Practical Vedanta of Swami Vievekananda

PRACTICAL VEDĀNTA OF VIVEKANANDA

1. INTRODUCTION

“Awake, Arise, until the goal is achieved” with this topic of the symposium I would like to begin my paper on the Pratical Vedānta of Vivekananda who never gave up until his goal being achieved. He wakes up the whole humanity with his idea of Vedānta. Let us begin with the roots of his philosophy. 

1.1. Vedas

The sacred books of Hindus in India is divined into two namely Śṛuti (what is heard) and Śmṛti (what is remembered). Śṛuti includes Vedas, Brāhmanas, Aranyakas and Upaniṣads. The Vedas, part of Śṛuti, is basically Mantras or sacred hymns addressed to some god or goddess. The Vedas contains two major divisions namely Karmakanda (of ceremonials and practices) and Jñakanda (treatises).[1] Furthermore, the writings of Vedas are divided into four: Ṛg Veda, Sāma Veda, Atharva Veda and Yajur Veda. The Vedas are eternal, infinite and apauraśeya (no claim for human authourship). The Hindus believe that the Vedas is not acquired but revealed to Ṛṣis who had supra normal consciousness.[2] 

1.2 Vedānta

The word Vedānta is a compound of two Sanskrit terms ‘Veda’ and ‘Anta’ (the end). Thus Vedānta is the end part of Vedas, usually it denotes Upaniṣads that constitute the final aim of Veda viz., and restoration of Upaniṣadic Brahmanism is the work of Vedānta system.[3] Vedānta is not a homogenus, monolithic and fossilized matrix of teachings. The same Veda is understood by various philosophers in different context. Some prominent Vedāntins are: the Advaita Vedānta of Śaṇkara, Viśiṣtādvaita Vedānta of Rāmānuja, Dvaita Vedānta of Mādhava, Dvaitādvaita Vedānta of Nimbārka and Suddhādvaita Vedānta of Vallabha.[4]

1.3 Advaita Vedānta

The philosophy of Vivekananda is concretely based on Advaita Vedānta. The term A-dvaita means non-dualism. This concept is found in epics and purānas but the eminent proponent of this theory is Śaṇkara. Vivekananda has a high esteem for Śaṇkara. There are three basic propositions that Advaita Vedānta of Śaṇkara contains: (i) Brahman is the sole Reality (ii) jīva (living being) in its essential nature is no other than Brahman. (iii) the world of plurality is māyā (illusion).[5]

1.4 Monism

Based on Advaita Vedānta, Vivekananda’s philosophy propagates Monism. This term has a broad understanding as it is applicable to many doctrine of the West. The monism in Indian Philosophy especially in Śaṇkara centers on the reality of God. According to Śaṇkara all the things have oneness in the reality called Brahman. To perceive any entity separate from Brahman is erroneous.[6] Vivekananda handles monism to get a solution for the two contrary thoughts. The first is of the monotheistic idea of personhood of God and the creation of the world which he deems as unscientific and the second thought of agonistics who hold that only quality exists and no substance viz., there is no infinite power beyond what is seen. He says that the former perceives only the phenomenon and the latter sees noumenon of some reality. And so the only solution is monisitc theory which says that the Reality is one and the individualizing things from the One Reality is meaningless, the apparent separateness of things are only the manifestation of One Reality.[7] This oneness of the Reality is ‘being’ than ‘becoming’. The movements like I go, I do, etc. can be seen as change and yet what remains constant is the ‘I’ which is the Reality in itself.[8]  

2. PRACTICAL VEDĀNTA

The monistic Vedānta that Swami Vivekananda propagates is not just an intellectual gymnastics but a down-to-earth concept on reality. It is very practical and applicable to the everyday walks of life. The following few concepts may help us understand his position better.

