Indian Constitution and Vedanta
Questioner: Good afternoon sir. Sir, you are promoting the Vedantic teachings and want people to adopt them in their day-to-day lives. As per my understanding, Vedant talks about Self-awareness, and the path to Self-awareness can be different for different people, as we are all facing different kinds of obstacles. So, it will be subjective and today we live by the Constitution, it has definite sets of rules and regulations that are the same for all and objective in nature. So, sir how can we adopt the Vedantic way of life working within the framework of the Constitution?
Acharya Prashant You see a few things that need to be understood, great question please sit. Vedant does not impose any particular way of life, right? Vedant is not commandment-based. It does not give a list of do’s and don’ts. It says know. And knowing is something universal, right? You may have one path to take and he may have another path to tread but you must know your path, right? You will know your path only when you know who you are what you want and where you want to reach. Equally, he must know his path. Even if the paths are going to be necessarily different. See the unity lies only at the point of the destination, that destination has been called the truth or Brahma or Atama. There is unity at the destination but no uniformity in the paths or in the travelers or in the ways that they need to take or in their conduct, no?
So, Vedant is not commandment-based, it's not a belief system. It does not say you must believe in something or you must follow these rules. It’s not doctrine-based. The beauty of it is, it simply says, “figure out on your own, figure out on your own. And reject what you see as false.” Keep rejecting what you see as false till you reach a point where you are able to see the falseness of the rejector as well. But that’s the final thing. One need not worry about that.
To begin with, one just wants to know who am I, how am I operating, how are my relationship, what am I into, what are my ambitions, what am I targeting, what are my goals, what am I fond of, what I hate. When you look at these things you realize a lot about yourself and that itself is very core spirituality called self-knowledge. Self-knowledge, atam gyan. Now coming to the constitution of India, please keep a slide of the Preamble to the Constitution ready. I will ask for it when I come to that before that a few things on the constitution of India. We believe as if The Constitution of India is largely an imported thing. We are made to think as if are intellectuals, the founding fathers of the Constitution, went abroad they looked at for example The Irish Declaration of directive principles and they said let there be directive principles in the Indian Constitution as well. Or they looked at the French Revolutionaries' Declaration of Man and Citizens and they said let there be fundamental rights in The Indian Constitution as well. Or they read the works of Russo or Voltaire or Lock or Didero and they said wow such liberal Principles, such egalitarian principles let them be incorporated in the Indian Constitution as well. Or they looked at the Declaration of Independence by the American States and they said wow such great things we have never heard of these things, these are foreign concepts, these are alien concepts and they are wonderful. We are amazed, we are overloud let them be present in The Indian Constitution as well. That carries a grain of truth but that’s not entirely true. Where is the Indian Constitution really coming from? Please think about it. Most of those who were in the Constituent Assembly were also freedom fighters, were they not? Think of them, were they, not freedom fighters? So, it is coming from the spirit of freedom. Mind you not even the spirit of Independence but the spirit of freedom. And the spirit of freedom is over and above the spirit of Independence. It was not just an Indian Independence Movement, it was Lynn's Freedom Movement. What is freedom? All those, all the names you know of, if you read their work if you get into their minds you will find that they had defined freedom in a very holistic, very deep, very comprehensive way. Freedom was not just about replacing the Union Jack with a Tri-color. They was Independence, that was political Independence.
Freedom meant much more and the project of gaining freedom was to continue even after 1947. If you would ask a Baghat Singh he would say that the revolution must be on even in 2023. It was not supposed to come to a standstill or a conclusion in 1947 or 1950, no. Are you getting it? So, if you, I asked for the Preamble so that you could understand that the Indian Constitution already embodies the highest spiritual principles. Because it is coming from people who are dedicated to something very very deep. A lot of them went to The Gallows carrying Geeta in hand. Do you think they will need to turn to exclusively the West for inspiration? If you count the number of freedom fighters who took The Geeta as their inspiration you would run short of the count. There are just so many. Think of Aurobindo. Think of Tilak.
Even if you talk of Bhagat Singh, he was an avid reader. And was he not placing The Geeta in high esteem? He was. Even as he declared himself an atheist. What he meant to denounce was The Gods that the commons worship. He had an unflinching faith in the truth and Geeta is not God worship, Geeta is about submitting yourself to the truth. Fighting for the truth alone even if it means against everybody you have been related to in your life. Are you getting it?
