There has been lot of debate on various Hindu and Bharatiya traditions as Bharat started to shake off the Secular shackles and particularly since Sri Narendra Modi’s election as Prime Minister of Bharat in 2014. Various Special Interest Groups and Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) are filing Public Interest Litigations (PIL) in courts to discontinue various traditions on flimsy grounds. In almost all cases this well coordinated high-decibel debates and PILs are only against Hindu traditions; and nothing against even more distasteful and eco-hazardous traditions of non-Hindu religions. The rare exceptions to this rule are the Triple Talaq bill and the Mehram criteria for Hajj pilgrims, which are actively contested by the associated religious organizations as well as self-declared atheist, secular, communist groups, organizations and parties.
Often, these instances of contest against prevailing Hindu traditions are coming into public knowledge very late in the process; just before a court verdict or, in worse cases, after the court verdict leaving Hindus very little time and legal space to present their case and get a judicial outcome. Few examples of this challenge are to do with ban on Jallikattu, Sri Krishna Janmashtami Dahi Handi, entrance rules to Garbha Gruha of Shanisinghapur temple, entrance rules to Ayyappa temple and so on. In all these scenarios, the Hindu groups are left with post-verdict protest articles explaining the Hindu rationale behind these traditions and in some cases voluntary movements to continue a given tradition (Ex: women entering Ayyappa temple). This process is not only un-democratic and unjust to Hindu majority, but would slowly kill the Hindu Dharmic ethos that are enshrined in our society as traditions.
Does it mean Sanatana Dharma is against honest debate on traditions and discontinuing them if found to be unsuitable for a given region (dEsa) and time (kAla)?
The answer is an emphatic NO. One of the key foundations of Sanatana Dharma or Hinduism is to have a continuous awareness, observation and debate on all traditions and to discontinue or start traditions to fit into a given dEsa/kAla (region and era). That is why unlike non-Hindu religions, Sanatana Dharma delivered numerous Dharma Sastras written by various Rishis to suit a specific region and era. These Dharma Sastras are infinite even though many of us know very few of them like Manu Dharma Sastra, Parashara Smriti, Yagnavalka Smriti, Aapastamba Sutra, Chanakya Artha Sastra etc.
Is there a preferred approach to study, debate and transform Hindu traditions?
Before going into this, it is important to touch upon a key aspect of Hinduism/Bharatiyata. This is called Dharma. Dharma has two aspects to it; the first one is eternal; as in Sanatana Dharma and the second one is contextual; suitable to dEsa/kAla as in Dharma Sastras. A Dharma Sastra must pass the criteria of Sanatana aspect of Dharma for it to be accepted by the society. In many scenarios, a Dharma Shastra was adopted as the constitution of Bharat of that era. It is important to understand the Sanatana (eternal) aspect of Dharma before defining contextual Dharma.
Eternal Dharma is often personified as the four legs of a Cow or Bull; because Dharma gives the society nourishment as Cow’s milk and keeps us eternally faced /focused towards Shiva (universal consciousness) as Nandi does in all Shiva temples. The four legs of this Dharma are described as Satya, Saucha, Bhuta Daya and Nishkama Karma. A quick description of these are:
- Satya = sarvam khalvidam brahma - All of this is brahman (Chāndogya Upaniṣad 3.14.1) combined with tat tvam asi - "YOU are THAT" (Chandogya Upanishad 6.8.7 of the Sama Veda)
- Saucha = Bhagavad-Gita explains that Saucha as combination of Shubhrata, Swachata, Sundarata and Pavitrata. Shubhrata means getting rid of filth and corruption amidst us. Swachata is the process of adopting the set of practices that help maintain health and prevent corruption. Sundarata is the body of aesthetic knowledge that makes our surroundings and society a celebration. Finally, Pavitrata brings the sense of reverence towards our own surroundings, society and nation
- Bhuta Daya = Kindness towards all (non-human) beings & non-violence towards helpless
- Nishkama Karma = Emphasis on Duty/Action combined with non-emphasis on results.
As one can see, the above four legs of Dharma are applicable in all contexts and regions; thus eternal. One can easily apply this Dharmic Test and to verify if a given idea or tradition is Dharma or not.
By using the Dharma structure above, Hindus can analyze any tradition to check if it passes the eternal aspect of Dharma and decide if it is in Bharatiya Interests to continue that tradition. If a given tradition fails the Dharma test then laws to discourage and penalize those obsolete traditions can be formulated.
A methodology to study Bharatiya traditions:
1. Purva-Paksha: Study and summarize a given tradition in terms of its context, usage, region and timing. Explain in what socio-economic-political background and circumstances that tradition came in to being and who are prescribed to follow it and at what time and location. Identify the people, places, flora-fauna, if any, that are adversely impacted by the tradition.
2. Dharma Test: Conduct a dharma test against the subject tradition using above model. If a tradition passes the above four aspects, then it is a Dharmic sampradaya; and it must be encouraged. If a tradition fails the Satya test then it is Adharmic and must be discontinued immediately. If a given tradition passes Satya test but fails one or more remaining aspects of Dharma, then it is Aapaddharma; a temporary deviation. This must be corrected as soon as the underlying root-cause is removed from the society. This author believes that most of repugnant traditions that exist in Bharat today must have come into being as Aapaddharma (temporary compromise) during the 1300-year triple-colonization (by Islam, Christianity and Secularism) era.
3. dEsa/kAla analysis: Describe how contemporary socio-economic conditions make a given tradition unnecessary to continue. Explain how these new socio-economic factors pass the Dharma test themselves. Summarize how a given Aapaddharma tradition can be discontinued to reestablish Dharma.
4. New Dharma Sastra: Draft laws to penalize the continued use of Aapaddharma law so the society moves out of survival (Aapaddharma) mode to progressive mode (Dharma). Develop social awareness and seek Rashtra (Parliament, Govt of India) help to formalize this law and overall implementation.
In summary, neither Sanatana Hindu Dharma nor the Bharatiya civilization is averse to a structured debate on any of its traditions. In fact, Bharatiya civilization thrived by continuously rewriting Dharma Sastras (Contextual Dharma that passes Sanatana Dharma tests) to meet challenges thrown at it in every era. At the same time, it is important for Hindu majority to demand that any study and reformation of Bharatiya traditions is done based on Sanatana Hindu Dharma and not on Asuric agendas. Each tradition must be studied and tested for its compliance to Sanatana Dharma. Traditions that fail Sanatana Dharma test must be considered for reformation. At the same time, it is important to verify that current socio-economic and political environment and instruments of governance pass the Dharma test themselves. Laws must be formulated with the sole aim to lead the great Bharatiya civilization from Aapaddharma (survival mode) to Dharma (progress and celebration).