VEDIC CULTURE AND THE CONFLICTING IDEOLOGIES

By Dr Satyavrat Siddhantalankar

THE hottest and the reddest lava which the volcano of modern ideas is continuously belching forth through its crater is: that and that alone is real which is visible, whilst that which cannot be seen is unreal and thus, it is the visible or the real which is the problem and the sole issue which demands our attention. A look at ourselves reveals the body of flesh and blood, and a scrutiny into the universe brings before our vision the five elements, namely, the earth, the water, the fire, the air, and the sky. Nothing is visible beyond. Hence it is held that the only real thing with regard to ourselves is the body, and that the only reality in nature is the physical world of matter.

These facts have come to occupy such a prominent place in the  modern scale of values that it is contended that only when a person has got complete control over the things of bodily comfort as well as the forces of nature that he can be said to have solved his life’s enigma. Naturally the question arises: how does one obtain these bodily comforts as well as the treasures stored in nature? The answer pouring forth from the crater of modern civilization is that this is possible only through the assessment of wealth which can purchase all that which we need and even that Which we do not need. These powerful thoughts have for the past few centuries been forcefully moulding all human endeavours in the various parts of the globe. They have given rise to many isms and theories.

Time was when the only way to amass wealth was to rob those who had it in plenty. Persons resorting to this method were and are called thieves, robbers, and dacoits. But even kings and sovereigns had been availing themselves of the same method without ever being termed as such; Alexander the Great, Mahmood Gazanvi, Napoleon, all of them were motivated by the same ambition to accumulate wealth and set out to attack, plunder, and loot other countries. Once a dacoit was produced before a king for the heinous crime of loot. ‘My Lord,’ said the dacoit, ‘I see no difference between yourself and myself except that you commit on a larger scale the deeds I do on a scale much smaller. Big dacoits are called kings.’ The dacoit was right.

Then came a time in social evolution when this method of accumulating riches by force gave way to another means for obtaining them which was termed as business. This method was considered to be more refined, cultured and reasonable. In this new era u number of factories sprang up and new ways of generating wealth were discovered.

The discovery of  many a new territory and kingdom led to the expansion of business. Was not Africa at mere stretch of forests lying neglected as barren land before the English arrived there and settled down only to exploit its resources in terms of men and money? Indian labourers were recruited and sent to Africa by force, and it is through the hire of their services for paltry pennies that the Englishman became a multi-millionaire. It was essentially for business that the British through the East India Company first landed in India. The moment they realised that their continuance would no longer be serviceable to their interests, they decided to quit the country.

Capitalism

The decades of Alexander and Napoleon coupled with periods in history which are noteworthy for the accumulation of wealth through business are known as the eras of Capitalism. The setting out of kings and sovereigns with their armies to subjugate other countries and the landings of the English and other European nations in foreign territories under the banners of business to seek wealth through exploitation are the outcome of the capitalistic mode of thought and behaviour. Both wanted money, money at any cost; the kings by the use of force, and the traders through devious methods of exploitation. They wanted to accumulate and accumulate as much as possible. But does this amassing of wealth create a feeling of lasting satisfaction? If one is in want, one desires to have enough; but if one has got enough, one tends to crave for enough and to spare for hoarding.

Man is man; he covets and compares. It is natural for him to become dissatisfied with his own lot as soon as he sees and realizes that others are comparatively richer, better clothed, better fed, and better housed. When even the haves are not satisfied, how can the have-nots be? How is it possible for the poor cook, who prepares sumptuous dishes for us, to take only rotten meals himself and yet not rebel? How long will the weaver who knits the silken threads for our shirts remain contented with rags? It is incredible that a labourer who has built a palace for us must shiver in the cold in an adjoining hutment and yet not turn hostile.

Reaction against Capitalism and Economic Inequalities: theirProducts, Socialism and Communism

In a purely capitalistic set up, the labourer works and sweats, whereas the owner does nothing. If the capitalist earns a profit of Rs. 20, he gets rid of the worker by paying him Rs. 2, and keeps and enjoys the balance himself. The plea put up by the owner is that it is he who had invested his moneys and must therefore get a return. But actually Rs. 20 were earned not by mere investment but also by the blood and sweat of the labourer. Even it‘ some moneys were invested could they have yielded such a high return in the absence of labour? ls it, therefore, reasonable to give the worker only a pittance of Rs. 2 against the huge profit of Rs. 20 ‘2 Is it unnatural for the labourer to rebel against the capitalistic order of society sanctioning such a dispensation?

