There is a very great potential in Hindu philosophic thoughts, which opens up only when you engage in it in all seriousness. And comparative philosophical study can provide a great tool to cognize the depth and implications. Of course it need not be said that bromides are hurdles in the path of right understanding. And also for people like me, who do not subscribe to caste discriminations and gender discriminations, most of the sociological concepts as found in dharma sastras are quite unagreeable to say the least. That apart, looking into the philosophical concepts, I find a rich store of them, which can contribute towards the general human thought.
Take the case of 'will and desire' as Spinoza juxtaposes them or 'language and thought' as Wittgenstein will put it. Let us imagine the whole human being as an intricate machine and nothing else. Let us say that desire is just the bio-face and the cognition by the brain in flux-mode. i.e. a set of impulses read with the tag 'value' by the nature's computer is what is felt as desire. Just let us suppose. Then what is will? i.e. the set of thrusts which come inside out in efforts of attaining or obtaining the 'desired'? Now we have slipped a word 'effort'. So 'willing' 'taking effort' all depend on the initial point of cognizing. If all these are only bio-processes superannuating one over another linearly or recursively, the fundamental problem of the core of being which cognizes, wills and/or engages in action still crops up all the more brutally. Hindu philosophic thought openly admits and recognizes this problem of infinite regression and straight-away admits it. Instead of positing convenient shifting stances, Hindu thought says that the core of being where all these infinite regressions inhabit is what is called soul. The Atman is defined by these basic energies or potencies of 'knowing' willing' and 'acting'. Jnana, Icchaa, Kriya sakthis.
In the spectrum of world when you are able to read features of knowing, willing and acting you can honestly admit of the soul rather than attempt to reductively explain in terms of matter.
*
On transfer I had to commute between a far off village and my residence. It was taking me more than one and a half hours of train journey. How to pass the time and ward off boredom? Books, yea, they have been my very good friends all along. So some book or other was in my hands keeping company, of course a real good company. So it started I think in that way.
Young students, IT boys and girls, talking about sundry things, how we locked into each other on this question, 'What is Hinduism?' is difficult to answer now after a great passage of time. Somebody asked something like 'Was there anything like Hinduism in the past?' Is not the name itself something new and given by others?
May be . What of that? In fact no religion bears the very same name which it had in the beginning. Was Christianity called so by Christ and the disciples? Buddha himself called his path as Arya Dharma, not Buddhism. 'Arya attAngamagga'. Therefore can we say 'There was not any Buddhism in the past'? The same holds good for Hinduism. Why should double standards be adopted whenever Hinduism is talked about? Perhaps some vested interests at home and abroad have their own reasons to pop up such doubts in the minds of the Hindu people themselves. While talking about Hinduism we will be careful enough not to fall a prey to such shifts in approach. And we must give Hinduism all the margins that we allow for other religions.
And another point. Who am I to explain about Hinduism? Am I any realized soul? No. I am born in Hinduism. I was brought up by my parents, taught by my teachers and I grew in Hinduism. I have grown in Hinduism and Hinduism has gone into my feelings and emotions. Of course I have studied a lot. Right from the Vedas, across the scriptures of the World Religions, lots of literature, philosophy, science -- enough to make a talkative of me. But always I shy away from imposing my ideas on others. Management theory may say, 'Hey! you lack the basic quality of management'. But what to do? men are different. And I prefer to stay as myself.
Perhaps that was the reason why those young minds were fond of asking me such questions and also pursuing in getting my replies. Anyhow it was gala time and my travel was a joy. Otherwise what a boredom would have set in the two and a half years commuting. Thank you little hearts. You all sweetened my time.
*
What is Hinduism? If you call it a Religion, then why are there so many religions within it? Any religion, does it not fall into a simple formula like, say, 'one God, one Book, one Master'. Can you say that Hinduism has this simple pattern? If yes what is that? If no, then, can you explain how Hinduism can be called a religion?
