Hinduism

Its Meaning for the Liberation of the Spirit

Swami Nikhilananda

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2021
• ISBN:
  9781000480061
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Theology & Religion
• Subtopic: Hinduism

First Published in 1959, Hinduism written specifically for the modern readers describes and interprets one of the world's chief religions. For thousands of years Indian sages have speculated on man, creation, and the universe. One result has been an astonishing amount of myth and ritual, of art, asceticism, and philosophy. Swami Nikhilananda provides a brief account of Hinduism in both its theoretical and its practical aspects. It is written mainly from the point of view of non-dualism which the author argues is the highest achievement of India's mystical insights and philosophical speculation, and her real contribution to world culture. The volume deals with themes like Hindu Ethics; Karma-Yoga; Bhakti-Yoga; Jnana- Yoga; Raja-Yoga; and Tantra. This complete survey of Hindu beliefs and customs is indispensable for scholars and researchers of Hinduism, religion, Indian philosophy, Indian culture, and heritage.

IV

Hindu Ethics

ETHICS, which concerns itself with the study of conduct, is derived, in Hinduism, from certain spiritual concepts; it forms the steel-frame foundation of the spiritual life. Though right conduct is generally considered to belong to legalistic ethics, it has a spiritual value as well. Hindu ethics differs from modern scientific ethics, which is largely influenced by biology; for according to this latter, whatever is conducive to the continuous survival of a particular individual or species is good for it. It also differs from utilitarian ethics, whose purpose is to secure the maximum utility for a society by eliminating friction and guaranteeing for its members a harmonious existence. Hindu ethics prescribes the disciplines for a spiritual life, which are to be observed consciously or unconsciously as long as a man lives.

Hindu ethics is mainly subjective or personal, its purpose being to eliminate such mental impurities as greed and egotism, for the ultimate attainment of the highest good. Why Hindu ethics stresses the subjective or personal value of action will be discussed later. Objective ethics, which deals with social welfare, has also been considered by Hindu thinkers. It is based upon the Hindu conception of dharma, or duty, related to a man’s position in society and his stage in life. Objective ethics, according to the Hindu view, is a means to an end, its purpose being to help the members of society to rid themselves of self-centredness, cruelty, greed, and other vices, and thus to create an environment helpful to the pursuit of the highest good, which transcends society. Hinduism further speaks of certain universal ethical principles which apply to all human beings irrespective of their position in society or stage in life.

The ethical doctrines of the Hindus are based upon the teachings of the Upanishads and of certain secondary scriptures, which derive their authority from the Vedas. But though their emphasis is mainly subjective, the Upanishads do not deny the value of social ethics. For instance, we read: ‘As the scent is wafted afar from a tree laden with flowers, so also is wafted afar the scent of a good deed.’ Among the social virtues are included ‘hospitality, courtesy, and duties to wife, children, and grandchildren.’ In one of the Upanishads, a king, in answer to a question by a rishi regarding the state of affairs in his country, says: ‘In my kingdom there is no thief, no miser, no drunkard, no man without an altar in his home, no ignorant person, no adulterer, much less an adulteress.’

Ethical action calculated to promote social welfare is enjoined upon all who are identified with the world and conscious of their social responsibilities. Without ethical restraint there follows social chaos, which is detrimental to the development of spiritual virtues. According to the Upanishads, the gods, who are the custodians of society, place obstacles in the path of those who seek liberation from samsara, or the relative world, without previously discharging their social duties. As a person realises the unreality of the world and the psycho-physical entity called the individual, his social duties gradually fall away; but they must not be forcibly given up. If the scab is removed before the wound is healed, a new sore forms. Every normal person endowed with social consciousness has a threefold debt to discharge: his debts to the gods, to the rishis, and to the ancestors. The debt to the gods, who favour us with rain, sun, wind, and other natural amenities, is paid through worship and prayer. The debt to the rishis, from whom we inherit our spiritual culture, is paid through regular study of the scriptures. The debt to the ancestors, from whom we have received our physical bodies, is paid through the propagation of children, ensuring the preservation of the line. With the blessings of the gods, the rishis, and the ancestors, one can cheerfully practise spiritual disciplines for the realisation of the highest good, in which all worldly values find fulfilment.

The observance of social ethics, in a large measure, preserved Hindu society when various outside forces threatened to destroy it. The neglect of social ethics, on the other hand, has undermined its vitality.

