This piece is an after-thought
on my “The Myth of Similarity Between Religions” where I argue that all
religions are not the same. I continue here and argue that Dharma is different
from religion as understood in West.
I’ve based my understanding of
religion mainly on the perspective of practitioners, to confirm if my
understanding of the religion accurately represents its true position.
Fate of a good atheist
We shall consider an atheist
who is a man of certain values, law-abiding and treats others well. But, we
repeat, he does not believe in any religion.
From a Hindu perspective, this
man’s fate is entirely dependent on his karma [roughly sum-total of his deeds
in life]. His lack of belief does not interfere with the law of karma, and if
his conduct is good, post-death he may in all probability get a human life
again with better material prosperity.
However according to Islam and
Christianity, the person’s lack of belief on Prophet Mohammed and Jesus Christ
respectively, qualifies him for eternal hellfire after death. The atheist’s
good work notwithstanding, his lack of belief renders all positives useless.
Please note that by belief we
specifically mean belief-in-Jesus-ONLY or belief-in-Prophet-ONLY. These
religions are categorical in naming only their Saviour’s God as one and reject
Gods of other faiths. They do not believe that salvation is possible outside
their faith.
Fate of a Hindu
We analyse here the fate of a
Hindu from various standpoints.
From a Hindu perspective, a
Hindu’s belief on Hindu principles is of little influence on his fate. His
belief does not absolve him of any sins he has committed. If one is a sincere
Hindu, he must automatically seek the welfare of world and should not hate/harm
others. However, if he harms others, (except as defence) he must face his karma
however pious he might have been. A Hindu who kills innocent people of other
religions too faces retribution for his deeds.
To both Christianity and Islam,
a Hindu just by virtue of being one, is worthy of contempt however lofty he
might be in human terms.
A case in point is the opinion
of Maulana Muhammad Ali (an important Muslim leader of Khilafat movement of
1922, India) on Mahatma Gandhi: "However pure Gandhi's character may
be, he must appear to me from the point of view of religion inferior to any
Mussalman, even though he be without character”. He repeated it later,
saying, 'Yes, according to my religion and creed, I hold an adulterous
and a fallen Muslim to be better than a Mr. Gandhi."
According to core scriptures of
Islam, it is a pious to destroy Pagan temples, forcefully convert them to
Islam, and kill those who refuse to obey the rule of Allah. Likewise, a pious
Christian feels justified in exploiting poor people or those mentally weakened
by problems and forcing them to convert in lure of material benefits.
Social-service has always been the mask under which the missionary apparatus
seeks to convert “heathens”. If conversions are banned, the whole “healing”
will end instantly.
Fate of a Muslim and
Christian
The Hindu position with respect
to Muslim and/or Christian believer follows the pattern of an atheist. If this
believer performs good karma he will reap good harvest, his non-belief in
Hinduism has nothing to do with his fate. However, if this believer kills innocent
people in the name his religion, he will face due negative karma. Hinduism
doesn’t absolve any sin committed in the name of converting others. Unless
necessitated by dharma [for larger good of mankind] and purely as a defence
against atrocities, war is not scripturally sanctioned.
This cannot be misinterpreted
by anyone for his selfish cause and needs proper examination beforehand [like
all efforts were made to avert Mahabharata war and only as the last resort when
all discussions fail, is war declared].
On the contrary, a Christian
and Muslim are actually urged to go around the world and “help” people realize
their truth. All means are justified to convert the unbelievers. While Islam is
still pre-modern, Christianity post-reformation is more subtle and intelligent
in this endeavour. But the root motivation remains the same.
History-centrism
Let us imagine a hypothetical
situation where the whole world forgets the past and there is no way to regain
knowledge of history. What happens to Islam and Christianity in such a
situation? Because both cite their authority on truth, based on historical
references, these religions are sure to fall apart.
But Hinduism is like a
scientist’s discovery of nature’s laws. Just like if Newton would not have
discovered the law of gravity, it could have been discovered by someone else
although it might have taken more time. Extending the same logic of
mass-amnesia to this concept, we can be sure that the same law can be reached
again through independent enquiry which is not subject to prior knowledge or
belief.
The principles of Hinduism are
universal and open to anyone to wishes to gain from them. It is not the
political affiliation of religion that matters. One may call himself a Muslim,
Christian or Hindu, but what does not change is man’s relationship with his
activity. This has little to do with politico-religious organization and
depends on self-realization.
One line sums it all: Hinduism:
Liberation through Knowledge. | Abrahamic religions: Salvation
through Faith.
Dharma can be termed as an
intrinsic nature of each matter whether animate or inanimate. It is the dharma
of tiger to hunt down other animals and eat them. The dharma of inanimate
objects when studied in detail becomes what we term of Physics today, like it
is dharma of earth to revolve around the sun.
Likewise, irrespective of one’s
political affiliation to a cause which differs with space and time, one’s
dharma is deeply interweaved with one’s activities from which none is exempt.
The intrinsic nature of human community also has a dharma and each varna
contributes towards maintenance of universal dharma by performing its
sva-dharma (personal dharma) well. A non-religious society can be ethical. But
a non-dharmic society cannot be ethical.
Contrast
this with the Monotheistic Prophetic religions – they appear like an
imperialist ideology that provides a garb under which its people indulge in
wanton exploitation. The rapid rise of these religions and its longevity is
explained by its apologists as a vindication of its truthfulness – I contend
that longevity isn’t necessarily a measure of a theory’s correctness.
