Tuesday, May 27, 2014

वैदिक दंड व्यवस्था पर विचार





  वैदिक दंड व्यवस्था विषय में एक शंका हमारे समक्ष आई हैं। शंका इस प्रकार हैं की एक और वेदों में विश्व में सम्पूर्ण मानव जाति के लिए शांति का सन्देश हैं जबकि दूसरी ओर वेदों में शत्रु को जड़ से नष्ट करने का, उसके प्राण हरने का, उसके राज्य को भंग करने का स्पष्ट आदेश हैं। इसके अतिरिक्त वेदों में विभिन्न प्रकार के अस्त्र और शास्त्र का उल्लेख होना क्या दर्शाता हैं ? शांति और शत्रुओं का नाश करना इन दोनों बातों में परस्पर विरोध हैं, ऐसा कैसे संभव हैं? एक अन्य शंका यह थी की इस दंड व्यवस्था को कौन लागू करेगा।
 यह शंका नवीन नहीं   हैं। पूर्व में भी यह शंका पहले कई बार सामने आई हैं और इसका यथोचित समाधान भी किया गया हैं। जैसे पूर्व में अब्दुल गफूर से महाशय धर्मपाल बनने और फिर दोबारा से अब्दुल गफूर बनने पर मुसलमानों में धाक ज़माने के लिए आर्य समाज और स्वामी दयानंद के विरुद्ध कुछ पुस्तकें प्रकाशित की गई थी। इन पुस्तकों में से एक उर्दू पुस्तक थी  "वेद और स्वामी दयानंद"।  इस पुस्तक में इसी शंका को अब्दुल गफूर ने प्रस्तुत किया हैं। अब्दुल गफूर लिखता हैं "वेदों के इज़हार से पेशतर दुनिया में इस क़िस्म के कुश्त व ख़ून और जंग व हदल जारी थे और कि वेदों की तालीम से पहले ही लोग तोप बन्दूक़ और तीर व कमान से एक दूसरे को हलाक कर रहे थे तो उनसे सिर्फ़ यही नहीं कि इस दावे की कि वेदों का इलहाम शुरू दुनिया में हुआ, तरदीद हो जाती है। बल्कि वेदों के सर पर ये इलज़ाम आयद हो जाता है कि जिस सूरत में कि ये जंग व हदल और कुश्त व ख़ून वेदों से पहले ही जारी थे तो वेदों ने अपनी तालीम से बजाये इनका ख़ात्मा करने या सुलह की तालीम देने के जलती आग पर और भी घी डाल दिया और जंग व जदल कुश्त व ख़ून करने फ़ौज भर्ती करने, तीर कमान, तोप बन्दूक़ और अनवाअ़ व अक़साम के आतिशीं और बिजली के असलहे तैयार करने की ऐसी ख़तरनाक तालीम दी कि तमाम दुनिया शोला-ए-ग़ार बन गयी। "
मुसलमानों द्वारा इस शंका को उठाये जाने का मुख्य कारण क़ुरान में जिहाद के नाम पर गैर मुसलमानों के ऊपर विभिन्न प्रकार के अत्याचार, उनके जायदाद छीनने, उनको गुलाम बनाने, उनका कत्ल करने सम्बन्धी जो आयतें हैं उनको वेदों का सहारा लेकर जायज ठहराने का एक असफल प्रयास हैं।
कारण स्पष्ट हैं वेदों में शत्रु और क़ुरान में शत्रु की परिभाषा में पर्याप्त भेद हैं। वेदों में शत्रु उसे कहा गया हैं जो दुराचारी हैं, पापी हैं, अज्ञानी हैं, दुष्ट हैं। ऐसा व्यक्ति कोई भी हो सकता हैं चाहे वह किसी भी मत मतान्तर का हो जबकि क़ुरान के अनुसार शत्रु वो हैं जो  गैर मुस्लिम हो, जो क़ुरान की शिक्षाओं पर विश्वास नहीं लाता हो और जो मुहम्मद साहिब को अंतिम पैगम्बर नहीं मानता हो। यहाँ पर वेदों की विस्तृत परिभाषा के समक्ष क़ुरान की सोच संकीर्ण नजर आती हैं क्यूंकि वेदों के अनुसार विश्व का कोई भी व्यक्ति, चाहे वह किसी भी मत-मतान्तर का हो अपने श्रेष्ठ कर्मों से धार्मिक बन सकता हैं जबकि क़ुरान के अनुसार वही धार्मिक हैं जो मुस्लमान हैं। स्पष्ट हैं की यहाँ पर भेद एक और कर्म का हैं दूसरी और विश्वास का हैं। यही भेद धर्म और मजहब अथवा मतमतांतर की नींव रखता हैं।

