BHARAT MATA  (by Anwar Shaikh)

It is not easy to inculcate into the mind of a Hindu that Spiritual
Nationalism, founded on the love of Bharat Mata, is the essence of the
Vedic doctrine. This difficulty arises from the fact that the fertility of
India brought tremendous prosperity to the Hindus for many centuries,
making them oblivious of the secular problems, and they became dedicated
to the next world. Thus nationalism ceased to have any appeal for them.

A beauty of the Vedas is, that they strike a balance between secular and
spiritual pursuits in such a way that the patriotic actions lead to the
elevation of soul. In the Vedic language, patriotic action means the
following:

1. Love of Bharat Mata (the original India).

2. Attainment of power for the glory of India, and

3. Willingness to fight for self-defence and international brotherhood.

First hymn, Book Xll of the ATHARVA VEDA, comprising sixty-three verses,
referred to as Bhumi-Sukta, describes the celestial reverence that the
Vedas attach to India. As it is not possible to discuss all these verses,
the reader ought to read the hymn for himself.

Hinduism is an enriched form of humanism. It is a way of life, which does
not admit narrow nationalism. Thus a Hindu has no wish to rule the world
but seeks a position compatible with the dignity of a guide because he is
destined to lead the world with the Vedic Light. Therefore, he is the
first among equals. This hymn clarifies the fact with reference to other
parts of the globe. Verse no. 1 declares:

        "Truth, high and potent Law, the Consecrating Rite,
        Fervour, Brahma and Sacrifice uphold the Earth.

        May she the Queen of all that is and is to be, may
        Prithivi make ample space and room for us."

Here, it should be noted that the hymn shows respect to the entire
earth but refers to the land of Bharat as the "Queen of all ..." It
is because Bharat is the land of the Vedas, meaning knowledge and
true enlightenment. She is the fountain of human civilisation and
superior cultural values, which adorned mankind with the sense of
morality. Since I have discussed all these facts in my book, "The
Wonders of the Rgveda," which is being serialised in "Liberty," I
need not go into details here.

That this hymn is about Bharat Mata (the undivided India), is borne out by
the facts especially connected with this country. Verse no. 3 states:

        "In whom the sea, and Sindhu, and the waters, in
        whom our food and corn-lands had their being,

        In whom this all that breathes and moves is active,
        this Earth assign us foremost rank and station."

It must be remembered that Bharat Mata is originally associated
with the areds of the Indus river (Sindhu). One should also note
love and respect of the Vedic man for Bharat Mata because he
believed that the mere fact of belonging to this country brought
him "the foremost rank and station" in the world.

Again verse no. 50 mentions Gandharvas and Apsarases, Kimidins, Pisachas
and Rakshdsas, which are ingredients of the Indian mythology.

Verse 4 addresses India as "Lady of the earth's four regions," and
verse 7 states:

        "May Earth, my Prithivi, always protected with
        ceaseless care by Gods who never slumber ..."

Prithivi, as I understand, is the deified earth, when it refers to Bharat
Mata. This hymn clearly states Defence of India as the first and most
sacred duty of a Hindu, who earnestly prays that Gods should protect her
with ceaseless care.

Verse 12 expresses the total devotion of a Hindu to Bharat Mata:

        " ... I am the son of Earth, Earth is my Mother."

Study of this hymn reveals that while the Vedic doctrine respects all
gods, it attaches the greatest importance to the land of Bharat becduse it
is the Mother of all those who dwell in her bosom. However, the following
two points ought to be noted in this respect:

a. One can live in India and believe in any god he likes because so
vast is the Vedic concept of Divinity that there is no jealousy
among gods. This liberality is based on the advanced Vedic
thinking, which realises that as the wheel of time moves forward,
changes of all sorts must take place, thus religious doctrines may
not form the cause of social discord.

b. This Vedic Iiberality is, however, restricted by the Concept of Bharat
Mata, that is, a dweller of this land must confess: "I am the son of
Bharat Mata, and Bharat is my Mother."

It goes without saying that just confession of love is not a convincing
proof of one's affection; it must be reinforced by sustained action.
Therefore, a dweller of India does not acknowledge her as his Motherland
if he hates Kaashi and loves Kaaba. All his civic rights depend on this
point.

