Introduction To Vedanta - P. Nagaraja Rao 3 страница

⇐ ПредыдущаяСтр 7 из 20Следующая ⇒

ideal. It is beyond logic and also beyond mere mora-

lity. It is not the mere acquisition of knowledge or

mere self-culture, but a certain immediate experience

resulting from both. In that state, all our doubts and’

disbeliefs are dispelled and our strife and tensions*

-are overcome. This practical and pragmatic motive

-is the dominant note in all the systems. This has

made some describe Indian philosophy as purely

religious.

The object of Indian philosophy is not merely to

advance in knowledge or to find a correct way of

thinking. It is more a right way of 'living. “It is

a way of life, not a mere view of life. ” It is essen-

tially a philosophy of values. The Indian philoso-

phical ideal is a direct experience of Reality and not

a mere intellectual mode of apprehending it.

The ideal is significant. Moksa is eternal.

There is no lapse from it once it is attained, no re-

turn from mok$a to samsara. It is absolute, and

never becomes a means to other ends. It is an end

in itself. All the systems describe moksa as their

ideal. The Nyaya declares that moksa results from

knowing the true nature of Reality. The Sankhya

speaks of the destruction of the threefold misery

( duhkhatraya ) as the consequence of the knowing of

what the system takes to be the ultimate nature of

Purusa. The Vedanta declares that the knower of

the Self overcomes all sorrows, that in such knowl-

edge alone perfection lies.

The ideal of moksa has over-shadowed the logi-

cal acumen of the systems. Yet an acquaintance with

the polemical texts of the various systems will bear

out their dialectical subtlety, logical analysis, formal

precision and coherent inter-relation of concepts and

doctrines. A study of these aspects will convince the

student of the philosophical worth of each system.

It will regale the most ardent admirer of metaphysics

and pure thought, and the untrained may well feel

3> affled on occasions. Thus it is clear that there is no

SPIRIT AND SUBSTANCE OF INDIAN PHILOSOPHY 2 T

want of logic in Indian philosophical systems. Reason-

ing and logic also are their methods.

Indian philosophical systems pay great attention,

to epistemology (p ramdnas). Max Muller observes

that the very first question that every one of thef-

Indian systems of philosophy tries to settle is: “How

do we know? ” The Mlmamsakas have formulated the

dictum that “the establishment of cognition of a

thing depends upon the instruments of knowledge. ”

Every system has given us its theory of knowledge,

its doctrines of truth and error.

This leads us to the exact place and function of

reason in Indian philosophy. Philosophy is not, as

in the contemporary West, a mere attempt to analyze-

and clarify concepts, beliefs and meaning? of words.

Philosophy is the search for an experience of Reality.

The subject-matter of Indian philosophy, however,

is not the entire Reality. It is more the true nature

of t he Sell. One of the postulates of Indian philo-

sophy is that the soul is in its intrinsic nature full of

bliss. The realization of the true and native nature

of the Self is another name for moksa. The Self to*

be realized is not the individual ego that we are

aware of. We mistake the ego for the true Self and

that is the cause of our suffering. The ignorance of

the true nature of the Self, which is free from all

impurities, sorrows, etc., is the cause of bondage. Thisi

ignorance is called by different names. Nyaya calls it

mithyd jndna (illusory knowledge). Sankhya calls it

lack of discrimination between Purusa and Prakrti.

Advaita calls it mayd (illusion). Self-realization is

achieved either through self-culture, or as in some

forms of Vedanta, through the Lord’s Grace.

Every system attempts to demarcate the Self

from the not-Self. The Self is the supreme Reality.

This is the reason for philosophy in India being called

adhyutma sdstra and dtma vidya. It is the science

of the Self.

Philosophy in the West begins with the analysis

of experience with the a)d of reason. But the term

experience is narrowed to the limits o i sense experi-

ence. Indian philosophy takes the entire gamut of

experience into account. It includes normal and

super-normal ( laukika and alaukil ca), waking, dream-

ing and deep-sleep ( susupti ) experiences. Experi-

ence has two sides to it: the objective and the sub-

jective. The systems of Indian philosophy are more

interested in the subjective aspects. There are ex-

ceptions to the main trends, of course, in both the

West and the East.

