The Pilgrim

The Quarterly Bulletin of the Christian Society for the Study of Hinduism

The Christian Society for the Study of Hinduism

Patrons: The Metropolitan of India, Calcutta Bishop BRENTON T. BADLEY, Delhi.

President: Bishop CLEMENT D. ROCKEY, Lucknow.

Vice-Presidents: The BISHOP of LUCKNOW, Allahabad Dr. A.J. APPASAMY, M.A., Ph.D., Palamcottah. Rev. C.S. THOBURN, M.A., Jabalpur. Rev. G.H.C. ANGUS, M.A., Serampore College.

Secretary: Dr. J.E. McELDOWNEY, Leonard Theological College, Jabalpur

Treasurer: Dr. C.H. HAZLETT, A. P. Mission, Mainpuri, U.P.

Convener, Benares Institute: Rev. R.C. DAS, M.A., Benares United City Mission, Ramkatora, Benares Cantonment.

Committee: Mrs. W. STANLEY GOULD, Ewing Christian College, Allahabad Prof. V.E. DUTT, M.A., B.D., Serampore Mr. PAUL DAS, B.A., N.I.C. Tract and Book Society, Allahabad Rev. J.S. MOON, M.A., Ramkatora, Benares

Editorial Board: Bishop Clement D. Rockey, Lucknow Dr. J.E. McELDOWNEY, Leonard Theological College, Jabalpur Rev. G.H.C. Angus, Principal, Serampore College Rev. R.C. Das, United City Mission, Benares Rev. J.S. MOON, United City Mission, Benares (Editor)

The objects of the Christian Society for the Study of Hinduism are,

1. To create and maintain adequate interest in the study of Hinduism by Christians
2. To carry on the study in a sympathetic, constructive and critical way for the purpose of effective evangelism and
3. To achieve the above objects in co-operation with Church and Mission bodies.

The activities of the Society are,

1. To conduct in Benares (and if possible in a South Indian centre) an Institute of Hinduism stressing its popular aspects
2. Publish The Pilgrim, a quarterly bulletin, bearing on Hinduism, its relation To Christianity and work among Hindus and
3. To encourage the organisation of a permanent School of Hinduism.

The minimum annual subscription is Rs. 2/-. Membership fees and gifts may be sent to the treasurer, Dr. C.H. Hazlett, A.P. Mission, Mainpuri, U.P.

Every member will receive The Pilgrim free.

Hinduism - A Methodological Approach

By ASHANANDA NAG, CALCUTTA.

Hinduism is a problem to a student of comparative religion, and is not easily defined. It is said that its connotation is so vast and comprehensive that it hardly admits of definition. But if Hinduism is a religion, and if religion can be defined - it has been defined - there is no reason why the term Hinduism should not lend itself to definition. The difficulties attaching to the definition of Hinduism may arise from the fact that there is something arbitrary and wrong about the term.

Before we familiarise ourselves with the theological contents of Hinduism we should institute an enquiry into the historical origin of the word. In the whole range of Sanskrit literature the word “Hindu” is not to be found. It is a word of Persian origin. It occurs in a Persepolis inscription dated about the 5th century B.C. It is the ancient Persian form of the Sanskrit word Sindhu which is mentioned more than once in the Rigveda. The sibilant of the Sanskrit changes and assumes the aspirate form in Ancient Persian. Sankara did not call himself a Hindu and Ramanuja probably never heard the word. If a man in ancient India had been asked. “What are you?”, he would probably have answered that he was a Vaishnava, or a Saiva, or a Vedantist etc., or he would have said that he was a Brahmin, or a Kshatriya or a Vaisya etc. He would never have thought of describing himself as a Hindu. Mohammedan conquerors popularised this word Hindu and often used it as a term of reproach. Towards the end of the 18th century the word Hindu was not much used by non-Mohammedans. The word “Gentoo” was used - e.g., Sir William Jones refers to the Laws of the Gentus. This word is derived from “Gentile” and was perhaps used by the Portuguese: to mean the non-Christians. The Mohammedans, except a few like Al-Beruni¹ and others, had no clear knowledge of the religions that were current in India. They felt however that the religious practices and customs of India were so different from their own Mohammedanism. This difference, constituted in their eyes the unity of the religions of India. In the light of this historical fact Hinduism may be defined as “a collective term created by foreigners² to lump together the religions that were then current in India.” There is no such religion as Hinduism and for this reason the term does not correspond to reality as we know it. Hence, the difficulty that one has in defining it. Hinduism is only a name and an artificial name at that. To the realm of actual existence belong such religions as Saivism, Vaisnavism, Vedantism etc. They may have some kind of unity, but the most obvious kind of unity is geographical - i.e., all these different religions and systems rose and attained development on the soil of India. The atmosphere of India caused their origin, evolution, and progress or decline. It may be pointed out that all these religions and systems derive directly or indirectly from the Vedas which constitute the earliest document of Hindu thought. They tacitly or decisively believe in the four-fold division of castes, and in transmigration. Buddhism and Jainism are not strictly speaking part of the Hindu system because both defy and ignore the authority of the Vedas.

