| The concept of Hindutva evolved during the British period as a form of Indian Nationalism. Dayanand Saraswati, Swami Vivekanand, Swami Shraddhanand, Lala Lajpatrai, and Masurkar Maharaj propounded various ideas interpreting Hindutva as the Nationalism of Hindu people and initiated movements to put these ideas into practice. The concept was more concerned with Nationalism and less with religion. Savarkar’s Hindutva: Veer Savarkar is considered the father of the ‘areligious concept of Hindutva’. Savarkar wrote a book, Hindutva, in 1923, which elaborates the concept in great detail. The book runs into some hundred pages. It provides the historical background of the word “Hindu,” explains the idea of Nationalism, and establishes Hindutva as a secular form of Bhartiya Nationalism. He defines the word “Hindu” in one Sanskrit anushtap shloka: “आसिंधु सिंधुपर्यंता यस्य भारत भूमिका | पितृभू पुण्यभू श् चैव स वै हिंदुरिती स्मृत: ||” This definition comes almost at the end of the book and should therefore be considered as his inference from all the arguments made earlier. The shloka defines who a Hindu is. It first describes a geographical piece of land with loosely defined boundaries. A person is a Hindu if he considers this land as his “Fatherland” and “Holyland.” The definition considers three aspects: (a) geographical, (b) ancestral, and (c) emotional. Savarkar claims that his definition is precise and does not omit anyone nor include persons who are not Hindus (avyapti and ativyapti). However, Hindus dwelling in other countries for generations who consider that country as their fatherland are omitted. Likewise, foreigners staying in India who have willingly accepted Hinduism cannot be called Hindus due to their ancestry. If Indian Muslims, Christians, and others who converted from Hinduism start considering India as their holyland, they would, by this definition, have to be considered Hindus because their ancestral fatherland is India. The Punyabhu concept presumes that allegiance to religions established outside India makes a person non-Hindu due to extra-territorial faith. This is not correct. The objection to Islam, for instance, should not be because it was established in Arabia, but because of its contents. Even if an anti-humanistic ideology were established in India, it would be equally deplorable. The intention here is not to fault Savarkar’s definition but to stress that it is unwise to hang on to any precise definition of “who is Hindu and who is not.” Any person who sincerely considers themselves a Hindu must be accepted as such. Savarkar specifically discerns Hinduism from Hindutva, keeping Hindutva secular. He succeeds because he never believed religious tenets should interfere in worldly matters. Hindutva, derived from the word Hindu, can be misunderstood if ‘Hindu’ itself is defined incorrectly. Savarkar emphasizes that Hindus are a national society in Hindusthan, and others—mainly Muslims and secondarily Christians—are not. He includes Hindus settled elsewhere in the concept of Hindutva, stating: “There are hundreds of thousands of Hindus who have settled in all parts of the world… the first essential of Hindutva is not that a man must not reside in lands outside India, but that wherever he or his descendents may happen to be he must recognize Sindhusthan as the land of his forefathers… The only geographical limits of Hindutva are limits of our earth.” The tone of this passage is blatantly imperialistic. However, Hindutva is not the intellectual property of Veer Savarkar; every generation may interpret it afresh. RSS’ Hindutva: Dr. Hedgewar established the RSS in 1925. Savarkar had already written Hindutva in 1923 and had dialogues with Hedgewar. Savarkar thought Hindu people were already a nation, whereas Hedgewar felt Hindus never lived as one national society, which allowed aggressors to succeed over centuries. Hedgewar decided to form an organization to establish Hindus as a nation but avoided bringing religion into the organization, naming it the National Volunteer Corp. He kept Hindu religious practices away from RSS daily shakhas, making the concept of Hindutva in RSS secular and national. The picture changed after Guruji Golvalkar became Sarsanghchalak in 1940. Golvalkar, a sanyasi, followed orthodox Hindu practices, which attracted criticism of religious bigotry. Yet, whether interpreted by Hedgewar or Golvalkar, Hindutva was not their intellectual property. A common objection is why Savarkar’s Hindu Mahasabha and RSS did not allow non-Hindus as members. This is because these organizations were started in self-defense against aggressive Muslims. Excluding non-Hindus does not make them communal; it was a protective measure. Common Enemy – Islam and Christianity: Islam divides mankind into believers and non-believers (Kafirs), commanding Muslims to convert or eliminate non-believers. Muslims’ population increased from 200 in 622 A.D. to 126 crores today. In majority regions, Muslims establish Islamic states; in minority areas, they seek special rights. Despite this, Hindutva must remain secular: religious commands of Hinduism should not interfere in worldly matters, though pride in Hindu religion must be maintained. Hindus face unique challenges. Originally, “Hindu” had a geographical context. Several faiths coexisted peacefully until foreign religions aggressively entered India. Hindus underestimated the threat of Islam and Christianity, considering them just another way of praying. Hindus – Their Own Enemy: Hindus are often intolerant internally but tolerant externally. Hindu intellectuals often ridicule Hinduism while failing to address aggressive external threats. The diversity among Hindus can only be bridged with a common enemy, which historically has been Islam. Hindus do not proselytize, unlike Buddhism or Semitic religions. Conversion back to Hinduism must be pursued respectfully, especially for those forcibly converted to Islam or Christianity. Engaging spiritual Gurus and cultural practices can help integrate such individuals without creating religious antagonism. Hindus do not need to invent counter-symbols for Islam but must foster cohesion around shared intangible symbols and faith to unite the community. Decolonizing Hindutva: Hindutva is not tied to any economic theory, political ideology, or sociological viewpoint. One can be a socialist or leftist and still uphold Hindutva. It is not puritanical; it is about considering all Hindus as one people and protecting their worldly interests. Hindutva is not a “way of life.” Hindutva in India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh: Before independence, Savarkar defined Hindutva in the context of a united Bharatbhumi. Partition divided the country on religious lines. Indian Muslims who helped create Pakistan retained loyalty to the Muslim world. In India, Hindutva remains the same: Hindus must unite nationally and integrate non-Hindus, particularly Muslims, into the national mainstream. For Bangladesh, Hindutva means working towards a secular state where Hindus can live honorably. In Pakistan, Hindus were largely removed through persecution, making Hindutva less relevant there. Conclusion: Hindutva remains a relevant secular, non-communal, and non-political concept. It defines nationalism for Bharat while remaining open to non-Hindus assimilating into a territorial-cultural nationalism. In Bangladesh, it aims to restore secularism for Hindus to flourish as equal citizens. About the author: siders that country as a fatherland are omitted. Also those foreigners staying in India, who have willingly accepted Hinduism cannot be called Hindus due to their ancestry. Also, if Indian Muslims, Christians and others who got converted to Islam or Christianity from Hinduism, start considering this country India as their holyland also, will have to be considered as Hindus because their ancestral fatherland is anyway India. Punyabhu concept presumes that allegiance to religions established outside India makes a person non-Hindu because of extra-territorial faith. This is not correct. I deplore Islam not because it was established in Arabia, but because of its contents. Even if someone in India would have put forward such anti-humanistic ideology and established Islam as a religion, it would have been equally deplorable as it is now.My intention is not to find fault with Savarkar’s definition, but to stress that it is not wise to hang on to any precise definition “who is Hindu and who is not”. Any person who wholeheartedly and very honestly considers himself as a Hindu must be accepted as a Hindu. Because Savarkar specifically discerns Hinduism from Hindutva, he wants to keep Hindus’ religions away from Hindutva. He keeps his concept of Hindutva completely secular. He succeeds in this, because in any case Savarkar never believed in any religious tenets to interfere in worldly matters. It was therefore both easy and natural for Savarkar to keep his concept of Hindutva completely and strongly secular. But ultimately Hindutva is an abstract noun formed from the word Hindu. Savarkar even preferred English word ‘Hinduness’ as a closest alternative to Hindutva. The point is the word Hindutva is derived from the word Hindu and if ‘Hindu’ is defined wrongly, Hindutva also is misunderstood. Savarkar wants to stress only one point in his book – Hindus are a National Society in Hindusthan and others are not. ‘Others’ include mainly Muslims and secondarily Christians. He does not very much bother about Jews (anyway a very small community in India) and feels sorry that Parsees, who are loyal to the land and people of this land, cannot be included in ‘Hindus’. But frankly, there was no need to make such a precise definition of Hindus to exclude Muslims and Christians from Hindutva. No Muslim or Christian had ever made a claim to be called a Hindu. But to prove his point, he went on to define who is a Hindu and therefore what is Hindutva. Unfortunately, he did not stop at that and went on to include Hindus settled in other parts of the world in the concept of Hindutva. It is worthwhile to give the extract from the book verbatim.“There are hundreds of thousands of Hindus who have settled in all parts of the world. A time may come when these our Hindu colonist, who even today are the dominating factor in trade, numbers, capacity and intellect in their respective lands, may come to own a whole country and form a separate state. But will this simple fact of residence in lands other than Hindusthan render one a non-Hindu? Certainly not; for the first essential of Hindutva is not that a man must not reside in lands outside India, but that wherever he or his descendents may happen to be he must recognize Sindhusthan as the land of his forefathers. Nay more; it is not a question of recognition either. If his ancestors came from India as Hindus he cannot help recognize India as his Pitribhu. So this definition of Hindutva is compatible with any conceivable expansion of our Hindu people. Let our colonists, continue unabated their labour of founding a Greater India, a Mahabharat to the best of their capacities and contribute all that is best in our civilization to the up building of humanity. So long as ye, O Hindus! Look upon Hindusthan as the land of your forefathers and as the land of your prophets, and cherish the priceless heritage of their culture and their blood, so long nothing can stand in the way of your desire to expand. The only geographical limits of Hindutva are limits of our earth.” The tone of the above passage is blatantly imperialistic. But we must realize one thing. Hindutva is not an intellectual property right of Veer Savarkar. We have our own talent and reason to make our own interpretation of the concept of Hindutva.RSS’ Hindutva Now we must consider second claimant to Hindutva i.e. Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh (RSS). Dr. Hedgewar established RSS in 1925. Savarkar had already written his book ‘Hindutva’ in 1923. Dr. Hedgewar had not only read it but also had a dialogue with Savarkar before starting RSS. The difference which I can see in thinking of these two great men is, Savarkar thought Hindu people are actually a Nation, whereas Dr. Hedgewar was convinced that unfortunately Hindus never lived as one national society (this inspite of tall claims of ‘this nation of last 5000 years etc’). That was the reason all aggressors could easily succeed in their aggression. For centuries, Hindus could not push the aggressors out of the country. Dr. Hedgewar therefore decided to form an organization to establish Hindus as a Nation. However, he scrupulously avoided to bring in religion and therefore named the organization as National Volunteer Corp. He behaved in his personal life in such a manner that none could charge him as a religious bigot. He also scrupulously kept Hindu religion and religious practices away from RSS daily shakhas. Thus the concept of Hindutva as put forward by RSS was also a secular national concept, clearly independent of Hindu religion. The picture definitely changed after Guruji Golvalkar became Sarsanghchalak in 1940. Guruji was a Sanyasi himself and therefore had long hair and flowing beard. He used to carry Kamandalu always along with him. His personality was of a staunch religious Hindu from top to bottom. He used to perform Pratah Sandhya and Sayam Sandhya regularly. Such a behaviour of the Head of an organization inevitably attracted a criticism that RSS was an orthodox religious organization. It is true that he believed in many antiquated practices like Chaturvarna and believed in pristine Vaidic Sanatan Dharma. If one reads his books “We” and “Bunch of Thoughts”, it is not possible to repel the charge of religious bigotry and generally reactionary and regressive attitude. However again, whatever way, Dr. Hedgewar or Guruji Golwalkar might have interpreted Hindutva, it is not their intellectual property right either. Before leaving Savarkar’s and RSS’ Hindutva, I must state one common objection taken against Savarkar’s Hindu Mahasabha and Dr. Hedgewar’s RSS. If the basic idea was to achieve a national resurrection in a secular way, why their membership was not open for non-Hindus. On the face of, it appears to be an insurmountable objection. But it is not really so. After all, it was due to aggressive nature of Muslims that these organizations were started in self-defense. It was but natural that non-Hindus were not allowed to become members. That in itself does not make these organizations “Communal”. The basic condition to make any organization communal is that the organization must be working not only in the interest of that community but also against the legitimate interests of other communities. Hindu Mahasabha and RSS were organizations made for self-defense (although it may sound amusing that a majority community should be doing so) due to the strong communal character of Muslims and Christians.Common Enemy – Islam and Christianity Now let me come to redefining Hindutva in my own way. Before we do that, we must understand Islam and its philosophy. We should understand why Muslim psyche is so intolerant and perpetually aggressive. Islam divides the mankind in two parts – One who believes in Allah, his last prophet Muhammad and Quran as the divine book of command i.e. Muslims; and those who are non-believers (i.e. those who do not believe in Islam) who are called Kafirs in Islam. Islam commands all Muslims to either convert the non-believers into believers i.e. Muslims or eliminate them. By obeying their religious command, Muslim population has increased from 200 believers in 622 A.D. i.e. at the time of Hijrat to Medina (the world population was 20 crores then i.e. Muslims constituted of 0.001 percent), to 126 crores at present in a world population of 804 crores i.e. 15 percent; a phenomenal increase indeed. Muslims have developed a peculiar mentality. Where in majority, they have an Islamic state with total rights for Muslims and no rights for non-Muslims. Where in minority, they must have special rights over and above the rights of majority community. Muslims just cannot peacefully live with equal rights with non-Muslim community. In spite of this coercive Muslim mentality, there is no doubt that Hindutva must remain a secular concept. This simply means that religious commands of Hindu religion should not interfere in worldly matters. But that should not mean that various indigenous religions of Indian people should have no space in worldly life. In fact, it is necessary to strengthen the pride in our own religion and keep that self-esteem high. I feel that too much stress on Secularism has come to mean that concept of religion itself is something mean, substandard and outdated. To be a proud secular person has automatically come to mean a progressive person. To be religious has come to mean (in Hindus at least) to be retrograde, backward and behind times. This feeling must go. Hindus must be given to understand that being secular is a minimum condition of present day life and not something great achievement, not something lofty. Secularism does not mean deriding Religion. A wide diversity in Hindu religious ethos is normally ridiculed by secular rationalists intellectuals. But this in fact was a strong point due to which Hindus and their religions did not get wiped out in Islamic onslaughts. A loose religious organization proved to be a strong point for survival. Hindus have a unique problem, which no other religionists have to face. Hindu word had a geographical context in the beginning. It has become a religion later. There were several religious faiths in India, co-existing peacefully for ages. There were dissents, friction, even armed conflicts but never a total enmity. This was not a big issue until a totally alien religion aggressively entered India with an intention to destroy indigenous