II
Indian History
The Vedic period, and even the Upanisadic one
which followed it, accorded primacy to Vedic scriptures as divine authority. This was challenged little, if at all, even in
the philosophical germinations that were the Upanisads. It was in the Epic period which arose, amongst other things, as a
direct intellectual stir against the unquestioned
supremacy of the Vedas that one finds it in its full-blown
form. This was represented, on the one hand, by the Materialism of the
Carvakas or the Lokayatikas, and on the other, by the Pluralistic Realism of the Jainas
and the Ethical Idealism of the Early Buddhists. All three rejected the authority
of the Vedas and were atheistic in their philosophy. The Carvakas were rank hedonists
(the susikshit or educated Carvakas were a later development) and were first
in breaking the fascination with the past that exemplified the Vedic age. They
applied, "a judgement free from the fancies of theology and dictates of authority. When people begin to reflect with freedom
from presuppositions and religious superstitions, they easily tend to the materialist
belief, though deeper reflection takes them away from it. Materialism is the
first answer to how far our unassisted reason helps us
26 AJAI R. SINGH AND SHAKUNTALA
A. SINGH
in the difficulties of philosophy" (Radhakrishnan
1983; 285). It is also true that materialism has
been the major driving force of most political philosophy in modern times. And for most of its proponents, as for their followers, this is its fundamental attraction. The reason as much for its study, as its interpretation
for modernist paradigms, and pedigree linkages to supremacy of reason. One suspects that this is to consciously avoid looking
beyond the frontiers of materialist belief for fear of ideological disruption,
thinning in the ranks of followers, and dampening of an enthusiasm that is a major
factor in keeping up the show, and the self-deception that goes along with it.
Of course to remember that our first answers are often only impulses and a means to find easy solutions is to acknowledge the essential impermanence of thought itself; and to reject the simulation of finality that is the major need, and ploy, of such dogmatism as perpetually searches for some semblance of order in a universe of thought characterized
fundamentally by unpredictable and chaotic responses. This dogmatism is a characteristic
as much of the believer as its staunchest critic; for if belief can be blinding,
its criticism can be no less so opinionated. And fanatic espousals are characteristic
as much of one as the other.
The Ramayana and
the Mahabharata were also products of the Epic period.
Unquestioned authority of the so-called moral order was crumbling and needed reiteration by a Rama and a Krsna. Hence, though
stories of the Vedic age, they became literary
products of the Epic period. That these were attempts to offset the anarchical forays of materialist over-belief becomes obvious when one studies both the timing and the essential
thrust of these works.
The Epic period
was "... keenly alive to intellectual interest, a period of immense philosophical activity and many sided development... The people were labouring with the contradictions felt in the things without and the mind within ... (But) with the intellectual fervour and moral seriousness
were also found united a lack of mental balance and restraint of passion ... Sorcery and science, scepticism and faith, lisence and asceticism were found commingled. When the surging energies of life assert their rights, it is
not unnatural that many yield to unbridled imagination.
Despite all this, the very complexity of thought
and tendency helped to enlarge life. By its emphasis on the right of free enquiry, the intellectual stir of the age weakened the power of traditional authority and prompted the cause
of truth. Doubt was no longer looked upon as dangerous"
(Radhakrishnan 1983; 272; parenthesis added). Free enquiry of course weakens the power of traditional authority but does not necessarily prompt the cause of truth. This is
especially so when lack of mental balance, of
restraint of passion, or a surfeit of unbridled imagination gain hold over the creative capacities of the more fertile minds. The sickly minded and those suffering from reduced vitality and weak nerves the world over in the meanwhile, "try to heal their sickness by either seeking repose and
calm, deli-
A PEEP INTO
MAN'S HiSTORITY 27
verance and nirvana through art, knowledge, morality,
or else intoxication, ecstasy, bewilderment and
madness". (Radhakrishnan 1983; p. 272).
This was the beginning
of the first robust questionings of established dogma
in India. Doubt was no longer considered a taboo, enquiry gained ascendancy over faith, religion gave way to philosophy. "When attempts are made to smother the intellectual curiosity of people, the mind of man rebels against it, and the inevitable reaction shows itself in an impatience of
all formal authority and a wild outbreak of the
emotional life long repressed by the discipline
of the ceremonial religion ... (But we also know that) when once we allow thought to assert its rights it cannot be confined within limits" (Radhakrishnan, 1983; 273; parenthesis added). Of course to suppress curiosity can arouse rebellion as a backlash. Rebellion by its very nature
is impatient, rejects formal authority and is sustained
by a surging core of emotionality. But the difficulty
it causes is by refusing to believe in limits. To obviate this many revolutionary rebellions seek to channellize its raw power by well-worked out theoretical formulations. But all that the more successful amongst them achieve is to strait-jacket an emotion that must only burst
its frontiers in the long run. Both the totalitarian
aftermath of most such revolutions and their continuous
endeavour to maintain conformity and stifle dissent, and the growing disillusionment with goals and methods that most earlier propagators and champions experience, have to be understood in this perspective. For the veil must fall from the eyes sometime or the other, and the resultant
ideological disruption becomes the first important
step in search of meanings.
When the masses were dissatisfied
with the brilliance of the Vedas and the interpretations
of the Upanisads, it became difficult to continue upholding the old faith. Short-cuts to salvation appeared tempting. "When everybody thinks that life is suffering, at least a doubtful blessing, it is not easy to continue in the old faith". (Radhakrishnan 1983; 274) So many metaphysical fancies and futile speculations were put forward because, "An
age stricken with a growing sense of moral weakness is eager to clutch at any spiritual stay" (Radhakrishnan 1983; 274). When
an order crumbles prematurely, anarchy of thought and governance is inevitable.
