Jignasa Journal Of History Of Ideas And Culture Part 01

Author(s): Vibha Upadhyaya and Others
Publisher: University of Rajasthan

Page 89

An Appraisal of "Bhakti in Philosophical Perspective" / 51
It is interesting to notice, how Mehta's holistic conception of bhakti not only is relevant to the modern concept of man but also amounts to a possible refutation of Krishan Chandra Bhattacharyya's thesis or, for that matter, to any other thesis, like traditional concept of three ways of attaining the highest value, treating feeling, willing or knowing in exclusion from each other. In this context Mehta says: "...it has been held, notably by the philosopher K.C.Bhattacharyya, that the relation between consciousness and its content, as he called it, varies according to whether the consciousness has the form of knowing, willing or feeling. Each of these modes of distinction of content and consciousness implies its own absolute: truth in the case of knowing, freedom or reality in the case of willing and for feeling it is the unity of felt content and the feeling of it, that is, value.""" Mehta's analysis towards the end of his paper also emphasizes the holistic or integral approach to bhakti where no place is given for a notion of superiority of bhakti or treating it as an autonomous mode devoid of jñāna and karma. Mehta's integral approach towards the concept of bhakti and the concept of man presents an alternative to Prof. Kalidas Bhattacharyya's argument of construing bhakti.jñāna and karma as three alternative absolutes. In K.D.Bhattacharyya's view the subjective, the objective and the dialectical are the three alternatively absolutes and corresponding to these, three are there attitudes : cognitive, affective, and conative attitudes. As he points out: "Now what are called jñāna-marga and karmāmārga in Indian philosophy are exactly identical with the subjective and the dialectical attitudes... Taking the word bhakti-marga in a wide sense-as identical with the objective attitude or feeling in general-we might then say that there is alternation between the three margas, that each marga is alternatively absolute."*20 It seems that Mehta's analysis neither supports KCB'S views of the three alternative paths nor the spirit of the dialogue although the later like Mehta's, displays superiority of bhakti. However, it is a matter of further investigation to get at the truth regarding bhakti/feeling which requires a further attempt of reunderstanding and reinterpretating the works of the thinkers mentioned here.
I am thankful to Prof. R.S. Bhatnagar, the Late Prof. Francine Krishna and Prof. Daya Krishna for the linguistic corrections including diacritical marks. With minor modifications in the earlier draft, in form of quotations from Mehta, the views related to Professor G.C.Pandeyhave been added to the present form of this paper.
***Bhakti in Philosophical Perspective" was an Inaugural address given by Late Professor J.L. Mehta[1912-1988] at an International Seminar on Bhakti: its Formsand Expressions. The Seminar was Organized by the Council for World Religions at Varanasi in November 1986. The Inaugural address "Bhakti in Philosophical Perspective" was later included in a Book by Professor J.L. Mehta's. Philosophy and Religion Essays in Interpretation, ICPR. 1990, Delhi as Chapter 10 [pages 204214]. The book consists of Mehta's 15 articles/ with an Introduction by Professor J.N.Mohanty. Among these 15 articles some were inagural/presidential/ memorial lectures delivered by him and few were papers presented by him in different conferences. Few of his articles were published in journals like Philosophy East-West, Hawaii, Rescarch in Phenomenology, New Jersey. The last chapter of this book is: The Rgveda : Text and Interpretataion which was his last presentation in India in an conference held in January 1988. I am indebted to late Professor Daya Krishna for giving me the opportunity to review this book of Professor Mehta. The Review was published as Review Article in JICPR Vol. (VI), No. 1, 1993 [ pp. 158-174].
References
1. J.L.Mehta, Philosophy and Religion, Essays in Interpretation, ICPR, 1990. Delhi p. 204 2. ibid, p. 205