One religion is not like another religion. There are some common aspects, but again there are aspects peculiar to that religion alone. We can't say Christianity is exactly like Islam, or like Buddhism and so on. That too, when we are talking about a very great ancient religion, passing through various times of Hindu society, we can't apply blindly this formula. There are very real structural differences between religions. That is the point. Seemingly there is a similarity, like -- God, Book, Master.
This GBM formula holds good for the various paths within the fold of Hinduism. SriVaishnavism, Saivism, Saktham, Kaumaram, Ganaapatyam, all so many separate paths or Sampradayas or Samayas, they all fulfill this formula viz., GBM -- GOD, BOOK, MASTER. Just ask any devotee of Vishnu. He will say clearly what is his chosen God? what are his prescribed books? and Who are the Masters of his path? He will be as clear as any other religious devotee. The same with a Saivaite, he is very clear about his books, God, Masters. A Saktha is also like that.
But in Hinduism these devoted worships of the Chosen God are called Ishta Devata Nishta. Is this Ishta Devata Nishta in any way a form of fanaticism? Most definitely not. Because in fanaticism, what you choose to follow, you begin to think as the only truth. And all other religions become so many barren paths in wilderness. Your duty becomes changing other people. To tolerate such blasphemies becomes a sacrilege, according to what has been preached to you. You become bad in the eyes of your Most Righteous God, if you don't obey your scriptural commands, exhorting you to make the world, a uniform place for your One and Only God. Such a mentality is fanaticism.
But in Ishta Devata Nishta, the idea is 'I want to worship the Ultimate Soul in this form. I know that it is really He, who resides in everything and also is the soul of others' Gods. He has assumed various forms to cater to the devotions of various types of religious people throughout the world. But this is my chosen Ideal. I prefer to worship in this way. In the same way, I do understand your choice of your own God. I respect your right to your chosen way of worship. After all is it not true, that all worships go to my Beloved in reality? Then why should I not wish you good luck in your spiritual endeavors. God speed!
*
The meaning of the word Ishta Devatha Nishta is - Ishta - one's own liking; Devatha -- Godhead. Nishta -- deeply involved practice. So this 'deeply involved devotion towards one's Choice of Godhead' is never allowed to become, in any way, fanaticism. Because, even from the Vedic times, the Universal Idea has been firmly implanted in the Hindu's mind.
'There is but one Truth; Sages have been calling it by different names'
'The water falls from the Sky and flows through many ways to the self-same Sea; likewise the devotions towards many Gods ultimately reach the self-same Kesava'
The same thought is given in a sloka of Siva Mahimna stotra. So the General and Universal aspect of Hinduism always worked in tandem with the individual worships of Chosen Gods. This two layered structure was organic rather than artificial. It was not an outwardly agreed upon arrangement but something which has evolved through the internal exercise of coupling the vast spiritual freedom with inevitable human limitations. The human nature was at no time ignored. The transcendence of abstractions was at no time lost sight of. The whole field of Religion was a veritable education for the Hindus. Any human being can start anywhere and go by his own path unhampered by any sort of sojourners' pressure.
You unto your path
Me unto mine
And for us there is
Always the Divine.
*
The Devotee's passion is to see his Chosen God as the Ultimate and God Almighty of the universe. The Jnani's passion is to merge in the Ultimate. Both ways are seeing the same thing from different perspectives, provided, you don't get sabotaged by fanaticism or snobbery of intellectualism. If by becoming narrow in your chosen devotion, you become more spiritual, then your narrowness is blessed. If by becoming more universal and more abstract in your inner most mind, you go nearer to the Ultimate Soul, then your universal and abstract outlook is blessed. What matters is, are you going towards the Centre? If the circumference takes you towards the centre, then it serves the prime purpose. If the radii take you away from the Centre, then the radius is wretched. But Hinduism is a Beautiful Circle. The radii never take you away. And the circumference never makes you dry.
Did I say a beautiful circle? Yes, and more than that, an enchanting spiral and an engulfing spherical. An expert artist is fond of free variations of his tunes. Never is he content in striking a mono chord. The God of the Hindus is highly aesthetic. Art seems to be Its passion. It rejoices in the sight of the ardent soul. It comes unseen as the abstract vastness. It hides Itself in the heart as the possessing Love. Treading the solo path, the soul takes to wings every now and then. To arrest it in any single walk may become an injustice to the Infinite. To feign a vastness where you have to feel pangs of Love may be an act of deserting the Centre. Who knows which soul is in what delicate equilibrium of spiritual growth? It is this mystical humility, the real concern imbued with spiritual expectation, that is at the heart of all the systems and paths of Hinduism.