Sometimes, a theory is just too useful as a tool for many people who abuse it
for their own selfish purposes.
I conclude by offering two paradigms
that contrast Indian and Western culture.
- Two millenniums ago, Emperor Ashoka of Maurya Empire surrendered to Buddhism [which I consider as an offshoot of Sanatana Dharma]. Here, the warrior surrendered to the faith and changed himself for better to became a benevolent ruler.
- Sometime later, Constantine the Roman Emperor, accepted Christianity. Instead of the Christianity changing the warrior, the warrior manipulated Christianity to further his imperialistic designs.
That helps understand to a considerable extent the difference between Dharma and Religion.
What I like in your writing is the Clarity, Substantiation and the flow of words.. The Universality of Hinduism is beautifully explained in your History Centrism..
ReplyDeleteBut.. I m obliged to float my observations here..
The moment we separate Religion and Dharma,.. it gives us a wrong message that a Religion may exist without Dharma.. As Humans started forming community (as they started Farming and settling), necessity for commonly agreed terms among the members rose and hence came the practice called Religion. What Religion spoke was Dharma. May be, the Creator of Religion could have either intentionally manipulated it for internal exploitation or unknowingly could have spread a wrong message (which is against Dharma - as being proved in Islam and Christianity). But, Dharma couldn't be a different entity from Religion. I want to quote your own writing here.. As you have mentioned, a perfect example is Hinduism that fosters Dharma. And another perfect example of a Religion misnomer that goes against Universal Righteousness is the Western Origination.
I had a mixed feeling after reading this. I agree with you on certain points , while others seemed too narrowed, misconceived and biased. What you said on Islam could be 100 % true (but not practed by all the muslims), But those Christians you referred were mainly the Evangelical kind off religious fanatics, rather than the whole community itself. This ideology that all Non-Jesus Followers will rot in hellfire is generally seen among the ultra religious groups of Catholics who tend to live life as prescribed in the Bible. Now coming back Hinduism although everything seems to be fine now ............ but we had so many shameful practices in our society in the past like Untouchability, Sati, abjuration of widows etc etc. Which are unseen by us people living in the cities but are still practiced customarily in many unknown parts of the villages in India. I am an atheist but spiritual, when you look at each religion objectively and rationally you actually can notice how much of every religious practices tend to be more anthropomorphically fascistic than sheer acts for attaining gods spiritual glory.
DeleteRamesh,
DeleteThanks for commenting.
while others seemed too narrowed, misconceived and biased.
We shall presently examine whose opinions are "narrow, misconceived and biased".
What you said on Islam could be 100 % true (but not practed by all the muslims)
Despite your sincerest convictions on one's ideology, all followers cannot implement them always due to various reasons such as impracticability, formidable enemy etc. While most Muslims aren't terrorists, most terrorists are Muslims. Most Muslims still believe that their God is the one-and-only-God.
But those Christians you referred were mainly the Evangelical kind off religious fanatics, rather than the whole community itself. This ideology that all Non-Jesus Followers will rot in hellfire is generally seen among the ultra religious groups of Catholics who tend to live life as prescribed in the Bible.
As late as 2000, Pope John Paul II, clearly specified that "there is no salvation outside Jesus" (itself a modification of "no salvation outside Church"). Vatican is the seat of Roman Catholics, far from being a fringe group is the most original and largest group.
New converts to Christianity in India are specifically told that Hinduism is witchcraft. That they should disown idol worship and Hindu culture. Most converts will never enter a temple or take prasadam. Not that they have to, but eating prasadam certainly does no harm to anybody's faith. Most Christian converts are culturally alienated.
Far from being an ultra religious view, the most common/normal view of any Father, Pastor, etc. is that Hinduism is devil worship and doesn't offer salvation. I request you to quote a single instance of any Christian Father/Bishop/Pastor that Hinduism also offers salvation. [ Clue: You won't. Else, how can they justify conversions if Hinduism is equally good?]
Now coming back Hinduism although everything seems to be fine now ............ but we had so many shameful practices in our society in the past like Untouchability, Sati, abjuration of widows etc etc.
On untouchability and Caste System, I've written this Controversial Caste System of India
Do check it up and let me know if you concur. Also, Hindus have been second-grade citizens for past 1000 years (800 years of Islamic rule and 200 years of British). They were not in a position to reform themselves. As soon they got the opportunity the corrected it via reservations.
am an atheist but spiritual, when you look at each religion objectively and rationally you actually can notice how much of every religious practices tend to be more anthropomorphically fascistic than sheer acts for attaining gods spiritual glory.
I do not observe this in Hinduism. Can you quote me just one Hindu scripture from which Hindus seek inspiration and explain how it encourages fascism? Do not bring in Manusmriti, as no Indian ever seeks any inspiration from it in real life. A simple google search can bring dozens of results regarding Islam & Christianity.
Do read this earlier blog Caste System and Conversionswhere I explain why all religions are not the same.
Politically correct notions are intellectual laziness. Just because few notions appear trendy, doesn't mean they're right.
Balasanjeevi:
DeleteThanks for commenting.
Most ardent scholars of Sanatana Dharma consider these religions are political ideologies. My point was that Dharma and religion are not the same. West understood Hinduism the way it understood its own religions i.e. they mapped dharma with their western counterpart.
Since, both have different origins, we cannot go into who is *right*. Since, all these days, Hinduism was being evaluated in Western template, I am reversing this and evaluating Western religions in Dharmic template.