How, by suitable ethical disciplines, the brutish man may become a decent man, the decent man an aristocrat, and the aristocrat a spiritual person, has been explained by a story in one of the Upanishads. Once a god, a man, and a demon—the three offspring of the Creator—sought his advice for self-improvement. To them the Creator said: ‘Da.’ As the syllable da is the first letter of three Sanskrit words, meaning, respectively, self-control, charity, and compassion, the Creator was in effect asking the god to practise self-control, the man charity, and the demon compassion. In human society there exist aristocrats, average men, and demoniacal men. The aristocrat, in spite of his education, refinement, generosity, and gentleness, may lack in self-control and go to excess in certain matters like eating, drinking, or gambling. Hence he needs self-control to improve his character further. The average man, in spite of his many human qualities, is often greedy; he wants to take what belongs to others. Liberality or charity is his discipline for self-improvement. The demoniacal person takes delight in treating others with cruelty and ruthlessness, which can be suppressed through the practice of compassion. The Upanishads say that the Creator, even today, gives the same moral advice to different types of human beings through the voice of the thunderclap, which makes the reverberating sound ‘Da-da-da.’

The caste system in Hinduism is intimately connected with the social aspect of Hindu ethics, demonstrating the importance of renunciation and self-denial as cardinal virtues. The origin of this system is found in the Vedas, though it later underwent much transformation in the hands of the Hindu law-givers. The Bhagavad Gita says that the Lord Himself divided human beings into four groups, determined by their actions and virtues. Traditions other than Hinduism support similar divisions. Plato divided the state into three classes, castes, or professions, namely, philosopher-rulers, warriors, and the masses. Nietzsche says that every healthy society contains three mutually conditioning types and that it is nature, not Manu, the Hindu law-giver, which separates one from another: the mainly intellectual, those mainly endowed with muscular and temperamental strength, and those who are distinguished neither for the one nor for the other, the mediocre third class. The first group contains select individuals, and the last, the great majority.

According to the Hindu scriptures, a normal society consists of the brahmins, who are men of knowledge, of science, literature, thought, and learning; the kshatriyas, who are men of action and valour; the vaisyas, who are men of desires, possessiveness, and acquisitive enterprise; and lastly the sudras, who are men of little intelligence, who cannot be educated beyond certain low limits, who are incapable of dealing with abstract ideas, and who are fit only for manual labour. Each of them, in the words of Nietzsche, has its own hygiene, its own domain of labour, its own sentiment of perfection, and its own special superiority. In the Vedas the four castes are described as four important parts of the body of the Cosmic Person: the head, the arms, the thighs, and the feet. This analogy suggests the interdependence of the four castes for the common welfare of all; it also suggests that the exploitation of one by another undermines the strength of the whole of society. The rules regarding the four castes sum up the experience, sagacity, and experimental morals of long centuries of Hindu thinkers.

The Bhagavad Gita describes the virtues of the four castes, and their duties. The qualities of a brahmin are control of the mind and the senses, austerity, cleanliness, forbearance, uprightness, scholarship, insight, and faith. He possesses a minimum of worldly assets, accepts voluntary poverty, and is satisfied with simple living and high thinking. Both a priest and a teacher, he is the leader of society and an adviser to king and commoner. A custodian of the culture of the race, he occupies his high position in society by virtue of his spirituality, and not by the power of arms or wealth. The qualities of a kshatriya are heroism, high spirit, firmness, resourcefulness, dauntlessness in battle, generosity, and sovereignty. Agriculture, cattle-rearing, and trade are the duties of a vaisya. The main duty of a sudra is action entailing physical labour.

The hierarchy in the caste system is determined by the degree of voluntary renunciation, poverty, and self-control, and also by the degree of intellectual and spiritual attainments. A brahmin has to suppress many impulses for physical enjoyment. A kshatriya, no doubt, enjoys power and pleasure, but he is ready at any time to lay down his life for the protection of the country from external aggression or internal chaos. A vaisya, whose moral code and intellectual attainments are not so rigorous or high as those of the two upper castes, amasses wealth, both for his own enjoyment and for the welfare of society. One does not expect from a sudra very much of spiritual, intellectual, or moral perfection. The higher is one’s position in the caste system, the greater is one’s obligation to members of the lower castes, and the more stern is the renunciation of personal comforts. Noblesse oblige. The caste system was designed to promote the harmonious working of society, the weak being assured of protection from the strong. ‘It is a law of spiritual economics,’ said Mahatma Gandhi; ‘it has nothing to do with superiority or inferiority.’ When a person belonging to a lower caste becomes a saint, he is honoured even by the brahmins. The disciplines for spiritual development are not withheld from anyone.

