HINDUISM AND SECULARISM IN PRESENT-DAY INDIA:
SOME REFLECTIONS
AND EXPLORATIONS
These reflections are written by an ordinary Indian
Hindu who has had neither any theological instruction, nor any spiritual
training. At the very outset, I would
also like to say that I am conscious of the grave period through which our
society is passing, when political challenges are being raised by Hindu
nationalists against the religious and cultural traditions of Muslims, and the
‘backward’ and ‘scheduled castes.’ Such a challenge to accepted Hindu
traditions of living side by side with other religious and cultural traditions
is being voiced in the name of producing a modern powerful Nation-State. The secular opposition to Hindu nationalism
is also being raised in the name of producing a modern scientific society. This conflict between two western-oriented
elite groups, seems to me, a denial of the lived culture of the masses of
Indian people. We, all of us, are aware
that Hindu culture is not a homogenous one; but that it encompasses very many
cultural traditions rooted in history, and in the practices of people, who have
developed special identities in different parts of the country. Even broad-based caste or sub-caste
identities cannot really capture all of the important traditions and
distinctions that create the several social identities that go to form the
peoples of India. We are told the
Anthropological Survey of India identifies around 2,800 distinct communities in
India.
Certainly, Europeans also have such local identities;
and even today these identities are not relinquished in the interests of a
homogenous European Union. The growth of European Nation-States was part of the
historical process, which gave rise to European imperial and colonizing powers.
It is a path which brought immeasurable suffering to Europeans and the rest of
the world. There is now a clearly
articulated desire among the Europeans people to rediscover their local
communities and identities, to dismantle the fearful imperial nation-state
edifice and to find pleasure once again, as Voltaire put it, in ‘digging in
your own garden.’
The rise of Hindu nationalism as a latter-date copy of
nineteenth century European imperialism, is both anachronistic and incapable of
political achievement. It is a creation of some politicians in their struggle
to capture power and money. However,
what is disturbing is that educated Indians, and in fact the elite of the
country, seem only to speak from a historical cultural understanding that they
have learnt from books written in the West.
The debates of the Indian elite seem to be ignorant not
only of the culture and feelings of the ordinary masses, but they also brush
aside in an insulting manner the local identities of people. These identities, the respect for their own
culture and history, the belief in the principles of humanity and civic duty,
are all enshrined in the knowledge the common people have gained from their
religious myths, their religious beliefs, and the practices, the common
sayings, and the social prescriptions, of their elders. To set aside a whole belief-system as so
much superstition (as the secular leaders do), or to think that the religion of
the people can be manipulated for political ends (as the Hindu nationalists do)
is an insulting elite attitude towards the people. Another matter of great concern is that both
the secular and the nationalist approaches seem to ignore the spiritual needs
of people. If religion continues to be a
living web of knowledge, security and comfort for the mass of the people, it is
because through ordinary cultural-religious practices, the common person can
follow a spiritual path of self-discovery, and a quest for spiritual
unity. Unfortunately even the so-called
traditionalist today does not seem to appreciate the personal need of people to
retain spiritual belief or spiritual identity.
Perhaps the colonial period has much to answer for. Indians, more than any other third world
people, perhaps, began to admire the West not only for its imperial conquest of
the world, but also for its industrial prowess.
Such unqualified admiration among our leaders of two generations ago also
discounted in equal measure the value of Indian traditions, and knowledge. A
sharp reaction to such self-denigration came from a few diehards, who read into
myths ‘puranic’ knowledge of modern technologies, even of atomic energy and
space travel!
In the West itself philosophers earlier in the twentieth
century began to express their fears about the incompatibility between the
rationality of science and religious belief.
The Spanish philosopher, Miguel de Unamuno, felt that the two cardinal
aspects of the modern mind, the need to believe, and the need for rationality,
could never be reconciled, leaving a religious person who was also a scientist
alienated from the one or the other part of his life. In the early part of this century such a
distinction could be made with confidence.
However, this rationalist society produced the great unreason of
fascism, and Unamuno himself died in despair when the fascists took over his
precious University of Salamanca in 1936.
Modern thinkers challenge such a dichotomy between faith and reason. The
growth of powerful scientific elites, the secrecy that shrouds the development
of atomic energy and bio-technology; the refusal of scientific communities to
discuss important social, ethical issues in public; all has painted a picture
of a power-ridden, secretive theocracy, which is as irrational as any other
social group, and which is ready to indulge in half-truths and manipulations of
public opinion through disinformation.
