Sanatana Dharma Versus Monotheistic Creeds

The one Vedic verse which modern Hindus quote most frequently is the third quarter (caraNa) of Rigveda 1.164.46 – Ekam sad viprah bahudha vadanti. The full mantra reads as follows :

Indram mitram varuNam agnim ahuh, atho divyah sa suparNo garutman, ekam sad viprah bahudha vadanti, agnim yamam matarishvanam ahuh.

(They hail Him as Indra, as Mitra, as VaruNa, as Agni, also as that Divine and noble-winged Garutman. It is of One Existence that the wise ones speak in diverse ways, whether as Agni, or as Yama, or as Matarishvan.)

Why do modern Hindus quote only one-fourth and not the whole mantra ? Why do they forget or refuse to cite the rest of it, or at least consider three-fourth of it as irrelevant or superfluous ? And why do they assign a disproportionate weight to just one word, ekam, out of the five words which comprise what they consider to be the weighty one-fourth ?

A careful reading of the full mantra, particularly in the context of the sukta of which it is a part, leaves no doubt that the three-fourth which is ignored is not at all a repetition or paraphrase of the one-fourth which is presented. On the contrary, that three-fourth is as significant, if not more, as the one-fourth when we take into account the spirit of the Veda from which the citation has been selected. In fact, the one-fourth which is flourished so forcefully remains meaningless unless it is read with the rest of the mantra.

Why do modern Hindus maim in this manner a mantra from what they hold as their most sacred shastra ? What do they want to prove by this wanton misrepresentation of an entire and ancient ethos in spirituality, philosophy and culture ?

The answer becomes obvious as soon as we look into the psychology behind the citation.

Hindu Psychology of Surrender

Firstly, modern Hindus want to stake a claim for admission to the exclusive club of Monotheism maintained by Christianity and Islam. Hindus here are out to convince the monopolises of monotheism that the earliest Hindu shastra, the Rigveda, also supports and sanctions what is supposed to be the summum bonum of religion according to Christian and Muslim theology, or its apotheosis according to the modern Western ‘Science’ of Comparative Religion. At the same time, there is an almost pathetic appeal to the monopolises of Monotheism that they should not be appalled by the multiplicity of Gods and Goddesses in the post-Vedic Hindu pantheon, and that they should judge Hinduism in terms of the ‘original aspiration’ rather than in terms of the latter-day ‘aberration’.

Secondly, modern Hindus are pleading before the custodians of the ‘only true’ creeds that Hinduism is only a different way of stating the same truths which were revealed to the founders of the former. In effect, Hindus are praying with folded hands, “Please do not denounce Hinduism as polytheism, pantheism, idolatry, paganism, and kufr. Please ignore the differences of language and metaphor, and attend to the fundamental spirit which informs your faiths as well as ours.”

The Hindu psychology throughout this exercise is one of apology, of shamefacedness, of defence against what is initially conceded as a valid criticism of the idioms and forms in which Hindu spirituality has been spelled out in its shastras. This is a disastrous psychology. It leads to a supine surrender on the one hand, and to a slavish invitation on the other.

The psychology of surrender is best symbolised by the well-intentioned Hindu slogan of sarva-dharma-samabhava when it is extended indiscriminately to Christianity and Islam. Hindus are shouting themselves hoarse in stressing the identity of Brahma with Abraham, of Manu with Noah, of Rama with Rahim, of Krishna with Karim, of Kashi with Ka’ba, and so on. But the monopolises of Monotheism remain far from mollified. The orthodox among the monotheists dismiss with contempt the Hindu claim of sharing the same faith with them fundamentally. The kinder (or craftier) among the monotheists take pity on this plight of poor Hindus, and invite them to renounce their nebulous, if not counterfeit, Monotheism in favour of the fully developed doctrine.

Hindu Psychology of Imitation

The psychology of imitation is manifest in modern Sikh scholars who have, over the years, forced the message of the great Gurus into monotheistic moulds. They have almost succeeded in eclipsing, more or less completely, the Upanishadic spirituality of the nirguNa Saints among whom Guru Nanak occupies the front rank. They take immense pride in equating the Ek OMkar with Allah, the Ãdigrantha with Al-Kitab, the succession of Sikh Gurus with the succession of prophets in which Guru Gobind Singh is the last, like Muhammad, and the injunctions of the last Guru regarding outer symbols with similar injunctions of the Sunnah.

A manifestation of the Islamic spirit could not lag far behind, once Sikhism started Islamicizing itself. It has progressed on the path of a similar exclusiveness, a similar self-righteousness, a similar self-aggrandizement, a similar use of terror in the service of religion, and a similar mob mentality vis-a-vis internal dissent, as have characterised Islam throughout its blood-soaked career. Sikhism is fast moving out of its spiritual moorings, and becoming a politics of power which Islam has always been.

The Way Out

Hindu society will never be able to combat or come to terms with the ‘only true’ creeds like Christianity and Islam, so long as its spokesmen continue to clothe Hindu spirituality in concepts borrowed from Monotheism. The slogan of sarva-dharma samabhava will fail to make any dent in the armour of Christian and Muslim animosity, so long as Hindus fail to recapture the spirit and the context in which this slogan had been evolved.

