I constructed this paper through
many hours of reading,
writing, re-writing, keying, editing, and proofreading.
I do not profess to be a so-called
“expert”
on Hinduism; therefore, the paper that you are about to read should not
be
taken as one written by a Hindu practitioner. Hinduism
as a religion is vast. It
would take a lifetime to read and study all
of its aspects, let alone practice.
I
humbly confess that my effort is limited to what I have gleaned through
reading. Please
read what follows with
that in mind.
In
Christ, Ronald Coleman
Hinduism has developed from
pre 3000 BC to the
present day. It is not a static religion, but has continued to change
by
absorbing other religious beliefs. During this process there has been
no
attempt to standardize beliefs, so today Hindus can quite happily hold
a
multiplicity of opposing views.
Though Hinduism may seem far
removed from everyday American
experience, it's becoming more important that Christians understand
this
mysterious religion from India. The reason is that Hinduism claims
millions of followers
worldwide. It is also important because its influence is being felt in
the
United States.
Most
people have had at least some exposure to what is called the New Age
movement. We have
realized that Hinduism is the fountainhead
of a good deal of New Age thinking. Most of us are also aware than an
increasing number of Asian Indians are residing in the U.S. There are
over 200
Hindu temples or Hindu centers in the U.S. Many believe (I am not one
of them)
that due to its diverse nature, Hinduism has the potential to serve for
uniting
much of the non-Christian religious world.
i] They live with a deep respect for life
(ahimsa) because of
their belief in the unity of all life. Therefore they tend to be
vegetarian.
Even their treatment of nature expresses this principle. The tending of
a
vegetable patch is carried out with care and deep respect for the
life-force
within each plant. Those Hindus who do eat meat raise the animals
without
cruelty and take their lives painlessly. Even the preparation and
eating of
food expresses this principle. For this reason Hindus refrain from
talking
during a meal.
ii] As matter is something to be cast off - an impediment to
the soul -
a Hindu puts a low value on material possessions and sensual desires
(gluttony,
drunkenness, sex, etc.) To dwell on these things, rather than divest
them, can
only bring rebirth (karma) rather than salvation (moksha) and the
attainment of
Nirvana. Therefore eating and drinking is carried out in moderation,
with
certain days set aside as fast days, while sex is held in esteem only
for
procreation. For this reason marriages of "love" are frowned upon and
therefore mostly arranged.
iii] To break from the cycle of rebirths and
attain union with
God (Nirvana) is a Hindus aim in life. Unless they follow the path set
before
them (marga), they have no hope. Therefore the performance of their
religious
and social duty is uttermost in their mind.
Religious duty is extremely involved and varies between
caste and sub
caste. A good Hindu's home will have a separate room for a temple with
a shrine
containing pictures and statues of the personalized form of Brahman
that the
family worships. On rising in the morning each member of the family
performs
ritual washing, offers prayers inside and outside of the household
temple, and
eats breakfast separately. Lunch is usually vegetarian. In the evening,
there
is ritual washing again, evening prayers and offerings in the temple
(pudja)
chanting of mantras (verses from the Veda), the singing of hymns
(Bhajans) and
a reading from scripture in Sanskrit and then translated. After prayers
there
is the sharing of fire, and then the evening meal. A Hindu is not bound
to
visit a public temple or holy place and only does so on special
occasions and
pilgrimages. Their religion tends to be personal.
Social duty must also be faithfully
performed. Inward
righteousness is stressed, i.e. the motive. The intent of any action
determines
its worth, i.e. its spiritual value. All action must seek to purify
self.
Performance of dharma (correct duty) will achieve this. It will also
inspire
others to follow your path and so find Nirvana themselves. For this
reason a
Hindu lives their faith rather than preaching it. They will answer
questions,
but will not evangelize.
The
appeal of Hinduism is not difficult to comprehend. For one thing,
Hinduism is comfortable
with evolutionary thinking. As modern science emphasizes our physical
evolution, so Hinduism emphasizes our spiritual evolution. As much of
modern
psychology emphasizes the basic goodness and unlimited potential of
human
nature, so Hinduism emphasizes man's essential divinity. As modern
philosophy
emphasizes the relativity of all truth claims, so Hinduism tolerates
contradictory religious beliefs. As a religion that also emphasizes the
predominance
of the spiritual over material reality, Hinduism appeals to
disillusioned
people with material pursuits.
Although
there are some beliefs common to virtually all Hindus, there is no
"Hindu
orthodoxy"—no dogma that all Hindus must believe. Hinduism is
a
concatenation of developing beliefs and practices.
Hinduism
has its roots in the interrelationship of two basic religious systems:
that of
the ancient civilization residing in the Indus River Valley from the
third
millennium B.C., and the religious beliefs brought to India by the
Aryan people
who began infiltrating the Indus Valley sometime after 2000 B.C.
The
religion of the Aryans is described in the writings of "holy men"
contained in the Vedas (meaning "knowledge" or "wisdom").
The Vedas are four collections of writings composed between about 1500
and 500
B.C. that form the basis for Hindu beliefs, and that reveal a gradual
development of religious ideas. The later sections of the Vedas are
known as
the Upanishads. These Vedic writings are considered sruti, the
infallible, inspired word of God. Later
Hindu writings, including the Bhagavad Gita, are of lesser authority,
but
widely popular.
Overview
of Hinduism
The Hindu Cosmos
Classical Hinduism takes its
form from the uniting of
two different (and indeed opposing) worldviews. This unification is the
result
of a long religious and intellectual confrontation (roughly 500 to 300
bce)
between the Vedic Religion and the worldviews of Jainism and Buddhism.
From the
Vedic Religion, it took the life-affirming perspective and from Jainism
and
Buddhism, along with the late Upanishads it developed a life-negating
view.
Both views were fit into the understanding of the cosmos that Hinduism
developed out of the Vedas. To explain how this works, we must start
with two
intertwined descriptions of the cosmos, from which we will then move to
the
life-is-good and life-is-bad approaches to the human problem.
The
Hindu Cosmos #1
A)
The Vedic Gods
The sacrifices and rituals of
the Vedas involve a
number of gods and goddesses. There is Indra, the warrior god who can
be seen
as the leader of the gods. With his band of Maruts, he defeated the
demons of
darkness each morning so that the sun could rise. The Vedic literature
contains
a number of stories about his exploits and successes. There is also the
sky god
Dyaus and a few goddesses, such as Aditi and Ushas.
Although the Vedas comprise the
most sacred
literature of Hinduism, the divine pantheon in them is essentially
ignored in
later Classical Hinduism. Only one god important in this period
continues his
significance later. This is Agni, who is the god of fire and the sacred
fire
itself. He continues to be worshipped in the daily rituals of each
Hindu home.
Every morning, an offering of clarified butter (ghee) and some grain
cakes is
shared communion-style between Agni (i.e., the fire) and the members of
the
household.
B)
The Gods of Classical
Hinduism
Hinduism has always had a
remarkable ability to
absorb new influences and ideas within its fluid structure. This is
true of the
gods as well. One sage observed that there were 330 million divine
beings in
Hinduism. But if one looks for the most important gods, the usual
answer is
that there are three main gods, those of Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva. But
this
answer is unsatisfactory, for Brahma--the emanation of Brahman into the
realm
of maya--receives little regular worship. Indeed, if we determine the
importance of gods by the number of their temples, Brahma has almost
none. Instead,
a group of female gods appear much more important. Therefore, the
following
discussion will focus on Vishnu, Shiva, and the goddesses. Much of the
information about these gods comes from the two epics Mahabharata and
the
Ramayana, as well as from the Puranas.
Vishnu is a mighty male god, who
plays several roles
for his followers. He is at once the creator of the cosmos, its
sustainer, and
its destroyer. His most common female consort is Lakshmi. The followers
of
Vishnu are called Vaishnavites. On earth he has appeared in the form of
ten
different avatars, i.e., forms or manifestations. Some of the avatars
in which
he appeared were animal, such as a fish or a boar. But the most common
avatars
are Krishna and Rama, forms in which he continues to be worshipped.
There are three main stages in
Krishna's worldly
life. First, Krishna is born in a prison where his royal parents are
being held
by a rival king. His father works out a scheme to enable the baby
Krishna to
escape to a nearby village and replace him with another child. Krishna
grows up
as a mischievous boy within this village of cowherds, playing tricks on
his
family and friends.
Second, as a youth, Krishna woos
all the gopis
(female cowherds) in the village with his good looks, charms, and
attentions.
Although Radha is his favorite, he dallies with the other gopis as
well.
Occasionally he even divides himself (makes copies, remember
Multiplicity?) so
that he can pay attention to several of the girls at once. These
stories, while
making good tales on the surface level, are also interpreted on a
spiritual
level...
Third, as an adult, Krishna
regains his kingdom in
northern India by killing King Kamsa, an act seen as the restoration of
dharma.
In the story of the Mahabharata, he then helps Arjuna (by serving as
his
chariot driver, and his brothers (the Pandava brothers) in a war to
regain
their rightful kingdom. The night before a major battle, Krishna and
Arjuna
have a long discussion regarding the nature of dharma and the cosmos,
which is
preserved within the Mahabharata as the Bhagavad Gita. At the end of
the
discussion, Krishna reveals himself to Arjuna as Vishnu. The exploits
of
Krishna are told and rehearsed in the Vishnu temples and in the annual
festival
of the Ras Lila.
More
Concerning Krishna and the Bhagavad Gita
The Bhagavad
Gita (the Gita) was composed sometime
between the 7th and the 6th
centuries BC and later incorporated into the great Hindu epic Mahabharata.
It stated a new path towards liberation, a new kind of asceticism at
hand for
any human, independent of social status. It requires neither withdrawal
from
social life as the Upanishads do, nor performing severe austerities as
the Hatha
and Raja Yoga. This explains its great success both in the East and the
West.
The new Yoga presented in the Gita is concerned
with one's attitude of
mind when performing normal social duties, and could be defined as a
combination of Karma, Bhakti and Buddhi Yoga. Karma Yoga in the Gita
means the performance of one's duties in a spirit of renunciation, of
not being
bound to its fruits, Bhakti Yoga is one's effort to bring all actions
as
sacrifices to Krishna, while Buddhi Yoga is a particular kind of wisdom
one has
to develop in understanding life. Let us analyze the way this new kind
of Yoga
works.
The Gita
is an episode of the great epic Mahabharata, which
narrates the dialogue
of Arjuna, one of the five sons of the Pandava family, and the Hindu
god
Krishna, an avatar of Vishnu. A major battle is about to begin in which
Arjuna
sees himself playing a contradictory role, that of fighting against his
relatives, the Kaurava family. Caught between his warrior duty and the
ethical
meaning of fighting against his cousins, between his social duty and
the threat
of karma, he chooses to not fight and to be killed rather than have his
conscience loaded with the killing of his relatives. At this moment
Krishna
reveals himself to the distressed warrior and helps him understand the
situation from a transcendental point of view. He performs a spiritual
exegesis
of Arjuna's situation, stating: "Not by abstaining from work can one
achieve freedom from karma, nor by renunciation alone can one attain
perfection". "Abstaining
from
work" is practically impossible according to Krishna, as "everyone is
forced to act according to the tendencies (gunas) he
has acquired from
the modes of material nature (prakriti)". As a
warrior, Arjuna must
always follow his caste duties, in other words, his dharma.
On this
basis the Gita founds a new element in Hindu
philosophy: Spiritual
perfection is not attained by asceticism or abandoning action, but by
giving a
new meaning to action - that of detachment from its fruits, an attitude
that
does not feed karma and reincarnation. Krishna formulates the famous
principle:
Be focused on action
and not on the fruits of action. Do not become confused in attachment
to the
fruit of your actions and do not become confused in the desire for
inaction.
Therefore,
one should not withdraw from the world of social involvement but live
in it
detached from the fruits of actions, as "action is better than
inaction" and "renunciation of all action is impossible". As a
result, Krishna's command to Arjuna is: "Always act with detachment to
the
fruits of actions. The one who is acting without attachment attains
God".
This is Karma Yoga, the path of attaining liberation through
accomplishing
one's normal duties with a totally detached attitude toward personal
benefit.
In his given context, Arjuna has to fight no matter who is going to die
on the
battlefield.
There
is also a new meaning for sacrifice and Bhakti Yoga. Written at the
time when
the authority of the Vedas has heavily decreased, the Gita
states a
hierarchy in the value of different kinds of sacrifice, with the lowest
being
the Vedic sacrifice, brought to a god in order to get personal favors,
the next
being the inner sacrifice of Raja Yoga (that of breathing; of the mind
and
senses; and that of empirical knowledge) and the best being that of
detached
action. Acting like this, one brings his actions as sacrifices to
Krishna and
therefore they do not generate karmic seeds anymore:
Consider all your
acts as acts of devotion to me, whether eating, offering, giving away,
performing austerities. Perform them as an offering to me. In this way
you will
be free from karma, you will be liberated and you will come to me.
According
to this new understanding of Bhakti Yoga, there is no need for any kind
of
material sacrifices, rituals or other kind of performances. Act only in a worshipping
attitude toward
Krishna, as if all acts are dedicated to him. This particular mindset
in
judging particular situations in life is called Buddhi Yoga. Following
it, one
should attain liberation.
Krishna,
Karma and Grace
A first
inconsistency of the Gita concerns the relation
between the law of karma
and the grace granted by Krishna in helping his followers attain
liberation. On
the one hand, it seems that Krishna is sovereign over the law of karma,
using
it as an instrument for punishment or reward. He says: "Those who are
envious and mischievous, who are the lowest among men, I perpetually
cast into
transmigration, into various demoniac species of life". And also:
"Those who worship me and surrender all their activities unto me, being
devoted to me without hesitation, engaged in devotional service and
meditating
unto me, I deliver them quickly from the ocean of birth and death".
On the
other hand, karma seems to be a self-functioning rule that produces
effects by
its own power. One has to struggle alone against its drive and attain
better
incarnations from one existence to the next: "When the Yogi engages
himself in making further progress, being washed of all karma, he
achieves
liberation after many, many births". Meanwhile, Krishna holds a
detached
position toward all humans: "I see all creatures equally disposed and I
am
not partial to anyone".
These
two positions are not reconcilable. In
trying to explain the relation between karma and the grace of Krishna,
the
Hindu analysts of the Gita had to choose between
holding to the supremacy
of Krishna and the ultimate power of karma in ruling the world. There are theistic and
pantheistic
interpretations (and even translations) of the Gita,
indebted to one or
the other alternative. The first see Krishna as a super-personal god
using
karma as an instrument for awakening humans from ignorance, and the
second see
him as a mere form of Brahman's manifestation, with no real power in
controlling karma. As the two positions contradict each other and the Gita
leaves enough room for both, we wonder which could actually be the
relation
between karma and grace.
In
order to attain liberation, Arjuna is advised to strive hard to realize
a
detached attitude of mind, called Buddhi Yoga:
To those who are
constantly devoted to serve me, I give them the Buddhi Yoga by which
they can
come to me. I show my mercy to them by destroying their ignorance with
the lamp
of knowledge.
Here it
looks like Krishna burns karma by his grace only if one strives hard to
deserve
it. Therefore, the major role in salvation belongs to the individual
who
performs Buddhi Yoga. The grace granted by Krishna is far away from the
meaning
it got later in the prapatti
devotional trend. Therefore, Krishna must be understood as a kind of
meditation
object rather than as a personal god who gets himself involved in one's
reincarnation journey. The only grace one benefits from Krishna is
receiving
his advice. The rest depends on the disciple.
Dharma
and Karma
In
anyone's life the conditioning couple of dharma and
karma is at work.
The "duty" that forces Arjuna to fight is his dharma,
i.e. his
caste-duty as warrior. In turn, Arjuna's dharma is
generated by his
karma. Therefore, the real impetus of Arjuna's actions is his karma,
which
pushes him into action independently of his present intentions. Krishna
states:
"When you become confused in your false ego you say to yourself, 'I
will
not fight' you are misled. By your nature you must fight". This
"nature" is prakriti or, more specifically, the way
the three gunas
influence one's mind under the influence of past karma. Therefore,
Arjuna is
not free to fulfill his dharma, but is compelled by
his karma to act
according to it. The action that "is better than inaction" is not a
free decision of man; it does not follow the understanding of one's
social
duty, but is the way of accepting a pre-ordained scenario. Such an
action is
devoid of any sense of freedom, being a mere resignation to fate. The
only
freedom left to Arjuna is to give a certain meaning to his
predetermined
actions, that of sacrifices to Krishna: "Consider all your acts as acts
of
devotion to me, whether eating, offering, and giving away, performing
austerities. Perform them as an offering to me. In this way you will be
free
from karma, you will be liberated and you will come to me".
Another
inconsistency of the Gita is regarding the
character of Krishna.
According to classic Vaishnavism, Krishna is only an incarnation of the
Hindu
god Vishnu (which according to Vedanta is only a form of Brahman's
manifestation). In the Gita Krishna becomes the
Supreme Lord of the
Universe, eternal, and the source of all existence: "I am the source of
all spiritual and material worlds. Everything emanates from me".
Contrary
to Vedanta, Krishna becomes the source of Brahman and contrary to
Vaishnavism
he is the instrument of attaining fusion with Brahman. Although the
intention
of the Gita is to present Krishna as
super-personal, he is a
heterogeneous mixture of theistic, dualistic and pantheistic kinds of
Ultimate
Reality. He is not only the creator but also the substance of the
universe. The
cycle of permanent transformation between the manifested state and the
unmanifested one is characteristic for Krishna too, as it was with
Brahman:
At the end of an
era (kalpa) all creatures disintegrate into my nature and at the
beginning of
another era I manifest them again. Such it is my nature (prakriti) to
follow
again and again the pattern of the Infinite manifestations and
disintegrations.
Krishna
has to "follow the pattern of the Infinite manifestations and
disintegrations", which implies that the process is a necessity that
surpasses him as personal god. He is just a detached and helpless
spectator to
it. Therefore it is hard to accept his dominion over creation along
with the
periodic manifestation of nature. Rather, we should conclude that the
creation
of the world is not an option for him, but a periodic duty at the end
of each
cosmic cycle, as was the case with the manifestations of Brahman. S.
Dasgupta
comments on the contradictory personal character of Krishna:
The Gita combines
together different conceptions of God without feeling the necessity of
reconciling the oppositions or contradictions involved in them. It does
not
seem to be aware of the philosophical difficulty of combining the
concept of
God as unmanifested, differenceless entity with the notion of Him as
the
super-person Who incarnates Himself on earth in the human form and
behaves in
the human manner. It is not aware of the difficulty that, if all good
and evil
should have emanated from God, and if there be ultimately no moral
responsibility, and if everything in the world should have the same
place in
God, there is no reason why God should trouble to incarnate Himself as
man,
when there is a disturbance of the Vedic dharma. If God is impartial to
all,
and if He is absolutely unperturbed, why should He favor the man who
clings to
Him, and why, for his sake, overrule the world-order of events and in
his favor
suspend the law of karma? (S. Dasgupta, Indian Philosophy, Motile
Banarsidass,
1991, vol.2, p. 533).
The demand
to act in the world without attachment to the fruits of action seems
itself
contradictory. Could it actually be possible to act like this? How
could one
really perform his social duties without being attached to them?
Otherwise what
motivation remains for acting in the world? That of a robot, devoid of
any
personal input to his acts? The philosophy of the Gita
itself aims at
fulfilling a personal fruit - liberation from reincarnation, which is
useful
for nobody else than oneself. Should this fruit be treated with
detachment too?
Could one act detached regarding his eternal destiny? If the philosophy
of
detached acting cannot be valid for the major aspect of existence, how
can we
know it works in other respects?
On the
other hand, how much could one know about his dharma,
especially in a
Western society, where the caste system doesn't exist? At to what
extent can one
be sure he is fulfilling his dharma and not a
personal attachment to a
certain egoistic motivation? Where is the limit between my dharma
and my
neighbor's? Therefore, under the cover of religion, anyone can
masquerade,
pretending he follows his dharma, but having no
altruistic motivations
at all in what he does.
When
Arjuna found himself in the process of choosing between his duty as
warrior and
the killing of his relatives (a severe violation of Vedic morality),
Krishna
explained to him that he must give another meaning to traditional
morality.
Traditional ethical values should not be a hindrance to acting detached
to the
fruits of action. He argued: "The wise men who reached true knowledge
see
with as equally a brahman (priest), a cow, an elephant, a dog and a
dog-eater".
As only
the soul (atman) is immortal, Krishna argues that it
is actually
impossible to kill anyone: "Those who think that they can kill or those
that think they can be killed are confused in the manifestations of
ignorance.
The infinite, immortal soul can neither kill or be killed". Therefore
Arjuna is free to kill his relatives, considering them only temporary
abiding
forms for the eternal self, mere mortal frames. S. Dasgupta states in
his
commentary:
The theory of the
Gita that, if actions are performed with an unattached mind, then their
defects
cannot touch the performer, distinctly implies that the goodness or
badness of
an action does not depend upon external effects of the action, but upon
the
inner motive of action. If there is no motive of pleasure or self-gain,
then
the action performed cannot bind the performer; for it is only the bond
of
desires and self-love that really makes an action one's own and makes
one reap
its good or bad fruits. Morality from this point of view becomes wholly
subjective, and the special feature of the Gita is that it tends to
make all
actions non-moral by cutting away the bonds that connect an action with
its
performer (Ibid, p. 507).
The
contrast with traditional morality is obvious. Its representative is
another
important character in the battle of Kurukshetra, Yudishthira, Arjuna's
brother. He tried to expiate his sin of killing his relatives in battle
through
repentance, gifts, asceticism and pilgrimages. For him a bad conscience
could
not be cleansed by a right attitude of mind, but by compensatory acts.
Rather
than a consistent philosophy, S. Dasgupta considers the Gita
only a
manual of conduct:
The Gita was
probably written at a time when philosophical views had not definitely
crystallized into hard-and-fast systems of thought, and when the
distinguishing
philosophical niceties, scholarly disputations, the dictates of
argument, had
not come into fashion. The Gita, therefore, is not to be looked upon as
a
properly schemed system of philosophy, but as a manual of right conduct
and
right perspective of things in the light of a mystical approach to God
in
self-resignation, devotion, friendship and humility. (p.534)
The Gita
falls short of coherence and viability. A god that rules the world by
the
"help" of karma cannot be the super-personal embodiment of
perfection. One's (mostly unknown) dharma fed by
past lives' deeds
cannot provide any real meaning for freedom. Acting without attachment
to its
results cannot be a valid solution for fulfilling one's social duty.
