Perspective World Moral Issues
Vedantic Perspective
The subject of moral issues is as comprehensive as our life. It has
always been important, and because of the technological progress it is
even more important today. Morality attempts to answer fundamental
questions, like, 'What is good , what is bad?, 'How should I lead my
life?, 'Is telling of truth imperative?, 'Are pleasures the aim of life?
Morality encompasses all activities of life. The fact that there are
problems galore with the world today, demonstrates that morality is
complex, and also that people do not behave as morally as they should.
Look at some of the problem areas we are all facing today- terrorism,
threat of nuclear war, poverty, education, racism, environment, legality
or otherwise of abortion, homosexuality, violence, vulnerability of
human rights, religious conversion etc. There are many facets to the
problems mentioned above. If most of the world is condemning terrorism,
there are many who believe that terrorism is a moral weapon. Then there
are learned and devoted activists who feel that, 'Every gun that is
forged, every battleship that is launched, every missile fired, is an
inhuman theft from those who are hungry and starving, from those who are
cold and are shivering. And so on, these differences in moral views also
create conflicts. In this short essay I plan to discuss briefly some
'world moral issues' from the point of view of Hindu or, more precisely,
Vedantic system of morality. Subject of ethics was of great concern to
the Hindus in Ancient India.
Contrary to some Western philosophers' opinions, Hindu moral thoughts
were developed in a formal and analytical sense. It had meta ethics
because it investigated the source of moral statements. It of course had
'normative ethics' because it took on a more practical task, which is to
arrive at moral standards that regulate right and wrong conduct. The
indication of ten characteristics of Dharma is just one such example.
Arthur Schopenhauer was the first European philosopher to start out from
the ethical achievements of Ancient India (Wikipedia). Albert Schweitzer
has stated that for the first time in world history, the Hindus
described the highest ethical standards called "absolute ethics"
(Wikipedia). Hindu moral view takes its authority from direct experience
of Reality. It can be categorized as a mystic view. A wide range of
perspectives occur among mysticisms which embrace direct experiential
knowledge of God, Divinity, or Ultimate Reality. Hindu mysticism is
different from those mystical views where commandments etc are received
from God either in a tablet or through revelations. Mystical experience
in Western tradition is most often understood as individual communion
with a god or goddess. These experiences are very subjective, and they
may be experienced as visions, dreams, revelations, prophecies, and so
forth. In Catholicism the mystical experience is not sought for its own
sake, and is always informed by revelation and ascetical theology.
In Vedanta the mystical experience is not revelation. In Vedic mysticism
the 'knowledge of Self' ('Prajnyaanam Brahma' 3.1.3. Aitaraiya
Upanishad) or 'realization of Self' (Aham Brahm Asmi, 1.4.10
Brahadaaranyak) is itself the goal of the mystical experience. It may be
termed as Self-transcending, 'Self-discovery'. As a result of such a
transcendental experience, suddenly, mind, body and intellect of the
seeker are recognized to be not the Self but the instruments for the
Self, which are necessary for the journey in this world (1.3.3.
Katthopanishad) This Self is also realized to be 'Brahma' the Supreme
Self, the cosmic Self ('Ayam Atman Brahma' 2. Maandookya
Upanishad), i.e. Existence Consciousness Bliss (Sat-Chit-Anand).
This non-dualistic state which is a transcendental experience can be
realized by any seeker as it was realized by ancient Rishies, and in
modern times by Yogi Paramaananda, Raamkrishna, Vivekananda, Aurobindo,
yogi Ram etc. In this sense it may be called 'empirical', but not in the
strict scientific objective sense. Science cannot prove moral statements
as to why must they be obeyed. Western systems of philosophy though they
are well developed also cannot prove moral statements as to why must
they be obeyed. In the end they appeal to either religious authority or
individual emotions. Even what is 'good' has been found difficult to
define. Therefore it is worth noting that Vedantic ethics does not take
its authority from any religious book, nor from individual emotional
make-up, but from direct experience of Reality, from which it is
logically derived. Therefore the moral statements are naturally
acceptable, as naturally as ones own existence. 'Perennial Philosophy'
proposed by Aldous Huxley was heavily influenced by Vedic philosophy as
understood by him.
