Two Old Faiths Part 2

[Sidenote: The Nyaya.]

It is doubtful, however, whether the earlier form of the Nyaya was theistic or not. The later form is so, but it says nothing of the moral attributes of G.o.d, nor of his government. The chief end of man, according to the Nyaya, is deliverance from pain; and this is to be attained by cessation from all action, whether good or bad.

[Sidenote: The Sankhya.]

The Sankhya declares matter to be self-existent and eternal. Soul is distinct from matter, and also eternal. When it attains true knowledge it is liberated from matter and from pain. The Sankhya holds the existence of G.o.d to be without proof.

[Sidenote: The Vedanta.]

But the leading philosophy of India is unquestionably the Vedanta. The name means "the end or scope of the Veda;" and if the Upanishads were the Veda, instead of treatises tacked on to it, the name would be correct; for the Vedanta, like the Upanishads, inculcates pantheism.

The form which this philosophy ultimately a.s.sumed is well represented in the treatise called the Vedanta Sara, or essence of the Vedanta. A few extracts will suffice to exhibit its character. "The unity of the soul and G.o.d--this is the scope of all Vedanta treatises." We have frequent references made to the "great saying," _Tat twam_--that is, That art thou, or Thou art G.o.d; and _Aham Brahma_, that is, I am G.o.d. Again it is said, "The whole universe is G.o.d." G.o.d is "existence (or more exactly an existent thing[15]), knowledge, and joy." Knowledge, not a knower; joy, not one who rejoices.

[Sidenote: It teaches absolute idealism.]

Every thing else has only a seeming existence, which is in consequence of ignorance (or illusion). Ignorance makes the soul think itself different from G.o.d; and it also "projects" the appearance of an external world.

"He who knows G.o.d becomes G.o.d." "When He, the first and last, is discerned, one's own acts are annihilated."

Meditation, without distinction of subject and object, is the highest form of thought. It is a high attainment to say, "I am G.o.d;" but the consummation is when thought exists without an object.

There are four states of the soul--waking, dreaming, dreamless sleep, and the "fourth state," or pure intelligence. The working-man is in dense ignorance; in sleep he is freed from part of this ignorance; in dreamless sleep he is freed from still more; but the consummation is when he attains something beyond this, which it seems cannot be explained, and is therefore called the fourth state.

[Sidenote: Doctrine of "the Self."

Inconsistent statements.]

The name, which in later writings is most frequently given to the "one without a second,"[16] is Atman, which properly means self. Much is said of the way in which the self in each man is to recover, or discover, its unity with the supreme or real self. For as the one sun s.h.i.+ning in the heavens is reflected, often in distorted images, in mult.i.tudes of vessels filled with water, so the one self is present in all human minds.[17] There is not--perhaps there could not be--consistency in the statements of the relation of the seeming to the real. In most of the older books a practical or conventional existence is admitted of the self in each man, but not a real existence. But when the conception is fully formulated the finite world is not admitted to exist save as a mere illusion. All phenomena are a play--a play without plot or purpose, which the absolute plays with itself.[18] This is surely transcendent transcendentalism. One regrets that speculation did not take one step more, and declare that the illusion was itself illusory. Then we should have gone round the circle, and returned to _sensus communis_. We must be pardoned if we seem to speak disrespectfully of such fantastic speculations; we desire rather to speak regretfully of the many generations of men which successively occupied themselves with such unprofitable dreams; for this kind of thought is traceable even from Vedic days. It is more fully developed in the Upanishads. In them occurs the cla.s.sical sentence so frequently quoted in later literature, which declares that the absolute being is the "one [thing] without a second."[19]

[Sidenote: The Gita.]

The book which perhaps above all others has molded the mind of India in more recent days is the Bhagavad Gita, or Song of the Holy One. It is written in stately and harmonious verse, and has achieved the same task for Indian philosophy as Lucretius did for ancient Epicureanism.[20] It is eclectic, and succeeds, in a sort of way, in forcing the leading systems of Indian thought into seeming harmony.

[Sidenote: Intellectual pride.]

Some have thought they could discern in these daring speculations indications of souls groping after G.o.d, and saddened because of the difficulty of finding him. Were it so, all our sympathies would at once be called forth. But no; we see in these writings far more of intellectual pride than of spiritual sadness. Those ancient dreamers never learned their own ignorance. They scarcely recognized the limitations of the human mind. And when reason could take them no farther they supplemented it by dreams and ecstasy until, in the Yoga philosophy, they rushed into systematized mysticisms and magic far more extravagant than the wildest _theurgy_ of the degraded Neoplatonism of the Roman Empire.

A learned writer thus expresses himself:

"The only one of the six schools that seem to recognize the doctrine of divine providence is the Yoga. It thus seems that the consistent followers of these systems can have, in their perfected state, no religion, no action, and no moral character."[21]

[Sidenote: Indian philosophy a sad failure.]

