwadi Party are interpreting it in their own way to bring dalit communities, especially the Pasis, into their own fold. (Ibid. p. 219)
While these caste communities have to fight to create their own space in politics and power with the politicians, they also have to fight with other groups within their fold to keep the unity of a dalit-Bahujan collective identity. While Chamars assert that the Pasis oppressed the dalit castes on behalf of the colonial overlords, under the new political regime, the Pasis seem to be eager to minimize these contradictions by writing that Chamar interests were safeguarded by the Pasis.
There is always a struggle between ideology and reality. While "assertive caste identities articulate alternative hierarchies" (Gupta, p. x) and try to work out their own salvation by vertical mobility to improve their social status, yet, when it comes to practical life, "in ideological matters, one is not concerned with actual facts" (Narayan, p. 235). This is demonstrated by the field research done by Anuja Agrawal among the Beidas ("a 'denotified' community which lives off the prostitution of its own women," p. 221). Agrawal points out that "While the inclination of community members is to pass off as belonging to an upper caste, eligibility for state benefits requires an acceptance of their lower-caste origins" (ibid. p. 241).
Finally, the truth about caste in India is that "caste identities too undergo change," and they have never functioned as "pure ideological systems" (Jodhka, p. 189). "While ideologically it is dead, or nearly so, caste survives and thrives as a source of identity" (ibid.).
Notes
1. Dumont, Louis. 1970. Homo Hierarchicus: The Caste System and Its Implications. London: Paladin. According to Dumont, caste ranking is based on purity and impurity, and levels of purity are defined and maintained by strict control over formal ritual transactions.
2. Regarding the origin tales, Gupta rightly remarks that "Like the Brahman who must go back to the original division in the Purusasukta, each caste has its own theory explaining its origin" (in "Continuous Hierarchies and Discrete Castes", Dipandar Gupta (ed.), Social Stratification, pp. 110-41, Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1991:121). On the basis of their origin tales, the villagers claim that they have descended from one or another of the Hindu gods (pp. 116-117). This point is seen in claims of Yadavas to be descendants from Krishna; "The unifying myth of Krishna not only tells of the origins of the entire Yadav community, but also nullifies the hierarchy and ‘cultural’ differences existing within the community." Still further, modern politicians "Mulayam Singh Yadav and Laloo Prasad Yadav are at times described by their caste supporters as avataras (incarnations) of Krishna sent to earth to protect ‘the oppressed’ and promote social justice…" (Lucia Michelutti, pp. 60-61).
3. "While the gurudwara management formally invited all the others, dalits were not even informed about special programmes and festivities. Rarely were they allowed to participate in the cooking and serving of the langar in local gurudwaras" (ibid., p. 184).
4. The mainstream anthropological/sociological discourse on caste usually conceives it as a unified system that worked in more or less similar ways everywhere in India; it has invariably tended to emphasise the underlying cultural/ideological consensus across castes on its governing normative order. However, as scholars have repeatedly pointed out, Dumont constructed his theory of caste on the basis of some Hindu scriptural sources and did not care to look at the lived reality of caste
5. "Caste was the major pillar of Indology through which European-trained writers "essentialised" Indian peoples. The dissemination of these imagined essences not only denied Indians agency, but also justified European intervention in India" (ibid., p. 198).
6. Vinay Katiyar, President of the UP state unit of the BJP, has launched a campaign to propagate the BJP’s version of cultural nationalism by projecting Dr Ambedkar as anti-Muslim (Amar Ujala, 31 January 2003). (fn. 9, p. 217)
Book Review
An Introduction to Hinduism
by Gavin Flood, Cambridge University Press,.
A self-understanding based on ideologies shaped by long traditions which give real meaning is essential for one's identity in this life. And such an identity in an individual's life as well that of a nation is not only useful for his/its growth, but considering the "modern world in which everyone is, in some sense, a 'global citizen'", (p. 4) may contribute to others' efforts to understand and uphold their own identity also. Keeping this in mind, Gavin Flood in his first and last chapters attempts to draw a picture of Hinduism based on Hindu self understanding and identity. The remaining chapters present factual information which he presents according to his western understanding of Hinduism as a religion, at times still referring to contributions to national identity.
