Pitfalls of Intellectual Debates on Advaita Vedanta
Ram Chandran
The Pitfalls of Intellectual Debates on Vedanta
Ram Chandran
When the subject matter of discussion focuses on relative merits or demerits of different Vedantic philosophies then such discussions are likely to develop an Intellectual Crisis. Intellectual Crisis always brings chaos and utter confusion. Instead of focusing on the philosophical issues, such debates centered on the abilities of the debaters. One of the themes of Advaita is to curtail Ego and debates kindle Ego! At some threshold point it is necessary for the intellect to bow down to faith and intuition. It is intellectually arrogant for anyone to believe that through arguments, we can come to a conclusive position and there will be no disagreement whatsoever. None of us can ever claim that we have completely understood our scriptures and the philosophical and religious dogmas that have been postulated in the past. If anyone dares to make such claims, no one will ever believe!
I hope that the debate that took place long time back between Sankaracharya and Mandana Misra will open our eyes and ears. Mandana Misra's wife Bharathi (considered reincarnation of Goddess Saraswati) was appointed as the referee. The debate was not decided by intellectual abilities of these two masters. Instead, the debaters were garlanded with two identical flower garlands. These two great intellects had the humility to bow down to faith in the miracle of whether their respective garlands withered away or not. The debate continued for several weeks Sankaracharya was declared the winner by the adjudicator, the wife of his opponent! This episode once again illustrates the superiority of faith and intuition over intellectual ability. Faith and Intuition are parts of Hindu tradition and Advaita is no exception.
Now let me turn my attention to the following issue raised by Allan Curry who wrote: It seems most religions base themselves on some kind of scripture which gives valid epistemological status to "things that are not perceived or inferred" in any other way. Most religions feel quite certain that their >scripture is correct and the other fellow's scripture is "make believe". >I had hoped Advaita Vedanta could establish its truth independently of Sruti (if that means scripture) and perhaps it can although it seems >a little doubtful to me at this point.
First, let me assure Allan, that Hindu scriptures do accept the view that TRUTH is always independent of religion, dogma and belief. But the scriptures want the believers to approach the TRUTH starting with some belief. Scientists also explore TRUTH by postulating Hypotheses. Hence the Hindu approach does not deviate from normal intellectual practice of investigation. Two feasible approaches are available to search for the TRUTH: The first is the path of no faith or the concept "Truth is a Pathless Land " proposed by J. Krishnamurty. This approach asks the seeker to refrain from accepting any religion, dogma, or belief. In the second approach the seeker first accepts his (her) faith on a specific religion or dogma and continues the search for the TRUTH. Hinduism and Advaita the second approach where faith and intuition play an important role in the search for the TRUTH. There is a difference between "blind faith" and "faith." Let me give an example. To learn the truth of physics, I approach a teacher. It is important that I have faith on ability of the teacher. This faith does not preclude me to ask questions to clear my doubts. I have no blind faith and hence I go and verify the teacher's assertions in library, books, and Internet! The teacher becomes the vehicle and the seeker is the driver and driver is the controller of the vehicle! The seeker of TRUTH also verifies the statements postulated in the scriptures and/or dogmas using personal experience. Intuitions are always based on experience and knowledge and it can certainly vary by individual. Once we reach the destination, the vehicle is irrelevant and religion, dogma and faith become irrelevant when the seeker knows the TRUTH. .
Let me quote this famous saying in the Upanishad on human life: "Life is a bridge, enjoy while crossing, but don't build a castle on it." In summary, self-realization is nothing more than this simple fact. We are great creators and each of us create a whole world around us! Sankara claims that all such creations are illusions. When we completely detach our "SELF" from the illusory world and attach the "SELF" with "Brahman" then World becomes irrelevant. For Advaitic philosophy, the material world is irrelevant. Sankara was correct in ignoring the irrelevant material world in theorizing the Advaita Philosophy. I am fully aware that any interpretation of scriptures and religion is based on faith and intuition. Faith and intuition varies by individuals and hence there will be always disagreements. Such disagreements do no prove that a religion or dogma is wrong! It only confirms the famous quotation in the Upanishads: "The more I know, I realize that more I don't know!" Allan had expressed his doubt on the verification of personal experiences of "Self- realization." Those who are inside the Black Hole and those experience "Self-Realization" will not be able to describe what it is. This is a limitation and we have to accept this fact with faith and intuition! Let me thank the Advaita Group for this opportunity to participate. I hope that Advaita group focuses the discussions more on getting new insights on Upanishads, Bhagavad Gita, Vivekachudamani, etc.
Thanks for the opportunity to share with you,
Ram Chandran.