The Histories of India and its Dharma Traditions – an Overview

Sādhanā, which is focused effort and spiritual practice, comes in pravṛtti and nivṛtti varieties. Pravṛtti refers to a person’s normal flows of life in any human society. Some Hindu traditions recognize four goals of human life in the pravṛtti mode: dharma (a sense of balance, purpose, and wellbeing grounded in ethical values), artha (a sense of security and prosperity), kāma (experience of mental and physical pleasure), and mokṣa/nirvāṇa (a sense of wholeness and liberation). Most people, having found satisfaction through this, stay in this pravṛtti frame of mind, content with life as it goes.

When the mind, for whatever reason, is not hyper-focused on daily life and achieving a comfortable standard of living for oneself and one’s family, it can delve into thoughts about existence. Some people may decide to seek insight into the existential questions of: who am I, who are we, what are we doing here, what is the multiverse, what will happen when my life is completed, etc. Finding insights through the Hindu or other Dharma traditions, an individual may discern that seeking mokṣa/nirvāṇa is their goal, and so will undertake the learning and practice required to go deeper. This can be done as they live a conventional life (pravṛtti), as part-time practitioners, or as full-time practitioners, leaving behind their former life to undertake a purely spiritual life (nivṛtti). Buddha Dharma practitioners use the words upāsaka, and śramaṇera and bhikkhu to describe these modes of life. Spiritual practice is called sādhanā and each Dharma tradition has sādhanā methods and rationales for numerous types of practitioners in accordance with each person’s own proclivities. Most practitioners will try to engage in some kind of sādhanā at least once, whether they follow a pravṛtti or nivṛtti path in life, not as a dogmatic duty, but as a natural desire to find out how to manage themselves better in life and even existentially.

Dhyāna: Many ancient teachers of philosophy and practice in the Dharma traditions agreed that meditation, or dhyāna, is the most effective spiritual practice. Some people meditate using non-theist principles, focusing totally on philosophical management of the mind and consciousness. Others, particularly in Hindu Dharma traditions, focus on the multiverse and our relationship to it without the need to focus on a Supreme Being, and so, through self-cultivation, they perceive Brahman, the totality of all things. Still others prefer a strong focal point, something that reaches beyond mere cerebral awareness to emotional connection.

The monotheist Hindu Dharma traditions – connected to the histories of the clan and tribal confederations – provided the idea of an underlying sentient direction of the multiverse, characterized as Īśvara. The Supreme Being, or Īśvara, is thus the best focus for such people and each of the monotheist Hindu Dharma traditions focuses on a specific personification that is discussed in that tradition’s sources of knowledge. Some traditions focus on Īśvara only, while others focus on Īśvara as an embodiment of Brahman, Brahman as symbolized through Īśvara, or Brahman only (see below for discussions on Īśvara and Brahman). Because of this, Hindus can be described as either monotheist, non-theist, atheist, or a combination/spectrum. An individual may oscillate within the spectrum depending on how they are at a given point in their lives, all of which they may discuss with their spiritual teacher to ensure overall progress. Many Hindu Dharma traditions like Śākta, Vaiṣṇava, Śaiva Dharma traditions, Zoroastrian tradition, named for Zarathuṣṭra (c. 7th-6th centuries BCE) and Sikhī/Sikh Dharma which developed after its original teacher Guru Nanak (1469-1539 CE), are monotheist, whereas Buddha Dharma, Jain Dharma and a number of Hindu Dharmas are non-theist.

Ātman means self. Hindu and Jain philosophers first developed the theory of self in a variety of ways, but for the majority, ātman refers to the ‘individual essence’ – what makes you, you. Some Hindu Dharma traditions teach that it is a principle, others as well as Jains that it is a type of distinct being, and yet others that it is an imagined reality. In all cases though, the concept of ātman is intended to help Hindus, Jains, and Sikhs to understand that the body, mind or intellect of all living beings are pervaded by ātman, but that their bodies, minds or intellects do not define who they are. Ātman, individual essence, is eternally part of existence no matter what the world throws at it. Hindu philosophers teach that meditation on the nature of one’s individual essence, its connection to the multiverse (jagat) and its connection/unity/relationship with Brahman/Īśvara provides true insight, wisdom, self-realization, and ultimately freedom from the ups and downs of life (saṃsāra). Jains teach that one needs to burn off karma that adheres to the ātman through samyak jñāna, samyak darśana and samyak caritra (correct knowledge, correct perspective, correct conduct). Buddha Dharma traditions generally teach that there is no eternal principle of the ātman, but that everything is a coalescence of transient co-dependent phenomena (pratītyasamutpāda).

