Sri Ramakrishna Math : The Vedanta Kesari, December 2002

'There are two interpretations of the scriptures: the literal and the real. One should accept the real meaning alone--what agrees with the words of God. There is a vast difference between the words written in a letter and the direct words of its writer. The scriptures are like the words of the letter; the words of God are direct words. I do not accept anything unless it agrees with the direct words of the Divine Mother.' --Sri Ramakrishna

'Scriptures contain mixture of sand and sugar, difficult to separate.' --Sri Ramakrishna. [So he says that a spiritual aspirant should be like an ant and take only sugar from the mixture. Of course, there are sand-dealers who will take only sand. Both are right.]

'It is said in the scriptures that water is a form of God. But some water is fit to be used for worship, some water for washing the face, and some only for washing plates or dirty linen. This last sort cannot be used for drinking or for worship. In like manner, God undoubtedly dwells in the hearts of all--holy and unholy, righteous and unrighteous; but an ordinary man should not have dealings with unholy, the wicked, the impure. He must not be intimate with them. With some of them he may exchange words, but with others he shouldn't go even that far. He should keep aloof from such people.' --Sri Ramakrishna

All religions have holy books called the scriptures. These books inspire the followers and guide them in their spiritual journey through personal and collective life. To follow these guidelines in social life we are required to set up common codes to define and regulate our conducts for the sake of promoting moral and ethical values. As a result, in course of time there appear some subsidiary books to fulfil the need. The religion of the 'Hindus' contains all the three mandatory aspects of a spiritual life: the revelation (the Shruti, reference book), the rationality (the Yukti, intellectual conviction through reasoning), and the experience (the Swânubhuti, application of the truths in life). It is the first natural development of this kind. It recorded the experiences of the realized souls for the benefit of the posterity. It rationalized our approach to the highest value in life. The codes of conduct or Smritis come in handy in respect of the third grade or aspect, viz., the experience. Scriptures or holy books which are created by holy men and deal with these social do's and don'ts come under this third grade, the Smriti. There is another notable fact about the scriptures of the Hindus. The sheer bulk of them with their varied contents are so overwhelming that one, who is a casual visitor, gets lost in the labyrinth of the injunctions. Considering the difficulties that the theoretical scholars might face later, the great patriarch Veda-Vyâsa, son of a fisherwoman, organized the whole lot of the reference books into the following three major Prasthânas (canons):

1. The Shruti Prasthâna (the revelations of the Rishis) that includes the Upanishads;

2. The Yukti Prasthâna (the logical support to the Shruti Prasthâna) or the Brahmasutras;

3. The Smriti Prasthâna (elaboration on the ethical, moral and spiritual contents of the Shrutis through popular stories etc) which includes the celebrated holy book of the 'Hindus' called the Bhagavad Gitâ.

The Vedas (Rig-veda, Sâma-veda, Yajur-veda and Atharva-veda), and the Bhagavad Gitâ (regarded as the quintessence of the Upanishads).

(i) Dharma Shâstras: Smritis (moral and ethical codes) of Manu, Yâjnavalkya, Parâsara, and others; Itihâsas--the Râmayana, and the Mahâbhârata; Purânas (they are 18 in number); Âgamas and Tantras (scriptures of the Shaivites, Vaishnavites and Shâktas); Artha Shâstras (guidelines for ruling the country); Kâma Shâstras (manual of love and pleasure).

(ii) Darshanas (philosophical schools): Brahma Sutras (Vedanta Philosophy by sage Vyâsa); Mimâmsâ Sutras (Philosophy of rites and rituals by sage Jaimini); Nyâya Sutras (Logic of sage Gautama); Vaisheshika Sutras (Philosophy of atomic Realities of sage Kanâda); Sâmkhya Sutras (Sâmkhya Philosophy of sage Kapila); and Yoga Sutras (Yoga Philosophy of sage Patanjali).

For delimiting our scope to our subject matter, we shall take up for discussion the item of Dharma Shâstras called Smritis. The speciality about the Smritis is that they all have a democratic approach to injunctions, which is why we have so many of them to refer to. The Smritis do not claim that the codes are sacrosanct and infallible. Sage Parâshara says: 'Manu-smriti was relevant in Satya Yuga. In Tretâ Yuga, the Smriti created by Gautama had relevance whereas in Dwâpara Yuga Shankha's Smriti was followed. But in Kali Yuga, it is the Parâshara-smriti that shows the way to be followed by people.' Thus new Smritis arose successively to fulfil the logical demand of changes in customs, manners etc, with the passage of time.

