Misconception and Misunderstandings – III
(B) Sociology and Culture
For the last few centuries, Sanatana Dharma has frequently been analysed and evaluated, particularly by the Western sources, through their socio-religious lenses, thereby reducing an open, vibrant and liberal millennia-old cultural matrix into some rigid stereotypes. Critics and outside scholars/observers often confuse late-historical distortions, local customs, and institutional abuses with the tradition’s core philosophical doctrines and beliefs. By conflating fluid social frameworks like Varna with rigid birth-based discrimination, or misinterpreting wide-spread practices like idol worship (Murti Puja), dietary preferences and ethics in the context of vegetarianism, as also Sannyasa as backward superstitions, the so-called inherent subjugation of women, or worshipping the cow, Western mainstream narratives routinely tend to obscure and discredit the organic, pluralistic and highly adaptable nature of the Indian (Hindu) civilization.
At its core as a central theme, the social and cultural matrix or architecture of Sanatana Dharma was never designed as a stagnant, dogmatic rulebook as the later evolved Western Abrahamic religions, but as a dynamic blueprint for human flourishing as a way of constantly evolving life. Grounded in the principle of Desha-Kala-Patra (context of space, time, and capacity) and balanced by the Ashrama-based Purusharthas (the four noble goals of life), its cultural practices reflect an unbroken reverence for the eternal cosmic order, non-duality, including the divine feminine (Shakti). Reclaiming the true essence of these traditions requires deconstruction by digging deeper through centuries of colonial misreadings and foreign-engineered social decay to reveal a heritage fundamentally anchored in dignity, cosmic harmony and profound social balance. Author’s attempt here is to briefly look into this misconception to explain correct position on issues flagged in the foregoing paragraph.
1. Idol Worship
This is one of the most disputed, talked about and criticized misconception that Hindus worship physical stone, wood, metal or paper images assuming them as God rather than understanding the real object i.e. idol (consecrated image) as a medium and physical focal point to concentrate and connect with the sole omnipresent Divine (Brahman). For centuries, it has been so violently opposed by proponents and followers of the foreign invaders and particular religion(s) that hundreds of Hindu temples and consecrated idols have been desecrated or destroyed in the past. The term “idol worship” carries a heavy, pejorative connotation inherited from Abrahamic and Western frameworks, where an “idol” is defined as a false god or a piece of inanimate object (stone) mistakenly worshipped as the God itself. In Sanatana Dharma, however, this concept is altogether different and aptly called as Murti Puja or Pratima Upasana.
A Murti, derived from the Sanskrit root murt, meaning “to embody” or “give form to”, is not a “deity” trapped in stone, metal or any other object; it is a sacred/sanctified vector, lens, or consecrated focal point. Because the ordinary human mind struggles to concentrate on or develop deep reverence for a purely abstract, formless, infinite Reality (Nirguna Brahman), the Sanatana tradition thoughtfully provided forms (concept of Saguna Brahman) as medium through which the finite mind of common people could interact with the Infinite. It is more or less akin to looking at a photograph of a loved one: there one does not love the paper and ink product (object), but the photograph allows his or her mind and affection to connect directly with the person it represents.
The fact that a newly sculpted statue is worshipped in a public or private Hindu temple only after it undergoes a precise spiritual procedure and process called Prana Pratishtha (inculcation or establishment of life-energy/consciousness) as prescribed in Agama Shastras, which are vast collection of ancient texts and scriptures that lay down the structural, philosophical and ritualistic framework of Sanatana dharma. Here Agama literally means “that which has come down” or “received tradition”, which serve as practical manuals that script how to build temples, sculpt deities including transfusion/establishment of life energy, perform daily worship, including yoga and meditation. Through elaborate Vedic chanting, rituals and mantras, the practitioner invites the divine consciousness to manifest through that specific physical medium. These Agama texts, and Srimad Bhagavad Gita as well, explicitly explain that Murti Puja is a conscious spiritual tool – a stepping stone – designed to ensure and refine concentration (Dharana) and devotion (Bhakti) until the seeker matures to realize the divine presence in every atom of creation and within their own soul.
In the Bhagavad Gita, Lord Krishna directly addresses the psychological difficulty embodied beings face when attempting to meditate on the unmanifest, formless Absolute (Nirguna Brahman or God) directly, as compared to a tangible form (Saguna) as a stepping stone.
Kleśo ‘dhikataras teṣām avyaktāsakta-cetasām,
Avyaktā hi gatir duḥkhaṁ dehavadbhir avāpyate.
(Bhagavad Gita: Chapter 12, Verse 5)
(For those whose minds are attached to the unmanifest and formless Absolute, the path of spiritual progress is exceedingly difficult and full of tribulation. The goal of the unmanifest is reached with great pain by embodied beings.
Besides, in many other supporting verses BG 4.11, BG 7.21, BG 6.30, it has been explained and amplified that the Divine accepts worship in whichever form the devotee sees and approaches Him. While Western view, erroneously, call it idolatry worshipping the physical object treating itself as God, the Sanatana Dharma considers Muri Puja (image worship) as a medium to offer devotion to the omnipresent, omnipotent God through a sacred, consecrated medium. The author would like to further elaborate this point here through the concept of Sadhya (Goal, Deity), Sadhaka (Practitioner, Devotee), Sadhan (Instrument, Medium), and Sadhana (Practice, Devotion).
