Religion & Society:

(Adapted from the chapter 'Indian Philosophy' of 'The Heart of Hindustan' by Dr S. Radhakrishnan, published by Natesan & Co., Madras, fifth edition, pages 119-125.)

Dr. Radhakrishnan made these observations/predictions many many years ago in the context of the Indian environment. Today we observe how insightful and true his previsions were. Some of the variations that have been introduced in the Jain system violate the spirit of Jainism. In view of this fact, shouldn't the Jain society adopt a course conforming to the basic tenets of the Jain religion?

- D. C. J.

The thinkers of India are the inheritors of the great tradition of faith in reason. . . . We simply cannot copy the solutions of the past, . . . We have to keep our eyes open, find out our problems and seek the inspiration of the past in solving them. . . . As the present is continuous with the past, so there will be no breach of continuity with the past.

One of the arguments of the conservatives is that truth is not affected by time. It cannot be superceded, anymore than the beauty of the sunset or a mother's love for a child. Truth may be immutable, but the form in which it is embodied consists of elements which admit of change. We may take our spirit from the past, for the germinal ideas are yet vital, but the body and the pulse must be from the present. It is forgotten that religion, as it is today, is itself the product of ages of change; and there is no reason why its forms should not undergo fresh changes so long as the spirit demands it. It is possible to remain faithful to the letter and yet pervert the whole spirit.* . . . Today a great mass of accretions have accumulated, which are choking up the stream and the free life of spirit. . . . The conservative mind must open itself to the necessity of change. Since it is not sufficiently alive to this need, we find in the realm of philosophy a strange mixture of penetrating sagacity and unphilosophical confusion. The chief energies of thinking Indians should be thrown into the problems of how to disentangle the old faith from its temporary accretions, how to bring religion into line with the spirit of science, how to meet and interpret the claims of temperament and individuality, how to organize the divergent influences on the basis of ancient faith. . . .

While those who have not yet been subjected to the influence of Western culture are conservatives in all matters of thought and practice, there are some among those educated in Western ways of thinking who adopt a despairing philosophy of naturalistic rationalism and ask us to get rid of the weight of the past. These are intolerant of tradition and suspicious of the alleged wisdom of age. This attitude of the "progressives" is easily understood. The spiritual heritage of the race has not protected India from the invader and the spoiler. It seems to have played her false and betrayed her into the present state of subjection. These patriots are eager to imitate the material achievements of Western states, and tear up the roots of the ancient civilization, so as to make room for the novelties imported from the West. . . . Suggestions of the inferiority of Indian culture permeate the whole educational atmosphere. . . .

It is a bewildering phenomenon that, just when India is ceasing to appear grotesque to Western eyes, she is beginning to appear so to the eyes of some of her own sons. The West tried its best to persuade India that its philosophy is absurd, its art puerile, its poetry uninspired, its religion grotesque, and its ethics barbarous. Now that the West is feeling that its judgement is not quite correct, some of us are insisting that it was wholly right. While it is true that it is difficult in an age of reflection to push men back into an earlier stage of culture and save them from the dangers of doubt and the disturbing power of dialectic, we should not forget that we can build better on foundations already laid than by attempting to substitute a completely new structure of morality, of life and of ethics. . . .

. . . The radicals and the conservatives, who stand for the new hope and the old learning, must come closer and understand each other. We cannot live by ourselves in a world where aircraft and steamships, railways and telegraphs are linking all men together in a living whole. Our system of thought must act and react on the world progress. . . . There is nothing wrong in absorbing the culture of other peoples; only we must enhance, raise and purify the elements we take over, fuse them with the best in our own. The right procedure regarding the fusing together of the different elements tossed from outside into the national crucible, is indicated roughly in the writings of Gandhi and Tagore, Aurobindo Ghosh and Bhagawan Das. In them we see that faint promise of a great future, some signs of a triumph over scholasticism, as well as response to the discovery of a great culture. While drawing upon the foundations of humanistic idealism in India's past, they show a keen appreciation of Western thought. . . .

Footnote:

* This is the story of the rituals present in the Jain system. - D. C. J.

