Roots of Aryan Religion

The Aryans invaded India around 2000 BC. Historians tell us that just prior to this, the people in Harappa seemed to have been in fear of an invasion from the west. Why do they make this assumption? There was a wall surrounding Harappawhich was 35 – 40 feet thick at the base and was 35 feet tall. There were two gates. Close to the year 2000, they closed up one of the gates.

At Mohenjodaro, there were many big rooms which were divided into smaller rooms. Certain industries which were outside of the city moved within the city walls. They started to disregard city planning. They all knew there was danger from the Aryans. The Aryans had first attackedBaluchistan. The refugees were coming down intoIndiawhere they buries their gold and jewelry to protect it.

The enemy were horse riding soldiers. They had better weapons than the local people and wreaked havoc. They destroyed the advanced cultures of the ancient countries. The Aryans warpath ended with the destruction of Babalonia in 1000 BCE. Sir John Marshall believes that the invasion of theIndusvalley happened over a period of 200 years.

The invaders came throughPersiaandSyria, but they were spread through out Central Asia, all the way back toPoland. The group that came fromSyriawere called the Mitāni people. They came from northeastSyria. When the invasion came, the people ofHarappawere flood stricken and thus unable to resist.

The Mitāni had their gods called Indra, Urvin, Mitera and Nasatiya. In the holy book of the Aryans, the Rig Veda, the war between the Aryans and the indigenous people is described indirectly. Indra, the war god, fought against the Dasyus. The Dasyus probably represented theIndusValleypeople. The Dasyus were described as being black and flat nosed. Some historians say that this cannot describe theIndusValleypeople. However, if the description is correct, then those people were Dravidians.

In the Rig Veda, there is a term “purubhid” used to glorify Indra, the war god. “Puru” refers to “castle”; “bhid” means to “destroy’. This could mean the great walled cities of theIndusValley. There was another term for Indra called, “Jalasata” or, “he who gave freedom to water”. The IV people had built water reservoirs. They were cultivating farmers. The Aryans were hunter- gatherers. The Aryans destroyed the reservoirs in order to free the water from “captivity”.

A third term for Indra was “Vajasata” meaning, “freer of the animals”. The IV people had domesticated animals. The Aryan people thought this was terrible and chased the animals back to the wild.

The Aryans performed sacrifices or “yajvan”. They called the IV people “ayajvan,” or non-sacrificing people. The Aryans looked down upon the IV people for not speaking their language. They called both the group of Aryans left behind inSyriaand the IV people, “asuras” meaning, “non-human”. They called themselves the suras or sacred humans.

After the invasion, the Aryans settled down into villages. They were very simple people with two classes to their society. They were illiterate. When a less civilized group invades and suppresses a more civilized people, even though authority flows from invader to invaded, the culture flows the reverse way. The uncivilized Aryans started to learn from the IV people and eventually there was ethnic mixing.

Even though the Dasyus were black in color, there were intermarriages. The children of black and white parents came out dark. There were even special pujas to give birth to a black child. These were to hide the misdeeds of some married women. They would go to the Brahman to have the puja done. If the child came out black, they could say that the gods have blessed them.

Indus Valley Civilization

Samana-Brahman is the term used by the Buddha to refer to all other philosophical / religious systems. It is a compound term of the two main philosophies of the time. Buddhism took from both systems. At the time of the Buddha there were many philosophies.

Aryans were the white invaders who came from Syria and before that Poland. Prior to the invasion of the Aryans, the Indus civilization lived in the Indus Valley. Many scholars believe that the seeds of Buddhism are to be found in the Indus Valleycivilization, the pre-Vedic people, and not from Brahmanism. The Samanic beliefs, practices, etc. were more ancient than the Vedic.

Aryans are not the Bhumiputra (aboriginals) of India. Archaeological finds show an advanced civilization living in theIndusValley. Noted places are Mahenjodaro (next to the Indus River), Harappa (next to the Ravi River), Kalibangan (near the Sarasvati River) and Rupar (on the upper bank of theSutledgeRiver).

