Weekly page from Hindu Dharma: Distinctive Features of Sanathan Dharama

[Guest guest]

This week's page from Hindu Dharma (see note at bottom) is "Distinctive Features

of Sanathan Dharama" from "The Vedic Religion: Introductory". The original page

can be found at http://www.kamakoti.org/hindudharma/part2/chap3.htm.

 

Next week, you will be emailed "The Vedas - the Root of All" (from "The Vedic

Religion: Introductory")

 

Best regards

for kamakoti.org

 

 

Venkatesh

(this email is being sent on an automated basis)

 

Distinctive Features of Sanathan Dharama

from The Vedic Religion: Introductory, Hindu Dharma

 

Our religion has a number of unique or distinctive features. One of them

is what is called the theory of karma, though this theory is common to religions

like Buddhism which are offshoots of Hinduism.

 

What is the karma doctrine? For every action there is an equal and opposite

reaction. There is an ineluctable law of physics governing cause and effect,

action and reaction. This law pertaining to physical phenomena our forefathers

applied to human life. The cosmos includes not only sentient beings endowed with

consiousness but also countless insentient objects. Together they consititute

worldly life. The laws, the dharama, proper to the first order must apply to the

second also. According to the karma theory, every action of a man has an effect

corresponding to it. Based on this belief our religion declares that, if a man

commits a sin, he shall pay the penalty for it. Also if his act is a virtuous

one, he shall reap the benefits thereof.

 

Our religion further asserts that one is born again and again so as to

experience the consequences of one's good and bad action. "Do good. Do not do

evil, " such are the exhortations of all religions. But Hinduism (and its

offshoots) alone lay stress on the cause-and -effect connection. No religion

originating in countries outside India s to the cause-and-effect

connection, nor to the reincarnation theory as one of its articles of faith.

Indeed religions originating abroad hold beliefs contrary to this theory and

strongly oppose the veiw that man is born again and again in order to exhaust

his karma. They believe that a man has only one birth, that when his soul

departs on his death it dwells somewhere awaiting the day of judgement. On this

day God makes an assessment of his good and bad actions and, on the basis of it,

rewards him with eternal paradise or sentences him to eternal damnation.

 

Some years ago, a well-known writer from Europe came to see me nowadays you see

many white men coming to the Matha. This gentleman told me that the Bible stated

more than once that God is love. He could not reconcile this with the belief

that God condemns a sinner to eternal damnation without affording him an

opportunity for redemption. On this point a parade had told him: "It is true

that there is an eternal hell. But it is eternally vacant. "

 

The padre's statement is difficult to accept. Let us suppose that the Lord in

his compassion does not condemn a sinner to hell. Where then does he send his

soul? Since, according to Charistianity, there is no rebirth the sinner is not

made to be born again. So he too must be rewarded with heaven (as much as the

virtuous man). This means that we may merrily keep sinning without any fear of

punishment. After all, God will reward all of us with heaven. This belief

implies that there is no need for morelity and truthfulness.

 

According to our religion too, Isvara who decides our fate after death on the

basis of our karma is infinitely merciful. But, at the same time, he does not

plunge the world in adharma, in unrighteousness- that is not how his compassion

manifests itself. What does he do then? He gives us another birth, another

oppotunity to reap the fruits of our good and bad action. The joys of heaven and

the torments of hell truly belong to this world itself. The sorrow and happiness

that are our lot in our present birth are in proportion to the virtuous and evil

deeds of our past birth. Those who sinned much suffer much now and, similarly,

those who did much good enjoy much happiness now. The majority is made up of

people who know more sorrow than happiness and people who experience sorrow and

happiness almost in equal measure. There are indeed very few blessed with utter

happiness. It is evident from this that most of us must have done more evil than

good in our past birth.

