It is also necessary for every seeker to know why Ancient Vedic
Religion or Santana Dharma is not present in Hinduism if they are seeking truth in
India. Hinduism has nothing to do with the Advaitic wisdom of Sage Sankar.
It's easy for people to get overwhelmed by emotions in this country. And so it makes it a great playground for all kinds of Gurus.
It is very much necessary for foreigners to
know why Ancient Vedic
Religion or
Santana Dharma is
not present in Hinduism if they are seeking truth in India. India is a
spiritual supermarket with diverse philosophies, theories, ideologies, yoga, and
beliefs. If they are not searching for truth but are only attracted to Indian culture and tradition,
then choose their path whichever satisfies them.
The path of wisdom is the Atmic
path. Sage Sankara’s wisdom bifurcated from Advaitic
orthodoxy is Self-knowledge or Brahma Gnana or Atma Gnana.
The serious seeker
must follow the Atmic path to save their time and effort in their pursuit of
truth.
Hinduism indulges non-Vedic beliefs such as idolatry,
ancestor worship, pilgrimages, priestcraft, offerings made in the temple, the caste system, untouchability, and child marriages. All these lack Vedic
sanction, therefore, Hinduism is not an Ancient
Vedic religion or Santana Dharma.
Hinduism is the museum of diverse beliefs and
dogmas. Hinduism is
not the means to ‘Self’-knowledge or Brahma Gnana or Atma Gnana All Hindus
indulge in non-Vedic practice barred by the Vedas introduced by the different
founders of the different sects of Hinduism at
different times, whereas the Vedic
religion or
Santana Dharma is ancient and has no founder.
Hinduism is not Santana Dharma or Vedic
religion. Hinduism is not a religion. Rather it is a group of
religions found within India that share common beliefs while remaining very
different.
Hinduism is not a religion but more a way of life.
The term "Hinduism" is used to label the entire Indian people.
To be considered an orthodox Hindu one need only accept the authority of
Shruti, however, there is no universal agreement among Hindus on what constitutes
Shruti. Vedantins consider the Vedanta, i.e., the Upanishads as Shruti but also
include the Bhagavad Gita and Brahma Sutras as authoritative.
For some Vaishnavas, the Bhagavata Purana is to be considered Veda. Some
consider the Tantras to be Veda. Thus, we find that there is ample
scope for different philosophies and practices under the very broad umbrella of
Hinduism.
When the religion of the Veda knows no idols then why so many gods and
goddesses with different forms and names are being propagated as Vedic gods. Why
these conceptual gods are introduced when the Vedic concept of God is free from
form and attributes.
The Bhagavad Gita: ~ Brahmano hi pratisthaham ~ Brahman (God in truth) is
considered the all-pervading consciousness, which is the basis of all the
animate and inanimate entities and material. (14.27).
When Bhagavad Gita says, that God is considered the all-pervading consciousness which is the basis of all the animate and inanimate entities and the material then nothing must be accepted as God other than consciousness because
there is no second thing that exists other than consciousness.
The Vedas confirm God is Atman (Spirit), the ‘Self’.
Rig Veda: ~ The
Atman is the cause; Atman is the support of all that exists in this universe.
May ye never turn away from the Atman, the ‘Self’. May ye never accept
another God in place of the Atman nor worship other than the Atman?" (10:48, 5)
Rig-Veda 1-164-46 and Y.V 32-1 clearly mention that God is “One”.
Rig Veda declares God is ‘ONE’ and God is Atman, then why believe and
worship in place of the real God.
Brihad Upanishad: ~ “If you think there is another entity, whether man
or God there is no truth."
When Upanishad itself declares: ~ Sarvam khalvidam brahma ~
all this (universe) is verily Brahman. By following back all the relative
appearances in the world, we eventually return to that from which it is all
manifest – the non-dual reality (Chandogya
Upanishad).
Sage Sankara’s Supreme Brahman (God) is impersonal, Nirguna
(without Gunas or attributes), Nirakara (formless), Nirvisesha (without special
characteristics), immutable, eternal, and Akarta (non-agent). It is above all
needs and desires. It is always the Witnessing Subject. It can never become an
object as it is beyond the reach of the senses. Brahman is non-dual, one
without a second. It has no other besides it. It is destitute of difference,
either external or internal. Brahman cannot be described, because description
implies a distinction. Brahman cannot be distinguished from any other than It. In
Brahman, there is no distinction of substance and attribute.
