Sambodhi 1989 Vol 16

Author(s): Ramesh S Betai, Yajneshwar S Shastri
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad
Catalog link: https://jainqq.org/explore/520766/1

Page #1

SAMBO DHI
WA
Vol. 16
1989
DR. S. RADHAKRISHNAN BIRTH CENTENARY SPECIAL ISSUE
EDITORS: Dr. Ramesh S. Betai Dr. Yajneshwar S. Shastri
V
L. D. INSTITUTE OF INDOLOGY,
AHMEDABAD
1991

Page #2

Vol. XVI
SAMBOO HI
DR. S. RADHAKRISHNAN BIRTH CENTENARY SPECIAL ISSUE
EDITORS:
Dr. Ramesh S. Betai Dr. Yajneshvar S. Shastri
लाल
MITATO POS
अहमदाबाद
L. D. INSTITUTE OF INDOLOGY, AHMEDABAD
1989

Page #3

Published by
Ramesh S. Betai
Acting Director
L. D. Institute of Indology Ahmedabad-9
and
Printed by
KRISHNA PRINTERY 966, Naranpura Old Village Ahmedabad-380 013
Price: Rupees 50-00
FR1348 36 22233395 LD INSTITUTE
Revised Price.
65
Rs.

Page #4

CONTENTS
1. The Bhagavadgit and Dr. Radhakrishnan 2. Social Philosophy of Dr. Radhakrishnan 3. Reason and Intuition in Dr. Radhakrishnan's Philosophy
4. Dr. Radhakrishnan on the Philosophy of the Upanisads
8. Being and Differance-Radhakrishnan and Derrida
5. Radhakrishnan and Christianity
6. Dr. Radhakrishnan on "Kalki or Future of Civilization"
7. An Appreciation of Radhakrishnan's Trans- Jag Mohan lation of "The Bhagvadgita"
9. Dr. Radhakrishnan on Buddhism: a Glance 10. Compatibility of Radhakrishnan's Metaphysics with his Epistemology and Ethics ૧. ભારતીય ઘનના મર્મજ્ઞ-ડો. રાધાકૃષ્ણન ૨. પ્રવતમાન શિક્ષણની સમસ્યાઓના સંદર્ભમાં રાધાકૃષ્ણનના ચિંતનની પ્રસ્તુતતા
-
3.
Radhakrishnan-Bibliography ૪. જિનવિજય વાઙમયચિ
Other Articles
1. Jayanta on the Buddhist Definition of Perception
2. Doctrine of Maya-A Critical Study
Dr. G. K. Bhat
Dr. H. M. Joshi Prof. C. V. Raval
4. दोहा पाहुड
Dr. R. S. Betai
Dr. Bharati Savan
Dr. R. S. Betai
M. V. Baxi
S. G. Kantawala Dr. J. A. Yajnik
સી. વી. રાવલ
ડૉ. ભાવના ત્રિવતી
Nagin J. Shah
Dr. Yajneshwar
S. Shastri
3, आचार्य श्री हेमचन्दका प्राकृत व्याकरण और अर्धमागधी डॉ. के. आर. चन्द्र
भाषा- एक समीक्षा
'પા. ૨. મ. શાહ
11
30
41
1
58
84
89
Comp. Saloni Joshi 33 સપા. સલોની જોધી 39
108
120
128
1120
3
18
42

Page #5


Page #6

EDITORIAL
It is with great pleasure that we publish Vol-XVI of our Journal 'Sambodhi' as a special volume entitled "Dr. S. Radhakrishnan Birtli Centenary Special Volume" that was planned during the Birth centenary year of the great scholar and pundit who was rightly adjudged as a special Ambassador of Indian philosophy, Religions and culture to the world.
We are happy that the contributors deal with several facets of the scholastic personality of the ideal scholar and philosopher of Himalayan heights that Dr. Radhakrishnan was. We are sorry that some of the faccts of his contribution could not be included in this volume because some invitees could not prepare their Papers in time.
We are thankful to the local contributors who co-operated by correcting proofs of their own papers.
It is sincerely hoped that the world of scholars and interested readers will find some thing positive and original in every paper that is printed in this special Issue. The volume can very well claim to give a correct, precise and clear picture of the grand personality of one of the noblest sons of mother India.
Editors
Our Contributors in this Special Volume
1. Dr. G. K. Bhat (Late)
Former Professor of Sanskrit in Maharashtra Government and former Director, Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Pune.
2. Dr. H. M. Joshi
Prof. of Philosophy, M. S. University, Baroda. 3. Prof. C. V. Raval
Prof. of Philosophy (Retd.), Gujarat Government Service. 4. Dr. R. S. Betai
Former Director, Institute of Indology, Dwarka. At Present, Hon. Professor and Director-in-charge, L. D. Institute of Indology, Ahmedabad.

Page #7

5. Dr. Bharati Savan
U. G. C. Research Awardee 6. Shri Jag Mohan
Executive Secretary, Namedia, New Delhi 7. Dr. M. V. Baxi
Prof. of Philosophy and Principal, G. L. S, Arts College, Ahmedabad. 8. Dr. S. G. Kantawala
Former Director, Oriental Institute, Baroda and Prof. of Sanskrit
(Retd.), M. S. University, Baroda. 9. Dr. J. A. Yajnik
Prof. of Philosophy and Director, University School of Psychology,
Education and Philosophy, Gujarat University, Ahmedabad. 10. Dr. Bhavana Trivedi
Lecturer in Philosophy, Gujarat University, Ahmedabad. 11. Dr. N. J. Shah
Reader in Sanskrit, L. D. Institute of Indology, Ahmedabad. 12. Dr. Y. S. Shastri
Reader in Philosophy, Gujarat University, Ahmedabad. 13. Dr. K. R. Chandra
Reader in Prakrit, Gujarat University, Ahmedabad. 14. Dr. R, M. Shah
Lecturer in Prakrit, Gujarat University, Ahmedabad 15. Saloni Joshi
Lecturer in Prakrit, L. D. Institute of Indology, Ahmedabad. 16. Dr. Jaydev A. Jani, Sanskrit Dept., M. S. University, Baroda.

Page #8

राधाकृष्णमहं नमामि.... (श्री सर्वपल्लीपञ्चकम् ।)
डॉ. जयदेव जानी
ख्रिस्ताब्दस्य वसुत्रयारुणमिते (१८८८) वर्षे च सप्टेम्बरे मासे जातममु सुशीलसरल मद्रासराज्यारुणम् । रस्यन्तां मम वाग्विलासविभवा मद्राससाथी कर' राधाकृष्णमह नमामि सततं विद्वद्विलासाम्बुधिम् ।।१।।
आर्यावत निवासिनां निरुपमा राजत्प्रभां सस्कृति प्राणान्तेऽपि न योऽत्यजत् समवहद् गण सम्मानतः । स्वाचारेण स शिक्षकः समभवत् श्रीसर्वपल्लीमुद राधाकृष्णमहौं नमामि सतत विद्वप्रिय ज्ञानिनम् ॥२॥
धर्माणामुदधि प्रविश्य सतल संशोध्य सारस्वत सगृह्याऽऽतततत्त्वरत्ननिचय संग्रथ्य सस्थापकम् । संघ शुद्धधिय च' सर्वसुखदं विद्वत्पुरःस्थापक राधाकृष्णमह नमामि सतत' प्राचीनतासंप्रियम् ।।७।।
यस्याऽभूच्च नियुक्तिरेव विदिते देशेऽतिसौहार्दिते सोव्येते * सरसे समृद्धिजनके सन्मित्रतापादके । त तत्राऽविरत स्वशुद्धमतिदं देशप्रिय शारद राधाकृष्णमह नमामि सतत शान्तिप्रिय संस्कृतम् ॥४॥
योऽस्माक गणतन्त्रशासनधुरां शान्त्या समत्वेन च वर्षाणां दश चोपराष्ट्रपतिरित्याख्यां दधार स्थितिम् । वर्षाणां दश सोऽथ राष्ट्रपतिरित्येव प्रसिद्धिश्च तं राधाकृष्णमह नमामि सततं देशे विदेशे प्रियम् ।।५।।
* The Soviet Union

Page #9


Page #10

THE BHAGAVADGITA AND DR. RADHAKRISHNAN
11
Dr. G. K. Bhat
If the Gita takes the pride of place for man seeking a way towards betterment of human life, so does Dr. Radhakrishnan for thinkers in the east and the west, and especially for Indians. An Indian of remarkable pre-eminence, an intellectual politician, who rose to the rank of President of India, a life-long Bhäsyakāra of Indian philosophy and religion, an independent thinkcr and a philosopher in his own right, Dr. Radhakrishnan could well be described as a sage of the twentieth century. Being also a Sanskritist, it would be interesting to sce how Dr. Radhakrishnan looks upon the Gitā and what it signifies, according to him, for mankind.
Dr, Radhakrishnan's views on the Gitä are expressed in his monumental volume on Indian Philosophy, and more elaborately, along with an English translation and notes, in his text-edition of the Gila (George Allen and Unwin Ltd., Great Britain), which was first published in 1948 and has been reprinted several times.
There is no dearth of books on the Gitā, both of the text-interpretative type and of discursive type, and in several languages beginning with the Sanskrit down to the present-day languages of India and of several other countries. The comman man worships the Gitā as a Divine Mother, and accepts her teaching as the nectar of milk, milked for him by the Divine Krşņa from the cow of the Upanişads. The intelligent man cqually revers the Gitā, but is sometimes puzzled by the inconsistent or conflicting statements found in the Text, and then chooses to follow the lead of some Ācārya, Bhāşyakāra or Interpreter. The scholar, with due reverence and devotion to this unique Text, enters still into a search for the original Gitā and attempts to seek an explanation for the apparent contradictions and the mixture of diverse thought-currents that seem to exist in the Gita and that his intellectual approach refuses to slur over by a mere feeling of devotion. But then, we have several different views, and interpretations of the Gitā from the old tradition of Sanskrit Bhäsyakāras like Sankarācārya, through Saint-philosophers like jñāneśvara, down to modern thinkers like Tilak or Mahatma Gandhi. Such a diversity of views among the intellectuals is a little bewildering to the common, intelligent man of the world, although it may not affect any one's,

Page #11

including that of the intellectuals and the scholars, feeling of reverence for and devotion to this unique Text.
What is Dr. Radhakrishnan's approach to this basic situation ? In the first place, it is necessary to acknowledge, both in an academic and intellectual way, the chroonological position that the Gitä takes in the evolution of Indian thought, philosophical and religious. D. Radhakrishnan points out that,
"The Bhagavadgita is later than the great movement represented by the early Upanişads and earlier than the period of the development of the philosophic systems and their formulation in sutras. From its archaic constructions and internal references, we may infer that it is definitely a work of the pre-Christian era. (fifth Century B. C.)....." (Text ed. Intr. p. 14).
It is clear, then that the Gita cannot be read as an exposition of 3. particular system of thought, nor can a philosophic system be imposed on it. The colophon at the end of cvery chapter indicates that thic Gitä is both metaphysics and ethics-brahmavidya and yogas listra, "the science of reality and the art of union with reality." But the teaching of the Gita is not presented as a metaphysical system tlought out by an individual thinker or school of thinkers. "It is set forth as a tradition which bas emerged from the religious life of mankind".
Dr. Radhakrishnan tells us that "the different clements which, at the period of the composition of the Gita, were competing with cach other within the Hindu System, are brought together and integrated into a comprehensive synthesis, free and large, subtle and profound. The teacher refines and reconciles the different currents of thought, the Vedic cult of sacrifice, the Upanişad teaching of the transcendent Brahman, the Bhāgavata theism and tender piety, the Samkhya dualism and the yoga meditation." (Ibid., pp. 13-14). In other words, the teacher of the Gitā is a profound seer who sees truth in its many-sidedness and believes in its saving power. The Gitā, thus,
"represents not any Sect of Hinduism but Hinduism as a whole, not merely Hinduism but religion as such, in its universality, without limit of time or space, embracing with its synthesis the whole gamut of the human spirit, from the crude fetishism of the savage to the creative affirmations of the saint.” (Ibid., p. 12)
'Understood in this light and on this chronological background, the scholarly attempts to discover the old and the new in the Gītā, the so

Page #12

called revision of the Gitā by the doctrines of a particular system of thought, would appear to be not only irrelevant to the basic purpose of the Gita but merely intellectual exercises. For, if any mingling of the thought-currents of the day was to be done, and a refined, integrated synthesis was to be worked out, it was done already by the author of the Gitā. This should also mean that we must accept tlic Gitā as it is, as a whole, as "an organic unity" which draws and synthesises all the living elements of Hindu life and thought.
By its official designation, the Gitā is called an Upadişad, because that body of literature is its main inspiration. But the Gitā also accepts the assumptions which are a part of the tradition of past generations and embedded in the language it employs." As a result, "the fratricidal struggle is made thic occasion for the development of the spiritual message based on the ancient wisdom prajna purāni, of the Upanişads" (Ibid; p. 13). Viewed thus, it would be clear, again, that the Mahābhārata context, the dialogue pattern, the lack of a coherent systematic development of thought as in a mctaplıysical essay, the rambling discussion and repetitions and the archaic language too are all elements of the composition of the Gitā and must be treated as such. It is futile to criticise these elements, complain about them, or feel that the Gitā presents, occasionally, a jumble of unwarranted beliefs and profound truths. Dr. Radhakrishnan says that the different opinions about the teaching of the Gītā seem to arise from the fact that in the Giti are united currents of philosophical and religious thought dillused along many and devions courses. Many apparently conflicting beliefs are worked into a simple unity to meet the needs of the time in the truc Hindu spirit, that over all of them broods the grace of God." (Ibid., p. 15). Whether the Gita succcds in this or not is a matter for individual opinion. But the Indian tradition has always felt", Dr. Radhakrishnan tells us, "that the apparently incogruous clements were fused together in the mind of the author and that the brilliant synthesis he suggests and illuminates, though he does not argue and prove it in detail, fosters the true life of the spirit". (ibid., p. 15).
Il, intellectually speaking, the Gitäis brahmavidya and yogaśāstra rolled into one, it follows that the Gita is concerned with the science of reality on the one hand, and with the art of linking the individual with reality, on the other. The first of these concerns, namely of the science of reality, the Giti tackles in the upanişadic spirit by asserting the supreme, transcendental reality of Brahman and the immortality of the soul. The nature of Brahman and Atman is described here in terms and language of the Upanişads. But the aim of the Gilā is not an inquiry into the nature of

Page #13

metaplıysical reality alonc, and it cannot allow itself to be pre-occupied with it. Its other concern with the need of man would not let it do so. Unless the knowledgc of reality is somehow harnessd to fulfil the practical needs of man in seeking spiritual progress leading to union with reality, knowledge would be divorced from life. The Gitä keeps this concern continuonsly before itself. And, at the same time, it does not lose touch with different thoughts and religious beliefs that were assimilated into the stream of tradition. The explanations, the teacher of the Gita gives, are naturally coloured by these concerns and considerations. Thus, while accepting the abstract, transcendental concept of Brahman, the Gitā is yet able to accept īśvara as the Creator of the universe, as the immanent aspect of reality. The praksti and puruşa known to us from the Samkhya system of thought, are similarly accepted and placed below iśvara, as the material and living aspects which make up the totality of the universe. The process of evolution and the operation of three gunas whichi characterizes and diversifies the evolutionary products are accommodated in the explanation of creation. All this, however, is kept free of doctrinaire insistence and fluid. The intimate relation between Brahman-iśvara and the soul, for instance, is emphasised by describing the latter as a part and parcel of the Divine, without any formulation as in the Vedāntic systems of thought. In fact, the terminology that the Gitā uses does not possess that precise connotation which it acquired in the various systems of thought. At the same time, the Gitā's presentation looks like a meeting place of familiar thoughts and ideas, so that it has the effect of not disturbing any mind drawing from any tradition or culture. Thus, while condemning the Vedas for their materialistic outlook, the Gitā accepts the principle of yajña as an act of surrender of the lower in the interests of the higher, giving it the context of life's activities. The Gita's god is Vāsudeva-Srikrsna. He is Brahman. But the Gitä is prepared to accommodate any kind of god, even of lower or savage order. It only emphasises in principle that the imprint of divinity is scattered at large in the universe (vibhūti), and the truth is that the many-sidedness of the universe is derived from the One; the One is in the many; and the many are in the One; 'woven like a string of beads in a thread'. This knowledge of reality is vouchsafed by the Gitā through the exposition of jñana and vijñāna and its direct impact is conveyed by the vision of the viśvarüpa.
The other concern of the Gitā is with the art of union with reality, with the integration of the individual with spiritual truth. In this regard, Dr. Radhakrishnan points out that "the truths of spirit can be apprehended only by those who prepare themselves for their reception by

Page #14

rigorous discipline. We must cleanse the mind of all distraction and purge the heart from all corruption, to acquire spiritual wisdom”. (Ibid., p. 12.) There is no doubt that the yoga discipline that thc Gitā speaks of becomes relevant in this context as a systematic mode of cleansing the body and the mind, acquiring a control of the senses, achieving mental concentration and a state of samadhi in which there is a perception of reality. It is evident that the author of the Gita uses the (Patañjala) yogaśāstra for this purpose and finds a valid place for it in the life of man.
But before man gets spiritual-minded and starts preparing himself for receiving the truths of spirit, he has to live his common life and confront the day-to-day situations. He has to act, and accept the consequences of his actions, whatever they may be. This is the problem of the common man. The world in which man lives is a staggering reality to him, which he cannot suppress or deny. The question is whether this is a different order of reality from the order of spiritual truth. And a further question is if the two orders are different, are they related ?
In the language of philosophy the two orders of reality are called transcendental and empirical. The direction of philosophical thought has generally been towards regarding the enpirical order as on a lower level. sometimes as an impediment to progress to the higher order of the spirit. A school of thought came near dismissing the empirical order as an illusion treating it, at least, as not worthy of the name of reality in relation to the transcendental order. Such a philosophical attitude, however valid. is not likely to help man much in solving his practical problems of life. The greatness of the Gitā as a gospel of life is bound to be universally felt in this particular context. The Gitā does not connive at such situations as life poses. In fact, the opening section of the Gitā raises the question of the problem of human action. Arjuna stands as representative of humanity who is completely baffled and bewildered by the problem of his duty. In the first few chapters the teacher of the Gita provides an answer to the question of man's duty and action.
The answer is, of course, well-known. What is worthy of note is the combination of the pragmatic conception of action and the doctrine of devotion that is brought to bear on this problem. In recognising karman as the very life of the universe, the cause of its continuity and functioning, the Gitā not only accepts the necessity of action but also the reality of the universe which is operated by action. The talk of renouncing karman is, therefore, idle; for, it means only substitution of one action by another kind of action. If renunciation is necessary, it must come

Page #15

from within. It is on these lines that the Gitā develops its philosophy of karmayoga, which has the soundness of scientific thinking and the validity of practical utilization. The discovery of the Gita is that the desire to get returns from the action done, and not the action itself, is man's enemy that chains him down to a low life. The conquest of such desire and performance of action without expectation of any reward or profit liberate man from the bondage of life. In addition, when actions are further done as a dedication to God, considering oneself as an instrument through whom God has chosen to work, one reaches the vicinity of God Himself.
The answer that the Gitā gives to the problem of action and right conduct is "the traditional answer of Hindu religion", but we cannot miss the new emphasis in the Gita's statement. Dr. Radhakrishnan says:
“The whole setting of the Gitā points out that it is an exhortation to action. Work is inevitable till we attain spiritual] freedom. We have to work for the sake of freedom, and when we attain it, we have to work as instruments of the divine." (Indian Philosophy, Vol. I, p. 568).
In other words, "the truc ideal is lokasarigraha, or the solidarity of the world. The spirit of the whole works in the world. The good man should co-operate with it and aim at the welfare of the world..... The best people have the largest burdens to bear". (Ibid., p. 567).
Dr. Radhakrishnan, thus, sces in the Gitā's exposition of karman a close relation between the transcendental and empirical orders of reality. According to the Gitā, the two orders cannot be divorced. To do so would be to divide man into outer desire and inner quality, and to violate the integrity of human life. "Good work is that which helps us to the liberation of the individual and the perfection of spirit. Right conduct is whatever expresses our real unity with God, man, and nature; wrong conduct is whatever does not bring out this essential structure of reality”. (Indian Philosophy, Vol. I, p. 566). Of course, the common man needs help to work his way to the reality of union with the spirit. It is here that right action, yogic discipline and religious devotion help him. But once he is liberated, has attained unity with the supreme self, his contact or responsibility with the world does not really end. While the philosophical ideal of mokşa and the infinite destiny of the individual apart from human society must be recognised, the insistence of the Gita on social duties and obligations has also to be recognised. And it means that the ascetic ideal of the sainyasin is not favoured by the Gitā.

Page #16

7
Dr. Radhakrishnan says:
"He (the sanyasin) may be aloof from society; yet he has compassion for all. Mahadeva, the ideal ascetic, seated in the Himalayan snows, readily drinks poison for the saving of humanity". (Indian Philosophy, Vol. I, p. 580).
"Every scripture", says Dr. Radhakrishnan, "has two sides, one temporary and perishable, belonging to the ideas of the people of the period and the country in which it is produced, and imperishable, and applicable to all ages and countries". (Preface, Text ed, p. 5). The way the Gita touches and solves problems which confront man as an individual and as a member of the society of the world, makes it a valid text for humanity. Its direction towards spiritual religion, without obliterating the necessities of human life, makes it a scripture worthy of man's respect and reverence. Dr. Radhakrishnan is, therefore, inclined to look on the Gita mainly as a theistic scripture that attempts to integrate the two orders of reality and help man to find his place in the scheme of the universe and with the Supreme Spirit.
"For the Gia", Dr. Radhakrishnan says, "the world is the scene of an active struggle between good and evil in which God is deeply interested. He pours out his wealth of love in helping man to resist all that makes for error, ugliness and evil.. The Gita is interested in the process of redeeming the world", (Text ed., Intr. pp, 25, 26).
Apart from its metaphysical and ethical value, the Gita gives a religion to man. Dr. Radhakrishnan writes:
"The chief problem facing us today is the reconciliation of mankind. The Git is specially suited for the purpose, as it attempts to reconcile varied and apparently antithetical forms of the religious consciousness and emphasises the root conceptions of religion which are neither ancient nor modern but eternal and belong to the very flesh of humanity, past, present and future". (Preface, Text ed., p. 6)
Tradition recognises intellectual inquiry, strenuous self-sacrifice, fervent devotion, ceremonial observance and yogic exercises as means of access to the divine. Dr. Radhakrishnan points out that, "Man is a complex of reason, will, and emotion, and so seeks the true delight of his being through all these". (Indian Philosophy, Vol, I. p. 553). The beauty is that the Gitä recognises that different men are led to the spiritual vision by different approaches; it synthesises them therefore, and believes in the effectiveness of a combined attack". "The harmonising ideal which all

Page #17

8
these different methods have in view is the increasing solidarity of the individual with the universe presided over by Purusottama." (Ibid., p. 554).
Dr. Radhakrisluran adopts the text followed by Sankara "as it is the oldest extant commentary on the poem". His translation is accurate and faithful. In his notes he calls attention to different interpretations on controversial verses, without taking any special positions. Yet his explanations of some of the concepts in the Gitā are very illuminating. For example lokasaritgraha (BG. III, 20) according to liim "stands for the unity of the world, the inter-connectedness of society". He adds, "If the world is not to sink into a condition of physical misery and moral degradation, if the common life is to be decent and dignificd, religious ethics must control social actions. The aim of religion is to spiritualize society, to establish a brotherhood on carth. We must be inspired by the hope of embodying ideals in earthly institutions. When the Indian world lost its youth, it tended to become other-worldly. In a tired age we adopt the gospel of renunciation and endurance. In an age af hope and energy we emphasize active service in the world and the saving of civilizativ". (Text ed., Notes, pp, 139-140). Similarly, commenting ou the concept of avatārs (BG. IV. 7-9), Dr. Radhakrishnan first points out that "Dharma literally means mode of being. So long as our conduct is in conformity with our essential nature, we are acting in the right way. Adharma is n011-conformity to our nature". "Avatāra is the descent of the Divine into the human world", and the cosmic function of the avatāra is to point out “the way by which men can rise from their animal to a spiritual mode of existence by providing us with an example of spiritual life. The Divine nature is not seen in the incarnation in its naked splendour'. ." The lives of the avatāras "dramatize for us the essential constituents of human life ascending to the fulfilment of its destiny". (ibid., pp. 155, 156). In explaining the verse na buddhibhedam janayed ajñānäm..(BG. III, 26). Dr. Radhakrishnan directs spiritual and social workers not to disturb the simple beliefs of the illiterate or common people, their innocent joys, feasts and festivals, and religious devotion of any kind, The elements of duty, sacrifice and love are the foundation of religion. In the lower forins, they are mere symbols; but they are vital to those who believe in them. They become intolerable only if they are imposed on those who cannot accept them and when they are suggested to be absolute and final forms of human thought. Till then, we must approach the followers of simple faith with respect and love and not disturb them heedlessly. The Hindu pantheon presents ant immense synthesis by accomodating gods of all kinds and of diverse groups. (see, Text ed., Notes, pp. 142–143.)

Page #18

It has been said about Dr. Radhakrishnan that he was essentially a philosopher of life. To him thought was meaningless unless it was related to life. He is grieved to find that, "We are taught to fly in the air like birds, and to swim in the water like fishes, but how to live on the earth like men we do not know". For him service is prayer. "We worship the creator by working for a new creation, a new society". It should not be surprising therefore that Dr. Radhakrishnan should find the Gitā to be after his own heart. In the true spirit of the Gita his exposition of its teaching is broad-based, aiming at the essential harmony, and emphasising all that is significant for man's understanding of the true religion of the spirit that lifts him up to Divine height. It is in this sense that Dr. Radhakrishnan stands by and for the Gitä,

Page #19


Page #20

SOCIAL PHILOSOPHY OF DR. RADHAKRISHNANT
Dr. H. M. Joshi
In contemporary Indian philosopliy Hinduism and Indian traditional beliefs came under critical review. Thinkers such as Mahatma Gandhi, Sri Aurobindo, Tagore and Radhakrishnan have elaborately dealt with the principles of Hinduism and traditional features in their several writings and books. Among such principles of Hinduism are casteism, four Purusharthas, four Ashiramas, status of women in society, family, monogamy and collective growth of society. The name 'Hindu' is a product of historical happening. It is the Indian cultural development and progress since the times of Rigveda which influenced the races and racial life in India. During the course of centuries many races lived together and built up certain definite practices-principles of life and thinking, standards of betterment of inner living as well as values which came to be known as 'Hinduism'.
Metaphysics of Rigveda is monistic and Idealistic. Radhakrishnan accepts the Monistic nature of Reality and the truth of several Gods as grounded in one Supreme Brahman. Fourfold 'Varna', castes is rooted in Purusha Sukta which is part of Rigveda. The import of 'function', ‘Division of work has been understood but the deterioration of the original intention in later times has not been seen through. Under the impact of Brahmanism and its consequent ritualism the main import of Purusha Sukta is lost sight of and distorted. Radhakrishnan does not express this deterioration in clear terms. He, however, takes note of injustice done to flower' class in Hindu society and gross discrimination shown to Sluudras' by the so-called upper class.
Radhakrishnan wrote tlıree books in succession concerning Hinduism and related social issues of casteism and women. They are, (i) Hindu View of Life, (ii) Eastern Religions and Western Thought and (iii) - Relligion and Society. "Hindu View of Life' are his Upton Lectures delivered at Oxford in 1926. In this book Radhakrishnan attempts to defend caste-system in Flindu Religion. Caste-system is the result of care. ful and dyuamic thought of the Hindu mind. It is not only the device of the division of labour but it was the arrangement of inward and outward flow of persons and races in India. In the second book 'Estern Religions and Western Thouglit' Radhakrishnan appears to think caste as result of

Page #21

'class' division between 'twice-bora' and the opposite Shudra. It is in Religion and Society that Radhakrishnan offers a liberal interpretation and advocates change in psychological attitude, approach and treatment of 'Untouchables' in Hindu Society.
In 'Religion and Society' he writes, 'Caste divisions are based on individual temperament which is not immutable'. In the beginning there was only one caste. We were all Brahmins or all Shudras 2 A Smriti text says that one is born a Shudra and through purification he becomes a Brahmin. The caste groups are more trade guilds in charge of the cultural, political, economic and industrial sections of the community. Hinduism has drawn to its fold the Aryan, the Dravidian and the Mongoloid races which had drifted into the Ganges valley from the East, the Parthian, Scythian and Hun invaders from beyond the Himalayas. In Mahabharata, Indra tells the emperor Mandhatru to bring all foreign people like the Yavanas under the Aryan influence. In the period of the Rigveda we have the distribution between Aryan and Dasa and there were no rigid divisions among the Aryans themselves. In the times of Brahmanas the four classes became separated into rigid groups dependent on birth. The Smritis trace the innumerable castes to intermixture of the four Varnas by means of Anuloma and Pratiloma marriages. The four orders supersede the original racial differences. It is a classification based on social facts and psychology. In the Mahabharata we are told that the Yavanas (Greeks), the Kiratas, the Daradas (Dards), the Chinas (the Chinese), the Sakas (Scythians), the pahlavas (Parthians), the Savaras (Pre-Dravadian tribes) and several other Non-Hindu peoples belonged to one or the other of the four classes. These foreign tribes were absorbed into Hindu society. The sort of social adjustment by which foreigners followed the general traditional and common law of the society, the foreigners admitted into the Hindufold from very early times. So long they were treated as Hindus. The great Empire-builders, the Nandas, the Mauryas and the Guptas were, according to the Orthodox view, low-born. The Gupta emperor's married Licchavis who were regarded as Mlecchas. Latterly some Hindus have married European and American women. Race and Society
Though strong racial differences opertated, inter marriages had not been unsatisfactory. Owing to the inflow of many races in India with the marriages of a men and women of such divergent races brought certain kind of unity and homogeneity among them. When marriages between heferogeneous race-persons took place then standards of binding, norms of promise and mutual progress became loose. However, the castes

Page #22

i3
became rigid and orthodox Brahmins took advantage of this situation. The standard of quality and action was lost siglit of and birth as well as heredity were regarded as norms of casteisin. The aim of casteism in a specific epoch was to achieve racial harmony by absorbing newcomers and giving them definite work and quality. Four castes were thought to be four moulds into which different vocations, people with several apti tudes and abilities can be adjusted. Tlie basis of Varna Dharina is that every human being must try to fulfil the law of development. Thts is the ideal set by ideal Hinduism. In course of time it may have been distorted by certain communities and races. It is held by sages and wise
persons that distinct qualities and traits of development are determined by cosmic forces. One should follow one's own 'Dharma' rather than spend time on somebody else's advice and imitation.
In ancient times sages and seers regulating the conduct of society did not try to implement the principles of heredity and classification in a rigid way. In special cases individual and community have changed their occupation and class. Vishvamitra, Ajamidha and Puramidha were admitted to the status of the Brahmin class. Vishvamitra had coniposed Vedic Hymns. Yaska in his Nirukta says that of two brothers, Santanu and Devapi, one became a Kshatriya king and other a Brahmin priest at a sacrifice. 'We are Brahmin not on account of birth or the performance of rites, not by study or family, but on account of our behaviour.'5 Even if we are born Shudras, by good conduct we can raise ourselves to the highest status. Manu limits the right to study the Dharmashashtras to Bralimins, while Sankara holds that members of all castes can read them.
Radhakrishnan emphatically asserts that 'Our habits are to be based on principles of cleanliness, not on taboos. Pollution by touch must be given up. The sin of untouchability is degrading and the prejudice should be removed. Bhagavad Geeta points out that there are only four Varnas based on natural aptitude and vocation, and two classes of persons, divine (daiva) and demoniac (asura). Places of Worship, public wells and public utilities such as cremation grounds, bathing ghats, hotels and educational institutions should be open to all.
Sacraments :
There are sixteen sanskaras or sacraments among which four are main sacraments, (i) Jatakarma or birth, (ii) Upanayana or initiation into study or reflection of Brahman, (iii) Vivala or marriage and (iv)

Page #23

Antyeshti or final ceremonies, Radhakrishnan believes that 'The sacrament of Upanayana is of Indo-Iranian origin'. This is not true. In the times of Rigveda Upanayana was given both to man and woman. Woman who put on the sacred thread was called Brahmvadinj. In Arya Samaj women are given and intiated into thread ceremony. In the period of the Upanishads, Upanayana was a simple ceremony. The student used to go to the lut of the teacher or forest-Ashrama of Guru with fuel in his hands and expressed the desire to get knowledge. The story of Satyakama Jabala brings out the significant point that caste is immaterial in the study and reflection of Brahman and it is the truthfulness which is essential in the relationship between teacher and taught.
Radhakrishnan says that it is essential that the important sacrament of Upanayana should be permitted for all Hindus, men and women, for, all are capable of the highest goal of spiritual insight. It is said that the Vedic path is open to three upper classes; the Bhagavata says that for women, Shudras and degraded Brahmins there is no access to the Veda and the compassionate sage has provided for them the epic 'Mahabharata'. In ancient times the prohibition of Vedic study was not so strict. Sankaracharya says that while the Shudra has no adhikara for Brahmvidya based on a study of the Veda, he can attain spiritual development even as Vidura and Dharmavyadha did, and attain to spiritual freedom (moksha), the fruit of wisdom. Jaimini states that according to Badari, even the Shudras could perform Vedic rites.?
"Whatever might have been the case in the past it is essential that our spiritual inheritance should be thrown open to all those who call themselves Hindus.' 'Gayatri prayer is coeval with India's cultural history and must be taught to all men and women, high and low. It is the symbol of the true religion which is spiritual adventure and perpetual renewal. Radhakrishnan accepts Individual as the fountain head of spirit and values. Therefore his suggestion of change of social set-up as well as of past undesirable customs and conventions follows from his belief in Reality of the Individual. Radhakrishnan is an Advaita Vedantin in his metaphysical conviction. However he is also sympathetic with Vishishtadvaita of Ramanuja when he is attempting to interpret mystic utterances of prophets, experiences and datum of the spirit. He says, God is not the silent sea of infinity in which the individuals lose themselves, but the Divine person who inspires first, past and without ceasing... God is a real symbol of the Absolute Reality, 8

Page #24

15
Aryans and Non-Aryans
Radhakrishnan points out that Hinduism is a missionary religion if not in the sense of individual proselytism then at least in the sense that whole tribes or communities have been absorbed by Hinduism. 'Hinduism has come to be a tapestry of the most variegated tissues and almost endless diversity of hues. It would be difficult indeed to get anything coherent out of such a heterogeneous mass of doctrines and practices. This very heterogeneity of content makes for tolerance. It is to be remarked however that no reformer in the long centuries of Hinduisin has escaped the bentem and contempt of the orthodox or the tribulation which goes with an exquisitely organised excommunication. Radhakrishnan holds that 'It is a matter of history that vast masses of the original ponAryan population were absorbed by the Aryan fold as Shudras, a class which was not included in the Vedic trivarnikas (a threefold division of society as contrasted with the later fourfold division). As against the old dogma of the Aryan superiority over the Dravidian, recent historical discoveries have gone to show that the Aryans were unable to resist the pressure of Dravidian ideas to such an extent that it has become a real riddle to determine with any definiteness whether the Hinduism of to-day is more Aryan or more Dravidian. Moreover the excavations of Mohenjodaro and Harrappa in 1911 by John Wheeler and his teain have at least shown that there was no such so-called Aryan invasion from north-western India. There are at least two hundred and more such sites in western and norther parts of India where it is shown that Aryans and Dravidians lived together and there was very systematic city-dwelling life with well-facilitated amenities and articles of decoration as well as utilities. This city dwelling has shown further that there was pre-Mohenjc Harrappa civilization in which Vedas and Upanishads were a part of cultured life. There is shown no historical landmark when Aryans entered India and as a race attempted to overpower and dominate the supposed hostile Dravidians. The said battles and their descriptions in Rigveda are symbolic of two parts of inward life and forces evident in human struggle expressed in 'syinbolic metaphors by poets. It is however a fact that Aryans and Dravids have mixed and they lived their lives together. There were at times conflicts of ideas and ways of living. This is evident in the lives of heroes of Ramayana and Mahabharata. Vasudeva was an Aryan but his wife Devaki was Dravid as she was sister of Kansa who was later on killed by Lord Krishna. Similarly Shishupala and Jayadratha were non-Aryans with whom Lord Krishna had to fight. In Ramayana Ravana was non-Aryan but Mandodari, his wife was Aryan

Page #25

16
who advised Ravada not to touch Seeta although he had abducted her from the forest. It seems that Aryavarta of about three thousand B. C. was very wide, expanding upto Iran and Afghanistan on the north and upto Cambodia in the South. The names Gandhari and Kaikeyi reveal that they came from those countries such as Gandhar which is Afghanistan and Kekaya in present Russia. The four castes or Varoas were an attempt to include and absorb different heterogenous races in India.
led the the periodise, the di assificar
There was deterioration and distortion of classification of caste which was a social organic attempt to harmonise the divergent elements of society and country. There was a kind of disgust shown towards the fourth "Shudra' and especially in the period of Dharmashashtra and Smritis the authors misinterpreted the original noble intention of Shruti laid down in Purusha Shukta. Radhakrishnan has attempted to show the democratic character of Hinduism. It is, of course, difficult to show this in the face of rigid casteism prevalent in Hindu society for the last so many centuries. Human beings are not all equal and are not all fit to achieve the highest truth, most of them have been left alone to go their own way. Even in the prescut ceutury there are aboriginal tribe' not getting its due share in the Hindu fold. There are 'Untouchables' who do not get entrance to Hindu temples and they are not uplifted to higher level. Till then it can not be said that Hinduism is democratic in its social temper.
Class and Stages of Life
The priuciple of the four stages of life like that of four castes is not so rigidly followed in Hindu society although it has a certain definite following among certain sections of people in the country. In modern times when the longevity has been considerably decreased, the divisiou into twenty five years for each stage of life is bound to be shortened. Monkhood is not the only aim of life. Household and family have a positive contribution to healthy and proportioned growth of life and social pro. gress. Of course, persons such as Buddha, Mahavir and Sankaracharya decided to take Samnyasa at an early age of life and Indian society as such has not rejected such a drastic step. When certain period and individuals are taken into cognizance, Hinduism, Buddhism and Jainism have been ascetic in their main character. The ideal of Samnyasa has been exalted in certain periods and schools of Hinduism. Although many of the Samnyasins really lead an idle life and sponge on the slender earnings of the masses, there have been quite a good number who have been great teachers, holding aloft the ideals of a high moral and spiritual life.

Page #26

17
Radhakrishnan has pointed out the degradation of caste in Hindu society to 'class'. Shudras were looked upon with hostility and as 'lower class people by so-called higher class people. At times caste is regarded as a sigojficant achievement of Hinduism, but looking to the rigidity developed in later period it cannot be justified except that of its original well-intentioned cosmic view regarding work and social harmony. Unfortunately its distorting interpretation lent its hereditary nature associated with the rules of marriage permissible only within a caste and only even within a sub-caste. Moreover the recent deinand of the Dravidians amounting to the separatist tendency is a pointer to the fact that after centuries Aryans and Dravidians have not been sufficiently mixed in blood and in ideas to orientate one people in the country. To rectify this Radhakrislinan says in 'Religion and Society that "To be in too great a harry to make fundamental concessions to changing circumstances shows a lack of confidence in the principles of our own tradition; but never to change at all is stupid.'11 He says further, 'From a study of the imperishable principles that have been evolved on our past history, we must develop new institutional safeguards for the protection of human dignity, freedom and justice.. radical changes in our social habits and institutions are essential, if India is to be saved from physical and spiritual death.??
Status of Woman
In ancient Vedic society woman was regarded as 'Ardhanigini', 'a queen of the House' and the institutior as well as the ceremony of 'Vivah' was regarded as symbolic of social and spiritual relationship of man and woman. Man was regarded to be imperfect without woman and in religious ceremonies the presence of wife was held to be essential. In 'yajna' wife used to sit by the side of the husband to perform offering and sacrificial rites. Man and woman were believed to be equal and there was no dominance of either in social, political or cultural vocations. The ancient symbol of 'Ardhanarishwara' signifies the equal role of woman in society and spirituality. However there is a marked difference of quality, and function between man and woman. Rearing children, nursing, grace and household duties are specially belonging to woman. Of course like Spartan education women in India were too educated in archery, horse-riding and spear-bearing. Kautilya mentions women archers. 'In the houses as well as in the forest universities of India, boys and girls were educated together'. ‘Atreyi studied under Valmiki along with Lava and Kusha, the sons of Rama.'13 However the belief persisted in Smriti period and in later middle

Page #27

ages that women are inferior to men in intellectual quality and power. Such a belief gained momentum and in Manusmriti woman's initiation into study and Brahmacharya was thought to be substituted by marriage. She was thought to be dependent on man and later under the impact of foreign races she was held to be part of property. Just as in religious institutions, ceremonies, customs, castes and other beliefs, the infiltration of other races influenced their forms and change, similarly it made impact upon the status of women in society.
Polyandry, Polygamy, abduction and other illegitimate forms of marriage were the result of mixing of races and social expediency. Radhakrishnan says in this conncection that 'Monogamous marriage is not a natural condition but a cultural state. The traces of promiscuity belong to the Pre-Vedic stage, as the institution of marriage is well established by the time of Rig Veda.'14 Manu argued that women should have all the sacraments but without the Vedic formula. The only Vedic sacrament for them is marriage. A wifeless man is not eligible for sacrificial rites. 15 For Manu and for Manu and Dharmashashtra, woman is 'a fragile plant, to be cared for and nourished by man.' When in later times the position of woman deteriorated the Bhakti religion arose responding and satisfying seceral religious needs of woman.
The marriage ideal among Hindus is quite high but in practise this ideal loses much of its worth when for a long time Polygamy was sanctioned, infant marriages were common and women were left in ignorance. In epic like Ramayana the ideal of marriage as monogamy was strictly laid down. It is true that marriage has got sanctity and it is indissoluble. Yet if a woman intends to remarry in case her husband dies or has been proved insane, is a eunuch or diseased, then she is not permitted to do so while a man is permitted to remarry even when his first wife is living. Customs and conventions prevalent in Hinduism are prejudicial to women in Hindu society. Widdow remarriage is looked upon with frown and contempt by people in Hindu society whereas man who is widowed is regarded to be free to marry more wives. It is only recently in 1954 that Hindu Code Bill was passed in parts enforcing monogainy and endowing certain rights in succession to women and daughters. It is true that world over there is spread out movement for liberation of women in the present century. So as a part of it, in India also women largely have arisen and been demanding equal rights for marriage, property and other legal inatters."
Owing to influence of external races such as Turks, Mongols and Muslims the customs of wearing bangles, putting curtain on the face by women, child marriage and polygamy took stronghold in Hinduism. Putting

Page #28

19
curtain on the face was never a custom among women in ancient India. It was a distinct Islamic influence on Indian culture. Moreover in Islan marriage is believed to be a contract which can be terminated by its utterance with the result that its influence on Hindu society was grievous. Woman was regarded as a chattel in family and her privileges were largely curtailed. In a joint family woman could not enjoy her individual respectable life. In modern times there is a notable change among Hindu young men and women towards individual separate families. There a visible rush towards urban life deserting rural conditions and community life.
Aims of Life
Four aims of life, Dharma, Artha, Kama and Moksha provide for adequate channelisation of desire, security, sex, love, aspiration for righteousness and liberation in life and human communication. Radhakrishnan writes that 'It seems never to have entered into the heads of Hindu legislators that anything natural could be offensively obscene, a singularity which pervades all their writings, but is no proof of the depravity of their morals. Love in India, both as regards theory and practice, possesses an importance which it is impossible for us even to conceive."16 Radhakrishnan says that 'when natural instinct of sex is guided by brain and heart, by intelligence and imagination, we have love." Marriage as an institution is a device for the expression and development of love. The Hindu view thinks highly of the ideal of marriage and householder. 'As all living beings depend on the support of the mother, so do all the stages of life depend on the support of the householder. Home is not what is made of wood and stone, but where a wife is, there is the home.'18 The Hindu view regarding marriage does not advise persons to become saints but to strike means in satisfying passions as part of achieving comprehension of life. 'Spiritual freedom is to be secured not by arbitrary suppression of desires but by their judicious organisation.' Again, 'The highest ideal even in sex matters is that of non-attachment, to use the relations when valuable and forgo them without trouble.' Radhakrishnan advises persons to understand and approach marriage in a 'sacramental spirit'.
While exhorting the married" relationship Radhakrishnan is cautious. about separation, breakdown and undesirable unions between husband. and wife. He favours divorce when separation is found to be inevitable. It is true that in later period of Hinduism birth of a son was welcome in family whereas birth if a daughter was looked upon with sadness and ill-luck. Even the blessings of marriage priest to the wedding.

Page #29

20
bride in later Hindu period were to the effect that she may become the mother of eight sons. This was unfortunate development in Hindu society. There was a time in eighteenth and nineteenth century when in Hindu society among Kshitrayas daughters were tortured and done to death right in their childhood. Males married second and third time in order to get male issue. Radhakrishnan deplores this unhealthy attitude towards daughters in family. He says, 'In patriarchal families and in primitive conditions a son is economically more valuable than a daughter. This does not mean that parents loved their daughter less. An educated daughter is the pride of the family."19 He tries to defend the preference for boys. 'There is also the difficulty of procuring suitable husbands, and even after marriage there is a large element of chance in regard to the future. This difficulty of securing happiness for girls is the cause of preference for boys and not any unfairness to the female sex.20
Radhakrishnan is appreciative of healthy marriage relationship and expresses optimism if marriages are largely successful in society. The ideal of family, monogamy and four stages of life which are although traditional and much is to be desired, to improve upon them, yet when in countries of Europe and U.S.A., divorce and desertion of married responsible life are common, these ideals build up the pillars of healthy social and cultural life. In Sweden the statistical analysis of married life and later desention indicate that sixty percent of married couples live outside their family life and prefer desertion of spouse and children. Radhakrishnan advocates the healthy creatively mental and spiritual union of husband and wife. Of course such an ideal may be in contravention of modern earning couple and struggling to adust to the hardships of business and industrial machine and market life. In India too many couples in urban areas live and continue to adjust to such demands of ecconomic stress and strain. Emotional and mental tensions as well as anguishes are bound to crop up among the couples during such adjustments. They may affect and disturb the harmonious relation between husband and wife. However the ideal and standard of mental and creative union helps the couple and family to make progress in the long run. Radhakrishnan says in this connection. "The marriage relation is intended to contribute to both life and mind. While woman is entangled more in the activities which life has assigned to her, man in engaged more in creation of mind. It is vital national service to work hard, to serve and rear family. If woman is engaged in activities which prejudice the work of preservation, she comes into conflict with her own inner nature. She is the giver of joy and the inspirer of activity and she cannot do her part successfully if she immitates man. Modern woman is discontented with her role of child

Page #30

21
rearing and home-making and wishes to devote herself to some other “higher activity. 21
A faithful monogamous marriage is the ideal to be ained at, though its realization is difficult..Marriage is an art which involves both pain and joy. The difficulties of life do not end, but begin with marriage. Uma won Shiva not through her personal beauty but through austerity and suffering. Kalidas in his 'Abhijnana Shakuntalam' shows how two loving souls are worked through suffering into shape and moulded into fitness for cach other.' It is the element of suffering undergone by partners in marriage either before it or after which makes marriage and life more mcaningful as well as worthy. In great plays of the masters, the object of love is heightened by austerity which brightens the value of love and consequent union. The sublimity of love is achieved by making the lovers aware of the contingencies and mercurial nature of life. If the partners in marriage think that life is a bed of roses throughout, then it will make them soft, weak in face of ordeals and dangers of life. It requires a hard metal, courage and psychic temper to resist and react to the wild frenzies of life and circumstances.
The ceremony of marriage should be educative and indicating a guideline of the significance of marriage. So Hindu seers have shown legitimate forms of marriage as against improper forms of it. Since ancient times there have been at least eight forms of marriage prevalent in Hindi fold. Many of these cannot be traced to the period of Rigveda. Hinduism has the tendency to presserve old beliefs and customs without deleting them when they are outworn. Four forms are approved while the other four are disapproved."22 Paishacha, Rakshasa, Asura, Gandharva, Arsha, Daiva, Prajapatya and Brahma are the forms of disapproved and approved marriage in Hindu society. The Paishacha form of marriage is that in which the bride is overpowered by the husband. It is of a very low type. The bride is deceived or loses control over herself by taking drugs or drink and in such a frame of mind she yields to the husband. Rakshasa form of marriage refers to a period when women were regarded as prizes of war. In certain cases conflict and clash regarding women occur. Rukmini, Shubhadra and Vasavadatta lielped their husbands, Krislina, Arjuna and Udayana respectively. In the Asura form of marriage the husband buys the bride for a price. 'It is marriage by purchase.' 'This form was in practise but was not approved. These three forms of marriage are disapproved.
The Gandharya form of marriage is based on mutual approval and Choice. 'Kama Sutra regards this type of marriage as ideal.'23 The most

Page #31

22
interesting case of this type of marriage is that of Dushyanta and Shakuntala which is the theme of 'Shakuntala' of Kalidasa. As Gandharva unions were brought about without the recitation of mantras, to give them sanction it was laid down that ceremonies should be performed after the union.24 This is meant at least for the Dvija, three classes. In the Arsha marriage the father of the bride is permitted to accept a cow and a bull from the son-in-law. This is a modified form of Asura marriage and is held low among the approved form of marriages. In the Daiva form the sacrificer offers his daughter in marriage to the officiating priest. It is called Daiva because the marriage is settled during the course of the performance of the sacrifice, to the Gods. It is not generally approved, as during the religious ceremony itself the priest selects the wedding bride. In the Prajapatya marriage the bride is offered to the bridegroom with due rites and the couple are enjoined to be inseparable companions in the discharge of their religious duties. Many marriages are like those of Urvashi and Pururava, merely contractual where the woman yields her body but not her soul. This is not proper respect for sex-relationship. "The physical union is the outward sign of an inward spiritual grace. 'The Brahma form of marriage is the one approved and popular among all classes and in it the couple pray that their friendship and love shall be lasting and genuine. The present conventions and forms tend towards the Brahma ideal, though other forms such as Gandharva and Ashura forms are found prevalent.
Customs and Radical reform
The customs of child-marriage and Sati are the result of influence of external races invading upon India during particular epoches of historical progress. As regards the custom of Sati only one name is found in incient Indian History which is the name of Madri, wife of king Pandu in Mahabharata. Ancient Vedic literature and Manu Samhita do not advocate early or child marriage. Manu even permits girls to remain unmarried if suitable husbands cannot be had. She can live till 'her death at her father's liome rather than be given in marriage to an unworthy man.25 Early marriages, as distinguished from child marriages, arranged by parents, in consultation with their sons and daughters. have been the norm in India.
Now after the renaissance in the beginning of the nineteenth century, both the abovesaid evils of Hindu society have diminished. Sharada Act has prohibited child marriage and Sati is also stopped by law. Of course these evils are ingrained with the ignorance of the masses in India. With education and persuasion there is hope of fighting against these evils. Certain orthodox priests and heads of Muths also are close-minded and

Page #32

23
they do not like India to make progress. They suffer from myopea with regard to social change and value. The recent case of 'Sati' in Rajasthan is a rengant of ignorance of village masses and their fanatic outlook.
Generally marriages should take place between members of groups who belong to homogeneous social and cultural level having understanding and harmony among them. However certain rules in Hindu orthodox institution regarding norm of marriage such as it should be within one's caste. outside the paternal line that is 'Gotra' are improper and out of date. To maintain one's Gotra while marrying is not feasible also as 'Gotra' refers to the belonging to particular head of the Book of Rigveda such as Kaundinya, Shandilya, Bhargava and such others under which specific family took initiation as well as education of Mantras of Rig Veda. This event occurred thousands of years ago. How can this 'Gotra' and its retention by the descent of line help in modern times ? It must have chauged after so much lapse. Of course marriage among cousin, brethern and in the same paternal line is not healthy as the norm in marrage is that of the opposite blood and its group. Even then this practice is found in South India and it is prevalent among Mahommedans. It is largely under the common interest of members to preserve the property and allied investment. It cannot be made rule for healthy society.
Brecding of healthy children is the care of social leaders and planners. There should be marrige among the opposites which is the rule of nature. High and low castes are social fixations which may be removed in progressive society. Radhakrishnan says, 'Cultural differences among castes are gradually diminishing, inter-caste marriages will again be on the increase and canuot be said to violate the spirit of Hindu Dharma 26 Manu allows a man to marry a girl from even inferior families if the girl is a jewel among women. Mahanirvana Tantra mentions the Shaiva form of marriage and lays down only two conditions: that the woma u is not within the prohibited degree of marriage and that she has no husband. Questions of age and caste need not be looked into.27 Under the present conditions, the Civil Marriage Act, Special marriage Act of 1954 also marriages between two persons of different faiths is possible without demanding their formal renunciation of religion.
'Polyandry and Polygamy are forbidden and yet there are occasions when both are permitted. Polyandry prevailed in certain communities. The well-known instance is that of Draupadi's marriage with five brothers. Her father King Drupad was aghast at the proposal and said it was opposed to the codes, but Yudhisthir argued that family traditions justify it and it is dificult to know what is right in all cases, 28 Polygamy was

Page #33

24
the privilege of princes and noblemen. Common persons were ordinarily monogamous. But the Shashtras allow a husband to contract a second marriage with the consent of his wife. Though polygamy is becoming rare it is still practised. Of course with the law of judisial separation and provision of maintenance to be given to wife and for child if child is under the care of the wife, divorce is not easily granted and if granted the husband would not be able to afford it economically. Even in Mahommedan religion where a husband can have four wives women have raised protests through organisation and there are indications of reform. Moreover for husband to marry four wives becomes an economic liability. On economic grounds monogamy becomes fair relationship and just ideal. However Radhakrishnan admits the orthodox Hindu mind and belief expressed in Manu Samhita, "The unfairness to woman in Manu Samhita is found when he says that good wife should adore a bad husband.'
In RigVeda there are found references to remarriages of widows. Arjuna accepted as wife the widowed daughter of Airavata, Naga king and had by her a son. Satyavati was sought in marriage by King Ugrayudha shortly after the death of her husband. Kautilya in his Arthashashtra writes, 'On the death of her husband a woman wishing to lead a virtuous life shall at once receive not only her endowment, money and jewellery but also the balance of the dowery due to her. If she is desirous of a second marriage, whatever her father-in-law or her husband or both had given her. If a widow marries any man other than the person selected by her father-in-law, she shall forfeit whatever had been given to her by her father-in-law and her husband. 29 Apastamba opposes the marriage. of widow. Amitagati in his Dharma Pariksha (1014 A.D.) refers to widow marriages. Alberuni records that remarriage of widows was prohibited by custom and this prohibition became extended to child-widows also. There are reports that near about 250 B. C. widows used to marry their brotherin-law (Devarah), brother of the deceased husband when the widow has a son she gets a share of the family property.
In recent years as women have begun to get education there is awakening among them and there is a trend towards widow remarriage. In Surat (Gujarat) during nineteenth century Narmadashanker who started. the first Gujarati Weekly paper 'Dandio', advocated widow re-marriage and did sufficient social reformative work to awaken the popular opinion in this direction. Arya Samaj has done a significant reformative work in society and in helping widows for restitution in household life in respectable manner. Dayananda Saraswati writes in his 'Satyartha Prakash' to the effect that there is nothing wrong in remarriage of widow if it is arranged

Page #34

25
with mutual understanding. In the present century education has also generated certain amount of economic independence for women. Maheela organisations in different states liave been establishing institutions, hostels; home for rehabilitation and supervising the situation of broken unions and families. There are of course cases of women commtting suicide, being burnt by in-law persons, cruelty by husbands and immoral traffic. This is seen declining during the last hundred years. In case of selection of spouses casteism is fastly receding among Dwijas and during Gandhi Age people married spouses of Shudra caste and obtained blessings of Mahatma Gandhi. There are lacs of Indians residing in foreign countries such as U. K. and U.S. A. and they have largely abandoned casteism in case of marriage of their children especially.
Current Problems
India is facing the problem of over-population and birtli-control has become the major demand of present times. There are two views prevalent in India as regards the measures to be adopted with respect to check births of more children in the family. One is for natural moral check over passions whereas the other view is for the use of contraceptives and other aritificial medical checks over conception and birth of baby on mass scale. Radhakrishnan says, 'Control of births by abstinence is the ideal and yet the use of contraceptives cannot be altogether forbidden.'30 It is at times argued that birth control is an unnatural interference with the process of nature. Radhakrishuan argues that 'We have interfered with the process of nature by inventions and discoveries. If we argue that ancient things are more natural than modern, then polygamy and promiscuity should be regarded as more natural. Birth control is fast becoming in some countries as natural as wearing clothes, on account of the present social climate with its economic insecurity and the longing of parents to provide their children proper starting in life.'
It is true that these measures are not properly used by people and they are taken up merely as instruments of pleasure and license. Women intend to avoid pregnancy and men do not want to take the responsibility for the pleasures and acts. If we watch the recent techniques of propaganda, advertisement and modelling of women, we can observe the heavy impact of western culture and unconscious imitation by people in urban areas. After independence there is craze for foreign goods and styles in costumes, dress and mannerism among people. The one time movement and demand of people for Swadeshi' is lost sight of and

Page #35

people have begun to take advantage of Star-Hotels in big cities. Sense of conimitment to Indian values of self-restraint, sacrifice, devotion, nationalism and spirituality is diminishing among leaders and thinkers of social change in present India. Once again as a result of capitalistic trends in society the chasm between rich and poor persons is increasing. The largest slum-dwelling of Asia is in the city of Bombay. Fifty percent persons of Indian population are living below poverty line and the problem of maintaining legitimate standard of living has become grievous. With the decline in economic standards there is deterioration in moral norms and appreciation of social and cultural value among the masses. So the misuse of scientific measures for improving conditions is rampant in society. Esepccially among young men and women there is dearth of moral and spiritual training with the result that the conciliation between scientific ineasures and moral uplift and evaluation are lacking.
Government should undertake the work of providing adequate housing facilities to the poor and slum-dwellcrs. Children are the future citizens of the country and they should be properly looked after by society and state. Poor people do not mind having inore children but as they are ignorant, they do not know how to educate and rear them so as to enable thein to become better men and women in society. At present family planning centres, Gram Panchayat and social workers are engaged in helping the rural people to adopt measures to check birth of more children. It should not be limited to certain class and religion. It is a national problem. So people of all classes and religions should understand problems of population, price rise, waste of food and water as national and each one should attempt to eradicate evils of economic and social nature.
Radhakrishnan is very keen to defend the liberal outlook of Hinduism regarding marriage, divorce, succession and family. He has attempted to inerpret Hinduism in wider and universal connotation so as to make it anenable even to supposed Non-Hindus. It is the 'Open System of Hindu inviting others to join and become members of World culture and Religion. As Dayananda Sarasvati said 'Krinvanto Vislivam Aryam'. The whole world should embrace Hinduism in its pure and Universal spirit. Similarly Radhakrishnan appeals to the citizens of the world to appreciate the rational and detached character of Hinduism incorporating all good and noble elements of different religions and philosophies of the world. Wherever limitations and shortcomings are found in society and institutions of India, Radhakrishnan is optimistic about their removal in due course of time. As regards the status of women in Hindu society there is a bode of

Page #36

27
liberation of women froin the yoke of custom and ingorance. The image of Indian woman is standing as loving, sacrificial and noble. 'India in every generation has produced millions of women who were never fond of fame but whose daily existence has helped to civilise the races and whose warmth of heart, self-sacrificing zeal, unassuming loyalty and strength in suffering when subjected to trials of extreme severity, arc among the glories of this ancient race.31 The ideals of Secularisın, Democracy and Socialisin laid down in our constitution are not entirely new to Indian society and people. Radhakrishnan attempts to carve out the universal image of Hindu society and Religiou which can be acceptable to all women and men alike. As such there are several facts of orthodoxy, historical dialectic and ignorant masses which stand against such ideals of egalitarian social framework. However there is a potentiality of improving, rectifying and building up better social construction in which men and women share equally tlie disabilities and prospects of commissions and omissions of the dynamism of society.
In the metaphysical background of Hinduism the original principles would be the forms of ultimate belief and guidelines for general activities of people at large. They will not be directly and positively helpful in solving present riddles and problems of social and political life. Moreover during last forty years and more nations are moving towards interrelationship implying broader agreements in cconomic, educational, cultural and social fields. Nationalism of 1920-30 is on the wane. Even if nations are poor, orthodox and conventional, they cannot afford to connive at international market, racial discrimination, calamities, idcologial changes, treaties, border disputes, positive and negative actions and reactions of liberal nature among neighbouring and other countries. As Radhakrishnan has said in 'Kalki or the Future of Civilization', 'Cultivation of brotherhood and fellowship among the nations is the indispensable prerequisite. The nation we hate is the nation we do not input. The peace of the world depends on drawing together of the minds and consciences of cultured men and the growing commerce of knowledge and ideals.'32 It is a union of nations by mutual consent and goodwill wherein the uniqueness of cacl nation is preserved and permitted to flourish in larger federation. Indian society requires positive thinking and adjustment in the context of non-alignment and forces of international politics of our times,
Problem of work and National uplift
The progress of the nation depends upon output of goods and circus : lation of power of money in wider market of consumers and buyers. Of

Page #37

course India is committed to good and benevolent uses of wealth for larger betterment of mankind. However the present problem of the people in the country is to find proper work and satisfaction for contributing to uplift of society and state. From social point of view Indian socicty requires new orientation towards work for all and collective welfare of groups and institutions. It has been the convention of Indian society to respect household, family, child-rearing, old persons and moral and spiritual fervour of pcoplc and society. In changing conditions of physical, cconomic and social significance it has become imperative to become economically free. secure and self-reliant. Earning and maintaining fainily is the responsibility of the married couple. With soaring prices and demands of modern society, no mature and educated member of family can afford to sit idle and look to others for maintenance. For centuries wife, old persons and dependents in Indian society liave continued to remain non-earning members. Especially in rural areas people like to remain idle and pass time without positive activity. Now times are l'astly changing. Women have to a certain extent started undertaking jobs in schools, banks, offices, railways, post-offices and industrial undertakings.
There should be more number of women to take up different vocations in society and help in liberating the forces of stagnation and lethargy for upliftment of society and state. Right to work should form a part of citizens' rights in a free nation and everybody should take up for collective rise and harmony in the country. Radhakrishnan has not attended to the problem of 'work' in society to be done by persons whether young or old. Nations such as U. K., U.S. A., Japan and Germany as well as U.S.S.R. have shown liare-speed in progress owing to their citizens being diligent and hardworking. It is a modern problem raising the value of labour and collective work for progress of socicty. At some stage of life the question of work and service of society requires to be attended to by men and women alike.
References and Notes:
1. Sattyadhiko brāhmaṇah syāt ks'atriyastu rajodhikah tamodhiko bhaved
vaisyo guņasāmyāt tu südrata. 2. Brhadāraṇyaka Upanişad I-4. 11-5; Manu I. 31. cf., also Maha
bhārata XII. 188. Na Višeşo'sti Vaiņānām Sarvam brahman idam jagat
brahmaņa pūrvasrstam hi karmabhir varṇatām gatam. 3. Sānti Parva 65. 4. śānti Parva 55. See also Manu. X. 43, 44,

Page #38

5. Na yopirnäpi samskāro na ca santatih karanam dvijatvasya vșittam
eva tu kāraṇam. 6. Religion and Society : Radhakrishnan : George Allen & Unwin Ltd.
1947; London; p. 135. 7. Nimittärthena badarih sarvadhikārakam syāt-I. 3, 27. See also Bhara
dvāja Srauta Sūtra, V. 2, 8.; Kātyāyana. I. 4, 5. 8. My Search for Truth: Radhakrishnan : 1946 edition. p. 40. 9. Hindu View of Life : Radhakrishnan. P. 20. 10. Philosophy of Radhakrishnan : Edited by Paul Schlipp : Tudor Publi
shing Company New York. 1952; p. 761. 11. Religion and Society : Radhakrishnan : p. 138 12. Ibid. p. 138 13. Ibid. in his Malatimadhava, Bhavabhūti makes Kāmandaki study
along with boys. 14. Ibid. p. 145. 15. ayājñiko vā cşa yo apatnikah-Taittirīya Brāhmaṇa II. 2.26. 16. Studies in Psychology of Sex : Havelock Ellis. : VI. 129. 17. Religion and Society; p. 146. 18. Na Gșiham Kāșthapaşāņaih Dayitā yatra tad grham-Nitimanjari. 68. 19. Kanyāyām Kulajivitam-Kumārsambhava VI. 63. Cf. also Vidyāvati
dharmaparā kulaśri loke nūnam ramaņiyaratnam. 20. Religion and Society; 152. 21. Ibid. p. 154. 22. Ibid. p. 165. 23. Devala, quoted by Kullūka on Manu VIII. 226. 24, Religion and Society. 166. 25. IX. 89. 26. Religion and Society. p. 173. 27. Vayojati vicāro tra śaivodyahe na vidyate/Asapiņdām bharthiņām
udvahecchambhuśāsanāt. 28. Apastamba mentions that in some communities a single woman is
given in marriage to a whole family. (II. 27.3) 29. III, 2. 30. As quoted in Philosophy of Radhakrishnan', Volume edited by Paul
Schilipp; p. 782. 31. Religion and Society; p. 198. 32. Kalki or the Future of Civilization : S. Radhakrishnan : Hind
Kitabs Ltd., Bombay; 1948, p. 67.

Page #39

REASON AND INTUITION IN DR. S. RADHAKRISHNAN'S
PHILOSOPHY
Prof. C. V. Raval
Introductory
The critics of Indian Philosophy at home and abroad have lamented that "the creative period in Indian Philosophy" stopped at the close of the Hindi period in Indian history. They hold that the subsequent development in contemporary Indian philosophy has nothing of the grandeur or the majesty of the imposing systems of philosopliy of the age of the Darshanas or of the great Indian Acharyas. There is no such originality in the modern Indian Thinkers as in the systems of Kant, Hegel, Whitehead or Bergson. Indian philosophers lack in creative independent thinking. There is now an atmosphere of intellectual stagnation.
The above criticism is not justifiable and it is unfair and not correct to describe like this the contribution of the contemporary Indian thinkers like Gandhiji, Tagore, Sri Ramkrishna Paramahansa, Sri Aurobindo, Vivekanand, Vinobaji and Dr. Radhakrishnan. They entertain a global view and stand for a synthesis. Assimilation and not exclusion, toleration and not dogmatism characterise their attitude. This trend has clicited the admiration of persons like Lord Russell. The great Indian thinkers of this century have made significant and substantial contributions in the different fields of philosophical discipline. They have certainly enriched our understanding of the nature of reason and intuition or Spiritual Experience and their importance and role in man's life. They start enquiry into the deeper truths of metaphysics and religion with utmost seriousness and devotion. They show great interest in man's life in the world and they seem to be deeply interested in the spiritualization of man's secular life.
Dr. S. Radhakrislinan
Among the contemporary interpreters and exemplar's of India's ancient cultural ideas and philosophic wisdom harmonised with the best in modern thought, Prof. Radhakrishnan stands second only to Gandhiji and R. Tagore. Glowing tribute has been given to this worthy son of India by eminent thinkers of the world. The space here, does not permit us to go into all the details. However we shall mention here only a few of them.

Page #40

C.E.M. Joad in his 'Counter attack from the East' writes--"..the function, the unique function which Radhakrishnan fulfills today is that of liason officer. He seeks to build a bridge between the traditional wisdom of the East and the new knowledge and energy of the West.”! "Dr. Radhakrishnan combines in himself the essential charactiristics of a Rishi, an Acharya, a saint, a reformer, and also a brilliant expounder and interpreter of Hinduism."2 "When I consider the all-inclusive range of Radhakrishnan's philosophical vision as indicated by his published writings, I am reminded of the Iranian scholar of 900 years ago-Al Biruni”3 "God must place a high value on a creative spirit such as Dr. Radhakrishnan. His words should be added to our sacred scriptures as revealing much of eternal truth."'4 He is thus almost elevated to an incarnational level. He was a Guru without disciples. He established no Asramas. He did not believe in institutionalizing his message of universalism. One is compelled to admit graciously the genius of a man who has profoundly influenced the development of the Indian philosophical thought, the study of comparative philosophy and religion, the process of promoting the East-West unity, and the search of a spiritual religion. The distinguishing characticistics of his dynamic idealism are a deep spiritual note, a catholic outlook, a quick appreciation of the eternal values. The constructive metaphysician in him has given us a rough outline which can generally be described as Spiritual Humanism.
His title to fame rests on his diligent and enormous work in two fields : (i) Interpretation of India's philosophy and religion and (ii) his constructive metaphysics and thic formulation of the characteristics of a true spiritual religion. He has some thirty volumes to his credit. As an expositor, he has the genius to explain clearly the most abstract and difficult problems in philosophy in a most lucid manner. His works are partly interpretative and partly constructive, but a holy fervour', a 'synthetic outlook' and a constructive passion' are evident althrough. The search for a unity among the diverse manifestations of human culture takes him through a zigzag course. In his writings, we find an engaging fruitful entry into the heart and mind of India. His exposition of ideas is manysided, not sequential. It illustrates his way of thinking so characteristic of India's intellectual giants.
The vision of a universal spirit behind all human phenomena releases the shackles of his mind which finds a sacred home in everything human. It makes him specially feel that-"There is a certain kinship of the spirit among the religious geniuses who have made the mark on history, who join hands across the centuries and bid us enter into the kingdom of the Spirit."5

Page #41

Etymologically, the term 'Reason' is derived from ratio'. It means relation. "In the most generalised sense of all, reason might be defined as the relational clement in intelligence."6 D. D. Runes defines "Intuition as "the direct and immediate apprehension by a knowing subject of itself, of its conscious states, of other minds, of external world, of universal. of values, or of rational truths."7 Intiution is defined by Webster as the act or process of 'coming to direct khowledge' or 'certainty without reasoning or inferring.' Intuition is direct apprehension' or 'immediate cognition. We can understand intuition as a direct, immcdiate and certain way of knowledge whiich dispenses with the logical modes of reasoning and sense-experience.
The East lays emphasis on the development of the powers of intuition and the West on the critical faculty of intelligence. Whereas the Eastern systems are mainly idealistic, spiritualistic, axiological and intuitive, the Western outlook is rational, intellectual realistic, scientific and existential. Radhakrishnan is a synthetic philosopher and conceives that there are different grades of consciousness and ways of knowing. Knowledge is scientific, mathematical, realistic, and rational and also extends to intuitions. axions and values. Man's awareness is-broadly speaking-of three kinds. the (i) Perceptual (ii) the logical and the (iii) intuitive, Hall or the sensemind, fana or logical intelligence and a which for our present purposes, may be defined as spiritual intuition. All tliese belong to human consciousness. The human mind does not function in fractions. We need not assuine that at the sense level, there is 110 work of intuition or at the level of intuition there is not the work of the intellect. When intuition is defined as integral insight, the suggestion is that the whole mind is at work in it.
Intellect, emotion and will are tlic fragmentary manifestations of the piritual energy of man. They are not cut off from one another, because all spring from the same spiritual fonnt.
How do we know the spirit ?
The spirit can not be subjected to epistemology. It can not be subjected to human analysis, because the rational mind is incapable of apprehending its truth. Consequently, the rational mind needs to be exhausted. The process therefore, does not eliminate the use of reason or logic altogether; rather, when the rational mind realizes its own limitations, it makes room for the spirit to reveal itself. Rcality is neither completely unknown, nor completely known. Reality in its wholeness cannot be grasped by the discursive understanding, which distinguishes, seperates and relates.

Page #42

33
The final unity at which thought aims is beyond all concepts. The Absolute unity is opposed to the intellectual duality and the intellectual account of the Absolute remains a negative one.
Radhakrishnan thinks that knowledge is gained by intuition which operates in a mode of presentational immediacy. He thus takes the position that knowledge of the real is intuitive. He equates intuitive knowledge and integral insight. 'Spiritual certainty is conveyed by spiritual knowledge, which is not merely pereeptual or conceptual. This knowledge is not alogical but super-logical. It is called integral insight or intuitive koow ledge, in which the knower and the known are one; to know reality is here to be reality."9 Reason and Intuition
Reason is an essentially human phenomenon. It is the capacity to use universal concepts and in this respect man alone can claim reason. Radhakrishnan tries to use the word reason in a wider sense. According to him, reason is not mere abstraet or formal in nature, but it is higher and synthetic. Reason operates through the whole of mind. "It is the whole mind in action, the indivisible root from which all other faculties arise.”:10 He also draws a distinction between reason and intellect. According to him, mind as a whole can know things which are beyond the purview of intellect. Intellect is abstract and partial, but reason is comprehensive and synthetic. Reason is superior to understanding or intellect. It is a sort of contemplation. It is a principle of the identity of opposites.
Intuition is subjective experience. It is a higher source of knowledge than reason. Reason does not give immediate knowledge. It works under the limitations of senses and categories of mind, whereas intuition is free from all such influences. Intuition is the very basis of reason. Reason is not discarded but thoroughly subordinated to intuition. In the philosophy of Dr. S. Radhakrishnan, words like reason, intellect, logic are used in dual sense, as excluding and including intuition 11 There is no opposition between reason and intuition in his philosophy. The seeming opposition remains between intelleet and intuition, and not between reason and intuition. Reason can not fathom the depth of Reality. It is inadequate in so far as it fails to realise the transcendent or the Absolute. Reason can not restore the living whole. It distorts and mutilates Reality. Reason and intuition are interdependent. The postulates of thought, the pervasive features of experience, number and causality provide scope for intuitive function; and there are intuitions of logical, scientific, aesthetie, ethical, physical and religious types.

Page #43

34
Intuition probes into the nature of God and intuitive scers shrink from precise statement and definitions because definition involves relation and comparison, which are obviously the function of reason. It is due to this reason that the seers and the mystics all over the world take recourse to symbolic language in order to give expression to the deeper spiritual experiences of their life. To Dr. Radhakrishnan, logic and language are the lower forms or a diminution of intuitive knowledge, and thought is a mcans of partially manifesting this knowledge. Thought can thus reveal reality, but necds verification as it involves the duality of knowing and being. "Strictly speaking logical knowledge is non-knowledge, Avidyā, is valid only till intuition arises. Intuition is experienced when we break down the shell of our private egoistic existence, and get back to the primeval spirit in us from which our intellect and our senses are derived."12 In intuition, the ego disappears' and 'the individual becomes the instrument of the Universal', lifted above the limitations of the ego. If intelligence has its being turned towards the Universal Self it develops intuition or true knowledge or wisdom. "Intuitive knowledge is not non-rational; it is only non-conceptual. It is rational intuition in which both immediacy and mediacy are comprehended."13 The intuitive consciousness is the totality of vision. Radhakrishnan agrees with British Idealist Bradley when lie says "We can form the general idea of an absolute experience in which phenomenal distinctions are merged, a whole becomes immediate at higher stage without losing any richness."14 Intellect and intuition
The intellect breaks the qualities into static concepts. It gives us superficial knowledge of reality. Intuition reveals the truth of it. Intellect locs not impart knowledge of Reality; it is valid only so long as the intuition does not manifest in us. In intellectual knowledge, the distinction between the subject and the object remains always there. It is verified and developed through progressive inquiry. To know reality, we must transcend discursive thinking. Intuition is direct and immediate perception. In all creative works of art and discovery, intuition is essentially involved. "Direct perecption or simple and steady looking upon an object is intuition. It is not a mystic process, but the most direct and penetrating examination possible to the human mind.”
Reality is life, movement, concrete continuity and logic gives us concepts which are dead, inmobile and timeless. If all knowledge were conceptual, the reality would have remained unknown for ever.
Intellectual knowledge is one of abstraction. Intuition reveals the knowledge of the thing in itself.

Page #44

35
Intuition is related to intellect as a whole is to a part. It comprehends sense and intellectual knowledge. Intuition is knowledge by identity. It is the final and supreme knowledge, whereas the intellect grows and develops from error to truth. Both intuition and intellect belong to the self. Intuition carries with it its own guarantee; it has the character of revelation. Genius and creative work depend on it.
Intellect and intuition are not disconnected; in intuition, one thinks more profoundly, feels more deeply and sees more truly. While intellect involves a specialised fact, intuition employs the whole life. In intuition, we become one with the truth, one with the object of knowledge. "The object known is seen not as an object outside the self, but as a part of the self."15 Intellectual cognition also is not quite infallible. It is not free from doubt. Logical arguments are challengeable and can be rejected on the strength of equally strong arguments. Its main tool is analysis' and so it fails to grasp the 'whole' nature of objects. But this does not suggest that intellect and intuition are quite opposed to each other. In fact, intuition needs intellect for the expression, elaboration and justification of its results. Intuition in itself is dumb. Its results in order to be communicated to others have to be put in understandable and intelligible form; and for this, intellect is needed. Intellect, on the other hand presupposes intuition, without which its deliberations can not start. The function of intellect is analysis' but there must be something to be analysed, and that something must be a 'whole'. The whole as a whole can be grasped by intuition alone. That gives to intuition its primacy. Intuition depends, on the intellect and also transcends it. Dr. Radhakrishnan says, "Intuition is not independent but emphatically dependent on thought, and is immanent in the very nature of our thinking. It is dynamically continuous with thought and pierces through the conceptual context of knowledge to the living reality under it. It is the result of a long and arduous process of study and analysis and is therefore higher than the discursive process from which it issues and on which it supervenes."16 Intuition should not be confused with anti-intellectualism. It is not antagonistic to the intellect. "Intuition which ignores intellect is useless. The two are not only incompatible but vitally united. Intuition is beyond reason, though not against reason. As it is the response of the whole man to reality, it involves the activity of reason also," "Intuition is not used as an apology for doctrines which either could not or would not be justified on intellectual grounds. It is not a shadowy sentiment or pathological fancy fit for cranks and dancing dervishes."

Page #45

Application of reason and intuition in the fields of Science, Arts, Ethics and Religion
Reason and intuition operate in each and every sphere of human knowledge. Let us see how Dr. Radhakrishnan shows their application in the different fields of human activity, namely Science, Arts, Ethics and Religion.
Reason shapes the outer structures whereas intuition fathoms the depth of inner truth. There is mutual participation of reason and intuition in the different fields. According to Dr. Radhakrishnan "The cognitive, the aesthetic and the ethical sides of life are only sides, however vital and significant, the religious includes them all". 17
Science
The application of reason and intuition in the field of science has been much confused due to the misunderstanding that science is solely a matter of observation and reason. It is true that scientific laws are ascertained and determined by reason and higher mathematical knowledge but their discovery is also often the result of some flashes of intuition. All creative work in science is inspired by intuitive experience. Dr. Radhakrishnan observes-"The great scientific discoveries are due to the irtuitive genius of the creative thinkers and not the plodding processes of the intellect", "amid much that is entangled and dark we have flashes of wondrous insight which appear less the product of reasoning than of revelation." Intuition discovers, whereas reason proves it. The art of discovery must not be confused with the logic of proof. Radhakrishnan writes "We forget that we invent by intuition, though we prove by logic". 18
Art
Art has got its formal structure as well as inner essence. Reason works on the formal or external structure of art, whereas intuition penetrates into the inner essence. Reason adds to the value of art (e.g. music; every evoice is not music; or a lump of colour is not painting; a picce of stone is not a piece of artistic sculpture). Even if art is the self-expression, the self that is expressed is not the narrow one. (It is the expression of the whole self ). Art is a mode of integral insight. "In aesthetic experience, we have a type of intuitive knowledge, a personal relationship with the object which is essentially different from what is found in intellectual cognition."19 Art in its perfection, merges into ethics.

Page #46

Ethics :
Radhakrishnan lays emphasis on the mysterious nature of the universe which we have to understand not by reason alone but by intuition as well. Reason and intuition equally work in ethics and yield moral consciousness. When a man is faced with two alternative and conilicting situations in matters of ethics, his reason alone helps him to choose the right course. Integral visiou helps to resolve the right and wrong of any given situation. Reason educates conscience and by intuition one attains automatically the knowledge of his duty. Moral virtuc is not simply a matter of reason but arises out of the depth of souls. e.g. Socrates : 'Virtue is knowledge'; but this knowledge is not mere rational knowledge but it is knowledge which springs from the deeper leveis of man's being. Dr. S. R. says-“The deeper a man is rooted in spirit, the more he knows directly. To one of ethical sensitiveness, the path of duty is as clear as any knowledge we possess." "He, whose life is directed by insight expresses his deeper consciousness not in poems and pictures as the artist does, but in a superior type of life.”20 (e.g. lives of Buddha and Christ).
Religion :
Every true religion is based on intuition and the religious life commended by prophets, saints and seers consists in the culture of intuition through the harmonious perfection of emotion, intellect and will. Religion in its deeper aspects transcends reason. But it need not decry it. Reason does play an important role in religion also.
Otherwise it would be difficult to distinguish right faith from superstition. Reason should not be eradicated from the spheres of religion and theology. It shapes our religious beliefs and experiences. There is a level of religious life in which reason las to play a superior role. Religion finds its fulfilment in supra-rational or spiritual or intuitive experience. Creativity in cognitive, aesthetic, ethical or religious activity springs from thought which is intuitive or spiritually quickened. Radhakrislinan reverently, searches, therefore, the heart of every great religion to discover the intuitive basis from which it springs. To this purpose, he specially devotes his book Eastern religion and western thought.
Radhakrishnan thinks that the materiality of the world does not contradict the spirituality of God. As a matter of fact, spirit comprehends matter. The universe or world is the manifestation of the spirit. Spirit is not opposed to matter. If integral experience is the awareness of the universe as harmony, how do we explain the tension and discord existing

Page #47

38
in the universe? Dr. Radhakrishnan writes: "For the intellect, the unity is only a postulate, an act of faith, for the spirit, the harmony is an experienced reality'. The transcendent and the immanent aspects of Reality are woven together in his integral knowledge or integral experience. He takes integral experience both in the ontological as well as in the epis temological senses; for, according to him, integral experience is not only a mode of knowing but also a mode of being. Being is to be taken in the sense of both knower and the known.
The deepest convictions by which we live and think and the root principles of our thought and life are not derived from perceptual experience or logical knowledge, but from intuition. Great truths are not proved but seen.
REFERENCES
1. See: Joad C.E.M. Counter attack from the East, George Allen and Unwin. London, 1933, page: 38.
2. See: Row K. S., 'Dr. Radhakrishnan's service to Hinduism' article in Dr. J. P. Atreya's Dr. S. R. Souvenir Vol. Darshan International, Moradabad, 1964, page: 579.
3. Chatterjee Suniti Kumar: "Dynamic Hinduism and Radhakrishnan" and article in P. A. Schilpp (Ed) Tudor Publi. page 507.
4. Shimer William A. in Atreya's (Ed.) Souvenir Vol. page 429 (article: "Radhakrishnan Man and the Universe")
5. His personal statement: Contempo-Indian Philosophy page 493-94. Quoted by Dr. D. M. Datta: The chief currents of contempo-philo. Univ. of Calcutta, II Ed. 1961, page 135-36.
6. Hasting James: (Ed.) Encyclo. of Reli. and Ethics, page 125.
7. Dictionary of Philosophy, page 149.
8. See Indian Philosophy, Vol. I, page 234.
9. See Idealist view of life, page 128 and Indian Philosophy, Vol. II, page 534 and page 639.
10. See
Idealist view of life, page 134.
11. Dr. Arapura J. G. Radhakrishnan and integral experience, Asia Publi. Bombay, 1966, page 63.
12. See Idealist view of life, page 146.

Page #48

13. Ibid. page 153.
14. Bradley F. H. Appearance and Reality, page 160
15. See: Idealist view of life, page 160.
16. See Contemporary Indian Philosophy, Muirhead Lib. of philo. II Ed. George Allen and Unwin, London, 1952 page 486-87.
17. See: Idealist view of life, page 158.
18. See Ibid..page 138-140.
19. See 20. See
Reply to critics in P. A. Schilpp's Vol. (Tudor) page 793. Idealist view of life, page 157.
Dr. Radhakrishnan S.
-Do
-Do
Radhakrishnan S.
39
-Do
Radhakrishnan and Muir- Contemporary Indian Philosophy, George Allen head (Ed.) and Unwin London 1958, III Ed.
Schilpp Paul Arthur (Ed.)
Sharma D. S.
Sinha R. C.
Arapura J. G.
Ewing A. C.
Stocks J. L.
Harris Ishwar C.
Selected Bibliography
An idealist view of life, George Allen and Unwin, London 1961
Indian Philosophy Vol. II 1951
The reign of religion in contemporary Philosophy, Mac Millan and Co. Ltd. London, 1920.
The Philosophy of S. Radhakrishnan, Tudor Publi. Co. N. Y. 1952.
Fragments of Confession (Tudor) Reply to Critics (" )
Studies in the renaissance of Hinduism B. H. U. 1944.
Concepts of Reason and Intuition (with sp. ref. to Sri Aurobindo, Prof. K. C. Bhattacharya and S. Radhakrishnan) Janaki Prakashan, Patna, 1981.
Radhakrishnan and integral experience, Asia Publi. Bombay, 1966.
Reason and Intuition, Oxford Uni. London, 1942 Reason and Intuition, Oxford, 1939
Radhakrishnan-profile of a Universalist, Minerva, Calcutta, 1982

Page #49

40
Browning R
Nagaraja Rao P. and
others (Ed.) Kaul R. N.
Reason and types of intuitions (Tudor) Ed. Schilpp P. A. Radhakrishnan Reader-an anthology, Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, Bombay, 1969 Immediacy, Reason and Existence, Udayana Publi. Allahabad, 1965 Counter attack from the East, George Allen and Unwin London, 1933. Modern Indian Thought, Asia Publi., Bombay 1964. Idealistic thought of India, Combridge, 1953
Joad C. E. M.
Naravane V. S.
Raju P. T.