And a
morality that considers people temporary frames of the eternal self
cannot
grant social harmony. Therefore, it as difficult to accept the message
of the Gita
as a proper teaching of conduct, especially in the Western world.
The other major avatar of Vishnu
is Rama, the central
figure of the Ramayana. In keeping with the actions in the story, Rama
(i.e.,
Vishnu) bears the attributes of trust, faithfulness, and strength.
Along with
Sita, his faithful wife, Vishnu as Rama continues to be worshipped in
temples
and in the annual festival of the Ram Lila.
Shiva, by contrast, has no
avatars, but he has a
family of wives and children. Shiva was originally seen as the
destroyer, but
has since added the attributes of creator (destroy to make things
anew), and
sustainer. In fact, the figure of the dancing Shiva who sustains the
world is a
common Hindu image. Shiva's worshippers are known as Shaivites. The
tales of
exploits are mentioned in the Ramayana, but appear much more fully in
the
Puranas. Shiva's primary depiction is as a meditating sadhu, but due to
the
attentions of Parvati, one of his wives, he also has a familial side.
The main symbol of shiva is a
lingam, a phallic
shaped object. This symbol is placed as the central image in a Shaivite
temple
and often made from valuable material, such as silver. It is usually
two to
three feet tall, and constitutes a focus of worship for his followers.
Shiva's "wives" are the symbols
of feminine
powers, called sakti. They are often worshipped within Shaivism, but
can be
worshipped on their own in a form of Hinduism called Saktiism. Although
there
are numerous female figures associated with Shiva, four stand out:
Parvati,
Umma, Durga, and Kali.
Parvati is the goddess of love
and romance. She is
young, beautiful and full of life. She represents union with Shiva, a
representation that has distinct sexual overtones. Indeed, they are
often
depicted in the act of intercourse, the combination of their male and
female
(sakti) energies sustaining the universe. Parvati is also the mother of
Ganesha.
Although Shiva initially tried to kill Ganesha, he ultimately adopted
him and
the three of them are a favorite family scene.
Umma is the wife who represents
motherhood. She is
seen as kind, caring, nurturing, and displaying other features of
motherhood.
Durga represents the attribute
of justice. She rides
a tiger and carries the weapons of battle. In this character, she is
unafraid
to kill to reestablish justice.
Kali is wild, terrible, and
unpredictable, and is
usually associated with death. She is usually depicted naked, wearing a
necklace of human heads and a skirt of human arms. Blood drips from her
sword.
Death is thus connected with her activities. She is sometimes depicted
dancing
upon the prone form of Shiva, symbolizing the strength of wild and
unpredictable power. The city of Calcutta is named after her.
Shiva also has two sons. The
first, Ganesha, has the
head of an elephant and is the god of overcoming obstacles, which links
him to
good luck and prosperity. The
second,
Skanda, becomes the divine warrior and thus the god of war.
The Hindu Cosmos #2:
What's really there?
Although Christianity holds that
God is immanent,
that is usually not meant in physical terms. God is near all humans,
but he is
not in physical objects; God created, but he is not his creation. For
example,
he is not a boat nor is he in a boat.
Hinduism provides a radically
different idea, one
which goes against the evidences of human senses. The idea is simple:
Brahman
(the "creator" god) IS his creation. The cosmos is not so much a
creation, but more an emanation from him. His essence lies in all
created
objects, including human beings. This means that the multiplicity of
the
cosmos--with all its gods, goddesses, humans, animals, and other beings
and
objects--is actually a unity; it is one divine being. The multiplicity
that
hides the cosmos' unity is called maya; that is the reality humans
perceive
with their senses everyday. The overcoming of maya to perceive true
reality
(Brahman) thus constitutes an important task in Hinduism.
This simple notion has a
stunning ramification: the
soul of each individual human being--called atman—is Brahman.
The soul of each
person is thus Brahman, the entirety of creation. This is a difficult
concept
to comprehend, for how can the "small" soul of each person be identical
with the "large" god of the cosmos? But it is the comprehension of
this idea that becomes a central goal in human life and in the
resolution of
the human problem.
The Human Problem and its
Solution: The
Life-Affirming View
For that part of Hinduism rooted
in the Vedas which
views life as good, the human problem is how to enjoy life, how to
enjoy one's
lives. Since the samsara system continually causes people to be reborn
after
their deaths, every life should be lived to maximize one's enjoyment
both in
the present life and in future lives.
In terms of one's present life,
enjoyment comes from
working towards the first three goals of life: dharma (virtue), artha
(success), and kama (pleasure). Success and pleasure clearly can bring
about
enjoyment in-and-of-themselves, but so can the practice of virtue. The real reward for
following virtue,
fulfilling the duties of one's varna and jati, one's stage in life,
comes in
future lives. The more a person leads their life according to dharma,
the
greater a store of good karma they develop. Good karma leads to a
higher
position in rebirth, while bad karma can lead to a lower position,
possibly
even one below the human race (like a slug). The more virtuous a person
is in
the present life, the higher the will be reborn in the next. And of
course, the
higher one is born, the more enjoyable life will be.
The Human Problem and its
Solution: The Life-Negating View
That part of Hinduism which
views life as bad defines
the human problem in a different way. Since life is not a good
experience, many
lives are definitely not pleasant. The problem therefore is how to stop
living.
A person could end his life, but that would only cause a rebirth. The
problem
is obviously how to get out of the system of samsara, how to die
without being
reborn.
The solution is to gain moksha,
release. The simple
characterization of this goal is for a person to realize the true
nature of the
cosmos. That is, a person must come to the understanding, with every
fiber of
being, that atman and Brahman are one and the same. The key is to
realize this
with "every fiber of being"; head knowledge does not count.
The more complex depiction of
this goal is actually a
fuller version of the previous one. First, recall that each person is
reborn on
the basis of their karma: good karma enables a higher birth, while bad
karma
results in a lower birth. But what if there is no karma at all? In this
situation,
there would be nothing attached to the individual that could determine
where
they would be reborn. This, in turn, would prevent rebirth and thus
take the
person out of the system.
How does one avoid having karma?
How does one come to
realize that Atman is Brahman? This comes about through the practice of
one of
several different forms of yoga which will be explained later.
According
to the Vedic cosmogony of the golden egg (Hiranyagarbha),
both gods and
men have their origin in an impersonal primordial entity (Rig
Veda
10,129). The Brahmana texts add the appearance of a Creator (Prajapati)
from
the golden egg, who created the world and humans out of his own body,
by the
power of his ardor. The Purushasukta hymn states
that the product of the
golden egg is the giant Purusha, and through his sacrifice by the gods
the
physical world was built, the four caste system, the animals and the
duality of
sexes.
Although
the Vedic hymns do not clearly state what role the most worshipped gods
played
in the creation of man, man is responsible to them for how he lives his
life.
The prayers people address to Varuna, Indra, Agni or other gods denote
a sinful
human nature. Man constantly asks for forgiveness for the sins he does,
which
are either errors in performing the right religious ritual, or faults
against
one’s neighbor:
If we have sinned
against the man who loves us,
Have wronged a brother, a dear friend, or a comrade,
The neighbor of long standing or a stranger,
Remove from us this stain, O King Varuna.
(Rig Veda 5,85,7)
To the
fire god Agni, who burns away sins through the fire ritual, people ask
for
forgiveness, but also for material welfare:
Shining brightly,
Agni, drive away
our sin, and shine wealth on us.
Shining bright, drive away our sin.
For good fields,
for good homes, for wealth,
we made our offerings to you.
Shining bright, drive away our sin.
(Rig Veda 1,97,1-2)
According
to the hymns of the Rig Veda, man is a personal
being dependent on the
gods, and his destiny is eternal life in a celestial world. Here is how
the
worshippers of Indra express their longing for personal immortality:
Make me immortal in
the realm
where the son of Vivasvat
(Yama) reigns,
Where lies heaven’s secret shrine, where
are those waters that are ever
young.
For Indra, flow you on, Indu!
Make me immortal in
that realm
where movement is accordant to
wish,
In the third region, the third heaven of heavens,
where the worlds are
resplendent.
For Indra, flow you on, Indu!
(Rig Veda 9,113,8-9)
Yama,
the god of death is sovereign over the souls of the dead and also the
one who
receives the offerings of the family for the benefit of the departed.
Divine
justice was assured by the gods Yama, Soma and Indra, not by an
impersonal law
such as karma. One of their functions was to cast the wicked into an
eternal
dark prison from which they can never escape (Rig Veda
7,104,3; 17). It
is important to keep in mind that the Vedas do not consider man as a
part of an
impersonal Absolute, with whom he should fuse after death.
According
to Vedic anthropology, the components of human nature are the physical
body, asu
and manas. Asu is the vital
principle (different from personal
attributes), and manas is the sum of psycho-mental
faculties (mind,
feeling and will). The belief in the preservation of the three
components after
death is proved by the fact that the family addressed the departed
relative in
the burial ritual as a unitary person:
May nothing of thy
manas, nothing of the asu, nothing of the limbs, nothing of thy vital
fluid,
nothing of thy body here by any means be lost (Atharva Veda 18,2,24).
The
departed relatives constituted a holy hierarchy. The last one deceased
was
commemorated individually for a year after his departure and then
included in
the mortuary offerings of the monthly shraddha
ritual (Rig Veda
10,15,1-11). This ritual was necessary because the dead could influence
toward
good or bad the life of the living (Rig Veda
10,15,6). Beginning only
with the Brahmana writings (after the 9th century BC), which are the
first to
mention a primitive idea of karma and reincarnation, did the tendency
appear to
abandon the idea of preservation of personhood after death. However,
this was
not the spirit of early Hinduism.
At a
macrocosmic level, the Upanishads state that there is an ultimate unity
of the
world in Brahman, the impersonal pattern equivalent to the One of the Rig
Veda (10,129). In their search for a fundamental entity of
human nature,
something that should be the unifying principle of all psycho-mental
faculties,
but above their temporal fluctuations, the Hindu rishis defined the
concept of atman.
In the Chandogya Upanishad (5,1,1) it is stated
that breath (prana)
is the “oldest and the best” principle that assures
the functioning of all
other psycho-mental capacities. That is why from the notion of breath
derived
the notion atman, which came to designate the self,
man’s spiritual
being. Therefore atman is not the seat of
personhood, or man’s soul, as
it is sometimes mistakenly translated.
It is a spiritual entity distinct to personhood and to the
physical
body.
Unlike
all other manifestations of Brahman, atman is of
the same ontological
quality with Brahman; it does not fluctuate, it is expressionless,
irreducible,
eternal and pure:
The self is not
this, not this. He is incomprehensible for he is never comprehended. He
is
indestructible for he cannot be destroyed. He is unattached for he does
not
attach himself. He is unfettered, he does not suffer, he is not injured
(Brihadaranyaka Up. 4,2,4).
Given
his condition as a product of Brahman’s manifestation, man's
purpose in life is
to join the returning process of all manifestations to the initial
state of
non-manifestation. This is possible only through disassociating the
self (atman)
from the corporeal and psycho-mental experience and realizing the
identity
between his self and Brahman. However, there is an important aspect to
emphasize: Man’s return to Brahman is a concept that could
raise confusion. In
fact, Brahman is already present in man, both at a transcendent and an
immanent
level, that is, both as the absolute atman and the
relative
manifestations. Discerning between the two conditions is possible by
gaining a
deep mystical knowledge of atman: “The
self is to be meditated upon, for
in it all these become one. This self is the foot-trace of all this,
for by it
one knows all this, just as one can find again by footprints”
(Brihadaranyaka
Up. 1,4,7). “Meditating on the self”
means getting the knowledge of essential
identity with Brahman, and this knowledge is equivalent with attaining
effectively the atman-Brahman identity, as the Brihadaranyaka
Upanishad states:
This is the great
unborn self who is undecaying, undying, immortal, fearless, Brahman.
Verily,
Brahman is fearless. He who knows this becomes the fearless Brahman
(4,4,25).
However,
there is the obstacle of illusion (maya) against
getting this intuitive
knowledge. Maya deceives man about the true nature of existence,
channeling his
wishes toward the phenomenal world that is ever changing. At the same
time, maya
strengthens the confusion of atman with the
psycho-mental activity and
the physical body. As a result of illusion, man grants true spiritual
value to
what is unstable and changing instead of knowing his eternal immutable
self.
This ignorance (avidya) is the cause of atman’s
captivity in the
world of material experience:
Just as those who
do not know the field walk again and again over the hidden treasure of
gold and
do not find it, even so all creatures here go day after day into the
Brahma-world and yet do not find it, for they are carried away by
untruth
(Chandogya Up. 8,3,2).
As a
result of ignorance, in the spiritual world a process develops similar
to the
law of action and reaction that works in the physical world. This is
karma, the
law of action and retribution according to one’s deeds. Its
origin is found in
the exegesis of the benefits of sacrifice. It was thought that the same
way
sacrifices bring good results to the one who performs them, all his
other acts
need a reward too. This prevents a person from entering the celestial
world
after death or limits the person’s stay there, forcing one to
come back in this
life and reap the fruits of his deeds. As a result of karma, any action
performed by man has an effect on its performer. The practical way one
reaps
the fruits of his deeds is reincarnation (samsara).
It teaches that we
live further lives as humans or, according to how badly we acted and
how gross
our ignorance was in detaching from the material world, as animals or
plants.
The
first clear mention of samsara is in the Brihadaranyaka
Upanishad
(3,2,13), where it is mentioned that “one becomes good by
good action, bad by
bad action”. It is also stated that the reincarnation cycle
is started by
desire: “As is man’s desire so is his will; as is
his will, so is the deed he
does, whatever he does, that he attains” (4,4,5). The
“desire” is that of
experiencing the physical world, and consequently illusion, and
“that he
attains” is the fruit reaped in a further life, as a result
of karma’s
retribution. Karma is the direct link between desire and reincarnation,
which
builds a total inter-conditioning mechanism between the previous, the
present
and the next lives. As a result of karma’s retribution, any
thought, word or
deed of this life will find its reward in the next life, at the same
level. In
the Katha Upanishad (2,2,7) it is stated:
“Some souls enter into a womb
for embodiment; others enter stationary objects according to their
deeds and
according to their thoughts.”
An
important aspect to emphasize here is the fact that reincarnation
should not be
understood only as solution for punishing bad deeds. Reincarnation
functions
independently of how good or bad actions are. It follows only the
necessity
imposed by karma, an impersonal and amoral law. Between atman
and moral
values there is no possible connection: “He (atman)
does not become greater
by good works or smaller by evil works (. . .) What he has done or what
he has
not done does not burn him” (Brihadaranyaka Up.
4,4,22). Good deeds only
provide a short reward in heaven, but then the soul has to return to
earth and
continue its struggle. In the Mundaka Upanishad
(1,2,10) is stated:
These deluded men,
regarding sacrifices and works of merits as most important, do not know
any
other good. Having enjoyed in the high place of heaven won by good
deeds, they
enter again this world or a still lower one.
The
Upanishads mark a transition from the point where man's condition is
determined
by divine personal agents (such as the Vedic gods), to the situation of
being
totally controlled by the impersonal law of karma. In this situation
man is alone
facing his destiny, having the duty to escape by his own efforts from
the
vicious cycle avidya-karma-samsara,
an objective that is
foundational to all Hindu religious systems.
These
two darshanas are dualistic, accepting the real
status of primordial
substance (prakriti) beside purusha
(the equivalent of atman).
None is the manifestation of the other. Purusha and
prakriti have
different natures and do not aim to reconstruct a unique essence, as
was the
case in pantheism.
Purusha, the self, is the spiritual
entity that defines
human existence from a transcendental point of view. It is the eternal
substrata of the individual being, devoid of any attributes and
relations,
without beginning or end, indifferent, autonomous, immutable and
perfect, above
senses, intellect, time and space. All these categories belong to prakriti.
Purusha can have relations only with itself. It can
know only itself and
contemplate itself. On the other hand, prakriti,
the primordial
substance, is capable of manifestation and produces all the physical
and mental
aspects of the world.
Not
only is the physical world a product of prakriti’s
manifestation,
through the loss of balance of the three gunas, but
also the world of
psycho-mental phenomena. Sattva produces virtue,
wisdom and goodness; rajas
produces passion, contradiction, agitation and wickedness; and tamas
is
responsible for generating ignorance, confusion, indifference and
depression.
The psychological human states are combinations of effects produced by
the
three gunas. For instance, when the sattva
dominates, the soul is
calm and tranquil; when rajas dominates there is
passion and
nervousness; and with tamas in control man is
inert, lazy, and ignorant.
Although
there is not much known about how the initial balance between the three
gunas
was affected and how purusha got involved with the
manifestations of prakriti,
this situation is the source of all problems, the cause of purusha’s
captivity in the illusion of psycho-mental activity. The confusion of
the two
opposite realities, the eternal purusha and the sum
of psycho-mental
activities, is maya, illusion. Persistence in this
state is a result of
ignorance (Yoga Sutra 2,24) and starts the process
of karma and
reincarnation. Purusha will reincarnate as many
times as needed,
according to the deeds performed by the individual in ignorance toward
his true
identity. All actions demand a fulfillment, or consummation, in the
present or
further lives. Samsara works the same way as in pantheism, until true
knowledge
about the nature of purusha is attained.
As both
Hindu Tantrism and Hatha Yoga describe in a similar way man’s
condition in the
world, they will be viewed together.
The
world and mankind appeared through the dissociation of the primordial
unity of
Shiva and Shakti. In the Shiva Samhita (1,92), a
text that is common to
both religious schools, is stated:
Out of the
combination of spirit, which is Shiva, with matter, which is Shakti,
and
through the interaction of one with the other, all creatures were born.
The
self (atman) is considered to be Shakti, who lives
in the human body as
a spiritual energy called kundalini. Following the pattern of
pantheism, the
goal to be pursued is the return of self (Shakti, corresponding to atman)
in the Ultimate Reality represented by Shiva (the equivalent of
Brahman).
Illusion (maya), ignorance (avidya),
karma and reincarnation are
described in a similar way. Personhood and empirical knowledge are two
main
categories that produce false attachments and have to be surpassed.
The Condition in Theistic
Hinduism
The
main Hindu theistic schools are those which worship Vishnu (including
his
avatars such as Rama and Krishna), Shiva and Shakti (also in her forms
as Durga
or Kali). Out of the many forms of theistic Hinduism that exist in the
present,
we will view briefly only some aspects of Vaishnavism as it was stated
by the
great theistic Hindu thinkers Ramanuja and Madhva. The works of
Ramanuja and
Madhva represent an extraordinary contribution to Hindu spirituality,
by the
special way they understood the relation between man and divinity and
the
significance of salvation. According to them, man has a totally
different
nature from Vishnu, the personal god who is accepted as Ultimate
Reality, and
there is no impersonal atman-Brahman fusion that
has to be attained.
According
to Ramanuja, God’s relation to the world is similar to that
existing between
soul and body. As the body cannot exist separately from the soul, the
existence
of the universe and of individual beings depends totally on God. He
conducts
the souls; they cannot exist without him, but have also energies and
activities
of their own. The individuality of each soul (jiva)
is not an illusion
that has to be discarded through knowledge, but a metaphysical fact.
Although
they depend entirely on God, individual souls are real, unique,
eternal, and
possess intelligence and conscience. The main causes of their present
state are
ignorance (defined as the illusory idea of independence from God) and
the
desire for seeking material goods. The souls enter into connection with
material bodies according to the karma they acquired in previous forms
of
existence. Karma is an instrument used by God to punish evil but also
to remind
humans of their true status and what they should actually seek in life.
But the
question of how souls first came under the power of karma is
unanswered,
because the cosmic process has no beginning.
For
Madhva too, matter and mankind depend totally on God. The ontological
differences between God, humans and matter are fundamental and eternal.
However,
the fact that God, souls and karma are eternal, beginningless, poses
difficulties in understanding the relationship between them. On the one
hand,
if God didn't create souls, he cannot have any role in sustaining them,
and
they have no reason to be responsible to him. If one's soul is
beginningless,
it means it isn't created by God, which further means it isn't
responsible to
him. A soul can only be responsible to the one God who created it, I
should
think.
On the
other hand, how can God and karma be reconciled? It is stated that
there are
three phases in the existence of a soul: 1) the dormant state; 2) the
transmigration process; 3) the liberated state. God is the one who
introduces
the soul into the stream of transmigration so that it might discover
its
spiritual nature. It is stated that in the incarnated state, the
physical and
subtle bodies produce the illusion of independence toward God and also
attachment to the physical world, perpetuating in this way the chain of
samsara.
As a result of their accumulated karma, God chooses to have each soul
undergo
the fruits of his past labors. But on what authority? Why should God be
the
controlling force, giving each soul what it deserves? Karma is a law
that can
work by itself, as it does in Samkhya, so it doesn't require a god. The
soul (purusha)
in Samkhya is eternal and doesn't depend upon any god for its
existence,
transmigration and liberation. Karma operates without the need or
intervention
of any god. Why should the situation be different in Dvaita, as long as
the
souls are not created? Simply adding the fact that karma is under the
sovereignty of God is an artificial and useless theory, I would think.
When the Aryans moved into northwest India, they
imposed a caste system to
organize the new society created by their arrival. They initially put
together
a hierarchy of four varnas
(castes), which
later was expanded to include a fifth category. The caste system
initially
served to maintain rigid social boundaries between the invaders and the
previous inhabitants. Over the generations, the origins were forgotten
and the
system became the stratification of a single society.
The four original
varnas were actually put together as three plus
one. The top three varnas were the invaders, while the one on the
bottom
consisted of the Dravidian inhabitants. The four varnas are
called:
|
Varna |
Occupation |
Key status |
|
Brahmin |
Priests and religious officials |
Twice-born, Aryan Varnas |
|
Kshatriya |
Rulers and warriors |
|
|
Vaishya |
Farmers, merchants, traders, and
craftsmen |
|
|
|
|
Not Twice-born, Non-Aryan |
|
Shudra |
Servants of upper castes and peasants |
People are born
into the caste of their parents. There is no
mobility across caste lines during one's lifetime. Each varna is
divided into a
number of sub-castes, each of which is called a jati. Just as the varnas provide a social
hierarchy in society at large, the different jatis provide a social
hierarchy
within a varna.
This system of
varnas and jatis serves two important functions.
First, it assigns occupations. The varna and jati to which one belongs
is
usually identified with an occupation. Within the Vaishyas, for
instance, there
are jatis of bakers, sheep herders, metal workers, and so on.
