Religion: Its Influence on Indian Literature

RELIGION:
ITS INFLUENCE ON INDIAN LITERATURE

Dr. UMASHANKAR JOSHI
President, Sahitya Akademi, New Delhi

I am thankful to the Ramakrishna Mission Institute of Culture for inviting me to deliver the Foundation-Day oration on “Religion: Its Influence on Indian Literature.” I think it will be rather a talk, a sort of loud thinking on my part, on a subject, which in a manner of saying, is much “too often profaned, for me to profane it.” For is one not aware of an element of cant entering into one’s words when one just speaks about religion and fails to live up to it? Religion is, if anything, much more than belief, it is a ceaseless becoming, which should result in achieving an effortless state of being–shall I say, pure being.

I am emboldened to make a few observations on the subject assigned to me, in the time put at my disposal, by the fact of the Institute being associated with Sri Ramakrishna, a phenomenon in religious living. He lived the truth of all major religions of man in his own life, thus emphasizing not only sarvadharma-sama-bhava–that all religions are equal in the eyes of the seeker–but also what I should prefer to call sarvadharma-mamabhaava–that the seeker feels the truth in all religions to be his own. In fact, it is the life of the spirit in which all religions are grounded. So it would be helpful to use the word “religion” in the larger sense in which dharma is used. Dharma denotes not merely denominational religions but also the sense of Right–something that is the ground on which human life stands. (Dhaarayateiti dharmah.)

It is no use shying away from denominational religions, especially from the various texts they swear by, if one is to discuss the influence of religion on literature. However, the emphasis should constantly remain on how far those texts converge to the central truth of the life of the spirit and not to the dogma of individual religions.

Often the religious texts are couched in inspired language. Paul Valery, the French poet, while discussing the poetic process talked of “une ligne donnee”–one line given. The religious texts are said to be wholly “given.” They are the glory and the very bone of the language. The translations of the Holy Bible in modern European languages have contributed to their overall richness. The English language is said to be three parts Bible and one part Shakespeare. But is the holy book a work of literary art in the sense that Shakespeare’s plays are? The two experiences are different, though the word is the medium in both cases.

The Vedas abound in sublime poetic images. Even the music and the magic of word-sound is often captivating, e. g. naadonadasya–the roar of a mighty river. The literal meaning of the onomatopoeic and descriptive word nada is that which makes a sound, a roarer. Agni(Fire), the messenger of the earth to the heavens, is described in glowing images: Yuvaa kavih priyo atithir amartyo mandrajihvo rtacid rtavaa–” the youthful poet, the beloved, honey-tongued, immortal guest, the Truth-conscious Truth-finder.” But nobody wants to treat the Vedas, the Bible, and the Quran as works of literary art. They permeate a whole culture and influence the literary art also.

Culture comprises man’s economic, political, and social life, his use of language, his world of ideas and beliefs, as also the products of the activity pursued by him in response to the aesthetic propensity in him. His artistic creations are for him a source of joy, which comes nearest to the bliss of beatitude–the peak of religious experience. Our Aacaaryas (Teachers), therefore, described the aesthetic joy as brahmaasvaada-sahodara, kindred to the taste of the Absolute Reality, derived as a result of religious and spiritual pursuits. Brahmaasvaada(the taste of the Absolute Reality) may not be so easy to attain. But the aesthetic (brahmaasvaadasahodara) joy is available to even the pit class viewer of a play, and not merely to the learned critic. Even the common man, while he is involved in seeing the performance of the play, loses consciousness of the world around him, does not think of acquiring or discarding or feeling indifferent to something and becomes for that period the total dramatic context. His physical) vital and mental personality is, for the time being, just a consciousness, which, with the help of the aesthetic artefact, becomes unmixed bliss, Even he, a common worldling, for a moment, is nothing short of aalmaanandamaya–“the self consisting of bliss”–to become which a yoginor religious seeker would have to pass through a rigorous and often prolonged discipline, with this difference, of course, that while the latter would be able to remain in that state continuously, the former will again revert to his earlier worldliness as soon as he steps out of the theatre. But what is important is that he has had a taste of his real self which is Bliss, be it for a moment. This is why the aesthetic activity is so highly prized by all types of societies, even by, rather more especially by, the so-called ‘primitive’ societies. This is perhaps what prompted Matthew Arnold, an agnostic, to suggest, when religion seemed to suffer under the first onslaughts of Science in the nineteenth century, that poetry should be taking the place of religion in modern times. But poetry, i.e., the literary art or the fine arts in general, just could not do that. The aesthetic experience is akin to and gives an inkling of the experience of the beatific state, but it can go that far and no further. However, the arts have freely drawn upon religious content and seem to have thrived on that qua arts.