The basis of the caste system, according to the Hindu view, is men’s self-evident inborn inequality: physical, intellectual, and spiritual. An individual is born into a higher or lower caste as a result of actions performed by him in his previous life, and each person, therefore, is himself responsible for his position. By discharging the duties determined by his caste, a man becomes qualified for birth in a higher caste in a future life. If one does not accept the doctrine of rebirth and the law of karma, then the inequity from which members of lower castes often suffer cannot be explained.

A second element in the organisation of the caste system is varna or colour. Even in the remote past of history, the Indian subcontinent was inhabited by people of different racial groups marked by different complexions, which formed the basis of their divisions. In course of time, through trade relations and invasions, the Persians, the Greeks, the Scythians, the Bactrians, the Sakas, the Kusanas, the Huns, and peoples of other races entered India and were gradually absorbed into Hindu society. They were assigned places in the caste system according to their physical or mental aptitudes. In this manner Hindu society solved the problem of alien minorities in its midst. Gradually the contrast between colours was toned down by intermarriages. Through permutations and combinations many subcastes came into existence. A tolerant Hindu society allowed the newcomers to preserve, as far as practicable, their own racial preferences regarding food, clothes, and social and religious customs. This perhaps explains the existence of a great diversity in India in regard to these matters. A composite Hindu society gradually came into being, whose watch-words were unity in diversity and friendly coexistence. In olden times inter-dining was permitted, as also intermarriage under certain conditions. Through the caste system, Hindu society entrusted itself to the leadership of spirituality and intellect in preference to that of military power, wealth, or labour.

As the population increased and other complexities set in, the qualities of the individual became less easy to determine and heredity was gradually accepted as a sort of working principle to determine the caste. The son inherited the professional duties of the father as well as some of his physical and mental traits. But in olden times, when a brahmin did not live up to his virtues, he was demoted, and a sudra, by the acquisition of higher qualities, was promoted. Conduct was more important than birth. One of the Upanishads narrates the touching story of Satyakama, a young boy who wanted to study the Vedas, a privilege accorded only to one who was born in the brahmin caste. When the boy asked his mother about his lineage, she said that she did not know it because she had conceived him when, as a young woman, she had been preoccupied with many household duties and had had no time to ask his father about his lineage. When the teacher whom Satyakama approached for the Vedic knowledge heard this he was impressed with the boy’s truthfulness and outspoken nature and concluded that his father must have been a brahmin.

For many centuries the caste system worked in a superb manner, creating and consolidating the Indian culture, which reached its height when the brahmins, kshatriyas, vaisyas, and sudras all dedicated their activities and efforts to the common welfare. But in this relative universe even a good custom, if it continues for a long time, becomes corrupted. The brahmins had a monopoly of the knowledge of the scriptures, which was the source of their power; eventually they became greedy for more and began to exploit the lower castes. They demanded privileges and respect even when they did not possess brahminical qualities. Similarly, the kshatriyas and the vaisyas exploited the sudras, who formed the majority of the population. The social laws became rigid, and in the absence of freedom Hindu society stagnated. On account of exploitation, the masses became weak and the country fell an easy prey to powerful invaders from the outside. Islam and Christianity took advantage of the injustices that prevailed in Hindu society and made easy converts, especially among those who were denied social privileges. Hindu society, however, was not completely to blame; for these foreign religions also sometimes used force and unethical persuasion for the purpose of conversion.

But it should not be forgotten that the caste system, even in its rigid form, rendered good service to Hindu society during the days of foreign domination. The brahmin leaders, by means of iron-clad caste laws, prevented Islam and Christianity from completely destroying it. They became the custodians of the Hindu culture and zealously protected it from the levelling influence of these alien faiths.

Contact with the West revealed to the Hindu leaders many drawbacks in their society and made them aware of the need for drastic changes in the caste system. Since India’s attainment of political freedom, laws are being enacted for the gradual elimination of taboos about marriage, inter-dining, and social intercourse. The lower castes are being given greater facilities for education, and no one is being debarred from government jobs on account of his caste. It is to be hoped that this unique social system, which has in the past decisively contributed to India’s spiritual life, will again create an environment in which men and women will be able to practise the virtues stressed in Hinduism for the realisation of the final goal of human evolution.