Second, the system
separates the members of the different the
varnas and jatis by a complex system of purity and impurity. The higher
a varna
or jati in the system, the higher a level of purity they must maintain.
The
lower, the more likely they are to transmit impurity. These purity
restrictions
appear most frequently in four areas: marriage, drink, food, and touch.
Marriage is possible only between members of jatis closely related in
the
hierarchy. A mere touch--if a shudra should accidentally brush against
a Brahmin--can
require the Brahmin to undergo extensive rites of purification.
The top three
varnas have a status that excludes the fourth; this
is the status of being "Twice-born." This means that the religion
described in the Vedas
applies to them only. The designation
"twice-born" refers to the rite of initiation that the members of
this caste go through upon reaching maturity. This rite brings them
into the religion;
they are reborn as a Hindu and not just as a caste member. The shudras,
therefore, are excluded from worship in the Vedic religion, and are not
even
permitted to hear the Vedas read out-loud. They have their own priests
and
religious rites.
When the Aryans
moved across India from their foothold in the
northwest, they conquered yet more people. To place the newly conquered
groups
into their society, the Aryans created a new caste. However poorly off
the
shudras were at the bottom of the caste system, the members of the new
category
were even worse off, for the new caste was placed below the shudras. In
fact,
the Untouchables, as the new caste was called, were put outside the
caste
system altogether; they were outcastes. The purity regulations were
such that
not even the shudras would relate to them, and they were assigned the
worst
occupations, such as latrine cleaners, leather tanners, and so on. Thus
the
final picture of the caste system looks like this:
|
Category |
Occupation |
Key status |
|
Brahmin |
Priests and religious officials |
Twice-born, |
|
Kshatriya |
Rulers and warriors |
|
|
Vaishya |
Farmers, merchants, traders, and
craftsmen |
|
|
|
|
Not Twice-born, |
|
Shudra |
Servants of upper castes and peasants |
|
|
|
|
Outside the |
|
Untouchables |
The dirtiest jobs: latrine cleaners,
etc. |
The caste system
has been remarkably stable in India for over two
millennia; it is only since the modern, independent state of India was
formed
that the system has come under any scrutiny at all. (It is presently
outlawed,
but many of the practices and attitudes remain ingrained in Hindu
society.) The
reason for this stability is twofold. First, Hindu rules for social
behavior
expect one to fulfill the requirements of their caste. Second, in the
system of
samsara and reincarnation that governs the cosmos; rebellion
against caste
expectations will result in a lower rebirth in the next life.
Time and Worship
In
Hinduism, time follows the life of Brahma. The age of the world is
reckoned in
terms of one day in the life of Brahma, which is equivalent to
4,320,000,000
years. This period of time is divided four yugas, which are reckoned in
multiples of 432,000,000 years. Together these four yugas are called
the Great
Cycle. The world is now in the fourth and most degenerate stage, the
Kali Yuga,
which started in 3102 bce.
The
annual calendar is lunar. It is regularly adjusted to retain a rough
equivalence with the solar year by adding an extra month. The numbering
of the
years goes according to two different systems called Vikram Samvant and
Saka.
The Vikram Samvant is more widely used.
It
is important to note that popular Hinduism holds that certain times are
better
for important events (marriage, business ventures, religious rites,
etc.) than
others. These times are different for different people and are
calculated
through a complex system based on the Vedas, the movements of the stars
and
planets, and the moon. In fact, each change in the moon's phase brings
in a new
moment. This is often carefully worked out.
Daily
worship in Hinduism usually takes place in three different places: in
the home,
in a temple, and/or at a street-side or road-side shrine.
The
home of a religiously observant Hindu is the location of two types of
worship.
First, there is the practice of rites that are probably older than the
Vedas
themselves. At dawn, the householder and his wife rise, purify
themselves with
a bath--usually in a temple pool or a river if one is available--and
then make
an offering to the fire-god Agni in their household fire. The man may
then turn
towards the rising sun and say a mantra to the sun-god Savatar, asking
for
blessing and understanding. A similar sequence of activities will take
place in
the evening.
Second,
most Hindu households have a small shrine to the gods important to that
house.
It may have a small statue of Krishna or a picture of Shiva or Durga.
If the
householder has a guru, a photo of the guru will appear, to remind the
worshipper
of the guru's teachings. This shrine will be the focus of household
puja, i.e.,
worship. Offerings of food or drink may be laid before the statues,
mantras and
prayers may be said, and so on.
A
nearby temple to a god or goddess is usually the focus of regular puja
(i.e.,
worship). While a local temple may do for everyday worship, a grander
cathedral-like, temple may be visited on special occasions.
Offerings
of meals, money, flower, whatever, may be brought by the devotee. Once
the god
has taken his part of the sacrifice, the devotee may share in some of
the
now-blessed food (called prasad). The worshipper may also say mantras,
or
listen to the priests chant, sing, or read from the sacred texts.
Within
the temple, the god (such as Vishnu as Rama, or Ganesha) or goddess
(perhaps
Kali) will be treated as royalty--living royalty to be exact. The
statue will
be bathed and dressed, sometimes with sumptuous clothes for "holding
court" other times with pajamas for sleeping. Meals and other gifts
will
be regularly given. During the god's or goddess' festival, the statue
will be
paraded through the streets. While some of this may seem ridiculous to
Western
sensibilities, these actions help the worshippers view the divine being
as
immediately present. A mere statue does not need any special care, a
statue
revealing the divine presence does.
Small
shrines to Hindu gods and goddesses, both major and minor, stand on
road sides
in the country and on the streets in cities. They may be permanently
fixed and
unattended, or on a cart and moved around by an attendant. During the
day, as
people pass by, they may stop, offer a short prayer or mantra, and
perhaps
leave a small offering in gratitude for some blessing.
Hindu
festivals are based on the lunar calendar. In modern India, there are
sixteen
officially recognized holidays (when businesses close), although there
are many
more holidays. Most festivals are annual, but some happen on a longer
cycle.
The festival of Kumbha Mela, when millions of
Hindus gather at the
confluence of the Ganges and Jumna rivers takes place once every twelve
years.
Of
the annual festivals, the two-day rites of Holi
mark the end of winter
and the beginning of spring. This celebration is linked to Krishna
whose
exploits with the gopis are re-enacted. It is a time of gaiety, joy,
and hope
for nature's rebirth.
In
late summer, Krishna's birthday is celebrated at the Janmashtami.
Shortly
afterwards, Ganesha is honored with the festival of Ganesh
Charurti.
Sometimes
festivals that happen on the same day will be given different
interpretations
depending on whether the worshippers follow Shiva, Vishnu or the Sakti.
In late
September or early October, Shaivites and Saktites will celebrate the Durga
Puja, while Vaishnavites will take part in the Dussehra,
which
celebrates Vishnu and his exploits as Rama in the Ramayana (and don't
forget
Hanuman!). Similarly, the Divali, which is the
festival of lights, is
celebrated either as the return of Rama from exile or as the puja of
Lakshmi,
the goddess of wealth and fortune.
Hinduism
recognizes four main stages of life. Like the goals of life, these can
be
divided into three plus one, with the three deriving from the "life is
good" strand of Hinduism, and the one deriving from the "life is
bad" strand. The first three are the student, the householder, and the
retired person, while the fourth is the ascetic (also known as a
sannyasin or a
sadhu).
The
three stages of life that come from the life-affirming, Vedic side of
Hinduism
were initially designed with the caste system in mind. In particular,
they were
set up to apply to members of the three Twice-Born varnas: the Brahmin,
the
Kshatriya and the Vaishya. Other castes and jatis have adopted them in
different ways, transforming them to meet their needs.
The
first stage is that of the student, during which a boy traditionally is
expected to go to live and study with a teacher (a guru) for several
years.
Today only a few Brahmin families follow this tradition to its full
extent. A
boy enters into student-hood at adolescence (ages 8-12), and spends
most of his
maturing years studying. For Brahmins, this would mean studying and
memorizing
large portions of the Vedas and accompanying texts, along with training
in the
various rituals. Members of all castes learn how set up and maintain
their own
household worship, centered on the holy fire of Agni.
For
the Twice-Born castes, the ritual (samskara) of becoming a student
contains
great significance, for it is the means by which a person becomes
reborn. This
ceremony--often called the thread ceremony because of the red thread
which the
initiate wears over his left shoulder--symbolizes the entrance of the
boy into
Hinduism. Originally, it was at this point that the initiate was first
permitted to hear the words of the sacred Vedas and learned his first
mantra.
Once initiated, the boy became, like other Twice-Born males,
responsible for
maintaining the balance of the cosmos.
After
student-hood, the next stage of life is that of householder, usually
entered
into through an elaborate, many-day marriage ceremony. It is during
this stage
that a man has children (with his wife), forms a family, establishes
himself in
a career or job, and strives to be an active member of his community.
He will establish
his own household, with its own worship. With his wife, the householder
is now
responsible for ensuring that the rituals of domestic life are carried
out at
their proper times and in the proper manner. This stage is important
because it
carries the responsibilities of looking after and supporting peoples at
all
other stages, both male and female.
The
third stage of life is that of retirement. When a man reaches old age
and his
son has a family and is ready to take over the leadership of the
household, he
and his wife will retire. On the one hand, their household
responsibilities--both religious and secular--diminish significantly.
On the
other hand, they become free to contemplate the meaning of their coming
death
and rebirth. They may choose to withdraw into a secluded area--perhaps
become a
"hermit"-- or they may involve themselves in more active worship
(bakti) of Hinduism's pantheon of gods and goddesses.
Each
of these three stages is preceded by a samskara, a ritual that brings a
person
from the previous stage of life into the new one. While these are the
most
important stages of life, brought on by the most elaborate samskaras,
there are
many other samskaras performed during one's life. Traditionally, a
person may
undergo anywhere from 10 to 18, even up to 40, samskaras during his
lifetime.
The majority of these will be performed before a baby is even six
months old,
with many of them done before birth. These are believed to help a
person leave
their previous life behind and to enter successfully into their new
one. Each
samskara advances a person further along the path of life, initiating
them into
a new aspect or stage.
It
is apparent that the three main stages of life are designed for males
and do
not include women. Traditional Hinduism, like many religions, places
women in a
dependent role. In the traditional view, women always need the
protection of a
responsible male, whether father, husband or adult son. This does not
mean that
women have no religious life. On the contrary, women are actively
involved in
worship, both in support of their family and on their own. On the one
hand, a
married woman is responsible for carrying out many of the domestic
rites along
with her husband. Many rituals cannot be performed with her involvement
or in
some instances leadership. On the other hand, women are often active
practioners of forms of bakhti yoga, that is, the worship of the gods
and
goddesses. In the modern period, this subordination has begun to change
and
women have gained more active roles in public life. Indira Ghandi, for
instance, was a Prime Minister of India for many years (women have yet
to gain
a corresponding position in the United States).
The
fourth stage of life breaks the progression of the other three; it is
that of
the ascetic, who in Hinduism are called the sadhu or the sannyasin.
This is a
rejection of life and all that it means in exchange for a search to
attain
moksha, that is, release from the cycle of samsara. A person may enter
into
this stage of life at any time.
The
rejection of life, especially as defined by the life-affirming strand
of
Hinduism, is complete. It requires rejection of the household duties
and
responsibilities of all stages of life. It also requires the rejection
of the
religious beliefs. Indeed, the ceremony making one a sannyasin includes
the
burning of copies of the Vedas, a symbolic rejection even of one's role
in
maintaining the cosmos, and of one's red thread, the symbol of their
status as
Twice-Born. It is such a powerful rejection that a person even loses
their
caste affiliation; even a shudra can become a sannyasin and lose their
low-caste identity.
The
sannyasins become wandering hermits, living life without any shelter or
possessions. They eat when they can acquire food, but never enter into
any work
to acquire it; it must be given or found. They become holy men, seeking
spiritual enlightenment and power, striving to achieve the true wisdom
of the
cosmos. Some may become kind and give blessings to those around them,
while others
may become wrathful and powerful and wield magic against those who
cross them.
Classic Hinduism
promotes four different goals. Like other aspects
of Hinduism, the goals are split between those emphasized by the "life
is
good" perspective and those emphasized by the "life is bad"
perspective. The three life-affirming goals are Dharma (virtue), Artha (success) and Kama
(pleasure), while the life-negating goal is that of moksha (release).
The three "life is
good" goals can be pursued all at
once or at different times in one's life. Some goals seem more suited
to
different stages
of life than others.
Dharma (Dharma
Shastra) is the practice of virtue, the living of
an ethical and ritually correct life. The definition of what is
virtuous,
however, varies, depending on a person's caste and jati membership. The
primary
virtue is to fulfill the duties assigned to one's caste. Thus a Brahmin should offer
sacrifices and do them to the best of his ability, while a Vaishya silversmith should create his plates
and bowls as strong
and beautiful as possible. If either person tried to do the other's
job, that
would be seen as violating their caste duty. The dharma a person is
expected to
fulfill also varies depending on their stage of life. A student, for instance,
becomes virtuous through a different set of actions than a householder.
Dharma
is elaborate. Its principal aim is to preserve the world order (Rta),
by
maintaining its overall structure, basic values and innate harmony.
According
to Hinduism, one of the main functions of the Divinities is to protect
the
creation by maintaining the Dharma in all the worlds. The rules of
Dharma are
not universal. They are bound to time and space and are subject to
perennial
change. They are also not applicable to all human beings or the entire
creation. At the highest level of human or divine existence, when man
transcends his animal nature and the qualities of the three gunas,
there are
actually no laws to govern him, because in the transcendental planes
there are
no bounds, only awareness, understanding and an overwhelming sense of
love and
understanding. In truth, he governs himself, much like God, out of a
sense of
self responsibility and lack of desires.
The
Dharama Shastras were meant for people who were driven by the illusory
world,
who would engage in desire oriented actions and needed to be regulated
for the
purpose of maintaining or preserving the moral, social and political
order.
They were composed to emphasize the importance of leading a virtuous
and divine
oriented life on earth and remain on the side of God for a better
tomorrow and
harmonious today. Unlike the Vedas which are believed to be divine in
origin,
the Dharma Shastras represented the collective wisdom of intellectuals,
scholars, politicians and law makers who created them. Some of them had
their
own reasons to support a belief system that ensured the continuation of
their
family names and privileges and at the same time kept the lower castes
and the
women at the bottom of the oppressive, feudal and religious ladder.
In
the name of God and religion, in a society that believed in the laws of
karma
and the possibility of a better life through reincarnation, the Dharma
Shastras
attempted to achieve this complicated task on an ongoing basis. They
laid down
elaborate rules to deny a vast majority of the people the right to live
a
decent life and made provisions at the same time for the continuation
of a
system which, from present day values, was extremely racial and
arrogantly
inhumane. Interestingly, although a vast majority of the people was not
aware
of these law books, because they were not allowed to read and study,
they
somehow remained subservient to these laws and accepted them as their
lot. In this
regard they were like the medieval farmers of Russia or Europe, who
willingly
subjected themselves to the feudal structure and the laws of the Church
that
perpetrated it.
Some
of the laws prescribed in the Dharama Sutras are bound to offend the
sensibilities and sentiments of Americans and many Christians, who have
been
brought upon the values of equality, individual liberty and social
justice.
Many verses in these scriptures stand in contrast to these fundamental
values
that define many democratic societies today and characterize the free
world.
Readers should consider these scriptures from an academic or historical
point
of view to understand the times they represent. To consider them as the
authoritative text books of present day moral or social values of
Hinduism would
wrong. They belong to a particular time frame and represent certain
social and
moral values most of which are irrelevant today.
Artha is the
working for and achieving of success, in terms of
both wealth and power. This means it is religiously good to be a
successful
businessman. It also means that it is religiously good to serve on the
city
council, to be active in civic organizations, or even to become a
politician.
This kind of success is most easily achieved at the householder stage
of life.
Kama is pleasure,
usually understood as aesthetic pleasure. This
includes: the producing and enjoyment of art, music, dance, drama,
literature,
poetry, and sex. (The "Kama Sutra," which may be one of the best
known Hindu texts in the West, is about the aesthetic pleasure of men
and
women; it discusses beauty, music, dance and sexual activity.) It is
religiously
praiseworthy to take part, to support, or to appreciate any form of
pleasure.
This should be done, of course, within the realm of dharma (i.e., in a
virtuous
manner).
The
"life is bad" goal is moksha. It is the striving for release from
life (since, after all, it is bad). To achieve this, a person must turn
their
back on life and strive to live without the things that make up life.
At first,
it requires the turning away from the first three goals, of rejecting
family,
comforts, pleasure, education, and so on. It also requires one to
become an
ascetic, a hermit, and to spend one's time in contemplation. This
contemplation
should be directed towards overcoming the maya that clouds human
perception of
reality and towards realizing the true nature of the cosmos and one's
place in
it (that Atman and Brahman are one).
In
Hinduism, there are four main ways to reach towards the divine reality,
whether
the ultimate goal is a better life, union with the divine, or a release
from
life. The ways are called yoga, a word similar to the English term
"yoke." Each yoga puts on its followers a set of actions that help
lead the practitioner towards their goal. The yogas are: Jnana yoga,
Bhakti
yoga, Karma yoga, and Raja yoga. The first three are discussed in the
Bhagavad
Gita, while the fourth derives initially from the Yoga Sutra. These are
all
spiritual approaches to understanding the divine world; what we in the
west
generally term yoga--forms of physical exercise and control of the
body--is
properly known as Hatha yoga. It has no spiritual impact.
Janana
means knowledge and this yoga is the path to understanding ultimate
reality
through knowledge. Of course, the reality the yogi (a practitioner of
yoga) is
trying to comprehend is the identity of Atman (one's own soul) with
Brahman
(the creator and essence of the cosmos). And comprehension of this
identity
must happen not just at the intellectual level, but with every fiber of
a
person's being.
There
are three main steps in Jnana yoga. The first is learning. The initiate
is
taught about the identity of atman and Brahman through instruction,
study of
holy writings, and so on. Once the intellectual understanding of the
concept
has been achieved, the yogi moves to the next level.
The
second step is that of thinking. The yogi is taught to embody the
teaching he
has received. The teacher often encourages this process, for example,
by
pushing the student to think about the "I," "me," and
"my" that always crop up in a person's speech. The goal of this stage
is to bring the yogi to the ability to separate his/her eternal soul
(the Self)
from the temporary self within which it is encased.
The
third step is to differentiate oneself from oneself. In other words,
once it is
understood that each individual's eternal atman is enclosed in a
temporary body
of maya, the goal is to relocate one's identity in the atman, rather
than in
the body and its temporary accompanying emotions and thoughts. In the
initial
stages of this process, the yogi begins to think of themselves in the
third
person. Rather than thinking, "I am taking a bath," they think,
"John is taking a bath." A person thus becomes an observer of their
temporary body, rather than its motivator. The ultimate aim is complete
detachment of the eternal Self from the temporary one. Once this is
achieved,
then there is nothing that separates the Self (the atman) from Brahman.
This
is the path of devotion to a god, or, more precisely, the path of the
love of a
god. A person thus centers on a god or goddess (such as Vishnu,
Parvati,
Ganesha) and expresses their love for him or her. The goal is not to
just say
"I love Shiva" or "I love Kali" or just to perform acts of
love and worship, but to actually love them, to devote oneself to them
as if
they were a lover, a parent or one's child.
Bhakti
takes many forms. It can be the constant repetition of the
god's/goddess' name
throughout the day to enhance a person's awareness of the divine
being's role
in life. It can be the giving of gifts to the god at his temple, and
the
participation in worship of the god there. It can be pilgrimage to a
site
sacred to the goddess' life. The goal is thus not identity or unity,
but
nearness. Lovers are not one person; they are two people whose lives
are
intertwined. So too it is with the worshipper and their god.
This
yoga aims to reverse the natural order workings of karma. Karma is
generated by
every action a person performs during their lives, and, it is the
working out
of karma that requires rebirth after death. So, Karma Yoga reasons, if
a person
could live without generating karma, then there would be nothing to
cause
rebirth.
This
task is accomplished by detachment, namely, the detachment of one's
Self (one's
atman) from one's actions. This is done by removing all involvement,
including
one's intent, from their activity. This can be accomplished either
through the
knowledge of one's true Self (like Jnana yoga) or by putting all the
actions
onto one's god (following a path similar to Bhakti yoga).
Raja
means "royal," so this is the royal yoga. This is essentially the
path of meditation, that is, of being able to remove one's own
consciousness
from its awareness of this world of maya and to focus only on the
ultimate
reality of the cosmos' unity. This is quite difficult to accomplish,
and there
are eight stages that are designed as the simplest path. The difficulty
is to
overcome one's awareness first of their surroundings, and then of their
own
body and its activities (such as breathing and the pumping of the
heart). Once
this is accomplished then a person must take control of their mind and
to focus
it on one thing only, Brahman. The goal is achieved when through
concentration
and meditation, all separateness of the world of maya disappears and
the unity
of atman and Brahman appears.
Timeline
for Hinduism
Please
note: Read the layers from
bottom to top
Mahatma
Ghandi dies (1948)
India
gains independence from Great Britain (1947) map
Great
Britain takes over India (1858)
Mughal
Dynasty in India (Moslem) (1526-1707) map
Sikhism
founded (~1500)
Delhi
Sultanate rule of India (Moslem) (1210-1526) map
Late
Puranas composed (800-1200)
Early
Puranas composed (300-800 ce)
Laws
of Manu composed (100 ce)
Ramayana
composed (200-100 bce)
Ashoka,
Indian King who favors Buddhism (272-236 bce)
Mahabharata
& Bhagavad Gita composed (400-100 bce) map
Alexander
the Great invades NW India (327 bce)
Buddha's
death (483 bce)
Hindu
interaction with Jainism and Buddhism (500-200 bce)
Beginning
of "Life is Bad" Worldview.
Upanishads
composed (700-300 bce)
Brahmanas
composed (1000-500 bce)
Vedas
composed (1200-900 bce)
Aryan
tribes migrate into Northwest India (1500-1200 bce)
Beginning
of "Life is Good" Worldview and Caste System
Dravidians
Religious
items include temples with large water pools, fertility statues, and
lingam
figures.
The
plural term Vedas has two related meanings in Hinduism. First, it
refers to the
four Veda texts: the Rig Veda, the Yajur Veda, the Sama Veda and the
Atharva
Veda. Second, "Vedas" may also belong to the literature of the Vedic
period which is based upon the four Vedas; the term thus includes the
Brahmanas, which are commentaries on each Veda, and the Upanishads,
which are
philosophical treatises based upon them. Sometimes the term may also
include
the Sutras, books which are rules and regulation codified according to
different schools, even though these texts were written later in the
period of
Classical Hinduism.