Thus we see that on the one hand stands the capitalist and on the other hand opposing him stands the labourer. The employee is becoming more and more conscious of the gulf separating him from his employer, and this awakening has led to many problems. In the sphere of domestic life, for example, it is now becoming more and more difficult to get as well as to maintain a servant. The situation will deteriorate still further because domestic servants, like the rest of labour, have started demanding higher wages. The demands of labour as a Whole are increasing. Ordinary peons in good concerns are now getting the same salaries as clerks used to get previously. The demand for the enforcement of the economic concept of the reduction in the inequalities of wealth and income between man and man is gathering momentum.

This problem of the disparity between the rich and the poor has become universal, and Socialism as well as Communism claim to solve it. These isms maintain that this problem of bridging the gulf between the rich and the poor can only be solved through the state regulation that work must be taken from everyone according to his capacity and each should be remunerated according to his needs. It is perfectly possible that certain individuals will and must earn more because individual capacities very, but the fact to be borne in mind here is that there must be equality of opportunity and secondary as well as higher education must be provided for all to eliminate the factor of capacity which perpetuates inequality. The welfare of society depends on the concept that all its members have sufficient resources to meet their requirements adequately.

Because of this rationalistic mass approach Socialism and Communism are having their sway in the modern world. What is the position in China? What took place in Korea‘? Why was the Prime Minister of Iran, Razmara, killed? Why was the coup staged in Pakistan‘? What happened in Telangana in India‘? What else are these if not reactions against Capitalism? Both Socialism and Communism are constantly engaged in a duel against Capitalism, and neither of them is prepared to leave the wrestling ground. The only difference between Communism and Socialism is that while the former proposes to bring about the desired changes through revolutionary methods, the latter opts for going slow as well as for adopting peaceful means to achieve its ends.

But we need not go into the origin, development, and other subtleties of Socialism and Communism. It is sufficient here to note that both of them aim at bridging the gulf between the rich and the poor, both are opposed to Capitalism and aim at a more equitable distribution of wealth.

Time was when Socialism and Communism were unheard of in practical life, and these terms were only to he read in books on Economics. Capitalism, which was at its zenith at that time, has now been shattered to pieces. Even‘ the capitalist countries have started pointing the footsteps of their policies in the direction of Socialism. This preference of Socialism to Capitalism may be attributed to the terrors created by the latter. And it is precisely to avoid both the harshness of Communism as well as the exploitative ills of Capitalism that Socialism is being ushered in all over the world. Socialism is being adopted voluntarily lest Communism with all its naked violence may show its teeth. It has become an established fact as well as a rule and law of commonsense that no political stability can be guaranteed so long as economic stability and prosperity are not assured. This accounts for Socialism and in cases even for Communism gaining an upper hand against Capitalism in social and political reconstruction.

And this is precisely what is happening in India today; the wind of Socialism is blowing all over the country. Let some socialists allege, if they choose to do so, that India is being governed by capitalists, but what confronts us is something entirely different. Old values are giving place to new ones. Rajas and Maharajas have been forced to shed off their former glitters. Though they reigned over different parts of the country for several centuries, they were deprived of their political powers overnight with a. single stroke. The Zamindari system has also come to an end. Transport enterprises are being brought within the purview of the public sector in large number of states. Cooperative societies are springing up everywhere. The profits so far earned  and enjoyed by the business community are now being monopolized by the government. The underlying aim or objective is to discourage the concentration of wealth in the few hands who make use of it for their personal pleasure and to ensure that its surges lush against every home. So we are laying the foundation of  welfare state which may re-invest all the profits of the public sector in the ameliorative activities of the community.

Capitalism in the modern age has become as much a theoretical concept its Socialism and Communism once were. Even the capitalists themselves feel diffident in lending their support to it in its original form and hence they too prefer to use the terminology of Socialism. This struggle of ideologies which is constantly being staged before us will definitely result in the total extinction of Capitalism and removal of man-created barriers between the rich and the poor. But none can tell whether this change will be brought about by power struggle, by violence and hatred, through Communism or through Socialism, or by the use of some totally deferent means. It is difficult to predict which ism will usher in this era of perfect equality, but the present trend clearly indicates that economic inequality cannot survive any longer. And, what is the position about social inequality‘?

Social Inequality

The annals of history indicate that white races have in the past entertained the wrong notion of superiority over the colored races and felt that there was something lacking in the latter. This feeling of racial superiority was one of the reasons for many of the Asian countries having been deprived of their independence for centuries.