The Bhagavad Gita states, in its last verse, that the secret of prosperity, strength, morality, and all-round social welfare lies in the harmonious working together of the spiritual and the royal power. Sankaracharya points out that a conflict between the brahmins, the creators of the spiritual culture, and the kshatriyas, the protectors of that culture, causes the disintegration of society. If India gives up the caste system in principle and in practice, she will surely lose her spiritual backbone. There is, however, no room for the caste system in an industrialised society, which is controlled largely by the power of wealth and labour. It is the goal of a secular classless society to create an equality on the level of the sudras, whereas Indian society, through the caste system, has aimed at creating an equality by raising all to the level of the brahmins.

Even at its best, however, the caste system is a human institution, and one cannot expect perfection of it. The good and evil of the rule of society by the four castes have been brilliantly pointed out by Swami Vivekananda in a letter to an American friend written during the last decade of the nineteenth century. The Swami says:

Human society is, in turn, governed by the four castes—the priests, the soldiers, the traders, and the labourers. Each state has its glories as well as defects. When the priest (brahmin) rules, there is a tremendous exclusiveness on hereditary grounds—the persons of the priests and their descendants are hemmed in with all sorts of safeguards—none but they have any knowledge. Its glory is that at this period is laid the foundation of the sciences. The priests cultivate the mind, for through the mind they govern.

The military (kshatriya) rule is tyrannical and cruel; but they are not exclusive, and during that period the arts and social culture attain their height.

The commercial (vaisya) rule comes next. It is awful in its silent crushing and blood-sucking power. Its advantage is that, as the trader himself goes everywhere, he is a good disseminator of the ideas collected during the two previous states. They are still less exclusive than the military, but culture begins to decay.

Last will come the labour (sudra) rule. Its advantages will be the distribution of physical comforts—its disadvantages (perhaps) the lowering of culture. There will be a great distribution of ordinary education, but extraordinary geniuses will be less and less.

If it is possible to form a state in which the knowledge of the priest period, the culture of the military, the distributive spirit of the commercial, and the ideal of equality of the last can all be kept intact, minus their evils, it will be an ideal state. But is it possible?

Yet, the first three have had their day, now is the time for the last—they must have it—none can resist it… The other systems have been tried and found wanting. Let this one be tried—if for nothing else, for the novelty of the thing. A redistribution of pain and pleasure is better than always the same persons having pains and pleasures. The sum total of good and evil in the world remains ever the same. The yoke will be lifted from shoulder to shoulder by new systems, that is all.

Let every dog have his day in this miserable world, so that after this experience of so-called happiness they may all come to the Lord and give up this vanity of a world and governments and all other botherations.

Outside the pale of society are the untouchables, whose contact pollutes others. Who are these untouchables? Originally they were the aborigines, with a very low mental development, who ate unclean food, lived by hunting, and were uncouth in appearance, manner, and conduct. The Aryans, proud of their spiritual culture, shrank from them. But instead of annihilating them outright, or forcibly superimposing upon them their own higher culture, the Aryans sought to assimilate them through education. The Ramayana and the Mahabharata record that many of these aborigines established intimate friendships with the Hindus of the higher castes. During the foreign rule of India, when the very existence of Hinduism was threatened, society became conservative and the process of assimilation practically stopped. Now that the danger is over, laws have been passed abolishing untouchability. Economic and political positions, educational facilities, and temple entry for the purpose of worship are open to all. Even in the past many Hindu religious leaders have protested against untouchability and regarded it as a blot upon society.

Apart from caste, a person’s duties, in the Hindu tradition, are determined by the stage of life to which he belongs. Life, which is regarded by Hinduism as a journey to the shrine of truth, is marked by four stages, each of which has its responsibilities and obligations. In that journey a normal person should leave no legitimate aspiration unfulfilled; otherwise physical and mental sickness will follow, putting roadblocks in the way of his further spiritual progress.

The first stage of life covers the period of study, when a student cultivates his mind and prepares himself for future service to society. He lives with his teacher in a forest retreat and regards the latter as his spiritual father. He leads an austere life and conserves his energy, spurning the defilement of the body and mind through evil words, thoughts, or deeds. He shows respect to his elders and teachers, and becom...