Transcendental experiences is the source of Hindu morality, its meta
ethics, if you will. Though ineffable, they have been described by many
seekers including the rishies, the authors of Upanishads. Upanishads are
also known as Vedanta. As a result of their transcendental experience,
rishies said that the absolute Reality is 'the only One without the
second' ('Aykmaywa adwiteeyam' 6.2.1. Chhandogya Upanishad) .
There is nothing else but the 'Existence Consciousness Bliss'
(Sat-Chit-Anand). What they see is an ever changing world which is based
on ever unchanging Absolute Reality (1. Ishaawaasya Upanishad). They
tell us that differences in human beings and in all living creatures,
that we see are merely differences of forms, not the content; internal
Reality is 'the same'. I would attempt to give an analogy, though
difficult and incomplete.
Scientists have been attempting for the last 300 years the fundamental
particle that universe is made of; Einstein wanted to go a step ahead by
attempting to discover the 'Unified Field Theory'. By now the scientists
have reduced the number of fundamental particles to be 6, they call them
'quarks' of 6 different flavors. That means entire universe of billions
of different things is nothing but different arrangements of those 6
quarks. They see in these billions of things just 6 quarks! Hopefully,
tomorrow, they would be able to discover the one fundamental particle of
which these 6 are made, then they would say that all these myriad forms
of matter are projection of but one particle! Similarly Rishies have
been saying for at least 5000 years that the external reality is based
on or is projection of just one Reality, one Atman of three flavors
'Existence, Consciousness, Bliss. I should clarify here that the three
flavors are not three distinct entities, but the trinity is just one
which we sometimes experience as three. The fundamental basis of
morality is as inbuilt in human beings as are their identities. The
realized ones become Blissful, and fearless (2.9 Taittareeya & 8.3.4.
Chhandogya Upanishads), they have no 'moha' i.e. obsessions, experience
no hatred (6&7. Ishaawaasya Upanishad). Indeed they become free of greed
and desires (3.2.2. Mundak Upanishad) etc. Such Blissful persons are
motivated to serve humanity by spreading the knowledge leading to Bliss
in this world.
Bliss is not happiness or joy or delight etc because its sources are not
the senses or even the mind, but the source is our own Self. Hindu
ethics is not a social invention but a discovery, discovery of the
source of ethics. All psychologists agree that self-oriented interests
ultimately motivate all human actions. And some state that pleasure is
the specific driving force behind all our actions. These motivations no
doubt lead to material prosperity, progress and pleasure, but are no
guarantee of happiness, and what is worse is that they inevitably lead
to conflicts among humans, societies and nations. Rishies discovered
that the same selfish person is naturally benevolent after the mystic
experience; he is not driven by pleasure but by love, kindness and
justice. Lives of Rishies and sages, ancient and modern like
Shankaachaarya, Raamaanujaachaarya, Raamkrishna, Vivekananda, Aurobindo,
Yogi Ram, Maharshi Mahesh Yogi etc. demonstrate the same truth. Hindu
ethics is not emotion-based, and it progresses on rationality. It does
not agree with the 'emotive based theory' of British philosopher A.J.
Ayer; but agrees more with the rationalist Kurt Baier. Rishies had also
discovered that morality exists within the living creatures, especially
in humans; it does not live in the Platonic spirits. Objective morals
are those that exist regardless of the existence of beings who can
perceive them; in this sense Hindu morals are not objective. Hindu
ethics is this worldly (2.3.14. Katthopanishad); it is other worldly
also for those who believe in other world; for those who believe in
rebirth, it liberates them from this cycle. The realization of (the Self
and thus) the Bliss is to be experienced here and now in this world. The
realization is really a discovery of the true Self which was hidden
behind the worldly mind. The 'knowledge' that is realized during the
mystical experience is, therefore, not 'man-made', in the sense that it
is not made by the mind or brain of man, indeed one has to go beyond the
mind and brain of a man. It is neither 'God-made' in the sense that
there is no personal God, except that it is the nature of Brahman to be
everywhere including the creatures. It is simply discovering the already
present one's own real Self through the direct experience of 'Reality'
or 'SatChitAnand.
