Introduction: A
‘critical’ approach to the study of religion predetermines a philosophical
enquiry as it embraces the abstract and metaphysical realms which empirical
science cannot attest. Accordingly, it is Radhakrishnan, a great philosopher
and a leader, who champions in the comparative study of philosophy and
religion. He was born on 5th September, 1888 at Tirutani, near
Chennai in an Orthodox Hindu family. His fervent desire to study religion
started at his days in the Christian missionary institutions where he was
confronted with criticisms of his hold-dear Hinduism. Thus, his queries began
as he accessed the New Testament in his institution and started to speculate
the defaults on Hinduism. His life and works truly proclaim his being an
exception. As Dev Raj Bali puts, he realized the platonic dream of philosopher
becoming king by being the Vice – President and the President of India. After
achieving all that a human can cherish to achieve in this life, Radhakrishnan
passed away quietly in 1975.[1]
Yet his works still speak loudly with voluminous writings on many subjects like
religion, culture and philosophy which this paper will be dealing with,
particularly his approach to the study of religion.
1. His understanding
of Religion: Radhakrishnan defines religion as the insight into the nature
of Reality (darśana) or experience of
Reality (anubhāva). This experience
is not an emotional thrill but is the response of the whole personality, the
integrated self to the central reality. It is a specific attitude of the self,
itself and no other, though it is mixed up generally with intellectual views,
aesthetic forms, and moral valuations.[2]
Religion is the self–manifestation of the Ultimate Reality in human. It is the
awareness of our real nature in God. Religion should be accepted as a
discipline to achieve the goal of spiritual ascent. There is great need to
understand the true meaning of religion. Only this can prevent complete
annihilation of the human race.[3]
All religions teach that God is in human, that human is
possessed of the power to choose between good and evil, and this power to make
a choice make him/her a human and distinguishes him/her from the animal, and
leads sacredness to human life. According to Radhakrishnan, the religious human
transcends the limitations imposed on him by his material nature or social
conditions and enlarges the creative purpose. Religion is a dynamic process, a
renewed effort of the creative impulse working through exceptional individuals
and seeking to uplift humankind to a new level.’[4] Radhakrishnan’s
own aim seems to be to lead philosophy of religion into the relatively safe
road of metaphysics. “Philosophy of Religion,” he defines as “religion come to
an understanding of itself.” He makes a sustained effort to vindicate religious
experience as the plane where the realms of essence and existence meet, and as
such, as the most indispensable subject-matter for metaphysics., if metaphysics
is to be nothing short of a complete theory of reality. What religious
experience is capable of revealing is the complete reality, reality as it is.[5]
2. Religious
Experience: Radhakrishnan states that śravaṇa,
manana and nididhyāsana (hearing, reflection and disciplined meditation) are
the three stages of religious life. One has to rise from one stage to another.[6]
Thus, religious experience is of a self-certifying character (svarassiddha). It carries its own
credentials. But the seers are compelled to justify their inmost convictions in
a way that satisfies the thought of the age.[7] According
to him, religions must be lived and experienced. In fact, it is life
experienced in its depth. Religion aims at spiritual fulfillment but it cannot
be realized if human sticks to mere outer forms of religion without religious
experience.[8]
Experience is not limited to the perpetual experience (repeated forever) or the
data of introspection. It should take into account para-normal (beyond normal)
phenomena and spiritual insights.[9]
3. Doctrines of
Religion
3.1 Ultimate
Realty: For Radhakrishnan, the
ultimate reality is God and It is absolute. He holds that God is all inclusive
and any way to approach Him is the right approach. He tried to prove that the
idea of God as Father, as Love, as Person, and as Trinity in Christianity is
already present in Hinduism. According to him, the primacy of Being is the
ground of all existence. Following the Upanishads, Radhakrishnan maintains that
there is only one Being and that
Being is the Divine Spirit… “To say that God exists… is to say that God is
Being itself. Ultimate reality is one, not many; it is Spirit, not matter”. Thus,
he is an avowed monist who clearly identifies God and the absolute. His
position is advaita-absolute monism.
He goes on to say, “This is the concept of the Brahman formulated in the
Upanishads. It is the ‘I am that I am’ of the Christian Scripture.[10]
The Brahman has two aspects- nirguna, the
impersonal, indescribable Absolute and saguna,
the personal and qualitatively describable God. The impersonality of the
Brahman does not mean that it is purely a negative concept. It simply means
that it exceeds both the mere finite and the infinite.[11] Like
Śankara, Radhakrishnan maintains that Īśvara,
as the Supreme Personal Spirit, is lower than the Absolute (Brahman). In the Higher Brahman (Parabrahman), all is one without
external and internal distinctions. The material world also is part and parcel of
the Brahman, in which the material nature is transformed into spiritual.[12]
3.2. The
Doctrine of Man and its concomitance
3.2.1.