The word Hindu has primarily reference to Sindhu which is the Sanskrit name for the Indus. It then began to mean the region through which the river flowed. Then it was used of people who inhabited this region. But it should be borne in mind that it had at that time no religious significance. It was used in a geographical sense. It was probably the Mohammedans who began to use the word in a religious sense. It became fairly current all over India by the middle of the nineteenth century. The use of the words Hindu and Hinduism seems to have imposed an artificial unity on the religions that have grown on the soil of India. From this particular point of view the difference between Christianity and Hinduism seems to be this. In Christianity, we have the spectacle of unity followed by diversity. We have the message of Jesus Christ which was in primitive terms known as “the Way.” The word “Christian” was first used in Antioch. Then arose creeds and sects which all lay claim to the designation “Christian.” In Hinduism on the other hand we have diversity first and then some sort of unity comes afterwards. This unity is mainly geographical and nomenelative.

The problem of critical scholarship is to enumerate and separate the different strands of the complicated thread of Hinduism. Some elements are plain enough, e.g., Saivism, Vaisnavism, Vedantism etc. They admit of identification and can be labelled accurately. But the structure of Hindu thought becomes more and more complex as it exhibits syncretic tendencies. Hinduism, absorbs new cults and creeds and makes the problem of critical investigation more difficult. It should however be borne in mind that this problem is not peculiar to Hinduism. It is a far cry from Harnack’s “What is Christianity?” to the historical interpretation of the Christian faith by theologians like Ernst Troeltsch and others. Troeltsch would have us believe that Christianity in its historical setting is highly syncretistic. This is true insofar as Christianity has incorporated into itself cults and creeds from Jewish, Persian, Hellenistic and Latin sources. The Christian faith has made room for extraneous elements and given them a new meaning and sanctity.

Some recent Hindu writers are keenly conscious of the foreign character of the term Hinduism, and refer to the Hindu religion as Sanatana Dharma. They mean to suggest that Hinduism is the eternal religion which knows no change. Hinduism has no founder whereas Christianity was founded by Jesus Christ and Buddhism by Buddha. The Vedas constitute the earliest documents of Hinduism, and it is contended that the Vedas have no authors.³ In short, Hinduism is not a founded religion like Christianity and Buddhism.⁴ It is also asserted that since the word. Veda means knowledge, it must be eternal. Vivekananda says that the law of gravitation will continue to operate whether the human race remembers it or forgets all about the law. Critical scholarship is reluctant to admit that the Vedas have no authors. Some of the composers of the Vedic hymns are mentioned by their names (e.g., Vamadeva) and even if we should grant that the authors of the Vedas are not known, it would hardly follow that the Vedas had no authors. Our ignorance has reference only to the exact names of the authors and not to the fact that the Vedas have authors.⁵ If the Vedas are equated with knowledge, geometry, physics and chemistry have a better right to be termed eternal than the Vedas as we know them. We may also point out that the term Sanatana Dharma would be a misnomer if it were used of Hinduism. The term is often found both in the Dhammapada and in the Mahabharata. Ethical laws are Sanatana Dharma, i.e., an ethical law is the eternal law. But it would be manifestly wrong to suggest that Hinduism is always identical with the law eternal. In the Gita we are told that caste-duties are to be preferred to moral duties as ethics postulates them. Here Hinduism runs counter to the law eternal. If one says in support of the Gita that morality is determined by circumstances, then by this very admission the law eternal ceases to be eternal. It becomes contingent. The term Sanatana Dharma loses its meaning.

Another term which is often used in recent Indian literature is Arya Dharma i.e., the Aryan religion. But we shall do well to remember that the term Arya was used not only by ancient Indians but also by the ancient Persians and perhaps by the Irish. Some German philologists think that the word Eire is cognate with the Sanskrit word Arya. Moreover, Hinduism as we know it has incorporated many non-Aryan cults. The religion of the Rigveda no longer exists in India. A large proportion of the Hindu population is Non-Aryan in origin. It is therefore wrong to suppose that Hinduism in its present day forms can be termed Arya Dharma. Buddha refers to the cardinal tenets of Buddhism and calls them Arya Satya i.e., Arya truths. The word Arya in this context has no racial connotation. It means noble or excellent. The word Aryan in its racial connotation cannot be used of the form Hinduism has assumed at the present day.