Further, as love of Bharat Mata is the basic Vedic demand, I believe,
Bharat Mata is the Major Deity of the land. It is especially true when we
realise that other gods have suffered from the effects of change but
Bharat Mata has always remained the same. Therefore, she ought to be
worshipped as the Deity of India. Therefore, worship of other gods is
optional but the worship of Bharat Mata, the Chief Diety is a must for the
simple reason that the people born on her soil are fed, clothed, educated
and cremated or buried there. Thus, their dignity, destiny and dominion
are directly dependent on their devotion to Bharat Mata; a free and
prosperous Bharat Mata is a source of pleasure, pride and probity to her
devotees but a betrayed, bedevilled and battered Bharat Mata is the source
of decay, decline and disaster; other gods have come and gone but Bharat
Mata shall always be there. This is the reason that the Hindu gods are
different from the Semitic God, who is jealous and wants to be adored
exclusively, but a Hindu can welcome them all at the same time (R.V. 1:
LXXV-V).

Again, a person's national identity is determined by the land of his
hirth, and his greatness or smallness becomes directly associated with the
reverence that he shows her in action. This is what makes a German,
English or French great and an Indian, Pakistani and Bangladeshi small.
History testifies to the fact how the former have adored their motherlands
with blood and worldly treasures and how the latter have dishonoured
Bharat Mata by truncating her to worship foreign gods whose validity
cannot be acknowledged rationally. Thus, one can establish the principle:

        The more powerful a country, the greater the stature of her people.

2. This brings me to the discussion of the second point i.e. attainment of
power for the glory of (India) Bharat Mata.

        With a view to achieving this end, a Vedic Hindu is the devotee of
        Indra, the Lord of Power;

        Praise be to Indra, the Lord of Power, the holy synod's might.
        (R.V.I: LVI - 2)

The Rgveda inculcates into the minds of its devotees that a characteristic
of power is that it seeks to vanquish the adversaries of the powerful:

        "Indra goes on from one fight to another intrepidly, destroying
        castles of the enemies." (R.V.I: Llll - 7)

        Again the purpose of power is to seek victory through battles:

        "Indra, the Victor is great; he shines in manly battles; his
        character remains unstained; his might sparkles like the peak of a
        mountain." (R.V.I: LVI - 3)

        The true treasure to a genuine Hindu is his mighty deed:

        "Indra, the most splendid and powerful, is rich in mighty deeds,
        which are Indra's treasures. O, Conqueror, give them to us."
        (R.V.I: Llll - 3)

One must realise that mighty deeds are the treasures of Indra, which a
Hindu begs for. It means that he seeks to emulate his Lord to be like Him
in practice. This is the source of the famous Hindu doctrine known as
Karma: "one reaps what one sows." Thus a Hindu must be a man of action; he
must seek power and use it bravely.

The central point of this discussion is a Hindu's duty and desire to be
God-like through attaining power. He knows God is God because He is
powerful. Therefore, His devotee has to be like Him, yet a true Hindu is
humble, humanitarian and honey-like, but as a practitioner of faith, he is
proud, powerful and pragmatic.

Power to a Hindu is not a fleeting affair. To be a Hindu, he has to
perpetuate it:

        "Indra ... we make thy might perpetual."
        (R.GV. III:XXXVlI - X)

3. Having established the rapport between a Hindu and power, I must now
state that he is forbidden by dharma to abuse it. This is what brings me
to the discussion of the third point i.e. "Willingness to fight for
self-defence and international brotherhood."

In this connection, freedom is considered the greatest virtue: even the
gods need it and attain it through might and battle:

        a. "Lord of the brave, Indra who rules the people, gave freedom to
        gods by might and battle:
        (R.V. Ill: XXXIV: Vll)

Here is a stunning verse:

        b. "When Indra's helpers fighting for the good of
        men, the Maruts, faithful to mankind, joyed in the Iight."
        (R.V.I: Lll - llX)

Marut, originally means storm but has been deified as stormgod. This is
the epithet of a Vedic warrior for being thunderously bold in a battle. To
be a true Hindu, he has to acquire this trait of fearlessness. Thus, this
verse means that a Hindu is faithful to mankind, and fights battles for
their good.

It imparts Hinduism an international character and appoints a Hindu the
custodian of world affairs. This is what makes me proud of my Vedic
ancestry. The Rgveda, which is at least 5500 years old could think and
preach in terms of humanity and internationalism when the rest of the
world was no more than cave-dwellers. This is a cogent proof of the fact
that civilisation started in India.

Freedom is justice. As my freedom is fragile unless I am willing to defend
your right to be free as well, the verses "a" and "b", clearly demonstrate
that a Hindu has been commanded by Dharma to maintain international
liberties through righteous use of power.