religions and convert the people to their intolerant religion. Hindus unfortunately could not judge the seriousness of the calamity fallen on them and considered Islam (and also Christianity) as just one more way of praying just one more God Hindus – Their own enemy Actually Hindus are their own enemies. Hindu intellectuals take great sadistic pride in making fun of Hinduism. Saffronisation is considered as worst form of communalism. But have you heard anything like Greenisation? Because for rationalists, Hinduism is a great danger to liberal civic society of India, not Islam or Christianity. The word Hindutva is used as a pejorative. Now we must understand Hindu mindset also. Somehow Hindus are tolerant of external aggression though intolerant internally. Hindus must have inculcated this trait right from mythological period. The stories of Raja Harishchandra, Ram, Yudhishthir, Bhishmacharya, all depict this pervert mindset and still they are all considered great heroes. Whatever may be the historical background, Hindus must painstakingly change their nature, should realize who their enemies are and learn to behave with them as enemies. The diversity amongst Hindu fold can be bridged only due to existence of a common enemy of all Hindus transcending caste, creed, language, ethnicity, etc. Fortunately Hindus have a common enemy in Islam and Muslims led by Mullah and Maulvis are really deadly, virulent and wicked enemy at that. As far as Muslims are concerned, they do not distinguish between Brahmins and Dalits, between Begalis and Maharashtrians, Aryas and Dravids, between Adivasis, Vanvasis and Nagarvasis, all are just Kafirs for them and hence all equally deserve extermination. This was very well experienced at the time of partition in 1946-47-48. All leftist Hindus got the same treatment like the rightists. All Manmohans, Indrakumars, Khushwantsinghs, Kuldeepsinghs, and Jyoti Basus, had to run away inspite of their leftist leanings, along with rightist LalKrishnas. Atleast such an enemy should help Hindus unite. With eyes wide shut, Hindus are meekly observing their numbers dwindling and land shrinking. And progressive intellectuals of today and philosophers of yesteryears do not feel perturbed nor concerned. Hindus are by nature and also by its philosophical doctrine against spreading their religion. This has proved to be suicidal. As a religion, Hinduism either considered to be too great only to be admired but not be followed by others or some consider it out-dated and therefore not apt for spreading. Although these points are contradictory, they are put forward as they are. Non-proselytizing nature of Hindu religion and Hindu people has turned out to be suicidal to Hindus. It is bound to be a permanently shrinking religion. It is not only that Hindus do not spread their religion, they even oppose taking back people in Hindu fold, who were forcibly converted to Islam or Christianity. Hinduism at one level is considered too sacrosanct to accept “fallen” people back in its fold, lest it may be contaminated. At another level, Hindus plead that, after all, all paths lead to the same God. Therefore one can be good Muslim or a good Christian and achieve the same goal of Mukti (emancipation) or Swarga (heaven). But Muslims or Christians do not think that way. Therefore there is only a one-way traffic, Hindus getting converted to Islam and Christianity. We can learn a thing or two from Buddhism. It is a proselytizing indigenous religion. However there are no instances of individual or mass conversions of Muslims or Christians to Buddhism. Either indigenous religionists of Srilanka, China, etc eastern countries accepted Buddhism two thousand years back or in recent times it is only a mass conversion within Hindu fold. There are two aspects of proselytizing. One accepting Indian Muslims and Christians back to Hindu fold. Those Hindus, who were converted to Islam, fell in Stockholm syndrome. They started feeling love and affection for captors because Hindus considered those who were forced to accept Islam or Christianity as “fallen” people and not “aggrieved”. It is necessary to appreciate the circumstances in which they were converted and bring them back to Hinduism with all honour and not by ‘Shuddhi’ process as if they were polluted. In fact Hindus must declare that Hinduism is purified to the extent more and more Muslims and Christians come back to Hindu fold. While considering proselytizing, we should not rule out Sikhism. Although Sikhism has some similarities with Semitic religions like one founder, one book, strict worldly dress and behavioral codes, strong community life, that may in fact help in getting Muslims back to a similar alternative as Sikhism. We should rope in spiritual Gurus also in our attempt to de-Islamise Muslims and bring them closer to Hindu ethos, if not a total conversion to Hinduism, Yoga, Meditation, Vipashyana, Art of Living, Swadhyay, etc. Rationally speaking, there is no reason why Hindus should find a counter answer for every Muslim religious symbol. Therefore Hindus need not invent an Avtar to counter a Prophet, invent a book Bhagwad Geeta as an answer to Quran or Swastik and Om to counter Star and Crescent. But at the same time, creating, accepting and revering such symbols cannot be under-rated. Not only intellectuals, even common Hindus do not consider such symbols or even superstitions necessary to bring the people around some intangible mark of religion to sacrifice their life for. This has proved to be a disadvantage for making Hindus unite. A little irrational faith in religion is perhaps a practical requirement. I do not see any point in perpetually whining against Muslim behaviour, their aggressive nature and their loyalty towards world Ummah. Hindus must develop a cogent policy for Hindus in various countries. Developing a Hindu commonwealth is not against any nationalism or patriotism towards a country. For centuries, Hindus have not given any thought in that direction. It is necessary to develop a well thought out policy. Decolonizing Hindutva Hindutva has nothing to do with any economic theory. There is a general feeling that Hindutva stands for rightist policies. This impression must be removed. With socialist and left leaning views, one can be a “Hindutva”wadi. A Bardhan or a Yechuri must ridicule Hindu customs to prove that he is a Marxist. But have you come across any Muslim Marxist who has blamed Islam for its anti-liberal views? No. Never. Because even for a Marxist Muslim, he is a Muslim first and Marxist afterwards. Also, Hindutva is not any political theory. It has nothing to say, for or against, democracy, globalization, SEZs, big dams, etc. Bhartiya Janata Party or Shiv Sena has no right to claim an exclusive right on Hindutva. A Hindutvavadi can be a member and leader of any other political party like Congress, Janata Dal, etc for various other issues, keeping his Hindutva in tact. Hindutva also does not have any sociological viewpoint. Hindutva need not subscribe to a joint family system and other conservative ideas. Even to the extent of accepting free sex relationship, same sex relationship should not come in the way of one being a Hindutvawadi. Hindutva is not Puritanism. It is, considering all Hindus as one people and protecting their worldly interests. So take courage in both hands and listen “Hindutva is not a way of life”. Now we must come to the last point of the meaning of Hindutva in different contexts. Savarkar had enunciated Hindutva before independence i.e. before partition of British India which Savarkar called Bharatbhumi. The country was partitioned entirely on the basis of religious nationalism. Pakistan became a Muslim nation-state and India (named as India i.e. Bharat in Indian Constitution subsequently as a Hindu nation, howsoever secular the state might be.) It is necessary to fresh up the memory that it was Indian Muslims i.e. the Muslims in that part of India which never could have become Pakistan, who fought tooth and nail to create Pakistan under the leadership of an Indian Gujarati Muslim – a domicile of Bombay – Mohammad Ali Jinnah. It is inappropriate here to narrate the entire story of partition. But it must be noted that All India Muslim League was not automatically partitioned on 15th August 1947 along with India’s partition. A special session was called to split Indian Muslim League at Karachi in December 1947. In this session by a special resolution, All India Muslim League was split into two – Pakistan Muslim League (with Liaqat Ali Khan elected as special convener) and Indian Union Muslim League (with President of Madras Provincial Muslim League, M. Mohammad Ismail, elected as special convener.) The resolutions adopted in Karachi session are worth studying in totality. But I reproduce below (in part) resolution no.3. Resolution no. 3 (All India Muslim League, Karachi Session, 14-15 Dec 1947) – “The Council of All India Muslim League views with great satisfaction the attainment of its great objective, namely, the establishment of Pakistan, and congratulates Musalmans of the Indian subcontinent on sacrifices they have made for achievement of their national goal. The council feels confident that the unique struggle of Muslim League for establishment of a fully independent sovereign state, under the superb leadership of Quaid-e-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah, and its ultimate triumph in the birth of largest Muslim State and fifth largest of all States of the world, will go down in history as the most outstanding world-event of modern times.” The tenor of the above resolution will make it amply clear that Muslims in partitioned India could not sever their relationship with brother Muslims in Pakistan. After expressing their pride in partitioning the country on religious basis, they could not be expected to be loyal national of Bharat. But Indian National Congress just automatically ceased to exist in Pakistan. Congress was not required to be partitioned. It was always a Hindu organization irrespective of what Congress pleaded. Therefore none ever thought what happened to Congress houses in Lahore, Karachi, Peshawar, Multan and Dhaka. Therefore we must redefine Hindutva in India, Pakistan and Bangladesh too as Pakistan was further dismembered and Bangladesh became a separate nation-state in 1971. As far as India is concerned, the Hindutva concept remains unchanged i.e. same as before partition. But we must remember after complete independence from British rule and any left hangovers of Muslim rules, the responsibility of Hindus is increased. Not only they must remain as united national people in India, but they must be able to bring all non-Hindus and particularly Muslims in the main national stream, leaving behind their ambition of creating Muslim State. The onus is on Hindus to integrate Muslims in territorial and cultural Nation-State as Bharat and not look to making India a Hindu Nation-State. The clock cannot be turned back. What Hindus could not achieve in thousand years, cannot be achieved now. If Hindus can turn all Muslims into loyal Indian nationals with no attachment to Muslim Ummah, it will be a big achievement. And it should be possible. After all, every Muslim is as much a homosapien as any Hindu. To turn a Muslim as a true national, he will have to be weaned away from Mullah, Maulavis who keep on harping on the old ideas of Dar-ul-Harb and Dar-ul-Islam. Muslims will have to be liberated from their blind faith in Islam and treating remaining humanity as Kafirs. How do we define Hindutva for Bangladesh? Even today Bangladesh has 16 percent Hindu population. What is the meaning of Hindutva to them? Their Hindutva should aim at making Bangladesh a true secular Nation-State. In fact, it was born as a secular state in 1971. but due to lack of Indian diplomacy and lack of fighting spirit of Bangladeshi Hindus, Bangladesh became an Islamic State in 1975 and also a member of Organisation of Islamic Countries (OIC). Hindus of Bangladesh can still aspire to take more and more active part in political life to turn the country back to a secular state and press for their rights within the legal and constitutional framework. Pakistan (then West Pakistan) solved the Hindu issue just by pogroms and squeezing Hindus out of Pakistan. The percentage of Hindus came down from ten percent at the time of partition to just one percent at present. So we are relieved of the issue of defining Hindutva of Pakistani Hindus. To sum up, Hindutva is a still relevant secular, non-communal, non-political concept. Just defining nationalism of Bharat keeping it open for non-Hindus to assimilate in a territorial cultural nationalism. In Bangladesh, it means attempts to turn the Islamic Republic to Secular Republic in which Hindus can live honourably and flourish as equal citizens. | |
| – Arvind Bal | |
Hindutva: Not a Way of Life
Hindu Traditional Knowledge System and Educational Reforms
Swami Vigyananand
Dying traditional knowledge systems and steps to reintroduce, maintain, and preserve traditional knowledge system. Steps to learn, popularize, and spread the traditional knowledge.
Hindu civilization has the longest history with continuity, and the oldest amongst the great civilizations of the world. Traditional knowledge systems are a body of knowledge, which is very ancient and deep rooted. They have the origins in the remote past. From the very beginning of our civilization, all knowledge was in the oral tradition. There was no written text in those days. It was handed over generation to generation through oral tradition based on memorizing hymns, verses and poetry, therefore it was called Shruti. Later on, the Vedas and Vedic literature were written down in prevalent scripts of those days. Subsequently these Vedas, and allied Vedic literature, Shramanic Jain and Boudha, Shaiva, Shakta, and Vaishnav etc, agama based traditions; language, literature, philosophy and the knowledge system were organized in methodical way.
At that stage we can divide traditional knowledge system in two sections – one written thus organized, and the other oral and unorganized. This unorganized traditional knowledge system and technology that also incorporated the wisdom distilled through millennia of experimentation of trial and error. This traditional knowledge systems which are essentially the indigenous (Desi) tradition of Indian science, are oral, unsystematic, undocumented. It contained vast treasure house of knowledge in simple poetry on agriculture, horticulture, soil science, climate, meteorology, mines, minerals, astronomy, hydrology, mathematics, plants and herbs, ayurveda, sports and games, ethics and principles, etc. This undocumented body of knowledge is also a part of great heritage of humankind, which is under imminent danger of getting lost with the onslaught of western-oriented modern education. This body of knowledge needs to be preserved and documented and used for benefit of the possessors of such knowledge, their region and humanity at large.
Let us focus on the vastness of organized section of Vedic and Shramanic literature. I am quoting from Vyakaran, Mahabashya, authored by Rishi Patanjali:
“Mahan hi Sabdasyah prayog vishayah, Saptadweepa vasumati, Trayolokah Chatwaro vedah, Sanga Sarahasya Bahudha vibhinnah, Eksatam adhvaryu Sakhah.
Sahasra vartma samvedah Ek vinshatidha Bahva Richyam, Navdha Atharvano Vedah, Vako vakyam Ithihasah, puranam vaidyakam iti Etavat Sabdasya prayog Vishayah.”
i.e. The usage of word is spread in seven continents (Saptadweepa) of the Earth and three lokas (Akash, Prithvi and Paathal i.e. everywhere), four Vedas together with Vedang, Brahman, Aranyaka and Upanishads. They are many in types and number. These Vedas are again spread in several and different Shakha, such as Yajurveda has 101 Shakha, Samved has one thousand Shakha, Voluminous Rig Veda has 21 Shakha and Atharva Veda has 9 Shakha, Itihasa, Purana (history), and Ayurveda, etc that the usage of word is so vastly spread.
This ocean of organized traditional knowledge system is divided in Ashtaadash Vidya (Eighteen Vidyas – Knowledge System):
“Angani Vedah Chatvaro Mimansa Nyaya Vistarah Dharma Saastram Puranam cha Vidya hi Eta Chaturdash. Ayurvedo, Dhanurvedo, Gandharvaveda Cha iti. Arthasastram Chaturthayantu Vidya Ashtadash Smrita”
Angani i.e. Six Vedang – Shiksha, Vyakaran, Nirukta, Kalpa Shastra, Chhanda, and Jyotish
Shiksha – Science and technique of correct pronunciation: The popular Shiksha was by Rishi Panini, which is lost in practice. Several other Shikshas are in use. Therefore we find corruption in pronunciation.
Vyakarana – Sanskrit Grammar: starts from Indra Vyakaran of 1 lakh shlokas authored by Indra (which is completely lost.) Saktayana Vyakaran and several other school of Vyakaran also followed Indra grammar are lost. At the last Indra Grammar School was followed by famous Rishi Panini as in Ashtadhyayi. This Vyakaran is big ocean itself. The scholarship in this school is dying in this independent India.
Nirukta – Vyutpativad of Vedic words (etymological interpretation or explanation of a word; name of a commentary on the Nighantu by Rishi Yaska): The real scholars of Nirukta are really very difficult to find in Bharat.
Kalpa Shastra – Practicable; feasible; proper; fit; a correct precept; law; rule; ordinance prescribed by the Vedas, such as Katyayan Sraut Sutra, etc: This Kalpa Shastra system is very vast. Sulba sutra is part of Kalpa shastra, the origin of mathematics. Learning and practicing tradition of this Kalpa Shastras are dying.
Chhanda Sastra – Metrical science of Veda Mantra: Authored by Rishi Pingal Jyotish – Surya Sidhantha (Astronomy & Mathematics). Aryabhat, Bhaskaracharya, Brahmagupta were great teachers of this school. This is again spread in several types of mathematics and astronomical school of Joytisha Shastra.