But, if one were to take the present overall picture into account, it could be said that racial inequalities are gradually disappearing. It is no doubt true that the inhabitants of South Africa do not still enjoy the same rights as the white men there do, but it is impossible to justify this code of conduct in the modern age. Of course, at one point of time this sort of unequal social treatment was considered to be natural as well as very much in vogue.

Let us consider the case of our own country. Only n few years ago the fortress of untouchability was considered impregnable and even to touch men and women of 21 certain caste or community was deemed to be a  sin. But how long could such a sorry state of affairs survive? Un touch ability was made an offence after independence under the constitution. It is only the last flickers of  untouchability which are now awaiting to be extinguished.

And what is the position about women? Even in Europe, it was once held that women had no soul, and that the soul was an exclusive gift of God bestowed upon man. Today in all the European countries women enjoy equal rights with men, and a similar emancipation of women has also taken place in India. Are not these social changes signs of the coming times when there will be no man-made barriers between man and man and complete social equality will prevail? It is clearly writ large on the wall that the time has come when there will not be even one in this wide world who could be said to have no food to fill his belly, no shelter to lay his head, no means to educate his children. The economic inequalities must vanish as surely as the social inequalities have disappeared and the balance of which are surely on the wane today. The main problem of man in the present set up is more economic than social because social inequalities are invariably the outcome of economic inequalities.

Economic Problem is Man’s First but Not the Last Problem

It is self-evident that the coming era will not be an era of Capitalism, rather it will be one of Socialism or of Communism or any other ism which may emerge more powerful than the others. But the question of all questions is: will this put an end to the conflicts now going on among the different isms and ideologies? The answer is emphatically in the negative. In fact, there.is no difference between the problems dealt with in Capitalism, Socialism, and Communism, because they all have their origin in materialism. They may appear on the surface to hold enmity against one another, but in reality they present the same out- look, in so far as all of them keep the monetary wick flickering before them. They maintain that a man’s economic problem is his only problem and that it is towards the solution of this issue that a man should divert all his energies.

As against this conception, Vedic culture opines that even after a man’s economic problem is solved, his basic yearning still remains a quest. What is this basic quest or problem? The basic problem of man is that his needs do not end at the physical level, he cannot get peace merely by satisfying his hunger or quenching his thirst. He also craves, hungers, and thirsts for the higher things of life.

This visible human form is only an expansion of the spiritual principle lurking behind this body; and whatever is visible in the world form is merely the expansion of the self-same principle operating behind the world of matter. We are not Sharira but Alma; the real power motivating this universe is not Prakriti but Parama Atman. Thus Vedic culture presents men’s problems in an altogether new and different perspective. Man’s real search is not of the body but of Atma, not of the world of matter but of the spiritual principle from which all this emanates and has its being. In the light of the judgment of the Vedic seers, Capitalism, Socialism, and Communism would try to solve the human problem only on an animal level. They would see man only as the body and take no note of his spiritual nature, because according to them, this element does not exist at all.

Spiritual Nature of Man

However, the truth is that in spite of these world-wide attempts to satisfy our bodily and sensual needs, despite wars, murders, and dacoities raging all over the globe for man to fulfil his ambition, regardless of nature looking red in tooth and claw, we are, all of us, at some time or the other, motivated by certain higher impulses. These cannot be said to be material but they go to form the spiritual element in the individual. Is there any amongst us, who would not, for example at some point of time, think of sacrificing his life to save the life of a close relation from some imminent danger or of giving his own blood to save the life of one who is the nearest and the dearest to his heart by brushing aside his own personal considerations‘? How is this possible if economics and money were the two last words in human affairs and social relations? Is it not a fact that a man who sacrifices his life for the welfare of others becomes the idol and the hero for thousands of his admirers through the centuries? Do we not reverence Buddha, Christ, Dayanand, and Gandhi because they renounced the world and sacrificed themselves for the sake of humanity? What does all this mean? Does it not mean that though we are engaged in the accumulation of wealth and enjoyment of worldly objects yet deep within ourselves we still regard its renunciation and sell’-sacrifice I” or some higher aim far nobler and worth aspiring to‘? In this context let us recall the words that Dickens makes Sidney Carton speak when the latter is guillotined of his own accord because he wishes to save the life of Darncy, husband of Lucy Manette, his beloved: ‘It is u fur, fur better thing that [ do, than I have ever done; it‘s a fur, tar better rest that I go to, than I have ever known.’ Is it not an enigma that despite our constantly harping upon the slogans of world peace and universal brotherhood, restlessness, hatred, and violence are rampant everywhere‘? Why is it that though love, harmony, service, sacrifice, self-surrender are the eternal and fundamental principles of the universe, they are being discarded in the modern world?