Syncretism constitutes the crux of the problem of Hinduism. The lines of demarcation between Saivism, Vaisnavism and other cults were more prominent in ancient times than they now are. They are almost blurred today, and we see, within the pale of Hinduism itself, Vaisnavism running into Saivism and Vedantism tingeing non-monistic creeds. The present writer is inclined to think that this Hindu syncretism is of fairly recent growth. The religious panorama in India was different about a thousand years ago. There was a time when Saivism was at loggerheads with Vaisnavism and Vedantism was fulminating against dualistic and pluralistic creeds. Some of the stories of Panchatantra can be interpreted as indicating a feud between Saivism and Vaisnavism. But the writer of Panchatantra has room both for Siva and for Vishnu in his pantheon. The celebrated grammarian, Vopadeva, is a votary of Krishna. But he is not reluctant to salute Siva. In one of the poems he wrote to illustrate rules of grammar he tells us that “these two have Kesava i.e., Krishna for their god and the remaining two have Siva for their god.” Prof. Dinesh Chandra Sen thinks that the Rama cult of fourteenth century Bengal was so exclusive that it refused to come to terms with other cults. Syncretism was probably the result of the impact of Buddhism and Mohammedanism upon cults and creeds which acknowledged in varying degrees the authority of the Vedas. Cults and creeds of Vedic origin presented a united front against the onslaught of these hostile religions. Syncretism was a sort of Maginot Line erected by those religions which directly or indirectly had their roots in the Vedas. Syncretism renders the connotation of Hinduism elusive and vague and adds immensely to the difficulty one has in offering a definition of Hinduism. For our purpose we will define Hinduism as “a collective term invented by foreigners to lump together creeds and cults that had directly or indirectly their origin in the Vedas and acknowledged their authority.” This definition would exclude Buddhism and Jainism.

Hinduism presents the same kind of problem as Hellenism does, only the latter term was of Greek origin and the Greeks called themselves Hellenes. The word Hindu has no place in classical Sanskrit literature. An ingenious lexicographer has suggested that the word Hindu is a shortened form of two Sanskrit words Himalaya and Indu. The lexicographer is evidently anxious to find room for this Persian word in classical Sanskrit. He suggests his etymological interpretation on the analogy of the word Hora. A medieval Indian commentator had suggested that the word Hora was a shortened form of the word ahoratram (i.e., day and night) But comparative philology tells us that the word hora, which was used in late Sanskrit astronomical treatises, is really of European origin. Classical Sanskrit literature scrupulously avoids the word Hindu. The present writer finds that Kabir uses this word in one of his poems. So far as Bengali literature is concerned, the first use of this word is probably found in Aanadamangal by Bharatchandra. A Portuguese priest who wrote a treatise in Bengal dialect in the early part of the 18th century used the word in a peculiar sense. He refers to the Hindu King of Egypt (Misarer Hindu raja). He uses the word in the sense of “idolater.” Whatever its origin or its real meaning may have been in the past, the word Hindu has come to stay. Withdraw this word from usage, and you will have a confusing conglomeration of creeds and cults and of lords many and of gods many. This word of foreign origin, which has for centuries been refused admission to the Sanctum of classical Sanskrit, serves to give unity and coherence to a bewildering variety of religions and cults which otherwise defy unification. The history of Hindu thought, barring its social implications has been on the whole one of unity in essentials, difference in non-essentials, and charity in all.

General Note

The definition which the Hindu Mahasabha suggests of Hinduism is too wide. All the religions that have originated on the soil of India are grouped together under the term Hinduism. It is only too apparent that the leaders of the Mahasabha are out to rope in the Buddhists, Jains, Sikhs and Brahmos in order to swell the number of Hindus and advance the cause of Hindu Chauvinism. Is Buddhism a branch of Hinduism? The Hindu affiliations of Buddhism are less prominent than the Jewish affiliations of Christianity. Hinduism and Buddhism have no common scripture. In what is known to Christians as the Old Testament, Christianity, and Judaism have a common authority to appeal to. Although Christian and Jewish interpretations of this religious document are divergent, there is in the life and teaching of Christ and in the New Testament a good deal that bears the impress of Hebraic thought and ritual. In spite of its Jewish origin Christianity is now a separate and distinct religion in its own rights. There was a time when Christianity did not have this independent status. Buddha received recognition in Hinduism very late; and Vaisnavism was the first cult to give him a place in the Hindu pantheon. The general attitude of orthodox Hinduism towards Buddhism was one of opposition and denunciation. There is no reason why an independent status should not be assigned to Buddhism in the commonwealth of religions. The Buddhists of Ceylon, Burma, China and Japan would be reluctant to call themselves Hindus. The present writer once asked the famous Buddhist missionary, Dharmapala, if he would care to call himself a Hindu. He replied in the negative and somewhat resented the idea that the followers, of the Buddha should ever be confused with those of Vishnu and Siva.

It is a different story with the Brahmo movement. Many Brahmos take a pride in calling themselves Hindus. Tagore was one of them; and another member of this group was Ramananda Chatterjee. But the writer of this article knows many cultured and high class Brahmos who simply refuse to call themselves Hindus and vehemently repudiate any possible claims upon the appellation Hindu. Brahmoism had its rise on the soil of India, but it presents traits of extra-Indian origin. Without the impact of Christianity and also that of Islam; Brahmoism would hardly have taken the forms it did in the theology of the New Dispensation and in the theistic outlook of the Sadharan Brahmo Samaj. Maharishi Devendranath Tagore, who was not at first favourably impressed by Christianity, found solace in the poems of the Sufi saints of Islam. But upon Rammohan Roy, Keshab Chandra Sen and Pratap Chandra Mazumdar the influence of Christianity was profound. Hinduism by itself would have failed altogether, to produce a theistic movement like Brahmoism. The present writer who once had the privilege of being closely associated with Rabindranath Tagore thinks that Tagore’s exposition of the Upanishads reflects the influence of Christian theism.