There are a few Upa-smritis also. They are named after their writers. Though all of the Smritis and Upa-smritis are not available now, here is a list:

Eighteen Smritis: Manu, Brihaspati, Daksha, Gautama, Yama, Angirâ, Yogishwara, Prachetâ, Shatatapâ, Parâshara, Samvarta, Sage Ushna, Shankha, Likhita, Atri, Vishnu, Yâjnavalkya and Hârita.

Upa-Smritis: Nârada, Pulaha, Garga, Pulastya, Shaunaka, Kratu, Baudhâyana, Jâtukarna, Vishwâmitra, Pitâmaha, Jâbâli, Sage Skanda, Lokâkshi, Kâshyapa, Vyâsa, Sanatkumâra, Janaka, Vyâghra, Kâtyâyana, Sage Kapinjala, Âpastamba, Kanâda, Devala, Paithinasi, Gobhila, Vashishta, Bharadwâja, and some others.

On the whole, there prevails a lot of misconception in the minds of the moderns regarding the role of Smritis in organizing our social and individual life in this nuclear age. We have purposefully quoted in the beginning of this write-up the views of Sri Ramakrishna to show that misunderstanding of the scriptural injunctions stems from dry scholarship that has no connection with the 'practice' aspect of any theory. In India, it has never been the tradition to take up philosophy (darshana) sans practices--religious, spiritual and all. It may be that the various sects here were more cautious to protect their identity from the predators; but they were not bigoted, dogmatic or fanatic, i.e., intolerant to other spiritual seekers or religions. An intellectual tradition of fanaticism, or in other words, projecting the greatness of one's own point of view by denigrating, reviling or finding fault with that of others is an aberration, imported; and the mindset of the egregious clash between science and religion is indeed borrowed.

The codification of the 'Hindu' 'personal laws' in India has been done in obedience to canonical traditions. It is a story of the late eighteenth century. William Jones translated the Manusmriti into English and later Colebrook translated the Mitâksharâ and the Dâyabhâga traditions of 'Hindu' succession laws. Thenceforth, these translations became popular and gained considerable celebrity throughout the world of reference. But the appreciable fact about this is that over the years, the Acts promulgated by modern Governments based on these Smritis have also undergone inescapable 'amendments' to suit to the changing traditions, customs and practices. This vindicates one point that we do not stand in need of referring to or recalling the moribund and obsolete codes presented in the books of Smritis to guide us in organizing our life in post-modern age.

Unfortunately, it has been a trend among the scholars, ignorant critics and opportunists for a quarter of a millennium that Hinduism is synonymous with casteism. The same hackneyed arguments are advanced to prove the existence of a black cat in a dark room where there is no cat at all. Curiously enough, the blind seeker will find it! Dr. Radhakrishnan says that there had been a gradual change in the caste system and that 'This work has ceased to be effective since the loss of political freedom by the Hindus. It was then that the Hindu society became fixed in a conservatism and left outside its pale a considerable part of the population of India, which has been the field for exploitation by the non-Hindu religions.' Indeed, Indian society is a tolerant society.

Social evils and inequalities are there everywhere in the globe. And the trend of aligning them with religious sanctions is also there in all countries. The hatred between colours, the mentality of superiority and inferiority in the same religion, etc. can also be synonymous with other religions if one has the misfortune to count faults or differences. Nowhere one can get a better version of injustice or inequality. The way to equality is not running after the mirage of a greener pasture, but claiming it here itself.

For the last more-than-one-hundred years enlightened people in overwhelming numbers have been practising the ideals of social equality bereft of any distinction of caste, colour, or creed as preached by Sri Ramakrishna, Sri Sarada Devi and Swami Vivekananda. The enormous volume of welfare activities done by the Ramakrishna Math and Mission centres and a few other NGOs for the benefit of poor people do go to them directly without any distinction and ulterior motive. They are not put under any ethical obligation of 'reciprocity'. Let us not forget that the general public and moneyed people with big hearts support these activities. As a result there has been a sharp decline in the magnitude of social inequalities in India. This much in passing.