2.1 Personal God Versus Impersonal God

The core claim of monistic theory is to believe in the Impersonal God. Monotheistic religions like Jewish, Christianity and Islam have the concept of Personhood of God. For example, Christianity presents the Almighty God as three persons namely Father, Son and Holy Spirit. But, Vivekananda is unhappy with the personalization of God for he considers this theory as unscientific and it reduces the nature of God. He presents two principles of knowledge: the first one is deduction i.e., moving from particular to general and later general to universal; the other method is explaining a thing from its own nature. In knowing about God, if the first principle is applied, the personalistic understanding of God becomes an incomplete generalization as it is only the sum total of different consciousness and it is impossible to apply the second principle since the personhood of God excludes God away from creation, Here, the effect is different from the cause. And so the modern scientists do not conceptualize personal God. [9] Only impersonal God can be understood rationally taking these two principles. The attribution of infinity and eternity can only be given to impersonal God. Calling God in any form is acceptable because he is infinite. For example, fire has multifarious forms of existence yet is the same fire, it is a single reality. Although he does not acknowledge the scientific ground of personal God, he accepts this concept as it is one form of impersonal God. He says, “We believe in personal God as the Christians, but we go further; we believe that we are He! That personality is manifested in us, that God is in us, and we are in God.”[10]     

2.2 Tattvamasi

The thrust of Vivekananda’s practical Vedānta is Tattvamasi which means ‘That Thou Art’ or ‘You Are That’. This mahāvākya (great saying) is well explained by Śaṇkara. This ideology attracted young Narendranath by the answer given by Ramakrishna, “I see God just as I see you here.”[11] Tattvamasi seems to refer to our human self as ordinarily apprehended or simply identified with the Absolute like any other reciprocal identity. It implies that effect has its Ātman in the cause, but not the cause in its effect. The relation is non-reciprocal.[12] But how it is possible for an ignorant, suffering and sinful to be identified with Satya-Jñānam-Ānantam? Śaṇkara says that our conscious ego is the door (dvāra) by which we can access to the true import of this saying. This relationship is not an accessory and extrinsic but metaphysically constitutive of beings.[13]  

2.3 Concept of Man

Having Tattvamasi as the center, the anthropological implication of monism lifts the nature of man up to the status of God. Man who is the pinnacle of the external entities replicates the eternal God. Vivekananda confirms it saying, “The only God to worship is the human soul in the human body, of course, all animals are temples too, but man is the highest, the Taj Mahal of temples. If I cannot worship in that, no other temple will be of any advantage.”[14] Whereas the idea of separate God in heaven brings only fear but the watchword for humanity is freedom, because He and I are same. Within ourselves the eternal voice speaks of eternal freedom. We possess immortality and bliss. On the other hand, the self to build a real self it should give up ‘I’ self. The evil that is found in us is the misdirection of the power of good and the so called sin is only ignorance. Thus love, the basis for freedom, should prevail as love is the form of oneness.[15]

2.4 Practical Religion

The practicality of monism is vividly expressed in the concept of religion that Vivekananda proposes. His is a staunch propagator of Hinduism and yet his outlook on religion is the logical outcome of neo-Vedāntism. According to him, religion is the unity of man and God, man and man and service of man because man is God. Thus religion should have contemplation and action, i.e., Nirvakalpa Samādhi and humanitarian work.[16] And so he calls the humanity to let go the small things such as claiming for prominence of religion, bloodshed in the name of religion, etc. in order to attain the oneness of God, the Infinite. Although Vivekananda is for the doctrinal monism he accepts the ceremonials in religion which he considers less truth and not truth in themselves. To answer the question of many gods in Hinduism he replies that they are the prototypes of man who are created by man to see world as paradise than an eternal prison that needs to be surpassed to reach heaven.[17]     

3. CONCLUSION

3.1 Implications of Practical Vedānta

The practical Vedānta of Vivekananda is a positive approach to life with the philosophical and scientific foundation. It is proof for the human transcendence to the Absolute. His concept of monism stands against the apparent dualism. In matters of change, his solution that Change is only in parts and not in whole is praiseworthy. In fact, he considers the evolution theory of Darwin as continuous expansion of the Infinite Individual.[18] The practical Vedānta has more humanitarian values. Sin is replaced with the ignorance or less good; love gains prominence in relationship with all including the non-human beings. Vivekananda, with his Vedānta, reacts against the injustice in the name of religion and so he wants to see the satisfaction of the hungry than the jewels in the temple. Moreover, he says that meditating on the real nature of one, will direct oneself to accept others as one’s ownself.

Although this Vedānta carries valuable humanitarian aspects the very concept of monism is questioned philosophically. Monism makes a over simplification of the plurality of things, especially it reduces the human individuality, the individual freedom is denied. His clarion call of ‘Freedom’ does not have sufficient philosophical ground. Human being is not absolutely free as Vivekananda claims. In addition, when we say that plurality in the world is actually One in God, we also mean that human being is infinite. To claim a concept to be true it must be verified by an extraneous method, but the mere fact of verification with other principles eliminates the concept of monism.