The civilization was spread over an area more than 1000 square kilometers. Yet, there were astounding similarities among the settlements. Even the sizes of the bricks were uniform. There were also a few places outside of India (ex.Baluchistan) that shared similar characteristics. These places were also destroyed by the Aryans.

The time of period of the destruction of the Indus Valley civilization was 2800 – 1800 BC.

The IV (Indus Valley) people had well developed cities with an outer wall and 30 foot wide roads. All of the houses were made of bricks and houses had at least two rooms each. Many houses had bathrooms. There was a municipal drainage system.

In Mahenjodaro, there is a pool 29 x 27 feet made of bricks with a tar sealant. There was the facility to drain and refill the pool. Anthropologists think that they may have practiced some kind of water purification rituals or religion.

The cities had granaries where they kept wheat, barley, mustard and so forth. There was no evidence of rice cultivation, but there was kapok (tree cotton) cultivation. There were domesticated animals: cows, buffalo, goats, lambs, pigs, donkeys, dogs and chickens.

There was national and international trade. Mahenjodaro traded with Mesopotamia and Babylonia. In Total, there is evidence of trade by ships.

They had an alphabet of 270 letters, which has not yet been deciphered. It was attempted unsuccessfully by Paranawithana. There are no books, or literature found.

The people had fine clothes and ornaments such as bangles, necklaces, etc. Looking at the figurines left, both males and females had long hair and hair ornaments.

They had toys for their children: small carts, small whistles shaped like birds, toys with moving parts and clay monkeys which could move up and down a string.

They had various precious stones and knew their value. They used color to decorate common objects.

In such a materially advanced civilization, naturally there is religion. There seemed to be a sophisticated religious system. However, there are no texts left which tell the details of the belief system.

Sir Mortimer Wheeler, who spearheaded the excavations, said that what remains is enough for us to surmise that they had a sophisticated religious culture which they passed down as an inheritance.

Archaeologists feel that the civilization at Mohenjodaro was not sophisticated in philosophy, but also not primitive. They had both State / great religion and folk /small religion. These could also be seen as religions and magic. These sowed the seeds for later development in Indian culture.

Sir Mortimer Wheeler say, “Even though they weren’t able to pass down their material advancements, they were successful at passing down their metaphysical thinking to the future generations.”

Buddhist theory of Kamma

Mind is the master; change the mind and change the world.

All Indian religions have a view of karma. It is a fundamental belief. Buddhism has its specific view of karma. Common to all the traditions in their idea of karma is the following:
Karma is actions, divided into good and bad, each having results in proportion to their intensity. Karma determines the quality of life in rebirth.

Karma + rebirth = samsāra (sam – all + sru – around, wandering)

Samsara is an individual experience and process. It is not an objectively existent place. After enlightenment, the Buddha first uttered: “I can see that I have been running around life after life…”

In the first meeting with Angulimala, Angulimala told the Buddha not to run. The Buddha told him, “I am not running, it is you who need to stop.”

Did the Buddha accept pre-Buddhist ideas of karma or did he expound something different? He accepted the ideas in general but made some subtle but important distinctions.

Karma = action / behavior / doing

1. ethical viewpoint
“kammassa komhi…” (Dasadhamma Sutta)
“My karma is my own; good or bad, I will inherit that…”
2. human behavioral viewpoint
“kammanā vasalo hoti…” (Vasala Sutta)
“It is through karma, not birth, that one becomes high caste or low caste.”

In the Hindu view, one’s identity is unchangeable. In the Buddha’s view, there is no permanent identity. This is the difference between atma and anatma.

In Buddhism though, there are many different theories as to the mechanism by which karma is connected to the results in future lives. If one has an atma, it is easy to explain, but within the theory of anatma, it becomes difficult. Does someone else get the result? Does the same person get the result? Both have implications within the theory of anatma.