Sadhya: The ultimate, formless, omnipotent, omnipresent Reality (Nirguna Brahman) that the practitioner aims to reach or realize.
Sadhaka: The human practitioner or seeker who is limited by sensory perception, mind and intellect, yet seeking a tangible connection with the Infinite.
Sadhana: The internal and external discipline such as devotion, concentration (Dharana), contemplation and ritual, elevating the seeker’s consciousness.
Sadhan: The consecrated Murti or Pratima serves as instrument or medium to connect with God. It is neither the Sadhya (the Godhead) nor the end goal, but only a specialized tool through which the Sadhaka conducts Sadhana to attain the Sadhya.
The aforesaid explains process of Murti Puja not only methodically but also in the most logical and rational form, which also presents an exceptionally precise and elegant philosophical framework of devotion to the Absolute. Besides, by grounding Murti Puja in the aforesaid four classic pillars, it also completely dismantles the simplistic “idolatry” trope using pure Vedic pedagogy.
2. The Inherent Subjugation of Women
Citing past practices like Sati, Purdah, widow restrictions, child marriage, and selective interpretations of some socio-legal texts like the Manusmriti, the Western historians and commentators have often criticised Sanatana Dharma as fundamentally patriarchal society alleging systemic subjugation and ill-treatment of women. The Islamic and Christian clerics too have so often used these critiques in their missionary and polemic discourses to contrast indigenous Indian traditions with their own religious ideals, arguing that true spiritual dignity and social liberation for women could only be achieved through conversion to their respective faiths. This propaganda has been so widespread and forceful that many common people in the West perceive at the condition of the Indian women as pathetic from the same lenses and coloured vision.
As against the above propaganda or disinformation, scholars and practitioners of Sanatana Dharma contend that this critique is a fall out of the colonial-era misreadings, and disinformation as well, that confuse post-Vedic social degenerations and historical invasions with core metaphysical principles. In reality at its foundational level, Hindu scriptures like Vedas and Upanishads elevate women to absolute spiritual equality and divinity. For instance, Ishvar (God) is also revered as Ardhanarishvara i.e., both male and female, and cosmic energy is conceptualized as Shakti (the active power of the Supreme). Several women (such as Gargi and Maitreyi) actively participated in intellectual and spiritual discourses as Vedic seers (Rishikas) and contributed several hymns in Vedas. Moreover, fundamental Hindu scriptures explicitly hold that no spiritual or social ritual (Yajna) is complete without participation of the woman as an equal partner (Sahadharmini). Thus, defenders of the Sanatana tradition strongly maintain that few social evils indeed developed in response to historical crises and institutional decay at a certain age, but such practices represent a departure rather than an authentic spirit and teaching of Sanatana Dharma.
The author indeed finds the narrative that Hinduism inherently subjugates women is a vicious distortion, misidentifying and mistreating late-medieval social practices and colonial-era legal codes owing to then obtaining threats and compulsions from foreign invaders and their misrule in contrast to original Vedic and Upanishadic principles. Looking directly at the foundational scriptures viz. Vedas and Upanishads, one clearly finds a worldview that not only affirms absolute spiritual and intellectual equality between both genders, but also exalts the Divine Feminine (Shakti) as the fundamental energy of creation itself.
The Concept of the Sahadharmini and Equal Partnership
In the Vedic paradigm, a woman is conceptualized not as a subordinate or a dependent, but as a Sahadharmini i.e., an equal partner in spiritual and moral duties, and an Ardhangini (equal half of a complete entity) in socio-cultural existence. The most prominent Vedic illustration of this absolute companionship is found in the Vivaha Sukta (Rigveda 10.85). Comprising of 47 verses, it encompasses cosmic allegories with human vows framing marriage as a sacred, equal and life-affirming partnership grounded in Satya (Truth) and Rta (Cosmic Order). These verses explicitly provide that the husband does not claim authority over the wife; instead, accepts her as an equal sovereign partner, scholar and guide, and who shares equal responsibility in governing the home as well fulfilling their spiritual and moral duties (Yajna). The Veda explicitly commands that the wife enters her new home not as a subordinate, but as a Samrajni (i.e. queen or sovereign leader) of the household (Ridveda 10.85.26).
To illustrate mutual respect, shared wisdom, and spiritual parity, the Atharvaveda has recorded the solemn declaration exchanged between husband and wife as under:
Amo ‘ham asmi sā tvaṁ sāmāham asmi ṛk tvaṁ dyaur ahaṁ pṛthivī tvam tāv iha saṁ bhavāva prajāmā janayāvahai.
(Atharvaveda 14.2.71)
(I am he, you are she; I am the chant (Saman), you are the verse (Rik); I am the heavens, you are the earth. Let both of us unite here as equal partners to achieve knowledge, prosperity and a noble progeny.)
Here, the relationship to the Rik (the divine word) and Saman (the divine melody) signifies that just like a sacred chant cannot exist without the verse and tune, the human existence and spiritual well-being are incomplete without the equal, harmonious partnership of man and woman. Yet another supporting Sanskrit mantra from Rigveda signifies the complementary equality of both genders in explicitly affirming that a husband without a wife remains incomplete in the eyes of spiritual law:
Ut tvo bhavaty ūnāvayan miśraś cid agnir edhate;
Yaṁ patnyā saha somo avati.