अब वैदिक दंड व्यवस्था को समझने का प्रयास करते हैं। सभी जानते हैं की वेदों में आलंकारिक भाषा शैली हैं। विभिन्न प्रकार के विज्ञान को कम से कम शब्दों में वेदों वर्णित किया गया हैं। शत्रु को दंड देने उसे केवल शारीरिक दंड देना नहीं हैं। पाप कर्म का मुख्य कारण अज्ञानता हैं। अज्ञानता का शत्रु सत्य ज्ञान हैं। ज्ञान से मनुष्य का उद्धार करना भी तो शत्रु का नाश कहलाता हैं। कठोपनिषद में यम नचिकेता के संवाद में यमाचार्य को मृत्यु का देवता बतलाया गया हैं। क्या यम नचिकेता के प्राण हरने आये थे? नहीं! अपितु यमाचार्य वहां पर नचिकेता को ज्ञान प्राप्त करवाने आये थे अर्थात उसकी अज्ञानता का नाश करने आये थे। इसलिए अज्ञानता का नाश शत्रुता का नाश हैं।
वैदिक दंड व्यवस्था को लागु करने का भर राजा अर्थात क्षत्रिय एवं ब्राह्मण अर्थात विद्वान पर हैं। क्षत्रिय राजा और ब्राह्मण के कर्तव्यों का वैदिक वांग्मय में विस्तृत रूप सेवर्णन मिलता  हैं।
ऋग्वेद 1/14/9 में राजा के लिए आदेश  प्रजा के भक्षक, समाज विघातक, भ्रष्टाचारी, दुष्ट बुद्धि, दुखदायी, दुश्चरित्र आदि को नाना प्रकार के दंड से दण्डित करे और प्रजा में न रहने दे। 
अथर्ववेद 3/1/1 में सन्देश हैं की सेनापति राष्ट्र के शत्रुओं  का नाश करे।
अथर्ववेद 3/19/3-1 में पुरोहित के कर्तव्यों का वर्णन करते हुए लिखा हैं की हम पुरोहित राष्ट्र में सदा जागरूक रहे, अपने कर्तव्यों का तत्परता और सतर्कता से पालन करते रहें तथा ज्ञान के द्वारा अज्ञान का तथा क्षात्र के द्वारा बाह्य शत्रुओं का नाश होता रहे।
ऋग्वेद 10/137/1 में शिक्षा हैं की सत्य निष्ठ निष्पाप विद्वान ऐसे नीच, मृत समान व्यक्तियों (पापी और अपराधी) को भी उत्तम धर्मोपदेश देकर उनके अंदर फिर पवित्र दिव्य जीवन का संचार करते हैं।
ऋग्वेद 1/106/3 में शिक्षा हैं की पाप, भ्रष्टाचार और दुराचार से बचाने का कार्य अनुभवी पिता के समान ज्ञान-उपदेश द्वारा पालन करनेवाले गुरुजनों और विद्वान माता-पिता का हैं।

