|
Bharat Mata
by Anwar Shaikh |
It is not easy to inculcate into the mind of a
Hindu that Spiritual Nationalism, founded on the love of Bharat Mata, is the
essence of the Vedic doctrine. This difficulty arises from the fact that the
fertility of India brought tremendous prosperity to the Hindus for many
centuries, making them oblivious of the secular problems, and they became
dedicated to the next world. Thus nationalism ceased to have any appeal for
them.
A beauty of the Vedas is, that they strike a balance
between secular and spiritual pursuits in such a way that the patriotic actions
lead to the elevation of soul. In the Vedic language, patriotic action means the
following:
1. Love of Bharat Mata (the original India).
2. Attainment of power for the glory of India, and
3. Willingness to fight for self-defence and
international brotherhood.
First hymn, Book XII of the ATHARVA VEDA, comprising
sixty-three verses, referred to as Bhumi-Sukta, describes the celestial
reverence that the Vedas attach to India. As it is not possible to discuss all
these verses, the reader ought to read the hymn for himself.
Hinduism is an enriched form of humanism. It is a way
of life, which does not admit narrow nationalism. Thus a Hindu has no wish to
rule the world but seeks a position compatible with the dignity of a guide
because he is destined to lead the world with the Vedic Light. Therefore, he is
the first among equals. This hymn clarifies the fact with reference to other
parts of the globe. Verse no. 1 declares
"Truth, high and potent Law, the Consecrating Rite,
Fervour, Brahma and Sacrifice uphold the Earth.
May she the Queen of all that is and is to be, may
Prithivi make ample space and room for us."
Here, it should be noted that the hymn shows respect to
the entire earth but refers to the land of Bharat as the "Queen or all
..." It is because Bharat is the land of the Vedas, meaning knowledge and
true enlightenment. She is the fountain of human civilisation and superior
cultural values, which adorned mankind with the sense of morality. Since I have
discussed all these facts in my book, "The Wonders of the Rgveda,"
which is being serialised in "Liberty," I need not go into details
here.
That this hymn is about Bharat Mata (the undivided
India), is borne out by the facts especially connected with this country. Verse
no. 3 states:
"In whom the sea, and Sindhu, and the waters, in
whom our food and corn-lands had their being,
In whom this all that breathes and moves is active,
this Earth assign us foremost rank and station."
It must be remembered that Bharat Mata is originally
associated with the areas of the Indus river (Sindhu). One should also note love
and respect of the Vedic man for Bharat Mata because he believed that the mere
fact of belonging to this country brought him "the foremost rank and
station" in the world.
Again verse no. 50 mentions Gandharvas and Apsarases,
Kimidins, Pisachas and Rakshasas, which are ingredients of the Indian mythology.
Verse 4 addresses India as "Lady of the earth's
four regions," and verse 7 states:
"May Earth, my Prithivi, always protected with
ceaseless care by Gods who never slumber ..."
Prithivi, as I understand, is the deified earth, when it
refers to Bharat Mata. This hymn clearly states Defence of India as the first
and most sacred duty of a Hindu, who earnestly prays that Gods should protect
her with ceaseless care.
Verse 12 expresses the total devotion of a Hindu to
Bharat Mata:
" ... I am the son of Earth, Earth is my
Mother."
Study of this hymn reveals that while the Vedic doctrine
espects all gods, it attaches the greatest importance to the land ot Bharat
because it is the Mother of all those who dwell in her bosom. However, the
following two points ought to be noted in this respect:
a. One can live in India and believe in any god he likes
because so vast is the Vedic concept of Divinity that there is no jealousy
among gods. This liberality is based on the advanced Vedic thinking, which
realises that as the wheel of time moves forward, changes of all sorts must
take place, thus religious doctrines may not form the cause of social discord.
b. This Vedic liberality is, however, restricted by
the Concept of Bharat Mata, that is, a dweller of this land must confess:
"I am the son ol Bharat Mata, and Bharat is my
Mother."