(Rigveda 5. 61. 8)
(The man who performs sacrifices without his wife is incomplete. The sacrificial fire truly brightens and yields spiritual fruit only when the husband and wife offer oblation together as equal partners.)
Unlike the Western religious faiths that view the Divine exclusively as a patriarchal father figure, the Vedic concepts and vision clearly recognize that the Ultimate Reality (Brahman) transcends gender, manifesting equally as Male (Purusha) and Female (Prakriti/Shakti). The iconographic representation of Shiva and Parvati as a single, split entity (Ardhanarishvara) signifies that the cosmic existence is incomplete without the absolute fusion and balance of the masculine and feminine energies.
Further, Rigveda 10.125 represents the profound Vedic hymn known as the Devi Suktam, which is one of the most remarkable hymns as here the Divine speaks in the first person through the voice of a woman rishika, Vak Ambhrini. The hymn comprises of eight mantras signifying the feminine divine, and the relationship between consciousness, language and cosmic power. The hymn’s essence unfolds in a remarkable progression of in Divine Goddess sustaining the Rudras, Vasus, Adityas and other deities; wisdom and inspired speech; sovereignty and universal presence; and source and expanse of creation. The Goddess (through Rishika Vak Ambhrini) pronounces herself as sovereign power (Queen), the gatherer of treasures, and one who is thoughtful and understands in the cosmic order (Rigveda 10.125.3).
Illustrations of Vedic Rishikas/Women Scholars
In the Vedic period and for a considerable period afterwards, women were not just domestic or household companions but many of them were also spiritual leaders, scholars, ascetics and visionaries known as Rishikas and Brahmavadinis (i.e. women who pursued lifelong Vedic learning and realization). These illustrations should be sufficed to learn the status of women in Hinduism.
Gargi Vachaknavi: Among the most celebrated rishikas, she is better known for challenging Rishi Yajnavalkya in Upanishadic debate on the ultimate nature of Brahman in afamous philosophical assembly hosted by King Janaka.
Lopamudra: A revered philosopher who, along with husband Sage Agastya, authored several hymns in the Rigveda, explored nature of Atma and contributed significantly to the Shakta traditions.
Maitreyi: She was spouse of sage Yajnavalkya better known for her aversion to material riches and discourse on the nature of Atman.
Ghosha Kakshivati: The daughter of Sage Kakshivatand a Vedic scholar who wrote many Vedic hymns though married to a noble house and lived a Grihastha life.
Apala Atreyi: The daughter of Maharshi Atri and Sage Anasuya, known for her literary and spiritual pursuits, and authorship of hymns of Rigveda.
The Vedic texts explicitly affirm that young women too underwent the Upanayana (sacred thread ceremony) and initiation into Vedic education, just as young men did. Some Vedic texts refer to ancient women as Brahmavadinis and Sadyovadhus: The former category of women is those who underwent Upanayana, studied the Vedas and devoted themselves to lifelong spiritual learning; the latter category pursued education until marriage.
How Did the Shift Occur?
The aforesaid status of women continued in Vedic age and afterword for a long time. Historical analysis reveals that the status of women declined in later centuries driven by the external threats and historical pressures rather than any Vedic mandate. Recurring foreign invasions and consequent social instability and security situations became a major threat for Hindu women. The continuous waves of medieval Islamic invasions led to severe social disruption, prompting Hindu and other Indian communities like Buddhist and Jain to hide at homes, minimize or even restrict women’s mobility and outdoor activity for their physical safety that gradually hardened into rigid social taboos in many cases. The purpose of this essay is not to cast reflections on other communities and religions but, as a matter of fact, such threats are a constant reality for Hinu women even in the modern age in neighbouring countries like Pakistan and Bangladesh, and even in certain regional pockets of independent India itself.
Largely owing to the aforesaid developments in medieval contexts, later secondary Hindu texts, such as certain Smritis and regional codes, were written restricting female autonomy, literacy and outdoor exposure. What is relevant in this context as established in Hindu jurisprudence, any Smriti rule or code that vitiates or violates the egalitarian principles of the Shruti (Vedas) is legally and spiritually invalid. In modern age India, constitutional guarantees of equality (Articles 14 and 15) and landmark legislative reforms, most notably the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act of 2005, have legally restored women (daughters) as equal coparceners by birth with the same inheritance rights as sons. Furthermore, women’s active participation is evident across all spheres of contemporary society, with women increasingly assuming leadership roles in governance, higher judiciary, civil services, science and public administration.
The key takeaway of the foregoing analysis is that Sanatana Dharma does not inherently subjugate women; rather it has elevated the feminine as Shakti (the vital power of the cosmos) and historically recognized women as Vedic seers, philosophers, and equal seekers of Truth. The common misconceptions about subjugation of women in Sanatana Dharma has also been systematically deflated, setting aside the colonial era distortions and propaganda worldwide for selfish motives, by directly returning to the foundational authority of the Vedas and Upanishads. Finally, the author has also highlighted how the Vedic worldview exalts the Divine Feminine (Shakti) and historically afforded women complete intellectual and spiritual equality, as evidenced by revered female seers (Rishikas) like Gargi, Lopamudra and Maitreyi. In modern age Hindu society, in fact, women are allowed and excelling better than men several walks such as education, sports, governance, etc.