            Itihaasa-puraanabhyaam vedaartham upabrmhayet–“The secret of the Vedas should be elaborated with the help of legend and myth.” The two great epics of India, the Ramayana and the Mahabharata–even in the earlier core-form given by Valmiki and Vyasa respectively–were suffused with dharma-sentiment and exercised a powerful magnetism as poems. No wonder, their scope was enlarged, the latter taking on an encyclopaedic character. Both are Dharma-kaavyas, each in its own way. The Ramayana, dealing mainly with the person-to-person relationships, concentrates on poignant moments, which culminate in a spiritualized emotion. The Mahabharata scans a wider field of public affairs, that is to say of politics in a larger sense, and sheds illumination on many a possible crisis in human life. The Ramayana and the Mahabharata are examples of Dharma-kaavyas turning into Dharmasastrasand have been the source of and an influence on later literary works. They provided material to Sanskrit plays and epic poetry in Sansktit. Prakrit, and Apabhramsa. It is impossible to think of the modern Indian languages without them. Great poets of these languages have not only resung the Ramayana (e. g., Kamban in ancient Tamil, Tulasidasa in Hindi, Krittivaasa in Bengali) and the Mahabharata (e. g., Saaralaa Daasa in Oriya), but also reproduced important episodes and upaakhyaanasfrom them.

The birth of the modern Indian languages synchronized with the tidal wave of bhakti surging from the South towards the North and inundating the whole subcontinent. Some of the first great singers of these languages are saints, quite a few of whom are not only illiterate but also members of the so-called ward castes. These God-intoxicated bhakti-singers communicated the Truth of the Spirit to common people in an intimate manner in their own tongue. Rama and Krishna had, by then, come to be looked upon as incarnations. The Bhagavata, especially the Raasapancaadhyaayiiof the tenth book, helped the tradition of bridal mysticism.

The influence of religion on the literatures of modern Indian languages was propitious from another point of view also. It acted as an integrating force, overcoming with great ease the differences of language. The same Indian spirit found utterance through the Aalvaars and Naayanaars, Basavesvara and Akka Mahaadevi in the South, Jnaanesvara, Naamadeva, Tukaaraama and Raamadaasa, Narasimha Mehta, Akho, and Mirabai in the West, Kabir, Nanak, Suradasa and Tulasidasa in the North, Sankara Deva, Chandidaasa, Krittivaasa, and Saaralaa Daasa in the East.

As a matter of fact, the integration achieved by the medieval bhaktasaints was of a more comprehensive and profound nature. Although the bhakti centring round Krishna and Rama appeared to be in the forefront, there was an attempt on the part of the poets for achieving a larger synthesis. All the three main traditions–Brahmanical, Buddhistic, and Jain–found echoes in the outpourings of these poets. Worship of the Mother Goddess also found utterance in some languages. The monistic Vedanta approach was fairly popular along with that of a personal God. These two were also sought to be synthesized. As the Gujarati philosopher-poet Akho said:

Nirguna thai e sagunmaan male,
To, Akhaa, dudhamaan saakar bhale.

[“If after firmly establishing one’s self in the Absolute (nirguna), one takes to the personal God (saguna), it would be, O Akhaa, like sugar being added to milk.”]

Apart from synthesizing the various approaches of the Hindu religion, some of the medieval saints, like Kabir, successfully tried to synthesize the Hindu and Muslim approaches, especially the Vedantist and the Sufi ones, a living tradition of which is that of the Baauls singing in Bengali.

Another feature of the influence of religion on the early literature of the modern Indian languages was the almost vitriolic attack on all sham, hypocrisy and lifeless ritualism. Kabir and Akho have written unsparingly about the pseudo-religious.