Man (sic): For Radhakrishnan, out of all creation, man is created with an
ideal by which he should select the law he should obey. With the natural law in
man’s heart, man is more than he is able to comprehend of himself. The nature of man is constituted by three
factors- cognition, emotion and will. Radhakrishnan also believes that the
freedom and self-consciousness can help man to raise himself to the divine
status or degrade himself into animal life. He has Divine image in him and is
free to act and is thus a responsible being.[13]
3.2.2.
Sin: Man’s freewill is the source of selfish ambition as well as of
disinterested love. This freewill, when misused, is a sin. Man has divine image
in him and is free to act and is thus a responsible being. But according to
Radhakrishnan, sin enters into a man when he forgets that he is a divine being
and lives the life of flesh only. Radhakrishnan agrees with the Hebrew theory
that the source of suffering is the consequences of sin. Man loves his false
self and not God, thus evil arose.[14]
3.2.3.
As for life after death, Radhakrishnan
affirms that in immortality which equates- eternal life, life after death- what
counts is personal effort. While the goal may be fixed, the attainment of it
depends on the active co-operation of the selves. Religious conceptions of
heaven and hell suggest a deathless life after death. Though it is conceivable
that the life after death may be so indefinitely long as to admit of a
continuous development of the process begun in this life, it is not probable
that there will be such a change from the present order of experience. Thus,
life after death is continuous with our present existence.[15]
3.2.4.
Concerning Rebirth,
Radhakrishnan holds that rebirth is a change within a general structural
progression. Death is not a unique event in our progression. It is part of a
continually recurring rhythm of nature, marking a crisis in the history of the
individual. It is the moment when the self assumes a new set of conditions.
Since the self is not an atomic nucleus quite separate from the organism as a
whole, it will continue to be of the same character after death. The life of human
self does not centre in the body, it is the body which dies when left by the
self, the self does not die.[16]
So there is no random inhabitation of bodies - any self cannot inhabit any
body. Rebirth in the form of animals and angels is incoherent. He infers that
rebirth in animal form is a figure of speech for rebirth with animal qualities.
3.2.5.
The human soul represents an
order of reality different from that of plants and animals. It is a more
complex organization with its own specific nature. It is more intimately bound
up with its environment. It has two features of continuity with the past
(karma) and creative advance into the future (freedom). It is as incomplete as
any other organism and so perpetually moves on.[17]
The soul of human whose nature is infinite has infinite and unlimited
possibilities in it which distinguish us from animals. “Our troubles are due to
the fact that we do not realize the God in us.”[18]
3.2.6.
Salvation: Salvation is different
from survival, liberation (mokşa)
from rebirth (samsāra) and life
eternal. For him salvation is to be earned. Quoting from the Bible Radhakrishnan emphasizes that
if a person wants forgiveness
than s/he must forgive others and gives references like The Five Foolish
Virgins, Sheep, Talents, wedding garments for feast etc. He believes that no
individual can obtain salvation till the others also obtain it. On the other
hand, rejects the Christian idea of getting salvation in this life, immediately
by having faith in Jesus Christ.[19]
He gives his reasons for such a belief that God and the world form an organic
unity, and the world consists of matter and the individual finite ātmans. So long as God exists or matter
exists or any of the ātmans exists,
the others also must exist as such. Salvation is becoming one with the Higher
Brahman, and that is possible when God becomes one with the Brahman. But God
does not become one with the Brahman if a single ātman remains without salvation. Therefore, the enlightened ātmans have to stay at the stage of God,
and work with Him/Her for the enlightenment of the other ātmans.[20]
3.2.7.
Intuition: Religion holds that human exists on the level of supernature and
also that of nature. Religion is the reaction of the whole individual to the
whole Reality; integral intuitions that reveal a Being who reveals Him/Herself
to us, are our authority of religion.[21] Immediate
religious self–consciousness or intuitive awareness is the common ground of all
religions. In intuition, reality is directly known; the sense of reality
penetrates our own consciousness and becomes one with us eternally. This
intuitive religious experience is the key to our fellowship in the Religion of
the Spirit. In Radhakrishnan’s thought reason, intuition and religious or
mystical experience are integral elements constituting the absolute knowledge.[22]
This intuition arises from an intimate fusion of mind with reality. It is
knowledge by being and not by mere senses or by symbols. [23]
3.2.8.
Spirit: Besides consciousness in the animal world (perception and action),
and self-consciousness in the human (intelligence and will), we have a spiritual
consciousness or super-consciousness, a level of experience at which new
aspects of reality reveal themselves. At the spiritual level, the individual
becomes aware of the substance of spirit, not as an object of intellectual
cognition but as an awareness in which the subject becomes its own object, in
which the timeless and the spaceless is aware of itself as the basis and
reality of all experience. There is a universal spirit which is higher than the
self-conscious individual that is present and operative in self-conscious mind
that the latter is dissatisfied with any finite form it may assume, thus leads
to unbelief. Spirit is something essentially and purely inward to be known only
from within, and yet when it is known it leaves nothing outside. Thus,
spiritual being is the vital contact with reality which is the source of all
values.[24]
3.3.