It is the rocks of the materialistic theories of Capitalism, Socialism, and Communism which stand in the way and block the advancement of the surging waves of world peace and universal brother- hood. But as wave upon wave of these eternal spiritual Verities of truth, love, harmony, sacrifice, non-violence break upon the mountainous rocks of these materialistic isms and are forced to turn back leaving room for these isms to hold their momentary sway, they do so only to gather greater strength, vigor, and momentum with which to lash forth in future. These materialistic theories have imprisoned us so firmly within their four walls that we cannot have a glimpse of anything beyond this body and its needs. And similar to the prisoner who yearns for fresh air and a peep into the outside world we also pine to uphold and assimilate in life these principles. But like him we find ourselves helpless to do so until and unless we can successfully break open the dungeon bars and come out into the open. Nevertheless we cannot but talk about these principles because they hold us fast and howsoever we may wish We cannot escape from their grip. Why is this so? This is so because these principles alone are true, they alone are real, and cannot but help influencing even an outright materialist or a hard atheist. The reason why materialists admire these principles only by word of mouth and not through  practice, is that though the spiritualism as conceived by the Vedic seers does not renounce materialism, yet materialism does not so readily make a compromise with spiritualism. And living as we are in a materialistic age, all our efforts at spiritualizing materialism are resisted Whereas those at materializing spiritualism are encouraged.

It is thus clear that these high ideals of love, sacrifice, and benevolence can exist only if our outlook is spiritual; they cannot be kept alive if we view the world as reflected through the capitalistic, the socialistic, or the communistic mirrors. If Capitalism, Socialism, and Communism can help us only in removing hunger and thirst and if these urges are not the only needs of man, then they can ill provide us with a lasting solution to our problems. They solve only a part of our question, only a fragment of our difficulties. Spiritually speaking, these ideologies could hold a permanent footing in the minds of men only if they could give a local habitation and a name to those far of, glowing, glittering, eternal verities.

These are passing through the ordeals of labour, essentially to be horn into the World and there- by to bring about its transformation from the world of violence, untruth, stealth, indulgence, and attachment into a world of non- violence, truth, non-possession, self-control, and non-attachment. These alone are the eternal, these alone are the universal. Thus does the Epistle to the Philippians read: ‘Whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue and if there be any praise, think on these things.’ But no, the prevailing economic theories do not offer a lasting solution to the Whole of man. ‘Thou shalt not live by bread alone’ depicts the crux of the problem. There is no denying that hunger and thirst are very important urges for which due consideration is absolutely necessary. But the fact still remains that Whereas materialism confines its scope to merely providing man with his physical necessities and comforts, Vedic spiritualism goes a step further and embraces man and his needs as a whole. Outlook of Vedic Culture

According to Vedic culture, the body exists but it is the beginning and not the end of human existence; the satisfaction of our bodily needs is and no doubt should be our goal but not our final goal in life. Vedic culture does not teach us to ignore the body or to shut our eyes to the economic aspect of life. The body is real, it is in  fact so real that it has even hidden within itself its spiritual principle. How, then, can we neglect the body ? How is it possible that the saints and sages who prayed for the span of a hundred years of life could afford to neglect or hate or abhor the body‘!

Vedic culture pays its tribute to all those ideologies which aim at solving the problem of hunger and thirst. and its preference must naturally go to the one which deals with this problem the most efficiently. It only emphasizes that alter having fulfilled their mission of removing hunger and thirst these ideologies must recede into the background, and that they should not keep us in their shackles after they have outlived their utility. In other words, in the panorama of human existence it is the spiritual mountain which should stand out against the skyline as towering over the hill of materialism, and man must remember that after climbing the material mount the spiritual ascent still remains. It is essentially at the point at which materialism ends its task that spiritualism begins its own. Both materialism as well as spiritualism singly by themselves cannot render any useful service to humanity. One-sidelines is not and cannot be the truth of existence. Does not Christ say: ‘Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s and to God the things that are God’s.’

Vedic culture does not ignore materialism because it regards the body as at means for the realization of its destiny by the soul and Prakriti (matter) as an instrument to be used for the fulfilment of its mission in life. The message of Vedic culture enshrined in the teachings of the Rishis of old is that we should start with Sharira  (the body) and its needs but not end with it; we should begin with Prakriti (matter) and its products but not make it our final goal.