The international character of Hinduism and the role of a Hindu becomes
even clearer when we look at the following:

        Being the devotee of God, a Hindu is a divine warrior who "stirs up
        with his might, great battles for mankind."
        (R.V.I: IV - V)

At this juncture, I ought to point out that a Hindu has divine obligation
to be powerful not for jingoistic reasons because the Vedas appoint him as
the custodian of the world order. This is obvious from the fact that there
is no proselytisation in Hinduism as it is in Christianity or Islam. A
person can have any faith he likes and he will not be persecuted or denied
justice by a Hindu because all Indian doctrines even when they collide
with the Vedic authority, originate from free thinking based on reason and
observation. The superstitious element that we find in Hinduism, is an
accretion introduced by the selfish interests over a long period of time.

The liberality of Hindu thinking is so important a point in this context
that a little digression seems justified: the Indian philosophy has been
arranged into two categories i.e. Astika and Nastika systems; the former
affirms but the latter denies. The Charvahas, the Buddhists and the Jains
are Nastika (nihilist or heterodox) not because they do not acknowledge
the existence ot God but because they deny the authority of the Vedas.
Though the revolts against the Vedas as mounted by the Charvakas and
Buddhists were really serious, no violence was ever demonstrated by the
Hindus or their antagonists because they were all Indians, bred in similar
traditions of tolerance and free thinking. On the contrary, the European
movement known as The Reformation was deeply steeped in murder and
destruction, and the Islamic sectarianism denoted by Sunni-Shia division,
exhibits the apex of mutual hatred and thirst for bloody carnage.

Again, the six Astika systems of philosophy as believed in by the Hindus
are considerably diiferent from one another. Yet, all believers are proud
Hindus and no one throws mud of blasphemy on another for having difference
of opinion. Reverence for the Vedas is the root of their unity, which
cannot be shaken by the difference of interpretation. The veracity of this
statement can be judged by the liberal thinking of the Sankhya System,
which is not only the most ancient mode of Hindu thinking but also older
system than any other philosphicai discipline known to mankind.

The purpose of digression is to establish that Hinduism is based on reason
and not a pretended divine dictation.

Therefore, it is free from intrinsic aggression associated with a wolf or
a hyena. This is what makes it a natural way of life, free from
perversion, prejudice and passivity, raising it to a message of hope,
hilarity and humanity.

Hinduism is essentially humanism in action. This is what makes a Hindu the
protector of humanity and he feels obliged:

a. to be non-aggressive, and

b. protect mankind against any aggressor in his capacity as the custodian
of humanity.

Having already discussed 'b,' now I may touch upon 'a' and must add
emphatically that the Hindu dharma is non-aggression and not non-violence,
usually described as ahimsa. As a Hindu is the guardian of humanity, he
must be free from malice, and therefore cannot be aggressive. The same
humanitarian obligation makes it incumbent on him to be able to deter the
aggressor with a superior power, courage and will-to-fight. Therefore,
ahimsa means non-aggression and not non-violence as usually understood by
the Hindus. As non-violence, ahimsa, is the contempt of the Rgveda, which
describes Indra as the "Lord of Power," who "fights battles for mankind.
(R.V. I: IV - 4.5)

The Hindus have a proud past for being the pioneers of human civilisation.
It is the law of nature that what is young today shall become old
tomorrow; while youth represents the prime of life owing to its lofty
aspirations requiring forward thrust, old age marks the decline of these
adventurous virtues, giving rise to make-believe and hesitation. Of
course, old age has its own merits but gripping with major issues ot life
does not appear as a priority. This is what has happened to the Hindus,
who are the oldest nation on this earth. Their will to stand up and be
counted has suffered further from the fact that they were the richest
people on the planet for the longest period. Prosperity, though the most
enjoyable thing, can also be debilitating, bringing moral weakness in its
wake. The decline of rich nations is usually due to the fact that they
become ahimsa-oriented i.e. they lose the virtue of fighting and thus fail
to check advances of the aggressors determined to destroy their honour and
cultural values. The Arab and Turkish raids of India are glaring examples
of this fact.

Not only historically is ahimsa, the national bane, but it is also
despicable psychologically. All animals, including humans are endowed with
antagonistic behaviour. It means that they defend themselves through the
natural mechanism of flight and fight: sometimes they run away to avoid
selfdestruction and sometime they fight for the sake of survival.
Therefore, fighting is a natural virtue of humans but ahimsa means
renunciation of fighting to make flight the way of life. thus, ahimsa
meaning non-violence is totally inhuman. In fact, it is cowardice dressed
up as piety; it is a poison looked uporl as an antidote; it is a whore
thought of as an apsera. This is the biggest evil that the Hindus have
come to suffer.