The
Vedas proper were composed and then transmitted orally beginning around
1400
bce and probably recorded in writing about 1000. The first three Vedas
are
collections of material for sacrifices. The Rig Veda contains 1028
hymns to the
various gods (Indra, Agni, Soma, Rudra, etc.) which a priest recited
loudly
during a sacrifice to attract the god's attention to it. Many of the
Rig Veda's
verses are mantras, vocalizations that encapsulate and resonate the
nature of
Brahman. The Yajur Veda contains mantras and other instructions for the
priest(s) who actually perform the sacrifice. And the Sama Veda adapts
mantras
and verses from the Rig Veda to music which is then sung during the
sacrifice.
The Atharva Veda differs from the first three in that it does not
relate to
sacrifice and also contains spells and magic rites.
The
contents of the Vedas should make it clear that these are texts for the
Brahmins. It is this varna who monopolized the Vedas and used them as
the basis
for education, requiring students to memorize large amounts of them.
Until recently,
it was forbidden for anyone not of the Twice-born castes even to hear
the Vedas
recited.
The
Vedas (including the Brahmanas and Upanishads) constitute the sacred
texts of
Hinduism. Hinduism considers these texts to be sruti,
a word which means
"heard." The Vedas were written down by rishis
(holy men who
are the mythical founders of Hinduism) who "heard" them during deep
meditation. Thus, the texts come neither from gods nor men, but from
the nature
of the cosmos itself.
The
Brahmanas were composed between 1000 and 700 bce as commentaries on the
four
Vedas. As such, each Brahmana is attached to a specific Veda. As
commentaries,
they explicate matters needing explanation. For example, they discuss
the
meaning of mantras, specify how to perform certain sacrificial actions
only
briefly mentioned, and describe the impact the sacrifices have on the
eternal
world. In short, they function as a manual teaching the proper use of
the
material in the Veda to which it belongs.
The
Upanishads are as different and diverse as the Vedas to which they
belong.
Composed between roughly 700 and 300 bce, they delve into discussions
of the
deep inner meaning of their respective Vedas. Thus, discussion can
range from
the meaning of the sacrificial altar as the center of the world to the
priestly
singer's role and the meter he sings in. If there is anything that
unifies the
Upanishads, it is their continual discussion of atman, Brahman and
their
relationship--a theme which becomes important in Classical Hinduism.
This
literature is revered but is not considered holy in the same way as the
Vedas.
They are termed smriti, i.e., "remembered." This
means that
they are traditional and originally passed on orally. They have a human
rather
than a divine origin.
Sutra
has two meanings: a short pithy saying (like a proverb), and a
collection of
such sayings. The Sutras, as the latter, are a collection of the
former. In
this way they organize many of the ideas of the Vedas into a series of
rules
and regulations than can be practiced. The Sutras came at the end of
the Vedic
literature and each one is usually derived from a Veda and its
commentary
literature. One of the most famous sutras in the West is that rulebook
of
sexual pleasure, the Kama Sutra.
The
Mahabharata centers on the five Pandava brothers, who are sons of a
king whose
kingdom lies on the southern slopes of the Himalayas. In a fit of
passion, the
eldest brother gambles away the kingdom and his brothers in a dice
game. The
rest of the story is about the struggles and battles of the brothers to
gain
back their kingdom. The greatest warrior of the five brothers is
Arjuna. On the
night before a major battle, he has doubts about the rightness of
killing the
enemy, who are his cousins. At that point, his charioteer, Krishna (who
is an
avatar of Vishnu), engages him in a discussion about performing one's
duty
(dharma), and about the paths to a better life, namely, devotion
(bhakti yoga),
action (karma yoga), and knowledge (jnana yoga), with an emphasis on
Karma
Yoga. This discussion is known as the Bhagavad Gita and it forms the
basis of
much popular Hinduism, including strengthening worship (bhakti) and
devotion.
Sample of the
Bhagavad Gita (Chapter 13)--
The Supreme Lord
said: O Arjuna, this body (the miniature universe) may be called the
field or
creation. One who knows the creation is called the creator by the seers
of
truth. (13.01)
Know Me to be the
creator of all creation, O Arjuna. The true understanding of both the
creator
and the creation is considered by Me to be the transcendental or
metaphysical
knowledge. (13.02)
What the creation
is, what it is like, what its transformations are, where the source is,
who
that creator is, and what His powers are, hear all these from Me in
brief.
(13.03)
The sages have
described Him in many ways, in various Vedic hymns, and also in the
conclusive
and convincing verses of the Brahmasutra. (13.04)
The five basic
elements, the "I" consciousness or ego, the intellect, the unmanifest
Prakriti, the ten senses, the mind, and the five sense objects; (See
also 7.04)
(13.05)
Desire, hatred,
pleasure, pain, the physical body, consciousness, and resolve. Thus the
field
(the creation or body) has been briefly described with its
transformations.
(13.06)
Humility, modesty,
nonviolence, forbearance, honesty, service to guru, purity (of thought,
word,
and deed), steadfastness, self-control; and (13.07)
Aversion towards
sense objects, absence of ego, constant reflection on the agony and
suffering
inherent in birth, old age, disease, and death. (13.08)
Detachment, non-fondness
with son, wife, and home; unfailing equanimity upon attainment of the
desirable
and the undesirable; and (13.09)
Unswerving devotion
to Me by the yoga of exclusivity, love for solitude, distaste for
social
gossips; and (13.10)
Steadfastness in
knowledge of the Supreme Spirit, and the perception of (the omnipresent
God as)
the object of true knowledge is called knowledge; what is contrary to
this is
ignorance. (13.11)
I shall fully
describe the object of knowledge, knowing which one attains
immortality. The
beginningless Supreme Brahman is said to be neither Sat nor Asat. (See
also
9.19) (13.12)
Having hands and
feet everywhere; having eyes, head, and face everywhere; having ears
everywhere; the creator exists in the creation by pervading everything.
(13.13)
He is the perceiver
of all sense objects without the senses; unattached, yet the sustainer
of all;
devoid of the Gunas, yet the enjoyer of the Gunas. (13.14)
He is inside as
well as outside all beings, animate and inanimate. He is
incomprehensible
because of His subtlety. He is very near as well as far away. (13.15)
Undivided, yet
appears as if divided in beings; He, the object of knowledge, is the
creator,
sustainer, and destroyer of (all) beings. (13.16)
The light of all
lights, He is said to be beyond darkness. He is the knowledge, the
object of
knowledge, and seated in the hearts of all beings, He is to be realized
by the
knowledge. (13.17)
Thus the creation
as well as the knowledge and the object of knowledge have been briefly
described. Understanding this, My devotee attains Me. (13.18)
Know that Prakriti
and Purusha are both beginningless; and also know that all
manifestations and
Gunas arise from the Prakriti. (13.19)
The Prakriti is
said to be the cause of production of physical body and organs (of
perception
and action). The Purusha (or the consciousness) is said to be the cause
of
experiencing pleasures and pains. (13.20)
The Purusha
associating with Prakriti (or matter), enjoys the Gunas of Prakriti.
Attachment
to the Gunas (due to ignorance caused by previous Karma) is the cause
of the
birth of Jeevaatma in good and evil wombs. (13.21) (Jeevaatma or Jeeva
is
defined as Atma accompanied by the subtle (or astral) body consisting
of the
six sensory faculties and vital forces; the living entity; the
individual soul
enshrined in the physical body.)
The Supreme Spirit
in the body is also called the witness, the guide, the supporter, the
enjoyer,
and the great Lord or Paramaatma. (13.22)
They who truly
understand Purusha and Prakriti with its Gunas are not born again
regardless of
their mode of life. (13.23)
Some perceive God
in the heart by the intellect through meditation; others by the yoga of
knowledge; and others by the yoga of work (or Karma-yoga). (13.24)
Some, however, do
not understand Brahman, but having heard (of it) from others, take to
worship.
They also transcend death by their firm faith to what they have heard.
(13.25)
Whatever is born,
animate or inanimate, know them to be (born) from the union of the
field (or
Prakriti) and the field knower (or Purusha), O Arjuna. (See also 7.06)
(13.26)
The one who sees
the imperishable Supreme Lord dwelling equally within all perishable
beings
truly sees. (13.27)
Seeing the same
Lord existing in every being, one does not injure the other self and
thereupon
attains the Supreme goal. (13.28)
Those who perceive
that all works are done by the (Gunas of) Prakriti alone, and thus they
are not
the doer, they truly understand. (See also 3.27, 5.09, and 14.19)
(13.29)
When one perceives
diverse variety of beings resting in One and spreading out from That
alone,
then one attains Brahman. (13.30)
The imperishable
Supreme Self, being beginningless and without Gunas, though dwelling in
the
body (as Atma) neither does anything nor gets tainted, O Arjuna. (13.31)
As the
all-pervading ether is not tainted because of its subtlety, similarly
the Self,
seated in everybody, is not tainted. (13.32)
O Arjuna, just as
one sun illuminates this entire world, similarly the creator illumines
(or
gives life to) the entire creation. (13.33)
They, who
understand the difference between the creation (or the body) and the
creator
(or the Atma) and know the technique of liberation (of Jeeva) from the
trap of
Maya with the help of knowledge, attain the Supreme. (13.34)
The
Ramayana, composed around 200 bce, is the story of Rama and his wife
Sita. Rama
is heir apparent to his father, the King of Ayodhya. He learns of the
beautiful, royal Sita of a neighboring kingdom and wins her hand in
marriage by
performing the mighty feat of stringing Shiva's bow. Due to palace
intrigue at
home, however, Rama is sent into exile as a sadhu for 14 years. Sita,
ever
faithful, chooses to accompany him. They have many adventures, the
greatest of
which happens when Sita is kidnapped by the demon king Ravana, who
disappears
with her to his kingdom of Lanka (Sri Lanka). Rama enlists the help of
the
monkeys, especially their champion Hanuman. Hanuman finds Sita, and
enlisting
the assistance of a monkey army, helps Rama regain Sita. During her
captivity,
Sita spurned all Ravana's advances, quoting the Vedas and lecturing him
on
dharma. Rama is ultimately returned to his kingship in Ayodhya, but the
people
doubt Sita's faithfullness, since she was a captive for more than a
year. In
the end, she called upon the earth goddess to bear witness and she is
swallowed
up forever.
Each
of the main figures of the story represents an ideal type in Bhakti.
Rama is
the strong, active, hero, while Sita is the faithful, loyal, beautiful
wife.
Once it is realized that Rama is the incarnation of Vishnu and Sita is
the
incarnation of his consort Lakshmi, then Hanuman becomes the
representation of
an ideal follower, one who is totally devoted to the god.
If
the Vedic literature was composed by and for the use of the Brahmin
caste and
thus remained an elite and esoteric literature, then the Puranas and
their
stories were designed for and used by the average Hindu. The eighteen
major
Puranas are collections of stories about the gods and their activities.
The
earliest were composed around 400 ce, but others, especially some minor
ones,
were created a millennium later. Thus the Puranas span the period from
Classical Hinduism into Medieval Hinduism. They tend to emphasize two
points:
bhakti (devotion to a god) and dharma (doing one's personal and social
duty).
The Puranas can be categorized into three groups: those dealing with
the stories
of Brahma, those concerning Vishnu (and his avatars and consort(s)),
and those
about Shiva and the goddesses associated with him.
Hinduism
is not a unitary religion, but a multitude of religious and
philosophical
trends. Three main patterns can be identified among them. First, there
is
henotheism, the religion of the ancient Vedas and later Vaishnavism and
Shaivism, which states that many gods exist, but one of them is more
important
than the others. Second, there is pantheism, the perspective brought by
the
Upanishads and later Vedanta, which considers Ultimate Reality to be an
impersonal transcendent being. Third, there are the Samkhya and the
Yoga darshana
of Patanjali that admit two ultimate realities. I will briefly describe
them
following an approximate chronological order.
The
oldest sacred scriptures of Hinduism are the four Vedas (Rig,
Sama,
Yajur, and Atharva Veda). They
are four collections of hymns (Samhita)
describing deities, their works and the praises that must be addressed
to them
in religious rituals. Each of the four collections of Vedic hymns is
associated
with three other kinds of Vedic literature - the Brahmanas,
the Aranyakas
and the Upanishads. Together they represent the
most sacred religious
literature (Shruti) of Hinduism. (Remember that
throughout the content
of this paper by “Vedas” I mean only the four
collections of hymns, and not the
whole body of Vedic literature.)
The
hymns of the oldest Veda, the Rig Veda, are almost
all praises addressed
to gods. The ancient Aryans worshipped many gods, associated with the
elements
of nature, among which we can discern at least two important
generations. The
oldest supreme god, according to the Vedas, seems to be Varuna, the
sustainer
of creation and guardian of universal order. A hymn in the Atharva
Veda
proclaims:
This earth belongs
to Varuna, the King,
and the heavens, whose ends are far apart.
Both the oceans are the loins of Varuna,
and He is merged within the small water drop.
If one will go away
beyond the heavens,
still he cannot escape King Varuna;
His envoys move about here from the heavens,
and, thousand-eyed, they look upon the earth. (Atharva Veda
4,16,3-4)
A
second generation of Vedic gods has Indra as the most important
representative.
He takes over all the functions of Varuna after saving mankind from
demon
Vritra's influence, the embodiment of the rough aspects of nature.
Vritra had
locked the waters in the sky, which caused a catastrophic drought on
earth. At
humans' demand, Indra consumed a large quantity of ritual drink (soma),
took the lightning (vajra) shaped by god Tvashtri
and, with the help of
other gods, killed the demon and brought back the rain on earth (Rig
Veda
10,113). That is why he is praised in the hymns:
Adorable Indra, our
savior,
Vritra-slayer and furtherer of our highest aims,
May he be our protector from the end,
from the middle, from behind, and from in front.
Lead us to a free
world, wise one,
where lie divine luster, sunlight, and security.
Valiant are the arms of thee, the powerful;
we will take to their vast shelter. (Atharva
Veda 19,15,1-2)
It is
important to notice that although Indra takes over the role of
fertility god
from Varuna, he fulfills it with much more effort than his predecessor
does.
Indra depends on the ritual drink soma, and
consequently on the
sacrifices done by people (which represents a weakness), and has to fight
in order to maintain the universal order. His sovereignty over the
world is not
as striking as it was with Varuna. On the other hand, people appreciate
him
more than Varuna. They didn't understand Varuna's ways, but can
influence Indra
through the sacrifices and therefore get the earthly blessings they
seek. Once
proclaimed sovereign Lord, Indra takes over the title of maker of the
universe,
which he doesn't create, but rearranges
after his conquest.
Two
other gods of this generation, with less important roles in the Vedas,
but
which will play major roles in later theistic Hinduism, are Rudra
(forerunner
of Shiva) and Vishnu. Rudra has a dual aspect; on the one hand he is
monstrous,
murderous and savage; on the other hand he is benevolent, divine healer
and
protector of cowherds. Vishnu, too, has a minor role in the Vedas,
being just
one of Indra's helpers in his combat against Vritra and in building the
universe. At the same time, he is an intermediary between gods and
people, a
role that will certainly develop in his later special position.
Along
with praising the gods, there are passages in the Vedas that suggest
another
kind of Ultimate Reality of the universe, beyond the gods we mentioned.
One of
the most important Hindu cosmogonies is that of the golden egg (Hiranyagarbha),
an entity that was the source of all existing beings and worlds:
At first was neither
Being nor Nonbeing.
There was not air nor yet sky beyond.
What was its wrapping? Where? In whose protection?
Was Water there, unfathomable and deep?
There was no
death then, nor yet deathlessness;
Of night or day there was not any sign.
The One breathed without breath, by its own impulse.
Other than that was nothing else at all.
Darkness was
there, all wrapped around by darkness,
And all was Water indiscriminate. Then
That which was hidden by the void, that One, emerging,
Stirring, through the power of ardor (tapas), came to be. (Rig
Veda 10,129)
There
are two important aspects to be noticed here: 1) water produced the
One; and 2)
the whole process was realized by the power of ardor (tapas).
This idea
is important because it opens the way towards the notion of One (the
primordial
matrix that encapsulates all existence) and also toward asceticism, the
cosmic
creative energy through which the unmanifested becomes manifested.
Another
important factor here is the preexistence of an impersonal reality (the
One)
against personal beings. Gods and men are said to have their origin in
this
primordial impersonal entity.
Considering
an impersonal Ultimate Reality above the gods is a pattern that will
dominate
most Hindu religious explanation. The cosmogony of the golden egg is
continued
in the Brahmana texts in a similar fashion as in the Rig Veda,
adding
the appearance of a Creator (Prajapati) from the golden egg (Shatapatha
Br.
11,1,6). The same way as the golden egg appears as a result of ardor,
this
Prajapati created the world using the power released by his ardor. His
words
are fulfilled as a result of ardor and the material out of which he
builds the
universe is his own body.
A
similar view is presented in the Purushasukta hymn (Rig
Veda 10,90),
that can be found in a similar version in the Atharva Veda
(19,6) and in
the Taittiriya Aranyaka (3,12). According to this
hymn, the product of
the golden egg is the giant PurushaChristian Witness . By his consuming himself in
the fire of
creation all of the worlds came into existence, including our physical
world,
the four-caste system, the animals and the duality of the sexes. There
is no
doubt that Purusha and Prajapati are equivalent, both being produced
out of
that impersonal One of the Rig Veda 10,129. This
passing from a personal
Ultimate Reality (represented by the gods) to an impersonal One is an
important
feature of early Hinduism that will have major implications for later
developments.
Already
in the Brahmana writings (Shatapatha
Brahmana 6,1,1) it is stated
that the whole universe has its origin in non-existence (asat),
meaning
that existence must be the product of manifestation of some
unmanifested
potentialities. This topic is made clear in the Upanishads, which claim
that
the origin of any manifestation is Brahman, the One of the Vedic hymns:
As the spider moves
along the thread, as small sparks come forth from the fire, even so
from this
Self [Brahman] come forth all breaths, all worlds, all divinities, all
beings.
(Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 2,1,20)
According
to the Upanishads, the Ultimate Reality is Brahman. It (neuter gender)
is at
the origin of any physical, moral or spiritual activity (see also Brihadaranyaka
Up. 4, 1-2; Chandogya Up. 3,18,1-6; Taittiriya
Up. 2,6; 3,1).
Paradoxically, Brahman has two aspects: immanent, or manifested, and
transcendent, or unmanifested. For a better understanding of this
concept, we
can compare it to the "Big Bang" theory on the origin of the
universe. The point of infinite mass out of which all celestial bodies
would
have originated, according to the astronomical theory, has its
ideological
correspondence with the unmanifested Brahman of Hindu cosmogony.
However, in
the manifestation of Brahman, the product is not only matter, but also
living
beings, gods, humans and animals. The cause of the manifestation
process is
Brahman's desire to be multiplied: “Let me become many, let
me be born” (Taittiriya
Up. 2,6,1). (However, in a pantheistic context, this is a
strange and
contradictory idea, because the impersonal being cannot have desires.)
After
the manifestation is completed, all its products tend to return to the
initial
state of unmanifestation, evolving from one level of manifestation to
another.
Then another manifestation will happen:
As from a blazing
fire, sparks of like form issue forth by thousands, even so, O beloved,
many
kinds of beings issue forth from the immutable and they return thither
too.
(Mundaka Up. 2,1,1)
Similar
to the day and night cycle, the transformation of Brahman between the
manifested state and the unmanifested one is everlasting (Kaushitaki
Up.
3, 3).
The
philosophical system (darshana) that follows the
pantheistic teachings
of the Upanishads is called Vedanta. The most important organizers are
Badarayana (4th century AD) and Shankara (9th century AD), the one who
conferred to it a pure monistic character as Advaita Vedanta - "the
Vedanta of pure monism".
Shankara's
vision of the relation of the Absolute with the phenomenal world is
reflected
in an old Hindu parable, that of the rope mistakenly perceived in the
dark as a
snake. As the coiled rope in the dark is thought to be a snake, the
same way
the empirical world is mistakenly considered to have a distinct
existence,
independent to the Absolute, through the illusion (maya)
produced by
ignorance (avidya). As only the rope exists, not the
snake, only Brahman
has a real existence (sat) and is the true reality.
The phenomenal world
is real only if perceived as Brahman, as the "reality" of the snake's
existence lays in the substratum that produced the confusion, namely
the rope.
The plurality of the phenomenal world is an illusion (maya),
a veil that
has to be put aside in order to perceive Brahman. The universe is not
unreal,
but has the same value as the snake in the parable - it produces
confusion and
causes man to pursue a wrong spiritual direction. All that goes beyond
this
vision of the world is illusion, produced by ignorance.
Shankara
tried to settle the relation of the Absolute Brahman (Nirguna Brahman -
the One
without any definable characteristics) with the origin of the world by
proclaiming two distinct points of view: the absolute (paramarthika)
and
the relative (vyavaharika). In an absolute sense,
Brahman is above any
duality and external relation; nothing real exists outside him. But
from our
empirical and relative point of view, Brahman is the cause of the
universe we
know. In fact there is no real causality; the world is only an illusory
sight
of Brahman, as with the rope seen as a snake. Brahman's activity in the
world
and among human beings is nothing but lila, divine
play. In conclusion,
the Vedanta of Shankara is somehow different from Upanishadic
philosophy; the
universe is only a phenomenal appearance (vivarta-vada)
of Brahman and
not his transformation (parinama-vada). From a
substantial
manifestation, the universe becomes only a dream (or self-forgetting)
of
Brahman.
According
to the pantheistic view of the Upanishads and Vedanta, the gods are
merely
inferior manifestations of the supreme impersonal Brahman. However,
they
continued to play an important role for the average Hindu. The gods
that are
worshipped today are not the same as in Vedic times. The most important
ones
became Vishnu and his avatars (especially Rama and Krishna), Shiva and
the
goddess Kali.
Here is
what is said in Vaishnavism about the relation between Brahman and
Vishnu:
Just as light is
diffused from a fire which is confined to one spot, so is this whole
universe
the diffused energy of the supreme Brahman. And as light shows a
difference,
greater or less, according to its nearness or distance from the fire,
so is
there a variation in the energy of the impersonal Brahman. Brahma,
Vishnu, and
Shiva are his chief energies. The deities are inferior to them; the
yakshas,
etc. to the deities; men, cattle, wild animals, birds, and reptiles to
the
yakshas, etc.; and trees and plants are the lowest of all these
energies....