So, ‘We the People of India having solemnly resolved to constitute India into Sovereign, Socialist, Secular, Democratic Republic’ where do you think these words are coming from, come on? Where do you think these ideals are coming from? It's easy to say they are coming from France, the UK, or America. And I agree to this, I agree with this in a very contextual way, in the contemporary sense they did some from Europe and the Spirit of the reminiscence. But when you, Sovereign you know what the word Sovereign means? What does Sovereign mean? Not ruled by somebody outside of yourself. Now come on, that’s a spiritual thing. To be not to be ruled by somebody outside of yourself. Sovereign does not mean that you will, it does mean that you will not allow China to lord over you and that there would be a hegemon that you would tolerate, obviously, it does mean that. But it means something far beyond that as well. Vedant would say, Na karta si, na boghta si. Mukt asi ev. That’s your identity. You are only free, Mukt asi ev, you are just free that’s your fundamental identity. Are you seeing that in Sovereignty? Otherwise, why would, from where would words like freedom and sovereignty come? Socialist, what does socialist mean? You want to have a society in which opportunity, resources, and status are available to all. You do not want to create a society of unequal, that’s socialism. And what kind of equality do you want to give? You want to give equality of opportunity, opportunity to do what? Opportunity to indulge in nonsense? Opportunity to indulge in nonsense? No. Opportunity to self-actualize, the opportunity to reach the purpose of life, the opportunity to materialize your highest potential, right? And what is that highest potential? That exactly is what Vedant aims for. You are beyond yourself, right? See in the very material sense a socialist would mean, let there be schools for all, let there be bread for all, let there be uniformity in income distribution. But that’s the beginning, that’s not the end. Just as the Independence is the beginning Freedom is the end.
You do want people to have access to food, healthcare, education, opportunity all these things. But these are means what is the end?
The end of the nation has to be congruous with the end of the individual, right? Because the nation is the people, what does it begin with? ‘We the people’ am I right? Yes, We the people of India, and then that’s so beautiful. We the people of India. So Vedant, what does it say? Aho aham namo mahayam, nobody else is foisting this thing on us. I am the most wonderful one, Aho aham, look at my glory. Namo mahayam, I bow to myself. So, nobody else can give this to me.
We the People of India, are giving ourselves as the last line says, and give to ourselves this constitution. Because nobody else can give this to me. No God can give this to me, I decide I will rule myself. And that’s Vedant. Nobody outside of you can be allowed to rule you.
The first line, ‘We the People of India’, last words, ‘give to ourselves this constitution’. We, I decide I will live the way I am and to know who I am and reach the place of my purity all this is needed, Justice is needed, Liberation is needed, Liberty is needed, Equality is needed, Fraternity is needed all these are means so that ultimately, I can be myself. This is a purely spiritual document. This is an Upanishad, are you getting it? So, there is no dissonance really. You cannot say there is the way of Vedant but then we have to follow the rule of law and we have to live under the constitution. So, the Constitution does not arise from a vacuum. You have to know where does it come from. So, we have all respect for all the different places it came from. But we also know that at its core the constitution of India arises from the very spirit of Freedom and freedom as well known is the very, only goal of all Spirituality, particularly Vedant. Mukti. You look at the philosophies that India has had and if you just ask basic questions. What is the aim of this philosophy? The aim will be mukti, mukti, mukti, mukti, mukti, mukti. Without fail, without aberration mukti. The means might be different. Yoga has one particular means, Nayay Vaisheshika they will have other means. Even those philosophies that do not believe in any God like Jain and Bodh philosophies, even they have mukti as their end goal. So, that’s the mukti that you see here. This is a spiritual document. Mukti. And Mukti cannot come to you without the right kind of external conditions. So the constitution strives to give you those conditions externally in which Liberation can be possible internally. Are you getting it?
The constitution of India, if you look at the Preamble, tries to give you those conditions externally that can make liberation possible internally. So, please do not take it as a conflict between the Constitution and the Vedant and this question has again and again come to me. People come and say, you are teaching Geeta, you have been with the Geeta for many years, but we respect only Samvidhan. It's beautiful if you respect the Constitution but if you respect the Constitution you must get close to the heart of the Constitution. And at the heart of the constitution is freedom and freedom in its highest way is called Liberation. And if you love liberation then you will have to come to the Upanishads, you will have to come to the Ashtavakra, are you getting it? The constitution exists to provide conditions in which the vision of the founding fathers can see meat materialization and where were those founding fathers really drawing their inspirations from? I am positing that it would be only half correct to say that their inspiration was coming from other countries. If you really look at the spirit of this (constitution) each word is talking of just one thing, freedom, mukti.