The Vedas – Four: Rigveda, Yajurveda, Samveda and Atharvaveda (Every Veda has one Upaveda also)
| Vedas | Total Shakha | Lost | Available | State of Scholarship |
| Rig Veda | 21 | 18 | 3 | Very few |
| Yajurveda | 101 | 93 | 8 | Sharply declining |
| Samaveda | 1000 | 995 | 5 | Rare |
| Atharvaveda | 9 | 4 | 5 | Dying |
Rig Veda – Ayur Veda: Ayurvedic surgery and famed plastic surgery of Aryurvedic School in Bharat is completely lost. Briksha Ayurveda (Botany), Go Ayurveda (Veterinary Science) is lost. Books on the above subject are also not available in Bharat. Some books are known to be available in foreign libraries.
Yajurveda – Dhanur Veda: Shastra which created experts like Bhagwan Parasuram, Bhagwan Ram, Laxman, Bhishma Pitamaha, Dronacharya, Karna and the famous Arjuna is completely lost today. Even it is very difficult to find it in the archives.
Samveda – Gandharva Veda (Nritya and Sangeet Shastra): As a Veda, Gandharva veda is lost. Bharat Muni Natya Shastra is popular.
Atharva Veda – Artha Veda as a Veda is no more available. Arthshastra of Kautilya (Chanakya) is available. The Silpa shastra is part of Arthveda. The knowledge system of this Silpa shastra is spread in several complete knowledge system like architecture, civil engineering, mechanical engineering, metallurgy and mining, etc.
The construction of Raja Rajeshwara temple at Tanjavore is a mystery. No one knows how such heavy stone reached on top of the temple. No one knows what type of engineering and instruments were used in those days. It is completely lost. Only few sculptors and Sompura families are surviving. Our Rishis were aware of the full consequence of using big and heavy technology and instruments. Therefore they controlled the use of heavy technology by minimizing to the maximum level.
“Sarvakareshu Adhikari Mahayantra pravartanam
Himshaoushadhinam strayajeevoabhicharo Mulkarama cha”
This quote from the Manu Smriti means – do not use the big technology, it creates exploitation of human being and environment along with unemployment. Use of heavy machine is very harmful for society and nation. In 1950 when Pt. Bhagwaddatt while translating the above shloka commented that “the western world is enjoying by using heavy engineering and technology, the disastrous consequence would be known very shortly to the western world”. Now we are watching the consequence. A small portion is shown in a movie Inconvenient Truth produced by Mr Al Gore, former Vice President of USA.
Serious Scholarship in Brahmanas and Aranyaka are no longer available. Here is a list of the old, new and lost Brahmana and Aranyakas.
Brahmanas – Old and New (which are available in Granthalayas i.e. libraries)
Brahmanas of the Rigveda:Aitareya Brahmana, Kaushitaki Brahmana, Samkhayana Brahmana.
Brahmanas of the Yajurveda: Madhyandia Satapatha Brahmana, Kanva Satapatha Brahmana, Taittiriya Brahmana of the Krishna Yajurveda.
Brahmanas of the Samaveda:Tamdya Brahmana, Shadvimsa Brahmana, Mantra Brahmana = Chhandogya Brahmana, Daivata or Devatadhyaya Brahmana, Arsheya Brahmana, Samavidhana Brahmana, Samhitopanishad Brahmana, Vamsa Brahmana, Jaiminiya Brahmana, Jaiminiya Arsheya Brahmana, Jaiminiyopanishad Brahmana
Brahmana of Atharvaveda: Gopatha Brahmana
The Lost Brahmanas –
Brahmanas of the Rigveda:Paimgi, Paimgya, Paimgayani Brahmana, Bahvricha Brahmana, Asvalayana Brahmana, Galava Brahmana
Brahmanas of the Yajurveda: Charaka Brahmana, Svetasvatara Brahmana, Kathaka Brahmana, Maitrayani Brahmana, Jabala Brahmana, Khandikeya Brahmana, Aukheya Brahmana, Haridravika Brahmana, Tumburu Brahmana, Ahvaraka Brahmana, Kankati Brahmana, Chhagaleya Brahmana.
Brahmanas of the Samaveda: Bhallavi Brahmana, Kalabavi Brahmana, Rauruki Brahmana, Satyayana Brahmana, Talavakara Brahmana
Miscellaneous Brahmanas: Aruneya Brahmana, Saulabha Brahmana, Sailali Brahmana, Parasara Brahmana, Mahasaravi Brahmana, Kapeya Brahmana, Rashasyamnaya Brahmana, Nirukta Brahmana, Anvakhyana Brahmana, Bashkala Brahmana and Mandukeya Brahmana, Trikharva and Karadvisha Brahmanas.
Aranyakas of the Rigveda: Aitareya Aranyaka, Kaushitaki Aranyaka, Samkhayana Aranyaka
Aranyakas of the Yajurveda: Brihadaranyaka (Madhyandina), Brihadaranyaka (Kanva), Taittiriya Aranyaka, Maitrayaniya or Brihad Aranyaka of Charaka Recension
Aranyaka of the Samveda: Talavakara Aranyaka or Jaiminiya Upanishad Brahmana
Compilation of Aranyakas: Saunaka, Asvalayana, Katyayana, Yaska, Panini, Pinmgala, Vyadi, Kausta.
Upanishad: 108 Upanishads out of which 20 are major.
Dharma Sastra – Aapastambha Dharma Sutra, Gautam Dharma Sutra etc. This is widely spread up sastra.
Smriti – Code of conduct (Manu Smriti etc). There are several Smritis.
Itihas & Purana – Ramayana, Mahabharat, 18 major Puran and 18 Uppa Purana etc.
Mimansa & Nyaya which include – Sankya – Yoga, Nyaya – Vaisheshika, Purva Mimansa – Uttar Mimansa. Four School of Buddhist Philosophy, Jain School of Philosophy, Shaiva Vaishnava, Shakta all comes under these schools of Philosophy. These are all traditional vidyas.
Volume of Documented Organized Traditional Knowledge System:
For a long time, perhaps for more than a hundred years, the scholars of Indology have been trying to compile the available catalogues and lists of known Indian manuscripts in various languages. After their long and tedious search, they have recently come to the conclusion that there exist probably two thousand catalogues of Indian manuscripts in Sanskrit, Pali, Tamil, Prakrit, etc. These two thousand catalogues are from perhaps seven or eight hundred different locations and about one third of these locations may be outside India. Each of these catalogues lists a hundred or two hundred manuscripts. The scholars thus have a listing of two to four lakh Indian manuscripts.
We do not know how many of the manuscripts listed actually survive today, and of those, which survive, how many are in a condition fit enough to be opened and read, or even microfilmed. This vast available literature comes just only under 50 word roots (Dhatu) of the Sanskrit Grammar whereas we have studied about 2800 word roots. Usages of 2750 roots are completely lost now. We can only imagine the vastness of the literature and the lost knowledge.
In a somewhat similar exercise of scholarly thoroughness, some eminent scholars of India keep mentioning that there are some fifty crore (500 Million) Indian manuscripts in various Indian languages – Bangla, Oriya, Kannada, Telugu, Tamil, Malayalam, Assamees, Gujarati, Marathi, Hindi, Punjabi, Bhojpuri, etc which have survived till today.
These huge amounts of organized systems of great literature and philosophy have created self-respect and pride in Hindu society. This self-respect and pride had ignited the Hindu society to resist the onslaught of Greek, Bactrian, Partho-scythian, Kushan, Saka and Barbarian Hun and finally defeated them. Same spirit continued in Hindu society and from 7th century onward Hindu society resisted Arab, Turk and Mongol and defended the civilization for thousands of years. The society also resisted Portuguese, Dutch, French and British.
With these entire onslaughts, we are the only surviving civilization with continuity of dharmic, cultural, social and spiritual ethos whereas other civilizations of world like Roman and Greek of Europe, Egyptian of Africa, Mesopotamian, Assyrian Persian of Middle-east and Gulf, Incas, Maya and Aztec of South America were wiped out and become part of archaeological museum. Credit for survival of Hindu Society also goes to the traditional knowledge system, which created self respect and pride in Hindu Society. This pride inspired them in resisting the foreign invasion.
State of Sanskrit learning in India:
How many in India today have any fluency in Sanskrit? Now-a-days, one can even get a doctorate in Sanskrit without seriously learning the language. One can write a thesis in English and obtain a Ph. D. degree for Sanskrit literature from most Indian Universities. There may be a thousand or so of the traditional Pandits who still retain a certain level of competence in the language. Among the families traditionally associated with Indian learning, there may still be four or five lakh individuals who can read and understand Sanskrit, though small number would be fluent enough to converse in it. That is about all the talent we have in the language.
Gandhian scholar Shri Dharampal recorded in his memoirs that “South India has had a long tradition of Sanskrit learning. Some time ago, I happened to meet Sri Sivaraman, the scholarly former editor of the Tamil daily Dinamani. I asked him about his estimate of the number of people in South India who might still be fluent in the language, and who might feel comfortable reading, writing and speaking in Sanskrit. His answer was that there was probably not a single such individual in South India. There might be, he later said, about a thousand scholars, definitely not any more, who would have some level of competence in Sanskrit, but even they were unlikely to be fluent in the language.”
The All India Radio, Akashvani, has been broadcasting an early morning news-bulletin in Sanskrit for many years. But there are probably not many who listen to this bulletin.
This is the state of Sanskrit learning in the country. We have to accept the condition to which we have been reduced, and we must start building up from there. RSS and VHP supported organizations – Sanskrit Bharati and Bharat Sanskrit Parishad are trying hard to popularize simple and spoken Sanskrit. Their efforts in this regard need our encouragement and support.
Institute of Sanskrit learning in India:
We have a large number of Institutes founded with the specific mandate of studying the various texts of Indian literature. Many high scholars have spent long years investigating various parts of the Indian corpus. But, these institutes and the scholars, it seems, have been looking at Indian literature from the perspective of modernity and from the eye of Colonel Joseph Boden Will. Indology, by its very definition, is the science of comprehending India from a non-Indian perspective, and practically all Indian scholars and Indian institutions engaged in the study of Indian literature fall within the discipline of Indology.
All the institutions, colleges and universities of Indian learning of 19 century were conceived along the lines laid down by western scholarship. Their organization had no relation to the traditional organization of learning in India. They were in fact structured on the pattern of the corresponding western institutions, especially those in London. And, their main objective was to enter into the various streams of modern western scholarship. Various institutes such as Bhandarkar Institute at Pune, Sanskrit colleges in big cities were founded during that time.
The Sanskrit University at Varanasi is one classical example of the institutions of Indian learning that came up in India during 19th century. An institution known as the Queen’s College had been functioning in Varanasi from the times of Warren Hastings. Later the same college was named as Sampurnananda Sanskrit University. Today this University is counted amongst the most important institutions of Indian learning in the country. Most of the other Indian institutions engaged in the study of Indian literature have similar antecedents and inspirations behind them. And more of the same type is being established even today.
To gauge how deeply modernity has insinuated itself into the work of Indian scholars, it is enough to have a look at Sri Sripad Damodar Satawalekar’s translation of Purusha Sukta, and his commentary on it. Sri Satawalekar reads the Purusha Sukta to mean that from the sacred effort, Tapas of Brahma there arose, at the beginning of the Universe, a modern government with its varied departments. And, he goes on to name some twenty departments, which the Purusha Sukta supposedly defines. From Sri Satwalekar’s commentary it seems as if the content of the Purusha Sukta is merely a concise prescription for the establishment of a government on the pattern of modern departmental bureaucracy. Sri Satwalekar was recognized and respected in India. His intellect, his commitment to the Indian thought, and the intensity of his effort were indeed very high. But even he got so carried away by the unrelenting sweep of modernity that he began to see a prescience of the modern governmental organization in the Purusha Sukta. Much of the work done by the Indian scholars on Indian literature is similarly tainted by the touch of modernity and influenced by westerners.
Motive behind colonial approach to Sanskrit learning:
The Founder of Boden Chair of Oxford University and Endowment in Professorship in Sanskrit language Col. Joseph Boden’s will dated 19th November 1811 in Lisbon is presented here. Extracted from the Principal Registry of the probate divorce and admiralty division of the High Court of Justice –
“In the name of God Amen, – I Joseph Boden Late a Lieutenant Colonel in the Honorable East India Company’s service and now about to depart to the Island of Madeira being of sound and disposing mind memory and understanding (praised be Almighty God for the same) do the day and year hereunder written make and ordain this my last Will and Testament in manner and form following ——
I do hereby give and bequeath all and singular, my said residuary estate and effects, with the accumulations thereof if any and the stocks funds and securities whereon the same shall have been laid out and invested unto the University of Oxford to be by that Body appropriated in and towards the erection and endowment of a Professorship in the Sanskrit Language at or in any or either of the colleges in the said university being of opinion that a more general and critical knowledge of that language will be a means of enabling my countrymen to proceed in the conversion of the natives of India to the Christian religion by disseminating a knowledge of the sacred scriptures amongst them more effectually than all other means whatsoever.”
The First Boden Professor of Sanskrit in Oxford University was H.H. Wilson. Then it was Monier Williams and he was followed by Max Muller. Personal letters of Mr Max Muller gives a true picture of the writer’s inner mind. Such letters are very helpful in estimating his real nature and character. In a letter to his wife in 1886 A.D. Max Muller wrote:
“This edition of mine and the translation of the Veda will hereafter tell to a great extent on the fate of India … It is the root of their religion and to show them what the root is, I feel sure, is the only way of uprooting all that has sprung from it during the last three thousand years.”
In a letter on 16th December 1868 A.D he writes to Duke of Argyll, the Minister for India:
“The ancient religion of India is doomed and if Christianity does not step in, whose fault will it be?”
You can understand how bias was colonial scholarship of Sanskrit learning. Max Muller’s bias is now an open secret. The strange factor is that Max Muller does not understand simple Sanskrit and he cannot write and translate. Then what about his Vedic knowledge?
Disastrous consequence in not knowing proper Sanskrit Grammar and Literature:
Mr Max Muller was doubly blind. One because of his bias and prejudice against Hindu knowledge system and second he was totally ignorant in Sanskrit language and literature that led to disastrous translation of Rig Veda. It was more than once that Max Muller admitted his shortcomings as a scholar of Vedic Sanskrit. He freely owned that while he was busy with the work of translating the Rig Veda he took help from Sayanacharya.
Following is a quote from his book “My Autobiography” –
“Over and over again I was stopped by some short enigmatical reference to Panini’s grammar or Yaska’s glossary, which I could not identify…. How often I was in perfect despair, because there was some allusion in Sayana which I could not make out, and which no other Sanskrit scholar, not even Bournouf or Wilson could help me to clear up. It often took me whole days, nay weeks, before I saw light.”
In a letter which Max Muller wrote (September 28, 1898) to Pandit Chavilal of Kathmandu (Nepal) only about two years before his death he frankly admitted the inadequacy of his knowledge of Sanskrit. Since this letter had been kept out of Max Muller’s first biography (The Life and Letters) and found no space in the 2nd biography “Scholar Extraordinary” by Nirad C. Choudhary. Full text of the letter is produced here.
