Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, (born Sept. 5, 1888, Tiruttani, India—died April 16, 1975, Madras [now Chennai]), a scholar and statesman who was president of India from 1962 to 1967. He served as professor of philosophy at Mysore (1918–21) and Calcutta (1921–31; 1937–41) universities and as vice chancellor of Andhra University (1931–36). He was professor of Eastern religions and ethics at the University of Oxford in England (1936–52) and vice chancellor of Banaras Hindu University (1939–48) in India. From 1953 to 1962 he was chancellor of the University of Delhi.
Radhakrishnan led the Indian delegation to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO; 1946–52) and was elected chairman of UNESCO’s executive board (1948–49). From 1949 to 1952 he served as Indian ambassador to the Soviet Union. On his return to India in 1952 he was elected vice president, and on May 11, 1962, he was elected president, succeeding Rajendra Prasad, who was the first president of independent India. Radhakrishnan retired from politics five years later.
Radhakrishnan’s written works include Indian Philosophy, 2 vol. (1923–27), The Philosophy of the Upanishads (1924), An Idealist View of Life (1932), Eastern Religions and Western Thought (1939), and East and West: Some Reflections (1955). In his lectures and books, he tried to interpret Indian thought for Westerners.
Dr Radhakrishnan: Messenger of Indian philosophy
India has had a rich philosophical heritage for thousands of years. Although Western philosophy represents a particular thought, it places itself above all. Eastern philosophy and particularly Indian philosophy have a union of several thoughts – Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, Sikhism, Islam & many others; which makes it more rich, more acceptable and strong.
India has had a rich philosophical heritage for thousands of years. Although western philosophy represents a particular thought, it places itself above all. The eastern philosophy and particularly Indian philosophy have a union of several thoughts – Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, Sikhism, Islam & many others; which makes it more rich, acceptable and strong. Dr Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan was one of the renowned Indian philosophers who demonstrated the Indian philosophy before the world on the so-called western standard and created a bridge of understanding between eastern wisdom & western materialism.
The challenge of western Christian critics impelled him to the critical study of Indian philosophy and religion and find out what is living and what is dead in it. He saw Hinduism as a scientific religion based on facts, apprehended via intuition or religious experiences. He explained that intuition is of Savatassiddha (self-certifying character, Svasamvedya (self evidencing) and Swayam Prakash (self-luminous). He was a prominent spokesman of Vedanta and reinterpreted Advaita Vedanta for a contemporary understanding. His philosophy is based upon idealism. Radhakrishnan emphasizes that education must be based on the twin principles of Truth & Love. Education will be said to be complete, only if it includes not only training of the intellect but refinement of the heart and discipline of the spirit. The aim of education must be character building, man-making, development of spiritual values & secular attitudes, vocational development and national integration. Dr Radhakrishnan was a true nationalist personality of Indian soil and lifelong defence of Hinduism and Indian culture & civilization against uninformed western critics. Due to his dedication towards Hindu religion, culture & philosophy, the so-called secular forces and western-minded thoughts have been critical to him. But ignoring all critics, he continued his nationalist writings throughout his life and kept burning the light of Indian Philosophy on the world map. He took his last breath on 17th April 1975, but his lamp of understanding of intuition and interpretation of experiences will light our path from age to age.
His Views on Hindu Tradition:-
At this point in Radhakrishnan’s thinking, the Hindu tradition comes to the front, though it is soon connected with the mystical note in the West. The Vedic seers stressed the eternal and sought to raise themselves to this plane. In this respect, the early thinkers Plato, Saint Augustine, and Dante are examples of the same direction. Can this massive evidence be illusory? However, it involves a higher kind of knowledge or insight. That is the problem for philosophy of religion. The justification of this claim is taken up in the conclusion. This constitutes the debate with scientific empiricism and naturalism.
One must be very careful here, Radhakrishnan warns. There is danger in a purely negative approach. It is difficult to translate the mystical experience. Its note is timelessness and unity. When one uses language to bring out the contrast, this ultimate reality is called the Absolute. The term “God” is of the nature of a symbol. With the experience, says Radhakrishnan, goes a sense of harmony and unity. Self-mastery is involved. From this flows idealism and denial of what is selfish. The danger in this concentration is, perhaps, disregard of social ties. This should be guarded against.
According to Radhakrishnan, if all knowledge were of the scientific type (as some empiricists hold), then the challenge to the religious outlook on the world could hardly be met. Hence comes the importance of the question of intuitive knowledge, something that cannot be expressed in propositions, yet is justifiable. It is well to recall that sense qualities are confused and that logic and mathematics are essentially analytic and do not give us factual information.
In Hindu thought and in the works of Plotinus and philospher Henri Bergson, Radhakrishnan notes, emphasis is placed on direct intuition, which seems to be the extension of a sort of perception beyond the senses. Bergson sets limits to the intellect. He thinks it useful rather than true. Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel criticizes immediacy and tends to ignore the importance of feeling and will. Yet he is opposed to the abstractions of the understanding. However, is not the unity of nature coordinate with the unity of the self? Kant emphasized the “I think” at the phenomenal level and believed in a noumenal world beyond. Faith and spiritual experience make their demands. It is well to look at the creative spirit in humanity, according to Radhakrishnan.
Radhakrishnan also notes that scientific discovery is more like intuition than people ordinarily realize. French mathematician Jules-Henri Poincaré’s account of mathematical imagination is a case in point. There is something creative about it. We prove deductively but invent by intuition. There is here a kind of integrative passivity. English chemist Michael Faraday, who made many breakthroughs in electricity, is another case of unpredictable invention. The whole self is involved. When philosophers devote themselves to abstruse analysis, this creative factor may escape them.
Presentation on the Three Major Writers
References:-
https://www.britannica.com/biography/Sarvepalli-Radhakrishnan
https://www.enotes.com/topics/an-idealist-view-life
https://mahasoe.com/2020/10/24/contribution-of-dr-sarvepalli-radhakrishnan-towards-india/
Click Here for the original Chapter from The History of Indian Writing in English by K.S.Iyengar
Happy Learning!!!
Comments
Post a Comment