March 14, 2005
The Legacy of Rishis / Munis
Dr. Baldev Singh
316 R Glad way,
Collegeville, PA 19426, USA
Introduction
Throughout
human history the conquerors have justified their actions by invoking divine
sanctions and declaring themselves morally, intellectually, socially and
racially superior to their victims. The
slave master with whip in hand standing under the shade of an umbrella used to
holler at the slaves toiling under blazing hot sun, “ O you lazy bums! You so
and so¾when will you learn to work
hard?” The Muslims regarded the killing
and coercing of kafirs (infidels,
non-Muslims) to bring them into the fold of Islam as the Will of Allah. The
Christians carried out genocide of native populations, enslaved them, colonized
them and inflicted untold atrocities on them on the pretext of “saving the soul
of heathens” and “civilizing the savages” turning the meaning of civilized
“upside down”. The “soul saver”¾missionary with a Bible in hand used walk behind the
Christian soldier with a gun in hand.
Since 1947
Hindu intellectuals have started rewriting Indian history. They blame the
British and Muslim rulers for the ills and the division of the Indian society.
They are right, as rulers use the policy of “divide and rule” to exploit their
subjects and keep them under their grip. However, they forget that their
ancestors, the so-called Aryans were also invaders / conquerors who destroyed
the Indus Valley Civilization of the native Indians known as Dravidians. They also turn a blind eye to the atrocious Varna Ashrama Dharma
/ Caste System when they project India before the conquest by Muslims as a land
of peace and harmony and milk and honey¾utopia¾Ram Raj. Moreover, they regard their ancient
seers / sages (Rishis / Munis) as paragon of virtues¾the fountainhead of civilization. Nothing could be further from truth than
these absurd claims.
It should be
pointed out that India’s next door neighbor, Nepal, which is far worse than
India in every respect, has been ruled continuously by Hindu kings since
antiquity. So the problems of modern India can not be simply blamed on past
Muslim and Christian rulers.
The ethics
of the modern Hindu elite reflect the teachings of the two most renowned Hindu
thinkers, Manu and Kautilya (Chanakya), who were the founders of the policy of
“divide and rule” and were responsible for shaping the destiny of Hindu
society.
Permanent
human inequality by birth is the summum
bonum of Brahmanical ideology. The
Brahmans proclaimed that Prajapati (God) created the caste-system and the Sudra
as a slave of the other castes. Moreover, Prajapati was the God of Aryans only,
from whom the Sudras were excluded. It was also claimed that gods do not
associate with every man, but only with an Arya, a Brahman, or a Kashtriya, or
a Vaisya, who can make religious sacrifices to gods. Nor one should talk with
everyone, as God does not talk to everybody but only to an Arya. The order and rank of castes is eternal as
the course of stars and the difference between the animal species and human
race. Thus the Sudra was excluded from the domain of religion and barred from
any religious activity. 1
Manu claimed
that Brahma (God) enacted the code of the caste system, and taught it to him
and he taught it to Bhrigu and the later would repeat it to the sages. 2 It
was Manu who codified Varna Ashrama Dharma / Caste System dividing the Indian
people into four castes and myriad of sub-castes. It is based on the avowed principle that “men are for ever
unequal”. Caste-system is the most rigid social mechanism devised by human
ingenuity to entrench human inequality and hierarchy. It raised “caste status” above “economic status” and
“political status”. It compartmentalized the economy according to its own
social patterns, and prevented the economic forces from attaining to their
unhindered growth and stature. The caste system also made political power
subservient to political patronage. In fact, the preservation of the caste or
sub-castes became the over-riding motive / consideration of the Brahmanical
order.
This system
was designed to serve the interests of a small minority of people, the
Brahmans, at the expense of the vast majority belonging to other castes, the
bulk of whom belonged to the Sudra caste. Lower still were the Antyaja (untouchables / outcastes),
whose mere shadow could pollute the upper castes. The entire conquered /
enslaved population of Advasis
(aboriginal tribes) called Dravidians was
forced into Sudra and untouchable / outcaste ranks. Never in the history of
mankind such an “evil and cruel system” was conceived by intelligent but
devious men for the exploitation of man by man. It took away the human dignity of vast majority of the Indians
and subjected them to untold injustices and atrocities. The untouchables / outcastes were treated
worse than animals for thousands of years and this is continuing in villages
across India even today.
Brahman was
the kingpin of the caste system in more than one way. He was the ideologue as
well as the focal point around which the system revolved. Brahman caste was
like a wheel within a wheel¾
the axis of the caste-system. It was this caste which set the guidelines of the
system, and determined the direction of its course. It is the Brahmans who have
profited most from the system and are mainly responsible for its maintenance
and furtherance.
Sacerdotal
functions were made the sole monopoly of the Brahman caste. Manu declared that
Brahman alone was to teach the Vedas and a Kshatriya was never to usurp a
Brahman’s functions. It was not merely an empty declaration; it became fixed
rule in the caste order. 3 Kshatriya
rulers who defied the supremacy of the Brahmans were dislodged and replaced by
others like the Huns (Rajputs) who replaced the old Kshatriyas. According to
one legend, Parsurama, a Brahman destroyed all the Kshatriyas and installed
another royal caste in their place. So the Kshatriyas were made and unmade
according to the will of the Brahman. Manu has described the names of Kshatriya
races, who by their omission of holy rites and disrespect for the Brahmans
gradually sunk among men of the lowest of the four castes. 4
The Vis (the
later day Vaisyas) of the Vedas were not limited to a caste, but included everyone
in the Aryan population which was not distinguished by sacerdotal functions or
aristocratic rank. They formed a bulk of the free men of the Aryan nation. The
caste system gradually reduced them to a derogatory social position, very near
the borderline of the Sudras. According to Aitareya
Brahmana Vaisya is to be lived on by another and to be oppressed at will. Bhagvadgita puts women, Sudra and Vaisya
in the same category of people to whom eligibility to absolution through Bhakti
(devotion) is conceded by the Lord. One explanation given for downgrading the
peasants, who constituted the bulk of Vaisyas, is that ploughing involved the
killing of worms and insects. If this
is correct, it only serves to show how little consideration the Brahmans had
for the bulk of the people of their own Aryan stock, since they could be
penalized for ever on such flimsy grounds. 5
The cunning
Brahman invoked divine sanctions to perpetuate this system for eternity. Sacred
Hindu scriptures proclaim that the caste division has divine sanction. Manu
declared that the soul of one who neglected his caste-duties might pass into
demon. The Bhagvadita preaches that
according to the classification of actions and qualities of people, God creates
the four castes. According to a passage
in Mahabharta: as cisterns for
cattle, as streamlets in a field, the Smriti
(code of caste system) is the eternal law of duty, and is never found to
fail. The Dharma-Sutras enjoined that
a King has to rely on the Vedas and Dhrma Sastras for carrying out his
duties. 6 To combat Buddhism strict adherence to Dharma (caste
system) and obedience to Brahmans is constantly insisted upon in Mahabharta. According to Bhgvadgita if anybody wants to quit the
works and duties of his caste and adopt those of another caste, even if it
would bring a certain honor to him, it is a sin, because it is a transgression
of the rule. 7
Next came the doctrine of Karma to
desensitize people’s sense of justice and compassion against atrocities
committed on the masses to enforce the caste system. According to this divine law, one reaps the fruit in this life
for the deeds performed in the previous life.