“7 Norham Gards, Oxford,
28th September, 1898,
Pandit Chhavilal,
Dear Sir, accept my best thanks for your Natakas, Sundara Charita and Kushalavodaya, the Vritalankara, and the Sanskrit verses addressed to me. As soon as I find time I hope to read your two plays, but I am getting so old (75) and have still so much to do, that I have but little leisure left to me. I am surprised at your familiarity with Sanskrit. We, in Europe, shall never be able to rival you in that. We have to read but never to write Sanskrit. To you it seems as easy as English or Latin is to us. You see, we chiefly want to know what INDIA is and has been – we care for its literature, its philosophy, etc and that takes up so much time, that we never think of practicing composition, that we can admire all the more because we cannot rival, and I certainly was filled with admiration when I read but a few pages of your Sundara Charita. And now a question. Mr Bahramji Malabari is publishing at Bombay (India Spectator) translation of my Hebert Lectures in Marathi, Bengali, Gujarati, Tamil, etc. He is very anxious to find a scholar to translate them into Sanskrit. One translation was made, but it was too imperfect. Would you undertake that work? Of course, you would be paid for your trouble”
That means Max Muller himself was unable to translate his own English lecture to Sanskrit. It was perhaps the first time that Max Muller had so candidly confessed to anyone that he was no scholar of Sanskrit and much less of Vedic Sanskrit. Very plainly he had admitted that he was not capable of writing flawless Sanskrit. What he could do was only to read (perhaps that too incorrectly) what some others had written and that too in all probability without being sure whether all that he was reading had been correct or incorrect. Yet, Max Muller is put into worldwide circulation as the greatest and as an extra ordinary scholar of Vedic Sanskrit like a counterfeit coin.
Schopenhauer had said regarding German and Western Scholar of Sanskrit
“I add to this the impression which the translation of Sanskrit words by European Scholars, with very few exceptions, produce on my mind. I cannot resist a certain suspicion that our Sanskrit Scholars do not understand their text much better than the higher class of school boys their Greek and Latin”
Danger of not knowing ancient Sanskrit Grammar, Literature and Language properly:
Just a small example “Aja Yastabyam” – Literal meaning in modern Sanskrit is Aja means Goat – Yastabyam – Perform Yaaga (Sacrifice). In ancient Sanskrit Aja means which cannot reproduce. Again the Sastra explains Aja means Sapta Varshansi Brihaya – means 7 year old paddy (dhan – rice covered with husk) i.e. seven-year-old paddy cannot produce (germinate) another paddy. The seven-year-old paddy is used in performing Yaaga.
Early Efforts to Preserve and Popularize this Organized Body of Traditional Knowledge System:
During the Hindu Renaissance of 19th century, the last quarter of the century Swami Dayananand Saraswati challenged the western indologist and their Sanskrit scholarship. In the beginning of 20th century Swami Shradhananand, the follower of Swami Dayananand made a beginning to preserve and popularize and produce quality scholars in the Vedic knowledge system in a true Hindu perspective system for defending Hindu society. He founded Gurukul Kangadi at Haridwar, which created a great enthusiasm and hope. British colonial system was dead against such efforts. They did not recognize the Degree of Gurukul Kangadi. In spite of this denial of recognition, there was a deep commitment, which kept them going. In the early phase they produced good scholars and these scholars did great work also. Inspired by the great work of Gurukul Kangadi, a number of Gurukul institutions have come up in northern Bharat. These Gurukul also produced good scholars and did great work for the preservation of Vedic knowledge system in their own limited way without any British India Government support. Though they had survived and flourished during British rule but irony is that they started diminishing in independent India. Most of them are closed or are the verge of closure.
In the beginning of same century Sanatan Dharma Sabha also started some Sanskrit Vidyalaya such as Rishikul. They did little but failed miserably. Maharshi Mahesh Yogi did great work in popularizing Vedic patha parampara during 1980s onward. Because of mismanagement this sacred efforts also failed. RSS & VHP supported organization – Sanskrit Bharati and Bharat Sanskrit Parishad started popularizing simple spoken Sanskrit. This is not enough. They also started Ved Pathashala to preserve ved paatha parampara. To my knowledge this is also not going to work. The Gurukul and pathasala started by these organizations is not enough to preserve the traditional Vedic knowledge.
Bitter Truth of Indian Sanskrit Learning:
During the Independence struggle of 19th and 20th century, there were traditional Gurukul and Pathasala. Except few none of these Gurukul and Pathasala produced any great revolutionary or revolutionaries or national leader. The truth is that most of the revolutionaries and national leaders were product of English schools & colleges run by Britishers or DAV College and Schools run by Arya Samaj or national school/colleges run by independent foundation or society.
Drawbacks of the Gurukul and Pathasala System in the Modern time:
The Gurukul and Pathasala system of teaching focuses only on teaching Sanskrit language and literature to get a degree. They are not taught of modern science, mathematics, history, geography, sociology, etc. Because of that they don’t get proper knowledge or exposure of the society and happening in the world. They suffer deep inferiority complex not only in knowledge but also in dress and sports along with lack of confidence. Once they get degree from colleges/university, the only option as a career before them is to become a teacher or priest in temple. They cannot become doctors, engineers, scientists, professionals, businessmen and administrators. They are unable to face the students educated in modern university/colleges. Therefore they never encourage their children also of other children to join the Pathasala or Gurukul. Thus this system does not get intelligent students to study the traditional knowledge system. If you do not get good student you cannot produce good scholar and teacher. When you do not have good student and teacher coming in the system, the system may suffer loss. This is happening in the case of Sanskrit learning in independent India.
Reintroducing the Traditional Knowledge Systems in Gurukul and Pathasala:
First we have to bring back confidence in the students of Gurukul and Pathasala by introducing the latest syllabus system of science, technology, mathematics, history, sociology, etc. together with blending the traditional knowledge system. After education, the students of such Gurukul and Pathasala should be able to pursue any career like doctor, engineer, scientist, professional, businessman or administrator. They should be proud of their Gurukul or Pathasala education system. On the same time they will be able to tell the modern university/college educated students with guts and confidence that gentlemen what you know is also known to me but what I know, you do not know. That will make the difference.
How to Popularize the Traditional Knowledge System:
We have to create another renaissance in the traditional learning system:
- i. Some Hindu corporate houses have to create big foundations and invest good amount of money,
- ii. Group of dedicated individuals should get together and create a foundation with lot of money and,
- iii. We have to identify / locatededicated traditional scholars scattered here and there.
We have to establish two types of Institutions:
• i. Institutions for Serious Studies of Traditional Knowledge System
Our focus on this institution should be on serious study of organized traditional knowledge system of Vedic, Shramanic Sanskrit language and literature along with modern science, technology, mathematics, etc. Those students who want to leave these institutions in course of their study may join the modern education system in college or university for their professional career. They should have free choice but at the same time they should not regret of the time they have wasted in serious study. Those who want to continue and devote time in this serious study will continue. This will produce serious scholars who would again revive the whole traditional knowledge system.
• ii. General Study
We have to establish new model of boarding school focusing on the teaching of modern science, technology, mathematics, history, sociology, etc. together blending with organized traditional knowledge system of Vedic and Sanskrit language and literature with Hindu values. Those students during their course of study get motivated and want to devote time for serious study of Vedic and Sanskrit language and literature can also join serious study institution. Otherwise they can continue their course and join in any professional career. Once they go to the society after finishing their studies, where they will meet and interact with other group of professionals and students educated in modern university and college. The students of model school should be able to tell the modern university/college educated students with guts and confidence that gentlemen what you know is also known to me but what I know, you do not know. That will make the difference. Then the society will realize the importance of traditional knowledge system and will then start in participating and popularizing the traditional knowledge system.
When the above happens, the memory of our Hindu society will be restored and begin to form appreciation of geography and history of Hindu civilization whereby the real task of building strong Hindu nation and society will begin in real sense and spirit.
Email: vigyananand@yahoo.com
About the Author:
Swami Vigyananand, a Bachelor in Technology from IIT, Kharagpur, India. A Vidyavaridhi (Similar to Ph.D) in Oriental Philosophy which includes six school of Hindu Philosophy (Upang) along with Buddhist, Jain, Atheist Philosophy and other Hindu school of Philosophy and Vachaspathi (Similar to D.Lit) Brahmana and Vedic Samhita. He has also published several books including the Bibliography of Sanskrit Grammer; (Sanskrit Research Book). Currently he is the Coordinator for Asia and Pacific Zones of Vishwa Hindu Parishad (World Hindu Council).
Women as Intellectuals: Vedic Period and Beyond
What Is So Heroic About Intellectuals?
“What is so heroic about intellectuals?” dear reader, you may well ask.
“As a warrior fells an enemy with his darts, O sage, I rise to decimate you with my questions.” Thus resonated the challenge of the great woman scholar, Gargi, to sage Yajnavalkya, one of the principal authors of the Upanishads, through the court of King Janaka.
All revolutions in human history—whether it be the dawn of democracy, of science, of communism, or of information technology—have been heralded by intellectuals. Galileo, Thoreau, Rousseau, Voltaire, Marx, Engels: all of them challenged the existing order, for better or worse, enduring great personal privations. Like the first shaft of the sun’s rays piercing the darkness, since time immemorial, intellectuals have pointed out to humanity the path it must take.
The seers of the Vedas and Upanishads may be justly regarded as the harbingers of Hindu civilization. The forests wherein the Upanishads were composed were the birthplaces of Indian civilization. As the poet Tagore points out in his Sadhana, this mode of inception accounts for the liberality and all-embracing nature of the Hindu ethos.
The Contributions of Women
What were the contributions of women, if any, to this phenomenon? Hindu civilization has been accused, perhaps with some justification, of glorifying women in mythology and denigrating them in daily life. This article and the succeeding pieces therefore will limit themselves to historical accounts, insofar as they are available. It is not without a pang of regret that this pen leaves behind the wealth of mythology that is so real and so dear to all Hindus and has played so great a role in shaping the Indian psyche.
pradeepa jvaalaabhir-divasakara neeraajana vidhih ~
sudhaa sootes-chandraopala jala lavair-arghya rachanaa | ~
swakeeyair-ambhobhih salila nidhi sauuhitya karanam ~
tvadeeyaabhir-vaagbhi stava janani vaachaam stutiriyam ||
As one offers to the ocean with its own water, with these verses bestowed by You, O Mother, I have composed these paeans in Your praise.
These concluding lines from the composition Saundarya Lahari (Waves of Beatitude) reflect the utter humility of the seer Sri Adi Shankara, indisputably the greatest Vedic scholar of the Kaliyuga, as he dedicated this immortal work to the Divine Mother.
In Hindu mythology, the Divine Mother, as Saraswathi, the goddess of learning, is held to be the source of all knowledge, of all the arts and crafts. The Gita describes the skill of speech, memory, and the intellect as feminine attributes:
mrutyuh sarva-haras chaham
udbhavas cha bhavishyatam ~
kirtih srir vak cha narinam smrutir
medha dhrutih kshama ~ ~ (10.34)
“I am the all-consuming death, the progenitor of that which is yet to be; among women I am fame, the skill of speech, memory, intellect, fidelity, patience, and forgiveness.”
Women Scholars in History
The Vedas are believed to have been transcribed by both men and women—rishis and rishikas. Yet, we had degenerated to a point where women—like my music teacher gifted with a melodious voice and profound jnana—were relegated to the kitchen. She was refused permission even to sing in private by her husband and in-laws. The innumerable subterfuges she adopted to keep her skills alive and to transmit the art to her students is a saga common to millions of unnamed heroines in Hindu society. Countless women have undergone great travails to obtain an education from a male-dominated society.
The famous Hindu woman scholar, Pandita Ramabai, has contended that there is no period in Indian history where women had equal status. The biographies of the scholars Gargi, Maitreyi, and Sulabhi in Vedic times; of Ubhaya Bharathi in later years, who challenged Sri Adi Shankara himself; and of the saint-poetess Avvaiyaar, refute and yet confirm this assertion, in part. Some prominent later-day women intellectuals were Pandita Ramabai herself, Jahanaara (the daughter of Shahjahan, who chronicled the beginning of the end for the Mughal dynasty), and Sarojini Naidu. This account will explore these biographies one by one, though later-day heroines will be dealt with in subsequent sections. This article will not serve its purpose without exploring, albeit briefly, the intellectual prowess of mythological heroines.
dharmaat arthah prabhavati
dharmaat prabhavate sukham ~
dharmeNa labhate sarvam
dharma saaram idam jagat ~~ 3.9.30
strii chaapalaat etat udaahritam
medharmam cha vaktum tava kah samarthah ~
vichaarya buddhyaa tu saha anujena
yat rochate tat kuru ma achireNa ~~ 3.9.33
From rightful life (dharma) comes prosperity; happiness too emanates from dharma. All is gained from dharma; indeed, this entire universe is based on dharma.
All this I speak because of my wavering woman’s mind, for who may presume to debate on dharma with you? Therefore, please reflect on this along with your brother and do the needful, without delay.
Such is the wise counsel given by Sita to her husband Sri Rama in the Valmiki Ramayana. Indeed, a whole chapter is dedicated to this sage advice. She proceeds to list the three cardinal sins humans may be guilty of—dishonesty, lust, and violence. She elaborates: “Dishonesty is unthinkable for one who has left a kingdom to uphold his father’s word. Do I not know that you will not even let the shadow of another woman fall upon you? It is therefore the last, attacking someone without personal enmity (vina vaire), that concerns me.”
He had given his word to the sages in the Dandaka forest to destroy the demons who persecuted them. This, Sita felt, was the duty of kings and warriors and not that of her husband, who had taken upon himself the role of an ascetic in the forest. She rightly points out that dharma is not a fixed entity; rather, what is appropriate and what is not depends on the circumstances. She goes on to tell a story of an ascetic who lost the merits of his penance when he was gifted a sword by Indra, king of the celestials, with that very intent. She compares violence without provocation to a fire that consumes the perpetrator. Her advice proves to be prophetic.
She evidently feels that as a woman she is being presumptuous in advising her husband. Yet he does not take it amiss; indeed, his respect and admiration for her increases several fold. He says that nothing less can be expected of a daughter of an eminent scholar like King Janaka—an example for modern men who feel intimidated by intellectual women.
Earlier in the epic, Sri Rama’s mother, Kausalya, displays both erudition and worldly wisdom in her counsel. Even Kaikeyi, who resorts to low stratagems, displays vast knowledge of dharma in her debate with her husband, King Dasaratha.
Later in the epic, Sita counsels her abductor, Ravana, on his folly and warns that such conduct will destroy him and his whole clan. The dignity with which she deals with the villain should serve as an example for modern young women who feel impelled to use abusive language with ‘eve-teasers’. Verily, God and His divine Consort incarnated as a human couple to serve as role-models for humanity for all time.
The mythological princess Savithri uses her wits and wisdom to bring her husband back from the dead. With her legendary courage, knowledge, and gift of repartee, she defeats Yama Dharmaraja, the god of death, the source of immortal wisdom and the giver of the eternal law. Her achievement is matched by the wise King Yudhishtira in the Mahabharata but surpassed by none.
Her debate with Yama summarizes all that is good and best in the Hindu way of life and carries profound mystic symbolisms, which have been explored by Sri Aurobindo in his epic-poem Savitri.
