Editorial
Ganga, the Root of All Joy and Auspiciousness
Goswami Tulsidas ji expressed these sentiments for the holy river Ganga Maiya in the Ayodhya Kand of Shri Ramcharitmanas:
Ganga sakal mud mangal mula. Sab sukh karani harani sab mula.
Meaning, Ganga is the root of all joy and auspiciousness. She is the bestower of all happiness and the remover of all sorrows. In the Anushasana Parva of the Mahabharata, it is said that just as nectar satisfies the gods, svadha (sacrificial offering) satisfies the ancestors, and sudha satisfies the Nagas, similarly, the water of the Ganga satisfies humans.
Yatha suranamamritam pitrinam cha yatha svadha. Sudha yatha cha naganam tatha gangajala nrinam.
On June 21, 1954, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru wrote in his will: The Ganga has been a symbol of India's ancient civilization, a sign, always strong, always flowing, still the same Ganga.
Overwhelmed by the cultural beliefs of India, the Muslim poet Abdurrahim Khan-khana, in the invocation of his book 'Dohavali', praises Ganga Maiya, writing that O all-powerful Mother Ganga! You flow from the feet of Vishnu, and Lord Shiva has worn you on his head like a garland of jasmine. Don't make me Vishnu, make me Shiva so that I can wear you on my head—
Achyut charan tarangini Shiv sir malati mal. Hari na banayo sursari keejau indavabhal.
Ganga is the continuous sacred flow of India's folk life and national cultural values. It holds the unbroken faith of the people of India. May Ganga be free from pollution. The purity of the Ganga is the aspiration of the masses. It is fully believed that the leadership endowed with Indian values will surely succeed in making the eternally benevolent Ganga's uninterrupted, pure stream flow, through its committed activism towards cleaning the Ganga.
Religion and Society
Pt. Chandradhar Sharma Guleri
Is religion necessary for society or not? The purpose of this article today is to express some of my views on this question. This question has arisen from the conflict between the ancient and the modern, or the East and the West. Eastern civilization has always been a proponent of religion and has given it the highest place in society. Western civilization, at this time, may not be its opponent, but it is certainly indifferent to it and, at least for the progress of society, does not consider it necessary. In its opinion, man can achieve his personal and social progress with the help of moral strength even without relying on religion.
Although the West was once as devout a follower of religion as India is today. But in the Middle Ages, there was great turmoil there for many centuries due to religion. Intoxicated with religious fervor, the great scholars and reformers of society were treated in a way that robbers would treat wealthy people. The religious war in Europe, which lasted for 50 years, is well-known. Let alone the treatment Islam gave to Christians, because that was a different religion. The two branches of Christianity itself, Catholic and Protestant, committed such atrocities and inhuman behaviors against each other that the history of Europe still sheds tears of blood over them. Therefore, if in this age of civilization and progress, the people of the West do not have the same faith in religion as their ancestors had, it is for a reason. Although their religion has been considerably reformed compared to before, and with the progress of education, in which Europe and America have taken the most part, the amount of tolerance, freedom, and liberalism in their religion has also increased. Nevertheless, the bitter fruits they had to taste as a result of religious fanaticism forced them to define the limits of religion, and accordingly, they freed their society from the absolute authority of religion. Now, not only can religion not interfere in the governing power of society, but it also cannot intervene in individual freedom and social management, and like many other things, religion is also considered a personal matter. Anyone can follow any religion they want, or not. Following a religion does not create any special rights, nor does not following it cause any harm.
Indian Cultural Nationalism
Acharya Vishnukant Shastri
According to most Western scholars, nationalism is a political doctrine that considers the nation as the primary unit of political organization and whose main goal is to form an independent nation-state based on a specific national community. It is clear from the history of the last two centuries that the followers of this doctrine oppose the rule of other countries in their own country, but soon, due to their political ambitions, they often adopt the guise of imperialism. Can this belief be applied to India? In my opinion, it cannot be done, because in our traditional national thinking, the role of politics is secondary; the primary role is of 'Dharma' or 'Sanskriti' (culture) used in a broader sense. Therefore, its culmination is not in violent aggression but in liberal, tolerant globalism.
After being a prisoner under trial for a year on charges of revolution against the British government, when Aurobindo was released from jail, he said in his famous speech at Uttarpara, 'Our Sanatana Dharma is our nationality. When Sanatana Dharma declines, this nation declines, and if the destruction of Sanatana Dharma were possible, then this nation would also be destroyed along with it.' Here it seems necessary to clarify that Sanatana Dharma means a religion that is eternal yet ever-new, remaining unchanged in its essence, yet capable of assuming new forms according to the needs of the times.
The fundamental difference between form and essence should be understood. Form is external, so it can be changed, but essence is internal, it cannot be changed. When it changes, the object itself changes. A mimic can change his form ten times a day, but he cannot change his essence. This has been explained very well through the definition of Bhakti in the Naradiya Bhakti Sutra. Giving the characteristics of Bhakti, it is said, 'Sā tv asmin paramapremarūpā amṛtasvarūpā ca.' That Bhakti is indeed in the form of supreme love for God. If the formal characteristic of Bhakti were only supreme love, the identification of Bhakti would not be complete because supreme love can also exist between husband and wife or others. That is why, to make the identification of Bhakti free from confusion, it was added that it is of the nature of immortality. Bhakti is dedicated to immortality, is immortal itself, and is also capable of bestowing immortality upon its devotees. Devotion to God has the form of supreme love and the essence of immortality.
