印度的女性
本译文由人工智能辅助工具生成，可能存在不准确之处。如需查阅权威文本，请参考英文原文。
AI-translated. May contain errors. For accurate text, refer to the original English.
中文
辨喜斯瓦米："有些人希望在讲座之前就印度教哲学提问，并在讲座之后就印度的一般问题进行提问；但主要的困难是我不知道该讲什么。如果诸位愿意提出任何话题，我将非常乐意就印度教哲学，或关于这个民族的任何方面——其历史、文学——发表演说。女士们、先生们，如果你们能提出建议，我将非常高兴。"
提问者："斯瓦米，我想问一下，印度教哲学中有什么特别的原则，是您希望我们美国人——我们是一个非常务实的民族——所采纳的？而且这些原则能为我们带来什么超越基督教所能给予的益处？"
辨喜斯瓦米："这对我来说很难决定；这取决于你们。如果你们发现有什么东西是你们认为应该采纳的，并且对你们有所帮助，你们就应该去取用。你们知道，我不是一个传教士，我不是四处奔走去让人皈依我的思想。我的原则是，所有这样的思想都是美好而伟大的，因此你们的某些思想也许适合印度的某些人，而我们的某些思想也许适合这里的某些人；所以思想必须广泛传播，遍及全世界。"
提问者："我们想知道你们哲学的成效；你们的哲学和宗教是否将你们的女性提升到了超越我们女性的地位？"
辨喜斯瓦米："你看，这是一个很刁钻的问题：我既喜欢我们的女性，也喜欢你们的女性。"
提问者："那么，您能告诉我们关于你们的女性、她们的习俗和教育，以及她们在家庭中所处的地位吗？"
辨喜斯瓦米："哦，是的，这些事情我非常乐意告诉你们。所以你们今晚想了解的是印度女性，而非哲学和其他事情？"
我必须先说明，你们可能需要多包涵我一些，因为我属于一个从不结婚的修道团体；所以我对女性在各种关系中——作为母亲、作为妻子、作为女儿和姐妹——的了解，必然不如其他男性那般完整。况且，印度，我必须提醒诸位，是一个广袤的大陆，而非仅仅一个国家，其中居住着许多不同的民族。欧洲各国彼此之间的距离更近、更为相似，远不及印度各民族之间的差异之大。如果我告诉你们印度总共有八种不同的语言，你们大概就能有一个粗略的概念了。是不同的语言——而非方言——每一种都有自己的文学。仅印地语就有一亿人使用；孟加拉语约有六千万人使用，等等。此外，北印度的四种语言与南印度的语言之间的差异，比任何两种欧洲语言之间的差异都要大。它们完全不同，其差异之大就如同你们的语言与日语的差异一样，所以你们会惊讶地得知，当我去南印度时，除非遇到一些能说梵语的人，否则我不得不用英语与他们交谈。更进一步，这些不同的民族在礼仪、习俗、饮食、服装以及思维方式上也各不相同。
此外，还有种姓制度。每个种姓都已成为一个独立的种族要素。如果一个人在印度生活足够长的时间，他将能够从面部特征辨别出一个人属于哪个种姓。而且，不同种姓之间的礼仪和习俗也各不相同。所有这些种姓都是排他的；也就是说，他们可以社交聚会，但不会一起吃喝， 也不通婚。在这些方面他们保持着分离。他们可以见面并彼此交友，但也仅止于此。
虽然由于我的身份和职业——作为一个传教者，不断地从一个地方旅行到另一个地方，与社会各阶层接触——（而且在北印度，那里的女性通常不在男性面前露面，在许多地方她们会为了宗教而打破这一规矩，来听我们传教并与我们交谈）——我比许多人有更多的机会了解一般的女性，然而，我若断言自己了解印度女性的一切，那仍是冒失之举。
因此，我将试图把理想呈现在你们面前。在每个国家中，无论男女都代表着一种理想，有意识或无意识地在实现着。个体是某种待体现之理想的外在表达。这样的个体的集合就是民族，而民族也代表着一个伟大的理想；它正朝着那个方向前进。因此，正确的假设是，要了解一个民族，你必须首先了解它的理想，因为每个民族都拒绝以任何其他标准来被评判，除了它自己的标准。
一切成长、进步、福祉或退化都不过是相对的。它们参照某一个标准，而每个人要被理解，就必须参照他自身的完善标准。你们在民族之间更能明显地看到这一点：一个民族认为好的东西，另一个民族未必如此。在这个国家，表亲通婚是完全许可的。但在印度，这是违法的；不仅如此，它会被归入最可怖的乱伦之列。在这个国家，寡妇再婚是完全合法的。在印度的高种姓中，女性再嫁将被视为最大的耻辱。所以你看，我们的观念运作方式如此不同，以一个民族的标准来评判另一个民族，既不公正也不可行。因此，我们必须了解一个民族为自己所树立的理想是什么。在谈论不同民族时，我们从一个一般性的观念出发，即所有民族都有一套伦理准则和同样的理想；然而在实践中，当我们评判他人时，我们认为对我们好的必然对所有人都好；我们所做的就是正确的事，我们不做的事，在别人那里当然就是荒唐的。我这样说并非批评，只是想把真相呈现出来。当我听到西方女性谴责中国女性的缠足时，她们似乎从未想过紧身胸衣对人种造成了远更严重的伤害。这只是一个例子；因为你们必须知道，缠足对人体造成的伤害，连紧身胸衣所造成和正在造成的伤害的百万分之一都不到——当每一个器官都被移位，脊柱弯曲得如同蛇一般。当进行测量时，你们能注意到那些弯曲。我并非要批评，只是想向你们指出这种状况：当你们对其他民族的女性惊骇不已，自以为至高无上时，她们不采纳你们的礼仪和习俗这一事实本身就说明，她们同样对你们惊骇不已。
因此，双方都存在某种误解。有一个共同的平台，一个共同的理解基础，一个共同的人性，这必须成为我们工作的根基。我们应当去发现那完整而完善的人性，它只是在不同地方、不同部分中运作着。上天并未将一切完美赐予一人。你有你的角色要扮演；我，以我卑微的方式，有另一个角色；这里有一个人扮演着小小的角色；那里，又有另一个。完美是所有这些部分的组合。正如个人如此，民族亦然。每个民族都有其角色要扮演；每个民族都有人性的一面要发展。而我们必须将所有这些综合起来；或许在遥远的将来，会出现一个民族，在其中所有这些由不同民族所达到的 奇妙的个体种族之完善，将汇聚在一起，形成一个世界前所未梦的新民族。除此之外，我无意对任何人提出批评。我一生旅行不少；我一直睁大眼睛观察；走得越多，我的嘴巴就闭得越紧。我无意提出任何批评。
那么，印度的女性理想是母亲，首先是母亲，最终也是母亲。"女性"这个词在印度人心中唤起的是母性；而神被称为母亲。作为孩子，每天，在我们还是男孩的时候，我们必须在清晨带着一小杯水，放在母亲面前，母亲将脚趾浸入其中，然后我们将水饮下。
在西方，女性是妻子。女性的观念集中在那里——作为妻子。对于印度的普通人而言，女性的全部力量集中在母性之中。在西方的家庭里，妻子当家。在印度的家庭里，母亲当家。如果母亲进入一个西方家庭，她必须服从于妻子；家是属于妻子的。母亲永远住在我们的家中：妻子必须服从于她。看看这些观念的差异。
现在，我只是提出比较；我将陈述事实，以便我们比较两方面。做这样的比较吧。如果你问："印度女性作为妻子怎样？"印度人会问："美国女性作为母亲在哪里？她——那位万般光荣者——赐予我这副身体的人，她是谁？她在自己体内孕育我九个月的人在哪里？那个在我需要时愿意二十次为我献出生命的人在哪里？那个无论我多么邪恶、多么卑劣，其爱永不消逝的人在哪里？与她相比，那个一旦我稍有不好的对待就跑去离婚法庭的人又在哪里？哦，美国女性！她在哪里？"我在你们的国家找不到她。我没有找到那个认为母亲排在第一位的儿子。当我们临终之时，即使那时，我们也不愿让妻子和子女取代她的位置。我们的母亲！——如果我们先她而去，我们愿意再一次将头枕在她的膝上离世。她在哪里？女性难道只是一个与肉体相连的名号吗？唉！印度人的心灵畏惧所有那些宣称肉体必须依附于肉体的理想。不，不！女性！你不应与任何与肉体相关的事物相连。这个名号已经被永远地称为神圣的，因为还有什么名号是淫欲永远无法接近、情欲永远无法靠近的，除了"母亲"这一个词呢？这就是印度的理想。
我属于一个修道团体，很像你们天主教教会中的托钵修士团；也就是说，我们必须四处行走，衣着简朴，挨家挨户化缘乞食，以此为生，在人们需要时向他们传道，在能找到地方的地方睡觉——我们必须遵循这样的方式。而规矩是，这个修道团体的成员必须称每一位女性为"母亲"；对每一位女性和小女孩我们都要说"母亲"；这就是习俗。来到西方后，那个旧习惯还在，我会对女士们说"是的，母亲"，然而她们感到惊恐。我无法理解她们为何惊恐。后来，我发现了原因：因为那意味着她们老了。在印度，女性的理想是母性——那奇妙的、无私的、饱受苦难的、永远宽恕的母亲。妻子走在后面——如影随形。她必须效仿母亲的生活；那是她的职责。但母亲是爱的理想；她主宰家庭，她拥有家庭。在印度，是父亲鞭策孩子，当孩子做错事时打骂他们，而母亲总是挡在父亲和孩子之间。你看，这里恰恰相反。在这个国家，打孩子已经成了母亲的事，而可怜的父亲插在中间。你看，理想是不同的。我并不是在批评。这一切都是好的——你们所做的；但我们的方式是我们世代以来所受的教导。你们从不会听到母亲诅咒孩子；她是宽恕的，永远宽恕的。我们不说"我们在天上的父"，而是一直说"母亲"；这个观念和这个词在印度人心中永远与无限的爱相联系，母爱是我们这个尘世中最接近神之爱的。"母亲啊，母亲啊，请慈悲吧；我是有罪的！许多孩子曾经有罪，但从来没有有罪的母亲"——伟大的圣人朗普拉萨德（Ramprasad）如是说。
