IMPLICATIONS FOR SECULAR HUMANISM FROM PERIYAR’S CRITIQUE OF BRAHMINICAL HINDUISM
IMPLICATIONS
FOR SECULAR HUMANISM FROM PERIYAR’S CRITIQUE OF BRAHMINICAL HINDUISM
Periyar wanted everything that is done in this world should have some
positive contribution to humanity, beyond religious and other differences. This
is possible only in a secular Humanistic framework.
16.1 Secularism
Before
getting into any further discussion it is necessary to define, secular
humanism. To define secular humanism, it is essential to note two preliminary
words which together constitute the idea of secular humanism. They are
secularism and Humanism. Secularism has varied meanings. R. Paulraj has defined it as ‘a movement in
society directed away from other worldliness to this worldliness’.[1] It
is defined in the New Catholic
Encyclopedia as “a form of humanism that limits true value to those
temporal qualities that contribute to man’s natural perfection, both individual
and social, to the actual exclusion of the supernatural.”[2] It
is also “…desacralisation of political forces and deconsecration of values.”[3] It
may be defined thus as a system or philosophy which is concerned with this
world, and activities in this world, at the exclusion of any spiritual aspect.
In relation to human beings, it can be said as a system which is concerned with
the life of humanity in this world. As a system it does not oppose religion as
such. But it has no regard for spiritual or supernatural elements. But it is
not secularization.[4]
16.2 Humanism
Humanism
is a world view ‘in some way centered on man rather than on the superhuman or
the abstract’.[5] For Ambedkar, “it is concerned with man’s
life here on earth, and welfare of man in human society.”[6] He was also of the opinion, that Humanism and
rationalism have advanced together.[7] So the aim of humanism is to have a meaningful
and harmonious life in this world. Harmonious life means that people should
come together and work towards establishing a healthy society, beyond all
religious and caste differences.
16.3 Secular Humanism
Generally, “it may be defined as
any philosophical, political, or cultural affirmation of man as the principal
object of concern, to the exclusion of all religious or theological thesis
about his origin and destiny.”[8] Paulraj says, “(the) secular humanism
recognizes the value and the dignity of man and makes him the measure of all
things.”[9]
Thus in secular humanism man is the measure of all things. Secular humanism
rejects the idea of God and his divine providence. The secular humanists will
not deny the religious element in humans. But they would say that religious
elements are of no use to human life.
The notable secular humanist M.N. Roy did not reject religion as such but
he protested against it for it suppressed the revolt of people against the
unjust activities. Secular Humanism persuades people to give up anything which
are of no help to humanity.
Another notable secular humanist is Jewaharlal Nehru. He also did not
reject religion as such, but condemned the irrational dimension of religion.[10] Nehru further states how religion is used to curb
human abilities:
Social evils,
most of which are certainly of removal, are attributed to original sin, to the
unalterableness of human nature, or the social structure, or (in India) to the
inevitable legacy of previous birth. Thus one drifts away from even the attempt
to think rationally and scientifically and takes refuge in irrationalism,
superstition, and unreasonable and inequitable social prejudices and practices.[11]
16.4 Periyar a Secular Humanist
Like other Secular Humanists, Periyar also did not reject religion as
such. He accepted religion as a way of
life. He was also of the opinion that,
religion was misused by the religionists to exploit the mass. He therefore felt
that religion is the cause of all evils in the society. Like other Secular Humanists,
Periyar emphasized and lived for the life of human beings in this world. Periyar
was of the opinion that only a Secular Humanism, that is pure concern for
humanity beyond religious flavours could unite the human beings together.
16.5 Implications for Secular Humanism
Periyar’s
secular humanism contains factors like, reason, right perception, helping one
another, religion a way of life, human dignity, human progress, morality,
harmony, welfare, service and human liberation.
16.5.1 Periyar and Secular Humanism
Periyar would accept any religion that is subject to reason and concerned
with humanity. His perspective
therefore, is not anti-religious, but anti-supernatural and
anti-superstitious. For him that part of
religion, which Periyar accepts, should also be applicable to all and should
help in developing human life in this world.