Page #50

4
DR. RADHAKRISHNAN ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE UPANISADS
Dr. R. S. Betai
"Knowledge of Brahman is called Upanisad because in the case of those who devote themselves to it, the bonds of conception, birth, decay etc., become unloosed, or because it destroys them altogether, or because it leads the pupil very near to Brahman, or because therein the highest God is seated." (Samkara)'
The Upanisads that record and give expression to the philosophical experiences of seers of different strata of intellect and intuition as also the consequent realization, that are written not precisely at one time, have posed several problems. One of the problems is that even though most later philosophers run to the Upanisads as the highest proof" - parama pramaņa-for philosophical speculation and systematization, we cannot derive one single unified philosophical system, very often even from the same Upanisad, much less from different Upanisads. There are apparent repetitions, contradictions and varied approaches in the Upanisads. More than one reason have led to this state of affairs. One basic reason is that they are an expression of the intuitive experience of different scers, keen on not only knowing but experiencing Reality; they are experiences of many and therefore varied. That leads Dr. Radhakrishnan to state that:
6
though the Upanisads are essentially the outpourings or poetic deliverance of philosophically tempered minds in the face of the facts of life, not being systematic philosophy, or the production of a single author, or even of the same age, they contain much that is inconsistent and unscientific; but....they set forth fundamental conceptions which are sound. and satisfactory, and these constitute the means by which their own innocent crrors, which through exclusive emphasis have been exaggerated, can be corrected."2
But all will agree that there is unity in the midst of diversity in the philosophy of the Upanisads, and it is possible with the derivation of some fundamental concepts, to derive this philosophy, at least in broad outline. Even the commonest of the common in India have atleast some conception of these basic principles of the Upanisadic philosophy. Dr. Radhakrishnan analyses this philosophy. He states:

Page #51

42
"Notwithstanding the variety of authorship and the period of tim covered by the composition of these half-poetical and half-philosophic: trcatises, there is a unity of purpose, a vivid sense of spiritual reality i them all, which become clear and distinct as we descend the strear of time.3
Scope of Differing
But the very nature of the Upanişads is such that this task deriving one philosoply, one systematic thinking, is difficult. The Upan şadic teachings are not and they cannot be strict doctrinal systemati thinking set in one mould, but the actual attempts at and the consequen visioning of the secrets of Reality. The struggle of man's soul to riset the highest, his visioning, his experience cannot necessarily be one. Tha leads Radhakrislinan to probe deeper into the philosophy of the Upan şads. All schools of philosophy seck their inspiration in the Upanişad and all read their own philosophy in these works. The very fact tha most schools could read their own philosophies in these works prove their importance as also their diverse and complex structure. Radhi krishnan rightly states:
"When disputes arise, all schools turn to the Upanişads. Thank to the obscurity as well as the richness, the mystic as well as th suggestive quality of the Upanişads, the interpreters have been able to use them in the interest of their own religion and philosoplıy."4
Thus, even though it would not be very much fruitful, il' not actuall l'utile, to try to derive one systematic doctrinal philosophy from the Upa nişads, they remain undisputed in their importance as the mainspring o all later philosophy almost. That is the reason why the Upanişads are th primc works of 'Prasthänatrayi' of Indian philosophy. Even the latter two the Gita and the Brahmasūtra base their philosophical thought on th Upanişads.
Not mere metaphysics
One more remarkable feature of the Upanişads is that they are no mere metaphysics, mere Adhyātma philosophy or mere mysticism etc. Mai probes into the reality of life, into the deeper secrets of life. Consequenti there develops in his mind aspiration for the Higher and Highest. Ther are the problems of Karma, religious consciousness, ethics, evil and suffer ing, and so on. Actually, in the different stages of his Sadhanā, man find one or the otlier solution to these. All these varied problems and the

Page #52

solutions are given by the Upanişads; on all these they have something positive to contribute, something that persists in the outlook of the Hindu even to-day, after inore than 2500 years. But in the Upanişads these are 10t questions to be discussed in isolation or independent of one another. They are interwoven with the central theme of the Upanişads, that is a wakening of man's consciousness to the innermost realies of life, his vision of the subjective Ātman and realization of the objective highest reality, i.e., Brahman, his experience of identity of Atman with Brabman and tlic consequent release and Ananda. Radhakrislunan lists the contribution of the upa nişadic thinking on all these questions, but every time these are in fusion with the central theme discussed above. The Upanişads are thus, unity in diversity (i) in the realm of the highest philosophical questions of life, and (ii) in the fusion of the thinking on these other questions with the central theme. Radhakrishnan here strikes at reality, his grasp is perfect, his understanding and interpretation of the Upanişads is sound and scholarly.
Teaching of the Upanişads
Radhakrishnan rightly stresses the fact that finding out the original teaching of the Upanişads and pin-pointing it to some fixed idcas is a task indeed. It is possible to arrive at the real teaching of the Upanişads, only with an unprejudiced and open in ind. Our mind in the present century is saturated with so many pre-conceived theories of Acāryas and we are at a loss to arrive at a fixed decision on the matter. Actually, all pre-conceived philosophical theories, very often poles apart, scek and find consistency in the authority and word of the Upanişads. We can arrive at the central teaching of the Upanişads only if we adopt the approach advised in an upanişadic statement
"Know what is unknown and forget what is known." This also speaks for the richness of the upanişadic thinking. But all the Upanişads, with their varied approaches and thinking have something common to contribute by way of teaching. Radhakrishnan claims to divest his mind of the later philosophical thinking and to interpret them from the viewpoint of the seers who composed these.
Problems
The Upanisads record the struggles, the Sadhanā of different nien aiming at spiritual perfection, their practices, and pursuits after thc reality of life, their attempt at knowing the infinite and the cternal. Naturally all problems move round this central struggle of man. This effort at higher

Page #53

44
realization makes mau conscious of his problems which are narrated. The Upanişads also answer these. Radliakrishnan stresses this point in these words :
"Only the infinite gives durable happiness. In religion we are for cternal life. All these force upon us the conviction of a timeless being, a spiritual reality, the object of philosophical quest, the fulfilment of our desires and the goal of religion. The seers of the Upanişads try to lead us to this central reality which is infinite existence (sat), absolute truth (cit) and pure delight (ānanda)."6
That is the reason why he rightly stresses that the Vedas are inferior to the Upnişads in that (i) even though the Vedas raise the questions on reality of man's life and the universe, they are more interested in this life, not so the Upanişads, (ii) the religion taught by the Upanişads is higher than that in the Vedas, (iii) the religion of the Vedas centres round sacrifice, not so in the Upanişads, (iv) the Vedas lift man high to the lrigliest conceivable world known as Syarga, the Upanişads scale far higher heights. That is the reason why the Upanişads, though considering the Vedas to be of supernatural origin, yet stress that Vedic knowledge is inuch inferior to true divine insight that the Upanişads aim at. Radhakrishnan brings out the superiority of Upanişadic knowledge thus : "In the Upanişads we find a return to the fresh springs of spiritual life. They declare that the soul will not obtain salvation by tle performance of sacrifices. It can be obtained by the truly religious life, based on an insight into the heart of the universe. Perfection is in ward and spiritual, not outward and mechanical."8
Nature of Reality
Man's inner urge and the consequent desire to know and experience Reality, often starts with his effort at knowing his Self and its subtlest secrets. This Self of man, Atman, is subjective that leads him to the objective that is Brahman. Consequently the Upanişads discuss first the individual Self and then Ātman. This is because, as Radhakrishnan says:
"It is the subject which persists throughout the clanges, the common factor in the states of waking, dream, sleep, death, rebirth and final deliverance. It is the simple truth that nothing can destroy. Death does pot touch it nor vice dissolve it. Permanence, continnity, unity, eternal activity are its characteristics. It is a world self-complete. There is nothing outside of it or set against it,"9

Page #54

When man desires to go nearest to the secrets of the Sell, it should be stripped of all that is alien. Man should thoroughly grasp the real state of his body, mind, ego, dream state ctc. and get his self, stripped of all that is alien to it. The Upanişads probe into these question in the subtlest details. The object is dependent on the subject for realisation. It is therefore necessary to know first lhe individual Self and Atman and then Brahman. When man probes into the Self in this manner, he recognizes its infinity, its absoluteness. An upanişadie mantra statcs :
"When, following his reallzation, one grasps the identity of all (in the Ātman), what attachment or sorrow could be there ?"10 The Self thus becomes universal. That leads man to nniversal consciousness. Radhakrishnan states
“We are obliged to accept the reality of a universal consciousness which cver accompanies the contents of conscious and persists even when there are no contents. This fundamental identity, which is the presupposition of both Self and not-sell, it called the Atman. None can doubt its reality."11
Thus, in his onward march towards perfection, towards self-rcalisation and universal realisation, man starts with his subjective consciousness because he feels that
“The world is too much with us. Our Self is lost in feelings, desires and imaginations and does not know what it really is. Leading the life of mere objectivity, absorbed in the things of nature, cver busy with the active pursuits of the world, we do not want to waste a moment's thought on the first principle of all things-the Self of man."12
Man starts with his Self and ends in the realisation of the universal consciousness. It is an experience of realisation in which ultimately the distinction of subjective and objective is lost. The Self or Ātman is the Universal Brahman. Radhakrishnan has analysed the fundamental problems of the Upanişads with the analysis of the Indra-Brahmā conversation in Chh. Upan, and the three states of the soul followed by the fourth, the turiya in the Māṇdūkyopanişad. The extreme difficulty of this experience is also acknowledged when Radhakrishnan states
"It is impossible for us finite beings to define the character of the ideal reality, though the Upanişads are quite emphatic that it is not a blank. Yet to refute false idcas of the highest and to point the truth that it is no abstraction, they indulge in inadequate concepts."13

Page #55

16
Brahna-Bralinan and Atman
Naturally enough there is vast difference of opinion regarding the objective reality that is Brahman. It is interesting to note that after Atman, Brahman is next in discussion in the Upanişads. Radhakrislinan concedes that the conclusions arrived at are so varied, and at places statements are so abstract that it is possible for the later Açüryas to find authority for their own varied thcories in the words of one or the other Upanişad. In the Kena and the Mundaka Upanişads the Sadhaka pupils ask some fundamental questions in this regard. Some basic questions on the origin of life and origin of the universe had struck the Rgvedic mind also. Man becomes keen to know if some unalterably fixed principle underlies the changing universe. In his onward march in the realm of pursuit of reality, in his Sadhanā, the Sādhaka gradually comes to strike at different principles; with every principle he has only a limited understanding and hic strives further. He in this process ultimately comes to the highest principle or reality conceived by the Upanişads. On his march to seek Reality gradually man comes to matter, prūna (vital principle), Manas, Vijnana and Ananda. The final realisation in the Upanisads is in Anānda that is Brahman. Here Radhakrishnan states :
"Ananda or delight is the highest fruition, where the knower, the known and the knowledge become one, Here the philosophical quest terminates, the suggestion being that there is nothing higher than Ananda. This Anands is active enjoyment or unimpeded exercise of capacity. It is not sinking into nothingness, but the perfection of being."14 Thus, in the Upanisads, Ananda is the most inclusive of all, though Radhakrishnan wonders whether it is possible to go still higher. The Upanişads go LD to this. Radhakrishnan stresses the point in this manner :
“It is the aim of the Upanişads to point out that elements of duality and externality persist at the intellectual level, however much we try to overcome them. In knowledge and morality we have the subject-object relation. There must be something higher than mere intellect, where existence is no longer formulated in terms of knowledge. The unity of existences requires that we inust transcend the intellectual level."15
But Radhakrishnan concedes that there is very great difference of opinion about the precise meaning of Ananda and consequently of Braman. The ānanda of the Upanişads answers to the highest Brahman accepted by Rämāpuja as also the Nirguna Nirākāra Brahman accepted by Sankara. We may add ibat so many of the upanişadic statements will also support the Suddhādvaita of Vallabha and Dvaitadvaita of Madhva. Hard and fast,

Page #56

47
rigid and absolute, all-aggreeable statements on what precisely Brahman is, are not to be had in the Upanisads. Actually all these varied statements hold equal authority according to tradition.
Similar is the varied thinking that we come across with regard to the question 'Brahman and Atman'. Brahman and Atman are the cosmic and psychical principles that are held to be identical. Experience or realisation of the identiry of the two is said to be the final aim of the Sadhana of man in several references. This is the basic doctrine on the question, though we many add that even with regard to this identity, there can be varied views. Radhakrishnan rightly states:
"This identity of subject and object is not a vague hypothesis, but the necessary implication of all relevant thinking, feeling and willing. The human self cannot think, conquer and love nature, were it unthinkable, unconquerable and unlovable."16
With all this Kadhakrishnan concedes that af Tattvamasi is difficult to understand but also difficult to deny. It is clear that here, as in all else, Radhakrishnan derives what he thinks to be the highest speculation in the Upanisads.
But there are varied conceptions of Brahman corresponding to the different ideas on Atman. He lists the most important ones as follows:
(1) The highest Brahman, which is änanda, is just Atman realised in the turiya state.
(2) Brahman is self-conscious Isvara, with a force opposed to him.
(3) Brahman is Hiranyagarbha or the cosmic soul or sutratman coming between isvara and the soul of man.
(4) Brahman is cosmos or Virät when Atman is identified with the body.
(5) Supreme Self beyond cause and effect is Brahman.
(6) Aum' is Sabdabrahman in concrete character. It is the symbol of concreteness and completeness standing as it does for the three principal qualities of the Supreme.
(7) The ultimate reality is sat, chit and ananda, spirit personified as Brahma, Viṣṇu and Siva in later literature.
The Upanisads narrate and support all these varied conceptions of Brahman and Atman. It may here be added that the two words. "Brahman' and 'Atman' are used in senses interchangeable, they are often synonymous. The conceptions are described in the Upanisads not for

Page #57

their own sake, but for tlie Sadhana leading to self-realization which is ultimately Brahma-realisation. That is the reason why Radhakrishnan stresses the iniportance of these conceptions in tliese words:
**It is not an abstract monism that the Upanişads offer us. There is difference but also identity. Brahman is infinite not in the sense that it excludes the finite, but in the sense that it is the ground of all finites,
etc.":17
Radhakrishnan also refers to the contradictory predicates attached to Braliman by the Upanişads. When he discusses the question of intellect and intuition as the means to probe into the secrets of life and the consequent self-realisation that it leads to, so many Upanişads describe this Ultimate Rcality in contradictory predicates. Here, the purpose is to stress that though this whole moverse is Brahman, Brahman is beyond all conception that man's intellect can grasp or reach. It is natural that the Reality that is Brabman should be conceived to be the be-all and endall of this universe with also its concept of time and the concept of mind that moves faster. This reality should, of necessity, be conceived to be far above cverything with all traits that we can conceive of. This partly explains the contradictory predicates attributed to Bralinan. The seers of the Upanişads associate Brahman with the threefold process of creation etc. in the universe and associating it with every atom in this universe, conclude that this universe is Braluman. But the creator ctc. is naturally conceived to be far above the creation and therefore the other predicates of Brahman. The Isopanişad sightly says of Brahmau
"This one, though not moving is faster in movement than the mind," and "It is far and yet near, it is inside of all and yet outside of all iu this universe."18
The Kena Upanişad says: "That which is not conceived of by the mind but that by which the mind functions, that precisely is Brahman,
etc."19
That is again the reason why exceptional dependence upon Viciya borders on self-deception according to the same išaopanişad
"Those who worship Avidyā arc engrossed in blinding darkness. Deeper darkness than this is the lot of those who are engrossed in Vidyā. But one who knows Vidyā and Avidyā both at a time, crosses over death by Adidyā and enjoys immortality by Vidyā."20
The Upanişads want to stress that our intellect, in its pursuit of the Supreme Principle is confounded by these contradictory predicates though

Page #58

49
4
there is no genuine reason to be confounded. Here, Radhakrishnan stresses the limitations of mere intellect and lays down the importance of intuition and intuitive experience from the viewpoint of the Upanişads. Intellect, by its very limitaions, cannot, on its own comprehend Reality. He says:
**Causality is the rule of all changes in the world. But Brahman is free from subjection to causality. There is no change in Brahman though all change is based on it. There is no second outside it, no other distinct from it. We have to sink all plurality in Braliman. All proximity in space, succession in time, interdependence of relations rest on it."21 Intellect, reason, may be, even yoga etc. have their own limitations and mystics realize Brahman by intuition that leads to illumination. The theories of cause and effect which logically apply to all else perhaps, do not apply to Brahman. In the Gitä Krisliņa says: "They are in me though I am not in them.""? This is an idea on the same lines. Radhakrishnan adds :
"It is attained by the mystics in their moments of Illumination. It is direct knowledge or immediate insight. In the mystic experience the soul finds itself in the presence of the highest. It is lost in awareness, contemplation and cnjoyment of the Ultimate Reality."23 Here it is that all the aspirations of the human mind are fulfilled. But intellect and intuition are complejnentary and mutually dependent also. They often go hand in hand as the Upanişads agree. Actually mere intellect and mere intuition liave their own capacities as also limitations. Both going hand in hand, simultaneously, is necessary, for a man struggling to realize the Self as the supreme end of life and all philosophical aspirations. Yet to the Upanişads intuition is more dependable than intellect because Brahman or Ātman in its true, subtle perspective and reality is a matter of comprehension, not by the mind but by the whole Self of man that shall get merged in it and come to a stage when all sense of distinction, all duality, all that knowledge yields, everything gets disintegrated into the Supreme Reality. With all this the upanişadic doctrine is not pessimism. What the upanişdic doctrines expect us to know and realize is everything in its proper perspective and as it is. This knowledge of Reality culminates in the knowledge of the Supreme Reality
Radhakrishnan also refers to the individual Self that constantly feels the need to probe into reality, to grasp the secrets of life, to attain to self-realisation. But in its march in Sadhanā, the individual Self has its own limitations that must be got over. This is due to the lower nature in man. He is the enjoyer of the world and he is ruled by the ego in him. Philosophical experience of self-realisation leads him to know that

Page #59

50
the finite cannot subsist on its own and therefore it is unreal on its own and becomes real only iit' reference to the Infinite. Radhakrishnan rightly states:
"When we are delivered in lifc, our condition is that of the Jivanmukta,, who is freed from the bonds of conditional existence. His appearance continues without much outer change. His embodied state does not affect the bcing whom it clothes, as he has complete control over the bodily fraine and knows its externality."'24
Intellect hclps man upto a certain stage to get over this conditioned state and then intuition works. When the finite attains to the Infinite, the Suprenje, man reaches the final aim and therefore end of all spirifual life, and of all philosophical pursuit. The Upanişadic thinking probes deep and subtle when it separates the individual or finite Self from the Atman that is infinite and from Brahman, though in fact all attain to unity in realisation and ultimately all doubts are set at rest in this philosophical pursuit.
Release-Moksa
By this time we liave noted that wliat is necessary before man enters llic spiritual attainment is negation of the ego and fixation in the Divine ground, that free man from conditional existence and sarisāru. In this context Radhakrishnan deals with the question of final release or mokşa, popularly known as liberation. The question is taken up by him after hc deals with the questions of ethics and religion in the Upanişads. This is because, to the Upanişads, the highest state of religious consciousness and realisation is Mokşa. Man is liberated froni saisāra, from the ego, from the conditioned existence; this release is complete disintegration of individuality, giving up of isolation and yet it is not mere nothing. 1 Man's desire for self-realisation is in fact a desire for mok şa. Perfection, from imperfection, Infinite from the finite is tlic goal of man in his spiritual, philosophical sādhanā. In fact it is the fullest expression of the Self, it is realisation of 'what is. That is the reason why the highest state of Ananda, of rapture and ecstasy, is a state iu which man becomes one with the creator. Naturally this condition of the highest bliss is the condition of freedom. Our thinking, language, conception, worldly experience etc. are too poor to describe it. It is therefore described in the Upanişads by metaphors; it cannot possibly be described in precise, clear terms. That is vagueness in the opinion of Radhakrishnan, but we must add that the Upanişads had no alternative. It was therefore natural that it should lead to different

Page #60

51
theories of liberation in the days that followed. However, Radhakrishnan summarizes the central concept of mokṣa in the Upanisads in these words:"
"Mokṣa literally means release, release from the bondage to the sensuous and the individual, the narrow and the finite. It is the result of self-enlargement and freedom.. The path of deliverance is the path of soul growth. The Reality in which we are to abide transcending our individuality is the highest, and that is the reality asserted by the Upanisads."
Ethics
In his Introduction to 'The Principal Upanisads,' Radhakrishnan starts with the importance of ethical life to the Upanisads because practice of moral virtues and good acts is necessary. Man's ego has no self-sufficiency and to a great extent man shapes his present and future life. In his 'Indian philosophy' he starts his discussion of the Ethies in the Upanisads by referring to objections raised against the possibility of Ethics in philosophical discussion and system. The objections are mainly these:
(i) If all is one as the Upanisads state, how can there be moral relations ? (ii) If the absolute is perfection, what is the need to realize the accomplished?
(iii) If man is divine in nature, there is no room for any ethical endeavour.
Radhakrishnan answers these objections from the viewpoint of the Upanisads and then discusses the nature of Ethics of the Upanisads. The ethical doctrines accepted and described by the Upanisads are based on the fundamental concept of the Upanisads that the final aim and end of life of man is self-realisation, that is also realisation of the universality of the Supreme Principle that is Brahman. Man also realises the identity of Atman with Brahman that leads to Mokṣa. Though divine, man in his finite state has an element of non-being that exposes him to evil, to Avidya etc. (Principal Upanisads, p. 104 onwards). The Upanisads accept that all living beings, conscious or unconscious though they may be, are on their march to spiritual uplift. Man who feels finite and imperfect has an inner urge and push that make his Self struggle for the Infinite and Perfection. That stresses the need of sublimation and here the ethical principles step in. The ideal of ethical principles is thus so high that all ethical principles are subsidiary to man's highest goal in life as man. Only he moves consciously towards the Divine. Radhakrishnan analyses in his scholarly discussion the following ethical principles of the Upanisads that follow the ideal stated above.

Page #61

(1) A life of reason is a life of unselfish devotion to tle world. This unselfish devotion in the philosophical context amounts ultimately to becoming holy. Renunciation as the dominant path is deliverance. 26
(2) Morality is not external and superfluous, it is essentially inward. Motive in moral conduct and inner purity are therefore basically important.
(3) Like the Self of man, the whole world with all living beings is to be looked upon as born of God. That is the reason why self-love is said to be at the root of all kinds of love. Only 'cgoism' is objccted against. Love of the eternal is real love with intrinsic worth
(4) Man must renounce selfislı endeavours but positively not all interests. What is necessary is detachment. The Upanişads distinguish between animal and other desires, selfish desires and desire for salvation, true and false desires. Desires are not bad in themselves but bad indeed are attachments and mental reactions that they lead to.
(5) The Upanişads permit all means of cleansing the body and mind of animal instincts as also even flimsy human instincts plus the means to higher rise of man. Cleansing, fasting, continence, solitude etc. are purificatory of the body. The vratas described in the Gitā27 are means for this.
(6) Code of duties for control of passions, peacefulness of mind, freedom from narrowness and selfishness, restraint, liberality, mercy etc. are laid down as training of the mind and man's sublimation, so that he rises in aspiration and comes to a state of cultivation of quietude, balance, equanimity etc. These make man deserve to probe into spiritual rise.
(7) Retirement from the mortal couditioning world after fulfilling duties to society and a life of purity, humility, asceticisin, detachment etc. is recommended. This too is ultimately a means to the end in form of striving after liberation at the proper time and age.
(8) Observation of Āśramadharma to fill the whole of life with the power of the spirit. This is again to make man detached by slow and gradual steps from the worldly life to develop his spirituality the highest.
(9) Observation of rules of caste as duties to ones self and to society, so that on one side the social fabric is held intact and it grows strong, and on the other there is sostening of divisions and undermining of class hatreds and antipathies. This is necessary because God is the inner soul equally of all and therefore all have the right to rise higher to the ultimate truth.
(10) Man must become moral in the real sense of the term and he becomes moral only when he rises to religion and religious consciousness. The possibility of religious realisation is the presupposition of all morality.

Page #62

Man rises higher and highest by religion and one who rises the highest is above all laws.
The Upanişads, with thesc cthical principles accept the necessity of a good, decent, noble life in the world. Yet tliese are ethical principles of the Upanişads as a means and not the end even if thcy be good on their own. They are a means to the rise of man from the interest of flesh, of worldly attachment, of the satisfaction of the egoism to the higher stage in lifc physically, mentally, emotionally so that ultimately man rises spiritually. This is the end and truth of these cthical principics. "Moral activity is not an end in itself. It is to be taken over into the perfect life. Only this has transcendental worth."
Religion
"In the Upanişads we find a criticism of the empty and barren ritualistic religion. Sacrifices were relegated to an inferior position. They do not lead to final liberation..when all things are Gods there is no point in offering to him anything, except one's self.'29 Naturally enough the religion of the Upanişads is not and it cannot be religion in the ordinary sense of the term as a sect, its practices, external marks, certain faith ard values and a God. The Upanişadic conception of religion is very wide. It is on the whole a means again and not the end. It is meant to transform the whole nature of man, so that it rises higher from lower levels and is endowed with a wider spiritual outlook. Naturally enough a man religious in this sense will come to stand on the threshold of higher and highest realisation. They therefore teach the religion of Sraddha and Upāsanā, faith and worship. This may be followed by practices of yoga and the three become the means to self-knowledge, atma-darsana. Man next prepares for God-realisation and here come the three stages of man's religion-śrarana, manana and nidiahyāsana. Sravani is listening to, understanding and grasping traditional values. Naturally this is to be done with faith. The Upadişads accept tradition as a source of strength for man and they are vehemently opposed to what one might call traditionalism. Manana is personal reflection thereon by which "we attempt to forin clear ideas by the logical process of inference, analogy etc.” (Principal Upanişads, p. 133). Nidishyasana or contemplative meditation is meant to transform logical ideas into spiritual perception or darśana. This brings man on the threshold of the secrets of truth and the highest truth. Religion in this sense is meant to take man's personality higher from flesh, worldly attractions, attachment; it is meant for mental, emotional and spiritual sublimation. That is the reason why Radhakrishnan states

Page #63

54
**The Upanişad religion is the feeling of reverence and love for the great spirit. Such meditation is spiritualised bhakti. It recognises also that the distinction between subjcct and object ielts away in the licart of religious fervour."530 It is meant to lead man to perfection. All other modes of religion permitted by or not protested against by the Upanişads are preparatory to this. Prayer, worship of a personal god etc. are accepted but not for themselves. Radbakrishnan therefore specifically states
"The unity of spirit is the first principle of the upanişadic doctrine. Divine emanence is its central fact. If that is inconsistent with religious worship, it means only that theism has no place for true religion, since a true theism must accept divine immanence."34
Karma and Rebirth
The first fact to be noted is that the law of Karma is within, the judge is within in form of the awakened consciousness of man, the Ātman is the wielder of this law. The world-order is referred to in the Vedas as Rta and the world--order must go on. Varuņa is the ruler of this world-order. The law of Karma thus works in the world as also in man's life. We are told that man's life and birth are determined by his actions in his past births. The law works and works in the most dispassionate mauner. But this should not mean any pessimism. Man can to a good extent slia pe lis future as he shaped his past by his actions. The law of Karma in the Upanişads is thus (i) going on of the world-order which is a must and (ii) man being shaped by his past actions and shaping his future by actions again. Though within limits, man has free-will and he can shape his future, even partially he can better his present. The belief in the law of rebirth is a natural corollary to the law of Karna. Man's new birth will be slaped and determined by his actions in previous births. The Upanişacs adopt this law and describe in details the manner in which man dics and is reborn. Karma and rebirth, it is emphasised, are there till true knowledge is obtained. Here, virtuous acts, ethical rules and religious consciousness lielp man.
Thus, a sense of individual responsibility is emphasised. The law is not inconsistent with social scrvice. Actually in social service man disintegrates his ego and therefore attains to a stage when his actions do not bind lim. It has therefore a cliance to become a means to free ones self from Karma. Disinterested work or work for the good of the world help man to attain to freedom. Thus, the law of karma is there, but it does not negate individual cffort. In a sense the law works only at lower level. Once man enters the higher stage of thc spirit, he transcends the finite and becomes infinite. This shows also that karma has psychological

Page #64

55
aspects, it influences the mind as it does nature and the world. It fea an impact, impression, on the mind and man may repeat his actions. The law is not held to be inconsistent with theism by the Upanişads; the law is consistent with the reality of absolute Brahman. Radhakrishnan states
"Only the karma theory can give us a just conception of the spiritual universe. It brings out the living rational nature of the whole IC is the mechanism by which spirit works... Freedom and Karma il re the two aspects of the same reality.”32 Conclusion
In order to impart a sort of completion to his interpretation of the philosophy of the Upanişads, Radhakrishnan discusses some other questions also. But the questions discussed and analysed here from the VICW point of Radhakrishnan, are enough to give to us almost a complete picture of his understanding of the upanisadic philosophy. Radhakrishnan here succeeds in giving a clear picture of the immense wcalth of the Upanişadic thinking in all its variety and vastness. He successfully shows how this thinking has become the basis for all later philosophy.
He bases his analysis on the original sources from the Upanişads and is therefore on sound lines and proof. His reason is perfect almost and his style lucid and dignified. He writes with case and confidence. At places he brings in western philosophical thinking and concepts by way of comparison and in order to make himself more clear. However, it may be added that in referring to the use of the Upanişads by later philosophers, he refer's again and again to Sankara and some times also to Rāmänuja. Many of his thoughts would perhaps have been better clarified if he had referred also to Vallabha and Madhva. But he is mainly a follower of Sankara whose philosophy is too much with him.33 As far as doctrinal discussion is concerned, it is felt tllat he should have discussed the problems of Bhakti and Yoga in greater details. With this one suggestion, it must be accepted that perhaps with the exception of Dasgupta, no other philosopher-writer has treated the philosophy of the Upanişads better. The treatment is an important contribution of the scholar to a near correct and precise understanding of the philosophy of the Upanişads.
1. Introduction to his Bhāşya on Taitiriyopanişad
उपनिषदिति विद्योच्यते तच्छीलानां गर्भ जम्मजरादिविज्ञानात्तदवसादादा ब्राह्मणों वोपनिगमयितृत्वादुपनिषण्ण बास्यां पर श्रेय इति । तदर्थ त्वाद् ग्रन्थोऽप्युपनिषद । Also vidę 'Principal Upanişads', Intro. p. 19

Page #65

56
2. 'Indian Philosoply', Vol. 1. p. 138
Also 'Principal Upanisads', p. 19-20, also p. 99 3. Indian Philosophy', Vol. I, p. 139 4. 'Iudian Philosophy', Vol. I, p. 140. Also on p. 141 5. अविज्ञात विजानतां विज्ञातमविजानताम् । 6. 'Indian Philosophy', Vol. I, p. 150 7. The difference between Svarga and what the Upanişads aim at is
aptly suggesed by Kālidāsa in his Sākuntala in luis verseप्राणानामनिलेन वृत्तिरुचिता सत्कल्पवृक्ष बने
ताये हैमसहस्रपत्रसुभगे नक्त दिव' सदाव्रतम् । ध्यान' रत्नशिलागृहेषु विबुधस्त्रीस निधी सयमा
यत्कांक्षन्ति तपाभिरन्यमुनयो तस्मि'स्तपस्यन्त्यमी ॥ (७--१३) 8. 'Indian Philosophy', Vol. I, p. 147 9. 'Indian Philosophy', Vol. I, p. 152 10. तत्र का मोह क: शोकः एकत्वमनुपश्यत:। 11. Indian Philosophy', Vol. I, p. 159 12. Indian Philosophy', Vol. I, p. 154 13. 'Indian Philosophy', Vol. I, p. 162 14. Indian Philosophy', Vol. I, p. 165 15. "Indian Philosophy', Vol. I, p. 165 Also p. 166 16. 'Indian Philosophy', Vol. I, p. 170 17. 'Indian Philosophy, Vol. I, p. 173
Also vide 'principal Upanişads' p. 59 18. अनेजदेक मनसा जवीय!......etc.
तद दूरे तद्वन्तिके, तदु अन्त: सर्वस्य तदु सर्वस्यास्य बाह्यत: । 19. यन्मनसा न मनुते येन आहुमने। मतम्
तदेव ब्रह्म त्वं विद्धि......etc. 20. अन्धतमः प्रविशन्ति ये अविद्यामुपासते ।
तता भूय इव ते तमो य उ विद्यायां रता: ॥ विद्यां चाविद्या च यस्तद्वेदेोभयं सह ।।
अविद्यया मृत्यु ती, विद्ययामृतमश्नुते ॥ 21. 'Indian Philosophy', Vol. I, p. 175. Also p. 176
Also vide 'Principal Upanisads' p. 64 22. न चाहतेषु ते मयि । (Gita 7-12) 23. 'Indian Philosophy' Vol. I, p. 177
Vide also 'Principal Upanisads' p.95-98 24. 'The Principal Upanisads'-Intro. p. 121

Page #66

25. 'Indian Philosophy Vol. I, p. 209
Also 'Principal Upanişads' p. 118 26. Vide 'Principal Upanişads' p. 105 onwards, also. 27. Vide 'Bhagavadgitā', 16. 1 to 5 28. 'Indian Philosophy Vol. I, p. 230
Also 'Principal Upanişads', p. 106 29. 'Principal Upanişads', p. 49 30. 'Indian Philosophy Vol. I, p. 233
Also ‘Principal Upanişads' p. 136 31. 'Indian Philosophy Vol. I, p. 236
Also 'Principal Upanişads' p. 138-139 32. 'Indian Philosophy Vol. I, p. 248 33. He takes Sankara's view to be the most representative of the principal
doctrines of the Upanişads, vide Indian Philosophy Vol. 2, p. 467
Select Bibliography 1. Indian Philosophy. Vol. 1 2. The Principal Upanişads - S. Radhakrishnan 3. Religion and Society - S. R. 4. Hindu View of Life - S. R. 5. Eastern Religion and Western thought - S. R. 6. Heart of Hindustan S. R. 7. East and West in Religion --S. R. 8. An Idealist View of Life - S. R. etc., etc.

Page #67

RADHAKRISHNAN AND CHRISTIANITY
-Dr. Bharti Sayan
OO
Christianity has flourished in India from the beginning of the christian era. The Syrian Christians of Malbar believe that their form of Christianity is apostolic, delievered directly from the Apostle Thomas. They contend that their version of the christian faith is distinctive and independent of the forms established by St. Peter and St. Paul in the west. A heretical work of the third century called 'The Acts of Thomas' tells us that the Apostle was unwilling to go to India, and therefore the Lord contrived to sell him as a slave to Abbanes, the representative of Gondophares, the ruler of India. The whole story was dismissed an incredible until in 1834 a coin was found in the north-western corner of India bearing the name Gondoplares. Dr. Radhakrishnan remarks here that "from this we can gather, not that the Apostle went to India in the first century-though it is not improbable-but that there were close relations between India and the Christians of Persia and Mesopotamia before the third century. What is obvious is that tliere have been christians in the west coast of India from very early times."! In connection with the topic how christianity spread all over the world, Dr. Radhakrishnan observes that "Christianity began humbly among a band of disciples who knew and remembered the earthly life of Jesus, the ministry of a revolutionary prophet who announced the speedy coming of the kingdom and demanded repentance. The Gospels give us what the apostles and the others had to tell of the life and doctrine of Jesus."2
ious is that the lines."
In
padhakrishnan
Birth of Jesus Christ
King Herod ruled Judea for nearly forty years from 37 B.C. He is mentioned in the Gospel in connection with the birth of Jesus. The Magi who came to pay their respects to Jesus on his birth, guided by a star told Herod that a great king was born. After hearing this, king Herod ordered to destroy all newly born babies in Bethlehem. Here Dr. Radhakrishnan finds some similarity regarding the birth of Christ and Krishna. He writes : “....it reminds us of Kamsa murdering all the children of his sister except the last, at the time of krşna's birth, for he was told that he would be killed by a child born of his sister, who would succeed to his throne." He is of the opinion that the second chapter of Matthew has a striking resemblance to Krşņa's birth - story.

Page #68

59
Christians believe and accept that Christ was conceived in the womb of the blessed Virgin Mary by the power of the Holy Spirit, without the means of man. This emphasizes the fact that the birth of Christ was not at all an ordinary but a supernatural birth, in virtue of which he was called, "the son of God". The most important element in connection with the birth of Jesus was the supernatural operation of the Holy Spirit, for it was only through this that the birth by virgin becomes possible. The doctrine of the virgin-birth is based on the following passages of Scriptures : "Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign, Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his Dame Immanuel." Isaiah. 7.14;" Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his inother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost ...... Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife : for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost." St. Matthew 1 : 18, 20.
The Question is sometimes asked, whether the virgin - birth is a matter of doctrinal importance. Brunner rejects the doctrine of the miraculous birth of Christ and holds that it was purely natural. Karl Barth recognizes the miracle of the virgin - birth, and sees in it a token of the fact that God has creatively established a new beginning by consenscending to become man. The wonderful birth of Jesus, the Messiah is supported by the Bible and he was a Son of God. And being a Son of God, his brith was altogether different.
The birth of Jesus Christ is predicted in Old Testament. Enoch, the Saint of antiquity mentioned in Genesis (V. 23), preaches the coming world judgement, and proclaims 'the son of Man who was to appear in order to rulc with righteous as their lead in the time of the new age. The four titles attributed to Jesus 'the Christ', 'the Righteous one', 'the Elect one and the 'Son of God' are all found in the Now Testament.
The name Jesus Christ :
The name Jesus is the Greek form of the Hebrew Joshoshu, Joshua or Jeshu5. The generally accepted opinion is that it is derived from the root 'Yasha' hiph; hoshia, to save, but it is not easy to explain how Johoshua became Jeshua. Probably Hoshea, derived from the infinitive, was the original form, cxpressing merely the idea of redemption. The Yod, which is the sign of the imperfect, may have been added to express the certainty of redemption. This would best agree with the interpretation of the name given in New Testament. For another derivation form Jeho (Jehovah) and Shuq, that is helf (Gotthilf).

Page #69

60
I Jesus is the personal, Christ is the official name of Messiah. It is the equivalent of the Old Testament Mashiach (from mashach to anoint), and thus means "the anointed one." Kings and priests were regularly anointed during the old dispensation. The king was called "the anointed of Jehovah."9 Only a single instance of the anointing of a prophet is recorded, 10 but there are probably references to it." The oil used in anointing these officers Symbolized the spirit of God, 12 and the anointing represented the transfer of the Spirit to be consecrated person.13 The anointing was a visible sign of (a) an appointment to office; (b) the establishment of a sacred relationship and the consequent sacrosanctness of the person anointed;14 and (c) a communication of the Spirit to the anointed one.15
The Old Testament refers to the anointing of the Lord, and the New Testament also refers to it.17 Formerly references to it were also found in Psalms and proverbs, 18 but to-day Hebraists assert that the word nasak, used in these passages means “to set up " rather than "to anoint." But even so the word points to the reality of the first thing symbolized in the anointing,19 Christ was set up or appointed to His offices from eternity, but historically his anointing took place when he was conceived by the Holy Spirit, 20 and when he received the Holy Spirit, especially at the time of his baptism.21 It served to quality him for his great task. The name 'Christ' was first applied to the Lord as a common noun with the article, but gradually developed into a proper noun, and was used without the aricle.22
Teachings of Jesus :
Jesus left nothing written. For some years after his death, his disciples believed that his return as judge andt he consummation of this age were imminent.
In the words of Dr. Radhakrishnan "Jesus" religion was one of love and sympathy, tolerance and inwarduess.. He did not profess to teach a new religion but only defended spiritul life.. He learned and taught in the synagogues of the Jews":23 He observes "Christianity is a syncretistic faith, a blend of various earlier creeds. The Jews, the Greek and the Roman as well as the races of the Mediterranean basis have contributed to it, with the result that, in spite of its anxiety for system, this is lacking. Its ideas about God, to take one example, vary between a loving father, a severe judge, a detective officer, a hard school master and the head of the clerical profession."24

Page #70

61
Jesus spcaks from his personal experience.” My teaching is not mine but His that sent me.. He that speaketh from Himself seeketh his own
glory, but He that sccketh the glory of Him that sent him, the same is truc." (The Bible St. John. 7.16-18.) He setsa side all authorities. Whatever they may say "I say unto you." He takes his stand on truth as verified in his experience.
"Truth, for him” writes Dr. Radhakrishnan, "is not a historical fact but spiritul life. His teaching brushes aside all the legalistic encumbrances of the Jewish religion and holds that in the two old commandments everything recquired of man was summed up." 25
Love and Suffering :
While quoting the words of Jesus Christ, Dr. Radhakrishnan says that--" "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God.' 'Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.' Jesus' religion affirmed these two central simplicities."26 While quoting St. John he says that the law was given through Moses and grace and truth came through Jesus. St. John brings out the concept of love preached by Jesus in a very appealing manner. He says "Beloved, let us love onc another, for Love is of God. Every one that loveth is born of God and knowcth God. He that loveth not knoweth not God. For God is Love."
Love of neighbour is taught by all religions but the capacity to love is difficult to attain. Dr. Radhakrishnan believes that growth in spiritual life is the only force which gives as the capacity to love our neighbour, even when we are not naturally inclined to do so. Hc quotes the Epistle of St. James- "whence comc wars and fighting among you ? Come they not hence, even of your desires, that war in your members." Conflicting desires within men lead to strains and conflits among men. Here Dr. Radhakrishnan gives an advice which is simple yet hard in practise - that we must be at harmony within ourselves. He quotes St. Teresa's words- "Christ has no body now on earth but yours, yours are the feet with which he goes about doing good; yours are the hands with which he blesses." He also quotes William Law, the great eighteenth Century mystic- "By love I do not mean any natural tenderness, which is more or less in people according to thcir constitution; but I mean a larger principle of Soul; founded in reason and piety which makes us tender, kind and gentle to all our fellow creatures as creatures of God and for his sake."
Turgeniev once commented on love thus- it seems to me that to put oneself in the second place is the whole significance of life.. If meat

Page #71

makes my brother to oflend, I will cat no flesh while the world standeth, lest I make my brother to offend." After quoting Turgeniev, Dr. Radhakrishnan asks uis-If we are to be so particular even in matters of diet, how much more respectful should we be ia matters of social life and religion ?
Dr. Radhakrishnan compares Buddha's words with the christian concept of Love. "Not by hate is hate destroyed, by love alonc is hate destroyed. Ye monks, if robbers and murderers should severe your joints and ribs with a saw, lic who fell into anger, threat would not be fulfilling my commands."27 To love one's enemies, to bless them that curse, to do good to them that late, to turn the other cheek, to leave the cloak with him who takes the coat, to give all to him who asks, are the teachings of Jesus. Jesus asks us to forgive our brethren even if they sin against us. 'Seventy times seven.28 St. Paul said, -I11 Christ there is neither Jew nor Greek, Barbarian, Scythiau, bondu nor free, but yet are all one man in Christ Jesus.29 Jesus asks us to assume a responsibility for the whole humanity.
When Jesus tells his disciples for the first time that he must suffer, Peter reaproaches him: "Be it far from thee, Lord : this shall not be unto thee" and Jesus repulses him with sharp words: "Get thee behind me, Satan."30 The Gospel tradition shows clearly this change of emphasis in Jesus' teaching, and the new note served to heighten the significance of his message. The intercessory and expiative power of suffering is emphasized in Christianity. Jesus' appeal on the cross "Father, forgive them for they know not what they do" is a piece of his love for his people.
Love and suffering go hand in hand. Dante looked at the lover's wearing through all the ages the Supremest Crown of sorrows."Suffering is not punishment but the prize of fellowship" says Dr. Radhakrishnan. "It is not always a misfortune. It often helps us to grow."31 Here Dr. Radhakrishnan is very far from the actual Biblical meaning of suffering. The sufferings of life, are the result of the entrance of sin into the world. Scripture and experience both teach us that sin is universal, and according to the Bible, the explanation for this universality lies in the fall of Adam. The whole life of Jesus was a life of suffering. The sufferings of the saviour were not purely natural, but also the result of a positive deed of God.32
Sin :
The sufferingsof li fe, which are the result of the entrance of sin into

Page #72

the world, are also included in the penalty of sin. Sin is one of the saddest but also one of the most comman phenomenon of human life. It is a part of the comman experience of mankind and therefore forces itself upon the attention of all those who do not deliberatlely close their eyes to the realitics of human life. There are direct statements of Scriptures that point to the universal sinfulness of man.33 And several passages of Scriptures teach that sin is the lieritage of man from the time of his birth, and is therefore present in human nature so carly that it cannot possibly be considered as the result of imitation.34
It is quite impossible to give a unified and comprehensive classification of actual sins. The Old Testament makes an important distinction between sins committed presumptuously and sins comitted unwittingly i.e. as a result of ignoranee, weakness or error.35 The former could not be atoned by sacrifice and were punished with great severity, while the latter could be so atoned and were judged with far greater leniency. Hence Dr. Radhakrishnan does not deal with the concept of sin, it is not necessary to go into the details though it is considered to be of great value by Christian thinkers.
The nature and status of Man :
"And Jehovah God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living soul." Genesis 2.7. Thus, according to the Bible, man was created in the image of God, and is therefore God-related. As mau is created in the image of God,36 he is distinguished from all other creatures and stands supreme as the head and crown of the entire Creation. The terms 'image' and 'likeness have been distinguished in various ways. Some were of the opinion that 'image' has reference to the body, and 'likeness' to the soul. Augustine held that the former referred to the intellectual, and the latter, to the moral faculties of the soul. Bellarmin regarded 'image' as a designation of the natural gifts of man, and 'likeness' as descriptive of that which was supernaturally added to man. Calvin goes so far as to say that it cannot be denied that the angels also were created in the likeness of God, since as Christ declares, 37 our highest perfection will consist in being like them. But the angels are never represented as Lords' creation in the Bible.
Dr. Radhakrishnan observes that-"Man is made in the likeness of God, in his own image. The vast cosmic impulse has embodied itself in him. He is an active and purposeful force in the world. His duty is not to mark time and wait on chance."38 The unity of God and man is not seen in Christianity. Man is man. He can never be God. He is the crea

Page #73

64
tion of God. So, the relation between God and man is the relationship of creater and creation. As man is created in the image of God, he shares some of the qualities of God in a finite manner. God is infinite, personal and transcendent. Few qualities of God in a limited form like intelligence, morality, love, righteousness, justice, creativity are found in man.
"An important teaching of Christianity is that the physical body is real and significant. It is not evil, nor is it necessarly the source of evil." Writes Charles A. Moore in his article: "The fundamental of living faiths: Christianity."39 Since the body is real and since man is to use Aristotalian language brought into Christianity by St. Thomas Aquinans 'a substance' composed of soul and body, the good life is to be lived in the body and in the world where the body may act.
Creation of World
The Bible begins with the very simple statement-"In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." Genesis 1.1. The great significance of the opening statement of the Bible lies in its teaching that the world had a beginning. The Scripture speaks of this beginnings also in other places.40
Dr. Radhakrishnan compares the creation of the world mentioned in the Bible And the earth was without form and void; and darkness of God moved upon the face of the water;41 with the Vedic hymns of creation. The Vedic seer uses the same metaphor of water. 42 While quoting from the Bible "The spirit of God moved on the face of the wators" Dr. Radhakrishnan mentions other version of the Bible which mentions 'brooded' on the water. (Genesis: Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges). He further states that the spirit of God brooded over the waste and the void, and brought forth light and life. This symbol of brooding is taken from the traditional cosmogony, where the world is compared to an egg and God is figured as a bird brooding over it. He is of the opinion that the brooding power of a bird like deity is responsible for the production of life and light. He quotes from the Upanisads where the metaphor of God brooding over the world - egg is found.43 He also accepts Tapas' the inward travail of the spirit with the 'brooding' which is responsible for the creative work.44 He remarks "The successive acts of creation detailed in the first chapter of Genesis are due to this power of the spirit which creates world after world in order to realize itself."45
He then moves from the beginning of creation to He says: "In the beginning, says the Bible, was the
our present time. void, we have it

Page #74

65
still." He quotes the words of Jeremiah "when the fruitful place was a wilderness and all cities thereof were broken down, it is the state of chaos. (4.26)," and says that we live miserable lives in a world of enormous wealth.. our world is a nude one which has torn off its old clothes and has failed to procure new ones.. We must identify ourselves with the spirit of God moving on the face of the waters, enter into the very spirit of the universe and become its vehicle."40
The Holy Trinity
The word "trinity” is not quite as expressive as the Holland word 'Drieeenheid' for it may simply denote the state of being three, without any implication as to the unity of the three.
According to Dr. Radhakrishnan--"The doctrine of trinity not only sought to provide a place for Jesus in the unity of God but also tried to correct the one-sided view of God adopted in the Old Testament. God is not merely the infinite majesty seated on high (the Father), but is also the heart of love (the Son) and the inmancnt principle of the world process (the Holy Spirit)."47 He compares the view of the Father, the son and the Holy Spirit to the Vedantic formula of Brahman as Sat, Chit and Anand-reality, wisdom and joy.
Let us examine what the Bible speaks about the doctrine of trinity. It has always bristled with difficulties. Some of the early church Fathers and even some later theologians, disregarding the progressive character of God's revelation, gave the impression that the doctrine of Trinity was completely revealed in the Old Testament. On the other hand Socinians and Arminians were of the opinion that it was not found there at all. Both are mistaken. The Old Testament does not contain a full revelation of the trinitarian cxistence of God, but does contain several indications of it. The Bible never deals with the doctrine of the trinity as an abstract truth, but reveals the trinitarian life in its various relations as a living reality, to a certain extent in connection with the works of creation and providence, but particularly in relation to the work of redemption. Its most fundamental revelation is a revelation given in facts rather than in words. And this revelation increases in clarity in the measure in which the redemptive work of God is more clearly revealed, as in the incarnation of the Son and outpouring of the Holy Spirit.
The proof for the Trinity has sometimes been found in the distinction of Jehovah and Elohim, and also in the plural Elohim, but the former

Page #75

is entirely unwarranted and the later is, to say the least, very dubious,
The New Testament carries with a clearer revelation of the distinctions in the Godhead. If in the Old Testament Jehovah is represented as the Redeemer and Saviour of his people,48 in the New Testament the Son of God clearly stands out in that capacity.49 And if in the Old Testament it is Jehovah that dwells among Israel and in the hearts of those that fcar him, 50 in the New Testament it is the Holy Spirit that dwells in the Church.51
The New Testament offers the clear revelation of God sending His Son into the world, 52 and of both the father and the son, sending the spirit.53 We find the Father, 54 and the Holy Spirit praying to God in the hearts of believers.55 Thus the separate persons of the Trinity are made clear. Now how far does the concept of Trinity correspond with the concept of Brahman as Sat, Chit and Ananda ? There is nothing common except the numbers among them.
At the time of baptism, the Son and tlie Father speaks from heaven and Holy Spirit descends in the form of a dove.56 Jesus also mentions the three persons : ".. baptizing them into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.” (St. Matthew. 28.19).57
The name 'Father' is applied to God in the first person, the name 'Son' is applied in the second person and is called 'Son of God' i.e. Jesus Christ is represented as the Son of God in the Scripture. The name of the 'Holy Spirit is applied in the third person as God is Spirit or the Spirit of God.'
The Significance of Cross :
"The cross means physical suffering, earthly defeat but spiritual victory" writes Dr. Radliakrishnan. "Through suffering lies the way to liberation."58 Now let us examine the Christian view of the death of Christ. It deals with the problem of human sin and brings out that men into fellowship with God is one of the central ideas in the New Testament. “ ... For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received that Christ died for our sins and accordance with the scriptures."59
In almost every letter Paul refers in one form or another to the death of Christ using variety of expression referring to Christ's death, His blood, His cross and His crucifixion. The New Testament denotes the death of Christ as a sacrificial death. It distinctly associates it with the Old Testament ritual sacrifice for sin given on the great Day of Atonement by the main priest at the mercy seat.60

Page #76

"The mystery of life is creative sacrifice. It is the central idea of the Cross..he who truly loves us will have to suffer for us, even to the point of death," Says Dr. Radhakrishnan. The life of Jesus is the best example of it. We see the victory over evil in the garden of Gethseinane, and also in the cell where Socrates drank the hemlok. Dr. Radhakrishnan is right when be states that Jesus who suffered and died is tlie living God. He directly appeals to us by telling "The Cross becomes significant only when we make it our own, when we undergo crucifixion."
Crucifixion was not a Jewish but a Roman form of punislıment. It was accounted so infamous and ignominious that it might not be applied to Roman citizens, but only to the sum of mankind, to the meanest criminals and slaves. By dying that death, Jesuis met the extreme demands of the law.
Salvation :
Faith in God (Christ), purity of heart and God's forgiveness and grace are component parts of the road to salvation in Christianity.
Dr. Radhakrishnan says – "Jesus did not give any definito account of the future life. His references to it in the parables of the Sheep and the Goats, Dives and Lazarus, are coloured by the beliefs of the age in heaven and hell, as geographical areas, ..Jesus evidently did not believe in a long interval between death and judgement, for the rich glutton and Lazarus had their punishment and reward almost immediately after death. Jesus was not misleading the repentant thief when he said "Today shalt thou be with me in paradise (St. Luke xxiii. 1, 43). The official view that the dead will rise with their physical bodies for judgment after death is not supported by these statements of Jesus." It is very difficult to accept Dr. Radhakrishnan when he says that Jesus did not give any definite account of the future life61.
The Bible teaches that the soul of the believer when separated from the body, enters the presence of Christ. Paul write to the Philippians that he has a "desire to depart and to be with Christ." (Phillipians. 1.23). And Jesus gave the penitent malefactor the joyous assurance "To-day shalt thou be with me in paradise" (St. Luke 23.43). And to be with Christ is also to be in heaven. In the light of II Coronthiaus 12.3,4. "Paradise" can only be a designation for heaven. Moreover Paul says that "if the earthly house of our tabernacle be dissolved, we have a building from God, a house not made with hands, eternal in heaven". (IInd Coronthians. 5.1). Westminster Catechism, one of the great commentators

Page #77

68
on the Bible says that the souls of the wicked after death "are cast into hell, where they remain in torments and utter darkness, reserved to the judgment of the great day.” Moreover he adds: “Besides these two places (heaven and hell) for souls separated from their bodies, the Scripture acknowledgcth non," The Bible sheds very little direct light on this subject. The only passage that can really come into consideration liere is the parable of the rich moud Lazarus. 62 Here Dr. Radhakrishnan clearly states that "The only interprctation of heaven and hell consistent with the teaching and character of Jesus is that they refer to qualitative changes in the souls. Heaven symboliscs the improvement of the soul and hell its opposite. And there are grades in hell, as well as in heaven, many mansions in God's Kingdom, and each man will go to his place in accordance with the strength of his faith and the merit of his life.”63
Dr. Radhakrishnan compares the Christian concept of salvation with the Hindu law of Karma in his book the Heart of Hindustan. He there says that our conduct determines our future. The law of Karma is criticised as being too mechanical and inconsistant with Divine Love. It is true that the problem of the way to salvation has been the cause of a major debate in christian thought through the ages and there being strongly divergent opinions concerning the question as to whether salvation is gained by faith or by works. Essentially, Christianity is a religion of faith. The Christian concept of salvation is in sharp contrast with the doctrine of Karma and absolute individual responsibility as found in Hinduism, Buddhism and Jainism
The reward of the righteous is described as etcrnal life, that is, not merely an endless life, but life in all its fullness without any of the imperfections and disturbances of the present.64 The fullness of this life is enjoyed in communion with God which is really the essence of eternal life.65 They will see God in Jesus Christ face to face, will find full satisfaction in him, will rejoice in him, and will glorify him.
Here, let us sce some few things about Hell ! In connection with the subject 'hell' the Bible certainly uses local terms right along. It calls the place of torment gchenna, a name derived from the Hebrew 'ge' (land or valley) and Hinnom or beney hinnon, that is, Hinnou or Sons of Hinnom. This name was originally applied to a valley south west of Jerusalem. It was a place where wicked idolators sacrificed their children to Moloch by causing them to pass through the fire. Hence it was considered impure and was called in later days "the valley of tophet (spittle)", as an utterly despised region. Fires were constantly burning there to consume the official of Jerusalem. As a result it became a symbol of the place of eternal

Page #78

69
torment. The Bible speaks of a "furnace of firc"66 and a "lake of fire'07 which forms a contrast with the "sea of glass likc unto crystal."GS Seripture speaks of those who are excluded from heaven as being "outside" and as being "cast into hell." In short, Hell is a place where there is il total absence of the favour of God, and positive pain and suffering are being experienced.
According to Dr. Radhakrishan Salvation in Christianity is achieving God consciousness or awareness of God or the union with God;69 not the teaching of the Bible. The Bible does not accept the unity of God and man. According to Christianity, man is man, and he can never be God. Actually man is a creation of God but because of the sin, the relationship between God and man has been broken. “Love for God" writes Dr. Radhakrishnan "is the casiest way to reach salvation.'70 In fact the only way to salvation is the grace of God. If one is thinking in terms of comparative religion, perhaps the most significant aspect of the way to salvation in Christianity is the absolute necessity of God's forgiveness and grace, that is, the free gift of salvation to men, who by their very nature cannot achieve salvation of their own ability.
The Resurrection of the Dead
The resurrection is a work of the triune God. In some cases we are simply told that God raises the dead, no person being specified. 71 Moreover the work of resurrection is ascribed to the son,72 and indirectly, it is also designated as a work of the Holy Spirit.73
There were some in the days of Paul who regarded the resurrection as spiritual,74 and there are many in the present day who believe only in a spiritual resurrection. But the Bible is very explicit in teaching the resurrection of the body. Christ is called the first fruits" of the resurreetion,15 and "the firstborn of the dead."76 This implies that the resurrection was a bodily resurrection, and theirs will be of the same kind.
Dr. Radhakrishnan has a doubt here. He observes that at death Lazarus is taken up directly into Paradise and the rich man goes to hess. Jesus' resurrection after three days is probably suggested by Matthew : "As Jonah was three days three nights in the belly of the whale : so shall the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth," (St. Matthew 12.40). Here Dr. Radhakrishnan writes - "This view is in conflict with what Jesus is alleged to have said to the thich on the Cross: To-day shalt thou be with me in Paradise.' There is immediate cntrance into blessed fellowship with God. The moment of death is the moment of exaltation,"77

Page #79

70
Here let us see what Bible tells regarding resurrection. The New Testament has more to say on the resurrection of the dead than the Old Testament, because it brings the climax of God's revelation on this point in the resurrection of Jesus Christ. According to Scripture, physical death is a termination of physical life by the separation of body and soul. Life and death are not 'opposed to each other as existence and non-existence', but are opposites only as different modes of existence. The Soul of the thief on the Cross went to heaven with Christ. The Bible teaches that the soul of the believers at death enter an intermediate place and remain there until the day of resurrection. Paul writes to the Philippians that he has a "desire to depart and be with Christ."78 And Jesus gave the penitent malefactor the joyous assurance-"To-day Shalt thou be with me in paradise."79 And to be with Christ is also to be in heaven.
According to Scripture there will be a resurrection of the body, that is, not an entirely new creation but a body that will be in a fundamental sense identical with the present body. God will not create a new body for every man, but will raise up the very body that was deposited in the earth. At the same time Scripture makes it perfectly evident that the body will be greatly changed. Christ's body was not yet fully glorified during the period of transition between the resurrection and the ascension; yet it had already undergone a remarkable change. Paul refers to the change that will take place, when he says that in sowing a seed we do not sow the body that shall be; we do not intend to pick the same seed out of the ground. Yet we do expect to reap something that is in a fundamental sense identical with the seed deposited in the earth. While there is a certain identity between the seed sown and the seed that develops out of it, yet there is also a remarkable difference. Thus the resurrection of the dead is explained.
Conclusion:
Dr. Radhakrishnan is undoubtedly one of the greatest thinkers of this century. He is not merely a scholar, a historian of Indian thought, but also a thinker who can handle concepts as concepts, whether Indian or western. His great contribution lies in his interpreting Christianity. Besides his books, 'Easterns Religions and Western thought', 'Heart of Hindustan', his interpretations regarding Christianity are scattered in his lectures: The Jowett lectures given on March 18, 1930 at the Mary Word Settlement, London. I, Series on Comparative Religion given at Manchester College, Oxford, on Oct. 22, 1929; Sermon delivered at Manchester College, Oxford, Nov. 1929; Beatty Memorial lectures Series is published in a

Page #80

71
book under the title-East and West—some reflections. A collection of his lectures is published under the title of 'Ocassion speeches and writings.' As such there is no uniformity of the Christion concept though his knowledge regarding the Christian doctrine is very decp and sound. He quotes from the Bible, verses in connection with what he wants to say. And in that we see his love and respect for the Christian doctrine. He says "Christianity triumphed as it encouraged mysticisin, preached an eschatology of hope and had a noble ritual. It appealed to the lowly as it taught that in the eyes of God the slave was cqual to the emperor. It ordained brotherly love and fellowship."80
Radhakrishnan's main aim is to show that man is basically the same in the East and the West, that human thought runs along basically the same lines, and that man every where is a creature in quest of his spirit, although the cultural forms to which he belongs may be different. He says that Jesus' teaching has an ascetic note which is characteristic of all true religions. He has described the most original and significant principles of Christianity in a scholarly and lucid way.
FOOT NOTES
1. East and West-Some reflections. by Dr. Radhakrishnan. George Allen
& zinwin Ltd. London. Second edition 1955. p. 34. 2. Eastern Religion and Western Thought by Dr. Radhakrishnan. Ox
ford Uni. Press, London. Second edition. 1940. p. 186-187. 3. East and West-some reflections by Dr. Radhakrishnan. p. 70. 4. Now after the death of Moses. the servant of the Lord, it came to pass, that the Lord spake unto Joshua the son of Nun, Moses' minister.
—The Bible. Joshua. I.I. - And he Shewed me Joshua the high priest standing before the angel of the Lord, and Satan standing at his right hand to resist him.
- The Bible. Zechariah. 3.1. 5. Which came with Zerubabel, Jeshua, Nehemiah, Seraiah ...... The number of the men of the people of Israel.
- The Bible. Ezra. 2.2. 6. - These are the names of the men which Moses sent to spy out the land. And Moses called Oshea the Son of Nun Jehoshua
- The Bible. Numbers. 13.16. And Moses came and spake all the words of this song in the ears of the people, he and Hoshea the son of Nun.
- The Bible. Deuteronomy. 32.44.

Page #81

7. Auld she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name Jesus: for he shall save his people from their sins.
--- The Bible. St. Metthew. 1.21. 8. Then shalt thou take the anointing oil, and pour it upon his head, and anoint him.
--- The Bible. Exodus. 29.7. - If the priest that is anointed to do sin according to the sin of the
people, then let him bring for his sin, which he hath sinned, a young bullock without blemish unto the Lord for a sin offering.
- The Bible. Leviticus 4.3. Tomorrow about this time I will send thee a man out of the land of Benjamin, and thou shalt anoint him to be captain over my people Israel, that he may saye my people out of the hands of the philistines; for I have looked upon my people, because their cry is come unto me.
- The Bible. I Samuel. 9. 16. Then Samuel took a vital of oil, and poured it upon his head, and kissed him, and said-Is it not because the Lord hath anointed thee to be Captain over his inheritance ?
- The Bible. I Samuel. 10.1. - And Absalom, whom we anointed over us, is dead in battle. Now therefore why speak ye not a word of bringing the king back ?
-- The Bible. II Samuel. 19.10.
9. Behold, this day thine eyes have seen how that the Lord had delivered
thee to-day into mine hand in the cave: and some bade me kill thee : but mine cye spared thee, and I said, I will not put forth mine hand against my Lord; for he is the Lord's anointed.
- The Bible. I Samuel. 24.10. 10. And Jehu the son of Nimshi shalt thou anoint to be king over Israel:
and Elisha the son of Shaphat of Abelmeholah shalt thou anoint to be prophet in thy room.
-- The Bible. I Kings. 19.16. 11. Saying, Touch not mine anointed, and do my prophet no harm.
- The Bible. Psalm. 105.15.
12. The spirit of the Lord God is upon me; because the Lord hath ano
inted me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the broken-hearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound.
- The Bible. Isaiah. 61.1,

Page #82

73
13.
And the spirit of the Lord will come upon thee and thou shalt prophesy with them, and shalt be turned into another man.
The Bible I Samuel.10.6. ..... And the spirit of God came upon him, and he prophesied among them.
The Bible I Samuel 10.10. Then Samuel took the horn of oil, and anointed him in the midst of his brethren and the spirit of the Lord came upon David from that day forward. So Samuel rose up, and went to Ramah.
The Bible. I Samuel, 16.13. 14. And he said unto his men, The Lord forbid that I should do this thing unto my master, the Lords anointed to stretch forth mine hand against him, seeing he is the anointed of the Lord.
-The Bible. I Samuel 24.6 15. Now he which establisheth us with you in Christ, and hath anointed us, is God; who hath also sealed us, and given the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts.
-The Bible. II Corinthians. 1.21, 22. 16. The kings of the carth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the Lord, and against his anointed..
The Bible Psalm 2.2 Thou lovest righteousness, and hatest wickedness: therefore God, thy God, hath anointed thee with the oid of gladness above thy fellows.
-The Bible Psalm. 45.7
17. For of a truth against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel were gathered together.
-The Bible. Acts 4.27 How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the evil; for God was with him.
10
-The Bible. Acts 10.38
18. Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion.
-The Bible. Psalms 2.6
I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth -The Bible. Proverbs 8.23
was.

Page #83

74
19. And the Spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the Lord.
-The Bible. Isaih 11.2 Behold my servant, whom I uphold, mine elect, in whom my soul delighteth I have put my spirit upon him, he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles.
-The Bible. Isaih 42.1
20. And the angel answered and said unto her, the Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the son of God.
-The Bible. St. Luke 1.35 21. And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lightening upon him.
- The Bible. St. Matthew 3.16 And Straightway coming up out of the water, he saw the heavens opened, and the Spirit like a dove descending upon him.
-The Bible. St Mark 1.10 And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him, and a voice came from heaven, which said, Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased.
-The Bible. St. Luke 3.22 And John bare record, saying, I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it abode upon him.
-The Bible. St. John. 1.32 For he whom God hath sent speaketh the words of God: For God giveth not the Spirit by measure unto him.
-The Bible. St. John 3.34 22. Systematic Theology by Louis Berkhof. The Bauner of Truth Trust. Edinburgh. 1981. Eleventh Edition. p. 313
23. East and West in Religion by Dr. Radhakrishnan. George Allen & Unwin Ltd. London. Second edition. 1949. p. 58
24. Ibid. p. 62
25. East and West-Some Reflections. p. 72
26. Ibid. p. 72
27. Suttanipata Verses 149-150. (trans by Mrs. Rhys Davids).

Page #84

75
28. Jesus saith unto him, I say not unto thee, Until Seven times but, Until Seventy times Seven.
-The Bible. St. Matthew 18.22
29. But now ye also put off all these; anger, wrath, malice, blasphemy, fillthy communication out of your mouth. Lie not to another.....If any man have a quarrel against any even as Christ forgave you, so also do ye.
-The Bible. Colossians 3.8, 13, 30. From that time forth began Jesus to shew unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusasalem, and suffer many things of the elders aad chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day. Then Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord; this shall not be unto thee. But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me Satan: thou art an offence unto me for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.
-The Bible. St. Matthew 16.21-23 31. East and West in Religion by Dr. Radhakrishnan, p. 29
32. All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the Lord hath laid on him the iniquinty of us all .... Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise him; he hath put him to grief when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hand.
-The Bible. Isaiah 53.6, 10.
33. If they sin against thee (for there is no man that sinneth not), and thou be angry with them, and deliver them to be the enemy, so that they carry them away captives unto the land of the enemy, far or
near.
-The Bible. I kings 8.46
And enter not into judgment with thy servant: for in thy sight shall no man living be justified.
-The Bible. Psalms 143.2 Who can say, I have made my heart clean, I am pure from my sin? -The Bible. Proverbr. 20.9 Far there is not a just man upon earth, that doeth good, and sinneth not.
-The Bible. Ecclesiastes. 7.20

Page #85

- As it is written, there is non righteous, no, not one.
--The Bible. Romans. 3.10 -- For all have Sinned, and come short of the glory of God.
-The Bible. Romans. 3.23 - But the Scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.
-The Bible. Galatians. 3.22 It we say that we have no sin, we deceivc ourselves, and the truth is not in us.... If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.
-The Bible. 1 John. 1.8, 10 34. Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean ? not one.
-The Bible. Job. 14.4 - Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my motlier conceive me.
-The Bible. Psams. 51.3 - Whatsoever abideth in him siureth not : Whosoever Sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him.
-The Bible. 1 John, 3.6. 35. Ye shall one law for him that sinnetli through ignorance, both for
him that is born among the children of Israel, and for the stranger that sojourneth among them.
Because he hath despised the word of the Lord, and hath broken his commandment, that soul shall utterly be cut off; his inquity shall be upon him.
The Bible. Numbers. 15.29, 31. 36. And God Said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness :
and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fow of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the carth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the carth. So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
--The Bible. Genesis. 1.26, 27 37. For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.
-The Bible. St. Matthew 22.30 38. East and West in Religion by Dr. Radhakrishnan. p. 78. 39. The Indian Philosophical Congress. Silver Jubilee Commemoration
Voume. 1959. p. 159
40. - And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female.
-The Bible. St. Matthew. 19.4

Page #86

-
77
But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.
│ | |
-The Bible. St. Mark. 10.6 In the beginning was the word, and the Word was with God, and the Ward was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not anything made that was made.. And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.
-The Bible. St. John. 1.1-5. And Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands:
-The Bible. Hebrews. 1.10
41. The Bible. Genesis. 1.2
42. तम आसीत्तमसा गूढमग्रेऽप्रकेत सलिल सर्वम् इदम् |
तुच्छेनाभ्वपिहित यदासीत् तपसस्तन्महिमाऽजायतैकम् ॥
| नासदीय सूक्त १०:१२९.३
43. Aitareya Upanisad, 1.4; iii.2. East and West in Religion by Dr. Radhakrishnan. p. 76
The question regarding the creation of the world is found in other Upanisads also:
आपो वा इदमत्रे सलिलमासीत् - तंत्तिरीय ब्राह्मण.
असद्वा इदमग्र आसीत् तैत्ति उपनिषद्,
स्रदेव सौम्येदमग्र आसीत् छान्दोग्य उपनिषद्,
44. He performed tapas, having performed tapas he produced all this whatsoever. Taitiriya Upanisad. II. 6.1. Brihadaranyaka Upanisad. 1.2.6
45, East and West in Religion by Dr. Radhakrishnan p. 77
46. East and West in Religion by Dr. Radhakrishnan. p, 77, 78, 79 47. Heart of Hindustan by Dr. Radhakrishnan. Pub. by G. A. Natesan & Co., Madras. Sixth Edition. p. 79
48. For I know that my redeemer liveth, and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth.
-The Bible. Job. 19.25.
....O Lord, my Strength, and my redeemer.
-The Bible. Psalms. 19.14 And they remembered that God was their rock, and the high God their redeemer.
-The Bible. Psaims. 78.35 They forget God their Saviour, which had done great things in Egypt. -The Bible. Psalms. 106.21

Page #87

78
-- Fear not, thou worm Jacob, and ye men of Israel; I will help thee, saith the Lord, and thy redeemer, the Holy One of Israel.
--The Bible. Isaiah. 41.14 As for our redeemer, the Lord of hosts is his name, the Holy one of Israel,
---- The Bible. Isaiah. 47.4 - I the Lord am thy Saviour and thy Redeemer, the mighty One of Jacob.
--The Bible. Isaiah. 60.16 49. And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name Jesus: for he shall save his people from their sins.
-The Bible. St. Matthew, 1.21 - To give knowledge of Salvation unto his people by the remission of
their sins. . To give light to them that sit in darkness and in the shadow of deatli, to guide our feet into the way of peace.
-The Bible. St. Luke. 1.77, 79 - ..indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the world.
--The Bible. St. Johı. 4.42 But Peter said. Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost, and to keep back part of the price of the land.
- The Bible. Acts. 5.3 Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us : for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree.
--The Bible. Galatians. 3.13 Because for the work of Christ he was nigh upto death, not regarding his life, to supply your lack of service toward me.
- The Bible. Philippians. 2.30 Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ, who gave himself for us, that he miglit redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.
-The Bible. Titus. 2.13, 14 50. Blessed be the Lord out of Zion, which dwelleth at Jerusalem. Praise ye the Lord.
- The Bible. Psalm. 134.21. Behold, 1 and the children whom the Lord hath given me are for signs and for wonders in Israel from the Lord of hosts, which dwelleth in Mount Zion.
-The Bible. Isaiah. 8.18

Page #88

79
And he said unto me, Son of man, the place of my throne, and the place of the soles of my feet, where will I dwell in the midst of the Children of Israel for ever, and my holy name, shall the house of Israel no more defile, neither they, nor their kings, by their whoredom, nor by the carcases of their kings in their high places.
-The Bible. Ezekeil. 43.7. So shall ye know that I am the Lord your God dwelling in Zion, my holy mountain: then shall Jerusalem be holy, and there shall no strangers pass through her any more.
-The Bible. Joel. 3.17
Sing and rejoice, O daughter of Zion: for, lo, I come and I will dwell in the midst of thee, saith the Lord. And many nations shall be joined to the Lord in that day, and shall be my people and I will dwell in the midst of thee, and thou shalt know that the Lord of hosts hath sent me unto thee.
-The Bible. Zechariah. 2.10, 11 51. And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.
-The Bible. Acts. 2.4
But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.. But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you. -The Bible. Romans. 8.9, 11 Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?
-The Bible. Corinthians, 3.16 And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, Crying Abba, Father.
-The Bible. Galatians. 4.6 In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.
-The Bible. Ephesians. 2.22 Do you think that the Scripture saith in vain, the Spirit that dwelleth in us lusteth to envy?
-The Bible. James. 4.5 52. That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is Spirit.
-The Bible. St. John. 3.16

Page #89

80
- But when the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son.
--The Bible. Galatians. 4.4 - In this was manifested the love of God towards us, because that God
sent luis only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him.
--Tlie Bible. 1 John. 4.9 53. But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will
send in my name, lie shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.
-Tlie Bible. St. John, 14.26 But wlien the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Fatlier, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Fatlier, he shall testify of me :
-The Bible. St. Jolin. 15.26 54. At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord
of heaven and earth, because thou last hid these things from the wise and prudent, and last revealed them unto babcs. Even so, Father : for so it seemed good in thy sight.
-The Bible. St. Matthew. 11.25, 26 - O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass froin mc : nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt.
-The Bible. St. Matthew. 26.39 - Father. glorify thy name. Then came there a voice from heaven, saying, I lave both glorified it, and will glorify it again.
--The Bible, St. Jobu. 12.28 55. Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities : for we know not
wliat we should pray for as we ought : but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.
-The Bible. Romans, 8.26 56. Aud Jesus, when lie was baptized, went up straightway out of the
water: and, lo, the licavens were opened unto him, and be saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him :
And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.
-The Bible. St. Matthew. 3.16, 17 57. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name
of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. 58. Occasional Speeches and Writings by Dr. Radhakrishnan. 59. The Bible, 1 Corinthians. 15.3

Page #90

81
60. For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh,
God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh.
-The Bible. Romans. 8.3 Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us :
-The Bible. 1. Corinthians. 5.7 61. Heart of Hindustan, by Dr. Radhakrishnan. p. 95 62. There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine
linen, and fared sumptuously every day : And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores. And desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table : moreover the dogs came and licked his sores. And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abrahani's bosom : the rich man also died, and was buried; And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments and seeth Abraham afer off, and Lazarus in his bosom.
-The Bible. St. Luke. 16.19-23 63. Heart of Hindustan. by Dr. Radhakrishnan. p. 95 64. -And these shall go away into everlasting punishment : but the righteous into life eternal.
- The Bible. St. Matthew. 25.46 - To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life.
-The Bible. Romans. 2.7 65. And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the taber
nacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God.
And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain : for the former things are passed away.
-The Bible. Revelation: 21.3 66. And shall cast them into a furnce of fire : there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.
-The Bible. St. Matthew. 13.42 67. And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second
death. And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.
-The Bible. Revelation. 20.14, 15
death, nenumer things are bible. Revela

Page #91

82
68. And before the throne there was a sea of glass like unto crystal :
and in the midst of the throne, and round about the throne, were four beasts full of eyes before and behind.
-The Bible, Revelation. 4.6 69. Occasional Speeches and writings. by Dr. Radhakrishnan. p. 331.
(lecture : Indian Religious Thought and Modern Civilization.) 70. Ibid. 71. Jesus answered and said unto them, ye do err, not knowing the Scriptures, nor the power of God.
-The Bible. St. Matthew. 22.29 But we had the sentence of death in ourselves, that we should not trust in ourselves, but in God which raiseth the death.
-The Bible. II Corinthians. 1.9 72. For as the Father raiseth up the dead, and quickeneth them; even
so the Son quickeneth whom he will.... Verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God : and they that hear shall live. ... And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life, and they that have done cvil, unto the resurrection of damnation.
-The Bible. St. John. 5.21, 25, 29 - For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with
the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God : and the dead in Christ shall rise first;
--The Bible. 2. Thessalonians. 4.16 73. But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in
you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.
-The Bible. Romans. 8.11 7.4. Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some.
-The Bible. 2 Timothy. 2.18 75. But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of
them that slept.... But every man in his own order : Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his Coming.
- The Bible. 1 Corinthians. 15.20, 23 76. And he is the head of the body, the Church; who is the beginning,
the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the pre-eminence,
--The Bible. Colossians. 1.18

Page #92

77. Eastern Religions And Western Thought. by Dr. Radhakrishnan. p. 175 78. The Bible. Philippians. 1.23 79. The Bible. St. Luke. 23.43 80. East and West-Some Reflections by Dr. Radhakrishnan, George
Allen & Unwin. London. First edition. 1955. p. 69
Bibliography
1. East and West in Religion. S. Radhakrishnan. Pub. George Allen
and Unwin Ltd. Ruskin House, London. Second edition. 1949. 2. East and West-Some Reflections. S. Radhakrishnan. Pub. George
Allen and Unwin Ltd. Ruskin House, London, First edition. 1955. 3. Eastern Religions and Western Thought. S. Radhakrishnan. Pub.
Oxford University Press, Amen House, London. Second edition. 1940. 4. Heart of Hindustan. S. Radhakrishnan. Pub. : G.A. Natesan and
Co.; Madras. 1949. 5. Systematic Theology, Louis Berkhot. Pub. : The Banner of Truth
Trust Edinburgh. Eleventh edition. 1981. 6. The Indian Philosophical Congress. Silver Jubilee Commemoration
Volume. 1950. 7. Holy Bible.-Translated by His Majesty's special Command Authori
zed King James Version. Pub. : Collins' Clear Type Press. London and New York. 1959.

Page #93

5
DR. RADHAKRISHNAN ON "KALKI OR FUTURE OF CIVILIZATION"
Dr. R. S. Betal
"Man himself seems terrifyingly near the knowledge of how to des troy his planet in a blazing chain of reaction, and terrifyingly far from the self-control necessary to avoid using his knowledge." G. G. Simpson.
Any man can say, just with a superfloous glance at the events that are happening in the world to-day that man is faced with a unique problem of realizing his own self. He struggles and struggles for the comforts and happiness of his life, but the way he conducts himself shows that he is running after the things that he fails to understand. He probes deep into the mysteries of life and unravels so many of its secrets, but the attainments that follow bring in store for him qualities of joys and sorrows, happiness and sorrow both. Ambition, greed and materialisim are his guiding principles; thirst for power, pride and vanity are his Gods. Freedom amounting to licence is his ideal and the ethics. The evident result is that he seems to march with a rather quickened pace to meet his own end, end amounting to self-annihilation. The reason of all this turmoil is that he has lost hold over his own self, but to his utter misfortune, he is not prepared to take a lesson from the past. He has for gotten the truth that "the extent to which we can hope to understand ourselves and to plan our future depends in some measure, on our ability to read the riddles of the past." But it seems that man is not much interested in reading the riddles of the past. It seens that he wants to shake off the past that he feels is too much with him; hardly realizing that the past is too much with him; it is in his very blood, veins, in his mind and conscience. As a result he stands at cross-roads. One road leads to progress and happiness and the other to extinction and sorrow. He is not able to decide which path he should tread upon. Like Duryo dhana man seems to feel.-"I am in the know of Dharma but not activated towards it; I know Adharma but know not how I can avoid it".2
Dr. Radhakrishnan, in his 'Kalki or Future of Civilization', written more than half a century back, looke upon the present state of civiliza tion as "one of its periodic crisis." (P-1). He says

Page #94

85
"The world is casting off its old garments. Standards, aims and institutions which were generally accepted even a generation ago are now challenged and changing; old motives are weakening and new forces are springing up. Anyone who has an insight into the mind of the age is vividly conscious of its restlessness and uncertainty, its dissatisfaction with the existing economic and social conditions and its yearning for the new order which is not yet realized." (P. 7).
Dr. Radhakrishnan attributes this unsettlement in human civilization to modern science as one of the chief factors. This is because "its pace of progress has become latterly too fast and its range too wide and deep for our quick adaptation." (P. 7). This is all the more true to the modern world with its hydrogen bombs and chemical weaponary, man's astounding researches in all the spheres-medical, nuclear and all. These have brought about revolutionary changes in all the spheres of man's life. The picture that Radhakrishnan has drawn fifty years back is all the more terror-striking and true to-day on one side and showing that the life of man on earth and human civilization have been revolutionized far beyond his expectation and imagination, Dr. Radhakrishnan is yet a man of strong optimism and unstinted faith in the ultimate goodness and gigantic powers of humanity. He, therefore, naturally states
"There is a quickened consciousness, a sense of something inadequ ate and unsatisfactory in the ideas and conceptions we have held and a groping after new values. Dissolution is in the air. The old forms of faith are tottering. Among the thoughtful men of every creed and country there is a note of spiritual wistfulness and expectancy," (10.11).
When next Radhakrishnan analyses the negative results, he refers to and describes the state of affairs in the realms of Religion, Family life, politics, International Relations and through these he gives a most realistic, stunning picture of man and his civilization. Today, after fifty years man has become more individualistic and self-centred, more worried about the ends and not the means, taking recourse to religious fundamentalism and labelling it as revolution, looking upon even the United Nations only as a means of guarding and strengthening ones national interests and so on, the dismal picture drawn by Radhakrishnan becomes all the more horrifying. The Berlin wall breaks and communism is fast losing ground; the same communist ideology and life-style can ruthlessly crush the democratic voice of a people as in China. The white minority that ruled over the vast black majority in South Africa, crushed the

Page #95

86
vast majority of the blacks to utter humiliation, torture, exploitation and economic degradation is today forced, may be, against its own will, to release a Nelson Mandela and also to agree to the independence of Namibia. The world often seems to be full of contradictions with apartheid, racial superiority of the white, the iron rule of the mullas and so on. In the modern days we do liave atheists at one extreme and blind followers of religion at the other. In the modern world Salman Rushdiea citizen of the United Kingdom can be given death penalty by the head of state of Iran and he can make it not only a national but religious issue. The truth of the picture of civilization and modern man drawn by Radhakrishnan is all the more pronounced to-day than it was fifty years' back.
The progress that man could not acquire in the last 500 years has become a reality of his life in the last fifty years. Man has realized all the more glaringly that:
"From China to Mexico there is increasing faith in the progress depending on the continued expansion of man's command over the resources and control of the powers of nature." (p. 8). And what Radhakrishnan stated 50 years back stands all the more true to-day that "The outer uniformity has not, however, resulted in an ioner unity of mind and spirit. The new Dearness into which we are drawn has not meant increasing lappiness and diminishing friction, since we are not mentally and spiritually prepared for the meeting." (p. 8). And the words of Maxim Gorky are all the more true to-day that :
"Yes, we are taught to fly in the air like birds, and to swim in the water like fishes, but how to live on the earth we do not know.” (p. 8).
It is all the more true to-day after half a century that:
"There is a quickened consciousness, a sense of something inadequate and unsatisfactory in the ideas and cenceptions we have held and a groping after new values. Dissolution is in the air. The old forms of faith are tottering." (p. 10).
Man continues to feel the inadequacy of the past and no new value seems to settle in man's life for more than five or ten years. It is true to-day that we talk and talk loudly of one world, unity of mankind, the developed countries lielping the developing, the results of all scientific and other inventions being made available to entire mankind, reducing military weaponry and atomic and nuclear weapons and so on. With all this even to-day the dream of Radhakrishnan, expressed in these words is yet only a dream :

Page #96

87
"Today the circle of those who participate in the cultural synthesis has become wider and includes practically the whole world. The faith of the future is in co-operation and not identification, in accomodation to feellowmen and not imitation of them, in toleration and not absolutism." (p. 11).
Radhakrishnan in the second chapter turns to the negative results of the modern age. It is true to state that in the sphere of religion, man lives on faith, mostly blind faith. Modern science, with all its inventions and achievement has shaken this faith and many have turned to atheism while those amongst the less intelligent and educated do not find in Science something like a god in whom one can have faith to derive strength in times of crisis and to be happy. However, Radhakrishnan refers to scientific inventions "undermining the foundations of orthodox theology in every historic religion." (p. 12) He next adds:
"The varied accounts of religous experience seem to support the fashionable view that God is but a shadow of the human mind, a dream of the human heart. Religious genuises who speak to us of 'the world' are fit subjects for investigation in mental hospitals. The traditional arguuments do not carry conviction to the modern mind (p. 12)". He then refers to the gaining of ground by atheists who proclaim that-"Religion is a pursuit of infantile minds with which the bold thinkers have nothing to do. There is no God and we are the instruments of a cold, passionless fate to whom virtue is nothing and vice nothing and from whose grasp we escape to utter darkness." (p. 13).
He then refers to agnostics who experience that "though there is no positive evidence for the existence of God, we cannot be sure that there is no God." (p. 13). To the agnostic the problem is beyond him.
There are again some who "believe in the pragmatic value of the theistic doctrine" (14) that they intend to make use of for improvement of the world. They proclaim that
"We can use religion for the latter purpose as it contributes to social peace and betterment." (p. 14).
A very vast majority have blind faith in religion and in their view
the past "contains the whole accumulated wisdom of Only the dead really live and should rule the living."
human experience.
(p. 14).

Page #97

88
In the modern context we can add many things to this very short account and refer to the grave dangers that the use of religion for social supremacy and political domination by some has led to. In India there is talk of "Hindi domination" which is a political doctrine; when there is inner dissatisfaction and struggle and upheaval, the minds of the common man are drawn to "Islam in danger." in Pakistan. A campaign of killings, hatred, human salaughter etc. results from this. The use of Religion in this direction is all the more pronounced and surely this is of no benefit or any good to either Hinduism or Islam. The propagation of the doctrine of "Islamic brotherhood" or of "Jewish cause" etc., have been of no good whatsoever to religions that are exploited for political and similar other causes. This religious fundamentalism, whatever form it takes, is frought with gravest dangers for mankind. This too is a challenge to humanity and civilization both; it is in no way less dangerous than the use of atomic weapons, we can say..
Radhakrishnan next turns to the state of family-life. In his days he finds several new trends in family life that have today almost broken to pieces the fabric of family life. He begins by referring to the causes that have led to laxity in standards. He says
"A number of factors, such as the disorganization brought about the last war, economic conditions favouring late marriages, the passion for self-expression, weakened parental control, inadequate sex-education, freudian psychology, and the knowledge of the methods of birth-control which saves us from the fear of natural consequences, have brought about a laxity in standards."
The concept of male superiority, the ideal of virginity, sexual license, sexual promiscuity, breaking of the ties of marriage, divorces etc. are fast increasing; the idea of loss of morals has got loosened. He refers to four different attitudes of social idealists, sceptics, bolder spirits etc., persons believing in rampant individualism etc. Family life is thus on fire, we might say. What was true of family life in the days of Radhakrishnan is all the more true and pronounced today. We see that with the concept of individualism on the ascent, the ideal of a happy, smooth, peaceful, intimate family-life is declining. There are three mental trends-family-life going on in the thoughtless traditional way and slowly losing ground; the family of awakened educated and conscious husband and wife, in which there are more conflicts and collapsing families and families of the extremist men and women very often resulting in trial marriages and over on the

Page #98

89
brink of collapse. The author here quotes Trotsky who stated in his Problems of life that:
"Gigantic events have descended on the family in its old shape, the war and the revolution.... we need more scientific economic reforms. Only under such conditions can we free the family from the functions and cares that now oppress and disintegrate it". (p. 21). We have today so many facilities like washing machines, catering, ultra modern facilities of sewing, ready-made clothes etc. on the increase. Still the ideas of relation between man and woman, parents and children, care of the old by their sons and daughters have changed fundamentally and these ideas are adversely affecting even those men and women who lead a family life in the traditional way. Values and concept of family of old are tottering and the prosperity and facilities of modern life have not given peace, smooth life and happiness to men, women and children born of modern marriages.
Radhakrishnan next turns to the state of politics in his days. In his rather quick survey he refers to the rise and state of democracy and democratic institutions the world over. He is specific when he states that
"We welcomed democracy as a release from autocratic rule, but we are not satisfied with its working today. We are coming to realise that government is a technical art and only those skilled in it can be the rulers. Democracy in its actual working rarely permits a country to be governed by its ablest men." (p. 22).
If we were to take a view of the state of affairs in India, we find that this is glaringly true. Our democracy has brought to the forefront the illeducated, rich, caste-ridden, religion-based and terror-inspiring men and groups to the forefront, so much so that the real ablest in the country feel that it is far better for them to remain away from politics. Rule of mediocres is the order of the day. The ideal of good and decent means for good and decent ends taught to us by Mahatma Gandhi and A. Huxley has failed. Come to power through the ballot-box by any means, by hook or by crook, is accepted as a normal practice. To a great extent terrorism, racialism, goondaism etc. that are becoming more and more pronounced with every election are the off-shoots of our ill-conceived democracy. Situation the world over is more or less the same. Political strifes, murders, revolts have become common in countries claiming to uphold real democracy. World over monarchies have been shattered. The glaring latest development in the west is the breaking down of communism in countries that were commu
12

Page #99

90
nist for fifty years and more! Radhakrishnan is again right when he desires political equality and adds that "Tliere can be 110 political equality where there is so much economic inequality.” (p. 24). Economic inequality the world over has proved that there can be no political equality or genuine peace and happiness in politics, in democracy, in any ism at that. Here also the situation is far more glaringly painful and bad than Radhakrishnan could conceive of.
In the study of the negative results that are a veritable challenge to humanity and civilization, the author next takes up the problem of International Relations. He has rightly stressed that almost all countries are interested more or principally in national interests and even the League of Nations lived for some time only till it furthered national interests of some countries and, as we know, it crumbled with time. As he states
"The nations plead for peace and prepare for war. They are not ready to give up the cast of mind that leads to strife ..... From the nursery we cultivate this conceit of nationalism by the waving of flags and the blowing of bugles, by songs of patriotism and the hymns of hate. Each nation in the last war claimed to be the only one engaged in the defence of civilzation. In its name each nation justified everything, excused everything, massacres and destruction." (p. 25). That invited the second world-war and all the devastating annihilation that it led to. The situation has gone from bad to worse in the modern days when the nations of the world are divided into blocks nourishing and furthering common interests. We have the “United Nations" with all the good work to its credit. Yet atomic weapons are piling up. Countries have collected weapons that can destory outright the entire world several times. The human mind remains still under the spell of narrow and selfish interests, racial and religious discriminations, a keen sense of superiority, mutual distrust and hatred and what not ! The concept of one world is still a distant ideal cherished by some but not fulfilled and not likely to be fulfilled in the near future; the world is torn into strifes. Radhakrishnan gives a picture of pessimisni, it is a faint and painful picture that has become ghastly today. He rightly states
"It is no good preventing cruetly to animals and building hospitals for the sick and poor-houses for the destitute so long as we are willing to mow down masses of men by machine-guns and poison non-combatants, including the aged and the infirm, women and children and all for what ? For the glory of God and the honour of the nation.” (p. 26).
The world has become more ghastly today. It is with sadness that the author adds :

Page #100

91
"Internationalism is only an idea cherished by a few and not a part of human psychology." (p. 28).
The third section in this famous scholarly monograph analyses the problem with which humanity and civilization are faced in the state of affairs that we had described and that has become all the more pronounced after fifty years. The author does not in any way underestimate the graveness of the problem and places it in the right perspective before going to the last part of his thesis.-The Reconstruction. He distinguishes, first of all between the barbaric and the human natures in man. He says:
"The animal in us is ever striving to fulfil itself-when all impulses are perfectly satisfied we have the full development of the animal being, the perfection of our animal nature. If we identify the self of man with the body and life-purpose with physical development, we are said to be barbarian, worshipping brute strength and power and idealizing the satisfaction of the passions,” (p. 30).
and
“Such an exclusive culture of the body, would coarsen the spirit and deprive it of its rights. The supremacy of physical prowess and development is the characteristic mark of barbarism. In such a society, men belittle and cxploit women, for the latter are physically weaker, and women in their turn respect and pander to brute strength and prefer those known for their bravery and deeds of arms." (p. 30-31)
By this definition and these ideals, today the world is more in a barbaric state and not human or civilized. He adds further :
"The universe has spent so much pain and struggle to produce human individuals who adore tfie good, the lovely, and the true and who are not content with a finished animality.” (p. 33).
One famous Sanskrit statement says that "there is none superior to the human existence in this world” and another, from Shri Shankara adds
"For the living beings, birth as a luamn being is rare to come across," in his Vivekacudamani. Our concept of the three Gunas and the confidence that man is essentially good and powerful enough ultimately to rise to the blessed state of genuine happiness for man and eternal peace on earth that Indian culture has taught, inspires the author to show as to on which path man will ultimately tread. He, therefore, even inspite of the painful picture of the realistic state of humanity and civilization that he has drawn, states

Page #101

92
"It is the transformation of the individual into the universal outlook. the linking up of our daily life with the eternal purpose that makes us truly human. The procese is costly, but when the redirection of our whole nature to this universal end takes place, the yoke is easy and the burden light. A new kind of life, a new order of consciousness would begin as different from that which now men have, even as human life and consciousness are different from animal life and consciousness.” (p. 33).
And Radhakrishnan's robust optimism and faith in the ultimate goodness of man depend upon the long history of ups and downs and ups again that have come in the life of man. The struggle is on, it is constant. But the author emphasises with all force at his command that
“Civilization is within ourselves, in our moral conceptions, religious ideas, and social outlook. Though the achievements in exact science and mechaical organization of Ancient India or Greece or Medieval Italy are immensely inferior to ours, it cannot be denied that they had a truer perception of spiritual values and the art of life.” (p. 35).
A civilization with firm human values suffers onslaughts even of barbarism, onslughts that, for the time being seem to uproot the civilization outright. But liistory has proved that again and again those values prevail and the civilization rises up again. Hindu civilization is a concrete example in the matter. Our philosopher-author firmly believes that this can be true and will be true of entire humanity and world civilization. We have been taught that "for personalities with large hearts, the entire world is one family," and a state and time will come when “the entire universe will become just one nest." The ideal of Gandhiji in his mantra “truth is God", his love for the entire humanity, his concept of non-violence amounting to universal love and his dream of Sarvodaya are pointers in this direction. Vedas have taught us and asked us to dream of and work for the ideal -
“May all be genuinely happy here in this universe, may all be without diseases (physical, mental, emotional etc.), may all have a vision of the good and blessed state in life; let no one suffer any sorrow." Our author depicts in the clearest of the terms the reality of the diseases, the ailments of human life; he is yet confident that man will ultimately solve his own problem of, shall we say, ghastliness and terror in his life. There will be reconstruction which must, of necessity, come in life. He concedes that
"The future of civilzation, nay, mankind is in jeopardy." He yet hasteus to add that "It is, however, plastic in our hands. It is up to us to make the world safe for humanity.” (p. 40).