World: Radhakrishnan holds that the world has been created by God at
certain point of time Christians believe, but he differentiates it from the
Christian idea of creation out of nothing. He states, “It was created by God
out of a pre-existent formless matter and love is the motive in creation”[25]
He thinks creation is transformation of the eternal idea of God’s plan of
space-time and it is a gradual process. It is the activity of
self-communication which belongs to God’s life. There is order in the universe
and all the orders are the expressions of mind and so the universe is the
expression of a supreme mind and not by chance.
4. Authority of Scripture: Radhakrishnan’s understanding of scripture as
the scientific records of spiritual insights holds not only for Hinduism, but
for all religious creeds. Correctly understood, the various scriptures found in
the religions of the world are not an infallible revelation, but scientific
hypotheses: “The creeds of religion correspond to theories of science.” He thus
recommends that “intuitions of the human soul… should be studied by the methods
which are adopted with such great success in the region of positive science.” True
religion, argues Radhakrishnan, remains open to experience and encourages an
experimental attitude with regard to its experiential data. Hinduism, more than
any other religion, exemplifies this scientific attitude.[26]
5. Religion as a
binding force/ Aims of Religion: For Radhakrishnan, a true religious soul will
identify with the social and human revolution and guide humankind for a better
and fuller life. All religions are only varied historical expressions of the
one truth. True religion is not polluted by creeds, dogmas, sentiments or
superstitions. It affirms the reality of only spirit. He further says that the
different religions are not rival competing forces, but fellow labourers in the
same great task.[27]
It is only in religious experience that sense of separation is transcended and
one feels wholehearted commitment to the cause of peace and human unity. He
further states that ‘the different religions should be regarded comrades in a
joint enterprise in facing the common problems of the peaceful co–existence of
the peoples, international welfare and justice, racial equality and political
independence of all peoples. Different religions are to be used as building
stones for development of human culture in which the adherents of different
religions may be fraternally united as the children of one supreme.’[28]
Religion may start with the individual but it must end in a
fellowship. The purpose of religion is spiritual awakening in human so that
they rise above ‘base delusions of caste and creed, of wealth and power.’ For
this reason Radhakrishnan emphasized that the need of the world today is for a
Religion of the Spirit, which will give purpose to life, which will not demand
any evasion or ambiguity, which will reconcile the ideal and the real.’[29]
True religion is born in spirit and aims at complete freedom from limitations
which imprison the human mind. It must help us in direct experience of reality.
Human lives at two levels, the level of nature and the level of spirit.
Function of religion is to bridge the gulf between the two, so that the real
human is known. The real nature of human finds expression in the spiritual
nature whereby all divisions and distinctions become irrelevant and life is
experienced in its totality. Religion should help in the cultivation of inner
life and spiritual freedom. Thus it becomes Catholic, it becomes a rational and
spiritual experience. [30]
6. Inter–Religious
Relations: According to Radhakrishnan, though each religion takes its own
path to the realization of the goal of union with the divine, they are all one
in their essence and in what is eternal in them. Hence, no religion can lay
claim to exclusiveness or superiority. All religions are imperfect expressions
of the immutable essence of religion or the ultimate truth. Radhakrishnan
rejects exclusivism and supports pluralism in theology of religions. He argues
that belief in exclusive claims and monopolies of religious truth has been a
frequent source of pride, fanaticism and strife. The same truth is clothed in
different languages and symbols by different religions and all the different
religions can be used for correction and enrichment. It is religious fellowship
and not religious fusion which he suggests and one need not adopt religious
syncretism by giving up one’s own faith.[31]
Evaluation & Conclusion:
We can now infer that Radhakrishnan’s approach to the study of religion is a
combination of a rationalist, humanistic and monistic approach. He asserts that
a religion which does not give importance to social reform and international
justice has no appeal to the modern mind. Service to human is the ultimate
expression of any kind of religion. By religion is meant an instrument of
social change, social transformation. It is the inner spiritual regeneration of
the individual which can result in compassionate action in society. But in his
attempt to present God as all inclusive, he is often criticized as an
apologist, as he constantly attacks Christians as being narrow and elevates
Hinduism. However, it has to be noted that, in some points, he disagrees with
Hinduism and incorporated Christian terms like Trinity etc. After all, we
cannot deny the fact that his contributions were the stepping stone in the
field of the approach to study religion particularly in India.
Web/Bibliography
Aleaz, K. P. Jesus in Neo–Vedānta. A Meeting of Hinduism and
Christianity. Delhi: Kant Publications, 1995.