*
It is great and grand enough to be universal and all inclusive, just like the Sky and the Sea. Hinduism is of course a beautiful circle. But are there any books of reference, in times of preparatory years and the beginning steps of one's spirituality. Any definite anchor to stay floating and not to drift aimlessly. Even birds which fly inter-continentally, do carry some chart of instincts in their flights. The Soul after all, does have its beginning in self-realization, in the mortal coil. Books are indispensable in any religion, even in those religions which have dispensed with gods. Hinduism prescribes three prime most important books. It has garnered all its spiritual values in there, in those three books. Upanishads, Brahma Sutras, Bhagavat Gita.
Upanishads proper are called the Vedanta, the culminations and conclusions of the Vedic inquiries. Vedantas or Upanishads are also called the Srutis, the Revelations seen by Rishis. These three books are called Prasthana Traya. Three Books based on the primacy of three facets of spiritual quest. What are those? Sruthi, Yukthi, Anubhava. Revelation, Reasoning, Experiencing.
The Book that is based on the Revelation is Vedantas or Upanishads. The Book that is based on Reasoning is Brahma Sutras. The Book that is based on Experiencing is Bhagavat Gita. The human being comes to know of God only when He informs of His presence through some ways. He is not of the category of concrete things. He is definitely abstract. He is the abstraction of abstractions. So He is known more clearly through Words. For only words can connote more than concrete the abstractions. Hence the Book of Revelations.
Then comes the Book of Reasoned out arguments on the Upanishadic concepts. Human Reason is given full scope to analyze and understand the Heard Book of The Divine or the Seen Mantras of the Seers. Textual exegesis and hermeneutics form very important tools along with the philosophical understanding of the Grammar. Only then ensues the study of Brahma Sutras or Vedanta Mimamsa.
Then comes the Book of Experiencing, viz., Bhagavat Gita. The whole Gita pours out of the involved experiencing of Sri Krishna, the greatest Vedantic teacher ever born.
*
To speak of abstractions is good. But life happens to run on details. That too daily, domestic concerns and cares. We are impelled to actions more out of necessity than out of intellectual commitment. Human being is an acting being as much as a willing being, as much as a knowing being. To know, to will and to act form the three facets of the self-same soul. Jnatrutvam - the faculty of knowing; kartrutvam -- the faculty of acting; bhogtrutvam -- the faculty of enjoying. These three describe the three facets of the Soul. These three facets form the basic psychology of any individual. So any spiritual practice must incorporate in itself different strands of these triads. Hinduism has devised four such modus operandi -- viz., the four Yogas -- the Jnana Yoga, the Karma Yoga, the Bhakti Yoga and the Raja Yoga or the psychological Yoga proper.
*
All the world religions talk about something in Heaven, which man must reach. Religion is other-worldly, according to them. So religion as an institution of training men to mourn and wish for a super reality is inherent in world religions. But Hinduism never talks of religion in that way. It always speaks of Dharma. Dharma is the reality as it is in principles. From atom to cosmos Dharma runs like a golden thread. The sustained, becomes the sustainer, through out nature. But this dharma which started as the grounding in nature and awareness of whatever is existing became narrowed down to mean social stratifications and status.
Divinity is not somewhere. It is, has been, and will be shining in your heart. In the heart of every being, He resides and moves the world. Realising that in one's own self and transacting with the world based on that is the dharma. But this clarity is most often lost sight of by people in general.
*
Divine Revelation. Debating Reason. Devotional experience. These are the three lights that form the basic canons of Hinduism. Vedas or Shruthi is the light of Divine Revelation. Brahma Sutras is the light of debating Reason. Srimad Bhagavad Gita is the light of Devotional Experience. All the three lights bring to vision the same reality. What Reason understands of the Revelation, Experience confirms. Shruthi, Yukthi, Anubhava are the words used by the great Adisankara for Revelation, Reason and Experience.