With the dawn of the modern period after our coming in contact with the West, there were attempts at putting the house in order. The Indian genius for going to the root of the matter could be seen at work in first throwing up a matching movement for Reformation before the Renaissance gathered momentum. In Bengal was started the Aatmiiya Sabhaa in 1815 and Braahmo Samaj was started in Surat in 1844. In Bombay the Praarthanaa SamaaJ in 1828. In Gujarat Maanava Dharma Sabhaa was founded in 1867 and the Aarya Samaaj in 1875. While the reformers virulently attacked inhuman customs, superstition, dead rituals, and rigid dogma, the new writers, especially the new university graduates, developed a secular vein of writing. Patriotism, personal love, and social realities came to be the subject of poems, plays and novels.

Not that all pre-modern literature was devoid of secular specimens. Even the Rigvedahas the gamblers’ suukta(hymn). Much of the narrative literature, the Sanskrit renderings of Gunaadhya’s Brhatkathaain PaisaaciiPrakrit which is lost, must have been of a secular nature. Though the Jains gave the tales a religious orientation, many of them became in the hands of the medieval poets of modern Indian languages frankly secular.

But on the whole the influence on religion on Indian literature has been considerable all through the ages. The overall guiding idea seems to have been the Vedic maxim: Ekam sad vipraa bahudhaa vadanti–Truthis one, those who apprehend it call it by many names. This has contributed to the spirit of tolerance, to the absence of anything that would remind one of the European Inquisitions. The renderings of the Ramayana, and aakhyaanasfrom the Mahahharataand the Puraanas in the modern Indian languages contributed to the aesthetic and moral culture of the vast masses. Till yesterday there were ladies even in villages who knew whole aakhyaanas–narrative poems–by heart. Many of the padas–lyricsof saint poets–are still sung byrural folk. Thanks to the influence of religion on literature, India presented a rare cultural phenomenon. One might call the common people illiterate, but could not describe them as uncultured.

Religious epochs have been epochs of abundant creativity. For sometime all aspects of life seemed to be determined by religion. Even when there was an ebb in the religious movement, dharma–the sense of Right–more than anything else, seemed to give a tone to all cultural activities and can be seen in the works of Bhasa, Kalidasa and Bhavabhuti.

Two questions remain to be examined: (1) Should creative literature and all fine arts not get weaned away from religion and get completely secularized? (2) Will man’s religious aspiration itself succumb to progressive secularization?

(1) In order to illustrate the autonomy of the aesthetic experience–which, in principle, need not lean on man’s religiousness–perhaps Shakespeare’s work comes handy. Lord Kenneth Clark in his B. B. C. talks on Civilization says: “And then Shakespeare must be the first and may be the last supremely great poet to have been without a religious belief, even without the humanist’s belief in man.” Let us hear, now, what Aldous Huxley has to say in his essay “Shakespeare and Religion” written only a week before he died. He says: “Our many-faceted Shakespeare commented on religion in almost all its aspects.” Huxley adds that what the poet recorded in his plays was “a pluralistic mystery.” Quoting the very familiar words–“We are such stuff/As dreams are made on”, etc.,–he says: “Prospero is here, enunciating the doctrine of Maya” and wisely adds: “we must learn to come to reality without the enchanter’s wand and his book of the words. One must find a way of being in this world while not being of it.” And contemplating on Hotspur’s words– “And time … Must have a step,” –he says: “we are all well on the way to an existential religion of mysticism.” Macbeth is being treated as a study in religio-spiritual problem. Let us also remind ourselves that Milton had on his list of themes that of Machethalso, and maybe felt that he could not “justify the ways of God to man” better than the “Bard of Avon” with the help of this theme.

A great literary work may vary well do without denominational religion, but not without dharma, the sense of Right. And in that sense a work of art may not be completely divorced from dharma.