Bali, Dev Raj Modern Indian Thought. Rammohun Roy to Jayprakash Narayan. New
Delhi: Sterling Publishers Private Limited, 1988.
Mahadevan, T. M. P. &
G. V. Saroja, Contemporary Indian Philosophy. New Delhi: Sterling Publishers
Private Limited, 1985.
Munshi , Dr K.M. &
Dr R.R. Diwakar, Radhakrishnan Reader. Bombay: Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, 1969.
Radhakrishnan, S. The Hindu View of Life. London: George
Allen & Unwin Ltd., 1927.
Radhakrishnan, S. Recovery of Faith. London: George Allen
& Unwin, 1956.
Radhakrishnan, S. The Heart of Hindusthan. Madras:
Natesan, 1932.
Radhakrishnan, S. Eastern Religions and Western thought.
London: Oxford University Press, 1940.
Radhakrishnan, S. An Idealist view of Life. London: George
Allen & Unwin Ltd [1932], 1951.
Raju, P. T. The Philosophical Traditions of India.
Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers Private Ltd, 1998.
Samartha, S.J. Introduction to Radhakrishnan.New Delhi: Y.M.C.A. Publishing House,
1964.
www.iep.utm.edu
[1] Dev Raj Bali, Modern Indian Thought. Rammohun Roy to
Jayprakash Narayan (New Delhi: Sterling Publishers Private Limited, 1988), 224
– 226.
[2] S. Radhakrishnan, The Hindu View of Life (London: George
Allen & Unwin Ltd., 1927), 15.
[3] T. M. P. Mahadevan and G. V.
Saroja, Contemporary Indian Philosophy
(New Delhi: Sterling Publishers Private Limited, 1985), 246.
[4] Dev Raj Bali, Modern Indian Thought, op. cit., 226.
[5] Ibid., 226 – 227.
[6] T. M. P. Mahadevan and G. V.
Saroja, Contemporary Indian Philosophy
op. cit., 247.
[7] S, Radhakrishnan, The Hindu View of Life, op cit., 17.
[8] Dev Raj Bali, Modern Indian Thought. Rammohun Roy to
Jayprakash Narayan op. cit., 227.
[9] Dr K.M.Munshi & Dr R.R.
Diwakar, Radhakrishnan Reader
(Bombay: Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, 1969), 425.
[10] S.J. Samartha, Introduction to Radhakrishnan, (New
Delhi: Y.M.C.A. Publishing House, 1964), 37.
[11] Ibid., 39.
[12] P. T. Raju, The Philosophical Traditions of India (Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass
Publishers Private Ltd, 1998), 233.
[13] S. Radhakrishnan, Recovery of Faith (London: George Allen
& Unwin, 1956), 92.
[14] S. Radhakrishnan, The Heart of Hindusthan (Madras:
Natesan, 1932), 98.
[15] S, Radhakrishnan, Eastern Religions and Western thought, (London:
Oxford University Press, 1940), 297.
[16] Ibid., 292.
[17] S, Radhakrishnan, An Idealist view of Life (London: George
Allen & Unwin Ltd [1932], 1951), 301.
[18] S. Radhakrishnan, The Heart
of Hindusthan, op. cit., 8.
[19] Ibid., 88.
[20] P. T. Raju, The Philosophical Traditions of India, op. cit., 233.
[21] T. M. P. Mahadevan and G. V.
Saroja, Contemporary Indian Philosophy
op. cit., 247.
[22] K. P. Aleaz, Jesus in Neo–Vedānta. A Meeting of Hinduism
and Christianity (Delhi: Kant Publications, 1995), 21.
[23] S, Radhakrishnan, An Idealist view of Life, op. cit., 138.
[24] Ibid., 302.
[25] S. Radhakrishnan, Eastern Religion and Western Thought, op.
cit., 192.
[26] http://www.iep.utm.edu/radhakri/#SH2d
as on 28th August, 2011.
[27] Dev Raj Bali, Modern Indian Thought. Rammohun Roy to
Jayprakash Narayan op. cit., 228.
[28] T. M. P. Mahadevan and G. V.
Saroja, Contemporary Indian Philosophy
op. cit. 249.
[29] Ibid., 228.
[30] Dev Raj Bali, Modern Indian Thought. Rammohun Roy to
Jayprakash Narayan op. cit., 228 – 229.
[31] K. P. Aleaz, Jesus in Neo–Vedānta. A Meeting of Hinduism
and Christianity, op. cit., 20.
Where can I watch NBA games online? | Sporting100
ReplyDeleteSports betting is now available 정읍 출장마사지 in the 익산 출장샵 US and the online sportsbooks are 경기도 출장마사지 available for the US. 토토사이트 and many 세종특별자치 출장안마 other American betting sites and sites