What, then, is the way out ?

Firstly, Hindus have to reawaken to the sublime spirituality of their own Sanatana Dharma, and base their evaluation of other religions and cultures on its pristine premises. That will give them the requisite self-confidence to counter all misinformed or malicious criticism.

Secondly, Hindus have to study and scrutinise the sources from which the ‘only true’ creeds derive their inspiration. That will invest Hindus with an insight into why the monopolises of Monotheism have always been so impervious to appeals for goodwill and understanding among different sections of the human family.

The fundamental difference between the Sanatana Dharma family of faiths on the one hand, and the ‘only true’ creeds like Christianity and Islam on the other, can be drawn out in the form of a dialogue between a Soviet citizen and a citizen from a free society. The story may not be literally true. But it is illustrative of what can happen to the human mind when it is deprived of freedom, and is regimented by blind beliefs imposed from outside.

A Free Society Versus a Closed Fraternity

A Soviet diplomat arrived in the capital of a democratic country on a commercial mission on behalf of his Government. The mission was to continue for several months, and the hotel in which the diplomat had to stay immediately on his arrival was rather expensive by Soviet standards. Next day, the diplomat approached the enquiry counter of the hotel and asked the lady in attendance, “Where can I find your Housing Committee ?” The lady could not understand his question and asked him to elaborate. The diplomat explained, “You see, I cannot stay for long in this expensive place. I want to apply to the appropriate authority for allotment of adequate but cheaper accommodation.”

The lady picked up the telephone directory, opened it at a particular page, and told the diplomat, “Sorry, we have no such committee in this city or anywhere else in this country. You have to go to an estate agent who will show you all kinds of accommodation and negotiate for the one you approve of finally. The leading estate agents are listed on this page. You may phone to any one of them for an appointment.”

The diplomat was visibly annoyed. He shoved aside the telephone directory and shot his next question, “And where can I find your Food Committee ?” The lady informed him that there was no such committee either. The diplomat was now furious. He shouted, “How and where, then, do I buy the food which I will need everyday ? I must have the necessary permit.”

The lady assured him patiently that he needed no permit, and that he could go into any of the hundreds of stores to buy whatever he wanted, whenever he wanted.

By now the diplomat was in tantrums. He taunted, “I suppose you have no Transport Committee either ?”

The lady kept her cool and said with a smile, “Why, there are all those taxies standing and cruising all over this city. You can hire any one of them at any time of the day or night and go wherever you please.”

The diplomat gave up in utter disgust. There was sadness writ large on his face. He shook his head several times and said to himself, “Very bad ! Very bad indeed ! There is no system in this country. It is a chaos all around. I feel lost.”

Psychology of Closed Creeds

A student of Sanatana Dharma can ignore these pronouncements and proceed to examine the ‘only true’ creeds. To start with, he will not judge these creeds for their inner logic or want of it, but instead weigh them on the scales of yogic spirituality systematized by reflective reason. And he will very soon find out that these creeds are not born of a spiritual consciousness at all. On the contrary, they are constructs of the outer mind drawing strength from dark drives of the unregenerate unconscious which Freud and other psychoanalysts have studied and surveyed with some insight.

The one and only true God of these creeds is the embodiment of fear and awe of the dark and the unknown. Their only saviour or last prophet is a father figure in an infantile search for security in a world full of doubts and uncertainties. Their al-kitab is a collection of rationalisations mounted upon human passions like self-love, jealousy, vindictiveness, cunning, covetousness, and aggression. Their heaven represents an explosion of the animal hunger for endless sense-pleasures unmixed with or followed by pain. Their hell symbolizes a deep-seated hatred for follow human beings who refuse to bow down before self-appointed messengers of an imaginary almighty.

Hindu society will acquire self-confidence vis-a-vis the ‘only true’ creeds when it recognizes that Sanatana Dharma stands for self-exploration, self-purification, and self-transcendence, while these creeds stand for self-stupefaction, self-righteousness, and self-aggrandizement. The horrible histories of these creeds are running commentaries on the character of their doctrines. Those histories are full of crusades and jihads, massacres and genocides, inquisitions and witch-huntings, extinction of the freedom of thought and spiritual aspiration, and imperialist aggression against ‘infidels’ in which the latter’s religion and culture are destroyed, their properties pillaged, their lands misappropriated, and their men and women and children slaughtered or enslaved. It is a sin to regard them as religion in any sense of the term, and to extend samabhava towards their exclusive and intolerant dogmas. One of the tasks of a resurgent Hindu society will be to rescue those people who have been forced or lured into the folds of these crude and cruel creeds.

(Courtesy : Excerpts from ‘Defence of Hindu Society’ by Shri. Sita Ram Goel ji, posted on voibooks.bitbucket.io)

(Shri. Sita Ram Goel ji was a religious and political activist, writer and publisher in the late 20^th Century. He is considered to be one of the two Sages of Modern Hindu Renaissance.)

Modern Hindus want to stake a claim for admission to the exclusive club of Monotheism maintained by Christianity and Islam !

One of the tasks of a resurgent Hindu society will be to rescue those who have been forced or lured into the folds of cruel creeds !