Sanatan Dharma: Antiquity, Continuity and Nomenclature

Evolution and Composite Nature of Sanatan Dharma

• Sanatan Dharma (SD) is arguably the oldest living religion on this planet.  I also think it is correct to call it Sanatan Dharma rather than Hinduism.
• In its five millennia old journey it has gone through many changes and permutations within a general framework of continuity.

In the earthly realm Sanatan Dharma has a long and ancient history and shows elements from every part of the Indian sub-continent and even beyond. Some doubts have been raised about change in practices within the religion and certain deities and aspects of SD not appearing in the Vedas.

As far as changes in practices are concerned, over the millennia religious practices have definitely evolved and changed, as they should. The urban, sophisticated IVC dwellers, the pastoral nomads who described their lives in Vedic literature and later settled down and built cities in the Later Vedic age, the merchants and city dwellers of the second wave of urbanization in about the 6th century BCE who also embraced the paths of Buddha, Mahavira, Gosala etc, a later wave of Brahmanism, the advent of the Muslims and then the Western Europeans have all had an impact on this religion. Why or how would it not? There is, however, a bed rock of continuity amid the apparent change. 

Although the Vedas are revered as the holiest books of the Hindus, there is more to Sanatan Dharma than just the Vedas. This is a seminal issue around which the understanding of the Vedas as contributors and a pivot of belief, but not sole owners of the religion, revolves.  There are pre Vedic and non- Vedic sources for much of SD that is not found or only peripherally found in the Vedas e.g. the worship of Shiva and Shakti is absent.  SD is a mélange of Vedic and non-Vedic practices. To compound issues further, the Vedas themselves, in terms of language and influence, are anything but pristine. Social, cultural and linguistic analysis throws up evidence of an assimilation of many cultural and linguistic sources.
(I would strongly recommend reading ‘Sanskriti Ke Chaar Adhyaay’ by Ramdhari Singh Dinkar whose understanding as a historian (which he studied formally) and a literary genius (which he was through his writings) is unparalleled.)

I will try to explain below the evolution of SD over the years in brief.  This is a vast and complex subject not really amenable to short cut understanding but I will try to give a basic outline.

At least the following reading would be necessary to have good understanding;
Volume 1 of B G Tilak’s commentary on the Geeta;  ‘Geeta  Rahasya’ ( pp 439 to 443))
Volume 2 of S Radhakrishnan’s  Indian Philosophy.  Especially pp 19-22 of the Introduction will give an idea of the underlying unity with reference to the religious philosophy of the different schools of thought.