(See karma entry in the Buddhist Encyclopedia)

“Monks, I say that karma is cetana.” (AN)

With most gross actions, our intention is very clear to us. In more complex or subtle situations, it can be difficult to determine. However, to merely have an intention but not to act upon it doesn’t constitute a full karma. Likewise, without intention, an action alone doesn’t constitute a full karma. Therefore, karma is really intentional action.

The Jainis view is that everything in this life is due to past karma. “Sabbam pubbekatahetu vāda.” The Buddha rejected this view. So if everything is not due to past life karma, then what is the dividing line? What comes from past karma and what doesn’t?

Karma

In order for a physical karma to be a karma, there must also be intention. Opposite, by intention alone, one cannot commit a physical karma.

The connection of verbal, physical and mental karma with cetana is very important and very controversial area of debate.

Anger, jealousy, and so forth happen in the mind. They can lead to action, they can harm one’s self or they can fester within one’s mind like a cancer. Karma has both internal and external effects. To explain all of this and it’s connection to vipaka (retribution) is very difficult.

J.L. Austin wrote what was called a new philosophy of language. It was not actually new. These things were being discussed during the Buddha’s time. When a priest says, “I now pronounce you man and wife,” he has said something, and on top of that something has happened. It had some effect. The Buddha talked about the cause and effect of actions of body, speech and mind.

Actions can be kusala / akusala, puñña / pāpa.
Kusala / akusala are the two fundamental modes of motivation of behavior.
Puñña / pāpa are actions performed consciously which can make samsara a happy or unhappy journey.

Kusala actions are motivated by alobha, adosa and amoha.
Akusala actions are motivated by lobha (attachment), dosa ( ), moha ( ), and rāga (intense attachment or desire)
Puñña are meritorious deeds and pāpa are unmeritorious deeds.

These two sets of concepts were originally quite distinct. During the time of writing the commentaries however, a/kusala were used to imply puñña / pāpa but not visa versa. All kusala actions are puñña but not all puñña actions are kusala.

One basic distinction is that puñña actions are done with the motivation of obtaining sensual comfort. Kusala actions are done with the motivation of liberation. Puñña can be done with greed as a motivation. Puñña makes for a nice prison experience and pāpa makes a bad one. Both puñña and pāpa prolong samsara. Akusala actions also prolong samsara. Only kusala actions lessen samsara.

Of the arhats, the Buddha said, “Puñña pāpa pahīna.” They have given up puñña and pāpa.

Karma Vipāka

Personally, cetana is the most important aspect of karma. Socially, one’s actions are more important. For vinaya, both one’s actions and intentions must be taken into consideration.

The four kinds of karma:
1. Janaka – generative
Karma which creates new situations, in particular a new life. This kind are usually very powerful.
2. Upatthambaka – supportive
These are factors which support a movement either good or bad; ie. When one thing goes wrong, everything goes wrong; when things are going well everything seems to support this trend.
3. Upapīdaka – obstructive
Either the good karmic force can obstruct something bad or visa versa.
4. Upaghātaka – destructive
Certain karma can totally destroy a person’s situation. This can be positive or negative.

Some Theravada traditions say that the Buddha was above karma and others say that he was still affected by past karma. There are 14 examples of things which were supposed to have been bad karma from a previous life, for example: Devadatta throwing the rock at him, his constant backache, not getting any food on an alms round…

The four ways of karma producing results:
1. karma producing results in this very life (ditthadhamma vedaniya)
2. karma producing results in the next life (uppadaveccami)
3. karma producing results at any suitable occasion
This is very much like supportive karma. The results can occur in any lifetime when the right circumstances arise.
4. karma which becomes null and void
This is particularly true of the arhats who go into nirvana. The past karma is voided.