她就在那里——印度的母亲。儿子的妻子进入家庭，成为她的女儿；正如母亲自己的女儿出嫁离去一样，她的儿子娶了妻，带来了另一个女儿，而新妇必须服从于这位王中之王、他母亲的统治。即使是我，从未结婚，属于一个从不结婚的团体，如果我的妻子——假设我已结婚——胆敢让我的母亲不悦，我也会感到厌恶。为什么？难道我不崇敬我的母亲吗？她的儿媳为何不该如此？我所崇敬之人，她为何不崇敬？她是谁，竟敢骑在我头上，统治我的母亲？她必须等到她的女性使命实现之时；而唯一成就女性、使女性成为真正女性的，就是母性。等到她成为母亲；那时她将拥有同样的权利。按照印度人的思想，这是女性的伟大使命——成为母亲。但哦，多么不同！哦，多么不同！我的父母斋戒祈祷，年复一年，为的是让我降生。他们在每个孩子出生之前都要祈祷。我们伟大的律法制定者摩奴（Manu）在给雅利安人（Aryan）下定义时说："通过祈祷而降生者，即为雅利安人。"根据这位伟大的律法制定者，凡非由祈祷而降生的孩子，皆为私生子。必须为孩子祈祷。那些伴随着诅咒而来的孩子，那些在一时疏忽中滑入世间的孩子——因为无法避免——我们能对这样的后代有什么期望呢？美国的母亲们，想想这些吧！在你们内心深处想一想，你们准备好做真正的女性了吗？这不是种族或国家的问题，也不是那种虚假的民族自豪感的问题。在我们这凡尘的生命中，在这充满悲苦和苦难的世界里，谁敢骄傲呢？在神的无限力量面前，我们算什么？但今晚我要问你们这个问题：你们是否都为即将到来的孩子祈祷？你们是否感恩于成为母亲？你们是否认为母性使你们神圣化了？向你们的内心问这个问题。如果你们不这样做，你们的婚姻便是谎言，你们的女性身份便是虚假的，你们的教育便是迷信，而你们的孩子，如果他们不是在祈祷中降生的，将成为人类的诅咒。
看看现在呈现在我们面前的不同理想。从母性中产生出巨大的责任。那里是根基，从那里出发。那么，为什么母亲要受到如此崇敬？因为我们的经典教导，正是产前的影响赋予了孩子向善或向恶的动力。去十万所大学，读一百万本书，与世上所有的学者交往——当你生下来就带着正确的印记时，你会更好。你生来就趋善或趋恶。孩子是天生的神或天生的魔鬼；这是经典所说的。教育和所有这些东西都是后来的事——不过是些琐碎之物。你是什么样的人取决于你的出生。生来就不健康，即使吞下多少间药店的药物，又怎能让你一生健康？有多少过着健康生活的人是从虚弱的父母、血液中毒的父母那里出生的？有多少？没有——一个也没有。我们带着巨大的善或恶的冲力来到世间：生而为魔或生而为神。教育或其他事物不过是些琐碎之物。
因此我们的经典说：引导产前的影响。为什么母亲应受崇敬？因为她使自己纯洁。她有时经历了严苛的苦行以保持自身纯洁如纯洁本身。因为，请注意，在印度没有哪个女性会想到把自己的身体交给任何男人；那是她自己的。英国人作为一项改革，现在引入了他们所谓的"恢复夫妻同居权"，但没有印度人会利用这项权利。当一个男人与妻子有肉体接触时，她通过怎样的祈祷和怎样的誓愿来控制着这些情境！因为那孕育孩子的行为本身，就是神最神圣的象征。这是夫妻之间最伟大的祈祷，这一祈祷将把另一个灵魂带到世间，而这个灵魂承载着善或恶的巨大力量。这是玩笑吗？这只是简单的神经满足吗？这只是身体的粗野享乐吗？印度人说：不，千万次的不！
然而随之而来的是另一个观念。我们起初的观念是，理想乃是对母亲的爱——她自身饱受一切苦难、宽容一切。对母亲的崇敬，其源泉就在于此。为了将我带到世间，她是一位圣者；她保持身体纯洁、心灵纯洁、饮食纯洁、衣着纯洁、想象纯洁，年复一年，因为我将要降生。因为她做到了这些，她值得受到崇敬。接下来是什么呢？与母性相连的是为妻之道。
你们西方人是个人主义的。我想做这件事因为我喜欢；我要挤开每一个人。为什么？因为我喜欢。我要自己的满足，所以我娶了这个女人。为什么？因为我喜欢她。这个女人嫁给了我。为什么？因为她喜欢我。到此为止。她和我是整个无限世界中唯一的两个人；我娶了她，她嫁给了我——没有其他人受到伤害，没有其他人需要负责。
你们的约翰和珍妮可以走进森林，在那里过他们的生活；但当他们必须生活在社会中时，他们的婚姻对我们意味着巨大的善或恶。他们的子女可能是真正的魔鬼——纵火、杀人、抢劫、偷盗、酗酒、丑陋、卑劣。
那么，印度社会秩序的基础是什么？是种姓法则。我为种姓而生，为种姓而活。我不是说我自己，因为加入了修道团体后，我们就在种姓之外了。我说的是那些生活在世俗社会中的人。生在种姓之中，一生都必须按照种姓的规定来生活。换句话说，用你们国家当今的语言来说，西方人生而为个人主义者，而印度人则是社会主义者——完全的社会主义者。那么，经典说：如果我允许你自由地去和任何你喜欢的女人结婚，而女人也可以嫁给任何她喜欢的男人，那会发生什么？你们坠入爱河了；而那女人的父亲也许是个疯子或肺病患者。女孩爱上了一个男人的面孔，而那个男人的父亲是一个嗜酒如命的酒鬼。那么法律怎么说呢？法律规定所有这样的婚姻都是非法的。酒鬼、肺病患者、疯子等人的子女不得结婚。畸形者、驼背者、疯癫者、白痴——绝对不允许他们结婚，法律如此规定。
但穆斯林来自阿拉伯，他有自己的阿拉伯法律；于是阿拉伯沙漠的法律被强加给了我们。英国人带着他的法律而来；他尽可能地将其强加给我们。我们是被征服者。他说："明天我要娶你的姐妹。"我们能怎么办？我们的法律说，那些出自同一家族的人，即使相隔百代，也不得通婚，那是非法的，那会使种族退化或使其不育。这是不允许的，就此为止。所以在我的婚姻中我没有发言权，我的姐妹也没有。一切由种姓决定。
我们有时在孩童时期就结婚了。为什么？因为种姓说：如果他们无论如何都要在未经本人同意的情况下结婚，那不如趁早在他们还没有产生爱情之前就让他们结婚；如果让他们分开长大，男孩可能会喜欢上别的女孩，女孩可能会喜欢上别的男孩，然后就会有坏事发生；于是种姓说，在那里就把它截断。我不在乎我的姐妹是畸形的、好看的还是难看的：她是我的姐妹，这就够了；他是我的兄弟，这就是我所需要知道的一切。所以他们会彼此相爱。你们也许会说："哦！他们失去了很多乐趣——一个男人爱上一个女人、一个女人爱上一个男人的那种精妙情感。这种像兄弟姐妹一样相爱、好像不得不如此的方式，是一种平淡无奇的事。"那就随它去吧；但印度人说，"我们是社会主义者。我们不愿为了一个男人或一个女人的精妙快感而将痛苦加诸数百人之上。"
他们就这样结婚了。妻子随丈夫回家；这被称为第二次婚礼。幼年时的婚礼被视为第一次婚礼，他们分别与各自的母亲和父母一起长大。当他们长大后，会举行第二个仪式，称为第二次婚礼。然后他们在一起生活，但与丈夫的父母同住一个屋檐下。当她成为母亲时，她便轮到自己接任家族中女王的位置。
现在来看另一项特殊的印度制度。我刚才告诉你们，在最初的两三个种姓中，寡妇不被允许再婚。即使她们愿意也不行。当然，这对许多人来说是一种苦难。不可否认，并非所有寡妇都非常乐意接受，因为不再婚意味着她们必须过学生的生活。也就是说，学生不能吃肉或鱼，不能饮酒，只能穿白色的衣服， 诸如此类；有许多规定。我们是一个僧侣的民族——总是在苦修，而且我们乐在其中。你看，女性从不饮酒或吃肉。当我们还是学生时，这对我们来说是一种苦难，但对女孩们却不是。我们的女性在想到吃肉时会觉得有失尊严。有些种姓的男性有时吃肉；女性从不吃。然而，不被允许再婚对许多人来说一定是一种苦难；我对此确信无疑。
但我们必须回到那个观念上去；他们是极度社会主义的。在每个国家的高种姓中，你会发现统计数据表明女性的数量总是远多于男性。为什么？因为在高种姓中，世代以来女性过着安逸的生活。她们"也不劳苦，也不纺线，然而所罗门极荣华的时候，他所穿戴的还不如她们中的一个呢"。而可怜的男孩们，他们像苍蝇一样死去。在印度人们说，女孩有猫的九条命。你会在统计数据中看到，在很短的时间内女性的数量就超过了男性，除了现在她们也开始像男孩一样努力工作。高种姓中女孩的数量远远多于低种姓。低种姓的情况恰恰相反。在那里所有人都辛勤劳作；女性有时更辛苦一些，因为她们还要做家务。但是，请注意，我本来绝不会想到这一点，但你们的一位美国旅行家马克·吐温写了关于印度的这些话："尽管西方批评家们对印度教习俗说了种种，我从未见过一个女人像在某些欧洲国家那样被套在犁上与牛一起拉，或被套在车上与狗一起拉。我在印度没有看到任何女人或女孩在田间劳作。在（火车的）两旁和前方，棕色身躯、赤裸的男人和男孩们在田间犁地。但没有一个女人。在这两个小时里，我没有看到一个女人或女孩在田间劳作。在印度，即使是最低种姓的人也从不做任何繁重的工作。与其他国家的同一阶层相比，他们通常过得相当轻松；至于犁地，她们从来不做。" 这就是事实。