वेदों के अनुसार त्यागी, तपस्वी विद्वान साधु महात्माओं के प्रेमपूर्वक समझाने पर भी जो भ्रष्टाचार और दुराचार का परित्याग न करके समाज के लिए विघातक हो उनको राजा द्वारा कठोर दंड देना चाहिए, उन पर दया नहीं दिखलानी चाहिए। थोड़े से लोगों को भी ऐसा कठोर दंड देने से अन्य लोग प्रेरणा प्राप्त कर उन पाप कार्यों में निवृत नहीं होंगे। इसीलिए वेदों में दंड विधान में छोटे दंड से लेकर कारागार, कारागार से लेकर मृत्यु दंड तक का विधान हैं। अस्त्र-शस्त्र का उद्देश्य केवल दूसरे पर आक्रमण करना ही नहीं हैं अपितु शत्रु से प्राण रक्षा भी हैं। इसलिए यह केवल कुतर्क ही हैं की वेदों में अस्त्र-शस्त्र के वर्णन और उनके प्रयोग से विश्व की शांति भंग होती हैं। वेदों के अनुसार विश्व में शांति स्थापित करने के उद्देश्य से ही दंड व्यवस्था का प्रावधान हैं। अगर समाज में चोर, डाकू, भ्रष्टाचारी लोग अपने कुकृत्य में लगे रहेंगे तो समाज में शांति की स्थापना हो ही नहीं सकती। इसलिए उनका उचित समाधान निकालने से ही शांति संभव हैं। वेदों में सामान्य प्रजा जो अपना धर्मानुसार जीवन व्यतीत कर रही हैं को प्रताड़ित करने का नहीं अपितु उसकी रक्षा करने का आदेश हैं इसलिए वेदों पर विश्व शांति को भंग करने का दोष लगन बचकानी बात हैं।
एक और बात की वेदों में पाप कर्म होने से  पूर्व ही उसके दंड के होने का विधान का पहले से होना ईश्वर के सर्वज्ञ होने के सिद्धांत को सिद्ध करता हैं। वैदिक व्यवस्था  "Necessity is the mother of invention" अर्थात आवश्यकता आविष्कार की जननी हैं के विपरीत हैं। जैसे ईश्वर ने मनुष्य के जन्म से पहले प्रकाश के लिए सूर्य, पीने के लिए जल, श्वास लेने के लिए वायु का निर्माण सृष्टि उत्पत्ति के समय किया उसी प्रकार मनुष्य को क्या करना हैं और क्या नहीं करना हैं ऐसा सन्देश वेद रूपी ज्ञान के माध्यम से पहले ही प्राप्त करा दिया। इसलिए वेदों में पाप कर्म करने पर दंड आदि का स्पष्ट विधान हैं। ईश्वर पूर्व की, वर्तमान की और भविष्य की सभी सृष्टियों से परिचित हैं। इसलिए ईश्वर ने मानव जीवन में समय समय पर व्यवहार में आने वाली समस्याओं से से भी परिचित हैं। इसलिए ईश्वर ने उनके समाधान के लिए दिशा निर्देश वेद ज्ञान रूप में सृष्टि के आदि में ही दे दिया। वैदिक दंड व्यवस्था निश्चित रूप से  व्यवाहरिक, सार्वभौमिक एवं सार्वकालिक हैं।
डॉ विवेक आर्य

Tuesday, May 20, 2014

Fake theory of persecution of Buddhists in India




Fake theory of persecution of Buddhists in India

(This is a Research article to explode the myth of Fake theory of persecution of Buddhists in India)

Recently a new trend is being noticed in the literary circles particularly amongst the camp followers of Dr.Ambedkar that the Buddhism disappeared in ancient India due to persecution by the Hindus. This camp especially holds Brahmins as responsible for almost extinction of Buddhist tradition from this country. In this regard, Pushyamitra Shung, the Brahmin chieftain of Buddhist King Brihadratha who was also the founder of Shung dynasty is commonly targeted as the destroyer of several Buddhist stupas and killer of thousands of head shaven Buddhist monks.

The myth of religious persecution of Buddhism in India has been is rejected by Rhys Davids[i] who is considered as the grand authority on Buddhism. Renowned Historian Vincent Smith also rejects this assumption that Buddhism had been extinguished by the storm of Brahman Persecution. He considers this as false explanation[ii]. Most important Hiuen Tsang, during his visit to India does not mention any persecution against Jains and Buddhists[iii] but according to Sir Alexander Cunningham both Fa Hian and Hian Tsang noticed decline of Buddhism during their visits in India.

The fact of the matter is that Buddhism disappeared from the land of its origin due to various other important reasons:



1. Decline of moral values and ignoring the teachings of Lord Buddha by the followers especially of the Vajrayana sect of Buddhism.

