|
That the Indian Yogi was in existence when the Aryans reached India is
proved from the Zend Avesta for in the fourth Fargard, the Persian Âryans
denounce his solitary dreamings in an Indian forest:—
"Verily I say unto thee, O Spitâma Zarathustra, the man who
has a wife is far above him who begets no sons; he who keeps a house
is far above him who has none; he who has children is far above the
childless man; he who has riches is far above him who is poor.
"And of two men he who fills himself with meat is filled with
the good spirit much more than he who does not do so.
"It is this man who can strive against the onsets of the death
fiend; that can strive against the winter fiend with the thinnest
garments on; that can strive against the wicked tyrant and smite him
on the head; can strive against the ungodly Ashemaogha (heretic) who
does not eat."
S’iva is Darkness—the Lord of Hell, a region that seems to have
sprung from him and his cave. But from him has also came the idea of
Kailas and its jewelled buildings. That was still the Hindu Paradise
at the date of the Râmâyana. And S’iva's rude stone denotes life
as well as death,—earthly life, heavenly life.
Also he is sometimes represented with three heads. Trailinga
Ishwara, as Creator, Protector, Destroyer. This fancy has been stolen
by the Brahmins who call Brahma the Creator, and Vishnu the Protector.
But the central head of his statue, say the one at Elora is not that
of Brahma, for it has Ganga (a head of the Ganges) in its top knot.
Trailinga Ishwara dates very far back, for a considerable portion of
Madras is called Telinga after him. And Mr. Crawford tells us that in Java and the Islands it appeared to be the name of the
islanders for India. And Siva has one more attribute, the most
formidable of all. S’iva is Mahâkâla (Remphan, Kronos, "Great
Time.") In the Râmâyana, Valmiki informs us that S’iva has
"emasculated all the gods." And when winter tourists in
India sneer at a white-dusted yogi in the bazaar, they little guess
what he represents. He bears the white ash of the innumerable gods,
stars, systems, races of men that the Great Yogi, Mahâ Kâla, has
burnt up. *
Man's religion may be called the "Non-ego as viewed by the
Ego." It is the relation that the thinking individual believes
himself to hold with the infinite universe around him. What
mind-picture did the facts of life present to the early races of
India, driven by the hardier Aryans into jungles and wastes where
serpents and fevers were very plentiful, and food very scarce? They
were pronounced to be Pariahs. They were forbidden to look into any
sacred book, death being the penalty. Indra, Agni, Varuna and other
gods had poured down on the Indian soil colleges of holy men to
perform certain rites that pleased these gods; and folks gained in
return happiness and comfort. But such joys were not for the
yellow-faced Turanian. Even the Nirvâna promised after many dreary
rebirths was refused to him.
But whilst matters were running along in this manner S’iva's Yogi
was sitting in his jungle seeking the Bodhi, or transcendental
knowledge. It came to him in a form which we might call the critical
faculty. He examined the divine claims of the priests, and found them
contradicted by experience. Agni ate up greedily the flesh of the
bullocks, the rice and the ghee, placed on his altar, but did not give
in return wealth, health, or immunity from the accidents and sorrows of life.
Indra, when requisitioned, refused, as often as not, to strike with
his vajra the bellying cloud and deluge the baking earth with fruitful
showers. Soon an early philosophy arose. It was called the Sankhya,
and had two schools, two Bibles. One, that of Patanjali, is called
Seshwara Sankhya, the Sûtras or maxims of S’iva, the Great Serpent
Sesh. The other that of Kapila, is called the Nirîswara Sankhya, and
it denies the existence of God altogether. These tractates are
immensely old. Professor Manilal Mabhubhai *
Dvivedi says that in the Yoga Patanjali talks as if he were only an
editor, and Colebrooke believes Kapila to be a mythological personage.
We will copy down from Colebrooke a digest of the two prominent
philosophies of the followers of S’iva, the first derived from the
Yoga S’âstra of Patanjali, and the second from the Karica of Kapila.