A person who lives within a system may find it difficult to express several ideologies of his system in clear cut technical terms, though he very well understands them in a subjective way. And any scientific study of such a system by an outsider objectively may help him to learn the required technical terms to express his ideology, but will surely cause disappointment when he finds that those technical terms and scientific studies fail to express his inner experience and the spirit of his system in the right way. But the only consolation that he can derive is that in such studies outsiders may communicate to the others what he himself finds difficult to do. This is the impression a Hindu will arrive at after reading this book. Most points in this book are discussed based on the Western point referring to studies done by other westerners. Such a study may help them to understand India but will also indirectly impose their own ideology in the minds of the reader. But one who lives within a system understanding it subjectively will feel the contrasts from the objective studies done by others who stand outside the system.
Take one example: "As we have seen there is a fundamental distinction in Hinduism between worldly life and soteriology, the former being the concern of the householder, the later being the concern of the renouncer " (p.201). But it is one thing to say that rites of passages may not be concerned directly with liberation, yet it is an oversimplified statement to say that worldly life belongs to the householder and salvation to the sanyasi. Even the rites are in one sense a process for salvation. Above all, Hinduism keeps moksha as the climax of the four purushartas of dharma, artha, kama and moksha. Likewise his theory of urbanization putting "the individual above wider social group" (p.81) is another example of reading his ideology into another system. Of course he says, "This is not to say that at this time there was an articulate ideology of individualism which stressed autonomy and personal rights—there was not—or that the urban individual was not subject to law and a hierarchical social structure, but merely that socioeconomic functioning was placed more in the hands of innovators than would have been possible in a rural context. The form of individualism that developed was not present in the ancient world, but a form of individuality which emphasized or particularized the distinct self, did develop in urban centres." (p.81) But one who can observe the life of Hindus based on the hierarchical social structure of casteism would agree that this individualism is not a so called development of individuals above the wider social group, but the continuing influence of social groups over individuals, even in this 20th century with e-mail.
It must also be pointed out that numerous factual errors mar the value of Flood's study. Some rather basic geographical errors will shock those who know India (see pg 24, 25, 145, 172); there are numerous language-related problems, especially concerning Tamil (but note also the wrong definition of Saranaagati as 'grace', which properly is 'taking refuge for protection', pg 137; and the Raamacaritmaanasa was composed in Avadhi not Hindi, pg 146); confusion regarding Hindu deities is evident on pg 66 where Balarama instead of Lakshman is said to accompany Ram to exile; later Lakshman is rightly identified but it is wrongly stated that he and Sita were also banished, whereas they chose freely to accompnay the banished Rama; further, on pg 129, Tamil deities Mudvalan and Tirumaal are said to have become identified with Visnu and Siva, but Mudalvan (not Mudvalan) became identified with Siva and Tirumaal with Visnu; modern facts, where one expects more confident handling, are also at times muddled, as in the suggestion on pg 254 that Dayanand Sarasvati kept all-night vigil during Navaratre, when in fact it was at Sivaraatri; on pg 263 it is stated that RSS members dress in black instead of kaki; and on pg 37 we are wrongly told that most Vedic literature is not yet available in any European language; fearing a charge of being overly pedantic, some errors on rather abstruse points must also be noted, as on pg 61 it is claimed that candaalas are born from Suudra women, but rather it is from a male Suudra with a Brahmin woman; on pg 204 we are told that the sacred thread is comprised of three times three single strands, but rather it is one time three single strands for a brahmachari, changed to two times three single strands after marriage, and then only after crossing fifty or sixty years as a symbol of attaining wisdom it becomes three times three single strands; and finally on pg 206 there is reference to a newly married couple viewing the "Pole-star" when in fact it is the star Arundadi (close to the sixth star in the Sabda Rishi mandala).
Having noted these limitations, it is granted that Flood has presented a valuable study on the Hindu traditions in chapters 2 to 10. But chapters one and eleven which discuss what Hinduism is (chapter one) and the development of Hinduism as a world religion (chapter11) raise several questions about Flood's understanding of our efforts at achieving a 'national identity', which he tries to reduce only to 'Hindu nationalist politics' (p. 3). While granting that 'through the work of Ram Mohan Roy and later of Vivekananda and his followers, Hinduism has become a world religion which has had a deep impact both on India and on the West at all cultural levels, from the scholarly study of texts in Indology departments in universities, to devotion to popular gurus' yet one must disagree with his following point that 'in contrast to these universalizing tendencies, there has also developed a Hindu political nationalism which connects Hinduism, or Hindu Dharma, with the nation-state of India" (p. 273).