In Indian philosophy the methods of perception

and inference are made use of, but it is held that rea-

son, by its very nature, cannot absolutely and com-

pletely comprehend Reality. Spiritual realization is

a matter of experience. It is self-certifying and be-

yond reason. This experience is the ultimate autho-

rity. All others are valuable in the measure in which

they lead to it. There is no demonstrative knowledge

of Reality. The revelations that are set forth in the

scriptures are jnapaka (reminders) for us and not

kdrakas (makers) of our experience. It is this aspect

that has made Indian philosophy scientific. The final

acceptance is not based on a second-hand report, or

on an inherited authority, but on direct experience.

It is hardly fair to describe such a position as dog-

matic. The student of philosophy has only fixed a

limit for the working of reason. He has no distrust

of reason, but he has assessed its limitations. Reason

does not supply the premises for Indian philosophy.

Revelation sets its working hypothesis, which is finally

accepted after spiritual experience. Reason inter-

prets, clarifies and works out the implications of the

working hypothesis. The spiritual experience of sages

is the premise for reason to work on.

Though the omnicompetence of reason is not ac-

cepted, it is made use of at every stage in the inter-

pretation of the scriptures. It is one of the most

important determinative marks of purport in finding

out the meaning of the scriptural statements. Thet

Indian philosophers’ reliance on scripture is not

authoritarian or dogmatic as it seems at first sight.

They only tell us that the philosophic ideal of

moksa is beyond the purview of perception and in-

ference. Sense perception and reasoning do not ex-

haust Reality — “our reach exceeds our grasp. ” Reve-

lation is the means of communication to us only in

spiritual matters, matters beyond the reach of com-

mon experience. Further, the findings of reason are

inconclusive. Reason can be refuted by better reason.

Reason follows certain premises. Logic is called in

India anviksa, i. e., “examination after. ” It is not an

independent instrument of knowledge. Commenting

on an important sutra, Sankara observes: —

We see how arguments which some clever men

have excogitated with great pains are shown by peo-

ple still more ingenious to be fallacious, and how the

arguments of the latter again are refuted in their

turn by other men; so that on account of the diversity

of men’s opinions, it is impossible to accept mere rea-

soning as having a sure foundation....

Logic has the intrinsic defect that it cannot com-

prehend the ultimate Reality or spiritual experience.

It can only work within the scheme of the network;

of relations. All our rational knowledge is relational.

Spiritual experience of the Supreme Reality does not

admit of divisions. Relational knowledge cannot give

us immediate experience of the indivisible nature of

. Reality.

The validity of reason itself rest’s on something

that cannot be demonstrated by reason. If it rests

on some other reason, we shall have to go on from

one truth to another, which lands us in an infinite

regress. Such tests and criteria of truth as non-con-

tradiction and coherence are not themselves obtained

through reasoning. They are the presuppositions of

reason. Hence it is that reason is given a limited place

in Indian philosophy.

Let us sum up the issue. Spiritual experience

alone can demonstrate the nature of Reality and the

truth of scriptural declarations. Reason adduces the

probability. It cannot give us absolute proof. Not

all scripture is accepted. Only that which has pur-

port is accepted. Sankara observe^ that “ev en if a

thousand scriptural texts proclaim that fire is cold

one is not* bound to accept it. ” The Upanisads de-

clare that there is no admittance into the shrine of

philosophy for those who are* intellectually indolent

or cannot or will not think. The final position is:

Scripture enunciates truths and philosophy seeks to

establish them by arguments. Without the material

supplied by scriptures and faith, logical reason will

be mere speculation and fancy.

All the Indian philosophical systems exhibit a

t wofold unity of outlook. There is first the “spiri-

tual unity” in their outlook. This is brought out

clearly by the common philosophical ideal of moksha,

which is a spiritual experience, not an intellectual

^apprehension* or an occult vision or a physical ecstasy.