Some simple excerpts from this immortal debate:
“When one walks seven steps with someone, he becomes a friend. Therefore, O death, I look upon you as a friend.” When urged to go back to do the last rites for her departed husband, she points out that marriage is a companionship of souls that lasts beyond birth and death.
“For dharma and knowledge the wise perform great austerities. Therefore, O knower of the law, do not command me to transgress.”
“Even a single meeting with a good person makes him a life-long friend. The company of such should be sought as it is very fruitful.”
“One should never deceive anyone in thought, word, or deed; one should instead strive to help others. The good are thus kind even to enemies. Such is my faith. Such is the dharma that binds the world. O Dharmaraja, I have faith in you, for you bind everyone with a common code and you yourself never transgress that law.”
Queen Kunti was believed to be profoundly knowledgeable. Likewise, the princess Draupadi displays her knowledge of the law and the norms of right conduct for men in various walks of life. The modern Hindu woman continues to perpetuate a tradition of martyrdom because she fails to acquaint herself with the laws enacted to procure justice for women in society.
Innumerable examples can be found from the epics not merely for martyrdom but for a tradition of female erudition, wit and worldly wisdom. Tara, the widow of Vali, heals the rift between Sri Rama and Sugriva with her diplomacy and skill of speech, simultaneously protecting the rights of her son, prince Angada. There may be considerable merit in appointing Hindu women as ambassadors.
Our self-imposed ban precludes an elaboration of mythology. Return we must to the realm of biographies like reiterating the words of a familiar song without the music.
Gargi
Arundhatyanasooya cha
Saavitree Jaanakee Satee
Draupadee Kannagee Gaargee
Meera Durgaavatee tathaa ~~ 10 ~~
The name of Gargi figures in the Ekatmata Stotra, which lists Hindu women who are to be venerated as mother goddesses. The debate between Gargi and Yajnavalkya at the yajnastala, at the sacrifice conducted by King Janaka, is described in the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad. Other than this, very little is known of the personal life of this great scholar.
The fifth brahmana of the third chapter of this Upanishad describes her as Vachaknavi, the daughter of the rishi Vachaknu. She was known at a very young age as brahmavadini because of her intuitive knowledge of brahmavidya, the eternal reality. Her debate with Yajnavalkya displays both her personal skills and the intellectual advancement of ancient India. She starts the discussion thus: everything on earth is solvable in water, water being the element of cohesion; everything on earth may be said to be based in water. Hence, water surpasses the earth.
Which then is the realm that surpasses water? From modern science we know that two-thirds of the earth’s surface and 70% of the bodies of all living beings, including humans, is composed of water. All life arose from the primordial ocean. Both science and religion testify to that.
Yajnavalkya says it is Vayu, or air, which precedes the formation of water. This is literally true because water is formed by a combination of the gases hydrogen and oxygen. They then proceed to discuss ether, and prior to that, the sun, which precedes all creation on earth. We know that it is solar energy that makes the earth habitable. They then proceed to discuss the stellar realms and finally Brahman, or God, as the ultimate reality upon which all else is based.
When she questions him on the nature of Brahman, he says it should not be discussed and that he will have her head off for her impertinence. True to her challenge, she puts him on the defensive. One wonders if a male opponent would have been silenced in a like manner. She later braves his displeasure to question him once more (chapter 3, brahmana 8).
She puts two questions to him: “What is that which is below the earth, above heaven, and yet which is between the two?” He answers that this is based on the ethereal principle. For her second question, she asks, “And what is that ether based upon?” He says it is based on Brahman, which may not be perceived but only experienced in Being, just as the seer may see with his eyes and yet is unable to see his own eyes.
The discourse then delves into profound philosophy and metaphysical precepts, upon which Gargi, with great humility, proclaims him as a sage who is second to none. The true Hindu woman, regardless of her skills, does not yield to false pride. Thereafter, she resumes her seat and speaks no more. But she has found her place among the greatest of Vedic scholars. Now, it is the young women of Delhi who aspire for seats at the prestigious college named after her!
Maitreyi
“You are indeed my svadharmini, my twin soul, my ardhangi, one half of my own self, for you have proved to be my unfailing companion on the dharmic path.” So spoke the sage Yajnavalkya to his wife Maitreyi. The sage had two wives: Katyayini and Maitreyi. On completing his duties as a grahasthin or householder, he prepares to depart for an ascetic’s life in the forest after advising his two wives to share his worldly wealth among them. Katyayini is content to claim her share, whereas Maitreyi declines hers.
She asks him what wealth is to be found in the seclusion of the forests. She shrewdly observes that despite all the wealth and the favor of kings at his disposal, her husband aspires for greater “wealth and power.” He then shares with her the limitless and imperishable wealth of his knowledge, and together they embark upon a path of spiritual glory in the forests.
Their discussions on the nature of finite reality and absolute truth comprise many chapters of the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad and are beyond the scope of this text. Folklore describes that it was Gargi who instructed the sage on the true meaning of marriage—that marriage was not merely a means for begetting progeny, but husbands and wives were intended to be constant companions on the dharmic path. Sage Yajnavalkya and his wife Maitreyi are testimony to this fact. The story of Maitreyi shows that women had achieved equal status on the intellectual and spiritual plane in the days of yore.
Sulabhi
The yogini Sulabhi was believed to be capable of assuming any form at will. She thus goes to the court of Emperor Janaka as a beautiful maiden to test the extent of his emancipation from material things. She finds that he has indeed conquered sensual urges. She points out, however, that though he is king, he has not gained “mastery of his own house,” meaning the material body. Their debate goes into Tantra and metaphysics.
Her discussion on the sensory pathways and the process of childbirth is largely consistent with modern science. For instance, she says vision represents a fusion of four elements: the nature of the object, sunlight by which it is seen, the condition of the eye of the observer, and his/her state of mind. All this is borne out by science.
She says whether a child is a girl or a boy is determined in the womb at conception. Also, that the fetus comes to possess a life of its own mid-way in pregnancy. All this is consistent with the scientific theories of viability and gender determination.
Ubhaya Bharathi
During the 5th–6th century BC, Hinduism entered a phase of degeneracy with Upanishadic philosophy being replaced by mindless ritualism, when Jainism and Buddhism came to hold sway. Foremost among the scholars who restored Hinduism to its former glory was Sri Adi Shankara, founder of a religious order that established four strongholds in the four directions and holds sway until this day.
One of his numerous accomplishments was to engage scholars across the length and breadth of the country in productive debate so as to codify the Hindu scriptures and modes of worship. One of his celebrated debates was with Mandana Mishra, a renowned shastric scholar. Enter the latter’s wife, Bharathi, in the role of judge, to this contest.
So great was Ubhaya Bharathi’s mastery of the Vedas and Shastras that she was regarded as the goddess Saraswathi herself in human form. The standards of fairness and objectivity she established rendered all spectators speechless. After a prolonged debate lasting several days, she conceded victory to the challenger, Sri Adi Shankara. Her own husband had to accept defeat. This episode counters the myth that women are sentimentalists not given to critical analysis.
However, she picks up the gauntlet on behalf of her husband and proves to be the only scholar in the land who could match, to a degree, the intellectual storm unleashed by Sri Adi Shankara. After a heated debate, she questions the seer on married life. Having no experience in that aspect of life, Sri Adi Shankara briefly assumes the role of a grihasthin, at the royal household of Kashi, and returns to ultimately defeat her in the debate. She joins her husband in entering the religious order established by Sri Adi Shankara.
The greatest wonder is that she is said to have been fully devoted to mundane household chores through the entire period. This may be interpreted both favorably and unfavorably. Equally great, Sri Adi Shankara did not show even a trace of intellectual chauvinism.
Avvaiyar
The name of this saint-poetess is a household word in Tamil Nadu, yet her life is shrouded in mystery. Fact and folklore are woven together inextricably. Thus, we have no recorded history of her life, save the oral traditions and some accounts of contemporaries. The word Avvaiyar means venerable dame, and it is possible that there may have been more than one poetess by this name. But over fifty compositions are attributed to her.
She is said to have transformed herself into an elderly woman in order to avoid the bondage of matrimony. This, despite the fact that her beauty attracted no less than the king of the land as a potential suitor. She then devoted herself to a life of chastity, service, and intellectual pursuits. This was a woman who clearly valued her intellectual assets over the physical or material.
Children are literally exposed to her works from the cradle. Her composition Attichoodi is a primer of the Tamil alphabet where, instead of ‘A’ for Apple and so on, children are instructed in the niceties of dharma. The very first line, aram cheyya virumbu, says that one should desire to adhere to dharma in thought and deed.
She was an iconoclast who refused to bow to traditional ritualistic modes of worship. She called for an egalitarian society rejecting barriers of caste and gender. She addresses her peers as women of the ‘caste of bards.’ In contradistinction to the submissive stereotype for the Hindu woman, her poetry urges mothers to be heroic in order to have valiant sons. Furthermore, her poetry fosters self-esteem. Quoting at random:
“A family life foregoing self-respect! It is better by far to lead the life of a wandering mendicant.”
“Boycotting the doorstep of one who shows us no respect is worth one crore gold coins.”
She describes her first patron, King Netuman Anci, as a majestic elephant, gentle with his subjects, as with children who play with his tusks, yet crushing his adversaries like an elephant in rut. Hers was a pride tinged with humility: “What one knows is like unto a handful (of earth), what one is yet to learn akin to the entire universe!”
How many such women will we lose every day before we take education to the masses?
Bibliography
- Swami Krishnananda, discourses & articles, The Divine Life Society, Sivananda Ashram, Rishikesh, India.
- Swami Krishnananda, Brihadaranyaka Upanishad
- Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, Bhagavad Gita As It Is
- C. Rajagopalashari, The Ramayana, Bhavan’s Publications
Online Resources
5. 4000 Years of Women in Science: http://www.astr.ua.edu/4000WS/GARGI.html
6. Sushila Patil and Moses Seenarine, Letter to Gargi, http://www.saxakali.com SaxakaliPublications/gargi.htm
7. Desiraju Hanumanta Rao & K.M.K. Murthy, Valmiki Ramayana, http://www.valmikiramayan.net
8. Free India: http://www.freeindia.org
9. About Ramakrishna Paramahamsa: http://www.angelfire.com/ma/ramakrishna
10. Ramakrishna-Vivekananda Center of New York: http://www.ramakrishna.org
We Must Stand Up Against the Adharma of Conversions
Conversions are a hotly debated subject everywhere now. September 11, 2001, is going to remain in the psyche of all Americans, especially the white, European American, for a very long time. I make this reference to the European Americans in particular as they have been shaken up more by the incidents of recent terrorist acts on the soil of this country. Americans of other origins and hues bore the brunt of unjust treatment and behavior from dominant groups. Hence, their reaction has been one of sadness and less of panic.
For the fundamentalists within the Christian faith, this is an opportunity to further enflame the fear of the fearful! Apart from being able to shred all other traditions to pieces, they can convince their flock that it is all because of the infidels, pagans, heathens, and all who do not accept their religious beliefs. Hindus are the worst, though others are not excluded. Muslims are at least people of the book, and thus they are a bit more tolerable than Hindus, Jains, Buddhists, Sikhs, and a host of other non-Abrahamic traditions, which deserve no respect. In fact, the fundamentalists would like to see all of us blended into a creamed soup of one religion, or simply eradicated. We are called the Devil worshippers, a Godless race, and people of darkness, often on evangelising television channels in this secular and powerful country. Did you know that?
Of course, with the presence of not one, but two true religions (neither recognizes the legitimacy of the other), there is a bit of a problem, as you can tell! They will not, cannot agree either in the name of God or in the name of Allah. Freedom of Religion? They do not believe in that at all! There is also a raging controversy whether the Christians should convert the Muslims, who provide a one billion-strong potential market (see Time magazine, 30 June 2003).
Sadly enough, this conversion issue is simply marketing God as a product in our consumer society. There are exact plans and figures of how the money is assigned to various people in the proselytising battalion—Asia, with an emphasis on India, gets top dollars, as many souls can be harvested there, as opposed to more intelligent nations who watch for their survival. There are many within the Christian fold who are also appalled by the conversion mania, but unfortunately, too few here or anywhere seem to understand the real danger of this kind of thinking. So, there is no critical mass to bring about a change. Converting by every means known to humanity has become a habit for these people over the past thousand years and more. The history of Christian crusades and Islamic jihad are well known and very well recorded throughout the literature of the world, and it continues in one form or another.
Even today, if we look at conflicts around the world—and more are added every day—there is a strong religious component to almost all of them. These include both inter-religious and intra-religious conflicts. While non-religious disagreements can be solved with some effort, those based on religion seem well-nigh insurmountable. So what about the Hindus with the liberal idea of sarva dharma samabhava? I am reminded of Kabir’s doha: “do paatan ke beech baaki bachaa na koi.”
The concept of sarva dharma samabhava is meaningless to all those who have no understanding of the Law of Dharma. It applies only to the dharma-based traditions of Bharat, and that too on the basis of mutual respect. I see no reason to go on accommodating those who have become a menace to all humanity. Hindu population and its Government are seen as the softest target for conversion! India allows anyone to come in and desiccate the Hindu society through nefarious means—multiple marriages for Muslims, which most of the Islamic world does not allow anymore; restrictions on Hindu pilgrimage but subsidies for others; control of the media by not only unpatriotic but downright hostile forces; no understanding of Kashmir as the Sharada Peetha (home of Sarasvati) and its importance to Hindu tradition of learning; no teaching of anything Hindu in the mainstream educational curriculum, while the Muslims have their madarsas and the Christians supply ‘education for all’ through the convents left behind by our white masters, which even today, hold a place of importance in the Hindu psyche.
Many other countries are doing quite well without English education. However, our problems do not stem from familiarity with one more language; rather, it is our tendency to forget what is ours. All our regional languages contain words for our own indigenous thought processes, which help us stay connected to each other and to our samskriti. It is well known that a foreign language creates a chasm between those seen as educated and those not knowing the language as being uneducated.
Living outside India, I observe that both non-Indians and those with Indian roots are amazed that we have survived so long. No one knows the cost, the tragedy, the pain, let alone the enormous death toll of Hindus. Yet, it is the only country to which people of Indian origin run when they are thrown out from other countries. The persecuted people of this planet continue to seek Bharat just as they always have done. Whether humanity dishes out religious discrimination or political oppression, India is a sure sanctuary for all. The Jews, the Parsis (the two non-proselytising, non-aggressive communities in India who have contributed to nation-building), the Buddhists, including the Dalai Lama, sought and found safety on the punya bhoomi of Bharat.
As a child, I used to wonder why the Dalai Lama did not go to a Buddhist country like Japan, Myanmar, or Thailand. China too was Buddhist, certainly more than India! Difficult for a fourteen-year-old to comprehend the complex way religion and politics come together and then part at the whim of some political leader with a blurred vision. In democracies, this power should rest with the people. In reality, the only place where it may be so is in the Panchayat Raj of Indian villages.
The survival of Bharat is critical for Hindus and important for humanity. India alone offers another way of looking at life and sees this manifestation called the jagat or universe as interlinked. In the world of science, quantum physics has come to the same conclusion, but the knowledge sits in the academic world. Our samskriti, on the other hand, disseminated complex ideas much like the discoveries of quantum physics, in an easy way and language to most of the people. In fact, the job was done so thoroughly that even now a common Indian is a very intelligent person, who can think independently in new situations. This is the secret behind the success of the Indian Diaspora as well as the citizens of the country—the ability to interpret, while retaining the core strength of the original Vedic rishi culture.