So, if a person is subjected to injustice and cruelty in this life, it
is the due to one’s own actions in previous life, not due to the perpetrators
of cruelty and injustice. By observing
the caste rules strictly and serving the superior castes faithfully one can
earn the reward for the next life. The Karma theory is a cruel and unconscionable
joke on the Sudra and untouchable ¾ as only faithful commitment to the duties of his caste
would earn him a reward in next life!
Under the
caste system some sections of the Indian population were regarded as almost
bestial rather than human. The whole conquered Sudra race (Dravidians) was equated with burial ground. Aitareya Brahmana describes Sudra as “Yatha-Kama-Vadhya” (fit to be beaten with impunity) and “Dvijatisusrusha” (menial service was his
prescribed lot). One text puts the murder of a Sudra on the same level as the
killing of a crow, an owl or a dog. A Sudra could be killed at will. The
excessive contempt, humiliation and degradation of the Sudra reached its climax
in the permanent institutions of untouchability and unapproachableness. 8 The Sudra was prohibited from amassing wealth
as it would subject his superiors to him. Sudra was also barred from the realm
of religion and prohibited from making religious sacrifices open to other
castes.8 The exploitation of the masses reduced them to the level of
dumb driven cattle.
On the other
hand any kind of harm or disrespect to the Brahman is unpardonable sin and any
type of crime by the Brahman is forgivable.
According
to Manu Smriti all the wealth and
resources in the world belongs to the Brahmans because they are created from
the mouth of Brahma (God). So it should not be construed that a Brahman is
using someone else’s goods when he accepts charity from others or takes goods
from others to give to someone else.
If a king
discovers a hidden treasure, he should give half to the Brahman.
A Brahman
may be an idiot or an erudite, he is god (devta).
The king
should not punish a Brahman for committing theft because it is the king’s
negligence, which made the Brahman so poor that he is forced to steel.
According
to Brihat Prasar Sanhita if a Brahman
wants to be a cultivator, he can have as much land as he wants without paying
any kind of tax because every thing belongs to the Brahmans.
A Brahman
remains sin free even after violating the teachings of Vedas as fire destroys
combustible matter to ashes or woman remains blemish free after enjoying sex
with her lover.9
Al-Biruni,
the celebrated mathematician and astronomer came to India in the wake of the
invading forces of Mahmud of Ghazni in the 11th century AD, and he spent
several years studying the Indian people and their literature. He is regarded
as one of the foremost Indologist. He
recorded the following information about caste system.
The highest caste of Brahmans
was created from the head of Brahman (God). The next caste of Kshatriyas was
created from the shoulders and hands of Brahman. The next two castes, Vaisya
and Sudra were created from the thighs and feet of Brahman, respectively. After
the Sudra follow the people called Antyaja
(untouchable), who render various kinds of services, who are not reckoned
amongst any caste, but only members of certain craft or profession. 10
He observed that Hindus believe
that people are unequal in every respect, whereas Muslims consider all men as
equal, except in piety. This is the greatest obstacle, which prevents any
approach or understanding between Hindus and Muslims. 11
Hindus totally differ from
Muslims in Religion, as Muslims believe in nothing in which Hindus believe, and
vice versa. On the whole, there is very little disputing about theological
topics among themselves, at the utmost they fight with words, but they will
never stake their soul or body or their property to defend their religion. On
the contrary, all their fanaticism is directed against those who do not belong
to them¾against all
foreigners. They call them mleccha,
i. e. impure, and forbid having any connection with them, be it intermarriage
or any other kind of relationship, or by sitting, eating, and drinking with
them, because thereby they think they would be polluted. They consider as
impure any thing which touches the fire and water of a foreigner, and no
household exist without these two elements. 12
The
Brahmans teach the Veda to the Kshatriyas. The latter learn it, but are not
allowed to teach it, not even to a Brahman. The Vaisya and Sudra are not
allowed to hear it, much less to pronounce and recite it. If such a thing can
be proved against one of them, the Brahman drags him before the magistrate, and
he is punished by having his tongue cut of. 13
Maitrayani Samhita identifies women with evil. The Satapatha-Brahmana declares woman, Sudra, dog and crow as
falsehood. A woman is never fit for independence. Manu made the subjection of
woman to man almost servile in character. He laid down the law that husband had
absolute rights over the wife to the extent of inflicting corporal punishment
and of discarding her immediately if she said any thing disagreeable to him. A
wife was to worship her husband as a god, even though he might be destitute of
virtue or is seeking pleasure elsewhere, or is devoid of good qualities. Thus
the woman is reduced, at least spiritually, to the status of Sudra and this is
clearly reflected even in Bhagvadgita.