The history of this glorious evolution has to be preserved for the sake of our lessons, readymade references. Moreover, there is a necessity of rituals, crude beliefs and all to help the journey of a not-so-evolved mind. If I choose a ritualistic approach to God which satisfies me, none should have objection to it. The primary school books should contain graphics and other formal support to do justice to the level of the beginners. Beginners are in need of tender care, cock and bull stories, and also stories of demons. Even the primary books on science may not and, considering the age of the readers, cannot discuss the whole truth about the creation etc. Neither can it delete the history of its long journey through the affirmation and validation of many theories and facts at different points of time, which proved to be untrue later. In fact, people were quite satisfied with their way of belief until a bigoted gentleman came and told them that the approach in their religion was wrong--it is called 'idolatry' etc. Let us watch how history comes back with vengeance: these bigoted saviors have now introduced ritualistic idol worship in their holy places to woo the idolaters. Is it not proof enough that we need formalities or rituals very badly? Is it not true that we take the babies in our lap, kiss them to show our love (which is abstract) to them (Even though the baby may cry due to the pricking of our beard!)? Is it not true that magic healing etc. get more and more support and sustenance in the modern cities throughout the world? Fortunately, we do not call the ancient surgeons barbarous, who used crude methods to treat the patients.

However, no one will plead in favour of continuing with the same methods even today. On the contrary, in the field of religious undertakings there seems to be none who wishes to be a beginner, and, no honest critic who is a practising spiritualist; this is the problem. Another problem is that we hold the writers of the books of codes responsible for the continuance of out-dated customs. This shows lack of guts on our part; because we are unable to disobey and deny the dictates of the communities who try to perpetuate and enforce them. Those who react in this manner, do not themselves follow the universal aspects of values; hence the confusion. By saying so we do not mean that long-standing social maladies are not there, inasmuch as we do not accept that there are no present day political oppression, economic exploitation or licentious abuse of moral and ethical norms.

At the same time, one single set of codes becomes meaningless in the context of the growing trend, particularly in the towns and cosmopolitan cities around the globe, of the inter-mingling of races in the same home and in the same neighbourhood. Hence, a Smriti is in need of addressing both local and universal, i.e., contextual aspects of living. The Vedas, which are the Primary Scriptures for the 'Hindus', do enjoin two sets of rules, special and general (like, respectively, adhvare pashum himsât, i.e., an animal sacrifice can be made in a fire-sacrifice--match it with today's 'fire' sacrifice at the frontiers by the military; and mâ himsât sarvâ bhutâni, i.e., do not injure any living being--match it with today's human rights) for this particular purpose. Smritis derive their sap from the same Vedic source and interpret it to suit contemporary disciplines and traditions in individual and community life. Considering the complexity and magnitude of the present day disorderliness, we are in need of new interpretations, additions and alterations, to the codes with more and more emphasis on the trans-cultural or universal aspects of values. As we have seen, the ancient law-givers themselves did not contradict and forbid, rather envisaged such readjustments in course of time. In this context, it will be for our benefit to remember that though the Sanskrit words like Varnâshrama, Brâhmana, Kshatriya, Vaishya, Shudra, etc. smack of some hierarchical oppression, the vices connected with the misuse of the privileges are no less manifested in the anglicized versions of these words like, social philosophers (propounding the concepts of 'economic man', 'power', 'libido' etc.), political leaders, administrators, business people, workers, etc. We say it was barbarous of the ancients to kill witches. But it is no less barbarous for us moderns to kill millions of people by one atom bomb!

As one traces back the origin of the Smritis one is pleasantly surprised to note that the authors themselves did not make the codes rigid or compulsory. They proposed some codes of conduct (for some groups of people following traditions) to be chosen from and enacted by royal decrees. Aside from this, the codes advised the kings to use their discretion in following the principles of justice that are required to be meted out to particular individuals considering all the circumstances which govern their life. For example, when two persons, a Brahmin and a Shudra, who were guilty of the same offence, were brought to the presence of Emperor Yudhisthira, the Emperor ordered a higher degree of punishment for the Brahmin because a Brahmin, albeit his knowledge of the codes of ethics and morality, committed the offence.

In the lives of practising spiritual aspirants we find that as they proceed in the path they outgrow the necessity of codes to move into a higher understanding of the goal. Sri Ramakrishna, most significantly, draws our attention to this natural phenomenon in the following words: 'Sandhyâ merges in Gâyatri and Gâyatri merges in Omkâra.' Âchârya Shankara alludes to this 'practice' aspect of religion when he writes: 'When death is approaching, memorizing the rules of grammar will not be of any use; O ignorant one, rather take the name of Govinda.' As we know, the great Âchârya vehemently protested against observance of rules that shackle the jivas. The Jivas, who are by nature ever-free, are already in sufficient torment due to the bondage in this transmigratory existence. Yet Âchârya Shankara pleaded in favour of those rules (like, daily duties or nitya karmas, obligatory duties or naimittika karmas, etc.) that help us to discipline and organize ourselves to break the fetters.