A certain group simply wants to see us gone; while the other wants to claim our ideas as theirs. The second group is doing just that in various ways. They have immense money power and often invite people of Indian origin who are willing to speak against us to major universities. This shows us in a bad light and also makes our own youth want to move away from our culture. This has been successfully done among the Native American groups as well as many other indigenous groups.
However, I see a ray of hope among the very intelligent youth of the world. This ray must be made dominant again. The task of making this possible is the real duty of the Hindus. It must be seen as something that is our destiny, the purpose of our still being here, while so many ancient traditions have been destroyed or nearly destroyed by aggressive religions.
“him apa shabdam dushyati khandayati – iti Hindu”
This is my favourite definition of a Hindu for the present kaala (time period). It describes Hindus as people who stand up against unrighteousness or adharma. Each individual is born with a certain svabhava or temperament, which is her/his core guna (quality). I believe this to be true also of nations, societies, and groups. This struggle for the sake of establishing dharma is our natural svabhava. In this, we find our greatest strength, our highest joy.
Once we are able to bring the understanding of what is dharma and how it relates to karma into the larger world community, a change will begin to take place—the signs are already visible. I believe the youth of this world are quite tired of the conflicts imposed on them—the ancestral burden of slavery, colonization, manipulations of history, and now outright lies in the media and financial markets, as well as the deceit of the multinational corporations. The youth in India, and to a certain extent outside, are ready for things to change, and they will usher in a new era—a yuga parivartan.
The present world focus on religious terrorism, which is a huge cost to society both in terms of security of life and financial instability of world markets, is an ideal time for the peaceful dharmas of Bharat to focus the attention of the world on the solutions that can be offered through the wisdom of the Vedic dharma-based societies.
Even within these fundamentalist religions, there is a lot of discord. A fundamentalist is one who will not change her/his stand in the face of reason. So, disharmony is the rule, not the exception. Conversion is an idea based on control of the weaker parts of society. Peace and religious conversion are mutually exclusive; we cannot have both.
Interrelatedness and interconnectedness of the universe are facts to be learned. That is why Vedanta is a teaching tradition, not a preaching system! The mathematician and the quantum physicist love the ideas of the Upanishads, but so far Kali Yuga is continuing because no free flow of information is allowed by powerful people within the aggressive religions! For a better future of the human race, the intelligent minority, the elite, must come together and resolve these issues or face the prospect of living in a world torn by religious conflict.
Prologue: Degradation and Reform
Since the beginning of reform movements in the early nineteenth century—motivated by a contempt for Hinduism and rooted in the uprooting influence of English education—we Hindus have agonized at the degradation that has crept into our society. Time was not far off when nearly two hundred students of Calcutta Presidency College in British-India left Hinduism under its ‘modernising influence.’ Young Bengal paraded the streets of Calcutta with bottles of brandy and baskets of beef, shouting slogans against Hinduism.
Over the past century, and more so in the last fifty years, we have made more serious and genuine attempts at social reform, but the results have neither been widespread nor substantial. There seems no end in sight even after these sustained efforts, and a widespread pessimism has taken root in the minds of many a would-be reformer. Economic progress seems to aggravate rather than eliminate the ills, the decay seems to be worsening, and a sense of rootlessness seems to be gripping the society. A lack of collective consciousness has been hampering the resolution of these social issues. Rather than giving up, we would do well to examine the reasons for this failure and begin afresh. Addressing the question of social reform is therefore of crucial importance to the proponents of a grassroots renaissance in Hinduism.
An Unexpected Culprit?
While lack of sincerity in our attempts at reform, and inefficiency in implementing our plans are strong contenders, there are reasons to suspect an unexpected factor. The culprit probably was our very approach to the whole problem—a fundamental flaw that neutralised social reform movements and exploited them to perpetuate those evils which they set out to counter!
This trend gained further ground in the post-Independence era as we blindly followed the postulates of what we may call the ‘Euro-reform’—the Western idea that traces all the evils of society to the characteristics of the native religion and culture, thus calling for a clean displacement of the indigenous culture with Western ideals. Society, it declares, must be based and ordered on human rights and economic principles. We did not bother to ask ourselves whether this approach, which evolved in a different social and cultural context—mainly in opposition to the theology and social norms of Semitic religions—is suitable for the Hindu society.
Commenting on the penury of our postmodernist social reformers, which showed up in the divisive politics of the 90s, sociologist Meenakshi Jain says:
“…[casteist politics] is based on a stereotype image of the caste system and Hindu society that our colonial masters popularised with devastating effect in the 19th century. It is not generally known that the India of rigid social stratification and hierarchical ranking was largely a British creation and that in their attempt to comprehend, and control the Indian social order, the British set in motion forces that transformed the older system in a fundamental way.”
Hindu Reforms
Compared to the Western notion, the Hindu idea of reform is a study in contrast, linked as it is to the concept of dharma, which is the quest to attune oneself to the harmonious cosmic order in everyday life. The understanding of the roles of the sruti and the smriti is ingrained in the Hindu mind. While the former strives to elucidate timeless metaphysical principles to emancipate the individual soul from spiritual ignorance, the latter lays down time-bound laws and customs to facilitate the reign of dharma and aid the realisation of the knowledge contained in the sruti. Thus, dharma is supported by the twin pillars of sruti and smriti.
A decline in dharma may arise either out of people’s ignorance of the meaning of the sruti and/or the outmoding of the smriti. Therefore, reform in the Hindu conception involves correcting such a decline by addressing one or both of these causes. Knowing that prevailing socio-political factors invariably influence the conduct of individuals in a society, our tradition has sanctioned a periodical revision of the smriti. Our sastras repeatedly declare the superiority of the sruti and demand that the smriti be continuously upgraded according to the age.
New Lamps for the Old
From this perspective, we find that the Western idea of reform falls flat when applied to the Hindu society. The reasons for the failure of our attempts at reform also become clear to us. In fact, the call for a complete withdrawal of religion from society is more suited to the Western society rooted in Abrahamic faiths, which do not make any such distinction between sruti and smriti. Instead, an outdated smriti with a semblance of spirituality is sought to be imposed on all societies, in order to materialise a global monoculture.
Thus, our earlier attempts at reform, based as they were on incorrect diagnosis and ineffective medicine, ended in a larger fiasco. It is apt to recall Swami Vivekananda’s warning to such zealous reformers; speaking to a gathering of young men in Madras who had internalised the Western approach to reform, he thundered:
“… I would tell them with a brother’s love that their method is not right; it has been tried a hundred years and failed. Let us try some new method.
Did India ever stand in want of reformers? Do you read the history of India? Who was Ramanuja? Who was Shankara? Who was Nanak? Who was Chaitanya? Who was Kabir? Who was Dadu? Who were all these great preachers, one following the other, a galaxy of stars of the first magnitude? Did not Ramanuja feel for the lower classes? Did he not try all his life to admit even the Pariah to his community? … They had not the fanfaronade of the reformers of today; they had no curses on their lips as modern reformers have; their lips pronounced only blessings. They never condemned … They looked back and they said, ‘O Hindus, what you have done is good, but, my brothers, let us do better.’ They did not say, ‘You have been wicked, now let us be good.’ They said, ‘You have been good, but let us now be better.’ That makes a whole world of difference.
We must grow according to our nature. Vain is it to attempt the lines of action that foreign societies have engrafted upon us; it is impossible. Glory unto God that it is impossible, that we cannot be twisted and tortured into the shape of other nations. I do not condemn the institutions of other races; they are good for them, but not for us. What is meat for them may be poison for us. This is the first lesson to learn …”
Indeed, the saga does not end there. And who was Swami Dayananda? Who was Narayana Guru? Who was Vallalar? Who was Ramakrishna? Who was Vivekananda? Were they all not Hindu reformers of the highest order? And 21st century Hindus also can ask, who was Eknath Ranade? Who was Golwalkar? Who is Amritanandamayi Amma? Who is Kiran Bedi? Not to mention the work of hundreds of unsung individuals and voluntary groups working tirelessly and silently, inspired by the same vision of a new India, of a dynamic Hindu samaj. Krishna, as though, has kept his promise through all of them:
yada yada hi dharmasya glanirbhavati bharata ~
abhyutthanam adharmasya tadatmanam srujamyaham ~~
‘Whenever of dharma There is a decline O Arjuna, And an uprising of Adharma, At that time, certainly I manifest myself.’
paritranay sadhunam vinashay cha dushkrutam ~
dharma-sansthapanarthay sambhavami yuge yuge ~~
‘For the protection of the good, Destruction of the wicked, And to re-establish Dharma, I manifest Myself age after age.’ (Bhagavad Gita IV. 7-8)
M. N. Srinivas, the doyen of Indian sociology, recorded the contribution of the Bhakti movement in propelling Hindu samaj towards an egalitarian future, in the following words:
“It was a powerful movement which surfaced in various parts of the subcontinent over several centuries. It was anti-caste, pro-poor, pro-women, anti-elitist, anti-Sanskrit, and it affirmed that genuine love of God was sufficient to achieve salvation … The Bhakti movement attracted large numbers of the lower castes, and the poor and lowly, including women.”
In spite of the question as to why these anti-caste Bhakti movements failed to institutionalise egalitarianism, many of us will agree that our task is greatly simplified by this fund of historical experience. Let us gain some useful insights from the history of Hindu reform through a study of the lives of these pioneering Hindu saints cum social reformers. In their lives, we have the basis for our future work. Therein lies the true genesis of Hindu reform; this is the ideal we must translate into further action now, on a nationwide scale. It is time to propose and implement a Hindu line of reform for the Hindu society.
Fountainhead of Indian Culture
The region of Jammu and Kashmir has had a profound influence on Indian thought and culture. The story of Indian culture is inspired by centuries of events in Jammu and Kashmir, as the paths of the rivers Sindhu and Saraswathi show. There is considerable archaeological evidence that a well-developed, organized religion of Shiva, with the characteristic accompanying features of the bull (Nandi) and the Shiva-Linga, was practiced in the Sindhu civilization. This religion, it is believed, was the precursor to what is known as ‘Kashmir Saivism,’ which spread from Kashmir in the Kashmir-Gandhar region to envelop the Sindhu valley.
In the words of Shri Krishna himself (Mahabharata, Karna Parva, 69.59), dharma is defined as follows:
dharanad-dharmam-ityahuhu ~ dharmo dharayate prajaha yatsyadha rana samyuktam ~ ~ sa dharma iti nischayaha
The word dharma stems from the root dhru, which means ‘to hold,’ and it is by dharma that society (social order and civilization) is held together. Thus, it is in essence true that ‘dharma’ is that system which sustains our civilization. To understand dharma, it is important to understand the events in the life of the people who dwelled on the banks of the river Sindhu and its surroundings. The river Saraswathi, revered in the Rig Veda, once passed by Rakhigarhi, coming forth not far from Yamunotri, and flowing past the lower Jammu district. It is on the banks of these rivers that the ancient Sindhu civilization grew.
In the Sanskrit verse chanted in Hindu homes beginning with ‘Namaste Sharade Devi Kashmirapura vasini’, Goddess Saraswathi, the Goddess of Learning (also called ‘Sharada’), is described as having her abode in Kashmir. Wealth and learning were not seen as separate from each other; in fact, learning itself was wealth. There was no basal distinction between Saraswathi, the Goddess of Learning, and Lakshmi, the Goddess of Wealth and Prosperity, the latter also known as Sri—hence the very ancient name of Jammu and Kashmir’s capital, Srinagar.
Recent research on archaeology and the decipherment of ancient seals has now firmly refuted the Aryan Invasion Theory. The Aryans were in fact natives of India, and presumably the very natives of Kashmir-Gandhar, Sindhu-Saraswathi valley region. What has remained common to our forefathers and to us across more than five thousand years is thus not merely some dogmas or geographical boundaries of provident territories, but the common culture and a system of ethics we subscribe to, as did our forefathers who lived along the Sindhu.
India’s Nationhood and Dharma
Nationhood for India cannot then be defined merely in terms of the Radcliff or the Mc. Mohan line, which are but modern conveniences that provide an operational definition of a ‘country,’ only to prevent, and ironically sometimes only to cause, international conflicts. To understand nationhood in the Indian context comprehensively, one must understand India’s enduring and pervasive samskriti (good deeds, ethical conduct). This culture stemmed from the region in and around the Sindhu-Ganga belt.
It is the ‘way of life’ of the people in the Sindhu-Saraswathi-Yamuna-Ganga belt, synthesized with the parallel evolution of congruous dharma in the central and southern parts of India, which has resulted in the homogeneous binding spirit across the entire Indian subcontinent. It has retained the plurality of independent approaches of the peoples of the region to satisfy one’s spiritual needs in a powerful singular ethos. In the Sindhu-Ganga belt, our forefathers painstakingly laid the foundations of Indian civilization through contemplation and meditation, exploration and experimentation, by innovative design, consummated by adaptive capability.
Role of J & K in Indian History and Mythology
The story of Indian culture is the very history of the state of Jammu and Kashmir. The Brahmanas and the Upanishads mention that the region of Gandhar extended on both sides of the Sindhu and included Takshashila and Pushkaravati (modern Charsada, Peshawar). It was in Kashmir that Caraka, the distinguished physician—amongst the first known to mankind—composed the Carakasamhita. The flora and fauna of this exquisite region inspired the foundation of Ayurveda, and some other Vedangas were also composed here.
To understand the impact of life in Jammu and Kashmir on our dharma, our literature, arts, and the scriptures, we must search for evidence for these contentions. To deny this evidence would amount to denying the precise calculations of astronomy, a science so glorious and rigorous that enjoins the beauty of physics with the strictness of mathematics.
Astronomy does not establish that Shri Krishna was an Avatar of Vishnu, nor does it confirm that remote control weapons of mass destruction existed at the time of the great Mahabharata war, triggered by consonant chanting of specific mantras. However, astronomy does establish some salient facts. Events described in Mahabharata, when reconciled with the descriptions of stellar configurations, indicate that the main events narrated in the Mahabharata indeed have a historic base and took place 5100 years ago, when Yudhishthira was crowned at Hastinapura. There is an undeniable consistency and correlation found in the smritis about the stories of peoples from distant regions across the subcontinent—from the north-west frontier region in Gandhar to the eastern regions of Pataliputra, Magadha, and Bang, and places as far as Amaravathi in central India.
The irrefutable links between detailed and complex stories from across the subcontinent bear witness to the Mahabharata being a historical event surrounding real characters in flesh and blood, whose destinies brought them to dramatic expressions of love and hatred. Increasing corroborative evidence is found as inter-disciplinary scientific techniques are used to unravel our past.