The fundamental discovery of 'Unity' and the deductions from this are
absolute (6.2.1. Chhandogya Upanishad). The fundamental Hindu ethics is
absolute, and that it never changes, and also that it is timeless and
universal insofar as it applies to all rational creatures around the
world; because its source is timeless (2.1. Taittareeya Upnanishad).
However, some applied ethical morals derived from the most fundamental
morals may be regional, temporary and may depend upon situations for
their ranking or validity. Therefore for a Hindu some moral values can
be relative to a society depending upon their approval, thereby
expressing his belief in cultural relativism or pluralism (1.89.1.
Rig-Veda). Here it must be clarified that 'individual relativism' in
which an individual decides the code of conduct disregarding the
society, would not be acceptable in Hindu morality. Even if an
individual may be responsible for his actions, as in Existentialism, it
would not be acceptable.
It is worthwhile noting that the Hindu view of morality is neither male
oriented nor female oriented, rather it is 'unity' oriented or it is
just humane; again because Brahma is genderless, indeed formless; the
realization of the Self is independent of gender of the seeker, and the
realized person sees nothing but Unity everywhere (3.14.1. Chhandogya
Upanishad).
Hindu Normative Ethics: The realized persons see 'Unity' every where,
see their selves and all others as Existence Consciousness Bliss (
7. Ishawaasya Upnishad). Therefore they only love all humanity as
themselves and hate none. The commandments 'Love thy neighbor as thy
self', 'Do unto others as you would have them do unto you', and 'Thou
shalt not kill' etc. are not deontological statements which have to be
obeyed just because it is said so in the religious book'. To a Hindu
these moral statements are as natural as loving himself is. Indeed to
him these are part of fabric of reality in the world. What is
'categorical imperative to Kant is natural and rational to Hindu ethics,
viz 'Treat people as an end, and never as a means to an end. That is, we
should always treat people with dignity, and never use them as mere
instruments.' ((The moral statement, 'Thou shalt not kill' is called
'ahimsa', but Ahimsa is not to cause harm in thought, word and deed; a
concept not even talked about in many religions.))
Rishies have made another far reaching discovery, 'that there may be
persons who may have different beliefs or knowledge and that they are
free to have them'. The rishies have stated that though the Reality is
one, wise persons describe It in many different ways (1.89.1. Rig-Veda).
The well known morality of Hindus - 'tolerance' - also issues from the
same experience; but others' aggressive intolerance should be guarded
against. Hindus are not exclusivists. Thus Hindus neither believe nor
act on the dangerous principle 'I am right. You are wrong if you
differ from me, I must correct you.' Hindus say, 'there are many
different ways of realizing that Reality'. We can all follow different
paths that appeal to us according to our personalities. Thus Hindu view
subscribes to pluralism and 'cultural relativism'. Hindu morality does
subscribe to 'utilitarianism' with some conditions, e.g. it is not of
the variety of J. Bentham or J.S.Mill. Once all beings are equal and are
to be loved, then how does one choose an action that affects people
differently? In such cases utilitarian principle 'largest good of the
most' (this moral statement was made by Buddha in 6th century BC.) would
be operative.
The essence of morality lies in its practice. Wonderful morals exist,
though a few are controversial. Harm is being done either by not
practicing the good morals such as 'speak the truth', and 'love thy
neighbor', or by practice of those that are 'exclusive'. Exclusive
morals such as 'My path is the true path, you better follow my path,
O.K?' can be dangerous. Humanity is so diverse in its worldly behavior
that 'tolerance' becomes a high moral value itself. This accords well
with the principle of freedom as well. Practice of good morals is
difficult, such as 'love thy neighbor' or 'speak the truth always' etc.