 

In His mercy the Lord gives us every time a fresh opportunity to wash away our

sins. The guru, the sastras, and the temples are all his gifts to wipe away our

inner impurities. That Isvara, in his compassion, places his trust even in a

sinner confident that he will raise himself through his own efforts and gives

him a fresh opportunity in the form of another birth to advance himself

inwardly- is not such a belief better than that he should dismiss a sinner as

good for nothing and yet reward him with heaven? If a man sincerely believes, in

a spirt of surrender, there is nothing that he can do on his own and that

everything is the Lord's doing, he will be redeemed and elevated. But it is one

thing for God to bless a man who goes to him for refuge forsaking his own

efforts to raise himself and quite another to bless him thinking him to be not

fit to make any exertions on his own to advance inwardly. So long as we believe

in such a thing as human endeavour we should think that Is!

vara's supreme compassion lies in trusting a man to go forward spiritually

through his own efforts. It is in this way that the Lord's true grace is

manifested.

 

That God does not condemn anyone to eternal punishment in hell is the personal

opinion of a particular padre. It cannot be said that all religions like

Christianity which believe that a man has only one birth agree with this view.

They believe that God awards a man hell or paradise according to the good or

evil he has done in one single birth. Since sinners who deserve to be condemned

to hell predominate, the day of judgement has come to be known by the terrible

name of doomsday. Here we have a concept according to which the Lord's

compassion seems to be circumscribed.

 

There is strong evidence to support the reincarnation theory. A lady from the

West came to see me one day and asked me if there was any proof of

reincarnation. I did not have any discussion with her on the subject. Instead, I

asked her to visit the local obstetric hospital and find out all about the

children born there. There was a learned man who knew English where we were

camping then. I asked him to accompany the lady. Later, on their return from the

hospital, I asked the woman about her impressions of the new- born children. She

said that she had found one child plump and lusty, another skinny; one beautiful

and another ungainly. One child was born in a comfortable ward [that is to a

well-to-do mother] and another to a poor mother.

 

"Leave aside the question of God consigning a man to eternal hell after his

death, " I said to the foreign lady. "We are not witness to such a phenomenon.

But now you have seen with your own eyes how differently the children are born

in the hospital that you visited. How would you account for the differences? Why

should one child be born rich and another poor? Why should one be healthy and

another sickly? And why should one be good-looking and another unpretty?

 

"If you accept the doctrine that men are born only once, you cannot but from

the impression that God is neither compassionate nor impartial- think of all the

differences at birth- and that he functions erratically and unwisely. How are we

to be devoted to such a God and have the faith that he will look on us with

mercy? How are we to account for the differences between one being and another

if we do not accept the doctrine that our life now is determined by the good and

the bad we did in our past births. " The lady from the West accepted my

explanation.

 

Such an explanation is not, however, good enough for people in modern times.

They demand scientific proof of reincarnation. Parapsychologists have done

considerable research in the subject and their findings are in favour of the

theory of rebirth. During the studies conducted in various parts of the world

they encountered people who remembered their past lives. The latter recalled

places and people they had seen in their previous birth-places and people that

have nothing to do with them now. The parapsychologists verified these facts and

to their amazement found them to be true. The cases investigated by them were

numerous. Most of us are wholly unaware of our past lives, but some do remember

them. According to the researchers the majority of such people had been victims

of accidents or murder in their previous lives.

 

The doctrine of the incarnations of the Lord- avataras- is another unique

feature of our religion. The Reaility (Sadvastu) is one. That It manifests

itself as countless beings is one of our cardinal tenets. It follows that it is

this one and only Reality that transforms itself again and again into all those

beings that are subject to birth and death. Also it is the same Reality that is

manifested as Isvara to protect this world of sentient beings and insentient

objects. Unlike humans he is not subject to the law of karma. It is to live out

his karma- to experience the fruits of his actions- that man is born again and

again. But in birth after birth, instead of washing away his old karma, he adds

more and more to the mud sticking to him.

 

If the Lord descends to earth again and again it is to lift up man and show him

the righteous path. When unrighteousness gains the upper hand and righteousness

declines, he descends to earth to destroy unrighteousness and to establish

righteousness again- and to protect the virtuous and destroy the wicked. Sri

Krsna Paramatman declares so in the Gita.

 

Isvara is to be known in different states. That the Lord is all- that all is

the Lord- is a state that we cannot easily comprehend. Then there is a state

mentioned in the "vibhuti yoga"of Gita according to which the Lord dwells in the

highest of each category, in the "most excellent" of things. To creat the

highest of excellence in human life he sends messengers to earth in the guise of

preceptors (acaryas), men of wisdom and enlightenment (jnanins), yogins and

devotees. This is another state in which God is to be known. Not satisfied with

the previous states, he assumes yet another state: he descends to earth as an

avatara. The word "avatarana" itself means "descent". Isvara is "paratpara",

that is "higher than the highest", "beyond what is beyond everything". Yet he

descends to earth by being born in our midst to re-establish dharma.