It was Kashmir that Jarasandha’s cousin Gonanda ruled, and Gonanda marched to help Jarasandha against Shri Krishna, but was killed by Balarama. Gonanda’s son Damodara awaited an opportunity to avenge his father’s death and attacked Shri Krishna and Balaram when the two traveled to Gandhar, also on the banks of the Sindhu, but predictably got defeated and killed. On Damodara’s death, Shri Krishna crowned his widow, Yashowathi, the queen of Kashmir. When the courtiers protested the widow’s crowning, Shri Krishna sang the glory of womanhood and chanted from the Nilamata Purana, older still, that the mountains of the Himalayas were a part of Shiva, and Kashmir was none other than Parvathi. Yashowathi, who ruled Kashmir, was revered as the very mother of the people of Kashmir.
Later, it was Parikshit’s son and Arjuna’s great-grandson, Janamejaya, who ruled Hastinapura, but only after defeating his brother Harandeo, who went north and placed himself in the service of Gonanda II, a descendant of Gonanda-Yashowathi. Harandeo wrested the kingdom of Kashmir from Gonanda II and founded the Pandava dynasty in Kashmir.
Across the next many centuries, the Pandava dynasty founded by Harandeo ruled Kashmir. Many kings of the Pandava dynasty are listed in Kalhana’s Rajatarangini. Some of these kings were: Lava, Kusha, Khagendra, Surendra, Godhara, Suvarna, Janaka, and Sachinara. Raja Ramdeo, belonging to the Pandava dynasty, built the Martand temple in 2900 BC, later rebuilt by Lalitaditya of the Karkota dynasty. The names of these Pandava kings are linked to villages and towns which they founded, some of which can be tracked down even today. Some of this information comes from later historians incorporated in the Persian translation of Rajatarangini by Mulla Ahmad, based on an earlier chronicle by Ratnakara. Ptolemy VII referred to the region between Jhelum and Ravi as the ‘country of the Pandavas’. The history of these Pandava kings spans a vast period and brings us almost to the period of Gautama Buddha and Vardhamana Mahaveera, thus to the period just before Alexander.
In 331 BC, the Macedonian prince, Alexander, won against the Persians near the Tigris. The rough terrain tamed his troops, and they were forced to retreat without penetrating deep into India, after the battle with Puru (a descendant of Raja Puru mentioned in the Mahabharata). Alexander retreated within two years by 329 BC, and finally died in Babylon in 323 BC. The Persian defeat at the hands of Alexander, followed by his own retreat within two years, left a power vacuum in Kashmir. This was filled very quickly by Chandragupta Maurya, who had seized the kingdom of Magadha in 322 BC.
Chandragupta expanded his empire within two years to go beyond Takshashila, Gilgit, Kabul, and Gandhar in the north-west, right up to Herat, and included Ladakh and Kosala on the north-east, as it stretched forth through the great Gangetic plains. Chandragupta’s son Bindusara (BC 298-273) annexed the south up to Yerragudi, now known as Yerkaud, and conquered the region right up to Udipi. Bindusara’s son, Samrat Ashoka (BC 269-232), annexed Kalinga (mostly Orissa and some parts of Andhra) in BC 261.
The Arthashastra of Kautilya-Chanakya, political adviser to Chandragupta, is a classic work in statesmanship. He was well versed in the Vedas and the Vedangas, from where he drew his lessons in political science and stratagem. It was the Aitareya Brahmana that inspired Chandragupta’s expansion, under Chanakya’s counsel, that the territory of a sovereign king would extend up to the horizons that touch the seas. A glance at the Indian Empire of the Mauryas underscores the fact that the nationhood of India is a very ancient reality, contrary to the claims that it was the British rule which unified India.
The India of the Mauryas included Jammu and Kashmir, and Samrat Ashoka himself, at the very site of the ancient town, founded the modern city of Srinagar by the same name (named after Goddess Lakshmi, as mentioned earlier). Ashoka personally visited the area twice. He patronized the University of Takshashila (in northern Jammu and Kashmir, near Gilgit, close to the northern bend of the Sindhu), which along with another at Nalanda, were two of the foremost centers of learning.
As we flash back on the events in Jammu and Kashmir, we see our heritage, our roots. Jammu and Kashmir remains central to the cultural and political evolution of India. The Maurya Empire collapsed and disintegrated. Through the Khyber and the Bolan came a series of invaders from Iran, Turkey, Bactria, and other parts of Central Asia. These were the Sakas, Kushans, and the Huns. While they conquered India, Indian culture conquered them in turn.
Following the Greek collapse, the Gandhar-Kashmir region was occupied by the Kushans. Kadphises I (AD 15) conquered Afghanistan, and his son Kadphises II (AD 45) expanded the kingdom as far as Kashi. The Kushan king, Kanishka-I, was coronated in AD 78, from whence starts the Shalivahana calendar the Hindus use. Kanishka ruled over Takshashila and Gandhar and over most of the Kashmir-Afghanistan belt, which was always regarded as a politically single unit. From Afghanistan to Varanasi and beyond was a single empire once again, ruled by an invader who had submitted himself to Indian culture. When we say that Hindu dharma preaches tolerance, we must remember that what it preaches is tolerance of subtle ideas and philosophies, not tolerance of vice.
Subsequent rulers of Kashmir were the Nagas, whom mythology regards as serpents, but who were in fact snake-worshippers and largely influenced by Shaivism. It is believed that a form of Shaivism originated in Southern India and migrated to the North through Naga tribes intermingling with the original settlers in Gandhar-Kashmir. There was a period of conflict and power struggle between the Nagas and the Kushanas, but through that turmoil, a synthetic culture evolved that had the fragrance of the entire subcontinent through the nomadic Naga influence.
It was under Kumar Gupta that the Empire of the Guptas (240-600) was at its most expansive. If the period of the Guptas is known as the golden period, it is because arts, architecture, science, and literature flourished under them. Samudragupta himself was an accomplished musician and performed the Ashwamedha yagna according to the Vedic rites. It was in the court of Vikramaditya-I (Chandra Gupta-II) that the distinguished Kalidasa served as the royal poet and composed the great Shakuntala, Meghadoota, etc.
Kalidasa may have hailed from the Magadha area, as some evidence suggests, but some of his compositions suggest that he was a Kashmiri Brahmin. Kalidasa spent considerable time in Kashmir, and his compositions were greatly influenced by the beauty and folklore in Kashmir. Kashmiri culture and literature continued to influence the rest of India and remained a cornerstone of Indian culture. This was the wonderful period when poets often created compositions which offered different meanings depending on whether they were read from left to right or right to left.
During Skanda Gupta’s period, the Hun, Toraman, conquered Persia and pushed his way through the Hindukush into India. He was defeated and hurled back by Skanda Gupta, but after Skanda Gupta died in 467, Toraman returned and broke the Gupta Empire, though segments of it remained with the Guptas. Yashodharma Gupta reigned over Malwa and Baladitya Gupta over Magadha. Yashodharma defeated Toraman’s son Mihirkula, and later Mihirkula was defeated and captured in Magadha by Baladitya, who however took mercy on him and set him free. This was a mistake Indian kings have made time and again.
Mihirkula returned with another army and wrested Kashmir’s throne. Under Mihirkula’s tyrannical rule, Kashmir faced one of its worst traumas. He destroyed Buddhist stupas and Hindu temples. This was around the year 515. It is recorded, however, that Mihirkula later repented for his deeds and carried out penance, becoming a devotee of Shiva. Yet again, Indian culture conquered the conquerors. Then, the Gupta Empire fell apart across the subcontinent into small kingdoms in Bengal, Assam, Nepal, Magadha, Kalinga, Malwa, and Kashmir. But India was reunited once again by Samrat Harshavardhana (606-647), who became king of Thaneswar, located between Indraprastha and Srinagar. He brought a significant part of northeast India under his rule, including a small part of Kashmir, south of the Sutlej.
However, he moved his capital towards the east and hence did not bring Kashmir entirely under his rule. Nevertheless, as the principal sovereign king in the northeast, he dictated other rulers in the region (including Kashmir, then under the Karkotas). It was during the period of Samrat Harshavardhan that studies in physics and astronomy took giant leaps, and Brahmagupta (628) propounded the law of gravity (almost a millennium before Newton), and Vaisesikha’s atomistic theory was developed in great detail.
Cultural Continuity
Right from the Vedic period, Kashmir continued to be the dominant seat of the Sindhu-Ganga cultural heritage under the Pandavas, Chandragupta Maurya, Bindusara, and Ashoka, and also during the period of Samrat Vikramaditya and Harsha. Through this period, there was continuity in the evolution of Indian culture in the Sindhu-Vitastha-Asikni-Airavati-Satadru-Saraswathi-Yamuna-Ganga belt, through the flat terrain of Maharashtra, and right up to the deep south in the regions of Shravana Belagola, Udipi, and Kanchipuram. The story of Jammu and Kashmir takes us to Gandhar, Herat, Pataliputra, Magadha, and Kalinga, Shravana Belagola, Udipi, and Kanchipuram.
This is because Jammu and Kashmir has always belonged to one nation, to one culture, to one civilization that stretched homogeneously throughout the subcontinent. Deep in the southern parts of India, the regions were ruled by different dynasties, the Cholas and the Pallavas being the prominent ones, but they promoted essentially the same culture, the same values, and the same dharma.
It is almost startling that throughout this period, the valley has always been called Kashmir. In fact, the region was earlier known as Kashyap-pur and Kashyap-mar (mar = canal), after the Rishi Kashyapa, who designed the waterways to drain the waters that flooded the valley. Even today, his descendants adhere to his name, identifying themselves as belonging to the Kashyapa Gotra.
Indeed, the Kashmir-Gandhar region is rich with Hindu heritage and rich with places of pilgrimage for Hindus and Buddhists alike. The Kashmir-Gandhar region has been the very fountainhead of Indian thought and culture. The legal and constitutional integrity of Jammu and Kashmir in the union of India is unquestionable. The region is a national heritage, and it cannot be compromised because of political blunders, whether by one government or another.
[Prof. Pranawa C. Deshmukh is a faculty member of the Department of Physics, IIT-Madras. He is also the convener of the forum ‘Consolidation of the Integration First of Jammu and Kashmir with the Republic of India’ and coordinator for the Jammu and Kashmir Project, Bharat Awareness Forum, Atlanta.]
Gurupaurnima, Ravivar, Ashadh Shudhha 15, Yugabda 5105
A new vigour is coursing through the veins of the Hindu Civilization; there is a marked rise of activity in every sphere of its life. This vigour, many Hindus believe, is rooted deep in the consciousness of a memorable past and in the robust foundations of the Sanatana Dharma. The Hindu community is beginning to acquire, in the words of Ram Swarup, a “corporate identity,” resulting in a recognisation of the Indian polity and affecting almost every aspect of our lives in India and abroad, wherever the community has a presence. It is our humble desire to present to our readers many facets of this multi-dimensional renaissance.
Two serious allegations have been leveled against the Hindu community. One, that it is deficient in historical perspective and instead revels mostly in myth. Secondly, that proponents of this revival are lacking in academic aptitude and their discourse amounts to a new form of absolutism. It appears that the dynamics of this renaissance is lost on these critics; they fail to note that the de-colonisation of the Hindu mind has only begun, though the community has been free for more than half a century.
On the other hand, an unhealthy pattern has emerged in recent years. Opponents of this renaissance have been relentlessly trying to disrupt any progressive debate or reform by dragging critical issues, that deserve our practical attention, into controversies and litigations. Little do they realize the consequences if the Hindu society decides to pay them back for all their inordinate censuring and defaming of our sensibilities. Indeed, it is time to do so, and it is the responsibility of organized Hindu bodies to take up this thankless yet critical task.
At least, we hope that the articles appearing in this quarterly journal will furnish a suitable response to such critiques. This issue includes a spotlight on Ayodhya, an overview of existing archaeological evidence, and an analysis of the recent excavations.
We request you to kindly let us have your valued comments and suggestions for any improvement and await to hear from you.
M. Pramod Kumar,
Chief Editor
hreditor@hinduworld.com
A Tribute to the Best of Mothers
Ambitame naditame devitame Sarasvati |
Aprasasta iva smasi prasastim Amba naskridhi ||
(Rig. II. 41.16)
“Sarasvati, you are the best of mothers, you are the best of rivers and you are the best of goddesses; although we are of no status, dear mother grant us merit.”
Incomparable is the one word that could describe the rediscovery of the Sarasvati river that had dried up sometime in 1900–1500 BC. Like the mythical phoenix coming out of its ashes, the River Sarasvati is reborn. This augurs well for Bharatiya civilization, for its distant past is so little understood and its origins are being held for ransom with pseudo theories floated by the colonial bureaucrats and historians of the last century, who definitely had an axe to grind.
History was kidnapped after independence by the dominant Marxist school of historians, who had been indoctrinated themselves to follow a certain line of ideological thinking at the cost of historical truth, and thus very little was done by their institutional setup to throw new light on our collective past.
The entire course of the Sarasvati river has been meticulously analysed with scientific precision based on the most accurate and state-of-the-art technology. Old-time historians, who had no access to such tools for study, relied solely upon juxtaposition to form a hypothesis. In addition, the usual Marxist indoctrination techniques prevalent in academic institutions would have certainly influenced their outlook.
Dr. S. Kalyanaraman had no such blinders and consequent hiccups. He has completed the seven volumes (2100 pages) on Sarasvati single-handedly and documented everything known to scientists about the river – a monumental task by any standards. Like the Rishis of yore, he did immense tapas to bring back the knowledge of the Vedic River Sarasvati. This is an encyclopaedic work with much technical content and over 4000 illustrations drawn from over 20 different scientific disciplines.
Swami Vivekananda said, “the history of India should be written by Indians.” And in order to understand this history, one has to unravel the mystery of the Sarasvati River, which was till now believed to have vanished but remained in the memory of Bharatiyas. At Prayag, where every Hindu goes to take a holy dip, it is believed that the Ganga, Yamuna, and Sarasvati merge and that the Sarasvati does not flow visibly here but as ‘antaryami’ (literally “inner controller,” in invisible form). Now this oral tradition, which was dismissed by many a historian of the traditional school, has been proved to be correct. Those legends carry with them good ground truths that were never explored.
Geologists have established that “there was a dramatic turn of the river Yamuna at a place called Paonta Saheb in Himachal Pradesh when the tributary rivers Giri and Tamasa were captured by the river Yamuna, which became a pirate river and joined the Ganga at Prayag near Allahabad. The author remarks, “This is how the capture of the waters of Sarasvati by river Yamuna to join river Ganga is stated in Puranas of India to constitute the Triveni sangam at Prayag. This is a remarkable indication of the establishment of the facts recorded in the ancient texts of India to be ground truth based on geological and glaciological studies.”
PLATE TECTONICS
The antiquity of the Sarasvati Civilisation is attested by glacial maps which indicate that the Indian subcontinent was not affected by the great ice age that covered most of the northern hemisphere and southern hemisphere, with the glacial maximum of ca. 18,000, “when most of Eurasia was filled with an ice sheet with little or no support for vegetation” and hence “with little or limited or no support to ecological systems that in turn support human settlements.” These studies indicate that continuous habitation was possible in India since ca. 18,000 years ago.
The river Sarasvati had flowed as a mighty river from the Himalayas to Gujarat for thousands of years prior to 1500 BCE, a date when the submergence of Dwaraka was reported and recorded in the Mahabharata. The final desiccation of the river was caused principally by massive tectonic movements of the type that was witnessed on 26 January 2001, when an earthquake with the intensity of 8.2 Richter scale struck Gujarat (considered equivalent to the potency of 220 hydrogen bombs exploded simultaneously).