It goes without saying that just confession or love is not
a convincing proof of one's affection; it must be reinforced by sustained
action. Therefore, a dweller of India does not acknowledge her as his Motherland
if he hates Kaashi and loves Kaaba. All his civic rights depend on this point.
further, as love of Bharat Mata is the basic Vedic
demand, I believe, Bharat Mata is the Major Deity of the land. It is especially
true when we realise that other gods have suffered from the effects of change
but Bharat Mata has always remained the same. Therefore, she ought to be
worshipped as the Deity of India. Therefore, worship of other gods is optional
but the worship of Bharat Mata, the Chief Diety is a must for the simple reason
that the people born on her soil are fed, clothed, educated and cremated or
buried there. Thus, their dignity, destiny and dominion are directly dependent
on their devotion to Bharat Mata; a free and prosperous Bharat Mata is a source
of pleasure, pride and probity to her devotees but a betrayed, bedevilled and
battered Bharat Mata is the source of decay, decline and disaster; other gods
have come and gone but Bharat Mata shall always be there. This is the reason
that the Hindu gods are different from the Semitic God, who is jealous and wants
to be adored exclusively, but a Hindu can welcome them all at the same time (R.V.
1: LXXV-V).
Again, a person's national identity is delermined by
the land of his birth, and his greatness or smallness becomes directly
associated with the reverence that he shows her in action. This is what makes a
German, Engiish or French great and an Indian, Pakistani and Bangladeshi small.
History testifies to the fact how the former have adored their motherlands with
blood and worldly treasures and how the latter have dishonoured Bharat Mata by
truncating her to worship foreign gods whose validity cannot be acknowledged
rationally. Thus, one can establish the principle:
The more powerful a country, the greater the stature of
her people.
2. This brings me to the discussion of the second point
i.e. attainment of power for the glory of (India) Bharat Mata.
With a view to achieving this end, a Vedic Hindu is the
devotee of Indra, the Lord of Power;
Praise be to Indra, the Lord of Pcwer, the holy synod's
might. (R.V.I: LVI - 2)
The Rgveda inculcates into the minds of its devotees that
a characteristic of power is that it seeks to vanquish the adversaries of the
powerful:
"Indra goes on from one fight to another
intrepidly, destroying castles of the enemies." (R.V.I: LIII - 7)
Again the purpose of power is to seek victory through
battles:
"Indra, the Victor is great; he shines in manly
battles; his character remains unstained; his might sparkles like the peak of
a mountain." (R.V.I: LVI - 3)
The true treasure to a genuine Hindu is his mighty
deed:
"Indra, the most splendid and powerful, is rich
in mighty deeds, which are Indra's treasures. O, Conqueror, give them to
us." (R.V.I: LIII - 3)
One must realise that miglhty deeds are the treasures of
Indra, which a Hindu begs for. It means that he seeks to emulate his Lord to be
like Him in practice. This is the source of the famous Hindu doctrine known as
karma: "one reaps what one sows." Thus a Hindu must be a man of act
on; he must seek power and use it bravely.
The central point of this discussion is a Hindu's duty
and desire to be God-like through attaining power. He knows God is God because
He is powerful. Therefore, His devotee has to be like him, yet a true Hindu is
humhle, humanitarian and honey-like, but as a practitioner of faith, he is
proud, powerful and pragmatic.
Power to a Hindu is not a fleeting affair. To be a
Hindu, he has to perpetuate it:
"Indra ... we make thy might perpetual." (R.GV.III:
XXXVII - X)
3. Having established the rapport between a Hindu and
power, I must now state that he is forbidden by dharma to abuse it. This is what
brings me to the discussion of the third point i.e. "Willingness to fight
for self-defence and international brotherhood."
In this connection, freedom is considered the greatest
virtue: even the gods need it and attain it through might and battle:
a. "Lord of the brave, Indra who rules the people,
gave freedom to gods by might and battle: (R.V. III: XXXIV: VII) Here is a
stunning verse:
b. "When Indra's helpers fighting for the good
of men, the Maruts, faithful to mankind, joyed in the light." ~R.V.I: Lll
- IIX)
Marut, originally means storm but has been deified as
storm- god. This is the epithet of a Vedic warrior for being thunderously bold
in a battle. To be a true Hindu, he has to acquire this trait of fearlessness.
Thus, this verse means that a Hindu is faithful to mankind, and fights battles
for their good.
It imparts Hinduism an international character and
appoints a Hindu the custodian of world affairs. This is what makes me proud of
my Vedic ancestry. The Rgveda, which is at least 5500 years old could think and
preach in terms of humanity and internationalism when the rest of the world was
no more than cave-dwellers. This is a cogent proof of the fact that civilisation
started in India.
Freedom is justice. As my freedom is fragile unless I
am willing to defend your right to be free as well, the verses "a" and
"b", clearly demonstrate that a Hindu has teen commanded by Dharma to
maintain international liberties through righteous use of power.