When the so called (pseudo) secularism1 which was/is imported from western ideologies threatens our very self-understanding and identity, and which is being used by the narrow minded politicians to gain some temporary power politics, it become necessary 'to connects Hinduism or Hindu dharma with the nation-state of India'. Likewise it is not 'this political nationalism' but rather fundamentalism among Hindus, Muslims and even Christians, as everywhere, which alone 'has inspired friction between the Hindu, Muslim and Christian communities in India and evoked some terrible violence'. To refer to 'a fragmentation which identifies Hinduism with ....national identity' (p. 4) as 'narrowly conceived national identity' (p. 4) is to go against Flood's theme of self-understanding and the meaning of Hindus in their own heart and home. Hinduism at the cost of a national identity will never become a global religion 'to contribute to finding solutions to the global problems which face the human community in the coming century' (p. 273) Fortunately Christianity, Islam and Buddhism need not look to any particular country to claim their credit as world religions, but Hinduism can never arrive here at the cost of its basic identity. Remove India and Indians (Hindus) from the world map and there won't be a Hinduism as a global religion to contribute to human race every where.
Hinduism is such a vast subject that numerous introductions as well as technical studies are needed and are welcome. But one fears that Flood wanders from objectivity in pressing home his own perspective (something the Hindutva people are often rightly criticised for, but some of their critics seems guilty of a like offense). The introductions of Klostermaier and Lipner are more even handed and sensitive to Hindu self perceptions and so must be favoured above Flood, which is still not to say that Flood's work is without merit and insight and no doubt many can profit from reading it.
NOTES
1. Note the comments of A. H. Khan: "Perhaps of all the words that can be applied to India, the word 'secular' is the most unwanted. It is totally irrelevant and indeed offensive to most Indians. Which Hindu, Muslim, Sikh, Jain or Buddhist—leave alone Christian or Parsi—wants his country to be worldly and keep God out of its affairs of state? The irrelevance is clear in the very meaning of the word. In Hindi and Urdu it is grahasti or dunyawi or duniyadari...." (Ansar Husain Khan, A Rediscovery of India, p.253)
An Introduction to Hinduism
by Gavin Flood, Cambridge University Press,.
A self-understanding based on ideologies shaped by long traditions which give real meaning is essential for one's identity in this life. And such an identity in an individual's life as well that of a nation is not only useful for his/its growth, but considering the "modern world in which everyone is, in some sense, a 'global citizen'", (p. 4) may contribute to others' efforts to understand and uphold their own identity also. Keeping this in mind, Gavin Flood in his first and last chapters attempts to draw a picture of Hinduism based on Hindu self understanding and identity. The remaining chapters present factual information which he presents according to his western understanding of Hinduism as a religion, at times still referring to contributions to national identity.
A person who lives within a system may find it difficult to express several ideologies of his system in clear cut technical terms, though he very well understands them in a subjective way. And any scientific study of such a system by an outsider objectively may help him to learn the required technical terms to express his ideology, but will surely cause disappointment when he finds that those technical terms and scientific studies fail to express his inner experience and the spirit of his system in the right way. But the only consolation that he can derive is that in such studies outsiders may communicate to the others what he himself finds difficult to do. This is the impression a Hindu will arrive at after reading this book. Most points in this book are discussed based on the Western point referring to studies done by other westerners. Such a study may help them to understand India but will also indirectly impose their own ideology in the minds of the reader. But one who lives within a system understanding it subjectively will feel the contrasts from the objective studies done by others who stand outside the system.
Take one example: "As we have seen there is a fundamental distinction in Hinduism between worldly life and soteriology, the former being the concern of the householder, the later being the concern of the renouncer " (p.201). But it is one thing to say that rites of passages may not be concerned directly with liberation, yet it is an oversimplified statement to say that worldly life belongs to the householder and salvation to the sanyasi. Even the rites are in one sense a process for salvation. Above all, Hinduism keeps moksha as the climax of the four purushartas of dharma, artha, kama and moksha. Likewise his theory of urbanization putting "the individual above wider social group" (p.81) is another example of reading his ideology into another system. Of course he says, "This is not to say that at this time there was an articulate ideology of individualism which stressed autonomy and personal rights—there was not—or that the urban individual was not subject to law and a hierarchical social structure, but merely that socioeconomic functioning was placed more in the hands of innovators than would have been possible in a rural context. The form of individualism that developed was not present in the ancient world, but a form of individuality which emphasized or particularized the distinct self, did develop in urban centres." (p.81) But one who can observe the life of Hindus based on the hierarchical social structure of casteism would agree that this individualism is not a so called development of individuals above the wider social group, but the continuing influence of social groups over individuals, even in this 20th century with e-mail.