那么就是这样。在低种姓中，男性的数量多于女性；你们自然会预期什么呢？女性获得更多的结婚机会，因为男性的数量更多。
关于寡妇不得再婚这类问题：在最初的两个种姓中，女性的数量不成比例地多，于是出现了一个两难困境。要么面对不能再婚的寡妇问题和痛苦，要么面对无法获得丈夫的年轻女子问题。是面对寡妇问题，还是老姑娘问题？就是这样；两者必居其一。现在，再回到印度人的思维是社会主义的这一观念上。它说："好吧，你看！我们把寡妇问题视为较轻的一个。"为什么？"因为她们已经有过机会了；她们已经结过婚了。如果她们失去了机会，至少她们已经有过一次。坐下来，安静些，想想那些可怜的姑娘们——她们连一次结婚的机会都没有过。"上帝保佑你们！我记得有一次在牛津街，那时已过了十点钟，所有那些女士们都来那里购物，成百上千的；有个男人，一个美国人，四下张望说："天哪！我想知道她们中有多少人能嫁出去！"所以印度人对寡妇们说："好吧，你们已经有过机会了，现在我们非常、非常遗憾这样的不幸降临在你们身上，但我们无能为力；还有其他人在等着。"
然后宗教进入了这个问题；印度教作为一种安慰介入了。因为，请注意，我们的宗教教导说婚姻是不好的东西，它只适合软弱之人。真正有灵性的男人或女人根本不会结婚。所以信教的女性说："好吧，上主给了我一个更好的机会。结婚有什么用？感谢神，礼拜神， 我爱人有什么用？"当然，她们并非都能把心思放在神上。有些人觉得这简直不可能。她们不得不忍受；但其他可怜的人不应为她们而受苦。现在我把这个交给你们来判断；但这就是他们在印度的想法。
接下来我们谈谈作为女儿的女性。印度家庭中的巨大困难在于女儿。女儿和种姓加在一起毁了可怜的印度人，因为你看，她必须在同一种姓内结婚，而且要在种姓内完全相同的序列中；所以可怜的人有时不得不倾家荡产才能让女儿嫁出去。男方的父亲为他的儿子索要很高的彩礼，这个可怜的人有时不得不变卖一切，仅仅是为了给女儿找一个丈夫。印度人生活中的巨大困难就是女儿。而且，有趣的是，梵语中"女儿"这个词是"duhitā"。其真正的词源是，在古代，家中的女儿习惯于挤牛奶，所以"duhitā"这个词来自"duh"，意为挤奶；而"女儿"（daughter）这个词实际上的意思是挤奶女工。后来，他们给"duhitā"这个词——挤奶女工——赋予了新的含义——她是那个榨干了全家所有乳汁的人。这就是第二层含义。
以上就是我们印度女性所持有的不同关系。正如我已经告诉你们的，母亲的地位最高，妻子次之，女儿在她们之后。这是一个最为错综复杂的等级体系。外国人即使在那里住上多年也无法理解。例如，我们有三种人称代词；在我们的语言中它们类似于动词。一种非常尊敬，一种居中，最低的就像英语中的thou和thee。对儿童和仆人用最低的那个。居中的那个用于同辈。你看，这些要应用于生活中所有错综复杂的关系中。例如，对我的姐姐，我一生中始终使用代词"āpani"，但她对我说话时从不用这个词；她对我说"tumi"。她绝不应该，即使无意中也不应对我说"āpani"，因为那将意味着一种诅咒。对上辈的爱，应始终以那种语言形式来表达。这就是习俗。同样，我也绝不敢以"tu"或"tum"或"tumi"来称呼我的姐姐或哥哥，更不用说母亲或父亲了。至于直呼父母的名字，我们绝不会那样做。在我了解这个国家的习俗之前，有一次我受到了极大的震惊：在一个非常体面的家庭里，儿子站起来直呼母亲的名字！不过后来我也习惯了。这就是这个国家的习俗。但在我们那里，我们从不在父母面前直呼他们的名字。即使在他们面前，也总是用第三人称复数。
由此我们看到了，在我们男男女女的社会生活中以及我们的亲属关系等级中，存在着最为复杂的网络。我们不在长辈面前与妻子交谈；只有当我们独处或有晚辈在场时才可以。如果我已婚，我可以在我的妹妹、侄子或侄女面前与妻子交谈；但不能在姐姐或父母面前。我根本不能和姐妹们谈论她们的丈夫。这个观念是，我们是一个修道的民族。整个社会组织都将这一个理念放在首位。婚姻被视为不洁之事，是较低层次的事。因此，爱情的话题是绝不会被谈论的。我不能在姐妹面前读小说，或在兄弟们面前，或在母亲面前，甚至在其他人面前。我会合上书。
此外，饮食也属于同一范畴。我们不在长辈面前进食。我们的女性从不在男性面前进食，除非那些男性是孩子或晚辈。妻子宁死也不愿，如她所说，在丈夫面前"嚼东西"。有时候，比如兄弟姐妹可以一起吃饭；如果我和我的姐妹在吃饭， 丈夫一走到门口，我的姐妹就停止吃饭，而那可怜的丈夫赶紧飞奔出去。
这些是这个国家特有的习俗。其中有几个我在其他国家也注意到过。由于我自己从未结婚，我对妻子的了解并不完善。母亲、姐妹——我知道她们是什么样的；别人的妻子我也见过；从中我得出了我告诉你们的这些。
至于教育和文化，这完全取决于男性。也就是说，男性文化水平高的地方，女性也高；男性不高的地方，女性也不高。从最古老的时代开始，你们知道，按照古老的印度教习俗，初等教育属于村庄制度。自远古以来，所有的土地都是国有的，如你们所说——属于政府。从来没有私人的土地权利。印度的税收来自土地，因为每个人都从政府那里持有一定数量的土地。这些土地由一个社区共同持有，可能是五户、十户、二十户或一百户人家。他们管理全部的土地，向政府缴纳一定数量的赋税，供养一位医生、一位村庄教师，等等。
你们中读过赫伯特·斯宾塞著作的人，也许记得他所说的在欧洲曾经尝试过的"修道院式"教育制度，在某些地方取得了成功；也就是说，有一位教师，由村庄供养。这些小学是非常初等的，因为我们的方法非常简单。每个男孩带一张小草席；他最初用的纸是棕榈叶。先用棕榈叶，纸太贵了。每个男孩铺好他的小草席坐在上面，取出墨水和书本开始书写。一点算术、一些梵语语法、一点语言和记账——这些就是小学教授的内容。
一本由一位老者教授的伦理小书，我们把它背了下来，我记得其中一课： "为了村庄的利益，一个人应当舍弃他的家庭；
为了国家的利益，他应当舍弃他的村庄；
为了人类的利益，他可以舍弃他的国家；
为了世界的利益，舍弃一切。"
书中有这样的诗句。我们把它们背下来，由老师和学生共同讲解。这些东西男孩和女孩一起学习。后来，教育就有了分化。古老的梵语大学主要由男孩组成。女孩极少进入那些大学；但也有少数例外。
在当今时代，按照欧洲模式接受高等教育的动力更大了，舆论倾向于让女性获得这种更高的教育。当然，印度也有一些人不希望如此，但那些支持者占了上风。一个奇怪的事实是，牛津和剑桥至今对女性关闭大门，哈佛和耶鲁也是如此；但加尔各答大学在二十多年前就向女性敞开了大门。我记得我毕业那年，有几个女孩也出来毕业了——同样的标准、同样的课程、一切都与男孩相同；而且她们的表现确实非常出色。我们的宗教完全不反对女性受教育。女孩应当以这种方式接受教育；她们也应当如此被培养；在古书中我们发现，大学同样接纳男孩和女孩，但后来整个国家的教育被忽视了。在外族统治下你能期望什么？外国征服者来到那里不是为了我们的利益；他要的是钱。我辛苦学习了十二年， 成为加尔各答大学的毕业生；如今在我的国家我每月几乎只能挣五美元。你们能相信吗？这确实是事实。所以这些外国人的教育机构不过是为了用少量金钱培养出一大批有用的实用型奴隶——造就一群文员、邮政局长、电报操作员，诸如此类。就是如此。
结果是，男孩和女孩的教育都被忽视了，完全被忽视了。在那片土地上有很多事情应该去做；但你们必须始终记住——如果你们愿意原谅我，并允许我引用你们自己的一句谚语——"适用于鹅的酱汁也适用于公鹅。"你们那些生于外国的女士们总是为印度女性的苦难哭泣，却从不关心印度男性的苦难。她们都在流咸涩的眼泪。但那些小女孩嫁给了谁？有人被告知她们都嫁给了老头子，就问道："那年轻的男人怎么办？什么！所有的女孩都嫁给了老人，只嫁给老人？"我们生来就是老的——也许那里的所有男人都是。
印度民族的理想是灵魂的自由。这个世界什么都不是。它是一个幻象、一场梦。这一生只是无数百万世中的一世。整个自然界都是幻（Maya），都是幻象，是幻象的疫区。这就是哲学。婴儿对生命微笑，以为它如此美好；但几年后他们将不得不回到起点。他们以哭泣开始生命，也将以哭泣离开。国家在其青春的活力中以为他们无所不能："我们是大地的神。我们是上帝的选民。"他们以为全能的上帝给了他们一份特许状，让他们统治全世界，推进祂的计划，做任何他们喜欢的事，把世界翻个底朝天。他们有一份特许状去抢劫、杀害、屠戮；上帝赐予了他们这一切，而他们这样做是因为他们不过是婴儿。一个又一个帝国崛起——光辉灿烂、壮丽辉煌——如今却已消逝——不知去向何方；它在毁灭中也许曾是巨大的。