3. The Caste System in Hinduism
While it is true that the caste system in Hindu society is in vogue but, globally, many critics believe that a rigid, birth-based discriminatory caste system (Jati) and untouchability have been religiously mandated by the foundational Hindu texts. In contrast, while the modern Hindu society is painstakingly struggling to remove this anomaly through legislation and practice, the reality is that the Vedic scriptures and texts actually provided for an original, aptitude-and-occupation-based flexible Varna framework in Hindu society. Remarkably, discrimination in various forms in the human society, such as colour, creed, religion, region, social inequality (high breed, low breed), etc., exists globally in all communities of the world, at times even more vicious than the caste system, but that is not a subject of discussion here. When we examine the foundational texts of Sanatana Dharma, the stark truth clearly emerges that the modern birth-based caste system (Jati) has no sanction in the Vedic scriptures viz. Vedas and Upanishads; instead, the original framework of Varna finds a mention in scriptures which is a dynamic, fluid classification of society purely based on innate qualities (Guna) and conduct (Karma) of people.
Before endeavouring to analyse and to explain the aforesaid misconception quoting and citing from the Vedic and Upanishadic texts and traditions, the author considers the following etymological understanding is necessary. The word “Caste” is derived from the Portuguese term “casta” which means race or pure breed. This word was apparently first introduced in the 16th century by the Europeans to map their own socio-racial frameworks onto Indian society. The word Jati has Indian origin, derived from Janma (birth), which refers to birth-based communities, guilds or clans. This term does not have Vedic origin and represents much later socio-cultural development. However, the word Varna has Vedic origin, derived from the Sanskrit root vr implying “to choose” describing one’s natural inclination. This term essentially speaks for an organic and psychological typology of the human nature.
Varna in the Vedic Society
The earliest scriptural writings of the four Varnas is found in the in the famous Purusha Sukta of Rigveda, the oldest original scripture, essentially to represent the organic unity of Vedic society, instead of suggesting any discriminatory hierarchy.
Brāhmaṇo’sya mukham āsīd, bāhū rājanyaḥ kṛtaḥ;
Ūrū tad asya yad vaiśyaḥ, padbhyāṃ śūdro ajāyata.
Rigveda (10.90.12),
(The Brahmana was His (the Cosmic Being’s) mouth, the Rajanya (Kshatriya) became His arms, the Vaishya His thighs, and from His feet the Shudra was born.)
The verse describes the four varnas as Brahmaṇa, Kshatriya, Vaisya and Sudra representing the different parts of the cosmic being. This essentially speaks for the unity and mutual interdependence of the human body functioning as an integrated whole as the mouth, arms, thighs and feet perform different functions, yet everyone is important contributing towards the overall healthy functioning of the body. In the same manner, the verse should be interpreted as depicting a society as an interconnected whole in which knowledge, protection, economic activity and labour contribute to its collective evolution, sustenance and well-being. The verse explains varnas as various parts of the cosmic being but it does not say as if one (say Brahmana) is superior or the other (Sudra) inferior. However, some of the later social and religious smritis and codes have attempted this symbolism to justify the social hierarchy.
In Srimad Bhagavad Gita, ShreeKrishna states:
Chātur-varṇyaṁ mayā sṛṣṭaṁ guṇa-karma-vibhāgaśaḥ;
Tasya kartāram api māṁ viddhy akartāram avyayam.
(BG, Chapter 4, Verse 13)
{I created the fourfold order of society according to the division of gunas (qualities) and karma (actions). Although I am its creator, know Me to be the non-doer, eternal and immutable.}
It would apt to go by Adi Shankaracharya’s commentary on this verse about fourfold order based on gunas and karma. Of the three Gunas, Sattva represents clarity, harmony, knowledge and tranquillity; Rajas represents activity, passion, ambition and dynamism; and Tamas symbolizes inertia, obscurity and resistance to activity. Based on these qualities and actions, four orders were explained by him as under:
- Brahmana – where Sattva predominates with serenity, self-restraint, austerity and other associated qualities.
- Kshatriya – where Rajas predominates in association of Sattva, displaying valour, courage, fortitude and leadership
- Vaishya – where Rajas predominates with Tamas in subordination, suitable for agriculture and related economic activities
- Shudra – where Tamas predominates with Rajas subordinate to it, combination suitable service-oriented activities.
Shankaracharya’s commentary here explains the relationship between qualities, duties/actions and the four Varnas; it does not, by itself, addresses questions concerning hereditary caste or the historical development of the caste system. However, the human body perspective viz. the feet are as indispensable to its functioning as the brain; this indeed provides a thought-provoking analogy and reflection that the importance of one Varna does not eliminate the utility of another in the context of social interdependence. The original Purusha Sukta of Rigveda and subsequent scriptural writings highlight social structure, function and mutual interdependence but none explicitly establishes a birth-based system in the Vedic society. In contrast, the Western scholars and commentators often misinterpret this as a vertical hierarchy of oppression (qualifying the head superior to the feet).
