THE CRISIS OF INTELLECT : Part 1 of 5

The crisis of intellect – Part 1 of 5

There are two kinds of the crisis of intellect:  that which concerns only one religion, say, Hinduism and the other one which is larger, which dreams of an adjudication among the great religions of the world. We shall first consider the one within Hinduism.  This one again, has two facets.  The first one arises from the often-asked question : Why are the Upanishads being interpreted by different Masters in different ways?  Shouldn’t there be one, unique, correct interpretation of the Upanishads?

The very nature of the Upanishads does not allow one unique interpretation. The Upanishads are a collection of free, candid and detailed discussions between teacher and disciple and it is for the reader to draw his or her own conclusions after assimilating the analysis thus presented and in the light of one’s own spiritual experience, if any. It is here that a Master teacher like Sankara or Ramanuja helps. Even to understand them you will need the physical presence of a teacher before you – a guru. It is therefore not fair to expect the Upanishads to tell you categorically whether this is right or that is wrong. The privilege of making categorical interpretations of the Upanishads has devolved on the great Masters. The fundamental differences in the interpretations by the Masters  should not deter us from understanding the totality that is Hinduism and its philosophy that emanates from the Upanishads. Any attempt to sort out these differences at an intellectual level can become an exercise in futility.  It is desirable rather to follow one of these Masters with single minded faith and try to understand that Master  and his perception of what the Upanishads say. That itself is a life-time occupation.

I know of several friendly Hindu groups in various parts of the world, away from their homeland, who, being well-motivated and genuinely interested in passing on the tradition of Hindu religious culture to the next generation, take off an hour or so every week and collectively attempt to simulate the so-called Indian atmosphere of a bhajan, puja, recitation or a lecture-cum-discussion and the like.  So far so good. But more often than not, a significant part of the time is spent on discussing questions like: Which of our great Masters has the ‘right’ philosophy? The intellectual exercise thus started leads them into a mAyA of confusion and doubt.  Ultimately they see no end to this labyrinth and finally the project itself withers. This is an expression of a crisis of intellect.  Intellect has to bow to faith and intuition in such matters. It is intellectually arrogant to believe that by sitting together for one hour a week and by reading translations (at what order of removal, one knows not) of the great Masters as a hobby, one can adjudicate among them!

The spark of realization and the onset of spiritual becoming have to come through faith and intuition, not through study of books, though the latter may certainly trigger the process initially. The Soul can receive impulses from another soul and from nothing else, says Swami Vivekananda. According to him, ‘this inadequacy of books to quicken spiritual growth is the reason why, although almost every one of us can speak wonderfully on spiritual matters, when it comes to action and the living of a truly spiritual life, we find ourselves so woefully deficient. To quicken the spirit the impulse must come from another soul. The person from whom such impulse comes is called the GURU’.

(To be continued)