“Karmanyevadhikaraste Maa Phaleshu Kadachana” – “Go about your work and do not worry about the results” – a line said to be the essence of Hindu philosophy. Also, unfortunately, the most misinterpreted verse of its most misinterpreted book. As author R.K. Narayan has said about the Bhagavad Gita in his first book Swami & Friends “This generous piece of writing extends itself to any interpretation and in Ebenezar’s (The school scripture master) hands, it served as a tool against Hinduism.”
In this day and age of scientific thinking, the concept of reincarnation is difficult to accept in its entirety. Many scientist philosophers, notably Fritjof Capra, have tried to find parallels of Eastern mysticism with modern scientific thought. In light of their analysis, the hypothesis of reincarnation can be seen as our ancient seers’ ideas on the cyclic nature of the universe, alternating between creation and annihilation. I use the word hypothesis because nobody has been able to prove its veracity. On the other hand, nobody has conclusively proven it as humbug either. In fact, reincarnation as a concept is not unique to Hinduism or its descendant religions like Buddhism or Sikhism. The resurrection of Christ is a form of reincarnation.
The interpretation of karma in currency today is one that would make the people apologetic for everything. This state is primarily due to the vested interests among the Hindus themselves, who gave currency to this to suit their own ends. A passive and inert population is always more pliable. It is easier to lose accountability when you stress on the sins committed in your own past life, of which you have no knowledge or over which you have no control, as the cause of your present life troubles.
But first things first. Is the karmic law, with its stress of a continuum of lives across birth and death, internally consistent in its present explanation? Taking a purely pedantic note, a “Maanusha Janma” or human birth is said to be the culmination of the good deeds from previous birth(s). If I had done good deeds in my previous birth(s), why should I suffer now? Any sins I do now will show up only in a future birth, when I would not be a human being. Ergo, in a human birth, I do not suffer from any vestigial sins of previous births! If this argument sounds like the load of humbug (that it is), the supposed interpretation of karma is equally ludicrous.
To say that the Hindu mindset, because of its stress on karma (as defined by the West), is doomed to failure because of lack of ambition is a crude syllogism at best. If Hinduism were to make a person inert, we would not be able to explain the age of the Mauryas, the Guptas, the Cholas et al. I am not supporting myself on the crutches of past glory like most current Hindu fanatics, but the fact of the matter is that these dynasties, undoubtedly the pillars of Hindu thought, had ample military and artistic ambition, if nothing else!
Besides Karma, Hinduism talks about “Nishkama Chitta” and “Nishkama Karma”, wherein the idea is to do what is ones duty without a constant eye on the desired result. This does not mean a lack of ambition to achieve, but a resilience to carry on even in the face of adversity. It translates into a more stoic philosophy of equanimity. “Nishkama Chitta” also can be translated to mean a lack of personal goals. It talks about sacrificing ones personal gains and pleasures at the altar of society.
Yes, the ultimate aim of all Yoga (as in the school of philosophy, not the impossible-unless-rubberized convolutions of the body that is in vogue) is a rather selfish “Union with the Supreme Being”. But so is it of any other, be it the Christian “Kingdom of Heaven” or the Islamic “Jannath”. No one is the worse off for this.
Although there are several paths to the Supreme Being, the path recommended for the general populace is one of Karma Yoga or simply translated, excellence in whatever one does. At the conclusion of any work, a traditional Hindu would say “Narayanaya iti samarpayami” – “I submit this as an offering to the Supreme Being”. If there had been a tangible accountability to a godhead, which is a source of awe and fear, would there be a compromise on the quality of work?
I agree that the status of India leaves a lot to be desired. I also agree that there is selfishness more than necessary among Indians. There is a visible dichotomy between words and action. There is no accountability for the quality of ones work. Most sadly, there is an acceptance of sub-standard quality by the populace. However, to blame all of this on a Hindu mindset would be injustice.
Japan, by almost any yardstick, is the epitome of national success. The people have a sense of national pride, things work, government governs, the executive executes and people are willing to sacrifice personal comfort for national good. Surprise, surprise, both Buddhism and Shintoism have precepts relating to reincarnation and Karmic retribution!
The erstwhile U.S.S.R. had no religion. Post the Great October Revolution, it showed great signs of progress. There was no concept of private property or personal wealth. Everything worked; almost nothing was your personal fault. But, if there was no personal accountability, there was no room for personal ambition either. There were some people more equal than others, alright, based on the card that they carried (a variant of the caste system?!). And yet, today it is exactly that – Erstwhile. Any karmic law at work?
In today’s world, all religion is taking a more subliminal role. There is a new wave sweeping the world - materialism. No religion other than materialism has a development indexed to personal consumption; none else develops ways to beat the system as a parallel process with the system itself. Materialism is the religion that is the foundation of all the ills that plague not just India, but the whole world. The three key words of this creed are ‘I’, ‘Me’ and ‘Myself”. This concentration on the first person is the root of a lack of communal benefit. Money creates its own caste. Yes, there is easier entry and exit from your caste based on this index, but the system is as, if not more rigid in its differentiation.
If materialism were to be the panacea for all of India’s ills, I would turn around an Upanishadic statement
“Sato maa, asat gamaya, Jyotir maa, tamasam gamaya, amritor maa, mrityur gamaya” – Lead me not to the truth, but falsehood; lead me not to light, but to darkness; lead me not to immortality, but to death.
December 26, 1998: New Delhi, India
P.S.: This article was written in rebuttal of an article by a gentleman named John Elliot, published in the Outlook magazine dated December 21, 1998. The upshot of this article was that Hindus can never be ambitious because they believe in “Karma”. For the text of this article, please click here.
No comments:
Post a Comment