The Guru in Hinduism

(Continued) By J. RUSSELL - (TRIVANDRUM)

Now such being the idea of Guru in Indian thought the following factors are found to be unavoidable in Hindu religious life.

1. The search for a Guru. When a Hindu is religiously inclined he does not find peace unless he has found a guru who can initiate him into religious truth. This earnest searching for guru is found in the lives of almost everyone of the great religious teachers of India. Sankara for example went in search of a guru and became a pupil of Govinda who was himself a pupil of Gavapada. The same search for a spiritual preceptor is found in the life of another Vaishnavite leader Ramanuja. In his life there is the story of how he persuaded a guru to unlock for him the secrets of esoteric mysteries. Similar longing is found in the lives of Ramakrishna Vivekananda, Kabir and many others. Even at the present day we come across even men of high academic qualifications going from place to place in search of a real guru at whose feet they may sit and learn the saving truth.

2. The Guru Mantra. The chief function of the Guru is to help the pupil or devotee to get released from the bond of maya ignorance. It is this release or self-realisation which qualifies a person to be a guru. Now each guru has a mystic formula which summarises the whole meaning of self-realisation. It is by constant repetition of this formula that a person attains his release from Samsarsa. This formula is often called the Guru-mantra. It is also seen that when a person approaches a guru the primary attempt is to learn the guru-mantra. The whole power of the guru rests on the mantra and if one has learnt the guru mantra he has by that very act of learning confirmed his discipleship of that Guru. There is a beautiful illustration of this in the story of Kabir. Ramananda refused to be the guru of Kabir. Kabir however, firm in his desire to become Ramananda’s disciple decided to go to the river where the Guru takes his morning bath. There he stretched himself flat on the steps. When, the guru came repeating his usual mantra “Ram Ram” Kabir was quite satisfied because he got the guru’s mantra. Again in Marathi mystical writings we read that the only thing that should fill a devotee’s mouth is the mantra which the guru has taught him. The mantra is supposed to have magical value and when a disciple hears the words he becomes one with God. The importance given to the Guru-mantra is also found in the institution of the Diksha or the ceremony of initiation. Of the different dikshas, Vacaka diksha (teaching of the mantras) has a central place.

3. The Idea of Secrecy. The knowledge of the guru-mantra is considered to be esoteric and is not revealed to anyone unless one is tested and found to be sincere and deserving in his attempt to learn the mantra. In the Upanishads as well as in the Manudharma Sastras we come across passages laying down special rules as to the nature of the pupils to whom alone the esoteric knowledge could be revealed. It looks as though each Guru has a secret doctrine to teach. Some scholars have suggested that the meaning of ‘Upanishads’ itself indicates a body of truth communicated only to a few. There is the idea that the teacher has a monopoly in certain doctrines and his right seems to be handed down from one generation to another by a kind of apostolic succession. When Ramannua approached a Guru for the disclosure of esoteric mysteries he was asked to make a vow of secrecy. When Ramanuja wanted to give out a certain truth to all he was threatened by the Guru with eternal punishment.

4. Devotion to the Guru. It is a common feature that the highest devotion is given to the Guru. The 13th Century Marathi poet Gnaneswara evokes much of his poetic talents to describe his feelings for the master. A devotee is described as one who resigns all things to the care of the guru and makes himself a temple of devotion. Even greater depth of devotion is found in certain of the Tamil Saivite Bhakti poems. Such devotion to the guru is not merely an event of the past. In the pages of “The Indian Thinker” one often comes across the tribute paid by the editor to his guru Veerabhadra Sarma. The devotion to the guru is quite often carried even to the extent of respecting the guru’s sandals. A high official in an Indian state recently confessed that he had great delight in kissing the sandals of his spiritual master. There are instances where when a disciple meets his master he prostrates himself before him and takes some of the dust from the Guru’s feet and places it on his head. Some consider it a great privilege to be allowed to drink the water in which the guru has washed his feet.

5. The Grace of the Guru. Another interesting idea is the “grace of the Guru.” To the Hindu the Grace of the Guru is equivalent to the Grace of God. What exactly the Hindu means by ‘grace’ is not very clear. The two words used are _Guru-kripa and Guru-Prasada. But from the way that the words are used in the different contexts it is linked with the merit of the devotee. So the word prasada is often used for the gift given by a guru to his devotee when he is pleased. When a guru has been found, it is believed that anything can be obtained. Nadabindupunishad states that we can understand the atman only through the grace of the guru.

There is also the idea that the grace of God works miraculously in the case of some. For example there is the belief that the Guru himself seeks the disciples and finds them in the fullness of time if only they prepare themselves. In the life of the Kanarese saint Purandharadasa this idea is well brought out. Even while he was pursuing his secular profession he was met by his guru and was changed into a saint. It is said that Tukaram got his guru-mantra in a dream when Babaji Chaitanya appeared and delivered his mantra “Ram, Krishna Hari.” In Saivite thought the Guru is also the very embodiment of God’s grace.