The four natures of karma:
1. weighty karma or Garuka kamma:
This depends on who is doing the action or what the action is. If the president yawns on television, it could have an effect on the country but if we yawn, it’s no big deal.
2. immediate karma:
At the last moment before death, an action can propel you into a next life much different than expected. For example if you’ve been bad all your life but then in the last moment, you repent and die with a pure conscience you won’t go on to the bad existence that you would have if you didn’t have this last thought.
3. habitual karma
A karmic force builds up from our habit.
4. Random karma

There is a simile used to explain the above four is that there is a pen full of bulls and someone opens the door. As to who gets out first:
1. The biggest bull gets out first.
2. A bull who happens to be next to the door gets out first.
3. The bull who usually goes out first goes out first.
4. Some situation arises and some random bull goes out first.

Factors Affecting Karma:
1. gati – specific birth
2. upadhi – physical appearance
3. kāla – time
4. payoga – course of action taken

All of the above can either be fortunate / welcome (sampatti) or unfortunate / unwelcome (upatti). The first three are not in one’s control, but the forth one is.

Due to the place or the realm where you are born, you will have karma in accord with that place which may or may not be fortunate and welcome. One’s looks may be a help or a hindrance in different situations. The time period one lives in may be fortunate or not. Finally, the course of action you take, the things which you do may bring you fortune or may not.

Niyāma Dhamma (Natural phenomena subject to cause and effect)
1. utu niyāma – seasons
2. bija – seeds
3. kamma – karma
4. dhamma – nature
5. citta – mind

Human beings are not outside of the laws of nature. The laws of nature also apply to humans. We are one part of / within the web of natural phenomena.

Christians believe that man is above nature and rule the world. They believe that animals have no souls and move about similar to the way cars do (auto-mobile).

All of the above are subject to the laws of cause and effect. Seasons are ruled by the movement of the planet in relation to the sun.

You cannot plant watermelon seeds and get mangos. “You reap what you sow.” (SN) Seeds grow to be plants or trees depending on the conditions of the soil, moisture, temperature and so forth.

To understand karma, one simply has to look at nature.

Dhamma – nature has its rules, such as a rose will smell a certain way. This category also refers to the laws which govern all of the Buddhas. There cannot be two appearing in the world at the same time. Each has only one wife and child…

Citta – Mind is not ruled by a soul. It is under the laws of cause and effect. From childhood, one’s mind gets trained, encultured, educated, in certain ways. If one wishes to change the way they react or function, one must change the underlying causes of such reactions and functions.

The Arya Sālisthamba Sutra tells about how the idea of niyama dharma connects to paticca samupada.

Two laymen, Upatissa and Kolita who later became Sariputa and Mahamogallāna, saw the Elder Assaji on his alms rounds and were impressed by his deportment. They asked him what teaching he followed. Ven. Assaji simply answered, “Whatever from a cause proceeds, thereof the Tathāgata has explained the cause. It’s cessation too he has explained. This is the teaching of the Supreme Sage.”
“Ye dhammā hetuppabhavā, tesaŋ hetuŋ tathāgato āha tesaŋ ca yo nirodho, eveŋ vādi Mahā Samano.”

Human life and religious meaning: How meanings are created by religion in human life?

Functionally a religion is connected with two sets of needs. On the group level are the needs for stability for predictability in the behaviour responses and controlling to tragedy and frustration.

On the individual level is the need to handle problems of tension, anguish and frustration. Religion senses to give men shared goals, thus reducing the sharpness of their competitor goals; if promises later rewards, thus softening the anguish of present frustration, it helps to define the meaning of suffering, thus reducing the threat of disappointment.

Religion and social integration

The relevance to human society of religion is furthering more meaningful. Concerning Semitic religions (Indaism, Christianity and Islam) it brings people together as children of one family having a common father. The church enables the adherents to gather together to worship, to sing hymns to share common interests and beliefs.

Religion as a social institution

Society is a structure contained with numerous units, which of them exercise a distinct part. In sociology these cardinal are called social institutions namely Economy, Government, Religion and family, a social institution is a systematic way of meeting a GroupWise need provided by culture.