14
The system
of Sati (one who burns herself alive on her husband’s funeral pyre) is not
recommended by Dharmsastra, or by
earlier Smritis, but the practice is
very old one. It is recorded in the Mahabharta
and by Greek writers. Later it received religious sanction, as it is recommend
in Vaikhanasa Grihya-Sutra and later Smritis like those of Sankha, Angiras, Dakhsha and Vyasa. This diabolical practice did not
excite in the Indian society the same degree disapprobation and disgust as it
did among its Greek witnesses. Moreover, this custom was surrounded by a kind
of halo and served to raise or maintain the index of social status, as it was
more common in the ruling and warrior castes. Among the upper castes, it was
considered an outright sin for a girl to reach puberty without being married,
and this custom was indicative of social superiority. Manu prescribes that a man of thirty shall marry a maiden of
twelve, or a man of twenty-four a girl of eight. Yajnavalyka insists that girls should be married before the age of
puberty. Man could marry a woman from
his caste and from castes lower than his caste, but not from a caste higher
than his caste. Thus a Brahman could marry a woman from any caste. 15
The heinous
crime of infanticide is not peculiarly Indian in its inception, but here again
female infanticide was indirectly encouraged by the attitude of Brahmanism
toward woman. The birth of a daughter
is deplored and regarded as a source of misery. The abnormal climate of
status-consciousness created by the caste system further aggravated this evil.
Whereas in other countries generally infanticide was often the result of
poverty, in India female-infanticide was practiced precisely by the upper
castes like Rajputs.15
Hindu Dharma
In the
ever-changing scene of the shifting importance of deities, creeds, racial
antipathies and other considerations, there was one factor, which was
persistent and constant. It was the concept of Hindu Dharma. This concept was
synonymous, or very closely interwoven with the social order of Brahmanism¾Varna Ashrama Dharma / caste system. Like the banks of a
river it determined the limits within which the current of Indian social life
must flow and direction in which it must move. So long as the current remained
confined within the prescribed social limits, all varieties and sorts of
dogmas, ideas, faiths, creeds, customs and practices were tolerated and allowed
to be the a part of Hindu Dharma. But any threat to the framework of the social
order was frowned upon or combated against, depending upon the seriousness of
the threat posed. When a Hindu ignored the duties of the caste of his birth, he
destroyed his dharma. It was only through caste that one belonged to the Hindu
community, without caste identity one was a pariah.16
One of the
most outstanding features of Buddhism is its compassion and tolerance. Lord
Buddha himself showed respect to Brahmans and Asoka the great advocated respect
for them in his edicts. Then, why were the Buddhists, of all the creeds of
Indian origin, singled out for special punitive treatment, and purged out of
the Indian body politic in a manner the human system eliminates a foreign
element?
This
hostility could not be because Buddhists were atheists, as other atheistic
creeds like the Sankhya were left untouched. Moreover, Buddhism and Jainism are
far less divergent than the multitude of widely different paths of Hindu
Dharma.
The
Buddhists were singled out for destruction because they did not recognize the
authority of Vedas and other Hindu scriptures, and they undermined the
supremacy of the Brahmans by rejecting the caste system¾unpardonable sin in the eyes of Brahmans.
To cover
their heinous crimes against the Buddhists and to hoodwink the Indian people
and historians, the Brahmans came with a clever idea. After the eradication of
Buddhism from the soil of its birth, the Brahmans proclaimed Lord Buddha as an
Avatar, reincarnation of Vishnu.
On the other
hand from a purely theological point of view, Jainism was no less heretic than
Budhism, but the Jains suffered far less persecution than the Buddhists. It was
so because, if the necessity arose, Jainsim was willing to admit a god of
popular Hinduism to their galaxy of gods. Besides, it was also not opposed to
the theory of caste. It was thus very much less hostile and more accommodating
to Brahmans.17
Al-Biruni
wrote that he did not find any Buddhist literature or met any Buddhist during
his stay in India.18
Al-Biruni’s
observation is not surprising as by the time of Fa-Hein’s visit to India in the
5th century AD, Kapilvastu had become a jungle and Gaya had been laid waste and
desolate. Saivite Brahman king Sasank of Bengal carried out acts of vandalism
against the Buddhists, destroyed the footprints of Lord Buddha at Patliputra,
burnt the Bodhi tree under which he had meditated, and devastated numerous
monasteries and scattered their monks.19
The rise of
Adi Shankaracharya in the late 8th-early 9th century saw the intensification of
Brahman-Buddhist conflict. He traveled widely converting Buddhist centers into
Brahmanical centers of learning, maths,
at Badrinath in the north, Sringeri and Kanchipuram in the south, Puri in the
east and Dwarka in the west. The impact of his militant campaign against
Buddhism was all pervasive, as Buddhism almost disappeared from India. Over the
next couple of centuries, aptly termed Dark Age, it flickered in different
regions before it finally became extinct. 20
Even modern
Hindus “Avatars” like Gandhi and Vivekananda were diehard advocates and
defenders of the caste system.
I believe in Varna Ashrama (caste system) which is the law
of life. The law of Varna (color or caste) is nothing but the law of
conservation of energy. Why should my son not be a scavenger if I am one?
Mahatma Gandhi, Harijan,
3-6-1947.
He, Sudra may not be called a
Brahman, though he (Sudra) may have all the qualities of a Brahman in this
birth. And it is a good thing for him (Sudra) not to arrogate a Varna (caste)
to which he is not born. It is a sign of true humility.
Mahatma Gandhi, Young India, 11-24-1927.
There is something in
caste, so far as it means blood: such a thing as heredity there is,
certainly. Now try to [understand]—why
do you not mix blood with the Negroes, and the American Indians? Nature will
not allow you. Nature does not allow you to mix your blood with them. There is
unconscious working that saves the race. That was the Aryan’s caste. … The
Hindus believe—that is a peculiar belief, I think; and I do not know, I have
nothing to say to the contrary, I have not found anything to the contrary—they
believe there was only one civilized race: the Aryan. Until he gives the blood,
no other race can be civilized.21
Strict
observance of caste rules and regulations was made the essence of Hindu
religion and transgressors were severely punished. To protect Brahmans and their defenders the Kshatriyas from the
rage of inhumanely treated masses; it was declared sinful to wear arms and keep
arms by people other than the Kshatriyas.
Even blacksmiths and carpenters, the so-called progeny of the mythical
“supper engineer,” Vishava Karma, who made the weapons, were not allowed to use
the weapons. They were not allowed even
to fit the plowshare with an iron tip because it could injure the bullock,
offspring of the holy cow. After 1947, a large number of Sikh farmers were
settled in Haryana and Uttar Pardesh. Their Hindu neighbors were surprised that
Sikh farmers were using European style iron plows or iron-tipped plowshares
Thus the clever Brahman disarmed the entire Hindu population other than the
Kshatriyas. The agriculturist tribes
- Jats, Gujjars, Sainis, Yadavs, Ahirs, Patels, Kurmis, Kamas, Reddys and many
others were allowed to keep only wooden clubs (luth, lathi, soti, dang),
which they used very effectively to split each other’s heads, and beat their
animals, wives, children and Dalits.