Democratic discourse between communities is highlighting
the fact that ‘truth’ can never be the preserve of an elite, but is produced
through open dialogue amongst all sections of the people. The great Chinese leader, Mao Ze Dong, once
wrote in a simple essay that great ideas come from social practice. As he
himself was to discover, when power isolates leadership, gross acts of
inhumanity are likely to be committed. Positions of power by themselves create
falsehood and dogmas. The Church having
lost much of its political significance is no longer the powerful monolith of
the earlier centuries. Following the
tragedies of the two great world wars, the people of the West are disenchanted
with scientific panaceas and are searching for truth in life through community
inter-action; by spiritual reflection, and once again by admitting a return to
Nature.
The incompatibility between religious belief and
scientific rationality that haunted earlier European thinkers continues to tear
us apart today in India, since our society is in transition towards a modern
capitalist society. It is wrong to
believe that it is only the masses who somehow have to be cajoled into
accepting the modern world. All of us,
within our own circles, are tormented by the incompatibility of trying to
remain Indian, while accepting what seems to be the necessities of modernization.
I am very conscious within myself of such a strain, of trying to be an Indian,
and at the same time of living in the modern world. I remember that the same strain was felt by
my father, and even by my grandfather.
When to this historical strain on our individual psyches, and on our
culture, is added the cruelties of political exploitation of religion, we are
forced to ask ourselves what is important to us as individuals; what we wish to
cherish and preserve, and what we must change or transform. After several years of trying to grow into a
scientific mentality; of trying to grow into a westernized modern mentality,
and of trying to understand the present-day democratic, and secular meanings; I
must confess that I realize that I personally remain a Hindu, and do not really
wish to be anything else.
From the Hinduism that I learnt, both from texts and
from discourses with several of my elders; I saw in the ascetic Vedantic
principles what was to me an acceptable complete picture of cosmic relationships. Fundamental to Vedanta is the belief that Iswara,
or God as Creator, or active force, is a manifestation of Brahman, the
ever present, the all pervading, that which is and that which is not, and that
which can never be qualified by words.
Perhaps, this is the Hindu's understanding of the concept of Holy
Spirit, and the immanence of this spiritual force throughout Creation and
beyond space and time. While such a
belief can be seen as too ‘mathematical,’ too impersonal, it has also given
rise to a realization by human beings that God is not necessarily a distant
force, but is present everywhere and can be reached if the inner desire is
there. The concept of Aham Brahmasmi,
of God in Man, again central to Vedanta, gets spiritual meaning only when we
begin to see God in other human beings, in their opinions, actions and culture.
The great ascetic, Sri Sankara, developed the cardinal concepts of Vedanta in
the Eighth Century AD, in my opinion, building on Buddhist knowledge, and in
response to it, if you like, as counter-reformation. In Buddhism we find that
the three refuges for a human being are the Buddha, or the Godhead; Dharma
which is cosmic law, encompassing human justice within wider cosmic forces and
processes, as the ‘Wheel of Dharma;’ and Sanghas, that is, the communities of
humanity. Such a concept of a spiritual
community parallels the early Church. We are reminded that Jesus said:
"When two or three of you are met in my name, there am I also." The concept of the Dove of God descending on
a spiritual assembly further sanctifies the belief that people in spiritual
communion are more than a mundane assembly; they carry within their assembly
divine promise. The Prophet Mohammed has said that His community could not be
in error, and the Islamic concept of the Umma parallels the notion of the
Sangha. The very working of a community
of people who are consciously aware of a spiritual dimension to their work also
brings the individual closely in touch with himself or herself. Every-day life then becomes a part of a
spiritual pilgrimage through life.
In terms of Hindu society, I can only say that such
philosophical concepts did not develop in a historical abstract; but through a
process of historical struggle to come to terms with social, human realities of
a people drawn from several tribes, with different histories and different
cultures. In my own belief, the origins
of present-day caste society must be sought for in the terrible tribal
conflicts of several thousand years ago; perhaps, between Dravidian peoples of
the Indus valley civilization and the Aryan tribes, who most probably came much
later to the Indus valley from the Farghana area 4000 years ago. The mixing of these tribes, their conflicts
and wars can all be seen reflected in the stories that go to form our Puranas,
and the great epics of the Ramayana, and the Mahabharata. Many modern historians do not give any
historical weight to these myths.