In such a case, where religion is restricted, secular humanism
transcends religious barriers and concerns humanity as a whole. It helps to
avoid all unwanted troubles caused in the name of religion and god. This is the
background in which implications for secular humanism can be drawn, from
Periyar’s critique of Brahmanical Hinduism.
16.5.2. Reason
Periyar asserted that, “the two things that render people irrational are
god and religion.”[12] Since religion and God have made humanity
irrational, Periyar questioned the need of religion. His argument is that if there were no
religion and god, humanity could use reason evenly in all realms of life as
religious people are reluctant to apply reason to religious concepts, rituals,
etc. The first implication for secular humanism, therefore, is using reason to
decide upon anything in this world.
16.5.3. Right Perception
For Periyar, “God and religion are confusing the Society.”[13] As religion and God have already curbed human
reason, humanity is not in a position to understand why there are lots of
differences and inequalities in the society.
They have been also incapacitated
to think aright because the religionists have taught the people that
these are the works of God. But when
humanity is free from religion and God, they would be able to say that, these
are the realities of this world.
The second implication for secular humanism is clear and right
perception. When things are perceived
rightly, there will not be any chance for one group to exploit the other. For
Periyar, these irrationalities and confusions are the result of ignorance. He
said, “human knowledge alone can remove the pain caused by human ignorance.”[14]
16.5.4 Helping One Another
The third implication for opting secular humanism is that, we should help
one another. It is not in the hand of God,
but in the hand of people. Periyar says,
“if we are to share the food and work equally there is no necessity for god.”[15]
He further says, “belief in God is not in any way useful to help others.”[16] When Periyar says, belief in god does not
help in any way to help others, he contradicts his own stand that, religion
should induce one to be helpful to others. Every religion is based on some idea
of God or reality or Brahman. This idea creates faith in individuals. This
faith is the same in every religion. This faith should motivate a person to
help others. And that help should transcend all religions. Here is where secular humanism finds its
validity.
16.5.5 Religion a Way of Life
Periyar said that, he had no problem with people who accepted religion as
a way of life in this world.[17] This has been repeatedly expressed by Periyar
as:
People cannot
live without religion. I do not mean
relationship between man and god or salvation, fate, pardon, reward in the
heaven. What I mean is that there must
be regard between man and man through love, devotion, peace, brotherhood,
honesty and unity. To say the same in
understandable language, I would say religion is a way of life, a human
movement. If you want to call it
religion I have no objection: without even a religion of this type it would be
difficult for man to live in this earth.[18]
It can be
said that the fourth implication for secular humanism is accepting religion as
a way of life.
16.5.6 Human Dignity and Human Progress
Once Periyar said, any religion that operates against human dignity or
ill-treats human beings should be destroyed.[19] Thus human dignity is the fifth implication
for secular humanism. According to him
“even if I were to lead a life in hell, I would deem it better than the earthly
one, if I were regarded there as a human being.”[20] Another lucid expression is that “even if I
were to live in a place where I would have to experience much worse sufferings
than those of a hellish life, I would consider it a pleasanter life than this
mean, caste-ridden existence, if only I were respected as a man there.”[21] It was not mere human dignity that Periyar
worried about, but anything that affected any human effort or human progress.[22] He puts his mission, as “my work is the
emancipation of the society. I am for
the eradication of the high and the low.
I want to restore dignity and respect for all men. I want equal justice and equal treatment and
equal opportunities to all. Redemption
of self-respect and restoration of dignity to mankind is the dedicated task of
mine.”[23]
It may be said that the sixth implication for choosing secular humanism
is human progress. Periyar’s concern was not limited to individuals alone but
to society also. He said, “therefore, real progress for society can come only
when the leaders of society disabuse the minds of people of blind faith in
fate, destiny, religion and god.”[24] Here too he did not reject faith as such, but
blind faith or superstitious beliefs.
16.5.7 Morality and Harmony
The seventh implication in secular humanism is high regard for
morality. Since Periyar had accepted
religion as a way of life, for him morality counted more than anything
else. He says, “religious devotion is
for the individual. Character is for
all. There is no loss if there is no
devotion. Everything is lost if there is
no character.”[25] For him, morality is more important because
it is concerned with this world and life in this world. Moreover, this morality leads to harmonious
life.[26]
The eighth implication for secular
humanism can be said as harmonious life.