Mukto Muktabhimani, the one who takes himself as free will become free. The one who takes himself as free will becomes free. Takes himself as free, what does that mean? Behaves in the way of freedom, strives for freedom. The one who’s abhiman, that is the ego, that is belief is all placed in freedom itself will become free, mukt. That’s what the Constitution is trying to bring to you. That also tells that everything about the Constitution being a foreign document is all nonsense and we are hearing a lot of that these days, right? We say, Oh the constitution is really not Indian, the word they use is ‘Indigenous’, they say ‘it does not have Indigenous origins, it is inspired from outside’. No sir, please read it carefully, please go close to the spirit of the Constitution and you will find nothing alien in it. If anything it has, it represents the universality of human aspirations. This kind of a thing applies mind you not only to India but also to America, also to Africa, does it not? Does it not? Any people anywhere would be glad to accept this as the preamble to their constitution, correct? So, this is something very very universal. You cannot say that the Indian constitution is an imported thing. If you will say that the Indian constitution is an imported thing then the result will be that you try to somehow subvert the constitution. And there are certain groups of people who are trying even that, they are saying, ‘no this constitution is not good, it does not merely needs amendments it needs replacement’. But why does it need replacement, it is already the Baghavad Geeta, it is already the Upanishads why do you want to replace it? Instead of respecting it as something, if not religious, then next to religious. Instead of respecting it, you are talking about replacing it. What's the point? Why? Look at the fundamental rights and the directive principles. You know of the fundamental rights, right? Those are the rights that allow the individual to bosom fully, those are the rights if you have them only then can you actualize your full potential. Otherwise, your life will be spent just fighting all kinds of bondages and superficial battles. Those rights have been given to you so that there is a secure ecosystem. An assured environment in which you can work towards the real purpose of life. Are you getting it? And what is the real purpose of life? That again is not something being imposed upon you by Vedant. That’s something that your heartbeat itself cries for. Who does not want to be liberated, hello! How many of you want to spend your life in various kinds of bondages? So liberation is something that is at the core of the existence of every human being man or woman, young or old, Indian or American, right, rich or poor. How does it matter? Are you getting it?
So, this is a very fine document and there is no way this is at odds with Vedant, right? If you love Vedant, you will find yourself respecting the Indian constitution as well. Additionally, you cannot modify the sacred texts. Here, sometimes with one by two majority, sometimes with two by three, sometimes with other kinds of majority, you can make suitable timely modifications as well. Obviously, you cannot play around with the basic structure of the constitution that has been forbidden. But otherwise, and look at the practicality, there are the directive principles, stuff that you know cannot be immediately implemented and has been given to you as a vision for the future. The directive principles are not justiciable, you cannot drag the government to a court of law by saying that they have not enforced the directive principles but they have been given as the road map and if you look at them, they are all talking of very high stuff. They are not talking of day-to-day affairs, they are not saying you know this or that. The language approaches that of spirituality, if you look at the fundamental rights starting from article 14, if you go close to them you might be excused for thinking that this is some kind of treatise on wisdom. If you did not know this is the constitution of a particular country and that it’s a legal document you will be pardoned for assuming that it’s a spiritual thing. Was this clear or again too convoluted?
Questioner: Good afternoon sir. My name is Vishal, a student. Sir as you said it’s a very beautiful document and it's beautifully designed, I agree with your point but what about the points where India being a diversified country point of conflict occurs in the Constitution? Sometimes it happens.
Acharya Prashant: There is nothing in the constitution that gives rise to conflict. Conflict is the very prakriti of the ego, that’s how human beings behave, right? If you and I fight that’s not Geeta’s fault. So the question is, Is the constitution encouraging people to fight among each other is that what is happening? Is the Constitution encouraging people to fight? People fight in spite of all the guidance, right? Students fail in spite of having the best teachers. Do we then fire the teachers? But that’s what we have been doing. If you find Hindus in a fallen condition you start blaming the Geeta or the Upanishads. If you find other religious people behaving in fallen ways, you start blaming their texts. The question is are we following the religious texts and if we are not then how are the religious texts to be blamed? Did the student fail because he listened to the teacher? Did the student fail because he listened to the teacher? No. But then the student says, Oh I failed this teacher should be sagged. That’s what we Indians have also learned to do in the religious sphere. We say see all these so-called great books have been there and yet our condition is so bad, so surely these books are no good. Let's dump them, let's burn them. The question is, when did you read those books? When did you live by those books? Even today do you understand those books? If you have no relationship with those books, then what right do you have to blame those books for your failure and suffering?