水珠落在莲叶上翻滚几下便瞬间跌落，我们的凡尘生命亦复如是。无论我们转向何方，都是废墟。今天矗立着森林的地方，曾经是拥有巨大城市的强盛帝国。这就是印度心灵中占主导地位的思想、基调和色彩。我们知道，你们西方人有着年轻的血液在血管中奔涌。我们知道，国家如人，各有其时。希腊在哪里？罗马在哪里？不久前那个强盛的西班牙人在哪里？谁知道在这一切中印度会变成什么样？它们就这样诞生，又这样消亡；它们兴起又衰落。印度人从孩提时代就知道那个蒙古入侵者，他的大军地上无力可挡，他在你们的语言中留下了可怖的"鞑靼人"这个词。印度人已经学到了他的教训。他不想像今天的婴儿那样喋喋不休。西方人，你们有什么话就说吧。这是你们的时代。前进吧，婴儿们，往前走；尽情说你们的吧。这是婴儿们喋喋不休的时代。我们已经学到了教训，安静下来了。你们今天有了一点财富，就俯视我们。好吧，这是你们的时代。喋喋不休吧，婴儿们，喋喋不休吧——这就是印度人的态度。
万主之主不可以空泛的言辞来证得。万主之主甚至不可以智力的力量来证得。祂不因巨大的征服力量而可得。那个知道万物之隐秘源头并知道其余一切皆为短暂的人，万主之主便来到他面前；对其他人则不然。印度通过千千万万年的经验学到了她的教训。她已将面容转向了祂。她犯了许多错误；一堆又一堆的垃圾堆积在这个民族之上。不要紧；那又怎样？清除垃圾、清洁城市， 以及所有这些又有什么用？那能给予生命吗？那些拥有精良制度的国家，它们也在消亡。那些制度，那些五天造就、第六天破碎的锡铂西方制度，又算什么？这些弹丸小国中的一个也不能维持两个世纪之久。而我们的制度经受了千古的考验。印度人说："是的，我们已经埋葬了地球上所有的古老国家，并站在这里准备也埋葬所有的新民族，因为我们的理想不是这个世界，而是那个世界。你的理想是什么，你就将成为什么。如果你的理想是凡尘的，如果你的理想属于这个大地，那么你也将是凡尘的。如果你的理想是物质，物质你也将成为。看啊！我们的理想是灵。唯有灵存在，其他一切都不存在；像祂一样，我们永远活着。"
English
Swami Vivekananda: "Some persons desire to ask questions about Hindu Philosophy before the lecture and to question in general about India after the lecture; but the chief difficulty is I do not know what I am to lecture on. I would be very glad to lecture on any subject, either on Hindu Philosophy or on anything concerning the race, its history, or its literature. If you, ladies and gentlemen, will suggest anything, I would be very glad."
Questioner: "I would like to ask, Swami, what special principle in Hindu Philosophy you would have us Americans, who are a very practical people, adopt, and what that would do for us beyond what Christianity can do."
Swami Vivekananda: "That is very difficult for me to decide; it rests upon you. If you find anything which you think you ought to adopt, and which will be helpful, you should take that. You see I am not a missionary, and I am not going about converting people to my idea. My principle is that all such ideas are good and great, so that some of your ideas may suit some people in India, and some of our ideas may suit some people here; so ideas must be cast abroad, all over the world."
Questioner: "We would like to know the result of your philosophy; has your philosophy and religion lifted your women above our women?"
Swami Vivekananda: "You see, that is a very invidious question: I like our women and your women too."
Questioner: "Well, will you tell us about your women, their customs and education, and the position they hold in the family?"
Swami Vivekananda: "Oh, yes, those things I would be very glad to tell you. So you want to know about Indian women tonight, and not philosophy and other things?"
I must begin by saying that you may have to bear with me a good deal, because I belong to an Order of people who never marry; so my knowledge of women in all their relations, as mother, as wife, as daughter and sister, must necessarily not be so complete as it may be with other men. And then, India, I must remember, is a vast continent, not merely a country, and is inhabited by many different races. The nations of Europe are nearer to each other, more similar to each other, than the races in India. You may get just a rough idea of it if I tell you that there are eight different languages in all India. Different languages -- not dialects -- each having a literature of its own. The Hindi language, alone, is spoken by 100,000,000 people; the Bengali by about 60,000,000, and so on. Then, again, the four northern Indian languages differ more from the southern Indian languages than any two European languages from each other. They are entirely different, as much different as your language differs from the Japanese, so that you will be astonished to know, when I go to southern India, unless I meet some people who can talk Sanskrit, I have to speak to them in English. Furthermore, these various races differ from each other in manners, customs, food, dress, and in their methods of thought.