There are some poets for whom the search for poetry is also the search for dharma. The names of some poets immediately suggest themselves, that of Dante, not to talk of Valmiki’s and in our own days those of Rilke and Tagore. Such poets have a double commitment–to the poetic art as well as to spiritual life. Ezra pound referred to the ‘poetic piety’ in Tagore. Rabindranath’s work is enjoyable for its sheer poetic beauty as well as because of its unmistakable spiritual accent. No wonder, a hardboiled politician like Clemenceau asked an acquaintance of his on hearing the news of the outbreak of the First World War, to read to him poems from Gitanjali.

His epic novel, Gora, shows how dharma,and the saadhana(discipline) of dharma in India enter into the warp and woof of a work of art. Gora’s father recedes into a cell to protect the purity of his religion. Aanandamayi, the mother, chooses to be an outcast, and cannot but foster an orphan European child even if it meant being rejected by his much too religious husband. Pareshbabu bad left his society and become a Braahmo only to go beyond it also in the evening of his life. And Gora, a crusader for religion, finds on the day of the purification ceremony of his that he was not even an Indian, that he was just a White man and could have nothing to do with the religion here. The question that Rabindranath seems to be posing is: Has India now no meaning for Gora? The less India she. The poet suggests that the true India transcends mere Indianness.

Gorais a religious novel par excellence. It will be seen that Tagore’s vision of dharma is universal and profoundly human. For the narrowly dogmatic view he has nothing but scathing sarcasm. While inviting one and all to the Bhaarata-tirtha(holy India), he singles out the Brahmin and wants him “to come after purifying the mind.”

What is most lovable about Rabindranath is his courage to look at Truth in the face. He is not to be mistaken as a mystic of the wooly variety. In the last poem of his, dictated only eight days before his death, he, who had played with forms all through his life, addresses ‘The Guileful One’:

Tomaar sristir path rekhecha aakiirna kari
vicitra chalanaajaale,
he chalanaamayii.

“Your creation’s path you have strewn
With the net of deceits,
O Deceitful One!”

(2) Will progressive secularization swallow up the religious instinct in man? As far as literature is concerned, it will remain a humanizing force, whether it is under the influence of religion or not. However, religion itself, in its encounter with science, is if anything, getting rid of much dross. Moreover, science in recent times has also been doing some positive service to religion, The juxtaposition of, even the tension between, in Julian Huxley’s phrase, “luminous science and numinous existence” lends a new credibility to religion. As Julian Huxley points out, the more science “discovers and the more comprehension it gives us of the mechanisms of existence, the more clearly does the mystery of existence itself stand out.” So, Pierre Teilhard de Chardin was right when he suggested that religion was not something that primitive man developed in order to feel secure by believing in quasi-animal forces. It appears that it was his response to the mystery that existence is. Perhaps one can say that as the capacity to love–and love best–is independent of the stage of civilization reached, so may also be the capacity for religious experience. Modern man seems to be experiencing spiritual nightmare, caught up as he is in one or many of the present-day maladies–anxiety, uncertainty, doubt, guilt-sense, fear, alienation, meaninglessness, and existentialist anguish. Institutional religions fail to adequately help him out. One only hopes that the recent communication system is geared some day to establishing communion among fellow human beings–which may especially facilitate the various religions of man to converge into a basic faith for all–a religion of the future.

The present-day world-wide spiritual nightmare is reflected in the modernist literature in India also. It is, in a sense, no less valid a part of man’s saga of spiritual pursuit than “Inferno” is of “the Divine Comedy.”

Since science can neither adequately satisfy nor silence the obstinate questionings about the “how” and “why” of existence, it is for religion and literature to offer their answers, not spurning the light that science is in a position to shed on them at the moment.

The word, the poetic word, itself a thing of mystery, also attempts to unlock the mystery that existence is. The poetic word is born of an unswerving faith which can take doubt in the stride.

We expect literature to tell us not about the religion of the scriptures or dogma but about the dharma as visualized by the heart.

While approaching the master artist, the supreme poet, who with the power of his Pasyantii Vank–the Seeing Word–i. e., Speech born of Vision–illuminates the mystery that is at the heart of things, let our solicitation be:

Hridayenaabkvanujnaato yo dharmastam nibodhaya.

(Make us understand that dharma which has the sanctions of the heart.)

–Forty-third Foundation-Day Oration of the Ramakrishna
Mission Institute of Culture, Calcutta.