The international character of Hinduism and the role of
a Hindu becomes even clearer when we look at the following:
Being the devotee of God, a Hindu is a divine warrior
who "stirs up with his might, great battles for mankind." (R.V.I: IV -
V)
At this juncture, I ought to point out that a Hindu has
the divine obligation to be powerful not for jingoistic reasons but because the
Vedas appoint him as the custodian of the world order. This is obvious from the
fact that there is no proselytisation in Hinduism as it is in Christianity or
Islam. A person can have any faith he likes and he will not be persecuted or
denied justice by a Hindu because all Indian doctrines even when they collide
with the Vedic authority, originate from free thinking based on reason and
observation. The superstitious element that we find in Hinduism, is an accretion
introduced by the selfish interests over a long period of time.
The liberality of Hindu thinking is so important a
point in this context that a little digression seems justified: the Indian
philosophy has been arranged into two categories i.e. Astika and Nastika
systems; the former affirms but the latter denies. The Charvakas, the Buddhists
and the Jains are Nastika (nihilist or heterodox) not because they do not
acknowledge the existence of God but because they deny the authority of the
Vedas. Though the revolts against the Vedas as mounted by the Charvakas and
Buddhists were really serious, no violence was ever demonstrated by the Hindus
or their antagonists because they were all Indians, bred in similar traditions
of tolerance and free thinking. On the contrary, the European movement known as
The Reformation was deeply steeped in murder and destruction, and the Islamic
sectarianism denoted by Sunni-Shia division, exhibits the apex of mutual hatred
and thirst for bloody carnage.
Again, the six Astika system, of philosophy as believed
in by the Hindus are considerably different from one another. Yet, all believers
are proud Hindus and no one throws mud of blasphemy on another for having
difference of opinion. Reverence for the Vedas is the root of their unity, which
cannot be shaken by the difference of interpretation. The veracity of this
statement can be judged by the liberal thinking of the Sankhya System, which is
not only the most ancient mode of Hindu thinking but also older system than any
other philosphical discipline known to mankind.
The purpose of digression is to establish that Hinduism
is based on reason and not a pretended divine dictation. Therefore, it is free
from intrinsic aggression associated with a wolf or a hyena. This is what makes
it a natural way of life, free from perversion, prejudice and passivity, raising
it to a message of hope, hilarity and humanity.
Hinduism is essentially humanism in action. This is
what makes a Hindu the protector of humanity and he feels obliged:
a. to be non-aggressive, and
b. protect mankind against any aggressor in his capacity as the custodian of
humanity.
Having already discussed 'b,' now I may touch upon 'a' and
must add emphatically that the Hindu dharma is non- aggression and not
non-violence, usually described as ahimsa. As a Hindu is the guardian of
humanity, he must be free from malice, and therefore cannot be aggressive. The
same humanitarian obhgation makes it incumbent on him to be able to deter the
aggressor with a superior power, courage and will-to-fight. Therefore, ahimsa
means non-aggression and not non-violence as usually understood by the Hindus.
As non-violence, ahimsa, is the contempt of the Rgveda, which describes Indra as
the "Lord of Power," who "fights battles for mankind. (R.V. I: IV
- 4.5)
The Hindus have a proud past for being the pioneers of
human civilisation. It is the law of nature that what is young today shall
become old tomorrow, while youth represents the prime of life owing to its lofty
aspirations requiring forward thrust, old age marks the decline of these
adventurous virtues, giving rise to make-believe and hesitation. Of course, old
age has its own merits but gripping with major issues of life does not appear as
a priority. This is what has happened to the Hindus, who are the oldest nation
on this earth. Their will to stand up and be counted has suffered further from
the fact that they were the richest people on the planet for the longest period.
Prosperity, though the most enjoyable thing, can also be debilitating, bringing
moral weakness in its wake. The decline of rich nations is usually due to the
fact that they become ahimsa-oriented i.e. they lose the virtue of fighting and
thus fail to check advances of the aggressors determined to destroy their honour
and cultural values. The Arab and Turkish raids of India are glaring examples of
this fact.
Not only historically is ahimsa, the national bane, but
it is also despicable psychologically. All animals, including humans are endowed
with antagonistic behaviour. It means that they defend themselves through the
natural mechanism of flight and fight sometimes they run away to avoid self-
destruction and sametime they fight for the sake of survival. Therefore,
fighting is a natural virtue of humans but ahimsa means renunciation of fighting
to make fight the way of life. Thus, ahimsa meaning non-violence is totally
inhuman. In fact, it is cowardice dressed up as piety; it is a poison looked
upon as an antidote; it is a whore thought of as an apsera. This is the biggest
evil that the Hindus have come to suffer.