But what is the basic proof of Religion according to Hinduism? Is it reading, debating, being emotional, building an empire of the faith? Not anyone of these. They mean nothing, if the basic proof is not there. The basic proof is not believing something. It is 'Seeing God'. To see God is the basic proof of Religion. It is the Vision, which the words explicate. Beholding is the base, believing may be only a prop on the way. The Vision is not concrete. It is the Transcendental Vision.
Words are not mundane but they descend to the earth carrying the pure warmth of Divinity, only to ascend back carrying ardent souls. Unless and until one understands that Bhakti includes human rationality, it has not dawned on that person's eastern sky. Hinduism is the project of man, which started when he discovered that there is really, God.
*
Books have been written aplenty in any school of thought in Hinduism. Abstract treatises abound on any strand of thinking. Even on Sri Vaishnava Sampradaya, the books I have may fill up a library. But all the books, all the treatises, on all the schools have their bearing, have their anchor mainly or somewhere in Vedanta. Even the Agamas which centre their ideology on temple worship and theology have their locus in Vedanta. Knowing Vedanta is knowing its methodology. Knowing Vedanta is explicating the world of Upanishads into a consistent study of the Transcendent. The commentaries of the old, tutor one in this methodology and inculcate the Vedantic thinking. But we have a blessing in Swami Vivekananda. He is the great Master of Modern Hinduism. His complete works provide a cogent text book of Hinduism and lends an efficient work-table to improve oneself upon. For the young generations and coming ages there is no other better option than reading the Great Sage.
*
Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda is a vast corpus of writings of a great man. You get the positive statement of the essential and core features of Hinduism and the contributions of Bharath towards world-thought. But again to enter the CW, one needs some tips to steer one's way through the topology of ideas.
First, undoubtedly, the Chicago addresses form the natural introduction to his thoughts not only chronologically but also concept-wise. That too after the phenomenal 5 mts speech starting with Sisters and Brothers of America, the most important piece not to be missed is his PAPER ON HINDUISM. In that he has risen to a great challenge posed by the times and the onset of of world culture. For the first time, almost, Hindu thoughts in essence and having relevance to the future are given in the world language unmistakably. This comes in Volume I.
Next to that comes in the line of interest even according to his line of life-events, come his writings on an important theme. It is a great contribution to world-spirituality by Bharat-Desa. The Human being, if studied in its universal psychology, has the potencies of Work, Emotions, Deep Psychology and expanding Knowledge. Sometimes you like to work and work. You do things, alter this and that, bring things to what shape you want and all that. But are you always working just like that? You have your moments of deep emotions. Feelings move you like anything. You show passion, affection, great friendliness. Sometimes you just want to be with somebody. You need not talk; you need not express, as it were, anything much; but just being with that somebody gives you great joy. Those are, yea, some moments.!
But it is not the full picture of life. Sometimes you are deep into some moods, some idea where your mind is totally engrossed. You may be a painter, who sits, stands before a growing concept on a canvas hours together. You are not satisfied with a stroke or a bend or a colour tone. You find your mind so docile and calm and arrested in that deep moment, perhaps not wanting to stir any more for sometime. And again you are sometimes in vast knowing after knowing. The limits of your understanding go on extending. You comprehend more and more, linking this with that, incrementing shades of meaning by linking across disciplines. The nascent vastness making you almost impersonal, making you a vibrant process of knowing. Yea, sometimes you are that, most universal, transcending all colours, creeds and even anthropic particulars. You are becoming the expanding itself in thought.
All these are comprehended by the concept of Yoga in Hinduism. And what better writings can there be on these aspects than that of Vivekananda? You find his great ideas in his explanations on these topics of Karma-Yoga, Raja-Yoga, Bhakti-Yoga and Jnana-Yoga. Human spiritual pathways of Work, Mental Control, Emotions and Knowledge. All these you can find in his Volumes . Karma-Yoga Raja-Yoga in Volume I and Jnana Yoga in Volume II and Bhakti-Yoga in volume III.
