renunciation in advaita vedanta - macsphere: · pdf fileunderstanding not only the individual...
TRANSCRIPT
..
PERSONAL AND SOCIAL DIMENSIONS
OF
'RENUNCIATION IN"ADVAITA VEDANTA
By
.KAPIL NATH TIWARI, B.A., M.A.:' PH .D.
A Thesis
Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies
in Partial Fulfilment of the' Requiremen\:s
for the Degree
Doctor of Philosophy
McMaster UniversityI
(January) 1975
i
..
•
•
,©-,KAPIL HATH TIWARI - ',,",
1977 I,\
•
DOC'l'OR OF PHILOSOPHY (1975)(Religious Sciences)
McMaster University,Hamilton, Ontario
TITLE: Personal and Social Dimensions of Renunciation inAdvaita Vedanta
AUTHOR: Kapil Nath Tiwari, B.A.
M.A.
Ph.D.
SUPERVISOR: Professor J .G. Arapura
NUMBER OF PAGES: viii, 211
(
u
(Allahabad University)
(~lahabad University)
(Banares Hindu University)
1I
5cppe and Contents
The aim of this dissertatiop is to present a systematic exposition of
) -~unciation (Samnyasa) as a philosophico-religious category within Indian
" -tradition with special,reference to Advaita Vedanta bf Sarnkaracarya.
This study dealing with the implications of renunciation in its personal and
social dimensions is so all-embracing as to touch a1most every popular
spiritual conviction of the Indian mind and it overlaps almost every province
of Indian philosophy. I have tried to justify this category as a spiritual
technique systematically worked out and developed by Advaitins particularly
~
Samkara with a view to classifying and.systematizing values in terms of the
different forms which renunciation and its object may ~e found to assume.
This dissertation also highlights ~ot only lives of the enlightened persons,
but also principles of human behaviour in the Indian tradition ~plicitly
,clarifying therby such conceF~as dharma (socio-religious duties), the
good life, obligation and responsibility etc.
In elucidating these concepts within the Advaitic ideal of renunciation,
we are driven to conclude that this theory is not confined to the spiritual
dimension of iife representing the concept of MoJcsa (Release or Freedom)
but is also the ground upon Which a coherent and positive social philosophy
can be raised. The attempt seems worth making in view of profoundII
misunderstandings pertaining to the spirit of Indian philosophy in this respect..especially Advaita VedAnta: The AuthOr believes that Advaita vedan,ta, seemingly
the most unworldly, is itself capable of generating social thought of a
positive kind. The principle of renunciation is central to providin'1 social..iii
order not irrelevant to such a task. This investi~tion seemed to
me to be of special significance especially in the context of the present
situation when renunciation has acquired an Dnage of moral irresponsibility
"and henc~as fallen into disrepute. To such critics I humbly give a
Berkeleyian reply: "in such things we ought to think with the learned
and speak wi til the vulgar.", and contrariwise -- not quoting Berkeley
we must avoid thinking with the vulgar but speak with the learned.
This effort is to think with the great acarya (samkara) and some of
his eminent followers with a view to clearing up misunderstandings about
the matter prevailing among those who have not had the opportunity or
even patience to examine ~e renunciation questio~~. from the holistic
perspective which those learned teachers have sought to incul\ate.
"I
1~;"I'
WI',"
rj'-,I~
/,
fI-II
..,'
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
For the debts I have incurred in completing this dissertation,
I acknowledge my respectful gratitude to my supervisor, ~rofessor J.G. Arapura
who made me aware of the importance and positive aspect of this work. Despite
his extremely busy time, he read through the chapters of my dissertation
submitted to him from time to time and helped me with his valuable
suggestions.and comments. It is impossible for me to adequately express
my indebtedness to him whose judgments and encouragements will always
remain a source of inspiratiull to this author./'
)
GratefuJ acknowledgement is made to Professor T.R.V. Murti, ex-
Professor of Indian Philosophy at McMaster University, for his valuable/'
comments on some of the issues of this dissertation. ~-,. Sivaraman
read some of th~ chapters of my thesis and always encouraged me ~roughout
the preparation of this manuscript. I gratefully acknowledge his help.
Thanks are also due to Professor A. Shalom of the Philosophy Department for
some of hi~ critical reactions to an early draf~of the present thesis.