Then, again, there is caste. Each caste has become, as it were, a separate racial element. If a man lives long enough in India, he will be able to tell from the features what caste a man belongs to. Then, between castes, the manners and customs are different. And all these castes are exclusive; that is to say, they would meet socially, but they would not eat or drink together, nor intermarry. In those things they remain separate. They would meet and be friends to each other, but there it would end.
Although I have more opportunity than many other men to know women in general, from my position and my occupation as a preacher, continuously travelling from one place to another and coming in contact with all grades of society --(and women, even in northern India, where they do not appear before men, in many places would break this law for religion and would come to hear us preach and talk to us)-- still it would be hazardous on my part to assert that I know everything about the women of India.
So I will try to place before you the ideal. In each nation, man or woman represents an ideal consciously or unconsciously being worked out. The individual is the external expression of an ideal to be embodied. The collection of such individuals is the nation, which also represents a great ideal; towards that it is moving. And, therefore, it is rightly assumed that to understand a nation you must first understand its ideal, for each nation refuses to be judged by any other standard than its own.
All growth, progress, well - being, or degradation is but relative. It refers to a certain standard, and each man to be understood has to be referred to that standard of his perfection. You see this more markedly in nations: what one nation thinks good might not be so regarded by another nation. Cousin - marriage is quite permissible in this country. Now, in India, it is illegal; not only so, it would be classed with the most horrible incest. Widow - marriage is perfectly legitimate in this country. Among the higher castes in India it would be the greatest degradation for a woman to marry twice. So, you see, we work through such different ideas that to judge one people by the other's standard would be neither just nor practicable. Therefore we must know what the ideal is that a nation has raised before itself. When speaking of different nations, we start with a general idea that there is one code of ethics and the same kind of ideals for all races; practically, however, when we come to judge of others, we think what is good for us must be good for everybody; what we do is the right thing, what we do not do, of course in others would be outrageous. I do not mean to say this as a criticism, but just to bring the truth home. When I hear Western women denounce the confining of the feet of Chinese ladies, they never seem to think of the corsets which are doing far more injury to the race. This is just one example; for you must know that cramping the feet does not do one - millionth part of the injury to the human form that the corset has done and is doing -- when every organ is displaced and the spine is curved like a serpent. When measurements are taken, you can note the curvatures. I do not mean that as a criticism but just to point out to you the situation, that as you stand aghast at women of other races, thinking that you are supreme, the very reason that they do not adopt your manners and customs shows that they also stand aghast at you.