Some thirty years ago, it was widely reported in the British Press that a
wolf raided a sheep-pen. As he was about to rip her young ones, the mother
became violent to protect them. She subjected the predator to repeated
butting until he lay dead.

May the memory of that great sheep live for ever. She is the true exponent
of the word: "ahimsa," which means protection. It clearly demonstrates
that safety depends, not on running away from the aggressor but smashing
his head off. The beauty of the Vedic message lies in the fact that it
requires of the devotee to practise non-aggression towards others, and at
the same time be ready to crush the aggressor. Thus, ahimsa means
non-aggression and not non-violence because one needs violence to defeat
the villain.

Of course, sadhuism is a dedication to the search of God or Mukti.
Meditation is a part of it but the true path for salvation remains karma:
a person's quality of deeds. No divine, whether he be a Hindu or
non-Hindu, can attain his goal just by a devoted JAP. One can recite the
word: "sugar" one million times yet one's mouth will not become sweet
unless one eats sugar. Recitation of "Ramnam" is great, yet Mukti depends
on becoming like Ram, and the only way to achieve this purpose is to act
like him. He was a ruler, a husband, a father, a friend and above all a
crusader - the destroyer of the aggressor. He was not an ascetic who had
given up the world. He set a pattern of life to be followed by his
followers.

I do not wish to indulge in a divisive discussion but the truth has got to
be toid: Hinduism is a way of life based on the doctrine of Karma.
Asceticism or renunciation is its exact antithesis. Giving up the world is
a revolt against the doctrine of Karma because a Sanyasi or Sadhu turns
his back on it. A true Yogi is a member of the society; he lives a full
life, performs his duties, fights for his rights, he meditates and enjoys
marital blessings. This is the Godly way. You do not have to take my word
for it. Look at the examples set by Shiva, Rama and Krishna.

Once a friend discussed this issue with me and claimed that the
validity for asceticism is based on the following command from the
Bhagavad Gita (2: 45):

"Be thou indifferent to those enjoyments and their means, rising
above pairs of opposites like pleasure and pain."

Since the Bhagavad Gita represents higher philosophy, it is not always
possible to understand its meaning without proper attention. This verse
certainly does not mean renunciation though it appears so. It becomes easy
to understand this fact when we realise that none of the major gods is an
ascetic; they all have female partners. Even Shiva is not totally given to
meditation: he is a passionate lover. Rama is a ruler, and his example
requires a true Hindu to live a life of might and grandeur, but it must be
based on fairness and piety. Again, Hinduism is totally different in its
approach to salvation: the Semitic religions such as Islam advocate that
the faithful shall be saved by the intercession of the Prophet Muhammad
and Sufi saints. Hindusim does not acknowledge this approach: salvation
depends upon one's karma. Therefore, a sadhu cannot do much for you. All a
true sadhu can do is to show you the way. You yourself have to walk all
the way to reach your destination. This is what proves the veracity of
Hinduism. It is only the simpletons who are taken in by verbosity.

Now, I may explain the complexity of the above quoted verse:

The Rgveda is the first book ever to realise that, not only moral
conscience depends on pairs of opposites but the physical make-up of the
universe is also based on the principle of duality.

This verse has furnished us with a wonderful example of this fact,
that is, one cannot imagine pleasure without knowing what pain is.
Can you feel sweet without realising what bitter is' Nor can dark
have any sense without light, and so on. It demonstrates the truth
that moral concepts exist in pairs. This is equally true about
physical existence:

Everything in this world is structured and held together by Shakti i.e.
the overall combination of different forces. Without Shakti the particles
that storm any structure would move off in straight lines at random,
instead of staying together. The point to remember is that forces in the
universe come in equal and opposite pairs e.g., negative and positive
electric charges. So great is the exactitude of these forces that when
they are added, the positive cancels the negative, and the sum comes to
zero.

It should be borne in mind that existence is not possible without the
reaction of the opposites. This is the reason that pain requires pleasure
as its remedy and the sensation of pleasure is bound to be benumbed
without a touch of pain. Therefore, the meaning of this verse is not
giving up the opposites, which is an impossibility, but to create a
balance between them. This balanced state of karma equals zero like the
actions and reactions of natural forces which create activity through this
mechanism. It is not difficult to understand that zero is equated with
nothingness which amounts to renunciation. Therefore, "rising above pairs
of opposites like pain and pleasure," means avoiding pain and pleasure for
its own sake and pursuing a life of balanced action.

Credibility of what I have said above can be judged by the facts that
nobody can renounce this world while he lives; he needs food, water and
shelter to keep his body and mind in a fairly healthy state to exercise
meditation. It must be remembered that contemplation of a sickly mind is
nothing but pursuit of madness.