I am thankful to McMaster University for offering me fellowship
•to conduct my research in the Department of Religious Sciences. My studies
under Professor George Grant and Professor H. Mol were very stimulating and
Iishould record my thanks to them. In the midst of preparing this manuscript,
the author was given the opportunity to spend a year (1971-72) doing research
in India where ~e came ip contact with several Professors who helpetl him
directly or indirectly. While it is Unpossible to list the names of all,
v
he cannot fail to mention Professors N.K. Devaraja, A.L. Basham, D.O. Vadekar
and R.K. Tripathi.
A more recent debt is to my distinquished colleague Professor
Lloyd G. Geering, Head of the Department of Religious Studies at the
Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand. His help, advice and
encouragement have always been a source of inspiration to this author.
(
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
INTRODUCTION
Nature, Scope and Limitation••....•.•..............•.....•..•.... lThe Me thod ......• :;-..•..............•.........•..•.......... ',' .... 8Life and Work of Samkara...................•....•........•...... 10Later Work on Advai ta Vedanta ..•........•..•........••.......... 13The Central Theme of Advai ta Vedanta ......•.•.......•.•.••...... 14
CHAPTER o:m: HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
Introduction .......•.......•...•....•........•.................. 16Nature of Renunciation ...................•..••......... , 18The Vedas ..... , ...•.•.•••..•......••.....••.••.....•............ 24
\T"le Upan i ~ads ..........•...•.......•....•...•................... 31Renunciation in its Institutional Setting ...•...•..•............ 37The Various Motifs of Renunciation .•........•...•....•.......... 41
CHAPTER TWO: TYPOLOGY OF RENUNCIATION
Nature and Importance of the smrti in the context ofRenunciation•...•....•..................•................ 58
Renunciation in the Manabharata ; 67
Renunciation in Jain~sIE"""""""""""'" (,I, 73Renunciation in the Ajivakas ......•............................ 80Renunciation Among the Theistic Sects .•...•.•.•..............•.• 85Renunciation in Buddhism...•...••........•..•••.......... , 90
CHAPTER THREE: METAPHYSICAL FOUNDATION OF RENUNCIATION
Problem of Self-Knowledge ..•...•.•.•.....•.•.•...'............•.. 96xaya, Brahman and samnyasa ............•.••...•................. lOSlCarma, J'nana and Samnyasa ............•••...•...••.............. 122
CHAPTER FOUR: PERSONAL DIMENSION OF RENUNCIATION
Meaning and Significance •.•.....•.....•.•.....•.. '0' •••••••••••• 129Personal and Devotional Con tras ted •...•..••.•..•..•.•.......... 134The Dissolution of the Mind (Manona~a)•....•.......•........... 138The Obliteration of Latent Desires (Vasanaxsaya) ..........•.... 141Jlvan-mukti or Deliverance in this Life:••• : ..•.•..•........... 145Status of Ethics in the Life of JIvan-mukta •..••.•••••.••.•••.. 154Authority Bearing TestLmony to JTvan:mukti-. 5(Svarupasiddhip:ttayojanam) .•..••.•••••.•••••••..•••..... 1 a
vii
."
Page
CHAPTER FIVE: SOCIAL DIMENSION OF RENUNCIATION
Problems and Controvers ies ••......•..........••..•....... 160Reality, Renunciation and Commitment ..•.....••••••.•...•• 163Institutionalization of Renunciation ......•.............. 169Rm1unciat~on 3S the Basis of Hindu Society: A• Study of Four As'rarnas \71SaIDkara and the Foundlnq of the Mathas .....•......•....•• 180.
CONCLUSION •..•.....•....••..•••••.•••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 191
BI~CX:;RAPHY
Major Sources ................•....•.•••..••.••.••..••...• 202Some MaJor Secondary Sources ..•..•..•..•..•........••...• 203Some Secondary Sources ......••....•....••.•.....•.......• 207Per iodica1 s ..................•.....••.••..••••••......... 209
viii
.'
"
;
j:
(.~11!\
.;,
-I
1~ "
" 0
" J<.;J
;,\~J,
• 1t.;-.. t,
lki -
t:'I;;-f
\ ..,
f'\ .'l
{~l'I"
'-- r". f, .U..
