________________
90
Law of Karmà
explain the nature of the ultimate reality. It is valid so far as it seeks to provide an explanation for the orderliness that it discovers in the nature but it forgets that this orderliness of pature is not mechanical.
It is on account of this failure of the naturalistic principle that Radhakrishnan goes deeper in his attempts to conceive the nature of ultimate reality. He is aware that naturalistic explanation is not sufficient and he is also aware that the ultimate must be capable of explaining everything-the universe and even itself. In the material world we do not have any such principle which can account for itself because everything material is explainable in terms of something other. Therefore, the ultimate principle must be outside the material world. That is why Dr. Radhakrishnan feels that the ultimate must be a spiritual principle.
According to Dr. Radhakrishnan, spiritual can be understood in a negative manner. The spiritual may be understood as something different and higher from physical or material. More or less in the Vedāntic way, Radhakrishnan says that it is not possible to give an exact explanation of the ultimate but attempts can be made to understand it as much as possible. Keeping this in mind, we have to seck an explanation in terms of a non-physical principle. Dr. Radhakrishnan calls this nonphysical principle sometimes Braham and sonictimes the Absolute.
Absolute
The Absolute of Dr. Radhakrishnan contains in it the element of both-of the Advaita Vedānta and of the Hegelian tradition. It is the only reality, but it is not arrived at by the process of abstraction to its maximum limit.
If we examine the Absolute of Radhakrishnan, we will find that it is monistic in character. He believes that the ultimate explanation of the universe has to be monistic. Like the
vaita Vedānta, Dr. Radhakrishnan also believes that the Absolute does not admit even internal differentiation (Svagatabheda). The differentiations that appear to be there are only from the point of view of creation. It is true that