2. Loss of patronage from the ruling class.

3. External attacks of Islamic invaders.

4. Consolidation of Brahmanical Hindus.



The basic teachings of Buddhism are based on Truth, Non violence, abstinence and devotion. With the passage of time we see that different sects and schools of thoughts emerged within Buddhism and they deviated from the core tenets of Lord Buddha, e.g., principle of non-violence. The Buddhism by 7th century had adopted tantric practices which were not in conformity with the original doctrines of Buddhism. Having taken the vow to remain as celibate for the whole life, monks turned into ‘Married Monks[iv]. Once refraining from animal Killing and avoiding meat eating Buddhist openly started flesh eating. This practice is commonly seen amongst all Buddhist countries. Well known author Brijlal Verma in his works while quoting Fahian and Hian Tsang says that during early ages of Buddhism, no one consumed meat. Meat eaters were considered as Chandalas and they were considered as outcastes who were forced to live outside the city limit[v]. The practice of living on alms and charity by Buddhist monks gradually started disappearing. The practice of living on alms and charity by Buddhist monks gradually started disappearing. The large monastic establishments instituted by Ashoka, were all repositories of learning’s. There influence was everywhere superior to the power of the King and the people accepted their monarchs at the bidding of the monks[vi]. In due course, the gap between the general public and the monks widened and ultimately the influence of austerity and sage hood of Buddhist monks diminished almost completely. Similarly the influence of monks on the ruling classes also started varnishing.

Additionally, the philosophy of Buddhism got restricted to the monks while common man had hardly any access to that. After monks stopped living on charity, their common bonds or ties with masses also started shaking. Monks who were living lavishly on state funds were being considered as a parasite or a burden rather than as a helping hand. The system of admission into Buddhist Sangh also suffered a setback. In the early ages of Buddhism, only those people were permitted to get admission into a 'Sangh' who were fully capable of living the austere life of an ascetic. With the passage of time persons of dubious character, thieves, robbers, opportunists, disgruntled and discarded elements started becoming monks in order to enjoy the life without putting any hard work whether physical or intellectual.

The comparatively pure Theism and practical morality of Buddha were first encountered with the mild quietism of the Vaishnavas, and at last deformed by the wildest extravagances of the Tantrists[vii]. Men crossed by Fortunes and disappointed in ambition, wives neglected by their husbands, and widows by their children, the sated debauchee, and the jealous enthusiast, all took the vow of celibacy, abstinence and poverty[viii]. The desire of possession not the desire for salvation became attracting factor for the masses for Monasteries. Ultimately the inclusion of Tantric Practices, adultery, alcoholism etc lead to moral degradation and total wipe out of right conduct from Viharas. The people looked upon unmoved, and would not defend what they had long ceased to respect; and the colossal figure of Buddhism, which had once bestridden the whole continent of India, vanished like a sudden rainbow at sunset. Beyond any doubt one can say that if Lord Buddha had been alive to see such deteriorating conditions of moral values in his Viharas, he would have immediately closed them.

The patronage towards the spread of the message of Lord Buddha started during the reign of Asoka. We can learn from the records that Asoka was found to be unusually spending the state resources on Buddhism[ix]. The Buddhist prose romance, named Asokavandana (being part of the Dirgavandana) tells a long story of Asoka’s senile devotion to the church and consequent waste of the resources of the empire, which went so far that the ministers were compelled to remove him from power and place Samprati, son of the blinded Kunala, on the throne[x]. This fact is supported by the facts that it is believed that Ashoka build about 84,000 Buddha Viharas in whole country thus spending large part of the state resources on propagation ignoring the other important state tasks[xi]. The condition was so dreaded that the whole army of soldiers were transformed into shaven head monks leading to loss of military power of the state. Soldiers were denied using arms as even training with arms was considered equivalent to non violence. The result was weakening of the defensive force of our country. The other Jain kings also adopted same policy as Buddhist Kings. The Doctrine of non violence was forcibly implemented on the general public and even punishments were announced for those who break the rule. We can understand the impact of this rule by these examples. In the Twelfth century Kumarapala, King of Gujarat in Western India, after his conversion to Jainism in A.D. 1159 took up the doctrine of the sanctity of animal life with the most inordinate zeal and imposed savage penalties upon violators of his rules. An unlucky merchant, who had committed the atrocities crime of cracking a Louse, was brought before the special court at Anhilwara and punished by the confiscation of his whole property the proceeds of which were devoted to the building of a temple. Another wretch, who had outraged the sanctity of the capital by bringing in a Dish of raw meat, was put to death[xii].