Sudharma Swami, who was the fifth interpreter (GANADHAR) of Bhagwaan Mahaveer, inspired many aspirants, rich and poor alike, to embrace renunciation (DEEKSHA). One such disciple of Sudharma Swami was a poor woodcutter. In spiritual pursuit, family background and social status do not matter; it is the soul of the individual that is most important.

One day, some barons of King Shrenik's court saw the woodcutter monk entering the capital for collecting alms. The chief minister, Abhaya Kumar, also was with them. Abhaya Kumar promptly got off his horse and paid due respects to the venerable monk. The courtiers did not appreciate Abhaya Kumar's gesture. Instead, they exhibited ridicule for Abhaya Kumar as he paid homage to the monk from a lowly background. Even some townspeople laughed at Abhaya Kumar thinking that the chief minister was out of his mind to pay homage to the woodcutter monk.

Aghaya Kumar understood the reason for the spectators' disgust. Still he asked the barons about their uneasiness. One of the barons responded sarcastically, "The chief minister of Magadh is bowing before a majestic monk, who was a pauper till yesterday and has become a illustrious monk today by renouncing his inestimable worldly possessions. I am highly impressed."

The words of the baron had deep sarcasm. Abhaya Kumar did not appreciate the ridicule of renunciation. A decent cultured individual does not exhibit intolerance of others' actions. So, although, Abhaya Kumar was hurt and angry at the impolite humor of the noblemen, he exercised discretion, concealed his anger and smiled with grace. He knew too well that the best way to assail ignorance and ego is sagacity and modesty. Abhaya Kumar realized that an individual in pursuit of creature comforts can not understand the cardinal virtue of renunciation preached by Bhagwaan Mahaveer. With an eloquent smile on his face, he returned to his palace.

The next morning, in the court, Abhaya Kumar piled three huge stacks of gold coins and announced that he will award those gold coins to the individual who will renounce the use of fresh water and fire and avoid company of women for the rest of his life.

There was dead silence in the court. The barons were looking at each other's face. After a while, one baron remarked, "How difficult is this renunciation?"

A second baron observed, "Giving up these three things amounts to abandoning 'life' and becoming a monk. Then what will any individual do with the gold coins?"

When no baron came forward to accept the offer, Abhaya Kumar said, "It seems that renouncing the three things appears to be too demanding. So I am going to make it easier for you. The gold coins will be presented to anyone who adopts the vow of giving up any one item for life."

Still no body came forward to accept the challenge. No one could venture to accept the chief minister's condition.

Abhaya Kumar remarked, "Surprise! No one in the court has the courage to make this small sacrifice!"

All members of the court said in unison, "Honorable chief minister, it is not a small sacrifice. It takes utmost courage to renounce these things. If an individual gives up the use of water, use of fire or the companionship of women, he loses all amenities of life. He relinquishes all luxuries and sensual pleasures of life. Such renunciation is extraordinary. It is not easy by any measure."

Abhaya Kumar inquired, "Members of the court, what do you think of the eminence of the individual who has given up all three things? What about his bravery in the field of spiritual endeavor?"

All members of the court exclaimed, "Such renunciation entails supreme bravery. That is illustrious. It demands extreme courage and sacrifice."

Abhaya Kumar commented, "Honorable barons, the monk, whom I had worshiped yesterday, has renounced not only the use of water, use of fire and the companionship of women but he is also practicing numerous difficult vows and resolutions. He is extremely brave. He is a true ascetic. Granted that before embracing renunciation, the woodcutter did not have luxuriant material means of comfort but his desires and passions had no limitations. He conquered his passions and desires for comforts and pleasures by becoming a monk. The magnitude of renunciation is not measured by the status of a prince or woodcutter. It is enhanced by the state of mind and the elevation of spirit."

All courtiers were impressed and inspired by the interpretation of renunciation presented by Abhaya Kumar. For a moment, some felt sorry for their childish behavior but soon they were relieved and happy to see that the situation had been resolved with dignity and grace. Everybody praised Abhaya Kumar for his perceptive overture.

* * * * * * *

We hear much indeed of philosophy as a call to transcend the narrowness of egoism and identify ourselves with something greater than ourselves as the way of salvation, but this is not in order to escape from the ineradicable evil of existence but in order to find ourselves in things that give to existence its only true value. - Dr. S. Radhakrishnan

 Home / email us