Some thirty years ago, it was widely reported in the
British Press that a wolf raided a sheep-pen. As he was about to rip her young
ones, the mother became violent to protect them. She subjected the predator to
repeated butting until he lay dead.
May the memory of that great sheep live for ever. She
is the true exponent of the word: "ahimsa, " which means protection.
It clearly demonstrates that safety depends, not on running away from the
aggressor but smashing his head off. The beauty of the Vedic message lies in the
fact that it requires of the devotee to practise non-aggression towards others,
and at the same time be ready to crush the aggressor. Thus, ahimsa means
non-aggression and not non-violence because one needs violence to defeat the
villain.
Of course, sadhuism is a dedication to the search of
God or Mukti. Meditation is a part of it but the true path for salvation remains
karma: a person's quality of deeds. No divine, whether he be a Hindu or
non-Hindu, can attain his goal just by a devoted JAP. One can recite the word:
"sugar" one million times yet one's mouth will not become sweet unless
one eats sugar. Recitation of "Ramnam" is great yet Mukti depends on
becoming like Ram, and the only way to achieve this purpose is to act like him.
He was a ruler, a husband, a father, a friend and above all a crusader - the
destroyer of the aggressor. He was not an ascetic who had given up the world. He
set a pattern of life to be followed by his followers.
I do not wish to indulge in a divisive discussion but
the truth has got to be told: Hinduism is a way of life based on the doctrine of
karma. Asceticism or renunciation is its exact antithesis. Giving up the world
is a revolt against the doctrine of karma because a Sanyasi or Sadhu turns his
back on it. A true Yogi is a member of the society; he lives a full life,
performs his duties, fights for his rights, he meditates and enjoys marital
blessings. This is the Godly way. You do not have to take my word for it. Look
at the examples set by Shiva, Rama and Krishna.
Once a friend discussed this issue with me and claimed
that the validity for asceticism is based on the following command from the
Bhagavad Gita (2: 45):
"Be thou indifferent to those enjoyments and their
means, rising above pairs of opposites like pleasure and pain."
Since the Bhagavad Gita represents higher philosophy, it
is not always possible to understand its meaning without proper attention.
This verse certainly dces not mean renunciation though
it appears so. It becomes easy to understand this fact when we realise that none
of the major goes is an ascetic; they all have female partners. Even Shiva is
not totally given to meditation: he is a passionate lover. Rama is a ruler, and
his example requires a true Hindu to live a life of might and grandeur, but it
must be based on fairness and piety. Again Hinduism is totally different in its
approach to salvation: the Semitic religions such as Islam advocate that the
faithful shall be saved by the intercession of the Prophet Muhammad and Suti
saints. Hindusim does not acknowledge this approach: salvation depends upon
one's karma. Therefore, a sadhu cannot do much for you. All a true sadhu can do
is to show you the way. You yourself have to walk all the way to reach your
destination. This is what proves thte veracity of Hinduism. It is only the
simpletons who are taken in by verbosity.
Now, I may explain the complexity of the above quoted
verse:
The Rgveda is the first book ever to realise that, not
only moral conscience depends on pairs of opposites but the physical make-up of
the universe is also based on the principle of duality.
This verse has furnished us with a wonderful example of
this fact, that is, one cannot imagine pleasure without knowing what pain is.
Can you feel sweet without realising what bitter is? Nor can dark have any sense
withoul light, and so on. It demonstrates the truth that moral concepts exist in
pairs. This is equally true about physical existence:
Everything in this world is structured and held
together by Shakti i.e. the overall combination of different forces. Without
Shakti the particles that form any structure would move off in straight lines at
random, instead of staying together. The point to remember is that forces in the
universe come in equal and opposite pairs e.g., negative and positive electric
charges. So great is the exactitude of these forces that when they are added,
the positive cancels the negative, and the sum comes to zero.
It should be borne in mind that existence is not
possible without the reaction of the opposites. This is the reason that pain
requires pleasure as its remedy and the sensation of pleasure is bound to be
benumbed without a touch of pain. Therefore, the meaning of this verse is not
giving up the opposites, which is an impossibility, but to, create a balance
between them. This balanced state of karma equals zero like the actions and
reactions of natural forces which create activity through this mechanism. It is
not difficult to understand that zero is equated with nothingness which amounts
to renunciation. Therefore, "rising above pairs of opposites like pain and
pleasure, " means avoiding pain and pleasure for its own sake and pursuing
a life of balanced action.
