Distinctive Features of Sanatana Dharma.

[Guest guest]

(Written by : Paramacharya Sri Chandrasekharendra Saraswati Swamy )

 

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 consciousness but also

countless insentient objects. Together they constitute worldly life.

The laws, the dharma, 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 view 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 judgment. 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 Christian Padre 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 Christianity, 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 morality 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 opportunity

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 effort; therefore the Lord gives him a

fresh opportunity in the form of another birth to advance himself

inwardly. This is better to the option that He should dismiss a

sinner as good for nothing and yet reward him with heaven? If a man

sincerely believes, in a spirit 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 Isvara'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 judgment 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 not so good

looking?

 

" 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 Reality (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 Krishna 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 & #8221; of Gita according to

which the Lord dwells in the highest of each category, in the " most

excellent & #8220; of things. To create 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 way to know about the God . Not satisfied

with the previous states, God 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.

 

All Vedic followers , without exception, accept the doctrine of

divine Avataras. They are in agreement with the view that it is the

Brahman itself that is expressed as the & #8216;Avatara & #8217;. When we speak of

the Avataras, we mean the ten incarnations of Visnu. We adhere to the

doctrine of avataras because we 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.

 

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 Deities

representing these forms of God. For this reason others label us

polytheists. There view is utterly wrong. Because we worship the one

God, the one reality, manifesting in many different forms. It does

not mean that we believe in many Gods. It is equally absurd to call

us idolaters 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 Deity is not a lifeless idol. The Deity 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 the specific Deity (which is in accordance with the

Vedic specifications) . We see that practitioners of other religions

also have different types of 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 Christians and Muslims alike believe that

followers of other religions do not have the same sense of

fulfillment 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 sustained. 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 Mohammed. 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 Christianity

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

dispatching 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 liberation? 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 beginning. 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 subsequent 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. " " Practice 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 Varnasrama dharma). Asrama dharma deals with the conduct of an

individual during different stages of his life. In the first stage,

as a Brahmacarin , 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 children. In the third, as he ages further, he becomes a

forest recluse and, without much attachment to worldly 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 " (castes). 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 realize that it is a unique

instrument to bring about orderly and harmonious social life .