Sat-Chit-Ananda constitutes the very essence or Svarupa of Brahman, and not just
its attributes. The Nirguna Brahman of Sage Sankara is
impersonal.
Who introduced the concept of God with attributes
and attributeless gods, when Yajur
Veda says: ~ those who worship visible things, born of the
prakrti, such as the earth, trees, bodies (human and the like), in place of God
are enveloped in still greater darkness? Therefore, all these add-ons prove
that the form and attribute-based concepts are introduced by some sages of the
past with a new belief system and code of conduct in the name of Vedas.
Thus, it proves that Hinduism has nothing to do with the ancient Santana Dharma or
Vedic religion.
Hinduism does
not consist of struggles and attempts to believe a certain doctrine or dogma.
From the high spiritual flights of the Vedanta philosophy, of which the latest
discoveries of science seem like echoes, to the low ideas of idolatry with its
multifarious mythology, the agnosticism of the Buddhists, and the atheism of
the Jains, each and all have a place in the
Hinduism.
The vast ocean of
Vedic religion or Santana
Dharma was
consistently steady and calm for a very long period. It appears that as a consequence of the rage of the Buddhist revolution, it got suddenly disturbed and
flowed down to us in disorder. Even today
Vedic religion or
Santana Dharma has
not recovered from the onslaught of Buddhism and Jainism and is not able to
settle in people's hearts in its original form in the same old measure.
That is why Swami Vivekananda~ The
masses in India cry to sixty million Gods and still die like dogs. Where are
these gods? - Swami Vivekananda (Delivered In San
Francisco, on May 28, 1900) -The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda/Volume
1/Lectures and Discourses/The Gita II
As indicated in ISH Upanishads: - By worshipping gods and goddesses you will go after
death to the world of gods and goddesses. But will that help you? The time you
spend there is wasted because if you were not there you could have spent that
time moving forward towards ‘Self’-knowledge, which is your goal. In the world
of Gods and Goddesses, you cannot do that, and thus you go deeper and deeper
into darkness.
It clearly indicates that, if the human goal is to acquire Self-knowledge then why one must indulge in rituals and glorify the
conceptual gods, goddesses, and gurus to go into deeper darkness. Instead spend
that time moving forward towards Self-knowledge, which is one’s prime goal.
Since it is eternal and infinite, it comprises the only truth. The goal
of Vedic religion, through the various yogas, is to realize that the
consciousness (Atman) is nothing but Brahman.
The Vedic pantheon of gods is said, in the Vedas and Upanishads, to be
only higher manifestations of Brahman. For this reason, "ekam sat"
(all is one), and all is Brahman.
One must remember that for all periods the Vedas are the final goal and
authority, and if the Puranas differ in any respect from the Vedas, that part
of the Puranas is to be rejected without mercy.
If Hindus believe in one God, why do people worship so many Gods? There
are 33,000,000 Gods and Goddesses in Hinduism.
Unfortunately, Hindus have started worshipping so many
idols. In fact, Vedas specifically say that idols are not to be worshipped.
Here are quotes from the principal Scriptures which say that Idols shouldn’t be
worshipped.
Yajur Veda indicates that: ~ They
sink deeper in darkness those who worship sambhuti. (Sambhuti means created
things, for example, table, chair, idol, etc. - (Yajurveda
40:9)
Those who worship visible things born of the
prakrti, such as the earth, trees, and bodies (human and the like) in place of God
are enveloped in still greater darkness, in other words, they are extremely
foolish, fall into an awful hell of pain and sorrow and suffer terribly for a
long time."- (Yajurveda 40:9.)
The Hindus believed in polytheism, believing all their Gods to be
separate individuals, which was introduced much later by the founders of
Hinduism which contains diverse beliefs caste, and creeds.
When the religion of the Veda knows no idols then why so many gods and
goddesses with different forms and names are being propagated as Vedic Gods.
Why
these conceptual gods are introduced when the Vedic concept of God is free from
form and attributes.
