|
FOREWOED
THE question which forms the title of this book is of course absurd. Even the, most antipathetic or ignorant would admit that India has a civilization (as he would say) " of sorts." There is an acute difference as to the value of it. The question however is not mine but is raised by Mr. Wm. Archer, a literary and dramatic critic of note in his recent book "India and the Future." He finds India as a whole to be in the state of " Barbarism." " What does it matter if he does say so," said an Indian to me, adding " this is only the last of a long list of misunderstanding works abusive of our country and its culture." That is so,, though the number is increasing now-a-days of those who respect both. Yet this indifferent attitude is a mistake. India cannot at the present moment allow any charges against her to go unanswered. I have here given some reasons why, with- out waiting for the completion of a larger work I had in the first steps of preparation on the general principles of Indian Culture. Lordship over alien peoples at present ultimately rests on might, though particular circumstances may render its actual enforcement unnecessary. But (apart from such implied consent as may in any particular case be held to exist) the right which Power-holders to-day allege is cultural superiority and the duty to raise the ruled to the cultural level religious, moral, and intellectual of those who control. It is with reference to such a duty that Mr. Archer finds India to be barbarous.
Though his book is for want of sufficient knowledge, without intrinsic value as a criticism of Indian civilization, there are several matters which, apart from the general ground stated, make it a suitable object of reply. Unlike the general run of criticisms it is written not from a Christian but a " Rationalist" standpoint. It is next a typical instance of the cultural attack, (and vehement at that) for it assails
ii the fundamental principles of Indian civilization and every form of its? culture. religious, intellectual, artistic and social. Its vehemence may offend some. For myself I greatly prefer a candid violence to insidious attacks made under cover of patronizing or beguiling " sympathy." I do not refer to the feeling which rightly corresponds to that glorious, but to-day much-prostituted, word. As regards the matter of the book, " India and the future " is largely a re-statement of commonly current criticisms. Therefore a reply to this onslaught is an answer to others. Lastly the book in question well evidences the political basis of the cultural attack. Mr. Archer's treats of questions of practical politics now agitating this country. With these I am not here concerned :and upon them I express no opinion. I deal only with the subject of Indian culture and I am here interested chiefly to show the three causes, racial, religious and political, which are at the back of the influences making for the cultural conquest of this country. It is obvious also that criticism of philosophic principles affected by any of these causes is not a detached and truly rational one. In judging of a civilization we must look to its fundamental principles. Indian thought with its usual profundity and avoidance of arbitrary divisions regards Philosophy as religious and Religion as philosophical We must therefore go to first principles, however unfamiliar such a course may be to writers on Western civilization concerned with the external aspects-of social and political life. It is right to say that the truth of such principles must be judged by their result—the test of Ayurveda. But we must compare results, and if one is more defective than another we must be satisfied that the principles are in fault. For other causes may be operating. Having lived in this country for a period of nearly thirty years I am well aware of the divergence between Ideals and Facts. The greater one's interest in India the more acutely is it observed. But this charge is one which, in varying ways, can be made in iv different degree against all peoples. We-must also distinguish between what is essential and of value and what is mere crust. There are further some matters which evoke contempt in minds characterised by the organic shapeliness of Race. Well has it been said that any want of organic racial consistency means lack of moral and intellectual coherence; and that man in the mass fulfils his highest destiny not as an isolated individual but as a portion of an organic whole, as a member of a specific Race.
The question of the value of Indian culture is not merely an academic one. It has present practical bearing on the future of India and the World. I every day ponder upon, and question myself as to, the future of this country. Will it preserve its essential character, that is culture ? I say " essential" because I am thinking of its enduring principles and of their general applications. Some things are still happening which might lead one to think that it will not. Thus after this Book had been sent to
v Press I read the report of a speech of one who has been called an Indian " leader " in which he said that " English institutions were the standards by which their (the Indians) aspirations were set." We may all benefit by the example and influence of others. But it is the Racial Sun of those who speak in this way which is set. Is it possible to conceive of any ordinary, much less a leading, Englishman or Irishman, however friendly to and an admirer of, (let us say), France, saying that " French institutions were the standards by which his aspirations were set ?" He would think that his own perfected institutions and racial ideals were the standards according to which his aspirations should be set. Is it possible with such a frame of mind to have independence and nobility of spirit? But perhaps it and other like sayings are only evidence of the occasional lingering of the servient spirit of a disappearing generation into a newly opening age of nobility, courage, vigour and freedom. I greatly hope so.