Sikh
Gurus and Radical Bhagats (Nam Dev, Kabir and Ravidas)
Professor
Mohammed Iqbal was a celebrated poet and a great Islamic thinker of the
twentieth century. His understanding of Lord Buddha, Guru Nanak and the plight
of Sudras is noteworthy.
The Indian
people did not pay any attention to the message of Gautam. They did not recognize the value of
their ‘flawless diamond’. … India is a land of sorrow and suffering
for the Shudar. There is no compassion in this place. … Eventually, a voice rose from Punjab proclaiming the unity of
mankind under “One and Only God”. A “perfect man” from Punjab awakened the
conscience of the Indian people with his message of “universal love and humanism”.
Poem: Nanak
Sikh Gurus and radical Bhagats - Nam Dev, Kabir and
Ravidas denounced the caste system and rejected scriptures that support this
evil system and the pantheon of deities of Brahmanism / Hindu Dharma.
Nankian philosophy (Gurmat) differs with other religions
in the basic premise¾the
concept of God. Sure, the concept of one God was known long before Guru Nanak.
However, that God is nothing more than a tribal god. In addition to millions of gods, Hindus also believe in a God who
communicates only through the Brahmans and then there is a God for the chosen
people, the Jews. Christian God is approachable only through His only son,
Jesus Christ whereas the Muslim God, Allah is accessible only through Mohammed
who is Allah’s last and final Prophet in a long line of Prophets.
On the other hand Guru Nanak’s
God is accessible to all seekers of “Truth” irrespective of their creed, caste,
gender, color, ethnicity and geographical consideration.
Aad Guru
Granth Sahib (Sikh scripture) rejects - reincarnation, karma, transmigration,
hell and heaven, asceticism, celibacy, clergy and liturgy. Salvation in Nakian
philosophy means being one with God by living in harmony with God’s Hukam (Divine law). Also it means
freedom from ignorance, and political, religious, economic and social
oppression or domination.
According
to Nankian philosophy it is God, Who controls the working of the universe
(creation) through Its Hukam (Divine
law), which is immutable. Every thing in creation is subject to Hukam and nothing is beyond it.
On the
basis of the information in Hindu scriptures about the deities of Hindu Dharma,
they are described in Aad Guru Granth Sahib as mere mortals afflicted with
common human problems, not as saviors of mankind. For example, Guru Nanak says
that it is the Creator not Ram Chandar, Who controls the process of creation
and destruction.
Nanak,
it is the Creator who controls the process of creation and destruction. Ram was
distressed when his brother Lachman became unconscious due to curse and his
wife Sita was kidnapped by the ten-headed Ravan. He gathered an army to fight against Ravan. The Vanar army was
enthusiastic and happy to help him.
Aad Guru
Granth Sahib, p 1412.
In
exile, Ram bewailed when he was separated from Sita and Lachman. Even the
Pandvas who lived in the company their master (Lord Krishna) were forced to do
hard labor in destitution.
Aad Guru Granth Sahib, p 953.
Brahma,
Vishnu and Shiva are afflicted with self-centeredness (haumain) as the rest of the world. Only those are free from this
affliction, who have recognized the need to be one with God through meditation
on the Word.
Aad Guru
Granth Sahib, p 1153.
Bhagat Nam
Dev was tormented by the Brahmans and not allowed entry into the temple because
of his birth as a Sudra. He expressed
his anguish in a hymn addressed to a Brahman priest (pandey).
Listen o pandey, I meditate on the Almighty God and I have found Him. O
ignorant one, what have you gained from your holy mantras and gods? I have heard that your Gyatri was a cow in
previous life. When she strayed into
the field of a farmer, named Loda, he broke her leg with a club and she became
lame. I have heard about your god Shiv Ji, the rider of white bull. He went to
the house of a devotee for a feast. He didn’t like the food, so he killed the
host’s son with a curse. I have also heard about your god Ram, who fought with
Ravan, who kidnapped his wife.
Aad Guru Granth Sahib, p 637.
After thinking over the word Ram, Kabir says that it has two
meanings. While everyone uses “Ram” for God, the actors use it for Ram Chandar,
the son of Dasrath. Kabir dwells on
“Ram” Who is God. One Ram (God) is present in all whereas the other (Ram
Chandar) was only himself.
Aad Guru Granth Sahib, p 1374.
Hindu is spiritually blind whereas a Muslim is one eyed. Wiser
than both is the one who sees God in all.
Temples are sacred to the Hindus and mosques are sacred to the Muslims,
whereas Nam Dev focuses his mind on the One and Only, Who is not restricted
either to the temple or the mosque.
Aad Guru
Granth Sahib, p 875.
We are neither Hindus nor Muslims. Our
bodies and breaths belong to the Almighty God, Whom people call Allah or
Ram.
Aad Guru Garnth Sahib, p 1136.
It is
the teachings of Vedas, which has created the concepts of sin and virtue, hell
and heaven, and karma and transmigration. One reaps the reward in the next life
for the deeds performed in this life¾goes to hell or heaven according to the deeds. The Vedas
have also created the fallacy of inequality of caste and gender in the world.
Aad Guru
Granth Sahib, p 1243.
O
ignorant fool, don’t be arrogant about your high caste as it can lead to
degeneration. Everyone talks about the four castes without realising that all
are created from the same seed¾God.
Aad Guru
Granth Sahib, p 1128.
O
Brahman! Inside the womb there is no lineage or caste! All are created from the
seed of Brahm (God). If you are Brahman born of Brahman mother then why did not
you take birth by some other route? How come you are Brahman and I am Sudar?
How come I am defiled (blood) and you are holy (milk)?
Aad
Guru Granth Sahib, p 324.
Hey
brother, there is one Father and we all are His progeny.
Aad Guru
Granth Sahib, p 611.
Nanak
will stand by the lowest of the lowest, not with the elite. Where there is
compassion and care for the downtrodden, there is Divine grace.
Aad Guru Garnth Sahib, p 15.
I have
searched many Shastras and Smritis; their teachings do not show the
way to God. But the dwelling on God’s attributes is invaluable.