Page #102

93
He further states--
"If we go on progressing, not only physically and mechanically but also mentally and spiritually, the prospect for humanity is great indeed. I am optimistic enough to hope that the present upheaval will in the end promote the good of the world." (p. 41).
That is the Kalki, the bright tomorrow to dawn in the life of man. The Kalki Avatara lies in the divinity that is there in the human consciousness and its dawn is a certainty. With this aim in view, in the last part of the monograph, Radhakrishnan points out what reconstruction will be and how. What one famous mantra of an Upanişad proclaims about the path of liberation is true of the bright future of humanity and civilization that man bas to struggle to attain to. It is true that
"Like the walking on pointed sharp blade of a sword, the path for man is steep, very difficult indeed to tread as our philosophers and sages have stated in so many words."
In his section on Reconstruction, Radhakrishnan takes up the same five spheres in the same order and expounds his theory of reconstruction in the realms of Religion, Family-Life, Economic Relations, Politics and International Relations. It is natural that the longest is his analysis of of reconstruction is the realm of religion.
In the realm of Religon, Dr. Radbakrishnan concedes that even in a world of reconstruction, the vast majority of men and women in differen climate, society, culture, tradition, concepts and ideas, cannot have ana need not have one Religon. He says:
“A single religion for all mankind will take away from the spiritual richness of the world. If we want to prevent the sterelization of the mind and the stagnation of the soul of humanity, we inust not repudiate or refuse, recognition to any one of the historical religions. As many as are led by the spirit of God, these are the sons of God." (p. 45).
It is necessary for the entire world of human beings to experience a transformation so that the religious and spiritnal experience lead all on the right path. The author, with his unstinted faith in humanity accepts that "Man alone has the unrest consequent on the conflict between what he is and what he can be. He is distinguished from other creatures by seeking after a rule of life, a principle of progress," (p. 48).
and

Page #103

94
"It is by transforming ourselves that we shall be able to transform the world. The soul of all improvement, it has been rightly said, is the improvement of the soul." (p. 48).
In the realm of religion, as in all others, “There is no resting on the road of life. Every achiement is a starting point for something new." (p. 51).
All this expects of man full faith in belief and practice of moral values, humanistic outlook, sympathy even towards evil doers, a constant effort at widening our vision. For this the author adds that:
"It is good to be devoted to the moral code but it is wicked to be fanatic about it. It is our guide and beacon-light, but, if we make a god of it, it will blind our reason and strand us in immortality. No progress is possible if the moral rules are regarded as sacrosanct." (p. 57).
A true attitude of adherence to moral values, to the ethics of religion and life and all this with a universally wide vision of the ultimate good of man, all human beings and our future civilization will be real reconstruction. This will naturally have a deep impact on man's family life and other spheres of life. The author therefore states first of all that
"The different aspects of human life, physical, vital, mental, emotional, aesthetic and ethical are sacred since they are the means for our growth towards diviner being." (p. 58). The author therefore gives his ideal of happy and smooth relation between husband and wife in these words :
"True love requires for its maintenance the presence of an overarching end, the pursuit of a common ideal to the realization of which the lovers de dicate themselves. Husband and wife accept each other and evolve out of the given unlikeness a beautiful whole.” (p. 59).
This requires extreme patience, restraint, forebearance, charity and vigilance. Once this is achieved and husband and wife experience an identity, all other problems of family and social life will tend to be solved. Children and their natural growth under the loving care of parents will be achieved. The author is therefore opposed to trial-marriages, contract marriages etc. Man and woman should therefore take to married life in the seriousness that it expects. This will mean transformation of their lives, their children, the society and through that our civilization with all its human values.
. Dr. Radhakrishnan next refers to transformation and reconstruction
in the realm of economic relations. For this expects man not to cultivate servitude of machines; labour and leisure should be the right of all; man

Page #104

95
should cultivate an attitude of working for oneself and through oneself for fulfilling social needs. This requires shaking off of distinctions of high and low, rich and poor, the haves and have-nots and so on. All this is a must and for this it is necessary that
“We must overcome the lack of mutual understrading and achieve a more vital and all-pervading sense of the human and spiritual life in the individual and the group.” (p. 64).
Next what is required is to consider both the quantity and quality of human desirables. Man should know how to fulfil his own desires as also to curb them, to control them.
To-day, after fifty year's new problems have arisen in the econmic relations between countries and nations and these have again a dangerous and ghastly effect on political and international relations. The unrest brought about by grave iuequalities resulting in extreme riches of some individuals in society and of some countries and poverty rampant and extreme of some individuals and groups and countries. Mad race for prosperity leads to mad power-politics and the politics of prosperity and poverty has overshadowed both our politics and international relations. Things are far worse today in the realms of politics and international relations than the author could conceive of. Democracy is said to be the best form of government, though this so-called democracy has countless types and it has not made nian happier. Socialism and communism followed and led to dianietrically opposed power-blocks. Religious fundamentalism with all its grave dangers has entered the realm, communism is crumbling fast.
So many things could have been stated, though in matters of reconstruction and transformation the author's treatment is rather brief and incomplete. What is necessary is an off-shoot of the moral, spiritual, ethical and unity of outlook that religion gives. He wants a fostering of oneness of thought, and a change in "national psychology in its attitude to war." Here only an international outlook and its slow but sure cultivation and fostering can help. But in this cultivation and fostering, it should be known that
"Internationalism is not a scientific device like the wireless or the telephone which the world can, all of a sudden take to. It is a delicate plant which it takes long to rear.” (p. 68). What is necessary is that
“The world must be imbued with a love of humanity. We want religious heroes who will not wait for the transformation of the whole world

Page #105

96
but assert with their lives, if necessary, the truth of the conviction "on carth onc family," heroes who will accept the motto of the great StadhoIder : "I have no need to hope in order to undertake, nor succeed in order to persevere.” (p. 72).
Conclusion
True it is, beyond any doubt, that the views of Dr. Radhakrishnan on the future of civilization and humanity in its pursuit after eternal happiness, peace, a total extinction of war are as much, or, shall we say, far more relevant to-day than they were fifty years ago. In these fifty years the world has changed for the worse to-day and yet its dream of the future is not without basis. It has its foundation in some soothening traits of human temperament, of human consciousness, the vast and deep inner world of human beings. Here the great philospher shows that his picture of the future is quite on right lines. This speaks volumes for the foreslight, depth of understanding, grasp of human nature, his deep philosophic vision and so on.

Page #106

AN APPRECIATION OF RADHAKRISHNAN'S TRANSLATION OF "THE BHAGVADGITA"
Jag Mohan*
Having been born an Adi Dravida in Madras, I was not privileged to learn Sanskrit. At school and college, dazzled by the British Raj, I abandoned my mother-tongue, Telugu, and opted for English as my language of communication. Perforce, I had to content myself with translations of the Bhagvadgita and books on this Sanskrit classic. It has been a major literary preoccupation of mine over the last four decades. I must have read over a score of translations and over half a dozen interpretations and commentaries. This was in pursuit of my endeavour to get at the rahasya of Bhagavadgita, which from now on I shall refer as just the Gita.
Among all the Gita books I have read and re-read, Dr. S. Radhakrishnan's monumental translation, with a splendid introductory essay, has had a special fascination for me. It was after reading the philosopherstatesman's other books like The Hindu View of Life, Indian Philosophy and An Idealist View of Life that I was led to his The Bhagvadgita. It cast a spell on me and it continues to do so even after reading thrice over. And, each reading has been an enriching, rewarding experience.
The Song Celestial or The Song of God or the Song of the Blessed as it has been variously called, through Radhakrishnan's translation enthralled me so much that for a year or so I made a ritual reading of it. Every morning, I would read a few slokas and ponder over them. This led me to an extensive research with the aim and intent of writing a script for an art film, which is still an unrealized project.
Radhakrishnan's long introductory essay, notes and footnotes to the translation of the slokas were of immense use in the removal of the "Cloud of up-knowing." Subsequently, Aldous Huxley's short, compact introduction to Swami Prabhavananda and Christopher Isherwood's translation partly in verse and partly in prose and the longish introduction of Juan Mascaro's to his own prose translation of the Gita have also helped me in my pursuit of the rahasya. I am beholden to all of them.
* Executive Secretary, NAMEDIA, New Delhi
13
.

Page #107

98
And now I shall share my appreciative assessment of the one-time knighted Radhakrishnan's translation. I may be forgiven for this long personal introduction, which is intended to provide a contextual background. Subjectivism cannot be excluded from personal appreciation.
What has particularly distinguished Radhakrishnan's translation and explanatory commentary has been his attitude to the celebrated Hindu scripture, the perspective from which he did the translation and the methodology he adopted in making his achievement memorable.
It is to be recalled that more than a century and a half ago, the Gita became almost an obsession with European scholars. Sir Edwin Arnold, who himself translated the Gita into English as The Song Celestial, pointed out in mid-19th century that this Sanskrit classic has been turned into "French by Burnouf, into Latin by Lassen, into Italian by Stanislay Gatti, into Greek by Galanos and into English by Mr. Thomson and Mr. Devis." In Germany, Richard Garbe, Paul Deussen, Leopold Von Schroder and Helmuth van Glasenapp translated the Gita. According to a Belgian specialist in the Gila, there are said to be 140 translations from Sanskrit into various languages.
Radhakrishnan was an eminent scholar, completely at ease with Sanskrit and English. He was equally familiar with the various schools of Indian Philosophy to the extent of being their exponent in English at Oxford and through books. So, when he set out to translate the Gita into English, he had a clear concept of his purpose. He set it out at the very beginning of his preface to the book thus :
"The classical commentaries indicate to us what the Gita meant to the commentators and their contemporaries. Every scripture hastwo, sides, one temporary and perishable, belonging to the ideas of the people of the period and the country in which it is produced, and the other eternal and imperishable, and applicable to all ages and countries...."
The vitality of a classic consists in its power to produce from time to time, men who confirm and correct from their own experience truths enunciated in it. The commentators speak to us from experience and express in a new form, a form, relevant to their age and responsive to its needs, the ancient wisdom of the scripture. All great doctrine, as it is repeated in the course of centuries, is coloured by the reflections of the age in wbich it appears and bears the imprint of individual, who restates it."

Page #108

99
Radhakrishnan wanted to re-state the philosophy of the Gita in his own words, according to his profound understanding of the Hindu scriptures to the world after the Second World War. He sought to effect "the reconciliation of mankind" by highlighting "the truths of eternity," with "the accents of our time."
. . ! With the clarity of mind for which he became famous in his life time, Radhakrishnan also set out his credo as a translator in the same preface :
"There are many editions of the Bhagavadgita and several good English translations of it and tliere would be no justification for another, if all that was needed for English readers was a bare translation. Those who read the Gita in English need notes at least as much as those who read it in Sanskrit, if they are not to miss their way in it....
A translation to serve its purpose must be as clear as its substance will permit. It must be readable without being shallow, modern without being unsympathetic. But no translation of the Gita can bring out the dignity and grace of the original. Its melody and magic of phrase are difficult to recapture in another medium. The translator's anxiety is to render the thought, but he cannot convey fully the spirit. He cannot evoke in the reader the mood in which the thought was born and induce in him the ecstacy of the seer and the vision he beholds. Realizing that, for me at any rate, it is difficult to bring out, through the medium of English, the dignity of phrase, and the intensity of utterance, I have given the text in Roman script also so that those who know Sanskrit can rise to a full comprehension of the meaning of the Gita by pondering over the Sanskrit original. Those who do not know Sanskrit will get a fairly
correct idea of the spirit of the poem from the beautiful English : rendering by Sir Edwin Arnold. It is so full of ease and grace and has
a flavour of its own which makes it acceptable to ali but those who are scrupulous about scholarly accuracy."
Radhakrishnan's book was originally publislied by George Allen & Unwin in London, well-known for their books of ideas and quality. This went into nine impressions in a second edition. Then Blackie & Sons, a long-time publisher of English textbooks in India brought out a cheaper, Indian reprint and this too went into seven reprints by 1982, indicating the ever-widening readership of the book. More, the non-Sanskrit-knowing people all over India were allowing themselves to have an exposure to the Gita as translated and interpreted by Radhakrishnan,

Page #109

100
Between 1948 and today, two other translations of the Gita have been brought out, which have had world-wide reception-one by Swami Pradhavananda and Christopher Isherwood and the other by Juan Mascaro.
Christopher Islierwood was an outstanding intellectual, English novelist: and filmscript writer of the 'forties. During the Second World War, he migrated froin wartime Britain to the United States, where fortuitously he met Swami Prabhavananda of the Ramakrishna Mission and came under the latter's benign influence. This led to their collaborative venture, a fresh translation of the Gita, which is appended with short essays on the "Cosmology of the Gita" and "The Gita and the War.” Aldous Huxley, the celebrated novelist and protagonist of the "Perennial Philosophy" has written the introduction. This was published by J. N. Dent in the Everyman's Library.
In 1961, the next major translation by Juan Mascaro was brought out as Penguin Classic. A Spaniard, Mascaro had studied Sanskrit and Pali at Cambridge-and later taught there. He has also translated selections from the Upanishads. He is a Biblical scholar also. His translation is in impeccable prose uncluttered by notes and footnotes. But his own introduction is an eassay in Comparative Religion, in which context he has placed the Bhagvadgita, emphasising on its universality as well as relevance to the world of today. This book has gone into several reprints, almost once every year during the 'seventies. The Gita's message is obviously finding favourable response among readers worldwide.
To understand and appreciate Radhakrishnan's methodology of translation, I have selected two Slokas (Adhyaya III Verses 19 and 20) devoted to Karama Yoga. Their translation into English by five different Gwriters are quoted below and contrasted against Radliakrishnan's rendition. In quoting the texts I have incorporated the footnotes in the text at the relevant places within brackets, with the words in italics).
Sir Edwin Arnold, C.S.I., an eminent scholar, an able administrator of the Indian Empire and an Indologist, became famous for his translation of Bhagavadgita into English blank verse, The Song Celestrial. A century ago, this book was hailed in the English-speaking world for its simplicity: and intuitive understanding of Hindoo (it was much later that the spelling changed into Hindu) philosophy. Here is Sir Edwin's translation:
"Therefore, thy task prescribed With spirit unattached gladly perform Since in performance of plain duty man

Page #110

101
Mounts to his highest bliss. By works alone Janak and ancient saints reached blessedness! Moreover, for the upholding of the kind, Action thou should'st embrace.”
The same two slokas have been translated by R. C. Zaehner, who was a Spalding Professor of Eastern Religions and Ethics at the University of Oxford and had compiled Hiudu Scriptures in the following manner :
"And so, detached, perform unceasingly The works that must be done For the man detached who labours on (karma),
To the Highest must win through. "For only by working on (karma) did Janaka And his like attain perfection Or if again for the welfare (control) of the world thou carest
Then shouldst thou work (and act).” During the forties, when the Second World War was on, Christoplier Isherwood, a creative English writer came under the benign influence of Swami Prabhavananda of the Ramakrishna Mission in the United States. They collaborated on a fresh transalation of Bhagavadgita and called it The Song of God. Aldoux Huxley, who was a protagonist of the "Perennial Philosophy" wrote the introduction to this book, published in 1947.
The two slokas on the philosophy of Karma Yoga were translated by Swami Prabhavananda and Christopher Isherwood thus :
"Do your duty, always; but without attachment. That is how a man reaches the ultimate truth; by working without anxiety about results. In fact, Janaka (a royal saint mentioned in the Upanishads) and many others reached enlightenment, simply because they did their duty in this spirit. Your motive in working should be to set otliers, by your example, on the path of duty." Juan Mascaro's version from the Penguin Classic is as follows:
"19. In liberty from the bonds of attachment, do thou therefore the work to be done : l'or the man whose work is pure attains indeed the Supreme.
20. King Janaka and other warriors reached perfection by the path of action; Let thy aim be the good of all, and then carry on thy task in Lile."

Page #111

102
In this comparative study of the two slokas, it may be worthwhile to get acquainted with the version put out in 1897 by Alladi Mahadeva Sastry, an Andhra pandit, who was well-versed in Telugu, Sanskrit and English and one-time Director of the Library of the Theosophical Society at Adyar, Madras, in his The Bhagavad Gita with the Commentary of Sri Sankaracharya. This was brought out by Samata Books of Madras, who specialise in the works of Sri Sankaracharya. In Sastry's book, the slokas are reproduced in Devanagari script, followed by translation and interpretation.
Alladi Mahadeva Sastry's interpretation is :
"19. Therefore, without attachment, constantly perform the action which should be done; for, performing action without attachment man reaches the Supreme.
Performing action, without attachment, for the sake of the Isvara, man attains moksha, through attaining purity of mind (sattva-śuddhi).
20. By action only, indeed, did Janaka and others try to attain perfection. Even with a view to the protection of the masses thou shouldst perform (action)".
The wise Kshatriyas of old, such as Janaka and Asvapati tried "biy action alone to attain moksha (samsiddhi). If they were persone possessed of right knowledge, then we should understand that. Since they had been engaged in works, they tried to reach moksha with action, i.e. without abandoning action, with a view to set an exam to the world. If, on the other hand, such men as Janaka were persons. who had not attained right knowledge, then, (we should understand) they tried to attain moksha through action which is the means attaining purity of mind (sattva-buddhi)..
If you think that obligatory works were performed by the ancients such as Janaka because they were ignorant, and that it does not follow from that fact alone that action should be performed by another who possesses right knowledge and has done all his duties-- even then, as subject to your prarabdha-karma (the Karma which has led you to this birth as a Kshatriya), and having regard also to the purpose of preventing the masses from resorting to a wrong path, you ought to perform action." (A long footnote on knowledgeable Kshatriyas has been left out.)
Finally, let us get acquainted with Radhakrishnan's interpretation of the slokas. In his translation, each sloka is first transliterated into English,

Page #112

103
then the short, pithy translation is given, invariably appended with notes and footnotes. It is in this respect that Radhakrishnan's translation of the Bhagavadgita, dedicated to Mahatma Gandhi, is unique.
19. tasmäd asaktah satatam
kāryam karma samācara asakto hy ácaran karma param āpnoti pūruşah
Therefore, without attachment, perform always the work that has to be done, for man attains to the highest by doing work without attachment.
Here work done without attachment is inarked as superior to work done in a spirit of sacrifice which is itself higlier than work done with selfish aims. Even the emancipated souls do work as the occasion arises.
While this verse says that the man reaches the Supreme, param, :performing actions, without attachment, Samkara liolds that karma
helps us to attain purity of mind which leads to salvation. It takes us to perfection indirectly through the attainment of purity of mind. 20. Karmanai 'va hi samsiddhim
asthitā janakadayah lokasamgraham evä 'pi sampaśyan kartum arhasi
It was even by works that Janaka and others attained to perfection. Thou shouldst do works also with a view to the maintenance of the world.
Janaka was the King of Mithila and father of Sita, the wife of Rama. Janaka ruled, giving up his personal sense of being the worker. Even Samkara says that Janaka and others worked lest people at large might go astray, convinced that their senses were engaged in activity, guna gunşesu Varante. Even those who have not known the truth might adopt works for self-purification.
Lokasangraha : world-maintenance. Lokasamgraha stands for the unity of the world, the interconnectedness of society. If the world is not to sink into a condition of physical misery and moral degradation, if the common life is to be decent and dignified, religious ethics must control social action. The aim of religion is to spiritualize society, to establish a brotherhood on earth. We must be inspired by the

Page #113

104
hope of embodying ideals in earthly institutions. When the Indian world lost its youth, it tended to become other-wordly. In a tired age, we adopt the gospel of renonciation and endurance. In an age of hope aud energy, we emphasize active service in the world and the saving of civilization. Boethius affirms that he will never go to heaven, who is content to go alone."
"Cp. Yogavāșiştha. The knower has nothing to gain either by performing or by attaining from action. Therefore he performs action as it arises. Again, "To me it is just the same whether something is done or not. Why should I insist on not performing action ? I perform wliatever comes to me." (The transliterated slokas from Yogavasistha are not included here.)
For reasons of space, translations of the two slokas by K.T. Telang, L.D. Barnett, Annie Besant and Bhagawandas, W. Douglas, P. Hill, B.G. Tilak, D.S. Sarma, Franklin Edgerton and Mahadev Desai and others have been left out.
But from the half a dozen translations quoted here, it can be gathered that Radhakrishnan's version stands out as the most impressive, erudite and truly interpretative-especially with the emphasis on lokasamgraha. Radhakrishnan's translation is a model translation, when we take into consideration two noo4related languages like Sanskrit and English, even though they belong to the Indo-European family. Radhakrishnan, apart from being conversant with both languages from a professorial level, had a complete understanding of Oriental and Occidental philosophies, besides the psyche of our people and their ethos, wbich have sustained us through the centuries. Evidence of all this could be gathered from his version of the two slokas. In contrast, the four European translators according to their lights, had done simplistic, populist translations and the shastri had to abide by Samkara's commentary.
'Radhakrishnan's book was published in 1948. It was possibly written during the dark days of the Second World war or soon after. As such, when he wrote the preface, he began by saying that during the war and after the Sciences, in their practical applications became prominent in "the conduct of war and the comfort of citizens in peace.” Long before. C.P. Show and other intellectuals spoke about the "Two Cultures," the cultures of sciences and the Humanities and the telescoping of the two. Radhakrishnan made a plea for the fusion of two cultures," to give largeness and wisdom to men's outlook on life." He pointed out that

Page #114

105
the Sciences are the means to the ends of the Humanities. "A balanced culture should bring the two great halvas into harmony. The Bhagavdagita is a valuable aid for understanding the Supreme ends of life." .
Off at a tangent, a famous incident deserves to be mentioned here. When the first atomic bomb was tested at the Los Alamos desert, Robert Oppenheimer. the famous scientist, who masterminded the test was so struck with awe by the shattering brightness of the bomb, he recited to himself the famous sloka from the Viswaroopa Darshana chapter in the Gita (Adhyaya XI Verse 12). Oppenheimer, incidentally was a student of Sanskrit at one time.
12. divi suryasahasrasya
bhaved yugapad utthita yadi bhah sadrsi sa syad blasas tasya mahatmanah
If the light of a thousand suns were to blaze forth all at once in the sky, that might resemble the splendour of that exalted Being.
Oppenheiner's reference to "brighter than a thousand sums" was splashed on the "Time" magazine's cover the next week. Subsequently, when Robert Jungk wrote a well-documented book on the horrendous tragedy unleashed by the atom bomb over Hiroshima and Nagasaki he entitled it as "Brither than a Thousand Suns." Oppenheimer and Jungk. must have also hoped that the Sciences should be the means for the ends of Humanities.
Yet another aspect that Radhakrishnan has emphasised is that the Gita has sought to "reconcile varied and apparently antithetical forms of religious consciousness" and highlight "the root conceptions of religion which are neither ancient nor modern but eternal and belong to the very flesh of humanity, past. present aad future."
Radhakrishnan's 55-page introductory essay is invaluable and indispensable for any student of the Gita. It deals with date and the text used, the various commentators starting with Samkara and ending with Mahatma Gandhi the concept of Reality and Maya, in the Gita, the role of Krishna as a teacher, the three paths to knowledge, the cultivation of Yoga and so on. It is written with clarity, in impeccable English and in great style.
"The notes and footnotes scattered throughout the book are in a way an extension of the essay. Clarifying subtle points or providing historical
14

Page #115

106
parallels or revealing connection and linkages. They blend well with the. translation of the slokas and explanatory passages. All in all, for a nonSanskrit-knowing reader or a foreigner, Radhakrishnan's book is an updated commentary with the flavour of contemporaneity.
It is my firm belief that but for the translations of the Bhagavadgita by Dr. Sarvapalli Radhakrishnan, Christopher Isherwood and Juan Mascaro, a "near miracle" in the musical history of the Western World could not have happened, Could we in India ever imagine that an American composer would write an opera in which the entire libretto (text of the vocal music) would be from the Bhagavadgita? Yet it has happened.
The American composer, Philip Glass, has composed the music for "Satyagraha", an opera in three acts for which Constance Dejong adopted the slokas from the Gita in Sanskrit, from the 23rd sloka in the first adhyaya to the fifth in the fourth sloka adhyaya (Later chapters are not omitted by any means). The opera is based on the life and work of Mahatma Gandhi in South Africa from 1893 to 1914, during the course of which Gandhiji invented "Satyagraha" for the benefit of mankindas a political strategy. In the opera, Gandhiji's past, present and future are evoked by three "witnesses" in the three acts. They are Tolstoy, Tagore, and Martin Luther King and they sit as silent figures atop a podium and view the action on the stage. The Sanskrit verses are sung in the Western style and we Indians may have to get used to it by and by.
It was the privilege of the city of Rotterdam in Netherlands that commissioned Philip Glass to compose the opera. (Oddly enough Gandhiji struggled against the Boers, descendants of the very same Dutch people,) Satyagraha was first performed in 1980 at Rotterdam and subsequently in several other American cities, starting with New York in 1981 and also in Europe.
Unfortunately we in India have not been grateful to Philip Glass by inviting him though belatebly we did invite Peter Brooks and his marathon film, "The Mahabharat" recently. Even Cassette recordings of the opera are difficult to get in India. At least we were involved with Sir Richard Attenborough's film on Gandhiji and we have been lucky to see this award-winning film.
D Sad is the state of affairs that we who used to rave over Indologists and Indophiles in the past have not done a single gesture of recognition to Philip Glass. He had come to our country several times, met Ravi Shankar and Alla Rakha, studied our musical systems, read several

Page #116

107
books on Gandhiji and the Gita possibly including Radhakrishnans' Bhagavad-gita.
However, we should be justifiably proud and happy that the Bhagavadgita's ever expanding popularity is partly due to the translators and partly due to the faith that our leaders like Gandhiji, Aurobindo Ghosh, Bal Gangadhar Tilak and others had in it. Even as we are heading towards the 21st century and the Communications Revolution is trying to sweep us off our feet, there will be millions here and elsewhere reading the Bhagavadgita, reciting it, finding solace in it and endorsing what Gandhiji wrote in Young India in 1925.
"I find a solace in the Bhagavadgita that I miss even in the Sermon on the Mount. When disappointment stares me in the face and all alone I see not one ray of light, I go back to the Bhagavadgita. I find a verse here and a verse there and I immediately begin to smile in the midst of overwhelming tragedies--and my life has been full of external tragedies and if they have left no visible, no indelible scar on me, I owe it all to the teachings of the Bhagavadgita."

Page #117

BEING AND DIFFERANCE RADHAKRISHNAN AND DERRIDA
M. V. Baxi
Sarvapelli Gopal has shown what Radhakrishnan was doing in his work, Indian Philosophy :
"He reconstructed the arguments of the ancient texts and assessed them in relation both to the debates which formed their original context and to modern controversies. The text is the point of mediation between two minds and the interpretation must not only satisfy the curiosity but disturb the consciousness of the present day reader”. (Emphasis added)
Gopal's reference to Radhakrishnan's reconstructive reading of the philosophical texts reninds us inmediately of the contemporary poststructuralist French philosopher Derrida's deconstructive readings of the texts of Western philosophy. This is because of the fact that post-structuralism and post-modernism have become dominant in current philosophical discourse. For example, Magliola considers Derrida very close to Nāgārjuna?, while Coward, comparing Sankara and Derrida on the problem of relation of language to reality, finds Derrida and Sankara in the opposite canips. However, when Coward compares Derrida and Bhartphari on the origin of language, lie finds substantial concord between Derrida and Bhartyhari but he also clarifies that Derrida's deconstruction is not compatible with Advaita Vedanta or Buddhism. Further research by Indian and Western scholars is required in this area of comparative philosophy, but it follows both from Magliola's and Coward's analyses that if Sankara and Derrida find themselves in opposite camps and if Radhakrishnan is in Sankara's camp, then it follows that Radhakrishnan's philosophy also is incompatible with Derrida's deconstruction.
In this paper, Radhakrishnan's notion of Being has been considered in relation to Derrida's strategy of differance and the following points have emerged from such a comparative analysis :
(1) Radhakrishnan's Being has an ontological depth. Derrida's differance has no "ontic import" and "ontological weight”. Tlius, Radhakrishnan's notion of Being is different from Derrida's strategy of differance.
(2) Radhakrislınan's notion of Being involves some kind of negative theology, but as Derrida's differance has no ontological import, it does not involve any kind of ontotheology.

Page #118

109
(3) Even if there is a trace of mysticism in Derrida's différance, such a nysticism is different, from the mysticism of Being found in Radhakrishnan.
(4) Reality of self is central to Radhakrishnan's thought but for Derrida, human subject becomes a speaking and signifying subject only by inscribing itself in the system of differences.
(5) According to Derrida, the Westeri metaphysics has been a metaphysics of presence from Plato to Austin. We find the logocentric metaphysics of presence in Radhakrishnan also. Derrida deconstructs any such metaphysics of presence with the help of differance', 'trace', 'archewriting, 'erasure', etc. Derrida adopts the practice of writing 'under erasure'. It involves "writing the word, crossing it out and then printing both the world and its deletion". A particular word, for example, is crossed out because it is inaccurate but it is kept legible since it is necessary and there is no alternative, Thus the word 'Being put under erasure; Derrida puts "Sign' also under erasure. Expressions are erased in this manner to withdraw the writer's support to their grounding premises.
(6) For Radhakrishnan, Being transcends any definite form of expression, and yet it is at the basis of all expression.". For Derrida there is nothing outside the "text" which is itself nothing but a play of differance. In Radhakrishnan, Bcing has a foundational status", but Derrida's philosophy is antifoundationalist and antiessentialist. For Derridar Being and Void are both undccidable aporias.
(7) Radhakrishnan's integrative and convergent readings of philosophical texts are different from Derrida's deconstructive double readings and double interpretations. The philosophy of reading and writing shaping their interpretations are totally different.
Diffèrance :
Derrida formulates the French neographism “différance", The French word difference and the English word 'difference' are spelled in the same way, but the second 'e' in the French word "difference" is vocalized as the 'a' in the English word 'Father'. Thus when a Frenchman vocalizes the graphic form 'différance he hears only the French word "différence". Thus the graphic notation 'a' in the Fench word "diffèrance" can not be heard; it is lost in vocalization.

Page #119

110
In English, we have two words, to differ' and '10 dcfer',; The French word 'diffèrer' has botli these senses i.e. it is used for differing as well as 'deferring'. Derrida's Diffèrance ('Differanz' in Gerinan) can refer simultancously to all these senses i.e. to diffèrance as spacing as well as diffèrance as temporizing.
Derrida refers to Saussure's concept of the arbitrary and differential character of sign at the foundation of general semiology and shows that the principle of difference as the condition of signification applies to sign as both signifier and signified and hence the signified concept is never present in and of itself. Every concepi rel'ers to the other concept within a system by ineans of the systematic play of differences.
Derrida shows that the neographism "differance" is neither a word nor a concept. According to Derrida, his deliniation of differance is a strategy without finality. As Derrida puts it, "Such a play of differance is thus no longer simply a concept but rather the possibility of conceptuality... For the same reason différance is not simply a word, that is, what is generally represented as the calm present and self-referential unity of concept and phonic materials
Thus according to Derrida, in language, there are only differences, these differences play and they are themselves effcets, Differance is thus snon-full, non-simple, structured and differentiating origin of differences... Thus the name 'origin' no longer suits it."
Language, according to Derrida, is "constituted as a weave of differences, but 'production', 'constitution', etc,, are used by Derrida only for their strategic convenience. because there is no subject, substance, or a being which is the foundation of the play of differance. Differance has no ontological weight.
Differance, as a structure and movement, has three aspects. First, the play of differences among elements constitutes signification. Second, the play of traces of differences within each element also contributes to signification. Thus the trace of that which is absent determines the structure of a sign. Third, the differance includes the play of spacing by which the elements relate to each other, i.e. the temporal interval divides the spatial presence.10
Thus meaning is not a transcendental presence. No element can function as a sign without referring to another element which itself is never present. Derrida objeets to the repression of differences, privileging of presence and the illusion that the meaning has been mastered and controlled by the writer and the reader, 11

Page #120

111
Derrida raises the question of the presence to itself of the subject in silent intuitive consciousness and shows that privilege granted to consciousness is a privilege granted to presence and we should shake the whole of such metaphysics of presence, Consciousness, as presence, therefore is not a central form of Being for Derrida. It is itself a determination and effect of differance. The original process of teniporizing and spacing is at the heart of the transcendental subjectivity. Derrida incorporates the structuraJists notion of difference in his "strategy" of difference and uses it to go beyond Heidegger's ontological difference between Being and beings. The notion of simple self-identical presence of an undivided object is thus undermined because protentions and retentions, temporality and otherness are embedded in every actual experience of unmediated presence.13 Derrida replaces the transcendental subject by the subjectless anonymity of archewriting which makes it possible to treat culture as nature, different and deferred, and concept as different and deferred intuition.
II
Negative Theology
Differance is not a word, not a concept; not an entity, nor a truth or presence. It is not an appearance, not and essence, not a self-identical meaning and not an existence. It thus looks like Radhakrishnan's Absolute or Sankara's featureless Brahman. Differance looks like a hidden God because according to Derrida, "older than Being itself, such a differance has no name in our language." Caputo, in his discussion of Derrida with reference to Eckhart's mysticism however shows that even negative theologies are detours to higher affirmations whereas Derrida's differance is neutral regarding all claims of existence and non-existence, theism end atheism.1+ Derridr's grammatology leads to the unnameable, but as Caputo has shown, Derrida's differance lacks all ontological profoundity and mystical depth.
Radhakrishnan's discussion of Being involves some kind of negative theology, na iti, na iti. For Radhakrishnan, being is essentially unconcepualizable. It is not reachable by abstraction or rational analysis. 15 We can not be absolutely silent and yet when we speak of God we find that God is too great for words. There is a tension between mystical silence and unsuccessful attempts at any coherent articulation of Being. Radhakrishnan is keenly aware of the role of myths, metaphors and rhetorical devices involved in a discourse of Reality. He also finds that given the transcendent nature of reality, both logic and rhetorics are bound to fail. He therefore appeals to intutive insight which though not communicable has the sense of assurance and certainty and is in a sense a species of kowledge,10

Page #121

112
Radhakrishnan would have accepted Derrida's view that language is relational and differential and it can never lead us to knowledge by coincidence or identity. Radhakrishnan, however, would have emphasised against Derrida the role of negative theology as a stage in man's encounter with the Absolute Reality. Derrida finds that "only infinite being can reduce the difference in presence. In that sense, the name of God is the name of indifference itself. 17 On the other hand, Derrida himself has claimed that his strategy of differance is not any kind of ontotheology, For Derrida, "this unnameable is not an ineffable Being which no name could approach, God, for example."18.
If Being is without differences and if language is nothing but a play of differences, then language can not grasp reality as it is in itself. What Derrida shows is that the difference between differential nature of language and the differenceless fully present Reality itself is a distinction within language and thus any articulation of the difference between language and Reality is itself the effect of the play of differance within language. In the context of Heidegger's ontological difference, Derrida raises the following question :
"... are not the thought of meaning or truth of Being, the determination of difference, difference thought within the horizon of the question of Being, still intrametaphysical effects of differance ?19 For Derrida then even 'différance' remains with us as a metaphysical name.
III
Mysticism:
Differènce thus is not a negative theology. Even negative atheology is an accomplice of negative theology according to Derrida. In fact differance itself makes any positive or negative theology or any speech or writing possible; hence diffèrance is older than Being.
Habermas however points out that inspite of his deinals, Derrida remains close to Jewish mysticism. He quotes in his support Susan Handelman's similar interpretation :
"Derrida's choice of writing to Western logocentrism is a reemergence of Rabbinic hermeneutics in a displaced way. Derrida would undo GraecoChristian theology and move us back from ontology to Grammatology, from Being to Text, from Logos to Ecriture-Scripture". 20
Habermas observes that the motif of God that works through absence in Derrida is due to the Jewish tradition itself. Derrida's grammatology, according to Habermas, renews the mystical concept of tradition as an ever delayed event of revelation. 21

Page #122

113
Derrida writes: "To write is not only to know that the Book does not exist and that for ever there are books, against which the meaning of a world not conceived by an absolute subject is shattered, before it has even become a unique meaning... It is not only to have lost the theological certainty of seeing every page bind itself into the unique text of truth...(to write) is also to be incapable of making meaning absolutely precede writing, it is thus to lower meaning while simultaneously elevating inscription." For Derrida thus, writing is inauguaral and the absence of the Jewish God, the absence and haunting of the Divine Sign regulates all modern criticism and aesthetics.
For Derrida, the mysticisms of the Plenum, of the Void and of the Unity of opposites are logocentric mysticisms i. e. focussed, framed or centered. 23
Radhakrishnan's mysticism is based on the foundational nature of Being which is felt in the spiritual experience. For Radhakrishnan, the validity of such an experience is self-certifying. Derrida's differential mysticism involves a joyous affirmation without nostalgia, "with a certain laughter and certain step of the dance.25
IV
Logocentrism:
If we apply Derrida's criteria, Radhakrishnan's foundational philosophy of Being is logocentric. Derrida finds that the philosophical discourse from Plato to Austin is logocentric.
'Logos' is a term for absolute or foundation, the self-certifying presence of which is assumed to be given directly'. Such a foundation constitutes trancendental signified which is "unaffected by signifying system which. represents it."26
Every notion of an Absolute as origin, as end, as centre, as circumference i.e. every sense of Absolute as an all-inclusive frame accounting for everything derived from it is logocentric according to Derrida." All forms of Vedanta are logocentric in this sense according to Magliola. Passages on intuition, Absolute, God, religious experience and mysticism in Radhakrishnan's texts would also illustrate the kind of logocentrism highlighted by Derrida.

Page #123

114
Phonocentrism :
Phonocentrism privileges speech over writing. The binary hierarchical opposition speech/writing implies that writing is external, contingent, secondary, derivative, degrading, deviant and corrupt, while speech is primary and valuable because it symbolizes experience, origin, self-presence and self-contained meaning. Thus phonetic writing has valuc only because it follows speech.
Derrida deconstructs such an opposition firstly by reversing the hierarchy and secondly by displacing and dislocating the system that sustains such an opposition. Derrida uises 'writing in its standard sense and 'writing' in its special sense. In its special sense writing as archewriting (“Urschrift" in German) is prior to speech and writing, is subjectless, is anonymous and leaves its traces. The archewriting is the "subjectless generator of structures". Whether they are phonemes or graphemes, "all linguistic expressions arc to a certain extent set in operation by an archewriting not itself present."98
In a certain sense Radliakrishnan's intuitionism and his Śrutivada illustrate what Derrida has characterized as phonocentrism. For example Radhakrishnan finds the concept of the logos as analogous to the Vedic Vāc. Of course, an Indian philosophical history of the concept of writing in Derrida's grammatological sense has yet to be written and till then it is difficult to say whicther the Indian philosophers have subscribed to the same implications of the hierarchichal opposition speech writing, highlighted by Derrida with reference to the Western thought.
VT
Metaphysics of Presence :
We find in Radhakrishnan's intuitionism, absolutism and mysticism a foundational metaphysics of presence. For Radhakrishnan, the gap between truth and Beng is closed in the direct apprehension of Being, Svatahsiddha Svasam vedya and Svayam-prakas'a are the terms used by Radhakrishnan which illustrate the Derridean thematics of presence. According to Radhakrishnan, Buddha, Plato, Christ, Eckhart, Blake, etc. spoke of the real not as scribes but as those who were in immediate presence of the Supreme Being, Radhakrishnan's theory of religious experience is a logocentric theory of presence,

Page #124

115
VII Texts and Readings :
S. Gopal has shown that in the context of studying the philosophical thought of the past, Radhakrishnan treated as senseless the notion of an uninterpreted text. Radhakrishuan employed creative logic of interpretation by being faithful to the spirit rather than to the letter of the text. Derrida wants to be faithful to the letter of the text as well.
According to Richard De Smet, while preparing to write Indian Philosophy, Radhakrishnan found it difficult to reconcile the faithfulness to the historical data with the subjectivity required in interpreting them. Thus, at times, he creatively enforces upon the text the interpretations which show tlieir relevance for us today. Richard illustrates this point by referring to Radhakrislinan's interpretation of the place of intuition in Sarkara's Vedānta in ihe context of srutivāda: o.
Dallmayer finds Radhakrishnan mediating between ancient texts and contemporary understandings. Radhakrishnan asks us to remember as well as to create anew. He faced the competing paradigins of thought without being a traditionalist or a sceptic. His solution to the confiicting demands of the past and present was a recourse to interpretative mediation resembling Gadamer's hermeneutics. His work shows a "creative rethinking of philosophical and religious traditions.''31
Radhakrishnan advocates an essentialist version of the unity of all religions and a foundationalist version of the spiritual Being. His convergent readings of the texts involving Gadamer's kind of "fusion of horizons", are guided by synthetic and integrative orientation.
The underlying assumption behind Radhakrishnan's creative interpretative strategy is that there is a foundational Being and that an unmediated encounter with such a Being is of the same type across all cultures and all times. Thus there is historical diversity of expressions focussing on the essential unity of experience. Such a guiding assumption itself is an independent ontological and a linguistic thesis. It constitutes a philosophy of reading and interpretation.
Christopher Norris has rightly shown that Derrida's deconstruction has the qualities of logical tautness and dialectical rigour and it does not imply unlimited hermeneutic freedom in the sense that deconstructive reading suspends the issues of truth, meaning and reference in favour of an infinitized "free play” of language devoid of logical rigour or referential grasp.s? For example, in “White Mytholygy" Derrida shows

Page #125

116
that in a philosophical text a metaphor is written in white ink and not in black ink and in a sense metaphysics is thus a white mythology but at the same time he also shows that this does not mean that there is nothing in philosophy except metaphor because the concept of metaphor itself is a philosophical product and requires to be analysed with precision.
Abrams has shown that Derrida's strategy is of deliberate double reading.33 In reading, we find the passages 'lisible and understandable. Reading, construes the meaning but Reading, goes on to disseminate the meanings already construed. Thus, readingis provisional and strategic. Abrams finds that, for Derrida, "determinate reading always leaves an inescapable and ungovernable 'excess' or surplus of signification" and this is because the writer cannot dominate absolutely the language and logic shared by him with others. Unknown to the writer, the text ungovernably goes on to say something which requires deeper deconstructive readings. Such deeper rcadings, says Abrams, reveal equivocations, rhetoricity and the logic of hiearchichal oppositions at work in the texts inspite of the authors. Reading, however does not cancel the earlier readings but reinscribes them as effects of differential play of language. Thus the meaning of the text has first to be construed in order that it can then be "disseminated into an undecidability". The new 'text generated by reading. itself becomes a victim of dissemination and self-deconstruction, According to Abrams then, construal and deconstruction i.e., double reading and double interpretation is Derrida's strategy without finality.30
It would be wrong to say that for Derrida, there are neither authors nor texts nor meanings. It would be a mistake to think that all the standard readings and the range of their interpretations are false according to Derrida. In this sense Derrida is neither a sceptic, nor a nihilist, nor a logical positivist. Derrida would agree that Radhakrishnan was the real author of Indian Philosophy and that we can in a standard sense read the relevant passages from his texts and arrive at a general consensus of determinate meaning but reading, would deconstruct the meaning construed by reading, and that is the point of Derridean readings.
Radhakrishnan employed construal and reconstruction whereas Derrida employed "construal and" deconstruction". In Radhakrishnan, the standard meaning is construed and is then linked to the context of modern times. It is not dislocated or reinscribed as it is done by Derrida. Radhakrishnan's "double readings are different from Derrida's double readings because Derrida identifies a common pattern of aporias and paradoxes in the inajor texts of Western philosophy and at a metalevel explains how the underlying logocentrism and phonocentrism shape the

Page #126

117
patterns of different texts. Radhakrishnan finds convergence among various religious and philosophical texts because he gives priority to Being over texts, whereas Derrida finds convergence among the texts not because they highlight the same underlying reality but because they share the same logocentric assumptions. The convergence that Radhakrishnan finds orregarding the notions of truch, value, meaning or reality is due to what Derrida treats as 'metaphysics of presence' Certain terms assume dominance due to logocentric approach and such dominance is reflected in various texts. Radhakrishnan would say that it is due to the common and shared intuitions or mystical experiences that certain terms acquire legitimate dominance. It is in this sense that Derrida's grammatology is different from Radhakrishnan's onology. The ineffable Being of Radhakrishnan is different from the unnameable differance of Derrida. Derrida reduces the experience of presence to the differentiated system of signs. The question uliimately is about the "textually inmediated awareness of the objects about us". Some critics of Derrida, like David Novitz ! have argued that linguistic beliefs do mediate our perception of objects, but from this it does not follow that we can never observe non-seniotic and nonlinguistic objects. Radhakrishnan would have accepted Novitz's point against Derrida.
Play for Derrida is the disruption of presence. Derrida admits that the name of man is the name of that being who throughout his history has dreamed of full presence, the reassuring foundation, the origin and the end of play.36 Radhakrishnan would have found nothing wrong with such a dream and he has already shown the possibility of such a dream being realized in certain kinds of experiences. Radhakrishnan would never have agreed to dissolve experience into differentiated expressions. Of course, it is difficult to convey the meaning of experience without language but for Radhakrishnan all the features of language can not be transferred to the nonlinguistic experience of the object and all the objects of direct perception can not be treated as tlie products of the system of semiotic differences.
Radhakrislınan would say that the experiences of beings at an ordinary level and the experiences of Being at a transcendent level have to be accepted even though we inay fail to verbalize them fully due to the nature and structure of language. In this context. Radhakrishnan finds no difficulty in harmonizing various texts in relation to the experience of Being because he allowed for the textually uninediated experience at all the levels. This does not mean that there are no difficulties in Radhakrishnan's ontology but ihe point is that he is under no pressure to justify the normal assumption that reality is external to language, whereas Derrida is required to show why presence is reduced to a disruptive play of differance and

Page #127

118
also why there is nothing outside 'iext' even in the widest sense of the term. Derrida is compelled to make a move by which the word 'text' gets extended meaning in the sense that reality itself becomes "intertextual” as a system of differences.
The Lila of the Absolute in Radhakrishnan is different from the play of difference in Derrida. The play of ontological differences express Being according to Radhakrishnan. For Derrida the play of differance is itsel concealed and repressed in the illusion of control and mastery of meaning within the metaphysics of presence.
Terry Eagleton shows that we find in Derrida a kind of libertarian pessimism; libertarian, because of the dream of existence free from the shackles of truth, meaning and sociality and pessimistic because the blocks of creativity are inherent in the procss of liberation itself. In postmodernism, there is "a cynical erasure of truth, meaning and subjectivity"36. Radhakrishnan would not have endorsed such a position. A reader of the texts of Radhakrishnan and Derrida therefore would experience conflict between restorative and disruptive effects of such texts.
Notes and References : 1. S. Gopal (1989): Radhakrishnan-A biography. Delhi, Oxford.
(p. 61) 2. Magliola R. (1984) : Derrida on the mend; Indiana; Purdue Univ.
Press. 3. Coward H. (1989); "Sankara and Derrida on philosophy of language".
Journal of Indian Council of Philosophical Research; vol, 6;
No. 3: May-August 1989 (pp-13-21). 4. Coward H. (1990): "Derrida and Bhartrhari's Vākyapadia on the
origin of language". Philosophy : East and West vol. 40 No. 1,
Jan. 1990 (pp 3-16). 5. An Idealist View of Life : London; George Allen and Unwin Ltd.
(p. 343) 6. Dallamayer F. (1989) "On Being and existence-A Western View” In,
Radhakrishnan : Centenary Volume Delhi; Oxford Univ. Press. 7. Derrida on the mend. (pp 22-24.) 8. Derrida J. (1982) Margins of Philosophy : Harvester Press, (p. 11). 9. Ibid; p. 11. 10. Anderson J. (1989) "Deconstruction. critical strategy, strategic criti
cisni". In Atkins and Morrow (Eds); Contemporary Literary Theory
Macinillan. (p. 140). 11. Ibid; p. 142.

Page #128

119
12. Habermas Jurgen (1985; 1987) The philosophical discourse of
modernity, (p. 180) M.I.T. Press. 13. Ibid (174, 175). 14. "Mysticism and Transgression : Derrida and Meister Eckhart" In. H.
Silverman (ed) Derrida and Deconstruction. New York: Routledge
p. 29. 15. An Idealist View of Life. 16. Ibid, p. 145. 17. Leonard Orr; (1989) "The Post-Turn Turn; Derrida, Gadamer and the
remystification of language". In, Deconstruction; a Critique; (ed)
Rajnath : London Macmillan. (p. 207) 18. Margins of Philosophy; (p. 26) 19. Ibid. p. 22. 20. The philosophical discourse of modernity. p. 406. 21. Ibid, p. 183. 22. Writing and Difference. (1978), London Routledge : p. 10. 23. Derrida on the mend. p. 57. 24. Sivraman K (1989), "Knowledge and experience in mystical spiritua
lity". In, Parthasarthy and Chattopadhyaya (Eds) Radhakrishnan :
Centenary Volume. (192-203). 25. Margins of Philosophy p. 27. 26. Abrams M.H. (1989) "Construing and deconstructing", In Decon
struction-A Critique. (p. 36). 27. Derrida on the mend. p. 90. 28. The philosophical discourse of modernity. p. 180. 29. Radhakrishnan : A biography. p. 61. 30. Radhakrishnan : Centenary Volume. (pp. 53-70) 31. Ibid; pp. 217-245. 32. Christopher Norris (1985) Contest of Faculties : Philosophy and
theory after deconstruction. London. Metheun. (pp. 226-27). 33. Deconstruction-A Critique, (pp. 40-49). 34. The Monist Vol. 2, 1986. 35. Writing and Difference. p. 292. 36. Eagleton T (1990) The Ideology of the Aesthetic, Oxford; Basic
Blackwell. (373, 387)
[Shri Prashant Dave and Dr. Harivallabh Bhayani secured some books on Derrida and Deconstruction for me. Miss Achinta Yajnik has been kind enough to spare for me the copies of the very important papers by Coward. Dr. Upendra Baxi's personal collection of books on deconstruction and postmodernism at Delhi has also proved to be extremely useful to me. I am highly thankful to all of them for their kind help to me).

Page #129

DR. RADHAKRISHNAN ON BUDDHISM : A GLANCE
S. G. Kantawala
India is a land of diverse religious faiths and creeds expounding various paths to reach the Ultimate as per the diversity of tastes. Buddhism is one of the religions that has its origin in India and spread from India and its slow disappearance in India and spread over the neighbouring countries. In its growth and development with its catholic and absorbent character Hinduism has included Buddha in its list of "ten incarnations" (dašūvatāras). Buddhism has not only left its impact on the vedānta philosophy, but it "has left a permanent mark on the culture of India",
Several scholars have written on Buddha and Buddhism and the literature thereon is still growing. Amongst the celebrated writers thereon is Sarvapalli Radhakrishnan (=SR) (1888 A.D.-1975 A.D.). He was an illustrious scholar-statesman, diplomat, politician, educationist and an "academical philosopher." and as such he is "the most widely known philosopher."+ Of all the contemporary philosophers of modern India. The world owes to him many standard works on religion and philosophy and *4here are very few scholars like luim who grasped the spirit of the Eastern and Western thought alike."
As there is a plethora of literature on Buddhist religion and philosophy, we do not repeat the tenets and teachings of Buddhist religion and philosophy, but it is proposed, here, to evaluate the exposition of the Buddhist religion and philosophy by SR. He has referred to and discussed the Buddhist philosophy and religion in his various works which make an interesting and informative reading; but in this paper references are restricted to his (i) Indian Philosophy, vol. I, (=IP) London, 1956; (ii) Gautama, the Buddha (Proceedings of the British Academy Vol. XXIV), which is his “Annual Lecture" on a "Master Mind" delivered on 28 June, 1938. It is reprinted in his edition of the "Dhammapada" (EDP) (OUP, 1950) and (iii) Dhammapada (DP) (OUP, 1950).
For ready reference it inay be noted that he discusses the Buddhist religion and philosophy in two chapters of the IP, viz. (i) Chapter VII : Ethical Idealism of Early Buddhism, pp. 341 ff. and (ii) Chapter X: Buddhism as a Religion, pp. 581 ff. The "Appendix" (pp. 671 ff) in the IP discusses also some problems of Buddhism. The foot-notes in the respective chapters and the Appendix are learned, comparative and critical and this aspect is enhanced by "References" at the end of respective chapters. SR has "tried to keep in close touch with the documents, give

Page #130

121
wherever possible a preliminary survey of the conditions that brought them into being and estimate their indebtedness to the past as well as their contribution to the progress of thought.” (IP, Preface, p. 9).
SR is a renowned historian of philosophy and he brings out lucidly the role, function and duty to be played by a historian of philosophy in the following para :
“The historian of philosophy must approach his task not as a mere philologist or even as a scholar, but as a philosopher who uses his scholarship as an instrument to wrest from words the thoughts that underlie them. A mere linguist regards the views of ancient Indian thinkers as many fossils lying scattered throughout upheaved and faulty strata of the history of philosophy, and from his point of view any interpretation which makes them alive and significant is dismissed as farfetched and untrue. A philosopher on the other hand realises the value of the ancient Indian theories which attempt to grapple with the perenial problems of life and treats them not as fossils, but as species which are remarkably persistent... It is the task of creative logic, as distinct from mere linguistic analysis to piece together the scattered data, interpret for us the life they harbour and thus free the soul from the body. Collection of facts and the accumulation of evidence are an important, but only a part, of the task of historian who attempts to record the manifold adventures of the human spirit. He must pay great attention to the logic of ideas, draw inferences, suggest explanations and formulate theories which would introduce some order into the shapeless mass of unrelated facts. If the history of philosophy is to be more than a bare catalogue of facts about dead authors and their writings, if it is to educate the mind and enthral the imagination, the historian should be a critic and an interpreter and not a mere mechanical "ragpicker" (IP. 6 pp. 71-672)
"Indian Philosophy" (Vol. I and Vol. II) is his magnum opus wherein he successfully rises to fulfil and abide by the norms laid down by him for a historian of philosophy; he is also "convinced that we must interpret thinkers at their best and not at their worst.” It i.e. "Indian Philosophy" is not "a barc presentation of categories and arguments of systems discussed”? and these remarks apply happily mutatis mutandis to his treatment of Buddhism. At this juncture it is significant to note that he "so easily identifies himself with the stand-point of the system he is presenting that concepts become fluid and their connections become natural.”
SR lays down that a writer should be evaluated in the context of times, and climes in which he flourished, when he observes that "to know what Buddha actually taught or what his earliest followers thought he did, we

Page #131

122
must place ourselves in imagination in the India of the sixth century B.C." (DP, Introduction, p. 26) and he makes his statement effective and forceful by a generalised corroborative statement, viz: "thinkers like other people are in no small measure rooted in time and place. The form in which they cast their ideas, no less than the ways in which they behave, are largely moulded by the habits of thought and action which they find around them. Great minds make individual contribution of permanent value to the thought of their age in which they live........ They do not cease to belong to their age, even when they are rising most above it." (DP, Introduction, p. 26). The latter part of this observation reminds one of what Hillabrandt said in the context of the Rgvedic poets, viz. "they stood above, but not outside the people.""
Apropos of the methodology and approach suggested by SR as in the above cited para, it may be observed from a literary point of view that he is fond of using the figure of speech Arthantaranyasa according to Sanskrit rhetorics, 10 according to which a particular statement is corroborated by a general statement and vice versa by similarity or dissimilarity.
The abovegoing prefatory remarks of SR show his sympathetic and appreciative approach. This is further confirmed, when he observes that "he (i.e. Buddha, bracket ours) suffered as much as any one from critics without a sense of history". (DP., Introduction, p. 26).
He speaks also very highly of the DP by pointing out that it "is the most popular and influential book of Buddhist cannonical literature" (DP, Preface, and it has appeal to the modern mind, as "the central thesis of the book" is "that human conduct, righteons behaviour, reflection and meditation are more important than vain speculations about the transcendent. (DP, Preface. p.V) He, further, observes that "its teaching-to repress instincts entirely is to generate neuroses" to give them full rein is also to end up in neuroses is supported by modern psychology." (DP, Preface, p.V). How mildy and aptly SR brings out a modern relevant parallel !
SR is an Advaitin in his own way, but he possesses a spirit of tolerance, catholicity and sympathy. And this magnanimity of thinking and love coupled with critical accumen for one of the founder-philosophers of India is noticeable in his Selection of "Gautama the Buddha" as the theme of his "Annual Lecture on the 'Master Mind" under the auspices of the Henriette Hertz Trust. "He pays a rich tribute to Gautama, the Buddha, by pointing out that in" Gautama, the Buddha we have a master mind from the east, second to none, so far as the influence on the thought and life of the human race is concerned and sacred to all as the founder of

Page #132

123
a religious tradition wliose hold is hardly less wide and deep than any other. He belongs to the history of world's thought, to the general inheritance of all cultivated men, for judged by intellectual integrity, moral earnestness and spiritual insight, he is undoubledly one of the greatest figures in luistory." (Gautama the Buddha, reprinted from the Proceedings. of the British Academy, Vol. XXIV, London, 1938, p. 3; vide also DP, Introduction, p. 3).
SR is fair, appreciative and comparative in his exposition and evaluation of Buddhism. He is fair and appreciative, when he remarks that? "there is no question that the system of Buddhism is one of the most original which the history of philosophy presents. In its fuudamental ideas and essential spirit it approximates remarkably to the advanced scientific thought of the nineteenth century. The modern pessimistic philosophy of Germany, that of Schopenhauer and Hartman is only a revised version of ancient Buddhism." (IP, p. 342).
One of the remarkable and outstanding features of SR's writing is lucidity and perspicuity and this may be illustrated by his observation in the context of "Buddha and the Upanişads" :
"Buddha himself admits that the dharma which he has discovered by an effort of self-culture is the ancient way, the Aryan path, the eternal dharma. Buddha is not so much creating a new dharma as rediscussing a new norm. It is the venerable tradition that is being adapted to meet the special neds of the age". (IP. p. 360) Elsewhere he remarks, that he has "attempted" to make out the account of early Buddhism, and it is "only a restatement of the thought of the Upanişads with new emplasis". (IP; Appendix, p. 676). Note how cleverly and lucidly he experesses his opinion in the matter of contribution and indebtedness of Gautama, the Buddha to Upanişads. That how he is dispassionate in his exposition and evaluation may be illustrated with his following remark". Buddha was struck by the clashing enthusiasms, the discordant systems, the ebb and flow of belief and drew from it all his lesson of the futility of metaphysical thinking. Anarchy in thought was leading to anarchy in morals. Therefore Buddha wished to steer clear of profitless metaphysical dimensions. Whatever metaphysics we have in Buddhism is not the original Dhamma, but added to it (abhidamma), Buddhifm is essentially psychology, logic and ethics, not metaphysics" (IP. p. 353).
Every writer/crittc has his/her own way of criticisin and SR has his own distinct way. He can be charming and sweetly blunt, when necessary. And he appears to be so, when he refers to Hermann Oldenberg, while dealing with the concept ot nirvāņa. He (i.e. SR) observes: "Were

Page #133

124
Oldenberg correct, then nirvānā would be annihilation, which Buddha repudiates." (IP. p. 886). 18
One of the features of SR's style is that he states his views and proceeds to quote, without any prefatonry remarks sometimes, other writers. To illustrate, In the context of "Buddhism and the Upanişads" he writes that "the only metaphysics that justify Buddha's ethical discipline is the metaphysics underlying the Upanişads. Buddhism is only a later phase of the general movement of thought of which the Upanişads were the earlier," (IP. p. 470) and he proceeds immediately then afer the abovequoted remark, without any prefatory remark, to quote MaxMüller, (SBE, Vol. XV Introduction, p. xxxvii; vide Ip. p. 470, fn. 1) who observes : “Many of the doctrines of the Upanişads are no doubt pure Buddhism, or rather Buddhism is on many points the Consistent carrying out of the principle laid down in the Upanişads” (IP. p. 470) and then he (i.e. SR) comments that “ Buddha did not look upon himself as an innovator, but only a restorer of the ancient way i.e. the way of the Upanişads” (IP. p. 470). He has leaning towards Upanişads, but "he is quite quick to see the positive elements in other systems and he gives something refreshingly new in heterodox systems."14
His criticism in constructive, appreciative and sympathetic also. These features are noticeable, when he states that "Buddhism helped to demorcratise the philosophy of the Upanişads, which was till then confined to a select few... It was Buddha's mission to accept the idealism of the Upanişads at its best and make it available for the daily needs of mankind. Historical Buddhism means the spread of Upanişad-doctrines among the people". (IP. p. 471).
He is equally dispassionate, critical and magnanimous, unprejudicial and unscathing, when he proceeds to state the defects of Buddhism, viz, "the central defect of Buddha's teaching is that in liis etlical earnostness he took up and magnified one half of the truth and made it look as if it were the whole. His distate for metaphysics prevented him from seeing that the partial truth had a necessary complement and rested on principles which carried it beyond its imposed limits.". (IP. p. 471; for inadequacies in Buddha's thought vide DP, Introduction, pp. 56-57).
Sometimes his remarks/observations are very brief, beautiful and pregrant with meaning, erg. "Dislike for mere speculation is the distinguishing mark of the Buddha's teaching. (DP, Introduction, p, 23). How lacomically and aptly SR brings out an important feature of Buddha's teaching !
Citations of parallels are not restricted only to the body of the text; but they also occur in footnotes, from Brahmanical literature as well as

Page #134

125
from Western thought, as and when necessary. This tends to make the point under consideration clear and also tends to suggest how East and West have some common thoughts; for example, while discussing Buddha's discourse on fire to indcate the ceaseless fluss of becoming called the world, SR ciles a parallel from Heraclitus viz. "this world an eternally living fire" and proceeds to comment: "Buddha and Heraclitus both use fire, the most mutable of the elements to represent the metaphysical principle of becoming", (IP. p. 638, fn. 1). He quotes also from shelley, the following lines :
"Worlds on worlds are rolling ever,
From creation to decay,
Like the bubbles on a river,
Spankling, bursting, borne away" (IP, p. 368).10
15
Elsewhere in the context of the current of otherworldiness in John the Baptist, Jesus and paul SR notes that "the moral teaching of Jesus with its ascefic and otherworldly emphasis has been anticipated several hundred years by Upanisads and Buddha". [Eastern Religions and Western thought (=ERWT), Oxford, 1939, p. 173] and proceeds to quote from T. W. Rhys Davids, 16
Elsewhere while drawing a parallel between Jesus and Buddha he appreciatively writes: "Just as Buddha condemns the gloomy ascetic practices, which prevailed in ancient India, Jesus goes beyond John, the Baptist's emphasis on observances and ascetic rites. Even Buddha condemns ceremonial religion emphasing Baptism, Jesus insists less on sacraments and more on the opening of oneself." (ERWT, p.180). 17
From the literary point of view it may be observed that "in him we have a combination of style and scholarship..... In all that he (i.e. SR, bracket ours) writes is marked by elegance of literary form. His felicity of expression is amazing. He can be numbored amongst the greatest stylists in the history of philosophy and can be classed along with Schelling, Schopenhauer and Bergson-among those who have raised philosophic prose to the level of creative literature...... He endows his sentences with vitality that the frozen fossils of long forgotten ideas burst forth into new life."18 The use of significant objectives and proverblike general statements tend to enhance the vitality; mark the significant adjective "workable" in" The Buddha gives a workable system for monks and lay people." (DP, Introduction, p. 22); note proverblike remark: "it is those who do not see the truth that strike in the path of fiction." (IP., p. 353).
Finally, it may be said that his beautiful, elegant, flowing and lucid style coupled with transparent ideas, constructive and interpretative,

Page #135

126
magnanimgus and balanced approach and cricicism 19 and loyalty to original sources make his treatment of Buddhism live and enchanting. Being "a constructive philosopher of the first rank"?0 he keeps the reader spellbound with the magic of his forceful and lucid language and literary exposition and justice to the subject. In the end one would like to say : tasmai Buddhaya”namo namaḥ !
Reference Notes
1. Cf rucinām vaicitryādījukuţilanānā pathajuşām, nīņām eko gamyah tvam asi payasām arņava iva.//
Puspadanta, Śivamahimnastotra. 7. 2. Radhakrishnan S, IP, p. 608. 3. For a brief lifeskehla and philosophy of S. Radhakrishnan, vide e.g.
Raju P.T., Idealistic thought of India, London, 1953, Chapter VII; Mahadevan T.M.P. and Saroja G. V., Contemporary Indian Philosophy, New Delhi, 1983, Chapter VIII; Narawane V.S., Modern Indian Thought:
A Philosophical Survery, Bombay 1967, Chapter VIII. 4. Raju P.T., op. cit., p. 331. 5. Raju P.T., op. cit., p. 331. 6. Narawane V. S., op. cit., p. 242; vide also Fragments of a Confession
(Tudor, p. 13) as referred to in ibid, p. 242. 7. Raju P.T., op. cit., p. 333 8. Raju P.T., op. cit., p. 333. 9. Quoted by M. Winternitz in his "A History of sndian Literature"
Vol J, p. 79. (Calcutta, 1927). 10. Cf sämänyam vā višeso tad anyena samarthyate yatra so'rthāntaranyāsaḥ sådharmyenetareņa vāl/
Mammața, Kāvyaprakāşa 10.23. 11. It was read on 29 June, 1938. 12. The fn. 3 on p. 353 of the IP reads "abhi, beyond; dhamma,
physics, Medhamnas are analysed in Abhidhamma." 13. SR. on nirvāṇa vide IP, pp. 447 ff; DP, pp. 46 st 14. Narawane V.S; op.cit, p. 236.

Page #136

127
15.
16.
17.
Shelley, Heuas, A Lyrical Drama Composed in 1821 A.D. and published in 1822 A.D.), Chorus of Captive Greek Women, Lines 197-200. My thanks are due to Dr. C.K. Seshadri, Professor & Head, Department of English, Faculty of Arts, M.S. University of Baroda, Baroda, for tracing this reference. Rhys Davids, Journal of the Pali Text Society, 1923, pp. 43-44 as quoted in IP, p-174, fn. 1. Cf. also "Reverence shown to the righteous is better than sacrifice." (Mark 1.15). One may compre here the DP 108 which says," Homage paid to the righteous is better.” (abhi vādanā ujjugatesu seyyo/). “I am not of the world” says Jesus according to John. (vide John xvii 14-16) and Buddha says "Monks even as a blue lotus, a waterrose or a white lotus, is born in the water, grous up in the water and stands lifted above it, by the water undefiled; even so, monks, does the Tathāgata, grow in the world by the undefiled" (Sainyutta Nikaya xxii 94; vide ERWT, p. 180 fns 3,5 & 6) (for comparative remarks vide ERWT, pp. 177 ff.) It is interesting to compare here the thought in the Bhagavadgitā (5.10): padmapatram ivāmbhasi. Narawane V.S., op. cit; p, 231. Reference may also be made here to SR's lucid and striking similes and vivid and colourful pen-pictures available in his writings. Cf. "Unless he begins to criticise the system, the reader takes the author to be presenting his own views." (Raju P.T., op. cit, p. 333) Narawane V.S., op. cit., p. 238. Buddha-Gautama Buddha; paranomistically it refers to SR (buddha, wise, learned, enlightened)
18.
19.
20.
21.

Page #137

9
COMPATIBILITY OF RADHAKRISHNAN'S METAPHYSICS WITH HIS EPISTEMOLOGY AND ETHICS
-Dr. J. A. Yajnik
This paper humbly attempts to do some excercise in creative and constructive thinking directed at resolution of some basic philosophical conflicts within the philosophical system of Radhakrishnan. Resolution of philosophical and cultural conflicts has remained a chief concern of Radhakrishnan's voluminous writings. The paper, therefore, can be treated as a small step in the very direction which has been suggested with missionary. zeal by Radhakrishnan himself. This being so, the author has gret pleasure. in presenting this paper as a tribute to our great philosopher: Radhkrishnan.
Radhakrishnan's Epistemological Realism
Radhakrishnan's epistemology is essentially realistic. It stands for the view that knowledge to be knowledge must be revelatory of reolity. Radhakrishnan has written in unambiguous terms that "It so far as our minds are not creative of reality but only receptive of it, we must get into cotact with reality, outward by perception, inward by intuition, and by means of intellect interpret and understand it."1
This means that Radhakrishnan's epistemology is very clearly realistic. As Radhakrishnan has advocated epistemological realism, he is certainly not idealist in the sense in which Berkeley and Hegel are idealists. In order to properly understand and evaluate Radhakrishnan's philhsophy, this point needs to be specially emphasised, especially in the light of the fact that Radhakrishnaa has been known and recognized as idealist philosopher. He himself has propounded his philosophical position in his Hibbert. Lectures as "An Idealist View of Life."
Explaining the peculier nature of Radhakrishnan's idealism D. M. Datta has observed that, "His idealism, moreover, is not idea-ism but ideal-ism. It is the presentation of an ideal that can harmonize the flesh with the soul, individuals with individuals, nations with nations. Like Eucken he is a philosopher of life." If Radhakrishnan's philosphy is "not idea-ism," it has to be realism. However, even D. M. Datta has not clarified this point.

Page #138

129
Hartshornc has also left the point at the same level in his observation that "Our author (Radhakrishnan) scems to leave the incaning of "Idealism" somewhat obscure. He does not altogether approve of whitehead's complete translation of physical concepts into terms of "feeling", "satisfaction," "prehension," and the like. He also seems to reject anything like the Berkeleyan type of subjectivism. Yet I, at least, am not able to discern any third possibility for idealism......Also I wonder whether any way of conceiving idealism other than as panpsychism is not more "confusing' rather than less."'3
It will be clear in the sequel that Radhakrishnan's idealism which has been rightly described by Hartshorne as 'confusing', is itself realism in ethics and metaphysics. It is one of the chief contentions of this paper that on account of its strong realistic bias, Radhakrishnan's position is more akin to that of Aristotle and st. Thomas Aquinas than that of Plato and Hegel.
Radhakrishnan has recognized three ways of acquring knowledge. "while all varieties of cognitive experience result in a knowledge of the real, it is produced in three ways which are sense-experience, discursive reasoning and intuitive apprehension."
Explaining the nature and importance of the first two sources of knowledge in thoroughly realistic terms, Radhakrishnan has written : “Sense experience helps us to know the outer characters of the external world. By means of it we obtain an acquaintance with the sensible qualities of the objects. Its data are the subject matter of natural science which builds up conceptual structure to describe them.
Logical knowledge is obtained by the processes of analysis aad synthesis. The data supplied to us by perception are analysed and the result of the analysis yield a more systematic knowledge of the object perceived. This logical or conceptual knowledge is indirect and symbolic in its character. It helps us to handle and control the object and its working."5
It will be seen that Radhakrishnan's description of sense-experience and logical knowledge presuppose the realistic distinction between subject (jnata) and object (jneya). The object is there existing independently of the subject. It is capable of being known by the subject directly through sense experience and indirectly through discursive reasoning.
Radbakrishnan's description of intuitive apprehension is equally realistic : “There is knowledge which is different from the conceptual, a knowledge by
17

Page #139

130
which we see things as they are, as unique individuals and not as members of class or units in a crowd. It is non-sensuous, immediate knowledge. Sense knowledge is not the only kind of immediate knowledge. As distinct from sense knowledge or pratyaksa (literally presented to a sense), the Hindu thinkers use the term aparoksa for the non-sensuous immediate knowledge. This intuitive knowledge arises from an intimate fusion of mind with reality. It is knowledge by being and not by senses or by symbols.. It is awareness of the truth of things by identity."6
Radhakrishnan's reference to identity of subject and object is likely to blur the realistic distinction between the knower and the known. It, therefore, needs to be made clear here that according to Radhakrishnan, "Knowledge is an intense and close communion between the knower and the known."7 The communion between knower and known is so very intense and close in intuitive knowledge that the knower's attention gets fully absorbed in the known. Thus knowledge by identity' is not to be understood as implying the denial of the ontological identity of either the subject or the object of knowledge.
Radhakrishuan himself has closed all doors for idealistic interpretation of intuitive knowledge by the following observations:
(i) "There is the controlling power of reality in intuitive apprehension quite as much as in perceptual acts or reflective thought. The objects of intuition are recognized and not created by us. They are not produced by the act of apprehension itself."'8
(ii) "The reality of the object is what distinguishes intuitive knowledge from mere imagination. Just as in the common perception of finite things we become directly and inevitably aware of something which has its own definite nature which we cannot alter by our desires or imagination, even so intuitive consciousness apprehends real things which are not open to the senses. Even as there is something which is not imagined by us in our simplest perceptions and yet makes our knowledge possible, even so we have in our intuitions a real which controls our apprehension. It is not fancy or make-believe, but a bona fide discovery of reality. We can see not only with the eyes of the body but with those of our souls. Things unseen become as evident to the light in the souls as things seen to the physical eye. Intuition is the extension of perception to regions beyond sense."9
(iii) "The validity of divine existence is not founded on anything external. or accidental but is felt by the spirit in us. The Ontological argument

Page #140

131
is a report of experience. We cannot have certain ideas without having had the experience of the objects of which they are the ideas. In such cases it is not illegitiinate to pass from the ideas to the objects referred to by them. We should not have had an idea of absolute reality if we had never been in inmediate cognitive relation with it, if we had not been intuitively conscious of it. The proof of the existence is founded on the experience."10
The realistic colour of Radhakrishuan's epistemology will be more clearly and brightly seen in the light of the fact that Radhakrishnan.is neither a rationalist like either Plato or Hegel nor a transcendentalist like either Gaudapāda or S'amkarācārya. Unlike Plato and Hegel, he regards sense experience as genuine knowledge. And unlike Gaudapāda and sainkarācārya he fully admits the reality of empirical world known through sense and reason. Unlike these philosopheres, Radhakrishnan has not created an unbridgeable gulf either between sense and reason or between reason and intuition. He has rather advocated the view that there is a continuous development from sense perception to the vision of the real."11
He, therefore, regards it as "unfortunate that insistence on intuition is often confused with anti-intellectualism. Intuition which ignores intellect is useless. The two are not only not incompatible but vitally united."12
Growth in knowledge, for Radhakrishnan, always means enrichment and correction in knowledge and not the denial of the object genuinely known by any of the three ways of knowing. While explaining the nature of integral insight, Radhakrishnan has indicated this in the following words :
“The different energies of the human soul are not cut off from one another by any impassable barriers. They flow into each other, modify, support and control each other. The Sanskrit expression “samyagdarśana" or integral insight, brings out how far away it is from occult visions, trance and ecstacy."13
We thus see that Radhakrishnan's epistemology is neither mere sensationalism, nor mere rationalism, nor mere mysticism but an organically conceived federation of all the three. This can happen if, and only if, Radhakrishnan's epistemology is out and out realistic. Yet this has hardly been brought into fore-front by scholars who have worked on Radhakrishnan. Hence the justification of our effort in this paper.
Radhakrishnan's Ethical objectivism
Radhakrishnan's realism which remains partly obscure in his episte

Page #141

132
mology and metaphysics expresses itself most clearly in his ethical theory as ethical objectivism. In fact, Radhakrishnan's idealism is nothing more and nothing less than his theory concerning objective reality of ethical ideals and spiritual values. According to Radhakrishnan, because spiritual values are constitutive of ultimate Reality, they appeal to us as ideals to be realized by our ethical or spiritual endeavours.
Unlike Radhakrishnan's epistemological realism, his ethical objectivism is not a theory left to be clearly worked out by us. Radhakrishnan himself has stated and argued for ethical objectivism in absolutely clear terms. We are, therefore, not required here to do anything more than to give some citations from Radhakrishnan which constitute the statement and argument for his ethical objectivism. Many such citations are spread over the pages in different books by Radhakrishnan. The following are considered as sufficient for our purpose:
"Any serious pursuit of ideas, any search after conviction, any adventure after virtue, arises from resources whose name is religion. The search of the mind for beauty, goodness and truth is the search for God...To do justly, to love beauty and to walk humbly with the spirit of truth is the highest religion." 14
"Truth, beauty and goodness are not subjective fancies but objective facts. They are not only ultimate values included in the purpose of the world but supreme realities. Their objectivity and sovereignty are sometimes brought out by calling them attributes of God."15
"The principles which we have to observe in our daily life and social relations are constituted by what is called dharma. It is truth's embodiment in life, and power to refashion our nature."1 6
"The rules of dharma are the mortal flesh of immortal ideas."17
Religious consciousness is not reducible to either intellectual or ethical or aesthetic activity or a sum of these. If it is an autonomous form of spiritual life which, while including these elements, yet transcends them."18
"Truth, beauty and goodness cease to be the supreme realities and become a part of the being and essence of God. From the eternal values we pass to a supporting mind in which they dwell. They thus acquire an objectivity and are not simply dependent on our individual minds."19
"As creator and saviour, God is transcendent to the true process, even as realisation is transcendent to progress. This internal transcendence of

Page #142

133
God to the true process gives meaning to the distinctions of value, and makes struggle and effort real."20
"Moral enthusiasın is possible only if our motive includes the expectation of being able to contribute to the achievement of moral ideas.......We cannot help asking ourselves whether our ideals are mere private dreams of our own or bonds created by society, or even aspirations characteristic of the human specics. Only a philosophy which affirms that they are rooted in the universal nature of things can give depth and fervour to moral life.... If ethical thought is profound, it will give a cosmic motive to morality. Moral consciousness must include a conviction of the reality of ideals."21
"It may be argued that, although the universe may have 110 purpose, itenis in the universe such as pations and individuals may have their purposes..... This cannot be regarded as a satisfactory goal of ethics..... We long for a good which is never left behind and never superseded."22
"Dharma or virtue is conformity with the truth of things; Moral evil is disharmony with the truth which encompasses and controls the world."23
"There are certain vital values of religion which are met by the character of God as wisdom, love and goodness. Values acquire a cosmic importance and ethical life becomes meaningful." 24
"The highest order of being called spirit which is mind illumined by the ideas of truth, goodness and beauty is rooted in human intelligence and grows from it. The universe attempts to realize these ideas and cannot be understood except in the light of them. They are not only the goal of the
universe in the temporal sense but are the timeless principles in the light of which alone the universe becomes intelligible."25
We Shall conclude our expositon of Radhakrishnan's ethical objectivism with an observation made by C. E. M. Joad :
“Every word that he (Radhakrishnan] writes on ethical questions presupposes this intimate relation between ethics and religion, presupposes, indeed, as its basic assumption, the spiritual view of the universe, the spiritual nature of man and the concept of God as indwelling in man,... If this assumption be not granted, the ethical philosophy of [Radhakrishnan] ...is without foundation." 26
Radhakrishnau's Metaphysical Absolutism
Metaphysical absolutism of Radhakrishnan is a peculiar variety of a metaphysical theory partly based on his knowledge and understanding of the

Page #143

134
metaphysical positions of classical philosophers like Shankaracharya, Ramanujacharya, Plato and Aristotle, as well as contemporary philosophers like Bradley, Alexander, Bergson and Whitehead. In the light of Radhakrishnan's own vision and convictions, he has received glimpses of truth from these philosophers and attempted to accommodate them in his metaphysical theory, io use C. A. Moore's words, "by virtue of his veritable genius for synthesis."27 In this respect Radhakrishnan has been rightly described by C. A. Moore as "the Thomas Aquinas of the modern age with his remarkable ability and determination to see things in their comprehensive entirety and thus to eleminate the sharp distinctions which to the narrow and smaller mind serve as the basis for isolation and even contradiction of the several cultures and philosophical traditions." 28
Metaplıysical Absolutism of Radhakrishnan accepts Absolute as only unconditional ultimate reality and conceives it in such a way that the tattatraya (Jiva, Jagata and Is'vara) become only contingent items in the totality of the Absolute. This may seem surprisingly very unfortunate, especially in the light of Radhakrishnan's sincere concern and impressive endeavours to work out a comprehensive philosophical system. Yet, this is the fact to be reckoned with, as it will be evident from the following outline of Radhakrishnan's Absolutism :
According to Radhakrishnan, "God is the timeless spirit attempting to realise timeless values on the plane of time. The ideal of the cosmic process which at the same time is its goal and explanation is real in one sense though wanting to be realised in another. The ideal is the greatest fact in one way and a remote possibility in another. The values which cosmic process is attempting to achieve are only a few of the possibilities contained in the Absolute. God is the definitisation of the Absolute in reference to the values of the world."29
Explaining further the distinction and relationship between the Absolute and God, Radhakrishnan has written that “the way in which the relation between the Absolute and God is here indicated is not the same as that of Šamkara or of Bradley, though it has apparent similarities to their doctrines. While the Absolute is the transcendent divine, God is the cosmic divine. While the Absolute is the total reality, God is the Absolute from the cosmic end, the consciousness that informs and sustains the world. God is, so to say, the genius of this world, its ground, which as a thought or a possibility of the Absolute lies beyond the world in the universal consciousness of the Absolute. The possibilities or the ideal forms are the mind of the Absolute or the thoughts of the Absolute. One of the infinite

Page #144

135
possibilities is being translated into the world of space cond time. Even as the world is a definite manifestation of one specific possibility of the Absolute, God with whom the worshipper stands in personal relation is the very Absolute in the world context and is not a nere appearance of the Absolute."30
Radhakrishnan's views concerning interrelationship and destiny of tattvatraya will be clear by going through the following passages :
"God can only be a creative personality acting on an environment, which, though dependent on God, is not God. Though the acting of God is not forced on Him from without, still it is limited by the activities of human individuals. The personality of God is possible only with reference to a world with its imperfections and capacity for progress. In other words, the being of a personal God is dependent on the existence of a created order. God depends on creation even as creation depends on God."31
"At the beginning, God is merely the knower rith ideas and plans, which are realised at the end when the world becomes the express image of God. The difference between the beginnig and the end is analogous to the difference between the "I" and the "mc." The "me" becomes un adequate representation of the "T" at the end. All things move towards the creator. When the creator and the created coinside, God lapses into the Absolute. Being in a sense which both attracts and cludes our thought is the ideal goal of becoming. In attaining this goal, becoming fulfils its destiny and ceases to be."32
"God is the Absolute with reference to this possibility of which He is the source and creator. Yet at any moment God transcends the cosmic process with its whole contents of space and time. He transcends thic order of nature and History until His being is fully manifested. When that moment arises, the world beconies flesh and the whole world is saved and the historical process terminates. Until then, God is partly in potentia, partly in act. This view is not pantheistic for the cosmic process is not a complete manifestation of the Absolute." 3 3
So far we have tried to understand the Absolute and God from the point of view of tattvatraya. If tattvat raya is considered fron the point of view of the Absolute, then what Radhakrishnan has to say is the following:
"The question of immanence and transcendence does not arise with reference to the Absolute. For immanence implies the existence of an other in which the Absolute is immanent. But the Absolute represents the totality

Page #145

136
of being and there is nothing other than it. The Absolute is in this world in the sense that the world is only an actualisation of one possibility of the Absolute and yet there is much in the Absolute beyond this possibility which is in process of realisation."34
"So far as the Absolute is concerned, the creation of the world makes no difference to it. It cannot add anything to or take away anything from the Absolute. All the sources of its being are found within itself. The world of change does not disturb the perfection of the Absolute. "Though suns and universes would cease to be, Every existence would exist in thee" (Emily Bronte). We cannot say that the world follows from the nature of the Absolute cven as the conclusion of the syllogism follows from the premises, as Spinoza would have us believe. The Absolute is the ground of the world only in the sense that a possibility of the Absolute is the logical prius of the world. The world would not be but for this possibility in the Absolute.
As to why this possibility arose and not any other, we have to answer that it is an expression of the freedom of the Absolute. It is not even necessary for the Absolute to express any of its possibilities. If this possibility is expressed, it is a free act of the Absolute. Hindu writers are inclined to look upon the act of creation more as the work of an artist than that of an artisan. It is lila or free play. The world is the work of an artist whose works are worlds. His fertility is endless. S'amkara says that the world originates from the supreme without effort (faprayatnenaiva). on the analogy of sport (lilāryāyan 7), like human breath (puurilşanihs'vāsavat).”35
A little reflection on the above outline of Radhakrishnan's metaphysical Absolutism makes it clear that the tlieory is incompatible with his realistic episteniology and objectivistic ethics. The following are the chief points leading to this conclusion :
(i) As the possibilities of the Absolute are described as "the thoughts of the Absolute" and as "God is merely knower with ideas and plans," the evolution of the world can not logically and metaphysically contain any thing which is genuinely material and capable of being known by senses. This means that the ontological status of the material world and epistemological status of the sense experience of the external world lose their metaphysical foundation. This clearly means that Radhakrishnan's epistemological realism is incompatible with his metaphysical absolutism which turns out to be a form of nothing other than Absolute Idealism.