It must also be pointed out that numerous factual errors mar the value of Flood's study. Some rather basic geographical errors will shock those who know India (see pg 24, 25, 145, 172); there are numerous language-related problems, especially concerning Tamil (but note also the wrong definition of Saranaagati as 'grace', which properly is 'taking refuge for protection', pg 137; and the Raamacaritmaanasa was composed in Avadhi not Hindi, pg 146); confusion regarding Hindu deities is evident on pg 66 where Balarama instead of Lakshman is said to accompany Ram to exile; later Lakshman is rightly identified but it is wrongly stated that he and Sita were also banished, whereas they chose freely to accompnay the banished Rama; further, on pg 129, Tamil deities Mudvalan and Tirumaal are said to have become identified with Visnu and Siva, but Mudalvan (not Mudvalan) became identified with Siva and Tirumaal with Visnu; modern facts, where one expects more confident handling, are also at times muddled, as in the suggestion on pg 254 that Dayanand Sarasvati kept all-night vigil during Navaratre, when in fact it was at Sivaraatri; on pg 263 it is stated that RSS members dress in black instead of kaki; and on pg 37 we are wrongly told that most Vedic literature is not yet available in any European language; fearing a charge of being overly pedantic, some errors on rather abstruse points must also be noted, as on pg 61 it is claimed that candaalas are born from Suudra women, but rather it is from a male Suudra with a Brahmin woman; on pg 204 we are told that the sacred thread is comprised of three times three single strands, but rather it is one time three single strands for a brahmachari, changed to two times three single strands after marriage, and then only after crossing fifty or sixty years as a symbol of attaining wisdom it becomes three times three single strands; and finally on pg 206 there is reference to a newly married couple viewing the "Pole-star" when in fact it is the star Arundadi (close to the sixth star in the Sabda Rishi mandala).
Having noted these limitations, it is granted that Flood has presented a valuable study on the Hindu traditions in chapters 2 to 10. But chapters one and eleven which discuss what Hinduism is (chapter one) and the development of Hinduism as a world religion (chapter11) raise several questions about Flood's understanding of our efforts at achieving a 'national identity', which he tries to reduce only to 'Hindu nationalist politics' (p. 3). While granting that 'through the work of Ram Mohan Roy and later of Vivekananda and his followers, Hinduism has become a world religion which has had a deep impact both on India and on the West at all cultural levels, from the scholarly study of texts in Indology departments in universities, to devotion to popular gurus' yet one must disagree with his following point that 'in contrast to these universalizing tendencies, there has also developed a Hindu political nationalism which connects Hinduism, or Hindu Dharma, with the nation-state of India" (p. 273).
When the so called (pseudo) secularism1 which was/is imported from western ideologies threatens our very self-understanding and identity, and which is being used by the narrow minded politicians to gain some temporary power politics, it become necessary 'to connects Hinduism or Hindu dharma with the nation-state of India'. Likewise it is not 'this political nationalism' but rather fundamentalism among Hindus, Muslims and even Christians, as everywhere, which alone 'has inspired friction between the Hindu, Muslim and Christian communities in India and evoked some terrible violence'. To refer to 'a fragmentation which identifies Hinduism with ....national identity' (p. 4) as 'narrowly conceived national identity' (p. 4) is to go against Flood's theme of self-understanding and the meaning of Hindus in their own heart and home. Hinduism at the cost of a national identity will never become a global religion 'to contribute to finding solutions to the global problems which face the human community in the coming century' (p. 273) Fortunately Christianity, Islam and Buddhism need not look to any particular country to claim their credit as world religions, but Hinduism can never arrive here at the cost of its basic identity. Remove India and Indians (Hindus) from the world map and there won't be a Hinduism as a global religion to contribute to human race every where.