The Technique of Guru-Realisation

1. From what has been said it is clear that, the Guru is one who has reached a state of self-realisation. Now one of the terms that is most used for the process of self-realisation is Yoga. Self-realisation consists in one’s realising his essential unity with the ultimate self. It is from this idea of unity or unification that the word Yoga is derived. This unity is achieved through deep meditation and concentration on the Real Self. This would involve abstraction from all external objects.

2. The methods suggested in the principal Upanishads for the attainment of self-realisation are mostly based on mental discipline.

   1. Meditation of the mystic symbol ‘OM’.
   2. Tranquility of thought, being unaffected by good or evil.
   3. Suppression of speech and mind by the understanding self which in turn is to be suppressed by the Great self etc.
   4. The six-fold Yoga involving restraint of breath, withdrawal of the senses, meditation, concentration, contemplation and absorption.
   5. Ascetic renunciation or sannyasa Yoga. These different methods however cannot be said to be mutually exclusive.

   In the Gita too, the Yoga method of abstraction is advocated. But neither in the Gita nor in the Upanishads is any clear indication of any technique of body-control.

3. But soon there developed a technique which was supposed to enable a man to attain release. We find the description of such technical details in the Yoga Upanishads and in the Patanjali’s Yoga sutra. The eight-fold Yoga is supposed to help a man in two ways:

   1. By keeping one free from distractions, it helps intense concentration and leads the mind to its original state of serene repose.

   2. By bringing to activity the hidden psychic powers it helps to attain siddhis or occult powers.

4. Now various explanations are given as to how the Yoga discipline leads to the Miraculous results. The explanations differ according to the stress they place on the different steps of the Ashtanga Yoga. In the teaching of Ramana Maharishi the efficacy of Yoga is based on the efficacy of breath-control. The Kumbakonam school gives a more advanced metaphysical explanation. According to this school the sthula sarira, the sukshma sarira, and the atman are re-integrated into the Brahman aspect of one’s being by awakening the Kundalini where resides the condensed energy of the Brahman. Rishikesh Siradanda gives an interesting explanation based on the anatomy of the human body. According to him the Kundalini coiled up in the Muladhara is to be roused to action and brought to its original place in the centre of the sahasrara or a thousand petalled lotus in the brain. When this is achieved one becomes united with Siva who resides in the Sahasrara. Between the muladhara and the sahasrara there are what are called chakras and when the kundalini passes each of these chakras the yogi attains a particular siddhi.

5. In the process of rousing the Kundalini through pranayama and other steps of Yoga the guru is of practical necessity.

According to the physical conditions of an initiate different instructions have to be given concerning the various steps. The teacher or the guru has to examine the pupil very carefully and determine his capacity. The Yoga Upanishads and other treatises make it clear that one would feel dejected and sickly at certain points not being able to bear the strain of Yoga. At such points the guru must be nearby to help. So if a person starts on Yoga without a guru it would be the cause of his ruin. It would be equally dangerous to accept as guru one who has not himself passed through all the stages of Yoga successfully. Thus, in the Yoga practice the teacher guru and God-guru are unified in one person.

Some Modern Guru-Worship Cults in India

The purpose of this chapter is mainly two-fold. (a) To show how a Hindu religious seeker turns into a Guru, and (b) to see how in the modern guru cults the teacher-guru and god-guru ideas are closely linked together, So in the accounts of the gurus given below an attempt is made to show briefly how the cult grew up and what contribution it is making in Hindu life to day.

1. Master C.V.V.⁶

Master C.V.V. hailed from a middle class family of landowners in Kumbakonam. Till his 40th year he was not much inclined to religious life. The traditional religion of his family did not inspire C.V.V. to give much serious thought to the “baffling mysteries of life.” When he came to manhood he became a contractor, and through the influence of a certain friend he was led to the palace of the Pudukottah royal family where he spent a good portion of his time in the palace. Here he fell a victim to certain expensive tastes and some designing friends and soon found himself a failure in secular life.

Now it is said that C.V.V. was always profoundly affected by the fact of death which he could not satisfactorily explain. To him, it looked as though death completely frustrated God’s purpose in creation. A sudden answer came to him through a strange incident during the sickness of his child. When the child was dying C.V.V. was asking himself whether there was not enough prana available to save the child. He seemed to hear a mysterious voice answering in the affirmative and suddenly the child showed signs of recovery. Though the child did not survive C.V.V. felt that great powers were responding to his enquiry. A series of unexplainable spiritual experiences followed, and he began to realise that an inner voice was speaking in him and was guiding him. He soon identified that inner voice with God and concluded that God dwells within and not without man.

In course of time he also discovered that the mysterious power working in him could be transferred to any other person. For example, he found that he could transfer that power to his wife, and she became a medium of God’s voice. It is said that she was able to transmit divine message while she herself was in a trance condition.

Then C.V.V. founded a Yoga school to transmit his divine spiritual powers to others too. Those who expressed a desire to be initiated into the divine mysteries he had discovered were, received by him, and they were known as mediums. To each he issued a command to the inner powers to proceed developing a new man according to the plans provided by his Yoga scheme. The initiates or mediums were required to go through a certain course to prepare the body for the reception of the new power. These courses include repetition of a series of English and Sanskrit words, which form the guru-mantra. They contain the key-words explaining the evolution of the immortal man. Another course, called the “Olidere” was to be practised till the new life entered the body and began its work. The master has also prescribed a rule of life for all the initiates. The rule of life required among other things keeping the ethical standards of society and refraining from conflict with political authority.