Vishnu is the highest
and most immediate of all the energies of Brahman, the embodied
Brahman, formed
of the whole Brahman. On him this entire universe is woven and
interwoven: from
him is the world, and the world is in him; and he is the whole
universe.
Vishnu, the Lord, consisting of what is perishable as well as what is
imperishable, sustains everything, both Spirit and Matter, in the form
of his
ornaments and weapons. (Vishnu Purana 1)
Some
pantheist thinkers consider that devotion is nothing but an easier path
to the
same impersonal union with the impersonal Ultimate Reality. According
to them,
devotion can serve to attain the extinction of personhood, the main
source of
illusion (maya). As the adored god is nothing but a
form of Brahman, the
mystical union with him would be, in this case, nothing more than the
same
impersonal fusion atman-Brahman. However, the
theistic Hindu thinkers
strongly disagree with this. They see the personal creator God (Vishnu
in Vaishnavism
or Shiva in Saivism) as having no preceding origin. Consequently, the
One of
the Rig Veda, Purusha of the Purushasukta,
and Brahman of the
Upanishads are considered nothing but the supreme personal God (Vishnu
or
Shiva). He is both the creator and the substance of the world (as a
result of
creating the world out of himself), the One that both creates and
disintegrates
the world at will, and the target of all religious rituals and
devotion.
The
best known piece of literature representative of Hindu theism is the Bhagavad
Gita, where the worshipped god is Krishna, the eighth avatar
of Vishnu.
Although in classic Hinduism Krishna is a manifestation of Vishnu, and
Vishnu
himself is one of the first manifestations of Brahman (along with
Brahma and
Shiva), in the Bhagavad Gita Krishna is granted a
fundamental
theological importance. He claims to be eternal (4,6), “the
supreme Lord of all
planets and demigods” (5,29) and the source of existence:
“I am the source of
all spiritual and material worlds. Everything emanates from
me” (10,8). He is
not only the creator but also the substance of the universe (9,16-19;
8,4;
10,20-42). The cycle of permanent transformation between the manifested
state
and the unmanifested one is characteristic for Krishna too, as it was
with
Brahman:
At the
end of an era (kalpa) all creatures disintegrate into my nature and at
the
beginning of another era I manifest them again. Such it is my nature
(prakriti)
to follow again and again the pattern of the Infinite manifestations
and disintegrations. (Bhagavad Gita
9,7-8)
Krishna
has to "follow the pattern of the Infinite manifestations and
disintegrations", which implies that the process is a necessity that
surpasses him. He is just a detached (but also helpless) spectator to
it. Therefore
it should be difficult to accept his dominion over creation along with
the
periodic manifestation of nature (prakriti). Rather,
we should conclude
that the creation of the world is not an option for him, but a
necessity at the
end of each cosmic cycle, as was the case with the manifestations of
Brahman of
the Upanishads. Disagreeing with this, some see this "necessity" as a
divine play in which Krishna creates and disintegrates his creation at
will.
The
excess of Krishna's superlatives and his identification with the whole
existence grants him a personal portrait that is difficult to grasp. A
better
Hindu theism will be founded later in time by the great Hindu thinkers
Ramanuja
(1017 - 1137 AD) and Madhva (1238 - 1317 AD). They refused the idea
that the
Ultimate Reality is the impersonal Brahman, who has no attributes, no
initiative and no influence on man. As it is impossible to take Brahman
as an
object of worship, both thinkers accepted the god Vishnu as Ultimate
Reality.
He is not limited by karma, time, space or any other factor, and has an
infinite number of attributes (unlike Nirguna Brahman), the most
important
being love, absolute knowledge, and compassion. According to Madhva,
Vishnu is
said to be totally different from the substance of the world. Neither
nature
nor the souls of the universe fuse with him to form an impersonal
primordial
state. He created the world out of a primordial substance (prakriti)
and
helps it to attain perfection. In fact, creation is periodic and
dependent on
the karma acquired by souls in previous existences. At the moment of
creation,
karma works out the fruits of the soul under divine providence.
However, that
means that the act of creation is not totally independent, as an act of
God’s
sovereign will. He is not free to create the world at will, but has to
create
it in order that souls may work out their karma.
Samkhya
and Yoga are two of the six Hindu orthodox schools (darshana)
developed
in the post-Upanishadic period. As most of their metaphysical basis is
common,
what is mentioned here is valid for both schools.
The
origin of the Samkhya system is attributed to Kapila (7th century BC),
and the
real organizer is considered to be Ishvara Krishna (5th century AD).
The Yoga
system was structured by Patanjali (sometime between 2nd century BC and
3rd
century AD), who only systematized the ancient traditions preserved
until his
time. The writing in which Patanjali formulated the essence of the Yoga
system,
which represents today the reference writing on this topic, is the Yoga
Sutra.
Considering
how reality is defined, Samkhya and Yoga are dualistic philosophies,
stressing
two fundamental notions: purusha (the equivalent of
atman) and prakriti
(the primordial substance). Prakriti, the
primordial substance, is an
impersonal matrix capable of manifestation through transformation. In
some way
it resembles Brahman through its periodic manifestations. Unlike
Brahman, it
does not contain the spiritual principle purusha.
As a
result of the duality postulated by this system, the material world is
the
product of the manifestation of prakriti and has
real existence (not
illusory, as in Vedanta). Its manifestation is a result of the
existence of
three inner tendencies, called gunas: sattva,
rajas and tamas.
They are the material which evolves into the categories of existence
when one
or the other gains a dominating force. Sattva is the tendency that
brings
light, purity and knowledge; rajas is responsible
for activity, energy
and dynamism; and tamas opposes action, producing
darkness, heaviness
and ignorance.
The
world and individual beings came into existence as a result of the
disturbance
of the initial state of equilibrium between the three gunas.
Any known
form in which we see the world is generated by the participation of a
certain
proportion of the three gunas. The categories of prakriti's
manifestation are, in hierarchical order, as follows:
1) Mahat,
the
first product of manifestation, considered to be a mass of pure energy
appeared
as a result of the guna sattva
domination. Its psychic aspect is
the intellect, buddhi.
2) From mahat
evolves ahamkara, the principle of individuation
(the sense for the
"I").
3) After producing ahamkara,
the evolutionary process bifurcates. Under the influence of the guna
sattva,
the mind-thinking evolutes are produced: mind (manas),
the five
cognitive sense organs (sight, hearing, touch, taste and smell) and the
five
conative sense organs (speech, movement, prehension, excretion and
reproduction). Under the influence of the guna tamas
the physical
evolutes are produced: the five subtle essences (the essences of color,
sound,
touch, taste and smell) and the five gross elements, which emerge from
the
essences (the five fundamental elements in Hindu cosmology - earth,
water, air,
fire and ether). The guna rajas provides the force
required for this
evolution.
The
majority of the Yoga darshana metaphysics, at it
was systematized by
Patanjali, comes from Samkhya. It only adds the existence of a
divinity,
Ishvara. However, this Ishvara is not a personal god, but a macro-purusha
that was never involved with psycho-mental activity and the law of
karma (Yoga
Sutra 1,24).
As a
distinct spiritual trend, Tantrism appeared in the 4th century AD. It
is
possible that it doesn’t have Vedic origin, because its
theology is grounded on
two deities that did not belong to the Vedic pantheon: Shiva and the
Mother
Goddess (Shakti), the goddess of land, fertility and life. The two
deities
Shiva and Shakti became the fundamental terms in which Tantrism
developed a
pantheistic view of life, Shiva as the transcendental aspect, the pure
existence,
and Shakti as the immanent and dynamic aspect, through which the
phenomenal
manifestation occurs.
Hatha
Yoga is also a pantheistic school, which shares the same metaphysic
with
Tantrism. Its forerunner is considered to be Goraknath (13th century
AD). He
and his followers used three sources to ground the new doctrine:
Tantrism,
devotional Saivism and ascetic practices of the so-called siddhas (the
perfect
ones). Hatha Yoga reached its full development through Svatmarama (15th
century
AD), the author of the Hatha Yoga Pradipika
treatise. Other important
writings are the Gheranda-Samhita and the
Shiva-Samhita. They all
belong equally to Tantrism.
For
both Tantrism and Hatha Yoga, the Ultimate Reality of the universe is
the god
Shiva. Together with his divine consort Shakti, they form a state of
primordial
unity and unmanifestation that corresponds in the Advaita Vedanta to
Brahman
Nirguna, the unmanifested Brahman. The world and the human beings came
into
existence through the dissociation of the primordial unity of Shiva and
Shakti.
In the Shiva-Samhita 1,92, it is stated:
Out of the
combining of the spirit, that is Shiva, with matter, that is Shakti,
and by the
interaction of one on the other, all creatures were born.
The
same manifestation of the Absolute in creation, as stated by the
Upanishads, is
presented in the Shiva-Samhita 1,52;69-77.
The
philosophy and ritual of Tantrism have penetrated most forms of today's
Hinduism. It can be found in Buddhism too (where it generated the
Vajrayana
school), and also in Chinese Taoism.
The
only religions that admit a true incarnation of Ultimate Reality in
human form
and consider it important in their theology are Vaishnava Hinduism and
Christianity. They both assume that God descended into the world and
dwelt
among humans in order to save them. Vaishnava Hinduism ascribes ten
incarnations (avatars) to the god Vishnu, while
Christianity proclaims
the sole incarnation of God the Son in Jesus Christ. Could they be
equivalent?
In other words, could Jesus Christ be considered a mere Western avatar,
come
into our world according to the Hindu pattern? On the other hand, could
the
avatars of Vishnu have fulfilled the same goal as Jesus? Or are there
irreconcilable differences between them? As we witness today many
claims that
they express a similar theology, a proper investigation is necessary
for
unveiling the mystery that surrounds this topic.
The
following analysis will investigate why the incarnation of God was
necessary;
how the problem arose that he came for, what the form of the divine
embodiment
is and how it actually solves the problem.
Vaishnava
Hinduism states in its major writings, the Puranas,
that the god Vishnu
causes a cyclic manifestation and dissolution of the world. Each cosmic
cycle (mahayuga)
has four ages (Krita Yuga - 1.728.000 years, Treta
Yuga -
1.296.000 years, Dvapara Yuga - 864.000 years and Kali
Yuga -
432.000 years) followed by the dissolution (pralaya)
of the physical
world. The whole cycle is repeated 994 times, which a period is called kalpa,
and then dissolution (pralaya) of both the physical
and subtle world
follows. 36.000 kalpas and pralayas
make the lifespan of Brahma,
the creator god, which is followed by a total dissolution (mahapralaya)
of the physical, subtle and causal world. Then all worlds, time and
space
return into Brahman, and the whole cycle starts again in an endless
process of
manifestation and dissolution.
In
Christianity, on the other hand, the world was created only once, and
not as a
necessity (as the cyclic manifestation of Vishnu implies) but out of
God's
superabundant love. Although the world became corrupted by sin, this
situation
doesn't belong to a normally repeated scenario (as in Hinduism) but is
the
result of a wrong human response to God's love. Despite the fact that
our world
is different from what God has originally intended, it will not follow
a
repeated cycle of manifestation and dissolution. The "new heaven and
new
earth" presented at the end of the Revelation
account (21,1) is not
a new creation similar to the one presented in Genesis.
Otherwise it
would indeed confirm a cyclic manifestation of the world according to
the Hindu
pattern. The Bible doesn't confirm such a mechanism. The "new heaven
and
new earth" is an everlasting world where sin is eradicated and there
will
be "no more death or mourning or crying or pain" (Revelation
21,4). It will belong to those who accepted His grace through Jesus
Christ
(21,27) and will never have a pralaya to end it.
The god
Vishnu is said to descend ten times into our world during each cosmic
cycle (mahayuga)
in order to restore the balance between good and evil. His incarnations
(avatars) vary depending on the Hindu writing that describes them. The Mahabharata
gives three lists of Vishnu's avatars: First there are mentioned four,
then
six, and finally there is a list of ten, in the form of: (1) swan, (2)
tortoise, (3) fish, (4) boar, (5) man-lion, (6) dwarf, (7) Bhargava
Rama, (8)
Dasaratha Rama, (9) Krishna, and (10) Kalki. The Garuda Purana
lists 19
avatars of Vishnu, while the Bhagavata Purana lists
22 in one place and
23 in another. Since the time of the Bhagavata Purana
the number of
avatars has been uniformly recognized as ten. Therefore we will use the
following list in the present analysis: (1) fish, (2) tortoise, (3)
boar, (4)
man-lion, (5) dwarf, (6) Parasurama, (7) Rama, (8) Krishna, (9) Buddha
and (10)
Kalki. The first nine have occurred already and the last one is still
to come.
Let us give a brief description of each avatar and see what its goal
was and
the method used for fulfilling it.
(1) The fish (Matsya).
The Vedas were stolen from Brahma by a demon, so
the gods sent a flood
on the earth to drown him and thus recover the holy scriptures. Vishnu
took the
form of a fish, predicted the coming deluge to the saint Manu and saved
him
together with his family by leading his ship to safety.
(2) The tortoise
(Kurma). During the deluge that destroyed the world the cream
of the milk
ocean (amrita), by which the gods renewed their
youthfulness and avoided
death, was lost. Both gods and demons together set about producing amrita
by churning the ocean of milk, using a mountain as churning stick and
the
incarnation of Vishnu as a pivot on which to rest it. Their action was
successful and the amrita recovered.
(3) The boar (Varaha).
Brahma had been forced to grant the boon of immortality to a demon that
had
performed austerities. Under the cover of this boon, the demon
persecuted both
men and gods and even stole the Vedas from Brahma
and dragged the earth
under the ocean, down to his dark abode. However, he forgot to mention
the boar
when reciting the name of gods, men and animals from which to be
immune, so
Vishnu took the form of a huge boar, descended into the ocean, killed
the demon
with his tusks, recovered the Vedas and released
the earth.
(4) The man-lion
(Narasinha). A demon had obtained the boon of immunity
through asceticism
from the attacks of men, beasts and gods. He had the assurance from
Brahma that
he could not be killed either day or night, inside or outside his
house. This
demon grew powerful and forbade the worship of all gods and substituted
it with
worship for himself. Vishnu took the form of half-man, half-lion
(neither man
nor beast) and tore the demon into pieces in the evening (neither in
the day
nor in the night) in the doorway of his palace (neither inside nor
outside it).
(5) The dwarf
(Vamana). The king Bali had gained too much power by his
sacrifices, so the
gods were endangered of losing their heavenly position to him.
Therefore Vishnu
was incarnated as a dwarf and asked the king the gift of three paces of
land.
Once accepted, the dwarf suddenly grew to an enormous size and covered
all the
earth and the heavens by his paces and Bali was left with only the
nether
regions.
(6) Parasurama (Rama
with the ax). The warrior caste (kshatriya)
was exercising tyranny
over all men, especially over the Brahmins, so the priestly caste was
endangered. Vishnu came to earth as Parasurama and exterminated the
whole kshatriya
caste with his ax.
While he was still on
earth, the next avatar (Ramachandra) came and the two had to struggle.
Ramachandra defeated him in a trial of strength and broke his bow.
(Both the Ramayana
and the Mahabharata recollect this episode. In the Mahabharata
Parasurama is knocked senseless by Ramachandra.)
(7) Ramachandra
(Rama), the hero of the Ramayana epic.
The demon Ravana had
practiced austerities in order to propitiate Brahma, who had granted
him
immunity from being killed by gods, gandharvas and
demons. Under this
cover, Ravana persecuted gods and men. Vishnu took the human form of
prince
Rama, for Ravana was too proud to ask immunity from men. Many
adventures
followed in his trip to save his wife Sita, who was kidnapped by the
demon and
taken to the Lanka Island. Rama raised an army of monkeys and bears led
by the
monkey-god Hanuman and a great battle was fought in front of the gates
of the
city. Rama used a magic weapon infused by the power of many gods,
killed Ravana
and rescued his wife.
(8) Krishna.
The
objective of Vishnu's incarnation as Krishna was to kill the demon
Kamsa, who
had become a tyrannical king, killing children and banning the worship
of
Vishnu. Krishna's mission had three phases: childhood, youth and middle
age.
During childhood he performed many feats of strength, killing all
demons sent
against him by Kamsa. In his youth, Krishna had many amorous adventures
with
married cowgirls. At last, in his middle-age, he killed Kamsa and took
part in
the Bharata war (with the most famous episode being the one recollected
in the Bhagavad
Gita). His mission accomplished, Krishna retreated into the
forest in
meditation. A hunter mistook his foot for a deer and shot it, thus
piercing
Krishna's one vulnerable spot and mortally wounding him.
(9) Buddha.
The
demons had stolen the sacrificial potions of the gods and performed
asceticism,
so the gods could not conquer them. Vishnu incarnated as a man of
delusion in
order to propagate false ideas and lead them astray from their old
faith.
Buddha preached that there is no creator, that the three major gods
(Brahma,
Vishnu and Shiva) were just ordinary mortals, that there is no dharma,
that death is total annihilation, that there is no heaven and hell and
that the
sacrifices are of no value. Obviously, Buddha as avatar of Vishnu has
no
historical background. He was a kind of devil's advocate who managed to
weaken
the opponents of the gods. The demons became Buddhists, abandoned the Vedas
and consequently were killed by the gods. This story was first
presented in the
Vishnu Purana (5th century AD) and is an attempt to
subordinate Buddhism
to Hinduism.
(10) Kalki.
The
last avatar, who is still to come, puts an end to the degenerated
earth,
accomplishing the final destruction of the wicked and preparing the way
for the
renewal of creation and the resurgence of virtue in the next mahayuga.
|
Topic Which
avatar's case fits into this scenario |
The
avatar came to save humans 1,
3, 4, 6, 7, 8 |
|
|
The
avatar kills a demon 3,
4, 7, 8 |
||
|
A
demon performed austerities and gained too much power over the gods 3,
4, 5, 7, 8, 9 |
||
|
The
avatar's form of embodiment Animal
(1, 2, 3), half-beast, half-human (4), human (5, 6, 7, 8, 9) according
to how the demon had to be deceived. |
||
|
The
avatar came to save the gods 1,
2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9 |
||
|
|
The following
table summarizes the meaning of Vishnu's past 9 avatars:
Now let
us turn to the nature of the divine incarnation in Christianity by
presenting
the nature of salvation in Christianity.
The
Christian account of divine incarnation presents God the Son willingly
leaving
His divine glory, taking a human body and descending into our world
through the
virgin birth. The Apostle Paul states:
Christ Jesus, being
in nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be
grasped, but
made himself nothing, taking the nature of a servant, being made in
human
likeness (Philippians 2,6-7).
This
“making Himself nothing” performed by God the Son
is called in theology “the kenosis
of Christ” (lit. = “emptying”). It does
not mean a subtraction of deity, but
the addition of humanity with its resultant limitations. Although
taking a
human nature was humbling for God the Son, it did not involve the
giving up of
any divine attributes. The doctrine of the kenosis involves the veiling
of His
pre-incarnate glory (John 17,5), taking on Himself
the likeness of human
sinful flesh (Romans 8,3) and the temporary nonuse
of divine attributes
during His earthly ministry.
The
kenosis of Christ was His free will initiative and not a necessity
imposed by
His nature, as is the case with the periodical incarnations of Vishnu.
According to Christianity, Jesus Christ is the only incarnation of God,
descended into our world with a unique and non-repeatable mission in
history.
He is not a mere avatar, a periodical incarnation of a Hindu god, but
the
unique incarnation of God the Son, become God the Man, perfect in both
His
divine and human nature. This double nature of Jesus Christ is the key
for
understanding His mission of reconciling man with God.
In
Vaishnava Hinduism none of the avatars has a perfect union of the two
natures.
As they have no historical basis, it is difficult to speculate on how
their
divine nature combined with the physical one. Due to considering the
physical
body a mere garment that is put on and off (according to Bhagavad
Gita
2,22), there cannot be any real association of god with a physical
body. Christ
came to redeem the physical body as well; therefore His association
with it was
real. For the same reason there is so much accent laid on His physical
resurrection, which for a Hindu avatar would be completely absurd.
Therefore
the avatar fits best in the Docetic understanding of Christ (the
appearance of
a physical body, with no intrinsic value to it), which is considered a
classic
heresy in Christianity.
The
most striking difference from Hindu avatars regards Christ's death.
This was
the crux of His incarnation: He had to die on the cross for our
redemption from
sin and reconciliation with God. The Apostle Peter states in his
epistle:
He himself bore our
sins in his body on the tree, so that we might die to sins and live for
righteousness; by his wounds you have been healed (1 Peter 2,24; see
also
1,18-21; 3,18).
Jesus
Christ as “the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the
world” (John
1,29) is the cornerstone of Christianity and its non-paralleled
element. Mocked
and spit upon by the human race, nailed on a cross and forsaken by the
Father,
Jesus Christ took our place in punishment. While dying on the cross,
Jesus
shouted, “It is finished” (John
19,30). In Greek, the expression used
was Tetelestai, which means, “the debt
was paid in full”. What was meant
here is the debt that man deserved to pay for his sins in hell, through
eternal
torment. By His death, Jesus paid in full the price required for the
salvation
of mankind from sin.
Was the
suffering of Christ on the cross a mere illusion, as some esoteric
interpretations suggest? Obviously not! His torment and death were so
real that
none of those who saw it could expect a future victory over death. This
proves
the full incarnation of God the Son. He did not die only in physical
appearance, as the Docetist heresy suggests, but as a poor miserable
man,
experiencing suffering in its fullest sense. His death proves both the
seriousness of our sin and the unfathomable love of God, as Jesus once
proclaimed:
For God so loved
the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in
him shall
not perish but have eternal life (John 3,16).
According
to Hinduism, demons are either beings that appeared through the
primordial act
of manifestation, or humans that didn't follow their duty (dharma)
or
performed bad deeds during their lifetime. Consequently they
reincarnate as
evil beings which cause much suffering in the world. However, the evil
they do
is not arbitrary, as the law of karma makes sure that the humans
afflicted by
demons are justly punished for their own bad deeds performed in
previous lives.
Therefore, from a global point of view the demons' bad deeds must be
seen as
necessary in balancing karma. On the other hand, the demon stage of
existence
is limited, and eventually there is reincarnation back into human form
and
henceforth a new chance given to attain liberation.