Page #146

137
It is hardly necessary to clarify that liere the term "idealism' clearly means 'idea-ism.'
(ii) We are told that "of the infinite possibilities,” it is only “one specific possibility of the Absolute" which has been manifested as the world. How do we come to know about the infinite possibilities or thoughts of the Absolute, we do not know. No amount of südhana can lead us to this knowledge because we are part of the world which is destined with God to lapse "into the Absolute.” At no moment, including this last moment, "the world of change" can "distrub the perfection of the Absolute." Thus the Absolute in its perfection and infinitude remains always unknowable to us. From the standpoint of realism, even the Absolute does not know itself because the realistic distinction between the knower and the known is not admitted in case of the Absolute. Thus a kind of agnosticism for all knowers is inescapable in Radhakrishnan's Absolutism. The same is the case with subjectivism because the world evolves from and merges into the Absolute just as one of its possibilities which are not other than 'ideal forms' or thoughts. Thus the world is created and dissolved "as a thought" of the Absolute. Now, agnosticism and subjectivism are theories in epistemology which are not at all compatible with realism in epistemology. Hence the incompatibility of Radhakrishnan's metaphysics with his cpistemology.
(iii) God in Radhakrishnan's absolutism resembles Whitehead's God. Whitehead has criticised Aristotle for not providing God that is available for religious purposes. However, it has been rightly observed that in spite of Whitehead, the Whiteheadian God suffers from the same defect.”36 Radhakrishnan's Absolutism also takes away from God all that is significant from the standpoint of religion. No reality can be the object of man's moral and religious aspirations simply by being called by the name, God. Radbakrishnan cannot escape this criticism because his God is neither anādi nor ananta, neither self-existent nor the ultimate metaphysical ground of all-that-there-is. God and His world came into being, thanks to a contingent lila of the Absolute. We are clearly told that this lila “is not even necessary for the Absolute." Absolute would have gone quite well without ever playing this game of temporarily creating and absorbing God with His world of matter and souls aspiring to realize Him. We have seen that Radhakrishnan's exposition of ethical objectivism presented above includes the assertions like (i) “The search of mind for beauty, goodness and truth is the search for God;" (ii) "The rules of dharma are the mortal
18

Page #147

138
flesh of immortal ideas;" (iii) "We long for a good which is never left behind and never superseded;" and (iv) “They (spiritual values) are not only the goal of the universe in the temporal sense but are timeless principles in the light of which alone the universe becomes intelligible." These assertions clearly imply that Radhakrishnan's ethical objectivism emphatically ascertains the teleological character of the world and eternality of God. But Radhakrishnan's absolutism has no logical room for either teleology of the world or eternal character of God because here the world and God are regarded as nothing more than a temporal lila of the Absolute. Hence the absolute incompatibility of Radhakrishnan's metaphysics with his ethics.
An Improved Version of Radhakrishnan's Metaphysics
If Radhakrishnan's epistemological realism and ethical objectivism are worth maintaining ---Radhakrishnan himself has covetously maintained these doctrines throughout his long academic career--then there is no alternative but to revise his metaphysical position. This would have to be wholeheartedly approved by Radhakrishnan himself for he has given us a criterion · for acceptability of metaphysical belief by writing that "if the belief works
in the realm of mind or knowledge, of life or conduct, it is true; otherwise it is spurious."37
The spurious belief in Radhakrishnan's metaphysical outlook is his belief concerning the duality of God and the Absolute. The Absolute as distinct from God is a logical construction of Radhakrishnan's mind under the influence of thinkers like Bradley. It is on account of this logical prejudice that Radhakrishnan advocates the substitution of the phrase "the Absolute for the word 'God' in the language describing religious intuition or revelation. For example, he has written : "When tlie Old Testament says, "Before even the earth and the world were made, Thou art God from everlasting, and world witliont end," it is referring to the Absolute and not to God who is organic with the world process."'38
The needed revision in Radhakrishnan's metaphysics has thus to start with the elimination of the distinction between God and the Absolute. As the two are not distinguished in intuitive religious experience and as Radhakrishnan has so much argued for the validity of intuitive religious experience, we will not be without support from Radhakrishnan himself in our task of equating God with the Absolute.
Radhakrishnan has written : "Religion is, in essence, experience of or living contact with ultimate reality. It is not a subjective phenomenon,

Page #148

139
not mere cultivation of the inner life but the apprehension of something that stands over against the individual. The real is known not as the conclusion of an argument but with the certainty of a thing experienced."39 Radhakrishnan thus admits that religious experience is a "bona fide discovery of reality."
As to the nature of reality discovered by religious experience, Radhakrishnan has maintained: "There are aspects in religious experience, such as sense of rest and fulfilment, of eternity and completeness, which require the conception of a being whose nature is not exhausted by the cosmic process, which possesses an allfulness of reality which our world only faintly shadows. This side of religious experience demands the conception of the supreme as Self-existence, infinity, freedom, absolute light and absolute beatitude. On the other hand there are features of our religious experience which require us to look upon God as...a personal being with whom we can enter into personal relationship. Practical religion presupposes a God who looks into our hearts, knows our tribulations and helps us in our need. The reality of prayer and sacrifice is affirmed by the religious life of mankind. It assumes the reality of a concrete being who influences our life. To leave the Absolute in abstract isolation dwelling in Epicurean felicity is to reduce it to an ornamental figurehead who lends an atmosphere to an essentially agnostic view of the cosmic process. The permanent reality beyond the transient world of struggle and discord is also here and in everything. In religious experience itself there is no conflict. The supreme satisfies both sets of needs."40
The above quoted words of Radhakrishnan can be well interpreted as implying complete identity of the notions of the Absolute and of God. The Absolute here does not mean the sum-total of reality but the ever sustaining metaphysical ground of all-that-there-is. The same Supreme Reality, which is one without a second with respect to metaphysical and spiritual sovereignty, is the Absolute of some philosophers and God of all religious people. The philosopher in Radhakrishnan should not find difficulty in admitting this not only in the light of his interpretation of religious experience but also in the light of his own admission that "Professor Brightman's whole criticism about my vacillation between the nondualism of Samkara and the personal theism of Ramanuja is based on the postulate that the supreme must be either the one or the other, which I do not admit."4 1
The identification of God and the Absolute is clearly admitted by Radhakrishnan in his observation that, "All religions are founded on the

Page #149

140
personal experience of tlie seers who become directly aware of an Infinite Spiritual Presence beyond and within the range of the world of change and succession. The personal experience of union with Absolute Reality or God has been a common and continuous feature of all the faiths of mankind.”42
Once the distinction between the Absolute and God is eliminated, Radhakrishnan's metaphysical absolutism turns out to be a kind of Višistadvaitic theism comparable to that of Rāmānujachārya or of Sri Svāminārāyaṇa.
While appreciating Rāmānujāchārya's contribution to philosophy, Radhakrishnan has observed that, "Rāmānuja had the greatness of a religious genius. Ideas flowed in on hinn from various sources--the Upanişads and the Agamas, the purāṇas and the prabandham--and he responded to them all with some side of his religious nature. All their different elements are hell together in the indefinable unity of religious experince. The philosophic spirit was strong in Rāmānuja, so, too, was his religious need. He tries his best to reconcile the demands of the religious feeling with the claims of logical thinking. If he did not succeed in the attempt to give us a systematic and self-contained philosophy of religion, it should not surprise us. Much more remarkable is the deep earnestness and hard logic with which he conceived the problem and laboured to bridge the yawning gulf between the apparently conflicting claims of religion and philosophy. A thin intellect with no depth of soul may be blind to the wonders of God's ways, and may have offered as a seemingly simple solution. Not so Rāmānnja, who gives us the best type of monotheism conceivable inset with touches of immanentism."43
Radhakrishnan and others have pointed out that, Rāmānujācārya's višiştādvaita is involved in certain difficulties related to (i) the teleological character of the world, (ii) moral and inetaphysical status of individual souls and (iii) transcendental aspect of God. Sri Svāminārāyana's Visiştadvaita eliminates these difficulties by re-formulating the very concept of S'arira-S'ariri relation. 4 4 In the Višiştādvaita of Sri Svāminārāyaṇa, the individual souls and material world are said to be "body of God in the sense that (i) they are pervaded by God; (ii) they depend upon God; and (iii) they are incapable of doing anything without the s'akti of God.”4 5 Thus the philosophical position of Sri Svāminārāyaṇa preserves the organic view of the universe without damagiug its moral significance and God's

Page #150

141
transcendence. It, therefore, appears to LIS that the Visistadvaita of Sri Svaninarayana best serves the purposes of Radhakrishnan's philosophizing.
We conclude this paper with the observation that unless Radhakrishnan's metaphysical position is revised along the lines suggested above, it is not possible to reconcile it with his cpistemology and ethics. Again, unless Radhakrishnan's metaphysics is brought in logical harmony with his epistemology and ethics, his system cannot satisfy the claims of both religion and philosophy. And this is what Radhakrishnan very much wanted to do.
As this paper has been written as a tribute to Radhakrishnan, a reference to Radhakrishnan's advice to writers on philosophy will not be considered as irrelevent. After praising Plato and Samkarācārya as "masters in the art of tempering the rigour of their argument with that larger utterance which is the soul of true literaturc,"46 Radhakrishnan has written that "writers on philosophy sometimes require to be reminded of Landor's warning: 'clear writers like fountains do not seem as deep as they are, the turbid look most profound'." 47 As it is only through clear presentation that writers on philosophy can help real advancement in philosophical wisdom, the students of philosophy should always most vigilantly search for clarity in both understanding and presentaion of philosophical ideas.
NOTES N. B. The following is the list of abbreviations used in these notes : CIP ... Radhakrishnan's statement of his philosophy under the title "the
spirit in Man': S. Radhakrislinan and J. H. Muirhead (Editors): Contemporary Indian philosophy (George Allen & Unwin, London,
1952) IVL ... S. Radhakrishnan : An Idealist View of Life (George Allen & Unwin,
London, 1951) PR ...
Schilpp Paul Arthur (Editor) : The philosophy of Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan (The Library of Living philosophers, Tudor Publishing
Company, N. Y. 1952) RS... S. Radhak
S. Radhakrishnan : Religion and Society (George Allen & Unwin, London, 1948)
1. CIP, p. 485 2. D. M. Datta : The chief Currents of Contemporary Philosophy (Univer
sity of Calcutta, 1961) p. 136

Page #151

142
3. PR, p. 316, 317 4. IVL, p. 134 5. Ibid., p. 134 6. Ibid., p. 138 7. Ibid., p. 138 8. CIP, p. 485 9. IVL, p. 143 10. Ibid., p. 220 11. S. Radhakrishnan : Eastern Religion and Western Thought (Oxford Uni
versity Press, London, 1940) p. 51 12. CIP, p. 486 13. Ibid., p. 487 14. RS, p. 47 15. CIP, p. 494 16. RS, p. 104 17. Ibid., p. 108 18. IVL, p. 199 19. Ibid., p. 200 20. Ibid., p. 345 21. S. Radhakrishnan : Eastern Religion and Western Thought, p. 811 22. Ibid., p. 81 23. S. Radhakrishnan : The Hindu View of Life (George Allen & Unwin,
1949) p. 78 24. IVL, p. 342 25. CIP, p. 495 26. Quoted by C. A. Moore in PR p. 310 27. PR, p. 282 28. Ibid., p. 282 29. CIP, pp. 496-7 30. Ibid., p. 498 (Italics ours) 31. Ibid., p. 499 32. Ibid., p. 500 (Italics ours) 33. Ibid., p. 501 34. Ibid., p, 501 35. Ibid., p. 502 36. J. A. Yajnik : The difficulties with Whiteheadian God., the article in
Proceedings of the Indian Philosophical Congress, Patua, 1968 37. IVL, p. 221 38. CIP, p. 498 39. Ibid., p. 492

Page #152

143
40. Ibid., p. 497
41. PR, p. 797
42. S. Radhakrishnan Recovery of Faith (George Allen and Unwin, 1961) p. 110
43. S. Radhakrishnan : Indian Philosophy, Vol. II (George Allen and Unwin, London) pp. 720-21
44. For a detailed discussion of the Difference between the Visistadvaita
of Sri Svaminarayana and that of Ramanujacarya See J. A. Yajnik, The philosophy of S'ri Svāminārāyaṇa (L. D. Institute of Indology, Ahmedabad, 1972) Chapter 16, Section II
45. Ibid., p. 52
46. CIP, p. 484
47. Ibid., p. 484

Page #153


Page #154

ભારતીય દર્શનના મર્મજ્ઞ–ડૉ. રાધાકૃષ્ણન
સી. વી. રાવલ
આ મહાન તત્ત્વજ્ઞાનીની જન્મ શતાબ્દિ જ્યારે રાષ્ટ્ર ઉજવી રહ્યું છે ત્યારે આ લેખ દ્વારા એમને ઉષ્માભરી શ્રદ્ધાંજલિ આપવાને આ એક નમ્ર પ્રયાસ છે. તેમાં મને કેટલે અંશે સફળતા મળી છે તે તે વિદ્વાનોએ જ નક્કી કરવાનું રહે છે.
તત્વજ્ઞાનની મહાન પ્રણાલિકાનો તેમને જન્મથી જ વારસો મળેલો છે. તેમનું જન્ય એવું છે કે તેઓ પોતાના બાળપણની વાત કે જીવન-વૃત્તાંતની વાતમાં રસ ધરાવતા નથી. તેમના મા-બાપનું તેઓ બીજા નંબરનું સંતાન હતા તેટલા પૂરત જ તેઓ ઉલ્લેખ કરે છે. તત્વજ્ઞાનનો વિષય અભ્યાસ માટે પસંદ કરવા તેમને ખાસ કેઈ નિર્ણય ન હતો. તેમના એક નજીકના સગા દ્વારા ત્રણેક પુસ્તકો તેમને ભેટ મળ્યાં, જેમાં જી. એફ. રાઉટનું માનસશાસ્ત્ર પરનું પુસ્તક, જે. વેટનના તર્કશાસ્ત્ર પરના બે ગ્રંથ તથા જે. મેકેન્ઝીનું નીતિશાસ્ત્ર પરનું પુસ્તક હતું. તેમના ભાવિ રસનું નિર્માણ આ પુસ્તક દ્રારા થયું તેમ તેઓ લખે છે, ખ્રિસ્તી મિશનરી શાળામાં અભ્યાસ કર્યો હોઈ તથા ઉચ્ચ કેળવણી લેવામાં પણ ખ્રિસ્તી શિક્ષકોનું પ્રદાન હાઈ તેઓ તેમને ઋણ સ્વીકાર કરે છે. ખાસ કરીને પ્રો. હાગને. છતાં તેમના ગુરુઓ સત્યના અન્વેષકે ન હતા એમ પણ તેઓ માને છે, ભારતીય સંસ્કૃતિ તથા આદર્શોની તેઓ જે ટીકા કરતા તેનાથી તેમની ઊડી શ્રદ્ધાને ઠેસ પહોંચતી અને જે ભવ્ય પ્રણાલિ વિષે તેમને માન હતું તે ઓછું થઈ જશે એવો ડર પેસી જતો.
સમય જતાં જેમ જેમ તેઓએ ભારતીય દાર્શનિક વાહ-મયને અભ્યાસ કર્યો તેમ તેમ તેમને એ પ્રતીતિ થઈ કે આ ભવ્ય સાંસ્કૃતિક વારસો વિશ્વમાં શ્રેષ્ઠ સ્થાન ધરાવે તે કક્ષાનો છે, પ્રાચીન હિન્દુ તત્વજ્ઞાનીઓ જેમણે અવારનવાર ધર્મને પ્રાણને સાંપ્રદાયિક વિચાર અને આચારના ગેરમાર્ગેથી ઉગાર્યો છે, તેમને તેઓ સાચા અનુગામી બન્યાતફાવત માત્ર એટલે કે પ્રાચીન તત્ત્વજ્ઞાનીઓએ, કે જેને તેઓ દર્શનશાસ્ત્ર કહે છે, તેને પાતાના આધાર તરીકે લીધું હતું, જ્યારે આ અર્વાચીન તત્વજ્ઞાનીએ પિતાનો આધાર દુનિયાભરના વિવિધ પંથના સંતે, યોગીઓ અને સાધુઓના આધ્યાત્મિક અનુભમાંથી લીધો. તેમણે કેઈને ગુરુ કર્યા નથી કે ન તે કોઈના તત્ત્વજ્ઞાનનું શરણ સ્વીકાર્યું છે. ૩ છતાં આપણે તેમનાં લખાણમાં આદિ શંકરાચાર્ય, રામાનુજાચાર્ય, રવીન્દ્રનાથ ટાગોર તથા પશ્ચિમના મહાન ફિલસૂકો જેવા કે હેગલ, બગસી, બ્રેડલે વ.ની ઊંડી અસર જોઈએ છીએ: જીવનની સર્વગ્રાહી ફિલસૂફીના તેમના આકલનમાં તેઓ તેમના પૂરગામીએાને પગલે ચાલવું પસંદ કરે છે, છતાં તેમનું અંધ અનુકરણ કરવાના તેઓ વિરોધી

Page #155

*
છે. તેમનામાં વિચારકના જેવી કુશાગ્ર બુદ્ધિ ને આગવી સ્વતંત્ર પ્રતિભા છે, વિદ્વત્તા અને જરૂરી સાવચેતી પણ છે.
તત્ત્વજ્ઞાનના પ્રસિદ્ધ અધ્યાપક તરીકે તેમણે ભારતના તત્ત્વજ્ઞાન અને ધર્માંની અમૂલ્ય સેવા તેમના ગ્રંથે। અને વ્યાખ્યાના દ્વારા કરી છે, અર્વાચીન હિન્દના તેઓ એક અદ્વિતીય અભ્યાસક અને વિચારક તથા બહુશ્રુત ફિલસૂફ છે, પશ્ચિમના સાહિત્ય અને તત્ત્વજ્ઞાનના તેમણે સાંગાપાંગ અભ્યાસ કર્યાં છે. એક અચ્છા વિવરણકાર તેમ જ વિવેચક છે. સૂક્ષ્મદČક સમીક્ષક પણ છે. ભારતીય દાŚનિક વિચારસરણીનુ' સુયોગ્ય અને નિષ્પક્ષ અ ઘટન કરવા જતાં તેઓ કડક આલેાચના પણ કરે છે, જે તેમની સર્જનાત્મક આંતર્સ્ઝના પૂરાવા છે. માત્ર ભાષાશૈલી કે સાહિત્યને દષ્ટિ સામે રાખી વિવરણ કરવું એ બરાબર નથી પરંતુ દર્શીનશાસ્ત્રના ઇતિહાસલેખકે શબ્દોની પછવાડે રહેલા ગૂઢ વિચારને સ્પષ્ટ કરી બતાવવાનું કઠિન કાર્ય કરવાનુ છે. તેનુ ચિ'તન માત્ર તાર્કિક ખ`ડન—મંડનની પ્રવૃત્તિથી જ વિકસ્યું` નથી, પરંતુ એક સુદીધ આંતરિક આધ્યાત્મિક અનુભવનુ એ ફળ છે,જ એમ તેએ સ્વયં માને છે,
તે અંગ્રેજી ભાષા પર સારું પ્રભુત્વ ધરાવે છે, અને અંગ્રેજી ગદ્યના સિદ્ધહસ્ત લેખક છે. ભારતીય સસ્કૃતિ અને આધુનિક યુરે।પીય સંસ્કૃતિ બન્નેના પાયામાં જે તત્ત્વજ્ઞાન નિહિત છે એને ઊ'ડા અને તલસ્પર્શી અભ્યાસ એમણે કર્યાં છે ૫ અને પ્રત્યે એમના મનમાં અનહદ્ સદ્ભાવ છે. તેઓએ ભારતીય સંસ્કૃતિના મિશનરી થઈ યુરોપ સમક્ષ ભારતીય તત્ત્વજ્ઞાન તથા ધર્માંતે રજૂ કર્યા' છે. તેએ માત્ર હિન્દુ ધર્માંના જ અદ્યતન વિવેચક નર્થી, પરંતુ વિશ્વભરની સામાન્ય ધર્મ ભાવનાના મહાન પુરસ્કર્તા છે. બધા ધર્માંના હામાં પડેલા પ્રાણને તે ખચાવ કરે છે. વર્તમાન જગતના વિકારી દૂર કરવાના એક માત્ર ઉપાય તેમના મતે આધ્યાત્મિક ઉત્થાન છે, તેએક ધાર્મિક તત્ત્વજ્ઞાની છે અને સાથે સાથે સવ ધમ સમભાવના પડિત” છે.
ભારતીય તત્ત્વજ્ઞાનનું મુખ્ય દષ્ટિબિન્દુ કર્યુ તે સમજવુ પશ્ચિમના માનસને મુશ્કેલ લાગે છે, કારણ કે પૂર્વ-પશ્ચિમ બન્નેની પ્રણાલિકાએ સેંકડા વરસાથી જુદા જુદા ચીલા પર ચાલતી આવી છે. ભારત વર્ષના ચિન્તનાત્મક તત્ત્વજ્ઞાનના અર્ધાં ડૉ. રાધાકૃષ્ણને સુંદર રીતે સ્પષ્ટ કરી ખતાવ્યા છે, જેમાંથી આજે પણ સૌ કોઈને મધ અને યોગ્ય દારવણી મળે છે. ગાંધીજી અને ટાગેારની સમકક્ષ તેમને મૂકી શકાય. તે નિ:શંકપણે અદ્યતન હિન્દુ નવાસ્થાનના મહાન આગેવાનામાંના એક છે. ધાર્મિક વૃત્તિ માટે માણસે સંન્યાસી બનવાની જરૂર નથી.
ડો. રાધાકૃષ્ણના પ્રથા અધટનાત્મક છે; તેમજ અંશતઃ સર્જનાત્મક પણ છે. તેને જો એ વિભાગમાં વહેંચીએ તા પ્રથમ વિભાગ કે જેને અઘટનાત્મક નામ આપીએ તો તેમાં રવીન્દ્રનાથ ટાગોરનું તત્ત્વદર્શન', ભારતીય તત્ત્વજ્ઞાન' પરના બન્ને વિશાળકાય ગ્રંથા, તેમજ ‘સમકાલીન તત્ત્વચિંતનમાં ધતું પ્રભુત્વ' વ. ને મૂકી શકાય, તા ખીજા

Page #156

વિભાગમાં કે જેને આપણે સર્જનાત્મક ચિંતન કહીએ તેમાં જીવનની આધ્યાત્મિક દૃષ્ટિ” તથા “પૂર્વને ધર્મ અને પશ્ચિમી ચિંતન”ને મૂકી શકાય. આ ઉપરાંત ઉપનિષદો, ભગવદ્ગીતા, બ્રહ્મસૂત્રો અને ધમપદ પરનાં તેમનાં ભાષ્યો અને સંપાદને ઊંડી વિદ્વત્તા, આર્ષદષ્ટિ અને અસંદિગ્ધ વિવરણના ઉત્કૃષ્ટ ઉદાહરણરૂપ ગણી શકાય તેમ છે.
હિન્દુધર્મ, બૌદ્ધધર્મ અને ભારતીય તત્ત્વજ્ઞાન અને તે બધા ઉપરાંત સર્વસામાન્ય ધર્મના ઉદ્દેશ પ્રતિની તેમની સેવા અપ્રતિમ છે. યુરોપીય અને ભારતીય વિચારધારાઓ અંગેનું તેમનું પ્રતિપાદન અને વિવરણ તેમની નૂતન, વિશિષ્ટ અને પ્રેરણાદાયી દષ્ટિ દાખવે છે, તે જ રીતે પરમ ચેતન્યનું સ્વરૂપ, ધર્મોને ઈશ્વર અને પરમ ચૈતન્ય તથા ઈશ્વર વચ્ચેનો સંબંધ, તથા વૈશ્વિક પ્રક્રિયામાં તેમનું સ્થાન અને કાર્ય વ. અંગેના તેમના વિચારોએ આ કોયડાઓ અંગે બીજાઓએ સૂચવેલા સમાધાન અંગેની મુશ્કેલીઓનું નિવારણ કર્યું છે તેમ કહી શકાય. તેમના પૂર્ણ આદર્શવાદ અંગેનું તત્વજ્ઞાન પૂર્વ અને પશ્ચિમના સાચા સમન્વયને રજૂ કરે છે. (દા. ત. બ્રિટીશ વિચારક બ્રેડલેને નડતા કેટલાક ફૂટ પ્રશ્નોને તેમાં ઉકેલ છે.)
તેમના જીવનના આદર્શવાદી અભિગમ” અંગેનાં હિમ્મટ વ્યાખ્યાન (૧૯૨૯)માં આપણે તેમના ધર્મ અને તત્વજ્ઞાન અંગેના પરિપક્વ વિચારે જોઈ શકીએ છીએ, આ “તત્ત્વ શુદ્ધ જીવન–દષ્ટિ” દર્શાવતો ગ્રંથ એમની ફિલસૂફીના સારરૂપ છે. જીવન, ધર્મ અને સત્યની આત્યન્તિક સમજ શી હોઈ શકે એ એમણે આ વ્યાખ્યામાં નિરૂપ્યું છે, અને તે કરવા સારૂ પશ્ચિમે જે વૈજ્ઞાનિક અભ્યાસપદ્ધતિ ખીલવી છે તેને આશ્રય લીધો છે, એ એની ખાસ વિશેષતા ગણાય. સ્વ. રામનારાયણ પાઠક જે રા. આનંદશંકરભાઈ ધ્રુવના નિરૂપણ સંબંધમાં કહે છે, તે ડો. રાધાકૃષ્ણનને પણ લાગુ પડી શકે તેમ છે – એમને વેદાન્તની કઈ નવી શાખા સ્થાપવી નહોતી-નવું દર્શન સ્થાપે તેને જ જે ફિલસૂફ કહેવો હોય તે તે ફિલસૂફ નહતા. અને ફિલસૂફી એ અમુક મત અને અભિપ્રાયેનું તંત્ર જ ન હોય, પણ જીવનની દૃષ્ટિ હોય, તે તે તેમનામાં હતી. તેમની દષ્ટિ ખૂહદ દાર્શનિક અને મૂલ્યપર્વતગામી હતી, દાર્શનિક ચર્ચા–પદ્ધતિને તેમણે નવી વિશાળતા અને ગંભીરતા આપી.૧૦ હૈ. રાધાકૃષ્ણન અને ડે. દાસગુપ્તા એ બે વિદ્વાનોએ હિન્દના તત્ત્વજ્ઞાનનો ઈતિહાસ લખ્યો છે. એ સંબંધમાં ઘણીવાર એવો પ્રશ્ન પૂછાય છે કે બેમાંથી કોણ ચઢે ? એનો ઉત્તર આપતાં આ ધ્રવ લખે છે કે
સંસ્કૃતિની વિદ્વત્તાપૂર્વક તે તે ગ્રંથને સાર ઉધૂત કરી એને યથા સ્થિત રૂપે પ્રગટ કરવાનું કાર્ય દાસગુપ્ત વધારે સારું કર્યું છે, પરંતુ હિન્દનું તત્ત્વજ્ઞાન એક જુનું જડી આવેલું હાડપિંજર નથી, પણ વેદકાળથી ચાલી આવેલો મૈતન્યથી ભરેલું અને નિત્ય વિકસતે જ એક જીવંત પદાર્થ છે, અને તેથી એના શરીરનું વર્ણન કરવા કરતાં એના આત્માનું પ્રાગટ્ર કરવા ઉપર રાધાકૃષ્ણને અધિક ધ્યાન દીધું છે, અને એ દષ્ટિબિન્દુથી જોતાં રાધાકૃષ્ણનની કૃતિ ચઢિયાતી છે.૧૧

Page #157

ડો. રાધાકૃષ્ણન કહે છે કે ભૂતકાળનાં પિથાં આજના પ્રશ્નોને ઉકેલ આણવામાં ઝાઝી મદદ કરી શકે એમ નથી. જો કેઈ પ્રાચીન શાસ્ત્રોમાંથી આજની જરૂરિયાતને અનુકૂળ અર્થ કાઢવાનો પ્રયત્ન કરે છે તે તેમાં પૂર્વજો માટેનો આદર ભલે વ્યક્ત થત હોય, પણ તેમાં બુદ્ધિની પ્રામાણિકતા છે, એમ ન કહેવાય.૧૨ ડો. રાધાકૃષ્ણનમાં રૂઢિ પ્રત્યેની અંધ ભક્તિ નથી; તેઓ દઢપણે એમ માને છે કે પરંપરાગત વિચાર, આચાર અને માન્યતાઓ પડી ભાંગે એ પણ આધ્યાત્મિક એક Fellowship of the Spiritની સ્થાપના માટે આવશ્યક છે. બધાય લોકોના મનમાં આ ભાવના કાર્ય કરી રહી છે, બીજા માણસો ગમે એટલા વાવૃદ્ધ કે જ્ઞાનવૃદ્ધ હોય તે પણ તેમના હાથમાં માટીને પીડે બંનવા નારાજ એવા આજના યુવક વર્ગમાં તો આ ભાવના વિશેષ પ્રબળ બની રહી છે, કારણ કે લોકોમાં જાગૃતિ આવી છે. ૩ ધર્મ અને ફિલસૂફી વિષેના પેટા ખ્યાલે ખંખેરી નાખવાને યુગ આવી પહોંચ્યો છે, “અંતિમ સત્ય વિષેના વિચારને જીવનમાં પ્રયોગ કરવો એનું નામ ધર્મ” અને કોઈ ફિલસૂફી જો ધર્મને વિશે ખુલાસો ન કરી બતાવતી હોય તે તેને ફિલસુફી કહી જ ન શકાય. ધર્મને લગતી માન્યતાઓ જે તર્કની મદદથી બાંધેલા વિચારો સાથે મેળ ખાતી હોય તે વધારે સારું. ફિલસૂફીને ધર્મથી રંગવાને બદલે આપણે જે બની શકે તે ધર્મને ફિલસૂફીની કસોટીએ ચડાવ જોઈએ. તત્વચિન્તન જે આપણી માન્યતાઓનું સમર્થન કરવામાં આપણને મદદ ન કરે છે, એ પરથી એમ ફલિત થતું નથી કે આપણે તત્વચિંતન સિવાયની બીજી વસ્તુઓમાંથી અર્થાત્ લાગણી, સંકલ્પ અથવા અપરોક્ષ અનુભવ યા સાક્ષાત્કારમાંથી એને માટે આધાર ખોળી કાઢવાનો પ્રયત્ન કરવો જોઈએ. જે ધર્મસિદ્ધાન્તના મૂળમાં બુદ્ધિગમ્ય ફિલસૂફી ન હોય તે નિષ્ફળ નીવડ્યા વિના ન જ રહે.૧૪ સત્યને આપણી નજર આગળથી સંતાડી રાખનાર વસ્તુ તે કેવળ બુદ્ધિને દોષ નથી, સ્વાર્થની વાસના પણ છે. અજ્ઞાન એટલે બુદ્ધિને ભ્રમ નહિ, પણ આત્માને અંધાપે છે. તે દૂર કરવા માટે આપણે આત્મા પર વળગેલા દેહ અને ઈદ્રિયોના મેલને ધોઈ કાઢવા જોઈએ, અને આત્મચક્ષની તને જગવવી જોઈએ.
ડૉ. રાધાકૃષ્ણન જે આદર્શવાદના પુરસ્કત છે તે પૂર્ણ આદર્શવાદ કે અધ્યાત્મવાદ છે. તે ભૌતિક આદર્શવાદ નથી. તેમના મતે પૂર્ણ આત્મપરાયણતા, કેઈ પણ આધ્યાત્મિક વિચારધારાનું મૂલ્ય માપવાને કટી પત્થર છે. આદર્શનિષ્ઠ દષ્ટિ સમજે છે કે બ્રહાડને અર્થ છે, મૂલ્ય છે, આદર્શ મૂલ્ય ગતિ આપનારાં પરિબળો છે, બ્રહ્માંડની ચાલકશક્તિ છે. તેઓ જીવનને હેતુપૂર્ણ અને અર્થપૂર્ણ ગણે છે અને તેઓ માનવને એક એવી ભૂમિકા સાથે જોડે છે કે જે સેન્દ્રિય જગતની મર્યાદાથી મુક્ત ન હોય, જીવનના આદર્શ વાદી અભિગમનું વિવરણ શક્ય તેટલી સ્પષ્ટ ભાષામાં તેમણે આપ્યું છે. પૂર્વ અને પશ્ચિમ બન્નેની આધ્યાત્મિક વિચારણાથી સુપરિચિત હોઈ તેઓ અર્વાચીન જગતનો પડકાર ઝીલી લઈ પ્રકૃતિવાદ, જડવાદ, ઉપયોગિતાવાદ. માનવતાવાદ વગેરે બધા વાદોના ધર્મના પર્યાય રૂપ થવાના દાવાની ચકાસણી કરે છે, સાથે સાથે તેઓ ભૌતિકશાસ્ત્ર,
તિષશાસ્ત્ર, અને જીવશાસ્ત્ર જેવાં વિજ્ઞાનની છેલ્લામાં છેલ્લી સિદ્ધિઓની મૂલવણી કરે છે, અને તેમની ધર્મની સર્વગ્રાહી ફિલસૂફી આપે છે.

Page #158

પ
તેમનું, આધ્યાત્મિક તત્ત્વજ્ઞાન તાર્કિક તત્ત્વજ્ઞાનના અતિ દુર્ગાંમ માર્ગના ઇન્કાર કરે છે, અને સાંપ્રદાયિક તત્ત્વજ્ઞાનની સુરક્ષાની પદ્ધતિને પણ નકારે છે અને ધાર્મિક અનુભવ અંગે વૈજ્ઞાનિક દૃષ્ટિકોણ અપનાવીને બધા પંથના લેાકેાના આધ્યાત્મિક વારસાની અને જેમને કશે અનુભવ નથી તેની પણ નિલેષ અને નિષ્પક્ષ તપાસ કરે છે, ધાર્મિક ચેતનાની શકિત અને દાવાએ અંગેનુ' આવુ પક્ષણ જેની પશ્ચાદભૂમિમાં માનવજાતને સમગ્ર આધ્યાત્મિક ઇતિહાસ પડેલા છે, તેમાં આધ્યાત્મિક આદના કાલ રહેલા છે, જે એક તરફથી વૈજ્ઞાનિક પ્રકૃતિવાદનાં ખ'ડિત પરિબળાને અને બીજી તરફથી સાંપ્રદાયિક ધમ વાદના વિરાધી છે.૧૫
વર્તમાન તત્ત્વજ્ઞાનમાં ધર્મા પ્રભાવ' પુસ્તકમાં ડૉ. રાધાકૃષ્ણન જે પૂર્ણ આદર્શવાદનું નિરૂપણ કરે છે, તેની રૂપરેખા જોઈએ. તા—(૧) બ્રહ્માંડના આવિષ્કાર, પૂર્ણ માંથી ચેતન, અચેતન સ્વરૂપાને આવિષ્કાર છે. (૨) સૃષ્ટિની પ્રક્રિયા એ છે વચ્ચેનુ ન્દ્ર છે જેમાં (૩) પ્રકૃતિના ગજ અચેતન પર ચેતનની સરસાઈ દ્વારા આંકવામાં આવે છે. (૪) સૃષ્ટિનું અંતિમ ધ્યેય કે મુકામ ચેતનના જડ પરના સપૂર્ણ વિજય અગર તા આત્માના પદાર્થ પરને સર્વેĒપરિ વિજય પૂર્ણત્વને પ્રાપ્ત કરે છે, પરંતુ અહિં પ્રારંભ અને અંત માત્ર આદર્શ છે અને આપણી પાસે જે છે તે માત્ર એ વચ્ચેને માગ છે, જેના ઉલ્લેખ બ્રહ્માંડ તરીકે થાય છે, જેમાં આપણે સૌ માત્ર યાત્રાળુ છીએ. આ જગત એ કેવળ પરમાત્મા માટેની શેાધમાં નીકળેલા યાત્રીઓની આગેકૂચ છે. જગત એક નિરંતર વહેતા પ્રવાહ છે. જે કંઈ છે તે આ જગત છે અને તેની પાર કશુ છે જ નહિ એવું નથી. આ જગત નિયમને વશ વર્તે છે ને તે પૂર્ણત્વ તરફ ગતિ કરી રહ્યું છે, તે બતાવે છે કે એના પાયામાં કઈક આધ્યાત્મિક સત્તત્ત્વને આધાર છે. આપણી સુષ્ટિ પરબ્રહ્માને નૈસર્ગિક આવિષ્કાર છે. પરબ્રહ્મ શુદ્ધ અને ચેતના છે, શુદ્ધ મુક્તિ છે, અને અનંત શક્તિ છે. પસ`ગીની અન ́ત સંભાવનાએમાંથી, એક વિશિષ્ટ શક્તિ વર્તીમાન જીવ સૃષ્ટિમાં આવિર્ભાવ પામી છે, પરંતુ તેથી કાંઈ પરમ ચૈતન્યની પૂર્ણતા ખંડિત થતી નથી. ૧૬ અનંત ચેતના પેાતાના આવિષ્કાર કરવા પેાતાને બધનમાં મૂકે છે. પરબ્રહ્મની આ સ્વાધનની પ્રક્રિયાને હિન્દુતત્ત્વવેત્તાએ માયા કહે છે. અદ્ભુત બ્રહ્મવાદીએ એક’ને ખાતર “અનેક”ની હસ્તીનેા છેદ ઉડાવી દે છે એમ માની લેવું ખાટુ' છે, એ તે એટલુ જ કહે છે કે એકને અદ્વિતીય એવું બ્રહ્મ તે જગતને વ્યાપી વળેલુ' ચેતન, અને જગતના પ્રેરક અન્તરાઁની આત્મા છે. આ કથનના અથ એવા નથી કે જીવાથી ભરેલું વિકારશીલ જગત મિથ્યા અર્થાત્ અવિદ્યમાન છે. ૧૭
પરબ્રહ્મનાં નિર્ગુણ તેમજ સદ્ગુણ, અપૌરૂષય તેમજ પૌશ્તેય, નિરાકાર તેમજ સાકાર એ ઉભયરૂપ એક જ સત્તું વર્ણ ન કરવાની નિરપેક્ષ અને સાપેક્ષ રીતેા છે, પરમાત્મા એ કાં તા નિહઁણ બ્રહ્મ છે અથવા સગુણ ઈશ્વર છે એમ માની લેવુ' એ ભૂલ છે. તે નિર્ગુણ તેમજ સગુણ, બ્રહ્મ તેમજ ઈશ્વર બને છે. પરમાત્માનાં નિર્ગુણ અથવા અપૌરૂષય રૂપ અને સગુણ અથવા પૌરૂષય રૂપ એ એ એક ખીજાનાં હરીફ નથી, એક, અદ્વિતીય અને

Page #159

સર્વવ્યાપી એ પરમાત્મા મનુષ્યના આત્માને સગુણ તથા નિર્ગુણ એમ ઉભયરૂપે ભાસે છે. પરબ્રહ્મ એક જ હાઈ ક્યારેક તાત્વિક પર્યેષણ એટલે જ્ઞાનનો વિષય ભાસે છે, ને કારક ઉપાસના એટલે કે ભક્તિનો. બૌદ્ધિક તર્ક અને યૌગિક ધ્યાન હંમેશા પરબ્રહ્મની કલ્પના પસંદ કરે છે, જ્યારે નીતિમૂલક ભક્તિને ઈશ્વરની કલ્પના ગમે છે. હિન્દુ તત્ત્વજ્ઞાન પરથના પેરૂષય અંગને યથાયોગ્ય સ્થાન આપે છે ખરું, છતાં એ પરમ સતનું અપીરૂપેય રૂ૫ ૫ણ તે આપણને ભૂલવા દેતું નથી. ઈશ્વર જગતમાં છે પણ જગરૂપે નથી. પરબ્રહ્મ અને તેની માયા આપણી સ્થળ-કાળથી બદ્ધ સુષ્ટિમાં આત્મા અને પદાર્થ સ્વરૂપે દષ્ટિગોચર થાય છે.૧૮ પરમાત્મા જે સૃષ્ટિના સંદર્ભમાં ઈશ્વર નામે સંબોધાય છે તે આ રીતે અભિન્ન દૈતરૂપે, ચેતન અને પદાર્થરૂપે, આત્મા અને અનાત્મારૂપે છૂટા પાડે છે. આ બે વચ્ચેનું કન્જ આ જગત પર આપણે જોઈએ છીએ તે જીવામાં ભિને ભિન્ન કક્ષાએ છે; આપણે જ્યારે સ્વતંત્ર રીતે સતનું રૂ૫ નિહાળીએ ત્યારે પરબ્રહ્માને જોઈએ છીએ, એ સતના આપણી સાથેના સંબંધ પર ભાર મૂકીએ ત્યારે ભગવાન– પરમાત્માને જોઈએ છીએ. ૧૯ મનુષ્ય પરમ સત્યને નજરોનજર જુએ છે એટલે કે તેને સાક્ષાત્કાર કરે છે ત્યારે નિર્ગુણ અને સગુણની આ બે કલ્પનાઓ વચ્ચે ભેદ શમી જાય છે, પણ વિચારના ક્ષેત્રમાં એ ભેદ શમાવવાનું કામ સહેલું નથી. પરમાત્માની હસ્તી તની દલીલ વડે સિદ્ધ કરી શકાતી નથી, એનું દર્શન અથવા તેને સાક્ષાત્કાર તે શ્રદ્ધા અને ધ્યાન વડે જ કરી શકાય છે. આત્મા જયારે ઈશ્વરમાં લીન થઈ જાય છે ત્યારે તે ઈશ્વરનું દર્શન કરે છે.
દરેક આત્મા અણવિકસેલી વ્યક્તિ છે. એ પાશવી વૃત્તિઓથી પૂર્ણપણે મુક્ત નથી, છતાં ઉચ્ચતર વૃત્તિઓમાં તેનું રૂપાન્તર કરવાને એ શક્તિમાન છે. આત્માને જરૂરિયાતોને પ્રથમ સ્થાન આપવું જોઈએ, એ વસ્તુ જે આપણે આનંદપૂર્વક સ્વીકારી લઈએ અને તેના નિયમો અનુસાર આપણી પ્રકૃતિને નિગ્રહ કરીએ તે આપણે વિકાસ સાધી શકીએ. મનુષ્યને આત્મા અને વિશ્વને આત્મા પારમાર્થિક દૃષ્ટિએ એક જ છે. પરમાત્માને વાસ માણસના હૃદયમાં છે. અમર અંતરાત્મા અને મહાન વિશ્વાત્મા એક અને અભિન્ન છે. બ્રહ્મ એ જ આત્મા છે અને આત્મા એ જ બ્રહ્મ છે.૨૦
આધ્યાત્મિક અનુભૂતિ વિના આધ્યાત્મિક તત્ત્વજ્ઞાન હોઈ શકે નહિ. અલબત્ત દિવ્ય ચેતનાની વ્યક્તિગત અનુભૂતિ માત્ર પૂર્વને ઈજા નથી. સોક્રેટિસ, ઑટે, પ્લેટિનસ ઓગસ્ટાઈન, દાન્ત વ. એ પણ ઈશ્વરની અનુભૂતિની પ્રમાણભૂતતા આપેલી છે. આધ્યાત્મિક અનુભવને બહારના બીજા કોઈ પ્રમાણની કે પુરાવાની જરૂર રહેતી નથી. તે સ્વત: સિદ્ધ હોય છે પણ સત્યદષ્ટાને પિતાની ઊંડામાં ઊંડી શ્રદ્ધા અને પ્રતીતિ એવી વાણીમાં પ્રગટ કરવી પડે છે ખરી, જે તે યુગના વિચારકે સમજી શકે તે સમજીને તૃપ્તિ પામે. આધ્યાત્મિક અનુભવમાં ખરેખર સત્યને જ સાક્ષાત્કાર થયો છે એમ કહી શકાય એટલા માટે તથા આધ્યાત્મિક અનુભવની નિશ્ચિતતાને તાર્કિક નિશ્ચિતતા તરીકે સિદ્ધ કરી બતાવાય એટલા માટે, આપણે એ આધ્યાત્મિક અનુભવનું બુદ્ધિગમ્ય એવું વર્ણન

Page #160

આપવું પડે છે.૨૧ આધ્યાત્મિક અનુભવ અથવા સાક્ષાત્કાર એ સના યથાર્થતમ સ્વરૂપનું શુદ્ધ નિલેષ દર્શન નથી, તેમાં દર્શન કરનાર માનસનાં કલ્પનાઓ અને વિચારનું પ્રતિબિંબ પડયા વિના રહેતું નથી. બુદ્ધિ અને અપરોક્ષ અનુભવ Intellect and Intuition એ બે ના સંબંધ વિષે ડે. રાધાકૃષ્ણને વિસ્તારથી ચર્ચા કરી છે. એક તરફ ભૌતિક વિજ્ઞાન અપરા–અતીન્દ્રિય અનુભવને માનતું નથી. બીજી તરફ બસ જેવા કેન્ચ ફિલસૂફ બુદ્ધિને ભ્રામક માની તેનો છેદ ઉડાવી દે છે, અને અપક્ષ અનુભવને જ જ્ઞાનનું ખરું સાધન માને છે. આ બે છેડાની સામે અતવાદીનું દૃષ્ટિબિંદુ રજૂ કરતાં ડો. રાધાકૃષ્ણન કહે છે “અપક્ષ અનુભવને બુદ્ધિને ટેકો ને તેની પૂર્તિ મળવા છોઈએ. અપક્ષ જ્ઞાનને બુદ્ધિની દોરવણી ન હોય, તો તે (પશુના જેવી જ્ઞાનહીન) કુદરતી સ્કૂરણ બની જાય છે, તેને જયારે બુદ્ધિને ટેકે હોય ત્યારે તે દેવીને સર્જનશીલ
એવું સત્યદર્શન બની જાય છે. યોગ્ય પ્રકારને અપરોક્ષ અનુભવ આપણને એવાં સત્યનું દર્શન કરાવશે જે બુદ્ધિને સંતોષ આપી શકે, અપક્ષ અનુભવે કરેલા નિર્ણયોની બુદ્ધિઓ
યાયાધીશની પેઠે સમીક્ષા કરવી જોઈએ, ને તેનું મૂલ્યાંકન કરવું જોઈએ. ૨૨ બુદ્ધિશાળી વર્ગોની આવી સંમતિ ન મળે તે સત્યદૃષ્ટા શ્રદ્ધા અને વિશ્વાસ પર આધાર રાખીને વાલે છે. (આ અર્થમાં ધર્મને આધાર શ્રદ્ધા (આખ્તદૃષ્ટિ) પર છે.
ગૌતમ બુદ્ધમાં આપણને એક મહાપ્રાજ્ઞનાં દર્શન થાય છે. એમની બૌદ્ધિક નિષ્ઠા. ૧તિક આગ્રહ અને આધ્યાત્મિક સૂઝ જોતાં તેઓ ઈતિહાસની એક મહાન વિભૂતિ છે. મુદ્ધ માનતા કે ભક્તિ તર્ક સંગત થાય એ માટે એ સત્યપ્રતિષ્ઠિત હોવી જોઈએ. કપકણ સાંભળેલી વાત ન સ્વીકારો, પ્રણાલી ન સ્વીકારો જે કઈ મત તમારી સમક્ષ રજૂ વાય એને તર્ક તથા જીવનની કસોટી પર ચઢાવી જુઓ. સૌથી મહાન શાસ્ત્રાર્થ બાપણા આત્માની વાણી છે. અજ્ઞાન નિર્મૂળ કરવા કડક નીતિમત્તા આવશ્યક છે. શીલ બને પ્રજ્ઞા વચ્ચે સમવાય સંબંધ છે. વિદ્યા એટલે કેવળ જ્ઞાન નહિ, પરંતુ નિરંતર વ્યાન–સમાધિ. વિદ્યા એટલે પરમ સત્ય સાથેના સંબંધનો સાક્ષાત્કાર. એની દિવ્ય
ત્યાતિથી સકળ ભૌતિક આસકિતઓ અને બંધને ઓગળી જાય છે. સમગ્ર વિશ્વમાં હતનું શાસન પ્રવર્તે છે. જગતનાં દુ:ખે અને કષ્ટો જોઈને બુદ્ધના આત્માને ઊંડે બાધાત થયો, તેથી જગતની સાન્ત વસ્તુઓની અસારતાના તેમના ભાનની સાથે તીવ્ર ભરૂચનો ઉમેરો થયો, અને એમાંથી છૂટવાને ઉપાચ એમને તૃષ્ણા ત્યાગ અથવા નર્વાણમાં મળ્યો.
(ડો. રાધાકૃષ્ણને) બુદ્ધ ઉપરના તેમના બ્રિટીશ એકેડેમીના વ્યાખ્યાનમાં તેમણે આ મહાન ધર્મોપદેશકના ઈશ્વર અને નિર્વાણ અંગેના મૂળભૂત પ્રશ્નો અંગેના મૌનને સમજાવ્યું છે. તેઓ ધ્યાન ખેંચે છે કે શાશ્વત પરમ ચૈતન્યના સાક્ષાત્કાર સિવાય, બુદ્ધને જગતની તધી વસ્તુઓની ક્ષણભંગુરતાનું દર્શન ન થયું હોય, ઉપનિષદોના તત્વજ્ઞાનના આધારે મામસાક્ષાત્કારના વિશાળ આદર્શ ને વિસ્તાર કરી તેના આધારે જીવનની વ્યાપક
જના ઘડવાનું કામ મહાન ધર્મગુરુ બુધે કર્યું છે એવું ડે. રાધાકૃષ્ણનનું મંતવ્ય

Page #161

છે. પશ્ચિમમાં હજુ એવી કલ્પના પ્રચલિત છે કે બુધે ઉપનિષદોના અધ્યાત્મવાદ જેને સંબંધ સાવ તેડી નાખ્યો હતો, વળી તેઓ નિરીશ્વરવાદી હતા, નૈરામ્યવાદી હતા અને તેમણે તેમના અનુયાયીઓને ધાર્મિક જીવનના અંતિમ ફળરૂપે “નિર્વાણ”—અર્થાત શુન્યમાં વિલય-પ્રાપ્ત થવાની આશા બતાવી હતી. ઠે. રાધાકૃષ્ણનના મતે આ કલ્પના બેટી છે. આવી કલ્પના પ્રચલિત થવાનું કારણ એ છે કે બુધે અયવાદની વૃત્તિથી જે સેવ્યું તેને લોકોએ ચાખે ઇન્કાર માની લીધો. “બુદ્ધની સદાચારની સાધનાને
કારણ ડરાવી શકે એવું કોઈ દર્શનશાસ્ત્ર હોય તો તે ઉપનિષદોના અન્તસ્તલમાં રહેલું દર્શનશાસ્ત્ર જ છે. બુધે પરમસત્યનો સાક્ષાત્કાર કર્યો હતો તેથી તેઓ ક્ષણિકને ક્ષણિક તરીકે જોઈ શક્યા અને તેને છોડ્યું. આ સૃષ્ટિના અનુભવોથી પર (પાર) એક પરમ શૈતન્ય છે, જે તેના પર શ્રદ્ધા રાખનારને જવાબ આપે છે. આ સત્યને તેમણે “ધર્મ” નામ આપ્યું. આ ધર્મ તેમને મન બ્રહ્માંડની શાશ્વત શક્તિ છે. ધમની સૂક્ષ્મ દૃષ્ટિ એટલે જ્ઞાન–પ્રકાશ અને તેમના અષ્ટાંગ માર્ગનું ધ્યેય આ જ્ઞાન–પ્રકાશ પામવાનું છે. બુદ્ધને ધાર્મિક અનુભવ હતો, પણ ધાર્મિક લક્ષ્ય ન હતું એમ માનનાર તેમના ઉપદેશને અનર્થ કરી રહ્યા છે. શાસ્ત્રમામા નહીં પણ અનુભવના આધારે તેનું (એટલે કે ઓપનિષદ બ્રહ્મનું) નૈતિક મૂલ્ય સુચવવા તેઓ તેને “ધમં” કહે છે. ધર્મને માગ બ્રહ્મને માર્ગ છે. ધર્મરત રહેવું એટલે બ્રહ્મરત રહેવું.૨૩ એતિહાસિક બૌદ્ધ ધર્મને અર્થ જનસમૂહમાં ઉપનિષદના સિદ્ધાંતોનો પ્રચાર છે.
વળી ડો. રાધાકૃષ્ણન એમ પણ માને છે કે બ્રાહ્મણ ધર્મો અને મહાયાન સંપ્રદાયે તત્ત્વજ્ઞાન અને ધર્મમાં એક જ પ્રકારના વિચારોનું પ્રતિપાદન કર્યું. ભારતીય માનસમાં જે દાગ્રહ છે તે તત્વજ્ઞાનમાં અદ્વૈત બ્રહ્મવાદ દ્વારા અને ધર્મમાં “ઈષ્ટ દેવતારાધન”ની સ્વતંત્રતા દ્વારા પ્રગટ થયો. મહાયાન સંપ્રદાયને દર્શનશાસ્ત્ર અને ધર્મ. અદ્વૈતવાદના દાર્શનિક વિચારો તથા ભક્તિપ્રધાન સેશ્વરવાદના જેવા જ છે. પ્રજાના ઘણા મોટા ભાગની જરૂરિયાતને પહોંચી વળવામાં એ સંપ્રદાય ભગવદ્ગીતાની જ ફીકી નકલ જેવો બની ગયો. ૨૪
આમ ડો. રાધાકૃષ્ણનને પ્રાચીન બૌદ્ધ ધર્મ તદ્દન મૌલિક જણાતો નથી. તેને આધાર તેઓ ઉપનિષદમાં શેાધે છે.૨૫ આ સંબંધમાં ડો. ભાંડારકર, શેઅરબસ્કી , ઓહનબર્ગ તથા ગ્લસફીલ્ડના મતને તેઓ અનુસરતા જણાય છે. પ્રા. હિરિયાણા પણ બુદ્ધને ઉપનિષદના તત્વજ્ઞાનના અણી ગણે છે. ૨૬ જૈનદર્શનની વાત કરીએ તે તેની તત્વમીમાંસા બહતત્વવાદી હોઈ તે ડો. રાધાકૃષ્ણનને માન્ય નથી, કારણ કે તેઓ અદ્રતના પુરસ્કર્તા હોય એમ જણાય છે. વળી જૈનોનું તર્કશાસ્ત્ર તેને સપ્તભંગી નય તથા અનેકાન્તવાદ ને પણ ડે. રાધાકૃષ્ણને એકાંગી સાપેક્ષવાદ ગણી ઈન્કાર કરે છે. જૈન તર્કશાસ્ત્ર તેમને એકતત્વવાદી વિજ્ઞાનવાદ તરફ દોરી જતું જણાય છે. એક પરમ અને નિરપેક્ષતની પૂર્વધારણા કર્યા સિવાય સ્યાદવાદનું તાર્કિક દૃષ્ટિએ નિરૂપણ જ ન થઈ શકે તેમ તેઓ માને છે. જૈન દર્શનને આવા કેઈ પરમ સત તત્ત્વ અંગેના સિદ્ધાંતની જરૂર જણાઈ નથી એનું કારણ એ છે કે જૈન તર્કશાસ્ત્ર સમગ્ર સત્યને પ્રથમથી જ

Page #162

૯
આંશિક દૃષ્ટિથી જુએ છે. જૈન દર્શીનના બહુતત્ત્વવાદ પણ તેમને તસ`ગત જણાતા નથી.૨૭ પ્રા. હિરિયાણાં પણ આ બારામાં ડો. રાધાકૃષ્ણના મતને મળતા છે. તેઓ લખે છે કે જો સાપેક્ષવાદને તર્કવાદની અંતિમ સીમા સુધી લઈ જવામાં આવે તે। આત્યંતિકવાદ અથવા એકાન્તવાદ જ ફલિત થાય, જેને સ્વીકારવા જૈને તૈયાર નથી. વળી તેમના મતે જૈન તત્ત્વજિજ્ઞાસાનુ અધકચરાપણુ. સપ્તભ'ગીના સિદ્ધાંતમાં પ્રતિબિ'બિત થાય છે; જે અનેક આંશિક અભિપ્રાય યા વિધાનાને એક સાથે ગાઢવી ત્યાં જ અટકે છે, પણ જે ચેાગ્ય સમન્વય દ્વારા તે બધામાં રહેલ વિરાધને દૂર કરવા પ્રયત્ન નથી કરતા. જેટલે અશે આ સિદ્ધાંત આ એકાંગી નિચા યા વિધાનો સામે લાલબત્તી ધરે છે—તેટલા અંશમાં તે! તે ખરાબર જ છે, પણ અંતે તે તે આવા એકાંગી ઉકેલા કરતાં કઈ ખાસ વધારે સૂચવતા નથી. આનુ કારણ, જે આંત્યંતિકવાદ યા એકાંતવાદ સામેના પૂર્વગ્રહ ન હોય તેા, સામાન્ય માન્યતાઓને વળગી રહેવાની યા અનુસરવાની ઇચ્છા જ માત્ર છે.૨૮ જો કે સપ્તભંગીનયને સંશયાત્મક જ્ઞાન કહી તેના છેદ ઉડાડી દેવા એ ખરાખર નથી. એ તે સત્યના જુદા જુદા પ્રકારના સ્વરૂપોનું નિર્દેશન કરાવતી એક વિચારસરણી છે. શ્રી ન, કે. મહેતાએ પણ સપ્તભ’ગીનું નિરૂપણ બિલકુલ અસાંપ્રદાયિક દૃષ્ટિએ કર્યુ છે. સપ્તભ`ગીના આધાર નયવાદ છે અને એનુ ધ્યેય સમન્વયનુ છે, અમુક વિવક્ષિત વસ્તુ પરત્વે જ્યારે ધ વિષયક દૃષ્ટિભેદો દેખાતા હૈાય ત્યારે એવા ભેદોના પ્રમાણપૂર્વક સમન્વય કરવા અને તેમ કરી બધી સાચી દષ્ટિઓને તેના યેાગ્ય સ્થાનમાં ગેાઠવી ન્યાય આપવા એવી ઉદ્દાત્ત ભાવના સપ્તભંગીના મૂળમાં રહેલી છે.૨૯ પ્રસ્થાનત્રચી લખવાને મારા (šા. રાધા.ના) હેતુ એક તર્ક યુક્ત બૌદ્દિક નિરૂપણ દ્વારા એમ દર્શાવવાના છે કે પ્રાચીન ભારતીય પ્રણાલી અને આધુનિક વિચારસરણી અનેતે ન્યાય થાય છે કે કેમ, આધ્યાત્મિક ઊંડાણ તથા નૈતિક બળ ધરાવવામાં શું આપણે આપણાં પૂર્વજો કરતાં ચઢિયાતા છીએ? હિન્દુ ધર્માંની ખીજ રૂપ કલ્પનાઓ વેદાન્તના મૂલાધાર રૂપ ગ્રંથેામાં સમાયેલી છે. વેદાન્તના તત્ત્વજ્ઞાનમાં પ્રસ્થાત્રયીનું પ્રામાણ્ય મનાય છે. પ્રાચીન ઉપનિષદો, ખાદરાયણનાં બ્રહ્મસૂત્રેા અને ભગવદ્ગીતા એ ત્રણેમાં આખુ વેદાંતશાસ્ત્ર આવી જાય છે. આ ત્રણેની જે એકવાકયતા કરી બતાવે તે આચાય. આ ગ્રંથામાંનું એકપણ વચન પાતાના પ્રતિપાદનને પ્રતિકૂલ નથી, એવા અવિરોધ સિદ્ધ કરી આપ્યા સિવાય કાઈ પણ સિદ્ધાંત વેદાન્ત તરીકે સ્વીકારાતા નથી, મૂળ ત્રણે ગ્રંથામાં એકવાકયતા છે જ એ ગ્રહીત માનેલુ હાઈ એ એકવાકયતા કેવી છે તે પ્રત્યેક આચાયે બતાવી આપવાનુ હોય છે. માદરાયણનાં બ્રહ્મસૂત્રેા અને ભગવાનની ગીતા એ સ્વતંત્ર ગ્રંથા નથી, પણ અંતે ગ્રંથા ઉપનિષદના તત્ત્વજ્ઞાનનું જ ઉપબૃંહણ કરે છે, ઉપનિષદોનાં નિરનિરાળાં વચનેાના તાત્ત્વિક દૃષ્ટિએ વિચાર કરી બાદરાયણે તેમાંથી બ્રહ્મસૂત્ર નિર્માણ કર્યાં –બ્રહ્મસૂત્રેાને ઉપનિષદોનુ શાસ્ત્રીકરણ કહી શકાય. તર્ક પ્રણાલીનું અવલ`બન કરી બાદરાયણે ઉપનિષદોનુ તત્ત્વજ્ઞાન સૂત્ર રૂપે આપણી સમક્ષ રજૂ કર્યુ છે, મૂળ પ્રમાણ— ભૂત ગ્રંથ તા. ઉપનિષદો જ છે, આ ઉપનિષદ્યા એટલે વૈદિક પર’પરાના ઋષિઓના સ્વત ંત્ર, સ્વયંભૂ, મૂળભૂત ધર્માનુભવ, અને તેમને યોગયુક્ત સ્થિતિમાં હંમેશાં થયેલુ

Page #163

૧૦
જ્ઞાન ફુરણ. ભારતીય તત્વજ્ઞાનમાં સારભૂત કે અકરૂપ વસ્તુ તે ઉપનિષદોમાં છે. ઉપનિષદોનાં પાયા ઉપર જ ભારતના પાછળનાં દર્શને ધર્મોની ઈમારત રચાઈ છે. બ્લમફીલ્ડ યોગ્ય જ કહે છે કે ભારતીય તત્વચિંતનની કોઈ પણ મહત્વની શાખા-અવૈદિક બૌદ્ધ દર્શન સુદ્ધાં—એવી નથી કે જેનાં મૂળ ઉપનિષદોમાં ન હોય.” ઉપનિષદોમાં પરમ સત્યને લગતા પ્રશ્નને વિચાર, બાહ્ય સૃષ્ટિના પૃથકકરણ દ્વારા તેમજ મનુષ્યના આન્તર વ્યાપારના પૃથક્કરણ દ્વારા એમ બે દષ્ટિએ કરેલું છે. માણસને થતા જ્ઞાનની પ્રક્રિયામાં એકીકરણ કરનારું જે તત્ત્વ છે તે આત્મા છે. સુષુપ્તિની અવસ્થામાં પણ તે આખો વખત મોજુદ હોય છે. જ્ઞાતાને લોપ થાય તે ણેય વસ્તુ, આપોઆપ લેપ પામે છે, પણ ય વસ્તુ અથવા વિષય લેપ પામે તોયે જ્ઞાતા એટલે કે વિષયને લોપ થતો નથી. તે નિત્ય છે–અજન્મા છે, શાશ્વત છે. આપણે દેહ ભલે નાશ પામે પણ આત્મા એટલે કે શુદ્ધ, બુદ્ધ, મુક્ત અસંસારી એ દૃષ્ટા–તે નિર્વિકારજ રહે છે. આત્મા અને બ્રહ્મ એ છે તો એક અને અભિન છે. નાશવંત ઇન્દ્રિયોને શરીરની પાછળ આત્મા રહેલો છે, જગતના નાશવંત પદાર્થોની પાછળ બ્રહ્મ રહેલું છે. બ્રહ્મ અને આત્માને એક્યને અનુભવ દરેક માણસે જાતે સાક્ષાત્કાર દ્વારા મેળવવાનો હોય છે. નિત્ય અને નિર્વિકાર એવા બ્રહ્મને અનિત્ય અને સવિકાર એવા જગતની ભાષામાં વર્ણવવાનો પ્રયત્ન મિથ્યા નિવડે છે. અપક્ષ અનુભવ યા સાક્ષાત્કાર વડે જે બ્રહ્મનું દર્શન થાય છે તે બ્રહ્મ જગતનું આદિકારણ છે. નિર્ગુણ નિરાકાર બ્રહ્મ, તે સગુણ, સાકાર જગતનું જ પારમાર્થિક રૂપ છે. પરિમિત જગતનું તે અપરિમિત રૂ૫ છે. પરિમિત જગતમાં જ અન્તગંત એવું નિત્ય, શાશ્વત અને અપરિમિત વસ્તુતત્ત્વ છે. જગતની જોડાજોડ રહેલું કોઈ ભિન્ન તત્વ નથી. પરિમિત જગત એ અપરિમિત બ્રહ્મના જ પરિમિત આવિર્ભાવ સિવાય બીજુ કંઈ નથી, જગત એ બ્રહ્માનું જ સગુણ સાકાર ને સપાધિક રૂપ છે. પર બ્રહનું વર્ણન કરવા માટે વિચારની કઈ પણ કોટિ નકામી નીવડે છે. વિચાર કે વાણીથી તેનું યથાર્થ આકલન કે વર્ણન થઈ શકતું નથી. દિક, કાળ ને કાર્યકારણના નિયમવાળું જે ભૌતિક જગત છે તેની પાછળ રહેલું નિત્ય, નિર્વિકાર, સ્વયંભૂ ને સ્વતંત્ર સંતતત્વ તે બ્રહ્મ છે; વિકાસ પામનારી સર્વ વસ્તુઓ અવિચળ ને નિત્ય એવા બ્રહ્મમાં પ્રતિષ્ઠિત છે. સંસાર અથવા જગતપ્રપંચ પરબ્રહામાં પ્રતિષ્ઠિત છે. પરબ્રહ્મ જગતનું અધિષ્ઠાન છે, તેને લીધે પરબ્રહ્મને કેટલીકવાર નિર્વિકાર તેમજ સવિકાર એ બંને શબ્દથી વર્ણવવામાં આવે છે. આપણને ખાતરી છે કે પરબ્રહ્મ ન હોય તે જગત પણ ન હોય. એ બે વચ્ચેનો સંબંધ કેવી જાતને છે તે આપણે જાણતા નથી. આપણે “માયા” શબ્દને ઉપગ કરીને આપણું અજ્ઞાન ઢાંકીએ છીએ. બ્રહ્મ અને જગત એક છે, છતાં જુદાં ભાસે છે, અને એ આભાસનું કારણ માયા છે. સ્વયં અવિકારી પિોતે વિકારનું નિર્માણ કરે છે. તત્ત્વ ચિંતનની દૃષ્ટિએ આપણે અહીં આવીને અટકી જવું પડે છે.
- બ્રહ્મવિદ્યાને સર્વમાન્ય મહાગ્રન્થ જે બ્રહ્મસૂત્ર તેને આરંભ પણ બ્રહ્મને જાણવાની જિજ્ઞાસાથી થાય છે. જિજ્ઞાસા એટલે જાણવાની ઈચછા, અષણ, બુદ્ધિ વડે કરેલી તપાસ, તર્ક દૃષ્ટિએ કરેલું અધ્યયન, બીજું સૂત્ર પણ એમ કહે છે કે જેમાંથી આ

Page #164

૧૧
જગતના જન્મ વગેરે થયેલું છે, એવું કોઈ સત્ તત્ત્વ છે ખરુ' ? (જીએ તૈત્તરીય ઉપનિષદ) ત્રીજા સૂત્ર દ્વારા ઈશ્વરને જંગતના રચિયતા એવા કારણ તરીકે શાસ્ત્રના સંદર્ભ દ્વારા નિરૂપેલ છે. શાસ્ત્ર માત્ર લિખિત પાડચપુસ્તક! નહિ પણ શાશ્વત સત્યનું નિરૂપણ છે. સૂત્ર ખીજા અને ત્રીજા વચ્ચે જે સાતત્ય છે તે બુદ્ધિ કે તર્ક અને અંત:અનુભૂતિના જેવું સાતત્ય છે. ચેાથા સૂત્રમાં આ સર્વના સમન્વયની વાત છે. આ ચાર સૂત્રેામાં બ્રહ્મસૂત્રના અક છે. શ્રીમદ્ ભગવદગીતા એ મહાભારતના મહાભડારમાં રહેલુ એક અમૂલ્ય રત્ન છે. જગતનાં ધાર્મિક સાહિત્યમાં એની ખરાબરી કરી શકે એવા એક પણ ગ્રન્થ નથી એમ હિન્દુ અભિમાન રાખે તે તેમાં આશ્રય' જેવું નથી. ગીતાને ઉપનિષદો રૂપી ગાયાનું દૂધ કહી છે. જ્ઞાનની ગંગા અને ભક્તિની કાલિન્દીના જે એ મહાપ્રવાહ ચાલ્યા આવતા હતા તેમાં કાઁયેાગરૂપી સરસ્વતી જોડી ગીતાકારે એ સાધનાને પણ ત્રિવેણી સ`ગમ સાધ્યો છે. ગીતાકારને આ ત્રણેય સાધનેનેા સમન્વય (સમુચ્ચય અર્થાત્ સંમિશ્રણ નહિ, પણ સમન્વય અર્થાત્ રસાયણ) અભિપ્રેત છે, એમ રાધાકૃષ્ણને વિસ્તારથી બતાવ્યુ` છે. ગીતાના સંદેશા સ` દેશકાળને માટે છે. ગીતાના દાનિક વિચારાના પાયા પર જ લોકપ્રિય હિન્દુ ધર્મની ઇમારત રચાયેલી છે. વિચારની ભિન્ન ભિન્ન પ્રણાલિકાઓને ભેગી કરી તેમાંથી અખ'ડ અને એક રસ એવા એક સિદ્ધાંત ઉપજાવવામાં ગીતાને સફળતા મળી છે કે કેમ એ પ્રશ્નના વિભિન્ન ઉત્તરા આપણને મળે છે. ગીતામાં પરરપર વિરાધી તત્ત્વા એકખીજા સાથે ભળીને એક રસ બની ગયાં છે.
ગીતાના દરેક અધ્યાયને અ`તે જેસ'કલ્પ વાક્ય આવે છે તે પરથી એ જોઈ શકાય છે કે ગીતા એ બ્રહ્મવિદ્યા તથા યોગશાસ્ત્ર છે. બ્રહ્મવિદ્યા તે સત્ તત્ત્વનું દાનિક દષ્ટિએ કરેલું નિરૂપણ છે. સત્ તત્ત્વનું સ્વરૂપ કેવું છે તેનુ' તાર્કિક દષ્ટિએ કરેલુ વર્ણીન એમાં આવેલુ હોય છે. એ સત્ તત્ત્વની પ્રાપ્તિનો માર્ગ બતાવવાનું કામ યેગશાસ્ત્ર કરે છે, તે સદાચરણના રસ્તા છે, એ આપણે કરવાની સાધના છે, ગીતાના યોગશાસ્ત્રનુ મૂળ બ્રહ્મવિદ્યામાં રહેલુ' ગીતા તત્ત્વવિચારનું દન છે; તેમજ ધર્માચરણનું શાસ્ત્ર છે; સત્ય માટેની બૌદ્ધિક શેાધ છે, તેમજ એ સત્યને મનુષ્યના આત્મામાં જાગતી જ્યાત બતાવવાના પ્રયત્ન છે, ડૉ. રાધાકૃષ્ણન્ એમ માને છે કે નીતિ ધર્મોની ચર્ચા પાછળ દાનિક પ્રશ્નોની ચર્ચા હેવી આવશ્યક છે. જો કે આાથી ઉલટા મત પ્રા. હિરિયાણાના છે જેઓ લખે છે કે “ગીતા એક નૈતિક પ્રશ્નની ચર્ચા કરે છે અને તેથી તેમાં અવારનવાર જીવ, જગત અને બ્રહ્મને લગતા દાર્શનિક પ્રશ્નોની ચર્ચા આવ્યા વિના રહેતી નથી, પણ એ પ્રશ્નો તે આ ગ્રંથના નૈતિક ઉપદેશની પૂર્વભૂમિકા રૂપે જ આવે છે.’૩૦ ગીતામાં જીવ, જગત અને બ્રહ્મના સ્વરૂપને વિષે જે તાત્ત્વિક ચર્ચા છે તેમાં આપણને એવું કહ્યું નથી કે અમુક એક પણ વાત કેાઈએ કહી છે માટે આપણે ખરી માની લેવી. એમાં તે। માત્ર સૃષ્ટિના વિકાસના ક્રમ વર્ણવ્યા છે, અને એક પરમ ચેતનની–વિશ્વ પર અમલ ચલાવનાર તત્ત્વન-હસ્તી માનવી કેમ આવશ્યક છે તે સમજાવ્યું છે. પરમેશ્વર જે વિશ્વના શાસક હોય, તેા તેણે જગતના વ્યવહારમાં રસ લેવા રહ્યો, અને આપણે જો આપણને દરેકને અનુકૂળ હેાય એવા રસ્તા પર ચાલીએ તે આપણા અંતરમાં વસતા પરમાત્માનું અ-પરાક્ષ દન અથવા સાક્ષાત્કાર કરી શકીએ,

Page #165

ગીતામાં પરમેશ્વરના અવતારની વાત છે. અવતારવાદ માણસ જાતને ન આધ્યાત્મિક સંદેશ આપે છે. અવતારો તે લડાયક દે છે, ને તેઓ પાપ અને દુરાચાર, મૃત્યુ અને વિનાશની સામે ઝુંબેશ ચલાવે છે. આધ્યાત્મિક જગતને જે નિયમ છે તે ગીતામાં છટાદાર ભાષામાં વર્ણવેલ છે. ઈશ્વરનો આવિર્ભાવ તે જગતમાં સદાકાળ થયા જ કરે છે, માત્ર જ્યારે mતની વ્યવસ્થામાં પાપનું પલ્લું નમી જાય છે ને અધર્મને સુમાર રહેતો નથી ત્યારે તે આવિર્ભાવ ઉગ્ર રૂપમાં થવા પામે છે. પરમાત્માને અવતાર એ કે અમુક જ મનુષ્યમાં પ્રગટ થાય છે, એવું માની લેવાની જરૂર નથી, એ તે જગતમાં સર્વત્ર પ્રગટ થાય છે, એ અવતાર પિતાના જીવનમાં પ્રગટ કરવાની શકિત દરેક વ્યક્તિમાં પડેલી છે. ૩૧ અવતાર એ માણસનું રૂપ ધારણ કરીને ઉતરી આવેલ ઈશ્વર છે, ઊર્ધ્વગતિ કરીને ઈશ્વર પદે પહોંચેલે માણસ નથી. (શ્રી અરવિંદ ઘોષને આથી ભિન્ન મત છે તે અહીં ધ્યાન દોરવું રહ્યું) ગીતામાં જ્ઞાન, ભક્તિ અને કમને સમન્વય છે એમ રાધાકૃષ્ણન માને છે. તેઓ બૌદ્ધ ધર્મના મહાયાન સંપ્રદાય સાથે ગીતાનું સામ્ય દર્શાવે છે. મહાયાન સંપ્રદાયના વિચારે દાર્શનિક અતવાદ અને ભક્તિભરી શ્રદ્ધાને સંયોગ કર્યો છે. તેમાં તે ભ. ગીતાને મળતો આવે છે. સાથે સાથે ગીતાએ બૌદ્ધધર્મના મહાયાન સંપ્રદાય પર પણ અસર કરી છે એમ જણાય છે. ભગવદગીતા આપણી આગળ જે ઉંચ્ચતમ ધ્યેય રજૂ કરે છે તેમાં કર્મને કૌશલની સાથે ચિંતનની અવિચળ. શાન્તિને સંગ થયેલ છે. ઉદા. ત. ગીતાને છેલ્લે લૅક લઈએ: અર્થાત્ કૃષ્ણની ધ્યાનશક્તિ-એકલી કશા કામની નથી. તેની સાથે અજુનની ધનુર્વિદ્યા પણ જોઈએ, કેવળ ચિતનપરાયણ ભેગી નહીં, પણ વહેવારમાં રોપો માણસ–રાજા પણ જોઈએ. યોગી અને ધ્યાની કર્મરૂપી તપમાં ધ્યાનની શક્તિ રેડે છે, બેન સંયોગ સાધે છે, ધ્યાન અને કર્મને પરિણય કરાવે છે...આ ધ્યેય ગીતાએ આપણી સામે રજૂ કરેલું છે.
છે. રાધાકૃષ્ણન દ્વારા વેદાન્તનું અને ખાસ કરીને અદ્વૈત વેદાન્તનું અને તેમાં પણ શાંકર વેદાન્તની શાખાનું જે અર્થઘટન કરવામાં આવ્યું છે અને તે દ્વારા તેમણે જે કશીક પુનઃરચના સૂચવી છે, તેમાં મુખ્ય લાક્ષણિક મુદ્દાઓ આપણે જોઈએ.૩૨ અસરકારક અર્થઘટનમાં આલોચના અને મૂલ્યાંકનનો સમાવેશ થઈ જાય છે. જે શબ્દ નિર્લેપ અને નિષ્પક્ષ અલેચના કરીએ તે જ તેનું સ્થાન દર્શનમાં નિશ્ચિતપણે સ્થાપી શકાય. ૩૩ વળી દર્શનના ઈતિહાસને અભ્યાસ કરવામાં માત્ર સહાનુભૂતિપૂર્ણ પૂર્વકલ્પનાઓની જ નહિ પણ સર્જનાત્મક અને ગહન આંતઝની પણ આવશ્યકતા છે, આજના ધમધયુક્ત સંશયવાદી યુગમાં તે તે વધારે જરૂરી બને છે, ઠે. રાધાકૃષ્ણન એમ માને છે કે
જ્યારે ધાર્મિક કે દાર્શનિક પુનર્ધટન કરવાને કઈ મહાન પ્રયત્ન થાય છે, ત્યારે પહેલાં સંશયવાદનું પ્રચંડ મોજુ' આવે છે, રૂઢિઓ તૂટી જાય છે, પરિણામે નવી શ્રદ્ધાના ઉત્થાન માટે ભૂમિકા તૈયાર થતી જાય છે. આથી આધુનિક જ્ઞાન અને વિવેચના સાથે બંધ બેસે એ રીતે આપણે સાર્વત્રિક સત્યનાં નવેસર વિધાન કરવાની જરૂર છે. એક બાજુએ રૂઢિના જુલમ ઉપર વિજય મેળવવાનું અને બીજી બાજુએ વિચ્છેદક વ્યક્તિવાદને લીધે નીપજતી અરાજકતાને ટાળવાનું બેવડું કામ આપણે કરવાનું છે. ગંભીર પ્રશ્નો ઉપર સતત ચિંતન કરવાના ચાલુ પ્રયત્ન દ્વારા જ આપણું ભૂતકાળની ભૂલોને

Page #166

સુધારી શકાશે, પરંપરાગત નીતિ સામે જે બળો જામ્યો છે તે પણ અંતરાત્મા સચેત થયાનું એક લક્ષણ છે. નીતિ નિયમો ઉપર શ્રદ્ધા રાખવી એ ઈષ્ટ છે, પણ તેને વિષે આંધળું ઝનૂન રાખવું એ અનિષ્ટ છે. નીતિના નિયમોને અનુલંઘનીય જ ગણવામાં આવે તો પ્રગતિ થઈ જ ન શકે. ધાર્મિક અત: અનુભૂતિને બૌદ્ધિક સ્વરૂપનો સ્વીકાર બૌદ્ધિક કરીને તેમણે વેદાનમાં સૂર દાખલ કર્યાને સ્વીકાર કર્યો છે, બુદ્ધિ અને અન્તઃ અનુભૂતિ વચ્ચેના પ્રગાઢ સંબંધ પર તેઓએ ભાર મૂક્યો છે. વેદાન્તની પ્રણાલિમાં તેમણે નૈસર્ગિક ઈશ્વરશાસ્ત્રની હસ્તી શોધી કાઢી છે. શાસ્ત્રો એ માત્ર લિખિત પાઠ્યપુસ્તક નથી પણ સનાતન સત્યનું નિદર્શન કરે છે એ પરિવર્ધિત ખ્યાલ રજૂ કર્યો છે.
આમ સમન્વયની વિશાળ સંકલ્પના તેમણે વિકસાવી છે, જ્ઞાન એ સુસંગત સમષ્ટિરૂપ છે અને માનવજાતના જીવંત ધર્મોના જ્ઞાન દ્વારા સમન્વય સાધી શકાય છે. (Fellowship of faiths) પ્રણાલીગત વેદાન્તમાં રહેલા સંન્યસ્તભાવને તેમણે હળ બનાવ્યું છે. અને સર્વ સામાન્ય માણસની સમજમાં આવે તે વ્યાવહારિક વેદાન્ત વિકસાવ્યો છે. (અહીં આપણને સ્વા. વિવેકાનંદનું સ્મરણ થાય છે.) વિશ્વપ્રક્રિયામાં અંતર્ભત એવું પરમ સત તત્ત્વ અને વિશ્વથી પર એવું સતતત્વ એ બન્ને વચ્ચે ઘનિષ્ઠ સંબંધ દર્શાવી તેમણે એક નૂતન દષ્ટિ આપી છે; તેમનો મુખ્ય આશય જગતનું યોગ્ય-યથાર્થ—અર્થઘટન કરી તેને માયાવાદમાંથી બચાવી લેવાને છે; જ્યારે શંકરાચાર્યમાં આપણને બ્રહ્માને બચાવવાને અને જગતનું મિથ્યાત્વ સ્થાપવાનો આશય જણાય છે. “માયા” અંગેના ડો. રાધાકૃષ્ણનનાં વિવિધ અર્થઘટને આ બાબતની સાક્ષી પૂરે છે. મેક્ષ અથવા આત્માની વિમુક્તિ એ માનવજીવનનું અન્તિમ ધ્યેય છે, એ એને આખરી મુકામ છે, આત્મગિરિને શિખરે પહોંચવું ને અમૃતત્વ પ્રાપ્ત કરવું એ ઈશ્વરે એને માટે નિમેંલે આદર્શ છે. એ જીવનને પરમ પુરુષાર્થ છે, મુક્તિના બે પ્રકાર છે, (૧) જીવન્મુતિ (બૌધ્ધ-નિર્વાણ) અને વિદેહ મુક્તિ (બૌદ્ધ-પરિનિર્વાણ) આ લેકમાં જ અવિદ્યાએ રચેલાં કર્મ અને કર્મનાં બંધનેમાંથી જે છૂટી જાય છે એ જીવન્મુક્તિ છે. એ રીતે મુક્ત થયેલ તે મુક્ત–અર્થાત્ વિદેહમત થાય છે. અર્થાત ફરી શરીર ધારણ કરતું નથી. શંકર અને પ્રકારની મુક્તિ માને છે. જયારે રામાનુજ વ. માત્ર વિદેહમુક્તિ જ માને છે. મોક્ષની અવસ્થામાં આત્માને પરમાત્માનું અર્થ થાય છે એ એક મત છે, જ્યારે મેક્ષાવસ્થામાં આત્મા અને પરમાત્માનું અકળે નહિ પણ સામ્ય થાય છે એ બીજો મત છે. શંકર આમાંથી પહેલા મતના છે, અને રામાનુજ બીજા મતના છે. બંને મત પિતાના સમર્થનમાં ઉપનિષદોનાં વચન ટાંકે છે, ડૉકટર રાધાકૃષ્ણનના મતે મુક્ત પુરૂષ મુક્તિની પળે જ “સર્વાત્મ” પ્રાપ્ત કરે છે; છતાં જ્યાં લગી વિશ્વની ક્રિયા ચાલે છે ત્યાં લગી કર્મ કરવા માટેના કેન્દ્રરૂપે તે પિતાનું વ્યક્તિત્વ કાયમ રાખે છે, આખા જગતને મુક્તિ મળે તે પછી જ તેમને આ જગતમાં આવવાપણું રહેતું નથી. મોક્ષ એ અનન્તકાળ માટે વ્યક્તિત્વનો લોપ નથી, પણ આત્માના પરમ આનંદરૂપ મુક્તિની અવસ્થા છે ને તેમાં ઈશ્વરના સાંનિધ્યમાં જીવનું નોખું વ્યક્તિત્વ ચાલુ રહે છે. અપૂર્ણ જગતમાં સંપૂર્ણ મેક્ષ અશક્ય

Page #167

૧
છે અને તેથી જેમને આત્મદર્શન થયું હોય છે તેઓ જ્યાં સુધી અન્યાયનું નિવારણ કરવાનું હોય ત્યાં સુધી જગતમાં કામ કરે છે. '
એક ટીકા એવી કરવામાં આવે છે કે શંકરના અદ્વૈતવાદ તથા રામાનુજના વૈયક્તિક સેશ્વરવાદ વચ્ચે ડો. રાધાકૃષ્ણનનું તત્વજ્ઞાન ઘડિયાળના લોલકની માફક ઝોલાં ખાય છે.૩૪ આ ટીકા સામે ડો. રાધાકૃષ્ણનને જેવાથ એ છે કે ટીકાકાર અહીં પ્રથમથી જ એવી પૂર્વધારણા સાથે ચાલે છે કે સર્વોચ્ચ તત્ત્વ કાં તે નિરપેક્ષ, નિર્ગુણ નિરાકાર હોવું જોઈએ અથવા તે સાપેક્ષ, સગુણને સાકર; જેને તેઓ સ્વીકાર કરતા નથી, તે કઈ વળી એવી દલીલ પણ કરે છે કે ડો. રાણાકૃષ્ણન શંકરને હેગલની દષ્ટિથી જુએ છે. અન્ત: અનુભૂતિને સંબંધમાં આ ટીકા છે. એક બાજુથી અન્ત:અનુભૂતિને પ્રામાણ્ય નિરપેક્ષ માનવી કે સ્વતસિદ્ધ તરીકે સ્થાપવી અને બીજી બાજુથી તેની ચકાસણીમાં બુદ્ધિના તત્ત્વને દાખલ કરવું એ પિતાને મૂળ પક્ષ છોડી દેવા જેવું છે. એક બાજુથી શંકર અને બીજી બાજુથી રામાનુજ એમ બન્નેના તત્ત્વજ્ઞાનને આંશિક સ્વીકાર કે આંશિક અસ્વીકાર કરી શું કઈ મધ્યમમાર્ગ કાઢી શકાય તેમ છે ? ડો. રાધાકૃષ્ણનના મતે બને આચાર્યો વેદાન્ત તત્વજ્ઞાનની મહાન વિભૂતિઓ છે; પરંતુ તકલીફ એ છે કે એકમાં રહેલ સર્વોચ્ચ ગુણ તે બીજની ખામી બની જાય છે અને આથી ઉલટું પણ સાચું ઠરે છે. ૩૫ પરંતુ યથાર્થ તત્ત્વજ્ઞાન માટે બને પરસ્પર પૂરક નીવડે છે. શંકરના નિર્ગુણ બ્રહ્મને તથા રામાનુજન સગુણ બ્રહ્મને તેઓ છોડવા માગતા નથી. શંકર તાર્કિક સેશ્વરવાદ નિરૂપે છે એમ તેઓ માને છે. જો કે અન્ત: અનુભૂતિ દ્વારા પ્રસ્થાપિત નિરપેક્ષવાદ તથા તર્ક-યુક્તિ દ્વારા સ્થાપિત વ્યાવહારિક સેશ્વરવાદ વચ્ચે શું સંબંધ છે તે શંકર જણાવતાં નથી. ઠે. રાધાકૃષ્ણનને આશય શંકરના અતવાદમાંથી નિષેધનું તત્ત્વ દૂર કરવાનો જણાય છે, પરંતુ તેઓ તેમાં સફળ થયા છે ? શંકર અને બ્રેડલે માને છે તેમ ઈશ્વર એ નિરપેક્ષ, નિર્ગુણ બ્રહ્મને આભાસ કે વિવર્ત માત્ર નથી, પરંતુ તે અમુક દષ્ટિબિંદુથી જણાતે નિર્ગુણ બ્રહ્મ જ છે, હવે જે નિર્ગુણ બ્રહ્મ જ માત્ર પરમ સત્ હોય તે જગતના અસ્તિત્વને કેમ સમજાવવું . રાધાકૃષ્ણના મતે જગત એ ઈશ્વરની આત્માભિવ્યક્તિ છે. સૃષ્ટિકર્તા અને સર્જન બને એકરૂપ બની જાય છે ત્યારે ઈશ્વર નિર્ગુણમાં સરી પડે છે, જે માટે ડો. રાધાકૃષ્ણને શંકરની ટીકા કરી છે કે તે ઈશ્વરને નિરપેક્ષ નિર્ગુણ બ્રહ્મ જેડે સાંકળી શક્યા નથી. તેને ડો. રાધાકૃષ્ણન વિધાયક રીતે કઈ રીતે સાંકળે છે? એને એક શક્ય જવાબ એ છે કે તેઓ પોતાને અંત: અનુભૂતિના સિદ્ધાંત દ્વારા આ કાર્ય સાધે છે. આપણું બુદ્ધિ માટે ઈશ્વર એ સત્ય છે, આપણું પ્રજ્ઞા માટે નિર્ગુણ બ્રહ્મ સત્ય છે. અહીં પ્રજ્ઞા અર્થ તેઓ Integral Experience એવો કરે છે, ચેકસતા અને છતાં અ-વક્તવ્યપણું કે જે અંગેના વિચારનું આદાન પ્રદાન થઈ શકતું નથી તે અહીં અંત:અનુભૂતિની કસટી બને છે, છતાં બુદ્ધિ અને અ–પરોક્ષ અનુભવ અલગ કે અસતત નથી; અત:પ્રજ્ઞા અ– બૌદ્ધિક નથી, પરંતુ જેની બુદ્ધિ દ્વારા વિભાવના યોજી શકાતી નથી તેવી સ્થિતિ છે. વ્યવહિતતા અને અ-- વ્યવહિતતા બન્નેનું, જેમાં પૂર્ણ આકલન થાય તે બૌદ્ધિક અત: અનુભૂતિ છે. આજ

Page #168

૧૫
રીતે નિર્ગુણ બ્રહ્મ એ ઈશ્વરથી ભિન નથી પણ તેની પૂર્ણતા છે. ૩૬ - આ પ્રકારની વિચારસરણી સામે પણ આક્ષેપ થયા છે ઉદા. ત., ભારતીય તત્વચિંતન બુદ્ધિવાદી નથી એ તો ન ગૂઢ કે રહસ્યવાદ છે, કારણ કે તે શબ્દ તયુક્ત દલીલના બદલે રૂપકોની ભાષામાં વાત કરે છે અને પરિણામે તેને તત્વવિજ્ઞાન કરતાં કપોળ કલ્પિત એવું શાસ્ત્ર કહેવું ઉપયુક્ત છે. તેઓ જે માને છે અને જાહેર કરે છે તેને સાબિત કરવાનું અશક્ય કાર્યા ડો. રાધાકૃષ્ણન કરે છે, મતલબ કે વિચારની સપાટી પર પૂર્વને પશ્ચિમના જોડાણનું; અને આમ કરવા જતાં તેમણે ભારતીય તાવિક વિચારસરણીને ખોટી રીતે રજૂ કરી છે, કારણ કે તે પશ્ચિમની વિચારસરણીના વેશમાં છે. વળી એ સમજવું કઠિન બની જાય છે કે ડો. રાધાકૃષ્ણન તર્કશાસ્ત્રના કયા પાસાં સામે વાંધો ઉઠાવે છે, કારણ કે “તકશાસ્ત્ર” દ્વારા તેઓ શો અર્થ ધરાવે છે તે સ્પષ્ટ નથી, કોઈવાર તેઓ તકશાસ્ત્રને સમગ્રતયા ધુત્કારી કાઢે છે તે કોઈવાર માત્ર તેનાં અમુક પાસાંને, તો કોઈવાર તેઓ તત્વજ્ઞાન માટે તર્કશાસ્ત્રની અગત્ય જ પીછાનતા નથી ! ભારતીય તત્વજ્ઞાનને ઇતિહાસના નિરૂપણમાં તેમની નબળાઈ એ છે કે તેઓ પોતાના પુરગામીઓના વિચારોમાં પોતાનાં મંતવ્ય નિહાળે છે અને આ રીતે તેમના અતિહાસિક પરિપ્રેક્ષ્યને બધા પહોંચાડે છે,
ભારતીય તત્ત્વજ્ઞાનના ઈતિહાસના પ્રથમ ગ્રંથની પહેલી આવૃત્તિ પર જે ટીકાઓ થયેલી તે અંગેનું એક પરિશિષ્ટ તેઓએ તે પુસ્તકની બીજી અંગ્રેજી આવૃત્તિમાં ઉમેર્યું હતું. તેઓ જણાવે છે કે-“શંકરના માયાવાદની ટીકા મેં કરી એથી ટીકાકારોએ એમ ક૯પી લીધું કે હું શાંકરમતને વિરોધી છું અને સગુણવાદ પ્રત્યેની મારી ઉપેક્ષા જોઈ કેટલાકે આક્ષેપ કર્યો કે મારામાં રામાનુજ મત પ્રત્યે સમભાવ નથી. જે અર્થ મેં ઘટા છે તે ઈ એકાદ બાબતમાં એક યા બીજી પરંપરાથી જુદો પડતો દેખાય એ સંભવિત છે, પણ એ અર્થ બુદ્ધિ કે તક ન સ્વીકારી શકે એવો નથી, સામાન્ય રીતે ઉપનિષદોના અર્થે એક યા બીજ મહાન ભાકારે કરેલા વિવેચનને નજર સામે રાખીને ઘટાડવામાં આવે છે. ઉપનિષદમાંથી જુદી જુદી વિચાર ધારાઓ નીકળવાને કેવો અવકાશ હોં એ બતાવવાનો મારો પ્રયાસ હતે. શંકર અને રામાનુજનાં વિવરણ વચ્ચે અ–વિરોધ કે એકવાક્યતા સાધી શકાય એવું કોઈ દષ્ટિ બિંદુ હોય અને તેને ખાળી શકાય એમ છે કે કેમ તથા તે બે પ્રધાન ભાષ્યકારોનાં મુખ્ય સિદ્ધાંતોને ન્યાય થાય એવું ઉ૫નિષદોનું એકધારું ને સુસંગત વિવેચન કરી શકાય એવું છે કે નહિ એ પણ મારે બતાવવું હતું હું કબૂલ કરું છું કે “ઉપનિષદના મૂળ પ્રસ્થાન ગ્રંથમાં છેવટનો સિદ્ધાંત તે શંકરને કેવલાદતને છે કે રામાનુજના વિશિષ્ટાદ્વૈતને તે નક્કી કરવું કઠિને છે, કારણ કે પરમ સત્યના સ્વરૂપનું વર્ણન કરવામાં ઉપનિષદો બેવડે અવાજે બોલે છે” (મતલબ કે તેમાં નિગણ તથા સગુણ (બ્રહ્મ) એમ બનેનું નિરૂપણ છે, વળી જગતના સ્વરૂપ વિષે પણ તેમાં બે મત જોવા મળે છે, કેટલાક ભાગમાં તેને બ્રહ્મનો વિવત અને બીજામાં તેને બ્રહ્મનું પરિણામ માનેલ છે. આ બે વિસંવાદી દેખાતા સૂરો વચ્ચે બુદ્ધિ સમજી શકે એવી એકવાકથતા સાધવાનો રસ્તો એક જ છે અને તે બે પ્રકારનાં દકિટ બિન્દુની યક્તિ સ્વીકારવાનો. આચાર્ય શંકર પણ આ યુક્તિને જ ઉપયોગ કરે છે. નિર્ગુણ

Page #169

બ્રહ્મ અને સગુણ પુરુષરૂપ બ્રહ્મ તે એક જ પરમસતનાં અપક્ષ અનુભવ અને બુદ્ધિ દ્વારા મળેલાં બે જુદાં જુદાં ચિત્રો છે. પરબ્રહ્મ અચિન્ય અને અપ્રમેય હોઈ તેની વ્યાખ્યા આપવી શક્ય નથી. છતાં તેઓ પરબ્રહ્મનાં બુદ્ધિગ્રાહ્ય વર્ણને આપે છે, એ વર્ણને સાવ સાચાં નથી, કોઈ પણ તક શુદ્ધ વર્ણન જરાયે સાચું હોય તો તે રામાનુજે આપ્યું છે તે ટળે જ આપી શકાય, પરંતુ શંકર આ પ્રકારના તર્કની ભાષામાં વર્ણવેલા બ્રહ્મને અપર બ્રહ્મ માને છે અને તેથી ઉચ્ચ એવું પરબ્રહી છે તેમ કહે છે.” ઠે. રાધાકૃષ્ણની ફિલસૂફી” નામના ગ્રંથમાં ૩૭ સ્વામી અગેહાનંદ ભારતીને “ડૉ. રાધાકૃષ્ણ, અને અન્ય વેદાન્ત” પર એક લેખ છે, જેમાં તેઓએ ડે. રાધાકૃષ્ણનની સારી એવી ટીકા કરેલી છે. તેઓ લખે છે કે૩૮ કઈ પણ ફિલસૂફી, જે તેની અન્ય મહત્તવની શાખાઓ જેવી કે તર્કશાસ્ત્ર, નીતિશાસ્ત્ર અને કદાચ સૌન્દર્યશાસ્ત્રના ભોગે જે તેને સમગ્ર ભાર તે સત્તાશાસ્ત્ર અને તત્વવિજ્ઞાન પર મૂકતી હોય તે તે ઈશ્વરશાસ્ત્ર નામને જ લાયક છે. વેદાન્ત અને તેની સર્વશાખાઓએ આજ કાર્ય કર્યું છે અને તે સર્વ ઈશ્વરસત્તાશાસ્ત્ર જ છે. તત્વજ્ઞાની અને ઈશ્વરશાસ્ત્રી એ બન્નેને એક બનાવી દેવાનું આ એક ભારતીય વલણ છે. અધ્યાત્મવિચારણાની આ ભારતીય રીતમાં માહિતી કરતાં પ્રેરણાનું તત્વ વધુ રહેલું છે, પરિણામે વેદાન્ત અને બુદ્ધિસ્ટ સોસાયટીઓ નીકળી પડી છે, અને એ ખ્યાલ પ્રવર્તાવે છે કે આજની મુશ્કેલીઓમાંથી માત્ર ભારત જ જગતને બચાવી શકે તેમ છે. ડો. રાધાકૃષ્ણન પણ ઈશ્વરશાસ્ત્રી જ છે, તેઓ હિન્દુ ધર્મના ઈશ્વરશાસ્ત્રી છે. ફિલેસોફીને તત્ત્વશુદ્ધ અર્થ છે પ્રજ્ઞા કે જ્ઞાન માટે પ્રેમ, ડહાપણ માટે અનુરાગ, તે એક પદ્ધતિ છે, તેમજ વલણ પણ છે. જ્યારે ભારતીયો તેનું અર્થઘટન એમ કરે છે કે તે એક ધર્મ પણ છે. ભારતીય દર્શને હંમેશાં અપ્રગતિશીલ રહ્યું છે. કઈ પણ ભારતીય દાર્શનિકે આ સદીમાં કઈ વિશેષ કે નવીન સૂચવ્યું હોય એમ જણાતું નથી, એનો એ જૂન દારૂ નવા લેબલો તળે નવી બોટલમાં ભર્યો છે. હા, નવીન અને સુંદર આલંકારિક ભાષાના વાઘા પહેરાવી તેની રજૂઆત થઈ છે, ઈશ્વરને અહીં ગૃહીત તરીકે નહિ લેતાં તેનું સ્થાપન જ કરી રાખ્યું છે. ભારતીય સંસ્કૃત ભાષાના “દર્શન” અને અંગ્રેજી ભાષાના શબ્દ “ફિલેફી”ના અર્થમાં સમાનતા માની લઈ મોટે ગોટાળે જાણેઅજાણે ઊભો થયો છે. પશ્ચિમમાં જે તર્કયુક્ત બૌદ્ધિક વિચારણું છે તેને અહીં અભાવ જણાય છે. તર્કયુક્ત વિચારણાની વાત આવે એટલે અહીં ભારતીય દાર્શનિક તત્ત્વજ્ઞાનના ક્ષેત્રમાં પ્રવેશી અંતે મતાગ્રહી બની જાય છે, જેનું પરિણામ ઈશ્વર સત્તા તરફ વળવામાં આવે છે, આમ એકંદરે વલણ સ્વમત આગ્રહી કે હઠાગ્રહી તથા અંધશ્રદ્ધાયુક્ત બનતું જેવા મળે છે. વેદાન્તની વાત કરીએ તે તેનું મૂળ જ અ–તાર્કિક છે, ઉપનિષદોનાં મહાવાક લઈએ તો એ સંદર્ભમાં પણ કયારેક બ્રહ્મને નિર્ગુણ તે વળી કયારેક સગુણ કહેવામાં આવ્યું છે, વર્જિત મધ્યના તાર્કિક વૈચારિક નિયમનું અહીં પાલન થતું નથી. જે તાર્કિક ન હોય તે અતાર્કિક (પરંતુ તર્કથી પર નહિ) જ કહેવાય. માત્ર શબ્દની રમત કે ન સમજી શકાય. તેવા ભારેખમ શબ્દોના ભાર તળે તત્ત્વજ્ઞાન દબાઈ જાય છે અને ઘણીવાર આત્માશ્રયને દોષ વહોરીને પણ દલીલે થતી હોય છે, વેદાન્ત દર્શન એ ઈશ્વરશાસ્ત્રીની ફિલસફી બની જાય છે, જેમાં ચેડી વિદ્વતા આવે અને છેડે રહસ્યવાહ