Aad Guru
Granth Sahib, p 265.
Many a
Brahma got tired of studying the Vedas, but they could not estimate even an
iota of God’s greatness. Ten incarnations of Vishnu and the famous ascetic
Shiv, who got tired of smearing his body with ashes, could not fathom God’s
extent.
Aad Guru
Granth Sahib, p 747.
O my
brethren! Smriti is based on the
Vedas. It has brought chains of the
caste and ropes of false rituals and ceremonies to entrap you.
Aad
Guru Garnth Sahib, p 329.
I
shall not sing the endless songs and poetry of Vedas, Puranas and Shastras. I
shall play a steady tune on the flute of love of the Formless One, Whose abode
is Eternal.
Aad
Guru Granth Sahib, p 972.
If one
determines good or bad actions on the basis of Vedas and Puranas, one’s mind is filled with doubt and worry. These
scriptures do not tell how to cure self-conceit.
Aad Guru
Granth Sahib, p 364.
Guru Nanak was
an eyewitness to the invasion of India by Babur. He vividly described the
atrocities committed by Babur’s army on civilian population and the defeat of
Indian forces. He blamed the Indian rulers for not defending the people and the
country.
O Lalo!
Babur has launched an invasion from Kabul with a marriage party of sin and
demands a bride (India) by force. Sense of shame and duty has disappeared and
falsehood rules. Instead of Brahmans and Qazis, the devil is performing
marriage ceremony.
Aad Guru Granth Sahib, p 722.
The
desperate Indian rulers engaged Pirs (holy
men) to perform miracles and sorcery to defeat the Mughals. The hollowness of
the claims of the supernatural powers of the Pirs was exposed, as they could not blind a single Mughal solider.
It was the superior weaponry and determination of Babur’s army, which defeated
the Indians.
When
they heard of the invasion of Babur, the officials engaged many Pirs for their protection. The Mughals
overran Indian posts, burnt down fortresses to the ground and cut down the
princes to pieces. The supernatural power of the Pirs could not blind a single Mughal soldier.
Aad Guru
Granth Sahib, p 418.
It is
understandable when equally matched forces fight against each other, but not
when one side is like a powerful lion and the other is like a herd cows. In
that situation it is the duty of the ruler to protect his subjects like a
cowherd protects the cows against the attack of a lion. The rulers have wasted this jewel (India)
and no body would mourn the death of these dogs.
Aad Guru Granth Sahib, p 360.
Here Guru
Nanak is commenting on the superiority of Mughal forces and their easy victory
and he condemned the Lodhi Pathans and Rajputs for not making adequate
preparation to defend the country against foreign attack.
He denounced
the oppression and bigotry of Muslim rulers, cowardice and hypocrisy of Khatris
and Rajputs and the tyranny of the caste system. He condemned the
discrimination against women and the religious exploitation of masses by
Brahmans, Mullahs, Yogis and other religious orders.
The rulers are like ferocious tigers and their officials as wild
dogs, who harass and persecute the innocent subjects.
Aad Guru Granth Sahib, p 1288.
Unless the petitioner bribes, even the king does not accept the
petition. If someone petitions only in the name of God (justice), no body
listens.
Aad Guru Granth, p 350.
The ignorant populace is groping in darkness due to lack of
knowledge and victimized by official corruption.
Aad Guru Granth Sahib, p 468.
The kings perform religious duties for selfish interests and
practice charity for heavenly rewards.
Aad Guru Granth Sahib, p 1024.
Qazi (Muslim magistrate) tells lies and accepts bribe. The Brahman
priest bathes ceremoniously, but practices cruelty and deceit. The ignorant
yogi has lost his way in search of abstract tranquility. All three are
spiritually barren.
Aad Guru Granth Sahib, 662.
The one who has control over - lust, anger, greed, attachment and
arrogance - should occupy the throne (ruler).
Aad Guru Granth Sahib, p 1039.
It is the decree of the Merciful God that all are contented and
happy and no one is persecuted under a benevolent and just rule.
Aad Guru Granth Sahib, p 74.
Guru
Nanak rejected the idea that woman is inferior to Man. He condemned the persecution
and humiliation to which women were subjected. Woman was relegated to the
status of a man’s shoe in the Indian society. Both Hinduism and Islam sanction
the inferiority of woman. In both religions it is the rulers who protect and
enforce religious rules and regulations. In his composition extolling womankind
Guru Nanak challenged the custodians of discriminating laws:
It is the woman who sustains the human race through conception
and nurture. It is the woman through whom relations are created. When wife
dies, man seeks another one. Every one is dependent on woman except the Creator
of all. It is the woman who keeps human race going. How could women of who are
born sovereigns be considered inferior?
Aad Guru Granth Sahib, p 473.
Guru Amar Das emphasized the same point by saying that in this
world there is only one “Man” and all are His spouses. In other words for God
man and woman are equal.
Aad Guru Granth Sahib, p 591.
Due to discrimination and maltreatment women have lost their vitality
and become submissive and as a consequence of that men have become brute.
Aad Guru Granth
Sahib, p1243.
Guru Nanak warned
against greed for excessive wealth, disapproved of beggary and urged honest
living and charity.
Wealth can not be amassed without illegal means and
it does not go with the dead.
Aad
Guru Granth Sahib, p 417.
Why should he beg who claims to dwell on God?
Aad Guru Granth Sahib, p 953.
Never touch
the feet of those who claim to be spiritual leaders but live on charity.
Aad Guru Granth Sahib, p 1245.
One who works
hard to make an honest living and practices charity finds the righteous path.
Aad Guru
Granth Sahib, p 1245.
Truthful is
the one who practices truth, compassion and charity.
Aad Guru Granth Sahib, p 468.
Guru
Nanak saw three major problems facing the masses: lack of morality, grinding
poverty and the tyranny of the rulers (both political and religious).
For man
the greatest suffering is separation from God, second is the pain of hunger and
third is the tyranny of the ruler.
Aad Guru Granth Sahib, p 1256.
Guru
Nanak launched a campaign to awaken the people to the reality of their full
potential¾to become gurmukhs (Godlike). He set up an egalitarian society¾Sikh Panth (order) outside the caste society and made it
a springboard for giving shape to a revolutionary movement to fight against the
tyranny of caste system and the oppression of Muslim rulers. He gave a clarion
call to the people to join his movement with an explicit warning that the path
of righteousness is arduous one and requires extreme sacrifices.
