It’s a wide-spread belief among the westerners that the Hindu way of life and thought is pretty pessimistic and abhors worldly life. No sir! It is not. On the contrary, it is quite optimistic. It aspires to cling tenaciously to life, enjoy worldly happiness and, therefore, aspires for perpetual existence of one’s self.
The belief that the Hindu way of life and thought is pessimistic has been generated, largely because of Buddhism as the westerners, unfortunately, believe that the Buddhist thought is akin to mainstream Hindu thought. In fact they are two distinct philosophies. Buddhism believes in renunciation, Hinduism insists on perpetuation of oneself.
Take for example the Maha Mrityunjaya Mantra of Rig Veda (7.59.12) which is one of the most popular and most-sought-after mantra among the Hindus. It prays for the immortality and perpetuity of one’s own self.
ॐ त्र्यम्बकं यजामहे सुगन्धिं पुष्टिवर्धनम् ।
उर्वारुकमिव बन्धनान् मृत्योर्मुक्षीय मामृतात् ॥
Noted Indologist Ralph T.H Griffith (1896) translated the mantra in the following words :
Tryambaka, I worship thee, sweet augmenter of prosperity.
As from its stem the cucumber, so may I be released from death, not reft of immortality.
I will try to simplify it a bit more:
Oh Lord Shiva!, sweet augmenter of prosperity. As a cucumber is attached to its stem, so am I, attached to death!. I pray thee to release me from death and lead me to immortality.
Since all living organisms are immutably attached to death, the metaphor of cucumber and stem obviously denotes the umbilical cord with which a child is attached to the mother.
Similarly a shlok in Brhadaranyaka Upanishad (1.3.28), the most ancient and the most revered Upanishadha prays:
असतो मा सद्गमय।
तमसो मा ज्योमतिर्गमय।
मृत्योर्मामृतं गमय।।
I will take a line at a time and explain its meaning.
असतो मा सद्गमय।
Lead me from the unreal to the real. It can also mean ‘lead me from untruth to truth‘ because the Sanskrit word सत् connotes ‘that which exists everlastingly’ or ‘a truth that lasts for ever and is immutable — in all times and under all circumstances.
तमसो मा ज्योतिर्गमय।
lead me from darkness to light
मृत्योर्मामृतं गमय।।
lead me from death to immortality
The verse (shlok) is a part of morning prayer and nursery rhyme in many schools in northern part of India.
Yearning for immortality is the mainstay of the most ancient Veda — the Rig Veda. It enumerates and elucidates verse after verse, rituals (karma) and their modus operandi that seek to perpetuate one’s life and authority — and to brighten the prospects of second life/after-life. The Rig Veda is so replete with the yearnings for immortality and authority that the Bhagwadagita, the most revered book of the Hindus, (in verses 42-44 of chapter 2) in fact, condemns the vedic rituals meant to pray for the perpetuity of one’s life, better after-life and worldly authority/ hegemony.
If one goes through the works of sage Vyasa and his key writings the Bhagawadagita and Brahmasutra one is bound to conclude that Vyasa made an impassioned plea to shun worldliness and to adore the Brahama, the impersonal, neutral, absolute, all-pervasive, timeless divinity — something akin to “The One” of the Greek philosopher Plotinus.
In Taittiriya Upanishad Chapter 2 (Brahmananda Valli), section (Anuwak) 6 there is a verse (shlok) which, to most westerners, will seem rather jarring. And that’s because this particular shlok expressly connects the impersonal, neutral, absolute, all-pervasive, timeless divinity — the Brahama — with the material world, that is, the noumenon with the phenomenon.
I will try to translate the shlok as close to the Sanskrit syntax as possible:
He (the Brahma) desired himself (or itself) to be expressed in multiple forms and names. With strenuous effort He performed rituals and having done so it manifested itself into various forms and names that we see around us.
Having manifested all that we see around us, He entered into it. Having entered into it, He became the manifested (existent, Phenomenon) and the unmanifested (the ones that we can’t see, Noumenon), the defined and the undefined; substantial and un-substantial; conscious, alive and the non-living, static. Thus, He became sat (the existent) and the non-existent.
He became the Truth (meaning the ultimate, spiritual, sublime Truth) and the untrue, perishable, corporeal, physical world. And thus the Truth encompassed all, whatever there is. Therefore, the wise call it/Him the absolute Truth.
Similarly a shlok in the Brhadaranyaka Upanishad Chapter 5 Section 1 — a lyrical tongue-twister that I am so tempted to quote here to round off my point — will bolster my argument about a link between the noumenon and the phenomenon, the Brahama and the manifest world. They seem to be the mirror image of each other, so to say.
पूर्णमदः पूर्णमिदं पूर्णात्पूर्णमुदच्यते ।
पूर्णस्य पूर्णमादाय पूर्णमेवावशिष्यते ॥
The shlok in the Brhadaranyaka Upanishad Chapter 5, Section 1 harps on the word Purnam the literal meaning of which is ‘complete,’ but it has often been used to mean ‘infinite’, ‘whole’ or ‘indivisible’.
It says:
(In vedic Sanskrit, the pronoun ‘that’ is very generally used to mean impersonal, neutral, absolute, all-pervasive, timeless divinity or Brahama.)
That (the Brahama) verily is complete/infinite.
This (the universe) verily is also complete/infinite. Thus complete/infinite is borne out of the complete/infinite.
Despite having given birth to this (the universe) that (the Brahama) still remains complete/infinite.
The crux of the argument here is that the essential thought process of the Hindus — the Hindu Ethos — has a firm belief in the impersonal, neutral, absolute, all-pervasive, timeless divinity or Brahama as well as the material well-being of the inhabitants of the world/universe because the noumenon and the phenomenon — the Brahma and the manifest world/universe — are mere mirror images of the same absolute Self — the Aduvait Brahma. The westerners may call it “monotheism”.
Now the question is how to go about things in this world? Well the Upanishads have an answer for this as well. Non-attachment, rather than renunciation, is the essence of the Hindu ethos.
Non-attachment
Ishavasya Upanishad or just Isha Upanishad, provides the key to the Hindu ethos: the way a Hindu ought to live and lead his life.
The very first shlok or verse of the Ishavasya Upanishad, says:
ईशावास्यमिदं सर्वं यत्किञ्च जगत्यां जगत् ।
तेन त्यक्तेन भुञ्जीथा मा गृधः कस्य स्विद्धनम् ॥
Isha, (the Lord) lives everywhere and in everything in this dynamic world that we see round us;
Use (consume/enjoy) the worldly things with dispassionate abstinence, without attachment; for nothing is yours forever.
The next verse (shlok) makes things more clear:
कुर्वन्नेवेह कर्माणि जिजीविषेच्छतं समाः ।
एवं त्वयि नान्यथेतोऽस्ति न कर्म लिप्यते नरे ॥ २ ॥
The verse says that one must act in accordance with the verse 1 quoted above, that is use/consume/enjoy the worldly things with dispassionate abstinence, without attachment and yearn to live a hundred years blissfully. Acting in this way a person is not bonded by his karma — for there is no other way that could free you from the bondage of your karma.
If we see the scheme of the thought that is laid down in the Upanishads we can distinctly see that the Hindu scriptures emphatically says that the Brahama and this empirical world, both are real and infinite — mirror images — so to say. What is limited is our life-span and that you cannot enjoy the worldly things forever. Then why the heck are you getting attached with them?
Those who want to see the line of argument on this, better read the Bhagawadgita.
0 Comments