Further difficulty is caused by lack of full faith in the moral
statements. If such a faith is derived from a religious book then faith
in that 'book' is crucial. Also not every 'statement' in a religious
book is beyond question. In these days of science and skepticism and
hedonism such an unwavering faith is rare. Therefore morals become
loose. Such a problem does not exist theoretically in Hindu morality
because the faith in the moral statement is deduced from a direct
experience of Reality, which establishes the fundamental unity among
living creatures. And from here the other moral statements follow. As
'realization of Self' is not an easy activity, and not many may find it
practical to devote their time to practices leading to realization,
Vedic view subscribes to respect the realized persons and the necessity
of education (1.9.1. Taittireeya Upanishad) same as
'virtue theory'.
How do we relate all this to resolving our moral issues? In the preamble
of UNESCO it is stated that wars begin in minds. Therefore minds need to
be educated. If we care to look deeply at our behavior, we find that
most of the problems that are created in this world are mainly because
of our enemies within ourselves, viz. uncontrolled and misguided
desires, anger, greed, obsessions ('moha'), ego etc (37,38 & 39
Srimadbhagawat Gita). And practice of morality remains, inter alia, at
the mercy of these enemies. It can be said at this stage that desires
and actions that lead to spiritual evolution of oneself are benign, and
those that do not lead to spiritual evolution are our enemies, and
moment we are free from them we reach divine peace and realize our Self
(18.53. Srimadbhagawat Gita). Evolution here means progress from the
'mere body centered' approach to the 'realized state', which really
means progress from hate to love, from darkness to light, from death to
life, from an utterly selfish state to the most altruistic state
(1.3.28. Brihadaaranyaka) Desires and actions that lead to such
evolution are our friends (1.2.1. Katthopanishad). Society with such
morals would be a peaceful, progressive and humane society. Let us apply
these Vedic morals to some of the problems that the world is facing
today.
Let us take the burning and ubiquitous problem of 'terrorism'. There is
class of people who believe that their faith is the only right faith and
it is their sacred duty to bring the defaulters on the correct path by
hook or by crook. Such a people, for example, are being led by Osama Bin
Laden who is using terrorism for his 'divine' mission. In such a case,
will the code of nonviolence put a Vedic Hindu in a paralyzing dilemma?
First, a Hindu would try even more to create a feeling of love and
tolerance and coexistence among the people of that faith especially in
India. This should weaken the base on which Osama can act. Then he would
attempt to create a world opinion on the same basis. Only as a last
resort he would use violence. This argument may be objected. If a Hindu
sees his Self in Osama then how can he wish to destroy Osama? Here is
the problem of right Vs right. In such cases one 'right' is to be given
priority over another 'right' depending upon the situation. In this
situation nonviolence is being sacrificed in order to weaken and even
destroy the violent evil. So long as Osama practices his faith and does
no harm to the humanity, a Hindu has no problem with him, because to a
Hindu it is not a fight of one faith against his faith. But moment he
physically harms the rest of humanity, he becomes evil and one must
defend oneself from him, and kill him if necessary. A Hindu would oppose
his own brother if the brother became evil, like Vibhishan opposed
Raavan. Hindu code of conduct does not reside in some Platonic spirit. A
Hindu's moral code strives for sustenance of peaceful life here. He
values freedom and justice even more than nonviolence. Of course the two
need not be opposed to each other always. Mahatma Gandhi who was one of
the greatest 'ethical leader' of the world secured freedom of India,
from the cruel and brutal colonial British, through nonviolence, truth
and love.