Hinduism is such a vast subject that numerous introductions as well as technical studies are needed and are welcome. But one fears that Flood wanders from objectivity in pressing home his own perspective (something the Hindutva people are often rightly criticised for, but some of their critics seems guilty of a like offense). The introductions of Klostermaier and Lipner are more even handed and sensitive to Hindu self perceptions and so must be favoured above Flood, which is still not to say that Flood's work is without merit and insight and no doubt many can profit from reading it.
NOTES
1. Note the comments of A. H. Khan: "Perhaps of all the words that can be applied to India, the word 'secular' is the most unwanted. It is totally irrelevant and indeed offensive to most Indians. Which Hindu, Muslim, Sikh, Jain or Buddhist—leave alone Christian or Parsi—wants his country to be worldly and keep God out of its affairs of state? The irrelevance is clear in the very meaning of the word. In Hindi and Urdu it is grahasti or dunyawi or duniyadari...." (Ansar Husain Khan, A Rediscovery of India, p.253)
134. ஓர் அழைப்பு
ஆதியாகி அந்தமாகி
அருளுமாகி வந்தவன்
ஜோதியாகி துணையுமாகி
சொந்தமாகி நின்றவன்
கருணையாகி இறைவனாகி
காக்க இங்கு வந்தவன்
காலமெல்லாம் துணையுமாகி
கரம்பிடிக்க வந்தவன்
நீதியாகி நிமலனாகி
நேர்மை காட்ட வந்தவன்
ஊழிகாலம் தொடர்ந்துவந்து
கர்மம் போக்கி வென்றவன்
ஆதிமனிதன் சாயலாக
அவனி காக்க வந்தவன்
அன்பருக்காய் தன்னை ஈந்து
முக்தி அளித்து சென்றவன்
ஏது மற்ற என்னைக் கூட
ஏற்று அருள் தந்தவன்
இரக்கமுற்று என்னைதேடி
இவ்வுலகில் வந்தவன்
பாவமறியா பரமனுமே
பாவிக்காக வந்தனன்
பாவபலியுமாகி இங்கு
பாவம்போக்கி காத்தனன்
வழியறியா வாழ்க்கையிலே
வழிகாட்டி நின்றவன்
அனுதினமும் என்னை நடத்த
ஆனம உரு கொண்டவன்
மனமும் தெளிவு அடைந்திடவே
முக்தி மறை தந்தவன்
அதையும்கூட விளக்கிடவே
ஆசனாகி உரைப்பவன்
பக்தி நெறி நடந்திடவே
பக்தர் குழாம் தந்தவன்
பக்தியுடன் பாடித்தொழ
புதியபாடல் தருபவன்.
இருளில் வாழும் மனிதருக்கு
இந்த உண்மை சொல்லவே
என்னைகூட தொண்டனாக்கி
என்னை அனுப்பி வைத்தவன்
வாருங்கள் நாமும்போய்
இந்த உண்மை கூறுவோம்
வாழும்போதே உய்யும்படி
ஈசனருளைக் காட்டுவோம்
தேவை நிறைந்த மாந்தருக்காய்
தினமும் வேண்டிக் கொள்ளுவோம்
தெய்வமே உலகைக் காப்பார்
என்று உறுதி கொள்ளுவோம்
மீண்டும் வந்து நம்மையுமே
உடனழைத்துச் செல்லுவான்
ஊழி ஊழி காலமெல்லாம்
ஒன்றுகூடி வாழவே
இருள் அறியா நாட்டினிலே
ஒன்றுகூடி வாழுவோம்
பேதமெல்லாம் நீங்கி நாமும்
பரமன் சாயல் கொள்ளுவோம்
இந்த உண்மை அறிந்தோரே
இன்னும் என்ன தாமதம்
இதயம் நிறைந்து வாழ்த்துவோம்
முக்தேசன் பொற்பதம்.
01-11-2010. குருகுலம்.
135. உண்டோ வேறொன்று
அன்பின் வழிகாட்ட
அவனியில் வந்தாயே
ஐயனே நீயன்றி அதை
அறிந்திட வழியுண்டோ
பண்பின் மொழி கூற
பாரினில் வந்தாயே
பரமனே நீ அன்றி
புரிந்திட துணையுண்டோ?
தாழ்மை நெறிகாட்ட
தரணியில் வந்தாயே
தலைவனே நீயன்றி
நடத்திட யாருண்டோ?