Says Colebrooke:—
"God, Îs’wara, the supreme ruler according to Patanjali, is
a soul, a spirit distinct from other souls; unaffected by the ills by
which they are beset; unconcerned with good or bad deeds and their
consequences, or with fancies and passing thoughts. In him is the
utmost omniscience. He is the instructor of the earliest beings that
have a beginning (the deities of mythology), himself infinite,
unlimited by time."
Kapila on the other hand, according to Colebrooke, denies an Îs’wara
(ruler of the world by volition), alleging that there is no proof of
God's existence unperceived by the senses, not inferred from
reasoning, nor yet revealed. He acknowledges, indeed, a. being issuing
from nature who is intelligence absolute, source of all individual
intelligences, and origin of other existences successively evolved and
developed. He expressly affirms that the truth of such an Îs’wara is demonstrated, the creator of worlds in such sense of creation:
for "the existence of effects," he says, "is dependent
on consciousness, not upon Iswara." *
As I shall have to show that the second or Atheistic Sankhya had so
much to do with the great change of Buddhism, I will add another
detail, taking advantage of an able essay by Ludwig Büchner.
"A consistent pessimism is the main feature of the
system." "Happiness is a mere illusion, and all conscious
life, pain and suffering." †
Suffering man is involved in a vortex of rebirths. It is only after
tasting old age and death and other infirmities time after time for
thousands of years, that the saint can gain repose in complete
annihilation. ‡
S’iva is the God of Destruction as well as life. Periodically he
destroys the entire Kosmos—gods, men, and whirling stars. The white
ashes of his followers represent the charred remains of these
portentous destructions, as I have shown. The idea was plainly
invented as an answer to the high-blown pretensions of the Brahmin
polytheism—"Yes, there are gods, Brahma, Indra, Vishnu, etc.,
but S’iva sweeps them all away"; and oddly enough, the Brahmins
seem to have accepted the theory.
It is also plain that the callousness of the god is another gird
against the Brahmin priesthoods, who urged that sacrifices and other
savage rites alone could move him. The Yogis held that the Great All
was unknowable, unthinkable, omnipresent, inert, eternal.
The theory of this Pralaya, or destruction of worlds, suggests the
origin of the Nirvâna of Buddha, in the sense of annihilation.
According to his biography, he came to earth to give immortality to
mankind, but the Pralaya sweeps away gods, men, and stars. This made
immortality out of the question. And the Mahayana movement plainly
also got from the Sankhya philosophy its atheism, cosmism, pessimism,
and the idea of the grievous, prolonged tortures of its
metempsychosis. Early Buddhism had pronounced that by joining Buddha's
fold these torments could be made at once to cease.
But the Yogi of S’iva in his jungle gave to the world another
gift. He said practically this—A god mysterious and callous, who
dwells in the great Temple of Darkness, may be said to be
incomprehensible to all except minds of his own fathom. The Absolute
must be treated as the Absolute. It could not create anything for
everything is already perfection. It could not supervise and direct
mortal affairs, for those affairs were by absolute wisdom already
arranged. A mind inscrutable and boundless can have no will to produce
anything but what is like himself boundless and perfect.
But in the world some men are more wise, some more strong, some
more virtuous than others. Could we not, as a workable postulate,
deify what seem to be the attributes of this mighty mystery? Could not
we imagine a God of Wisdom, a son of God, and call him Gaṇes’a?
Could we not imagine a God of Strength and call him Karttikeya? The
result was the Avesthâ idea, which, according to Professor Horace
Hayman Wilson, was translated "Hypostasis" in Alexandria.
Gaṇes’a was the son of Sîva, the "Word" of God, the
Creator of the World; and two great feats are plainly his. As
Gaṇes’a he gave to India much of its civilisation. As Janus,
which Orientalists all affirm is the word Gaṇes’a a little
altered, he gave civilisation to ancient Rome.
I insert a quotation from the works of Sir William J ones.
|
|