If you
want to play the game of love with God then follow my path and be prepared to
make supreme sacrifice. Once you step on this path, do not hesitate to offer
your head.
Aad Guru Granth
Sahib, p 1412.
The above
proclamation is central to the Sikh Movement¾the basis of Miri-Piri (temporal and spiritual
sovereignty) and the evolution of the noble Khalsa. Only a moral person (gurmukh) can be a Mir-Pir ¾Khalsa.
After
rejecting the sacred thread at childhood ceremony (AGGS, p 471), Guru Nanak
proclaimed his solidarity with the downtrodden at the very beginning of his
ministry: “I will stand by the lowest of the lowest caste rather than with the
elite¾ high castes (AGGS, p 15).”
Two centuries later, people who had been dehumanized by the tyranny of caste
system and the oppression of Muslim rulers¾whose mere shadow could pollute the Brahmans, rallied
under the banner of Guru Gobind Singh as a “brotherhood” of the noble Khalsa
order. They challenged the mighty Mughals before whom the Rajput warriors used
to prostrate 22 and the Brahmans used to sing paeans “Eeshvro va Dilishvro va, (The emperor of
Delhi is as great as God).” 23 They carried on the struggle of life
and death against injustice and oppression for half a century. The more they
were persecuted and killed, the more they joined to fill the ranks of the
Khalsa.24 With dogged determination and firm faith in the
“sovereignty” 25 bestowed upon them by Guru Nanak, they succeeded in
defeating the combined forces of “caste
ideology” and Mughals, and establishing the Khalsa (Sikh) rule 26
from Ladakh in the north to Haryana in the south and from Sivalik hills in the
east to the Khyber Pass in the west. The remarkable thing is that the Khalsa
forces were overwhelmingly made up of people whom the Brahmanical order
regarded as Sudras and untouchables.
The
Bitter Fruit of Caste System
The caste
system not only destroyed the vitality and creativity of the people but also the
glue of love and compassion for fellow human beings, which is essential for a
healthy society. In due course of time India was like giant dead tree whose
roots had been eaten by termites and was waiting to be toppled by a wind gust
or in Indian parlance like a sick Brahma bull ready to be devoured by wild dogs
and vultures.
In 710 AD, a
young Muslim commander, Mohammad Bin Qassem led an expedition to Sindh. After
defeating the Indian forces, he marched deep into the Northwest territory
meeting very little resistance, because the populace was disarmed due to the
imposition of strict caste regulations, which allowed only Kshatriyas (Rajputs
and Khatris) to wear arms. He plundered
towns and temples, and murdered people by the thousands and went home taking
away thousands of Indian men and women as slaves. The news of his victory spread like a wild fire in the Muslim
world. Muslim daredevils from
Afghanistan and central Asia made their own forays into India. Small bands of
Afghans and Turks carved out small and large principalities for themselves all
over India, and finally the Mughals established their own empire in India.
There
was essentially very little resistance to Muslim invaders. They marched into
India at will. Mahmud Gazhnavi attacked India seventeen times. Neither Ramyana nor Mahabharta nor the bloodthirsty reincarnation of Shakti¾Durga, Kali and Chandi inspire the so-called
warriors¾Kshatriyas (Rajputs and Khatris) to take up arm
in defense of the motherland.
Al-Biruni says that no Muslim conqueror passed
beyond the frontier of Kabul and the river Sindh until the days of the Turks,
when they seized power in Ghazna under the Samani dynasty, and the supreme
power fell to the lot of Nasiraddaula Sabuktagin. This prince chose the holy
war as his calling, and therefore, called himself Al-ghazi (i.e. warring on the
road of Allah). In the interest of his successors he constructed, in order
to weaken the Indian frontier, those roads on which afterwards his son
Yaminaddaula Mahmud marched into India during a period of thirty years and
more. God be merciful to both father and son! Mahmud utterly ruined the
prosperity of the country, and performed there wonderful exploits, by which the
Hindus became like atoms of dust scattered in all directions, and like a tale
of old in the mouth of the people. Their scattered remains cherish, of course,
the most inveterate aversion towards all Muslims. 27
In the history of the fateful forty-five years
(1295-1345) traced by us so far, the one distressfully disappointing feature
has been the absence, in Maharastra, of the will to resist the invaders. The
people of Maharastra were conquered, oppressed and humiliated, but they meekly
submitted like dumb driven cattle.28, 29
What is painful is that, sometimes, a handful of
foreigners overran vast tracts of the land without countering any sizable
resistance. Shihab-ud-din Gauri won the second battle of Tarain (near Delhi) in
1192, and within fourteen years his Genral, Bakhtiyar Khilji had reached the
bank of Brahmputra. Nadiya was occupied with an advance party of no more than
eighteen horsemen and this opened the way for the establishment of Muslim rule
in Bengal.28, 30
During the
onslaught of Muslims, the Khatris and Rajputs, who used to practice their
martial art on the defenseless down trodden lower castes, were nowhere to be
found to defend the motherland and its people.
The entrepreneurial Khatris offered their services to their conquerors,
whom they called malesh (uncivilized,
impure, unclean) in private.
Guru Nanak
(1469-1539) rebuked the Khatris for
their hypocrisy.
The Khatris have abdicated their duty
of protecting the country, weak and women, instead they have adopted the
language and manners of their conquerors, whom they call malesh. As a matter of fact the whole society has degenerated to
such an extent that morality has disappeared.
Aad Guru Granth Sahib, p 663.
You are taxing the cow and Brahman whom
you worship; you are mistaken if you think that cow-dung coating of your
kitchen would absolve you of your sins. You wear a mark on your
forehead and a dhoti (cloth worn
around the waist) and tell beads, but you are working for the Muslims for your
livelihood. Give up hypocrisy!
Aad Guru Granth Sahib, P 471.
Commenting
on the atrocities committed on the Hindu masses by the bigoted Muslim rulers,
Guru Nanak exposed the nexus between Muslim rulers and the Khatris and Brahmans in a biting political satire. It was the
Muslim ruler, who was responsible for the persecution of Hindu masses, but it
was the Khatri officials who executed
the orders of their master, and the Brahman priests approved the doings of the Khatris.