11-11-2010. குருகுலம்.
136. வேண்டும்
உன்னையே மறவாது வாழ்ந்திட வேண்டும்
உன்னருள் அதற்கு நித்தமும் வேண்டும்
என்னையே கைவிடாது நீ காக்திட வேண்டும்
என்னுள்ளே அதற்கு பக்தியும் வேண்டும்
கண்களில் கண்ணீரும் நிரம்பிட வேண்டும்
உன்னருள் நினைந்து உருகிட வேண்டும்
கலக்கங்கள் வாழ்வில் நீங்கிட வேண்டும்
உன்காவலால் என்னைக் காத்திட வேண்டும்
வேண்டும் வேண்டும் என நான் வரவேண்டும்
உன்னடி ஒன்றையே நாடிட வேண்டும்
தந்தேன் தந்தேன் என்றே நீ தரவேண்டும்
உன்திருவடி நிழலிலே எனை வைத்திடவேண்டும்
30-1-2010. குருகுலம்.
137. செய்த புண்ணியம் என்னே
என்னதான் புண்ணியம்
செய்தேனோ நானும்
இணையடி தனில் வந்து
இளைப்பாறுதல் பெற
மானுடர் பாவம்
போக்கியே மீட்டிட்ட
மன்னுருகொண்டு
இந்நிலம் வந்த
உன்னடி அண்டி
இளைப்பாறுதல் பெற--என்னதான் புண்ணியம்....
பக்தி நெறியறியேன்
ஞான வழி உணரேன்
கருமமுறையிலும்
கருத்தின்றி வாழும்நான்
திருவடி வந்து
இளைப்பாறுதல் பெற--என்னதான் புண்ணியம்....
முக்தி மறை அறியேன்
மூர்க்க குணமுடையேன்
பக்தர் குழாம் நாடேன்
பணிவிடை செய்தறியேன்
திருவடி வந்து
இளைப்பாறுதல் பெற--என்னதான் புண்ணியம்....
02-01-2011. குருகுலம்
138. உன்னடி சேர்ந்திட வேண்டும்
என்னுள் இருந்து
எனையாளும் தெய்வமே
உன்னுள் இருக்க
நீ அருள வேண்டும்
தன்நிலை இழந்து
தவறினேன் நானே
உன்னருள் கொண்டு
மீண்டு வந்தேனே
செய்த பிழையெல்லாம்
மன்னித்தாயே
தெய்வமே உன்னுடன்
சேர்த்தணைத்தாயே
இந்த நிலை உணர்ந்து
வாழ்ந்திட வேண்டும்
இதற்கென்று உன்னடி
சேர்ந்திட வேண்டும்
09-03-2011. குருகுலம்
139. வேறென்ன வேண்டும்?
உன்னில் ஆனந்தம் நான் கண்டிட வேண்டும்
உனதருள் கடலிலே மூழ்கிட வேண்டும்
என்னை நானே மறந்திட வேண்டும்
எனதென்ற எண்ணமும் நீங்கிட வேண்டும்
தன்னிகரில்லாத தயவு நீ கொண்டாய்
தரணியை காத்திட பேரருள் கொண்டாய்
உன்னையே அளித்திட உவந்து வந்தாய்
உன்னுயிர் அளித்து மீட்புமே தந்தாய்
இந்த உண்மை அறிந்திட்ட நானும்
உலகுக்கு இதை உணர்த்திட வேண்டும்
உன்னருள் அதற்கு நீ தரவேண்டும்
வேறென்ன உலகில் எனக்கிங்கு வேண்டும்
14-03-2011 குருகுலம்
140. போற்றுவோம்
தோன்றினான் கதிரவன் குணதிசையிலே
தொழுதிட எழுந்தன உயிரினங்கள்
மாறிடா இறைவனின் மாண்பினைப்பாடி
மன்னுயிர் எழுந்தன மனமகிழ்வுடனே!
அமைதியுடனே அவனடி பணிந்திட
அவனியோர் எழுந்தனர் உளமே மகிழ்ந்து
எங்கும் அவனது அருள் காட்சியே
அகத்திலும் புறத்திலும் அவன் ஆட்சியே!