The second is the moral unity in outlook. All the

systems, though they give differing accounts of

moska, are at one in holding that it cannot be at-

tained by mere intellectual study. The Katha Upani-

shad declares that “the Self cannot be attained by

instruction or by intellectual power or even through

much hearing” ( nayam atma pravacanena labhyo na

medhaya na bahund srvfcena). The Mundaka Upa -

nisad reiterates the same verse. The Brihaddran -

yaka laments the futility of mere intellectual learn-

ing: “Brood not over the mass of words, for that is

mere weariness of speech” nanudhydyad bahun

sabddn vacho vijalpanam hi tat).

Intellectual study and reasoning must be accom-

panied by moral excellence and ethical virtues. There

must be moral discipline before enlightenment. No spi-

ritual realization is possible without a moral sadhand

{discipline). The insistence on sadhand is common, to

all systems. The Katha Upanisad is emphatic on the

point: “Not he who has not desisted from evil ways,

not he who is not tranquil, not he who is not con-

centrated in mind, not even he whose mind is not

composed can reach the Self through right know-

ledge” ( ndvirato duscharitdn-ndsanto nasamqhitah

Nasanta-manaso vapi prajnanenainam apnuyat). The

importance of the ethical life is insisted on in all the

systems. The state of spiritual realization is not con-

tra-ethical; it transcends the ethical. S ankara has. *

put among the four requisites for the study of the

Vedanta the a cquisition of moral virtues. The other

three are: discrimination of the real frormlhe unreal:

non-attachment toJ: he fruits of earth and heaven; and

the desire for release. The scriptures cannot purify

the man whose moral life is not pure. Some systems-

have insisted on a severe form of self-culture as the

true preparation for spiritual realization. For ex-

ample, Buddhism and Jainism appeal to no extrane-

ous inducements or punishments, to no invocation to

God. Referring to Buddhism, Whitehead observes

that it is “the most colossal example in history of

applied metaphysics. ” The Prabhakara school of

Mimamsa has elevated the moral good as an end in

itself. The author of the great epic Mahdbharata con-

cludes his grand work with this agonizing cry:

“I cry with arms uplifted, yet none heedeth. From

righteousness flow forth pleasure and profit. Why then

do ye not follow Dharma? ”

Ignorant and ill-informed critics at home and

abroad declare that in the Indian philosophical systems

spiritual realization frees men from moral obligations.

This is hardly true if we take into account the lives

and work of the Jivanmuktas (those liberated while

still in the. body). Moral life implies a constraint in

the unregenerate state of man’s life. The agent is

conscious of his obligations and fulfils them with diffi-

culty. In the Jivanmuktas there is no strife and ten-

sion. In the words of Professor Hirivanna^ “they are

not realizing virtue but revealing it. ” Their words-

are wisdom, and their work is consecration. It is only

in this sense, that their acts are spontaneous, that

they are said to be above the ethical sphere. Only i

in this restricted sense is the remark true that Indian!

philosophy is beyond logic and beyond ethics. It I

certainly is not anti-rational or infra-ethical. Its close

correlation of the moral and spiritual life has resulted

in the unity of philosophy and religion in India.

The Indian philosophical systems insist on the

necessity of getting spiritual instruction from a pre-

ceptor. All virile spiritual traditions have proclaim-

ed the necessity of the guru. It is no formality or

evasion of one’s responsibility. The Chandogya UpaJ

nisad declares, “He who has found a preceptor]

knows. ” An illumined teacher teaches a qualified

aspirant the methods of realization. He does not

broadcast the truth from housetops. He who wants

gold must dig; the rest must be content with straw.

The oath is as sharp as a razor’s edge. The aspirant

must have a tranquil mind, utter detachment and a

sharp intelligence.

