This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 2.5 India License.
Since time of siddhārtha Gautama himself the aastika and naastika “split” happened. It is based on much deeper level of drashTā. The split manifested on sociopolitical level too. Look at behaviour of Buddhists when Menander invaded India.
The urge to “overthrow restrictions of varNāshrama” using some adhyātmik experiences of siddhārtha gautama is very old. Many wanted to “use” this to stage a coup. Hence bauddha darshan was one of THE biggest challenges thrown to sanātana dharma on far deeper level of existence. It is very myopic to look at all dèvatās which are common & then claim ki see how much similarity
Even Sānkhya prescribes worship of all these dèvatās and many more w/o acknowledging existence of Īshwara. That is NOT the focal point of this “revolt” against vèda & varNāshrama. The split not just happened on level of adhyātma. As I said it manifested on social and political and economic level too. Because a section of public was chaffing to rebel against varNāshrama. Why rebel? Because of the restrictions that the system puts on “YOLO” type people.
The tension between Kshatriya and brāhmaNa was always there. Bound to be there. Perhaps that is the whole point - that all powerful Kshatriyas remain subservient to beggar Brahmins. This has manifested many times in past. Whole vashishTHa-vishvāmitra feud is precisely this. Parshurāma comes in this line only. Rāma was coordinator and restored balance.
But after MBH Great War, and mass-deaths of Kshatriyas on kurukshètra, this balance was almost skewed. Rise of vaishya+shudra kings (mahā-padmananda) is another defining point who were chaffing. It is this class which joined the Buddhist bandwagon en masse when Ashoka embraced bauddha-darshan as his “adhyātmik mārga”. These & YOLO type freeloaders too.
It became a difficult problem because it attacked vaidika system not from outside, but from inside. At level of drashTā. It is a very curious case of an adhyātmik experience being used to stage a sociopolitical and economic coup in India. Very unique. And very much dhārmik or Hindu.
The only problem which manifested was, the teachings of Buddha could not produce more Buddhas. 😊
This has very briefly (and a bit shallowly) addressed by Hermann Hesse in Siddhartha. The path taught by Buddha cannot grant that final liberation. Because even Shruti declares it is very fickle and one cannot hope to make a syllabus and a SOP to attain moksha (what Buddha did). Just as by giving a textbook and printed instruction manual does not make role of guru redundant, same this happened here.
Mind you, People who joined Buddhist bandwagon were not shallow people. They understood the meaning and importance of adhyātma. They just wanted to make this process free of some “shrotrīya and brahmanishTHa guru” who will address their needs as per their guNa-karma composition. In long run we know, it does not work that way. While vashishTHa-vishwāmitra feud ended in vishwāmitra becoming a great brahmarShi, similar things did not happen here.
Because we CANNOT wish away a guru and replace him with SOP. Took centuries to understand this.
The chaffing of the YOLO type people under sobering responsibility that varNāshrama forces people to own-up has its root in one more deeper question. kriyamāNa karma Vs prārabdha/Sanchita karma. Or as Abrahmics like to put it - question of free-will. YOLO emphasises, prima-facie, on importance of kriyamāNa karma over Sanchita. Which is absolutely true. KriyamāNa is the only thing we have in our hand, since Sanchita is already done and awaiting to bear fruits.
But YOLO (includes Abrahmics) tries to wipe-out Sanchita. The argument looks very “sexy” when it hits you. The patron hero of YOLO is karNa who proudly claims :
सुतोवा सुतपुत्रोवा योवाकोवा भवाम्यहम्दैवायत्तं कुले जन्म: मदायत्तं तु पौरुषम्(Whether a suta or sutaputra, whoever I am. My Birth is up to fate, but my valor is up to me)
We applause and cheer this for we are educated under influence of liberty-fraternity-equality values of modern education. But while karNa accepts “दैवायत्तं कुले जन्म:” part, his kriyamāNa karma doesn’t correct it. For all his life he lamented this fight against his Sanchita. Abrahmics, in the name of free-will, offer to completely wipe-out Sanchita (if one chooses to accept the messiah). An easy cop-out. Similar to how Ashoka might have attracted to Buddha dharma (as per popular narrative of Kalinga war effect on him). By overthrowing varNāshrama, there is a way out to overthrow Sanchita karma. As if nothing matters. Complete reset, all that is said and done in past is erased.