3.2 Counter Perspective

Vivekananda’s concept of impersonal God derived from his idea is based on Śaṇkara’s Advaita. But the eminent advaitin meant his theory neither for Hinduism nor monism. Will not the non-dualism be applicable for monotheism especially to Christian vision? The answer comes from a contemporary of Vivekananda, Brahmabandhab Upadhyay. His interpretation of Triune God of Christianity with Śaṇkara’s Advaita replies the intellectual attacks of Vivekananda on monotheism.

Upadhyay quotes that Śaṇkara while defining Parabrhman gives two views namely saguṇa and nirguṇa. Now, the concept of nirguṇa which is translated as ‘no quality’ favours impersonal God. On the contrary, Upadhyay takes the literal meaning of nirguṇa i.e., tie-less. To be tie-less means to be unrelated and this is what exactly denotes Parabrhaman. But this concept would contradict personhood of God for a person is always in relation with the person or thing outside the self, e.g. Creator and creation. But the relation is in the Trinity is not without but within thus it is tie-less therefore it is unrelated too. He also affirms it with the Thomisitic definition of person – that which subsists as distinct in a rational nature. After explaining this he moves on to relate the Father, Son and Holy Spirit of the Trinity with the sat (Being), cit (Intelligence) and ānanda (Bliss) of Śaṇkara logically. The Father, the creator, should be necessarily be a Being and so He is Sat; the Son who made to us clear his Self-Knowledge and so He is cit; finally, Spirit is the One who proceeds from te union of Sat and Cit, the Blessed Breath and so the Holy Spirit is Ānanda. Thus the Trinity is Saccidānanda.[19]   

Thus Upadhyay acts like Thomas Aquinas, who fought against the Avveroist taking their own base Aristotle, by taking Śaṇkara’s position to prove Personal God.

  

---

[1]Swami Vivekananda, Vedanta in its Application to Indian Life (Kolkata: Advaita Ahsrama, 1988) 76.

[2] Harry Immanuel, “Vedas” ACPI Encyclopadia of Philosophy, edited by Johnson J. Puthenpurackal (Bangalore: Asian Tradiing Corporation, 2010) 1492-1493.

[3] Richard DeSmet, Understanding Śaṇkara, edited by Ivo Coelho (New Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 2013) 305.

[4] Devaisa M. Antony, “Vedanta” ACPI Encyclopadia of Philosophy, 1484-1485.

[5] R. Balasubramanian, “Śaṇkara” History of Science, Philosophy and Culture in Indian Civilization, edited by D.P. Chattopadhyaya Vol. 2, Part 2 (New Delhi: Centre for Studies in Civilization, 2000) 70.

[6] Robert A. McDemotti, “Monism”, The Encyclopedia of Religion, edited by Mircea Elicde, Vol. 10 (New York: Macmikllan Publishing Company, 1987) 58.

[7] Swami Vivekananda, Practical Vedanta (Kolkata: Advaita Ashrama, 2007), 65-67.

[8] Vivekananda, Practical Vedanta, 83-84.

[9] Vivekananda, Practical Vedanta, 63-66.

[10] Swami Vivekanda, “Hinduism”, Swami Vivekananda: A Biography of His Vision and Ideas, edited by Verinda Grover (New Delhi: Deep & Deep  Publications, 1998) 121.

[11] R.P Varma, “Swami Vivekananda: The Practical Vedantin”, Swami Vivekananda: A Biography of His Vision and Ideas, edited by Verinda Grover (New Delhi: Deep & Deep  Publications, 1998) 567.

[12] DeSemt, Understanding Śaṇkara, 115.

[13] DeSemt, “Spiritual Valuses of Advaita Vedānta and Social Life”, Understanding Śaṇkara, 165-166.

[14] Vivekananda, Practical Vedanta, 50.

[15] Vivekananda, Practical Vedanta, 102-103.

[16] R.P Varma, “Swami Vivekananda: The Practical Vedantin”, 570-571.

[17] Vivekananda, Practical Vedanta, 56-57.

[18] Vivekananda, Practical Vedanta, 89.

[19] Brayan Lobo, “Brahmabandhab Upadhyay: Tripersonalizing the Parabrahman”, Divyadaan: Journal of Philosophy and education Vol. 20, No. 1 (2009), 39-54.