Again, this kind of asceticism is against the Hindu doctrine which
prescribes a code of action and glory for its devotees. Just look at the
following:

Lord Krishna Says:

"Arjuna, it is only the lucky among the Kshatriya, who get such an
unsolicited opportunity for war, which is an open door to heaven. Now if
you will not wage such a righteous war, then abandoning your duty and
losing your reputation, you will incur sin.

Either slain in battle you will attain heaven, or gaining victory you will
enjoy sovereignty of the earth; therefore, arise Arjuna, determined to
fight." (Ch. 11 - 32, 33-37)

These verses clearly state the Hindu way of life, that is, fighting for
honour and glory, which also happens to be "an open door to heaven." And a
Kshatriya is the man or woman who strives for national glory with sword
and fire without turning his back on decency.

Heaven lies not under the shade of asceticism or ahimsa but on the sharp
edge of a sword. The nations, who follow this truth, have led a life of
honour and glory but the people who concealed their cowardice under the
impious doctrine of ahimsa, qualified for dishonour, disrespect and
degradation. If you consult a dictionary, you will find "Hindu" means "an
infidel, a negro, a slave, a coward, an inhabitant of India," and so on.

Do I need add any more to this list of insults?

These conditions have been created by those who advocate that the Gita is
all about ahimsa. This is a deliberate misinterpretation of those who want
to enjoy the priestly privileges and do not want to lead the nation
through a personal example of boldness, hardship and sacrifice. The
Bhagavad Gita is Lord Krishna's sermon to Arjuna in the battlefield and
seeks to prepare him for a fight, but these hypocrites dedicated to a life
of softness, insist that the message is all about controlling one's greed
and anger. In an attempt to fool the devotees they also insult the Lord,
who clearly emphasises the merit of battling with the evil. How could he
lecture on greed and anger when the armies were poised in the battlefield
to annihilate each other?

Finally, I salute Sri Rangarajan, the hero of this article and stress that
a patriotic sadhu dedicated to serve Bharat Mata is not an ascetic but a
saint, who seeks Mukti through national glory. He represents Lord Shiva,
who is both a warrior and lover. It is high time that the Hindus were
taught the Vedic virtues of fighting evil to uphold the cause of
righteousness. To a virtuous Hindu, nothing is more righteous than serving
Bharat Mata. She is the fountain of life for all those who live on her
soil. Therefore, her dignity and honour must be the priority of all her
sons and daughters. It is essential that consciousness of the dignity of
Bharat Mata is preached with utmost zeal and sincerity. This goal is best
achieved if every sadhu learns to girdle himself with a sword to lead the
way for Dharma Yudh. Let every Hindu temple be adorned with a statue of
Bharat Mata and have facilities for training the devotees in martial arts
and patriotism. This is a job for the great Sadhu Rangarajan, the creator
of Vande Matram. Singing patriotic hymns is great but making people true
patriots, eager to serve the cause of Bharat Mata, is immensely greater.
In England, they say: "An ounce of practice is better than a tonne of
theory."

Let the Hindus understand clearly that ahimsa means cowardice and not
protection unless it is accompdnied by the will to fight. If someone
attacks your children, how will you protect them? The only way of
protecting them is to kill the killer. This is true ahimsa.

When Tamburlaine invaded India, he murdered 100,000 Hindus and carried
away 20,000 screaming Hindu virgins. The Muslim historian, Farishta, made
fun of the Hindus for not fighting Tamburlaine. I do not blame him for
this attitude. Why? Because Manu Smriti, the code of the Hindu Law clearly
states

        "The cowards are the food for the brave." (Ch. 5:29)

The people who flout their fundamental laws, yet call themselves Hindus,
deserve this fate and will continue to do so until they lose their taste
for cowardice under the guise of ahimsa, and start defending Bharat Mata
with their blood, sweat and breath of life.

A true sadhu is not an ascetic but a man of God. He cannot renounce this
world which is full of God's children. He has a duty to guide them and
participate in crushing evil. This is the crux of Dharma as explained by
the behavioural model of the Lord Rama, who was a virtuous son, a loving
husband, a good father and a great ruler. Thus, a true devotee of Rama
seeks perfection through serving his fellow-beings, and not by turning his
back on them.

May God bless Shriman Rangarajan with wisdom and courage to serve Bharat
Mata, the only Deity that can exalt her chiIdren.


Reproduced with permission from:

"Liberty: The Humanist Quarterly", Vol 2, Issue 9

http://www.hinduunity.org