 

Sindhanta Saivas do not to the view of Siva having avataras. Nor they

agree with the belief that Adi Sankara and Jnanasambandhar were incarnartions of

Siva and Muruga (Subrahmanya) respectively. Their view is that if Isvara dwells

in a human womb, in a body of flesh, he makes himself impure. According to

Advaitins even all those who inhabit the human womb made up of flesh are in

substance nothing but the Brahman. They see nothing improper in the Lord coming

down to earth.

 

All Vaisnavas, without exception, accept the doctrine of devine avataras.

Philosphically, speaking, there are many points of agreement between Vaisnavas

and Saivas though the former are not altogether in agreement with the view that

it is the Brahman itself that is expressed as the individual self. When we speak

of the avataras, we generally mean the ten incarnations of Visnu. Vaisnavas

adhere to the doctrine of avataras because the believe that Visnu descends to

earth to uplift humanity. Indeed it is because of his boundless compassion that

he makes himself small [or reduces himself] to any degree. In truth, however,

the Lord is neither reduces nor tainted a bit in any of his incarnations

because, though in outward guise he looks a mortal, he knows himself to be what

in reality he is.

 

Altogether the Vedic dharma that is Hinduism accepts the concepts the concept

of incarnations of the Lord. Saivas too are one with Vaisnavas in believing in

the ten incarnations of Visnu.

 

That the one and only Paramatman who has neither a form nor attributes is

manifested as different forms with attributes is another special feature of our

religion. We worship idols representing these forms of deities. For this reason

others lable us polytheists. There view is utterly wrong. Because we worship the

one God, the one reality, in many different forms it does not mean that we

believe in many gods. It is equally absurd to call us idolators who hold that

the idol we worship is God. Hindus with a proper understanding of their religion

do not think that the idol alone is God. The idol is meant for the worshipper to

offer one-pointed devotion and he adores it with the conviction that the Lord

who is present everywhere is present in it also. We see that practitioners of

other religions also have symbols for worship and meditation. So it is wholly

unjust to believe that Hindus alone worship idols- to regard them with scorn as

idolaters is not right.

 

That ours is the only religion that does not proclaim that its followers have

an exclusive right to salvation is a matter of pride for us Hindus. Our catholic

outlook is revealed in our scriptures which declare that whatever the religious

path followed by people they will finally attain the same Paramatman. That is

why there is no place for conversion in Hinduism.

 

Christianity has it that, if a man does not follow the teachings of Jesus

Christ, he shall be condemned to hell. Islam says the same about those who do

not follow the teachings of the Prophet Mohammed. We must not be angry with the

adherents of either religion on that score. Let us take it that Charistians and

Muslims alike believe that followers of other religions do not have the same

sense of fulfilment as they have. So let us presume that it is with good

intentions that they want to bring others into their fold (Christianity or Islam

as the case may be) out of a desire to help them.

 

Let us also assume that if they resort to means that seem undesirable, it is to

achieve what they think to be a good objective, luring others into their faith.

It was thus that they carried out conversions in the past, by force of arms.

Islam, particularly, expanded its sway in this way. It is often said that

Christianity spread with the help of money power. But Christians also used their

army to gain adherent, though with the force of arms was associated the

philanthropic work of the missionaries. White men had the advantage of money

that the Muslims of the Arabian desert did not possess. Christian missionaries

built schools, hospitals and so on to induce the poor to embrace their faith.

 

We may not approve of people being forced into a religion or of conversions

carried out by temptations placed before them. But we need not for that reason

doubt that those who spread their religion in this fashion really believe that

their work will bring general well-being.