Page #170

૧૭
આવે છે. ડૉ. રાધાકૃષ્ણન્ અલબત્ત એક સારા ઈશ્વરશાસ્ત્રી છે, એક સારા ભારતીય (હિન્દુ) છે. કેટલાક તા વળી અતિ ઉત્સાહમાં તેમને આધુનિક શંકર કે આધુનિક ઋષિ એવુ બિરુદ પણ આપે છે. જેઓ શંકરમતાનુયાયી નથી તેઓ તા ડૉ. રાધાકૃષ્ણન સામે પોતાની સર્વીસત્તા કામે લગાડી લડવા તૈયાર છે. તેમનું તત્ત્વજ્ઞાન માહિતી પણ આપે છે અને પ્રેરણા પણ. પર`તુ તેમાં જે કાંઈ છે તેમાં સ કાંઈ માત્ર શાંકરવેદાન્ત જ દૃષ્ટિગોચર થાય છે. વેદાન્તની અન્ય વિકસિત શાખાઓને તેમાં તદ્દન અપૂરતી જગ્યા ફાળવેલ છે, અન્ય આચાર્યોં દ્વારા પ્રવતિર્યંત વેદાન્ત તથા ત ંત્ર વ. તે ણે નાત બહાર જ છે. આથી જ પ્રેા. મલકાનીએ કહ્યું કે ભારતમાં જે વિકસિત અને પ્રગતિશીલ ન હેાય તેા તે માત્ર વેદાન્ત અને તે પણ આચાય શંકરની છાપવાળુ એવા જ પ્રચાર નિરંતર થતા રહેશે તે ભારત કદાચ બૌદ્ધિક રીતે રાંક બની જશે. અન્ય દશાને પ્રચારલક્ષી તથા વાણી વિલાસનું ફળ માનવું તે ભય'કર ભૂલ છે. જયતી અને બ્યાસતી જેવા તાર્કિકાને ભૂલી જવા ન જોઈએ,
ડૉ. રાધાકૃષ્ણનની ફિલસૂફીમાં પણ આપણને મૂલ્યાનુક્રમ આપેલા જણાય છે. અને તેને લાગણીની સભરતાથી ન્યાયી ઠરાવ્યેા છે. માયા જો બ્રહ્મની સાથે જ રહેતી હાય તા બ્રહ્મની શુદ્ધતા ોખમાય છે, અને તે બ્રહ્મથી ભિન્ન છે એમ કહીએ તા અદ્વૈતવાદના પાયા હલી જાય છે પછી આ હકીકતને સમજાવવા અને તેમાંથી મા કાઢવા વચ્ચે આગવુ તક શાસ્ત્ર લાવી સત્ની એ કક્ષાઓ–પારમાર્થિક અને વ્યાવહારિકની વાત કરવી એટલે મૂળ સતુની સ્થિતિને નકારી તર્કનુ ખૂન કરવા જેવી આ વાત છે. તત્ત્વજ્ઞાનના કેયડા ઉકેલવા માટે આનંદ'' શાન્તતા' વ.ની કસોટી કારગત નીવડે નહિ. તર્કશાસ્ત્ર અને નીતિશાસ્ત્રને ભેળવી ન દેવાં જોઈએ. શાંકરવેદાન્તના સ``માં ડૉ. રાધાકૃષ્ણનને Panegyriot કહેવા જોઈએ. રાધાકૃષ્ણનના મનમાં જાણે કે પ્રથમથી જ એક સૂત્ર વસી ગયુ` છે કે ‘વિચાર અને સત્તા એક છે,' જે આપણે સૌ માત્ર નિરપેક્ષવાદીએ જ હાવાની છાપ ઊભી કરે છે. તેમનુ' આ મતત્ર્ય તે શકરાઈટ છે તેના કરતાં વિશેષ તા હૈગલીયન છે એવી છાપ ઊભી કરે છે. પાશ્ચાત્ય તત્ત્વચિંતનમાં જે Thought-Being છે તે ઉપનિષદના સત-ચિત્ જેવું નથી. “આનંદ' તા તે છે જ નહિ. ખ્રિસ્તી ત્રિમૂતિ સાથે તેને સરખાવાય નહિ. વળી અદ્વૈતવેદાન્ત જે કહે તે જ સાચું અને સાંખ્ય જેવા દ્વૈતવાદી ને ખાટાં કારણ કે તેનું તત્ત્વવિજ્ઞાન ખાટુ' છે એમ માનવું તે સ્વમતાગ્રહીપણું જ સૂચવે છે. જે અમાં તર્કશાસ્ત્ર કદાચ ખાટુ હોઈ શકે તે રીતે તત્ત્વવિજ્ઞાન ખેાટુ ન પણ્ હાય, બહુશ્રુત વિદ્વાન પણ આ રીતે સંપ્રદાય પ્રવર્તકની ભાષામાં મેલે તે શાભે નહિ.
.
આ અને આ પ્રકારના આક્ષેપોને યાગ્ય પ્રત્યુત્તર ડૉ. રાધાકૃષ્ણને આપ્યા છે. ભારતીય દર્શીન પ્રગતિશીલ નથી એમ કેમ કહી શકાય ? પરાપૂર્વથી ચાલ્યા આવતા મહત્ત્વના સિદ્ધાંતાનું હાર્દ ગુમાવ્યા વગર પણ તેમાં જણાતી ક્ષતિઓની પૂર્તિ કરવી એ પ્રગતિ જ છે. ઇતિહાસને, અર્થ જ એ કે તેમાં સાતત્ય પણ છે અને આગેકૂચ પણ છે.
૩

Page #171

તદ્દન મૌલિક ઉત્પાદન જેવું તેમાં હોઈ શકે નહીં. પ્રણાલીનું સાતત્ય જાળવવું એટલે માત્ર યાંત્રિક પુનરુત્પાદન નથી. એ એક સર્જનાત્મક પ્રગટીકરણ છે, સત્યના આદર્શ પ્રતિ ઉત્સાહપૂર્વકનું અને વાર્ધક્ય સહિતનું ગમન છે.
અહીં યાદ રાખવાની બાબત એ છે કે ભૂતકાળના વારસાને જાળવી તેમાં પ્રાણ પૂરવાને છે, અને તે કઠિન કાર્ય છે. તત્ત્વજ્ઞાનમાં પ્રગતિ એટલે ભૂતકાળનો પુનર્જન્મ, વર્તમાનમાં ભૂતકાળની સતત હાજરી. સર્વમુખી પ્રગતિ એટલે આપણું ઉદાત્ત દર્શનનું સ્વાત્માનુભવરૂપે પુન:સર્જન.
આચાર્ય શંકરના તત્વજ્ઞાનમાં જે કેટલીક અસંગતિઓ જણાય છે તેના સ્પષ્ટીકરણરૂપે એમ કહી શકાય કે તેઓ બુદ્ધિઝમ તથા વેદાન્તીઝમ બન્નેને વફાદાર રહેવાની સતત ચિન્તામાં છે. એક વેદાન્તી તરીકે તેઓ ઈશ્વર કે નિરપેક્ષ તત્વને છોડવા તૈયાર નથી, પરંતુ જ્યારે બુદ્ધિસ્ટ જોડે તેઓ એ વાતમાં સંમત થાય છે કે ક્ષર તે બધું ભ્રામક છે, ત્યારે તેમનું અક્ષર તત્વ સર્વગ્રાસી બની જાય છે, અને શૂન્યની નજીક જઈ પહોંચે છે. પરંતુ એ હકીકત ને નકારી શકાય તેમ નથી કે વેદાન્તી તરીકે આચાર્ય શંકર જે વિધાયક પ્રણાલિને અનુમોદન આપી આગળ ધપાવવા પ્રયત્નશીલ છે તે અને બૌદ્ધ દર્શનના અર્થઘટનકર્તા તરીકે જે નિષેધાત્મક પદ્ધતિને તેઓ અનુસરે છે તે બેનું પરિણામ સંઘર્ષ અને વદવ્યાધાતમાં આવે છે. ૩૯ પરંતુ સમય જતાં ઠે. રાધાકૃષ્ણનું શંકર પ્રત્યેનું આ વલણ બદલાયું હોય તેમ જણાય છે, જેને તેઓ એક વખત વદવ્યાઘાત ગણતા તેને હવે તેઓ માત્ર એકપક્ષી કે એકાંગી ગણે છે. આ ઉપરાંત પણ ડે. સ્વાઈલ્સર જેવા દ્વારા થયેલા આક્ષેપ જેવા કે “જગત અને જીવનનો ઈન્કાર” તથા “જીવનની વાસ્તવિકતા તથા મૂલ્યનો ઈન્કાર” એ હિન્દુ વિચારણાની ખામી છે અને પરિણામે તેમાં નીતિમત્તા અંગે ઉદાસીનતા તથા ઉત્સાહને અભાવ, પુરુષાર્થહીનતા વ. જેવા મળે છે, તેને પણ યોગ્ય જવાબ હૈ. રાધાકૃષ્ણને આપ્યા છે.૪૦ ૫ણ સમયના અભાવે તથા વિષયાન્તરના ડરથી તે અહીં ચચી શકાય તેમ નથી.
સંદર્ભે
1. "I grew up in au atmosphere where the unseen was a living reality.” 2. "My Christian teachers.. were not seekers of Truth." 3. "I admire great masters but am follower of none." 4. (My thinking) "is born of spiritual experience rather than deduced
from logically ascertained premises." 5. "A liaison officer between two civilizations."
-C.E.M. Joad 6. "There are a few seholars like him, who have grasped the spirit of Eastern and Western thought-alike."
--Dr. P. T. Raju

Page #172

૨૯
1. “--a philosophical bilinguist.”
-J. H. Muirhead 8. કવિકુલગુરુ કાલિદાસના નીચેના આદર્શને તેઓ સ્વીકારતા જણાતા નથી.
શૈશવેડભ્યસ્ત વિદ્યાનાં યૌવને વિષયેષિણીમ્ | વાર્ધક મુનિવૃત્તિનાં યોગેનાને તનુત્યજામ્ | અર્થાત–બાળપણમાં વિદ્યાભ્યાસ, યૌવનમાં ગૃહસ્થી, બુઢાપામાં વાનપ્રસ્થ અને મુનિ
વૃત્તિ તથા અંતે એગ દ્વારા શરીર–ત્યાગ.” 9. Dr. D. M. Datta 'Chief Currents of Contemporary Philosophy.' 10. જુઓ : આપણો ધર્મ' (૧૯૬૩) આચાર્ય આ. ધ્રુવ. ઉપધાત પૃ. ૪ર
પૃ. ૬૩૨ 12. , કલ્ટી યાને સંસ્કૃતિનું ભાવિ પૃ. ૯
11.
•
છે
પૃ. ૬
14. The reign of religion in contemporary philosophy p. 20-21
–Dr. S. Radhakrishnan 15. An idealist View of Life.. Dr. S. R. p. 87 16. Creation is a free act.. It is an expression of the freedom of the
Absolute. 17. World's evolution and history are real and not mere appearances or
illusions. The world is not unreal or pure non-being. It is both
being and non-being. 18. In my writings, I have interpreted the doctrine of Maya, so as to save the world and give to it a real meaning,
–Dr. S. R. 19. હિન્દુ જીવનદર્શન પૃ. ૨૫ 20. God comes to self-expression through the regenerated individuals. 21. Reason and intuition are interdependent. 22. Intuition should not be confused with anti-intellectualism. Intention
which ignores intellect is useless. The two are not only incompatible but vitally united.. Intuition is beyond reason though not against reason. It is the response of the whole man to reality. It is dependent
upon thought. 23. Gautama-The Buddha-Dr. S. R. p. 39 24. See : Indian Philosophy Vol. I p. 607 25. See : Indian Philosophy Vol. I p. 360 26. See : Outlines of Indian Philosophy p. 135 27. See : Indian Philosophy Vol. I p. 305-8 28. See : Outlines of Indian Philosophy-(Gujarati Translation-Shukla)
p. 253. 257. 29. જુઓ : દર્શન અને ચિંતન-ખંડ ૨ (હિન્દી આવૃત્તિ) પૃ. ૫૦૩-૪
24. See : Indian Philosophy Philosophy p. 133

Page #173

30, Outlines of Indian Philosophy p. 117 31. 'Prabuddha Bharat'-May, 1946 32. Sec: Radhakrishnan Reader, an anthology. Extracts from an article
by R. P. Siugh, entitled 'Radhakrishnan's substantial reconstruction of the Vedanta of Shankara.'--Philosophy-East and West, Jan.--April,
1966. 33. See Indian Philosophy Vol. I p. 9 34. Prof. Brightmann. 35. See : Indian Philosophy Vol. II p. 720 36. An Idealist view of Life p. 153 37. આ અગત્યના ગ્રંથમાં ૨૩ વિશ્વવિખ્યાત વિદ્વાનોએ રાધાકૃષ્ણનની વિચારણાનાં એકે
એક પાસાને આવરી લેતા એજસ્વી વિવેચનલેખો લખ્યા છે જેમાં તેમનું સામાજિક તત્વજ્ઞાન, રાજકીય તત્વજ્ઞાન, અર્વાચીન ધર્મ અને અધ્યાત્મવાદ વગેરે અંગેનું તેમનું પ્રદાન, સમકાલીન હિન્દુતા પર તેમની અસર અને વીસમી સદીના
પ્રવાહમાં તેમનું સ્થાન–તે સઘળાં આવી જાય છે. 38. See : The Philosophy of Dr. S. Radhakrislinan, (Tudor Publi. Co.)
p, 461-476 39. See : The Philosopliy of R. Tagore p. 116--117 40. See : 'Indian Thought and its development' Dr. Switzer and 'Eastern
Religion and Western Thought.' (Dr. S. R.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Works by Dr. S. Radhakrishnan 1. The reign of religion in Contemporary Philosophy. London, MaMillan
& Co. 1920. 2. Indian Philosophy Vol. I (Libra. of Philo). George Allen and Unwin,
London. 3. Indian Philosophy Vol. II 1923
Publ. -Do- 1927 4. The Hindu view of Life -Do-1927 5. An Idealist view of life -Do-1932 6. Contemporary Indian Philosophy Ed. Dr. S. R. Pub. -Do- 1938. 7. Eastern Religion and Western Thought-Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1939. 8. Gautama, The Buddha, Hind Kitabs, Bombay, 1949. 9. Comparative Studies in Philosophy Ed. Dr. S. R., and Others,
New York, Harper, 1948. 10. Fellowship of the Spirit, Cambridge, Harward, Uni. Press, 1961.

Page #174

પ્રવર્તમાન શિક્ષણની સમસ્યાઓના સંદર્ભમાં રાધાકૃષ્ણનાં ચિંતનની પ્રસ્તુતતા
ડો. ભાવના ત્રિવેદી
વિષયવિન્યાસની દૃષ્ટિએ પ્રસ્તુત લેખને ચાર વિભાગોમાં વહેંચવામાં આવ્યો છે. (૧) કેળવણીકાર તરીકે રાધાકૃષ્ણનનું મહત્વ
પ્રવર્તમાન શિક્ષણની સમસ્યાઓ સમસ્યાઓનું નિરૂપણ તથા રાધાકૃષ્ણનના પ્રતિભાવોની પ્રસ્તુતતા મૂલ્યાંકન
(૧) કેળવણીકાર તરીકે રાધાકૃષ્ણન નું મહત્વ :
કેળવણીકાર તરીકે છે. રાધાકૃષ્ણનનું મહત્વ વિવિધ દૃષ્ટિથી દર્શાવી શકાય.
(૧) પરંપરા અને આધુનિકતાના સુમેળની દષ્ટિ . (૨) દષ્ટિસંપન પરંપરાગત દાર્શનિક અને આધુનિક કેળવણીકારની દષ્ટિ (૩) શૈક્ષણિક અને વહીવટી અનુભવના સમન્વયની દૃષ્ટિ (૧) અંગત રીતે ભારતીય સંસ્કૃતિના પરંપરાગત સંસ્કારો તથા મૂલ્યોને વરેલા
આ સંનિષ્ઠ, દાર્શનિક પાશ્ચાત્ય સંસ્કૃતિ તથા પશ્ચિમી વિચારપ્રવાહોથી પણું સુપરિચિત રહ્યા હોઈ તેમના શિક્ષણ પ્રત્યેના અભિગમ અને વિચારમાં આપણને પરંપરા અને આધુનિકતાનો એક વિશિષ્ટ સુમેળ દષ્ટિગોચર થાય છે. (૨) આજે જ્યારે શિક્ષણક્ષેત્રે દષ્ટિને દુકાળ પ્રવર્તત જણાય છે, ત્યારે શિક્ષણની સમસ્યાઓનું સમગ્રલક્ષી આકલન કરતી રાધાકૃષ્ણનની મૂળગામી દષ્ટિ તથા તેના ઉકેલ માટે મથતી તેમની વિશાળ દષ્ટિસંપન્ન પરિપકવતામાંથી નિષ્પન થતી ઊંડી કોઠાસૂઝ એક “દૃષ્ટિસંપન કેળવણીકાર દાર્શનિક” તરીકે રાધાકૃષ્ણનના ચિંતનની આગવી મહત્તા સિદ્ધ કરે છે. (૩) કેળવણીકાર તરીકે રાધાકૃષ્ણનના ચિંતનમાં આપણને શૈક્ષણિક અને વહીવટી અનુભવના વિશિષ્ટ સમન્વયે ઘડેલા એક પ્રૌઢ વ્યક્તિત્વના પ્રગભિ
વિચારો સાંપડે છે. (૨) પ્રવર્તમાન શિક્ષણની સમસ્યાઓ :
આપણા શિક્ષણે સર્જેલી કેટલીક ગંભીર સમસ્યાઓ પ્રવર્તમાન શિક્ષાણની મર્યાદાઓ સૂચવે છે. આ મર્યાદાઓના ઊંડાણમાં અવગાહન કરી, તેનાં કારણોનું મૂળગામી દષ્ટિથી

Page #175

વિશ્લેષણ કરીને તેના સમાધાન અંગે રાધાકૃષ્ણન પિતાને True Knowledge નામક ગ્રંથમાં કેટલાંક અત્યંત મહત્ત્વપૂર્ણ, વિધાયક અને નકકર સૂચને આપે છે. પ્રવર્તમાન શિક્ષણની કેટલીક મર્યાદાઓ : (૧) આજના શિક્ષિત યુવકના અંતરમાં પ્રવર્તતી દિશાશૂન્યતા (૨) વામણાં માહિતી કેન્દ્રો બની ચૂકેલાં આપણાં વિશ્વવિદ્યાલય (૩) પ્રસાર માટેના યાંત્રિક ઉપકરણોના ઉપયોગ સાથે મનુષ્યને યાંત્રિક બની જવાને ભય (૪) યુવા પેઢીનો મૂળહીનતાને અનુભવ (૫) પ્રવર્તમાન શિક્ષણ પદ્ધતિને એકાંગી અભિગમ (૬) શિક્ષણ ક્ષેત્રે દેખાતી ગેરશિસ્ત તથા આતંક્વાદી વૃત્તિ (૭) સુગ્રથિત વ્યક્તિત્વની સાથેસાથ ઊંચી ગુણવત્તા ધરાવતા દૃષ્ટિસંપન શિક્ષકોની
વિરતાતી અછત (૩) સમસ્યાઓનું નિરૂપણ અને રાધાકૃષ્ણનના પ્રતિભાવની પ્રસ્તુતતા : સમસ્યા : ૧ આજના શિક્ષિત યુવકના અંતરમાં પ્રવર્તતી દિશાશૂન્યતા: નિરૂપણ આપણાં વિશ્વવિદ્યાલયોમાંથી ઉત્તીર્ણ થઈને બહાર પડત આજને નવયુવક
અંતરમાં ઉઘાડ લઈને આવવાને બદલે એક શૂન્યતા લઈને આવતે જણાય છે. નથી દેખાતું તેનામાં જીવનના ઉદ્દેશ્ય અંગેનું કોઈ ચિંતન કે નથી તેના વર્તનમાં પ્રગટ થતી વિવેકપૂર્ણ દૃષ્ટિ. નથી તેને સાંપડી છવનનાં ગંતવ્ય વિષેની સભાનતા કે નથી તેને સાંપડયું ગંતવ્યપ્રાપ્તિની દિશા અંગેનું કઈ
માર્ગદર્શન. પ્રતિભાવ આ સંદર્ભમાં રાધાકૃષ્ણન વિદ્યાથીઓને નહીં પણ આપણી શિક્ષણ પદ્ધતિને
જવાબદાર ગણતાં લખે છે : “There is nothing wrong with our students. What is wrong, is the system.” ? આપણી શિક્ષણ પદ્ધતિ કેવળ માહિતીલક્ષી છે, જીવનલક્ષી નથી. પરિણામે વિદ્યાર્થીઓને તે વિષય નિષ્ણાત બનાવી શકે છે, જીવનનિષ્ણાત નહીં. અર્થાત્ જીવન કેવી રીતે જીવવું જોઈએ તે અંગેની કઈ જ દષ્ટિ કે તેને આનુષગિક જીવનમૂલ્ય કેળવવા અંગેના કેઈ જ માર્ગદર્શનની તેમાં ઔપચારિક જોગવાઈ નથી. રાધાકૃષ્ણનના શબ્દોમાં : If you look at our country today, if you have a fair look and a full look at the critical and political scence, you will discover that there is a moral crisis through which we are passing."
આ સંદર્ભમાં રાધાકૃષ્ણનું આપણી તમામ વિદ્યાશાખાઓમાં વિદ્યાર્થીઓ માટે મહાકાવ્યોનાં શિક્ષણની હિમાયત કરે છે. તેઓ કહે છે કે, મહાકાવ્યોમાંથી જીવનને જેવાને એક ન જ દૃષ્ટિકોણ, તેને સમજવાની એક નવી જ દિશા સાંપડે છે, કારણ કે મહાકાવ્યોની એ ખૂબી છે, કે તે કઈ પણ

Page #176

૨૩
દેશકાળના સંદર્ભ માં હંમેશાં પ્રસ્તુત હેાય છે. તેની મહાનતા એ છે કે પ્રત્યેક સંદર્ભોમાં, પ્રત્યેક પરિસ્થિતિમાં, પ્રત્યેક વ્યક્તિને લાયક પ્રેરણા અને આધ તેની પાસે હોય છે. પીટરપ્રુકે કરેલી મહાભારતની રજૂઆત (વિશ્વસંદર્ભોમાં માનવ સંધાની ઉત્તમ સમીક્ષારૂપે) આનું ઉત્તમ અદ્યતન, અર્વાચીન દૃષ્ટાંત ગણી શકાય. પોતાના વિચારનું સમન કરતાં રાધાકૃષ્ણન લખે છે : “Classics are contemporaries of all ages. They have something to tell us in every context and in every situation in which we find ourselves. When we are in distress, in troubles, we turn to them and they give us spiritual comfort. They give us not merely enlightment but they give solace of mind also. The Ramayana, the Mahabharata, Kalidas's works..all these give us examples as to how man should behave in difficult situations of life. The classics all over the world, have the same power to stimulate our minds, to sooth our hearts, to enrich our whole nature, to make us a being with a new perception altogether. They help us to develop an allembracing human personality.’૩
સમસ્યા : ૨ વામણાં માહિતીકેન્દ્રો બની ચૂકેલાં આપણાં વિશ્વવિદ્યાલયા : નિરૂપણું : વધુ પડતા માહિતીલક્ષી અને પરીક્ષાલક્ષી અભિગમે આપણાં વિશ્વવિદ્યાલયાને વામણાં માહિતી કેન્દ્રો અને પરીક્ષા કેન્દ્રો જ બનાવી દીધાં છે.
પ્રતિભાવ : આ સંદર્ભ માં રાધાકૃષ્ણન એ સ્પષ્ટ કરે છે કે : “Jnana is not mere information, not mere scholarship, it is not mere criticism, it is education in depth.''૪
વાસ્તવમાં વિદ્યાર્થી આના ધડતરમાં વિશ્વવિદ્યાલયાના ફાળા બહુ મોટા હાવા જોઈએ. વિશ્વવિદ્યાલયના કાર્યની સ્પષ્ટતા કરતાં રાધાકૃષ્ણન કહે છે : જે વિશ્વદષ્ટિ આપાદિત કરે, તે વિશ્વવિદ્યાલય કહેવાય.” “A University is one which gives a universal outlook.""
પ્રશ્ન એ છે કે રાજકારણીએ નાદારીસંચારથી સંચાલિત થઈ રહેલાં આપણાં વિશ્વવિદ્યાલયે વાસ્તવમાં શું વિશ્વદૃષ્ટિ પ્રદાન કરે છે ખરાં? વિશ્વદૃષ્ટિ તા દૂર રહી પણ રાષ્ટ્રીય દૃષ્ટિ સાંપડવી પણ મુશ્કેલ થઈ ગઈ છે. અહીં એ સ્પષ્ટતા કરવી જરૂરી છે, કે રાધાકૃષ્ણન્ માહિતીનુ મૂલ્ય નકારતા નથી એટલું જ નહી', બલ્કે બદલાતા જતા સમાજના સંદર્ભમાં માહિતીલક્ષી અને વ્યવસાયલક્ષી શિક્ષણની તાતી જરૂરિયાત પણ તેએ દર્શાવે છે. આમ છતાં અહી' જ અટકી જવાની વૃત્તિ સામે તેએ લાલબત્તી ધરતાં કહે છે : “Education is not the acquisition of information, important though it is, or acquisition of technical skills though

Page #177

२४
they are very essential in modern society. One must have that superior outlook, that outlook which goes beyond information and technical skill. Information is not knowledge, nor is knowledge wisdom. One must have the capacity to subsist in the battle and to look at things as they happen without any kind of inward disturbance or perturbation of one's being."
શિક્ષણના સંદર્ભોમાં જ્ઞાન અને વિજ્ઞાનનુ મહત્ત્વ દર્શાવતાં તેઓ લખે છે : "Our system of education should aim at a balanced growth of the individual-insisting on both knowledge and wisdom."
રાધાકૃષ્ણના મત મુજસ્થ્ય શિક્ષણનાં બે પાસાં છે : (૧) સત્યનુ અન્વેષણ અને (૨) સમાજને વિકાસ, “All education is on the side a search for truth. On
one the other side, it is a pursuit of social betterment."<
શિક્ષણનાં આ છે પાસાં પૈકા કાઈ એકની પણ ઉપેક્ષા કરવાથી શિક્ષણપદ્ધતિ એકાંગી બની જાય છે. આથી આ એયનેા સુભગ સુમેળ સાધવા એ સ્વસ્થ શિક્ષણપદ્ધતિનું લક્ષ્ય છે.
સત્યના અન્વેષક તરીકે શિક્ષણનુ કાર્ય છે પ્લેટોની પરિભાષામાં આત્માની આંખને પ્રકાશ તરફ ખેાલવાનું. ભારતીય પરિભાષામાં કહીએ તેા અંતરમાં વિવેકદૃષ્ટિ જગાડવાનુ’.”
સમાજને વિકસિત કરવા માટે શિક્ષણ માહિતીલક્ષી અને વ્યવસાયલક્ષી હાવા ઉપરાંત મૂલ્યલક્ષી હાવું પણ જરૂરી છે કારણ કે મૂલ્યલક્ષી માનવીને અનેલે સમાજ જ વિકાસ કે પ્રગતિને પંથે જઈ શકે,
સમસ્યા : ૩ ટેલિવિઝન, વિડીચા વગેરે જેવાં અદ્યતન યાંત્રિક ઉપકરણાના ઉપયાગ કરતા માનવી પાતે જ યાંત્રિક મની જવાનો ભય :
નિરૂપણ શિક્ષણ પ્રસારનાં અદ્યતન ઉપકરણા વિદ્યાર્થી સમક્ષ મૂકવાની સાથે તેની વિચારશક્તિ યુતિ થઈ બેસે, અને યંત્રાના ઉપયાગ કરતાં કરતાં તે પાતે જ યાંત્રિક કે યંત્રવત્ બની જાય એ એક મોટા ભય કે સમસ્યા છે. એક તરફ બદલાતા જતા સામાજિક પરિવેશમાં યંત્રની તાતી જરૂરિયાત પણ વરતાય છે. વિજ્ઞાનની વધતી જતી પ્રગતિ સાથે જીવનની વધતી જતી ઝડપ, જટિલતા, માનસિક તાણ, સમયની ખેંચ, વધતી જતી મેધવારી-આ પરિસ્થિતિમાં યાંત્રિક ઉપકરણા અપનાવવાં સ્વાભાવિક જણાય છે જેથી કરીને કામ ઝડપથી ઉકલી એછા સમયમાં વધારે કામ કરી શકાય અને વધારે સારી ગુણવત્તાવાળુ પણ થઈ શકે. ટૂંકમાં 'ત્રની મદદથી કામ સરળતાથી થાય, સમય બચે, શક્તિ બચે અને કાર્યની ગુણવત્તા વધે.
પરંતુ આ સાથે પ્ ́ત્રના ઉપયોગની આડઅસરો તેના અભિશાપરૂપ પણ ખની જણાય છે, જેમ કે—

Page #178

(૧) મન યાંત્રિક થવા લાગે અને વિચારશક્તિ કુંઠિત થઈ જાય.
સંવેદનશીલતા અને ઊર્મિશીલતા ઘટતાં માનવ સંબંધોની કુણાશ,
અને ઉમા ના રહે. પરિણામે માનવવ્યવહારો બરછટ બનવા લાગે. (૩) યંત્રની અસર માણસની જીવનદષ્ટિ પણ બદલી નાખે. (૪) યંત્રનું ગુલામ માનસ બની જાય.
મશીનના સતત સહવાસથી હૃદયને જીવંત સ્પર્શ ચાલી જતાં હદય
કઠોર બની જાય. (૬) જીવનની કાવ્યમયતા કરમાઈ જાય.
પ્રતિભાવ : તેમાંથી બચવાના ચાર ઉપાધે રાધાકૃષ્ણન સૂચવે છે :
(૧) માહિતીલક્ષી શિક્ષણ સાથે મૂલ્યલક્ષી શિક્ષણને અનુબંધ. (૨) સંવેદનશીલતા જીવંત રાખવા માટે વિજ્ઞાન શિક્ષણની સાથોસાથ
સાહિત્ય શિક્ષણની જરૂરિયાત. (૩) મહાકાવ્યોના શિક્ષણ દ્વારા વિષ્ટિનું આપાદન. • (૪) ધ્યાનના શિક્ષણ વડે મનને યાંત્રિક બનતું અટકાવવું. મહાકાવ્યોના
શિક્ષણ દ્વારા ગ્રાહ્ય–અગ્રાહ્ય વચ્ચે અને પ્રેય-શ્રેય વચ્ચે વિવેકદષ્ટિ ખીલવી શકાય છે, કારણ કે મહાકાવ્યો વ્યક્તિને જીવન કેવી રીતે જીવવું જોઈએ તેની સૂઝ આપે છે. રેજ થોડીક મિનિટેના નિયમિત ધ્યાનાભ્યાસને પરિણામે ચિત્ત સ્વસ્થ શાંત બનતું જાય છે જેને લઈને વ્યક્તિ પોતાના મનના ઊંડાણમાં અવગાહન કરતાં અને પિતાના મનની યાંત્રિક પ્રતિક્રિયાઓનું અવેલેકન કરતાં શીખે છે. રાધાકૃષ્ણનના 210 Hi : "We must not turn men into mechines, fragment their natures and destroy their wholeness. The best way to preserve intellectual integrity is by the study of classics and meditation for a few minutes. These are our defences against the assaults of mass communication."
સમસ્યા : ૪ આપણી યુવા પેઢીને મૂળવિહીનતાને અનુભવ : નિરૂપણ: આપણુ કમનસીબી એ છે કે વર્તમાન યુવાપેઢી પોતાને મૂળવિહીન અનુભવે છે. પ્રતિભાવ : આ અંગે પિતાના વિચારોની સ્પષ્ટતા કરતાં રાધાકૃષ્ણન કહે છે કે, જે
પ્રત્યેક યુવક પિતાના રાષ્ટ્રની સંસ્કૃતિ કે સાંસ્કૃતિક પરંપરા સાથે ભાવાત્મક રીતે જોડાયેલું રહે, તે જ તે મૂળવિહીનતાની લાગણીથી બચી શકે.
આ સંદર્ભમાં વિદ્યાલયનું વિશ્વવિદ્યાલયોનું એ કર્તવ્ય છે કે, યુવાનોને આપણે સાંસ્કૃતિક ઇતિહાસ તથા મહાકાવ્યના શિક્ષણ દ્વારા આપણું દેશની સાંસ્કૃતિક પરંપરાથી સુપરિચિત કરવા તથા આ પરંપરાના પ્રાણવાન,

Page #179

વિધાયક અને ગ્રાહ્ય અંશોથી તેમજ નબળા, ત્યાજ્ય અંશથી પણ તેમને માહિતગાર કરવા. શિક્ષણને આ બેવડા કાર્યની સ્પષ્ટતા કરતાં રાધાકૃષ્ણનું 40 :"Education is the process by which we conserve valuable elements in our culture and discard the wasteful. It is both a stabilising influence and an agent for change". 10
આ સાથે તેમનામાં એ વિવેક પણ જાગ્રત કરવો કે જેને લઈને તેઓ પિતાની મેળે ગ્રાહ્ય અને ત્યાજય અંશને ભેદ તારવી શકે, અને પ્રાણવાન, વિધાયક અંશેને પિતાના જીવનમાં આચરણ દ્વારા અપનાવીને આત્મસાત કરી શકે. કારણ કે કોઈ પણ સંસ્કૃતિના પ્રાણવાન અંશોનું રક્ષણ અને સંવર્ધન સ્વ-આચરણ દ્વારા તેનું અનુષ્ઠાન કરવાથી જ થઈ શકે અને તે જ તે સંસ્કૃતિ પણ ટકી શકે. અન્યથા ગમે તેટલી પ્રાણવાન સંસ્કૃતિ પણ કાળક્રમે તહસ-નહસ થતાં વાર લાગતી નથી.
ઈતિહાસના પરિપ્રેક્ષ્યમાં ભારતીય સંસ્કૃતિનું જે અવલોકન કરવામાં આવે તે એ સ્પષ્ટ થાય છે કે, ભારતની ચેતના ભૂતકાળમાં અનેકવાર આકમિત થઈ હોવા છતાં આજે પણ હજાર વર્ષથી તે જીવંતપણે ટકી રહી છે, નાશ નથી પામી. આ હકીકત આપણી સંસ્કૃતિનું વીર્ય, તેની આંતરિક શક્તિ સૂચવે છે. આ શક્તિએ જ અનેક પરદેશી આક્રમણ સામે આપણી સંસ્કૃતિને નામશેષ નહીં થવા દેતાં અદ્યાવધિપર્યત ટકાવી રાખી છે. આવી પ્રાણવાન સંસ્કૃતિમાં એ સામર્થ્ય છે, કે તેની ચેતના સાથે જે આપણી ચેતનાને સાંકળીએ, તે તે જરૂર આપણને નષ્ટ થવા ના દે. આ દષ્ટિએ આપણા યુવકે એ આપણી સંસ્કૃતિક ચેતના સાથે ભાવાત્મક એકતાના સંબંધથી જોડાવું પડશે. જેટલે અંશે આપણે આ ભાવાત્મક સંબંધ કેળવીને આપણી સાંસ્કૃતિક ચેતના સાથે ઓતપ્રોત રહીશું, તેટલા જ પ્રમાણમાં રાષ્ટ્ર તરીકે આપણે શક્તિશાળી અને વીર્યવાન બની શકીશું, એ
રાધાકૃષ્ણનની દઢ શ્રદ્ધા છે. સમસ્યા : ૫ વર્તમાન શિક્ષણ પદ્ધતિને એકાંગી અભિગમઃ નિરૂપણું : વર્તમાન શિક્ષણની તાસીર જોતાં એમ કહી શકાય કે, આપણું વર્તમાન
શિક્ષણ એટલે ખંડિત માનવીને ખંડિત દૃષ્ટિથી અપાતું શિક્ષણ. મનુષ્યના માત્ર બૌદ્ધિક પાસાને જ તે સ્પર્શતું હોવાથી સંપૂર્ણ માનવીના સર્વાંગી વિકાસને તેને અભિગમ હોય, એવું જણાતું નથી. પરિણામે વ્યક્તિત્વનાં અન્ય પાસાંઓ તેમાં ઉપેક્ષિત જ રહી જતાં જણાય છે. આથી પ્રશ્ન એ થાય છે કે જે શિક્ષણ વ્યક્તિને પિતાના સમગ્ર વ્યક્તિત્વ સાથે જે જોડી શકતું ન હોય, તો તે વ્યક્તિને પિતાના પર્યાવરણ સાથે કે સમાજ સાથે, રાષ્ટ્ર સાથે કે વિશ્વ સાથે કેવી રીતે સાંકળી શકે છે. અને આવું એકાંગી

Page #180

શિક્ષણ જયાં અપાતું હોય, ત્યાં વિશ્વદૃષ્ટિની અપેક્ષા પણ કેવી રીતે રાખી શકાય ?
આ પરથી એ સ્પષ્ટ થાય છે કે, આપણા આંતરકલહે કે આંતરિક અથડામણની જડ છે, આપણામાં દઢ થયેલી ભેદબુદ્ધિના પરિણામે જન્મેલી ખંડદષ્ટિ, અને તેને માટે જવાબદાર છે વર્તમાન શિક્ષણ પદ્ધતિને એકાંગી અભિગમ. આથી જયાં સુધી શિક્ષણનો એકાંગી અભિગમ ચાલુ રહે, ત્યાં સુધી ખંડ દૃષ્ટિવાળું આપણું માનસ પણ નહીં બદલાય, અને જ્યાં સુધી આ પ્રકારનું માનસ ચાલુ રહે, ત્યાં સુધી જુદાં જુદાં કારણેને લઈને (જેવાં કે ભાષા, ધર્મ, સંપ્રદાય વગેરે) પેદા થતી અથડામણે પણ નાબૂદ થવી મુશ્કેલ છે.
વળી આપણી બુદ્ધિકેન્દ્રિત વર્તમાન શિક્ષણને અભિગમ પણ પ્રધાનત: વિશ્લેષણલક્ષી જ રહ્યો છે. સંશ્લેષણના સમન્વયથી સંતુલિત થયા વિના કેવળ વિશ્લેષણલક્ષી અભિગમ સ્વઘાતક નીવડે છે.
શિક્ષણ પ્રત્યેના આપણા એકાંગી અભિગમનું ત્રીજું દુષ્પરિણામ છે તે છડાઈ ભર્યા અવિવેકથી છલકતું, અજ્ઞેયવાદી, સંશયવાદી અને ભૌતિકવાદી આપણું આધુનિક, શિક્ષિત યુવકનું માનસ.
પ્રતિભાવ : આ સંદર્ભમાં રાધાકૃષ્ણન્ એવા શિક્ષણની હિમાયત કરે છે, કે જે શિક્ષણ
અખંડ દષ્ટિ અપાદિત કરતું હોય. આથી આપણું શિક્ષણનો અભિગમ સંપૂર્ણ માનવીના સર્વાગીણ વિકાસને અનુલક્ષીને હો ઘટે. આ સંદર્ભમાં રાધાકૃષ્ણનું સંપૂર્ણ માનવી એટલે શું, તેની સ્પષ્ટતા કરતાં કહે છે : "What we need today is the education of tlie whole man-physical, vital, mental, intellectual and spiritual."1?
આ સંદર્ભમાં બીજું રચનાત્મક સૂચન તેઓ એ કરે છે કે, આપણું માહિતીલક્ષી શિક્ષણ મૂલ્યલક્ષી શિક્ષણથી સંપુટિત થયેલું હોવું જોઈએ. તેમના શબ્દોમાં : “Facts and values should go together.”૧૨
પ્રાકૃતિક વિજ્ઞાન આપણને માહિતી આપે છે જ્યારે સાહિત્યદર્શન, સાંસ્કૃતિક ઇતિહાસ, લલિત કલાઓ વગેરે મૂલ્યની દૃષ્ટિ આપે છે. કોઈ પણ સમાજના સ્વસ્થ વિકાસ માટે માહિતી અને મૂલ્યદૃષ્ટિનું આપાદન—એચની સમાન આવશ્યકતા છે. વધુમાં તેઓ જણાવે છે : “Social Sciences give us knowledge of man's behaviour in society-as to how he acts."93 "All empirical sciences (statistics, economics, politics, psychology ctc.) give us facts. Tbey give us principles. They tell us how man will bchave when confronted with certain

Page #181

R
circumstances. But how he should beliave, what attitude should be adopt, what self-control should he exercise over himselfall these things are not given by social sciences. "Thus they do not educate the liuman mind regarding the norms, the goals, the purposes.
If we want to use our knowledge-physicial and social, for the regeneration of humanity, social sciences by themselves are not enough. They supply us with instruments, but those instruments may be used or abused by man." "Man is a moral agent, who can determine his behaviour. In this respect, our social sciences need to be supplemented with social philosophy. *
સમસ્યા ૬ શિક્ષણ ક્ષેત્રે વધતી જતી ગેરશિસ્ત અને આતંકવાદી વૃત્તિ : નિરૂપણ : આજના વિદ્યાર્થી જગતમાં અસહિષ્ણુતા, ગેરશિસ્ત, હિંસા અને આતંકવાદી
વૃત્તિ પ્રવર્તતી જોવા મળે છે. વિદ્યાર્થીઓમાં પ્રવર્તતી ગેરશિસ્ત અંગે તેઓ જણાવે છે કે આપણી પાસે પૂરતી સંખ્યામાં લાયક શિક્ષકો છે કે કેમ, તેની પરવા કર્યા વિના જ આપણે કોલેજોની સંખ્યા વધારી દીધી છે. આમાંની કેટલીક તે એવી વેપારીવૃત્તિથી ચાલે છે, કે કારખાનાંની જેમ વિદ્યાથીઓને બેથી ત્રણ પાળીમાં શિક્ષણ આપવામાં આવે છે. સ્વાભાવિક છે કે, આ બધાનું વિપરીત પરિણામ આપણું શિક્ષણ જગતમાં આવે, તે તેને માટે આપણે સિવાય બીજા કોઈને ય જવાબદાર કેવી રીતે લખી શકાય ?
વધુમાં આવી પરિસ્થિતિ સર્જાતાં પિતાના મનનો અસંતોષ વ્યક્ત કરવા માટે વિદ્યાર્થીઓ જાહેર દેખાવનું આયોજન કરે છે, પરિણામે ગેરશિસ્ત અને વ્યવસ્થા ફેલાય છે તે વખતે જાહેર મિલ્કતને ભાંગફોડથી નુકસાન થતું અટકાવવા અને અરાજકતાભરી પરિસ્થિતિ નિવારવા પિલીસ બોલાવવામાં આવે છે ત્યારે વિદ્યાર્થીઓ પૂછે છે શા માટે પિલીસ વચ્ચે પડે છે ? આવી પરિસ્થિતિ ભારતના અનેક વિશ્વવિદ્યાલયોમાં પ્રવર્તે છે.
આ ઉપરાંત, કમભાગે આખાય દેશમાં બળજબરીથી કામ લેવાની વૃત્તિ પ્રવર્તે છે. અર્થાત્ પિતાનું ધાર્યું જ ન થાય, તે બળજબરી કે ગુંડાગીરીથી બીજાને પોતાના ધાર્યા મુજબ વર્તવાની ફરજ પાડવાની વૃત્તિ જોવા મળે છે. જે બધા જ આવું વલણ અપનાવે તે આખુંયે જાહેર જીવન ખોરંભે પડી જાય. આવી આતંકવાદી વૃત્તિથી થયેલા કૃત્યોએ દુનિયાની નજરે આપણા દેશની નબળી છાપ ઉપસાવી છે. આપણા દેશની પ્રતિષ્ઠા,
*Social ethics etc". 2X

Page #182

૨૯
તેનું ગૌરવ તથા સ્વદેશાભિમાન સાચવવું એ આપણા હાથમાં છે. દરેક જણ જે એમ વિચારે કે હું તે મને ફાવશે તેમ જ વર્તીશ. જે મને તેમ કરવાની તક નહી મળે, અને તે હું સંસ્થાનો ખુરદો બોલાવી દઈશ.
આ પ્રકારની મનોવૃત્તિ કેઈ પણ સમાજના વિકાસને માટે વિઘાતક છે, પિષક નહીં, રાધાકૃષ્ણન લખે છે : "Democracy and violence do not go together. Of you are the democract, you may have your differences but you will try to adjust them, you will try to overcome them by mutual settlement.”૧૫ - રાધાકૃષ્ણન એ પ્રામાણિકપણે સ્વીકારે છે, કે સૈદ્ધાંતિક રીતે આપણે લેકશાહી સ્વીકારી હોવા છતાં એક રાષ્ટ્ર તરીકે રોજિંદા જીવનમાં લેકશાહીનાં મૂલ્યોને લઈને જીવતાં હજુ આપણને જોઈએ તેવું આવડવું નથી. “The real problem of our country today is that we are not the practitioners of democracy in the true sense of the term. We admit it theoratically, but practically in our daily life we overlook it....we must make democracy 'faith and realize it in works and try to see that in our actual works we practice that spiritual democracy."?
કમભાગે વર્તમાન ભારતમાં પણ આજે પારસ્પરિક સંબંધોમાં દષ્ટિની સંકુચિતતા, ખેલદિલીનો અભાવ અને અસહિષ્ણુતા વરતાય છે. જેમાં વ્યક્તિની મહત્ત્વાકાંક્ષા હોય છે તેમ જૂથની પણ મહત્ત્વાકાંક્ષા હોય છે. ક્યારેક તે ફળે, ને ક્યારેક ના પણ ફળે, પણ તેથી કંઈ કાયદો હાથમાં લેવાય નહીં. બકે નિષ્ફળતાને ખેલદિલીથી સ્વીકારીને તેમાંથી વધુ મહેનત કરીને જીવનમાં આગળ વધવાની પ્રેરણા મેળવવી જોઈએ. રસ્તા પર વાહનચાલક ટ્રાફિકના નિયમો અનુસરવાને બદલે જે પિતાની મનમરજી મુજબ સ્વેચ્છાથી વાહન હંકારે, તો રસ્તા પર સંઘર્ષો, અસ્માત જરૂર, સર્જાય. આવું જ પરિણામ સ્વછંદી જીવન અપનાવવાથી દેશને જાહેર જીવનમાં પણ આવવાનું જ..
પ્રતિભાવ : વિદ્યાથીઓમાં પ્રવર્તતી ગેરશિસ્ત તથા આતંકવાદી વૃત્તિના મનોવૈજ્ઞાનિક
કારણનું વિશ્લેષણ કરતાં રાધાકૃષ્ણન કહે છે, કે જીવનની બદલાતી જતી પરિસ્થિતિની માંગ મુજબ આપણે વિદ્યાથીને પ્રતિકૂળતાઓ સામે ટકી રહેવાની હિંમત, સંયમ અને સમતાપૂર્વક પોતાના જીવનની સમસ્યાઓને પહોંચી વળતાં શીખવ્યું જ નથી. પરિણામે ઉચ્ચ કારણ કે ધ્યેય માટેના સંયત ઉત્સાહને અભાવે યુવકનું અસ્તિત્વ પિતાની જાત માટે તેમજ આખા સમાજ માટે ખતરનાક બોજારૂપ પૂરવાર થાય છે. આ સંદર્ભમાં રાધાકૃષ્ણનું કેટલાક વિધાયક ઉપાયનું સૂચન નીચે મુજબ કરે છે :

Page #183

૩૦
(૧) વિદ્યાર્થીઓએ પિતાને ઉપલબ્ધ તમામ તકે પૂરો ફાયદો ઉઠાવી
સ્વવિકાસાર્થે તેને વિનિગ કરવો જોઈએ. (૨) શિક્ષણને ઢાંચો એ હવે જોઈએ કે, જે પ્રત્યેક વિદ્યાર્થીને સ્વ
કર્તવ્ય પ્રત્યે જાગ્રત અને સમાજનો જવાબદાર નાગરિક બનાવે. શિક્ષણક્ષેત્રે પ્રવર્તમાન હિંસાવૃત્તિ, ગેરશિસ્ત, આતંકવાદી વૃત્તિ વગેરે એ દર્શાવે છે કે આપણે વિદ્યાર્થી સમાજ પ્રત્યે જવાબદાર બનતાં હજુ શીખ્યો નથી.
સમસ્યાને ઉકેલવાની દિશામાં રાધાકૃષ્ણન જણાવે છે કે, ધ્યાનાભ્યાસ એક અસરકારક સાધનરૂપે અપનાવી શકાય. ધ્યાનાભ્યાસની કળા આપણા દેશમાં પરંપરાથી પ્રાપ્ત છે. તદનુસાર દરેક વ્યક્તિએ ધ્યાનાભ્યાસ દ્વારા પિતાના અંતરનાં ઊંડાણને સ્પર્શ કરતાં શીખવું જોઈએ. આમ કરવાથી વ્યક્તિ પોતાની મનોવૃત્તિઓનું, પિતાના આંતજગતનું તટસ્થ નિરીક્ષણ કરવાની ટેવ પાડતાં શીખે છે.
૧
-
વર્તમાન સમસ્યાના સંદર્ભમાં ધ્યાનાભ્યાસની પ્રસ્તુતતા એ છે કે, પિતાના અંતરના ઊંડાણને સ્પર્શ કરવાની પ્રક્રિયામાં મનુષ્યની પિતાની
સ્વભાવગત ગૂંચવણે, નાની બાબતો અંગેના આગ્રહા, પૂર્વગ્રહો વગેરે પરનું , તેની પકડ ઢીલી થતી જાય છે. પરિણામતઃ તેના આગ્રહ મેળા પડતા જાય
છે, જેને લઈને વ્યક્તિ પોતાના મંતવ્યોથી અલગાવ કેળવી તેનાથી ઉપર ઊઠીને વિશાળ મનની એક તટસ્થ ભૂમિકા અપનાવી શકે છે. આ ભૂમિકા
પર તે સહિષ્ણુતા, સંયમ, અન્યને સમજવા માટે જરૂરી મનનું ખૂલ્લાપણું . ; અને તટસ્થતા ધ્યાનાભ્યાસ વડે કેળવે છે. પરિણામે અસહિષ્ણુતાને લઈને આ પરિણમતી હિંસા, ગેરશિસ્ત, આતંકવાદી મનોવૃત્તિ વગેરે ધીરે ધીરે નિયંત્રિત થઈ શકે છે.
.
સમસ્યા : ૭ સુગ્રથિત વ્યકિતત્વ અને ઊંચી ગુણવત્તા ધરાવતા સુયોગ્ય અને
વિદ્યાથી પ્રેમી શિક્ષકને વરતાતા દુકાળ: નિરૂપણ : શિક્ષણની ઊંચી ગુણવત્તાને વાસ્તવિક આધાર છે સારા શિક્ષક શિક્ષણની
ગુણવત્તા ઊંચી જળવાઈ રહે તે માટે આકર્ષક મકાને તથા સાધનોની સુવિધા એક સારા, સુયોગ્ય શિક્ષકની ગરજ સારી શકે નહીં. આથી ઉત્તમ બૌદ્ધિક ક્ષમતા ધરાવતા વર્ગ શિક્ષણના વ્યવસાય પ્રત્યે આકર્ષાય એ માટે સક્રિય પ્રયાસ થવા પણ જરૂરી છે. રાધાકૃષ્ણનના શબ્દમાં : “If this country is to participate in the marcla of mind in science and scholarship, universities must recruit for their teaching staff some of the best minds of the country."

Page #184

૩૧
પ્રતિભાવ : શિક્ષકના વ્યવસાયનું ગૌરવ તથા પ્રતિષ્ઠાને પારખી સમાજે તેને સન્માન
અને આદરથી જોઈએ. આ સંદર્ભમાં રાધાકૃષ્ણન જણાવે છે કે, દુર્ભાગ્યે આ બાબતને સ્વીકાર આપણે માત્ર સૈદ્ધાંતિક સ્તર પર જ કર્યો હોય તેમ જણાય છે. આપણી આ બૌદ્ધિક સમજણ હજુ આચરણમાં રૂપાંતરિત થઈ શકી હોય તેમ લાગતું નથી. “Unfortunately, in recent times, though we pay lip-service to the importance of the teaching profession, it stops at mere intellectual recognition and does not go beyond that:”૧૮
જો કે આ સંદર્ભમાં અત્રે ઉલ્લેખનીય છે કે પિતાની આર્થિક ચિંતાઓના માનસિક બોજથી મુક્ત રહીને શિક્ષક શિક્ષણ અને સંશોધનના
વ્યવસાયમાં સમર્પિત રહીને નિષ્ઠાપૂર્વક અને નિશ્ચિંતતાથી પિતાને સ્વધર્મ બજાવી શકે એ હેતુથી પ્રેરાઈને સરકારે શિક્ષકોને આર્થિક દરજજે હવે નોંધપાત્ર રીતે સુધાર્યો છે.
કઈ પણ વ્યવસાયની પ્રતિષ્ઠા કે સન્માનને લાગેવળગે છે ત્યાં સુધી વ્યાવસાયિક પ્રતિષ્ઠા કે સન્માન માગણી કરીને મેળવવાના હોતા નથી. બલકે તેને અનુરૂપ અધિકારની યોગ્યતા વ્યક્તિએ સ્વઆચરણથી જ સિદ્ધ કરવી પડે છે, Respect and honour can't be demanded. They are to be commanded instead.
આથી શિક્ષકેની આ પરિસ્થિતિ માટે અંશતઃ તેઓ પિતે જ નૈતિક રીતે જવાબહાર જણાય છે.
અધ્યાપન કાર્યના શિક્ષકના કર્તવ્ય અંગે અત્રે એ પ્રશ્ન સંભવિત રીતે ઉપસ્થિત થઈ શકે, કે શિક્ષકે વિદ્યાથીનું મન શું પિતાની ઈચ્છા મુજબ ઢાળવું જોઈએ, કે વિદ્યાથીની ઈચ્છા મુજબ? આ મહત્ત્વપૂર્ણ પ્રશ્નને પ્રાચીન ભારતની શાસ્ત્રીય પરંપરાને અનુસરીને સચોટ ઉત્તર આપતાં રાધાકૃષ્ણન કહે છે, કે સ્વ-આચરણ દ્વારા ઉત્તમ આદર્શનું નિદર્શન કરીને શિક્ષકે વિદ્યાથીને સ્વ-નિર્ણયની મુક્ત પસંદગી કરવા દેવી MSN: "Teachers by their achāra or conduct should be an example to the students.... placing before the pupil the best that has been taught and said on any particular subject and then leave it to him to reflect and decide.”૧૯
કારણ કે સારા વિદ્યાર્થી પુસ્તકમાંથી શીખે તે કરતાં વધારે શિક્ષકે પાસેથી તે શીખે છે. આથી જ આપણે શિક્ષકે માત્ર વિદ્વાન જ નહીં, વિવેકદૃષ્ટિયુક્ત તથા વિદ્યાથી પ્રેમી પણ હોવા જોઈએ. આ સંદર્ભમાં રાધાકૃષ્ણન કહે છે, કે જેણે સારું વાંચન કર્યું હોય એ જ માત્ર સારે વિદ્યાર્થી નથી, બલકે જેને સારું શિક્ષણ આપવામાં આવ્યું હોય તે સારે વિદ્યાથીં ગણાય. “A good student is not merely one who has read much out one who has been taught well."20

Page #185

(૪) મૂલ્યાંકન : ઉપરની ચર્ચા પરથી નીચેના ફલિતાર્થો તારવી શકાય : (૧) વર્તમાન શિક્ષણની સમસ્યાઓના સંદર્ભમાં રાધાકૃષ્ણને રજૂ કરેલ શિક્ષણવિષયક
વિચારો શિક્ષણ સાથે સંકળાયેલા સહુ કોઈને માટે અત્યંત પ્રસ્તુત ગણી શકાય. શિક્ષણની પ્રસ્તુત સમસ્યાઓ આપણે ઉકેલી શકીએ તેમ છીએ, કારણ કે તે ઉભી થવા માટેના કારણભૂત આપણે (શિક્ષણ સાથે સંકળાયેલા સહુ કે) તેનું નિરાકરણ કરવા માટે નૈતિક રીતે જવાબદાર છીએ એટલું જ નહીં પણ સક્ષમ પણ છીએ એવું રાધાકૃષ્ણનનું તારણ (૧) એક નિષ્ઠાવાન, સાંપ્રત દાર્શનિક તરીકે તેમનું પ્રામાણિક આત્મનિરીક્ષણ તથા (૨) પિતાના વિચારોની નિર્ભય અને નિખાલસ રજૂઆત કરનાર સનિષ્ટ કેળવણીકાર તરીકે તેમને ઉપસાવે છે. શિક્ષણની સમસ્યાની માત્ર રજૂઆત કરીને જ અટકી નહીં જતાં તેના ઉકેલ માટે રાધાકૃષ્ણને અપનાવેલે વિધાયક અને રચનાત્મક અભિગમ સમસ્યાઓનું સર્વગ્રાહી આકલન કરતી તેમની દાર્શનિક શ્રદ્ધા અને દૃષ્ટિસંપન્નતા તેમજ કેળવણીકાર તરીકે શિક્ષણની સમસ્યાઓના વ્યવહારુ ઉકેલની આગવી કોઠા
સઝને સમન્વય સૂચવે છે. સંદર્ભ સૂચિ:
૫૮. True knowledge : Dr. Radhakrishnan.
().
૧૧૩

Page #186

Comp. Saloni Joshi
In Compiling the bibliography the facilities available at the libraries of L. D. Inst. of Indology and Gujarat Vidyapeetha have been used.
Dr. S. Radhakrishnan-Bibliography.
This bibliography is arranged in four parts.
I
Books, Editings and Translations by Dr. Radhakrishnan.
II
Books on Dr. Radhakrishnan.
III Articles on Dr. Radhakrishnan.
IV Gujarati translation of Dr. Radhakrishnan's Works. This bibliography does not claim to be exhaustive.
Bhagavad Git.
London George Allen and Unwin, 1948.
Brahma Sutra: Philosophy Spiritual Life.
London George Allen and Unwin, 1960.
Comparative Studies in Philosophy/ ed. with others.
New Vork: Harper, 1948. Concept of Man/ed. with P. T. Raju. London George Allen and Unwin, 1960.
of
Contemparary Indian Philosophy/ed. with J. Muirhead.
Creative Life.
London George Allen and Unwin, 1938.
(Library of Philosophy).
Delhi Vision Books, 1975.
Dhamma Pada.
Oxford: Oxford Uni. Press, 1950.
East and West in Religion.
London George Allen and Unwin, 1933.
East and West: Some reflections. London George Allen and Unwin, 1955.
Eastern Religions and Western thought.
Oxford: Oxford Uni. Press, 1939. Education, Politics and War. Poona International Service, 1944.
Essential of Psychology.
Oxford: Oxford Uni. Press, 1912 Ethics of the Vedanta and its metaphysical Presuppositions. Madras: Guardian Press, 1908.
Fellowship of the Spirit. Cambridge
press 1961.
Freedom and Culture.
Harward
Book
Gautam The Buddha.
Uni.
Madras G. A. Natesan and Co., 1936.
London: Oxford Uni. Press, 1938.
Bombay: Hind Kitabs, 1938 Great Indians.
Bombay Hind Kitabs, 1949,

Page #187

[34]
Heart of Hindustan.
Madras : G. A. Natesaui and
Co. 1936. Hindu View of Life.
London: George Allen and
Unwin, 1927. History of Philosophy-Eastern and
Western. London: George Allen and Unwin, 1923-2 Vols. (Muirhead
Library of Philosoply). Idealist View of Life.
London : George Allen and
Uniwin, 1932. India and China.
Bombay : Hind Kitabs, 1944. Indian Philosophy
London : George Allen and Unwin, 1923, 1927. 2 Vols.
(Library of Philosopy). Indian Religions.
New Delhi : Vision Books, 1979. Introduction to Mahatma Gandhi :
Essays and reflections on Gandhi's Life and work. London: George Alleinland
Unwin, 1939. Is this Peace.
Bombay : Hind Kitabs, 1945. Kalki or future of Civilization.
London : Kegan Paul and Co.,
1929. Living with a Purpose.
Delhi : Oriental Paperbacks,
1982. Mahatma Gandhi : 100 years.
New Delhi : Gandhui Peace
Foundation, 1968. Meine Suche Nache Wahrheit
Gutersloh : 1 [, 1961,
My Search for Truth.
Agra : Shivalal Agarwal, 1956. Occational Speeches Writings.
Delhi : Ministry of Information ..., 1963–2 vols. V. 1, 1951
1959-V. 2., 1959-1962. Our Heritage,
Delhi : Vision Books, 1973. Philosophy of Rabindranath Tagore.
London: Macmillan and Co.
1918. President Radhakrishnan's speeches
and writings. Delhi: [ }, 1965, 1969,
V. 1. 1962-64.-V.2. 1964-1967. Principal Upanişads.
London: George Allen and
Unwin, 1953 Recovery of Faith.
London: George Allen and Unwin, 1956.
(World Perspectives). Reign of Religion in Contemporary
Philosophy. London : Mac Millan and Co.,
1920. Religion and Culture.
Delhi : [ ], 1968. Religion and Society.
London : George Allen and : Unwin, 1948 Religion and Changing World.
London : George Allen and
Unwin, 1967. Religion We need.
London : Ernest Benn, 1928.
(Affirination Series). Report of the University Education
Commission/with Sir James Duff and others. New Delhi : Govt. of Indir,
Un!

Page #188

[35]
Source Book in Indian Philosophy/
ed, with C. A. Moore. New Jercy : Princeton, 1957.
Spirit in Man : Principal Miller
Lectures. Madras : [ ], 1931.
Studies in Hindu thought.
Calcutta : [ Theism of thic Bhagavad Gita.
[ ] Vedānta According to Sajkara and
Ramanuja. Loudon: George Allen and Unwin, 1928.
Spirit of Religion.
Delli : Pankaj Pub, 1980.
Il
Basic Writing of S. Radhakrislunan/
ed. by Robert A. McDermott. Bombay: Jaico Pub. House.
1970. Chief Currents of Contemporary
Philosophy/ed. by D. M. Datta.
Calcutta : Calcuita Uni, 1952. Concept of man in Rabindranath
Tagore and Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan / V. Narayanakaran Reddy.
Banglore : [ ], 1973. Contemporary Indian thought/ed. by
V.S. Naravane.
Bombay : Asia Pub., 1964., Counter attack from the East : Philo
sophy of Radhakrishnan/ed. by C.E.M. Joad. London: George Allen and
Unwin, 1933. Facts of Radhakrishnan/ed. by B.K.
Ahluwalia. New Delhi : Newman Group
of Public Caton, 1978. Introduction to Radhakrishnan/S.J.
Samarth. New York/Association Press,
1964. Maya : Interpretive Principle for an
understanding of the religious thoughts of Sankar and Radhakrishnan/Donald Richard Tuck Ph. D. Thesis, Uni. of Iowa, 1970.
Dic Mystike bei Radhakrishnan und
die offenbarungs theologic/Christ Kumar Paul Singli. Ph.D. tliesis, Kirchliche Hochschyie (Berlin),
1966. Philosophy of S. Radhakrislınan/ed.
by Paul Arther Schillp. New York : Tudor Publishing
Co., 1952. Radhakrishnan/O, Wolff. Gottingen : [
], 1962. Radhakrishnan : An Anthology/ed.
by A.N. Marlowe. London : [
}, 1952. Radhakrishnan: a comparative stud
ies in Philosophy/ed. by W. R. Inge and others. London: George Allen and Unwin, 1951. [Presented. in
honour of liis 60th Birthday]. Dr. Radhakrishnan and Jñana/Jnana
Prakasam.
Tiruchira pali : [ [, 1959. Radhakrishnan and Integral Experi
ence/by J. G. Arapura and others.
Bombay: Asia Pub., 1964. Radhakrishnanr Centenary Volume/
ed. by G. P. Parthsarthi, G. P. Chattopadhyay.
Delhi : Oxford Uni. Press, 1989 Radhakrishnan : A Biograplıy/by
Gopal Delhi : Oxford Uni, Press, 1989,

Page #189

[36]
Die Universale Religion des Geistes.
Religion and Religion bei Sarvepalli Radhakrislinan. Ph.D. thesis, Uni. of Munich, 1966.
Radhakrislinan Reader: An Antho-
logy/ed. by P. N. Rao and others. Bombay : Bhartiya Vidya
Bhavan, 1969. Radhakrishnan Souvenir Volume/cd.
by B. I. Atrey. Moradabad: Darshan Interna
tinal. Radhakrishnan's Comparative Philo
sophy/by Robert A. Mc. Dermoth Ph. D. thesis, Boston Uni., 1969.
Radhakrishnan's Contribution to
Social and Political ThoughtA critical Evaluation/Clarissa Rodrigues. Ph. D. Thesis, Bombay Uni.
III
Philosophy Vol. 1/ed. by Karl
This list is based on Indian H. Potter.--2nd rev. ed.-1983 An Appreciation of Radhakrishnan's
Translation of “The Bhagarad Gita" | Jagmohan
Sambodhi 16, 1989 P. 97–107. Being and Difference Radhakrishnan
and Derrida/M.V. Bati
Sambodhi 16, 1989 p. 108-119. Bhagavad Gita and Dr. Radha
krishnan/G.K. Bhat.
Sambodhi-16, 1989, p. 1-9 Bhartiya Darşan na marmajna Dr.
Radhakrishnan/C.V. Raval.
Sambodh 16, 1989, p. 1-20 Compatibility of Radhakrishnan's
Metaphysics with his Epistemo logy and Ethics/J.A. Yajnik.
Sambodhi-16, 1989, p. 128–143. Doctrine of Maya : Radhakrishnan/
Donald Richard Tuck Darsnan International, 16.4, 1976.
p. 51-62 Faith Philosophy and Religion of
Dr. S. Radhakrishnan/ P. Nagaraja Rao. Triveni, 44.3, 1975 p. 9-13.
Hindu View of Life. A Resume/J.J.
Pandya Sārdāpitha Pradipa. Vol. XV-XVI, No 2-1 1975-76,
P,23-35. Idcalism of Prof. Sir S. Radha
krislinon/P. T. Raju. Calcutta
Review. 76, 1950-p. 511. Modern thought and S. Radha
krishnan/A.V. Vasavda. Bhartiya Vidya, 4, 1942-43.
p. 41-51. Nature of God in the Philoso
phy of Radhakrishnan/M.M. Joshi Sārda-pitha Pradipa. Vol. XV-I, 1975-76, P, 2.1
P. 12.27. Philosophy of Sarvepalli Radha
krishnan/Donald H. Bishop. Brahmavadin, 10, 1975,
p. 82-106. Philosophy of Radhakrishnan/N.B.
Chakraborty. Journal of the Indian Academy of Philosophy,
14.1, 1975, P. 52-58. Philosophy of Dr. S. Radhakrishnan/
p. Nagaraj Rao. Indo-Asian Culture, 11.3, 1963, p. 255-259.

Page #190

[37]
Pravartman Sikshagani Samasyaōnā Sandarbha man Radhakrishnan na cintan ni Prastutata/Bhavana Trivedi
Sambodhi 16, 1989, p. 21-32 Professor Krishnachandra Bhattacharya and his Colleague S. Radhakrishnan/Rameschandra Srivastava. Indian Philosophy and Culture, 17.1, 1972, p.46-55. Radhakrishnan and Christianity/ Bharti Savan.
Sambodhi 16, 1989, p, 58-83. Dr. S. Radhakrishnan and his Contribution to Philosophy/Nagaraja Rao Triveni, 33.3, 1964, p. 50-55.
Radhakrishnan and his Philosophy/ J.S.R.L. Narayan Moorty. Triveni, 35.1, 1966, p. 50-58. Dr. Radhakrishnan and Idealism/P. Nagaraja Rao. Journal of the Ganganth Jha Research Institute, 16, 1959. p.
Dr. Sarvapalli Radhakrishnan aur Adhunik Sikáha Pranali/Abhedunandn Bhattacharya. Darshanik Nibandhavali / Abhedananda Bhattacharya.
Delhi: Durga Publication, 1989, p. 219-223.
Radhakrishnan and the religion of
man/R. Raphad.
Indo-Asian Culture, 24.2-3, 1978, p. 41-49.
Dr. Radhakrishnan on Buddhism: a glance/S.G. Kantawala Sambodhi 16, 1989, p. 120-127 Radhakrishnan on Kalki or future of Civilization/R.S. Betai Sambodhi 16, 1989, p. 84-96 Dr. Radhakrishna on Idealist View of Life-A study/M.G. Machhar. Sardipitha Pradipa.
Vol. XV-XVI, No. 2-1 1975 76. P. 118-138.
Radhakrishnan on mind, matter and God/Charles Hartshorne. Studies in Philosophy and Religion/by S.K. Maitra-2nd ed.Calcutta: [ 1. 1956. p. 313-322. Radhakrishnan on the philosophy of the Upanisads/R.S. Betai Sambodhi 16, 1989, p. 41-57 Radhakrishnan the great reconciler/
A.U. Vasavada Proceedings of the All India Oriental Conference. V. 1-1927.
Radhakrishnan's and Bruner's anthropologies/K. C. Mathew. Indian Journal of Theology, 6. 1957, p. 29, 67.
Dr. S. Radhakrishnan's Conception of nature and destiny of man/Nilima Sharma. Bharati Bulletin of the College of Indology, BHU. 9.1. 1965-66, p. 63-70.
Dr. Radhakrishna's Conception of Religion/Ramesh Beta Sarada pitha Pradipa.
Vol. XV XVI, No. 2.1, 1975-76 P. 36-63. Radhakrishnan's Interpretation of history and of human destiny/ R. C. Sinha.
Prajña, 17.2; 1972. p. 43-50. Radhakrishnan's interpretation of
the nature and states of the Phenomenal world in Shankara Vedanta/C.V. Rgval, Sardapisha Pradipa.
Vol. PV-XVI, No.2-1 1975-76 P'. 64-86.
Reason and Intuition in Dr. S. Philosophy/
Radhakrishnan's C.V. Raval.
Sambodhi 16, 1989, p. 30-40 Radhakrishnan's Philosophy and religion of the spirit/ K Seshadri. Brahmavadin, 8, 1973, p. 20-33.

Page #191

[38] Dr. Radhakrishnan's Pliilosophy of Schweitzer and Radhakrishnan : a Values/P. S. Sastri.
Comparison/C.W.M. Gell. Calcutta Review, 148, 1958, Hibbert Journal. 51, 1952-3. p. 7–16.
p. 234-241, 355–365. Dr. S. Radhakrishnan's Solution of Sir Herbert Samuel and Sir S. Radhathe problem of Religious con.
krishnan/B. K. Mallik. flict/B. G. Tiwari
Aryan Paill 4, 1933, P. 505–517. Darshan International, 24, 1966,
Social Philosophy of Dr. Radhap. 101-106.
krishnan/S. Gopalan. Bulletin Sarvapalli Radhakrishnan's view of
of the Institute of Traditional the nature of Religion/S, M. Tiwari.
Cultures, 1967. p. 230-235. Darshan International. 23, 1966,
Social Philosophy of Dr. Rachap. 16–99.
krishnan/H.M. Joshi Radhakrishnan's views regarding
Sambodhi 16, 19, p. 5, 29 Jainism and Buddhism Structure of Radhakrishnan's idealH.M. Josli. Sardapitha Pradipa
ism. Vol. XV. XVI, No. 2-1,1975.76
Darshan International, 30, 1968, P. 108–17.
p. 41-52, Religious Idcalism of Berkely and
What is Intution according to Tagore, Radhakrishnan.
Radhakrishnan, Aurobindo Darslian International, 13, 1964,
K. C. Varadachari. p. 96–102.
Aryan Path, 6, 1935. p. 476.
[IVI ઉપનિષદોનું તત્ત્વજ્ઞાન અનુ. ચંદ્રશંકર ભારતના વારસઅનુ. ચંદ્રશંકર પ્રા. શુકલ પ્રા. શુકલ
મુબઈ : વોરા એન્ડ કંપની, ૧૯૪૬ મુંબઈ : હંસ પ્રકાશન, ૧૯૪૮. મહાત્મા ગાંધી/અનુ. ચંદ્રશંકર પ્રા. શુકલ કલ્કિ અથવા સંસ્કૃતિનું ભાવિ અનુ. મુંબઈ : વેરા એન્ડ કંપની, ૧૯૪૨ નગીનદાસ પારેખ
મહાત્મા ગાંધી શતાબ્દી ગ્રંથ અનુ. નગીનદાસ અમદાવાદ : ગુજરાત વિદ્યાપીઠ, ૧૯૩૯
પારેખ, યશવંત શુકલ ગાંધીજીને જગવંદના અનુ. ચંદ્રશંકર અમદાવાદ : [
, ૧૯૭૦ પ્રા. શુકલ
મહાભારત/અનુ. ચંદ્રશંકર પ્રા. શુકલ મુંબઈ : [
], ૧૯૪૭ મુંબઈ : વોરા એન્ડ કંપની, ૧૯૪૬ ગીતાદર્શન/અનુ. ચંદ્રશંકર પ્રા. શુકલ યુવાનોની સંસ્કારસાધના/અનુ. ચંદ્રશંકર મુંબઈ : વેરા એન્ડ કંપની, ૧૯૪૭
પ્રા. શુકલ ગૌતમબુદ્ધ અનુ. ગોપાલદાસ જીવાભાઈ પટેલ મુંબઈ : એન. એમ. ઠકકર, ૧૯૪૫
અમદાવાદ: ગુજરાત વિદ્યાપીઠ, ૧૯૪૬ વેની વિચારધારા/અનુ. ચંદ્રશંકર પ્રા. શુકલ (રેવાભાઈ પટેલ સ્મારકમાળા)
મુંબઈ : વોરા એન્ડ કંપની, ૧૯૪૪ ગતને આવતીકાલનો પુરુષઅનુ. હિંદુ જીવનદર્શન/અનું. ચંદ્રશંકર પ્રા. શુકલ મગનભાઈ પ્રભુદાસ દેસાઈ
અમદાવાદ : નવજીવન, ૧૯૪ર... અમદાવાદ : જેન સાહિત્ય પ્રકાશક (જમનાદાસ ભગવાનદાસ સ્મારક ગ્રંથ
સમિતિ (ગુજરાત વિદ્યાપીઠ), ૧૯૩૯, માળા, ૨૫) ધર્મોનું મિલન/અનુ. ચંદ્રશંકર પ્રા. શુકલ હિંદુ ધમઅનુ. ચંદ્રશંકર પ્રા. શુકલા
મુંબઈ : ભારતીય વિદ્યાભવન, ૧૯૪૭ મુંબઈ : વોરા એન્ડ કંપની, ૧૯૪૪
ગીતાદર્શનારા એવાભાઈ પટેલ

Page #192

મુનિ જિનવિજયજી-
વાય સૂચિ
૧૯૮૮નું વર્ષ મુનિ જિનવિજયજીનું જન્મ શતાબ્દી વર્ષ હતું. ભારતીય સંસ્કૃતિ, ઇતિહાસ અને સાહિત્યમાં તેમને અમૂલ્ય ફાળો છે. આ સૂચિ તેમના સારસ્વત કાર્યની ઝાંખી કરાવશે.
પ્રસ્તુત સૂચિ ત્રણ વિભાગમાં ગોઠવાયેલી છે. (૧) મુનિજીએ લખેલાં પુસ્તકો, (२) साहितया पुस्ती, (3) साहित २ याबाना पुस्त.
અંતે તેમણે સંપાદિત કરેલ ગ્રંથની સમયાનુસારી સુચિ આપી છે. જે પ્રકાશન વિષયક માહિતિ ઉપલબ્ધ નથી તે [ ] દ્વારા દર્શાવવામાં આવી. આમાં તેમના લેખોનો સમાવેશ કરવામાં આવ્યો નથી.
आयविद्या व्याख्यानमाला-१. भा.-अमदावाद : गुजरात पुरातत्त्व मंदिर, गुजरात विद्यापीठ,
1922. २. गुजरात का जैन धर्म. -बनारस : जैन संस्कृति संशोधन मंडल, 1949.
(सन्मति प्रकाशन, 3). ३. गुजरातनो जैन धर्म. [ ४. जैन इतिहासनी झलक, अमदावाद : [
] 1966, सहलेखकरतिलाल दीपचन्द देसाइ. ५. जैन तत्त्वसार.-१. आ. -भावनगर जैन आत्मानंद सभा, 1915. ६. प्राचीन गुजरातना सांस्कृतिक इतिहासनी साधन सामग्रो... [ ७. बाबू श्री बहादुरसिंहजी सिघी.-१. आ. मुंबई : भारतीय विद्या भवन, 1945.
-सहलेखक पं. सुखलालजी संघवी. ८. राजर्षि कुमारपाल, -बनारस : जैन संस्कृति संशोधन मंडल, 1949. ९. सर्वोदय साधन आश्रम, चंदेरिया. 1950--58 तक का सामान्य विवरण,
-चंदेरिया : सर्वोदय साधन आश्रम [ १०. श्वेतांबर स्थानकवासी शिक्षण परिषदना प्रमुखनु भाषण (प्रथम अधिवेशन, अजमेर)
]: शिक्षण परिषद, 1983. ११. हरिभद्राचार्यस्य समयनिर्णय.-पूना : जैन साहित्य संशोधक समाज, [ १२. जिनविजय जीवन कथा.-१. आ.-रूपाहेली : महात्मा गांधी स्मृति मंदिर, 1971. १३. मेरा जीवन प्रपंच कथा.-१. आ.-चितोडगढ : सर्वोदय साधना आश्रम, 1976. १४. [सद्गत मुमुक्षुभागिनी] श्री लाडुबहेन. अमदाबाद : कुमारी विद्या मंदिर, [
2452
१५. भारतीय पुरातत्त्व : श्री मुनि जिनविजय अभिनंदन ग्रंथ/संपा. पूर्णचन्द्र जैन.
--जयपुर : मुनि जिनविजय सम्मान समिति, 1971, .

Page #193

સંપાદન
१६. अभिधानप्पदीपिका / मोग्गलान थेर.-१. आ.-अमदावाद : गुजरात पुरातत्त्वमन्दिर,
गुजरात विद्यापीठ, 1924. १७. अर्थशास्त्र अपरनाम राजसिद्धांत कौटिल्य.-१. आ.-मुंबई : भारतीय विद्याभवन, 1959.
(सिंघी जैन ग्रन्थमाला; 47). -आचार्य योग्धम कृत नीति निर्णीत व्याख्या सह. १८. उक्ति रत्नाकार साधुसुन्दरगणि.-जयपुर : राजस्थान पुगतत्व मन्दिर, 1957.
(राजस्थान पुरातन ग्रन्थमाला; 12). १९. उक्ति व्यक्ति प्रकरण/दामोदर.-१.आ.-मुंबई : भारतीय विद्याभवन, 1953.
(सिंघी जैन ग्रन्थमाला, ३९). २०. कथाकोष प्रकरण/जिनेश्वर सूरि.-१.आ.-मुंबई : भारतीय विद्याभवन, 1949.
(सिंघो जैन ग्रन्थमाला; 11). २१. कर्णामृत प्रपा/भट्ट सोमेश्वर.-१.आ.-जोधपुर : राजस्थान प्राच्य प्रतिष्ठान, 1963.
(राजस्थान पुरातन ग्रन्थमाला; 2). २२. कुमारपाल चरित्र संग्रह/भिन्न भिन्न विद्वत् कर्तृक.-१.आ.-मुंबई : भारतीय विद्याभवन,
1958.-(सिंघी जैन ग्रन्थमाला; 41), २३, कुमारपाल प्रतिबोध/ सोमप्रभाचार्य:-वडोदरा : सेन्ट्रल लायब्रेरी, 1920.
(गायकवाह ओरिअन्टल सीरीझ, 14). २४. खरतरगच्छ पट्टावली संग्रह.-कलकत्ता : बाबू पूरणचन्द नाहर, 1932. २५. खरतरगच्छ बृहदगुर्वावलि | जिनगलोपाध्याय.-१.आ.-मुंबइ : भारतीय विद्याभवन, 1956,
(सिंघी जैन ग्रन्थमाला; 42). २६. गोराबादल चरित्र/हेमरतन.-१.आ.-जोधपुर : राजस्थान प्राच्य प्रतिष्ठान, 1968.
(राजस्थान पुरातन ग्रन्थमाला, 40). २७. जंबुचरियं | गुणपाल.-१.आ.-मुंबई : भारतीय विद्याभवन, 1959.
(सिंधी जैन ग्रन्थमाला; 44). २८. जयपायड निमित्तशास्त्र/पूर्वाचार्य विरचित प्रश्न व्याकरणारख्या-मुंबई : भारतीय विद्याभवन 1958.
(सिंघी जैन ग्रन्थमाला, 43). २९. जीतकल्प सूत्रम् / जिनभद्रगणि.-१.आ.-अमदावाद' : जैन साहित्य संशोधक समिति,
1926. (जैन साहित्य संशोधक ग्रन्थमाला ७). -सिद्धसेनगणि कृत बृहच्चूर्णि, श्रीचन्द्र
सूरिकृत विषमपद् व्याख्या सह. ३०. जैन ऐतिहासिक गूर्जर काव्य संचय.-भावनगर : जैन आत्मानंद सभा, 1926.
(श्री कान्ति विजयजी जैन अतिहासिक ग्रन्थमाला, ७). ३१. त्रिपुर भारती लघुस्तव / लघुपंडित.-जयपुर : राजस्थान पुरातत्व मंदिर, 1952,
(राजस्थान पुरातन ग्रन्थमाला; 1). .

Page #194

41
३२. धूर्ताख्यान / हरिभद्र सूरि- १. आ. - मुंबई. भारतीय विद्याभवन, 1944.
(सिंघी जैन ग्रंथमाला; 19).
३३. द्रौपदी स्यंवरम् / - भावनगर : जैन आत्मानंदसभा, 1918 ( क्रांति विजय जैन इतिहासमाला ; 5 ).
३४. पालि पाठावलि - अमदाबाद : गुजरात पुरातत्त्व मन्दिर, 1922.
( गुजरात पुरातत्त्वमन्दिर ग्रंथावलिः १ ).
३५. पुरातन प्रबंध संग्रह - १. आ. - कलकत्ता : सिंघी जैन ज्ञानपीठ, 1936.
(सिंघी जैन ग्रंथमाला; २).
३६. पुरातन समयलिखित जैन पुस्तक प्रशस्ति संग्रह - मुंबई : भारतीय विद्याभवन, 1943.
(सिंघी जैन ग्रंथमाला, 18).
३७. प्रबन्ध कोश / राजशेखर - १. आ. - कलकत्ता सिंघी जैन ज्ञानपीठ, 1935.
(सिंघी जैन ग्रंथमाला ६ ).
३८. प्रबन्ध चिंतामणि / मेरुतुंग आचार्य. -
(सिंघी जैन ग्रंथमाला; १ ).
३९. प्रबन्ध चिंतामणि / मेरुतुंगाचार्य, अनु. हजारीप्रसाद द्विवेदी. - १. आ. कलकत्ता : सिंघी जैन ज्ञानपीठ, 1940, (सिंघी जैन ग्रंथमाला; ३ ).
४०. प्रभावक चरित्र / प्रभाचन्द्राचार्य. - १. आ. - अमदाबाद: सिंघी जैन, 1940.
(सिंघी जैन ग्रंथमाला; १३ ) .
४१. प्राकृत कथासंग्रह. - १. आ. - अमदाबाद : गुजरात पुरातत्त्व मन्दिर, 1922.
( गुजरात पुरातत्व मन्दिर ग्रंथावली).
४२. प्राकृतानन्द / रघुनाथ कवि. - १. आ. - जोधपुर : राजस्थान प्राच्य प्रतिष्ठान, 1962 ( राजस्थान पुरातन ग्रंथमाला १० ).
४३. प्राचीन गुजराती गद्यसंदर्भ. - १. आ. - अमदाबाद : गुजरात विद्यापीठ, 1930.
( गुजरात पुरातच्चमन्दिर ग्रंथावली).
४४. प्राचीन जैन लेख संग्रह - भावनगर : जैन आत्मानंद सभा, 1917, 1921. २ भाग. ४५. बालशिक्षा व्याकरण / संग्रामसिंह. - १. आ. - जोधपुर : राजस्थान प्राव्य प्रतिष्ठान, 1968. ( राजस्थान पुरातन ग्रंथमाला; ३).
.- १. आ. - कलकत्ता : सिंघी जैन ज्ञानपीठ, 1933.
४६. भरतेश्वर बाहुबलि रास तथा बुद्धि रास / शालिभद्र सूरि. - मुंबई : भारतीय विद्याभवन. ( भारतीय विद्या, अनुपूर्ति; १ ).
४७. भारतीय विद्या : निबन्ध संग्रह - १. आ. - मुबई : भारतीय विद्याभवन, 1945 ( बाबू श्री बहादुरसिंहजी सिंघी - स्मृति ग्रंथ).
४८. मन्त्रराज रहस्यम / सिंह तिलकसूरि; - १. आ - मुंबई : भारतीय विद्याभवन, 1980. (सिंघी जैन ग्रंथमाला ७३ ).
४९. मंत्री कर्मचंद्र वंशावली प्रबन्ध / जयसोम पाठक, मुंबई : भारतीय विद्याभवन, 1980. (सिंधी जैन ग्रंणमाला ८२).
५०. विजयदेव - माहात्म्यम् / श्री वल्लभ पाठक- १. आ, अमदाबाद : जैन साहित्य संशोधक, 1928 (जैन साहित्य संशोधक ग्रंथमाला; ९ ).

Page #195

५१. विज्ञप्ति त्रिवेणी-१. आ.-भावनगर : जैन आरमानंद सभा, 1916.
(कान्तिविजय जैन इतिहास माला; १). ५२. विज्ञप्तिलेख संग्रह.-मुंबई : भारतीय विद्याभवन, 1960. (सिंघी जैन ग्रंथमाला; 51). ५३. विधि मार्ग प्रपा नाम सुविहित सामाचारी.-मुंबई : झवेरी मूलचन्द्र हीराचन्द्र, 1941,
(जिनदत्त सूरि प्राचीन पुस्तकोद्धार फंड, 44). ५४. विविधगच्छीय पट्टावली संग्रह-१.आ.-मुंबई : भारतीय विद्याभवन, 1961.
(सिंघी जैन ग्रंथमाला; 53). ५५. विविध तीर्थकल्प/जिनप्रभसूरि-१.आ.-कलकत्ता : सिंघी जैन ज्ञानपीठ, 1984.
(सिंघी जैन ग्रंथमाला; १०). भाग. १ ५६. शकुन प्रदीप/लावण्य शर्मा-जोधपुर : राजस्थान प्राच्य प्रतिष्ठान, 1964.
(राजस्थान पुरातन ग्रंथमाला; 89). ५७. शत्रुजय तीर्थोद्वार प्रबंध-१.आ.-भावनगर : जैन आत्मानंद सभा, 1917.
(कान्तिविजय जैन इतिहासमाला; 3). ५. सन्देशक रास/अब्दुल रहमान.-१. आ. मुंबइ : भारतीय विद्याभवन, 1945.
(सिंघी जैन ग्रंथमाला; 22). ५९. हम्मीर महाकाव्य नयचन्द्र रि-१. आ.-जोधपुर राजस्थान प्राच्य प्रतिष्ठान, 1968.
(राजस्थान पुरातन ग्रंथमाला; 65). ६०. हेतुबिन्दु टीका/भट्ट अर्चट, दुर्वेक मिश्र 'कृत आलोक सह संपा.. सुखलालजी संघवी,
जिनविजय मुनि.-बरोडा : ओरिएन्टल इन्स्टीटयुट, 1947. (गायकवाड ओरिएन्टल
सीरीझ, 113). ६१. Catalogue of Sanskrit and Prakrit Manuscripts/ed. Muni
Jina Vijayaji-1959-76. (Rajasthan Puratan Granth mala; No. 42, 44, 71, 77, 81, 82, 85, 91, 125),
(सामयिक) जैन साहित्य संशोधक, 1920 भारतीय विद्या 1939
सिंधी जैन ग्रंथमाला भारतीय विद्याभवन, मुंबई,
१. प्रबन्ध चिंतामणि मेरुतुंग आचार्य; संपा जिनविजय मुनि-1933. २. पुरातन प्रबन्ध संग्रह/संपा. जिनविजय मुनि.-1936. ३. प्रबन्ध चिंतामणि मेस्तुंग आचार्य; संपा. जिनविजय मुनि, अनु. हजारीप्रसाद द्विवेदी-1940. ४. धर्माभ्युदय महाकाव्य = संघपति चरित/उदयप्रभसूरि, नागेन्द्र गच्छीय; संपा. चतुर विजय मुनि,
पुण्य विजय मुनि.-1942.

Page #196

५. सुकृत कीर्ति कल्लोलिन्यादि वस्तुपाल प्रशस्ति संग्रह/उदयप्रभाचार्यादि अनेक कवि;
संपा. पुण्यविजय मुनि.-1961. ६, प्रबन्ध कोश/राजशेखर, संपा. जिनविजय मुनि.-1935, ७. देवानन्द महाकाव्य/मेघविजय उपाध्याय, संपा. वेचरदास जीवराज दोशी.-1937. ८. जैन तर्कभाषा: तात्पर्य संग्रहारण्य वृत्ति सह यशोविजय गणि; संपा. सुखलाल संघवी,
महेन्द्र कुमार, दलसुख मालवणिया.-1938.. ९. प्रमाण मीमांसाः स्वोपज्ञ वृत्ति/हेमचन्द्राचार्यः संपा. सुखलाल संघवी, महेन्द्रकुमार,
दलसुख मालवणिया-1939. १०. विविध तीर्थ कल्प/जिनप्रभसूरि; संपा. जिनविजय मुनि.-1934. ११. कथाकोष प्रकरणः स्वोपज्ञ व्याख्या/जिनेश्वर सूरि. संपा. जिनविजय मुनि.-1949. १२. अकलंक ग्रंथत्रयम्: स्वोरज्ञ वृत्ति सह (लघीयस्व्यम्, न्याय विनिश्चय, प्रमाणसंग्रह)/भट्ट
अकलंक देव; संपा. महेन्द्रकुमार-1939. १३. प्रभावक चरित्र/प्रभाचन्द्राचार्य; संपा. जिनविजय मुनि.-1940. १४. दिग्विजय महाकाव्य/मेघविजय गणि; संपा. अंबालाल प्रे. शाह.-1945. १५. भानुचन्द्र गणि चरित्र/सिद्धिचन्द्र उपाध्याय; संपा. मोहनलाल द. देसाइ.-1941. १६. ज्ञान बिन्दु प्रकरणम्/यशोविजय उपाध्याय, संपा. सुखलाल संघवी, दलसुख मालवणिया,
हीराकुमारी देवी-1942. १७. वृहत् कथाकोश/हरिषेणाचार्य; संपा. आदिनाथ नेमिनाथ उपाध्ये.-1943. १८. पुरातन समय रिखित जैन पुस्तक प्रशस्ति संग्रह[संपा. जिनविजय मुनि.-1943. १९. धूर्ताख्यान | हरिभद्र सूरि; संपा. जिनविजय मुनि.-1944. -संघतिलक कृत संस्कृत
धूर्ताख्यान, पुरातन गुजगती बालावबोधात्मक धूर्ताख्यान सह. २०. न्यायावतार वार्तिक वृत्ति शान्ति सूरि, पूर्णतल्लगच्छीय; संपा, दरसुख मालवणिया.-1949. २१. रिष्ट समुच्चय/दुर्गदेवाचार्य; संपा. अमृतलाल स. गोपाणी.-1945. २२. सन्देशकरास | अब्दुल रहमान, संपा. जिनविजय मुनि; हरिवल्लभ भायाणी.-1945. २३. शतकत्रयादि सुभाषित संग्रह/भर्तृहरि; संपा. दामोदर धर्मानंद कोसंबी.-1948. २४. पउमसिरि चरिउ/वाहिल; संपा. मधुसूदन चि. मोदी; हरिवल्लभ चु. भायाणी.-1948. २५. नाण पंचमी कहाओ/महेश्वर सूरि; संपा. अमृतलाल स. गोपाणी.-1949. २६. भद्रबाहु संहिता/भद्रबाहु; संपा. अमृतलाल स. गोपाणी.-1949. २७. जिनदत्ताख्यान द्वय । सुमतिसूरि तथा अज्ञात; संपा. अमृतलाल मो. भोजक.-1953. २८. धर्मोपदेशमाला विवरण/जयसिंह सूरि; संपा. लालचन्द्र भ. गाँधी.-1949. २९. नीति शृङ्गार, वैराग्य नामक भर्तृहरि शतकत्रय, घनसागरगणि कृत प्राचीनतम व्याख्या सह/
भर्तृहरि; संपा. दामोदर धर्मानन्द कोसंबी.-1959. ३०. शृङ्गार मञ्जरी कथा/भोजदेव; संपा. कल्पलता मुनशी.-1959. ३१. लीलावइ | कोहल; संपा. आदिनाथ नेमिनाथ उपाध्ये.-1949. ३२. कीर्ति कौमुदी तथा सुकृत संकीर्तन / सोमेश्वर देव तथा ठाकुर अरिसिंह; संपा. पुण्यविजय,
-1961.