The degree of loss of defensive power of Maurya Empire can be understood by the fact that Salisuka Maurya in B.C. 216 who was descendant of King Asoka (once the supreme ruler of the country) was defeated by Kharavela the king of Orissa[xiii]. Among many reason one of the reason was that Asoka grandson Samprati left Buddhism and adopted Jainism. He was such deeply influenced by Jainism that he ordered dissolving of all forces and conversion of all soldiers to Jain monks and he himself died after prolonged fasting in a Jain muth in South India[xiv]. The result was the gradual weakening of the strength of the forces. During the reign of Brihadratha his military chieftain Pushyamitra Shung found Brihadratha the Maurya King as inefficient as had showed no interests in defending of the country especially by the Greeks. Pushyamitra killed him and ascended himself to the throne. He started mass capturing of the Greeks who were hiding in the grabs of Buddhists in Vihar. Few Historians considers Pushyamitra as Brahmin King and his campaign as persecution of Buddhists but in reality it was an act of self defence. Sir Vincent Smith claims that the self appointment of Pushyamitra as king and his action against Buddhists are exaggerated[xv] statements supporting Buddhist persecution. Pushyamitra provided equal patronage to both Buddhist as well as the Brahmins of his age. This fact is proved by his involvement in construction of one of the biggest Buddhist Stupa of his ages. Sir Vincent smith clearly writes that the persecutions were so rare and that a rule the various sects managed to live together in harmony, and in the enjoyment of fairly impartial official favour[xvi]. The invasion of India by Greek Menander and his defeat by the forces of Pushyamitra is a perfect example to prove his dedication for transforming the country into a strong and unified nation as it was during the reign of Asoka. The Greeks after the loss under Menander never tried to reinvade the country[xvii].

The later rulers supported both Buddhism as well as Vaishnavism equally. The mentioning of Lord Buddha as one the Avatars in Puranas shows that the society of those ages was not hostile to Buddhism in spite of the fact that whoever was the ruler a Brahmin or a Buddhist King. Historians give another view point that Chandra Gupta, the ruler from Gupta Dynasty may have professed Buddhism in the early part of his reign and Vaishnavism in the later part; for the differences between the two is more nominal than real[xviii].

Slowly the patronage to Buddhist monasteries reduced due to lack of understanding between the rulers and the monks. The main reason was decline in the impact of Buddhist monks on the rulers. The General conduct of monks suffered heavily that they started indulging in tantric practices rather than the Damma as taught by Buddha. The introduction of tantric practices by Vajrayana sect of Buddhism, the inclusion of Alcohol, Meat eating and uncontrolled relationships with women which were strictly forbidden was the last blow to the falling standards principles of Buddhism[xix]. A valid point is sometimes asked that Jainism also flourished along with Buddhism in the middle ages. Then how was Jainism able to survive? The reason was simple that the followers of Buddha stopped the practice of abstinence, poverty (minimal requirements) and the morality. They confined themselves to the Viharas rather than teaching the common man living outside Viharas. The followers of Jainism maintained their lives with austerity and dedication thus surviving even in incompatible circumstances.