Jagat, the multiverse, literally means living and moving, from the verbal root √gam. Jagat contains all energy, matter, anti-matter, time, space, intelligence, consciousness, life, and their methods of interacting. It contains multiple universes (multiverse), dimensions, states of existence, types of living beings, etc. Jagat is eternal and cycles between expansion, wherein all above-mentioned facets evolve and exist, and dissolution, when all existing things return to their elemental and then potential/energy states. In Hindu Dharma traditions, meditating on the connection of the ātman with jagat, one is able to zoom out to manage the ups and downs of life.

Brahman, from the Vedic Sanskrit root √bṛh, is that which supports, evolves, and expands. In Hindu Dharma’s Vedānta philosophical tradition, Brahman refers to that principle that is the sum total of all ātman, jagat, all potentialities, and that which is beyond. It is similar to the ‘singularity’ and ‘totality’ principles of modern physics. It is a non-theist principle in that Brahman is that from and within which all existence and potentiality is located. Vedānta suggests that meditation and realization of Brahman and its connection to the individual essence of the practitioner will allow for management of the ups and downs of saṃsāra, and eventual freedom from these cycles. The monotheist Hindu Dharmas use Brahman as either an equivalent or facet of Īśvara. Due to this, Sikhī/Sikh Dharma tradition also references Brahman in the Guru Granth Sahib.

Īśvara: The monotheist Hindu Dharmas each have their own understanding and embodiment of the Supreme Being, Īśvara, meaning ‘capable of doing’ or ‘possessor’. Śāktas see it as the Divine Feminine Power; Śaivas see it as Śiva the transcendent; Vaiṣṇavas see it as Vāsudeva, the all-pervasive; Kaumaram sees it as Murugan; Sauras as the Solar Divinity; Gāṇapatyas as Gaṇeśa, etc. Īśvara thus can be a Supreme Being, in some ways similar to the Abrahamic concept of God. In Patañjali’s Yoga philosophy, however, Īśvara is simply a perfected being; other Dharma traditions use Īśvara as a designation of their founding teachers. The Nyāya philosophical tradition was one of the first to argue that Īśvara was the Creator in their dualistic approach, and this was adopted by or reflective of various traditions within the monotheist Hindu Dharmas, such as Śaiva Siddhānta. Vedānta sees Īśvara as the best symbol for humans to try and comprehend Brahman. Elements of these philosophical understandings are fused together in the monotheist Hindu Dharmas in various ways. When Sikhī developed in the fifteenth century, it, like many of the devotional Hindu monotheist traditions, focussed on Īśvara using a name that reflected their unique culture and teachings. In Jain tradition, Īśvara is a state of being of each liberated ātman; in other words, everyone can be an Īśvara.

Siddhānta & Saṃvāda: The Ṛgveda (1.164.46) says ekaṁ sadviprā bahudhā vadanti, “Reality is One; inquisitive people discuss it in various ways.” Hindu spiritual traditions were never about one select, chosen people, but always about all living beings, no matter who or what they were. These worldviews or philosophies are all rationalized according to standardized logic, and based on expert consensus (siddhānta). As humans have different natures, different groups arrive at different conclusions. This variety is natural, and the acceptance of natural diversity (vaividhya, bahudhā) is thus taught by Hindu Dharma traditions. Equitable discussions (saṃvāda) among knowledgeable and experienced experts of philosophy and practice is the origin of the variety of distinct traditions (sampradāyas) and practices (sādhanās) in the Hindu Dharma traditions in order to cater to the different natures of human beings. Learning to live with all of this diversity is one of the greatest teachings of the Hindu Dharmas. Buddhist, Jain, and other Dharma traditions of the ancient world engaged as equals with Hindu Dharma traditions through this effective method which ensured ancient Indian societies were pluralistic.

One of the most widespread and universally recognized Hindu Mantras is: auṁ sarve bhavantu sukhinaḥ sarve santu nirāmayāḥ | sarve bhadrāṇi paśyantu mā kaścid duḥkhabhāg bhavet || auṁ śāntiḥ śāntiḥ śāntiḥ ॥ “May all sentient beings be at peace, may no one suffer from illness, may all see auspiciousness, and may no one suffer. Aum. May there be peace in the multiverse, peace in our societies, and peace within.” In Buddhist traditions, there is a similar Mantra: Bhavatu sabba-maṅgalaṁ rakkhantu sabba-devatā | sabba-dhammānubhāvena sadā sotthī bhavantu te || May all have auspiciousness, may the illumined ones protect you, through the teachings of Dharma, may you always be well. Similar aspirational verses can be seen throughout the Dharma traditions showing that while there is a uniqueness and distinct nature and history of the traditions, there is nevertheless common concepts that emerged from their foundational pluralistic values.