Questions & Answers
September 2021
Srimat Swami Tapasyananda Ji (1904 – 1991) was one of the Vice-Presidents of the Ramakrishna Order. His deeply convincing answers to devotees’ questions raised in spiritual retreats and in personal letters have been published in book form as Spiritual Quest: Questions & Answers. Pariprasna is a selection from this book.
The Vedanta Kesari
34
Pariprasna
QUESTION: How are the points of difference regarding the concepts of God, World, and Sadhana of the different schools to be reconciled? What is the relevance of this synthesis of philosophy in spiritual life?
MAHARAJ: The question is probably how the synthesis of the varying interpretations of these concepts in the three systems of Dvaita, Visishtadvaita and Advaita is to be accomplished. No such reconciliation is needed if the synthesis is sought at the experiential level and not at the interpretative level. These systems of philosophy mentioned are not the same as the dualism, qualified dualism and monism representing ways of spiritual apprehension to aspirants. It must be remembered also that Dvaita, Visishtadvaita and Advaita are not purely philosophies. They are as much religions too. Or they are a kind of religion supported by certain philosophical standpoints. Just as religions have their particular dogmas, mythologies and rituals, philosophies too have their concepts with particular meaning-content attached to them. They can retain them just as religions can keep up their dogmas and forms of worship, even if a common goal for them is accepted. All troubles arise when we equate the systems of religious philosophies known in India as Dvaita, Visishtadvaita and Advaita, with dualism, qualified non-dualism and monism as ways of spiritual apprehension.
The relevance of it is this: We can approach these philosophies as intellectual frameworks for people with differing philosophical outlooks. An intellectual framework is always necessary for people whose thought has been stimulated by study. Otherwise all aspects of their mind would not be properly integrated and to that extent Sadhana will not be effective. When faced by these different philosophies, the human mind thinks that only one of them can be true and the others are either false or are inferior conceptions meant for dull-witted people. That which is suited to an aspirant’s outlook—and there are clear philosophical outlooks like realism and idealism imbedded in people’s intelligence—or that in which he is traditionally brought up is taken up and studied. In order to strengthen his conviction in the truth of his philosophy, the refutation of the other philosophies may seem a necessity for him and he indulges in it with gusto. It is more or less the same as in the case of religions. The crusading spirit and the controversial spirit spring from identical misconceptions. Now if a synthesis of these philosophies is accepted at an experiential level, leaving to each its own intellectual framework, people will not develop this acrimonious and intolerent spirit. This will help their Sadhana also. But it must always be held in mind that we are not downgrading any of these philosophies by this synthesis. For example, non-dualism, as an experience of effacement of individual consciousness in the contemplation of the Supreme Spirit is the citadel of Advaita Vedanta. What Advaita Vedanta does is to conceive and interpret this experience in the light of its tradition. The same experience