Page #197

३३. Literary circle of Mahamatya vastupal and its contribu.
tion to sanskrit literature./ by B. J. Sandesara.-1953.
(Sri Bahadur Singh Singhi Memoirs; V 3). ३४.२५, ३६. पउमचरिउ/स्वमभूदेव, संपा. हरिवल्लभ चू. भायाणी.-1953, 1960.
-३ भाग. ३७. ३८. Studies in India Literary history/by P. K. Gode-1953,
1954.-2. Vols, (Bahadur Singh Singhi memoirs; V.4, V.5). ३९. उक्ति व्यक्ति प्रकरण/दामोदर, संपा. जिनविजनमुनि, भाषास्वरूप विवेचन कर्ता सुनीतिकुमार
चाटा, सामाजिक ऐतिहासिक निदर्शन कर्ता मोतीचन्द्र.-1953, ४०. काव्य प्रकाश खंडन/सिद्धिचन्द्र गणि; संपा. २. छो. परीख.-1953. ४१. कुमारपाल चरित्र संग्रह/भिन्न भिन्न विद्वत् कर्तुक; संपा. जिनविजयमुनि.-1956. ४२. खरतरगच्छ बृहद् गुर्वावलि/जिनपालोपाध्याय, विद्वत् कर्तुक; संग्रा. संपा. जिनविजयमुनि.
1956. ४३. जयपायड निमित्तशास्त्र/पूर्वाचार्य विरचित प्रश्न व्याकरणाख्य संपा. जिनविजयमुनि.-1958. ४४. जंबुचरिय/ गुणपाल, संपा. जिनविजयमुनि.-1959. ४५. कुवलयमाला उद्योतन सूरि, संपा. आदिनाथ नेमिनाथ उपाध्ये.-1959.-भा. १-मूल कथा
ग्रन्थ. ४५A. कुवलयमाला कथा-संक्षेप/रत्नप्रभ सूरि, संपा. आदिनाथ नेमिनाथ उपाध्ये.-1961. ४६. कुवलयमाला/उद्योतन सूरि, संपा. आदिनाथ नेमिनाथ उपाध्ये,-1970 -भा. २ प्रस्तावना,
टिप्पणी, परिशिष्ट, ४७. अर्थशास्त्र अपरनाम राज सिद्धांत/आचार्य कौटिल्य, संपा. जिनविजयमुनि.-1959. ४८. नम्मया सुन्दरी कहा/महेन्द्र सुरि; संपा. प्रतिभा त्रिवेदी.-1960. ४९. छन्दोऽनुशासन/हेमचन्द्र सूरि; संपा. ह. दा. वेलणकर.-1961. ५०. विनयसूत्र/भदन्त गुणप्रभ; संपा. राहुल सांकृत्यायन.-1961. ५१. विज्ञप्ति लेखसंग्रह/संपा. जिनविजयमुनि.-1960-भाग १-मूल लेख संग्रह. ५३. विविध गच्छीय पट्टावली संग्रह/-संपा. जिनविजयमुनि.-1961... જ આ ગ્રંથમાળાના પુસ્તક કમાંક ૫૨, ૧૪-૭૦ અંગેની કોઈ માહિતી મળતી નથી.

Page #198

राजस्थान पुरातन ग्रंथमाला
ग्रंथांक
प्रका• राजस्थान पुरातत्त्व मंदिर, जोधपुर.
१. त्रिपुरा भारती लघुस्तव लघुपंडित; संपा. जिनविजयमुनि.-1952. सोमतिलक कृत विशेषवृत्ति,
पंजिका नामक लघुवृत्ति. उमा सहाचार्यकृत मांतगी स्तोत्र सह. २. कर्णामृत प्रपा/भट्ट सोमेश्वर; संपा. जिनविजय मुनि.-1963. ३. बालशिक्षा व्याकरणसंग्रामसिंह; संपा. जिनविजयमुनि.-1968. शर्ववर्माचार्य कृत कातन्त्र
व्याकरण सूत्र. ४. प्रमाण मंजरी/सर्वदेव, संपा. पट्टाभिराम शास्त्री.-1953. बलभद्र मिश्र, अध्यागज्य योगि,
वामन भट्ट-कृत व्याख्या सह. ५. यन्त्रराज रचना/जयसिंह देव; संपा. केदारनाथ.-1953. ६. महर्षि कुल वैभव (पूर्वार्ध)/मधुसूदन ओझा; संपा. गिरिधर शर्मा चतुर्वेद.-1956. ७. वृत्ति दीपिका/मौनी श्री कृष्ण भट्ट, संपा. पुरुषोत्तम शर्मा चतुर्वेद.-1956. ८. राजविनोद महाकाव्यम् उदयराज, संपा. गोपालनारायण बहुरा.-1956. ९. तर्क संग्रह अन्नं भट्ट; संपा. जितेन्द्र जेटली-1956. कल्याणगणि कृत फक्किका व्याख्या सह. १०. प्राकृतानन्द/रघुनाथ कवि, संपा. मुनि जिनविजय.- 1962. ११. कान्हडदे प्रबंध/पद्मनाभ; संपा. कान्तिलाल बो. व्यास.-1953. १२. उक्ति रत्नाकर साधु सुन्दर गणि; संपा. जिनविजयमुनि.-1957. १३. कया मखांरासा | कवि जान; संश. दशरथ शर्मा; अगरचन्द नाहटा, भंवरलाल नाहटा.
1953. १४. कूर्मवंश यश प्रकाश अपरनाम लावारासा/गोपालदान; सं. खारैड, महताब चन्द्रजी.
1953. १५. शृंगार हारावली / हर्ष; संपा. प्रियबाला शाह.-1956. १६. कृष्णगीति/सोमनाथ, संपा. मियबाला शाह.--1956. १७. नृत्तसंग्रह/अज्ञात; संपा. प्रियवाला शाह.-1956. १८. कारक सम्बन्धोद्योत/रभसनन्दि; संपा. हरिप्रसाद शास्त्री.-1956. १९. शब्दरत्न प्रदीप/अज्ञात; संपा. हरिप्रसाद शास्त्री.-1956. २०. चक्रपाणि विजय महाकाव्य/भट्ट लक्ष्मी घर; संपा. केशवराम का. शास्त्री.-1956, २१. बांकीदासरी ख्यात | बांकीदास; संपा. नरोत्तमदासजी स्वामी.-1956.
-(राजस्थानी-हिन्दी साहित्य श्रेणि). २२. दुर्ग पुष्पांजलि | दुर्गाप्रसाद द्विवेदी; संपा. गंगाधर द्विवेदी.-1957. २३. दशकंठ वधम् | दुर्गाप्रसाद द्विवेदी; संपा. गंगाधर द्विवेदी.-1960.

Page #199

46
२४. २५. नृत्यरतकोश/कुम्भकर्ण देव, संपा. रसिकलाल छो. परीख, प्रियबाला शाह.
-भाग १--1957. -भाग २-1968. २६. कर्ण कुतुहल/महाकवि भोलानाथ; संपा. गोपालनारायण बहरा...-1957. २७. राजस्थानी साहित्य संग्रह संपा. अन. डी. स्वामी.... आ.--1984. २८. वासवदत्ता कथा / सुबन्धु, संपा. जयदेव मो. शुकल.-1966. २९. ईश्वरविलास महाकाव्य / श्री कृष्ण भट्ट, संपा. मथुरानाथ शाखी.-1958, ३०. पद्य मुक्तावली | श्री कृष्ण भट्ट; स पा. मथुरानाथ शास्त्री.-1959. ३१. राजस्थान में संस्कृत साहित्य की खोज के विषय में विशिष्ट विवरणी/रामकृष्ण भांडारकर;
अनु. ब्रह्मदत्त त्रिवेदी.-1963. ३२. जुगलविलास / पीथल; संपा. लक्ष्मीकुमारी चूडावत.-1958. ३३. वीर वान / ढाढी बादर, संपा. रानीलक्ष्मी चूडावत.-1960. ३४. कवोन्द्र कल्पलता | कवीन्द्राचार्य सरस्वती; सपा लक्ष्मीकुमारी चूडावत.--1956. ३५. गोरा बादल पदमिणी चउपई / हेमरतन, संपा. उदयसिंह भटनागर.-1966. ३६. वसंतविलास फाग/सपा. मधुसूदन सी. मोदी.-1960. ३७. स्वयं भू छन्द/ स्वयं भू, संपा. ह. दा. वेलणकर.-1962. ३८. पदार्थ रत्न मंजूषा/कृष्ण मिश्र, संपा. जिनविजय मुनि.-1963. ३९. चान्द्र व्याकरण/आचार्य चन्द्रगोमी; सपा. बेचरदास जीवराज दोशी.-1967. ४०. गोराबादल चरित्र/हेमरतन; संपा. जिनविजय मुनि.-1968. ४१. रसदीपिका विद्याराम; संपा. गोपालनारायण बहुरा.-1959. ४२. राजस्थान पुरातत्वान्वेषण मन्दिर के हस्तलिखित ग्रन्थो की सूचि. भाग. १/संपा. जिनविजय
मुनि.-1959. ४३. भगतमाल बहादास, संपा. उदयराज उज्जवल.-1959. ४४. राजस्थानी हस्तलिखित ग्रन्थ सूचि. भाग. १/संपा. जिनविजय मुनि, पुरुषोत्तमलाल
मेनारिया, रमानन्द सारस्वत.-1960. ४५. वस्तु रत्न कोश/अज्ञात; संपा. प्रियबाला शह.-1959. ४६. ४७. काव्यप्रकाश/मम्मट; सपा. रसिकलाल छो. परीख.-1959. भट सोमेश्वर कृत कावाद
संकेत सह.
४८. ४९. मुंहता नैणसीरी ख्यात/मुंहता नैणसी; संपा. बदरी प्रसाद साकरिया.-२. आ.-1984. ५०. रघुवरजस प्रकाश चारण किशनजी आदा; संपा. सीताराम लालस.-1960. ५१. हस्तलिखित ग्रन्थ सूचि भाग-२/संपा. गोपालनारायण बहुग.-1960. ५२. राजस्थानी साहित्य संग्रह भाग. २/संपा. पी. एल. मेनारिया.--1960. ५३. राजस्थानी साहित्य संग्रह भाग ३/संपा. एल. एन. गोस्वामी.-1966.

Page #200

५४. श्री भुवनेश्वरी पद्मनाभ कृत टीका सह
बहुरा - 1960 कवि
५५. विद्याभूषण ग्रंथ सूचि/संपा. गोपालनारायण बहुरा; एल. एन. गोस्वामी. - 1961. ५६. ५७. सूरजप्रकाश / करणीदानजी; संपा. सोताराम लालस-भा. १. 1960 भाग २ 1961. भाग ३ 1963.
47
५८. राजस्थानी हस्तलिखित ग्रन्थ सूचि भा. २ / संपा. पी. एल. मेनारिया - 1961.
५९. महर्षि कुल वैभव / मधुसूदन ओझा; संपा. प्रद्युम्न शर्मा ओझा - 1961.
६०. रत्नपरीक्षादि सप्त ग्रन्थ संग्रह / ठक्कर फेरु, संपा. अगरचंद नाहटा, भंवरलाल नाहटा -
1961.
महोत्सव / पृथ्वीधराचार्य संपा. गोपालनारायण
६१. वृत्त जाति समुच्चय / विरहांक; संपा. ह. दा. वेलणकर. - 1962.
६२. कविदर्पण / अज्ञात संपा. ह. दा. वेलणकर, 1962.
६३. नेहतरंग / बुद्धसिंग हाडा; संपा. रामप्रसाद दचि.- 1961.
६४. एकाक्षरनाम कोष संग्रह / विविध विद्वद कृतः संपा. रमणीक विजय. - 1964.
६५. हम्मीर महाकाव्य / नयचन्द्र सूरि सौंपा. जिनविजय मुनि - 1968.
६६. ६७, मत्स्य प्रदेश की हिन्दी - साहित्य को देन / मोतीलाल गुप्त. - 1982.
६८. समदर्शी आचार्य हरिभद्र / सुखलालजी संघवी; अनु. शान्तिलाल जैन. - 1963.
६९. वृत्त मुक्तावली / श्री कृष्ण भट्ट, संपा. भट्ट मथुरानाथजी शास्त्री - 1963.
७०. इन्द्रप्रस्थ प्रबन्ध / अज्ञात संपा. दशरथ शर्मा. - 1963.
७८. II-B 1965.
७९. II-C 1966.
७१. Catalogue of Sanskrit and Prakrit Manuscripts in Raja - sthan oriental Research Institute (Jodhpur Collection). Ed. by Jinvijay Muni. Part I 1963.
७२ Part II-A 1964.
८३. III-A 1967.
९०. III-B 1968.
७३. मुंहता नेणसीरी ख्यात / मुंहता नैणसी, संपा. बदरीप्रसाद साकरिया - 1964 भाग-३. ७४. बुद्धिविलास / बखतराम साह; संपा. पद्मधर पाठक. --1964.
७५. रूषमणी हरण / सायांजी झूला, सौंपा. पुरुषोत्तमलाल मेनारिया . --1964.
७६. प्रताप रासो / जाचीक जीवण; संपा. मोतीलाल गुप्त. - 1965
७७. संत कवि रज्जब : सम्प्रदाय और साहित्य / व्रजलाल वर्मा - 1965.
८०. भक्तमाल / राघवदास; संपा. अगरचंद नाहटा - 1965 चतुरदास कृत टीका सह.
८१. वृत्तमौक्तिक / चन्द्रशेखर भट्ट संपा. विनयसागर - 1965 भट्ट लक्ष्मीनाथ कृत दुष्करोद्धार व्याख्या, मेघविजय कृत दुर्गमबोध व्याख्या. सह.
८२. पश्चिम भारत की यात्रा / कर्नल जेम्स टोड; अनु. गोपालनारायण बहुरा. - 1965.
८४. बिन्है रासौ / मसदास राव, संपा. सौभाग्यसिंह शेखावत - 1966.
८५. सोढायण / कविया चिमनजी; संपा. शक्तिदान कविया . - 1966.

Page #201

48
८६. मधुमालती/चतुर्भुजदास.-1967. ८७. आगम रहस्य आचार्य सूर्यप्रसाद द्विवेदी; स पा. गंगाधर द्विवेदी.-भाग-१. 1967.-भाग-२ ८८. शकुन प्रदीप/लावण्य शर्मा, संपा. मुनि जिनविजय.-1968. ८९. पाठ्यरत्न कोश/महाराणा कुम्भकरण; संपा. गोपालनारायन बहुरा.-1668. ९१. नंदोपाख्यान अज्ञात; प्रस्तावना फतहसींग.-1968. ९२. राठोडवंशरी वीगत और वंशावली/प्रस्तावना. फतहसींग.-1968. ९३. चन्डी शतक/बाण भट्ट, प्रस्तावना गोपालनारायण बहुरा.-1968. ९४. कवि कौस्तूम/रघुनाथ मनोहर, प्रस्तावना फतहसिंग.-1968. ९५. मीरा वृहत् पदावलि/सपा. हरिनारायण पुरोहित.-1968. ९६. स्थूलभद्र काक/देपाल, संपा. आत्माराम जाजोदिया.-1968. ९७, १००, ११६. राजस्थानी वीरगीत संग्रह सपा. सौभाग्यसिंध शेखावत.-भाग ४. 1968,
1972, 1979. ९९. गजगुण रुपकबन्ध/केशोदास गदान, संपा. सीताराम लालस.-1968. १०१.१११.१२१. मारवार रा परगणारी वीगत/मुंहणोत नेणसी संपा. नारायणसींग भाटी
भाग ३. 1968, 1969,1974. १०२. वैताल पचीसी/दे दान नाइता; संपा. पी. एल. मेनारिया.-1968. १०३, ११३. देवी चरित/बुधासींग चारण.-संपा. हुकमचन्द्र चतुर्वेदी.-भाग २. 1968, 1969. १०४. राजनीति रा कवित्त/देवीदास, संपा. नारायण दत्त श्रीमाली.-1968. १०५. सिंधुघाटी लिपि में ब्राह्मणो और उपनिषदो के प्रतिक/ फतहसींग.-1969. १०६. शंकारी संगीतम् कवि जयनारायण; संपा. लक्ष्मीनारायण गोस्वामी.-1969. १०७. संघपति रूपाजी वंश प्रशस्ति/श्री वल्लभगणि; संपा. म. विनयसागर.-1969. १०८. सनतकुमार चक्रीचरित महाकाव्य/जिनपाल गणि, संपा. म. विनयसागर.-1969. १०९. पाठ्य स्वस्ति/मधुसुदन शर्मा; संपा. सुरजनदास स्वामी.-1969. ११२. मन्त्र भागवत/नीलकंठ भट्ट, सपा. श्रद्धाकुमारी चौहान.-1969. ११४. सांख्यायन तंत्र/सांख्यायन मुनि, संपा. लक्ष्मीनारायण गोस्वामी.-1970. ११५, १२३. सिंह सिद्धांत सिंधु/गोस्वामी शिवानंद भट्ट; संपा. नारायण गोस्वामी.-भाग २.
1970, ११७, मालतन्त्र कल्याण मिश्र, सपा. कविराज विष्णुदत्त पुरोहित.-1972, ११८. नरसोजी रो महेरो/सम्पा. जेठालाल नारायण त्रिवेदी.-1972. ११९. संगीत रघुनन्दनः व्यंग्यार्थ चन्द्रिका सह/विश्वनाथ देव, संपा. दशरथ शर्मा.-1974 १२०. मीरा बृहत पदावली/संपा. के. एस. शेखावत.-भाग १. 1975 १२४. खण्ड प्रशस्ति/मनुमत कवि, संपा. म. विनयसागर.-1975.

Page #202

[49]
વર્ષ
ક્રમાંક
વર્ષ
કમાંકે
1915 1916 1917 1917 1918
1920
26
7
1921 1922 1922 1922 1924 1926 1926 1928 1930 1932 1933 1933 1934
વષ કમાંક 1935 37 1936 1940 1940 1941 1943 1944 1945 1945 1945 1947 1949 1949 1949 1952 1952 1953 1956 1956
1957 1958 1959 1959-76 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1966 1968 1968 1968 1971 1971 1976 1980 1980

Page #203


Page #204

OTHER ARTICLES

Page #205


Page #206

JAYANTA' ON THE BUDDHIST DEFINITION OF PERCEPTION
NAGIN J. SHAH
O
Jayanta first presents the Buddhist's case on the question of perception and then refutes it. On the Buddhist's showing perception is that type of cognition which is devoid of all thought and is non-illusory; Jayanta finds fault with both these elements of the definition but his discussion is largely concerned with the first." Kalpanā (=vikalpa) is the Buddhist's word for thought and Jayanta asks him : Granted that kalpana is that type of apprehension of an object, which is capable of being associated with a word, why should it be denied the status of a pramäņa (=valid cognition)?'' The Buddhist replies : 'A true cognition is that which does not deal with things unreal but what a word stands for is not something real. For a word stands for a definite class of objects, but a unique particular which alone is real is different from cverything else-whether belonging to its own class or belonging to an alien class." This reply is most crucial for an understanding of the strong as well as weak points of the Buddhist's position. Thus even while granting that there are classes to which a unique particular belongs and classes to which it does not, he speaks as if there is something fictitious about granting that there are classes and that a unique particular belongs to them. Now to identify a unique particular as belonging to a class is to observe in this unique particular certain sensory features that are characteristic of this class. Naturally therefore a living organism, in order to identify a unique particular as belonging to a class, inust observe in this unique particular certain sensory features and recall 1he past understanding that these sensory features are the characteristic features of this class. In human beings this recollection is facilitated through the employinent of words, for with the help of words a thing can be defined in terms of certain sensory features even in case there takes place no simultaneous observation of these sensory features; thus a human being is in a position to identify a unique particular as belonging to a class (as denoted by the word concerned) even in case he had not earlier observed a unique particular belonging to this class but in case he was earlier informed that such and such sensory features are the characteristic features of this class. The Buddhist's kalpana is the process of identifying a unique particular as belonging to a class, and since all class can be assigned a corresponding word even if there are classes which are not assigned-or are not known to be assignedma corresponding word he

Page #207

defines kalpanā as that type of apprehension of an object, which is capable of being associated with a word (the emphasis being on 'capable'). And his pratyaksa is the process of bare sensory experience through whose instrumentality sensory features are observed in a unique particular. Thus it sliould be a very correct proposition that pratyaksa followed by kalpana is the sole instrument of cognising objects. For all practical purposes the Buddhist even says just that, but he has involved himself in a highly misconceived theory according to which pratyaksa is the type of cognition that cognises unique particulars which are the only type of real things there are, while kalpana is the type of cognition that cognises classcharacters which are something unreal and are somehow falsely superimposed on unique particulars. And all sorts of misleading arguments have been concocted with a view to buttressing this misconceived theory. Of all that we have a foretaste in the two-sentence reply given by the Buddhist to Jayanta's simple query as to why kalpanā (=thought) should be denied the status of a pramāņa (=valid cognition). Thus we are here being told that kalpana is no case of valid cognition because it has to do with words while a word stands for something unreal, the point being that a word stands for a class-character which is something unreal superimposed on a unique particular which is alone real and is something different from everything else whether belonging to its own class or belonging to an alien class. Then comes the following piece : 'A cognition of the forin of kalpanā does not invariably follow in the wake of sense-object contact. For it might possibly arise even in the absence of sense-object contact, and even in case it arises in the wake of sense-object contact it invariably requires the memory of an earlier learnt word; certainly, if it were a product of sense-object contact it would have arisen as soon as this contact took place. The conclusion is that the cognition in question is not at all a produet of sense-object contact. Certainly, if even after encountering the object concerned a sensory cognition must require the services of the memory of an earlier learnt word, there will arise a gap between this cognition and this object.* Nor can it be said that the memory of an earlier learnt word-meaning comes to the assistance of a sense-organ in cognising its object; for apart from the consideration that the concept of an assistant cause is untenable, the fact remains that this meinory, its application to the present case and all tliat is a time-consuming process while a senseorgan cognises its objeet through a nirvikalpaka cognition as soon as this sense-organ encounters this object.' The whole argumentation makes strange reading. For what it is able to prove is that sensory experience and thought are two distinct types of process, cach produced by its own distinct type of causal aggregate, so that even when the two are produced together a sensory experience is a sensory experience, a thought is a

Page #208

5
thought. Not that to prove this was a mean performance, for thus to distinguish between sensory experience and thought was in a way the high water-mark of the Buddhist's speculation on logical problems; certainly, the distinction is not only very important but is also drawn very correctly. The difficulty rather is with the insinuation-nay, open declaration---that sensory experience has to do with something that is real, thought to do with something that is unreal. So, using the standard terminology of Indian logic it was proclaimed that pratyakṣa (=bare sensory experience) is pramaņa (valid cognition), kalpana (thought) is no pramana. His old question as to why kalpana is no pramana Jayanta repeats, this time claborating it abit; thus he says: May be kalpana is of two sorts-one that is of the form of building castle in the air, the other that grasps a present object like a blue patch. Nobody cares if the former is said to be no pramaņa, but why should the latter be no pramana when it does not arise except in the presence of the object concerned?' The query is very pertinent not only because a thought might possibly be true of its object, but because the question of being true or otherwise arises only in the case of a thought, not in the case of a bare sensory experience. On the other hand, the Buddhist's position is that a bare sensory experience is all pramāṇa, a thought is no pramaņa even when true. So, let us see how he answers Jayanta's present question; thus he argues: Really no thought whatsoever has anything to do with things real which are cognised in all fullness by nirvikalpaka cognition. The point is that a thing has but one nature and when this nature has been grasped by perception there remains nothing to be done by another pramana. As for the circumstance that in certain cases a thought appears to be grasping things real and to be lucid in character, that is because this thought arises in the wake of a nirvikalpaka cognition and so gets coloured by this cognition, not because this thought really grasps things real which in fact are grasped by a nirvikalpaka cognition alone." This again is a crucial pronouncement of the Buddhist, and again a highly misconceived pronouncement. For to cognise a thing means to identify it on the basis of its observed sensory features and in this sense a bare sensory experience is not at all a case of cognising a thing (though certainly an indispensable starting-point for cognising a thing) while a thought alone is a case of cognising a thing (though on the basis of features observed in the course of the preceding sensory experience). And here the Buddhist is saying something just the opposiic. Thus on his showing bare sensory experience not only cognises a thing but cognises it in all fullness so that nothing remains to be cognised by the forthcoming thought; hence even while distinguishing between a thought arising in a baseless fashion and one arising in the wake of a sensory experience with a view to identifying the object concerned he would not

Page #209

admit that the latter is a case of truly cognising this object, it being according to him at case of something mistakenly appearing to be a true cognition of this object on account of its proximity to the preceding sensory experience which is really a true cognition of this object. In this connection the Buddhist has also worked out a fivefold classification of kalpan and his contention is that each type of kalpanā cither inistakenly ditlerentiates things which are in fact identical or mistakenly identifies things which are in fact different. Thus on his showing when a class-character, : quality or ul action is attributed to a thing it is a case of dillerentiating things which are in fact identical (a class-character, a quality or an action being nothing different from the thing concerned) and when a name or the possession of another thing is attributed to a thing it is a case of identifying things which are in fact different (a name or a thing possessed being in fact different from the thing concerned). This too is il considerably confused thesis. Really, all thought identifies a thing as belonging to a class and this it does through observing in this thing features that are characteristic of this class, these features being called a quality if they stand for some static aspects of the nature of this thing, an action is they stand for some dynamic aspect of it; in fact, even to attribute a qualiiy or an action to a thing is to identify it as belonging to a relatively simple class, but there is some point in distinguishing between an individual quality or action and a class-character which is essentially an ensemble of certain qualities and actions. And all names attributed 10 a thing are attributed to it either because of its possessing a class-character or because of its possessing a quality or an action; even a proper name auributed to a thing becomes a reminder of the qualities and actions characteristic of this thing. Lastly, the case of one thing possessing another is a case of these two things entering into a relation where cach has its own distinctive role; and a name attributed to a thing might also be a name attributed to it because of its entering into a relation with another thing. All these aspects of the true situation are at the back of the Buddhist's mind when he works out his thesis on a fivefold kalpanā, but his misguided conviction thai a kalpanā must somehow falsify the nature of things real has played havoc with all this. A detailed comparison between what is the case and what he says is the case is futile, but a point or two might be noted profitably. Since all kalpana is to be conceived as a case of attributing--potentially if not actually-a name to a thing, the fourth kalpanā-type is to be understood as a case of attributing a proper name to a thing. Again, the Naiyayika posits a classcharacter, a quality or an action is an independent real existing besides the thing to which it belongs, and the Buddhist's impatience with this sort of proliferation of independent reals is somewhat understandable, but the

Page #210

latter's own understanding that a class-character, a quality or an action is a false imposition on the thing to which it allegedly belongs is a remedy worse than the disease. In any case, Jayanta lastly puts another pertinent question to the Buddhist as follows: 'If the attribution of a class-character ctc. to a thing is a case of false cognition, then why does this cognition not get cancelled as does the mistaken cognition of nacre as silver ?'The Buddhist's reply is again revealing even if again misconccived. For the following is what he says: "The mistaken cognition of x as not-x gets cancelled in case not-x is something apart from x, but a class-character etc. are nothing apart from the unique particular to which they allegedly belong. That is why the mistaken cognition of a classcharacter etc. is not cancelled, and that is why a thought is neither a case of true cognition (=pramāna) nor a casc of false cognition but a third sort of something.'10 Really, this argument is neither here for there. The Buddhist realises that a correct identification of a thing on the part of thought cannot be dismissed as a case of false cognition, but he has also persuaded himself that bare sensory experience is alone pramāņa. He therefore says that a thought is neither a case of pramāņa nor a case of false cognition but a third something, a statement which, as it stands, is senseless. It is correct to argue that a thought as such is neither a case of true cognition nor a case of false cognition because a thought might bc either of the form of true cognition or of the form of false cognition; but what is thus argued is very different from what the Buddhist actually says.
After thus presenting the Buddhist case as defended by the Buddhist himself Jayanta begins his own criticism of this case. He first cuumerates the several grounds on the basis of which the Buddhist has declared kalpanā to be no pramāņa and then considers thicm one by one. He begins by assailing the Buddhist's argument that kalpanā is 110 pramāņa bccause it has for its object what a word stands for, that is, something unreal; on Jayanta's showing what a word stands for, viz. a 'universal', is cognised by nirvikalpaka perception as much as by savikalpaka perception." I Really, on the question as to what is cognised by nirvikalpaka perception both the Buddhist and Jayanta are wrong; for nirvikalpaka perception being, in fact, the physiological process of sensory experience and not cognition proper, there arises no question as to what is cognised by nirvikalpaka perception. Moreover, Jayanta's position that universal' exists in the form of an independent real by the side of particular things is of doubtful validity. But liberally understood his present contention is that whatever object produces nirvikalpaka perception is the object cognised by savikalpaka perception, and that is substantially sound; for there are not two sorts of

Page #211

objects, one producing nirvikalpaka perception and the other cognised by savikalpaka perception. In this connection Jayanta reminds the Buddhist that on the latter's own showing kalpana is not a case of false cognition in the manner the mistaken cognition of nacrc as silver is. 19 Then it is submitted that savikalpaka perception does not cease to be a cognition born of sense-object contact simply because it requires the services of a word learnt in past, Jayanta's point being that the concerned sense-object contact persists cven while the services of a word are being availed of. 1 3 This submission too is substantially sound, for if anything can be called perceptual cognstion it is what the Naiyāyika calls savikalpaka perception, and it is called perceptual cognition precisely because it consists in the identification of an object with wliich a sense-organ is in contact; by the same token, essentially mistaken is the Buddhist's counter-submission that it is not this cognition (which lic calls 'post-perceptual thought and treats as no pramāņa) but the preceding sensory experience that is to be called perceptual cognition. The Buddhist has elaborately argued that a word can render no services to a sense-organ in the production of perceptual cognition, but this argument is valid only because he has arbitrarily chosen to equate perceptual cognition with bare sensory experience; certainly, in the production of bare sensory experience a sense-organ does not need the services of a word. Jayanta's refutation of the argument in question is equally elaborate but its details cease to be much note-worthy once the basic fallacy vitiating this argument is kept in mind. Thus he contends that there is nothing incongruous about the causal aggregate of savikalpaka perception including a word recalled, that the memory of a word creates no gap between a sensory cognition and its object, that savikalpaka perception inspite of being a time-consuming process is of the form of perceptual cognition.14 All this is plainly understandable. Then Jayanta takes exception to the Buddhist's argument that a thing in all its fulness having been cognised by nirvikalpaka cognition nothing new remains to be cognised by post--nirvikalpaka thought, the former's point being that the same thing can well be cognised by two cognitions. 15 But as has been already noted, on this question both the Buddhist and Jayanta are wrong simply because nirvikalpaka perception is not at all a process of the forin of cognition. Lastly, Jayanta refutes the Buddhist thesis on a fivefold kalpanā. In a nutshell his point is that a class-character, a quality and an action are each an independent real located in the thing to which they belong while nobody ever identifies a name with the thing to which this name is attributed or a thing with another thing which possesses this thing. 16 The point is substantially sound but for the fact that a quality, an action or a class-character even if really belonging to a thing are not an independent real existing besides this thing. In this connection Jayanta welcomes

Page #212

the Buddhist's declaration that a thought is not a case of false cognition but he disputes the latter's declaration that it is also not a case of praniāņa. Jayanta concedes that a thought might often be false but adds that a nirvikalpaka perception might often be false; e.g. the nirvikalpaka perception of one moon as two moons is false. 18 Correct is his implication that all thought cannot be dismissed as no pramāna simply on the ground that a thought is often false, but the fact remains that there is no question of a nirvikalpaka perception being true or false, it being not at all a case of cognition; thus the mistaken cognition of one moon as two moons is not a case of false nirvikalpaka perception but a case of false thought. Here Jayanta again distinguishes between a thought arising in a baseless fashion and one arising in the wake of a nirvikalpaka perception, his point being that the former is not but the latter certainly is a case of pramāņa. 10 Really, Jayanta should say that the latter, if it is true of its object, is a case of pranāņa; but he is right in rejecting as invalid the Buddhist's plea that such a thought is not actually a case of pranāņa but appears to be so because it follows in the wake of a nirvikalpaka cognition which is actually a case of pramāņa, the former's point being that this consideration is irrelevant so far as parmāņaship of the thought iu question is concerned." Jayanta cannot say that but the real point is that the question of being or not being prainānna arises only in the case of a thought, not in the case of a nirvikalpaka cognition; even so, his point is substantially valid in as much as a thought even when following in the wake of a nirvikalpaka cognition is true not for that reason but for the reason that it correctly identifies the object concerned. Here actually closes Jayanta's consideration of the point raised by the Buddhist in the cause of the defence of his case. What follows is a rambling sort of discussion interesting in its own manner. So, let it be examined separately.
Jayanta begins by referring to the Buddhist's contention that a thing in all its fullness having been cognised by a nirvikalpaka cognition there remains nothing to be cognised by a post-nirvikalpaka cognition. Here is first repeated the old point that the same thing can well be cognised by two cognitions but then a new point is raised." Thus Jayanta laments : 'It is difficult to say as to what is cognised by a nirvikalpaka perception. You say it is a unique particular that is thus cognised, some say it is the grand universal, some say it is Being-as-such, some say it is speech, some say it is a thing in the form of a commingled mass of qualities, actions, class-character etc. Certainly, on questions related to knowledge, perception is the last court of appeal, but when there is a dispute about perception itself oath seems to be the only court of appeal.''! However, from all this

Page #213

10
Jayanta does not draw the correct conclusion that nirvikalpaka perception is not at all a case of cognition but a misleading conclusion that whatever is cognised by savikalpaka perception is also cognised by nirvikalpaka perception. And then he in essence argues that since a savikalpaka perception does not cognise a unique particular, the grand universal, Beingas-such, speech or the comingled mass of qualities, actions etc. the hypothesis that any of these things is cognised by nirvikalpaka perception is false. Of the several hypotheses in question, the last alone receives a somewhat sympathetic consideration at the hands of Jayanta, for the rest are simply so many illusionist hypotheses current in his times while he was an uncompromising opponent of all illusionism. Thus the advocates of these hypotheses appealed to the authority of nirvikalpaka perception and dismissed as a vikalpa-born illusion the world of our day-to-day experience; (we have already some idea of how that was done by the Buddhist and the procedure was essentially similar with his comrades-in-arms). As directed against these hypotheses Jayanta's present argument has the important meaning that what is revealed in savikalpaka perception is not an illusion but a verity; but for reasons we have already noted he was prevented from further arguing that nirvikalpaka perception is not at all a case of cognition. As for the last hypothesis it was a Kumāralite position as much opposed to illusionisin as Jayanta's own position. So, against it Jayanta raised a relatively secondary objection. Thus the Kumärilite maintained that qualities, actions, class-characters etc. exhibited by a thing are some how identical with this thing though also somehow different from it; on the other hand, Jayanta maintained that these qualities etc. are absoultely different from this thing, so that if the Kumārilite agrees with him on this point the two will have nothing to differ on the question of nirvikalpakasavikalpaka."It is in this background that Jayanta concludes his present enquiry by emphasising that whatever is cognised by savikalpaka perception is also cognised by nirvikalpaka perception; and since it is his understanding that all sorts of independent reals in the form of substances, qualities, actions, class-character etc. are cognised by savikalpaka perception he contends that the same are cognised by nirvikaldaka perception as well.96 But this time Jayanta clarifies his position by further noting that even if the same set of entities are cognised by nirvikalpaka perception and savikalpaka perception, the latter does and the former does not involve an cmployment of words. 97 However, on the question as to how an employment of words is involved in savikalpaka perception, there was a lot of confusion in the Nyāya campos
As was noted in the beginning, the Buddhist definition of perception contained two elements in the form of saying that perception is devoid of

Page #214

all thought and is non-illusory. Uptil now Jayanta was preoccupied with the first element of this definition, now briefly criticises its second elenient. Thus he submits that on the logic adopted by the Buddhist there can be no perception that is illusory.99 The plea that a casc like cognition of two moons is a case of illusory perception is rejected on the ground that in such a case too there is nothing illusory about the concerned nirvikalpaka congnition which alone is what the Buddhist calls perception; thus on the Buddhist's logic a nirvikalpaka cognition cognizes but one mooi which the concerned post-nirvikalpaka thought misinterprets as two moons just as a nirvikalpaka cognition cognises but mirage-sands which the concerned postnirvikalpaka thought misinterprets as water.20 The Buddhist pleads that in the former case the cye has been rendered so defective that it cannot sec one moon but must see two moons; Jayanta retorts that on this logic it too might be said that in the latter case the eye las been rendered so defective that it cannot sccmirage-sands but must sec water.1 The Buddhist agrees to Jayanta's point, but then he is told that in that case he has no right to say that a valid post-perceptual thought rightly interprcts what the preceding nirvikalpaka cognition lias cognised, an invalid post-perceptual thought interprets it wrongly.39 This exchange of arguments is important because it throws enough light on low our philosophers grappled with the rather ticklish problem of nirvikalpaka-savikalpaka distinction. Thus the Buddhist came nearest to maintaining that what he called perception and defined as a sense-born nirvikalpaka cognition is in fact the physiological process of bare sensory experience; hence it was that so many lines of argumentation adopted by him led to the conclusion that there can be no illusory perception. For certainly, there is nothing illusory or non-illusory about bare sensory experience which just takes place wlien the appropriate causal aggregate is duly operative; thus, for examples the causal aggregate which includes a normal cye as a member produce, the sensory experience which the post-experiential thought interprets as the perception of one moon, while the causal aggregate which includes a defective eye as a member produces the sensory experience which the postexperiential thought interprets as the perception of two moons. So, when Jayanta suggests that in both these cases the concerned nirvikalpaka cognition cognises one moon, he is as much wrong as the Buddhist when he suggests that in the former case it cognises one inoon while in the latter case two moons. Jayanta pertinently points out that the Buddhist himself adopts another line of argumentation while explaining the case of a mistaken cognition of mirage-Sands as water; thus on the latter's showing the concerned nirvikalpaka cognition here cognises mirage-sands which the postnirvikalpaka thought misinterprets as water, cssentially the same sort of explanation Jayanta suggests for the case of a mistaken cognition of two

Page #215

12
moons. Really, in his explanation of the mistaken cognition of x as not-X the Buddhist is bound to have difficulty whether he maintains that here the concerned nirvikalpaka cognition and the post-nirvikalpaka thought both cognise not-x or that the former cognises x, the latter not-X; actually, he adopts the former alternative in certain cases and calls them the cases of illusory perception (c.g. the mistaken cognition of two m00115), adopts the latter alternative in certain other cases and calls them the cases of illusory thought (e.g. the mistaken cognition of inirage-sands as water). Jayanta asks the Buddhist to be consistent but mere consistency will be of no help to the latter in as much as both the alternatives in question are fraught with difficulty; the real solution of the problem lies in conlessing that what the Buddhist calls perception is not at all a process of cognition, so that there arises no question of its being illusory or otherwise. The real-merit of the Buddhist case lies in his realization that what he calls perception and what he calls thought are two distinct ways of dealing with things; he also virtually realised that the latter alone is the process of cognising things, but his failure to see as to what the former could be is not a process of cognising things misled him in so many ways. Thus cven while his own description of it clearly implied that what he calls perception is the physiological process of undergoing sensory experience, he went on speaking as if it is a process of cognising things in this way or that. As for Jayanta, his criticism of the Buddhist on this score is certainly penetrating and yet his own understanding of what nirvikalpakil perception is is almost as useless as that of any other Naiyayika, an understanding much inferior (because much less provocative of thought) to that evinced by cven an average Buddhist.
Notes and References
1. Jayanta Blata, a well known Naiyayika, famous for his Nyayamanjari,
a voluminous mature Sanskrit work on Indian logie, Nourished in the second half of ninth century A.D. His three works have so far been recovered and published. They are : Nyayakalikii, Agamadambara and Nyāyamanjarī. Though Nyāyamañjari is known as a commentary on the Nyayasūtras, it is really an independent work on the Nyāya philosophy. Therein one finds the triangular contest among the Naiyāyikas, the Mimasakas and the Buddhists. Its study gives us a clear idea of the problems of Indian philosophy and their solution offered by these three main branches of Indian philosophy. The present paper is based on the discussion of the problem, found in Nyayamanjari.

Page #216

2. यत् तावत् कल्पनापोढमभ्रान्तमिति लक्षणम् ।
प्रत्यक्षस्य जगी भिक्षुस्तदत्यन्तमसाम्प्रतम् ॥ न्यायमञ्जरो (द्वतीयमाह्निकम् ) गूर्जरभाषानुवाद. सहिता, संपादक-अनुवादक नगीन जो. शाह, प्रकाशक लालभाई दलपतभाई संस्कृति विद्यामन्दिर, अहमदाबाद-९, १९७८, पृ. ६६ For the comprehensive presentation of the Buddhist conception of perception one may refer to a chapter on Sense-perception in Buddhist Logic, Volume I, as also a chapter on Perception in Buddhist Logic. Volume II, by Th. Stcherbatsky, Mouton & Co..'S-Gravenhage, 1958.
3. शब्दसंसर्गयोग्यार्थप्रतीतिः किल कल्पना ।
अस्याश्च केन दोषेण प्रामाण्यं न विषह्यते । न्यायमञ्जरी, पृ. ६६ असदर्थविषयत्वमेवेदमुक्तं भवति, शब्दार्थस्य वास्तवस्याभावात् , स्वलक्षणस्य सजातीयेतर. व्यावृत्तात्मनः सम्बन्धाधिगमसव्यपेक्षप्रवृत्तिना शब्देन विषयीकर्तुमशक्यत्वात् , तद्व्यतिरिक्तस्य
वस्तुनोऽनुपलम्भात् । न्यायमञ्जरी, पृ. ६६ 5. न चेन्द्रियार्थसन्निकर्षान्वयव्यतिरेकानुविधायिनी कल्पनाबुद्धिः, तमन्तरेणापि भावात् , तस्मिन्
सत्यपि च पूर्वानुभूतवाचकशब्दयोजनं विनाऽनुत्सादात् । यदि चेन्द्रियार्थसन्निकर्पस्तजनको भवेत् प्रथममेव तथाविधां धियं जनयेत् , न च जनयति । तदयं शब्दस्मृतेर्वमपि न
जनक इति मन्यामहे । न्यायमञ्जरी, पृ. ६६ * अर्थोपयोगेऽपि पुनः स्मात शब्दानुयोजनम् ।
अक्षधीयद्यपेक्षेत सोऽथों व्यवहितो भवेत् ।। इति [प्रमाणविनिश्चय], न्यायमञ्जरी, पृ. ६६ 6. सङ्केतस्मरणोपायं दृष्टसङ्कलनात्मकम् ।
पूर्वापरपरामर्शशून्यं तच्चाक्षुषं कथम् ॥ इति [प्रमाणवार्तिक], न्यायमञ्जरी, पृ. ६७ 7. सर्व एवामो विकल्पाः परमार्थतोऽर्थ न स्पृशन्त्येव । स हि निर्विकल्पकेनैव सर्वात्मना
परिच्छिन्नः । तदुक्तम्एकस्यार्थस्वभावस्य प्रत्यक्षस्य सतः स्वयम् । कोऽन्यो न दृष्टो भागः स्याद् यः प्रमाणैः परीक्ष्यते ॥ इति [प्रमाणवार्तिक] यत् तु केषाञ्चिद विकल्पानामिदन्ताग्राहित्वस्पष्टत्वादिरूपं तदर्थाविनाभाविनिर्विकल्पकदर्शनपृष्ठभावित्वावाप्ततच्छायासंसर्गजनितं, न तु तेषामर्थस्पर्शः कश्चिदस्ति, अर्थात्मनो निर्विकल्पे
नैव मुद्रितत्वात् । न्यायमञ्जरी, पृ. ६८ 8. पञ्च चैताः कल्पना भवन्ति-जातिकल्पना, गुणकल्पना, क्रियाकल्पना, नामकल्पना, द्रव्य कल्पना
चेति । ताश्च कचिदभेदे भेदकल्पनात् , कचिच्च भेदेऽप्यभेदकल्पनात् कल्पना उच्यन्ते । जातिजातिमतोमेंदो न कश्चित् परमार्थतः । भेदारोपणरूपा च जायते जातिकल्पना ॥ . 'इदमस्य गोर्गोत्वम्' इति न हि कश्चिद् भेदं पश्यति । तेनाभेदे भेदकल्पनैव ।

Page #217

10.
एतया सदृशन्यायान्मन्तव्या गुणकल्पना | तत्राप्यभिन्नयोर्भेदः कल्प्यते गुणतद्वतो ||
14
तदा चाहु: - एष गुणी रूपादिभ्योऽर्थान्तरत्वेन नात्मानं दर्शयति तेभ्यश्च व्यतिरेकं वाञ्छतीति चित्रम् |
12.
भेदारोपणरूपै गुणवत् कर्मकल्पना ।
तरस्वरूपातिरिक्ता हि न क्रिया नाम काचन ॥
'गच्छति देवदत्तः' इति देवदत्तस्यैवान्यूना नतिरिक्तस्य प्रतिभासात् ।
विभिन्नयोस्त्वभेदेन प्रवृत्ता नामकल्पना |
चैत्रोऽयमित्यभेदेन निश्चयो नामनामिनोः ||
9. ननु यद्यभेदे भेदं भेदे चाभेदमारोपयन्त्यः कल्पनाः प्रवर्तन्ते, तत्कथमासु बाघकः प्रत्ययो न जायते, शुक्तिकारजतबुद्धिवत् ? न्यायमञ्जरी, पृ. ७०
चैत्र इत्यं शब्दः, अयमित्यर्थः कीदृशमनयोः सामानाधिकरण्यम् ?
एवं दण्डययमित्यादिर्मन्तव्या द्रव्यकल्पना ।
सामानाधिकरण्येन भेदिनोर्ग्रहणात् तयोः । न्यायमञ्जरी, पृ. ६९
यत्र वस्तु वस्वन्तरात्मनाऽवभासते तत्र बाघको भवति, मरीविष्वित्र जलबुद्धौ । इह तु न जात्यादि वस्वन्तरमम्ति, यतो वस्त्वन्तरात्माऽस्य ग्रहो भवेत् । व्यक्तिविषया एवैते सामान्यादिविकल्पाः । तस्माद् वस्त्वन्तरानवभासिष्वेषु न बाधकः प्रत्ययो जायते । तस्मान्न विपर्ययात्मानो विकल्पाः । न चैते प्रमाणम्, एतदुल्लिख्यमानस्य जात्यादेरपारमार्थिकत्वात् । अत एव प्रमाणविपर्ययाभ्यामन्य एव विकल इत्याचक्षते । न्यायमञ्जरी, पृ. ७०
It will be interesting to compare this Buddhist kalpana with Yogasutrakära Patanjali's vikalpa, one of the five cittavṛttis, the other four being pramaņa, viparyaya, nidra and smrti. Buddhist influence is evident here.
11. तत्र तावन्न शब्दसंसर्गयोग्यार्थग्रहणाद्वा रकम सदर्थग्राहित्वमेषामप्रामाण्य कारणमभिधातुं युक्तम्, शब्दार्थस्य वास्तवस्य समर्थयिष्यमाणत्वात् । कः पुनरसाविति चेत्, य एव निर्विकल के प्रतिभासते । किं निर्विकल्प के सामान्यादिकमवभासते ? बाढमवभासते इति वक्ष्यामः । न्यायमञ्जरी, पृ. ७१
बाधकान्तरस्य च नेदमिति प्रत्ययस्य शुक्तिकारजतादिज्ञानवद् भवतैवानभ्युपगमात् । न्यायमञ्जरी, पृ. ७१
13. नाऽप्यनिन्द्रियार्थसन्निकर्षजन्यत्वं
सङ्कवे तग्रह कालानुभूतशब्दस्मरणापेक्षणादस्य वतव्यम 2
सहकार्यपेक्षायामपि तद्व्यापाराविरते: । न्यायमञ्जरी, पृ. ७१

Page #218

15
14. (a ) य: प्रागजनको बुद्धेः स लब्ध्वा सहकारिणम् ।
कालान्तरेण तां बुद्धिं विदधत् केन वार्यते ॥
इन्द्रियालोकमनस्कारविषयवद् वाचकस्मरणमपि सामम्यन्तर्गतमेतत्प्रत्ययजन्मनि व्याप्रियते इति न वाचकस्मरणजनितत्वेन स्मार्तस्वादप्रमाणं विकल्पः । न्यायमञ्जरी, पृ. ७१-७२
15.
(b) यच्चेदमुच्यते ' सोऽर्थो व्यवहितो भवेत्' इति, तन्न विद्मः कीदृशं व्यवधानमर्थस्येति । न हि दीपेन वा मनसा वा विज्ञानहेतुना कदाचिदर्थो व्यवधीयते । मनोबच्च वाचकस्मृतिरपि सामय्यन्तर्गता सती तत्प्रतीतौ व्याप्रियते इति कथमर्थं व्यवदधीत ? स्मृतिविषयीकृतः शब्दस्तमर्थं व्यवधत्ते इति चेत्, न, शब्दस्य तत्प्रकाश करवेन ज्ञानवद् दीपवद् वा व्यवधायकत्वाभावात् । न चेन्द्रियव्यापारतिरोधानं व्यवधानं. तस्याधुनाऽप्यनुवर्तमानत्वात् ।
यथा तद्भावभावित्वादाद्यं विज्ञानमक्षजम् ।
तथा तद्भाविश्वादुत्तरं ज्ञानमक्षजम् ॥
न हि वाचकस्मरणानन्तरमक्षिणी निमील्य विकल्पयति 'पटोऽयम्' इति । न्यायमञ्जरी, पृ. ७२
(c) यत् पुनर्विशेषण विशेष्यग्रहणादिसामध्यपेक्षत्वेन बहुप्रयाससाध्यत्वमप्रामाण्यकारणमभिीयते, तदतीव सुभाषितम् । न हि बहुक्लेशसाध्यत्वं नाम प्रामाण्यमुपहन्ति । उक्तं च 'न हि गिरिशृङ्गमारुह्य यद् गृह्यते तदप्रत्यक्षम्' इति । न्यायमञ्जरी, पृ० ७४ अथास्य निर्विकरूपकेनैव सर्वात्मना स्पृष्टत्वात् पिष्टपेषणमयुक्तम् इति सविकल्पकम् अधिगतार्थग्राहित्वादप्रमाणमिति मन्यसे तदपि न साधु, पूर्वमेव परिहृतत्वात् । न नधिगताधिगन्तृत्वं प्रामाण्यमित्युक्तम् । गृहीतग्रहणेऽपि प्रमाणस्य प्रमाणत्वानतिवृत्तेः । न्यायमञ्जरी, पृ० ७५
16. यवभ्यधायि भिन्नेष्वभेदमभिन्नेषु च भेदं कल्पयन्त्य: कल्पना अतस्मिंस्तद्ग्र हे प्रामाण्यमवजहति इति, तद्युक्तम् अतस्मिंस्तद्ग्रहो भवत्यप्रमाणत्वकारणम्, तत् स्विह नास्ति । तस्य हि बाधकप्रत्ययोपसन्निपातान्निश्वयः । न च भवदुपवर्णितासु पञ्चस्वपि जात्यादिकल्पनासु बाधक किञ्चिदस्तीति नातस्मिंस्तद्ग्राहिण्यः कल्पना भवन्ति ।
जातिर्जातिमतो भिन्ना गुणी गुणगणात् पृथक् । यैव तत्प्रतीतेश्च कल्पनोक्तिरबाधिका ||
एतच्चोपरिष्टान्निर्णेष्यते ।
द्रव्यनाम्नोस्तु भिन्नयोर्भेदेनैव प्रतीतिः, नाभेदकल्पना । न हि 'देवदत्तशब्दोऽयम् इत्येव तद्वाच्यः प्रतीयते । ननु 'देवदत्तोऽयम्' इति संज्ञासंज्ञयभेदव्यवहारो दृश्यते इति चेत्, न, शब्दविशिष्टतद्वाच्या वगतिरेषा न शब्दोऽस्यामर्थारूढोऽवभासते न शब्दविवर्तरूपेणार्थः परिस्फुरति । किं तर्हि ?

Page #219

16
शब्दस्मृत्याख्यसामग्रयमामातिशयोद्भवः । प्रत्ययातिशयः सोऽयमित्येवं प्राक. प्रसाधितम् ॥ दण्डययमिति द्रव्याभेदकल्पना तु मन्दमतिभिरेवोदाहता । न हि दण्डोऽयमिति देवदत्ते प्रतीतिः,
अपि तु दण्डोति । तत्र च प्रकृतिप्रत्ययौ पृथगेवोपलभ्येते-दण्डोऽस्यास्तीति दण्डीति । तदिह यथैव वस्तु तथैव तदवसाय इति नाभेदारोपः । कर्मणि तद् द्वयमपि नास्ति, नाभिन्ने भेदकल्पनम्, न च भिन्नेऽप्यभेदकल्पना । क्रिया हि तद्वतो भिन्ना भेदेनैव च गृह्यते । चलतीत्यादिबोधेषु तत्स्वरूपावभासनात् ।। तेन क्रियागुणद्रव्यनामजात्युपरञ्जितम् ।
विषयं दर्शयन्नेति विकल्पो नाप्रमाणताम् ।। न्यायमञ्जरी, पृ० ७५-७७ 17. विपर्ययात् समुत्तीर्ण इति साधु सहामहे ।
प्रमाणात्तु बहिर्भूत विकल्प न क्षमामहे ॥ न्यायमञ्जरी, पृ० ७७ 18. क्वचिद् बाघकयोगेन यदि तस्याप्रमाणता ।' .... निर्विकल्पेऽपि तुल्याऽसौ द्विचन्द्राद्यवभासिनि । न्यायमञ्जरी, पृ० ७७ 19. मनोराज्यविकल्पानां काममस्त्वप्रमाणता । .... यथा वस्तुप्रवृत्तानां न स्वसावक्षजन्मनाम् ।। न्यायमञ्जरी, पृ० ७७ 20. न च निर्विकल्पकपृष्ठभावित्वकृतमेषामेतद्रूपम, विषयसंस्पर्शमन्तरेण स्वतः स्वच्छरूपाणां
ज्ञानानामेवमाकारत्वानुपपत्तेः, किं निर्विकल्पपृष्ठभाविता करिष्यति । न्यायमञ्जरी, पृ० ७७-७८ 21. ननु निर्विकल्पकेनैव वस्तुसर्वस्वं गृहीतम् , 'एकस्यार्थस्वभावस्य' इति वर्णितम् । प्रतिविहित...मेतत् गृहीतग्रणेऽपि प्रामाण्यानपायात् ।. न्यायमञ्जरी, ७८ . 22. किञ्च किं निर्विकल्पकेन गृह्यते इत्येतदेव न जानीमः ।
भवन्तो निर्विकल्पकस्य विषयं सम्प्रचक्षते सजातीयविजातीयपरावृत्तं स्वलक्षणम् ॥ महासामान्यमन्ये तु सत्तां तद्विषयं विदुः । वायूपमपरे तत्त्वं प्रमेयं तस्य मन्वते ॥ केचिद् गुणक्रियाद्रव्यजातिभेदादिरूषितम् । शबलं वस्तु मन्यन्ते निर्विकल्पकगोचरम् । प्रत्यक्षविषयेऽप्येताश्चित्रं विप्रतिपत्तयः । परोक्षार्थे हि विमतिः प्रत्यक्षेणोपशाम्यति ॥ प्रत्यक्षे हि समुत्पन्ना विमतिः केन शाम्यति । इदं भाति न भातीति संविद्विप्रतिपत्तिषु ॥ परपत्यायने पुंसां शरणं शपथोक्तयः । न्यायमञ्जरी, पृ० ७८

Page #220

17
23. न तु शपथशरणा एव निरुद्यममास्महे । मार्गान्तरेणापि तत्प्रमेयं निश्चिनमः ।
निर्विकल्पानुसारेण सविकल्पकसम्भवात् । ग्राह्य तदानुगुण्येन निर्विकल्पस्य मन्महे ॥ न्यायमलरी, पृ० ७८
24. तत्र न तावत् ......न पुन: स तदात्मकः । न्यायमञ्जरी, पृ० ७९-८०
चित्रतापि .....तदात्मकः । न्यायमञ्जरी, पृ० ८०
तस्माद्य एव वस्त्वात्मा सविकल्पस्य गोचरः । स एव निर्विकल्पम्य शब्दोल्लेखविवर्जितः ।। किमात्मकोऽसाविति चेद्यद्यदा प्रतिभासते । वस्तुप्रमितयश्चते प्रष्टव्या न तु वादिनः ॥ क्वचिजातिः क्वचिद् द्रव्यं क्वचित् कर्म क्वचिद् गुणः ।
यदेव सविकल्पेन तदेवानेन गृह्यते ॥ न्यायमञ्जरी, पृ० ८१ 27. इह शब्दानुसन्धानमात्रमभ्यधिकं परम् ।
विषये न तु भेदोऽस्ति सविकल्पाविकल्पयोः ॥ न्यायमञ्जरी, पृ० ८१ 28.
न्यायमञ्जरी, पृ० ३२-५६ 29. 'अभ्रान्त' पदस्यापि व्यावत्यै न किञ्चन तन्मते पश्यामः । न्यायमञ्जरी, पृ० ८२ 30. ननु तिमिराशुभ्रमणनौयानसंक्षोभाद्याहितविभ्रमं द्विचन्द्रालातचक्रचलत्पादपादिदर्शनमपोखमस्य
परैरुक्तम् । सत्यमुक्तम्, अयुक्तं तु, 'कल्पनापोढ'पदेनैव तद्व्युदाससिद्धेः । तत्रापि निर्विकल्पकं ज्ञानमेकचन्द्रादिविषयमेव, विकल्पास्तु विपरीताकारग्राहिणो भवन्ति, यथा
मरीचिग्राहिणि निर्विकल्पके सलिलावसायो विकल्प इति । न्यायमञ्जरी, पृ० ८२ 31. ननु तिमिरेण द्विधाकृतं चक्षुरेकतया न शक्नोति शशिनं ग्रहीतुमिति निर्विकल्पकमपि द्विचन्द्र
ज्ञानम् । यद्येवं तरलतरङ्गादिसादृश्यरूषितमूषिरे मरीचिचक्रं चक्षुषा परिच्छेत्तुमशक्यमिति
तत्रापि निर्विकल्पकमुदकग्राहि विज्ञानं किमिति नेष्यते ? न्यायमञ्जरी पृ० ८२ 32. अभ्युपगमे वा सदसस्कल्पनोत्पादादिकृतः प्रमाणेतरव्यवहारो न स्यात् । न्यायमञ्जरी, पृ० ८२

Page #221


Page #222

OO
DOCTRINE OF MĀYA-A CRITICAL STUDY
Dr. Yajneshwar S. Shastri
Adi Sankarācārya is one of the most outstanding philosophical personalities in the history of world-thought. There is no second opinion among the scholars that in metaphysical profoundity, logical acumen and spiritual insight, he is unparalleled among Indian thinkers. His Advaita philosophy is a rare contribution to mankind. Sarkara-the chief exponent of Advaita, adopting absolutistic approach to Reality maintains that the real is Existence, Consciousness and Bliss. It is one without a second.2 It is attributeless, beyond space and time, indeterminate, real being, but it appears to be non-being to dull-minded people.3 It is the highest universal in which all the particulars merge. He declares in clear terms that, Brahman is the only ontological Reality and except it everything else is just name and form.5 For Sankara, Brahman is all-pervading energy. The most outstanding feature of Sankara is that he proclaims the ultimate identity of the individual self (Jiva) or consciousness with the universal Principle of consciousness--Brahman. He also advocates the non-difference of the entire world with the Brahman-Absolute existence, but by that non-difference he does not mean the same kind of identity as that of the self with it. Vācaspati Mišra rightly points out that, non-difference to Sankara is merely a denial of difference or independent reality, and not an affirmation of identity in the strict sense. And it is, according to him, only, when a person has directly realized his own identity with Brahman, that can have a fully convincing experience of the universal non-difference.8
Again, it is most essential to know the definition of 'real (Satya) and ‘unreal (ansta) given by Sankara to understand his philosoplıy. Without giving the notice to this fact, critics of Sankara have missed the essence of Advaita philosophy of this great genious. Sankara maintains that a thing cannot be said to be real simply because it is perceived, for, perception is common to both the real and the unreal things. Real is something which is never non-existent, something uncontradicted in tripletime (i.e. in past, present and future). It is not subject to change, is unalterable in its essential nature. That object, which essentially remains what it is, is truly real. Thus, Sankara has defined the real as 'that the ascertained nature of which does not undergo any change' or as 'that

Page #223

19
about which our understanding does not vary': 10 In this sense only the Brahman is real which is unchangable, immutable and infinite. The unreal is 'that whose nature varies, changes and is subject to destruction.' Name and form world is, subject of change and destruction. Though it is real for all practical purposes, it is 'Mithya, apparent existence and unsta. The mundane world, thus, cannot be called real in the ultimate sense of the word. It is the only Brahman which is real in true sense.
Now, if reality or Braluman, is non-dual, uncaused, uncreated, unchanging and the phenomenal world is mere appearance (mithy a), then the question naturally arises how this non-dual pure consciousness, i.e. Brahman appears as unreal manifold world of phenomena ? How from the pure Brahman, the impure world of men and things came into existence ? Advaitin has to explain how the one became many? How this absolute is related to phenomenal world ? If Brahınıan be the cause of the world, will not the blemishes of the latter pertain to the former also ? will not Brahman cease to be truth, intelligence and bliss? Will not the nondifference of Brahman be destroyed ? By merely stating that Brahman illusorily appears as the world will not satisfy the curiosity of jaquirer into truth. Advaitins have to answer how the real appears as the trsnsitory world. To attribute any kind of causality in an absolutely real sense to the immutable, uncreated and transcendental Absolute will be logically absured. Sarkara-the Advaita stalwart, thought that without the assumption of an extraneous principle, (which is already found in seedling form in the Upanişads)'?, it is not possible to account for the world-appearance. There must be admitted some principle or power which superimposes the manifold of sense on the supersensuous supreme Braliman. This extrancous principle is called Māya by Sankara. This doctrine is specially introduced by Sankara as an explanatory factor and to satisfy the natural curiosity to know the why and how of appearances. This doctrine is a logical necessity for all the Absolutists to explain the otherwise inexplicable relation between the universe and the Absolute. Owing to this Mäyä, the Brahman though itself absolutely non-dual, appears to be holding up diverse, discrete and finite appearnaces as innumerable, animate and inanimate objects of the universe.
It is Māya which gives rise to all kinds of phenomenal appearances recognised as various empirical entities (Vyävahārika) and also to further appearances some times known as illusory objects (Pratibhāsika). So, besides one, non-dual Absolute Reality-Brahman, there has to be assumed a universal diversifying factor or effectuating principle. This principle is called Mäyä. It must be accepted, however illusory in its ultimate

Page #224

20
nature, as explanatory factor of all the appearances of the phenomenal world. An assumption of it is the only solution to the question which unavoidably arises as to how this non-dual Reality is to be related to the complications of diverse becomings, pscudo realities in the form of innumerable appearances as multiple empirical or illusory entities. In other words, to solve the vexed problem of relation between appearance and Reality, One and many, Noumena and phenomena, this doctrinc of Mayā is introducted by Sankara.
The concept of Māyā is not a fabrication of Sankara's mind as some critics think. The word Myää is of very great antiquity and had been in considerable use in orthodox literature much before the times of Sankara. It is at least as old as Rgvella and it occurs mumber of times in Rgveda.13 It is said that 'Indra assumes many forms through mysterious powers.", It is also said that 'by overcoming the Maya of the demons Indra won the Soma.''5 It is also found in Atharvaveda, 16 earlier Upanişads', Bhagavadgital8 and Yogavāsistha.19 In all these texts, this word is used primarily in the sense of mystical power, or cover, veil or ignorance. An indepth study of these scriptures reveals that Sankara's interpretation of this word is more faithful to the intended purpose of these scriptures than the views of anti-Sankaraites.
As in Rgveda and other ancient scriptures, so in Sankara's works too, 'Māya' has been used in varied senses. At places, it is used in the sense of illusory appearances, it is also used to connote the mysterious power of the almighty creator and Lord of the world.20 It is through and by dint of this his indescribable power that the supreme Lord of all, assumes, unaffectedly, the creatorship of the entire universe. This power, says Sankara, has got to be posited, or without it the highest Lord could not be conceived as creator, as he could not become active, if he were distitute of the potentiality of action'.21 This Mayā or causal potentiality has for its substratum or support the highest Lord and it is denoted by the term avyakta 22 It is this very 'Māyā' of the supreme Lord which in the scriptures has some times been designated as 'akasa' and some times as 'aksara' (indescribable).23 What has been called 'Praksi' in the Sruti and Smrti is this "Māya' itself, and the names and forms which belong to the self of the omniscient Lord as it were and which constitute the seed of the entire phenomenal world and cannot be defined as either real or unreal are also the same as this Maya.24 Prakrii, according to Sankara, is nothing but this Maya' of the Lord which is the causal potentiality of all the effects and has the three guņas as its constituents.25 It is called 'avyalta', for it cannot be described either as real or as unreal.20 This

Page #225

Māyā of Sankara should not, however, be mistaken for the 'Prakrti' or 'Pradhana' of Sankhya, No doubt, like Praksti of Sankhya, it is something material and unconscious. But like Prakrti of Sānkhya, it is neither real nor independent reality. Māyā is entirely dependent on and inseparable from the supreme Lord, and as such, lias no being of its own. It is a power of Lord. So, all power is non-different from its possesor, so also Māyā, being power of supreme Lord is not different from it.27 Tsvara creates the world out of liis this Māyāsakti which is tlie matrix of names and forms.28 It's activity and inactivity is on accout of Māyä.29 He is. in his essential nature, inactive. But becomes active in relation to his Mâyä.30 It is called Mahāmāya and Išvara is called Mahamayin.31 Mäyā is existent but not real like Brahman. Brahman is both sat and positive, Mäyä is positive but not sat. So, there is no two ultimate categories in Sankara's pliilosophy. According to Sankara the world is Māyā, means that it is an appearance of Reality in a form which is not its essential and ultimate nature and has no being after the dawn of the right knowledge.32 Māyā is a power of God, indistinguishable from him, just as the burning power of fire is from fire itself. It is neither real like Brahman por unreal like son of a barren woman. It is not real, for it vanishes at the dawn of knowledge, it is not unreal, for it is true as long as it lasts, Sankara beautifully states in his Vivekacūdāmani that 'this Māyā is neither real nor unreal, nor is it essentially both, it is neither differentiated nor is it un-defferentiated, nor is it essentially both, it is of the most wonderful and indescribable form.o33 On the ground that it is indescribable, Māyā cannot be denied. It is felt fact and is to be inferred through its effects by our intelligence.34 Sankara quotes a verse from Süryapurāna to support his anirvacaniyatva of Māyā.35
Māyā is the material cause of the world in conjunction with 1Svara, Māyā, the creative power does not affect God, does not deceive him, like magician who is not affected by his inagical power.36 The relation of Māyā and Braluman is unique. It is neither identity nor difference, nor both. It is energised and acts as a medium of the projection of this world of plurality on the non-dual ground of Brahman. Really it can do no harm to Reality, just as mirage water cannot make the sandy desert muddy. It is something positive (bhāvarīpa) though not real. It is called positive in order to emphasize the fact that it is not merely negative. The main functions of Māyā is two fold:-it superimposes and conceals the real nature of the object and shows up in it place some other object. These two powers of Māyā are called 'Avaraña' and 'Viksepa respectively,37

Page #226

22
It conceals Brahman from our knowledge point of view and shows up in it place the universe and world of souls. It not only makes not apprehend Braluman, but creates some other thing in its place. It is its speciality that it projects something in the place it conceals. In this sense Mäyā is considered as a positive. Everything is play of Maya, just appearance of Brahmm. How Bralman appears is very difficult to exppin, but we can only say that Bralman appears as the world, even as the rope appears as the snake.
It is very difficult to give logically satisfactory account of doctrine of Māyā. Sureśvara, a direct disciple of Sankara, admits that there is a core of unintelligibility associated with the doctrine of Māya 38 But on this basis it cannot be denied. It is a felt fact. It is basis of our intellectual, religious, inoral and social activities. In fact every one of our activity is the work of Mäyä, 39 It is a simple statement of facts, it is what we are and what is around us. 'It is co-eval with our life. We do not know how or when we got into it. Nobody walks into an illusion consciously. We can only know bow to get out of it. Really it is the result of a false indentification of the real and the unreal. It is a nature of mau's experience.40 For common man the world of Māyā is rcal. The learned, man thinks that it is unreal and for the metaphysician, it is neither real nor unreal.4!
This causal potentiality or the cause of the world appearance be understood from the two stand paths. For Isvara, or God, Māyā is only the will to crate the appearance. It does not affect God, does not deceive Him. For ordinary ignorant people like us, who are deceived by it and see maniness here instead of one Brahman, Mäyu is an illusion producting ignorance. In this aspect Mäyā is also called, therefore, Ajñāna, or Avidya and is conceived as having the double function of concealing the real nature of Brahman, the ground of the world and making him appear as something else, viz., the world. But for those wise few who are not deceived by the world show, but who perceive in it nothing but Brahman, there is no illusion, nor therefore, illusion producing Mäyā. Brahiman for them is not therefore, the wielder of Maya.42
MĀYA AND AVIDYA :
It secms that Sankara does not make any difference between Māyā and Aridyā. He uses them as synonymous terms. Even Rāmānuja took Māya in the sense of Avidya and criticises it in his Sribhâsya mostly using the word Avidyā. It is of the nature of Avidyā.13 Sankara, quite clearly states that Maya is Avidya.44 The world has also some times been

Page #227

spoken of hy Sankara as being constitnted of Avidya, imagined by Avidyā, presented by Avidy145 and so on. We feel that the terms Māyā and Avidyā are interchangable in Sankara's philosophy. But opinion is divided with regard to these two terms among Sarkara's followers. In Advaitic works like, Saiksepasiriraka, Sidulhāntamuktavali and Vivaranaprameyasangraha, Ho distinction is drawn between Mâyü and Avidyā. In Prakstārthavivarana Mapa has been described as the beginningless and indescribable, origin of all objects wliich is ussociated with (the infinite) cosmic consciousness, while Avidra is viwedd as a linitc unit of this cosmic Māyā.47 So, also in Pancailaši, Müyü is lield to be the adjunct (Upādhi) of Išvara, while 4vidyā is maintained to be adjunct of the finite individual souls (Jivas) only.48 Vacaspati Miśra recognises original nescience (Mülāvidya) and fragmentary nescience (tülāvidya) 49 Beginningless positive root nescience is the cause of the world. It is thic adjunct of Išvara. Individual nescience is the adjunct of the Jira. The Brahman, the object of ncscience subsisting in the Jira, is perverted in to the world with the aid of materiality of Māru subsisting in Brahman,50 Vidyāranya regards Māya as made up of pure Sattva, and Avidya as made up of impure sattva. Isvara is the reflection of Brahmian in Māyā. The Jiva is reflection of Brahman in Avidyā Mārā is adjunct of Iśvara. While, Avidya is the adjunct of the Jiva.51 Mahādevānandasarasvati52 states that one Ajñāna-which is positive nescience composed of Sattra, rajas and tamas, neither real nor unreal, but indefine able and capable of being annulled by right knowledge, is divided into two l'oled : Māyā and Aridyä. Like Vidyāranya he says that Māya is made up of pure Sattva while A vidyā is made up of impure Sattya, Māyā is adjunct of Isvara while Avidyā is the adjunct of the Jiva. He further states that Māyā las predominance of the power of projecting plurality of appearance while Avidyā has predominance of the power of veiling the nature of Bralıman. In this way, only one Ajñāna is called Māyā and Aridy, according to the pridominance of the power of projection (Viksepasakti) and that of the power of veiling (Avaranasakti). Sadānanda in his Vedāntasāra53 divides nescience (Ajñāna) into collective (Samaşti) and individual (Vyaşti). The collective Ajñāna with pure sattva predominates in it is the adjunct of Isvara and it is Māyā. The individual Ajñāna with impure Sattva predominates in it is the adjunct of Jiva and it is Avidyā. Māyā is cosmic nescience and Avidyā is individual nescience. Praksātman states that Māyū and Avidya are identical but, on practical level they are to be treated as different. Viksepasakti is predominent in Mäyd which projects the world appearance, while Avaranasakti is predominent in Aridya which conceals the nature of Brahman.54

Page #228

LOCUS OF MÃYA :
Locus of Mäyū or Avidyā is a matter of great controversy and even Sankara's followers liave divided themselves into two main groups. There are some who hold that the sanie pure Brahman is both the object and locus of Aridyā or Māyā; whereas there are others according to whom the Ajnana or Avidyā has not purc consciousness or Brahman, but Jiva or individual soul, for its locus or support. There are difficult es involved in holding either of these views. As far as first view is concerned, Maya or Avidyā, cannot be attributed to Brahman. Braliman is selfluminous and pure, while Māyā is impure by nature i.e. ignorance. There is some sort of antinomy between them as there is between light and darkness. It is beyond our comprehension to see how they can exist togetlier. If we accept second view, that, Jiva is the locus of Māyā or Avidyā, then there is the question as to how, prior to the functioning of Māya, there are Jivas. Jivas are products of Maya. How can Avidyā or Māyā have for its locus a Jiva which itself is a product of Avidya ? There is the defect or reciprocal dependence i.e. for Māyā to function we require the existence of souls and for the existence of souls (Jiyas) there is the necessity of the functioning of Māyā. For the upholders of first view. though locus of Māyā is pure Brahman, it is not affected by its impurity like inagician is not affected by his own magical pwer, and mirage water cannot make the sandy desert muddy. So, there is no harm in accepting the view that locus as well as content of Maya is the Brahman. Vācaspati Miśra 56 and his followers disagree with this first view and uphold that the Jiva is the locus of Māyā or Avidya. They have tried to o "ercome objections raised against it by means of the analogy of a tree and its seed.57 Apparently a tree cannot come into being without its seed exactly as a seed cannot be conceived without there being a tree to produce it. All the same the seeds and the trees are both there, similarly it has been said, the individual soul and its Avidya or Ajñāna have been there from beginningless time, because no beginning can be assigned to both by the finite mind. As far as Sankara is concerned, at certain places he seems to say that, supreme Lord is locus and content of Maya (Parames yarisrayi) and at certain places, it is Jiva which is locus of Maya or A vidya. There is nothing wrong in accepting either of these views. If we take first view, then the Isvara-the locus of Māya, is unaffected, like a magician who is not affected by his own magical power.59 As far as latter view is concerned Sankara is very clear. Answering the question whose is this ignorance, Sankara says that "It is of you who puts this question". (E 4 gafa De a sfa),60

Page #229

25
"Avil vi belongs to that very person in whom it appears"; he who sees it, lus it" (1731 aya aku). He also states, that, Avidyā is something which can be experienced by one's own self (6919777714) and something which has one's own self for its support of locus (11977).62
Mäyā and The World :
Closely allied with the doctrine of Māyā is the nature of the world. Müya is the causal potentiality of the world. World is creation of Māyā, just name and form. It is real for the all practical pursposes, but not real like a Brannan, in the ultimate sense. Sankara never denies the pragmatic or relative reality of the empirical objects of the world. When he calls them 'Unreal it is always from the ultimate point of view that he does so. Whenever, Sankara says that world is Māyā or Mithyā, it means, he wants to emphaisze the ultimate in reality of the world. His recognition of the three fold existence (Sattātraya)-Prātibhäsika, Vyāvahārika and Pāramārthika, is a point that needs to be borne in mind in this connection. The world is Vyāyahārika reality, but it becomes sublated when right knowledge dawns.63 So, long as we are in this world, we cannot take it to be unreal. This phenomenal world and worldly objects exist because we all experience them.64
Ignorant critics declare that l'or Sankara this mundane world is mere illusion, dream and thus, he is an illusionist. But this criticism is far from the truth. For Sarkara, the world is not an empty dream. It is objective and not creation of individual fancy. It has common objective reference. The world of object is not on par with dreams. The dream world is private and personal. The world of experience is public and has an objective referance. It also satisfys the pragmatic test. For from condemning this world to be unreal, Sankara claims some sort of reality even for error and dillusion. It is the real which appears and hence every appearance must have some degree of truth in it, though none can be absolutely true. Objects, seen in a dream are quite real as long as the dream losts. The water in dream can quench the thirst in a dream. It is only when we are awake that we can realize the falsity of the dream states. So long as rope is mistaken for a snake, it is sufficient to frighten the person who mistakes it. Similarly, so long as we are engrossed in ignorance, the world is quite real for us. It is only when true knowledge dawns that the world becomes sublated. This world becomes ontologically less real when Brahman is realized.65 Sankala rightly points out that the world of waking state cannot be reduced to the level of dream objects though it
quite rent in a dreant
states.

Page #230

26
resembles dreams in certain respects. "An object will not lose its real nature and acquire that of another, merely because it resembles that other in certain respects." This manifold world is taken to be real as long as the essential unity of the Jiva with Brahman is not realized. As long as this unity with Brahman, the supporting ground of all phenomena is not realized, the world with all its difference is perfectly real. It is only from the absolute stand point when right knowledge is attained that the Advaita Vedanta declares the world to be unreal.
Criticism of Mayavada
Sankara's doctrine of Maya, is unfortunately, misunderstood and misrepresented by many thinkers. For certain thinkers the word Māyā connotes nothing but the utter illusoriness of the world. This doctrine has been the target of much adverse criticism, even by the cminent philosophers, all down the ages, from Bhaskara to Sri Aurobindo. Even great Jain thinkers, like Vidyanandi and others criticise the Mayavada. Bhaskaracārya, is the first thinker to criticise Māyāvāda, 'who was either contemporary of Sankara or flourished just after his death. Bhaskara thinks that Mayavada is due to the influence of Mahayana Buddhism67 and it is an unwarranted hypothesis. Quoting a verse from Pudmapurana, he states that, Sankara's Mayāvāda is asat 'Sastra' and it is hidden Buddhism with its roots cut assunder.s While criticising the doctrine of Maya Bhaskara argues, that so called Maya or Avidya, which projects the sensible world of plurality and practical life, cannot be said to be indescribable. It is self-contradictory to hold that Maya or Avidya is both existent and non existent. If it is mere negation, it cannot cause bondage. It must he positive entity, since it causes bondage. So, it must exist along with Brahman. This is dualism. If it is beginningless, it must be endless. Then, there can be no liberation, because Advaitins claim that without destruction of Avidya no liberation is possible. If the knowledge of duality or difference is false, the knowledge of unity or identity, also must be false, because it is knowledge, knowledge of the world cannot be false, like the knowledge of dreams, since dreams are not absolutely false like hare's horns. So, doctrine of Maya is irrational concept.69
69
Vidyanandi, a first rank thinker of Jainism who flourished in 9th Century A. D., argues, that, if Brahman is the only Reality and on acconut of Maya or Avidya, this apparent world exist, then it is impossible to prove, either existence of Maya or Mithyatra (illusory nature) of the world
4.