Similarly, the Smriti codes were safeguards to individual and community interests to preserve some value systems as practised by the tradition of communities at a given time. With the passage of time, with the inter-mingling of races in different parts of the world and with a demand for universal application of values, traditions are melting in a bigger pot called 'Universality'. Does it mean that we do not require orderliness in our personal life and social fabric? There is a greater demand for it now, to be sure. We are in need of a set of social and personal codes to bring about discipline in family and society to promote a peaceful life on the planet. We want to rid ourselves of the outdated and at times confusing codes of the old Smritis and revitalize those codes that have withstood the test of time and have greater relevance in today's highly complex living. Fortunately, human beings, unlike other species in the animal kingdom, can behave ethically and morally for the survival of their groups. Hence there is hope to our planning for orderliness in a symbiotic living, for organizing individuals and communities in their daily conduct and to discipline their manners and customs. It is in this context that we look into the prospects of gleaning some guidance from the pages of the ancient records of codes, the applicability of which has survived the test of time, and look at them through the paradigm of the post modern age.

It is true that there are the Universal Declarations of Human Rights by the United Nations which put a stamp of acknowledgement on the concept of our rights cutting across all barriers. It is again true that all the nations in the globe have their Constitutions, Acts and laws, to define, promulgate and safeguard the rights and duties of their peoples. But it is also true that these formal do's and don'ts have in most cases failed to bring about the required change in individuals and societies, to bring peace in the homes and in the neighbourhood. This failure may be due to the fact that the codes have been misused by persons who never practised them but used them as tools of oppression to gain selfish ends for themselves as individuals and their communities. As a result, these codes lost their underlying plan of value-orientation and became dry. Yet, there is no gainsaying the fact that most of us behave under compulsion. This validates the need for codes, laws and acts, and for selecting, electing and appointing authorities to enforce them.

A word more in support of our seemingly sweeping comments in the foregoing paragraphs. In trying to establish the benevolent aspects of ancient codes are we not over-simplifying and generalizing the implications and applications of them? Maybe. But who does not wish to do it? Science evolves on the readjustment or even rejection of well-settled theories in favour of newly discovered ones. This is a glorious truth about the word 'scientific'. Moral and ethical codes have evolved in the same way. So, ancient codes are required to undergo readjustment and, of course rejection if necessary, to evolve scientifically. Doctrines evolve because they are open to changes, but dogmas die painful death; so do the dogmatic. Let us take an example from Swami Vivekananda's argument in a different context, which is apt in this respect also: 'Truly have they said, the tree is known by its fruits. Go under every mango tree in India; pick up bushels of the worm-eaten, unripe, fallen ones from the ground, and write hundreds of the most learned volumes on each one of them--still you have not described a single mango. Pluck a luscious, full-grown, juicy one from the tree, and now you have known all that the mango is.'

With the axiom that even the most universal practices need discipline and organization for adjustment with all, we are inclined to initiate a thinking as to how we could use universal values, to refer to as our guides to follow moral and ethical norms, specially for the sake of our identity (to preserve the best things about us), and generally for our contribution to humanity (to co-operate with all).

In his introduction to The Smritis, Swami Shivanandaji of the Divine Life Society, Rishikesh, India, writes:

'It is not possible to follow some of the laws of Manu at the present time. We can follow their spirit and not the letter. Society is advancing. When it advances, it outgrows certain laws which were valid and helpful at a particular stage of its growth. Many new things which were not thought out by the old law-givers have come into existence now. It is no use insisting people to follow now those old laws which have become obsolete.

'Our present society has considerably changed. A new Smriti to suit the requirements of this age is very necessary. Another sage will place before the Hindus of our days a new suitable code of laws. Time is ripe for a new Smriti. Cordial greetings to this sage.'

In this context, let us refer to the ideas of Swami Vivekananda also. We have culled a few quotations from the works of Swamiji in the article 'Swamiji on Shruti and Smritis' at pages 5 to 7, in this Special issue. Swami Vivekananda forcefully argues in support of a new set of Smriti-codes, and most significantly, not in support of their enforcement, but their observance. At one place he tells that the rules he has been making are not to bind people but to help them go beyond rules. The contributors to this special issue have tried to follow this line of argument with all good wishes to our endeavour.