Keeping
this in mind, it becomes absurd that Vishnu has to intervene in the
world by
descending as an avatar to save it. Save it from what? From the
consequences of
karma, a spiritual law that can never be abolished? As long as karma
operates
in the world, the killing of a demon has a limited effect. It doesn't
guarantee
that the demon will not create problems in his next existence.
According to the
reincarnation doctrine, only one's physical frame can be "killed"
(see Bhagavad Gita 2,19), not the "infinite,
immortal soul".
For this reason, demons never stop creating problems, so there are
necessary
periodical incarnations of the divine, at least 10 in each mahayuga.
As the
periodical manifestation of the world created by Vishnu never ends, so
does the
affliction of it by the demons. Therefore, the solution of killing the
demons
by the avatars is only a short-term solution to the problem of evil in
the
world.
On the
other hand, in Christianity, demons have a different nature and
destiny. They
are fallen angels who will never reincarnate, return to their initial
status or
attain salvation. As the present world has a limited time span and
there is no
re-manifestation of it, the demons will be eternally separated from the
Kingdom
of God at the judgment day.
How Did the Demons Attain Power
Over the Gods?
An interesting fact in Hinduism
is that anyone - god,
human or demon - can attain the same magical power through performing
austerities (tapas). Once this power is attained,
nobody can break it.
In fact, the 3rd, 4th, 7th, 8th and 9th avatars of Vishnu all came
because a
demon performed so many austerities that the god Brahma was forced to
grant him
the boon of immortality as a reward. The mechanism of attaining such
power is
beyond the control of the gods, which proves their weakness in ruling
the
world. As a result, the avatar has to find a way of killing the demon
without
breaking the promises made to him by Brahma. The solutions are
sometimes funny
(see for instance the 3rd and the 4th avatar).
On the other hand, in
Christianity demons have no
possible way of blackmailing God. They cannot attain more power than
they were
left with at the fall. Neither angels nor demons could ever represent a
threat
for God. According to Christianity, such a power as that attained by
the Hindu
demons cannot be attained by any creature in our world, by any possible
way of
asceticism. Power can only be given by God, in a limited measure, and
only in
order to recognize the true source of power, who is God himself.
Who did the divine
incarnation came to save, gods or humans?
In Hinduism not only can demons
force the gods to
admit their merits, but the descent of the divine into human form is
more
concerned with saving the world of the gods than that of humans. For
instance,
there are 8 avatars (no. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9) involved in saving
the
world of gods from the power attained by demons, while only 6 (no. 1,
3, 4, 6,
7 and 8) are concerned with saving humans. This proves that the gods
have a fragile
position and are more concerned about themselves than the problems of
humankind.
In Christianity the idea of God
becoming incarnate to
save Himself is absurd. God is not affected at all by anything demons
could do.
From this point of view, the coming of Christ could never have occurred
as
necessary. The only purpose of God's incarnation in Jesus
Christ is the
salvation of humans from the effect of sin. The problem in
Christianity is
not that demons are a threat to God, but that man has chosen to disobey
God.
Through the act of the divine incarnation man can gain a chance to
return to
personal communion with his Creator.
How does the divine
incarnation save?
Usually the Hindu avatar kills
the demon (no. 3, 4,
7, 8, only the demon-king Bali is spared and sent to hell by no. 5).
The
killing is performed with much caution, so that the promises made by
the god
Brahma should not be broken. However, due to reincarnation this
"killing" is not of much effect, being only a limited solution to the
problem of evil.
On the other hand, in
Christianity, Jesus Christ
didn't literally kill Satan. In accordance with the sacrificial system
of the
Old Testament, Jesus let Himself be crucified for our sake. This was
the
"gift of God" (Romans 6, 23) as ransom for our sins,
a chance
offered to us to be set free from the power of Satan and sin. According
to the
Bible, the final destruction of demons' power will only occur at the
judgment
day (Revelation 20, 10).
Contradictory aspects of the
Hindu avatars
An odd fact to mention here is
the conflicts between
two contemporary avatars of the Treta Yuga
(Parasurama and Ramachandra).
How can this be? How could two incarnations of the same god wrestle
with one
another? Isn't each avatar under divine control? Why didn't the first
Rama
leave in time? Or why couldn't he solve the problem for which the next
avatar
came, if he was present anyway in the world?
On the other hand, how could the
gods cooperate with
demons at the time of the second avatar's (Kurma) coming? How is it
possible to
become allies and to be both threatened by the absence of amrita?
This leads
us to believe that both gods and demons are of the same nature and use
the same
source of power.
A
Hindu View of Christ
Jesus Christ is an ineradicable
part of modern
Hinduism. The power of the cross is felt in the lives of many Hindus in
different walks of life. Hindus adore Christ. The way in which Christ
has
touched their lives, and their responses to him are varied: some Hindus
acknowledge Jesus as an avatar; some others
consider him as a yogi,
a satguru and so on. Mahatma Gandhi for instance,
showed great reverence
to Jesus Christ and publicly acknowledged his indebtedness to him, but
refused
to limit Jesus Christ to the boundaries of this or that church.
Hindus look upon Jesus without
the appendages of
theology, dogma or doctrine. They give attention to his life of love
and
forgiveness. In the majesty of pure living, in the breadth of his
sympathy, in
the unselfish and sacrificial outlook of his life, and in pure
disinterested
love, he was supreme. What strikes a Hindu above all is His complete
obedience
to the will of God; the more he emptied himself the more he discovered
God. The
Cross is not something to be believed in and subscribed to as a dogma;
but
something to be lived and borne in life and experience. Jesus signifies
to the
Hindus the transcendence of the ego as the whole purpose of morality
and
spirituality. The enlightened person gains release by the surrender of
his
little self and its vanities by the purity of self and devotion to God.
The New Testament symbol of the
Kingdom of God has made
a powerful appeal to modern Hindu reformers. It has showed them the
Christian
message in its moral aspect. The teachings of the Sermon on the Mount
are not
speculative; they are exemplified in the life of Christ. These
reformers were
impressed that the “Kingdom of God” belongs to the
humble and the poor, that
the “persecuted and the meek” are its citizens;
that the “pure in heart” see
it, and that the “Kingdom” is not meat and drink,
but “righteousness, and peace
and joy in the Holy Spirit.”
On the
social side, the Kingdom of God involves the establishment of right
relationships between institutions and communities of people. Modern
Hindu
reformers have felt that this aspect of Christ’s teaching was
much needed in
India. They tried to inculcate the view that spirituality did not
consist in
turning away from poverty, misery, and ignorance, but in fully facing
and
fighting them
Gandhi’s understanding
and practice of the cross
brought out fresh aspects of Jesus’ life and character which
the West has not
so clearly perceived. He demonstrated how the soul force fights and
overcomes
evil only with the weapons of Truth and love. Although satyagraha
was
used by Gandhi, a Hindu against governments run by Christians (whether
in South
Africa or Britain), many Christians all over the world recognized that
his
movements were in truth Christian, a reviving and reinterpretation of
the
cross. Dr. Stanely Jones, the well known American missionary (in his Gandhi:
An Interpretation, p. 105) observes: “Never in
human history has so much
light been shed through this one man, and that man not even called
Christian.
Had not our Christianity been vitiated and overlain by our
identification with
unchristian attitudes and policies in public and private life, we would
have
seen at once the kinship between Gandhi’s method and the
cross.”
Hindus do not accept the Bible as the only scripture and Jesus Christ as the only instance of God’s self-disclosure. And yet the Hindus accept the Bible, and the scriptures of other religions along with the Vedas as God-given. Despite this theological difference between Hindu and Christian approaches, practical cooperation with one another is possible in overcoming violence, war, injustice, poverty and sickness in the world. In this regard, the following verses of the New Testament are instructive:
And John answered and said, “Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name; and we forbade him, because he followeth not with us”. And Jesus said unto him, “Forbid him not: for he that is not against us is for us.” (Luke 9: 4-50).
Could Jesus Christ be
assimilated with a Hindu
avatar?
Christianity is a religion that
breaks into history,
presenting Jesus Christ as a historical God-man who was born, lived and
died
nearly 2.000 years ago. If his life were not a unique
historical event, His
whole teaching would be absurd. His claims, miracles, passion and
resurrection,
if taken out of history, leave nothing to Christianity. On the other
hand,
Hinduism is not concerned with historicism, so it can accept any tales
of the
repeated divine incarnation. The spiritual message of the
avatars is the
only element that matters, not their historical presence. Having this
mindset,
Hindus accept Jesus Christ as an avatar (of the Western world) with a
powerful
message, but being nothing more than any other avatar.
On the one hand, Hinduism is
syncretistic, including
even Buddha among the avatars, the one who rejected the basic tenets of
Hinduism. On the other hand, Christianity is exclusivistic when it
comes to
characterizing the descent of the divine into human form. Jesus Christ
cannot
be just another avatar, a mere variant of an eternal myth. This would
deprive
Him of His true identity. His passion, death on the cross and
resurrection give
Him a totally different portrait than the Hindu avatars. Rabindranath
Maharaj
summarized it in his book Death of a Guru in the
following words: Jesus
said he is the way, not a way; so that eliminates
Krishna and everyone
else. He did not come to destroy sinners - like Krishna said of himself
- but
to save them. And no one else could. Jesus is not
just one of many gods.
He is the only true God, and He came to this earth as a man, not just
to show
us how to live but to die for our sins. Krishna never did that. And
Jesus was
resurrected, which never happened to Krishna or Rama or Shiva - in
fact, they
never existed.
(R. Maharaj Death of a Guru,
Philadelphia, A.J. Holman Co., 1977, p. 148)
An Explanation of
Reincarnation in Eastern Religions
Many cultures throughout the
world have long held to
the concept of reincarnation. One Gallup Poll revealed that one in four
Americans believed in reincarnation. Reincarnation literally means, "to
come again in the flesh." World religions author Geoffrey Parrinder
defines reincarnation as "the belief that the soul or some power passes
after death into another body.”
Reincarnation
is a major facet of the eastern religions of Hinduism
and Buddhism. Many
sects have variant views of reincarnation. Here is a general summary of
the
basic principles: Most
hold to a
pantheistic view of God. Pantheism comes from the Greek pan
meaning
"all" and concept of theism meaning "God." In
Pantheism, God is an impersonal force made up of all things; the
universe is
God and God is the universe. All created beings are an extension of or
an
emanation from God.
Living
things possess a physical body and an immaterial entity called the
soul, life
force, or Jiva. At death, the life force separates from the body and
takes a
new physical form. The law of karma determines what form the individual
will
take. This law teaches, once again, that one’s thoughts,
words, and deeds have
an ethical consequence, fixing one’s lot in future
existences. Our present
state is the result of actions and intentions performed in a previous
life. The
amount of good or bad karma attained in our present life will determine
if one
returns in a higher or a lower form of existence.
One
will endure hundreds, even thousands of reincarnations, either evolving
into a
higher or lower form of life to work off the debt of karma. This cycle
of
reincarnation is called the law of samsara.
Eventually one hopes to work
off all bad karma and free oneself from the reincarnation cycle and
attain
unity with the divine. This freeing from the cycle of reincarnation is
called moksha.
The soul is viewed as imprisoned in a body and must be freed to attain
unity
with the divine.
Each
school of thought varies in their teaching regarding how one attains
ultimate
deliverance from the reincarnation cycle. Most agree that it is only
from the
human form one can attain unity with the divine. Deliverance from the
bondage
of the body can be attained through various means. Some schools teach
that
through enlightenment that comes from knowledge, meditation, and
channeling,
one can break the cycle. Other schools teach that deliverance comes
through
faith and service to a particular deity or manifestation of the divine.
In
return, the deity will aid in the quest for moksha. Other schools teach
that
one can attain deliverance through discipline and good works.
Much
of the reincarnation teaching in the West is adapted from the teachings
in the
eastern religions. Is there evidence that proves reincarnation to be
true? We
will examine this next.
Evidences for
Reincarnation
Leading reincarnation researcher
Dr. Ian Stephenson,
head of the department of Neurology and Psychiatry at the University of
Virginia,
believes there is compelling evidence for reincarnation. Proponents
give five
proofs: hypnotic regression, déjà vu, Xenoglossy,
birthmarks, and the Bible.
The
first proof is hypnotic regression. Reincarnation proponents cite
examples of
individuals giving vivid and accurate descriptions of people, places,
and
events the individual could not have previously known. Today there is a
small
branch of psychology that practice past life therapy, the belief that
one’s
present problems are the result of problems from a previous life.
However,
the accuracy of facts attained from hypnosis remains highly
questionable.
First, some people are known to have lied under hypnosis. Second, human
memory
is subject to distortions of all sorts. Third, under hypnosis a
patient’s
awareness of fantasy and reality is blurred. Dr. Kenneth Bowers, a
psychologist
at the University of Waterloo and Dr. Jan Dywane at McMaster University
states:
". . .although hypnosis
increases recall, it
also increases errors. In their study, hypnotized subjects correctly
recalled
twice as many items as did unhypnotized members of a control group but
also
made three times as many mistakes. During hypnosis, you are creating
memories."
Fourth,
studies have shown that under hypnosis, patients are easily influenced
by
leading questions. In the process of hypnosis, the patient is asked to
release
control of his or her consciousness and body. Hans Holzer states,
"Generally women are easier to hypnotize than men. But there are
exceptions even among women, who may have difficulty letting go of
control over
their bodies and personalities, something essential if genuine hypnosis
is to
take place." In this state, memories can be altered by the cues from
the
hypnotist. For these reasons, many law courts do not consider testimony
under
hypnosis reliable evidence.
Past
life recall can also be attributed to the influence of culture.
Cultures
heavily steeped in the doctrine of reincarnation create an environment
conducive to past life recall. The countries of India, Sri Lanka,
Burma, and
western Asia have a high number of cases. Many who make claims of past
life
recall win the respect of their society. In areas like these the
culture can
have a strong influence on one’s subconscious mind. If
reincarnation is true, past
life recall should be prevalent in all cultures, not primarily in one
area.
Finally,
the majority of the incidents occur among children. Dr. Stephenson
states,
"Many of those claiming to have lived before are children. Often they
are emotional
when they talk of the person they used to be, and they give minute
details of
the life they lived." Children are the most susceptible to suggestion
and
their testimony should be viewed with caution.
At
best, the evidence from hypnotic regress can only suggest a possibility
of
reincarnation, but it does not conclusively prove it.
Déjà
vu refers to a distinct feeling you have been to a place or performed
an event
before, while engaged in something that is presently happening.
Reincarnation
proponents attribute this to a previous life. However, researchers give
alternate explanations. In our subconscious, we often relate a present
event
with a past one that the conscious mind does not remember. Since the
two events
are similar we often fuse the events together in our minds, thus
creating an
impression that we have experienced this before. Other researchers have
shown
that the data that enters the eye is sometimes delayed for a
microsecond on its
way to the brain. This leads one to think that they have seen the data
before.
Xenoglossy
is the sudden ability to speak a language one has never learned.
Reincarnation
advocates attribute this as the language one spoke in a previous life.
However,
crypto-amnesia can account for this phenomenon. In crypto-amnesia, an
individual
forgets information that was learned earlier and recalls it at a later
time,
not knowing its source. It is possible that one can hear foreign terms
through
the media or as a child and recall these when prompted.
The
fourth proof is the appearance of unique birthmarks that are similar to
those
possessed by a deceased individual. However, it is difficult to show
any
connection to reincarnation. Similarity does not prove sameness.
These
alternative explanations can explain most of the evidences for
reincarnation.
However where they fall short, we must entertain the possibility of
demonic
possession where a foreign spirit takes control of the person as
demonstrated
several times throughout the New Testament. Demonic spirits have
existed for
thousands of years and are not limited by time and space. The
information they
possess can be injected into a person’s mind during
possession. Eastern
meditation techniques allow for this possibility. Dr. Bro writes of
Edgar
Cayce, the father of the New Age movement, "Cayce’s power
came without
equipment, in quiet. He appeared to empty himself, to hollow out his
consciousness as a receptacle, a conduit."
Even
reincarnation advocates believe that many cases of past life recall can
be
attributed to possession. They confess that it is difficult to
determine
whether a past life recall is the result of reincarnation or
possession.
William de Arteaga states, "In reference to the demonic counterfeit
hypothesis, we can safely say that for many past life visions it is the
most
solidly verified hypothesis of all."
Edgar
Cayce stated, "That’s what I always thought, and against this
I put the
idea that the Devil might be tempting me to do his work by operating
through me
when I was conceited enough to think God had given me special power. .
.
."
Although
the evidence can be interpreted to support reincarnation, it cannot
conclusively prove it.
Although reincarnation
proponents cite the Bible as
proof of their claim, the Bible refutes the idea. It teaches that we
live once,
die once, and then enter our eternal state. Hebrews 9:26b-27 states,
"But
now he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to do away with
sin by
the sacrifice of himself. Just as man is destined to die once and after
that to
face judgment, so Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of
many
people. . . ." The focus here is on the sacrificial work of Christ.
Instead of the continual animal sacrifices needed to atone for sins
under the
old covenant, under the new covenant Christ paid for sins once and for
all.
In
the same way as Christ, who appeared only once, man is destined to die
once.
Just as there is finality in Christ’s sacrifice, there is
finality in man’s
physical death. After that, the soul faces the judgment before God to
determine
one’s eternal destiny. Once judgment is delivered, Scripture
gives no evidence
that sins can be atoned for in another time of living on earth (Rev.
20:11-15;
Luke 16:19-31; Matt. 25:31-46).
The
passage often appealed to by those who support reincarnation is John
9:1-3,
which states, "As he went along, he saw a man blind from birth. His
disciples asked him, ‘Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his
parents, that he was
born blind?’" Reincarnation proponents claim that in this
passage the
disciples are attributing the man’s blindness as the result
of bad karma from a
previous existence.
However,
Jewish theology attributed birth defects to two factors. Prenatal sin
committed
by the baby after conception, but before birth, or sin committed by the
parents. Genesis 25:22, the struggle of Jacob and Esau in
Rachel’s womb, was
interpreted as a conflict that resulted from prenatal sin. Exodus 20:5
states
that the parents’ sin often had repercussions on their
offspring. However, in
the passage in John 9:1-3, Jesus refutes any connection
between the man’s
defects and any previous sins, thus putting an end to any concept of
karma.
Another
passage is Matthew 11 where Jesus states that John the Baptist is
Elijah.
Reincarnation proponents interpret John as being the reincarnated
Elijah from
the Old Testament. This cannot be true for the following reasons.
First, in 2
Kings 2, Elijah never died, but was taken to heaven. In the
reincarnation model
one must die before one can take on a new form. Second, in Matthew 17
Elijah
appears with Moses on the Mount of Transfiguration. John the Baptist
had lived
and died by this time. If he had been the reincarnation of Elijah, John
would
have appeared instead. John came not as the reincarnation of
Elijah, but in
a metaphorical sense as Elijah in that he was filled with the same
spirit and
power as Elijah.
No texts
in the Bible or Church History Teach Reincarnation.
There
is an opinion that some texts or their parts were taken out of the
canon by the
Church or even destroyed. (Prof. Nestle - Introduction to the Textual
Criticism
of the Greek Testament, Rev. G.J.R. Ousley - The Gospel of the Holy
Twelve,
etc.).
If
we take as a basis transcripts of New Testament texts extant on papyri
from the
2nd century as we find them in every critical edition of the Greek
original,
there is no trace of censorship. This would have to happen latest at
the
beginning of the 2nd century when the Church controlled only minority
of texts
and always only locally.
This
can be taken as a valid objection. The Bible, however, does not mention
many
other facts about the material or spiritual world. Still there are
interesting
passages in this regard:
Psalm
104:29-30: "Thou hidest thy face, they are troubled: thou takest away
their breath, they die, and return to their dust.
"Thou sendest forth thy spirit, they are
created: and thou renewest the face of the earth."
Reincarnation
seems to be an accepted fact in Jesus' time, but it is not, as I
alluded to
earlier. John
9:1-3: "And as
[Jesus] passed by, he saw a man which was blind from [his]
birth.” And his
disciples asked him, saying, Master, who did sin, this man, or his
parents,
that he was born blind? "Jesus answered, "Neither hath this man
sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made
manifest in
him." To infer that
this supports
reincarnation is to stretch the imagination.
There
are Bible quotes used that seem to support reincarnation in the Bible
which are
not relevant. They usually appear in texts from New Age scene known for
its
lack of intellectual rigor.
In
Matthew 11:14 Jesus said, "And if you are willing to accept it, [John
the
Baptist] is the Elijah who was to come." This does not mean that John
the
Baptist was a reincarnation of Elijah. Luke 1:17 tells that the
ministry of
John the Baptist was carried out "in the spirit and power of Elijah."
Moreover, John the Baptist, when asked if he was Elijah, flatly
answered,
"No." (John 1:21).
Likewise,
in John 3:3 Jesus said, "I tell you the truth, no one can see the
kingdom
of God unless he is born again." The context clearly shows that Jesus
was
referring to a spiritual rebirth (3:5-6).
2
Kings 2:11 says that Elijah was taken up into heaven in his own body
and
Matthew 17:3 mentions that Elijah appeared together with Jesus and
Moses on the
mountain.
There
are also quotes used to debunk the notion of reincarnation. Job 16:22: "When a few
years are come, then
I shall go the way whence I shall not return." On the other hand, Job
1:21
seems to suggest otherwise: "And said, Naked came I out of my mother's
womb, and naked shall I return thither: the LORD gave, and the LORD
hath taken
away; blessed be the name of the LORD." This passage is, however, not
clear and differs in various translations.
Hebrews
9:27 tells that "man is destined to die once, and after that to face
judgment." General Christian view is that man is a compact being (who
really dies only once), not a transcendent immortal entity inhabiting
various
bodies in succession, although Paul in several passages speaks about
presence
or absence from a body. 2 Corinthians 5:8 is one such case. It is used
to prove
that at death the Christian immediately goes into the presence of the
Lord, not
into another body. This is, however, not obvious from the quote.
The
stay in hell is eternal (Matthew 18:8, 25:41,46, 2 Thessalonians 1:9,
Jude 1:6
etc.).
Luke
16:19-31 indicates that unbelievers at death go to a place of
suffering, not
into another body.
There
is an interesting incident in early Church history. St. Doran (AD 563)
of Iona
(Hebrides), after being buried for some time as a human sacrifice, said
he had
a look into afterlife and claimed: "The saved are not forever happy,
the
damned are not forever lost." He was buried again as a heretic...
The
Council of Constantinople rejected pre-existence of souls, and thus, by
implication, the reincarnation.