Periyar was even eager to accept religion if it offered morality and
harmony. He says, “I want a religion in
which there is true brotherhood, unity and discipline.”[27] He was of the opinion that the first obstacle
for harmonious life in this world is religion.[28]
16.5.8 Welfare and Service
Periyar did not stop with human progress; he went further and said, “my
only goal is the welfare of the people.”[29] It is a clear indication to affirm that
Periyar was a genuine secular humanist. He wanted that in everything human
welfare should be given prime importance.
He also said that service makes human life meaningful and joyful. For instance, “compete in doing service to
others and thus seek your glory and joy.”[30] Welfare of humanity and service to humanity
therefore are other implications for secular humanism.
16.5.9 Human Liberation
Periyar’s concern for humanity impelled him to totally ignore the
spiritual dimension of religion. He discouraged
the spiritual dimension of religion in order to liberate humanity from
oppressive structures. Human liberation
from any oppressive structure or bondage is another implication for Secular
Humanism. Periyar was convinced that as
long as people follow Brahmanic rituals and practices, they will not be
liberated from Brahminism. According to Periyar, the money and material wasted
for festivals could be used constructively to educate the masses and also can
be used for feeding the poor and needy so that they also can be liberated from
their bondage.
16.6 Periyar’s Perspective
Periyar, as a secular humanist was not against religion as such but was
against the evils that were perpetuated in the name of religion. His opposition to religion was to purify it from
all supernatural and superstitious elements which were irrational and confusing
rather curtailing human progress. He was of the opinion that everything we do
in this world should help humanity. Otherwise such things should be abandoned.
Sometime religion makes people selfish and to confine to narrow outlook. Such an
attitude causes disharmony in the society. In such a situation, secular
humanism seems to be more meaningful.
[1] R.
Paulraj, Op.cit., P.5.
[2] New
Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol.XIII.
“Secularism”., by T.F. Mc Mahon, pp.36-38.
[3] The
Secular Witness of E.V. Mathew, Introduced by J.R. Chandran, (Madras:
C.L.S., 1972),
p. XVII.
[4] The Secular City
[5] New
Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. VII, “Humanism” by W.J. Ong, pp.215-224.
[6] K.N.
Kadam, “Dr. Ambedkar, the Rationalist and Humanist”, Dr.B. R. Ambedkar The
Emancipator of the
Oppressed, ed by K.N. Kadam, (Bombay:
Popular Prakashan, 1993), p.81.
[7] Ibid.
[8] New
Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. VII, “Secular Humanism”, by W.P. Hass, pp.226-229.
[9] R.
Paulraj, op. cit., p.8.
[11] Ibid., p.15.
[12] Collected
works, Vol. 1, p.100.
[13] Ibid., p.18.
[14] The
Revolutionary sayings of Periyar, trans. By Dr. R. Ganapathy, A Periyar
Cenetenary
Publication, Department of
Information and Public Relations, Government of Tamil Nadu, 1985, p.111.
[15] Collected
works, Vol.1., p.102.
[16] Ibid., p. 111.
[17] Kudi Arasu, 1-7-28.
[18] Periyar
E. V. Ramasami, The Salvation to Shudra Slavery, (Bangalore
Akademy, 1986) , p.23.
[19] Kudi
Arasu, 18-12-27.
[20] The
Revolutionary Sayings of Periyar, op. cit., p.4.
[21] Ibid.
[22] Cf. Periyar
Kalagiyam, Vol.3, p.152.
[23] Collected
works, Vol.1., p.161.
[24]
Periyar, Man and Religion, op. cit., p.2.
[25] The
Revolutionary Sayings of Periyar, op.
cit., p.107.
[26]
Periyar, Man and Religion, op. cit., p.9.
[27] Periyar
E.V. Ramasami, The Salvation to Shudra Slavery, op. cit., p.24.
[28] Periyar
Kalagiyam, Vol.3, p.133.
[29] The
Revolutionary Sayings of Periyar, op.
cit., p.7.
[30] Ibid., p. 108.
Comments
Post a Comment