| RAJGOPAL NIDAMBOOR
Madhva, or Madhvacàrya, in the
context of Indian philosophy, holds a pre-eminent place as
the proponent 'absolute' of the Dvaita, or Dualist, school
of Vedanta. A philosopher among philosophers, Madhva was no
straight-line thinker.
Madhvacàrya was a pioneer -- a
pioneer who went against a host of established standards, or
norms. What led him to propose a unique stream of Vedanta,
with its own laser-beam particle of exposition, were his
conventional differences and ideological dissatisfaction with
philosophical trends, within the scaffold of Hinduism.
Madhva always espoused
the philosopher's birth-right, or that God-given legacy of
every philosopher: independence of belief, and supremacy of
conviction. What led him to propose a unique stream of Vedanta,
with its own laser-beam particle of exposition, were his conventional
differences and ideological dissatisfaction with philosophical
trends, within the scaffold of Hinduism, during his time.
Madhva's philosophy was a new thought
of philosophical intensity, yes; but he was no born foe of
any philosophical interpolation. His vision, quite simply,
encompasses the most tangible, powerful, and unrelenting disapproval
of Vedantic monism.
Madhva [1199-1278], not only traced back Dualist thought even
to some of the Upanishads, but he also showed a great
deal of polemical spirit in refuting Adi Sankaracarya's Advaita
philosophy.
Madhva's cornerstone of conviction was
a puissant belief in the basic difference in kind between
God and individual souls.
Madhva strongly refuted the non-dualist
analogy of Sankara -- who believed the individual self to be
a phenomenon, with the absolute spirit, the Brahman, being
the only reality. That's not all. Madhva also cogently rejected
the venerable Hindu theory of maya, or illusion, which
infers that only spirituality is eternal, with the material
world being only 'varnished' and delusive.
Madhva was his own expanse and monitor.
He departed from orthodox Hinduism in a number of ways. He
believed, for instance, unlike a vast majority of Hindu thinkers,
in eternal damnation. In so doing, he offered a concept of
heaven and hell, with a third alternative: a Hindu purgatory
of endless transmigration of souls. Of reincarnation, or rebirth.
Madhva also glorified bheda [difference] in a novel
way: difference between soul and God, between soul and soul,
between soul and matter, between God and matter, and between
matter and matter. More importantly, he severely criticised
and rejected the popular Advaita concepts of falsity and indescribability
of the world.
Madhva, by way of his epistemology -- understanding
of the process of knowing -- admitted three ways of knowing:
perception, inference, and verbal testimony. He gave no place
to the creation effect, at a certain date, by one mere diktat
of God, out of an unmeasured anything. Madhva recognised the
creation of external substances, as B N K Sharma, a noted
Madhva scholar, once put it, "in a Pickwickian sense."
Real creation, in Madhva's view, was tantamount to an eternal
dependence of the world of matter, and souls, on God, as would
involve their non-existence in the absence of God's will.
In Madhva's system, the existence of God cannot be proved;
it can only be learned through the Scriptures.
The most remarkable aspect of Madhva's
thought is its classy ionisation, contemporaneity, and exceptional
refinement. Madhva demonstrated how philosophy could devolve,
fulfil its purpose, and even attain its zenith, by allowing
every mortal to comprehend the eternal effulgence and indivisible
or indissoluble connexion of bimba-pratibimba bhava
[reflection as a trans-empirical entity] that exists between
the infinite and the finite. God's will, Madhva also observed,
is the essential condition and sustaining principle; the Brahman
being the only independent Real, the source of all reality
-- of consciousness and activity of the infinite. Of perfect
happiness, the endless of the eternals, the indisputable of
the reals, and the cognisant of all the sentients.
Madhva's doctrine, in simple terms, is
the philosophical touchstone intended to argue, justify, and
bring about a sort of rapproachment for the presence of the
sinistral dimension with divine perfection, as Sharma avers,
"by fixing the responsibility of goodness or evil upon
the moral freedom born of diversity of the nature of the souls
who are themselves eternal and uncreated in time." There's
a striking parallel to Madhva's maxim in Alexander Campbell
Fraser's Philosophy Of Theism: "The mixture of
good and evil in the Universe is a sure enigma to Theism,
and a challenge to it: to believe that all is as it ought
to be and this is destroyed if anything is found existing
that ought not to exist, however insignificant the place in
which it is found, or however rare the occurrence."
Adds Fraser: "Pain, error, sin and
death are the chief evils in our world. Sin is absolutely
evil. Pain is the correlative of pity and sympathy. It is
natural and, therefore, a divine means of education of spiritual
life. But, the continued presence of what is unconditionally
bad cannot be disposed of in this way. How to relieve the
mystery of moral evil, including what seems an unfair distribution
of pleasure and pain and an unequal adjustment of opportunities
for moral growth has been a human perplexity from the beginning.
It finds expression in the Hebrew poets like Job, and in the
Greek dramatists like Aeschylus. How can it be reconciled
with the goodness of God?"
Madhva's cardinal avowal of the reality
of God is of an independent nature, with the rest being dependent.
The souls, Madhva testified, conform themselves implicitly
not only upon an inherent, distinctive gradation among them,
but also on their pedestals related to varying degrees of
knowledge, power, and bliss. Madhva thought of knowledge as
being relative, not absolute. He spurned the Universal as
a natural consequence: of a principal sense of belief, or
the uniqueness of a particular person or a thing. To know
a thing, said Madhva, is to know it as distinct from all others
in the general sense, and from some in a specific way. Mere
appearance, Madhva expressly, or clearly, related, wasn't
reality, while objective experience was -- a theme song that
Immanuel Kant advocated, much later.