Before coming to the practice of caste system, the author would also like to quote instances and the Upanishadic perspective of the interplay of Guna and Karma vis-à-vis Birth. The Upanishads present several instances of birth-based privilege asserting that true standing is determined by character, truthfulness and spiritual realization by the person. For illustration, the Chandogya Upanishad narrates story of a young boy Satyakam and his mother Jabala (Chandogya Upanishad 4.4) wherein Satyakam approaches Sage Gautam for the study of Vedas and when asked about his lineage, he candidly reveals that his mother Jabala is unaware of his father and gotra as she worked as maid-servant in several households in her youth. To his truthfulness, disregarding his lineage, Sage Gautam declared that no non-Brahmana could speak so candidly such an unvarnished truth; hence he was a Brahmana, and admitted him in his Gurukula for Vedic study. The ultimate Upanishadic conclusion (Vajrasuchika Upanishad) is that a Brahmana is defined solely by self-realization and birth plays no role in it.
The episode of Satyakam is not an isolated case which the author has cited for the sake of brevity; however, one would find such many examples in ancient Hindu texts. Some of such illustrations could be observed from Part III of this series exclusively devoted to Varna System and Vegetarianism in Hinduism. What it suggests is that for the higher studies (Vedas), some kind of eligibility test was mandatory for an entry to Gurukula which was met by Satyakam, and this is prevalent world over in modern age too for the studies demanding higher knowledge and skill. Western commentators may single out Hinduism but a hierarchical society exists everywhere in world even today on various criteria and parameters mentioned earlier. Now the question arises how to distinguish Varna from caste system, and at what stage so complex caste system became prevalent overshadowing the Vedic Varna tradition. In author’s opinion, Varna was more of an innate psychological profile (say akin to modern career-aptitude testing) while Caste (Jati) is a socio-historical structure, economics too playing a role, that became rigid and dictating over time due to later prevailing social, political, and historical factors.
While it is pretty clear that the Varna System of the Vedic India and the Caste System have originated and evolved in different time capsules despite commonalities; off course, as any specific timeline is not available, a possibility that the prevalent Caste System may perhaps be a distortion of the Varna system, cannot be entirely ruled out. However, when and how hundreds of castes and sub-castes evolved in the Indian subcontinent is still not very clear. Apparently, the social stratification in Hindu society began with the Varna system, which was fundamentally functional and fluid rather than being rigid or birth-based. The society was organized into four broad vocational categories viz. Brahmins or Brahmanas (scholars and priests), Kshatriyas (rulers and warriors), Vaishyas (agriculturists, traders, and artisans), and Shudras (labourers and other service providers) which was based on innate qualities and aptitude of individuals, and their professional role and contribution. In this early framework, social roles were permeable and inter-changeable, and an individual’s status was determined by their actions and capabilities rather than lineage.
Over centuries, this more or less flexible occupational classification gradually transformed into more complex and stratified Jati (caste) system, mostly driven by complex socio-economic, political and demographic shifts during the later Vedic and post-Vedic periods. As agrarian communities expanded, trade guilds consolidated, and diverse indigenous tribes and occupational groups were integrated into the broader civilizational fold, the then contemporary society fractured into numerous localized, endogamous sub-groups (Jatis). To preserve economic monopolies, vocational skill sets, and communal stability in an increasingly complex society, these occupational groupings began enforcing strict rules regarding coalition and marriage within the group (endogamy), dining custom and intimate social interaction. Later, this functional division was further codified by the socio-legal texts, such as Manusmriti, which over time increasingly linked social duty (dharma) to inherited birth rather than personal merit. This transition was apparently further solidified during medieval and pre-modern periods, where political instability and feudal land-grant systems reinforced hereditary privileges, ritual purity laws and social hierarchies leading to a rigid and hereditary caste system.
After Independence in modern India, the Constitution prohibited caste-based discrimination under Article 15, rejected untouchability under Article 17, and enabled several positive measures for historically disadvantaged communities, including reservation for such communities relaxing merit criteria in jobs and educational institutions. With passage of time, the social interaction and convergence among different groups is more relaxed now in so far as occupation, working, dining and sharing leisure time together is concerned. Besides, the recent trend shows that many educated and well-to-do families are more relaxed and receptive to unrestrained social interaction and inter-caste marriages. Government too is encouraging and incentivising such marriages among the different communities. The flip side of such protection and reservation is misuse thereof by such pressure groups and communities, thereby creating creamy layers within. From the standpoint of Sanatana Dharma’s ethical and philosophical concepts, no person’s dignity should be determined by birth, and no occupation or community should be used to deny another human being equal respect.
4. Sannyasa (Renunciation) demolishes Social Responsibility and Family Life
This is yet another common social and cultural misconception nurtured by largely materialistic Western world that by promoting Sannyasa and Vairagya (detachment), Sanatana Dharma encourages people to escape their duties and responsibilities towards families, civic duties and society at large. The usual widespread perception among many of them is that Sanatana Dharma demands extreme asceticism, self-mortification, or even total abandonment of worldly life. They treat Sannyasa and asceticism in Hinduism as rejection of life, worldly responsibilities, or material existence. A majority of Western people and in other parts of world too fail to realize that Sannyasa and Vairagya are not necessarily an escape from life but a conscious renunciation of attachment, ego and possessiveness at certain stage of materialistic life. The image of a hermit/sannyasi meditating in the Himalayas may appear iconic to some but, on the contrary, the scriptural framework of Sanatana Dharma is remarkably balanced, joyful and life-affirming.