Therefore there is some misunderstanding on both sides. There is a common platform, a common ground of understanding, a common humanity, which must be the basis of our work. We ought to find out that complete and perfect human nature which is working only in parts, here and there. It has not been given to one man to have everything in perfection. You have a part to play; I, in my humble way, another; here is one who plays a little part; there, another. The perfection is the combination of all these parts. Just as with individuals, so with races. Each race has a part to play; each race has one side of human nature to develop. And we have to take all these together; and, possibly in the distant future, some race will arise in which all these marvellous individual race perfections, attained by the different races, will come together and form a new race, the like of which the world has not yet dreamed. Beyond saying that, I have no criticism to offer about anybody. I have travelled not a little in my life; I have kept my eyes open; and the more I go about the more my mouth is closed. I have no criticism to offer.
Now, the ideal woman in India is the mother, the mother first, and the mother last. The word woman calls up to the mind of the Hindu, motherhood; and God is called Mother. As children, every day, when we are boys, we have to go early in the morning with a little cup of water and place it before the mother, and mother dips her toe into it and we drink it.
In the West, the woman is wife. The idea of womanhood is concentrated there -- as the wife. To the ordinary man in India, the whole force of womanhood is concentrated in motherhood. In the Western home, the wife rules. In an Indian home, the mother rules. If a mother comes into a Western home, she has to be subordinate to the wife; to the wife belongs the home. A mother always lives in our homes: the wife must be subordinate to her. See all the difference of ideas.
Now, I only suggest comparisons; I would state facts so that we may compare the two sides. Make this comparison. If you ask, "What is an Indian woman as wife?", the Indian asks, "Where is the American woman as mother? What is she, the all - glorious, who gave me this body? What is she who kept me in her body for nine months? Where is she who would give me twenty times her life, if I had need? Where is she whose love never dies, however wicked, however vile I am? Where is she, in comparison with her, who goes to the divorce court the moment I treat her a little badly? O American woman! where is she?" I will not find her in your country. I have not found the son who thinks mother is first. When we die, even then, we do not want our wives and our children to take her place. Our mother!-- we want to die with our head on her lap once more, if we die before her. Where is she? Is woman a name to be coupled with the physical body only? Ay! the Hindu mind fears all those ideals which say that the flesh must cling unto the flesh. No, no! Woman! thou shalt not be coupled with anything connected with the flesh. The name has been called holy once and for ever, for what name is there which no lust can ever approach, no carnality ever come near, than the one word mother? That is the ideal in India.
I belong to an Order very much like what you have in the Mendicant Friars of the Catholic Church; that is to say, we have to go about without very much in the way of dress and beg from door to door, live thereby, preach to people when they want it, sleep where we can get a place -- that way we have to follow. And the rule is that the members of this Order have to call every woman "mother"; to every woman and little girl we have to say "mother"; that is the custom. Coming to the West, that old habit remained and I would say to ladies, "Yes, mother", and they are horrified. I could not understand why they should be horrified. Later on, I discovered the reason: because that would mean that they are old. The ideal of womanhood in India is motherhood -- that marvellous, unselfish, all - suffering, ever - forgiving mother. The wife walks behind -- the shadow. She must imitate the life of the mother; that is her duty. But the mother is the ideal of love; she rules the family, she possesses the family. It is the father in India who thrashes the child and spanks when there is something done by the child, and always the mother puts herself between the father and the child. You see it is just the opposite here. It has become the mother's business to spank the children in this country, and poor father comes in between. You see, ideals are different. I do not mean this as any criticism. It is all good -- this what you do; but our way is what we have been taught for ages. You never hear of a mother cursing the child; she is forgiving, always forgiving. Instead of "Our Father in Heaven", we say "Mother" all the time; that idea and that word are ever associated in the Hindu mind with Infinite Love, the mother's love being the nearest approach to God's love in this mortal world of ours. "Mother, O Mother, be merciful; I am wicked! Many children have been wicked, but there never was a wicked mother"-- so says the great saint Ramprasad.
There she is -- the Hindu mother. The son's wife comes in as her daughter; just as the mother's own daughter married and went out, so her son married and brought in another daughter, and she has to fall in line under the government of the queen of queens, of his mother. Even I, who never married, belonging to an Order that never marries, would be disgusted if my wife, supposing I had married, dared to displease my mother. I would be disgusted. Why? Do I not worship my mother? Why should not her daughter - in - law? Whom I worship, why not she? Who is she, then, that would try to ride over my head and govern my mother? She has to wait till her womanhood is fulfilled; and the one thing that fulfils womanhood, that is womanliness in woman, is motherhood. Wait till she becomes a mother; then she will have the same right. That, according to the Hindu mind, is the great mission of woman -- to become a mother. But oh, how different! Oh, how different! My father and mother fasted and prayed, for years and years, so that I would be born. They pray for every child before it is born. Says our great law - giver, Manu, giving the definition of an Aryan, "He is the Aryan, who is born through prayer". Every child not born through prayer is illegitimate, according to the great law - giver. The child must be prayed for. Those children that come with curses, that slip into the world, just in a moment of inadvertence, because that could not be prevented -- what can we expect of such progeny? Mothers of America, think of that! Think in the heart of your hearts, are you ready to be women? Not any question of race or country, or that false sentiment of national pride. Who dares to be proud in this mortal life of ours, in this world of woes and miseries? What are we before this infinite force of God? But I ask you the question tonight: Do you all pray for the children to come? Are you thankful to be mothers, or not? Do you think that you are sanctified by motherhood, or not? Ask that of your minds. If you do not, your marriage is a lie, your womanhood is false, your education is superstition, and your children, if they come without prayer, will prove a curse to humanity.
See the different ideals now coming before us. From motherhood comes tremendous responsibility. There is the basis, start from that. Well, why is mother to be worshipped so much? Because our books teach that it is the pre - natal influence that gives the impetus to the child for good or evil. Go to a hundred thousand colleges, read a million books, associate with all the learned men of the world -- better off you are when born with the right stamp. You are born for good or evil. The child is a born god or a born demon; that is what the books say. Education and all these things come afterwards -- are a mere bagatelle. You are what you are born. Born unhealthful, how many drug stores, swallowed wholesale, will keep you well all through your life? How many people of good, healthy lives were born of weak parents, were born of sickly, blood - poisoned parents? How many? None -- none. We come with a tremendous impetus for good or evil: born demons or born gods. Education or other things are a bagatelle.
Thus say our books: direct the pre - natal influence. Why should mother be worshipped? Because she made herself pure. She underwent harsh penances sometimes to keep herself as pure as purity can be. For, mind you, no woman in India thinks of giving up her body to any man; it is her own. The English, as a reform, have introduced at present what they call "Restitution of conjugal rights", but no Indian would take advantage of it. When a man comes in physical contact with his wife, the circumstances she controls through what prayers and through what vows! For that which brings forth the child is the holiest symbol of God himself. It is the greatest prayer between man and wife, the prayer that is going to bring into the world another soul fraught with a tremendous power for good or for evil. Is it a joke? Is it a simple nervous satisfaction? Is it a brute enjoyment of the body? Says the Hindu: no, a thousand times, no!
But then, following that, there comes in another idea. The idea we started with was that the ideal is the love for the mother -- herself all - suffering, all - forbearing. The worship that is accorded to the mother has its fountain - head there. She was a saint to bring me into the world; she kept her body pure, her mind pure, her food pure, her clothes pure, her imagination pure, for years, because I would be born. Because she did that, she deserves worship. And what follows? Linked with motherhood is wifehood.
You Western people are individualistic. I want to do this thing because I like it; I will elbow every one. Why? Because I like to. I want my own satisfaction, so I marry this woman. Why? Because I like her. This woman marries me. Why? Because she likes me. There it ends. She and I are the only two persons in the whole, infinite world; and I marry her and she marries me -- nobody else is injured, nobody else responsible.