Page #231

by any means of valid knowledge.70 The fundamental objection raised by Jain thinkers against Advaitinis, whether the doctrine of Maya (Cosmic illusion) adopted to explain this multiplicity of the phenomenal world is real or unreal. If it is real, then it destroyes the non-dual nature of Brahman and leads to an inevitable duslisin. If it is unreal, then this world which is caused by Maya will not be possible. To say that Maya is unreal and still it creates this world is as absurd as to say that a woman is barren and that she is a mother. 71 And the advaitins themselves accept the theory that the real thing cannot be produced from unreal thing. Again, the very statement that Maya is indescribable. i.e. neither existent nor non-existent on account of being existent in the state of mundane life and no more at the state of realization, indicates, that it is describable in terms of either existent on the phenomenal level or non-existent in the state of liberation. To say that Māya is indescribable is self-contradictory like saying that I am silent throughout the life and my father is bachelor.72 Vidyānandi further, argues that, if we grant that Māyā exists, then where does it exist. Neither Brahman nor Jiva can be locus of Māya. It cannot exist in supreme Brahman which is pure consciousness by nature. If it exists in Brahman, then cannot be called pure consciousness on account of being associated with Māyā. Even individual self is pure consciousness by nature and in cssence, it is not different from Brahman and this free from all taint of Māyā. If Māya. is an independent reality like Brahman and co-eval with it from the beginningless time, then it will be an impossible task to annihilate it by any means of liberation and the consequence of this indestructibility of Māyā is an eternal bondage of the soul. It is argued that Māya exists (lihāvarūpa) but it cannot bc eternal like Brahman nor it be an independent entity. Though it is not capable of being determined by logic, still the denial of its existence would be contradiction of a felt fact and without adopting, this doctrine of Mayā, it is not possible to solve the problem of relation between tlic Absulute and the phenomena, Individual self and the Brahman, the real and the unreal. Here, again, one may argue why should such kind of illogical and irrational concept be accepted at all? Instead of postulating this kind of unreal principle (Māyā) as the cause of the world, it is better to accept the view that the world is both different as well as non-different from the Brahman. The relation between the Absolute and the world is to be identity-cum-difference. An advantage of accepting this view is that there is no necessity of denying any one of the felt facts, the world and its cause-the Absolute. 73
Rāmānujācāryā's seven important objections (anupapattis) against Māyāvada

Page #232

28
of Sankara are well-known. In his criticism of Maya or Avidya, he seemes to be influenced by Jain philosopher-Vidyanandi of 9th century A.D. Some of his arguments are very similar to that of Vidyanandi.
Ramanuja's first objection is, what is the locus or seat of Maya or Avidya. It connot be Brahman, who is full of perfections. It cannot be the individual, who is the product of Avidya. It cannot exist in Brahman, for then the unqualified monsim of Brahman would be break down. Avidya means ignorance, it cannot reside in pure, self-luminous or consciousness i.e. Brahman. Hence Maya or Avidya cannot exist either in Brahman or in Jiva, it is illusory concept, a figment of Advaitins imagination.74 (Asrayanupapatti). Secondly according to Advaitins, Avidya conceals nature of Brahman. But it is not at all possible, because, Brahman is of the nature of self-luminosity, self proved and pure knowledge. Avidya, ignorance cannot veil or conceal its essence. Veiling the selfluminosity of Brahman consists in either obstruction of the production of manifestation of Brahman or the destruction of its existing manifestation. The mainfestation of Brahman is eternal, it is not produced. So concealment is not possible. It is absured to say that darkness can hide light or that night can acts as a veil on day. If veiling means destruction of existing manifestation, that would mean the destruction of very nature of Brahman. But it is not acceptable to any e. So Avidya is incapable of concealing the nature ol Brahman75 (Tirodhananupapatti). Thirdly, what is the nature of Avidya: Is it real or unreal, positive or negative ? If it is real, there would be duality the other reality being Brahman. If it is real, positive how can it be Avidya? Avidya means ignorance and it is absence of knowledge, If it is unreal, negative, then, how can it project this world-illusion on Brahman? To say that Avidya is both positive and negative is to embrace self-contradiction. So reality of Avidya cannot be proved76 (Svarup mupapatti). Fourthly, to say that Maya is neither real nor unreal but indescribable is illogical. How can a thing be neither real nor unreal? A thing must be either real or unreal. All our cognition relate to either entitites or nonentities. There is no third alternative. To maintain a third alternative is to reject the well established canons of logic-the Law of contradiction and the Law of excluded Middle77 (Anirvacaniyanupapatti). Fifthly, no means of knowledge (Pramaņas) testify to the existenance of Maya. Avidya cannot be perceived, for perception can give us either an entity or non-entity. It cannot be inferred, for inference proceeds through a valid mark (Linga) which Avidyä lacks. In the Scriptures, Maya or Avidya is used to indicate the wonderful power possessed by God, who has

Page #233

nothing to do with an eternal unreal Avidya 78 (Pramänānupapatti). Sixthly there is no remover of Avidya. Advaitins believe that Māyā or Avidyū is removed by right knowledge of the unqualified, attributless Brahman. But Rāmānuja says that such knowledge is impossible. Discrimination and determinatiou are absolutely essential to knowledge. Pure identity is a mere abstraction. Hence, there can be no knowledge of indifferentiated attributeless Brahman. And in the absence of such knowledge, there can be no remover of Avidyā.79 (Nivartakanupapatti). Advaitins maintain that realization of identity between individual self and Brahman removes Avidyā. Really, removal of Avidyā is not possible. Avidyā is said to be positive by Advaitins. A thing which positively exists cannot be reinoved from existence by knowledge. The bondage of the soul is due to karma which is a concrete reality, not apparent, as it is actually experienced, and so cannot be destroyed by the integral knowledge of the identity of Braliman and the self. Cessation of bondage can be acquired by devotional meditation on God through his grace. The duality of Brahman and Jivas and the world is real and known by valid knowledge. So, the knowledge of identity contradicts the real nature of duality, and is therefore false. In other words, the knowledge of identity, which seeks to terminate Avidyā, is itself false 8 0 (Nivrit yanupapatti). By all these arguments, Rāmānuja concludes that the doctrine of Mäyä сreates more problems then solutions. So, it is not at all helpful in solving philosophical problenis.
Parthasārathi Misra, a follower of Kumārila Mimämsä, thinks that the concept of Māyā or Avidyā, is irrational. His main question against the concept of Avidyā is : 'Is Avidyā false knowledge ? or is its cause different from it? If Avidyā is false kuowledge, it either belongs to Brahman or Jivas. It cannot belong to Brahamn because Brahman is of the nature of eternal knowledge. Jivas are also non-different from Brahman in their essential nature, So, they cannot have false knowledge. Thus, Avidya, a false knowledge does not exist. Therefore, its cause, which is different from it, cannot exist. If Avidyā, a false kuowledge or its cause be said to exist, separate from Brahman, then Advaita is undermined. If Avidya exists in Brahman, what is its cause? It cannot be anything different from Brahman, nor can it be Brahman since it is of the nature of right knowledge. It cannot contradict its nature. So, existence of Ayidya cannot be proved. 81 Even Vijñānabhikṣu, in his introduction of Sankhyaprayacanabhäşya, like Bhāskara, quotes a verse from Padmapurana, and says Māyāyāda is hidden Buddhism. Criticism of Mäyāyāda is found in the works of Madhva, 8 3 Vallabh 84 and in other Vaişņava philosophers. There arguments against

Page #234

Mäyāvüda are more or less similar to those of Bhaskaril. Vidyanandut und Rāmānuja.
In defence of Māyāvāda
Bliāskarācārya quoting a verse from Padmapurinu was ille first philosopher to apply the term Müyüvada to Sarkara's philosophy. Bhüskaricārya's terming Sarikara's philosophy as Müpüüda is unjustifiable, because, it is not Mūpå but Brahman with which sankara is concerned. Müva. the mysterious power of the supreme Lord is not the last word with Sankara. It is not the goal of human aspiration. It is something that descrves to be discarded and got rid of. Throughout Sarkara's writings, it is realization of the Brahman, and not of the Mayů that is really aimed. And whenever 'Miyū is brought in, it is not with a view to make his reader realize its importance or value, but in order to direct his mind towards the realization of his all important Brahman. "Brahman, with Sarikara, is the only true Reality, Brahman with Sarkara is the whole and sole ultimate ground and support of all, and Brahman with Sankara is the only worthy end of human life.”85 Again, Sankara's Māyāvāda is not hidden Buddhism as Bhāskara thinks. We have already pointed out that, the word May is of very great antiquity and this concept has its roots in Rgreda and in major Upanişads. In fact, it is Mālajāna Buddhism which has developed this concept takikg idca from Upanişadic philosophy. 86 No doubt, in respect of his method of discussing philosophical problems, Sankara, certainly influenced by Buddhist writers. But influence does not mean acceptance of their principles. Really speaking, he was a formidable opponent not only of Vijñānavāda and Sanyavāda Buddhism, but of all Buddhists alike. and he left no stone unturned in criticizing them., $ ? One more important thing to remember is that no Bubdhist thinker, while criticizing Advaita of Sarikara has mentioned, that he owes to Buddhism for liis doctrine of Mīyā or Advaita. Even Santara kşita, 8 8 a great Māhūräna thinker and critic of Advaita Vedanta does not mention Sankara's indebtedness to Buddhism. It is, therefore, very unfair to call Sarikara as cripto-Buddhist or to regard his philosophy as Māyāyādu. Other objections raised against the doctrine of Māyā by Bhasker, Vidyānandi, Rāmānuja and others are more or less similar. In reply to all those objections, one thing can be clearly said that, all of them are based on misunderstanding of the doctrine of Māyā. All these philosophers, it seems, took Miyū in the sense of something real' and demand a seat and Pramüra for it. However, there is no difficulty in aceepting either Brannan or individual self as locus of Avidyö. If we accept first alternative, i.e. Brahman as the seat of Maya, Aridya bcing not real,

Page #235

the Adapira of Brahman is not destroyed, Brahman is not really affected by it. The rope is not really affected if it is mistaken as a snake. The Shell does not become silver if it is mistaken as that. Mirage water cannot make the sandy desert muddy. Müyü in Brahman is ignorance only in the sense of the power of producing ignorance and illusion in individuals: it does not afl'ect the Brahman any more than the inagician's power of creating an illusion affects his own knowledge. We may also agree with Madnanas 9 Misra and" Vācaspati Misra that the individual self and Avidyż go on determining each other in a beginningless cycle. Avidya comes from the Jiva and the Jiyas from Avidya. It does not involve the logical flaw of Interdependence or Pititio-Principle because, this process is beginningless, as in the case of the seed and the sprout. So, no fault should be found with this explanation. The difficulty arises only if we regard the one as preceding to other. But if we regard ignorance and individuality as but the two interdependent aspects of the same fact as a circle and its circumference or a triangle and its side, tlie difficulty does not arise. Rāmānuja himself, when he fails to explain the cause of bondage of the pure soul, falls back upon the nation that the relation of Karma and ignorance with the soul is beginningless. Again, Maya or Avidya does not really conceal the real nature of Brahman. Concealment does not mean destruction of essential nature, as Rämänuja and others think. The ignorance conceals Brahman in the sense preventing the ignorant individual froni realizing his real nature, just as a patch af cloud conceals the sun by preventing a person from perceiving a sun. So, ignorance does not do any harm to the nature of Brahman just as cloud does not destroy the self-manifesting nature of the sun. The Sun does not cease to be selfrevealing because the blind cannot see it.' 1 It is also said that, nature of Avidyâ canot be proved. It is neither positive, por negative. If it is positive, it cannot be destroyed and there would be Advaita, the other reality being Brahman. If it is merely negative it cannot produce world illusion. It is also said that, if the Nirguna Brahman has to restore to Māyā or Apidya to account for something, Brahman would cease to be one without a second. But, Maya is germinal power of Brahman which is neither the ..very nature of Braluman nor something different form it. Nature of Brahman
is not affected by it. Brahman is untouched by blemishes of Maya. Just as the face is not affected by any blemishes associated with the mirror in which it is reflected, Brahman does in no way lose its nature in any cireunstance. Aridyū is felt, fact thus, it cannot be deniccl. It is destroyeci after right knowledge, so, it is not real. This self controdictory nature is realized only when one rises above it and not before. Again, Māyā is said

Page #236

to be indescribable owing to a genuine difficulty.92 In so far as it appears to be something, an illusion or illusory objcct cannot be said to be unreal like a square circle or the son of a barren woman, which never cven appears to exist. Again, in so far as it is sublated or contradicted afterwards by some experience, it cannot be said to be absolutely real like Brahman whose reality is never contradicted. Māyā and every illusory object have this nature and compel us to recognise this nature as something unique and indescribable in terms of ordinary l'eality or unreality. To say that Māyā is anir vacaniya is only to describe a fact, namely our inability to bring it under any ordinary categary, and it does not mean any violation of the law of contradiction. Real means, 'absolutely real' and unreal means “absolutely non-existant, and Maya or Avidya is neither. These two terms are not contradictories and hence the Law of contradiction and excluded Middle are not overthrown. The Law of contradiction is fully maintained since all that which can be contradicted is said to be false. The Law of excluded Middle is not overthrown, since "absolutely real and 'absolutely unreal' are not exhaustive. Mandana Miśra, a contemporary of Sankara rightly pointed out while defending anirvacan ayattva of Māyā or Avidya, that "Māyā is false appearance. It is neither existent nor nonexistent. If it were the characteristic nature of anything, then whether one with it, or different from it, it would be a real thing and could not then be called Avidya. If it were utterly non - existent, it would be like the sky - flower and would have no bearing on practical experience as Apidyā has. Thus, Avidya has to be recognised as indescribable. This is an explanation which should be accepted by adherents of all the different schools of thought. 93 Really, the word Māyā signifies what is inconsistent and inexplicable, had it been concistent and explicable it would not be Maya but would be real. "* It is also unwise to say that, existence of Maya or Avidyā cannot be proved by any accredited means of knowledge. Ayidya is perceived in the forms of 'I ain ignorant', I do not know myself or any body else'. Here negation of knowledge is not perceived, since legation implies the object negated. 'I do not know, this perception apprehends general nescience. If cloes not apprehend negation of a particular object. Perception of nescience is different from perception of negation of a particular object. It can be known by non- apprehension. In dreamless sleep general nescience is perceived. It leaves an impression behind. On waking from sleep it is revived, and brings about the recollection' 'I do not know anything during deep sleep.' Thus, nescience is perceived.95 Even we perceive snake on a rope. Māyā is also inferred through its effects. (kāryānumeyā). It is already pointed out that even scriptures speak of Māyā, which can

Page #237

33
be get rid of. Prakāśānanda, an Advaitic thinker gives different picture. He states that Ajina or Avidyä cannot be established by any of the Pramnäs for the two are as opposed as darkness and light. Ajñana is vouched for by the witness so, it is superfluous to ask how it can be proved. It is argued by the Rāmānuja that, there is no remover of Avidya, because, kuowledge of attributeless and undifferentiated Brahman is not at all possible. But Śruti speaks of Nirguna Brahman.97 Nirguna Brahman is often spoken of as pure bliss. We cannot describe what Ananda is, but we can directly experience it, like sweetness of sugar. It is not a subject of logical demonstration but matter of experience. It is expressed by the words like 'Neti - Neti,'9 8 in Upanişads. Experience of this Nirguna Bralıman is a remover of Avidya. Again, Avidya is not 'real' but only a superiomposition, it vanishes when the ground relity is known. The rope - suake vanishes when the rope is known. It is only the direct knowledge, or intuitive knowledge of Reality wliich is the remover of Avidyā and hence, cause of liberation. It is also argued by the critics of Māyā or Avidya that ignorance (Avidya) means want of knowledge, and thus cannot to be positive. If it is positive, how can it be destroyed by the khowledge of Brahman ? Avidya is called positive only to emphasize the fact that it is not merely negative. The illusion producing ignorance is not merely an absence of the knowledge of the ground of illusion, but positively makes this ground appear as some other object. It is properly described as positive in this sense. In our daily experience of illusory objects, like the serpent in a rope, we find that the object positively appears to be there and yet it vanishes when we have a clear knowledge of the ground of the illusion, viz., the rope.99 When identity of Braluman and Arman (self) is realized, there is no Maya or Avirlyū, no bondage. Avidyā is removed by right knowledge.
Some modern crtics have condemned, Sankara's Māyāyāda as illusionisin. This misunderstanding is on account unwarrented and incorrect English rendering of the word Mäyd as 'illusion.' Mayū is falsc appearance. The false can never be equated with illusory or the non-existent. Something which is false must exist, its falsity consists in its appropriating to itself properties which do not really belong to it. What is called 'illusory', in the English language is called Prātibhāsika in Adyita Vedānta. Whenever Sankara says that the world is Māyā or Mithya, he does not mean it as entirely baseless illusory 'appearance. Sankara, never confused between subjective and objective existence. He did not regard the objective world as unreal for practical and moral purposes, and carefully distinguished it from dreams and other illusory appearances. The world has a Vyāvahärika

Page #238

reality. Brahman is absolute existence, whereas the world has a relative existence, and the silver seen in a shell has illusory existence. The world is called unreal or Mayā, because it does not conform to the criterion of reality upheld by him. Real according to Sarkara, is that which is selfexistent, cahngless or uncontradicted. Anything that has a dependent existence, or is subject to change or contradiction, must ipso-facto, be unreal. The unreal for Sarikara, therefore is not only that which is absolutely non-existent, or illusory, like a sky-flower, but also that which is ordinarily believed to be real. Though not absolutely non-existent or illusory, the objects of our common experience are certainly neither selfexistent or immutable. They are all effects of some cause or the other, and have as such a beginning, as well as an end. An effect or changing thing has no nature of its own which it can be said never to part with. 100 Sarkara, therefore, maintained that no effect is a real thing. World and its objects are dependent on cause, hencec canging. What is finite cannot be self-existent. It must be an effect of something?ol and hence, unreal. In this sense, world is called Māyā or Unreal. Thus Māyāyāda should be understood as asserting that the external world of our waking experience has its limited and conditioned reality in the sphere of the Vyävahärika experience and cannot 'usurp' the reality of the Päramärthika experience. Thus, Māyāvāda is not illusionism, we may call it certain kind of relativism. Sarikara, upholding Māyāyāda, maintained the nonduality of Brahman. He points out the truth that there is unity behind diversity. There is unity between Brahman-world and man. Prof. Hiriyanna rightly pointed out that 'the unity of the Absolute Brahman may be compared to the unity of painting, say of a landscape. Looked at as a landscape, it is a plurality, hill, valley, lake and streams, but it's groundthe Substance of which it is constituted is one, viz., the canvas.
NOTES 1. (a) सत्य ज्ञानं अनंतं ब्रह्मति ब्रह्मणो लक्षणार्थ वाक्यम् ।
Taittiriyopanişadbhāşya, Il-1, Ten Principle Upanişads with
Śänkarabhāşya (S. B.), Motilal Banarasidass, Delhi, 1978. (a) na pomenute -Aparokşānubhūti, 24.
Works of Sarkaräcārya, Vanivilas Press, Srirangam. 2. (a) paraldur -Chandogyopanişad-VI-II, 1-2
(b) gata pe geaca 4. SB. Tait, Up. II-6 3. दिग्देशगुणगतिफलभेदशून्य हि परमार्थ सत् अद्वयं ब्रह्म मन्दबुद्धिनां असदिव प्रतिभाति ।
-SB. Chāndogyopanişad-VIII-I-I, Introduction,

Page #239

35
4. अने के हि विलक्षणाः चेतनाचेतनरूपा : सामान्यविशेषाः । - तेषां पारम्पर्यगत्या एकस्मिन् महासामान्ये ऽन्तर्भाव: प्रज्ञानघने ।
-SB. Br. Up. II-IV-9. 5. ब्रह्म एव सत्य, सर्व तदतिरिक्त नामधेयमात्रमनृतम् । . -SB. Mand, Up. II-II-11. 6. (a) जीवो ब्रह्मेव नापरः । -Brhmajnanavalim āla-20
Works of Sankarācārya, p. 224, Vol. 16, Vanivilas Press, Srirangam. (b) एक एव हि कूटस्थनित्यो विज्ञानधातुरविद्यया मायया
मायाविवद अनेकधा विभाव्यते नान्यो विज्ञानधातुरस्तीति । _ - Brahmasātra Saikara bhāsya (BSB).-I-III-19, with Ratnaprabha, .. Bhamati and Anandagiri Vyakhya, Ed. Mahadevashastri, Bakre,
Nirnayasagar Press, Bombay, 1909. ...(e)..एकस्येव तु भेदव्यवहार; उपाधिकृतः । - BSB, I-II-20. __. (d) BSB, -II-III... 7. (a) ब्रह्म वेद विश्वमू-समस्तमिद जगत --SB. Mund- Ip.-II-II-11. ... (b) · कृत्स्नस्य जगतो ब्रह्मकार्यत्वात् तदन्यत्वम् - BSB. II-I-20. 8. Bhāmati. II-I. 14; Siddhāntaleśasangraha: (SLS)-1-24, _Ed. with Hindi trqnslation by M. S. Vyasa, Acyutagranth mala
Karyalaya, Kashi, V. S. 1993. 9. न तावत प्रतिपन्नत्वेन सत्यत्वं वक्तु शक्यंत प्रतिपत्ते: सत्यत्वभिशपात्वयोः रामानत्वात
. - SB. Svetasvataropanisad - I, Introduction. 10: (i) सत्यमिति यद्रूपेण यन्निश्चित तद्रूपं न व्यभिचरति
. तत्सत्यम् -- -- -- अत: सत्यं ब्रह्मति ब्राह्म विकारान्निवर्तयति
- SB. Tait, Up. II.I. (b) एकरूपेणह्यवस्थितो योऽर्थः स परमार्थः ।
- BSB-II-I-11. (c) यद्विषया बुद्धिन व्यभिचरति तत्सत ।
-- Sarkara's Gitäbhāşya (SBG) -II-16, Srimadbhagavadgita with
Sārkarabliäşya, (Hindi tr.) Gita Press, Gorakhpur, V.S. 1995. 11. यद्रपेण यन्निश्चित तदप' व्यभिचरत अनृतमित्युच्यते,
- SB-Tai. U; II-1. 12. Kathopanisad-I-II--5; Isavasyopanisad-153; Prasnopanisad-1-16; Chando
gyopanisad-VIII-III. 1-2; Brhadaranyakopanisad-JI-V-19; Svetasvat
aropanisad-IV-9, 10,11,14-17; 7-6, 13, 14. 13. Rgveda-VI-47-18; VII-XCVIII-5; VII-CIV-24; I-XXXIX-2; V. II-9;
VI-LXI-3; LXXXII-4; VI-XCIX-4. 14. इन्द्रो मायाभि: पुरुरूप ईयते। - Ibid. VI-47. 18. 15. Ibid-VII-XCVIII-5,

Page #240

36
16. Atharvaveda-XII-II, 11; VII-XXXI-1; VIII-IX-5; IV-XXXVIII-3. 17. See foot-note no. 12. 18. Bhagavadgita -IV-6; V-15: VII-15, 14, 25. Srimadbhagavadgita with
Shikarabhisya (SBG) Gita Press, Gorakhpur--V.S. 1995. 19. Yogavasistha-IV-21, 36-3. V-13.87-903; VI-2-86. 11: VI-2.84,; 111--
67-2; VI-1-125-13; V-49-40. 20. ईश्वरस्य मायाशक्तिः प्रकृतिः -- BSB-II-1-14. 21. Bhagavadgitabhasya - Introduction - SBS [-4-3. 22. SBG-XII-3-BSB-I-4-3. 23. BSB-I-2-22; I-4-3. 24. BSB II-I-14. 25. BSG-VII-4%B XII[-19-29. 26. BSB-I-IV-3. 27. “सा शक्ति: ब्रह्म एव.........शक्तिशक्तिमतो अनन्यत्वात"
SBG-XIV-27. 28. न हि तया विना परमेश्वरस्य सृष्टत्व सिध्यति,
शक्तिरहितस्य तस्य प्रवृत्यनुपपत्ते:- BSB-I-IV-3. 29. ईश्वरस्य महामायत्यात प्रवृत्यप्रवृत्ती- BSB-II-II--+. 30. परमात्मनः (ईश्वरस्य) स्वरूपव्यपाश्रय औदासीन्य, मायाव्यपाश्राय च प्रयतकत्वम् ।
BSB. II-II-7. 31. सर्वज्ञ सर्वशक्तिमहामाय च तद् ब्रह्म. B.S.B. II-1-37. 32. Tait. Up. I. VIII. 1-4. 33. (a) सन्नाप्यसन्ना उभयात्मिका नो भिन्नाप्यभिन्ना उभयात्मिका ना।
सदाप्यसका उभयात्मिका नो महाभुता अनिर्वचनीयरूपा ॥
- Vivekacudamani-Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, Bombay. .. (b) माया नाम वहिरन्यथात्मान' प्रकाश्यान्यथेव कार्य करोति सा माया मिथ्याचारहमा
SB. Prasnopanisad-I-16. 34. कार्यानुमेया सुधियेव माया- Vivekacidamani-110. 35. नासपा न सद्रूषा माया नेवोभयात्मिक।।
सदसभ्यां अनिर्वाच्या मिथ्याभूता सनातनी । Suryapuranit. 36. (a) यथा स्वयं प्रसारितमायथा मायावी त्रिवपिकालेषु न संस्पृश्यते अप्रस्तुतत्वात् ,
एव' परमात्मापि संसारमायया न संस्पृश्यते इति । BSB. 11-1-9. (b) न च मिथ्याज्ञानं परमार्थ वस्तु दूपयितु समर्थ', न हयूपरदशं स्नेहेन पीक "
शक्नोति मरीच्युदक तथाऽविद्या क्षत्रज्ञस्य न किम्चत कर्तुं शक्नोति ।
SBG. XIII-2. 37. शक्तिद्वयं हि मायाया विक्षेपावृत्तिरूपकम् ।
विक्षेपशक्तिलिङ्गादि ब्रह्माण्डान्तं जगत् सृजेत् । अन्तरदृश्ययोर्भद' वहिश्च ब्रह्मसर्गयोः ।

Page #241

-37
Agasi
आवृणोत्यपरा शक्ति: सा संसारस्य कारणात् । -Drkdrsyaviveka, 13/15, Quoted in Sri Sankarācārya. Baldeva Upadhyaya, Hindustani Academy,
Alhabad, 1963, p. 294. 38. सेय भ्रान्तिनिरालम्बा सर्वन्यायविरोधिनी ।
सहते न विचार सा तमो यदव दिवाकरम् । - Naiskarmyasiddhi II-26. Tutorial Press, Girgaon Back Road,
Bombay, 1925. 39. अविद्यावत्वेनैव जीवस्य सर्व व्यवहारः सन्ततो वर्तते ।
- BSB. 1-IV-3. 40. (a) सत्यानते मिथुनीकृत्य "अहमिदं, “ममेद" इति नैसर्गिकोऽय लोकव्यवहार:
___BSB/Intro. (Adhyasabhāsya). (b) यतोऽनुभवतोऽविद्या -Sambandhavirtika-177. ed. Kashinathshastri
Agashe., Anandasrama Press, Pune, 1982. 41. (a) तुच्छाऽनिव'चनीया वास्तवी चेत्यसो विधा।
ज्ञेया माया बिभिबेधिः श्रौतयौक्तिकलौकिकैः । - Pañcadast - VI-130. Pub. Bhargava Pustakalaya, Gaya Ghat,
Kashi, 1942. (b) SLS. P. 178. 42. An Introduction to Indian Philosophy, S. C. Chatterji and D. M.
____Datta, 6th edition, Uni. of Calcutta, 1960, P. 371. 43. अविद्यात्मिका हि सा बीजशक्तिः , BSB. I. -IV-3. 44. (a) एक एव...कूटस्थनित्यो विज्ञानधातु: अविद्यया मायया... -I-III-19.
(b) अविद्या लक्षणा अनादि माया- Mandikyakarika-IV-36. 45. अविद्यात्मक, अविद्याकल्पित, अविद्या प्रत्युपस्थापित... -BSB. 11-1-14, 46. (a) Sanksepasarirakam-I-20-Chowkhamba Sanskrit Series, Benaras,
1924. (b) Siddhantamuktāvali-pp 38-39, with English Translation by C. A.
Venis, E. J. Lazarus and Co., Benaras, 2nd edition, 1922. (c) Vivaranaprameyasangraha-I-I, P. 133-134, with Hindi translation___ by Lalitaprasad-Dabral, Achyutagranthamala Karyalaya, Kashi,
V.S. 1996. 47. SLS, I. 29. 48. Particadasi (PD)-I. 15-17. 49. Bhamati-1. 50. SLS. P.96-97. 51. PD. I. 14-15. . 52. Advaitacintakaustubha, P. 27-34, 38. 53. Vedāntasāra. Ed. G. A. Jacob. 4th edition, Nirnayasagar Press, Bombay,
1925.

Page #242

38
54. एकस्मिन्नपि वस्तुनि विक्षेपप्राधान्येन माया आच्छादनप्राधान्यन अविद्या इति व्यवहारभेद:
- Pancapādikāvivarana-P. 32. 55. शुद्धब्रह्माशयविषयमेकमेवाज्ञान - SLS-I-7.-P. 126. 56. (a) नाविद्या ब्रह्माश्रया किंतु जीवे, सा त्वनिर्वचनीयेत्युक्त, तेन नित्यशुद्धमेव धाम---
Bhamati-I-I-4 and अज्ञानाथायीभूतच जीव इति वाचस्पति मिश्रा: Siddhanta
bindu. P. 29-P.C. Diwanji, G.O.S., Baroda. (b) नाज्ञान' शुद्धचेतन्या भ्रय किंतु जीवाश्रयम्- SLS. P. 128. 57. बीजाइकुरवदनादित्वात्. Bhamati. I. I. 1. 58. BSB. I. IV. 3. 59. BSB. II. I. 9. 60. कस्य पुनरयमप्रबोध इति चेत्, यस्त्व पृच्छसि तस्य त इति बदामः ।
BSB. IV. 1-3. 61. सा अविद्या कस्येति । यस्य दृश्यते तस्यैव । कस्य दृश्यत इति । अत्रौव्यतं अविद्या कस्य
दृश्यते इति प्रश्नो निरथ कः । कथ। दृश्यते चेदविद्या तद्वन्तमपि पश्यसि । न च तद्वत्युपल
भ्यमाने सा कस्येति प्रश्नो युक्तः - SBG. XIII-2. 62. Svetā. UP. Sambandhabhāsya 63. (a) प्रपञ्चाव्य मायामात्रम्- SB. Mandakyakārika I-17. (b) तावन् सत्यं जगद्भाति शुक्तिकारजत यथा ।
तावन्न ज्ञायते ब्रह्म सर्वाधिष्ठानमद्वयम् ॥ Atmabodha. 7. 64. प्राक् चात्मैकत्वावगते: अव्याहत: सव: सत्यानृतव्यवहारो लौकिको वैदिकश्चेत्यवोचाम
BSB II. I. 14. 65. यद्यपि स्वप्नदर्शनावस्थस्य सर्वदशनादिकम्नानादिकार्य" अनृतं तथापि तदरगतिः सत्यमेव
फल, प्रतिबुद्धस्याप्यबाध्यमानत्वात्त...न चेयमवगति: अनथिका भ्रांतिरेव शक्य वक्तु अविद्या
नितिफलदर्शनात वाधकज्ञानानन्तराभावाच्च, BSB-II-I-14. 66. न च यो यस्य स्वतो धर्मा न सम्भवति सोऽन्यस्य साधति तस्य सम्भविष्यति, न
अग्निरुष्णः अनुभूयमानोदकसाधर्म्यात शीतो भविष्यति । -BSB. II-11-29. 67. महायानबौद्धधातित मायावादम्- Bhaskara's Brahmasutrabhasya-I-IV-25
Chowkhamba Sanskrit Book Depot, Benaras, 1903. 68. मायावादमसच्छात्र प्रच्छन्न बौद्धमेव च। ___ मयैव कथित देवि कली शङ्कररूपिणा । -Padmapurana, quoted in Sankara's
Brahmavada, R.S. Naulakha, Kitab Ghar, Kanpur, 1964, P. 12. 69. Philosophy of Bhedabheda, Ch. V, History of Indian Philosophy,
Vol. III, S. N. Dasgupta, Gambridge University Press, P. 4.5. 70. (a) Astasahasri (A.S.) Ed. by Vansidhar, Pub. Nirnayasagar Press,
Bombay, 1915, P. 161-163. (b) Satyasasanapariksa (SSP) ed. by Gokulcandra Jain, Bharatiya
Jnanapith, Kashi, 1964, P. 3.4.

Page #243

71. Syädvädamañjari. ed. A.B. Dhruva, Pub. Bombay Sanskrit and Prakrit
Series, 1933, Verse 13, Commentary. 72. Ca) Mandakyakarika with Sankarabhasya-Advaita prakarana, Verse 28.
P. 164-165. (b) Nyāyakumudacandra, Part 1, Ed. Maliendrakumar Shastri, Pub.
Manikachandra Jain Granthamala. Bombay, 1938, P. 63. (c) SSP. P. 8.
(d) Ibid. P. 8. 73. (a) AS. P.9. 163.
(b) SSP. P. 8-9. 74. सा हि किमाश्रित्य भ्रम जनयति इति वक्तव्यम् ।
न तावज्जीवमाश्रित्य अविद्याकल्पितत्वाज्जीवभावस्य । नापि ब्रह्माश्रित्य तस्य स्वय' प्रकाशज्ञानरूपत्वेनाविद्याविरोधात । साऽपि ज्ञानबाध्याभिमता । Sribhāsya of Ramanuja, Part I, Catussutri I. I.-1, Para
59, ed..R.D. Karmarkar, Uni of Poona, 1959. 75. अविद्यया प्रकाशकस्वरूप ब्रह्म तिरोहित इति वदता स्वरूपनाश एवोक्त स्यात ।
प्रकाशतिरोधान' नाम प्रकाशोत्पत्तिप्रतिबन्धः, विद्यमानस्य विनाशो वा प्रकाशस्यानुत्पाद्यत्वा
भ्युपगमेन प्रकाशतिराधान प्रकाशनाश एव । bid. - I. I.-1. 76. ...किमय स्थाश्रयदोष: परमार्थ भूतः इति विवेवनीयम् । न तावत्परमार्थ : अनभ्युपगमात् ।
नापि अपरमार्थः । Ibid I. I. I. Para 60. 77. अनिर्वचनीयत्य च किमाभप्रेतम् । सदसद्विलक्षणमिति चेत् तथा विधस्य वस्तुनः
प्रमाणशून्यत्वेनानिर्वचनीयतै वस्यात । एतदुक्त भवति सर्व हि वस्तुजात प्रतीतिव्यवस्थाप्यम् । सर्वा च प्रतीतिः सदसदाकारायाः प्रतीते: सदसद्विलक्षण' विषय इत्यभ्युपगमे सर्व सर्वत्रतीते
विषयः स्यात् इति । Ibid I. I. 1. Para 60. 78. Ibid. I. I. I. Para 62-71. 79. यदुक्त निर्विशेषब्रह्मज्ञानादेवाविद्यानिवृत्ति वदन्ति श्रुतयः इति, तदसत....
Tbid I. I. 1. Para 72-78.
80. यत्पुनरिदमुक्त ब्रह्मात्मैकत्व विज्ञानेनव अविद्या निवृत्तिः युक्त. इति, तदयुक्तम् बन्धस्य.
पारमार्थिकत्वेन ज्ञाननिवृर्त्यत्वाभावात- Ibid. I. I. 1. Para 79. 81. Sastradipika P.P. 313-314, Nirnayasagar Press, Bombay. See also
History of Philosophy Vol-II, Jadunath Sinha, Central Book Agency,
Calcutta, 1952. 82. Sankhyapravacanabhasya-Introduction, ed. by R.G. Bhatta, Chowkli
amba Sanskrit Series, Benaras. 83. Anandatirtha (Madhva): Māyāvādlakhandanam. T. K.
Venkatacharya, Srividya Printing Press, Kumbhakonam, 1929, P.P. 1-15.

Page #244

40
84. Suddhädvaitamārtanda-P. 22-24 Sec also History of Indian Philosophy.
Vol-II, J.N. Sinha, P. 713. 85. Saikara's Brahmavada-R.S. Naulakha, P. 15. 86. Malāyānasūtrālarikāra-a study in Vijñānavāda Buddhism. Y. S. Shastri,
Indian Books Centre, New Delhi. 1989, P.P. 122-137. 87. BSB II-11-18-31. 88. Tattvasangraha-P. 328-331 Vol. I. ed. pt. k..
Krishnamacharya, G.O.S. 1926. 89. Brahmasiddhi P..10. 90. (a) बीजाकरवदनादित्वातू- Bhamati-I-1-1. (b) अज्ञानविषयीभूत चैतन्यमीश्वरः, अज्ञानाश्रयीभूत च जीव इति वाचस्पतिमिश्राः ।
Siddliānta bindu P. 29. 91. घनच्छन्नद्रष्टिः घनच्छन्तमर्क यथा निष्प्रभ मन्यते चातिमूढः । 92. Sambandhavārtika. 175-181 ed. by Kashinath Shastri Agashe, Anandas
hrama Press, Pune, 1982, P. 55-57. 93. अत्रोच्यते नाविद्या ब्रह्मण: स्वभावः नार्थान्तरम् । नात्यन्तमसती नापि सती । एवमेवेयम
विद्या माया मिथ्यावभास इत्युच्यते । स्वभावश्चेत कस्यचित अन्योऽनन्योवा परमार्थ एवेति नाऽविद्या । अत्यन्तासत्वे खपुष्पसदृशी न व्यवहाराङ्गम, तस्मादनिवचनीया । सर्वप्रवादिभि
श्चेत्थमियमास्थेया । -Brahmasiddhi P. 9. 94. नासिद्ध वस्तु वस्त्वन्तरनिष्पत्तयेऽलम् । न मायामाने । नहि मायायां काचिदनुपपत्तिः ।
अनुपपद्यमानार्थे व हि माया । उपपद्यमानार्थत्वे यथार्थभावान्न माया स्यात् । Ibid. P. 10. 95. (a) Vivaranaprameyasangraha. P. 16-17.
(b) Pañcapādikāvivaraņa. P. 12-13. 96. तथा च प्रमाणप्रश्नोऽनर्थक एवाज्ञानस्य साक्षणैव सिद्धत्वात् । न चाज्ञानविषयाज्ञाननिवृत्यर्थ
प्रमाणप्रश्नो युक्त इति वाच्ये, तदभावात् । अज्ञानस्य प्रमाणेन ज्ञातुमशक्यत्वाच्च तेन तस्य विरोधात । तदयं तमोदीपन्यायः । तथाहि
अज्ञान ज्ञातुमिच्छेद्यो मानेनात्यन्तमूढधीः । स तु नून तमः पश्येद्दीपेनेात्तमतेजसा ॥
-Siddläntamuktävali. P. 125. 97. (a) द्वावेव ब्रह्मणो रूपे मूर्तञ्चैवामूर्तञ्च-- Br. Up. III. II-6.
(b) निर्गुणो केवलश्च । (c) यतो वाचो निवर्तन्ते अप्राप्य मनसा सह.
___ -Tait. Up. JV. 1. 98. नेति नेति इत्यात्मा अग्राह्यः...
-Br. Up. IV. IV. 22; IV. V. 15.

Page #245

(99. (a) मायामात्रं हि एतत् परमात्मनोऽवस्थात्रयात्मनावभासमानं रज्वा इव सर्पादिभावेन इति ।
BSB. II. I. 9.
(b) सर्वोsविद्यामात्रो रज्ज्वामिव सर्पप्रत्ययः ।
41
SB. Mund. U.P. II. II. 11.
(c) नानात्वप्रत्युपस्थापिकाया अविद्याया निवृत्तत्वादिह ब्रह्मणि नाना नास्ति किञ्चनाणुमात्रमपि
S. B. Kath. Up. II. 11.
100. (a) Tait. Up. II. 1.
(b) BSB. II. I. 11.
(c) SBG II. 16.
(d) सतोsन्यत्वे अनृतत्वम्
SB. Chānd. Up. VII. II. 2.
(c) न हि वस्तुवृत्तेन विकारो नाम कश्चिदस्ति ।
BSB II. I. 14. and also अतो विकारोऽनृतम् SB Tait Up. II. I.
SBG. II. 16.
101. सर्वे विकारा: कारणव्यतिरेकेणानुपलब्धेः असत

Page #246

४
अर्धमागधी भापा और आचार्य श्री हेमचन्द्र का प्राकृत व्याकरण
डॉ. के. आर. चन्द्र
पू. आचार्य श्री हेमचन्द्र प्राकृत भाषाओं का व्याकरण 'अथ प्राकृतम्' (8.1.1) सूत्र से प्रारंभ करते हैं। व्याकरण के जो नियम दिये जा रहे हैं उनमें प्रवृत्ति, अप्रवृत्ति, विभाषा अन्यत् इत्यादि विविधता के कारण इस भाषा की विशेष लाक्षणिकताओं को बतलाने के लिए उन्होंने दूसरा ही सूत्र दिया है 'बहुलम्' (8.1.2) । तत्पश्चात् 'आर्षम्' (8.1.3) का उल्लेख किया है जिसे ऋषियों की भाषा बतलायी गई है ।
इसी सम्बन्ध में सूत्र नं. 8.4.287 की वृत्ति में एक उद्धरण (आवश्यक सूत्र से) प्रस्तुत किया है। -पोराणमद्धमागह-भासा-निययं हवइ सुत्तं अर्थात् पुराना सूत्र अर्धमागधी भाषा में नियत है । इसी को समझाते समय 'आर्ष' और 'अर्धमागधी' एक ही भाषा बतलायी गयी है-इत्यादिनार्षस्य अर्द्धमागधभाषां नियतत्वम्......(वृत्ति 8.4.287) ।
इसी अर्धमागधी या आर्ष भाषा के विषय में अपने व्याकरण ग्रंथ में अलग से कोई व्याकरण नहीं दिया है यह एक आश्चर्य की बात है । मागधी भाषा में कोई विशेष स्वतंत्र साहित्य नहीं मिलता है परन्तु उस भाषा के लिए 16 सूत्र (8.4.287-302) दिये हैं । पैशाची भाषा के लिए 22 सूत्र (303-324) उपलब्ध हैं । चूलिका पैशाची का कोई साहित्य ही नहीं मिलता है फिर भी 4 सूत्र (325-328) दिये हैं । शौरसेनी साहित्य दिगम्बर आम्नाय में अधिक प्रमाण में मिलता है तथापि उसके लिए भी 27 सूत्र (260-286) मिलते हैं और अपभ्रंश भाषा के लिए उन्होंने 118 सूत्र दिये हैं। स्वयं श्वेताम्बर होते हुए भी श्वेताम्बर अर्धमागधी आगमों की भाषा के लिए कोई स्वतंत्र सूत्र एक स्थल पर व्यवस्थित रूप में नहीं लिखे हैं जबकि अर्धमागधी आगम साहित्य विपुल प्रमाण में उपलब्ध है।
क्या जिस प्रकार अन्य भाषाओं का व्याकरण उन्हें परम्परा से प्राप्त हुआ उस प्रकार अर्धमागधी का प्राप्त नहीं हुआ या अर्धमागधी साहित्य की भाषा उनके समय तक इतनी बदल गयी थी कि उसके अलग से सूत्र बनाना असंभव सा हो गया था। उनके व्याकरण
1. पाइय-सद्द-महण्णवो, उपोद्घात पृ. 35, टिप्पण नं. 4, द्वितीय आवृत्ति, ई. स. 1968. 2. नाटकों में प्रयुक्त मागधी के अतिरिक्त कोई स्वतंत्र कृति नहीं मिलती है ।

Page #247

४३
के सूत्रों से तो ऐसा लगता है कि जो सामान्य प्राकृत के लक्षण हैं वे ही प्रायः अर्धमागधी प्राकृत के लिए भी लागू होते है और कुछ विशेषताओं के लिए, उन्होंने बीच-बीच में वृत्ति में उल्लेख कर दिया है । प्रारंभ में ही 'आर्षम्' का सूत्र दे कर उसकी वृत्ति में (8.1.3) उन्होंने जो कहा है कि 'बहुलं भवति' एवं 'आर्षे हि सर्वे विधयो विकल्प्यन्ते' -अर्थात् आर्ष में बहुलता पायी जाती है और उसमें सभी विधियाँ घटित होती हैं । इससे तो यही साबित होता है कि अन्य भाषाओं का व्या मरण लिखने का श्रम किया परन्तु अर्धमागधी के लिए ऐसा नहीं किया क्योंकि उस साहित्य में से प्राचीनता-लक्षी विशेषताओं को अलग करने में बड़ी कठिनाई उनके सामने रहो हो। इस तरह का रूख अपनाने के कारण ही पं. श्री रुख बेचरमाई दोषी अपने 'प्राकृत व्याकरण' में अर्धमागधी को कोई एक अलग भाषा मानने को तैयार ही नहीं हुए। हाला कि इसकी आलोचना श्री हरगोविन्ददास सेठ ने की है और पिशल ने तो अर्धमागधी को अलग भाषा का दर्जा दिया ही है ।
कहने की आवश्यकता नहीं कि भरतमुनि ने अपने नाटयशास्त्र में सात भाषाओं के साथ अर्धमागधी भाषा को एक कीर्ति-प्राप्त स्वतंत्र भाषा के रूप में गिनाया है ।
पू. हेमचन्द्राचार्य अपने व्याकरण की प्रशस्ति में अलग से एक नया व्याकरण लिखने का कारण बतलाते हुए कहते हैं कि वे निरवम (न्यूनता रहित) और विधिवत् व्याकरण बना रहे हैं । अर्धमागधी के विषय में क्या उनका यह विधान लागू होता है १ 'बहुलम्' और सर्वे विधयो विकल्प्यन्ते' कह देने से आर्ष भाषा को कितनी बड़ी स्वतंत्रता मिल गयी और व्याकरणकार भो सभी बन्धनों से मुक्त हो गये हो ऐसा ही प्रतीत होता है ।
इस परिस्थिति के होते हुए भी अर्धमागधी की अपनी लाक्षणिकताओं के विषय में क्या एक स्वतंत्र व्याकरण का विधान किया जा सकता था इसी मुद्दे पर इस चर्चा-पत्र में विचार किया जा रहा है।
आर्ष की विशेषताओं के उल्लेख
- आचार्य श्री हेमचन्द्र ने अपने प्राकृत व्याकरण में सूत्रों की वृत्ति में अलग अलग स्थलों पर आर्ष भाषा (अर्धमागधी ) की विशेषताओं के बारे में 31 बार उल्लेख
1. पाइय-सद्द-महण्णवो, 1963, उपोद्घात, पृ. 35.
2. पिशल, 18-17.
3. ...... सप्तभाषाः प्रकीर्तिताः-भ.ना.शा., 17.47.

Page #248

इन
किया है। इनमें एक उल्लेख उसकी मुख्य विशेषता के बारे में है अर्थात् अकारान्त पुं. प्र. ए. व. के लिए -ए विभक्ति के बारे में है । इसके सिवाय नाम विभक्तियों के बारे में दो और उल्लेख है । काल तथा कृदन्त के विषय में एक एक उल्लेख है जबकि अन्य उल्लेख अधिकतर ध्वनि-परिवर्तन के विषय में हैं।
इन विशेषताओं के लिए जो भी उदाहरण दिये गये हैं उनसे यही स्पष्ट होता है कि अर्धमागधी एक प्राचीन प्राकृत भाषा थी । उदाहरणों के रूप में :
1. शब्द के प्रारंभिक य का अ ।
सूत्र है - आदेो जः (8.1.245 य = ज) परंतु-आर्षे लोपोऽपि । उदाहरण :- अहक्ख.यं, अहाजायं । अशोक के शिलालेखों में भी ऐसी ही प्रवृत्ति मिलती है। आदि य का न बहुत बाद को प्रवृत्ति है (मेहेण्डले, पृ. 274) । अर्धमागधी में यथा और यावत् अव्ययों में यह प्रवृत्ति मिलती है।
1. श्रीमती नीति डोल्चीने जिन सूत्रों का उल्लेख किया है उनमें एक सूत्र 8.3.137 और जोड़ा जाना चाहिए । देखिए
The Prakrit Grammarians, p. 180, f.n. 1(1972)
हेमचन्द्र के व्याकरण में विभिन्न सूत्रों की वृत्ति में विषय इस प्रकार है
सूत्र-संख्या
सूत्र-संख्या
विषय आषम् स्वरपरिवर्तन अः का परिवर्तन प्रारम्भिक असंयुक्त व्यंजन मध्यवर्ती असंयुक्त व्यंजन प्रारंभिक संयुक्त व्यंजन मध्यवर्ती संयुक्त व्यंजन
विषय अंतिम व्यंजन अध्यय निपात नामविभक्ति विभक्ति-व्यत्यय भूतकाल कृदन्त
कुल 31 सूत्र
सूत्र नं. I. 3, 26, 46, 57, 79, 118, 119, 151, 177, 181, 206, 228, 245, 254 (14)
II. 17, 21, 86, 98, 101, 104, 113, 120, 138, 143, 146, 174, (12) III. 162, IV. 238, 283, 287 (3)

Page #249

४५
2. आषै दुगुल्लं का उदाहरण सूत्र 8.1.119 में दिया गया है । यहाँ पर क के लोन के बदले में ग मिल रहा है हालों कि उदाहरण स्वरपरिवर्तन और व्यंजन के द्विख का है । लेकिन यहाँ पर लोप के बदले क का घोष ग मिलता है । घोष की प्रवृत्ति लोप से प्राचीन है । अशोक के पूर्वी प्रदेश के शिलालेखों में जौड के पृथक् शिलालेख में एक बार 'लोक, का 'लोग' भी ( 27 ) मिलता है । खारवेल के शिलालेख में भी एक बार 'क' का ग ( उपासक = उवास ) मिलता है ।
3. इस के साथ साथ सूत्र नं. 8.1.177 में मध्यवर्ती अल्पप्राण व्यंजनों के प्रायः लोप का जो नियम दिया है, उनकी वृत्ति में भोक का ग होना दर्शाया गया है; उदाहरण - एमत्तं, एंगो, अमुगो, सावगो, आगारो, तिथगरो । आगे कहा है अर्ष में ऐसे अनेक उदाहरण मिलेंगे । यह सब घोषीकरण की प्राचीन प्रवृत्ति है और बाद में अनेक ऐसे शब्द जैन महाराष्ट्री साहित्य में भी प्रचलित हो गये अनुसार घोषीकरण की यह प्रवृत्ति पूर्व से अन्य क्षेत्रों में फैी है । वास्तव उल्लेख आर्ष की विशेषता के रूप में होना चाहिए था ।
अर्धमागधी के प्रभाव से
।
मेहेण्डले ' (पृ. 271) के
1
इसका
4. सूत्र नं. 8,2,138 में उभय शब्द के लिए अवह और उवह दिये गये हैं और वृत्ति में कहा गया है || आफैँ उभयोकालं | अर्थात् महाप्राण भ का ह में परिवर्तन इस शब्द में नहीं है । प्राचीनतम प्राकृत भाषा में भ का ह में परिवर्तन प्रायः होता हो ऐसा नहीं है । शुक्रिंग महोदय, शार्पेण्टियर और आल्सडर्फ द्वारा संपादित प्राचीन आगम ग्रंथों में यह लाक्षणिकता मिलती है ।
5. मध्यवर्ती न न या ण
8.1.228 सूत्र
के अनुसार मध्यवर्ती नाण होता है । परंतु फिर वृत्ति में कहा आरनालं, अनिलो, अनलो इत्याद्यपि ।
गया है कि
मध्यवर्ती न के ण में बदलने की प्रवृत्ति अशोक के शिलालेखों के अनुसार दक्षिण भारत की और ई. स. के पश्चात् अन्य क्षेत्रों में पश्चात् कालीन है और यह पूर्वी भारत की प्रवृत्ति थी ही नहीं ।
6. सूत्र नं. 8.1.254 में रकार के लकार में परिवर्तन वाले लगभग 25 उदाहरण वृत्ति में दिये गये हैं । अन्त में कहा गया है आर्जे दुवालसङ्गे इत्याद्यपि । अशोक के शिलालेखों में दुवास और दुवास (द्वादश) शब्द मिलते हैं । बाद में ड और ळ कार ल में बदल जाता है । र के ल में बदलने की प्रवृत्ति महाराष्ट्री या शौरसेनी प्राकृत की नहीं है । यह तो मागधी की और पूर्वी भारत की प्रवृत्ति है । जो भी शब्द उधर दिये गये हैं वे प्रायः अर्धमागधी से ही अन्य प्राकृतों में प्रचलित होने की अधिक संभावना है ।
7. सूत्र नं. 8.1.27 की वृत्ति में मनोसिला (मनःशिला) और अइमुत्तयं ( अतिमुक्तकम् ) आर्ष के लिए दिये गये हैं जबकि प्राकृत के लिए मर्णसिला और अइमं तयं दिये गये हैं । 1 Historical Grammar of Inscriptional Prakrits, 1948, p. 271

Page #250

४६
संयुक्त के समीकरण के बदले उनमें से एक व्यंजन का अनुस्वार में बदलने की प्रवृत्ति बाद की मानी जाती है (मगस्सिला + मणसिला) ।
8. सूत्र न. 82.17 में क्ष = च्छ समझाया गया है । वृत्ति में कहा गया है आप इक्खू, खीरे, सारिक्खमित्याद्यपि दृश्यन्ते । अर्थात् क्ष का क्ख भी होता। अशोक के. शिलालेखों में यह पूर्वी क्षेत्र की प्रवृत्ति है । अन्य क्षेत्रों में छ मिलता है। बाद में क्ष का सभी जगह च्छ और क्ख एक साथ मिलता है (महेण्डले, पृ. 217) |
9. सूत्र न. 8.1 57 की वृत्ति में 'आर्षे पुरेकम्म' का उदाहरण दिया गया है। यह अस् = ए यानि पुरः = पुरे है । इसी तरह ही अः = ए की प्रवृत्ति पूर्वी भारत को रही है । अशोक के शिलालेखों में प्रथमा ए. व. के अलावा षष्ठी एवं पंचमी ए. व. के व्यंजनांत शब्दों में जहाँ अकारान्त के बाद अन्त में विसर्ग आता है वहाँ पर -ए भी मिलता है । इसिभासियाई में नामते (नामतः) प्रयोग मिलता है (अध्याय 22 और 31) ।
10. अकारान्त पु. प्र. ए. व. की -ए विभक्ति (सूत्र 8.4.287 की वृत्ति के अनुसार) अर्धमागधी भाषा की प्रमुख लाक्षणिकता है जो पूर्वी भारत की भाषाकीय विशेषता रही है।
11. ब्रू धातु के रूप :अब्बबी (अब्रवीत्)
भूतकाल के -सी, -ही, ही प्रत्यय देते समय वृत्ति में आर्ष के लिए 'अब्बवी' रूप दिया है -आष देविन्दो इणमब्यवी, 8.3.162 की वृत्ति । वर्त, काल के बेमि (मि) का उदाहरण स्वराणां स्वरा: (8.4.238) के सूत्र की वृत्ति में दिया गया है (आप बेमि) .
ये दोनों रूप अति प्राचीन हैं और प्राचीनतम प्राकृत साहित्य में ही प्रायः मिलते हैं । अर्वाचीन प्राकृत साहित्य में ऐसे रूप नहीं मिलेंगे दिखिए विशल और गाइगर)। प्राचीन पालि में भी ऐसे ही प्रयोग मिलते है ।
12. सूत्र नं. 8.1.206 में (क. भू. कृदन्त प्रत्यय) -त का -ड होना समझाते समय वृत्ति में कहा गया है कि आर्षे कृत का कड हो जाता है, दुक्कड, सुकडं, आहर्ड, अवहडं।
यह प्रवृत्ति भी अशोक कालीन शिलालेखों में मिलती है-कृत कट | इसी ट का बाद में घोष होकर ड बन गया है ।
13. संबंधक भूतकृदन्त के उदाहरण देते समय सूत्र न. 8.2.146 की वृत्ति में कहा गया है
कट्ठ इति तु आर्षे, अर्थात् -१ प्रत्यय । यह विशेषता अशोक कालीन पूर्वी क्षेत्र की है। अन्य क्षेत्रो में 'त्त' प्रत्यय मिलता है।
इन सभी विशेषताओं को सूत्रबद्ध करके क्या अन्य प्राकृतों की तरह उन्हें एक जगह व्यवस्थित नहीं रखा जा सकता था जबकि अन्य प्राकृतों की एकल दोकल विशेषताएँ भो सूत्रबद्ध करके समझायी गयी हैं । उदाहरणार्थ :--

Page #251

(अ) शौरसेनी के लिए :
(1) पूर्वस्य पुरवः 8.4.270 ॥ पूर्व शब्द का पुरव ।। (2) कृत्वा
1,271 ।। से. भू. कृ. के इय एवं दूण प्रत्यय ।। (ब) मागधी के लिए :---- (1) ब्रजो ज: 8.4.294
मागभ्यां बजे: जकारस्त ओ भवति ।। अदि । (2) तिष्ठः चिष्ठ: 8.4.298 || चिष्ठदि ॥ (3) अहं वयमोः हगे 8.4,301
अहम् और वयम् का हगे होता है। (क) पैशाची के लिए :
हृदये यस्य पः ॥ हितरकं ॥ 8.4.310 ।। प्राकृत के लिए :(1) किराते च: 8.1.183 ॥ चिलाओ || (2) शृङ्खले ख: क: 8.1.189 ॥ सङ्कलं ॥ (3) छागे ल: 8.1.191 ॥ छालो, छाली ॥ (4) स्फटिके ल: 8.1.197 || फलिहो ।। (5) ककुदे हः 8.1.225 ॥ कउहं ॥ (6) भ्रमरे सो वा 81.244 || भसलो ॥ (7) यष्ट्यां ल: 8.1.247 || लट्ठी ।।
आर्ष भाषा के उन्होंने जितने भी उदाहरण दिये है उन सब के लिए अलग अलग सूत्र बनाने के लिए उनके पास काफी सामग्री थी । इसके अलावा प्रारंभिक नन के लिए भी सविशेष कह सकते थे और ज्ञ, न्न, न्य- न्न के बारे में भी सूत्र दे सकते थे जैसा कि उन्होंने मागधी के लिए सूत्र (8.4 293) दिया है । ये सब प्राचीन प्रवृत्ति के अन्तर्गत आते हैं । उन सब का मूर्धन्य ण या ण होना बाद के काल को प्रवृत्ति है । आचार्य श्री हेमचन्द्र के ही व्याकरण-ग्रंथ में विभिन्न स्थलों पर (चतुर्थ अध्याय के धात्वादेश को छोड़कर) जो उदाहरण दिये हैं उनमें शब्द के प्रारंभ में न कार 8 बार और ण कार एक बार यानि 8:1 के अनुपात में मिलता है अर्थात् प्रारंभ में प्रायः न कार ही मिलता है। उसी प्रकार ज्ञ, न्न, न्य का न्न अधिक बार और पण कम बार मिलता है ।
इसी प्रकार क-वर्ग एवं च-वर्ग के अनुनासिक स्ववर्ग के व्यंजनों के साथ प्रयुक्त हो सकते हैं ऐसा भी सूत्र बनाया जा सकता था।
अपने व्याकरण के प्रथम सूत्र की वृत्ति में वे कहते हैं कि अनुनासिक संयुक्त रूप में आते ही है और पुनः 8.1.30 में ऐसा आदेश है कि संयुक्त रूप में आने पर उनका विकल्प से अनुस्वार हो जाता है। इस सूत्र के बावजूद भी उनके व्याकरण ग्रंथ में जितने भी

Page #252

प्रयोग हैं उन सब में अधिकतर ये अनुनासिक व्यंजन ही प्रयुक्त है न कि उनके बदले अनुस्वार ।
अमुक विशेषताओं का उल्लेख ही नहीं अर्धमागधी की जिन जिन विशेषताओं का आचार्य श्री हेमचन्द्र के प्राकृत व्याकरण में उल्लेख ही नहीं हुआ है वे इस प्रकार हैं । इनमें से कुछ तो बहुप्रचलित हैं और कुछ कभी कभी कहीं पर प्राचीनता के रूप में बच गयी है। अ. बहु-प्रचलित
(1) सप्तमी एक वचन की विभक्ति-अंसि : उदाहरण - नयरंसि, लोगसि, रायहाणिसि (2) हेत्वर्थक कृदन्त का प्रत्यय-इत्तए (3) चतुर्थी विभक्ति (पुं. अकारान्त ए. व. की) - आए (4) संबंधक भूतकृदन्त प्रत्यय-इयाण, - इयाणं (5) -उचा प्रत्यय का सं. भू. कृ. के अन्य कृदन्तों के साथ उल्लेख नहीं हुआ है ।
हाँ स्व - च्च के प्रसंग पर अवश्य दिया गया है (8,2.15 सोचा, भोच्चा, णच्चा)।
ब.
क्वचित् प्राप्त [i] अकस्मा या अकस्मात् के प्रयोग, [ii] त श्रुति के विषय में, [iii] मध्यवर्ती त और थ के बदले में क्रमशः द और ध के प्रयोग, [iv] तृ. ब. ब. की विभक्ति -भि,
सार्वनामिक सप्तमी एक वचन की विभक्ति -म्हि, [vi] स्त्रीलिंगी एक वचन की विभक्तियाँ -या और य, [vii] वर्तमान कृदन्त का प्रत्यय-मीन और [viii] भूतकाल का तृ. पु ए. व. का प्रत्यय -इ।
___ इन विशिष्टताओं में त और थ के बदले में द और ध के प्रयोग मागधी और शौरसेनी के अवश्य हैं परंतु ऐसे प्रयोग कभी कभी पालि में भी मिलते हैं और प्राचीन शिलालेखों में मिलते हैं । -भि विभक्ति पालि के प्राचीन साहित्य में मिलती है । स्त्रीलिंग की --या और -य विभक्तियाँ प्राचीन शिलालेखों और पालि भाषा में मिलती है। वर्तमान कृदन्त -मीन अशोक के शिलालेखों में पूर्व में और दक्षिण में मिल रहा है। भूत काल का-इ प्रत्यय पालि में मिलता है और इसिभासियाई में भो ।
- ये सब विशेषताएँ अर्धमागधी के प्राचीन साहित्य में किसी न किसी तरह बच गयीं क्योंकि अर्धमागधी साहित्य का प्रारंभिक काल तो उतना ही पुराना है जितना पालि का और उस साहित्य के सर्जन का प्रदेश भी पूर्व भारत हो रहा है जहाँ भगवान महावीर ने और भगवान बुद्ध ने उपदेश दिये थे और उसी प्रदेश में अशोक के शिलालेखों में भी ऐसी प्रवृत्तियाँ मिलती हैं । अतः इन प्राचीन तथ्यों को ध्यान में लेना इसलिए महत्त्वपूर्ण है कि इनसे अर्धमागधी की मागधी भाषा के जितनी ही प्राचीनता सिद्ध होती है ।

Page #253

मूल अर्धमागधी प्राकृत की लाक्षणिकताएँ कौन कौनसी ? अर्धमगध देश की जो भाषा थी या जिस भाषा में आधे मागधी भाषा के लक्षण ये उसे अर्धमागधी भाषा की संज्ञा दी गयी है। इस परंपरा को ध्यान में रखते हुए प्राकृत व्याकरण, प्राचीन पालि साहित्य, प्राचीन शिलालेखों, प्राचीन अर्धमागधी साहित्य, आगम साहित्य की हस्तप्रतों, चूर्णि आदि में उपलब्ध अर्धमागधी के प्राचीन तत्त्वों के आधार से मूल अर्धमागधी की अपनी विशेषताएँ निश्चित की जा सकती हैं जो अर्धमागधी साहित्य के प्राचीन अंशों (विषय-वस्तु, शैली एवं छन्द के आधार से निर्धारित) के सम्पादन में पथ-प्रदर्शक बन सकती हैं। अपनी अल्पज्ञ मति (विद्वानों द्वारा सम्मान की अपेक्षा रखते हुए) के अनुसार उन लाक्षणिकताओं को इस प्रकार दर्शाया जा सकता है :
इन विशिष्टताओं को ध्यान में रखते हुए भी सम्पादन के लिए पाठों का चुनाव काल्पनिक नहीं होना चाहिए परंतु जो आधारभूत सामग्री बनायी जाय उसमें से किसी एक प्रति में भी यदि प्राचीन रूप मिले तो उसे स्वीकार्य माना जाना चाहिए । आल्सडर्फ महोदय ने अन्य सन्दर्भ में प्राचीन प्राकृत साहित्य के सम्पादन में एक महत्त्वपूर्ण पद्धति अपनायी है । उनकी पद्धति के अनुसार कोई भी पद्य छन्दोबद्ध होना चाहिए और उसके लिए अन्य सभी प्रतियों के पाठ एक समान होते हुए भी यदि किसी एक प्रति का पाठ (चाहे वह प्राचीन प्रति हो या अर्वाचीन प्रति हो) अलग होते हुए भी छन्द की दृष्टि से उपयुक्त हो तो उसे ही स्वीकृत किया जाना चाहिए और अमुक अवस्था में छन्द को व्यवस्थित करने के लिए किसी शब्द में मात्रा जोड़नी पड़े या घटानी पड़े या एक वर्ण जोड़ना पड़े या छोड़ना पड़े तो भी सम्मिलित रूप में सभी आदर्शो के एक मात्र पाठ के प्रतिकूल भी जाना पड़े तो जाना चाहिए, चाहे ग्रंथ की टीका का पाठ भी इस प्रकार के स्वीकार्य पाठ का अनुमोदन न भी करता हो । इसी पद्धति के अनुसार क्या भाषा का प्राचीन रूप ही स्वीकृत नहीं किया जाना चाहिए जबकि वह प्राचीन प्रत में या अर्वाचीन प्रत में या नियुक्ति या चूर्णी मात्र में ही मिलता हो ।
: मागधी और पैशाची दोनों ही प्राचीन प्राकृत भाषाएँ मानी गयी हैं अतः उनके कुछ लक्षण यदि अर्धमागधी साहित्य में कहीं पर मिलें तो उन्हें निकाल कर दूर नहीं किया जाना चाहिए ।
सम्पादन योग्य भाषाकीय मुद्दे :---
1. यकार से प्रारंभ होने वाले संस्कृत के अध्ययों में यदि य के बदले में अमिले तो उसे प्राथमिकता दी जानी चाहिए ।
2. मध्यवर्ती सभी अल्प प्राण व्यंजनों का महाराष्ट्री प्राकृत की तरह प्रायः लोप नहीं किया जाना चाहिए । (स्वर प्रधान पाठ गेय होने के कारण मध्यवर्ती व्यंजनों के लोप की प्रवृत्ति को पुष्टि मिली है इस तथ्य को नकारा नहीं जा सकता ।)
3. मध्यवर्ती महाप्राण व्यंजनों के बदले में प्रायः ह ही अपनाया जाना चाहिए यह भी उचित नहीं है।
4. मध्यवर्ती क या उसके बदले में ग को और मूल ग. को यथावत् रखने में प्राथमिकता मिलनी चाहिए।

Page #254

5. मध्यवर्ती त को सर्वत्र त श्रुति मानकर उसका लोप नहीं किया जाना चाहिए ।
6. मध्यवर्ती त और थ का क्रमशः कभी द और ध मिले तो उसे प्राचीनता का लक्षण माना जाना चाहिए । कभी कभी द का त मिले तो उसे भी प्राचीन और उसके लोप के पहले की प्रवृत्ति मानी जानी चाहिए ।
7. कभी कभी पालि की तरह ळ मिले तो उसे ड में बदलने का नियम नहीं होना चाहिए (देखिए आ. श्री हेमचन्द्र द्वारा दिया गया उद्धरण, सूत्र न. 8.1.7 की वृत्ति में 'कळम' शब्द और पिशल (304,379) द्वारा दिये गये उदाहरण, लेलु, लेळुसि) ।
8. प्रारंभिक नकार को प्राथमिकता देनी चाहिए और अध्ययन का नकार ही रखा जाना चाहिए (जैसी की शुबिंग महोदय की पद्धति रही है)।
9. मध्यवर्ती न मिले तो उसका सर्वत्र ण बनाना जरूरी नहीं समझा जाना चाहिए ।
10. संयुक्त व्यंजनों में समीकरण के बदले स्वरभक्ति का पाठ मिले तो उसे प्राथमिकता दी जानी चाहिए, जैसे-द्रव्य : दविय, नित्य = नितिय, तथ्य = तथिय, अग्नि - अगणि, उष्ण = उसिण ।
11. कु. और . को सजातीय व्यंजनों के साथ संयुक्त रूप में यथावत् रखा जाना चाहिए, उन्हें अनुस्वार में सर्वत्र बदलने की पद्धति पर भार नहीं दिया जाना चाहिए ।
12. संयुक्त अमिले तो उसे त्याज्य नहीं माना जाना चाहिए ।
13. संयुक्त व्यंजन ज्ञ, न्न और न्य का शुनिंग महोदय की तरह न्न किया जाना चाहिए ।
14. अहेत् का अरहा या अरहन्त, आत्मन् का अत्ता या आता; क्षेत्र का खेरतन्न ये सब प्राचीन रूप हैं अत: ऐसे रूपों को प्राथमिकता दी जानी चाहिए ।
15. पुरस् का पुरे की तरह अघस् का अघे रूप मिले तो उसे रखा जाना चाहिए ।
16. अकारान्त पुंलिंग प्रथमा एकवचन की -ए विभक्ति यदि मिले तो बदले में-ओ नहीं की जानी चाहिए।
17. नपुंसकलिंगी शब्दो में प्रथमा एवं द्वितीया के बहुवचन में यदि -णि विभक्ति मिले तो रखी जानी चाहिए ।
18. तृ. ए. व. की विभक्ति के लिए यदि -सा प्रत्यय मिले तो रखा जाना चाहिए (कायसा, पन्नसा)।
19. तृ.ब. व. की विभक्ति-भि मिले तो-हि में नहीं बदली जानी चाहिए (जैसे-थीभि, पसूभि) ।
20. अकारान्त शब्दों में चतुर्थी ए.व.के लिए प्रयुक्त-आए विभक्ति को बदलना नहीं चाहिए ।
21. संस्कृत के नामिक -सार्वनामिक रूपों में पंचमी में जहाँ अकारान्त शब्द में अन्त में -अ: आता है उसके बदले में प्राकृत में यदि-ए मिले तो उसे बदला नहीं जाना चाहिए।

Page #255

22. उसी तरह पंचमी एक वचन में क्रियाविशेषण के लिए पुराना रूप मिले तो रखा जाना चाहिए (पदिसो)।
23. पंचमी एक वचन की विभक्ति -म्हा मिले तो रखी जानी चाहिए ।
24. स्त्रीलिंगी शब्दों में तृतीया से सप्तमी तक एक वचन की विभक्तियाँ -य अथवा या (-ई और -आ भी) को मात्र पालि की विभक्तियाँ मानकर उन्हें त्याज्य नहीं समझा जाना चाहिए।
25. सप्तमी एक वचन की विभिन्न ऐतिहासिक विभक्तियाँ -स्सि, -स्सि, -स्मि, -म्हि -या यदि मिले तो उन्हें सुरक्षित रखना चाहिए (स और म की आपसी भ्रान्ति मात्र हस्तप्रतों में ही नहीं परंतु शिलालेखों में भी देखने को मिलती है)।
.. 26. तृ. पु. ए. व. आत्मनेपदी प्रत्यय -ते (-ए) मिले तो उसे -ति, या -इ -ती, -ई में नहीं बदलना चाहिए ।
27. कर्मणि भूत कृदन्तों के रूपों में मिलने वाला-ड प्रत्यय जैसे कि कड, गड, को बदला नहीं जाना चाहिए ।
28. वर्तमान कृदन्त का प्रत्यय-मीन मिले तो रखा जाना चाहिए ।
29. उन उन ऐतिहासिक रूपों को जो प्राचीन भारतीय आर्य भाषा (OIA) के साथ सम्बन्ध रखते हैं (जिनमें कभी कभी ध्वनि-परिवर्तन भी हो गया हो तो) चाहे वे नामिक रूप हो, चाहे क्रियावाची रूप हो या कृदन्त हो उन्हें प्राचीनता की प्रामाणिक सामग्री के रूप में यथावत् रखा जाना चाहिए।

Page #256

Statement about ownership and other particulars about Sambodhi, the Quarterly Journal of L. D. Institute of Indology Ahmedabad, to be published in the first issue every year after the last day of March.
'roni IV (See Rule 8)
Alimedabad.
Yearly
1. Place of publication 2. Periodicity of its publication 3. Printer's Name
Nationality Address
Harjibhai N. Patel indian Krishna Printery 966, Naranpura Old Village Ahmedabad-380 013
4. Publisher's Name
Nationality Address
Ramesh S. Betai Indian Director in-charge L.D. Institute of Indology, Ahmedabad 9. (1) Ramesh S. Betai (2) Yajneshwar S. Shastri Indian L.D. Institute of Indology, Alimedabad 9.
5. Editors' Names
Nationality Address
L.D. Institute of Indology Alimedabad 9.
6. Names and addresses of
Individuals who own the newspaper and partners or shareholders holding more than one-percent of the total capital.
I, Rainesh S. Betai hereby declare that the particulars given above are true to the best of my knowledge and belief.
Ramesh S. Betai Director in-charge Signature of Publisher

Page #257

Request to Contributors
Our learned contributors are requested to note the following requirements when they send Papers for our Journal:
Papers should be preferrably typed in double space.
Internationally accepted diacritica! marks should be used where
necessary.
Words to be italicised should be underlined.
As far as possible Sanskrit or Prakrit quotations should be written in the original language only.
Footnotes should be serially numbered and given at the end of the
Paper.
Footnotes should clearly give reference number from the work referred to, the name of the author, as also name of the publisher and date of publication wherever necessary.
A brief list to works consulted should be given at the end.

Page #258

દોહા-પાહુડી સંપા, અનુ. રમણુક શાહ
પ્રાસ્તાવિક ભારતીય રહસ્યવાદી સાહિત્યમાં જેનોનું પ્રદાન નોંધાવતી જે અલ્પસંખ્ય રચનાઓ ઉપલબ્ધ છે તેમાં દહાપાહુડ એક નાની પણ ગણનાપાત્ર રચના છે. ૨૨૨ પદ્ય-જેમાં મુખ્યત્વે અપભ્રંશ દોહા છે-ની આ પદ્ય કૃતિ “પાહુડહા’ નામે વર્ષો પૂર્વે પ્રસિદ્ધ જૈન વિદ્વાન સ્વ. ડો. હિરાલાલ જેને પ્રથમવાર હિન્દી અનુવાદ સાથે પ્રકાશિત કરી હતી.' ઈ. સ. ૧૯૭૬માં ફ્રેન્ચ વિદુષી ડે. કેલેત કેલાએ કરેલું તેનું અંગ્રેજી ભાષાંતર પ્રકાશિત થયું. તે સમયે જ આ અપ્રાપ્ય કૃતિ મૂળ અને ગુજરાતી અનુવાદ સાથે પુનઃ પ્રકાશિત કરવાનો લા. દ. વિદ્યામંદિરે નિર્ણય કર્યો અને પરિણામ સ્વરૂપે પ્રસ્તુત અનુવાદ તૈયાર થયો.
ડો. હિરાલાલ જેને બે અશુદ્ધ હસ્તપ્રત પરથી પાઠ નિર્ધારિત કર્યો હતો. તેમાં ડે. કેલાએ અંગ્રેજી ભાષાન્તર કરતી વેળા કેટલાક સુધારા સૂચવ્યા હતા. તેમાંના જરૂરી સુધારા સામેલ કરીને અને તદુપરાંત પણ રહી જતી કેટલીક અશુદ્ધિઓનું નિવારણ કરીને મૂળપાઠ અને ગુજરાતી અનુવાદ તૈયાર કરેલ. પરંતુ વિસ્તૃત પ્રસ્તાવના અને ટિપ્પણ લખવાના ઇરાદાથી તે અત્યાર સુધી પ્રકાશિત કરેલ નહીં. દરમિયાન હું વિદ્યામંદિરમાંથી નીકળી યુનિવર્સિટીમાં જોડાતાં કામ આગળ વધી શકવું નહીં. હાલ માત્ર મૂળ, ગુજરાતી અનુવાદ, પદ્યોની અકારાદિ સૂચિ અને ગુજરાતી અર્થ સાથે મૂળના મહત્ત્વપૂર્ણ શબ્દોને કેશ આટલું પ્રકાશિત કરવું મુનાસિબ માન્યું છે.
- ડો. જેને પિતાને મળેલ બેમાંની એક હસ્તપ્રતને અનુસરીને ગ્રંથને ‘પાહુડોહા” શીર્ષક આપેલું. પરંતુ પિતાની પ્રસ્તાવનામાં નામની સમજૂતી આપતાં તેમણે ગ્રંથનામને અથ દેહાને ઉપહાર (દોહે કે ઉપહાર) એવો કર્યો છે. વળી તેમણે અંગ્રેજી પ્રસ્તાવનામાં
હાપાહુડ' શીર્ષક પ્રર્યું છે. અર્થની દૃષ્ટિએ પણ એ જ ઉચિત હોઈ અન્ને દેહાપાહુડ” એવું મૂળ નામ રાખી, અનુવાદ “દેહા-ઉપહાર' નામે આપે છે.
છે. હિરાલાલ જૈનની માન્યતા એવી છે કે દેહાપાહુડ કાઈ રામસિંહ મુનિની રચના છે. આવી માન્યતા માટેનું એક માત્ર કારણ તેઓ એ દર્શાવે છે કે દોહાપાહુડના દોહા ૨૧૧માં “રામસિંહ મુનિનો ઉલ્લેખ છે. પરંતુ હસ્તપ્રતની પ્રશસ્તિ, કૃતિનાં ભાષાશિલી-છંદ તથા વિષયવસ્તુનું ઝીણવટભર્યું અવલોકન કરતાં ઉપરોક્ત માન્યતા યોગ્ય જણાતી નથી, ઊલટું એવી પ્રબળ માન્યતા બંધાય છે કે કૃતિ કોઈ એક જ કર્તાની રચના ન હોતાં કોઈ અભ્યાસીએ સમાન વિષયના પદ્યોને એકત્રિત ગેહવી કરેલ સંગ્રહ છે. મારી આવી માન્યતા અનેક પુરાવા સાથે અલગ લેખરૂપે મૂકવાને વિચાર હોઈ અહીં તેની ચર્ચા કરતો નથી.

Page #259

અનુવાદ વેળાએ કિંમતી સૂચના આપવા માટે ડે. એચ. સી. ભાયાણીને આભારી છું. “સંબધિમાં કૃતિને પ્રકાશિત કરવાનો નિર્ણય લઈ લાંબા સમય સુધી પડી રહેલ કૃતિનો ઉદ્ધાર કરવા માટે વિદ્યામંદિરના કાર્યકારી નિર્દેશક ડો. આર. એસ, બેટાઈને આભાર માનું છું.
૧. પાદુ –. . . હિરાહ્યા માં,
प्रका-अम्बादास चवरे दिगम्बर जैन ग्रंथमाला-३, कार जा, १९३३ *. The Offering of Distics (Dohāpāhuda) Translation with Critical notes by Dr, Colette Caillat, Sambodhi Vol. 5, No. 2
July-Octo, 1976

Page #260

रामसिंह-मुणि-विरझ्य दोहा-पाहुड
गुरु दिणयरु गुरु हिमकरणु गुरु दीवउ गुरु देउ । अप्पापरहं परंपरहं जो दरिसावइ भेउ ॥१ अप्पायत्तउ जं जि सुहु तेण जि करि संतोसु । परसुहु वढ चितंतहं हियइ ण फिट्टइ सोसु ॥२ जं सुहु विसयपरंमुहउ णिय अप्पा झायंतु । सं सुहु इंदु विण उ लहइ देविहिं कोडि रमंतु ॥३ आभुंजता विसयसुह जे ण वि हियइ धरंति । ते सासयसुहु लहु लहहिं जिणवर एम भणंति ॥४ ण वि भुंजता विसयसुह हियडइ भाउ धरति । सालिसित्थु जिम वप्पुडउ णर णरयह णिवडंति ॥५ आयई अडवड वडवडइ पर रंजिज्जइ लोउ । मणसुद्धई णिच्चलठियइं पाविज्जइ परलोउ ॥६ धंधई पडियउ सयलु जगु कम्मई करइ अयाणु । मोक्खहं कारणु एकु खणु ण वि चितइ अप्पाणु ॥७ जोणिहि लक्खहिं परिभमइ अप्पा दुक्खु सहंतु । पुत्तकलत्तइं मोहियउ जाम ण वोहि लहंतु ॥८ अण्णु म जाणहि अप्पणउ घरु परियणु तणु इछ । कम्मायत्तउ कारिमउ आगमि जोइहिं सिटु ॥९ जं दुक्खु वि तं सुक्खु किउ जं सुहु तं पि य दुक्खु । पइं जिय मोहहिं वसि गयइं तेण ण पायउ मुक्खु ॥१० मोक्खु ण पावहि जीव तुहुं धणु परियणु चितंतु । तो इ विचिंतहि तउ जि. तउ पावहि सुक्खु महंतु ॥११

Page #261

२
रामसिंह- मुणि-विरइय
घरवासउ मा जाणि जिय दुक्कियवासउ एहु | पासु कयंते मंडियउ अविचल ण वि संदेहु ॥ १२ मूढा सलु विकारिमउ मं फुडु तुहुं तुस कंडि । सिaus णिम्मल करहि रह घरु परियणु लहु छंडि ॥ १३ मोहु विज्जिइ मणु मरइ तुट्टइ सासु णिसासु । केवलणाणु वि परिणवह अंबरि जाह णिवासु ॥ १४
पिं मुक्की कंचुलिय जं विसु तं ण मुएइ । भोयहं भाउ ण परिहरइ लिंगग्गहणु करेइ ॥ १५ जो मुणि छंडिवि विसयसुह पुणु अहिलासु करेइ | लुंचणु सोसणु सो सहइ पुणु संसारु भमेइ ॥ १६ विसयसुहा दुइ दिव्हडा पुणु दुक्खहं परिवाडि । भुल्लउ जीव म वाहि तुहुं अप्पासंधि कुहाड ॥१७ उव्वलि चोप्पड चिट्ठ करि देहि सुमिहाहार | सयल विदेह णिरत्थ गय जिह दुज्जण उवयार ॥ १८ अथिरेण थिरा मइलेण णिम्मला णिग्गुणेण गुणसारा । कारण जा विढप्पइ सा किरिया किण्ण कायव्वा ॥ १९
वरु विसु विसहरु वरु जलणु वरु सेविउ वणवासु ।
णउ जिणधम्म परम्मुहउ मिच्छत्तिय सहु वासु ॥ २० उम्मूलिवि ते मूलगुण उत्तरगुणहिं विलग्ग | वण्णर जेम पलंबचुय बहुय पडेविणु भग्ग ॥२१ अप्पा बुज्झिउ णिच्चु जइ केवलणाणसहाउ । ता पर किज्जइ काई वढ तणु उप्परि अणुराउ ॥२१ सो णत्थि इह परसो चउरासीलक्खजोणिमज्झमि । जिणवयणं अलहंतो जत्थ ण दुरढुडिओ जीवो ॥२३ जसु मणि गाणु ण विष्फुरइ कम्महं हे करंतु । सो मुणि पावइ सुक्खु ण वि सयलइ सत्य मुणंतु ॥ २४ बोहिविवज्जिउ जीव तुहुं विवरिउ तच्चु मुणेहि । कम्मविणिम्मिय भावडा ते अप्पाण भणेहि ॥ २५
1

Page #262

दोहा - पाहुड
हउं गोरउं हउं सामलउ हउं मि विभिण्णउ वणि । हउं तणुअंगउ थूल हउं एहउ जीव म मणि ॥२६
वि तुहुं पंडिउ मुक्खु ण वि ण वि ईसरु ण वि णीसु । ण वि गुरु कोइ विसीसु ण वि सव्वई कम्मविसेसु ॥२७
विनुं कारणु कज्जु ण वि ण वि सामिउ ण वि भिच्चु । सूरउ कायरु जीव ण वि ण वि उत्तमु ण विणिच्चु ॥ २८
पुणु वि पाउ वि कालु णहु धम्मु अहम्भु ण काउ | एक्कु वि जीव ण होहि तुहुं मिल्लिवि चेयणभाउ ॥२९ णवि गोरउ ण वि सामलउ ण वि तुहुं एक्कु विवष्णु । ण वि तणुअंगउ थूल ण वि एहउ जाणि सवण्णु ॥ ३०
हउं वरु बंभणु ण वि वइसु णउ खत्तिउ ण वि सेसु । पुरिसु णउंसर इत्थि ण वि एहउ जाणि विसेसु ॥ ३१ तरुणउ बूढउ बालु हजं सूरउ पंडिउ दिव्वु । खवणउ वंदउ सेवडउ एहउ चिति म सव्वु ॥ ३२ देहो पक्खिवि जरमरणु मा भउ जीव करेहि जो अजरामरु बंभु परु सो अप्पाण मुणेहि ॥ ३३ देहहि उभउ जरमरणु देहहि वण्ण विचित्त । देहहो रोया जाणि तुहुं देहहि लिंगई मित्त ॥ ३४ अस्थि ण उब्भउजरमरणु रोय वि लिंगई वण्ण । णिच्छइ अप्पा जाणि तुहुं जीवहो णेक वि सण्ण ॥ ३५ कमहं केरउ भावडउ जइ अप्पाण भणेहि । तो वि ण पावहि परमपउ पुणु संसारु भमेहि ॥ ३६ अप्पा मिल्लिवि णाणमउ अवरु परायउ भाउ । सो छंडेविणु जीव तुहुं झावहि सुद्धसुहाउ ॥३७ वण्णविहूणउ गाणमउ जो भावइ सम्भाउ । संतुणिरंजणु सो जि. सिउ तहिं किज्जइ अणुराउ ॥ ३८ तिहुयणि दीसइ देउ जिणु जिणवरि तिहुवणु एउ । जिणवरि दीसइ सयल जगु को वि ण किज्जइ भेउ ॥ ३९

Page #263

रामसिंह-मुणि-विरइय बुज्झहु बुज्झहु जिणु भणइ को बुज्झउ हलि अण्णु । अप्पा देहहं णाणमउ छुड्डु बुज्झियउ विभिण्णु ॥४० वंदहु वंदहु जिणु भणइ को वंदउ हलि इत्थु । णियदेहाहं वसंतयहं जइ जाणिउ परमत्थु ॥४१ उपलाणहिं जोइय करहुलउ दावणु छोडहि जिम चरइ । जसु अखइ णिरामइं गयउ मणु सो किम बुहु जगि रइ करइ ॥४२ ढिल्लउ होहि म इदियह पंचहं विण्णि णिवारि । एक णिवारहि जीहडिय अण्ण पराइय णारि ॥४३ पंच बलद्द ण रक्खिय णंदणवणु ण गओ सि । अप्पु ण जाणिउ ण वि परु वि एमइ पव्व इओ सि ॥४४ पंचहिं बाहिरु णेहडउ हलि सहि लग्गु पियस्स । तासु ण दीसइ आगमणु जो खलु मिलिउ परस्स ॥४५ मणु जाणइ उवएसडउ जहिं सोवेइ अचितु । अचित्तहो चितु जो मेलवइ सो पुणु होइ णिचिंतु ॥४६ वट्टडिया अणुलग्गयहं अग्गउ जोयंताहं ।। कंटउ भग्गइ पाउ जइ भज्जउ दोसु ण ताहं ॥४७ मिल्लहु मिल्लहु मोकल्लउ जहिं भावइ तहिं जाउ । सिद्धिमहापुरि पइसरउ मा करि हरिसु विसाउ ॥४८ मणु मिलियउ परमेसरहो परमेसरु जि मणस्स । बिण्णि वि समरसि-हुइ रहिय पुज्ज चडावउं कस्स ॥४९ आराहिज्जइ काई देउ परमेसरु कहिं गयउ । वीसारिज्जइ काई तासु जो सिउ सव्वंगयउ ॥५० अम्मिए जो परु सो जि परु परु अप्पाण ण होइ । हउं उज्झउ सो उव्वरइ वलिवि ण जोवइ तो इ ॥५१ मूढा सयल्लु वि कारिमउ णिक्कारिमउ ण कोइ ।। जीवहु जंत ण कुडि गइय इउ पडिछंदा जोइ ॥५२ देहादेवलि जो वसइ सत्तिहिं सहियउ देउ । को तहिं जोइय सत्तिसिउ सिग्घु गवेसहि भेउ ॥५३

Page #264

दोहा - पाहुड
जरइ ण मरइण संभवइ जो परि को वि अणंतु । तिदुबणसामिउ णाणमउ सो सिवदेउ भिंतु ||५४ सिव विणु सत्ति ण वावरइ सिउ पुणु सत्तिविहीणु । दोहिं मिजाहिं सयल जगु बुज्झइ मोह विलीणु ॥५५ अण्णु तुहारउ णाणमउ लक्खिउ जाम ण भाउ । साक पवियपिउऽणाणमउ दड्ढउ चित्तु वराउ ॥५६ णिच्चु णिरामउ णाणमउ परमाणंदसहाउ | अप्पा बुझउ जेण परु तासु ण अण्णु हि भाउ ॥५७ अम्हहिं जाणिउ एक्कु जिणु जाणिउ देउ अणंतु । वरि सु मोहें मोहियउ अच्छइ दूरि भमंतु ॥५८ अप्पा केवलणाणमउ हियडइ णिवसइ जासु । तिहुयणि अच्छइ मोक्लउ पाउ ण लग्गइ तासु ॥५९ चितइ जंपइ कुणइ ण वि जो मुणि बंधणहेउ । केवलणाणफुरंततणु सो परमप्पउ देउ ॥ ६० अभितर चित्ति मइलियई बाहिरि काई तवेण । चित्ति णिरंजणु को विधरि मुच्चहि जेम मलेण ॥ ६१ जेण णिरंजणि मणु धरिउ विसयकसायहि जंतु । मक्ख कारणु उ अवरई तंतु ण मंतु ॥ ६२ खंतु पिरंतु वि जीव जइ पावहि सासयमोक्खु । रिस भडारउ किं चवइ सयल वि इंदियसोक्खु ॥ ६३ देहमहेली एह वढ तउ सत्तावइ ताम । चित्तु णिरंजणु परिण सिहुं समरसि होइ ण जाम ॥ ६४ जसु मणि णाणु ण विष्फुरइ सव्व वियप्प हणंतु । सो किम पावइ णिच्चसुहु सयलाई धम्म कहंतु ॥६५ जसु मणि णिवसइ परमप्पउ सयलई चित चवेवि । सो पर पावइ परमगइ अट्ठई कम्म हणेवि ॥६६ अप्पा मिल्लिव गुणणिलउ अण्णु जिझायहि झाणु वढ अण्णाणविमीसियहं कहं तहं केवलणाणु ॥ ६७

Page #265

रामसिंह-मुणि-विर इय अप्पा दंसणु केवल वि अण्णु सयल ववहारु । एक्कु सु जोइय झाइयइ जो तइलोयहं सारु ॥६८ अप्पा दंसणणाणमउ सयलु वि अण्णु पयाल ।। इय जाणेविणु जोइयहु छंडहु मायाजालु ॥६९ अप्पा मिल्लिवि जगतिलउ जो परदवि रमति । अण्णु कि मिच्छादिटिठयहं मत्थइ सिंगई होंति ॥७० अप्पा भिल्लिवि जगतिलउ मूढ म झायहि अण्णु । जिं मरगउ परियाणियउ तहु किं कच्चहु गणु ॥७१ सुहपरिणामहिं धम्मु वढ असुहई होइ अहम्मु । दोहि मि एहिं विवज्जियउ पावइ जीउ ण जम्मु ॥७२ सई मिलिया सई विहडिया जोइय कम्म णिभंति । तरलसहावहिं पंथियहिं अण्णु कि गाम वसंति ॥७३ अण्णु जि जीउ म चिंति तुहं जइ विहउ दुक्खस्स । तिलतुसमित्तु वि सलडा वेयण करइ अवस्स ॥७४ अप्पाए वि विभावियइं णासइ पाउ खणेण । सूरु विणासइ तिमिरहरु एकाउ णिमिरोण ॥७५ जोइय हियडइ जासु पर एक्कु जि णिवसइ देउ । जम्मणमरणविवज्जियउ तो पावइ परलोउ ॥७६ कम्मु पुराइउ जो खवइ अहिणव पेसु ण देइ । परमणिरंजणु जो णवइ सो परमप्पउ होइ ॥७७ पाउ वि अप्पहिं परिणवइ कम्मई ताम करेइ । परमणिरंजणु जाम ण वि णिम्मलु होइ मुणइ ॥७८ अण्णु गिरंजणु देउ पर अप्पा दंसणणाणु । अप्पा सच्चउ मोक्खपहु एहउ मूढ वियाणु ॥७९ ताम कुतित्थई परिभमइ धुत्तिम ताम करंति । गुरुहं पसाएं जाम ण वि देहहं देउ मुणति ॥८० लोहिं मोहिउ ताम तुहुं विसयह सुक्ख मुणेहि । गुरुहं पसाएं जाम ण वि अविचल बोहि लहेहि ॥८१

Page #266

दोहा-पाहुड उप्पज्जइ जेण विबोहु ण वि बहिरण्णउ तेण णाणेण । तइलोयपायडेण नि असुंदरो जत्थ परिणामो ॥८२ तासु लीह दिढ दिज्जइ जिम पढिज्जइ तिम किज्जइ ।। अह व ण गम्मगम्मइ तासु भज्जेसहिं कम्मई ॥८३ वक्खाणडा करंतु बुहु अप्पि ण दिण्णु णु चित्त । कणहि जि रहिउ पयालु जिम पर संगहिउ बहुत्त ॥८४ पंडियपंडिय पंडिया कणु छंडेविणु तुस कंडिया । अत्थे गंथे तुट्ठो सि परमत्थु ण जाणहि मूढो सि ॥८५ अक्खरडेहिं जि गव्विया कारणु ते ण मुणंति । वंसविहत्था डोम जिम पर हत्थडा धुणंति ॥८६ णाणतिडिक्की सिक्खि वढ किं पढियई बहुएण ।। जा सुधुक्की णिड्डहइ पुण्णु वि पाउ खणेण ॥८७ सयलु वि को वि तडप्फडइ सिद्धत्तणहु तणेण । सिद्धत्तणु परि पावियइ चित्तहं णिम्मलएण ॥८८ केवल मलपरिवज्जियउ जहिं सो ठाइ अणाइ । तस उरि सवु जगु संचरइ परइ ण कोइ वि जाः ॥८९ अप्पा अप्पि परिडियउ कहिं मि ण लग्गइ लेउ । सव्वु जि दोसु महंतु तसु जं पुणु होइ अच्छे उ ॥९० जोइय जोएं लइयइण तइ धंधइ ण पडीसि । देहकुडिल्ली परिखिवइ तुहं तेमइ अच्छेसि ॥९१ अरि मणकरह म रइ करहि इंदियविसयसुहेण । सुक्खु णिरंतरु जेहिं ण वि मुच्चहि ते वि खणेण ॥९२ तूसि म रूसि म कोहु करि को हैं णासइ धम्मु । धम्मि णढि णरयगइ अह गउ माणुसजम्मु ॥९३ हत्थ अहुटठहं देवली वालहं णा हि पवेसु । संतु णिरंजणु तहिं वसइ णिम्मलु होइ गवेसु ॥२.४ अप्पापरहं ण मेलयउ मणु मोडिवि सहस त्ति ।। सो वढ जोइय किं करइ जासु ण एही सत्ति ॥९५

Page #267

रामसिंह-मणि-विरइय
सो जोयउ जो जोगवइ णिम्मलि जोइय जोइ । जो पुणु इंदियवसि गयउ सो इह सावयलोइ ॥९६ बहुयइं पढियई मूढ पर तालू, सुक्कइ जेण । एक्कु जि अक्खरु तं पढहु सिवपुरि गम्मइ जेण ॥९७ अन्तो णस्थि सुईणं कालो थोओ वयं च दुम्मेहा ।। तं णवर सिक्खियव्वं जिजरमरणक्खयं कुणहि ॥९८ णिल्लक्खणु इत्थीबाहिरउ अकुलीणउ महु मणि ठियउ । तसु कारणि आणी माहू जेण गवंगउ संठियउ ॥९९ हउं सगुणी पिउ णिग्गुणउ णिलक्खणु णीसंगु । एकहिं अंगि वसंतयहं मिलिउ ण अंगहिं अंगु ॥१०० सव्वहिं रायहिं छहरसहिं पंचहिं रूवहिं चित्तु । जासु ण रंजिउ भुवणयलि सो जोइय करि मित्तु ॥१०१ तव तणुअं मि सरीरयहं संगु करि हिउ जाहं । ताहं वि मरणदवक्कडिय दुसहा होइ णराहं ॥१०२ देह गलंतहं सवु गलइ मइ सुइ धारण घेउ । तहिं तेहई वढ अवसरहिं विरला सुमरहिं देउ ॥१०३ उम्मणि थक्का जासु मणु भग्गा भूवहिं चारु । जिम भावइ तिम संचरउ ण वि भउ ण वि संसारु ॥१०४ जीव वहति णरयगइ अभयपदाणे सग्गु । वे पह जवला दरिसियई जहिं भावइ तहिं लग्गु ॥१०५ सुक्खअडा दुइ दिवहडइं पुणु दुक्खहं परिवाडि । हियडा हउं पइं सिक्खवमि चित्त करिज्जहि वाडि ॥१०६ मुढा देह म रज्जियइ देह ण अप्पा होइ । देहहं भिण्णउ णाणमउ सो तुहूं अप्पा जोइ ॥१०७ जेहा पाणहं झुपडा तेहा पुत्तिए काउ । तित्थु जि णिवसह पाणिवह तहिं करि जोइय भाउ ॥१०८ मूलु छंडि जो डाल चडि कहं तह जोयाभासि । चीरु ण वुणणहं जाइ वढ विणु उट्टियई कपासि ॥१०९

Page #268

दोहा-पाहुड
सव्ववियप्पहं तुट्टाहं चेयणभावगयाहं । कीलइ अप्पु परेण सिहु णिम्मलझाणठियाहं ॥११० अज्जु जिणिज्जइ करहुलउ लइप(?य)ई देविणु लक्खु । जित्थु चडेविणु परममुणि सव्व गया गयमोक्खु ॥१११ करहा चरि जिणगुणथलिहिं तवविल्लडिय पगाम । विसमी भवसंसारगइ उल्लू रियहि ण जाम ॥११२ तव दावणु वय जिल्लडइ समदम कियउ पलाणु । सजमघरह उमाहियउ गउ करहा णिवाणु ॥११३ एक ण जाणहि वट्टडिय अवरु ण पुच्छहि कोइ । अडवियद्यहं डुंगरह णर भंजंता जोइ ॥११४ वट्ट जु छोडिवि मउलियउ सो तरुवरु अकयत्थु । रीणा पहिय ण वीसमिय फलहिं ण लायउ हत्थु ॥११५ छहदसणधंधइ पडिय मणहं ण फिट्टिय भंति । एक्कु देउ छहभेउ किउ तेण ण मोक्खहो जति ॥११६ अप्पा मिल्लिवि एक्कु पर अण्णु ण वइरिउ कोइ । जेण विणिग्मिय कम्मडा जइ पर फेडइ सोइ ॥११७ जइ वारउं तो तहिं जि पर अप्पहं मणु ण धरेइ । विसयह कारणि जीवडउ णरयह दुक्ख सहेइ ॥११८ जीव म जाणहि अप्पणा विसया होसहि मज्झु । फल किंपाकहि जेम तिम दुक्ख करेसहिं तुज्झ ॥११९ विसया सेवहि जीव तुहुं दुक्खहं साहि(?) करण । तेण णिरारिउ पज्जलइ हुववहु जेम घिएण ॥१२० असरीरहं संधाणु किउ सो धाणुक्कु णिरुत्तु । सिवतत्ति जि संधियउ सो अच्छइ णिच्चिंतु ॥१२१ हलि सहि काई करइ सो दप्पणु । जहिं पडिबिंबु ण दीसइ अप्पणु ॥ 'धंधवालु मो जगु पडिहासइ । धरि अच्छंतु ण घरवइ दीसइ ॥१२२

Page #269

रामसिंह-मुणि-विरइय जसु जीवंतहं मणु मुवउ पंचेंदियहं समाणु । सो जाणिज्जइ मोक्कलउ लद्धउ पहु णिव्वाणु ॥१२३ किं किज्जइ बहु अक्खरहं जे कालिं खउ जंति ।। जेम अक्खणरु संतु मुणि तव वढ मोक्खु कहंति ॥१२४ छहदसणगंथि बहुल अवरुप्परु गज्जति । जं कारणु तं इक्कु पर विवरेरा जाणंति ॥१२५ सिद्धंतपुराणहं वेय वढ वुझंतहं णउ भंति ।।
आणंदेण वि जाम गउ ता वढ सिद्ध कहति ॥१२६ सिव सत्तिहिं मेलाबडा इहु पसुवाह मि होइ । भिणिय सत्ति सिवेण सिहु विरला बुज्झइ कोइ ॥१२७ भिण्णउ जेहिं ण जाणियउ णियदेहहं परमत्थु । सो अंधउ अवरह अंधयह किम दरिसावइ पंथु ॥१२८ जोइय भिण्णउ झाय तुहं देहहं ते अप्पाणु । जइ देहु वि अप्पउ मुणहि ण वि पावहि णिव्वाणु ॥१२९ छत्तु वि पाइवि मुगुरुवडा सयलकालसंतावि । णियदेहडइ वसंतयह पाहणवाडि वहाइ ॥१३० मा मुट्टा पसु गरुवडा सयल काल झंखाइ । णियदेहहं मि वसतयह सुण्णा मढ सेवाइ ॥१३१ रायवयल्लहिं छहरसहिं पंचहिं रूवहिं चित्तु । जासु ण रंजिउ भुवणयलि सो जोइय करि मित्त ॥१३२ तोडेवि सयल वियप्पडा अप्पहं मणु वि घरेहि ।। सोक्खु णिरंतरु तहिं लहहि लहु संसारु तरेहि ॥१३३ अरि जिय जिणवरि मणु ठवहि विसयकसाय चारहि ।। सिद्धिमहापुरि पइसरहि दुक्खह पाणिउ देहि ॥१३४ मुंडियमुडिय मुडिया सिझ मुंडिउ चित्त ण मुंडिया । चित्तहं मुंडणु जि कियउ संसारह खंडणु ति कियउ ॥१३५ अप्पु करिज्जइ काइं तमु जो अच्छइ सव्वंगु संतें । पुण्णविसज्जणु काई तमु जो हलि इच्छइ परमत्थें ॥१३६ . .