In reality, Sanatana Dharma had created Ashrama System and Purushartha for a balanced four-stage life to enjoy and attain goals of life. In the overall life-cycle, renunciation through Sannyasa and Vairagya is ordinarily provided for a specific life phase or as an exception for some people with rare, genuine inner consciousness for it in early life. The Hindu way of life recognises multiple legitimate paths, that inter alia include a fairly long, distinct phase of the life of a householder who enjoys worldly pleasures while fulfilling familial and social duties, as well the path of renunciation pursued by those seeking spiritual liberation. Even distinguished Western thinkers and philosophers like J. Robert Oppenheimer, Aldous Huxley, HD Thoreau, and many more, have recognized that the Hindu scripture Bhagavad Gita teaches a balance approach towards life with an enduring message of equanimity, selfless action and transcendence of the ego leading to a path towards inner freedom and ultimate liberation.
Ancient Hindu Vedic philosophy did not view the physical or material world and living life a sinful or pernicious trap necessitating escape, but a worthwhile experience designed for a purposeful living. Accordingly, it provided a four stages Ashrama Dharma or System to live purposefully with Purushartha as four defined goals of human life, which have been explained at length in Part IV of this series. Briefly, to recapitulate it, the four stages of life (Ashrama System) are Brahmacharya, Grihastha, Vanaprastha and Sannyasa (Sanyasa); and four goals or aims of life are Dharma, Artha, Kama and Moksha.
Ashrama System
Ancient Vedic society divided human lifespan into four progressive and distinct stages (Ashramas) for a purposeful living without imposing or forcing renunciation for anyone at all times:
- Brahmacharya, a student phase, dedicated on right education, character building and skill acquisition as per pupil’s aptitude.
- Grihastha (Householder) phase, as the most important period in life span, earns wealth (Artha), enjoys worldly pleasures (Kama), and supports all other three stages (i.e. students, retirees and sannyasis).
- Vanaprastha, Retirement/Reflection phase, for gradual transition towards quiet contemplation, passing on wisdom to others, and initiation to detached life.
- Sannyasa, the last and ultimate stage of life when the person is expected to renounce worldly pleasures and possessions, focusing on Self-realization (liberation or Moksha). At this stage, he, if so chooses, may live like an ascetic or mendicant too.
Purushartha
Conjoined with Ashramas, scriptures also set four goals of human life collectively known as Purushartha viz. Dharma, Artha, Kama and Moksha.
- Dharma represented duties and actions, ethics and moral order.
- Artha symbolized wealth, material prosperity and economic security; suggesting an active pursuit of material prosperity, career success, and financial well-being for Grihastha life.
- Kama represented pleasure and love; recommending enjoyment of sensory pleasures, aesthetic beauty, arts, romantic love, and family life.
- Moksha, as last goal, symbolized ultimate self-realization and spiritual freedom.
Thus, contrary to misconception about Sannyasa or Vairagya, the Sanatana Dharma has a very scientific view of human life through systematic observance of the Ashrama System in tandem with Purushartha. The two together provide the most intelligible proof that Sanatana culture rejects blanket asceticism through the foundational doctrine of Purushartha, the four legitimate goals of human existence. Further, the oldest scripture Rigveda, far from asking renouncement of wealth and pleasure in favour of ascetism, actually contains numerous prayers (verses) for abundance, good health and bounty. Even Moksha has not been recommended at the expense of Artha and Kama; instead, through their ethical pursuance under the guidance of Dharma. In the Bhagavad Gita, Shree Krishna explicitly speaks against extreme ascetism (BG 17.5-6) and the Manusmriti (6.87-89) favours Grihastha (Householder) life as all other stages are dependent on it for their very survival.
Thus, contrary to aforesaid misconception, Sanatana Dharma is profoundly a life-affirming tradition that rejects extreme asceticism, body-mortification or forced renunciation. Exemplified by Upanishadic figures like King Janaka, original Vedic spirituality teaches that true renunciation (Vairagya) is an internal state of non-attachment while simultaneously fulfilling one’s worldly duties. Through the classical framework of the four Purusharthas and Ashramas, it accords a sacred legitimacy to material wealth (Artha) through right means and sensory or aesthetic enjoyment (Kama) besides ensuring that spiritual liberation (Moksha) is attempted not through the life-negation, but via balanced moral living (Dharma); that offers a holistic and harmonious blueprint for human fulfilment.
5. Vegetarianism as an Absolute Mandate
Many people in the Western countries have a notion that Hindus are strictly vegetarian, a widespread misunderstanding and oversimplification of Hindus dietary preferences. The common misconception among them about Hindus is that they are strictly vegetarian and that Hinduism, as a religion, opposes meat consumption. This misconception is further strengthened by the tendency to treat the dietary practices of certain sections and religious communities as representative of an entire civilisation. For instance, in Jain community vegetarianism is central to their culinary habits avoiding meat, fish and eggs, or even certain root vegetables like onion and garlic. Similarly, some other strict vegetarians belong to Swaminarayan Sampradaya (a Vaishnava tradition), ISKCON devotees and Bishnoi community of Rajasthan, and some others. However, these communities/traditions constitute only a small fraction of the large Indian (Hindu) population.