The master also gave certain promises in the form of “contracts” to the initiates. Among other things he promised liberation from suffering, physical immortality and powers of raising the dead to life. These, he said, could be achieved through the practice of the new yoga he had discovered viz., the Briktha Rahita Taraka Raja Yoga.

Even after his death in 1922 many of his disciples continue to hold him as their guru. Though his death was contrary to his promise of immortality many believe that his death was necessitated by the purpose he had in view and that he would return to earth after perfecting his work. C.V.V.’s disciples are now developing the new school of Yoga and worship the master as their guru. They have even construed an ingenious interpretation of the letters C.V.V. taking the letters to indicate that the guru helps the disciple to see himself.

2. Sri Ramana Maharishi

Venkataramana (this was the maharishi’s former name) was the son of a Brahmin pleader in Tiruchuzhi of Ramnad District. As a boy Venkataramana did not show any extraordinary talents except an occasional sleep-walking at night and a certain absent-mindedness during working hours. He had a great aversion to his lessons at school.

But it is said that he evinced great delight in meditating on religious questions. He used to ask himself “Who am I ?” “Whence am I?” etc. During his school days in Madura he used to go to the temple and sit for long hours meditating on these questions. He had a great desire also to become one of the Nayanars. He longed to get inner peace and Divine grace.

Besides the introspective thought he had also deep devotion centring round “Arunachala.” At this moment an unhappy incident at school drove him to decide to leave for Arunachalam. He felt that his heavenly father dwelt there in the Tiruvannamalia temple. He spent some months in the temple precincts and then made his abode in the caves at the foot of the hill. His life then was characterised by tapas including mowna (silence), Vairagya (non-attachment) and samadhi.

While in the caves he passed through many spiritual experiences. One particular experience removed from him all fear of death. He realised that apart from the body which will die there is a transcendental ‘I’ which cannot perish. Through constant meditation on this imperishable ‘I’ he found that his ‘I’ became merged in Divinity.

When he first stood before the temple he experienced the thrill of ecstasy and exclaimed:

    O Lord I came here obedient to Thy call
    Thou cast use me in the way Thou pleases

⁷

This implies a personal God with a plan for every man. But Venkataramana’s further experience was one of getting himself “transhumanised into God.” He ceased to recognise any difference between himself and the deity. He reached that state of self-realisation where no distinction of good or bad, matter or mind is real. He became what is called an Avadhuta. Enlightened and selfless, freed from the bondage of samsara.

Following this experience Venkataramana resorted to a very simple life wearing only a kavpina and remaining in silence (mahamouna). Soon he began to be called Maharishi, Bhagavan etc. People came to him believing in the miraculous effects of his darsan. Many came to him with the intention of deepening their spiritual life in his presence or learning his philosophy of life. His main teaching is that one becomes a jivanmukta by realising within his self the supreme self. Even other religions are interpreted in terms of this monistic philosophy. For example the cross of Christ is interpreted as symbolising the renunciation of the individual self in order to realise the Great Self.

All his devotees give to him the value of God. Whatever he gives is received as Prasada of God. What the devotees believe of the rishi can be summarised in the following words of G.R. Subbaramyya,⁸ “The personality of the maharishi and the heart of things are convertible terms. He is a god-man and therefore man-God … If you really want to see God in flesh and blood go to Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharshl”. He has had many western admirers too. His Socratic method of answering their doubts leads them to seek God within and not without.

The rishi himself is conscious that he is a guru and does not object to people prostrating before him. In his writings he suggests that such worship is an essential aspect of self-enquiry.⁹ He also says that such devotional acts towards the guru are needed to win the Gurukripa or the grace of the guru.

(to be continued)

I Say Unto You

It was on board ship two years ago that an Indian Pilot Officer asked the writer: “You teach the inspiration of the Bible. How do you distinguish in the Bible between the work of God and the work of man? Where does God leave off and man begin ?”

In this case the background to the question was western rationalistic reading, but the officer might well have asked as a Hindu. For behind the Christian doctrine of inspiration is the thought of God as being not only immanent in man’s deepest life but also beyond, transcending, the reach of that life. And therein at least superficially lies a paradox, for how can man’s being know of anything which lies beyond that being? The usual answer - and it is a true answer - is “By faith”, but we cannot blame those who want to probe this answer a little. There is some truth in Sir Si Radhakrishnan’s claim that “in spite of their opposition to each other, the Dialectical Theology of Karl Barth and National Socialism of Hitler are religious and political expressions of a common reaction against, liberalism …”¹⁰ It was the present, writer’s privilege to attend the lectures of Karl Barth during the months before and after Hitler’s accession to power in Germany, and the writer did feel then that for many young people in the lecture room the step from a higher irrationality like Barth’s to the irrationality of Hitler might be a very easy one. (Note that we say “a higher irrationalism”. There is no need to agree with Badhakrishnan when he says that “the type of mind is the same in both”. It is one thing to attempt to out soar reason, another thing to hate reason and burn books.)