However, as the French sociologist, Claude Levi-Strauss, has pointed out
that there is logic in the way cultures remember myths; and the reason why
these myths are enshrined in epics and remembered orally and faithfully over
several generations. Indian philosophers, religious leaders, and even
historians, have, by and large, taken an ahistorical view of the Puranas,
neither caring to question the reasons for their existence, nor attempting
reconstructions to throw light on the critical pre-Buddhist periods. I
personally find it difficult to account for the extraordinary persistence of a
highly stratified, inequitous, colour-prejudiced caste system over several
thousand years, if I do not seek its origins in the bloody beginnings of Indian
society itself. Europeans have come to terms with their own myths. The German scholar, Schliemann,
discovered Troy by re-reading the Iliad; and even conservative modern British
historians like Churchill are able to give a historical presence to the stories
of King Arthur. If we try to look at the
development of Indian philosophy as influenced by historical processes, by the
struggles and conflicts of one tribe with another, and the development of an
unjust and unequal caste society, we perhaps see that Vedanta was a way by
which the individual could transcend the limitations of an unsatisfactory
historical present. Buddhism itself,
with its emphasis on ethical action in the present, tried over a thousand years
to change the nature of our unequal caste-ridden societies. While, perhaps, its
great successes can be seen translated in the blending of physical racial
distinctions between tribes over this period; the counter-reformation launched
by elite Hindu castes retained many of the social injustices of early tribal
conquests. Militaristic hegemony of the few over the many was secured, and
continues to this day. In any case, Vedanta attempts transcendence not through
ethical social action, but through inner transformation.
The path of spiritual development for the Hindu was a
way by which an individual could try to transcend the narrowness and
limitations of lived-in society with all its injustices. In my youth I thought that the individualist
goal of Moksha, or individual liberation, was too ‘selfish,’ and that it
was an escape from trying to tackle social and political realities. After several decades of work, I have
realized that unless the individual Hindu wishes to seek his own liberation, he
will not find either the knowledge or the strength in himself to seek dharma or
justice in society. The knowledge that matters is more than instrumental
knowledge, or paravidya as it is called, and comes, if it does, only
after attempting a spiritual journey.
The ascetic tradition of Vedanta which has come down to
us, and finds its expressions in the writings of modern great philosophers,
such as J.Krishnamurthi, was felt insufficient to speak to ordinary people in
their need during periods of social collapse.
Such a grievous period of social collapse produced the Bhakti movement,
in itself, perhaps a synthesis of ascetic Vedantic traditions and the older
Tantric traditions which have always existed at the village level, from before
the days of the Aryans, and have come
down to us from Paleolithic times, with
figures of the ‘Devi,’ the great goddess of creation. Archeological work throughout the world, by
scientists such as Prof. Marija Gimbutas, has revealed the strength of these
ancient matrifocal, peaceful cultures that created the first civilizations of
the world, and produced also the agricultural revolution. In any case,
the Vedantic and Tantric traditions of India were brought together in
the spiritual renaissance of the Bhakti movement, which gave courage and
identity to several ordinary people 400 to 500 years ago; and resulted in the
composition of intimate religious music, by Thyagaraja, and Purandara Das; and
influenced the writings and poetry perhaps of even the great Sufi masters, of
Kabir and Amir Kushro. Here the highest knowledge is seen as mystical knowledge
available to anyone; with scholasticism
being the greatest stumbling block.
It is the Bhakti movement that made the figure of Rama a personal God to
be cherished in the heart of the devotee to help her or him overcome the
erosion of social identity; and overcome the sufferings of people during a time
of societal collapse. Thyagaraja and
Ramdas through music showed how the devotee can transcend the present, can ask
this God, who is enshrined in the intimate recesses of the heart for complete
understanding of all human weaknesses; and through a process of devotion to
receive the comfort of forgiveness and the ability to forgive others for their
cruelties. Rama is the Ista devata
the deeply personal god of the poor and the weak, because his is the story of
God who suffers as man in life. Such a
personal image of divinity cannot be transformed into a political vehicle
without impiety. Humanity at other times
has identified with God who suffers, who redeems through His suffering, who
speaks to the poor as He does in the beatitudes. This is the image of a very personal and
loving God, not of a fearful authoritarian distant God. The very worship of Rama that was central to
the social-religious Bhakti movement enabled ordinary poor people to reach into
their own hearts, see God there, and through dialogue with this personal god to
transcend the difficulties of their own lives. To take this image, to take the
name of Rama, and use it for a broad political purpose is a deeply irreligious
act, and cannot speak to an ordinary Hindu who has come near to Rama, through the
music of Thyagaraja and Ramadas, as I have done, among so many millions of
other Hindus.