The invasion by the outsiders is also an important cause of decline of Buddhism from our country. In 10th and 11th century Buddhism in Kashmir faced serious challenges by the invasion of Huns who weakened its roots in the Northern part of India[xx]. Subsequently by the 12th Century Buddhism was confined to the lands of Bihar and Bengal. The last blow which wiped out Buddhism from the land of its origin was Islamic invasion leading to destruction and mass killing of Buddhists. In Bihar and Bengal both rulers Palas and Senas were swept away by the torrent of Muhammadan invasion at the end of the twelfth century, when Kutub-ud-din General, son of Muhammad Bakhtyar stormed Bihar in or about A.D. 1197, and surprised Nudiah (Nadia) a year or two later. Great quantities of plunder were obtained, and the slaughter of the shaven head Brahmans, that is to say the Buddhist monks, was so thoroughly completed, that when the victor sought of someone explaining the content of the books in the libraries of the monasteries, and not a living man could be found who was capable of reading them. It was discovered, we are told, ‘that the whole of that fortress or the city was a college and in the Hindi tongue they call a college Bihar’. This crushing blow, followed up, off course, by similar act of violence, destroyed the vitality of Buddhism in the ancient home[xxi]. The remaining Buddhist Monks after widespread destruction like Shakyan Shri Bhadra, a Kashmiri in origin from Vikramsheela University shifted to Jagtala Vihar in Bengal. He had to even migrate from there to Nepal and finally he died in Kashmir. Similarly Buddhist monks spread out to the distant lands of Tibet, Nepal and survived outside India as staying here was invitation to death by the hands of Islamic invaders. As no tutors were left to teach the Dhamma of Buddha ultimately Buddhism disappeared from the land of its origin in almost 100 years of Islamic Invasion.

Need not to mention that one of the causes of the loss of social support of Buddhism from general public was the organization efforts by the Brahmins and foremost name which comes in front of us is of Adi Shankracharya. Believed to be born in Kerala in 8th century Adi Shankracharya well verses in Vedic philosophy toured throughout the country and started debates and dialogues with Jain and Buddhists monks. The famous one was arranged by the Ruler of Ujjain King Sundhava. After the victory of Adi Shankracharya King embraced himself the Vedic dharma and declared it as his state religion. These attempts were like winning state patronage and support for the propagation of Vedic Dharma. Needless to say that it was the scholarly efforts and hard work by Adi Shankracharya which enabled him to win over the rusted mind of so called Buddhist scholars who had left practicing the real message of Buddhism since ages. None of any historical documents till date provides any description of forceful killing or armed struggle by any King against the Buddhists during the lifetime of Adi Shankracharya. Fa Hian, a renowned Chinese pilgrim and traveller who came to India early in the fifth century, found Hindu temples and Buddhist monasteries in every great town in Northern India, and does not record one instance of hostilities or persecution. And all the great dynasties of the age those of Chandragupta and of Kanishka, the Andhras, the Guptas, and the Shah Kings, encouraged the holy men of both religions, and bestowed valuable gifts of land and property on Brahmans and Buddhist monks alike[xxii]. We can easily infer that Shankracharya did not destroyed Buddhism but he debated with the decaying and rotten structure which was mere symbolic remnants of the original Buddhism. Moreover Buddhism was still prevalent in centuries after the death of Shankracharya in the country.

Rahul Sankrityayan confirms this statements by providing existence of Buddhism till 12th centuries.. He mentions that for four centuries from 8th to 12th centuries we found Buddhist kings like Palas in Bihar under their rule the learning seat of Nalanda produced scholars like Shantrakshit and Dharmotara. He even credits the Gaharvar rulers of Northern India as a supporters of Buddhism and even mentions the queen of Gaharvar rulers Kumar Devi established Dhramchakra Mahavihar in Sarnath and King Govind chandra donated to Jaitvan Mahavihar. In southern India in Konkan Shilahar rulers were supporters of Buddhism. Even in the land of Shankar in Kerala there were supporters of Buddhism. The famous work of “Manjushree” was secured by the Brahmins of Kerala is an example of lack of any enmity between Brahmins and Buddhists in those ages[xxiii].

To sum up we need to understand that the Buddhists were never persecuted in India. No one can uproot a strong Banyan Tree. Only when it becomes hollow from inside by infestation of termites its life comes to end. Similar was the fate with Buddhism. It weakened due to its own internal causes like loss of morality, loss of conduct and other ill practices in Viharas. The weakened structure instead of acing as a light house became burden on the society. Thus social and ruler support extinguished with the times. The remaining skeleton was just like a feather which was flown with the wind of Islamic invasion. This fact is enforced by Historian R.C.Dutt as “During a thousand years Hinduism was influenced by Buddhism, until Hinduism adopted all that had made Buddhism popular, and thenceforth Buddhism declined. It is a mistake to suppose that Buddhism was stamped out in India by persecution; except in very rare instances, when conquerors indulged in cruelty and massacres, there was no religious persecution in India. Buddhism disappeared from India because its mission was fulfilled. Hinduism had adopted joyous celebrations and vast pilgrimages, Hinduism had assumed image-worship and popular rites, Hinduism had reunited the Aryans and the Hinduised non- Aryans into one homogeneous community, and thenceforth Buddhism declined in India because its mission was fulfilled and it ceased to be necessary.[xxiv]