Your Johns and your Janes may go into the forest and there they may live their lives; but when they have to live in society, their marriage means a tremendous amount of good or evil to us. Their children may be veritable demons -- burning, murdering, robbing, stealing, drinking, hideous, vile.
So what is the basis of the Indian's social order? It is the caste law. I am born for the caste, I live for the caste. I do not mean myself, because, having joined an Order, we are outside. I mean those that live in civil society. Born in the caste, the whole life must be lived according to caste regulation. In other words, in the present - day language of your country, the Western man is born individualistic, while the Hindu is socialistic -- entirely socialistic. Now, then, the books say: if I allow you freedom to go about and marry any woman you like, and the woman to marry any man she likes, what happens? You fall in love; the father of the woman was, perchance, a lunatic or a consumptive. The girl falls in love with the face of a man whose father was a roaring drunkard. What says the law then? The law lays down that all these marriages would be illegal. The children of drunkards, consumptives, lunatics, etc., shall not be married. The deformed, humpbacked, crazy, idiotic -- no marriage for them, absolutely none, says the law.
But the Mohammedan comes from Arabia, and he has his own Arabian law; so the Arabian desert law has been forced upon us. The Englishman comes with his law; he forces it upon us, so far as he can. We are conquered. He says, "Tomorrow I will marry your sister". What can we do? Our law says, those that are born of the same family, though a hundred degrees distant, must not marry, that is illegitimate, it would deteriorate or make the race sterile. That must not be, and there it stops. So I have no voice in my marriage, nor my sister. It is the caste that determines all that.
We are married sometimes when children. Why? Because the caste says: if they have to be married anyway without their consent, it is better that they are married very early, before they have developed this love: if they are allowed to grow up apart, the boy may like some other girl, and the girl some other boy, and then something evil will happen; and so, says the caste, stop it there. I do not care whether my sister is deformed, or good - looking, or bad - looking: she is my sister, and that is enough; he is my brother, and that is all I need to know. So they will love each other. You may say, "Oh! they lose a great deal of enjoyment -- those exquisite emotions of a man falling in love with a woman and a woman falling in love with a man. This is a sort of tame thing, loving each other like brothers and sisters, as though they have to." So be it; but the Hindu says, "We are socialistic. For the sake of one man's or woman's exquisite pleasure we do not want to load misery on hundreds of others."
There they are -- married. The wife comes home with her husband; that is called the second marriage. Marriage at an early age is considered the first marriage, and they grow up separately with women and with their parents. When they are grown, there is a second ceremony performed, called a second marriage. And then they live together, but under the same roof with his mother and father. When she becomes a mother, she takes her place in turn as queen of the family group.
Now comes another peculiar Indian institution. I have just told you that in the first two or three castes the widows are not allowed to marry. They cannot, even if they would. Of course, it is a hardship on many. There is no denying that not all the widows like it very much, because non - marrying entails upon them the life of a student. That is to say, a student must not eat meat or fish, nor drink wine, nor dress except in white clothes, and so on; there are many regulations. We are a nation of monks -- always making penance, and we like it. Now, you see, a woman never drinks wine or eats meat. It was a hardship on us when we were students, but not on the girls. Our women would feel degraded at the idea of eating meat. Men eat meat sometimes in some castes; women never. Still, not being allowed to marry must be a hardship to many; I am sure of that.
But we must go back to the idea; they are intensely socialistic. In the higher castes of every country you will find the statistics show that the number of women is always much larger than the number of men. Why? Because in the higher castes, for generation after generation, the women lead an easy life. They "neither toil nor spin, yet Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of them". And the poor boys, they die like flies. The girl has a cat's nine lives, they say in India. You will read in the statistics that they outnumber the boys in a very short time, except now when they are taking to work quite as hard as the boys. The number of girls in the higher castes is much larger than in the lower. Conditions are quite opposite in the lower castes. There they all work hard; women a little harder, sometimes, because they have to do the domestic work. But, mind you, I never would have thought of that, but one of your American travellers, Mark Twain, writes this about India: "In spite of all that Western critics have said of Hindu customs, I never saw a woman harnessed to a plough with a cow or to a cart with a dog, as is done in some European countries. I saw no woman or girl at work in the fields in India. On both sides and ahead (of the railway train) brown - bodied naked men and boys are ploughing in the fields. But not a woman. In these two hours I have not seen a woman or a girl working in the fields. In India, even the lowest caste never does any hard work. They generally have an easy lot compared to the same class in other nations; and as to ploughing, they never do it."
Now, there you are. Among the lower classes the number of men is larger than the number of women; and what would you naturally expect? A woman gets more chances of marriage, the number of men being larger.
Relative to such questions as to widows not marrying: among the first two castes, the number of women is disproportionately large, and here is a dilemma. Either you have a non - marriageable widow problem and misery, or the non - husband - getting young lady problem. To face the widow problem, or the old maid problem? There you are; either of the two. Now, go back again to the idea that the Indian mind is socialistic. It says, "Now look here! we take the widow problem as the lesser one." Why? "Because they have had their chance; they have been married. If they have lost their chance, at any rate they have had one. Sit down, be quiet, and consider these poor girls -- they have not had one chance of marriage." Lord bless you! I remember once in Oxford Street, it was after ten o'clock, and all those ladies coming there, hundreds and thousands of them shopping; and some man, an American, looks around, and he says, "My Lord! how many of them will ever get husbands, I wonder!" So the Indian mind said to the widows, "Well, you have had your chance, and now we are very, very sorry that such mishaps have come to you, but we cannot help it; others are waiting."
Then religion comes into the question; the Hindu religion comes in as a comfort. For, mind you, our religion teaches that marriage is something bad, it is only for the weak. The very spiritual man or woman would not marry at all. So the religious woman says, "Well, the Lord has given me a better chance. What is the use of marrying? Thank God, worship God, what is the use of my loving man?" Of course, all of them cannot put their mind on God. Some find it simply impossible. They have to suffer; but the other poor people, they should not suffer for them. Now I leave this to your judgment; but that is their idea in India.
Next we come to woman as daughter. The great difficulty in the Indian household is the daughter. The daughter and caste combined ruin the poor Hindu, because, you see, she must marry in the same caste, and even inside the caste exactly in the same order; and so the poor man sometimes has to make himself a beggar to get his daughter married. The father of the boy demands a very high price for his son, and this poor man sometimes has to sell everything just to get a husband for his daughter. The great difficulty of the Hindu's life is the daughter. And, curiously enough, the word daughter in Sanskrit is "duhita". The real derivation is that, in ancient times, the daughter of the family was accustomed to milk the cows, and so the word "duhita" comes from "duh", to milk; and the word "daughter" really means a milkmaid. Later on, they found a new meaning to that word "duhita", the milkmaid -- she who milks away all the milk of the family. That is the second meaning.
These are the different relations held by our Indian women. As I have told you, the mother is the greatest in position, the wife is next, and the daughter comes after them. It is a most intricate and complicated series of gradation. No foreigner can understand it, even if he lives there for years. For instance, we have three forms of the personal pronoun; they are a sort of verbs in our language. One is very respectful, one is middling, and the lowest is just like thou and thee . To children and servants the last is addressed. The middling one is used with equals. You see, these are to be applied in all the intricate relations of life. For example, to my elder sister I always throughout my life use the pronoun apani, but she never does in speaking to me; she says tumi to me. She should not, even by mistake, say apani to me, because that would mean a curse. Love, the love toward those that are superior, should always be expressed in that form of language. That is the custom. Similarly I would never dare address my elder sister or elder brother, much less my mother or father, as tu or tum or tumi. As to calling our mother and father by name, why, we would never do that. Before I knew the customs of this country, I received such a shock when the son, in a very refined family, got up and called the mother by name! However, I got used to that. That is the custom of the country. But with us, we never pronounce the name of our parents when they are present. It is always in the third person plural, even before them.