(Karma-Yoga - Yoga of Work; Raja-Yoga - Yoga of Mental Control; Jnana-Yoga - Yoga of Knowledge; Bhakti-Yoga - Yoga of Emotions)
My recommendation is one must read through these works before reading his Lectures from Colombo to Almora, which is placed in the very first volume.
Chicago Addresses form a beautiful start, real and chronological, of the manifestation of his message. I always prefer to think that from that moment of the great Parliament on, Sri Ramakrishna took over the psycho-somatic medium of Vivekananda. From that moment on, it was the unified being of Ramakrishna-Vivekananda who was talking and writing. My idea is due to that fantastic simplicity!
If all his works on the four types of Yoga are a potent communication of East-to-West, his Lectures of Colombo to Almora were vibrant adaptations of West-to East. The Lectures are where the Vivekananda in the two-in-one being Ramakrishna-Vivekananda become the active mode and the other one remains in the charging mode, if one may try to understand the phenomenon in this way.
A charter of Hinduism in its age-old psyche and practice was begun on the podium of the Parliament but a new canon of Indian Nationalism was bequeathed to the Indian public through the Lectures from Colombo to Almora. In the Lectures Swami was giving potent impulses and stirrings to the dormant national psyche of Bharath which began to manifest due to the effective thrust given by Sister Nivedita and Sri Aurobindo, in the year 1906 as national awareness and national awakening. The British were sharply perceptive about the potency of these lectures.
Apart from these, his intimate personality along with his pondering fervour we will be getting in his Conversations and Dialogues. But these records inform us about his later stages. He was such a one that he should have been attended with a Boswell or a M, right from his itinerant days. And another intimate record is his Letters. A wonderful literature of heart and sentiments he has left behind, if we choose to leave his words as his own. These records show that he was thinking and living what he was writing and talking. The letters come in instalments starting from Volume V to Volume IX. This system I do not like. His letters should have been put in a single volume chronologically, with no change, that too single English alphabets standing for persons referred to and addressed. No this highly irritates a reader whatever might have been the intention of the editors then. But they are grand as they are in these volumes.
Coversations and Dialogues come in Volumes V, VI, VII. Again a work that must come in one full piece. And another brilliant little work is his Inspired Talks. Whoever recorded these blessed be they! The words are fresh from the highs of ecstasy and they sometimes strike you dumb through some beautiful evenings. The Srirangam sky was a witness to many such evenings some forty years ago. It comes in Volume VII.
I think after finishing this first round of study and getting the personality in all its flavors, it will do well to come to his other translations and poems and essays on a second course of more familiar round. Notes on his lectures, stray lectures compiled and the translated essays do form another strata not only buttressing his thoughts, but also giving some new dimensions. His essays East and West and Modern India and also Buddhist India, though in translation are some of the very good pieces of thought. Memoirs of European travel, a humorous piece of writing in Bengali, introduced as if a new genre and style of writing in the original language as per Rabindranath Tagore. It retains its original humour here in translation also.
But another source of writing, which is a must-reading along with CW in order to grasp the vastness and varied nuances of his wonderful personality are two books by his famous disciple, Sister Nivedita - The Master as I saw Him and Notes on wanderings with Swami Vivekananda. Especially The Master, that book is a veritable commentary on Vivekananda's thought and personality. If the saying 'without Vivekananda it is difficult to understand Sri Ramakrishna' is true then saying 'without Sister Nivedita it is difficult to understand the total personality of Vivekananda' will not be anything less true. This book 'The Master as I saw Him' educated more nationalists in the seminal years of Swadeshi rise. The great poet Bharati was a close student of this great book. To understand the perennial worth of this book it will suffice if we look at the comments of Rev.Canon D D, T K Cheyne in his Review on this book of Sister Nivedita, which appeared in the Hibbert Journal 1911:
"Religion, to him, was not an intellectual theory, but the realisation of truth. For this, spirituality was an indispensable prerequisite, and such a rare quality needed cultivation. Still, Western and Eastern ideas being so different, it was necessary to expound the latter, i.e. the ideas characteristic of orthodox Hinduism, not as mere ideas, but as life-giving truths. Three volumes of lectures remain, delivered partly in England, partly in America, partly in India, besides the address before the Parliament of Religions at Chicago in 1893, and scattered separate lectures, especially that called "My Master," an account of the Swami's Guru, the saintly, God-intoxicated Ramakrishna, and a lecture on the Vedantic philosophy, given at Harvard University. All these are helpful, not only for a clearer insight into Indian thought, but for a somewhat tantalising glimpse of Vivekananda's personality. The present work, however, by Miss Noble, who in India became his disciple, gives a much more satisfying view of the Master. It is not a biography, but what our German friends would call a Charakterbild, and as such it may be placed among the choicest religious classics, below the various Scriptures, but on the same shelf with the Confessions of St Augustine and Sabatier's Life of St Francis."