We consider Buddhism as a reform movement against animal killing, untouchability and superstitions on name of Dharma widely prevalent in those ages. The basic teachings of Lord Buddha are inspired from the Vedic philosophy in terms of attainment of Moksha, Right Conduct, knowledge and following the right Path[xxv].

Dr Vivek Arya




[i] J. Pali Text soc,1896,pp.87-92


[ii] Page 368 ref Vincent Smith, The early History of India


[iii] Page 454-455 ref Vincent Smith, The early History of India


[iv] Page 367 ref Vincent Smith, The early History of India


[v] Page 26,27 ref The Fahian and Hian Tsang visits to India by BrijMohanlal Verma, 1928


[vi] Page 125 ref Alexander Cunningham, The Bhilsa Topes; or, Buddhist monument of central India


[vii] Page 158 ref Alexander Cunningham The Bhilsa Topes; or, Buddhist monument of central India


[viii] Page 168 ref Alexander Cunningham The Bhilsa Topes; or, Buddhist monument of central India


[ix] Page 98-100 ref Alexander Cunningham The Bhilsa Topes; or, Buddhist monument of central India


[x] Page 192 ref Vincent Smith, The early History of India


[xi] Page 37 ref The Fahian and Hian Tsang visits to India by BrijMohanlal Verma, 1928


[xii] Page 181 ref Vincent Smith, The early History of India


[xiii] Page 197 ref Vincent Smith, The early History of India


[xiv] Alexander Cunningham, The Bhilsa Topes;or,Buddhist movement of central India


[xv] Page 202 ref Vincent Smith, The early History of India


[xvi] Page 203 ref Vincent Smith, The early History of India


[xvii] Page 199 ref Vincent Smith, The early History of India


[xviii] Page 157-158ref Alexander Cunningham, The Bhilsa Topes; or, Buddhist monument of central India


[xix] Page 68 ref Mahapandit Rahul Sankrityayan, Buddha Sanskriti


[xx] Page 409-410 ref Vincent Smith, The early History of India


[xxi] Page 403-404 ref Vincent Smith, The early History of India


[xxii] Page 60, 61 ref The civilisation of India by R.C.Dutt published in 1900 from London


[xxiii] Page 67,68 ref Mahapandit Rahul Sankrityayan, Buddha Sanskriti


[xxiv] Page 68 ref The civilisation of India by R.C.Dutt published in 1900 from London


[xxv] Ref Buddha an Aryan Reformer by Dr Dharamdev Vidyamartand

Friday, May 9, 2014

There is only one God

 
 