The man-eater performs Namaz (Muslim prayer). The one who
carves out the flesh for him wears the sacred thread around his neck (Khatri). The Brahman blows the conch in
the Khatri’s house to sanctify his
doings.
Aad Guru Granth Sahib, P 471.
Earlier pagan invaders from the
Northwest like Greeks, Huns (Rajputs), Sakas ( Jats) and Gujjars were easily
accommodated in the web of Brahmanism, but Muslim invaders came with
monotheistic belief. They were idol breakers, not idol worshipers, so the
Brahmans came up with a different strategy to deal with them.
The Brahmans
who lost their position as raj mantri
(minister of state), raj guru
(religious advisor to the king) and raj
prohit (family priest of the king) after the defeat of Rajput rulers
devised a clever strategy to get back not only into the Mughal court but also
in the Mughal palace. They advised the Rajput
rulers to give their daughters in marriage to Emperor Akbar. It was (is) an
anathema even for an ordinary Rajput to
marry his daughter to a non-Rajput Hindu what to speak of a royal Rajput marrying his daughter to a
Muslim, whom he considered as malesh.
But this case was different as this matrimonial alliance was blessed and
sanctified by the Brahman. The Rajput rulers led by the Ambar family
accepted this proposal without blinking an eye. This opened the door for
Brahmans, Rajputs, and other Hindus
in Akbar’s administration. Many of them
held prominent positions, Birbal and Todar Mal were among the “jewels” of
Akbar’s court and Raja Man Singh was a very distinguished commander in the
army. In gratitude, Akbar cancelled the Jazia
(tax on non-Muslims) imposed by the earlier Muslim rulers. The Rajputs played a
major role in the expansion and consolidation of Mughal Empire. The Brahmans
coined a new mantra “Eeshvro va Dilishvro
va, (The emperor of Delhi is as great as God).”23
Akbar’s
Rajput in-laws made it sure that there was no royal Rajput left who would taunt
them, “You have sent to your daughter to the haram of a malesh.” The
only Rajput sovereign, who refused to kowtow to Akbar, was Maharana Partap. All
the Rajput vassals joined Akbar in defeating this valiant man.
The invasion
from the Northwest continued until the Khalsa forces put an end to it. The
British who came to India as traders replaced the Mughal Empire. The British
work force was never more than 200,000 at any time during their rule over India.
It was the Indian elite who supported the British occupation, and ran the lower
level administration. The British left India in 1947 after partitioning it into
Hindu and Muslim states. The later further split into Pakistan and Bangladesh.
The three countries are a living hell for minorities and downtrodden. This is the legacy of Mahan Rishi Manu.
Thousands of
years before the Italian writer and statesman Machiavelli, Kautliya (Chankya) was teaching his “kutil niti” (perverse policy) to the
Indian rulers that morality has no place in the affairs of the government.
Since 1947 the Indian rulers have been following this policy and this policy is
reflected in the thinking of the modern Hindu elite.
Moreover,
this policy is reflected in the sermons of Lord Krishna in Bhagvadgita¾
perverse morality ¾morality
turned upside down where good becomes evil and the evil becomes good. Lord
Krishna urges the reluctant Pandvas, who not only gambled away their kingdom
but also their only wife, to declare war on their cousins, the Kaurvas. When
the Pandvas start loosing the war, Lord Krishna urges them to use all means:
deception and lies to win the war by breaking all the rules, which both sides
agreed to observe before the start of the war. The Pandvas win the war through
treachery.
The hard
working and law abiding Kaurvas, who fought fair battles up to the end, are
called evil. The high stake gamblers, who sold their only wife to pay
their debt, and who won the war through treachery, are called righteous.
For Lord Krishna,
victory is every thing. He teaches that¾ treachery and foul means to achieve victory¾is moral¾and
he is regarded as reincarnation of God.
Dropti is
considered a virtuous woman, an idol for young girls to emulate. Her obvious
virtue is that she complied with her mother-in-law’s wishes to be a wife to
five brothers to keep peace in the family! What kind of a role model is Dropti
for any young girl? She accepted to be treated like cattle and was disposed of
like cattle to pay the debt!
Bhagavadgita is a
document, which is specifically designed to transform a vulnerable person into
a killer. In fact that is exactly what Krishna is doing to Arjuna in Bhagavadgita. Bhagavadgita is a part of Mahabharata
(which is a war document) and as such never existed as a separate text until
1785 when it was translated into English under the title Bhagavadgita.
Krishna’s
sermons are considered the essence of Hinduism. Mahatma Gandhi, the so-called
apostle of peace considered Bhagavadgita
as his most favorite scripture in spite of the fact that the battle of Mahanbharata was fought between kith and
kin, and more people were slaughtered in the battle of Mahanbharat than any other battle according to the story. So
Gandhi’s pacifism runs parallel to Lord Krishna’s moral teachings. No wonder,
the renowned Indologist, Al-Biruni remarked, “The Hindu mind is
incomprehensible to non-Hindus.”
Gurbakhash
Singh Kala Afghana has carried out a detailed analysis of the life of Lord Rama
(Ram Chandar, son of King Dasrath) described by Goswami Tulsi Das in Ram Chrit Manas Granth.31 Though
Lord Rama is regarded as reincarnation of God but he takes advice and
directions from Brahmans and Rishis.
He does what the Brahman and Rishis
ask him to do. Brahmans regard him as Maryada
Parshotam (upholder and defender of Hindu Dharma / caste system) and his
reign (Ram Raj) is regarded as an
ideal form of government. Ram Chandar’s life is not morally inspiring as it is
mainly based on myths, superstition, deception and lies. For instance, the
story of Lord Rama versus King Ravana is an example of “perverse morality”.
Lord Rama’s younger brother Laxman was a bal-jati
(born celibate, suffering from congenital sexual dysfunction). It is said that
Ravana’s younger sister was charmed by Laxmana’s looks, so she flirted with him
casting her amorous glances at him. Feeling insecure and inadequate about his
masculinity, he treated her in a cowardly and shameful manner¾ he chopped off her nose.
In revenge Ravana kidnapped Sita, Rama’s wife. Being an honorable man
Ravana did not cast even an evil glance at Sita.
Lord Rama
and Laxmana who treated Ravana’s sister in a cowardly and shameful manner are
considered as righteous and great warriors whereas Ravana who
treated a captive woman honorably is called evil!