<.;-
"~
..0'
f~I.
t...~[
r
IN1RODUCTION
Naturf', Scopp and L1mlt,at lon
This study on the phllosophico-rellgious cateqory of Renunc1atlon.-(in ~krit S~asa) 1n lts personal and social d~enslons grew out
of my keen desire to dwell u~0n the essentials of Indian spirit and culture
after previou~ly studying some fundamental features of contemporary Western
philosophy, lyinq largely and perhaps significantly in the interested
behavloural patterns of the individual and society. What I have in mind
in the preaent d1ssertation 15 not "another" interpretation of Indian
philosophical sys~ems particularly the Advaita Vedanta but first and
foremost a kind of reco~struction, the centrallty and significance of
which cent~~ around L~e prlnciple of Renunciation, giving rise to the personal
. .dimension of llfe representing the concept of Freedom (moKsa) but at the
same time containing a background for a social philosophy, which we have called
the social dimension of Renunciation. The attempt seem! worth maKlng in
view of the divergencies that have marked the interpretations of the Vedantic
thought in this respect in our time.
".
Much has been written about the Advaita Vedanta of S~kara but vast
controversies still remain concerning the significance of Renunciation
especially in its social sphere, for which we can hoLd n~responsible except
the subtle metaphysical structure of the philosophy of Advaita Vedanta itself
1
2
as it 1S largely concerned with the problem of Ultimate Reality, i.e. Nirguna-,
Brahman with its implied belief in the doctrines of maya and karma-Sarnnya9a
(Action-renunciation) having its basis in J:nana (metaphysical knowledge) for
the realization of Brahman. It is on th~s account that Samkara was criticized
by a numb~r of later thinkers for advocating the principle of samnyasa
(Renunciation) at ~e cost of the Hindu social structure based on the karma-
~ (Action-theory) and puru~artha (u1timate ends of life), which have the1r
roots in the idea~ of lokasamgraha (world-solidarity) throughout the Indian
Ii ' d" 1re glOUS tra ltlon.
o Whatever may be the central thrust of the Advaita vedanta,an analys1s
and descript10n of the religious trends of the society in which Samkara
~ormulated his thesis on Vedantic lines and of his organizatlon of the rnathas
(religious institutions) along with his extensive journeys throughout the
country as the apostle of the Vedanta, preaching it not only among the elite..but th&'masses, give strong indications of social relevance of his philosophy_
.In the present enquiry an effort is being made to show the possibilities Of
understanding not only the individual freedom but the meaning and function
lAmong the opponents, Ramanuja, oayanand Sarasvat~'and B.G. Tilakcould be mentioned. See K. Satchidananda Murty, The Indian Spirlt (Waltair:Andhra University Press, 1965). Rahula Sankrityayana and M.N. Roy who areapparently MarXists oppose Renunciation but to my mind, they have notthemselves deviated much frotn t.he Hindu tradition. See M.N. Roy, ~Orientations and also. Beyond Communism (Calcutta: Renaissance Publishers,n~d.).
3
,of society as well within the framework of Renunciation, fully taking into
account the scepticism regarding its credibility.2 But here it must be borne
in mind that a justification of the social dimension of the Advaita Vedanta
has to proceed along the lines of its metaphysical conviction with regard
to Ultimate Being which makes everything else significant ..
It is unfortunate t~at not much work has been done to explore the•
social dimension) of Samkara's Ved~ta, although there is no dearth of writing
on the mftaphysical aspect of it. The nature and characteristics of
Renunciation in Advaita Vedanta and the analysis of hypothesis involved in
greater details, as brought out in the present inquiry, ha~made the author
2Many scholars find this attitude as "world and life negating".See Albert Schweitzer, Indian Though and Its DevelOpment (Bombay, 1960)S.J. Samartha, The Hindu View of History, Classical and Modern (Banglore,1959) and B.G. Gokhale. Indian Thought Through the Ages: A Study of SomeDominant Conce~ (Bombay, 1961).
31 believe that a positive world philosophy orientated towards aconstructive action theory can be fully in accord with the Vedantic metaphysics <
of Brahman and Freedom, perhaps in fact, be even drawn from it. In actualfact, we find the explanation of that potentiality has been achieved onlyexceptionally rather than in rule. The reason why the Advaita has notflourished as a common philosophy -- the inadequacy of the Vedanta ispartially right but to blame the theory itself is not justified.
To act positively on the basis of a positive ethics or philosophyof action would be ea9i~ for the generality of mankind ~an to base one'spositive action on sheer freedom. To this extent the Vedanta may not haveacted as a sufficient impulsion to accomplish all the positive things thatwe have come today to eXpect from philosophy.
4
aware of its social aspect in harmony with Indian spiritual tradition.