Eminent Historian Francis Gautier posted on his face book profile that
“Unlike other religions, Hinduism refuses to sanction the monopoly of one God, or one Scripture as the only way to salvation.”
Our Clarification
Vedas speaks of one god ...and one way of worship. There is only one God and sages call him with different Names. This is not Monopoly but quality of God. The only path to attain salvation is Truth. For e.g. you cannot consider practices like animal sacrifice on name of Dharma (practised by some Hindus) equivalent to Ahinsa or concept on non killing (practised by many Hindus) equivalent to each other as both are totally opposite to each other. Better understanding of the Right Interpretation of the Vedas solves the doubts on Religion. There is also a misunderstanding about Christianity and Islam that they are monotheistic i.e. Believes in one God as Christianity believes in Neither one, nor two but three Gods that are Holy Soul, Holy Father an Holy Son. While Islam believes in God, his messengers and the Last Prophet Muhammad. The Vedic concept of God believes in one and only one God with no mediator in between and God is omnipotent, omnipresent, all pervading, never born, never dying, all knowing and creator of the Universe.
No other literature describes the existence of Only One God as beautifully as Veda does. Just see here.
Na dvitityo Na triyaschthurtho naapyuchyate|
N a panchamo Na shshtah sapthmo naapyuchyate|
Nashtamo Na navamo dashamo naapyuchyate|
Yagna yetham devamekavritham veda||
Sa sarvassai vi pashyathi yachha praanathi yachhana|
Tamidam nigatam sah sa yesha yeka yekavrideka yeva|
Ya yetham devamekavritham veda||
Atharva 13.4[2]19-20
There is no second God, nor a third, nor is even a fourth spoken of
There is no fifth God or a sixth nor is even a seventh mentioned.
There is no eighth God, nor a ninth. Nothing is spoken about a tenth even.
This unique power is in itself. That Lord is only one, the only omnipresent. It is one and the only one.
A more categorical, effective, emphatic and impressive refutation of polytheism cannot be imagined. The Vedas reject the multiplicity of Gods in the clearest possible terms and speak about One God, who is Omnipresent, Omnipotent and Omniscient and absolutely and absolutely formless, who is ever unmanifest and who never assumes human forms or never descends on earth in any form- human or otherwise. Rig-Veda says “Vishwarkya vimana advihaya” meaning who he is not entangled by mind, omnipresent Lord is the Creator. He is both sustainer and protector too.
The God oversees the insensate and conscious world in a unique way. The entire world rests with him. He is “Yeshah yekah” i.e. only one. He is conscious, indivisible. He is Yekah yevah” Only one.
Where can be more clear assertion of existence of Only One God than this? After reading the description of God in this manner, Sri W.D.Brown writes,
It [Vedic Religion] recognizes but one God.
Vedas call upon to offer worship due only to God and no one else; to nothing else. It is clearly stated in Rig-Veda as under.
Ma chidanyad vishamsata Sakhyo ma rishanyatha|
Indramit srotha vrishanam sacha suthe
muhurukhya cha samshata||
Atharva 20.85.1
Friends! Do not praise and worship anything else, do not be doomed, praise and worship only the benevolent God Almighty, unitedly in this world, sing his glory, again and again.
Yeka yeva namasyo vikvidah| Atharva 2.2.1
Among all the men and women, there is only one. Who is worthy of adoration, and worthy of worship too.
Na tvaam anyo divyo na parthivo na jato na janishyathe|
Yajurveda 27.36
Oh God! There is nobody like you either in this world or the world beyond. No body equal to you is born as yet nor will be born ever in future also.
There are people who are under illusion that there are many Gods after coming across words like Indra, Agni, and Varuna etc. But these words that signify both God and things other than Gods should not mislead the seeker after truth’ with this purpose in view, the Vedas declare clearly:-
Indram Mitram varunamagnimaahuratho divyah sa suparno garuthmaan|
Yekham sadvipra bahudha vadantyagnim yamam maatarishwanamaahuh||
Rigveda 1.64.46
The real God is one, the enlightened ones, speak of Him in several ways, God is divine, the supreme protector and graceful sentient, the Universal soul. They call Him Indra, the Almighty, the universal friend [mitra]. Varuna the most acceptable and obliterator of sins, they describe Him as [agnim] the supreme guide of the Universe, {Yaman} the controller of the Universe, and {matarishvanam] the life of all lives.
So in other words, Indra, Agni, Yama, Suparna, Garuthman and others are different epithets for one and the same God[ though not exclusively, as the same words signify other entities too in different contests]. All doubts about the correctness of the unequivocal statement that the Vedas uphold only monotheism and not Polytheism are set at rest when we consider
Yo na pitah janitha vidhata dhamani veda bhuvanani vishwa|
Yo devaanam namadha yeka yeva tam samprashnam bhuvanam yantyanya||
Rigveda 10.82.3
All these several worlds, find ultimate refuge, in that curiosity-provoking, thought –arousing Lord who is our father and creator, who is , the maker of sacred injunctions and Knows all the abodes and worlds and finally who is only one assuming the names of different divinities.
Vedas describe only One God at all places. The advice is He alone should be praised and worshipped. He alone is the emperor of the Universe.
Yekho Vishwasya bhuvanasya rajah Rig-Veda 6.36.4
The Lord of the entire universe is one and one only.

Vedas clearly mentions of one God.