Relation Between Religion And Philosophy

Here's a comprehensive summary of Dr. Jitendra S. Jetly's "Relation Between Religion and Philosophy," based on the provided text:

The presidential address delivered at the 25th All India Oriental Conference by Dr. Jitendra S. Jetly explores the intricate relationship between religion and philosophy, particularly within the Indian context. He begins by contrasting Western philosophical traditions, where philosophy is often seen as separate from religion and not concerned with salvation, with Indian philosophical systems.

Key Arguments and Observations:

• Intertwined Nature of Indian Philosophy and Religion: Dr. Jetly emphasizes that every Indian philosophical system is deeply connected to its respective religion, which is woven into the daily lives of its followers. This intermingling, while enriching, can sometimes lead to confusion about the "right path."

• The Cārvāka System: Contrary to popular belief, Dr. Jetly argues that the Cārvāka (materialist) philosophy, often considered irreligious, is rooted in "bhūtadaya" (compassion towards innocent creatures). He posits that their rejection of rebirth and heaven stemmed from their inability to tolerate the sacrifice of animals in Vedic rituals. Their emphasis on perception as the sole means of knowledge and their denial of a separate soul were consequences of this compassion. The Cārvākas, in this view, advocated for social justice in this life through good governance, making them early proponents of a form of "communism." Their core principle was non-exploitation, encapsulated in the idea: "What is unfavorable to yourself, do not do to others," extended to all beings.

• Jainism: Jainism, like Cārvāka, rejects the authority of Vedas and animal sacrifice. Its core philosophy is Syādvāda (the doctrine of manifold aspects), which promotes understanding viewpoints from multiple perspectives. Lord Mahāvīra advocated for this to reduce needless quarrels and foster right understanding. The ideal Jain, therefore, would not fault other religions and would strive for non-violence in action and thought, refraining from harming even the smallest creature. Dr. Jetly acknowledges that the misbehavior of some Jain followers (like dishonesty or exploitation) is a fault of the individuals, not the philosophy itself.

• Buddhism: Lord Buddha, like Mahāvīra, observed the futility of endless philosophical debates. He emphasized that metaphysical truths are known through intuition and experience (yoga), not mere logic. He considered elements like God and self as avyakta (indescribable) and advocated for non-attachment to worldly things, seeing the world as full of suffering. While Buddha aimed to prevent such debates, his followers developed various schools and used logic to defend their positions. This, along with internal differences, ultimately contributed to Buddhism's decline, highlighting that critical discussions alone are insufficient without religious implication and behavior.

• Orthodox Indian Systems (Sānkhya, Yoga, Nyāya, Vaiśeṣika, Pūrva Mīmāṁsā, Vedānta):

  • Sānkhya and Yoga: These systems aim for Prakṛti-puruṣa-viveka-khyāti (realization of the distinction between Prakṛti and Puruṣa) as the path to liberation (mokṣa). While the self (Purūṣa) is an observer, illusion leads it to believe it is the doer. Yoga aids in achieving this realization. Dr. Jetly notes that these systems accepted certain principles as axioms, not always provable by empirical science. He also mentions that followers of these systems, like the Udāsīna Panth, existed and influenced daily life, though they are less distinct today.
  • Nyāya and Vaiśeṣika: These are considered the most realistic systems, focusing on logic and reasoning. Nyāya's goal is liberation through the removal of mithyājñāna (false knowledge) via a systematic approach to categories and valid means of knowledge (pramāṇa). Vaiśeṣika introduces categories like substance, quality, action, etc., with some later categories being more imaginative. The address points out that both systems sought to prove metaphysical elements, but for ultimate liberation (niḥśreyas), knowledge of the self is considered paramount. The followers of these systems, particularly Vaiśeṣika, had religious affiliations, often with Śaivism.
  • Pūrva Mīmāṁsā: This system is older and focuses on the interpretation of Vedic injunctions, particularly concerning sacrifices. Its main emphasis is on the science of interpretation and karma (action), rather than abstract metaphysical discussions. God is not a central entity.
  • Vedānta (Uttara Mīmāṁsā): Vedānta, especially Śankara's Advaita Vedānta, has become the dominant Hindu philosophy, absorbing principles from Buddhism and other schools. While aiming for non-attachment through the concept of mithyātva (illusoriness of the world) and Brahmajnāna (knowledge of Brahman), it has also produced "armies of bhaktas who merely talk about philosophy" without embodying its principles.

• The Problem of Blind and Knave Followers: Dr. Jetly repeatedly stresses that the downfall and corruption of these philosophical and religious systems are not due to the founders' ideas but due to their "blind and knave followers" who misinterpret and misapply the core principles. This leads to a loss of faith in religion and philosophy among the younger generation.

• Religion as Implementation of Principles: True religion, according to Dr. Jetly, is not just intellectual understanding or good expression of thought, but the implementation of good philosophical principles into action with proper understanding. This is where the moral force lies.

• Modern Context: He draws parallels between the issues in ancient philosophy and the modern age. While science has brought progress, it hasn't inherently improved human minds or brought peace. Politicians, like blind followers, can lead the world to destruction. The true challenge is to improve the minds of leaders and implement good thinking into action, which requires moral force.

Conclusion:

Dr. Jetly concludes that Indian philosophers were not just thinkers but also social reformers aiming to correct the prevailing corruptions of their times. Their aim was to lead society to the right religious path. However, the misinterpretation and misbehavior of followers have marred the essence of these philosophies. He urges for the practical implementation of philosophical principles in daily life, emphasizing that true religion is about action and moral behavior, not just intellectual discourse. He acknowledges the shortcomings in his own expression and seeks understanding from the learned audience.