The original figure of the dark Rama still remains lost
in the Vedic period of inter-tribal conflict, of Aryan bowmen attacking other,
settled urban cultures. Theological
conservatism, and the lack of concerned anthropological or historical enquiry,
continue to leave this period in darkness, fitfully lit by great passages from
the epics, remembered orally for a thousand years. The Ramayana, recreated in
the classical Sanskrit of two-thousand years ago, was a courtly document of
ineffectual prescriptions for the kings of those times. The story was magically
transformed by the Bhakti saints a thousand years later to create a social
revolution among the artisans, the poor, and the others, disinherited, lost and
bewildered, by the exhausting wars of the period. No attempt was made then to
make Rama a figure of revanchist Hinduism; nor would it have made any sense
then.
The medieval world with all its grim cruelties never asked
a person to give up his or her soul into the keeping of the State. The inner
integrity of the lowliest person was respected, though scant respect was paid
to the physical existence of the poor. The perpetrators of cruelty knew they
had been cruel. But with the modern world's refusal to acknowledge the
spiritual needs of people has come
ordered modern society, which has sanctioned unspeakable bestialities in the
name of civilization, from the holocaust of six million Jews to the bombing of
Vietnam, and now the ethnic cleansing of Bosnia, a harbinger of massive, future
racial attacks on minorities in cultured Europe. In our world, despite
Nurnberg, there can be no individual responsibility, guilt, or remorse, or
personal agony over what action to take; no examining of one's conscience.
There is only State responsibility, or that of the system, which is supposed to
be a rational expression of the good of the majority. The veils of
disinformation, which in a less-educated age could never come between a person
and his conscience, now spread the balm of oblivion over millions; and selfish
cruelty is transmuted into scientific, national necessity.
The older Indian leaders have so far failed in their
enterprise to create a modern Nation-State out of Indians. Our very diversity
stands in the way of social regimentation, as well as the spiritual side to
life in India, which is so commonplace that it passes unnoticed. The newer
Hindu nationalists are undertaking this unfinished project, and mistakenly are
trying to use the strength of religious tradition for this political purpose.
The modern world with its messages of nationalism, and secularism does not
speak the language of India, or of the culture of India. It does not permit an ordinary person to seek
a resolution to the dilemma of life.
These modern forces freeze us into a period of uncertainty, and add to
our alienation and mental and spiritual torture. Such forces want to make us to be something
that we do not wish to be.
What the Indian of today desires more than anything else
is once again to feel a sense of integration with oneself as a human being,
with one's society, and the rest of the communities that make up India. The world of the Hindu was never merely a
world of Hindus. It was always a world
of very many different cultures, some of whom called themselves Hindu, and some
of whom called themselves by other religious denominations. The ordinary Hindu learnt to find a personal
identity within the refuge of the culture known from the family. Here he or she learnt that life was also a
pilgrimage. This pilgrimage was enriched by the insights received from friends
of other communities. Modern forces deny
the Hindu the chance of undertaking a spiritual pilgrimage. They hence attack the very nature of Hindu
culture. Perhaps, such attacks on the
nature of Hinduism are being launched because it is by excluding several other
people that the Hindu elite can make a powerful base for themselves. It was to create such bases of political
power that the country was partitioned without giving a chance to the common
Hindus, Muslims, Christians, and Sikhs to voice their opinions. Exclusion as a social principle would destroy
the very culture of Hinduism, an inclusive field of several cultures and
experiences, which could not deny the validity of any path without devaluing
all of its paths.
At the very end of these reflections, I remember that
when Jesus was challenged as to what was the truth, he said "I am the
Truth". The desire to seek the
truth is in every one of us. The truth
we seek can only come to light through a spiritual journey that is an intensely
personal journey. Making this personal
journey into a political platform destroys the very essence of religion, since
the sources of worldly power are antithetical to spiritual growth. If Satanic forces, or avidya, the
mantle of ignorance, can act upon this world, it is through the agency of this
very confusion of choice, between inner spiritual development, and the external
realities of power.
Again one remembers the story of the temptations of
Christ: When offered the whole world, He refused it; for His kingdom is not of
this world. Our spiritual progress
should illumine paths through which this world of ours can come to reflect that
City of God, which can be glimpsed, if we wish, mirrored in the inner
conscience, and where He has many mansions for all His children.