சிந்தை நேராக்க சொல்லை சீராக்க
எண்ணம் புதிதாக்க நோக்கம் தெளிவாக்க
ஆர்வம் பெரிதாக்க ஆக்கம் நிறைவாக்க
இறையடி பணிவோம் எல்லாம் சிறப்பாக்க
நன்மை செய்யவே நாடி வருகின்ற
நாதனை நம்பியே நாமும் தொழுவோம்
தேவை அறிந்து திடமுடன் இருந்து
காத்திடும் இறைவனின் திருவடி போற்றுவோம்
24-09-2011. குருகுலம்
ஆதியாகி அந்தமாகி
அருளுமாகி வந்தவன்
ஜோதியாகி துணையுமாகி
சொந்தமாகி நின்றவன்
கருணையாகி இறைவனாகி
காக்க இங்கு வந்தவன்
காலமெல்லாம் துணையுமாகி
கரம்பிடிக்க வந்தவன்
நீதியாகி நிமலனாகி
நேர்மை காட்ட வந்தவன்
ஊழிகாலம் தொடர்ந்துவந்து
கர்மம் போக்கி வென்றவன்
ஆதிமனிதன் சாயலாக
அவனி காக்க வந்தவன்
அன்பருக்காய் தன்னை ஈந்து
முக்தி அளித்து சென்றவன்
ஏது மற்ற என்னைக் கூட
ஏற்று அருள் தந்தவன்
இரக்கமுற்று என்னைதேடி
இவ்வுலகில் வந்தவன்
பாவமறியா பரமனுமே
பாவிக்காக வந்தனன்
பாவபலியுமாகி இங்கு
பாவம்போக்கி காத்தனன்
வழியறியா வாழ்க்கையிலே
வழிகாட்டி நின்றவன்
அனுதினமும் என்னை நடத்த
ஆனம உரு கொண்டவன்
மனமும் தெளிவு அடைந்திடவே
முக்தி மறை தந்தவன்
அதையும்கூட விளக்கிடவே
ஆசனாகி உரைப்பவன்
பக்தி நெறி நடந்திடவே
பக்தர் குழாம் தந்தவன்
பக்தியுடன் பாடித்தொழ
புதியபாடல் தருபவன்.
இருளில் வாழும் மனிதருக்கு
இந்த உண்மை சொல்லவே
என்னைகூட தொண்டனாக்கி
என்னை அனுப்பி வைத்தவன்
வாருங்கள் நாமும்போய்
இந்த உண்மை கூறுவோம்
வாழும்போதே உய்யும்படி
ஈசனருளைக் காட்டுவோம்
தேவை நிறைந்த மாந்தருக்காய்
தினமும் வேண்டிக் கொள்ளுவோம்
தெய்வமே உலகைக் காப்பார்
என்று உறுதி கொள்ளுவோம்
மீண்டும் வந்து நம்மையுமே
உடனழைத்துச் செல்லுவான்
ஊழி ஊழி காலமெல்லாம்
ஒன்றுகூடி வாழவே
இருள் அறியா நாட்டினிலே
ஒன்றுகூடி வாழுவோம்
பேதமெல்லாம் நீங்கி நாமும்
பரமன் சாயல் கொள்ளுவோம்
இந்த உண்மை அறிந்தோரே
இன்னும் என்ன தாமதம்
இதயம் நிறைந்து வாழ்த்துவோம்
முக்தேசன் பொற்பதம்.
01-11-2010. குருகுலம்.
135. உண்டோ வேறொன்று
அன்பின் வழிகாட்ட
அவனியில் வந்தாயே
ஐயனே நீயன்றி அதை
அறிந்திட வழியுண்டோ
பண்பின் மொழி கூற
பாரினில் வந்தாயே
பரமனே நீ அன்றி
புரிந்திட துணையுண்டோ?
தாழ்மை நெறிகாட்ட
தரணியில் வந்தாயே
தலைவனே நீயன்றி
நடத்திட யாருண்டோ?
11-11-2010. குருகுலம்.