Let us take the issue of 'abortion'. It is being discussed as 'pro-life'
Vs 'pro-choice'. Life is certainly sacred, and the one in the fetus is
even more so because it is helpless to defend itself. Further it is our
happy duty to bring up children in this world. Hindu scriptures don't
give any commandment on this issue specifically. The scriptures do
inform that 'dharma', which is loosely translated as 'religion', has ten
main characteristics, viz. truth, intellect, control of mind, control of
sensory organs, knowledge (including that of Self), steadfastness,
non-anger, forgiveness, purity and non-stealing (Manu Smriti). These ten
values have been deduced from the same transcendental experience. Dharma
means that which sustains all life and living. Dharma is always the
basis of all actions of a Hindu. Dharma leads to both, a 'good' material
life and spiritual evolution (1.1.2. Vaishayshik Sutra). Abortion is
again a case of right Vs right; right of fetus Vs right of mother. Life
is sacred. If the birth of that fetus, to one's best understanding, is
going to risk the survival of the mother or of the child itself or cause
serious problems to that child that would be born, then abortion is
better, provided that the mother herself desires it strongly enough to
willingly suffer consequences of the abortion. Therefore to a Hindu
'abortion' per se is not an issue but indiscriminate abortion is. Hindu
morality is 'consequentialist' in this sense.
Let us take the issue of 'poverty'. (India is a poor country. India was
among the richest countries till the twelfth century AD when Muslim
invaders colonized it. For centuries, it got busy fighting for its
survival. Even then it was rich enough to attract the Europeans in
sixteenth century. India was then colonized by the British who destroyed
its industrial base and took its wealth away. Britain became one of the
richest nations in the world and left India not only poor but shattered.
'Poverty is the worst polluter', said Indira Gandhi, the Prime Minister
of India in the World Environment Meet held in
Stockholm.) How to avoid poverty or increase the living standard of all,
is one of the greatest challenges faced by us today. When a realized
person sees his Self in everyone then how can he tolerate poor persons
suffering? Hindus realized long ago that the structure of a society is
also responsible for distribution of wealth in a society apart from the
qualities of a poor person. And whatever the structure, some persons
would always be vulnerable to poverty. Apart from structuring a just
society in to four castes based on ones ability and actions, donations
and alms were recommended to alleviate conditions of unfortunate
persons. It was just because everybody got a caste that he deserved as
per his ability and function, and this provided a distribution of Labour
that made the whole society prosperous. It is natural to some extent
that the caste system has a tendency to become ' birth determined'. For
it to remain it needed a society that was alert in this sense as well.
It is a pity that the caste system has become hereditary (it was
feared), which does not permit a low caste person to progress as much as
he may deserve.
Mahatma Gandhi, a high caste person, fought to give the low caste people
an honorable place in the society. In order that wealth may not become
the most coveted value in life, the rishies made the most respected cast
viz. Brahmin to live within modest means and never to covet wealth. This
helped in prevention of thriving of distortions such as greed, stealing,
cheating etc for money in the society. But it did not prevent
entrepreneurship for progress and wealth because one whole cast, out of
the four, was given this task of progress as their duty. Vedic Morality
is for prosperity but not at the cost of 'dharma' i.e. morality. However
prosperous the world may become, poverty and misery would be there
because of the inner enemies, like greed and attachment etc., of humans.
Poverty is also a relative term. What is poverty in USA is not so e.g.
in India. Also material prosperity without commensurate morality cannot
eliminate miseries, violence and turbulence. Vedanta states that it is
'knowledge' that can help in eliminating misery; this knowledge is of
both kinds, material and spiritual. Further Vedanta is not in favor of
unbridled consumerism though today it is treated as a sign of progress.
Hindu rishies had realized thousands of years ago that unbridled
consumerism does not lead to 'happiness'. It may lead to prosperity,
progress and pleasure, but not necessarily to happiness and certainly
not to Bliss. Indeed it leads to a feverish race for fulfillment of
desires that never end thereby leading to frustration and
dissatisfaction. In search of bliss, when rishies controlled their
desires, they found it easier to discover the Self, the Bliss; and
becoming desireless does not lead to inaction and poverty.
Rishies had also understood that unbridled consumerism leads to
distortion of human values and destruction of natural wealth. The whole
world cannot, even if made rich enough, afford the living standard of
USA; it would poison the air, pollute the water, ravage the earth,
deplete the energy sources and destroy the (ozone) umbrella in the sky.