Now bauddha Darshana is inherently a dhārmik darshana so it does not overrule karma. But this urge to “have a clean slate” is enticing nevertheless. With varNāshrama constantly reminding one that “whatever you are is effect of your own karma” - forces one to take up responsibility of whatever that is happening to us as fruit of our own doing. It is not surprising that there always was, is and will be a section who would wish to overthrow this constant reminder (like a teenager kid wanting to rebel/overthrow disciplining parents meaning good).
Samartha Rāmadāsa Svāmī beautifully explains this :
जननी-जनक माया लेकरू काय जाणेपय न लगत मूखीं हाणितां वत्स नेणे“What does a child know the love of parents - who like a cow pushing/disciplining her ignorant calf so that it can drink milk properly”
Except here, the “cow” is our own past karma, not some external God with grand plan. The fact of the matter is - there is no escaping from Sanchita karma. It improves (and deteriorates) slowly and requires consistency in kriyamāNa karma. And irrespective of the quality of your consistent kriyamāNa karma, you still HAVE TO face the fruits of your Sanchita. The moment this truth seeps in deep and realisation dawns, is the moment when we attain the second of the three “shānti” that we chant after every recitation of every stotra there is.
The adhidaivika shānti :
of manas-buddhi and ahamkāra.
Of chitta.
Of antahkaraNa.
Moral of the Story :
So in the end know that
1. Dèvatā (including big 3 or 5) are not main focus of sanātana dharma.
2. Chètana DrashTā (ātman/purush/Indra) and his moksha/kaivalya is the main focus. Because that chètanā is raison d’être
3. Guru, varNāshrama, Īshwara are there to help achieve 2
4. Guru and varNāshrama (based on past+present karma) are absolutely essential. Contrary to popular belief, even Īshwara can be optional (not recommended but each to his/her own prakruti)
5. When you realize that drashTā is sitting behind ALL the layers of prakruti, you are free.
PS :
No matter how wildly one differs with fellow dhārmik on ideological and adhyātmik or social issues, DO NOT betray them by colluding with mlechha. Some Buddhists in their blind hatred of varNāshrama dharma, did that too. They were first to die under mlechha or yavana yoke. It is very sad (for me personally) to see great human beings (nāgārjuna for example) colluding/giving upadèsha etc to mlechha invaders due an “adhyātmik disagreement”.
it affected political scenarios in India. Same thing repeated in Sindh and Bengal. There always is a section of bauddhas who, out of their absolute dislike towards vedas and varNashrama, end up helping absolute worst invaders. this is an example of same mentality. But then she is a globalist and not a nationalist (Communism, Xianity and Islam are globalist ideas - All land belongs to God/Proletariat, hence we do not believe in petty nation-states. Islam and Communism more so). It is painful to see dharmik people (i.e. a section of people belonging to dharmik darshans like Buddhism, Sikhism) indulge in same narrative and effort.
Eventually what happens is varNashrama saves Vaidik Hindus, but it obliterated these sampradayas. In Sindh, after generations of Bauddha darshan following kings, a brahmaNa named Chaacha became a king and started reinstating vaidik hindu dharma. Result, at opportune moment (after successfully stopping Arabs for 80 years), seeing Qasim win at Deval, a section flipped. Resulted in absolute wipeout of dharmik power. Hindus at least survived because they ghettoed themselves in their strongholds (and Rajput + Chalukya response began from interior).
But seeing Hindus cannot be obliterated, they turned towards Buddhists & destroyed them instead. Those who could not fight, converted en masse. Same movie repeated almost painfully similarly (in broader strokes) in Bengal 500 years later. After Buddhist Paala empire, Senas (Vaidik hindus) conquered Bengal and started reinstating mainstream hindu dharma there. Before job was completed, Khilji raid occurred, Senas retreated to east of Ganga (which was predominantly buddhist)
West of Ganga remained Hindu (mostly) - due to reinstatement of Vaidika Hindu dharma by Senas. East of Ganga, job was half-done perhaps. Almost all converted slowly. Dalits and Neo-Buddhists buying into friendship with MIM like parties should read this history. Jogendra Mandal is too recent an example. But this is one mistake these people have been repeating again and again.
Ideas are powerful. Do not let them be too powerful.
Experience and Anubhuti trumps ideas.
श्रीराम....
Sir, I stumbled upon your blog by accident. You write beautifully and are very learned person. If you look at details of the language , text and message Buddhism and Santana Dharma differ a lot. But again it depends on which century you look. For example in Gaudapad’s Karika the argument is very similar to that of Mahayana.
ReplyDeleteLastly, I think whatever maybe the text and debate, the Truth is just one and no word can describe it. All the attempts are at the most pointer to that which is beyond everything. Pranam.