It
was not the Fifth Ecumenical Council in AD 553, as often mentioned, but
local
Home Synod of Constantinople (AD 544-6) held to condemn Origen's
teachings,
pre-existence being one of them. Emperor Justinian required the bishops
to
condemn the doctrine of universal restoration. He especially urged
Mennas to
anathematize the doctrine "that wicked men and devils will at length be
discharged from their torments, and re-established in their original
state."
The
half-heathen emperor held to the idea of endless misery, for he not
only
defends, but defines the doctrine. He does not merely say, "We believe
in
aionion kolasin," for that was just what Origen taught. Nor does he say
"the word aionion has been misunderstood; it denotes endless
duration," as he would have said, had there been such a disagreement.
But
he says: "The holy church of Christ teaches an endless aeonian life to
the
righteous, and endless punishment to the wicked."
Justinian,
in his commentary on the Meteorologica of Aristotle, 8 says: "Do not
suppose that the soul is punished for endless ages in Tartarus.
Properly the
soul is not punished to gratify the revenge of the divinity, but for
the sake
of healing. But we say that the soul is punished for an aeonian period,
calling
its life, and its allotted period of punishment, its aeon."
The
synod voted fifteen canons, not one of which condemns universal
restoration
despite emperor's effort. The first canon reads thus:
"If
anyone asserts the fabulous pre-existence of souls, and the monstrous
restitution which follows from it, let him be anathema."
It
is confirmed in the fourteenth anathema (where the Church condemns also
advaita, monism): "If
anyone says
that there will be a single unity of all rational beings, their
substances and
individualities being taken away together with their bodies, and also
that
there will be an identity of cognition as also of persons, and that in
the
fabulous restitution they will only be naked even as they had existed
in that
pre-existence which they insanely introduced, let him be anathema."
The
whole issue was obviously a political, not a theological one.
Pre-existence is,
however, accepted in Jeremiah 1:5 and Ephesians 1:4. Revelation 3:12
says:
"Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and
he
shall go no more out."
The Bible does not affirm
reincarnation!
Reincarnation
and Resurrection
The Bible teaches that what
happens after death is a
resurrection, not reincarnation. First Corinthians 15 is one of the
clearest
passages on what happens to the human soul after death. Like the
reincarnation
proponents, it is agreed that the immaterial component of man separates
from
the body at death and survives eternally.
It is agreed that the soul inhabits another bodily form.
The
major difference is this: reincarnation proponents believe that the
soul
inhabits many bodily forms in an evolutionary progress toward union
with the
divine. This can happen over millions of years or in a shorter period.
The
Bible teaches in Hebrews 9:26-27, as previously discussed, that we live
once,
die once and then enter into an eternal state.
Our
eternal state is described in 1 Corinthians 15. Verse 20 states, "But
Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the first-fruits of those
who have
fallen asleep." By "first-fruits" Paul was drawing on the descriptions
found in the Old Testament. The first-fruits were prior to the main
harvest and
served as an example and an assurance of the harvest that was coming. Christ's resurrection is a
precursor and a
guarantee of the believer’s resurrection. His resurrection
greatly differs from
the reincarnation.
First,
Christ's resurrected body physically resembled His earthly body. It had
physical properties displayed by the fact that He could be touched, He
communicated, and He ate. His glorified body also possessed
supernatural
attributes. He was able to walk through walls, appear and disappear,
and ascend
to heaven.
Paul
describes the glorified body as having a different kind of flesh from
the
earthly body. He states, "All flesh is not the same: Men have one kind
of
flesh, animals have another, birds another, fish another. There are
also
heavenly bodies and earthly bodies. . . ." The new body will be
imperishable and immortal. It will be a spiritual body that is designed
for
life in heaven. The glorified body will not suffer the effects of sin
or the
effects of time, sickness, or pain.
The
unrighteous, however, enter a state of eternal torment immediately
after death.
Luke 16:19-31 demonstrates this point. In this example the unrighteous
wealthy
man enters hell immediately at death. In Matthew 25 the goats enter a
state of
eternal punishment with no hope of escape.
In
summary, the differences are as follows: First,
reincarnation teaches that the
migration of the soul occurs over many lifetimes while resurrection
occurs
once. Second, reincarnation teaches we inhabit many different bodies
while
resurrection teaches we inhabit only one body on earth and a glorified
immortal
body in heaven that resembles our earthly one. Third, reincarnation
teaches we
are in an evolutionary progress to union with God while resurrection
teaches we
arrive at our ultimate state immediately at death. The Bible does not
support
reincarnation, and it must not be confused with the doctrine of the
resurrection.
Hinduism in
America
In
America, the dominant Hindu belief is called Vedanta.
Of all
the conflicting schools of Hinduism, Vedanta has had the most profound
overall
influence: Vedanta
("the end of vedas")
was the school which gave organized and systematic form to the teaching
of the
Upanishads. While the other schools are almost or wholly extinct,
Vedanta is
still much alive, for nearly all the great Hindu religious teachers of
recent
centuries have been Vedantists of one branch or another. (1)
The
influence of Vedanta on Indian thought has been profound, so it may be
said
that, in one or another of its forms, Hindu philosophy has become
Vedanta. (2)
Hinduism
is, truly speaking, the religion and philosophy of Vedanta. (3)
Since
the texts of Vedanta are contradictory and impossible to interpret
uniformly
(4) various schools of Vedanta have arisen.
The
dominant Vedantic school in America is called advaita
or the
"non-dual" school. This belief teaches that there is only one
impersonal God called Brahman. Brahman alone is
real--everything else is
considered a dream of Brahman--an "illusion."
This
form of Hinduism teaches that as part of its "sport" or
"play" (lila), Brahman exuded or emerged the
universe as part
of itself, but then "covered" it with what is called maya
or
illusion. This illusion is the entire physical universe that we see
around us,
including all stars and planets, the sky, trees, rivers, mountains and
all
people as well (5).
However,
Hinduism also teaches that Brahman exists "beneath" this illusory
universe. In other words, Brahman resides "in" and
"underneath" the material creation, including man. This explains why
the goal of Hinduism is to go inward to allegedly discover that one's
true nature
is God or Brahman.
Hinduism
aims at supposedly revealing one's inward divine nature by
"contacting" Brahman through occult practice.
This
idea that the world is an illusion "hiding" Brahman is a key teaching
of Hinduism in America. As the next questions will demonstrate, this
teaching
has profound practical implications.
What are the beliefs of
Hinduism concerning the world in which we live?
Because
Hinduism teaches that the world is ultimately an illusion, a "dream"
of Brahman, the basic philosophy of Hinduism can be described as
nihilism. The
Oxford American Dictionary defines nihilism as: "(1) a negative
doctrine,
the total rejection of current beliefs in religion or morals; (2) a
form of
skepticism that denies all existence" (6). Thus, in the end Hindu
practice
leads to nihilism, e.g., "The experience of samadhi
[Hindu
"enlightenment"] is, literally, a death to the things of this
world" (7).
Nihilism
is exactly what the Hindu gurus in America teach:
Swami
Vivekananda
- The world...never
existed; it was a dream, maya. (8)
Paramahansa
Yogananda
- I don't take life
seriously at all....It's all a dream. (9)
Ram
Dass
- What responsibility? God
has all the responsibility. I don't have
any responsibility. (10)
Meher
Baba
- Mere mind and mere body do
not exist. (11)
Da
Free John
- All of this life, past
and future, up and down, in and out, is just an hallucination....What
is that
great universe?....It is absolutely nothing....In our [spiritual]
enlightenment, the entire appearing universe is impotent, no longer the
intentional creation of holy God at all....Birth, the world, and the
whole
affair of life become nonsense, no longer impinge on you, have no
implication
whatsoever, absolutely none....Ultimately, there is no world. (12)
Bhagwan
Shree Rajneesh - Your so-called
society....Is a conspiracy against man....Whatever you call real life
is not
real....Society is rotten....I am not at all concerned with
society....[we are]
escaping from illusions and escaping into reality [through
"enlightenment"]--hence it's not really escapist. (13)
There
is no purpose in life....the questions are meaningless, the answers are
even
more so [life is a] meaningless, fruitless effort leading
nowhere--...this
whole [life is] nonsense...you simply live: there is no purpose. (14)
Shree
Aurobindo/The "Mother" -
One lives in Auroville [the spiritual community] in order to be free of
moral
and social conventions. (15)
According
to Hinduism, Brahman is wholly indifferent to what goes on in the
world.
Brahman is impersonal; it does not speak, it is
unconcerned with good or
evil. It is unconcerned with men and women. It has no cares because it
has no
feeling. It is unconcerned with morals because it has no values. Thus,
the one
who "knows" Brahman knows there is no right or wrong nor is there a
world in which they actually happen. In Hinduism the truly
"enlightened" individual is indifferent to all actions.
These,
then, are the beliefs of Hinduism in America concerning the world we
live in.
Ultimately, the world we live in is an illusion, worth nothing.
Yet
ironically, the Hindu gurus claim they offer people a transcendence and
"meaning" to life which Western materialism has cruelly denied them.
In truth, however, both Hinduism and materialism end in exactly the
same
place--nihilism. This is why influential guru Da Free John asserts,
"Upon
this absolute Truth [of the despair of nihilism] we must build our
lives"
(16).
But,
switching to noted atheistic philosopher Bertrand Russell brings no
change:
"Only on the firm foundation of unyielding despair can the soul's
habitation henceforth be safely built" (17).
Nevertheless,
people who seriously adopt a nihilistic philosophy should realize that
it can
profoundly affect them. Consider the description of the truly
"enlightened" soul as given by the great Hindu saint Ramakrishna:
But
the man who always sees God [Brahman] and talks to him intimately has
an
altogether different nature. He acts sometimes like an inert thing,
sometimes
like a ghoul, sometimes like a child, and sometimes like a madman....He
is not
conscious of the holy and the unholy. He does not observe any formal
purity. To
him everything is Brahman....People notice his ways and actions and
think of
him as insane. (18)
Further,
any culture that adopts such a philosophy can also be profoundly
affected.
India is living proof that what a people are committed to inwardly is
powerfully manifested outwardly. India's so-called "Wisdom from the
East" carries a heady price tag. A small part of this cost is discussed
by
Paul Molnar. Writing in the National Review he
recalls his feelings
after a trip to India:
It's
the utter degradation of the scene; the squalor, defecation, hashish,
the
pus-filled wounds on the backs of the holy men, pilgrims pushing and
crowding
into temples where a sweetish stench dominates--all that, plus the dead.
It was
hard, afterward, to sort out my impressions, to pull them together.
Paul
Claudel once wrote to friends, during his travels and ambassadorships
in the
Far East, that oriental religion is the devil's invention. In these
ecumenical
times one is not supposed to say such things. Yet that is my
inescapable
conclusion. The faith of the worshippers is, without any doubt,
sincere, even
fervent....But the objects of worship are brutal, inhuman deities who
know how
to scare, punish, avenge, mock and cheat, not to elevate and forgive;
and the
environment surrounding the worshippers repels rather than attracts:
horrid,
grimacing idols with cunning or cruel stares; incredibly gaudy
vulgarity,
copulating monkeys, defecating cows, mud, stench, garbage. Hippies are
drawn to
this witches' brew, and the reason is not far to find.
What
attracts and keeps them here is the degradation: of reason, of
self-esteem, of
vital forces, of faith in God and man. Here they find innumerable gods
and none
at all; everybody may do this thing just like the monkeys and the cows,
sinking
slowly toward the Ganges or Nirvana. Intelligence and purposefulness
dissolve
on the trash heap, the body rots until it becomes one with the road,
the grass,
the dung. The great nothingness envelops all, and the ashes go into the
river.
(19)
What
gave India all this--and more? No one can deny it was the religion of
Hinduism,
a religion millions of Americans are now welcoming with open arms.
The development of altered
states of consciousness
In
most Eastern practices, including those of Hinduism, the development of
altered
states of consciousness is encouraged. Millions of people today are
pursuing
such altered states, thinking that these will produce a condition of
spiritual
"enlightenment." Altered states can involve a variety of different
experiences--everything from hypnosis and other trance states to yogic
kundalini arousal, shamanism, lucid dreaming, drug states, meditation
and
biofeedback induced consciousness, etc.
But
pursuing these states can be dangerous because altered states of
consciousness
also tend to open the doors to spirit possession.
Historically
the linkage between pagan cultures and the manipulation of
consciousness for
occult purposes, such as spirit possession, has been strong. This
indicates
that the spirit world has a vested interest in encouraging the
exploration of
altered states of consciousness along specific lines, especially those
devoted
to spirit contact. The history of Eastern religion, Western occultism,
modern
parapsychology, etc., constantly reveal the importance of developing
altered
states of consciousness for contacting other dimensions. Revelations of
the
spirits themselves often stress their importance for this purpose. (20)
Nobel
scientist, Sir John Eccles once commented that the human brain was "a
machine that a ghost can operate." His statement illustrates the truth
that given the proper conditions, the human mind can become an open
door
permitting the influence of spirits. Altered states of consciousness
are one
principal method offering the proper conditions. (21)
A
major study on altered states of consciousness revealed that of almost
500
societies observed, over 90% considered the experience of trance states
and
spirit possession as being socially acceptable (22). And now also in
America,
the influence of Hindu gurus and their occult practices are making
trance and
possession states socially acceptable. Today, in many quarters what was
once
called "spirit possession" is now simply termed "altered
consciousness."
For
example, consider the research of Tal Brooke, the former premier
Western
disciple of India's super guru Sathya Sai Baba. Brooke
offers a powerful examination and
critique of Eastern philosophy including the altered state of
consciousness
found in the meditative disciplines of endless numbers of gurus.
Altered states
of consciousness are revealed as potential ways to foster spirit
contact and
possession (23). Yet those who experience spirit possession frequently
define
it merely as an "altered state" of consciousness.
In
conclusion, when Hindu gurus claim that their yogic/meditative
practices will
produce a "higher" state of consciousness, the practitioner should
beware. These meditation-induced altered states frequently lead to
periods of
social withdrawal, mental illness and even demonization. (24)
Footnotes
1. A. L. Basham,
"Hinduism," in R. C. Zaehner (ed.), The Concise Encyclopedia
of
Living Faiths, Boston, MA: Beacon Press, 1967, p. 237.
2. "Vedanta" in Encyclopedia
Britannica Micropaedia, Vol. 10, p. 375.
3. Swami
Satprakashananda, Hinduism and Christianity, St.
Louis, MO: Vedanta
Society, 1975, p. 9; cf. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, Indian
Philosophy,
NY: MacMillan, 1951, Vol. 2, p. 28.
4. "Vedanta"
in Encyclopedia Britannica Micropaedia, op. cit.,
p. 375; Paul Edwards'
in Editor in Chief, "Indian Philosophy" NY: Collier MacMillan, 1972,
rpt., Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Vol. 4, pp.
155-156; R. Garbe,
"Vedanta" in James Hastings, ed., Encyclopedia of Religion
and
Ethics, NY: n.d., op. cit., Vol. 12, pp. 597-598.
5. See Swami
Nikhilananda, "A Discussion of Brahman in the Upanishads", The
Upanishads, A New Translation, Four Volumes, New York:
Bonanza/Crown
Publishers, Harper & Brothers, 1949.
6. The Oxford American
Dictionary,
New York: Avon, 1982, p. 601.
7. Christopher
Isherwood, "Introduction" in Christopher Isherwood, ed., Vedanta
For The Western World, NY: Viking Press, 1968, p. 20.
8. John Yale, ed., What
Religion Is in the Words of Vivekananda, New York: The Julian
Press, 1962,
p. 64.
9. Paramahansa
Yogananda, Man's Eternal Quest, Los Angeles, CA:
Self Realization
Fellowship, 1975, pp. 218-219.
10. Ram Dass, "A
Ten-year Perspective", The Journal of Transpersonal Psychology,
Vol. 24, No. 2, p. 179.
11. Meher Baba, Discourses,
San Francisco, CA: Sufism Reoriented, 1973, Vol. 3, p. 146.
12. Bubba Free John, The
Way That I Teach, Middletown, CA: The Dawnhorse Press, 1978,
pp. 226, 227,
238-248.
13. Bhagwan Shree
Rajneesh, "Society Is An Illusion", Sannyas,
March-April,
1979, pp. 3-5.
14. Bhagwan Shree
Rajneesh, I Am the Gate, San Francisco, CA:
Perennial Library, 1978, pp.
5-6.
15. Robert A.
McDermott, The Essential Aurobindo, ed. New York:
Schocken Books, 1974,
p. 24.
16. Bubba Free John, The
Way That I
Teach, op. cit., p. 239; cf., pp. 238-248.
17. Bertrand Russell, Why
I Am Not a Christian and Other Essays, NY: Simon &
Schuster/Touchstone,
1957, p. 107.
18. Mahendranath Gupta,
The Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna, NY:
Ramakrishna-Vivekananda Center, 1977,
p. 405.
19. Reprint of "Oh
Benares" article from National Review in SCP
Newsletter,
1985, p. 22.
20. Primary references
are supplied in John Ankerberg, John Weldon, Can You Trust
Your Doctor? The
Complete Guide to New Age Medicine and Its Threat to Your Family,
Brentwood, TN: Wolgemuth & Hyatt, 1991, pp. 287-301.
21. Ibid., pp. 146-147.
22. Erika Bourguignon, Religion,
Altered States of Consciousness and Social Change, Columbus,
OH: Ohio State
University Press, 1973, pp. 16-17.
23. Tal Brooke, with
research assistance by John Weldon, Riders of the Cosmic
Circuit,
Batavia, IL: Lion Publishers, 1986, pp. 39-50, 107-139, 165-208,
available from
Spiritual Counterfeits Project, P. O. Box 4308, Berkeley, CA 94702.
24.
"Meditation", John Ankerberg, John Weldon, Can You Trust Your
Doctor?, op. cit., Chapter 10.
The
inherent racism of historic Hinduism is blatant. You were judged by the
color
of your skin, not the content of your character, skills or
talents. The
darker your skin, the lower your caste and rank in Hindu society. The
whiter
your skin, the higher your caste and rank. The Brahmins prided
themselves on
their white skin while despising the darker skinned untouchables who
were often
viewed and treated as sub-humans.
This
explains why Hindu gurus are more than willing to travel to the West to
convert
rich white Europeans to Hinduism BUT never travel to black Africa to
make
converts. The truth is that they don't want
black people whose
skin color is an indication of bad karma. As long as they can sucker
rich white
people into giving them money ("Money is evil. So give it all
to
me."). Why bother with darker skinned people?
This
can be documented by the statements of many of the gurus who have
reaped riches
in the West. When one guru was asked on TV what he was doing to help
the poor,
he responded, "Let the Christians take care of them. I am here to help
the
rich."
The
terrible caste system was invented in order to protect the white
Brahmins from
polluting their sacred whiteness with black blood. You had to marry and
to
labor in the caste into which you were born. The lines were
clearly drawn
and no one was allowed to move from one caste to another by marriage or
trade.
The
mechanism of the caste system is tied to the Hindu theory of
soul-transmigration
in which rebirth determines caste. Rebirth was predetermined by karma.
Karma
was in turn determined by how a person lived in a past life. For
example, if a
person were to be born with a dark skin to untouchable parents, a life
of
misery and poverty is the punishment for being evil in a previous life.
In
other words, a person gets what is deserved.
The
poor, the sick, the disabled, the dark-skinned, etc. are what they are
because
of their own fault. They deserve their suffering because they
did
something bad in a previous life and karma has caught up with
them. A
person should not interfere with their suffering because if done, the
person
will be doomed to experience it in the next life. Thus, it appears that
the
kindest thing to do is to let them alone so they get their suffering
over and
hopefully have a better rebirth the next time around.
On
the other hand, if one were to be born with white skin to Brahmin
parents, a life
of wealth and pleasure is the reward for good deeds done in a previous
life. There
is no moral obligation to help the less fortunate.
The
social inequities of Hinduism ultimately led millions of lower caste
Indians to
abandon Hinduism for Buddhism, Islam, Sikhism or Christianity because
those
religions did not lock them into a rigid caste system. Social and
financial
mobility required a change of religion. Of course, if a person were a
rich
white Brahmin, why convert to a religion that would strip one of social
status
and wealth?
Being
originally fire worshippers, Hinduism developed the grisly practice of
burning
a widow alive on the funeral pyre of her husband (suttee). If she did
not
willing jump into the fire, she was often thrown into it by the mob
gathered to
watch her burn to death.
Child
sacrifices to animal gods such as sacred crocodiles were common until
this
Hindu practice was criminalized by the British. The ritual
murder and
burial of travelers by the Kali cult (the thugees) is another example
of
Hinduism's inherently demonic nature and inspiration.
Other
immoral practices of Hinduism included using children as sex slaves in
Hindu temples.
They not only served the sexual perversions of the priests and gurus
but were
used as prostitutes to bring in money. The poorest of the
poor who often
could not afford to keep a new child, left the baby in a temple
assuming that
the child would have a better life with the priests than with its
parents. They
doomed their child to a life of pain and misery.
The
tourist who travels to India's many temples is often shocked by wall
art that
depicts sodomy, child sex, orgies and bestiality of the grossest kind.
Yet, all
this is part of what lies at the core of Hinduism.
The
same shock is received when tourists see Hindus drinking urine from
animals and
humans and smearing dung in their hair and on their body. The smell
that
emanates from the gurus, monks and holy men of Hinduism is enough to
warn us
that Hinduism is rotten to the core.
Why
bring up this discussion of Hinduism with such ugly topics as racism,
the caste
system, burning of widows, ritual child abuse and gross immorality?
To
see the true nature of Hinduism we must study what it produces in those
societies where it is the dominant religion. Thus a mere
abstract
philosophic presentation of Hinduism in the classroom will give a false
view.
Hinduism is far more than a list of abstract dogmas. It is
actually a
social program that seeks to organize a culture according to Hindu
concepts of
soul-transmigration, karma, race and caste.
1. Hinduism denies
the existence of the infinite/personal triune God of the Bible who
exists
independent of and apart from the universe which He created out of
nothing. It
is atheistic in this sense.
2. Hinduism has never
solved the problem of the One and Many or the infinite/personal
dichotomy.
3. Those Hindus who
emphasize the One over the Many teach Monism (All is One) and pantheism
(All is
God), erasing any distinction between Creator and creation.
"God" is an impersonal infinite force or power which manifests itself
as the universe around us. The "things" we see around us do
not
really exist per se. They are only illusions of the
One. This is what
the high caste Hindus teach the Westerners who come to India in search
of
"enlightenment."