The s adhanas outlined in the different systems

are identical in many ways. The first stage is the life

of morality lived in a society, discharging all duties

and refraining from wrong. The path of ceremonial

purity cleanses the mind, without which moksa is

impossible. In the words of William Blake, “if thej

doors of perception were cleansed, everything will

appear to man as if it is infinite. For man has closedLi

himself up till he sees all things through the narrow

chinks of his cavern. ” The discharge of moral duties

and the leading of a pure life prepares the aspirant’s

mind for the message from the illumined teacher.

Receiving it is known as sravana. Reflection upon

it is called mamma. It is the process of convincing

oneself through reflection upon the truth learnt by

sravana. After manana, the aspirant begins to

meditate on the truth in an uninterrupted manner

till he has a direct experience of the truth. This is

called aparoksajndna-updsana or nidhidhydsana; it

transforms mediate knowledge into immediate experi-

ence,

The Indian philosophical systems subscribe to a

few common doctrines which are integral to their

thought. They are: the doctrine of Karma and re-

birth; the eternal, non-created, pure nature of the

Soul; the beginninglessness of the world; and its moral

nature.

The doctrine of Karma brings out a faith in the

eternal moral order of the universe. The universe is

not a blind unconscious force, nor is it a chance world.

It is a moral theatre for the art of soul making. We

are what we have made ourselves. We suffer for

what we have done. We reap what we sow. The

fault is not in our stars, but in ourselves. No act is

private and nothing is unimportant. Everything

works out its destiny. The doctrine of Karma does

not imply that actions are uncaused. But they are

determined by no external force. Karma is not cap-

rice. It is being determined by one’s own action.

The doctrine of Karma and the outlook it has

created in the minds of men have been responsible

for the manner of Indians’ lives. Faith in the law of

Karma, in the absolute justice of the rewards and

punishments that fall to the lot of men, makes people

bear their lot without bitterness and hatred.

Closely connected with the doctrine of Karma is

the doctrine of rebirth. One short life is hardly

sufficient for man’s spiritual development. Many re-

births are a spiritual necessity for the development

of man. The doctrine assures us that the moral

values and worth achieved in one life are not lost for

ever. They are carried to other lives. The theory

makes for the moral and spiritual continuity of man.

Nothing good is lost; no moral effort is without its

continued good effects.

Life in this world is regarded by all the systems}

as a preparation for the realization of moksha. “Samsara is a succession of spiritual opportunities, ” says

Dr. Radhakrishnan.

To awaken the spiritual in man and help him

realize it, and thus to humanize man, is the supreme

objective of all institutions, social and religious. Ill-

informed critics are of the opinion that Indian philo-

sophy is ascetic and other-worldly. They declare

that it is world-neglecting, static and life-destroying.

This is an overdrawn and partial picture. Indian

philosophy is dynamic, pragmatic and is inspired by

spiritual vision. It has taken note of the natural

motives, instincts and passions of man and has regu-

lated them. It aims at evolving a civilization which

is naturally productive, socially just, aesthetically

beautiful and spiritually integral. It is not a country

without a capital, nor is it a formless lump of creeds

with no central doctrines to hold it. It is a citadel

with a ring of outworks, intricate but interrelated.

The outworks are being added to from time to time.

(See Appendix )

Chapter IV.

APPROACH TO VEDANTA.

The dominant note that characterizes Indian cul-

true and thought is its passion for religion

and philosophy. We should look for India’s best

contribution to world’s thought in its religion and

philosophy. Indian philosophy is not any and every

kind of approach to the study of Reality. It is the

acceptance of tested knowledge and examined beliefs

in the light of not only the intellect but also inte-

gral experience, resulting in an enlightenment which

puts an end to all sorrows and brings in abiding bliss.

All the systems of Indian philosophy aim at the spiri-

tual realization of the soul which secures it bliss. 2

Some modern critics look upon the systems of

Indian philosopy as not warring with one another

but as constituting a whole, where each system sup-

plements the other and all find their consummation

and fulfilment in Vedanta.