As a social institution religion is inter related with other institutions, influences them and responds to them. Set us inquire them each.

Religion and family

Everywhere in the world religion is closely connected with family structure. All societies have culturally designated ways in which sexual behaviour and reproduction are regulated, status assignment is made (indicating who stands up for a child, giving his name and social position) maintaining socialisation of the child, giving him affection and parental support and so on. In virtually, every instance, marconer, they are reinforced by the religious system. In many countries, family deities and ancestor worship maybe important part of their religious life. The ethical norms governing interpersonal behaviour within the family are often given religious sanction. It is obvious that the basic structure of the family, the place woman, the importance of the children, the possibility of divorce and the like continues to be supported by religious norms and training.

Religion and governments

Religion and government is connected through the clergy. The same social strata that are richest acquired Very often leadership of both institutions. So that they both do whatever to protect there interests and privileges. Sometimes one of the institution strata becomes more powerful than the other. The situation seldom put them into clashes. Sometimes these clashes originate wars between two sides. The history of Vatican and England provide examples for these long-term wars. Western as well as Islamic religion expounded that the government must obey to God and for clergy of God has the power to control the government. The Chinese Emperors solved this problem by becoming themselves the God. Religion had clashes with the governing kings in ancient India too. But the kings were capable to dominate the Brahmins clergy.

Religion and economy

Religion influences an economic system in many ways; worship and holidays affect the timing of work. Occupational assignment as in Hindu Caste system may be religiously determined. The economic value of goods and services is partly determined by the religious definition of their value, which can raise or lower both demand and supply. The distribution of wealth is partly governed by religious norms. Religious organisations, activities, personnel and buildings may command a substantial proportion of the resources of the society.

Max Weber’s Protestant Ethics – Spirit of capitalism disensses deeply on this issue. He carefully examined the relationship between areas of rapid capitalist advancement and religious allegiance. In countries with both Protestant and catholic citizens, he noted, business leaders, owners of capital, technically trained persons and skilled corkers were overwhelmingly Protestant. Weber did emphasise what he was as the peculiar spirit of economic enterprise among early Protestants, a spirit characterised as disciplined, rational and highly ascetic. Another modern example in this regard is that majority of the people of wealth in U.S.A as are not Catholics lent Protestants.

Thus religion influences the society as well as the members of the society Particularly it’s impact in social change is distinctive. So that it is obvious that religion is a part of the social structure itself.

It is important to inquire the religious influence regarding the individual. In fact it is what we have to discuss here. Religion relates to the whole of a man’s personality and because of this totality of response people speak of “conversion” in relation to religious attitudes. Religious convert their adherents to specific pracific and particular moral codes. Thus often a religion makes rational changes of behaviour of the individual.

Religious precept and practices are inebriated by the childhood through various methods. Stories about noble and perfected religious saints inspire the newcomers. Most of the cultures have their own myths related to religion, which help to socialise the new generation. Church building, temples kovils etc. have numerous attractive things like images, statues drawings fine arts and so on. However, in a tribal or other homogeneous society one does not belong to a church. He belongs to the society, which has certain religious qualities. In modern urban societies the two memberships are separable in fact.

Some religious advocate that insofar, as human nature is inadequately understood, will never find satisfaction. Except through the self-realisation in sparing ideal, the person suffers again and again through the cycle of births. To achieve the goal he must develop his behaviour according to the prescribed way by the religion. Buddhism is an example to the religious maintains a path of complete moral development. The church (in Semitic religious) as a type strives to be coextensive with society in its membership and thus it maximises integration. In the effort to achieve this emphasis is placed on sacrament and creed, not on right behaviour.

As we have discussed do far the meaning of the religion in human life is tremendous. It is extra evidence to the literature of historical anthropological, sociological and psychological. We have paid our attention particularly in this discussion the way that religion conduced to convey the mankind individually as wee as socially the wee being he can reach and welfare he can gain by stepping forward in path prescribed by religion.