4. The vast
majority of Hindus do not follow the Brahmin doctrine of monism.
Instead of
emphasizing the One over the Many, they emphasize the Many over the One
and
practice the vilest forms of polytheism imaginable in which they
worship
millions of gods and goddesses. It is said that the Hindus
worship more
gods and goddesses than the total number of Hindus who exist today.
They
worship snakes, monkeys, elephants, crocodiles, cats, insects and other
absurdities.
5. As a world
view, Hinduism fails to answer
crucial questions:
a.
Why does the Universe exist as opposed to not existing? Since it cannot
answer
this question, Hinduism simply denies the existence of the world around
us. It
is an illusion (maya) or dream.
b.
Is the universe eternal or did it have a beginning? Hinduism has always
taught
that the universe is eternal. But this has been successfully refuted by
modern
science. This also exposes an inherent contradiction within Hinduism.
If the
universe does not exist but is illusionary in nature, how then is it
eternal?
How can Hinduism speak of the universe going through eternal cycles if
the
universe does not exist?
c.
Why does the Universe exist in such a form that predictability and
science are
possible? By denying the existence of the world around it, Hinduism did
not develop
science and cannot explain why it works.
d.
What is evil? Once again, since Hinduism can not answer this question,
it
simply denies that evil exists.
e.
Why does evil exist? Hinduism cannot answer this question.
f.
What is man? Hinduism denies that we actually exist.
g.
How can we explain the uniqueness of man? Hinduism cannot explain why
man is
distinct from the world around him.
h.
Why do we do evil? Hinduism cannot answer this question.
i.
What is sin? Because it does not have a concept of a personal/infinite
Creator,
Hinduism has no concept of "sin" per se.
j.
How do we obtain forgiveness for our sins? There is no forgiveness in
Hinduism.
You will have to suffer in the next life for the evil you do in this
present
life. This answer exposes an inescapable contradiction within Hindu
philosophy.
If the universe, evil, and man do not actually exist but are only
illusions
(Maya), then on what grounds does karma exist? If it does not actually
exist
either, then on what grounds does reincarnation happen?
k.
On what basis can we explain man's desire for meaning, significance,
justice,
morals, truth and beauty? Hinduism has no answer to these questions.
l.
How can we provide a sufficient basis for meaning, significance,
justice,
morals, truth and beauty? Hinduism cannot provide a
philosophic basis for
any of these things.
Hinduism
did not produce democracy, science or equality among different races
and racks
of mankind. Instead it produced great social evils, which afflict the
Indian
people to this day. As a religion and a philosophy, Hinduism
is a
complete failure and cannot provide a basis for meaning, significance,
justice,
morals, truth and beauty.
The
editor of the periodical Hinduism Today said not
too long ago that a
"small army of yoga missionaries" has been trained to "set upon
the Western world." And in his own words, "They may not call
themselves Hindu, but Hindus know where yoga came from and where it
goes."
What
should be the appropriate Christian perspective on this religion of the
East
that is making such an impact in the West?
At the outset it must be said that as Christians we concur
with Hindus
on a couple of points. Hindus
are
correct in their recognition that all is not right with the world and
with
human existence in it. They are correct as well in suggesting that the
ultimate
remedy to the human dilemma is spiritual in nature.
Beyond these two points, however, there's
little common ground between Hinduism and Christianity.
What follows are just a few of the more
important areas of divergence.
First,
Hinduism lacks any understanding that God created this world for a good
purpose. It is common for Hindus to speak of God bringing the universe
into
existence simply as a "playful" exercise of His power. Also lacking
is a conception of God as infinitely holy and righteous and as the One
to whom
we as His creatures are accountable for the way we conduct our lives.
The
second major area of contrast between Hinduism and Christianity is the
conception
of human nature and of the source of our estrangement from God.
According to
Hindu teaching, man is divine at the core of his being. He is one with
God! The
problem is that man is ignorant of this fact. He is deceived by his
focus on
this temporal and material world, and this ignorance gives rise to acts
that result
in bad karma and traps a person in the cycle of reincarnation.
According
to the biblical teaching, however, the source of our alienation from
God (and
ultimately of all that is imperfect in this world), is not ignorance of
our
divinity, but our sinful rebellion against God and His purpose for our
lives.
This
leads to the third and final point of contrast--the way of salvation.
According
to most Hindu teaching, salvation from the cycle of reincarnation is
achieved
by a person’s own efforts--whether through good works,
meditation, or devotion
to a deity. According to the Bible, however, a person’s
spiritual need is for
deliverance from God's judgment on sin and for restoration to a life
under His
direction and care. This salvation can be provided only by God's
gracious and
undeserved action in a person’s behalf.
It
is true that in certain Hindu groups there is a similar emphasis on
God's grace
(probably as a result of past Christian influence). But even here,
there is a
major distinction. The Hindu teaching about grace sees no need for
atonement
for sin, but simply offers forgiveness without any satisfaction of the
judgment
on sin required by a holy God.
In
contrast, the Christian gospel is this: God the Son became a man, died
a
sacrificial death on the cross, making real forgiveness of real sins
against
the real God possible to those who place complete trust in Christ. All
who do
so can experience true forgiveness, know God and His purpose for their
lives,
and have the certainty of eternal life with Him!
Other Notable Differences Between Christianity and Hinduism.
Differences
between Hinduism and Christianity are typical of the differences
between
Eastern and Western religions in general. Here are some examples:
When
C.S. Lewis was converted from atheism, he shopped around in the world's
religious supermarket and narrowed his choice down to Hinduism or
Christianity.
Religions are like soups, he said. Some, like consomme, are thin and
clear (Unitarianism,
Confucianism, modern Judaism); others, like minestrone, are thick and
dark
(paganism, “mystery religions”). Only Hinduism and
Christianity are both “thin”
(philosophical) and “thick” (sacramental and
mysterious). But Hinduism is
really two religions: “thick” for the masses,
“thin” for the sages. Only
Christianity is both.
Hinduism
claims that all other religions are yogas: ways, deeds, paths.
Christianity is
a form of bhakti yoga (yoga for emotional types and lovers). As
previously
mentioned in this paper, there is also jnana yoga (yoga for
intellectuals),
raja yoga (yoga for experimenters), karma yoga (yoga for workers,
practical
people) and hatha yoga (the physical preliminary to the other four).
For
Hindus, religions are human roads up the divine mountain to
enlightenment —
religion is relative to human need; there is no “one
way” or single objective
truth.
There
is, however, a universal subjective truth about human nature: It has
“four
wants”: pleasure, power, altruism and enlightenment. Hinduism
encourages us to
try all four paths, confident that only the fourth brings fulfillment.
If there
is reincarnation and if there is no hell, Hindus can afford to be
patient and
to learn the long, hard way: by experience rather than by faith and
revelation.
Hindus
are hard to dialogue with for the opposite reason Moslems are: Most
Moslems are
intolerant, Hindus are tolerant. Nothing is false; everything is true
in a way.
The
summit of Hinduism is the mystical experience, called mukti, or moksha:
“liberation”
from the illusion of finitude, realization that tat tvam asi,
“thou art That (Brahman].”
At the center of one’s being is not individual ego but Atman,
universal self
which is identical with Brahman, the All.
This
sounds like the most absurd and blasphemous thing one could say: that I
am God.
But it is not that I, John Smith, am God the Father Almighty. Atman is
not ego
and Brahman is not God the Father. Hinduism identifies not the immanent
human
self with the transcendent divine self but the transcendent human self
with the
immanent divine self. It is not Christianity. But neither is it idiocy.
Martin Buber, in “I and Thou,” suggests that Hindu mysticism is the profound experience of the “original pre-biographical unity” of the self, beneath all forms and contents brought to it by experience, but confused with God. Even Aristotle said that “the soul is, in a way, all things.” Hinduism construes this “way” as identity, or inclusion, rather than knowing: being all things substantially rather than mentally. The soul is a mirror for the whole world.
Having read stories of people who have left Hinduism for a personal relationship with Jesus Christ, I’ve identified that a common theme runs through their stories. These people left a life of hopelessness, where they were dependent on their own works to escape from samsara, to a life of hope and assurance of their salvation. They left their millions-in-one impersonal gods, and found the one true God of the universe, who cares intimately for each one of them. For this reason, it is important to identify the most basic differences between Hinduism and Christianity.
|
|
HINDUISM |
CHRISTIANITY |
|
GOD |
A vast plurality of gods and goddesses exist as part of the impersonal Brahman. |
There is one God, who cares
deeply for each one of us.
|
|
MAN |
Humans, as with all living
things, are just manifestations of Brahman. We have no
individual self, or self-worth. |
God created mankind, and gave us
free will. He cares deeply for us, and places a great deal
of worth on His creation.
|
|
THE WORLD |
The world and everything on it
are manifestations of Brahman. |
God created the universe, the world, and everything on it. (Genesis 1). As God did not create Himself, the world exists separately from God. |
|
SIN |
Sin is committed against oneself, not against God. |
God gave us rules because He
cares about us. He also gave us free will – we can
choose to disobey. Disobedience (sin) is an offense against
God.
|
|
SIN'S PENALTY |
Since “sin” is committed only against oneself, the penalties are accrued only against the self. The penalty is the repeated cycle of rebirths, until you can escape to Nirvana. |
Sin cannot exist in the presence
of God. Therefore, the penalty of sin is spiritual death, or
separation from God. “For the wages of sin is death…” Romans 6:23a |
|
SALVATION |
Salvation is the release from
the wheel of life, the cycle of rebirths, through which we must work to
better ourselves, and realize our oneness with Brahman. It
must be worked out by each individual through successive lives. |
Salvation is a free gift to us
from God. We must only accept it. We cannot earn
it. Jesus bought our salvation by taking all our sin upon
Himself on the cross, dying as a sacrifice for us, and then rising from
the dead three days later. Salvation means spending eternity
in heaven with our Almighty God!
|
If you are a
Hindu man or woman reading this, please know that a greater hope
exists.
Indeed, it is more than a hope – it is an assurance.
You
are not relegated to rebirth after rebirth in an attempt to
“get it right.”
There is a personal God who cares deeply for you. He knows
how many hairs
you have on your head, yet he controls ever facet of the
universe. He
loves you and desires to redeem you unto Himself. All you
have to do is
accept! Indescribable joy awaits you!
I
grew up in India till the age of seven before our family moved to the
U.S. in
1977. I lived in the U.S. for most of my life with the exception of
coming back
to India for junior high school. About that time I was getting involved
in bad
company in Queens. When I went to India not only did I have to relearn
Hindi
but endure corporal punishment as well. That experience helped me
develop a
godly fear of authority and taught me to trust God as well.
In
1985 we came back to the U.S. It was in high school that my interest in
the
Bible started. I used to secretly read it in my room for fear of my
parents.
All my relatives are Hindus so I had never been introduced to the
Bible. The
first time my parents found me reading the Bible they were surprised
and upset
immediately. For me, it was an enlightening experience. The first time
I read
the book of John, I knew that the Bible was from God. I had no doubt
because
the words were so convicting and applied beautifully to my life. The
teachings
were down to earth, compared with Hindu writings which tend towards
philosophy
and narration primarily. Although my family was not religiously
inclined, I
always had a desire to know God.
When
I went to college in 1988, I was approached by a member of the Church
of Christ
(not-Mormons) to study the Bible. I started studying with them and was
baptized
a few months later. Even though I was living away from my parents at
college, I
did not have the courage to tell them about my conversion until the
following
summer. Soon, after I told them, my family problems started. At first,
my mom
considered my conversion as cutting my ties with the Indian community
and
rejecting their heritage. My dad was concerned that his dreams for me
(marriage,
career) would be jeopardized by my commitment to God and His Kingdom.
At once,
he commanded me to come home, but I refused.
That
winter my grandmother was ill in India and my dad asked me to accompany
him
assuming she was dying. Upon arriving to India we found out that she
had
recovered from her illness and my dad's options for me. After about a
week or
so, I asked my dad when we were heading back. He told me that I had two
options. Either to go back to Albany, NY and live with them or they
would leave
me in India. I was shocked. He had tricked me! We went to the village
where he
was born. That's when I found out how upset he really was about my
conversion.
In front of all his relatives he told them of my conversion and how
displeased
he was with me. He said that I became a follower of this Jesus.' I had
never
seen such deep resentment in him before. Meanwhile, all this time our
congregation was worried about me.
My
relatives pressured me to co-operate with my family and leave the
faith. They
believed that I was jeopardizing my family's happiness and security in
America
by being divisive. I was repeatedly reminded of how my dad had
painstakingly
brought our family to the U.S. from India. It sort of reminded me of
how God
had saved the Israelites from Egyptian slavery to the promise land.
Therefore,
my purpose for coming to the States was in order to be freed from my
bondage to
sin through Christ. I was fulfilling my purpose for coming to America
by
becoming a Christian. I tried to explain that my only intention was to
follow
God wherever He may lead me. At this time, I must confess that I had
gotten
depressed and learned to appreciate the power of prayer and God's word.
After
two weeks we headed back to the states. My dad assumed that I agreed to
his
options to live with them in Albany. After exiting immigration, I told
him that
I was going back to the Stony Brook University instead of with him.
Since he
could not force me to go with him, he started to cry and plead with me.
It took
all my energy to walk away. I headed out of the airport. I called some
of my
brothers from the University and they came to pick me up. My dad
followed me
back to the university so I some brothers opened their dorm rooms for
me. What
an encouragement God's family had been to me in my time of difficulty!
I could
not have done it without their encouragement.
I
guess by this time my dad was filled with a combination of anger about
life,
resentment, and concern for me. His initial attempt was to get me
dismissed
from the University by hindering my financial aid. He met with the
school
financial counselor and tried to de-register me from school. Thank God
that did
not work! We are so fortunate to live in a land like the U.S. where we
are
blessed with freedoms such as these.
I
thought everything was all right and returned to my dorms. A few weeks
later, I
noticed that I started to develop some fever. I went to the doctor and
found
out that I had been infected with Malaria while I was in India. I was
admitted
to the hospital and treated. I had reached a fever of almost 107
degrees
Fahrenheit which apparently affect me psychologically. As a result of
the high
fever and the drugs I was given, I started to hallucinate. I could not
think
clearly and lost touch with reality. The stress of the situation may
have had
something to do with it as well. The affect of the medication and the
stress
took me several years to heal from. God stood by my side and
strengthened me as
always.
For
the next five years the problems continued. It was difficult for my
parents to
let go of me since I was the eldest son. They used every tactic in the
book:
emotional, psychological, financial. I would receive phone calls all
the time
where they would plead with me or try to discourage me from my faith.
My
university advisor learned about all this and called me in for a
meeting. He
had been told that I was using the school's funds and resources to
practice
Christianity. I had several meetings with the school advisor who was
told I was
in a cult. But the proof was not available and my grades were
satisfactory.
I
hope that I am not frightening anyone by sharing this experience. Never
had I
thought that Satan would try to use my own family to try to destroy my
faith.
Although my parents were trying to seek my interests, their concern was
misguided since they have no knowledge of God's grace or Word.
On
a positive note, a few years ago my mother accompanied me to Church
Worship on
Sunday. I often have open discussions about God and her need to trust
Him. God
has blest me with a great family here on Long Island. God has used them
repeatedly to help me deal with my struggles.
God
has given me the strength not to give up the faith through His
unfailing love.
I am grateful that I had persisted in my walk with Christ as I grow to
love Him
deeply as every day goes by. There is nothing worth comparing to the
relationship we have available through Christ.
II Corinthians
1:3-5 sums it up:
[2Cor 1:3]
Praise be to the God and Father
of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies and the God of all
comfort;
[2Cor 1:4] Who
gives us comfort in all our
troubles, so that we may be able to give comfort to others who are in
trouble,
through the comfort with which we ourselves are comforted by God.
[2Cor 1:5] For as we undergo more of the pain which Christ underwent, so through Christ does our comfort become greater.
Bibliography
Asian Religions
-- An Introduction to the Study of Hinduism, Buddhism, Islam,
Confucianism, and
Taoi
by Kenneth W. Morgan, The
MacMillan Company, New York, Collier-MacMillan Limited, London, 1964.
Bhagavad Gita, commentary by
Swami Chibhavananda, Shri Ramakrishna Tapovanam, Tirupparaitturai, 1991.
A Survey of
Hinduism,
by Klaus Klostermaier,
hardcover August 1994.
Brahman-knowledge : an outline
of the philosophy of the Vedanta as set
forth by the Upanishads and by Sankara, by L.D. Barnett, paperback, May
1942.
Classical
Hinduism,
by Mariasusai Dhavamony,
paperback, January 1982.
Comparative
Study of Religions: A Theological Necessity by Ivan Strenski, The
Christian Century, February 6-13, 1985, pp.
126-128. Copyright by The Christian Century Foundation.
Dictionary of
Non-Christian Religions, by Geoffrey
Parrinder, Philadelphia Westminister Press, 1971.
Eruption of
Truth: An Interview with Raimon Panikkar by Raimon Panikkar, The
Christian Century, August 16-23, 2000,
pp. 834-836. Copyright by The Christian Century Foundation.
Eye and Gaze in the Veda, by J. Gonda, paperback,
January 1969.
God's Breath: Sacred Scriptures
of the World: Essential Texts of Buddhism, Christianity, Judaism,
Hinduism, Islam,
Sufism and Taoism, by John Miller,
hardcover, November 1999.
Harmony of Religions:
The Revelance of Swami Vivekananda,
by K.P. Aleaz, hardcover, August 1993.
Hindu and Christian
in South-East India, (London Studies
on South Asia, No 6) by Geoffrey A. Oddie, hardcover, February 1993.
Hinduism. John A. Hardon, Chapter 3 in Religions
of the
World (Westminster, Maryland: The Newman Press, 1963), 41-85.
Hindus: Their
Religious Beliefs and Practices, (the
Library of Religious Beliefs and Practices) by Julius Lipner,
hardcover,
January 1994.
Hypnosis on Trial, by Elizabeth Stark, Psychology
Today,
February 1984.
Life Beyond, by Hans Holzer, Chicago:
Contemporary Books, 1994.
Indian Philosophy,
Motilal Banarsidass, by S. Dasgupta, 1991,
vol.2.
Indian Theism
and Process Philosophy by Delmar
Langbauer, Process Studies, pp. 5-28, Vol. 2,
Number 1, Spring, 1972.
The Story of
Edgar Cayce: There is a River, by
Thomas Sugue, Virginia Beach: Association for Research and
Enlightenment, 1973.
A Seer Out of
Season: the Life of Edgar Cayce, by
Harmon Bro, New York: New American Library, 1989.
A Survey of
Hinduism,
by Klostermaier, Klaus
K. New York: SUNY
Press, 1994.
Karma-Yoga and
Bhakti-Yoga,
by Swami Vivekananda,
paperback, September 1996.
Man's Religions, by John Noss, New York:
MacMillan Press, 1980.
Past Life
Visions: A Christian Exploration, by
William de Arteaga, New York: Seabury, 1983.
Problems &
perspectives in religious discourse: Advaita Vedanta implications, by John A. Grimes, hardcover,
February 1994.
Religion in South Asia, by G.A. Oddie (Editor)
hardcover, June 1991.
The Scriptures
of Mankind: An Introduction by
Charles Samuel Braden, Chapter 5, Published by The MacMillan Company,
New York,
copyright 1952 by Charles S. Braden.
The Secular
Selling of a Religion, by George E.
La More, Jr., The Christian Century, December 10,
1975, pp. 1133-1137.
Copyright by The Christian Century Foundation.
The Experiential
Dimension of Advaita Vedanta, by
Arvind Sharma, hardcover, September 1993.
Vedanta: Voice of
Freedom, by
Swami Vivekananda
(Editor), hardcover, March 1990.
What’s the
Difference? A Comparison of the Faiths Men Live By, by Louis Cassels,
Hardcover,
1965.
Yoga & the Spiritual
Life: The Journey
of India's Soul, by Sri Chinmoy.
Sources for
Further
Reading
On The
Vedas
Sacred Books of
the East, Vols.
32 and 42 and 46 (42
Atharva Veda). Sacred Books and Literature of the East, Vol.
9
A. A.
Macdonell, Hymns of the Big-Veda, Association
Press, Calcutta, 1922.
R. T. H. Griffith, Hymns
of the Rig-Veda, E. J. Lazarus, Benares, 2nd Edition,
1896-1897.
On The
Brahmanas
Sacred
Books of the East, Vols. 12 and 44.
Harvard
Oriental Series, Vol. 25.
Sacred
Books and Early Literature of the
East, Vol.
9.
On The
Upanishads
Sacred
Books of the East, Vols. 1 and 15.
H. E. Hume, Thirteen
Principal Upanishads, Charles Scribner’s Sons,
N. Y
On The
Epics
Romesh Dutt, The
Ramayana and the Mahabharata, Everyman’s Edition,
E. P. Dutton and Company,
N. Y., 1929.
Sir Edwin Arnold, Indian
Idylls, Roberts Brothers, Boston. The Ramayana, translated
by R. T.
H. Griffith, 5 Vols.
On The
Bhagavad Gita
Sir Edwin Arnold, The
Song Celestial, Roberts Brothers, Boston, 1885. It has
appeared in many
editions.
Franklin
Edgerton, The Bhagavad Gita, 2
Vols., Harvard University Press, 1946.
S. Radhakrishnan, The
Bhagavad Gita with Sanskrit Text and English translation and
notes, Harper
and Brothers, N. Y., 1948.
There are
nearly two score English
translations in circulation.
On The
Legal Literature
Sacred Books of
the East, Vols.
2, 7,14 and 25. The
last is the most famous Laws of Manu.
On The
Puranas
H. W. Wilson, The
Vishnu Purana, 5
vols., London, 1864 --1877.
In the
Anthologies
Hindu Scripture,
edited
by Nicol MacNicol, Everyman’s
Library, J. M. Dent & Sons, London, 1938.
The Wisdom of
China and India, edited by Lin
Yutang, Random House, Inc., NewYork, 1942, pp. 1-315.
Harvard
Classics, Vol.
45, pp. 799-884.
Lewis Browne, The
World’s Great
Scriptures, pp. 57-132.
Ruth Smith, The
Tree of Life, pp.
71-114.
Ballon, The
Bible of the World, pp.
3-180.
Grace Turnbull,
Tongues of Fire, pp.
27-42, 245-267.
Frost, Sacred
Writings of the World’s
Great Religions, pp. 9-68.
Sohrab, The Bible of Mankind, pp. 31-90.