Faith not only sustains itself, it sustains the semblance of an order that serves to
prop up a crumbling edifice till the time
a fresh one can be erected. That it may retard the erection of a fresh one is true only in case where it is blindly used. But the advent of free enquiry heralds the end of its reign. And this end becomes for some synonymous with the end of faith itself. An inability to allow
for contradictions to co-exist coupled with a new found joy of conquest results in an annihilatory fervour to abandon all faith. For the tyranny of reason which cannot couple with faith, which cannot accept that their mutual
contradiction is as complementary as ostensibly adversarial, matches the tyranny of blind subservience to faith itself. And paradoxically the blindness of conceit, malice
and malevolence can be as much a product of unbridled
faith as of unbridled enquiry. Idle fantasies and
futile speculations are then only measures of the
28 AJAI R. SINGH AND SHAKUNTALA A. SINGH
short-cuts that such a free-thinking
must inevitably engage energies in. Equally strong grows the urge to do away with the
trammels of unleashed thought. What begins to grow almost imperceptibly in the background, and this is of importance, is an
amalgam that combines the robust enquiry of the free-thinker with the steadfastedness
of the believer. This lays the background of enquiry that is as resolute as persistent.
It lays the background for all significant philosophizing.
Thus resulted what can
be considered the three main parts of this intellectual stir in the History of Indian philosophy: (1) the systems of
revolt represented by the Carvakas, Jainism, and
Buddhism (600 B.C.); (2) theistic reconstruction
in the form of: (i) Bhagavad Gita (where Krsna was represented as the incarnation of Visnu and the eternal Brahman of the Upanisads); (ii) the later Upanisads (e.g. the Saivism of the Svetasvatara); and (iii) even the Mahayana form of Buddhism, where Buddha became an eternal
god (500 B.C.); (3) the speculative development
of the six systems of Indian thought namely, Samkhya,
Yoga, Nyaya, Vaisesika, and the two Mimamsas, starting around 300 b.c. and attaining definiteness around 200 a.d. (Radhakishnan 1983; 276).
A small comment on the
first major reaction to the Vedic dogma by the Carvaka
materialists would not be out of place here. We learn from it where uncontrolled thought breaking loose from all restrictions lands us. Rejecting both Vedas and the ideal of God, Heaven
and Hell, they considered religion a foolish aberration,
a mental disease. According to them natural phenomena were
falsely traced to gods and demons. They had to be differentiated from the old religion of custom and magic. Efforts at such improvement could not succeed unless the indifference and superstition of centuries of blind belief got shaken by
an explosive force like the Carvaka ideology. For this it became necessary to declare that the spirit of man was independent.
And it became equally important to reject the supremacy of authority, for nothing could be accepted by man which did not appeal
to his reason. Thus the strangehold of dogma and
obscurantism got loosened. Free enquiry and man's speculative genius flowered. Thus far Carvaka ideology makes sense, and
that probably is its greatest attraction for today's man. But see where
further extrapolation of this thinking led them. What was material alone was real,
they said. Pleasure and pain were the central facts of life. Hence virtue was
a delusion and enjoyment the only reality. When the material is given such exclusive significance, personal pleasure and pain become the prime motivators of human endeavour. Considerations of virtue and morals that promote societal good appear imposed upon, a burden to be overthrown as one overthrows
the authority that appears to restrict one's quest for speculative genius and/or unbridled material enjoyment. For
both have the uncanny ability to go together, if not at the individual level, as a subtle
undercurrent that supports such articulation in others, whatever one's professed life-style for public consumption. This life, then, was the end of every thing for the A PEEP INTO MAN’S HISTOR1TY
29
Carvakas. They proclaimed the doctrine of uncontrolled
energy, of self-assertion and what significantly
went with it, reckless disregard for all authority,
convention and norms. These become for them hindrances in assertion of one's rights, one's independence. The danger in this reasoning becomes immediately apparent when extended to its logical conclusions. This the Carvakas did not fail to by saying that it was not right for some one to
govern and another obey, since all men were made
of the same stuff. The result of such thinking
was an adventurous indulgence in passions and reckless disregard for all authority. What started with resolute questioning did not take long to become a head-long dive into
individual pleasure-seeking. And not all the Ethical
Hedonism of the Sidgwicks and the Utilitarianisms of J.S. Mills has been able to save man from these blind pursuits the world
over. This manifests as much in the stranglehold of consumerism and fashion-waves as in territorial hegemony and super-power rivalries, and the arms and other races, for fastness and speed (yes, even the other 'speed'), wherein
the mad rush for material welfare must trample
underfoot man's humanism itself. This, for all
the hue and cry that thinkers of all persuasions, philosophers as well as others, have raised but fought a losing battle
over. And, if this fight appears endlessly irresolvable,
it also leaves in its wake a desert-track of demoralization, pessimism
and a lack of exactly that pleasure that it professes to promote. For "in a stratified,
if not fragmented, society, if we are exclusively concerned with our own sectarian
or highly private needs, we deny, wittingly or unwittingly, others the means
to satisfy their own needs which are not congruent with ours. Fastened to our
own needs, we get alienated from and become opposed to others' needs. In
the process we harm the social cohesion" (Chattopadhyaya 1987; 2). Confusion,
chaos, anarchy, in conviction and action, thus become inevitable.
Western History
(Contd.)
<<<Previous
Next>>>
|