Global portrayal of Indians as vegetarians and essential marker of Hindu identity overlooks the country’s substantial regional and community-based diversity. Then, equally erroneous is the perception or assumption that Hindus who consume meat are essentially less religious, less spiritual or less committed to Ahimsa, ignoring the wide diversity of regional and own-culture (life style) based dietary traditions across India, such as those of Kshatriya dietary norms or Eastern and coastal traditions where fish is offered in worship and abundantly consumed. As a matter of fact, in Indian traditions, the dietary choice and spiritual followings do not always conflict or follow a uniform or mutually exclusive pattern. Only well-informed people across the globe understand this finesse, and appreciate too it well, that India’s food traditions accommodate a spectrum of beliefs and practices, and that it has one of the most diverse and healthy practices and options rather than having one single and universally binding dietary code.
As original home place of Hindus, India’s remarkably diverse food culture has been shaped by regional traditions, climatic conditions, occupation, community practices, personal preferences, as well as religious beliefs in certain cases. While vegetarianism holds an important place among many Hindus, Ahimsa (non-violence) being a core virtue, as also Jain and certain Buddhist traditions, many other Hindu communities have historically consumed meat and fish since ancient age, with non-vegetarianism remaining integral part of cuisines in several Indian regions. Even within various folds of Hinduism, their attitude towards food drastically vary according to philosophical interpretations, regional variations, customary practices and individual preferences. The concepts of Ahimsa and Sattvik Ahara (food associated with purity and mental clarity) and certain dietary restraint have influenced a large number of Indians, but they have never translated into a universal prohibition or uniform practice against meat-eating.
Therefore, the Indian (Hindu) dietary culture is certainly not a simple vegetarianism versus non-vegetarianism divide, but rather a compound expression of the country’s civilisational, cultural and regional and diversity. In the context of Ahimsa and Sattvik food, the Hindu dietary ethics promotes foods believed to promote purity, mental tranquillity and self-restraint. Consequently, many Hindus choose to avoid animal flesh altogether; among the non-vegetarians, beef is particularly a taboo and avoided by an overwhelming majority because of the cow’s pious status, and majority of them also abstain from buffalo meat, pork, or meats of other animals than goat/sheep depending upon their family, regional or religious traditions. Similarly, not all birds and fish are consumed by Hindus; unlike most other communities of world, eggs, fish and poultry are likewise avoided by strict vegetarians, including onion and garlic by some people. Nonetheless, these restrictions vary considerably, and Hinduism does not prescribe a single, universally binding code or a list of prohibited foods.
Here the Core Issue from critics and observers’ viewpoints is that they try to evaluate Hindu dietary practices through a rigid, Abrahamic-style lenses or commandment/decree model thereby assuming that a religion must either strictly forbid or universally permit a particular food item. For instance, Islam prohibits pork and birds of prey and Christianity pork (Old Testament) and Shellfish; otherwise, they have a large range of animals, birds, and sea food for consumption. Contrary to this practice, Hindus only prefer a limited varieties of animals, birds, fish, etc. for own consumption. In fact, Sanatana Dharma has traditionally operated on a principle and framework of Desha-Kala-Patra (i.e. geography, time and individual capability/role) and Guna (psychological temperament). Accordingly, the dietary recommendations and restrictions were historically tailored to their lifecycle, duty (Svadharma) and regional environment, rather than influenced or dictated by any blanket dogma. Hindu scriptures, especially the Bhagavad Gita, have categorized food based on how it affects human consciousness, rather than issuing any moral decrees.
Some major takeaways from the Hindu dietary practices are as follows. Although such figures have varied from different sources and times but according to Pew Research Centre’s 2021 survey, about 44% of Hindus and 92% of Jains were identified as vegetarian and these figures also suggest why it is important not to equate an entire community or religion with one dietary pattern based on hearsay, gut-feeling or misinformation. Among Hindus, strict vegetarianism is associated only with a few small communities/groups and certainly not as Hindu identity; vegetarianism holds a revered position within the Hindu traditions because it embodies Ahimsa, the aspirational ideal of minimizing injury or harm to living beings. Thus, vegetarianism in Sanatana Dharma is a spiritual ideal due to Ahimsa being a core virtue, but not as an absolute dogma. Dietary practices have been historically evolved and largely shaped by geography, ecology, social perceptions, and spiritual intent. Sanatana Dharma encourages followers to consciously align their food choices with their material needs and spiritual aspirations rather than imposing a universal code or dietary law.
6. Worshiping the Cow
The oversimplified claim in Western circles and some Abrahamic faiths that Hindus worship cows as a deity actually misses the socio-cultural and philosophical nuance of the cow as a symbol of maternal sustenance as well as concern for all life. In fact, in historical perspective, there are many recorded instances of Western writers/commentators and Christian missionaries (from the colonial era criticising idol worship and Hindu reverence for the cow. While some critics portrayed cow reverence as idolatry or superstition, many others approached it through the lens of their own religious doctrines, dietary customs or colonial bent up of mind. There are many well-known instances of documented criticism and missionary polemics, including deliberate mockery about Hindu culture and traditions, and their reverence to cow. However, author considers it not necessary to cite or quote many of them; albeit, an American missionary and author John P. Jones’s book India’s Problem: Krishna or Christ (1903) may be sufficed to cite that illustrates the explicitly comparative and conversion-oriented approach of some missionaries inter alia ridiculing cow reverence.