Page #270

दोहा-पाहुड गमणागमणविवज्जियउ जो तइलोयपहाणु । गंगइ (?ड) गरुवइ(१ड) देउ किउ सो सणाणु अयाणु ॥१३७ पुणेण होइ विहओ विहवेण मओ मएण मइमोहो । मइमोहेण य णरयं तं पुण्णं अम्ह मा होउ ॥१३८ कासु समाहि करउं को अंचउं । छोपु अछोपु भणिवि को बचउ ॥ हल सहि कलह केण सम्माणउं । जहिं जहिं जोवउ तहिं अप्पाणउं ॥१३९ जइ मणि कोहु करिवि कलहीजइ । तो अहिसेउ णिरंजणु कीजइ ॥ जहिं जहिं जोयउ तहिं णउ को वि उ । हउं ण वि कालु वि मज्झु वि को वि उ ॥१४० णमिओ सि ताम जिणवर जाम ण मुणिओ सि देहमज्झई । जइ मुणिउ देहमज्झ ता केण णविज्जए कस्स ॥१४१ ता कप्पवियप्पा कम्मं अकुणंतु सुहासुह जणयं । अप्पसरूवा सिद्धी जाम ण हियए परिप्फुरइ ॥१४२ गहिलउ गहिलउ जणु भणइ गहिलउ मं करि खोहु । सिद्धिमहापरि पइसरइ उप्पाडेविणु मोहु ॥१४३ अवधउ अक्खरु जं उप्पज्जइ । अणु वि किं पि अण्णाउ ण किज्जइ ॥ आयई चित्ति लिहि मणु धारिवि । सोउ णिचितिउ पाय पसारिवि ॥१४४ किं बहुएं अडवड वडिण देह ण अप्पा होइ । देहहं भिण्णउ णाणमउ सो तुहुं अप्पा जोइ ॥१४५ पोत्था पढणि मोक्खु कहं मणु वि असुद्धउ जासु ।। बहुयारउ लुद्धउ णवइ मूलहिउ हरिणासु ॥१४६ दयाविहीणउ धम्मडा णाणिय कह वि ण जोइ । बहुएं सलिलविरोलियइं करु चोप्पडा ण होइ ॥१४७

Page #271

रामसिंह-सुणि-विरइय
भल्लाण वि णासंति गुण जहिं सहु संगु खलेहिं । वइसाणरु लोहहं मिलिउ पिट्टिज्जइ सुघणेहिं ॥१४८ हुयवहि णाइ(?सि) ण सक्कियउ धवलत्तणु संखस्स ।। फिट्टिसइ मा भंति करि छुड मिलिया खयरस्स ॥१४९ संख समुद्दहि मुक्कियए एही होइ अवत्थ । जो दुव्वाहहं चुंबिया लाएविणु गलि हत्थ ॥१५० छडेविणु गुणरयणणिहि अग्घथडिहिं घिपंति ।। तहि संखाहं विहाणु पर फुक्किज्जति ण भंति ॥१५१ महुयर सुरतरुमंजरिहिं परिमलु रसिवि हयास । हियडा फुट्टिवि कि ण मुयउ ढंढोलंतु पलास ॥१५२ मुडु मुंडाइवि सिक्ख धरि धम्महं बद्धी आस ।। णवरि कुटुंबउ मेलियउ छुडु मिल्लिया परास ॥१५३ णगत्तणि जे गलिया विगुत्ता ण गणति । गंथहं बाहिरभितरिहिं एक्कु इ ते ण मुयंतिः ॥१५४ अम्मिए इहु मणु हत्थिया विझह जंतउ वारि । तं भंजेसइ सीलवणु पुणु पडिसइ संसारि ॥१५५ जे पढिया जे पंडिया जाहिं मि माणु मरट्ट । .. ते महिलाण हि पिडि पडिय भमिय: जेम घर? ॥१५६ सिद्धा वम्मा(?ण्णा) मुट्टिइण फुसिवि लिहिहि तुहुँ ताम । जह संखहं जीहा लुसिवि सड्डुच्छलइ ण जाम ॥१५७ पत्तिय तोडहि तडतडह णाई पइट्ठा उट्ट । एवं ण जाणहि मोहिया को तोडइ को तुट्ट ॥१५८ पत्तिय पाणिउ दब्भ तिल सव्व जाणि सवण्णु । जं पुणु मोक्खहं जाइवउ तं कारणु कु इ अण्णु ॥१५९ पत्तिय तोडि म जोइया फलहिं जि हत्थु म वाहि । जसु कारणि तोडेहि तुहुँ सो सिउ एत्थु चडाहि ॥१६० देवलि पाहणु तित्थि जलु पुत्थ सव्वई कव्वु । वच्छु जु दीसइ कुसुमियउ इंधणु होसइ सव्वु ॥१६१

Page #272

दोहा-पाहुड
है
AAS
तित्थई तित्थ भमंतयह किं णेहा(?) फल एव । बाहिरु सुद्धउ पाणियह अभितरु किम हूव ॥१६२ तित्थई तित्थ भभेहि वढ धोयउ चम्मु जलेण । एहु मणु किम धोएसि तुहं मइलउ पावमलेण ॥१६३ जोइय हियडइ जासु ण वि इक्कु ण(?) णिवसइ देउ । जम्मणमरणविवज्जियउ किम पावइ परलोउ ॥१६४ एक्कु सु वेयइ अण्णु ण वेयइ । तासु चरिउ णउ जाणहिं देव इ॥ जो अणुहवइ सो जि परियाणइ । पुच्छंतहं समित्ति को आणइ ॥१६५ जं लिहिउ ण पुच्छिउ कह व जाइ । कहियउ कासु वि णउ चित्ति ठाइ ॥ अह गुरुउवएसे चित्ति ठाइ । तं तेम धरतिहिं कहिं मि ठाइ ॥१६६ कडूढइ सरिजलु जलहि विपिल्लिउ । जाणु पवाणु पवणपडिपिल्लिउ ॥ बोहु विबोहुतेम संघट्टइ । अवर हि उत्तउ ता णु पयट्टइ ॥१६७ अंबरि विविहु सद्दु जो सुम्मइ । तहिं पइसरहुँ ण वुच्चइ दुम्मइ ॥ मणु पंचहिं सिहु अत्थवण जाइ । मूढा(?वढ) परमतत्तु फुड तहिं जि ठाइ ॥१६८ अखइ णिरामइ परमगइ अज्ज वि लउ ण लहंति । भग्गी मणहं ण मंतडी तिम दिवहडा गणंति ॥१६९ सहजअवत्थहिं करहुलउ जोइय जंतउ वारि । अखइ णिरामइ पेसियउ सई होसइ संहारि ॥१७० अखइ णिरामइ परमगइ मणु घल्लेप्पिणु मिल्लि । तुट्टेसइ मा भंति करि आवागमणहं वेल्लि ॥१७१

Page #273

रामसिंह-मुणि-विरइय एमइ अप्पा झाइयइ अविचल चित्तु धरेवि । सिद्धि महापुरि जाइयइ अट्ट वि कम्म हणेवि ॥१७२ अक्खरवडिया मसिमिलिया पाढंता गय खीण ।। एक्क ण जाणी परम कला कहिं उग्गउ कहिं लीण ॥१७३ बे भंजेविणु एक्कु किउ मणहं ण चारिय विल्लि । तहि गुरुवहि हउं सिस्सिणी अण्णहि करमि ण लल्लि ॥१७४ अग्गइं पच्छई दहदिहहिं जहिं जोबउ तहिं सोइ । ता महु फिट्टिय भंतडी अवसु(?) ण पुच्छइ कोइ ॥१७५ जिम लोणु विलिज्जइ पागिए तिम जइ चित्तु विलिज्ज । समरसि इवइ जीवडा काई समाहि करिज्ज ॥१७६ जइ इक्क हि पावीसि पय अंकय कोडि करीसु । णं अंगुलि पय पयडणइं जिम सव्वंग य सीसु (?) ॥१७७ तित्थई तित्थ भमंतयह संताविज्जइ देहु । अप्पें अप्पा झाइयइं णिव्वाणं(?णह) पउ देहु ॥१७८ जो पई जोइउं जोइया तित्थई तित्थ भमेइ । सिउ पई सिहं हं(?)हिंडियउ लहिवि ण सकिउ तो इ ॥१७९ मूढा जोवइ देवलई लोयहिं जाई कियाइं । देह ण पिच्छइ अप्पणिय जहिं सिउ संतु ठिया इ ॥१८० वामिय किय अरु दाहिणिय मज्झ वहइ णिराम । तहिं गामडा जु जोगवइ अवर वसावइ गाम ॥१८१ देव तुहारी चिंत महु मज्झणपसरवियालि । तुहूं अच्छे सहि जाइ सुउ परइ णिरामइ पालि ॥१८२ तुट्टई बुद्धि तडत्ति जहिं मणु अस्थवणहं जाइ । सो सामिय उवएसु कहि अण्णहिं देवहिं का ॥१८३ सयलीकरणु ण जाणियउ पाणियपण्णहं भेउ । अप्पा परहु ण मेलियउ गंगडु पुज्जइ देउ ॥१८४ अप्पा परहं ण मेलियउ आवागमणु ण भग्गु । तुस कंडतह कालु गउ तंदुलु हत्थि ण लग्गु ॥१८५

Page #274

दोहा-पाहुउ देहादेवलि सिउ वसइ तुहुं देवलई णिएहि । हासउ महु मणि अत्थि इहु सिद्धे भिक्ख भमेहि ॥१८६ वणि देवलि तित्थई भमहि आयासो वि णियंतु । अम्मिए विहडिय भेडिया पसुलोगडा भमंतु ॥१८७ बे छंडेविणु पंथडा विच्चे जाइ अलक्खु । तहो फल वेयहो कि पि णउ जइ सो पावइ लक्खु ॥१८८ जोइय विसभी जोयगइ मणु वारणहं ण जाइ । इंदियविसय जि सुक्खडा तित्थु जि वलि बलि जाइ ॥१८९ बद्धउ तिहुवणु परिभमइ मुक्कउ पउ वि ण देइ । दिक्खु ण जोइय करहुलउ विवरेरउ पउ देइ ॥१९० संतु ण दीसइ तत्तु ण वि संसारहिं भमंतु । खंधावारिउ जिउ भमइ अवराडइहिं रहंतु ॥१९१ उव्वस वसिया जो करइ वसिया करइ जु सुण्णु ।। वलिकिज्जउ तसु जोइयहि जासु ण पाउ ण पुण्णु ॥१९२ कम्मु पुराइउ जो खवइ अहिणव पेसु ण देइ । अणुदिणु झायइ देउ जिणु सो परमप्पउ होइ ॥१९३ विसया सेवइ जो वि परु बहुला पाउ करेइ । गत्त्छइ णरयहं पाहुणउ कम्मु सहाउ लएइ ॥१९४ कुहिएण पूरिएण य छिद्देण य खारमुत्तगंधेण । संता विज्जइ लोओ जह सुणहो चम्मखंडेण ॥१९५ देखताहं वि मूढ बढ रमियई सुक्खु ण होइ । अम्मिए मुत्तहं छिडु लहु तो वि ण विणडइ कोइ ॥१९६ जिणवरु झायहि जीव तुहुँ विसयकसायई खोइ । दुक्खु ण देक्खहि कहिं मि वढ अजरामरु पउ होइ ॥१९७ विसयकसाय चएवि वढ अप्पहं मणु वि धरेहि । चूरिवि चउगइ णित्तुलउ परमप्पउ पावेहि ॥१९८ इंदियपसरु णिवारियई मण जाणहि परमत्थु । अप्पा मिल्लिवि णाणमड़ अवरु विडाविड़ सत्थुः ॥१९९

Page #275

रामसिंह-मुणि-धिरइय विसया चिति म जीव तुहुँ विसय ण भल्ला होति । : सेवताहं वि महुर वढ पच्छइ दुक्खई दिति ॥२०० विसयकसायहं रंजियउ अप्पहिं चित्तु ण देइ । बंधिवि दुक्कियकम्मडा चिरु संसारु भमेइ ॥२०१
इंदियविसय चएवि वढ करि मोहहं परिचाउ । र अणुदिणु झावहि परमपउ तो एहउ ववसाउ ॥२०२
णिज्जियसासो णिफंदलोयणो मुक्कसयलवावारो । एयाइ अवत्थ गओ सो जोयउ णत्थि संदेहो ॥२०३
तुट्टे मणवावारे भग्गे तह रायरोससब्भावे । ॐ परमप्पयम्मि अप्पे परिहिए होइ णिव्वाणं ॥२०४
विसया सेवहि जीव तुहं छंडिवि अप्पसहाउ । अण्णइ दुग्गइ जाइसिहि तं एहउ ववसाउ ॥२०५ मंतु ण तंतु ण धेउ ण धारणु । ण वि उच्छासह किज्जइ कारणु ॥ एमइ परमसुक्खु मुणि सुव्वइ ।
एही गलगल कासु ण रुच्चइ ॥२०६ है.. उववास विसेस करिवि बहु एहु वि संवरु होइ ।
पुच्छइ किं बहु वित्थरिण मा पुच्छिज्जइ कोइ ॥२०७ 37. तउ करि दहविहु धम्मु करि जिणभासिउ सुपसिध्दु ।
कम्महं णिज्जर एह जिय फुडु अक्खिउ मई तुज्झु ॥२०८ 2. दहविहु जिणवरभासियउ धम्मु अहिंसासारु । . अहो जिय भावहि एक्कमणु जिम तोडहि संसारु ॥२०९ 32. भवि भवि दंसणु मलरहिउ भवि भवि करउं समाहि । . भवि भवि रिसि गुरु होइ महु णिहयमणुब्भववाहि ॥२१० :: अणुपेहा बारह वि जिय भाविवि एक्कमणेण । रामसीह मुणि इम भणइ सिवपुरि पावहि जेण ॥२११
[प्रक्षिप्त-दोहा] सुण्णं ण होइ सुण्णं दीसइ सुण्णं च तिहवणे सुण्णं । - अवहरइ पावपुण्णं सुण्णसहावेण गओ अप्पा ॥२१२

Page #276

दोहा-पाहुड वेपंथेहि ण गम्मइ बेहसूई ण सिज्जए कथा । बिणि ण हुति अयाणा इंदियसोक्खं च मोक्ग्यं च ॥२१३ उववासह होइ पलेवणा संताविज्जइ देहु । घरु उज्झइ इंदियतणउ मोक्खह कारणु पन ॥२१४ अच्छउ भोयणु ताहं घरि सिद्ध हरेप्पिणु जेन्यु । ताह समउ जय कारियइं ता मेलियइ समन्नु ॥२१५ जइ लद्धउ माणिक्कडउ जोइय पुहवि भगत ।। बंधिज्जइ णियकप्पडइं जोइज्जइ एक्कत ॥२१॥ वादविवादा जे करहिं जाहिं ण फिट्टिय भनि । जे रत्ता गउपावियई (?) ते गुप्पंत भमंनि ॥२१७ कायोऽस्तीत्यर्थमाहारः कायो ज्ञानं समीहते । ज्ञानं कर्मविनाशाय तन्नाशे परमं पदम् ॥२१८ कालहिं पवणहिं रविससिहिं चहु एक्कट्टइं वास्तु । हउं तुहिं पुच्छउं जोइया पहिले कामु विणा ।।२१२ ससि पोख(? स)इ रवि पज्जलइ पवणु हलोले लेइ । सत्त रज्जु तमु पिल्लि करि काम का मिड .. मुखनासिकयोर्मध्ये प्राणान् सञ्चरते सदा । आकाशे चरते नित्यं स जीवो तेन जीवति ।।२२१ आपदा मूर्छितो वारिचुलुकेनापि जीवति । अम्भः कुम्भसहस्राणां गतजीवः करोति किम् ॥२२२
॥ इय दोहा-पाहुडं समत्तं ॥ ॥ श्री ॥

Page #277

शुद्धि पत्रक
दोहा
चरण
अशुद्ध
الله
الله الله
चिंतंतह विण उ वप्पुडउ
चितंताह वि णउ बापुडउ बोहि
बोहि
و
الله لم
झावहि
Mmm 3 vb१४..."
m
SmSK Www.
ه
झायहि चित्तु
चितु
م
م
سم سم
له
له
चवइ मिच्छादिटिठ्यह विहउ पढिज्जइ सुंधुक्की देहकुडिल्लि णा हि जोमवइ
चय मिच्छादिहियह बीहउ पढियइ संधुक्की देहकुडुल्लि णाहि जोगवइ
سه له
بم
ام
१०५
ام
११३
مه
दरिंसियई णिलडइ अक्खणरु वसतयह
दरिसियाई भियअडा अणक्खरु वसंतयह
१२४ १३१
له سه له
सते
ه
१४२
ه
परमत्थें ता कप्प० छडेविणु भमिय सव
ه
»
परमत्थे ता संकप्प० छंडेविण भमियई सव्वई पुत्थई गच्छइ सुपसिद्ध
१५६ १५९ १६१ १९४ २०८
لم
له
पुत्थ
سه لمی
गच्छ सुपसिध्दु

Page #278

दोहा - उपहार
( दोहा - पाहुडनुं गुजराती भाषांतर)
आत्मा अने परनी परंपरानो भेद जे दर्शावे छे ते गुरु सूर्य छे, गुरु चंद्र छे, गुरु दीपक छे, गुरु देव छे.
१
पोताने आधीन जे सुख के तेनाथी ज संतोष कर हे मूर्ख ! पारकाना सुखनी इच्छा करवाथी हृदयनी तरस छीपती नथी.
२
जे सुख विषय - विमुखने आत्मध्यानमां मळे हे ते सुख करोड देवीओ साथै क्रीडा करता इन्द्रने पण मळतुं नथी.
३
विषयसुख भोगवता छतां जे हृदयमां ( तेनो भाव ) धारण करता नथी ते तरत शाश्वत सुख मेळवे छे – एम जिनवरो कहे के,
४
विषयसुख न भोगवता छतां जे हृदयमां ( तेनो ) भाव धारण करे छे ते नर बापडां शालिसिक्थनी जेम नरकमां पड़े छे.
५
आपत्तिमां आडोअवळो विलाप करे छे, एनाथी तो दुनिया ज राजी थाय छे. मन शुद्ध अने स्थिर थाय त्यारे परमलोकनी प्राप्ति थाय छे. ६
जंजाळमां पडेल सकळ जगत अज्ञानवश कर्मों करे जाय हे, पण मुक्तिना कारणरूप (शुद्ध) आत्मानुं एक क्षण पण चिंतन करतु नथी.
७
ज्यां सुधी ज्ञान मेळवतो नथी त्यां सुधी पुत्रपत्नी आदिमां मोह पामेल आत्मा दुःखो सहन करतो लाख योनिमां भटके ले.
८
पोताना घर, परिवार, तन वगेरे ईष्ट न समज. ए बधां तो कर्मने आधीन अने बनावटी (क्षणिक) ले - एम आगमोमां योगीओओ कह्युं छे.
९
मोहने वश थई तें जे दुःख छे तेने सुख अने जे सुख छे तेने दुःख गण्युं तेथी ज तुं मुक्ति पाम्यो नहीं.
१०

Page #279

दोहा-उपहार
धन अने परिवारनी चितामां तु मुक्ति मेळवी शकतो नथी, तो पण ते ने तेज विचार्या करे छे अने तेमां ज महासुख माने ले. ११
हे जीव ! एने गृहवास न समज, ए तो पापर्नु निवासस्थान छे, यमे गोठवेलो अतूट पाश के. एमां संदेह नथी.
हे मूढ ! सघळु बनावटी (क्षणिक) ले ए स्पष्ट छे. तुं खाली फोतरां खांड मा. तरत घर-परिवार छोडी निर्मळ शिवपदमां आसक्ति कर. १३
जेनो निवास (निर्विकल्प समाधिरूप) आकाशमा ले तेनो मोह विलीन थई जाय छे, मन मरी जाय छे, श्वास-निश्वास तूटी जाय ले ने केवळज्ञान प्रगट थाय ले.
( साधु )-वेश तो ग्रहण करे छे पण भोगनो भाव त्यजतो नथी, जेम सापे कांचळी मूकी दीधी पण जे विष छे ते मूकतो नथी. १५
१४
१६
जे मुनि विषयसुख छोडीने फरी तेनी इच्छा करे छे ते केशलुंचननी पीडा अने शरीर सूकावानु दुःख (वधारामां) सहन करीने फरी संसारमा भटके छे.
विषयोनां सुखो बे दिवसनां छे, फरी पाछी दुःखोनी परंपरा. ए भूलीने हे जीव ! तुं पोताना खभे (ज) कुहाडी न फेरव.
१७ शरीरनुं विलेपन कर, मर्दन कर, संभाळ ले अने अति मीठा आहार दे - दुर्जन पर करेला उपकारनी जेम आ बधु निरर्थक ले. १८
अस्थिर, मलीन अने गुणहीन काया द्वारा स्थिर, निर्मळ अने गुणोना सार रूप क्रिया जो थई शकती होय तो केम न करवी ? १९
विष सारु, विषधर नाग सारो, अग्नि सारो, (अरे ) वनवासनुं सेवन पण सारु. (परंतु) जिनधर्मथी विमुख मिथ्यात्वीनो सहवास नहीं सारो. २०
मूळ गुणने ऊखेडी नाखीने उत्तर गुणने जे वळग्या रहे छे ते फलंगचूक्या वांदरानी जेम बहु नीचे पडीने नाश पाम्या समजवा. २१

Page #280

दोहा - उपहार
ર૩
आत्माने नित्य अने केवळज्ञानमय स्वभाववाळो जाण्यो तो पछी हे मूढ ! शरीर उपर अनुराग शाने करवो जोईए ?
२२
चोरासी लाख योनि मध्ये अहीं एवी कोई जभ्या नथी के ज्यां जिनवचननो लाभ न पामनारो जीव भटक्यो न होय
२३
जेना मनमां ज्ञान प्रगट्ये नथी तेवो मुनि सकळ शास्त्र जाणतो होवा छतां, कर्मनाकारणाने उत्पन्न करतो होवाथी सुख पामतो नथी, २४
हे अबोध जीव ! तुं तत्त्वने ऊंधुं समज्यो के के कर्मनिर्मित भावोने तु आत्माना भावो कहे हे.
२५
हुं गोरो छु, हुं शामळो छु, हुं जुदा जुदा वर्णवाळो छु, हुं पातलो छं, हुं जाडो छु - एवं हे जीव ! न मान.
२६
न तुं पंडित के के न मूर्ख न तुं समृद्ध छे के न दरिद्र, न तुं कोईनो गुरु छे के न शिष्य. ए बधामां कर्मनी विचित्रता छे.
२७
न तो तुं कारण ले के न कार्य, न तो स्वामी हे के न दास. हे जीव ! तुं शूर पण नथी के कायर पण नथी, उत्तम नथी के अधम पण
नथी.
२८
पुण्य के पाप, काळ के आकाश, धर्मास्तिकाय के अधर्मास्तिकाय -- चेतनभाव छोडी ( आमानुं ) एक पण हे जीव ! तुं नथी. २९
न तो गोरो के न शामळा न तु एके रंगनो हे. पातळा के न - एवं तारुं रूप जाण.
--
जाडो
३०
तो
हुं उत्तम ब्राह्मण नथी, न वैश्य हुँ. नथी क्षत्रिय के न शेष ( शुद्र ); पुरुष, नपुंसक के स्त्री नथी एवं विशेष जाण.
-
३१
हुं तरुण छु, वृद्ध छु के बाळक छु, शूर छु, दैवी पंडित छु, क्षपणक (दिगंबर), बंदक (बौद्ध) के श्वेताम्बर मुनि छु - एवं कई विचार मा.
३२
देहना जरा मरण जोईने हे जीव ! तुं गंभरा नहीं. जे अजरामर परम ब्रह्म छे तेवा आत्माने ओळख.
३३

Page #281

२२
दोहा - उपहार
देहने जरा-मरण संभवे हे ज रोग थाय छे. तुं जाणी ले के
देहना ज विविध वर्ण होय हे. देहने मात्र देहने ज जाति होय . ३४
जरा, मरण, रोग, जाति के वर्ण आत्माने के नहीं के थतां नथी. ए नक्की जाण के जीवने ( आमांनी ) एके संज्ञा होती नथी.
३५
जो कर्मना भावने आत्मा कहेतो होय तो तु परमपद पामीश नहीं अने फरी संसारमां भमीश.
३६
ज्ञानमय आत्मभाव सिवायनो बीजो भाव तो परभाव ले. ते छोडीने हे जीव ! तुं शुद्ध स्व ( आत्मा ) भावनुं ध्यान कर. ६७
वर्णविहीन अने ज्ञानमय स्वात्मनी भावना जे करेले ते ज शांत, निरंजन अने शिव छे. तेमां ज अनुराग करवो जोईए.
३८
त्रिभुवनमां जिनदेव देखाय छे, जिनवरमां आ त्रिभुवन ( समायेल ) ले. जिनवरमां सकळ जगतनुं दर्शन थाय छे. माटे ए वेमां कई भेद न करवो जोईए.
३९
जिनने जाणो, जिनने जाणो - एम (कोई ) कहे . पण हे सखि ! जो ज्ञानमय आत्मा देहथी भिन्न छे ए जाणी लीधुं तो बीजं शुं जाणवानुं
४०
ह्युं ?
जिनने वंदन करो, जिनने वंदन करो- एम (कोई ) कहे . पण ख परमार्थ जाणी लीधा पछी पोताना देहमां बसे के तेने अहीं कोण वंदन करे ?
४१
हे जोगी ! बंधन काढी नाखी ( मनरूपी ) करमने मुक्तपणे फरवा दे. जेनुं अक्षय निरामय ( परमात्मा ) मां मन गयुं छे तेवो ज्ञानी माणस संसारमा केम आसक्त थई शकशे :
४२
पांच इन्द्रियोना विषयमां ढीलो न था. बेने रोक काबुमा राख अने बीजुं पराई स्त्रीने विषे संयम कर.
एक तो जीभने
४३

Page #282

दोहा-उपहार
४४
पांचे (इन्द्रियरूपी) बळदने तु अटकावी शक्यो नहीं तेथी ( मुक्तिरूपी) नंदनवनमां तुं जई शक्यो नथी. ते न आत्माने जाण्यो , न परने - एम ज मुनि बनी बेठो छे.
हे सखि ! (तारा) प्रियतमने बहारना पांचनो नेह लाग्यो छे. जे खल जईने ‘पर 'ने मळयो होय ते पाछो आवे तेम देखातुं नथी. ४५
मन ज्यारे निश्चित थईने चिंतन करे छे त्यारे बोध पामे छे. अने ते निश्चित त्यारे थाय के ज्यारे आत्मतत्त्वने अनात्मतत्त्वथी जुदुं पाडे छे. ४६
जे आगळ जोता रस्ता पर चाल्या छे तेमना पगमां कचडाई कांटा भोंकाय तो भले भोंकाय. तेमां तेमनो दोष नथी..
४७ (मनने ) मूकी दे, मोकळं मूकी दे, ज्यां फावे त्यां जवा दे, सिद्धि महानगरीमा पेसवा दे. हर्ष के विषाद न कर.
मन परमेश्वरमां मळी गयुं छे, परमेश्वर मनमां. बन्ने समरस थई रह्यां २. पूजा कोनी करूं?
४९ परमेश्वर देवनी पूजा क्यांक ( अन्यत्र ) जईने केम कराय हे ? जे शिवपरमात्मा सर्वागमा वसेल ते केम विसाराय ?
५०
...... (?) जे पर छे ते पर जछे. पर तत्त्व आत्मा न होय. हु दामु छु , ते बची जाय छे (ते जोवा छतां) पण पार्छ वाळीने जोतो नथी.
हे मूढ ! सघर्छ विनश्वर छे, अनश्वर कई नथी. जीव गयो, झुपडी (देह) न गई - ए दाखलो जो.
देहमंदिरमा शक्ति साथे जे देव वसे छे, तेमां कोण शक्ति अने कोण शिव ते भेद तु जलदी शोधी काढ.
जे जीण थतो नथी, मरतो नथी, जन्मतो नथी, जे परमात्म अनंत, त्रिभुवनस्वामी,' ज्ञानमय छे ते निश्चय शिव छे.
५४
५३

Page #283

दोहा-उपहार
२४
५९
शिव विना शक्ति कार्य करवा समर्थ नथी, शिव शक्ति विना. बन्नेने जाण्याथी मोहलीन समग्र जगत जाणी लेवाय छे.
५५ ज्यां सुधी ते जुदो ज ज्ञानमय भाव तारा लक्षमां न आवे त्यां सुधी तारुं अज्ञानमय, हतभागी चित्त बापडु संकल्प-विकल्प करतु रहे छे. ५६
नित्य, निरामय, ज्ञानमय, परमानंदस्वभाव परमात्माने जेणे जाणी लीधो के तेने बीजो कोई भाव रहेतो नथी.
अमे एक जिनदेवने जाण्या, अनंत देवोने जाणी लीधा. त्यारे ते मोहमां मोहित थयेलो दूर दूर भटकतो रहे छे.
जेना हृदयमां केवळज्ञानमय आत्मा वसे छे ते त्रणे लोकमां मुक्त हे. तेने पाप लागतु नथी.
बंधनना कारणरूप कोई पण वस्तुने जे मुनि विचारतो नथी, बोलतो नथी के आचरतो नथी ते केवळज्ञानथी तेजस्वी शरीरवाळेा परमात्मा देव छे. ६०
अतरतम मन मेलु होय तो बहारना तपथी शुं ? चित्तमां कोई निरंजननी धारणा कर के जेथी मेलथी मुक्त थई शके.
विषय-कषायोमा जतां मनने निरंजनमां स्थिर करवु एटलं ज मुक्तिनु कारण छे, नहीं के बीजां कोई तंत्र-मंत्र.
६२ हे जीव ! जो खातो-पीतो (भोगो भोगवतो ) तु शाश्वत मुक्ति मेळवे एवं होय तो ऋषभ भगवाने सकळ इन्द्रिय-सुखोनो त्याग शा माटे कों हतो?
हे मूढ ! आ देहरूपी महिला तने त्यां सुधी सतावे ले ज्यां सुधी ताएं चित्त निरंजन परम तत्त्व साथे एकाकार थयु नथी. ६४
सर्व विकल्पोने हणनारुं ज्ञान जेना मनमां स्फुरतुं नथी, सघळी वस्तुने धर्म कहेतो ते शाश्वत सुख केवी रीते मेळवे ?
जेना सकळ चिंताओथी मुक्त चित्तमा परमात्मा वसे ले, ते आठे कर्म हणीने परम गति पामे ले.
६५

Page #284

दोहा-उपहार
24
हे मूढ ! गुणनिलय आत्माने मूकीने बीजानुं ध्यान जे धरे ले तेवा अज्ञानभरेलाने केवळज्ञान क्याथी थाय ?
६७ आत्मा ज मात्र दर्शन अने ज्ञानरूप छे, बीजं सघर्छ तो व्यवहार. हे जोगी ! जे त्रणे लोकना साररूप छे एवा ते एकनु ज ध्यान धरवू जोईए. ६८
3आत्मा ज दर्शन-ज्ञानमय छे, बीजु बधुं तो प्रपंच. ए जाणीने हे योगीओ! मायाजाळ छोडो.
जगतिलक (जगभूषण) आत्माने मूकीने जे परद्रव्य( पुद्गल )मां रमण करे छे ते अज्ञ (मिथ्याज्ञानी ) छे. मिथ्यादृष्टिने माथे शुं शींगडां होय छे ?
७०
___ जगतिलक आत्माने मूकीने हे मूढ ! अन्यनुं ध्यान न धर. जेणे मरकतमणिने जाण्यो छे तेने काचनी कई गणतरी ?
हे मूर्ख ! शुभ परिणाम( शुभ भाव )थी धर्म अने अशुभथी अधर्म थाय. के. ए बन्नेनो त्याग करनार जीव जन्म (भव-भ्रमण ) पामतो नथी. ७२ १. हे जोगी! कर्म पोतानी जाते ज एकठां थाय ले अने पोतानी जाते ज. छूटां. पडे छे, एमां शंका नथी. चंचळ स्वभावना मुसाफरोनां ते वळी गाम वसतां हशे ?
७३ जो तुं दुःखथी डरतो होय, तो बीजा जीवने माटे (पण ) जुदं न विचार. तलना फोतरा जेवडो कांटो य वेदना जरूर करे छे. ७४
___ आत्मा द्वारा आलोचना करातां पाप क्षणमात्रमा नाश पामे हे. सूर्य एकलो क्षणमा तिमिरसमूहनो नाश करे छे.
७५ .. हे जोगी ! जेना हृदयमा एक ज परम देव वसे छे ते जन्ममरणरहित बनी. परमलोकने पामे छे.
७६ ' जे पहेलांनां कर्माने नष्ट करे छे, नवाने प्रवेशवा देतो नथी, जे परम निरंजनने नमे छे, ते परमात्मा बने छे.

Page #285

दोहा - उपहार
आत्मा त्यां सुधी पापनुं परिणाम अनुभवे छे, त्यां सुधी कर्म करे छे, ज्यां सुधी निर्मळ थईने परम निरंजनने जाणतो नथी.
७८
२६
वळी, दर्शन-ज्ञानमय आत्मा निरंजन परमात्म देव े. हे मूढ ! एम समजी ले के आत्मा ज साचो मोक्षमार्ग छे.
७९
(लोको ) त्यां सुधी कुतीर्थो मां परिभ्रमण करे छे, त्यां सुधी धूर्तता करे छे, ज्यां सुधी गुरुकृपाथी देहमां रहेला देवने ओळखता नथी.
८०
लोभमा मोहित थयेलो तु त्यां सुधी विषयोमां सुख माने छे, ज्यां सुधी गुरुकृपाथी अविचळ बोध मेळव्यो नथी.
८१
जेनाथी विशेष बोध ( आत्मज्ञान ) ऊपजे नहीं एवा त्रणे लोकने प्रगट करनारा ज्ञानथी पण (जीव ) बहिर्ज्ञानी ज रहे थे. परिणामे तेवुं ज्ञान पण अशुभ ज छे.
८२
तेनी दृढ मर्यादा अकी लेवी जोइए, जेवुं भणाववामां आवे तेवुं ज कर जोईए. अने वळी आमतेम गमनागमन नहीं कर जोईए. तेनां कर्मों आपोआप नाश पामशे.
८३
तत्त्वनुं व्याख्यान करनार डाह्याए ( पोताना ) आत्मामा चित्त दीधुं नहीं. जाणे दाणा वगरनां घणां फोतरां संघर्यो ।
८४
पंडितोना पंडित । दाणा छोडीने तें फोतरां ज खांड्यां ! ग्रंथांना अर्थमां संतोष पाम्यो. तुं मूढ छे के तु परमार्थ जाणतो नथी.
८५
ग्रंथज्ञानमा जे गर्व करे से ते कारण ( परमार्थ ) जाणता नथी. जेम हाथां वांस धारण करेल चंडाळ केवळ ( समज्या विना ) हाथ धुणावे छे. ८६
हें मूर्ख | बहु भण्याथी शुं ? ज्ञानरूपी अग्नि पेटावतां शीख, के जे सळगतां पुण्य अने पाप बन्नेने क्षणमां ज बाळी दे छे.
८७
सिद्धत्व माटे सहु कोई वलखां मारे छे, पण सिद्धत्व चित्तनी निर्मळ - ताथी पानी शकाय .
८८

Page #286

दोहा-उपहार
केवळज्ञान मळरहित (निर्मळ ) २. ज्यां ते अनादि ज्ञान रहे छे ते उरमां सर्व जगतनो संचार थाय हो, कई एनाथी पर रहेतुं नथी. ८९
आत्मा आत्मामां स्थित थाय ले. कोई( कर्म-मळ )नो लेप एने लागतो नथी. जे सघळा महा दोषो छे तेनो उच्छेद थई जाय छे. ९०
हे जोगी! जोग लईने . जो जंजाळमां पडीश नहीं तो देहकुटि नाश पामशे, तुं तेमनो तेम रहीश.
अरे मनरूपी करभ ! इन्द्रिय-विषयोना सुखमां आसक्ति न कर. जेमां निरंतर सुख नथी एवा ते विषयोने क्षणमां छोडी दे.
न राजी था, न रीस कर, न क्रोध कर. क्रोधथी धर्म नाश पामे छे. धर्म नष्ट थवाथी नरकमां गति थाय छे. अने एम मनुष्य-जन्म एळे जाय छे. ९३
साडा त्रण हाथy देवळ छे. तेमां वाळनो य प्रवेश ( शक्य ) नथी. शांत निरंजन (देव) तेमां वसे छे. निर्मळ थईने (तेने ) शोधी काढ. ९४
मनने तरत पार्छ वाळीने आत्माने अन्य तत्त्वोमां मळवा न दे.-जेनी आटलीय शक्ति न होय ते मूर्ख योगी शुं करवानो हतो ? ९५
हे जोगी! ते जोगी छे जे निर्मळ योगमा मननो संयोग करावे. पण जे इन्द्रियोने वश थाय छे ते तो आ लोकमां पशु ज ले. ९६
हे मूढ ! जेना( उच्चारण )थी ताळg सुकाई जाय एवं घणु भण्यो. पण जेनाथी शिवपुरि जई शकाय तेवो एक ज अक्षर छे - ते भण. ९७
शास्त्रोनो पार नथी, समय थोडो छे अने आपणे दुर्बुद्धि छीए. माटे ते ज शीखवु जोईए जे जन्ममरणनो क्षय करे.
निर्लक्षण, स्त्रीबाह्य अने अकुलीन एवो ( प्रियतम ) मारा मनमा स्थिर थयो छे. तेने माटे....... (?) आणी छे. जेथी....... (?)
हु सगुण छं अने प्रियतम के निर्गुण, निर्लक्षण, निःसंग. एक ज शरीरम वसनारा अमारा बेनुं अंगथी अंग न मळयु ।
१००

Page #287

२८
दोहा-उपहार
जेनुं चित्त जगतमां पांच रूपोमां, छ रसोमां अने सर्व रागोमां रंगाय नथी -हे जोगी! तेने मित्र बनाव.
जेना शरीरमा तप थोडो संग करीने स्थिर थयु के तेवा नरोने पण मरणनो ताप असह्य होय छे.
१०२
देह गळी जाय त्यारे बधुं गळी जाय ले - मतिज्ञान, श्रुतज्ञान, धारणशक्ति अने ध्येय. त्यारे एवा अवसरमां पण हे मूर्ख ! बिरला ज देवनु स्मरण करे छे.
१०३ . भोगोथी भागेलु जेनु सुदर मन इच्छाओनी पेली पार स्थिर थयु के ते ज्यां फावे त्यां फरी शकेले. तेने भय नथी, भवभ्रमण नथी. १०४
जीवोनो वध करवाथी नरकगति अने अभयप्रदान करवाथी स्वर्ग - आ बे जोडिया रस्ता दर्शाव्या ले. ज्यां फावे त्यां चालो.
१०५
सुख बे दिवसनां छे, फरी दुःखोनी परंपरा. हे हृदय ! हुं तने शीखवू छु - (साचा) रस्ते चित्त लगाड.
१०६ हे मूढ ! देहमां आसक्त न थर्बु जोईए, देह आत्मा नथी. देहथी भिन्न एवा ज्ञानमय आत्माने तुं जो..
१०७ जेवू चंडाळनु झुपडूं तेवी अपवित्र(?) काया छे. त्यां ज प्राणपति बसे छे. हे जोगी! त्यां ध्यान कर.
१०८ थड छोडीने जे डाळे चडे ते योगाभ्यास केवी रीते करवानो हतो ? हे मूढ ! कात्या विनाना कपासमांथी कपडु केवी रीते वणी शकाय ? १०९
जेना सर्व विकल्पो लूटी गया छे, जे चैतन्य-भावने पाम्यो छे, जे निर्मळ ध्यानमा स्थिर थयो छे, तेनो आत्मा परमात्मानी साथे रमण करे छे, ११०
" आज तारे लक्ष आपीने (मनरूपी) करभने जीती लेबो जोईए के जेना पर चडीने परम मुनि सर्व गमनागमन( जन्म-मरण )थी मुक्त बने छे. १११

Page #288

दोहा - उपहार
भवभ्रमणनी विषम गतिनो ज्यां सुधी तें नाश नथी कर्यो त्यां सुधी हे मन करभ ! जिनगुणरूपी वाडीमां तपरूपी वेलीओ इच्छा मुजब चर. ११२
तपरूपी दामण, व्रतरूपी तंग अने शमदमरूपी पलाण कर्यु. संयमरूपी घरमाथी उत्कंठित थईने करम निर्वाण पाम्यो. ११३ एक तो वाट जाणता नथी, बीजुं कोईने पूछता नथी. डुंगरामां आडाअवळा आथडता माणसो जो.
११४
रस्तो छोडीने ( रस्ताथी दूर ) जे वृक्ष महोर्यु ते एळे गयु, ( कारण ) थाक्या मुसाफरोने विसामो न मळयो के न फळ हाथ लाग्यां.
११५
छ दर्शननी जंजाळमां पडीने मननी भ्रांति भांगी नहीं. एक देवनां छ रूप कर्या, तेथी मोक्षमां जता नथी. ११६
एक पोतानी जातने छोडीने अन्य कोई वेरी नथी, जेणे ( पोते ) कर्म उत्पन्न कयीं छे ( अने) ते ज कर्मनो नाश करी शके छे.
११७
जो वारुं छं तो पण त्यां ( विषयमां) ज जाय छे, पण आत्मामां मन लगाडतो नथी. विषयना कारणे जीव नरकनां दुःखो सहन करे छे. ११८
हे जीव ! एम न मानीश के 'भारा विषयो मारा थशे.' किंषाकफळनी जेम ते तने दुःख आपशे. ११९
हे जीव ! तुं विषयोनुं सेवन करे छे. जेम घीना संगथी अग्नि प्रज्वळे छे ते दुःख आपनार तेवा विषयोना संगथी तु अत्यंत दुःखी थाय छे. १२०
जेणे अशरीर ( आत्मतत्त्व ) नुं शरसंधान कर्यु ते साचो धनुर्विद्यानो निपुण कहेवाय. जेणे शिवतत्त्वनी साथै संधान कर्यु ए निश्चित रहे छे. १२१
हे सखि ! ते दर्पण शुं कामनुं जेमां पोतानुं प्रतिबिंब देखाय नहीं ? मने आ जगत एक जंजाळ भासे ले, ( ज्यां) घरमा रहेवा छतां घरघणी १२२ देखातो नथी !

Page #289

दोहा - उपहार
जेनुं मन पांचे इन्द्रियो सहित मरी गयुं के तेने जीवतो छतां मुक्त १२३ जाणवो. तेणे निर्वाणनो मार्ग मेळवी लीधो छे.
३०
काळ जतां नाश पामे एवा घणा अक्षरो ( शास्त्र ) थी शुं ? जे रीते अनक्षर बनाय एवा पदने जाण. हे मूढ ! तेने मोक्ष कहे छे.
१२४
छ दर्शननां शास्त्रो लईने ( लोक ) अन्योन्य खूब गर्जे छे. जे हेतु ले १२५ ते तो एक ज छे पण ( लोक ) विपरीत स्वरूपे समजे छे.
समज समजनारने भ्रांति रहेती नथी. जे १२६
हे मूर्ख ! सिद्धांत - पुराणोने
निश्चय आनंदपूर्वक गयो तेने सिद्ध कहे छे.
शिव अने शक्तिनो मेळाप तो आ जगतमां पशुओमां पण होय छे. १२७ पण शक्ति शिवथी भिन्न छे ते तो कोई विरला ज समजे छे. पोताना शरीरथी परमात्मा जुदो हे ए जेणे जाण्युं नथी तेवो अंध बीजा अंधोने मार्ग शुं देखाडे !
१२८
हे जोगी ! देहथी जुदा तारा आत्मानुं ध्यान कर. जो तुं देहने आत्मा मानतो होय तो निर्वाण पामी शकीश नहीं. १२९
मोटुं छत्र मेळवीने ( छत्रधारी राज बनीने) पण तुं सघळेा समय संतापमा रहे छे. पोताना देहमां रहेनाराने माटे तुं पाषाणनां मंदिरो बनावरावे १३०
!
( ? ), सघळो समय तुं संतापमां रहे छे. पोताना देहमां रहेनाराने ( शोधवा) माटे तुं खाली मठनुं सेवन करे छे ! १३१
हे जोगी! जगमां रागना प्रसारथी, छ रसथी अने पांच रूपथी जेनुं चित्त रंगायुं नथी तेने मित्र बनाव. १३२
सघळा विकल्पो छोडीने आत्मामां मन लगाड, तेमां तुं निरंतर सुख मेळवीश, शीघ्र संसार तरी जईश.
१३३

Page #290

दोहा-उपहार
अरे जीव ! विषय-कषाय छोडीने जिनवरमा मन स्थिर कर, तो तुं दुःखने विदाय करी सिद्धिरूपी महानगरीमा प्रवेश करीश. १३४
हे मुंडितोना य मुंडित ! तें माथु मूडयं पण चित्त न मूंडयु. जेणे चित्तनुं मुंडन कर्यु' तेणे संसारचं खंडन कयु'.
१३५ जे सर्वांग व्याप्त छे तेने काजे आत्मा शुं करे ? जे परमार्थनी इच्छा राखे छे तेने पुण्य-विसर्जननुं शुं काम छे ?
१३६
जे त्रणे लोकमां प्रधान छे ते तो गमनागमनथी रहित छे. तेथी जेणे पथ्थरनो मोटेा देव बनावी बेसार्यो छे ते ज्ञानी ( गणातो) होवा छतां अज्ञान छे.
१३७ __पुण्यथी वैभव मळे छे, वैभवथी मद थाय छे, मदथी मतिव्यामोह थाय छे, मतिमोहथी नरकनी प्राप्ति. तेवू पुण्य अमने न होजो. १३८
कोनुं ध्यान करूं ? कोने पूजु ? स्पृश्य-अस्पृश्य कहीने कोने छेतलं ? सखि ! कलह कोनी साथे करूं ? ज्यां ज्यां जोउं त्यां त्यां पोतानी जात ( ज नजरे पडे ) छे.
जो मनमां क्रोध करीने कलह कराय तो निरंजननो अभिषेक करवो. ( तो जणाशे के) ज्या ज्या जोयुं त्यां कोई नथी. हुं कोईनो नथी, कोई मारुं नथी.
१४०
हे जिनवर ! ज्यां सुधी देहनी अंदर ज रहेनारने न जाण्यो त्यां सुधी तने नम्यो. ज्यारे देहमा रहेलाने जाण्यो त्यार पछी कोण कोने नमे ! १४१
शुभ-अशुभ कर्म करवा छतां त्यां सुधी मनमां संकल्प-विकल्प रहे छे, ज्यां सुधी हृदयमां आत्म-स्वरूपनी सिद्धिनी झांखी थती नथी. १४२
'घेलो' 'घेलो' एम तने घेला लोक कहे छे. एनाथी गभराईश मा. मोहने उखाडीने सिद्धि-महानगरीमा प्रवेश कर.
१४३

Page #291

दोहा-उपहार
संपूर्ण अवध( अहिंसा )नुं व्रत आचरवामां आवे, वळी कई पण अन्याय न करवामां आवे - आटलं चित्तमां लखी अने मनमा धारण करी पग पसारीने निश्चित थई सुओ.
झाझु आकुंअवठु बोलवाथी शुं ? हे जोगी ! देह आत्मा नथी. देहथी जुदो ज्ञानमय ते ज तारो आत्मा समज.
जेनं मन अशुद्ध होय तेने पोथीओ पढवाथी पण मुक्ति क्याथी मळे ? ....... शिकारी पण बहु वार (?) हरणांने नमे छे. १४६
हे ज्ञानी योगी! क्यांय दया विनानो धर्म होय नहीं. पाणीने खूब मथवाथी पण हाथ चीकणा न थाय.
दुर्जनोना संगथी भला माणसोना गुण पण नाश पामे . लोढानी साथे मळवाथी अग्नि पण घणथी पीटाय छे.
१४८
शंखनी धवलता अग्नि पण दूर करी शकतो नथी, परंतु खेरनी साथे मळतां ज ए धवलता नाश पामे एमां शंका नथी.
१४९ । समुद्र द्वारा त्यजायेला शंखनी ए अवस्था थाय छे के गळामा हाथ नाखी एने माछीओ चुंबन करे . गुणरत्ननिधि समुद्रने छोडी जवाथी एने कांठे फेंकावं पडे छे. त्यां शंखोनी अवस्था एवी थाय छे के तेमने फुकावं पड़े छे, एमां शक नथी.
१५०-५१ - हे मधुकर ! कल्पतरुनी मंजरीनी सुगंधी आस्वादीने हवे खाखरामा भमवा लाग्यो ? हे हताश ! हैयु फाटीने तुं मरी केम न गयो ? १५२ ' माथु मुंडाव्यु, शिक्षा धारण करी, धर्मनी आशा बांधी, मात्र कुटुंब छोड्य' पण पारकानी आशा न छोडी (तो धर्मनी आशा क्यां वधी ?) १५३
नग्नतानुं जे अभिमान करे छे, वगोवायां छतां जे समजता नथी, ते बाह्य के आंतरिक एके बंधनने कापी शकता नथी.
१५४ हे भाई! आ मनरूपी हाथीने आंधळी दाटथी रोका. ते शीलरूपी बाडी. भांगी नाखशे अने फरी संसारमा पडशे.
१५५

Page #292

दोहा-उपहार
जे भणेला छे, जे पंडित छे, जे मोटा गर्व धरनारा ले, ते पण स्त्रीओना चक्करमा रहेंटनी जेम भमे छे.
१५६
कक्काना अक्षरोने मूठीथी भूसीने तुं त्यां सुधी लख्या करीश ज्यां सुधी शंखनी जीभ ...(?) लूछीने न ........ (?)
१५७
__ तुं तडतड पांदडां तोडे छे – जाणे ऊंट पेठं ! पण हे मूढ ! तुं ए नथी जाणतो के कोण तोडी रघु छे, कोण तूटी रह्यु छे ?
१५८
पांदडं पाणी, तृण के तल --बाने तारा जेवा ज जाण. पण मोक्षमा जेनाथी जई शकाय ते कारण तो कोई जुदुं ज छे.
१५९
हे जोगी! पांदडीओ तोड मा, फळने य हाथ न लगाउ. जेना माटे तुं तोडे छे ए शिवने ज अहीं चडावी दे.
१६०
.. देवळमांनो पथ्थर, तीर्थमान पाणी, पुस्तकमांनु सकळ काव्य के फूल्युफाल्युं जे वृक्ष दीसे छे ---- सघळु इंधण थशे.
१६२
- तीर्थे तीर्थे भमनाराने शुं फळ मळयु ? बाह्य शरीर पाणीथी शुद्ध थयु. अंदरनुं शुं थयुं ?
तुं तीर्थतीर्थमा भमे छे. हे मूर्ख ! चामडी तो पाणीथी धोई, पापरूपी मेलथी मेलं बनेलं आ तारुं मन केवी रीते धोईश ? १६३
। जेना हृदयमा एके य देव वसतो नथी ते जन्ममरणथी मुक्त थई परम-लोक केवी रीते पामे ?
एक (तेने) सारी रीते जाणे छे, बीजो नथी जाणतो. तेनुं चरित्र देवो पण नथी जाणता. जे अनुभवे छे ते ज जाणी जाय छे. पूछनाराने संतोष कोण आपे!
१६५

Page #293

दोहा-उपहार
my....
____ जे कोई रीते लख्यो लखाय तेम नथी, को कहेवाय तेम नथी, कीधेलो कोईने चित्तमा रहेतो नथी, ते गुरु-उपदेशथी चित्तमां दृढ थाय छे. तेवी रीते तेने धारण करतां बधे रहेल छे.
___ १६६
. समुद्रे धक्केलेला पाणीने नदीन पाणी खेचे छे, भारे जहाजने पवन हिलोळे चडावे छे तेम ज बोध अने विबोध अथडाय छे त्यारे बीजी ज वात बनवा लागे छे.
१६७
आकाशमा विविध शब्दो जे संभकाय छे त्यां तेना पडघामां कोई दुर्विचार आवतो नथी, मन पांचे ( इन्द्रियो) साथे अस्त पामे छे. हे मूढ ! खरे त्यां ज परम तत्त्व रहेल छे.
१६८
. अक्षय, निरामय, परमगतिमां आज सुधी लवलेश पण जाणतो नथी, मननी भ्रांति मांगी नथी. जेमतेम दहाडा गणे छे.
.. ' हे जोगी ! स्वाभाविक भावमा जता ( मनरूपी ) ऊंटने रोक. अक्षय, निरामय, परमगतिमां मोकलेल ते पोतानो संहार पोते ज करशे. १७०
। अक्षय, निरामय परमगतिमा मनने दबावीने मूकी दे. (तो) आवागमन( संसारभ्रमण )नी वेली तूटी जशे-तेमां शंका न कर. १७१
..एम चित्तने अविचळ करीने आत्मानुं ध्यान कराय तो आठे कर्म हणीने सिद्धि-महानगरीमा जवाय.
१७२
काळा अक्षर वांचतां वाचतां नाश पाम्या तो य एक परम विद्या न जाणी के क्यां ऊग्यो अने क्यां लीन थयो !
१७३ . (जेणे ) बे भांगीने एक कर्या', मननी वेलीने पोपी नहीं ते गुरुनी हु शिष्या छं. बीजानी खुशामत न करूं.
१७४
आगळ, पाछळ, दशे दिशामां ज्यां जोउं त्या ते ज छे. त्यारे मारी भ्रांति मांगी. हवे कोईने पूछQ नथी,
१७५

Page #294

दोहा-उपहार ___ भीठे जेम पाणीमां ओगळी जाय छे तेम चित्त जो ( आत्मामां ) गळी जाय तो (एवा ) समरस बनेला जीवने समाधिनु शु काम ? . १७६
जो तु एक ज पदने पामीश, हुं ( तारा माटे) अपूर्व कौतुक करीश. जेम आंगळी देखातां पग अने मस्तक देखातां सर्वाग शरीरनी धारणा थई शके छे. (?)
१७७
तीर्थे तीर्थे भटकनाराने शरीरसंताप ज मळे .. आत्माथी आत्मानु ध्यान करीने निर्वाणमां डग दे.
१७८
हे जोगी! जेने जोवा माटे तुं तीर्थे तीर्थे भमे छे ते शिव तो तारी साथे ज चाले छे. तो य तुं तेने पामी शक्यो नहीं ! १७९
हे मूढ ! लोकोए रचेलां देवळो तुं जुए छे पण पोताना देह( रूपी देवळ)ने तो जोतो नथी के ज्यां शांत शिव रहेल छे !
१८०
डाबी बाजु अने जमणी बाजु गाम वसाव्यां, मध्यमां शून्य. त्यां गामडु जे जाणे ते बीजें गाम वसावे छे.
१८१
हे देव ! मने तो ( सवार ), बपोर अने सांज तारी चिंता छे. (ज्यारे) तुं तो परम निरामय स्थानमा जईने सूई रहीश.
१८२
बुद्धि ज्यां तड दईने तूटी जाय ने मन ज्यां आथमी जाय - हे स्वामि ! एवा देवनो उपदेश करो. अन्य देवोथी शु?
सकलीकरण जाण्यु नहीं, पाणी ने पर्णनो भेद न जाण्यो, आत्माने परमात्मा साथे मेळव्यो नहीं ( के आत्म-अनात्मने छूटा पाड्यां नहीं) ने पथ्थरने देव तरीके पूजे छे ।।
आत्माने परमात्मामां मेळव्यो नहीं, भवभ्रमण भाग्युं नहीं. फोतरां खांडतां काळ गयो, तांदुल हाथ लाग्या नहीं !
१८५

Page #295

दोहा-उपहार
देहरूपी देवळमां शिव वसे ले ( अने) तुं (बाह्य ) मंदिरोमां शोधे ले. मारा मनमा हसवं आवे छे के तने मळेलु जले अने ( तेनी) तुं भीख मांगे छे!
१८६
'तुं वन, देवालय अने तीथों मां भमे ले, आकाशने य निहाळमो ( फरे ले ). अहो ! वरुओ छूटा पड्या छे ( अने ) पशुओ भमी रया छे ! ( ? ) १८७
बन्ने रस्ता छोडीने लक्ष्य वगरनो वच्चे जाय छे ! जो ते लक्ष्य मेळवे (तो पण ) बेमाथी एके ( मार्गर्नु ) कंई फळ तेने मळशे नहीं. १८८
हे योगी! योगनी गति विषम छे. मनने अटकावी शकातुं नथी. इन्द्रियविषयनां जे सुखो छे तेमां फरी फरी ( मन ) पाछु जाय ले. १८९
बांधेल त्रण लोकमां फरे छे, मुक्त करेल एक डग पण चालतो नथी! हे जोगी! जो, ( मनरूपी ) करम विपरीत कार्य करे हे ने ?! १९०
संसारमा भमतां न सत्य के न तत्त्व (जीवने) देखाय छे. जीव (पोतानी पांच इन्द्रियोनी) फोज साथे एक अटवीथी बीजी अटवीमा भमतो
उज्जडने जे वसतीवाळा करे ते अने जे वसतीवाळाने उज्जड ! - ते जोगीनी बलिहारी, जेने नथी पाप के पुण्य.
१९२
जे पहेलांनां कर्मनो नाश करे से, नवा कर्मने प्रवेशवा देतो नथी, प्रतिदिन जिनेश्वर देवनुं ध्यान करे छे ते परमात्मा बने ळे. १९३
बीजो जे विषय सेवे के अने घणां पाप करे छे ते कर्मना कारणे नरकनो महेमान बने छे.
जेम चामडाना टुकडाथी कूतराने संताप भोगववो पडे ले तेम सडेला पदार्थो अने क्षार-मूत्र-गंधथी भरेला छिद्र द्वारा लोको संताप पामे छे. १९५

Page #296

दोहा-उपहार
हे मूढ ! देखनारने रमण करवाथी पण सुख नथी थतुं. अहो ! नानकडं मूत्रनुं छिद्र ता य कोने संतापतु नथी ?
हे जीव ! विषय-कषायो छोडीने तुं जिनवरखें ध्यान कर. तो क्यांय तने दुःख देखाशे नहीं अने तु अजरामर पद पामीश.
विषय-कषाय छोडीने हे मूर्ख ! आत्मामां मन लगाड. (तो) चारे गतिनो नाश करीने अनुपम परमपद पामीश.
इन्द्रियोना प्रसरणने निवारवामां ज हे मन ! परमार्थ समज. ज्ञानमय आत्माने छोडीने बाकीना शास्त्रो प्रपंचजाळ छे.
१९९
हे जीव ! तु विषयन चिंतन न कर. विषयो सारा नथी. सेवन वखते मीठा लागे छे, पण हे मूढ ! पाछळथी ते दुःख आपे छे. २००
विषय-कषायोमां मोहित थई जे आत्मामा चित्त देतो नथी ते पापकर्मा बांधीने लांबा काळ सुधी संसारमा भ्रमण करे छे. २०१
इन्द्रिय-विषयो छोडीने हे मूर्ख ! मोहनो त्याग कर. प्रतिदिन परमात्मानुं ध्यान कर. तो ए (साचो) उद्यम कहेवाय.
२०२ .
. श्वास जितनारो, अनिमिष नेत्रवाळो, सघळी क्रिया छोडी दीधेलो - एवी अवस्था पामेलो ते योगी छे. एमां संदेह नथी.
२०३ ज्यारे मननो व्यापार तूटी जाय, रागद्वेषनु अस्तित्व नाश पामे अने आत्मा परमात्मामां स्थिर थई जाय त्यारे निर्वाण थाय छे. २०४
हे जीव! तु आत्म-स्वभाव छोडीने विषयोनु सेवन करे छे, तेथी तु अन्य दुर्गतिमा ज जईश -- ए एवो उद्यम छे.
२०५ न मंत्र, न तंत्र, न ध्यान, न धारणा के न श्वासोच्छ्वासनु कई काम छे. एम ज मुनि परम सुख पामे छे. आ गरबड कोईने य गमती नथी.
२०६.

Page #297

दोहा-उपहार
२०७
बहु विशिष्ट उपवासादिक करवाथी संवर थाय छे. बहु विस्तारथी पूछवाथी शु? कोईने पूछ नहीं.
तप कर, जिनभाषित सुप्रसिद्ध दशविध धर्मनु पालन कर. ए ज कर्मनी निर्जरा छे. हे जीव ! आ में तने साचुं कह्यु,
२०८
हे जीव ! जिनवरप्रणीत अहिंसाप्रधान दशविध धर्मनु एकचित्ते चिंतन कर अने एम तु संसारने तोड.
२०९ मने भवे भवे निर्मळ दर्शन हो, भवे भवे समाधिभाव हो. भवे भवे मननी व्याधिने हणनार ऋषि मारा गुरु हो.
२१०
हे जीव ! एकाग्र मनथी बार भावनाओनु चिंतन कर. रामसिंह मुनि कहे छे के एनाथी तुं शिवपुरीने पामीश.
२११
शून्य शून्य नथी. त्रिभुवनमां शून्य शून्य नजरे पडे छे. शून्यभावमा गयेलो आत्मा पाप-पुण्य बन्नेने छोडी दे छे.
२१२
बे रस्ते ( एक साथे ) चाली शकाय नहीं. बे मोढावाळी सोयथी गोदडी सीवी शकाय नहीं. हे अज्ञान ! इन्द्रियसुख अने मोक्ष - बे एक साथे संभवे नहीं.
२१३
उपवासथी प्रदीपन थाय छे, देहमां ताप पेदा थाय छे, इन्द्रियोनु घर बळी जय छे. ए रीते ते मोक्षनु कारण बने छे.
२१४ तेमना घरे भोजन न करो जेमना घरे अपहरण करीने भोजन बनावेलं होय(?). तेमने जयकार करवाथी पण सम्यक्त्व छूटी जाय छे. २१५
हे जोगी! पृथ्वी पर भमतां माणेक मळी गयुं, (तो) पोतानी गांठे बांधी लेवु अने एकांतमां जोवं.
२१६ जे वादविवादो करे छे, जेनी भ्रांति भांगी नथी, जे ........ (?) प्राप्तिमा रत छे - ते भ्रान्त थईने भमे छे.
२१७

Page #298

दोहा-उपहार
आहार काया टकावी राखवा माटे छे, काया ज्ञान माटे प्रयत्न करे छे, ज्ञान कर्मनो विनाश करे छे, कर्मनाशथी परम-पद मळे छे. २१८
काळ, पवन, रवि अने शशि – चारेनो एक साथे वास छे. हुं तने पूछु छु, जोगी ! पहेला कोनो नाश ?
२१९ शशि पोषे छे, रवि प्रजाळे छे, पवन हिलोळे चडावे छे. सत्त्व-रजस्तमसने ओगाळीने काळ कर्मने गळी जाय छे.
२२०
जे मुख अने नासिका वच्चे प्राणोनो संचार करावे ले ते नित्य आकाशमा विहरे छे. ते जीव नित्य तेनाथी जीवे छे.
२२१
आपत्तिथी बेभान बनी गयेल ( माणस ) खोबा पाणीथी जीवी जाय छे. पण निर्जीव ( माणस ) हजार घडा पाणीने य शुं करे ! २२२

Page #299


Page #300

दोहा-वर्णानुक्रमणिका
-७
..
.
.
.
अक्खरवडिया मसिमिलिया
१७३ अक्खरडेहि जि गम्विया अखइ णिरामइ परमगइ अज्ज वि १६९ अखइ णिरामइ परमगइ मणु अग्गई पच्छई दह दिहहि अच्छउ भायणु ताहं घरि २१५ अज्जु जिणिज्जइ करहुलउ अणुपेहा बारह वि जिय
२११ अण्णु जि जीउ म चिति तुहं अण्णु णिरंजणु देउ पर अण्णु तुहारउ णाणमउ अण्णु म जाणहि अप्पणड अत्थि ण उब्भउ जरमरणु अथिरेण थिरा मइलेण णिम्मला अन्तो णत्थि सुईण अप्पा अप्पि परिठियउ अप्पाए वि विभावियई अप्पा केवलणाणमउ अप्पा दसणणाणमउ अप्पा दसणु केवलु वि अप्पा परहं ण मेलयउ मणु अप्पा परहं ण मेलियउ आवागमणु १८५ अप्पा बुज्झिउ णिच्चु जइ
२२ अप्पा मिल्लिवि एक्कु पर ११७ अप्पा मिल्लिवि गुणणिलउ
६७ अप्पा मिल्लिवि जगतिलउ जो अप्पा मिल्लिवि जगतिलउ मूढ़ अप्पा मिल्लिवि णाणमउ
३७ अप्पायत्तउ ज जि सुहु अप्पु करिज्जइ काई तसु अभितर चित्ति मइलियई अम्मिए इहु मणु हत्थिया
अम्मिए जी पर सो जि पर अम्हहिं जाणिउ एक्कु जिणु अरि जिय जिणरि मणु ठयहि
र मणकरह म रइ करहि अवघउ अवरु जं उम्पज्जइ असरीरहं संधाणु किउ अंबरि विविहु सद्दु जो सुम्मइ आपदा मुर्छितो वारि० आभुजता विसयमुह आयई अडवड वडवडइ आराहिज्जइ काई दिउ इंदियपसरु णिवारियई इंदियविसय चएवि बद उपलाणहिं जोइय करहुलउ उप्पज्जइ जेण विबोहु ण वि उम्मणि थक्का जामु मणु १०४ उम्मूलिवि ते मूल गुण
२१ उववास विसेस करिवि बहु उववासह होइ पलेवणा
२१४ उज्वलि चोप्पडि चिट्ठ करि उव्वस बसिया जो करइ एक्क ण जाणहि वडिय एक्कु सु वेयइ अण्णु ण वेयई एमइ अप्या झाइयइ
१७२ कड्ढइ सरिजलु जलहि विपिल्लिउ
१६७ कम्महं केरउ भावडउ कम्मु पुराइउ जो खवइ...परम कम्मु पुराइउ जो खवइ...अणुदिणु १९३ करहा चरि जिणगुणथलिहिं कायोऽस्तीत्यर्थमाहारः
२१८ कालहिं पवणहिं रविससिहिं कासु समाहि कर
१३९
.
.
G
११२
१३६

Page #301

3
29 M
m
१
WAKA
०
०
२०३
कि किज्जइ बहु अावरह किं बहुए अडवड वडिग कुहिएण पूरिएण य छिद्देश केवलु मलपरिवज्जियउ खतु पियतु वि जीव जड गमणागमणविवज्जियउ गहिलउ गहिलउ जणु भाइ गुरु दिणयरु गुरु हिमकरणु घरवासउ मा जाणि जिवन चिंतइ जंपइ कुगइ ण वि छत्तु वि पाइवि सुगुरुवडा छहदंसणगंथि बहुल
१२५ छहदसणधंधइ पडिय
११६ छंडेविणु गुणरयगणिहि
१५१ जइ इक्क हि पावीसि पय १७७ जइ मणि कोहु करिवि
१४० जइ लद्धउ माणिक्कडउ
२१६ जइ वारउं तो तहिं जि पर ११८ जरइ ण मरइ ण संभवइ जसु जीवतहं मणु मुवउ
१२३ जसु मणि णाणु ण विप्फुरइ कम्मह जसु मणि णाणु ण विष्फुरइ सव्व जसु मणि णिवसइ परमप्पर जं दुक्खु वि तं सुक्खु किउ जं लिहिउ ण पुच्छिउ कह व जाइ १६६ जं सुहु विसयपरंमुहउ जिणवरु झायहि जीव तुहुँ जिम लोणु विलिज्जइ पाणिए, जीव म जाणहि अप्पणा जीव वहति णरयगइ जेण णिरंजणि मणु धरिउ जे पढिया जे पंडिया जेहा पाणहं झुपडा तेहा
१०८ जोइय जोएं लइयइण जोइय भिण्णउ झाय तुहुं
१२९ जोइय विसमी जोयगइ
जोइय हियडइ जासु ण वि जोइय हियडइ जासु पर जोणिहि लक्खहिं परिभमइ जो पई जोइउं जोइया जो मुणि छंडिवि विसयसुह दिल्लउ होहि म इंदियह गायत्तणि जे गब्बिया णमिओ सि ताम जिणवर ण वि गोरउ ण वि सामलउ ण वि तुहुँ कारणु कज्जु ण वि ण वि तुहुं पंडिउ मुक्खु ण वि ण वि भुंजता विसयसुह णाणतिडिक्की सिक्खि' वढ णिच्चु णिरामउ णाणमउ णिज्जियसासो णिफंदलोयणो णिल्लक्खणु इत्थीबाहिरउ तउ करि दहविहु धम्मु करि तरुणउ बूढउ बालु हर तव तणुअंमि सरीरयह तव दावणु वय भियअडा ताम कुतित्थई परिभमड ता संकप्पवियप्या तासु लीह दिढ दिज्जइ तित्थई तित्थ भमंतयह कि तित्थई तित्थ भमंतयहं संता० तित्थई तित्थ भमेहि वढ तिहुयणि दीसइ देउ जिणु तुदृइ बुद्धि तड त्ति जहिं तुट्टे मणवावारे भग्गे तह तूसि म रूसि म कोहु करि तोडेवि सयल वियप्पडा दयाविहीणउ धम्मडा दहविहु जिणवरभासियत देखताहं वि मूढ वढ देव तुहारी चिंत महु देवलि पाहणु तित्थि जलु
२०८ ३२
१४२ ८३
१६२
१७८
१६३
१८३ २०४
१५६
१३३ १४७ २०९
१८९
१८२ १६१

Page #302

K
m
. 0
. GN
.
२०
.
देह गलंतहं सवु गलइ देहमहेली एह बढ देहि उम्भउ जरमरणु देहहो पिक्खिवि जरमरणु देहादेवलि जो वसई देहादेवलि सिउ वसइ धंधइ पडियउ सयलु जगु पत्तिय तोडहि तडतडह पत्तिय तोडि म जोइया पत्तिय पाणिउ दव्म तिल पंच बलद्द ण रक्खिय पंडियपंडिय पंडिया पंचहिं बाहिरु णेहडउ पाउ वि अप्पहिं परिणवइ पुण्णु वि पाउ वि कालु णदु पुण्णेण होइ विहओ पोत्था पढणिं मोक्खु कह बद्धउ तिहुवणु परिभमइ बहुयई पढियई मूट पर बुज्झहु बुज्झहु जिणु भगइ बे छंडेविणु पंथडा बे पंथेहि ण गम्मइ बे मंजेविणु एक्कु किउ बोहिविवज्जिउ जीव तुहूं भल्लाण वि णासंति गुण भवि भवि दंसणु मलरहिट भिण्णउ जेहिं ण जाणियउ मणु जाणइ उवएसडउ मणु मिलियउ परमेसरहो महुयर सुरतरुमंजरिहिं मंतु ण तंतु ण घेउ ण धारणु मा मुट्टा पसु गरुवडा मिल्लहु मिल्लहु मोक्कलउ मुखनासिकयोमध्ये मुंडिय मुंडिय मुंडिया मुंह मुंडाइवि सिक्ख भरि
ew ....
मूटा जावइ देव मृढा देह म गंजयड मृढा सयन वि काग्निउ निकाल मृदा सयन्टु वि कारिनउ में मुल छडि जो डाल चटि मोक्ग्यु ण पावहि जीव नुहं मोहु विलिजइ मणु मन्द्र गयवयल्लाह छहमाह लोहि मोहिउ तान नहुँ वक्खागडा करंतु बुद्ध वट जु छोडिवि मलियन वडिया अणुटग्गवहं वणि देवलि नित्थई भमहि यणविहगर पागमत वरु वितु विलहरु वा जला वंदहु वंदह जिणु भगड वादविवादा जे कहि वामिय किय अर दाहिणिय १८१ विसयकसाय चणवे वह विसयकसायहं रजियउ विसयसुहा दुइ दिवहडा विसया चिंति म जीव नुहुँ विसया सेवइ जो वि पर विसया सेवहि जीव नुहुँ छंडॉव २०५ विसया सेवहि जीव नहुं दुक्खहं १२० सई मिलिया सई विहडिया सप्पि मुक्की कंचुलिय सयलीकरणु ण जाणियउ
१८४ सयल वि को वि तडफडइ सव्य-विषयहं तुट्टाहं सबहिं गयहिं ठहरसहि ससि पोसइ रवि पज्जलद सहज-अवत्थहिं करहुलर संख समुदहिं मुक्किम संतु ण दीसइ तत्तु मावि सिद्धतपुराणहं वेय पद १२६
N
१७४
१२८
८८
m
२२१ १३५

Page #303

१५७
dom
१२७
सेद्धा वम्मा मुट्टिइण सब विणु सत्ति ण वावरइ सिव-सत्तिहिं मेलावडा सुक्खअडा दुइ दिवहडई सुण्णं ण होइ सुण्णं मुहपरिणामहिं धम्मु वढ सो जोयउ जो जोगवइ
सो पत्थि इह पएसो हउं गोरउ हउं सामल हां वरु बंभणु ण वि वासु हर सगुणी पिउ णिग्गुण हत्थ अहुदहं देवली हलि सहि काई कर हृयवहि णासि ण सक्कियउ
२१२
महत्त्वपूर्ण शब्दोनी सार्थ सूची
... ( अंक गाथानो क्रमांक दावि छ )
अंकय १७७ (अकृत ?) अपूर्व अंच-१३९ (अर्च् ) पूजधुं अक्खर ९७, १२४, १४४ अक्षर अक्खरड ८६ अश्वर (+ड लघुतादर्शक) अक्खरवडिया १७३ अक्षर-पाटी अखअ ४२, १६९ अक्षय अग्गई १७५ (अग्रे) आगळ अग्घडि १५१ पूजा-स्थळ अछेउ . ९० उच्छेद (?) अछोप १३९ - अस्पृश्य अणक्खर १२४ (अनक्षर) अक्षय अणुपेहा २११ (अनुप्रेक्षा) चिंतन, स्वाध्याय
विशेष अडवड ६, अडवडवड १४५ आडुअवळू अवियडु ११४ -आडाअवळा अत्थवण १६८, १८३ अस्तमन अप्पणिया १८० (आत्मीया) पोतानी
(हिं. अपनी) अम्मिए ५१, १५५, १८७, १९६ आदि.
आश्चर्यसूचक संबोधनात्मक अव्यय अयाण ७, २१३ (अज्ञान) अजाण अरु १८१ (अपरं) अने अलक्ख २८८ (अलक्ष्य)
अवधउ १४८ (अ-वध-अहिंमा ?) अवराई १५१ अपर-अटवी ? अवरु १७५ (अपर) अन्य अवरुपपरु २५ (अपगपर) परस्पर अहुट १४ (अर्धचतुष्ठ) माडात्रण, ऊंद आण-(आणी ९५, आणइ १६५)
(आरा-नयू ) आणवू आयइ ६ (आपद) आपनि आयई१४४ (एतानि) आ इत्थु ४१ अन इम २११ (एवम् ) म
२३, ०६ (इह) अहीं इह १२७, १५५, १८६ (तत्) आ,
हिं. यह उग्गउ १७३ (उद्गत) उग्यो उट्ट १५८ (उष्ट्र) ऊँट उट्टिय १०९ ओटेलु उपलाण ४२ (उत्प्लानयू) बंधन काढी
नाखवू, पलाण छोर्बु उप्पज्ज-८२, १४८(उत्पद -कमणि) ऊपजवं उप्पाड-१४३ सुखाइ उब्भअ ३४, ३५ उद्भव उमाहिया ११३ उत्कंटिन ?

Page #304

उम्मण १०४ ( उद्+मनस ) मनथी वेगळं उर ८९ (उरस् ) छाती उल्लूर-११२ ( उत्+लू) नाश करवो,
तोडq
उवएसड ४६ उपदेश+इ लघुतादर्शक उव्वर-५१ ( उर्वर ) उगरवू उव्वल-१८ (उद्+वल) लेप करवा उव्वस १९२ (उदास) उज्जड एक्कट्ठ २१९ (एकत्र) एकट्ठ एक्कमण २०९, २११ (एकन-मनन्)
एकमन, एकध्यान एत्तडअ६२. (सतावत् ) एटलं एही , एवी कंचुलिया १५ कांचळी कंड - (कंडि १३, कंडत १८५) (कण्डय-)
खांडवू कथा २१३ गादडी, हिं. कथरी कच्च १ काच प्पड २१६ कपडे कम्मड ११७, २०१ कर्म+ड कुत्सार्थे रह १२, ११२, ११३ (करभ) ऊंट रहुलउ १२, १११, १७० करभ+उल
स्वार्थ लहीजइ १४० (कलहायत) कलह कराय छ साय ६२, १३४ कपाय रिम ९, १३, ५२ कृत्रिम सु १६६ (कस्य) कोर्नु पाक ११० (किम्पाक) वृक्ष-विशेष
जनां फळ - स्वादमां मधुर' पण प्राणघातक होय छे.
१५९ (कोऽपि) कोइ डे ५२ कुटी डेल्ली ९१ कुटी+ल्ली (स्वार्थ) डि १७ (कुठारिका) कुहाडी ल ६८ केवल ज्ञान ..
कोडि (१) १७७ कौतक खधावारिअ १९१ छावगी-फोजथी घेरा
येल ? खयर १४९ (खदिर) खेर
४५ १. खल, दुर्जन २. खोळ खव- १९३ (क्षपय्-) स्वपाव, नाश
करवो खवणअ ३२ क्षपणक, दिगम्बर मुनि खोइ १९७ खोई ने गंगड. १३७, १८४ गांगडो, नानो पत्थर
नो टूकडा गउपाविय (१) २१७ (१) गण्ण ७१ (गणन) गणना, गणतरी गम्मगस्म ८३ गम्यागम्य गरुव १३७ गरवड १३१ (गुरु+क
+ड' स्वार्थे) मोर्ट गलगल २०६ कलकल गवंगअ ९९ ? गहिलअ १४३ (पहिल) बेलु गामड १८१ (ग्राम+ड) गामडु गिल- २२० गळ्बु घण १४८ घण घरट्ट १५६ रेंट घरवइ १२२ गृहपति घल्ल-१७१ (क्षिप) घालवू घिप्प-१५१ (ग्रह-कर्म०) रखावू, मूकावं चङ- ४९, १०९, १११ व० (आरुह्)
चडवू चय- ६२ (त्यज) त्यजवू चिट्ठ १८ चेष्टा चोप्पड-१८, १४७ चोपडवू छड- (१६, २०५ छंडिवि, ३७ ठंडेविणु,
१०९ छडि) छोडवू, छोडवू छुडु ४०, १४९, १५३ (यदि) जो छोप १३९ स्पृश्य जंप-(जल्प) ६.० बोलवू
who

Page #305

जवला १०५ (मल) जोड जाइवउ १५९ जानुं, गमन जाम ८, ५६ व० ( यावत् ) ज्यां सुधी जीवड ११८, १७६ जीव+ड अल्पतादर्शक जीहडिय ४२ जीभडी
१०८ यथा, जेवा
५.१ योग
जेहा
जांअ
९ योगी
जोइ जोइय ४२,१३,६२ ० योगी जोगव - ९६,१८१ जोगववुं, जाणवुं जीयाभास १०९ योगाभास
झंखाअ - १३१ संताप करवो झाव - ( ) ३७, २०२ ध्यान कर झुंपडा १०८ कुटी, झुंपडुं उज्झ- ५१ दाझवु
डाल १०९ डाळ
डुंगर ११४ डुंगर डोम
८६ चांडाल ढंढोल - १५२ (भ्रम्) भमनुं ढिल्ल ४३ ढीलं दुरदुल्लिअ २३ भ्रमित णव - ७७, १४६ (नम् ) नमकुं वरि ५८ केवल
णाणिय १४७ ( ज्ञानिन् ) ज्ञानी णिक्कारिम ५२ निष्कारण डिह - ८७ बाळ
पित्तलउ १९८ ( निस्तुल्य) अमूल्य णिभंति ७३ (निर्भ्रान्ति) नियंत १८७ ( पश्यत्) जोतुं
णिराम १८१,१८२ पवित्र, शुद्ध णिरारिअ १२० निश्चित णिरुन्त १२१ निश्चित
पिल्लक्खण ९९ (निर्लक्षण) लक्षणरहित ? णिवड - ५ ( निपत्) पडं णीस २७ (निःश्व) निर्धन णेक्क ३५ (न+एक) एके नहीं
उ ४५ (स्नेह +ड + क) स्नेह ( सर. गु. नेह, डो)
तड ति १८३ ( तड इति) तड दईने
तडतड १५८ तड तड तडफड - ८८ तडफडवं
तिडिक्की ८७ (स्फुलिंग) तखरखो (हिं. तिलगी) तुहारअ ५६ तुहारी १८२ ( त्वदीय) तमारं-री १०८ (तथा) तेवा थडि १५१ ( स्थली) स्थळ
तेहा
यूल २६ स्थूळ वक्कडिया १०२ ताप, पीडा
दावणु ४२, ११३ दामणु दिक्खु-ण १९० जुओ तो खरा, हिं. देखो न दिढ ८३ दृढ
दिवडा १७, १०६, १६९ व दिवस+डा दुक्किय १२, २०१ दुष्कृत
दुम्मेह ९८ (दुर्मेधस ) दुर्बुद्धि
दुव्वाह १५० (?) देवली
१८ देवळ धंध ७, ९१, ११६ धंधो धंधवाला १२२ धांधलभर्यु
धाणुक्क १२१ धनुष्क धुत्तिम ८० धूर्तता पंथड १८८ पंथ+ड पगाम ११२ ( प्रकाम) अत्यंत पच्छइ १७५, २०० ( पश्चात् ) पछी पडिपिल्लिअ १६७ ( परिप्रेरित) धकेलायेलं पत्तिय: १५८, १५९,१६० (पत्रिका) पांदडी, हिं. पत्ती
परइ ८९, १८२ ( परे) पारकामां पराइय ४३ ( परकीय) पराई परायउ ३७ परायो
परिखिव - ९१ ( परि+क्षप) परिक्षीण थ परिवाडि १७, १०६ (परिपाटि ) परंपरा पयाल ६९, ८४ ( प्रजाल ) पराळ पलाण ११३ ( पल्याण) पलाण

Page #306

पलेवणा २१४ (प्रदीपना) प्रदीपन पवाण १६७ (प्रमान) मो? पसर १८२ प्रभात पसुलोगडा १८७ पशुलोक डा. पसुवा १२७ पशुआ पाणिउ १५९ पाणी पालि १८२ पाळी ? पाव- (प्राप्) पामबुं ६ पाविज्जइ ११, ३६ पावहि २४, ६५ पावड ८८ पावियइ १३० पाइवि १७७ पाविसि १९९ पावेहि पिक्ख-३३ जोवु, पेखळ पाहण १३०, १६१ (पाषाण) पाणो पाहुणअ १९४ (प्राधूर्णक) महेमान, हिं..
पाहुना पिड १५६ (पिट) अधीनता पिल्ल- २२० (प्रेरय् ) धकेलतुं पुत्तिए १०८ (पुत्रिके) संबोधनात्मक
आश्चर्योद्गार पुराइअ ७७ पुरातन पेस ७७ प्रवेश पोख-२२० (पोष् ) पाषर्बु फिट-२, ११६, १४९ (भ्रंश) नाश पामधुं फुक्क-१५१ फूंकवू फुस-१५७ भूसg फेड-११७ फेडवु बंभ ३३ ब्रह्म बप्पुडउ ५ बापडो बलद्द ४४ बळद बलि किज्ज-१९२ वारी जq बहिरपणउ ८२ बहिर्जानी बुज्झ-४० बोध पामवो भंतडी १६९, १७५ भ्रान्ति-न्डी भज्ज ८३ भांगवं भडारअ ६३ (भट्टारक) स्वामि भल्ल १४८, २०० (भद्र) भलु
भाव-१०४ भावबु, फावg भावडा २५, ३६ भाव+डा (अल्पतादर्शक) भिणिया १२७ (भिन्ना) भांगी भियमडा (१) ११३ घोडा ने
बांधवान तंग जेवू कोई साधन भुल्लउ १७ भूलेल भू १०४ ? भेडिआ १८७ (वृक) वरू. (हिं. भेडिया) मंडियउ १२ मांड्यो, नाख्यो मज्झण १८२ मध्याह्न मरह १५६ गर्व मसिमिलिय १७३ मशि+मिलित महेली ६४ महिला माणिक्कड २१६ माणिक्य+ड माहू ९९ (१) मिच्छादिहि ७० (मिथ्यादृष्टि) सत्य
धर्म प्रत्ये अविश्वासी मिच्छत्तिय २० (मिथ्यात्वी) सत्य-धर्म प्रत्ये
- अविश्वासी मुट्ट १३१ मोद मुवउ १२३ मुवी मेल-१५३ छोडी देवु, त्यजवं मेलाबड १२७ मिलन, मिळाप मो १२२ (मह्यम् ) मने मोक्कलउ ४८, ५९, १२३ व० (मुक्त+
लक) मोकळु मोड- ९५ फेरवq (हिं. मोडना) रज्जु २२० रजम रिसह ६३ ऋषभ, प्रथम तीर्थकर रीण ११५ (श्रान्त) थाकेलं लउ १६९ (लव) सहेज लल्लि १७४ लालन लिंगरगहण १५ साधुवेशग्रहण लीह
८३ रेखा लुस- १५७ लुछq लोण १७६ लवण

Page #307

वंदअ ३२ बन्दक, बौद्ध साधु ? (जुआ
परमप्पयास १.८२, टीका) वक्खाणड ८४ व्याख्यान+ड वच्छ १६१ वृक्ष वह ११५, वडिय ४७,११४ वाट+डी वडवड-६ बडबडवू बढ २,२२,६४ ब० मूर्ख वम्म (? वण्ण) १५७ वर्ण ? वयल्ल १३२ ककळाट वलि वलि १८९ वळी वळी वाड १०६, १३० वाड विझ १५५ विन्ध्य पर्वत विग्गुत्त १५४ (विगुप्त) वगोवायेलं विच्चे १८८ वच्चे विडाविड १९९ अंधाधुंध, आडुअवलं : विढप्प- १९ (व्युत्+पद्) व्युत्पन्न थर्बु विणड १९६ नडवू वियाल १८२ (विकाल) सांज विमीसिय ६७ (विमिश्रित) भेळसेळवाळु विरोलिय १४७ विलोडित, मथित विल्लडिय ११२ (वल्लि+डी) वेली, वेलडी . विल्लि १७४ वेली विवरेर १२५ विपरीत विहडिय ७३ विघटित, छुट्टे पडेल विहत्थ ८६ (विहस्त)-थी युक्त हाथ वुणण
१०९ वणवानी क्रिया (हिं. बुनना)
संधुक्क ८७ संधुक्षित प्रदीप्त सक्किय १४९ शक्यु सडुच्छलइ १५७ (१) सत्ताव - ६४ सतावg सत्तिसिउ ५३ शक्ति+शिव समउ २१५ (समक) साथे समित्ति १६५ संतोष (?) सम्माणउं १३९ साथे सल्लड ७४ शल्य+ड सव ८९ सर्व सालिसिथ ५ शालिसिक्थ, एक प्रकार
नो कीडो साधय ९६ (श्वापद) जानवर साहि १२० (१) सिउ ३८ शिव सिज्ज-२१३ सीवद्यु सिद्ध २१५ सिद्ध थयेलु, प्राप्त सिव-तत्त १२१ शिव-तत्त्व सिस्सिणी १७४ शिष्या सिह-हुँ ६४,११०,१२७ २० सह सुईणं ९८ श्रतिनो, शास्त्रोनो सुणह १९५ (शुनक) कुतरूं सुम्म- १६८ (श्रु-कर्म०) संभळावू सेवड ३२ (श्वेतपट) श्वेताम्बर' साधु हलोल २२० हिल्लोल हिमकरण १ (हिमकिरण) चन्द्र

Page #308

Sr. No.
Name of Publication
[ Continued from Title 4.)
Price
Rs.
100. Padmasundara sūri's Pārsvanātha carita Mahakavya pp. 24/
12+103+136 (1986) Ed. by Dr. K. Sharma Munshi 101. Śri śāntinātha caritra Citrapaļţikā (Gujarati) pp.
80/30+82 + Plates 25 BW + 8 Colour (1986) by Muni Shri
Shilachandra vijayaji 102. Śri śāntinātha Carita Citrapattikā (English) pp. 4 + 8 + 80/
52 + plates 250W + 8 Colour (1987) by Muni Shri
Shilachandravijayaji 103. Jānnapram odagaại's Jñānapramodikā A commentary on
36/Vägbhaçalarkāra pp. 8 + 20 + 144 (1987) Ed. by Dr. R.
S. Betai 104. Vardhamānasūri's Jugiji nimda cariya pp. 8 + 30 + 280
60/(1987) Ed. by Pt. Rupendra Kumar Pagariya 105. Padmasundara Gani's Yadusundar Mahakāvya pp. 12 + 38/
184 Ed. by D. P. Raval 106. Muni Suvrtasāmi Caritra--Critically Edited by Pt.
70/Rupendrakumar Pagariya 107. Prasamaratiprakarana of Umāsvāti-Critically edited with
90/English Trans. by Dr. Y. S. Shastri 108. Nyayamañjari (Ahnika 4-5)--with Traus. by Dr. N. J. Shah 120/
IN THE PRESS ...Kavyakalpalata Makaranda Tika-Dr. R. S. Betai
Tilakamanjari-Edited by N. M. Kansara ---Dravyalankära--Muniraj Jambuvijayaji ---Jaina Biology-Dr. J. C. Sikdar
Nyäyabindu-with Guj. Trans. by Nitinbhai R. Desai 114. Siddhantalesasangraha
95/* SAMBODHI-(The Journal of the L. D. Institute of 50/
Indology). Back Vols. 1-13 (Per volume) 40/-Current Vol. 15 (1984-1985) Prajnacaksu Pt. Srx Sukhalaljr Bharatiyavidya Granthamäla Vidūşaka (Gujarati) by G. K. Bhat (1981)
30/2 Essence of Jainism--Tr. Dr. R. S. Betai
55/Sole Distributor* Aspects of Jaina Art and Architecture : Editors Dr. U. P. 150/
Shah and Prof. M. A. Dhaky (1976) * Mahavira and his Teachings Ed. Dr. A. N. Upadhye 50/

Page #309
OUR LATEST PUBLICATIONS Sr. No. Name of Publication Price Rs. 81. Padmasundara's Jnanacandrodayanataka Ed. Nagin . Shah. 8/ Pp. 4+58 (1981). 82. A study of Civakacintamani by R. Vijailakshmi pp. 8+234,1981) 54/-- 83. Appointment with Kalidasa by Prof. G. K. Bhat. Pp. 10+140 24/ (1981) 84. Studies in Indian Philosophy (Pt. Sukhtalji Memorial Volume) 60/ pp. 22+323 (1981) Ed. by Pt. D. D. Malvania & Dr. N. J. Shah *5. Facets of Jaina Religiousness in Comparative Light by 18/ Dr. L. M. Joshi pp. 4+78 (1981) 85. A Study of Tattvarthasutra with Bhasya by Suzuko Ohira (1982) pp. 1+182 87. Hindi-Gujarati Dhaltukos by Raghuveer Chaudhari (1982) p. 12+230 88. Secondary Tales of the Two Great Epics by Rajendra l. 50/ Nanavati (1982) p. 12+795 89. Laksmana's Suktiratnakosa Ed. by Mrs. Nilanjana S Shah 9/ (1982) p. 16+71 90. Suracaiya's Danadiprakarana Ed. by Pt. Ainutlal M. Bhojak 9/ & Nagin J. Shah (1983) p. 12+04 91. Ramacandra's Mallikamakarandanayaka, Ed. Muni Shri 30/ Punyavijayji, Eng. Intro by V. M. Kulkarni (1933) pp. 6+35+166 92. Slokavartika: A study by Dr. K. K. Dixit (1983) pp. 8+120 27/93. Vardhamanasuri's Manoramakaha (Prakrit) Ed. by Pt. 66/Rupendrakumar Pagariya pp. 16+339+32 (1983) 94. Haribhadra's Yoga Works and Psychosynthesis by Shantilal 16/ K. Desai pp. 94 (1983) 95. Narasimha Mehatana Aprakasita Pada (Gujarati) Ed. by 10/ Ratilai V. Dave 16+102 (1983) 96. Jiniratna's Lilavati-Sara (A Sanskrit Abridgement of 81/ Jines ara Suri's Prakrit Lilaval-Katha) Ed. by H. C. Bhayani 84-8+443 (1984) 97. Jayanta Bhatta's Nyayamanjari (Trtiya Rahika) With Gujarati 21/ Translation. Ed. & Translated by Nagin J. Shah (1984) pp. 9+180. 98. Bhartrhari's Vakyapadtya (with Gujarati translation and 53-50 notes) Ed. by Dr. J. M. Shukla 46+720 (1914) 99. Dharmasenagani Mahattara's Vasudevahimdi-Madhyam: 120/ Khanda pt. I Ed. by Dr. H. C. Bhayani & Dr. R. M Shah. (Continued on Title 3)