Buddhism Buddhism: The Fulfilfilment of Hinduism
26 September 1893
I am not a Buddhist, as you have heard
and yet I am. If China, or Japan, or Ceylon follow the teachings of the Great
Master, India worships him as God incarnate on earth. You have just now heard
that I am going to criticize Buddhism, but by that I wish you to understand
only this. Far be it from me to criticize him whom I worship as God incarnate
on earth. But our views about Buddha are that he was not understood properly by
his disciples. The relation between Hinduism (by
Hinduism, I mean the religion of the Vedas) and what is called Buddhism at the
present day is nearly the same between Judaism & Christianity. Jesus
Christ was a Jew, and Shakya Muni as a Hindu, The Jews rejected Jesus Christ,
nay, crucified him, and the Hindus have accepted Shakya Muni as God and worship
him. But the real difference that we Hindus want to show between modern
Buddhism and what we should understand as teachings of Lord Buddha lies
principally in this: Shakya Muni came to preach nothing new. He also, like
Jesus, came to fulfill and not to destroy. Only, the case of Jesus, it was the
old people, the Jews, who did not understand him, while in the case of Buddha,
it was his own followers who did not realize the import of his teachings. As
the Jews did not understand the fulfillment of the Old Testament, so the
Buddhist did not understand the fulfillment of the truths of the Hindu
religion. Again, I repeat, Shakya Muni came not to destroy, but he was the
fulfillment, the logical conclusion, the logical development of the religion of
the Hindus.
The religion of the Hindus is divided
into two parts: the ceremonial and the spiritual. The spiritual portion is
specially studied by the monks.
In that there is no caste. A man from the
highest caste and man from the lowest may become a monk in India, and the two
castes become equal. In religion there is no caste, caste is simply a social
institution. Shakya Muni himself was a monk, and it was his glory that he had
the large-heartedness to bring out the truths from the hidden Vedas and throw
them broadcast all over the world. He was the first being in the world who
brought missionarising into practice-nay; he was the first to conceive the idea
of proselytizing.
The great glory of the Master lay in his wonderful sympathy for everybody, especially for the ignorant and the poor.
Some of his disciples were Brahmins. When Buddha was teaching, Sanskrit was no
more the spoken language of India. It was then only in the books of the
learned. Some of Buddha’s Brahman disciples wanted to translate his teachings
into Sanskrit, but he distinctly told them, ‘I am for the poor, for the people:
let me speak in the tongue of the people’. And so to this day the great bulk of
his teachings are in the vernacular of that day in India.
Whatever may be the position of
philosophy, whatever may be the position of metaphysics, so long as there is
such a thing as death in the world, so long as there is such a thing as
weakness in the human heart, so long as there is a cry going out of the heart
of man in his very weakness, there shall be a faith in God.
On the philosophic side the disciples of
the Great Master dashed themselves against the eternal rocks of the Vedas and
could not crush them and on the other side they took away from the nation that
eternal God to which everyone man or woman clings so fondly. And the result was
that Buddhism had to die a natural death in India. At the present day there is
not one who calls oneself a Buddhist in India the land of its birth.
But at the same time Brahminism lost something-that reforming zeal that wonderful sympathy and charity for everybody that
wonderful leaven which Buddhism had brought to the masses and which had
rendered Indian society so great that a Greek historian who wrote about India
of that time was led to say that no Hindu was known to tell an untruth and no
Hindu woman was known to be unchaste.
Hinduism cannot live without Buddhism,
nor Buddhism without Hinduism. Then realize what the separation has shown to us
that the Buddhists cannot stand without the brain and philosophy of the
Brahmins nor the Brahmin without the heart of the Buddhist. This separation between the Buddhists and the Brahmins is the cause of the downfall of India. That
is why India is populated by three hundred millions of beggars and that is why
India has been the slave of conquerors for the last thousand years. Let us then
join the wonderful intellect of the Brahmin with the heart, the noble soul, the
wonderful humanizing power of the Great Master.
Final Session
Address at the Final Session
27 September 1893
The world’s Parliament of Religions has
become an accomplished fact and the merciful Father has help those who labored
to bring it into existence and crowed with success their most unselfish labor.
My thanks to those noble souls whose
large hearts and love of truth first dreamed this wonderful dream and then
realized it. My thanks to the shower of liberal sentiments that has overflowed
this platform. My thanks to this enlightened audience for their uniform
kindness to me and for their appreciation of every thought that tends to smooth
the friction of religions. A few jarring note were heard from time to time in
this harmony. My special thanks to them for they have by their striking
contrast made the general harmony the sweeter.
Much has been said of the common ground
of religious unity. I am not going just now to venture my own theory. But if
anyone here hopes that this unity will come by the triumph of any one of the
religions and the destruction of the others to him I say, ‘Brother, yours is an
impossible hope.’ Do I wish that the Christian would become Hindu? God forbid.
Do I wish that the Hindu or Buddhist would become Christian? God forbid.
The seed is put in the ground and earth
and air and water are placed around it. Does the seed become the earth or the
air or the water? No. It becomes a plant; it develops after the law of its own
growth, assimilates the air, the earth and the water, converts them into plant
substance and grows into a plant.
Similar is the case with religion. The
Christian is not to become a Hindu or a Buddhist nor a Hindu or a Buddhist to
become a Christian. But each must assimilate the spirit of the others and yet preserve his individuality and grow according to his own law of growth.
If the Parliament of Religions has shown
anything to the world it is this: It has proved to the world that holiness,
purity and charity are not the exclusive possessions of any church in the world
and that every system has produced men and women of the most exalted character.
In the face of this evidence if anybody dreams of the exclusive survival of his
own religion and the destruction of the others, I pity him from the bottom of
my heart and point out to him that upon the banner of every religion will soon
be written in spite of resistance: ‘Help and not Fight’, ‘Assimilation and not
Destruction’, ‘Harmony and Peace and not Dissension’.