Vedanta is regarded as the perfect system of the

Hindus. Hinduism is the popular name for the reli-

gion of Vedanta. It stands out as the most signi-

ficantly ‘clear native Philosophy of India. ’ It is the

most impressive attempt at system building made in

India. It answers at once to the strict demands of

metaphysics and the deep requirements of a sound

religion, which does not surrender the claims of

reason or the, needs of humanity. Vedanta in one form

or another has become a great contemporary spiritual

force working for the good of humanity. It has at-

tracted the great intellectuals of our age to its fold.

Its influence on world’s thought, particularly that of

the West, is deep and widespread. Vedanta has in-

fluenced the personalities of Schopenhauer, Hart-

mann, Nietzche and Keyserling in Europe. Its in-

fluence on the Irish renaissance is seen through the

personalities of W. B. Yeats and G. W. Russell. Its

great influence on American thought is most vigorous

and is best illustrated in the works of Emerson,

Thoreau, Walt Whitman, Aldous Huxley, Gerald

Heard, Christopher Isherwood and Somerset

Maugham.

1. Louis Renous writes: ‘Religion is not an independent

phenomenon in India. Religion is not conceived as a duty, or a

problem facing every human being on reaching maturity. It is a

heritage and a tradition. It is not an obsession of the human

mind as it is constantly asserted/ ( Religions of Ancient India,

p. 48).

2. With the single exception of the Charvaka school.

Romain Rolland declared: “The only religion that

can have any hold on the intellectual people is the

rationalistic religion of Advaita Vedanta. ” Vedanta

and its fundamental ideas pervade the whole of Indian

literature.

There is a popular Sanskrit couplet 3 that states,

‘Like jackals in a wood, the various systems of philo-

sophy will howl, so long as the lion of Vedanta, with

mane ruffled, does not roar. ’ The words of Aldous

Huxley about Gltd describe the philosophy of

Vedanta also: Vedanta is “one of the clearest and

most comprehensive summaries of the Perennial

philosophy ever to have been made. Hence its en-

during value, [is] not only for Indians, but for all

mankind. ”

The system of Vedanta is twofold: Absolutistic

and Theistic. The former is represented by Sankara’s

3. ‘Tdvad garjanti shdstrdni jambuka vipine yathd,

Na garjati jataksepad ydvad vedanta-kesari. ’

Advaita and the latter by Ramanuja’s Visistadvaita.

All of them build their systems on the authority

of the Scriptures. Scripture is the source for the

fundamental tenets of Vedanta. The Vedas are re-

garded as eternal (nitya) and not as the composition

of any human being. They are the transcript and re-

cord of the revelations vouchsafed to the seers and

sages of India. The Risis are the media of the revela-

tion at the beginning of each aeon. Each Veda is

divided into four sections called Mantras, Brahmanas,

Araiijyakas, and Upanisads. There are four Vedas

called Rig, Yajur, Sama, and Atharvan.

The Mantras are hymns addressed to the various

deities like Indra, Varuna, Agni. They exhibit great

poetic qualities. They are the earliest poetry of the

human mind. The Risis of the Vedas are said to per-

ceive the Mantras. 4 In the words of Tagore, the Vedic

Mantras are the

poetic testament of a people’s collective reaction to the wonder

and awe of existence. A people of vigorous and unsophisticated

imagination awakened at the very dawn of civilization to a sense

of the inexhaustible mystery that is implicit in life. It was a

simple faith of theirs that attributed divinity to every element

and force of Nature, but it was a brave and joyous one, in which

fear of the gods was balanced by trust in them, in which the sense

of mystery only gave enchantment to life, without weighing it

down with bafflement. 5

The Brahmanas lay down the rules and direc-

tions concerning the performance of various sacrifices.

They are prose passages. They do not have any philo-

sophical thought worth the name. The Aranyakas:

mark the transition from the Brahmanas to the Upa-

nisads. They are composed in quiet forest hermitages,

4. ‘Risayo mantra - drastdra h /

5. Hindu Scriptures, ed. by Nicol Macnicol. Foreword by

Rabindranath Tagore. Everyman’s Library, 1938.