vi But is Indian civilization about to be renewed or to be broken up—another instance of that disintegration which has followed the introduction of Western civilization amongst Eastern peoples ? Its poison does not harm the snake but is death to others. Who can be sure that the close of the War will not be followed by movements tending to the cultural conquest of the whole of the Asiatic continent. There are events and possibilities which point this way. Moreover there is a party amongst the Indian people themselves who favour in varying degree the introduction of Western civilization; a party which in the proposed new political order may be powerful enough to achieve its ends. In every way, the coming assault on Hindu civilization will be the greatest which it has ever had to endure in the whole course of its long history.
Hope as each of us may, we have yet to see what will issue from this time fateful for us all. Here however Mr. Archer, though he intended it not, gives consolation
vii to those who need it. For his complaint is against the attachment which the Indian people show for their culture and the stubborn resistance which India makes against Western innovations. And why should She not, seeing, that, rightly or wrongly, the bulk of the ancient peoples of the East have never admitted the moral superiority of Western civilization. Moreover Mr. Archer's book was written before, though published during the War, an event, which has, in so many ways, called that alleged superiority in question. Since I wrote the above, the last book of the late sociologist Mr. Benjamin Kidd came to my hands. After citing with approval Mr. George Peel's statement (" The Future of England " 169) that in Europe, History and Homicide are undistinguishable terms and stating that the unfolding of the Christian Religion in the West has been an unparal-elled record of fighting and slaughter, aiming at worldly triumph, he says that civilisation has not yet arrived, for that of the West " is as yet scarcely more than glorified savagery" (120, 121). But bloodshed is not all. For it is unsoiling and honest compared with some things which have gone on in peace. Many to-day in this country would say to Mr. Archer and other would-be lecturers—"Physician heal thyself." Nevertheless European civilization, classic in its origins, has in the past displayed a greatness actively dominant in social and political life and in science and art. Whether it will continue to do so after present and coming revolutions is yet to be seen. In any case it is not to be imitated in neglect of the principles of Indian Culture except by such as are willing to confess their inferiority.
I have written from the standpoint of the Vedanta as interpreted by the Shakta Agama the principles of which effect a wonderful synthesis, through its "enjoyment-liberation" (Bhukti-mukti) doctrine, of the claims of the World and of the Spirit, the dual aspects of That which is in Itself One. As the Buddhist Tantra says " Let all avoid the extremes of worldly existence and selfish quiescence attaining success in the two ends. Let all become the Heruka Himself." I am not however concerned either to criticise or to establish the truth of any of the doctrines and practices here mentioned nor, (had I the desire) could I do so within the limits of this set of little Essays.
My object has been to state summarily and correctly the main principles of Indian civilization (incidentally removing certain common misconceptions); as also to explain the general causes of the attacks which have so constantly been made upon it. I would also urge now as ever the worship of beauty as true Form. How profoundly has it been said in Europe " Oh Middle Ages! when will your night leave us ? When will men understand that form is not an unimportant accident, a mere chance, but an expression of the innermost being, that in this very point the two worlds, the inner and the outer, the visible and invisible touch ?" To such as so understand, Dharma reveals itself in the beauty of all True Forms, racial and otherwise. To such again all that is misshapen and botched is an offence.
In writing then of Indian Culture I have in mind not any soiled or hybrid developments of the time, but the principles of the civilization of old India, with its Dharma, Devata and Gomata—a civilization in its depths profound, on its surface a pageant of antique beauty—the civilization of India of the Hindus. " This is to go back" I hear some one say. India might fare worse. But no man nor people can in this sense go back. If we be really vital however, we are able to, and will, maintain the present with the same splendid strength of the Racial Spirit which did the great deeds of the past.
Ranchi,
|
