Friday, May 19, 2006

Of principles and prophets...

There is a lot of heated debate and protests going on against the storyline that indicated that Jesus Christ had married Mary Magdalene and that their union resulted in a bloodline that continues till date. (here and here)

Such protests are not new. They keep happening every now and then, for books/movies and every kind of media. What is the root cause of such fanaticism in people?

"...So in every religion you find there are the three stages: philosophy,mythology, and ceremonial. There is one advantage which can be pleaded for the Vedanta, that in India, fortunately, these three stages have been sharply defined. In other religions the principles are so interwoven with the mythology that it is very hard to distinguish one from the other. The mythology stands supreme, swallowing up the principles; and in course of centuries the principles are lost sight of. The explanation, the illustration of the principle, swallows up the principle, and the people see only the explanation, the prophet, the preacher, while the principles have gone out of existence almost - so much so that even today, if a man dares to preach the principles of Christianity apart from Christ, they will try to attack him and think he is wrong and dealing blows at Christianity. In the same way, if a man wants to preach the principles of Mohammedanism, Mohammedans will think the same; because concrete ideas, the lives of great men and prophets, have entirely overshadowed the principles.

In Vedanta the chief advantage is that it was not the work of one single man; and therefore, naturally, unlike Buddhism, or Christianity, or Mohammedanism, the prophet or teacher did not entirely swallow up or overshadow the principles. The principles live, and the prophets, as it were, form a secondary group, unknown to Vedanta. The Upanishads speak of no particular prophet, but they speak of various prophets and prophetesses. The old Hebrews had something of that idea; yet we find Moses occupying most of the space of the Hebrew literature. Of course I do not mean that it is bad that these prophets should take religious hold of a nation; but it certainly is very injurious if the whole field of principles is lost sight of. We can very much agree as to principles, but not very much as to persons. The persons appeal to our emotions; and the principles, to something higher, to our calm judgement. Principles must conquer in the long run, for that is the manhood of man. Emotions many times drag us down to the level of animals. Emotions have more connection with the senses than with the faculty of reason; and, therefore, when principles are entirely lost sight of and emotions prevail, religions degenerate into fanaticism and sectarianism. They are no better than party politics and such things. The most horribly ignorant notions will be taken up, and for these ideas thousands will be ready to cut the throats of their brethren. This is the reason that, though these great personalities and prophets are tremendous motive powers for good, at the same time their lives are altogether dangerous when they lead to the disregard of the principles they represent. That has always led to fanaticism, and has deluged the world in blood...."
Quoted from: Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda Volume 6 (The Methods and Purpose of Religion)


AMAN said...

My clarification to the article woud be: The lack of time to educate all the followers to the desired levels ... the challenge of spreading the words of enlightenment, to distant lands and species ... forced the projection of personalities to an immortal level, so as to connect with the mass. The 'principles' were "preached" as "rules" that people need to follow to attain "salvation". The Indian race was an evolved one - having already gone through the philosophy, mythology and ceremonial stages. Hence, the upanishads spoke beyond personalities.
However, post the Upanishads - the "Hindu" race too deliberately deteriorated intellectually (as is the case with 'the people of the book' now) and got into the vicious gamble of projecting personalities beyond the principles. Eg: Ram, Krishna, etc
Again I'd like to acknowledge and endorse Karthik's research material, that these are phases of evolution in all faiths. the older the faiths, the sooner the phases. May be the followers of Christ & Mohammad (PBUH) are a slower; but the harm is only if they are not steady. Now who is the certifying authority to check the steadiness of faiths - it's purely subjective as faith is personal and religion is illogical.

My mirror image said...

I agree completely with what you have quoted about Vedanta.But one demotivating factor about vedanta in Indian philosophy is that people look at it as sacred and keep it aside. The main essense of Vedanta holds in it the principles on which daily life should be based and this is not seen here in India.Should Vedanta not behave as a beacon to lead the man kind in right path.I see it as a challenge to youth (like us) to imbibe vedanta principles in every day life and not let people look at it as a sacred bundle of thoughts to be worshipped.

Krishna said...

Couldn't agree more with swamiji.
But sadly,I feel this fanaticism has crept into hinduism also.As Aman points out,this projection of personalities beyond the principles, certainly, doesn't augur well for the future.
One only hopes that this indeed, is only a passing phase,that will ultimately make way for the prinicples to emerge to the forefront.