'God Of Humans', 'God Of Universe' And Savarkar

What were Vir Savarkar's ideas about the divine and sacred?

In an essay on god, Savarkar poetically extols the beauty of the world, the grandeur of natural world and the wonders that make human life possible and make it flourish.

How kind and magnificent the god who created all these in such a perfect manner. It is the typical argument for a benevolent omnipotent, omniscient designer:

But that is a prelude to what Savarkar was intending to deconstruct — the concept of the ‘god of the human beings.’

To Savarkar such a god exists only in the figment of wishful, and somewhat pitiable, imagination of humans. Because if one observes nature beyond such silly sentimentality, it is definitely not designed for humans or for that matter any specific species. Pointing out the fallacy of such a ‘god of the human beings’ he wrote:

Had Savarkar just stopped here then he would be just a mechanical rationalist and nothing more. But, he asks us to further look into the mystery of the universe, jettisoning the juvenile conception of ‘god of humans’. Then, he introduces the 'god of the universe'.

In a way, this is an impersonal god of Spinoza and Einstein. But Savarkar does not vouch for the ontological reality of even such a cosmic impersonal god. He writes:

The genius of Savarkar here is that he did not imply that the ‘god of the humans’ is false and the ‘god of the universe’ is true.

Note that even the phrase, ‘god of the universe,’ is ‘to satiate human spiritual hunger’. It makes one feel at ease with what science reveals.

The vastness of space and time, as revealed by science, can lead a relatively young species with an evolved faculty of contemplation to feel utterly lost in the meaninglessness of existence. Yet human species should survive and hence a sense of religion, a sacredness is built in human species by evolution. In the words ‘to satiate human spiritual hunger’ Savarkar shows the deep understanding of this evolutionary dimension of religion.

The next great insight from Savarkar is about the harmony of the inner and the outer worlds.

To this day, many in Hindu Right easily gravitate towards pseudo-science because they confuse the inner cartography of the Puranas with the outer reality of the physical universe that science reveals. Savarkar in the following lines gives us an extraordinary insight. The inner universe exists like the outer universe. He writes:

The authors of our Puranas have long hinted that the Puranas happen in an inner sacred space with liminal points in the outer forming the sacred geometry. Carl Jung would have called it individuation of the deepest kind. Here, Savarkar provides a blueprint for the Hindus to understand their Puranas avoiding the pitfall of literalism and pseudoscience.

Once more, Savarkar's unique approach to deconstructing and reconceptualising god does not reject the idea of the 'god of human beings.' Instead, he recognises the potential danger of monopolistic religious fundamentalism inherent in that conception of god.

A lesser rationalist would have called for the destruction of the conceptions of the ‘god of human beings’. Not Savarkar. He harmonises the ‘god of human beings’ with the ‘god of the universe’:

But can this feeling be directed to ethics as well? It is quite easy to dismiss the ‘god of human beings’ but that is also a source of ethics in the most fundamental way. Yet the shadow of that source of ethics is the belief in a god that dehumanises other sections of humanity in terms of belief system.

Savarkar again shows the way here.

He brings in rationalism. Discover what shall help humanity in the long run and in a sustained way. Abide by the values and ‘laws’ that emanate from those discoveries:

The brilliance of Savarkar, as highlighted in the paper from which these quotes are drawn, lies in his ability to present one of the most spiritually beautiful conceptions of the divine. This conception appeals simultaneously to intellect, aesthetics, and emotions.

He refrains from arguments for or against the existence of any supernatural deity and the undercurrent of the paper presupposes the absence of any deity. Yet the article is filled with both bhakti and jnana.

Both Spinoza and later Einstein felt the need to transcend the god of humans — a personal god to whom one prays — and move to the impersonal cosmic godhead.

Even as evolution proves the absence of any designer, neurobiology and primate studies show the evolutionary roots of our spirituality. Climate change and ecological crisis necessitate that we acknowledge the earth as a super-system that does not care much about our own existence. This system is called ‘Gaia’.

If there can be a single essay that anticipates and harmonises all these philosophical conceptions and scientific discoveries and developments, then it is this essay by Savarkar. This is an essay that should be translated across languages and included in every curriculum of Indian knowledge systems, for it is the quintessential wisdom of Vedic rishis expressed in the words of Sanghathanacharya Swantantrya Veer Vinayak Damodar Savarkar.

You can read the entire essay by Savarkar 'Conceptualising God', translated by Dr Aditya Dhopatkar here.