Faith there must be. Ultimately the answer to the pilot officer is that there is a better course than to ask where God leaves off and where man begins, namely to be confronted by Christ, to hear him say “I say unto you” and to learn by experience whether that “I” is only human. That is a matter for experiment rather than discussion. Yet we perhaps here linger a few moments over the question, “What is the source of the authority of that”I” which Jesus utters. For not only Christians acknowledge its authority. The Jewish mystical writer, Martin Buber, says of this “I”, How powerful, even to being overpowering, and how legitimate, even to being self-evident, is the saying of “I” by Jesus!” What is the source of its authority?

There is an important essay by Kierkegaard entitled, “Of the difference between a genius and an apostle.” Kierkegaard seeks to show that genius belongs to the sphere of immanence, apostleship to the sphere of transcendence, the one expressing something from within, the other something from beyond and outside. Thus, a genius lives to express himself whether he has an audience or not. “It is modest of the nightingale not to require anyone to listen to it; but it is also proud of the nightingale not to care whether any one listen to it or not.” The genius knows a similar modesty and pride. What matters is that he should be spontaneous.

The apostle however is neither modest nor proud in this way, for his message points beyond himself and must be directed to an audience. You do not ask of the king’s messenger that the important news which he brings should be the ex. expression of the messenger’s genius, His authority lies in the fact that he has been sent by the king.

So too even with regard to Jesus Kierkegaard argues that it is wrong to base His authority on His profundity or genius. “When Jesus says,”There is an eternal life”, and when a theological student says, ‘There is an eternal life’: both say the same thing, and there is no more deduction, development, profundity, or thoughtfulness in the first expression than in the second; both statements are, judged aesthetically, equally good. And yet there is an eternal qualitative difference between them! Christ, as God-man, is in possession of the specific quality of authority which eternity can never mediate, just as in all eternity Christ can never be put on the same level as essential human equality. Christ taught therefore with authority. To ask whether Christ is profound is blasphemy, and is an attempt (whether, conscious or not) to destroy Him surreptitiously; for the question conceals a doubt concerning His authority, and this attempt to weigh Him up is impertinent in His directness, behaving as though he were being examined, instead of which it is to him that all power is given in heaven and upon earth.”

Reading this paragraph we may well feel that Kierkegaard is a little too zealous in asserting that Christ’s authority is something to be accepted and not examined. We may feel that our Lord is at once more tolerant and more inexorable when he speaks his “I say unto you”; that this utterance invites judgement and yet is fearless. The courage of a prophet or apostle is of a different order. They know themselves to be sinners, and because of the disparity between their character and their message, they have to reiterate, “Thus saith the Lord” They are the bearers of a message; but in one sense Christ is his own message. When our Lord challenges us to convict him of sin, he intimates that he is prepared to trust our judgement, whatever our shortcomings.

Is the “I” which Jesus speaks comparable with the “I” of the Sage who has escaped from the illusions of Maya and attained to recognition? Is it the “I” of the enlightened self? This is a wide question, and we can here only refer to one particular assumption underlying the comparison. Of this enlightened self Paul Deussen speaks when he refers to “the profound and fundamental conception of the Vedanta which makes its appearance everywhere in the Upanishads, that the God, the sole author of all good in us, is not as in the Old Testament a Being contrasted with and distinct from us, but rather - without impairing his absolute antagonism to the depraved self of experience (jiva) - our own metaphysical I, our divine self, persisting in untarnished purity through all the aberration of human nature, eternal blessed, - in a word, our atman.”¹¹

Now it is no part of our work to deny the fact of the light which lighteth every man coming into the world. In one sense salvation does consist in the bringing to birth of the Christ in every man. But this particular thought will not explain the whole of the New Testament. Paul Deussen is one among others who teach that the New Testament and the Upanishads are complementary, the one telling of deliverance from sin, the other from unreality. Admittedly both agree in associating sin and unreality with a break in the continuity of the divine and the human. But here we must discriminate. The Bible teaches of two such breaks, and of these, one, the existence of the manifold world - God’s creation - over against God is regarded as innocent. (Indeed the Bible says that God saw that it was good). Where sin enters is not in the fact that there exists a multiplicity of beings related one to another, but in the fact that the relationship (of man to God, of man to man and of man to nature) has somehow been broken. Thus, individuality is a good rather than an evil, but it has become an occasion of evil. That being so, why should the Old Testament be wrong, as Deussen says it is, in describing God as “a Being contrasted with and distinct from us”?

Speaking of this distinction Kierkegaard inveighs against the view that whilst man “ought to obey and to pray God in this life, nevertheless the difference will, in eternity, vanish in an essential identity, so that in eternity God and man, like king and servant, become equals.”. The point is well-made ; a king’s authority is relative, God’s is absolute. We would claim that when Jesus says “I”, there is the authority of God behind that “I” the authority of the God who is beyond, as well as the authority of the God who is within.

EDITOR.