The evolution of Sanatan Dharma can be traced as follows

1. The most original aspect of Vedic religion, the first step as it were, is Yagya Pradhan i.e. based on ritual sacrifice. ‘Yagyayaag’ and ‘Karma’ are the basic characteristics (This set of practices was later given the name Mimansa because Jaimini’s ‘Mimansasutras’ provided an organized exposition) .
2. Further evolution had two aspects. While engaged in ritual sacrifices the question arose as to how only practices of Yagyayaag which are outward in nature would lead to knowledge of Parmeshwar which needs an internal focus on gyaan. This reflection and deliberation on the nature of Parmeshwar and Parambrahm was done both by the Gyaan Marg, and the Sankhya Marg.
1. The Gyaan Marg is reflected in the Upanishads especially the Chandogya Upanishad and was later called Vedanta. This is Advaita in character.
2. Kapil Sankhya is Dvaita.
3. Both Vedanta and Sankhya arose as an answer to the exploring the question of the nature of Parambrahm and are opposed to just the practice of ritual sacrifice.
3. It is clear from this that both of these were not satisfied with only the Yagyayaag method of devotion and advocated something more; Gyaan. There was another issue to be dealt with at this stage, how to reconcile Karma and Gyaan? Some of the Upanishads ( Brihataaranyak ) said that the two cannot be reconciled and Karma has to be given up for attaining Gyaan which is also the stand of Sankhya. Other Upanishads ( Isopanishad) advocated that the two should move together, Karma should never be given up for Gyaan. This is the ‘Gyaankarmasammucchay’ Marg and from this later, arose the Yog and the Bhakti Margs.
4. In some of the Upanishad’s including the Chandogya, it has been said that it is necessary to meditate on Brahm to achieve knowledge of Parmeshwar or Parambrahm; for this it is necessary to achieve shanti and concentration, to focus the mind a ‘Sagun’ symbol is necessary.  The focusing of the mind developed into the Yog Marg and the Sagun symbol into the Bhakti marg.
5. The Bhakti Marg started with visualizing the Yagya and its parts as exemplified in some Upanishadic sutras. Then Vedic gods such as Vishnu, Rudra etc  were visualized. Then , using the concept of avatars as a tool of unification and assimilation of different deities and their local conceptions, Narsingh, Varaha, Ram, Krishna, Narayan etc were visualized apart from different Devi swaroops.  There is not enough space here to go into the details of this complex, complicated and multifaceted process which still goes on which is why you find new deities being added even today( witness the English Goddess of the Dalits). It is however the basis of the cultural and religious unity of the country. ( Separate note is needed on this in case anyone is interested. As an example, I could link to a little piece on Lord Krishna). To repeat and emphasize, there is a mélange of Vedic, pre-Vedic and non- Vedic practices within the religion.
6. The basic wholeness of all the different religious practices and thought are evidenced by their common source and have been understood not only in abstract philosophical terms but also by the general Hindu unconcerned with detailed philosophical fights. For instance read Sant Gyaneshwar’s wonderful Marathi  exposition of this unity right at the beginning of the Gyaneshwari which is a simple commentary for the common man on the Geeta. (Can be accessed in any copy of the Gyaneshwari; in my Hindi translation it is on Page 34). All the schools of thought are explained as parts of the divine Lord Ganesh.  The centrality of the Vedas in this scheme is that all systems are defined in relation to it, whether in agreement or negation. Whether it is Tulsidas or Kabeer or the Agamas or the Bengali Vaishnavas or the Kashmir Shaivites they can be understood within the same framework.
7. The impact of the rise of different cults from within Hinduism which achieved different levels of success, ranging from Buddhism which is growing at a healthy clip in modern times to the Ajivikas which gave the Buddhists a run for their money but finally died out in the 14th century, was felt by the parent religion. As I have mentioned above the impact of Islam and Christianity have also been felt.  This does not take away from the continuity of the religion but merely explains changes within it. ( Again a vast subject very ably dealt with by Dinkar)

I will now, as an example of antiquity, discuss the links between the IVC and SD.

IVC and the Roots of Hinduism

Is there any evidence to link elements of the remains, symbols, art, sculpture etc. of the IVC with SD? The answer is an unambiguous and resounding yes.

The IVC has been dated to the period between 5200 and 3900 to 3000 years ago. There is a wealth of archaeological evidence to analyse because of the discovery of remains of cities with a plethora of artifacts. The script has not yet been definitively deciphered which limits the extent of information which can be gathered about all its facets. However, to compensate for that there is a cornucopia of other information from the physical archaeological ruins left behind.  This indicates very strongly that the religion/culture followed here was, at the very least, proto-Hinduism.

Consider the following

• The seals and emblems found which point to a Shiva like deity, a proto Shiva as he is called.  (See for example analyses of Seal Nos 420, 222, and 235 found at Mohenjo-Daro)
• The cult of Shakti or the Mother Goddess again found in the seals and symbols
• Religious symbols revered by the Hindus to this day such as the Pipal  ( both the leaf and the tree used as motifs, the conch shell, the Ksheer Sagar,  etc.)
• Small conical objects interpreted a proto shiv lingas
• Aspects of art forms; especially the so called animal style which bears a striking resemblance to and appeared on Ashokan pillars millennia later.
• The Great Bath as the precursor of the bathing tanks of Hindu temples.  The modern ‘Ghat’ echoes the steps of the Great Bath.
• The roots of Yoga have also been traced to the IVC.  (Yan Y. Dhyansky, Artibus Asiae, Vol. 48, No. 1/2 (1987), pp. 89-108)