136. வேண்டும்
உன்னையே மறவாது வாழ்ந்திட வேண்டும்
உன்னருள் அதற்கு நித்தமும் வேண்டும்
என்னையே கைவிடாது நீ காக்திட வேண்டும்
என்னுள்ளே அதற்கு பக்தியும் வேண்டும்
கண்களில் கண்ணீரும் நிரம்பிட வேண்டும்
உன்னருள் நினைந்து உருகிட வேண்டும்
கலக்கங்கள் வாழ்வில் நீங்கிட வேண்டும்
உன்காவலால் என்னைக் காத்திட வேண்டும்
வேண்டும் வேண்டும் என நான் வரவேண்டும்
உன்னடி ஒன்றையே நாடிட வேண்டும்
தந்தேன் தந்தேன் என்றே நீ தரவேண்டும்
உன்திருவடி நிழலிலே எனை வைத்திடவேண்டும்
30-1-2010. குருகுலம்.
137. செய்த புண்ணியம் என்னே
என்னதான் புண்ணியம்
செய்தேனோ நானும்
இணையடி தனில் வந்து
இளைப்பாறுதல் பெற
மானுடர் பாவம்
போக்கியே மீட்டிட்ட
மன்னுருகொண்டு
இந்நிலம் வந்த
உன்னடி அண்டி
இளைப்பாறுதல் பெற--என்னதான் புண்ணியம்....
பக்தி நெறியறியேன்
ஞான வழி உணரேன்
கருமமுறையிலும்
கருத்தின்றி வாழும்நான்
திருவடி வந்து
இளைப்பாறுதல் பெற--என்னதான் புண்ணியம்....
முக்தி மறை அறியேன்
மூர்க்க குணமுடையேன்
பக்தர் குழாம் நாடேன்
பணிவிடை செய்தறியேன்
திருவடி வந்து
இளைப்பாறுதல் பெற--என்னதான் புண்ணியம்....
02-01-2011. குருகுலம்
138. உன்னடி சேர்ந்திட வேண்டும்
என்னுள் இருந்து
எனையாளும் தெய்வமே
உன்னுள் இருக்க
நீ அருள வேண்டும்
தன்நிலை இழந்து
தவறினேன் நானே
உன்னருள் கொண்டு
மீண்டு வந்தேனே
செய்த பிழையெல்லாம்
மன்னித்தாயே
தெய்வமே உன்னுடன்
சேர்த்தணைத்தாயே
இந்த நிலை உணர்ந்து
வாழ்ந்திட வேண்டும்
இதற்கென்று உன்னடி
சேர்ந்திட வேண்டும்
09-03-2011. குருகுலம்
139. வேறென்ன வேண்டும்?
உன்னில் ஆனந்தம் நான் கண்டிட வேண்டும்
உனதருள் கடலிலே மூழ்கிட வேண்டும்
என்னை நானே மறந்திட வேண்டும்
எனதென்ற எண்ணமும் நீங்கிட வேண்டும்
தன்னிகரில்லாத தயவு நீ கொண்டாய்
தரணியை காத்திட பேரருள் கொண்டாய்
உன்னையே அளித்திட உவந்து வந்தாய்
உன்னுயிர் அளித்து மீட்புமே தந்தாய்
இந்த உண்மை அறிந்திட்ட நானும்
உலகுக்கு இதை உணர்த்திட வேண்டும்
உன்னருள் அதற்கு நீ தரவேண்டும்
வேறென்ன உலகில் எனக்கிங்கு வேண்டும்
14-03-2011 குருகுலம்
140. போற்றுவோம்
தோன்றினான் கதிரவன் குணதிசையிலே
தொழுதிட எழுந்தன உயிரினங்கள்
மாறிடா இறைவனின் மாண்பினைப்பாடி
மன்னுயிர் எழுந்தன மனமகிழ்வுடனே!
அமைதியுடனே அவனடி பணிந்திட
அவனியோர் எழுந்தனர் உளமே மகிழ்ந்து
எங்கும் அவனது அருள் காட்சியே
அகத்திலும் புறத்திலும் அவன் ஆட்சியே!
சிந்தை நேராக்க சொல்லை சீராக்க
எண்ணம் புதிதாக்க நோக்கம் தெளிவாக்க
ஆர்வம் பெரிதாக்க ஆக்கம் நிறைவாக்க
இறையடி பணிவோம் எல்லாம் சிறப்பாக்க
நன்மை செய்யவே நாடி வருகின்ற
நாதனை நம்பியே நாமும் தொழுவோம்
தேவை அறிந்து திடமுடன் இருந்து
காத்திடும் இறைவனின் திருவடி போற்றுவோம்
24-09-2011. குருகுலம்
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