And now to take a brief review of the whole subject. The Hindu sages were men of acute and patient thought; but their attempt to solve the problem of the divine and human natures, of human destiny and duty, has ended in total failure. Each system baseless, and all mutually conflicting; systems cold and cheerless, that frown on love and virtuous exertion, and speak of annihilation or its equivalent, absorption, as our highest hope: such is the poor result of infinite speculation. "The world by wisdom knew not G.o.d." O, that India would learn the much-needed lesson of humility which the experience of ages ought to teach her!

[Sidenote: Sacerdotalism.

The tyranny of sacerdotalism.]

While speculation was thus busy Sacerdotalism was also continually extending its influence. The Brahman, the man of prayer, had made himself indispensable in all sacred rites. He alone--as we have seen--knew the holy text; he alone could rightly p.r.o.nounce the words of awful mystery and power on which depended all weal or woe. On all religions occasions the priest must be called in, and, on all occasions, implicitly obeyed. For a considerable time the princes straggled against the encroachments of the priests; but in the end they were completely vanquished. Never was sacerdotal tyranny more absolute; the proudest pope in mediaeval times never lorded it over Western Christendom with such unrelenting rigor as the Brahmans exercised over both princes and people. The feeling of the priests is expressed in a well-known stanza:

"All the world is subject to the G.o.ds; the G.o.ds are subject to the holy texts; the holy texts are subject to the Brahman; therefore the Brahman is my G.o.d."

Yes, the sacred man could breathe the spell which made earth and h.e.l.l and heaven itself to tremble. He therefore logically called himself an earthly G.o.d. Indeed, the Brahman is always logical. He draws conclusions from premises with iron rigor of reasoning; and with side-issues he has nothing to do. He stands upon his rights. Woe to the being--G.o.d or man--who comes in conflict with him!

[Sidenote: Ritual becomes extravagant.]

The priests naturally multiplied religious ceremonies, and made ritual the soul of wors.h.i.+p. Sacrifice especially a.s.sumed still more and more exaggerated forms--becoming more protracted, more expensive, more b.l.o.o.d.y. A hecatomb of victims was but a small offering. More and more awful powers were ascribed to the rite.

[Sidenote: Reaction.]

But the tension was too great, and the bow snapped. Buddhism arose. We may call this remarkable system the product of the age--an inevitable rebellion against intolerable sacerdotalism; and yet we must not overlook the importance of the very distinct and lofty personality of Buddha (Sakya Muni) as a power molding it into shape.

[Sidenote: Buddhism.

Moral elements of this system.

Conflict with Brahmanism.

Victory of Brahmanism.]

Wherever it extended it effected a vast revolution in Indian thought.

Thus in regard to the inst.i.tution of caste, Buddha did not attack it; he did not, it would appear, even formally renounce it; as a mere social inst.i.tution he seems to have acknowledged it; but then he held that all the _religious_ were freed from its restrictions. "My law," said he, "is a law of mercy for all;" and forthwith he proceeded to admit men of every caste into the closest fellows.h.i.+p with himself and his followers.

Then, he preached--he, though not a Brahman--in the vernacular languages--an immense innovation, which made his teachings popular. He put in the forefront of his system certain great fundamental principles of morality. He made religion consist in duty, not rites. He reduced duty mainly to mercy or kindness toward all living beings--a marvelous generalization. This set aside all slaughter of animals. The mind of the princes and people was weary of priestcraft and ritualism; and the teaching of the great reformer was most timely. Accordingly his doctrine spread with great rapidity, and for a long time it seemed likely to prevail over Brahmanism. But various causes gradually combined against it. Partly, it was overwhelmed by its own luxuriance of growth; partly, Brahmanism, which had all along maintained an intellectual superiority, adopted, either from conviction or policy, most of the principles of Buddhism, and skillfully supplied some of its main deficiencies. Thus the Brahmans retained their position; and, at least nominally, their religion won the day.

III.

RECONSTRUCTION--MODERN HINDUISM.

[Sidenote: Revival, in an altered form, of Hinduism.

Only the position of the Brahman and the restrictions of caste retained.]

But the Hinduism that grew up, as Buddhism faded from Indian soil, was widely different from the system with which early Buddhism had contended. Hinduism, as it has been developed during the last thousand or twelve hundred years, resembles a stupendous far-extended building, or series of buildings, which is still receiving additions, while portions have crumbled and are crumbling into ruin. Every conceivable style of architecture, from that of the stately palace to the meanest hut, is comprehended in it. On a portion of the structure here or there the eye may rest with pleasure; but as a whole it is an unsightly, almost monstrous, pile. Or, dismissing figures, we must describe it as the most extraordinary creation which the world has seen. A jumble of all things; polytheistic pantheism; much of Buddhism; something apparently of Christianity, but terribly disfigured; a science wholly outrageous; shreds of history twisted into wild mythology; the bold poetry of the older books understood as literal prose; any local deity, any demon of the aborigines, however hideous, identified with some accredited Hindu divinity; any custom, however repugnant to common sense or common decency, accepted and explained--in a word, later Hinduism has been omnivorous; it has partially absorbed and a.s.similated every system of belief, every form of wors.h.i.+p, with which it has come in contact.

