IN the ever-increasing mass of literature which has been voted to the criticism and appreciation of Indian thought, a tendency to extremes has constantly manifested itself. On the one hand we find amongst outside critics signs of a disposition to undervalue the results of Indian speculation. Over-zealous attempts are sometimes made to derive from alien sources the most important elements in Oriental philosophy, and when such attempts are shown by serious scholars to be almost altogether impossible, recourse is taken to a superior and slightly patronizing attitude in which, no doubt, expressions of depreciation are politely avoided, but the place of genuine and sympathetic appreciation is occupied by intermittent ejaculations of wonder as to how a people who have not had the benefits of the cultural inheritance which the superior critics themselves enjoy, should have been capable of so much as has actually been accomplished in India. Needless to say, the feeling which is aroused by an attitude of this kind amongst those upon whom judgement is thus summarily passed, is one of irritation rather than of gratitude.
The other extreme is undiscriminating admiration. Under the influence of this mood, writers, both in the East and in the West, vie with each other in asseverating that everything that is good comes from the East, and that nothing is good which does not come from the East. It is only by Eastern windows that 'when daylight comes, comes in the light'. Moved by a spurious kind of cosmopolitanism or by an almost childish desire to vindicate their own broadmindedness, certain Western philosophers of the type here indicated have gone the length of. declaring that the Orient has a monopoly of spirituality, that the West is blatantly materialistic, and that all the more important elements in early European philosophy may be traced to the Eastern influences which moulded the precursors of Plato, or to the currents of philosophic thought which moved from East to West in the centuries immediately preceding or immediately succeeding the commencement of the Christian era. Three-quarters of a century ago Cousin described the East as 'the native land of the highest philosophy', and Schopenhauer earlier gave utterance to the unrestrained generalization that 'in the whole world there is no study so beneficial and elevating as that of the Upanishads'. Writers of a later date have to an even greater extent allowed their enthusiasm to overwhelm the undoubted elements of truth which are contained in such assertions. Opinions of this sort have, of course, been eagerly welcomed by some Indian writers, who have perhaps a keener relish for the compliment which appeals to patriotism than for the valuation which depends upon a balanced judgement. We come across, e.g., such statements as the following 'India has given to humanity the main outlines at least of the whole of the philosophy and religion of the world. Although, however, such sweeping statements are by no means isolated, it would be al-together unfair to suggest that judgements of this kind are passed without qualification by the generality of Indian writers on philosophy.
A more temperate and tenable position is taken up, e.g., by Prof. S. N. Das Gupta, who claims only that'most of the problems still debated in modern philosophical thought occurred in more or less divergent form to the philosophers of India'.
It cannot certainly be contended that in the course of the world's history India has been responsible for the only philosophical thought worthy of the name, but it may be argued with a considerable amount of justification that, at a very early period in intellectual development, the greater philosophical problems had presented themselves to the Indian consciousness and had received penetrating and illuminating treatment. India has had, and still has, a most important contribution to make to the thought of the world, and is well qualified to make this contribution by the intensity with which throughout the centuries she has devoted herself to her philosophical and philosophic religious task. Rarely has metaphysical speculation afforded to any people so absorbing an interest. As Prof. Radhakrishnan says: 'In many other countries reflection on the nature of existence is a luxury of life. The serious moments are given to action, while the pursuit of philosophy comes up as a parenthesis. In ancient India philosophy was not an auxiliary to any other science or art, but always held a prominent position of independence.'
A study of the Vedanta leads to many general reflections on the relations between philosophy and religion, and in particular to the questions how far such a philosophy can satisfy religious needs and how far it can be regarded as a preparation for Christianity. I have tried to set forth some conclusions as to these and allied problems. Sankara has been taken as the typical philosopher of the school, for reasons which appear to me to be satisfactory; and the general trend of opinion amongst Indian writers and thinkers themselves would appear to justify this concentration. It has been my endeavour to carry out my task in a spirit of fairness, and to avoid the mistake of merely working towards a foregone conclusion. And I have no hesitation in saying that such studies as I have been able to make in Indian philosophy have confirmed me in the faith that God has not left Himself without a witness in the characteristic thought of India, that much of it is unconsciously anticipative of Christian thought, and that Jesus Christ will one day be recognized there also as the 'light which lighteth every man that cometh into the world'.
"
Vedas (1182)
Upanishads (493)
Puranas (624)
Ramayana (740)
Mahabharata (354)
Dharmasastras (165)
Goddess (496)
Bhakti (242)
Saints (1504)
Gods (1288)
Shiva (370)
Journal (187)
Fiction (60)
Vedanta (362)
Send as free online greeting card
Email a Friend
Manage Wishlist