 

We cannot, however, help asking whether their belief is right. People who do

not follow either Christ or the Prophet, are they really condemned to hell? A

little thinking should show that the belief that the followers of Christianity

or Islam have an exclusive right to salvation cannot be substained. It is only

some 2, 000 years since Jesus was born and only about 1, 400 years or so since

the birth of the Prophet. What happened to all the people born before them since

creation? Are we to believe that they must have passed into hell? We are also

compelled to infer that even the forefathers of the founders of Christianity and

Islam would not have earned paradise. If, like Hindus, all those who lived

before Christ or the Prophet had believed in rebirth, we could concede that they

would have been saved: they would have been again and again until the arrival of

Christ or the Prophet and then afforded the opportunity of following their

teachings. But if we accept the logic of Chris!

tianity and Islam, according to which religions there is no rebirth, we shall

have to conclude that hundreds of millions of people for countless generations

must have been consigned to eternal hell.

 

The question arises as to whether God is so merciless as to keep despatching

people for ages together to the hell from which there is no escape. Were he

compassionate would he not have sent, during all this time, a messenger of his

or a teacher to show humanity the way to libration? Why should we worship a God

who has no mercy? Or for that matter, why should there be any religion at all?

 

The countries are many and they have different climates and grow different

crops. Also each part of the world has evolved a different culture. But the

Vedas encompassed lands all over this planet from the very begining. Latter

other religions emerged in keeping with the changing attitudes of the nations

concerned. That is why aspects of the Vedic tradition are in evidence not only

in the religions now in force but in what we know of those preceding them. But

in India alone has Hinduism survived as a full-fledged living faith.

 

It must also be added that this primeval religion has regarded- and still

regards- with respect the religions that arose subsiquents to it. The Hindu

views is this: "Other religions must have evolved according to the degree of

maturity of the people among whom they originated. They will bring well being to

their adherents. Live and let live" has been and continues to be the ideal of

our religion. It has given birth to religions like Buddhism and Jainism and they

[particularly Buddhism] have been propagated abroad for the Atmic advancement of

the people there.

 

I have spoken about the special characteristics of Hinduism from the

philosophical and theological points of view. But it has also another important

feature which is also distinctive- the sociological.

 

All religions have their own philosophical and theological systems. Also all of

them deal with individual life and conduct and, to a limited extent, with social

life. "Look upon your neighbour as your brother. Regard your adversary as

your friend. " Treat others in the same way as you would like to be treated

yourself. Be kind to all creatures. Speak the truth. Practise

non-violence. " These injunctions and rules of conduct relate to social life up

to a point- and only up to a point. To religions other than Hinduism social life

or the structure of society is not a major concern. Hinduism alone has a sturdy

sociological foundation, and its special feature, "varnasrama dharma", is an

expression of it.

 

Varna dharma is one and asrama dharma is another (together they make up

varnsrama dharma). Asrama dharma deals with the conduct of an individual during

different stages of his life. In the first stage, as a brahmacarins, he devotes

himself to studies in a gurukulas. In the second stage, as a youth, he takes a

wife, settles down in life and begets childern. In the third, as he ages

further, he becomes a forest recluse and, without much attachment to wordly

life, engages himself in Vedic karma. In the forth stage, he forsakes even Vedic

works, renounces the word utterly to become a sannyasin and turns his mind

towards the Paramatman. These four stages of life or asramas are called

brahmacarya, garhasthya, vanaprastha and sannyasa.

 

Varna dharma is an "arrangement" governing all society. It is very much a

target of attack today and is usually spoken of as the division of society into

"jatis". But "varna" and "jati" are in fact different. There are only four

varnas but the jatis are numerous. For instance, in the same varna there are

Ayyars, Ayyangars, Roas, etc - these are jatis. Mudaliars, Pillais, Reddiars and

Naikkars are jatis belonging to another varna. In the Yajurveda (third astaka,

fourth prasna) and in the Dhamasastra a number of jatis are mentioned- but you

do not meet with them today.

 

Critics of Varna dharma brand it as "a blot on our religion" as "a vicious

system which divides people into high and low". But, if you look at it

impartially, you will realise that it is a unique instrument to bring about

orderly and harmonious social life.

 

 

 

 

 

Note:

Hindu Dharma is a translation of two volumes of the well known Tamil Book

"Deivatthin Kural", which, in turn, is a book of 6 volumes that contains talks

of His Holiness Sri Chandrasekharendra Saraswathi Mahaswamiji of Kanchipuram.

The entire book is available online at http://www.kamakoti.org/ .