Credibility of what I have said above can be judged by
the facts that nobody can renounce this world while he lives; he needs food,
water and shelter to keep his body and mind in a fairly healthy state to
exercise meditation. It must be remembered that contemplation of a sickly mind
is nothing but pursuit of madness.
Again, this kind of asceticism is against the Hindu
doctrine which prescribes a code of action and glory for its devotees. Just look
at the following:
Lord Krishna says:
"Arjuna, it is only the lucky among the Ksatriya,
who get such an unsolicited opportunity for war, which is an open door to
heaven.
Now if you will not wage such a righteous war, then
abandoning your duty and losing your reputation, you will incur sin.
Either slain in battle you will attain heaven, or
gaining victory you will enjoy scvereignty of the earth; therefore, arise
Arjuna, determined to fight." (Ch. 11 - 32, 33-37)
These verses clearly state the Hindu way of life, that is,
fighting for honour and glory, which also happens to be "an open door to
heaven." And a Ksatriya is the man or woman who strives for national glory
with sword and fire without turning his back on decency.
Heaven lies not under the shade of asceticism or ahimsa
but on the sharp edge of a sword. The nations, who follow this truth, have led a
life of honour and glory but the people who concealed their cowardice under the
impious doctrine of ahimsa, qualified for dishonour, disrespect and degradation.
If you consult a dictionary, you will find "Hindu" means "an
infidel, a negro, a slave, a coward, an inhabitant of India," and so on.
Do I need add any more to this list of insults? These
conditions have been created by those who advocate that the Gita is all about
ahimsa. This is a deliberate misinterpretation of those who want to enjoy the
priestly privileges and do not want to lead the nation through a personal
example of boldness, hardship and sacrifice. The Bhagavad Gita is Lord Krishna's
sermon to Arjuna in the battlefield and seeks to prepare him for a fight, but
these hypocrites dedicated to a life of softness, insist that the message is all
about controlling one's greed and anger. In an attempt to fool the devotees they
also insult the Lord, who clearly emphasises the merit of battling with the
evil. How could he lecture on greed and anger when the armies were poised in the
battlefield to annihilate each other?
Finally, I salute Sri Rangarajan, the hero of this
article and stress that a patriotic sadhu dedicated to serve Bharat Mata is not
an ascetic but a saint, who seeks Mukti through national glory. He represents
Lord Shiva, who is both a warrior and lover. It is high time that the Hindus
were taught the Vedic virtues of fightng evil to uphold the cause of
righteousness. To a virtuous Hindu, nothing is more righteous than serving
Bharat Mata. She is the fountain of life for all those who live on her soil.
Therefore, her dignity and honour must be the priority of all her sons and
daughters. It is essential that consciousness of the dignity of Bharat Mata is
preached with utmost zeal and sincerity. This goal is best achieved if every
sadhu learns to girdle himself with a sword to lead the way for Dharm Yudh. Let
every Hindu temple be adorned with a statue of Bharat Mata and have facilities
for training the devotees in martial arts and patriotism. This is a job for the
great Sadhu Rangarajan, the creator of Vande Matram. Singing patriotic hymns is
great but making people true patriots, eager to serve the cause of Bharat Mata,
is immensely greater. In England, they say: "An ounce of practice is better
than a tonne of theory."
Let the Hindus understand clearly that ahimsa means
cowardice and not protection unless it is accompanied by the will to fight. If
someone attacks your children, how will you protect them? The only way of
protecting them is to kill the killer. This is true ahimsa.
When Tamburlaine invaded India, he murdered 100,000
Hindus and carried away 20,000 screaming Hindu virgins. The Muslim historian,
Farishta, made fun of the Hindus for not fighting Tamburlaine. I do not blame
him for this attitude. Why? Because Manu Smriti, the code of the Hindu Law
clearly states
"The cowards are the food for the brave." (Ch.
5: 29)
The people who flout their fundamental laws, yet call
themselves Hindus, deserve this fate and will continue to do so until they lose
their taste for cowardice under the guise of ahimsa, and start defending Bharat
Mata with their blood, sweat and breath of life.
A true sadhu is not an ascetic but a man of God. He
cannot renounce this world which is full of God's children. He has a duty to
guide them and participate in crushing evil. This is the crux of Dharma as
expiained by the behavioural model of the Lord Rama, who was a virtuous son, a
loving husband, a good father and a great ruler. Thus, a true devotee of Rama
seeks perfection through serving his fellow-beings, and not by turning his back
on them.
May God bless Shriman Rangarajan with wisdom and
courage to serve Bharat Mata, the only Deity that can exalt her children.
|
Index