Only to one or two things has it remained inflexibly true. It has steadily upheld the proudest pretensions of the Brahman; and it has never relaxed the sternest restrictions of caste. We cannot wonder at the severe judgment p.r.o.nounced on Hinduism by nearly every Western author. According to Macaulay, "all is hideous and grotesque and ign.o.ble;" and the calmer De Tocqueville maintains that "Hinduism is perhaps the only system of belief that is worse than having no religion at all."[22]

When a modern Hindu is asked what are the sacred books of his religion he generally answers: "The Vedas, the Sastras (that is, philosophical systems), and the Puranas." Some authorities add the Tantras.

The modern form of Hinduism is exhibited chiefly in the eighteen Puranas, and an equal number of Upapuranas (minor Puranas).[23]

[Sidenote: The Puranas.]

When we compare the religion embodied in the Puranas with that of Vedic times we are startled at the magnitude of the change. The Pantheon is largely new; old deities have been superseded; other deities have taken their place. There has been both accretion from without and evolution from within. The thirty-three G.o.ds of the Vedas have been fantastically raised to three hundred and thirty millions. Siva, Durga, Rama, Krishna, Kali--unknown in ancient days--are now mighty divinities; Indra is almost entirely overlooked, and Varuna has been degraded from his lofty throne and turned into a regent of the waters.

[Sidenote: New deities, rites, and customs.]

The wors.h.i.+p of the Linga (phallus) has been introduced. So has the great dogma of Transmigration, which has stamped a deeper impress on later Hindu mind than almost any other doctrine. Caste is fully established, though in Vedic days scarcely, if at all, recognized. The dreadful practice of widow-burning has been brought in, and this by a most daring perversion of the Vedic texts. Woman, in fact, has fallen far below the position a.s.signed her in early days.

[Sidenote: The Trimurtti, a triad of G.o.ds.]

One of the notable things in connection with the reconstruction of Hinduism is the position it gives to the Trimurtti, or triad of G.o.ds--Brahma, Vishnu, and Siva. Something like an antic.i.p.ation of this has been presented in the later Vedic times: fire, air, and the sun (Agni, Vayu, and Surya) being regarded by the commentator[24] as summing up the divine energies. But in the Vedas the deities often go in pairs; and little stress should be laid on the idea of a Vedic triad. That idea, however, came prominently forward in later days. The wors.h.i.+p both of Vishnu and Siva may have existed, from ancient times, as popular rites not acknowledged by the Brahmans; but both of these deities were now fully recognized. The G.o.d Brahma was an invention of the Brahmans; he was no real divinity of the people, and had hardly ever been actually wors.h.i.+ped. It is visual to designate Brahma, Vishnu, and Siva as Creator, Preserver, and Destroyer respectively; but the generalization is by no means well maintained in the Hindu books.

[Sidenote: The Avatara.]

The Puranas are in general violently sectarian; some being Vishnuite, others Sivite. It is in connection with Vishnu, especially, that the idea of incarnation becomes prominent. The Hindu term is _Avatara_, literally, _descent_; the deity is represented as descending from heaven to earth, for vindication of the truth and righteousness, or, to use the words ascribed to Krishna,

For the preservation of the good, and the destruction of the wicked, For the establishment of religion, I am born from age to age.

[Sidenote: The "descents" of Vishnu.]

The "descents" of Vishnu are usually reckoned ten. Of these by far the most celebrated are those of Rama and Krishna. The great importance attached to these two deities has been traced to the influence of Buddhism. That system had exerted immense power in consequence of the gentle and attractive character ascribed to Buddha. The older G.o.ds were dim, distant, and often stern; some near, intelligible, and loving divinity was longed for. Buddha was a brother-man, and yet a quasi-deity; and hearts longing for sympathy and succor were strongly attracted by such a personality.

[Sidenote: The G.o.d Rama.]

The character of Rama--or Ramachandra--is possessed of some high qualities. The great poem in which it is described at fullest length--the Ramayana of Valmiki--seems to have been an alteration, made in the interests of Hinduism, of early Buddhist legends; and the Buddhist quality of gentleness has not disappeared in the history.[25]

Rama, however, is far from a perfect character. His wife Sita is possessed of much womanly grace and every wifely virtue; and the sorrowful story of the warrior-G.o.d and his faithful spouse has appealed to deep sympathies in the human breast. The wors.h.i.+p of Rama has seldom, if ever, degenerated into lasciviousness. In spite, however, of the charm thrown around the life of Rama and Sita by the genius of Valmiki and Tulsida,[26] it is Krishna, not Rama, that has attained the greatest popularity among the "descents" of Vishnu.

[Sidenote: Krishna.

His early life a travesty of the life of Christ, according to the Gospel of the Infancy.]

Very different morally from that of Rama is the character of Krishna.