*
India is a land of religions. So many paths and so many peoples, so many mentalities. And from the hoary past many spiritual prescriptions gather unto themselves suitable votaries and devotees. Yogis, real or professed, have never been rare at any given time. Sometimes an engulfing personality sweeps the stage and the history twists around them for a moment. And always for a moment before the flow gyrates back to its stream. Perhaps such a moment was the advent of Sri Ramakrishna. Is it not? Or is it totally unique? I think it is unique in the history of human thought, the advent of Sri Ramakrishna and more so, the publication of the noumenon viz., Sri Ramakrishna to the world in the form of Vivekananda, the Phenomenon.
Of course the closest parallel happens to be the ancient and puranic pair Nara Narayana. To be the Master and to be the Disciple in the self-same incarnation. But it is just an happy parallel and remains only such without explaining very much the uniqueness of the modern event. It is a habit of thought with us to match the new with the old, however distant and however strange. And it is a favorite theme with us to reiterate that the time and hence the events are always cyclical, the old repeats itself.
But I think it will be a lot more effective towards understanding, if we, for a turn, are able to put these paradigmatic approaches away for a time and take the events as unique in themselves. Nothing wrong with the old parameters, but we scarcely understand their dynamic meanings, which should have been alive at least in the minds of some past masters of theology, though not in recent times but definitely in the relevant periods of the past.
Sri Ramakrishna and Vivekananda form the text and the commentary in themselves. One illustrates and the other explains. One intuits the meanings through life and the other illustrates by language and logic, the meanings imbibed. The Old happens anew and the Modern rediscovers its roots. The transcendental immortalizes itself in the transitory life and the temporal search finds its fulfillment in encountering the Eternal. It is a single happening janus-faced or janus-phased.
I think it is only in understanding Vivekananda in Sri Ramakrishna and again Sri Ramakrishna in Vivekananda that the modern India's self-discovery becomes complete. And this self-education has never become such a task of Nationalism in any past ages as it has become a necessity in our times. That is why I say we must keep the old parameters away for a time and approach anew our New Manifesto, which comprises all Nationalism, Spirituality and Universality in one.
*
Sankya philosophy spanned the whole world of things and knowledge about the world simply in 24 principles. And nearly all the schools of Hinduism take the Sankyan clarification of the known world as the base of their enquiry. In 24 principles you just grasp the whole universe.
Who is 'the one who grasps'? That is the knower? Yea really it is the soul or Jivatman. And he stands as the 25th principle. And he does stand apart different in kind. The previous 24 principles are all belonging to one classification - viz., 'Objects Known'. Whereas the 25th, i e., the knower, Jivatman, is not an object known. He is the knower who knows all things and objects.
And you can just think further about an encompassing whole which comprises all these, - known objects and the knowing soul, who are different in kind, but go to make our picture of the world. But what do you think, the nature of that encompassing whole? Will it be different in kind from these two, objects and the knower soul? Surely is it not? That Whole cannot be of the same kind as the objects known or the knower, Jivatman. But the nature of the Whole must be such that, the natures of the member-categories, viz., the objects and the soul are included within. That Whole cannot be totally 'Object' and also that Whole must house the object also inside itself. If that Whole cannot be just object, then the Whole must be more akin to the nature of the knower soul. But if it is just another soul, how can it include within itself different kinds like objects, which are known and Jivatman which actually knows the objects? So it becomes obvious that that Whole should be of a nature, which transcends the natures of member-categories like objects and knower, but which includes all the while these member-categories and accommodates their natures.