Vedic religion was modified and reintroduced with new add-ons by Sri,
Sankara a great Advaita Master to uplift the Vedic culture and Santana Dharma,
which were in ruins in the clutches of Buddhism. 18 Puranas are introduced in
the name of Veda Vyasa not by Sage Sankara but by someone else because the Puranic
gods are non-Vedic Gods. Vedas bar worship of Such Gods.
As one goes deeper in the annals of history, it indicates that somewhere someone has added the Puranas in the name of Veda Vyasa the
grandmaster of Vedas. It is impossible to accept and believe that Veda Vyasa
authored and introduced Puranas which have all conceptual gods because: ~
The Buddhist influence is seen in a great measure
in the Vedic philosophy which is followed by most Indians. Thus, it is clear that the Vedic religion or Santana Dharma has not retained its original form but has been
influenced by other religions and has undergone a sea change.
Thus, the
influence of Buddhism on
Santana Dharma is extraordinary. Even Kumarila Bhatta, who fought with great
heroism for the revival of Santana Dharma or Vedic
religion was
so much influenced by Buddhism that he established for the first time in the
country, an atheist Vedic
religion or Santana
Dharma.
There
is no room for any doubt to assert that the Kumarila Bhatta School was
influenced by atheist Buddhism
because the school which is based on the validity of the Vedas and rituals
refutes the existence of God.
Sage Sankara endeavored to establish the Vedic religion
overthrowing Buddhism. But even he was not able to avoid the influence of Buddhism.
The influence of the revolutionary atmosphere of Buddhism has reappeared in the Advaita of Sage Sankara. His
inability to revive the Vedic religion that flourished before the Buddhist
revolution in its pure form is discernible.
Many thinkers since his time have said about Sage Sankara that
he made use of many important tenets of
Buddhism and presented to the people the
very Buddhism in the guise of Santana
Dharma or Vedic
religion. Though the Santana Dharma or
Vedic religion represented by Sage Sankara is
like a conglomeration of many things he deserves the credit for having turned
the Hindu mind which was once averse to Vedas -the root of Hinduism, towards the Vedas once again. For this, the
followers of Santana Dharma or Vedic
Religion should
be grateful to Sage Sankara.
The brilliance shown by Sage Sankara, a man of wonderful genius, a
matchless speaker, and an extraordinary dialectician is really a great
spectacle in history. In his time, there was a severe conflict between Buddhism and
the atheist Santana
Dharma or the Vedic religion of Kumarila Bhatta. Utilizing this
opportunity Sage Sankara intervened
in the conflict and making use of some concepts and methodology of both the
Kumarila Bhatta School and Buddhism presented a new coalition religion before the people.
Sage Sankara gave extraordinary charisma to this religion
with the help of his methods of logic and style of exposition. Its influence
was so great that both the Bhatta School and
Buddhism had to flee from India without
leaving a trace. The absence, even today, of a single follower of the Kumarila
Bhatta School as well as of Buddhism is proof enough for the great achievement of Sage Sankara. This indeed is a historical miracle.
One can see in the Santana Dharma or Vedic
religion expounded
by Sage Sankara a different version of the Kumarila Bhatta School and Buddhism. That is why the tradition of following Kumarila Bhatta's methodology in expounding the Advaita
thought at the empirical level gained ground in the Advaita School.
Different
types of the methodology of Buddhism were absorbed into the Advaita
thought, of course, under new labels. There is a very clear similarity between
the Vedic religion of Sage Sankara and Buddhism and the Advaita School
has given the world a common message. The essence of both schools is: -
The entire world which man perceives is illusionary; it is just the appearance of unreality and there is only one indeterminate and attributeless
Sat at the root of this world".
Santana Dharma or Vedic religion was not the religion of the Hindus,
nor were the Vedic people Hindus, nor will the Hindus of today approve the
replacement of the term ‘Hinduism’ with Santana
Dharma or
Vedic Religion. None can say exactly when the
Aryans became Hindus, because, neither the name Hindu nor its major beliefs and
practices existed in the Vedic times.
To this, one must add the marginal place the Vedic
gods occupy in today’s Hindu pantheon. In addition, as we have seen, the Vedas
themselves are not attractive to most of today’s Hindus as sacred texts. The
Ramayana, Mahabharata, Bhagavad Gita, Puranas, and Manusmriti, may have more to
do with the Hinduism
of today than the Vedas.