Sadhus and Sanyasis

The word Sadhu means honest, good, virtuous, pious. It generally means one who wanders about and has attained some virtue or success mostly by his own idea and effort. It also includes those who are naturally good and are among householders. In short, it ordinarily means anyone who is simple, good and pious-devoted to God and generous towards men. Austerity is a general characteristic of Sadhu life but not necessarily so.

Whereas a Sanyasi is one who is strict and austere and has definitely left the world from various motives - such as the idea of the unreality of the world, disgust, domestic trouble, social ostracism, escape from family responsibility, cynicism, search for truth, reality and bliss or peace. They may be theists, atheists or agnostics or polytheists. But they are (at least should be) outside the operation of Varna or caste system. They belong to the fourth Ashram (stage of life) when a person is completely absorbed in other worldly pursuits and thoughts - hoping to attain Mokhsa (Hindu) or Nirvana (Buddhist) salvation - absorption or union with Brahma - extinction or perfect peace (Buddhist). In Buddhism such a person is called a Bhikshu. Many of these sannyasis go through severe kinds of austerities and asceticism. They are also called Tapasa, Muni, Shramana. Deep contemplation culminating ting in Samadhi (stage of supra-consciousness) and hard long fasting are common practices. Some have in the past fasted unto expiration. They are all vegetarians. But there are some ascetics like the Tantriks who eat and drink anything and everything.

Of all Sadhus and Sanyasis the most important, influential, large and as follows:

A. The Dasanamis (ten orders of monks) founded by Shankaracharya, the great philosopher and builder of Hindu socio-religious polity of modern times who flourished in the 8th-9th centuries A.D. They are the Vedantic ascetics each under its leaders name. Their constitution and rules are ascribed to Shankara. (1) Tirtha, (2) Ashrama, (3) Saraswati, (4) Bharati, (5) Vana, (6) Aranya; (7) Parvata, (8) Sagara, (9) Giri, (10) Puri.

First three are pure that is restricted to Brahmans. Half of Bharati is pure. Dandis (holding a stick in their hands) are the innermost group of all. Nagas are those who have discarded clothing. There are Sanyasinis (females) in the Giri order.

Four monasteries of Shankar-Muths.

1. Sringeri in Rameshwar, (2) Govardhana in Puri, (3) Sharda (goddess with 5 faces and 10 arms) in Dwaraka, (4) Joshi in the Himalayas 19 miles from Badrinath and 80 miles from Kedarnath.

B. Ramaites - Sanyasis who follow Rama.

C. Kabirpanthis - followers of Kabir.

D. Nanakpanthis - disciples of Nanak

E. Vairagis - followers of Krishna (Vairagi is one disgusted with the world).

F. Modern orders -

1. Ramkrishna Mission
2. Goudiya Math.
3. Bharat Sevashram Sangha.
4. Bholagiri.

Common features and other characteristics in the lives of Sadhus and Sanyasis.

1. They carry fire, a begging bowl and a blanket.
2. Some carry deer skin or tiger skin, a trident or lathis, a Saligram or a discus and a few carry even a human skull (Saktas and Aghorpanthis).
3. Many have a shaven head and a tuft of hair. Some wear heavy plaited locks.
4. Most wear marks on the forehead according as they are Vaishnavas, Shaktas or Shaivites and other subsects. Shaivites besmear bodies with ashes.
5. Mostly celibate and some strictly anti-sex.
6. Some have consorts or disciples or both (male or female).
7. Some belong to Akharas or institutions and are highly organised. Some have personal Ashrams and others wander about. Some live in temples while others live in special shelters - in boats, under trees, in caves or forests, or hill-tops or sea-side or river banks. Some even have their own homes - living as Banaprashthis.
8. They practice various austerities breathing exercises, Asanas (postures) meditations or contemplations - some eat and drink objectionable, repulsive and unnameable things.
9. Some teach others, preach to the public, do propaganda or carry on some philanthropic work (Ramkrishna Mission, Bharat Sevashram Sangha etc.)
10. Some study, others pray and bathe in holy waters and visit temples.
11. Some beg food, others are fed free in religious establishments.
12. Some are genuine, many seem to be wicked, vicious, sensual, criminals, political suspects, military and other absconders or just, idle vagabonds and poor beggars.
13. Some are self-controlled and chaste, others are intemperate and voluptuous smoking ganja, charas and opium and drinking wine and eating opium.
14. Some gamble, others steal or loot or commit robbery while others deceive by ruses or tricks and not an inconsiderable number travel ticketless and elope with young maidens.
15. There are about seventy-five thousand of them in India living on her charity.

Christianity has an obligation to reclaim this wonderful reserve of human power and to exploit it to the redemption of others. I believe quite a considerable percentage of them are serious seekers after truth, peace, reality - God.

R.C. DAS.

We are glad to be able to announce that the next number will be increased to thirty-two pages. A book review will be a regular item,

Will anyone possessing a copy of The Pilgrim - for July 1942 (Vol. II No. 2) which he or she can spare please communicate with Mr. R.C. Das, Benares.

Edited and published by Rev. J.S. Moon, Benares

Printed by Anglo-Oriental Press, Jangambari, Benares