A couple of quotes:

‘It is useful to distinguish hindsight from fast-forwarding. Hindsight often misreads an earlier phenomenon by assuming that it meant then the same thing that it meant later….But at times the atavism, the modern traces of ancient phenomena are so striking that it would be perverse to ignore them…For the resemblance between some aspects of the IVC and later Hinduism are simply too stunning to ignore.’ (‘The Hindus’ by Wendy Doniger pp 82-83) (emphasis mine)
‘The  other significant conclusion which  arises from the  above  discussion is  the presence of overwhelming evidence of  the  continuity of  Indian culture and religion from the  days of  Mohenjo-Daro to  the  present’ (Yan Y. Dhyansky, as cited above)

In actual fact pick up works by any historian who writes on Ancient India and you will find these facts which I am dealing with briefly because of their very ubiquity. You can profitably read about this for instance in DD Kosambi’s ‘The Culture and Civilisation of Ancient India in Historical Outline’ . The collection of his articles published in 2002; D.D. Kosambi: Combined Methods in Indology and Other Writings - Compiled, edited and introduced by Brajadulal Chattopadhyaya (Oxford University Press, New Delhi) has a number of references to the IVC and the web of connections between later Hinduism and the IVC.  Romila Thapar’s ‘Early India’, D N Jha’s ‘Ancient India ‘…indeed any historian on ancient India will provide the same insights. Others I may mention are John Marshall and  Asko Parpola. For a viewpoint from the religious history angle Wendy Doniger’s ‘The Hindus’ is useful. This is merely an indicative and not exhaustive list of books and authors.

In passing I may mention that those who claim to have deciphered the script such as Parpola are even more certain of the roots of Hinduism lying here.

The Question of Nomenclature

This is a vexed and much debated issue. I should make clear that I lean towards calling it Sanatan Dharma for the reasons I shall explain below but in terms of reality I think we are stuck with ‘Hindu’ whatever it may mean to different people.

The Bhagwat Geeta which is often scornfully called a book full of contradictions from which anyone can derive sanction for anything is, in my view, a great example of the Indian genius for synthesis and reconciliation of the otherwise irreconcilable so as to maintain harmony in society and give each view its due. It is a good place to look for much of Hindu concepts (although of course there are major absences such as the Shakta and the Tantra tradition.).

Chapter 4 of the Bhagwat Geeta ( Verse 1-3) describes the timelessness and hoary antiquity of this religion which appears in this world and disappears again to be re-established in each ‘kalpa’.( 4 yugas make a mahayuga and a thousand mahayugas make one day of brahma i.e. one ‘kalpa’ of earthly beings, Ch 8 verse 17.)

Brahma’s day gives birth to creation and all its manifestations which then merge into the formless (avyakt) at the end of the day, i.e. the night of Brahma. (Chapter 8, Verse 18)

At the beginning of another day of brahma when all is created afresh knowledge of dharma is given again to mortals.

The knowledge of this religion is therefore timeless, emerges and merges with the creation and destruction of srishti.  That is why ‘Sanatan’.

Chapter 7 Verse 10 of the Bhagwat Geeta also uses the word Sanatan in describing Parmeshwar; he is the ‘Sanatan Beej’ of everything.

Given the religious philosophy and explication of this religion I therefore feel that it would be correct for believers to call it Sanatan Dharma. (Those who do not believe in it will obviously reject the formulation of time, creation and destruction in the Geeta but then it is hardly logical or likely that non-believers should decide what to call any set of practices.)

Dharma coming from ‘dhri’ i.e. to uphold, SD is the eternal upholder of the world.

This is as far as my beliefs go. However, it will be impossible to fully change the nomenclature and people like me have to often reluctantly fall in line and use the word Hindu. This has been in use since the time of the Avesta to denote the inhabitants of the area around the Sindhu river and also has been mentioned in the inscriptions of the Persian Emperor Darius ( 550-486 BCE). It also has, however, a religious connotation and sometimes a pejorative one as used by Muslims for the inhabitants of India. The name will be very difficult to change but there is a trend towards using Sanatan Dharma.