Hence the Whole is named as Supreme Soul, Param Atma. The whole includes objects but also transcends the nature of objects. Hence it is called Para Vastu - Param Porul or Supreme Substance. And Vedanta, which is the methodology which inquires into the real import of the Revelations, for instance, Vedas, likes very much the brevity in the number of basic principles involved and to be studied. Some sects give a very detailed listing of basic principles, so that pinning down all shades and variations as separate principles. But Vedanta lays down as one of its basic dictums - Lagava or brevity is essential. The principles must be reduced to most essentials and just multiplication of principles will not in any way enhance one's enquiry and also will not help in understanding.
*
Jiva, the word for the living is synonymous with Chit, the word for being conscious. The whole world can be classified into the living and the non-living. Hinduism differentiates between the conscious and the non-conscious, the Chit and the Achit. Only the God and the Soul come under the classification of the Chit. The being of Chit is Chetana. God is Parama Chetana.
In Hinduism the whole world has been classified into 24 Tathvas. The natural elements 5 - Earth, Water, Fire, Wind, Space The sensory organs 5 - Eye, Ear, Tongue, Nose, Skin. The sensations 5 - Sight, Sound, Taste, Smell, Touch. Organs of action 5 - Hands, Feet, Speech, Anus, Sexual organs. Organs of mind 4 - Mental Stuff, Mind, Intellect, Ego
So the world that we come to know is comprised of and contained in these 24 principles, viz., the natural elements, the sensory organs, the sensations, the organs of action and the organs of mind. The Knower, the Chit or the Atman is the 25th principle that comes after enumerating all the principles of the Known. So Atman itself is sometimes referred to as the Twentyfifth Principle in the Sastras of Hinduism.
*
The four-fold paths of Yoga, viz., Jnana Yoga, Karma Yoga, Raja Yoga and Bhakti Yoga are deeply based on one important aspect of the Soul, which is the possession of the three faculties. The faculties are Knowledge, Action and Enjoyment. But what is the nature of the Soul as such? Or is there anything as Soul in human living, not to speak of general life as it is.
Hinduism points out how in our own experience we have assumed and accepted the presence of the Soul before we venture to talk of anything as me or mine. The very human experience of its own beingness becomes impossible if we dare to doubt the prime most premise of the reality of the Soul. Of course here and hereafter we would like to mean by the word 'Soul', not its original Greek concept but what Hinduism means by the word 'Atman'. Atman or Soul has as its innermost essential characteristic, 'Chaitanya'. Chaitanya is the fact of being the 'Chit'.- 'Conscious Core'.
Consciousness is the tool we use in Knowing. Applied Consciousness is Knowledge. Potential Knowledge or the potentiality to know is the Consciousness. So, according to Hinduism, Jiva, the living being, irrespective of its being a human or any other living being, is intrinsically Atman or Chit. Any living being is a conscious being in essence. How far any living being manifests its essence of being conscious, in actuality, makes all the difference between a human being and other living beings. Of course the sophistication of the Sarira or the Body scales the spectrum of Life on Earth.
The main idea is - Jiva is not only something which lives but also quite as essentially, if not more, a being which is conscious, and also, a being which enjoys. The degree may differ with the species but the nature is universal to the Jivas.
*
In Hinduism any living being is called Jiva. Ji is to live. Any being that lives is Jiva. Jiva has three aspects in existence.
First is - Jiva is a knowing subject. It is capable of knowing that which is. It is capable of knowing itself. That is, Jiva has Knowingness or Jnatrutva. Jiva is an acting agent. It is capable of action. It is capable of adopting means towards ends. Jiva has Actingness or Kartrutva. Jiva is also an enjoyer. It is capable of enjoying the pleasures and it covets the pleasures. Jiva has Enjoyingness or Bhogtrutva.