Thus, it is clear that there is no direct ancestry
of modern Hinduism traceable in the Vedas, though it does have some influence
on it “The Vedic corpus reflects the archetypal religion of those who called
themselves Aryas, and which, although it contributed to facets of latter-day Hinduism, was nevertheless distinct”.
Remember:~
The term Hindu religion is totally a new name that cannot be found in
any Indian literature prior to 1794 A.D. Out of the five Indian religions of
Buddhism, Jainism, Saivism, Vaishnavism, and Sikhism; Saivism, and Vaishnavism
were brought under the Varnashrama principle.
After naming the discriminating principle of
casteism of Manu Dharma as Hinduism, the
religions of Saivism and Vaishnavism, which were enslaved to the caste-discriminating principles were given a new name as ‘Hinduism’! Thus, the Hindu religion is different
from Santana
Dharma or Vedic
religion.
The term
Hinduism came into existence under British rule. Hinduism
is caste discriminating principle of
Varnashrama Dharma based on of the Book of Manu.
After 1750 A.D., Europeans captured certain parts of India and started
ruling those areas. The capital of then British India was Calcutta the present-day
Kolkata.
The Britishers were duty-bound to administer justice to the people
living within their dominion. Thus, they set up courts of justice. They needed
laws to administer justice through the courts.
To administer justice to the Christian citizens of India living within
their dominion, there was Christian Law, based on Biblical principles.
To administer justice to the Muslim citizens of India living within
their dominion, there was Islamic Law, based on Quranic principles. But to
administer justice to non-Christian and non-Islamic citizens living in British
dominion, there was no law book. This created problems for the Britishers.
As we peep into the annals of the religious history of India, we find that
Santana Dharma or Vedic religion was not the religion of the Hindus: ~
Every one of the great religions in the world, except our own, is
built upon such historical characters; but ours rests upon principles. No man or woman can claim to have created the Vedas. They are the
embodiment of eternal principles; sages discovered them.
In the British Raj,
Sir William Jones was appointed
as the chief justice of the Supreme Court at Calcutta. Local pundits made Sir William Jones believe that the book of Manu was the law book for
the people of India.
Sir William Jones believed pundits and translated the book of Manu
from Sanskrit to English. Thus, based on the laws of Manu, a law was formed for
administering justice to non-Christian and non-Muslim Indians of the British
dominion, and this law was called the Hindu law.
The principles of the book of Manu which was used for drafting the Hindu
Law were called Hinduism. The basic principle of the book of Manu is caste
discrimination.
The name coined by Sir
William Jones to
denote caste-discriminating principles is
Hinduism. It
is not a religion. It is a way of Life. It is the way of life of the Indus
people.
In this, a historical false perception crept in. That is when they called
the terms Christian Law, Muslim Law, and Hindu Law, both Christian Law and
Muslim Law were associated with the Christian religion and the Islamic religion. But with
respect to Hindu Law, a false perception of religion was wrongly attributed to
it as if it was also associated with a ‘Hindu religion’ which was not there.
This false perception developed a false notion that non-Christian and
non-Muslim Indians of the British dominion belonged to the Hindu religion.
Indian populace wrongly believes that Hinduism
is an ancient religion because they are unaware of the fact that Hinduism is
not the Santana Dharma or Vedic
religion. The
people in India believe in Varnashrama Dharma or caste discrimination.
The people of India must be liberated from the stranglehold of casteism to realize their original religion is not Hinduism
which is full of different castes and creeds but the Santana
Dharma or
Vedic religion. The
people should be educated about the historical truth of the religion of the Santana
Dharma or
Vedic religion.
Out of the five Indian religions, Saivism and
Vaishnavism were already enslaved to Varnashrama Dharma i.e. caste
discrimination. The people of India began to use the newly originated common
name of ‘Hinduism’
to denote Saivism and Vaishnavism. The context and substance of the term
Hinduism; coined by Sir William Jones is different from the context and the substance of the term ‘Hindu religion’, which was substituted erroneously and
used by the people to denote Saivism and Vaishnavism. : ~Santthosh Kumaar