Sita
suffered for the despicable actions of Laxmana. Back in Ajudhiya, one day Lord
Rama overheard the taunt of washerman to his wife: “I wont take you back like
Lord Rama took Sita back.” Stung by this taunt when Rama came home, he asked
his wife, Sita to prove her chastity through Agni Priksha (throwing oneself into the fire, chaste woman is not
harmed by the fire). This is how Lord Rama, the protector of Hindu Dharma
treated his innocent and faithful wife, who suffered so much for the misdeeds
of his impotent brother! Lord Rama’s cruelty is beyond human comprehension, he
sent his innocent pregnant wife into exile.
Al-Biruni
has described how the Sudras, who constituted vast majority of the population
were treated under the traditions established during Ram Raj (reign of Lord Rama).
The Sudra
is like a servant to the Brahman, taking care of his affairs and serving him,
If, though being poor in the extreme, he still desires not to be without a yajnopavita (sacred thread), he girds
himself only with the linen one. Every
action which is considered as the privilege of a Brahman, such as saying
prayers, the recitation of Vedas, and offering sacrifices to the fire, is
forbidden to him, to such a degree that when, e.g. a Sudra or Vaisya is proved
to have recited the Veda, he is accused by the Brahman before the ruler, and
the later will order his tongue to be cut off. However, the meditation on God,
works of piety, and alms giving are not forbidden for him.
Every man
who takes to some occupation which is not allowed to him by his caste as, e. g.
a Brahman to trade, a Sudra to agriculture, commits a sin or crime, which they
consider only a little less than crime of theft.
Al-Biruni
then recounts one of the traditions of the Hindus, that in the days of King
Rama human life was very long and well defined, so that a child never died
before its father. Once, however, a son of a Brahman predeceased his father.
The father brought him to the King’s palace, bewailing that there is something
rotten in the country. Then Rama began to inquire into the cause of this, and
finally they pointed out to him a Candala
(untouchable) who took the greatest pain in performing worship and
self-torment. The King rode to him and found him on the banks of Ganges,
hanging on something with his head downwards. The King bent his bow, shot at
him and pierced his bowels. Then he spoke: “I kill thee on account of a good
action, which thou are not allowed to do.” When the king returned to the
palace, he found Brahman’s son alive.32
The
treatment meted out to Sudras by Lord Rama raises serious questions about Rishi
Valmiki? According to the legend, Valmiki, the author of Ramayna was a Koli, a
member of one of the most despised aboriginal tribes on the Bombay coast.33
When Sudars were not allowed even to pray, how did Valmiki learn to read
and write? Moreover, why Valmiki would admire and worship an Aryan king who was
so cruel to his people? It was the
Aryan invaders who enslaved the aboriginal tribes by making them Sudras and
untouchables. I think making Valmiki, an Advasi (aboriginal) as the author
Ramayna is a clever ploy by the Brahman to hoodwink the Advasis (aboriginal tribes) into believing that Lord Rama was loved
and venerated by them. The story about the offer of tasted sweet berries by
Bhilni to Lord Rama was concocted to convey the same message. I urge Dalit
scholars to analyze the contents of the so-called Valmiki Ramayna to set the
record straight¾who
was Valmiki?
1
Jagjit Singh, The Sikh
Revolution: A Perspective View, 4th reprint, Bahri Publications, 1998, p
27.
2
Ibid, p 31.
3
Ibid, p 9.
4
Ibid, pp 9-10.
5
Ibid, p 10.
6
Ibid, p 31.
7
Ibid, p 41.
8
Ibid, pp 51052.
9
Bhai Kahn Singh Nabha, Ham
Hindu Nahin (Punjabi), Singh Brothers, 1995, pp 51-52.
10
India by
Al-Biruni, Ed., Qeyamuddin Ahmad, 3rd reprint, National Book Trust, 1995,
pp 45-46.
11
Ibid, p 45.
12
Ibid, p 9.
13
Ibid, p 57.
14
Jagjit Singh, The Sikh
Revolution: A Perspective View, 4th reprint, Bahri Publications, 1998, p
11.
15
Ibid, p 12.
16
Ibid, p 22.
17
Ibid, p 24.
18
India by
Al-Biruni, Ed., Qeyamuddin Ahmad, 3rd reprint, National Book Trust, 1995,
p 117.
19
Sangat Singh, The Sikhs in History, fourth ed., Uncommon Books,
2001, p 4.
20
Ibid, p 5-6.
21
G. B. Singh, Gandhi: Behind
the Mask of Divinity, Prometheus Books, 2004, pp 239-40.
22
Jagjit Singh, The Sikh
Revolution: A Perspective View, 4th reprint, Bahri Publications, 1998, pp
213-18.
23
Gokul C.Narang, Transformation
of Sikhism, 5th ed., Gujral’s Art Press. 1960, p 98.
24
Ibid, p
128:
We are the crop and Mannu the sickle,
The more he cuts us,
The more we grow,
In every house and hamlet.
Mir Mannu asadi datari asi Mannu de
soe, Jion, jion Mannu wadhda gharin gharin asi hoe
(Ali-ud-Din, Ibrat Namah).
25
Editorial. Nash Doctrine of Five Freedoms, Abstracts of Sikh Studies, July-
September 1996, p 1-13.
26
J. S. Grewal, The Sikhs of
the Punjab, 1994, p 62-127.
27
India by
Al-Biruni, Ed., Qeyamuddin Ahmad, 3rd reprint, National Book Trust, 1995,
p 10.
28 Jagjit Singh, The Sikh
Revolution: A Perspective View, 4th reprint, Bahri Publications, 1998, p
149.
29 S. R. Sharma, The Founding
of Maratha Freedom, p 480.
30 The Cambridge History of
India, Vol. iii, p 46.
31 Gurbakhash Singh Kala
Afghana, Bipran Ki Reet Ton Sach Da Marg
(Punjabi), 2nd ed., Sri Akal
Sahai Society, 1997, pp 183-210.
32 India by Al-Biruni, Ed.,
Qeyamuddin Ahmad, 3rd reprint, National Book Trust, 1995, p 229.
33
Jagjit Singh, The Sikh
Revolution: A Perspective View, 4th reprint, Bahri Publications, 1998, p
49.
********************************