The limitation of,this study which it must be pointed out here,
is that no attempt is made to present either a textual exposition or a
Isystematic explanation of Samkara's doctrine as such, or any part of the
Advaita philosophy, although the Advaita Vedanta has been directly or indirectly
taken to be the ground of consideration throughout. Rather an effort is
being made to perceive the meaning of Renunciation implied in Indian
philosophical writings, in modern term5. The author is aware of the
cample~ty of the p-~oblem and also of the danger he is exposed to in carrying
:.the problem too far, afield as that might result in some distortion of the
techings of the great acaryas. In such matters, however, one is always
to be guided by the' maxims "Let Understanding be the Law", and "Life be the
Goal" •
There are ascetic trends in the Roman Catholic Monasticism and in the
this - worldly renunciation of Protestantism but they could not be brought into
the purview of this study, although the author is aware of their importance.
The reason for omitting them is the limitation of the scope of this under-
taking as already indicated. The typologies of Renunciation outside the
Indian spiritual world are extremely useful in understanding the present
problem in general but they are so rather for a comparative'study than for a
work such as this which has express limitations. But the fact that the
4It is noteworthy that most of the contemporary leaders who had greatimpact on Indian society directly or indirectly belonged to the ascetic traditionof the Advaita vedinta. See Lloyd I. RUdolph and Susanne Roeber Rudolph, TheModernity of Tradition (Chicacpo and London: The university of Chicago Press,1967), pp. 216-244. .
5
problem and its significance have been noted, and these could engross our
attention for some later task. On the Buddhistic ~ide, we could not achieve
much either except the occasional references to it whenever and wherever
they have been found relevant to the theme of the present work. The ascetic
element in Jainism and its orientations to life in contradistinction to those
of the tBrahmanic' and tBuddhistic' is really a vast subject and was, therefore,
deliberately excluded, except partially, from the present undertaking in the hope
of a future opportunity.
In defining and understanding the nature of renunciation within its
personal and social frameworks, the writerts purpose throughout is twofold.,Firstly, I will investigate those passages of the Prasthana-traya (the
Upani~ads, the Bhagavad-Glta and the Vedanta-sutras) which predominantly, .
support the monistic doctrine of Samkara with clear implications for samnyasa,
..,which I have found, at the metaphysical level, indentical with Juana and
therefore realization of Brahman. There has also been a concern equally
important to refute the claims of the ritualistic Mrm;mS~ (Karma-MImamsa)with which no compromise could be possible at the level of ultimate spiritual
experienc~, viz. self-realization. It has been done with the Advaitic
conviction, that, however important the doctrine of karma may be, which
according to the ritualistic MImamsakas is the sole and central thesis of the
Veda, it cannot explicate Brahman whose realization is the ultimate aim of
the Advaita Vedanta.,
There is a dominant tendency on the part of 5aJhk.ara
I"to lean more towards darsana (Philosophy) than dharma (Religion), not by
abne<]ating the role of dharma but by making it subservient to the philosophical
6
understanding of the structure of Reality.S The significance of this aspect
of the problem has been thoroughly examined by presenting a detailed discussion
on (a) Various Motifs of Renunciation, (b) Typologies of Renunciation,
(c) the metaphysical foundations of Renunciation and (d) the Personal
Dimension of Renunciation.
secondly, I will examine the social dimension of renunciation which
has been worked out from tne following points of view: (a) the ultimate goal
of Advaitic philosophy as representing a system of hopefulness. This is
predominantly rooted in the Vedantic structure of Reality in contradistinction
to the nihilistic implications of Buddhism. To quo~Professor M. Hiriyanna:
The ascendency at one stage belonged conspicuously toBuddhism, and it seemed as if it had once for all gainedthe upper hand. But finally the vedanta triumphed •..The Vedanta may accordingly be taken to represent theconsummation of Indian thought and in it we may trulylook for the highest type of Indian ideal ... On the
SThe sole task of darsan for·the Advaita is understanding andrealization of Brahman in its indeterminate form (Nirguqa Brahman). Butthe goal that philosophy aims at cannot be accomplised without the re~igious
weans which in general represent the way in which we react to the ultimateproblems of existence. These means must correspond to the result of selfreal~zat1Qn. This correspondence between the philosophical goal and religiousmeans cannot take place in a socio-ethical vacuum. Renunciation in theAdvaita Vedanta is specifically a religious means which after accomplishingits spiritual task at the plane of Jriana assumes a very positive nature andprofoundly enriches the socjal dimension. It is important to extricate theVedantic method and understand its significance.
•