Thus we see the most complicated mesh - work in the social life of our men and our women and in our degree of relationship. We do not speak to our wives before our elders; it is only when we are alone or when inferiors are present. If I were married, I would speak to my wife before my younger sister, my nephews or nieces; but not before my elder sister or parents. I cannot talk to my sisters about their husbands at all. The idea is, we are a monastic race. The whole social organisation has that one idea before it. Marriage is thought of as something impure, something lower. Therefore the subject of love would never be talked of. I cannot read a novel before my sister, or my brothers, or my mother, or even before others. I close the book.
Then again, eating and drinking is all in the same category. We do not eat before superiors. Our women never eat before men, except they be the children or inferiors. The wife would die rather than, as she says, "munch" before her husband. Sometimes, for instance, brothers and sisters may eat together; and if I and my sister are eating, and the husband comes to the door, my sister stops, and the poor husband flies out.
These are the customs peculiar to the country. A few of these I note in different countries also. As I never married myself, I am not perfect in all my knowledge about the wife. Mother, sisters -- i know what they are; and other people's wives I saw; from that I gather what I have told you.
As to education and culture, it all depends upon the man. That is to say, where the men are highly cultured, there the women are; where the men are not, women are not. Now, from the oldest times, you know, the primary education, according to the old Hindu customs, belongs to the village system. All the land from time immemorial was nationalised, as you say -- belonged to the Government. There never is any private right in land. The revenue in India comes from the land, because every man holds so much land from the Government. This land is held in common by a community, it may be five, ten, twenty, or a hundred families. They govern the whole of the land, pay a certain amount of revenue to the Government, maintain a physician, a village schoolmaster, and so on.
Those of you who have read Herbert Spencer remember what he calls the "monastery system" of education that was tried in Europe and which in some parts proved a success; that is, there is one schoolmaster, whom the village keeps. These primary schools are very rudimentary, because our methods are so simple. Each boy brings a little mat; and his paper, to begin with, is palm leaves. Palm leaves first, paper is too costly. Each boy spreads his little mat and sits upon it, brings out his inkstand and his books and begins to write. A little arithmetic, some Sanskrit grammar, a little of language and accounts -- these are taught in the primary school.
A little book on ethics, taught by an old man, we learnt by heart, and I remember one of the lessons: "For the good of a village, a man ought to give up his family;
For the good of a country, he ought to give up his village;
For the good of humanity, he may give up his country;
For the good of the world, everything."
Such verses are there in the books. We get them by heart, and they are explained by teacher and pupil. These things we learn, both boys and girls together. Later on, the education differs. The old Sanskrit universities are mainly composed of boys. The girls very rarely go up to those universities; but there are a few exceptions.
In these modern days there is a greater impetus towards higher education on the European lines, and the trend of opinion is strong towards women getting this higher education. Of course, there are some people in India who do not want it, but those who do want it carried the day. It is a strange fact that Oxford and Cambridge are closed to women today, so are Harvard and Yale; but Calcutta University opened its doors to women more than twenty years ago. I remember that the year I graduated, several girls came out and graduated -- the same standard, the same course, the same in everything as the boys; and they did very well indeed. And our religion does not prevent a woman being educated at all. In this way the girl should be educated; even thus she should be trained; and in the old books we find that the universities were equally resorted to by both girls and boys, but later the education of the whole nation was neglected. What can you expect under foreign rule? The foreign conqueror is not there to do good to us; he wants his money. I studied hard for twelve years and became a graduate of Calcutta University; now I can scarcely make $5.00 a month in my country. Would you believe it? It is actually a fact. So these educational institutions of foreigners are simply to get a lot of useful, practical slaves for a little money -- to turn out a host of clerks, postmasters, telegraph operators, and so on. There it is.
As a result, education for both boys and girls is neglected, entirely neglected. There are a great many things that should be done in that land; but you must always remember, if you will kindly excuse me and permit me to use one of your own proverbs, "What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander." Your foreign born ladies are always crying over the hardships of the Hindu woman, and never care for the hardships of the Hindu man. They are all weeping salt tears. But who are the little girls married to? Some one, when told that they are all married to old men, asked, "And what do the young men do? What! are all the girls married to old men, only to old men?" We are born old -- perhaps all the men there.
The ideal of the Indian race is freedom of the soul. This world is nothing. It is a vision, a dream. This life is one of many millions like it. The whole of this nature is Maya, is phantasm, a pest house of phantasms. That is the philosophy. Babies smile at life and think it so beautiful and good, but in a few years they will have to revert to where they began. They began life crying, and they will leave it crying. Nations in the vigour of their youth think that they can do anything and everything: "We are the gods of the earth. We are the chosen people." They think that God Almighty has given them a charter to rule over all the world, to advance His plans, to do anything they like, to turn the world upside down. They have a charter to rob, murder, kill; God has given them this, and they do that because they are only babes. So empire after empire has arisen -- glorious, resplendent -- now vanished away -- gone, nobody knows where; it may have been stupendous in its ruin.
As a drop of water upon a lotus leaf tumbles about and falls in a moment, even so is this mortal life. Everywhere we turn are ruins. Where the forest stands today was once the mighty empire with huge cities. That is the dominant idea, the tone, the colour of the Indian mind. We know, you Western people have the youthful blood coursing through your veins. We know that nations, like men, have their day. Where is Greece? Where is Rome? Where that mighty Spaniard of the other day? Who knows through it all what becomes of India? Thus they are born, and thus they die; they rise and fall. The Hindu as a child knows of the Mogul invader whose cohorts no power on earth could stop, who has left in your language the terrible word "Tartar". The Hindu has learnt his lesson. He does not want to prattle, like the babes of today. Western people, say what you have to say. This is your day. Onward, go on, babes; have your prattle out. This is the day of the babies, to prattle. We have learnt our lesson and are quiet. You have a little wealth today, and you look down upon us. Well, this is your day. Prattle, babes, prattle -- this is the Hindu's attitude.
The Lord of Lords is not to be attained by much frothy speech. The Lord of Lords is not to be attained even by the powers of the intellect. He is not gained by much power of conquest. That man who knows the secret source of things and that everything else is evanescent, unto him He, the Lord, comes; unto none else. India has learnt her lesson through ages and ages of experience. She has turned her face towards Him. She has made many mistakes; loads and loads of rubbish are heaped upon the race. Never mind; what of that? What is the clearing of rubbish, the cleaning of cities, and all that? Does that give life? Those that have fine institutions, they die. And what of institutions, those tinplate Western institutions, made in five days and broken on the sixth? One of these little handful nations cannot keep alive for two centuries together. And our institutions have stood the test of ages. Says the Hindu, "Yes, we have buried all the old nations of the earth and stand here to bury all the new races also, because our ideal is not this world, but the other. Just as your ideal is, so shall you be. If your ideal is mortal, if your ideal is of this earth, so shalt thou be. If your ideal is matter, matter shalt thou be. Behold! Our ideal is the Spirit. That alone exists, nothing else exists; and like Him, we live for ever."
文本来自Wikisource公共领域。原版由阿德瓦伊塔修道院出版。