Madhva maintained the simple fact that
things are transient and ever-changing does not mean they
are not real. And, so he discerned: every new relation changes,
or modifies, the substance to some extent; greater in some,
less in others. The first Indian philosopher to have introduced
the new doctrine of visesas [speciality], and its application
to the underlying perception of difference, Madhva, never
dispelled the pre-eminence of the doubt maze. Where doubts
arise, he said, they must be put down to the perception of
difference from a few high-altitude counter-correlates, with
their close purport of resemblance to the object -- in question.
Bondage and release, in Madhva's system,
are real. Devotion, Madhva emphasises, is the only way to
release, albeit God's grace is more than a primal requirement
that saves us, in the ultimate analysis. Scriptural duties,
Madhva added, when performed without any ulterior motive,
purify the mind and help one receive God's grace.
In Madhva's motif, reality is one of the
more certain aspects of what could be defined as existence,
consciousness, and activity: a fount which maybe expressed
in space-time relationships vis-à-vis the eternal idea
of matter, mind and/or soul. Which also elucidates Madhva's
supple, valid and comprehensively intelligible allegory of
his concept of karma. Plurality, or the basic disparity
in the nature of souls, Madhva maintained, was based on something
that is more basal than karma with its myriad garbs
and influences. His replication: "If that something was
only an illusion, the law of karma would have been
a damp squib upon humanity."
Madhva left a great corpus of work: thirty-seven
in all. His works include ten philosophical monographs expounding
his logic and metaphysics, commentaries on the ten Upanishads,
the Gita, and the Brahmasutras, not to speak
of the Rig-Veda, and an epitome of the Mahabharata,
including the Bhagavata. His magnum opus is the Anu-Vyakhyana,
a metrical work -- a critical exposition of the Brahmasutras.
His writings are characterised by exceptional pithiness of
expression, and explicitness of thought. What's more, Madhva
went directly to the fountain-heads of ancient thought -- the
sourcebooks of Hindu philosophy -- to draw his inspiration
from them. He also had a strong note of mystic fervour in
his thought and writings: a great degree of substantiality.
You'd think of a similitude in Western philosophy -- Spinoza.
Scholars suggest that Madhva's life in
many respects was analogous to the life of Jesus Christ. Miracles,
for example, attributed to Christ in the New Testament were
also ascribed to Madhva. Historians suggest that Madhva was,
perforce, influenced during his youth by a group of Nestorian
Christians who were residing at Kalyanpur, near Pajaka, Madhva's
place of birth, located adjacent to the modern temple-town
of Udipi -- in India's southern State of Karnataka -- the seat
of his philosophy. Whatever the precepts or percepts, Madhva
was an uncompromising Dualist. He explored the real as being
present in the mind of God as a systematic repertoire, even
in terms of realities which are far beyond human perception.
Madhva implied, through his seminal, metaphysical doctrine,
that all acts of consciousness, by way of the dependent selves,
are finally dependent on God's will.
While modern science has its own theories
of the phenomena, such as the splitting of the atom, distinction,
in Madhva's parlance, is not denial. So also existence. "Existence,"
Madhva said, "is a test of reality" -- of existence,
which is not necessarily for all time and space. His theme
song? Actual existence, at some place, at some time, is sufficient
evidence to separate the real from the unreal. It is a profound
statement, a stroke of a genius, not really connected to one's
birth, or contemplated labels of one's race, creed, or colour.
It is something that is also, in essence, a reflection of
one's action, deeds and misdeeds, good and bad visages, in
one's journey through life, and/or existence.
It crystallises, more or less, the sum
and substance of Madhva's perestroika -- a signal principle
of logic, transcendental, and co-existing inwardness. It is
not only a concept that applies as much to the propagation
of spiritual life as peaceful co-existence, but also a legacy
that has endured every critical trial.
|
From
Madhva To Capra
A full organismic conception
of biology, or the belief that in every complex
system the behaviour of the whole can be understood,
essentially from the properties of its parts,
is central to Cartesian thought, and Descartes'
celebrated method of analytic thinking. Modern
science has reversed the relationship -- sort of.
Systems, as we now understand them, cannot be
understood by analysis. Which also implies that
properties of the parts are not intrinsic entities
-- it's something that can be understood only within
the context of the larger whole.
Madhva's Dvaita [Dualist]
philosophy envisages that scientific descriptions
are generally postulated to be objective, and
quite independent of the human observer, including
the process of knowing. Writes Fritjof Capra,
one of the world's foremost theoretical physicists,
in his landmark book, The Web Of Life:
"The new paradigm implies that epistemology
has to be included explicitly in the description
of natural phenomenon..." Reason? Systems,
according to Capra, are all interdependent. They
also encompass, Capra adds, a web of relationships,
including nature, with a corresponding network
of concepts and models, none of which is any more
fundamental than the others. [It is also -- more
or less -- cognate to what noted US biologist Edward
O Wilson describes as consilience -- the
basic unity of all knowledge. Of the proof that
everything in our world is organised in terms
of a small number of fundamental laws -- one that
also encircles the particles underlying every
branch of learning].
This 'new-fashioned' thinking,
Capra contends, recognises the fact that all scientific
concepts are limited and approximate; and, that
science can never provide any complete or definitive,
or total, understanding. According to Capra, the
process of living is not the world, but a world
-- one that is always dependent on interdependent
structures, including the genetic information
encoded in the DNA. Which also means that consciousness,
in essence, is a social phenomenon -- no more,
no less.
To be human, therefore, contends
Capra, is to be endowed with reflective consciousness.
Of body movements which become tightly linked
in a complex dance of behavioural co-ordination.
Of the numerous forms we perceive, all brought
forth by the divine actor or magician, which also
includes the dynamic force of play that is called
karma.
If this isn't a new vision
of reality -- a grid of life, and living systems
-- that envelops us all, what is? Go figure.
|
|
|