This author has purposely decided not to cite or quote many western missionaries and commentators from past, because he believes the best approach is to expose misconceptions through historical evidence, philosophical and ideological clarity and cultural understanding rather than a counter criticism or ridicule. In a nutshell, during the colonial era, Christian missionaries and Western ideologues portrayed Hindu civilizational and cultural practices through the lens of their own theological assumptions, arbitrarily dismissing some practices as idolatry or superstition including Hindus pious consideration of the cow. Quite obviously, they evaluated Hindu traditions and rituals through a strongly evangelical Christian framework at that time. Similarly, many Islamists from within and outside have opposed the protection and reverence of cow by Hindus. This object of cultural misunderstanding or derision became a matter of belief and conviction among the minds of Westerners with the passage of time. Among many, one such misconception exists till date that Hindus worship cow as a deity.
Among ancient Hindu scriptures, the Rigveda explicitly contains verses which recommend the protection, sacredness and non-slaughter of the cow. One of the most popular verses on cow protection is quoted here.
Mātā rudrāṇāṃ duhitā vasūnāṃ svasādityānām amṛtasya nābhiḥ;
Pra nu vocaṃ cikituṣe janāya mā gām anāgām aditiṃ vadhiṣta.
(Rigveda 8.101.15)
{(She is the mother of the Rudras, the daughter of the Vasus, the sister of the Adityas, and the centre/abode of nectar (potion of immortality); I proclaim to the men of wisdom not kill the innocent cow, who is as inviolable as the boundless cosmic mother (Aditi)}
In many verses of Rigveda and Atharvaveda, the cow is addressed as Aghnya which literally translates to that which ought not to be killed or harmed. Similarly, Aditi is symbolic primordial mother and divinity; thus, harming cow is equated to disrupting cosmic harmony. Besides Aghnya and Aditi, yet another term use in the context of cow is ‘Ahi’ which means one that must not be harmed or bound in cruelty. Since beginning of human history, the Vedic people linked cow with material sustenance for its milk, curd, ghee, yajna and agricultural uses as also spiritual ecology for it being a symbol of gratitude and living manifestation of Ahimsa. The main reason for Hindus treating the cow with reverence (Gau-Mata) is following analogy in scriptures “Like a human mother sustains life of her child feeding own milk, the cow selflessly provides nutrient-rich milk (Kshir) and butter (Ghrit) to entire society, irrespective of who actually raised her.”
In the Vedic age, protection of cattle in general and cow in particular was recommended because the ancient society was agriculture based largely dependent on farming and cattle rearing. While cattle (bulls and buffaloes) were abundantly used in farming and as beasts of burden, the cow milk was recognized as rich source of complete protein diet and also used a substitute for mother’s milk. Additionally, cattle faeces were used as easy and plenty source of fertilisers and fuel. Moreover, the cow milk was an important ingredient for Indian medicine and following the death of cattle, their various body parts were used in making various articles and artefacts. These appear some of the reasons why ancient Hindus laid emphasis on protection of cattle (particularly cow) in Vedic age. Such usage and application of cattle have continued till the modern age; hence it is not surprising that many well-meaning Hindus acknowledge gratitude till date and treat the cow with reverence. I
India is among few countries which have the most comprehensively written Constitution as the supreme law establishing the legal and governmental framework, and the Article 48 of it specifically mandates the state to prohibit the slaughter of cows, calves, and other milch and draught cattle. The Supreme Court of India too in a landmark judgement on 26 October 2005 had upheld the constitutional validity of anti-cow slaughter laws enacted by the states in India. As such choice of food may be a matter of personal preference but morality and ethics is a universal practice that goes against cruelty to life, be this a man or other living beings. Accordingly, from the legal, moral & ethical, and practical reasons as well, cattle being the economic and ecological backbone of any predominantly rural society, the protection and reverence for the cow have been deeply practical and justified for its unselfish giving, motherly nurture, ecological balance and non-violence. Misconception of other civilizations, including West, is understandable because many of them often view livestock merely as material wealth and consumables.
Endnote
An endeavour to evaluate the social and cultural fabric of Sanatana Dharma through the rigid, creedal and exclusionary lens of Abrahamic theology is fundamentally a flawed approach to understand or evaluate the oldest civilization on earth on date. The Sanatana Dharma was not built on dogmatic commands, but on an eternal organic and cosmic evolution. Where foreign observers and critics perceive or see idol worship, subjection of women, rigid caste, running away from duty, food choice, or literal cow worship, the Sanatana Dharmic tradition reveals consecrated instruments of divine focus (Prana Pratishtha), female as the primary creative power and the Sacred Feminine (Shakti), flexible functional aptitudes (Varna), structured stages of ethical life (Ashrama and Purushartha), and a profound regard for all living manifestations of nature. The Hindu society and culture evolved over millennia as dynamic applications of Desha-Kala-Patra (space, time and capacity), mapped out to nurture human growth at every stage of physical and spiritual readiness rather than enforcing a static, one-size-fits-all doctrine forbidden even to raise a question or query. True understanding requires stepping outside foreign paradigms and learning others’ perspectives & practices through latter’s own indigenous, non-dualistic and life-affirming concepts and application.
74 total views, 74 views today
No Comments
Leave a comment Cancel