Plate tectonics played a major part in the desiccation of the River Sarasvati, which is today seen to be lost in the deserts of Marusthali or the Thar Desert. A big fault line along the Aravalli ranges extending north-northeast from Siddhapura right through Delhi, “called the Luni Sukri lineament, which had a stunning structural control over the entire terrain of North West India…and the ongoing clash of the Indian or Deccan plate with the Tibetan or Eurasian plate. The plate was virtually along the course of and parallel to the courses of the rivers Sindhu and Sarasvati right up to the Himalayas.” This is the principal reason why the Rann of Kutch and Himachal Pradesh in India are declared as earthquake-prone zones. Plate tectonics also explains the continuous rise of the Himalayas and the formation of glaciers in a cyclical manner, together with the ingress and recession of the sea levels along the Gujarat coastline.
After the Pokhran tests conducted by India on 11 May 1998, the Indian scientists of BARC isotope division headed by Dr. S. L Rao and Dr. Kulkarni conducted tests from 800 samples of water taken from deep wells around the test area to check the possibility of radiation leaks from water wells around this area. The results yielded surprising results: freshwater sources aged between 8,000 and 14,000 years were found in the middle of the desert and also indications of fresh water of potable quality getting recharged from upstream sources, perhaps from the Himalayan region, considering the scant rainfall in the region.
A HISTORIAN RECONSIDERS
The discovery of the river Sarasvati and the discovery of over 2,000 ancient sites on the banks of the river out of 2,600 establishes it as the centre of the civilisation in Bharat, which evolved into the mature urban phase during the Bronze Age starting in circa 3300 BCE. The discovery also conclusively establishes that there was no Aryan invasion or migration into India (even Romila Thapar has now shifted to the migration theory instead of the invasion model), but that people had lived all along for several thousands of years on the banks of the Rivers Sarasvati and Sindhu, and that the Sarasvati Civilisation is an indigenous and autochthonous evolution.
The story of disappearance of the mighty river Sarasvati is an epic story of the struggles of an ancient civilisation of unparalleled excellence in the history of humankind. The Mahabharata mentions that the “river was disappearing fast” and “was later lost.” However, it was flowing in full, during the Rig Vedic period. This makes the Rig Veda much older than our history books would have us believe and contemporaneous in date to the so-called Indus Valley Civilisation, remarks Dr. Nanditha Krishna in a review in The New Indian Express. She goes on to acknowledge, “Like all Indian historians, I too grew up with and based all my research on the belief that the Indus Valley civilisation was pre-Vedic. I am no longer so sure. Here are a people, the Aryans, who have left a cornucopia of literature but were believed to have left not a shred of material culture, not even a humble potsherd, for archaeologists to find. And there we have a civilisation in the same time at the same pace with sufficient evidence of the written word found on the seals. There are no signs of an invasion, just abandonment, like any ghost city or village that has lost its water source… Sarasvati is better known today as the Goddess of knowledge and wisdom. Knowledge of the missing river will give us the clue to our history and the origins of our civilisation. We are lucky to have modern scientific tools to help us. We have to be wise and accept the fact that some of our earlier information was possibly wrong, and that the Indus, Sarasvati, and Vedic civilisations were one and the same.”
MARITIME RIVERINE CIVILISATION
The Sarasvati Civilisation was the substratum which sustained maritime trade over an extensive region from Central Asia and all over Bharat from Kashmir to Kanyakumari. In the Mausala Parva of the Mahabharata, Balarama undertakes a pilgrimage to offer homage to his ancestors all along the Sarasvati, from its place of merger with the Arabian Sea near Prabhas Pattan (where the famous Somnath Temple is located), to its source origin in the Himalayas. The entire route with all the pilgrimage sites, the ashrams, etc., has been described. The very same Rishis are venerated and remembered by the people even today by many melas that are celebrated every year, even now, in the villages.
On the rediscovery of the Sarasvati River, David Frawley says: “The retreat of the Aryan invasion theory has been accompanied by the rediscovery of the Sarasvati river of Vedic fame, though many scholars are still unaware of the connection of the river with the Vedas. Recent excavation has shown that the great majority of Harappan settlements were east, not west of Indus. The largest concentration of sites appears in an area of Punjab and Rajasthan along the dry banks of the Sarasvati (now called the Ghaggar) in the Thar desert. Hundreds of sites dot this river, which appears to have been the breadbasket of the culture. Mohenjodaro and Harappa, the first large Indus sites found, appear to be peripheral cities, mere gateways to the central Sarasvati region. The main sites are found in a region of north-western India, which owing to the lack of water was never again a region of significant habitation.”
Our sacred lore says that Maharishi Bhagiratha did immense tapas in days of yore to bring the Ganges from Lord Shiva’s locks in the Himalayan heights to the plains. It took Dr. S. Kalyanaraman two decades of study and research to bring the facts about the vanished Sarasvati river to our grasp. This project is of much more importance than many of us can visualize for comprehending our ancient civilisation. He says he has enough data for guiding 100 Ph.D. dissertations on the ancient civilisation of India. Any takers?
The writer is a student of Bharatiya civilisation for over 30 years and by profession a SAP/HR ERP Consultant and also an ISO 14000 environmental management systems auditor.
Title: Sarasvati (7 volumes, 2100 pages)
Author: Dr. S. Kalyanaraman
Publisher: Baba Saheb Apte Smarak Samiti; Tel: 080–6655238
Email: kalyan97@yahoo.com
ISBN: 81-901126-0
Price: Rs. 500/- (per volume)
First Edition: 2003
Panel Discussion on “India Today and Tomorrow”
Francois Gautier, Convener, Forum Against Continuing Terrorism (FACT); Koenraad Elst, Belgian Scholar; and General Alain Lamballe were panel members of a discussion on “India Today and Tomorrow,” held on June 19 this year. The programme was organised by Jaïa Bharati, an association of India lovers in France.
The panel discussed in-depth many issues plaguing India today, including Kashmir and Indo-Pakistan relations. A question and answer session followed. In the audience were seventy people, including Shri Sanjay Panda, Secretary to the Indian Ambassador in France, in charge of Culture. The panel received great appreciation for the rich and down-to-earth debates.
The annual Jagannath Ratha Yatra was held in Paris on July 6 and attended by hundreds of people, including Jaïa Bharati members. The Rath Yatra is a regular annual event in Paris, celebrated with gaiety.
More information about Jaïa Bharati can be obtained from their website: http://www.jaia-bharati.org/
Hindus Are Struggling for Equal Rights
A religious teacher of supreme wisdom, Dayananda Saraswati is also extremely articulate, a combination that is very rare, given the stereotype of a Hindu protagonist that often raises the hackles of the ‘intellectuals’.
His superb command over the White man’s tongue is backed by phenomenal knowledge of not only the Vedas, Vedanta, Upanishads, Gita, but also the religious texts and practices of other faiths, not to speak of modern literature. In a way, he is the ideal foil for those at the other end of the ideological spectrum, viz.; Communists, atheists, JNU historians and lest I forget, ‘other miscellaneous secularists’. He is one who could be more than a match to them, word for word and in wits.
You have come out strongly against the Pope’s statements on the anti-forcible conversions laws. You have also been a campaigner against conversions, terming it as violence. Can you elaborate?
A.: Okay. What is violence? When you physically hurt me, it is violence. When you do anything that can instigate physical violence, that too is an act of violence. And if you hurt me emotionally, that again is violence. If you hurt me spiritually, that is the worst violence, rank violence. All these are there in conversion because it leads to physical violence. When you convert somebody, you have to criticise the person’s religion, his worship, his culture; all these hurt. Even when he changes, it hurts. How will he change? He has to disown his parents, and their wisdom and their culture, his ancestors, and his entire community; you are isolating him, uprooting him and all the uprooted people are emotionally unsettled.
For instance, Blacks in America are uprooted people. Even after generations, they are not emotionally settled. It will never help the persons who are uprooted from their culture. So it is great violence against culture, tradition etc.
Is the religious person, then, the core person?
A.: Yes, we find some people die for their religion because in their scripture it is told that if your religion is in danger then you will have to sacrifice your life so that you will also have a better place in paradise. The fellow begins to believe that, and he is ready to give up his life. This is indoctrination.
So for their religion’s sake, there are double standards. One who does not believe in their religion is anti-god, as if God has given only their religion for everyone to follow. If he does not follow that, he is an enemy of God, an infidel, and deserves to be killed. Though God anyway is going to destroy him, if you destroy him, God will be pleased that you have proved your faith. This is the double standard. The values are not common for all. For the followers, one set of values; for the non-followers, another set. Killing gets a sanction. That is why these are all dangerous religions. And I say all converting religions are dangerous. They have created problems. It is like somebody wanting freedom to destroy me. If I do not give this freedom, then I become a ‘fundamentalist’. But if I give them the freedom to destroy me, then I am a ‘liberal’, my religion a free religion, that’s it.
And to the Pope?
A.: Not only the Pope. The Pope said this because they have got away with it for 2,000 years in the name of ‘freedom of religion’. They have wiped out continents, cultures in various continents, religions in countries. Where are those religions and cultures that built those pyramids? Show me one fellow now as a sample. Greek and Roman monuments are there, but where are the religions? In Europe, they completely wiped out all the indigenous religions. In North America and South America, they have finished off all the native cultures. Even in Africa, it is almost finished.
Now in Asia they are planting their religion. They want to be successful; between these two people, they want to destroy all cultures in this world. Therefore, I say, enough is enough. I don’t want to ask them to give up their (the convert’s) religions now.
But their concepts, their beliefs are not acceptable to me. I give them the freedom to follow what they follow. But I want them to leave me free to follow what I believe! They cannot say evangelising is not against other religions. It is against other religions; conversions are against other religions. We don’t believe in conversion itself. We don’t accept that, we don’t do that.
Then how do you deal with this problem when it is so basic? What are the practical ways?
A.: The theologians have to change, but they will not because they have enough inbuilt programming. What we call indoctrination. There is no use even to make an attempt but we should keep talking about it to them. They just wait for a time when there is more freedom for them to do. So that time, conducive for conversion, should be kept away. The people have to be made aware and proud of their religion; that would take care of this problem in course of time. They should be able to say enough is enough.
There is the lure of money, incentives and other benefits that the naive fall for…
A.: It is not really the money that buys. What do they do? Small things, and then they try to tempt them. That gives the thumb space, they begin to enter the heart. Then they make the most unkindly cut. When the missionary tells that the fellow’s daily pooja is wrong, that his altar of prayer is not the altar, he has to alter that. That is the unkindest cut you can get. It is a stab in the heart, where this fellow, innocently, gives some space for the missionary to enter. That very place becomes a place for attack. He attacks at the heart of the person, his religious core. Therefore, the missionaries are the most violent people in the world. They have committed violence and nobody else has committed violence as they have done. They continue to do that but people do not realise this. They do seemingly good things in order to commit this violence.
What is the effect of missionary activity on national security?
A.: Look at the northeast. I wonder if I can go and talk there, in my own country. They ask if I am from India! This is what the missionaries have done. Those people are made to feel they are non-Indians, this is very unfortunate. It is a major problem for national integrity and not good for our tradition. In fact, Hindu religion has to be saved for the sake of humanity, because Christians don’t believe Muslims will go to heaven and Muslims don’t believe that Christians will go anywhere. They are fighting each other in trying to reach heaven or paradise. Both believe that the other is not going there, so they will fight forever.
The only person who says paradise is not up there, but here, is the Hindu. The Hindu is the only one who makes sense. He has a methodology to teach; it is not just a belief. There, it is only beliefs, many of which cannot be proved and several of which are wrong and foolish. See, a belief is above reason.
The inequalities that have cropped up in our society are used as a handle against Hinduism?
A.: Even they have their own inequalities. They have their own problems that are endless but that is not a sanction for us to have problems. We should try and solve them, but still, all these are our problems. Suppose, when two brothers are fighting over a property, a third fellow comes and says, since you two are fighting let me occupy the property – that cannot be allowed. You remain an encroacher. You can help us, but you cannot become a beneficiary of our fight.
Indian Christians and Indian Muslims are converted from Hinduism, without themselves knowing what they are getting into. But once converted, they are told that their brethren and forefathers are devil worshippers! This is what I say is dangerous. As Indians, they have a right to know their religions, their people, their culture and their forms. If they know, there will be no problems but they are purposely kept away. The clergy is responsible for that, Islamic and Christian clergy are responsible for that.
But Christianity lays much store by charity works …?
A.: It is because these missionaries are using some of these perverted methods for conversion work. And you also think that, this is the role of religion? The role of religion is to make you human, that’s all.
They should do humanitarian work, like the way we do. We have charities all over the world. Look at Salem or Coimbatore, how many hospitals are there? Almost all of them are run by Hindu charities. And what do they do? They don’t convert; they just run the charities. There is no priest or nun there, for there is no conversion programme and therefore the charities remain charities.
But to run charities for some other purpose is the most uncharitable thing to do. You see, they feed the cows before slaughter to fatten them. Similarly, they perform humanitarian acts with hidden motives for conversion. Love with ulterior motives is not love. If you really love people, just give it, forget about it, keep your sacred religion in your heart.
But if they want to know or even reconvert, will the Hindu ‘clergy’ allow that…
A.: In India, there is no clergy. Here all are Hindus until they call themselves differently, because when I allow every form of worship, then where is the problem? We deem you another Hindu, it is only you who are saying I am this and that. There is no reconversion. They come back like a prodigal son. We do not even need to baptise. We have to ask him to give up beef, that is all.
The US government appears to have a different view on the religious freedom here…?
A.: The US government had appointed a Commission on International Religious Freedom. This Commission gets information from all countries and submits a periodical report. According to their report, India is among the Countries of Particular Concern (CPC). They cite the anti-conversion Bills of Tamil Nadu and Gujarat, and some Gujarat incidents as the basis for this. I question this matrix of theirs.
What’s your logic?
A.: What is it that you call ‘religious freedom’? Is it freedom to evangelise and convert with impunity? If they can evangelise to destroy me, that is called religious freedom. But if I question their activities, it is infringement. Therefore, I am appealing to the Government of India to appoint a Commission on religious freedom, to issue guidelines and submit reports dispassionately.
But even the minorities in India often complain about lack of religious freedom?
A.: We should examine the privileges of minorities. Nowhere in the world do minorities enjoy such privileges. Christians run teacher-training colleges; they get government aid, and appointments are controlled by management alone. Meanwhile, the majority faces reverse discrimination. Temple money is in government hands. We fight for equal rights. Whatever privileges minorities have, we want them too.
But for that to happen we may have to become real minorities…?
A.: If I am in the majority, I cannot open my mouth for anything, even dental surgery. Minorities enjoy many privileges, including government support. That is why I say reverse discrimination exists in this country. It is blasphemy to say there is no religious freedom in India. The only place where there is religious freedom in the world is India.
[Swami Dayananda Saraswati shared his candid views on the raging conversion debate with Shri T. R. Jawahar, Editor, News Today, an evening daily published from Chennai. Some excerpts are published here. For the full text of the interview, log on to: http://www.newstodaynet.com/swami.htm]