Jiva is a Knower; an Acting Agent; an Enjoyer. To act and to enjoy are nothing but more special forms of the Knowingness of Jiva. So to liberate Jiva is to make it free to express itself fully by way of knowing, acting and enjoying. Hence Hinduism designs the paths toward liberation in such a way that all the three faculties are put to use towards freedom.
Four such paths have been designed, viz., the Path of Knowledge, the Path of Action, the Path of Yoga, the Path of Love. They are called Jnana Yoga, Karma Yoga, Raja Yoga and Bhakti Yoga respectively. All the four elements are in each and every one of the four, but with varying predominance. This Four Way Road is the National Highway of Hindu Religious practice.
*
The God of Hinduism is both transcendent and immanent. The canons of Hinduism talk about the changing and the unchanging aspects of the human life. The Religion of Hinduism is both universal in philosophy and private in practice. The people of Hinduism are austere in celebrating and celebrating in austerities. They call this world as the Vibhuti of God. Vibhuti means manifested splendour. So to shine in this world devoid of God is to court deprivation and poverty of Spirituality. And to shun this world as something despicable is to dishonour His splendour. And to claim this world as one's own is to commit robbery. And to think of oneself as the property of the ego, forgetting the true owner viz., God is to commit ontological theft. But to enjoy this world as belonging to the God and to realise oneself as the property of Him are sure ways of securing Prosperity and Spiritual Felicity. Abhyudaya, i.e., Prosperity is to see this world as belonging to the God. Nisreyasa, i.e., Spiritual Felicity is to see oneself as His possession.
*
The canons of Hinduism categorize the changing and the unchanging aspects of the religious life. Srutis cater to the eternal questions. Smritis deal with the changing problems of the society and human beings.
God according to Hinduism is both immanent and transcendent in nature. He is even inside an atom. He transcends even the widest stretch of the Cosmos.
aNOr aNeeyAn mahatO mahIyAn. Even in the micro space He resides in total Fullness. Again in the macro space He encompasses the entire details. Perhaps this Vision of God has inspired the very structure of Hinduism. Hinduism is particular in its Universality and universal in its Particularity. Just because He is immanent in all things, we cannot say the world is spiritual. And just because He is Transcendent to the world, the World in no way becomes secular. Actually God is the Totality, - the spiritual, the mundane, the cognizing souls, the created objects - everything forms part of the Totality, which is God. In what way all these things share in the Totality makes the inter-related Whole share with the indwelling parts in more than many ways. We have to find out our place in this Totality. Or rather we have to yield ourselves so that the Totality may find its domain inside us.
*
We have been talking of Sruthi and Smrithi. Canons of the Universal Principles and Books that deal with the customs, mores and habits of the people. That which deals with the eternal principles are the Vedantas or Upanishads or the philosophical essences of the Vedas. They tell us about Atman, Jeeva, Paramatman and the eternal life beyond. Why is Jeeva born in this world and what is his goal and how to reach it? And basically who is Jeeva really? What is his real nature? Your real nature determines what you must attain and in what way you must do it? If your real nature is something temporal. i.e., you exist by your very nature for sometime and simply go out of existence with nothing surviving, then you cannot think of eternal life and so on. When you yourself is just temporal, there is no point in breaking your head about that nature. But if your real nature is not temporal but eternal, then you must realise that nature and strive to attain the eternal life, which is your right by the very fact of your real nature. If you are really the eternal soul then what is that goal which you must reach?
What is the nature of that Almighty and what relationship connects you two? And what is that Way which you must choose? What causes the delay? and what are the impediments on the way? All these are explained in detail in Vedanta. These questions never change in time. They are the eternal spiritual principles of man's life.
But the social questions, viz., the social divisions, the problems of man and woman, the problems of the ruled and the ruler, the questions of family, the relationships of social living, all these are social problems which change with the time and they have to be updated based on the social realities and necessities by the societies concerned. It is better we realise the sooner, that for the world our reason and science are sufficient and for the spiritual Vedanta. Is it not the meaning of the term Veda, as per Sayana,?
Srirangam Mohanarangan
***
* 