As per the Hindu thought these same are the five elements with which the
entire universe is made of. It never made much sense earlier, but now it
does. These elements need to be protected, if life has to survive on
this fragile planet earth. The concept of sustainable development was
always the part of Hindu system - one has to control the consumption of
natural resources, and nature is to be protected. For the protection of
nature, trees, even whole forests, and rivers etc. were (and to some
extent today are) worshipped in India (now only in Meghaalaya, and
Western Ghats). Hindus do not have much difficulty in accepting 'birth
control' also because for Hindus progress must be sustainable.
Let us take the issues of biases that we all have e.g. racial, regional,
religious, sexual etc. In the Vedic thought one would not expect any
such bias because of the inherent 'oneness' of all in the fabric of
Hindu system of thought. India has been home to Christians, Jews,
blacks, Parsees or Zoroastrians, Southeast Asians, Shakas and Hoons etc
for thousands of years, where they have enjoyed life without any
persecution. Shakas and Hoons, the barbarian aggressors, have merged
with Hindus. Jews themselves have stated that they have been persecuted
all over the world except in India. Parsees are doing extremely well in
India. Christians are prospering and living in peace except when the
question of conversion raises its demonic head. Hindus, till the arrival
of Mogul rule, treated women not only equally but also respectfully. It
is stated in scriptures that where women are highly respected, gods
reside there. India was one of the leading nations to adapt for a
democracy based on adult franchise, and again to produce first woman
Prime Minister. Persons from the low caste, Muslims and Sikhs have
either become President of India or Prime Minister. Today a Muslim is
our President and a Sikh a Prime Minister, and a woman of Italian origin
the President of the most influential political Party of India.
Let us take another bias that many people all the world over may have,
viz. against 'scientific thinking', including the Theory of Evolution.
It may be surprising to know that Hindus never had any bias against
science despite their mystic philosophy. Hindus have accepted the Theory
of Evolution without any reservation. ((Indeed some seeds supporting the
Theory of Evolution are present in Hindu thought e.g. one gets a human
birth after passing through 8.4 million species!)) Now it is accepted
by the authorities the world over that Hindus are the inventors of zero
and the decimal system in mathematics, apart from many theorems; that
Arya Bhata, a Hindu, around 500 A.D., proved 1000 years before
Copernicus, that the earth goes round the Sun, and also spins on its own
axis; that the eclipses are caused by shadows of the moon and the earth
(p 9-Scientific Edge Jayant V Narlikar). It is not that Arya Bhata
made a good 'deduction' by simple observations. He was conversant, if
not the originator, with concepts of higher mathematics, even 'Spherical
Trigonometry', like 'sine' of angles etc. Thus he could predict the
eclipses accurately. He was honored and made the Vice Chancellor of
Nalanda, the largest University in the world at that time, and was not
burnt on stakes like Bruno, and not jailed like Galileo (Scientific Edge
Jayant Narlikar). Now, despite joining the science - movement late due
to colonization, India has, probably, the largest, number of science and
technology students in the world.
Thus it can be seen that the Hindu system of thought and its philosophy
is humanistic, promotes love, kindness, service, tolerance, truth and
non-violence. It is based not on mere intellectual understanding, but on
direct experience of the Reality as Self. It is not against progress and
prosperity but is against unbridled consumerism. Thanks to the inherent
'oneness' of all in the fabric of Hindu system of thought one would not
expect any biases like racial, regional, religious, feminist, sexual,
anti- science etc. To a Hindu all creatures are part of nature, and
therefore he 'worships' Nature, and respects all living beings as equal.
Further it is easier for a Hindu to practice morality because its tenets
are derived from a direct experience of Reality which is unity with
Existence Consciousness Bliss. I conclude this with a prayer:
"May all be happy
May all be healthy
May all experience auspiciousness
May no body suffer misery."
Boloji.com is owned and managed by
Boloji Media Inc Privacy Policy |
Disclaimer No part of this Internet site may
be reproduced without prior written permission of the copyright holder.