APPROACH TO VEDANTA 39

hence the name Aranyakas. They give us allegorical

and mystic interpretation of some of the sacrifices.

Certain forms of meditation are also suggested. The

concluding portions of the Vedas are called the Upa-

nisads. They are described as Vedanta for two rea-

sons: they are the concluding portions of the Vedas

and are also the quintessence of the Philosophy of the

Vedas.

Every system of Vedanta declares that it derives

its doctrines from three texts (Prasthana-traya),

namely, the Upanisads, the Bhagavad-Gita, and the

V edanta-Sutras. Each school holds that its interpre-

tation of the texts is the only correct version and

those of the others wrong. Thus we have the differ-

ent systems of Vedanta being fastened on to one and

the same text. This has been possible because of

the presence of more than one way of looking at the

texts. There is an inherent ambiguity in all these

texts. They all do not speak with one voice. The

text for Vedanta is the Upanisads. The other two

though authoritative, are based on the Upanisads.

The Upanisads are the Sruti, i. e., revelation, while

the Gita and the V edanta-Sutras are Smritis, i. e.,

human compositions embodying the meaning of the

grutis.

Let us advert to the consideration of the

Upanisads. The term Upanisad has been interpreted

in different ways. 6 The etymological meaning of the

word is to sit close by devotedly (sad-upa-ni). It also

means secret knowledge ( guhya adesah). It is ap-

plied to the key passages of the Upanisads. Sankara

interprets the term to mean that which destroys

6. The root sad yields three senses according to Sureshvara —

to decay, to go or to know.

INTRODUCTION TO VEDANTA

ignorance and leads to Brahman. There is a large

number of treatises that go by the name of the Upani-

sads. Only some twelve are interpreted by the

Vedantins. They are ascribed to an age earlier than

that of Gautama the Buddha. 7

The American savant Thoreau exhorted his

countrymen not to read the Neio York Times, but to

read the Eternities, meaning the Upanisads. The Spa-

nish writer J. Mascaro described the Upanisads as

the ‘Himalayas of the Soul’. 8 Just as that great moun-

tain height determines the climate, the rainfall and

the physical features of the peninsula, so do these

heights of light and wisdom determine the scope and

the quality of the spiritual life of the race that in-

habits it. In point of popularity the Upanisads are

second only to the great charter of Hinduism, the

Bhagavad-Gita.

Schopenhauer, after reading them exclaimed:

“And oh, how thoroughly is the mind here washed

clean of all early engrafted Jewish superstitions, . . . !

In the whole world there is no study... so beneficial

and so elevating as that of the Upanisads. It has been

the solace of my life, it will be the solace of my death! ” 1

Max Mtiller, who has translated the Upanisads, des-

cribes them as “the light of the morning, like the pure

air of the mountains, so simple and so true if once

understood. ”

All the Upanisads are not alike. They differ

in their length and methods of exposition. Some are

only a few verses and others are very long. Some are

7. Dr. T. M. P. Mahadevan’s article on Upanisads. History of

Philosophy, Eastern and Western. Pp. 55-75. Edited by Dr. S.

Radhakrishnan and others.

8. Himalayas of the Soul by J. Mascaro. The Wisdom of the

East series. _ Edited by L. Cranmer-Byng and Allan W. Watts.

APPROACH TO VEDANTA

in verse and some in prose. Yet others combine

both. In style and manner also they vary widely;

sometimes we have simple concrete narrative, some-

times abstract metaphysical speculation, and at other

times argumentative dialogue. The tone also fluctu-

ates. There is in some passages high seriousness, and

in others homely humour, and in yet others innu-

merable analogies. 9

The philosophy of the Upanisads is the philo-

sophy of the two Vedantas. Each school, the Monistic

and the Theistic, claims that it solely and completely

⇐ Предыдущая 2 3 4 5 678 9 10 11 Следующая ⇒