Page 1 of 16
0
Indian Value System
According to Caitanya-Vaiṣṇavism
Radhamadhav Das, PhD
radhamadhavadasa@gmail.com
Projected permalink for this paper:
www.nectarpot.com/value
Presented at the International Conference on Values Embedded in Indian Philosophy
at Benares Hindu University on 10-12th January 2013,
organized by the Department of Philosophy and Religion,
Faculty of Arts, Benares Hindu University and the
Council of Research in Value and Philosophy, Washington DC.
Page 2 of 16
1
As mentioned in the theme of this conference, the conflict between ancient values and the
post modernistic rush for material enjoyment causes a value crisis and asks for a solution.
A very important question arises here: is a synthesis of ancient spiritual and modern
material values possible? In short, the answer of the Indian traditions is both yes and no.
First, why is such a synthesis not possible?
It is not possible, because they are diametrically opposed paradigms. Ancient values
posit service to God and to other living beings and realization of transcendence as the
centre of life, while material enjoyment is self-centered and forgetful of transcendence. The
ancient scriptures therefore contain injunctions to ultimately leave material engagements
and become fully immersed in spiritual engagements. One of the most well-known Vedic
commandments is Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad 1.3.28:
asato mā sad gamaḥ
tamasi mā jyotir gamaḥ
mṛto mā amṛta gamaḥ
“Do not stay in fleeting illusion; go to the eternal reality!
Do not stay in the darkness of ignorance; go to the light!
Do not remain bound by death; realize your immortal self!”
Of course, there are different interpretations of what is sat and what is asat. To try to
come to a common agreement, let us try to at least agree on a very basic teaching of most
Indian schools of thought, namely the teaching that the self is not the material body, but a
sublime spirit soul beyond material designations. I have termed this belief ‘sublimism’, and
I have termed the materialistic belief that the self is the material body ‘skeletonism’.
The case for sublimism in the Bhagavad-gītā (2.13) is as follows:
dehino 'smin yathā dehe
kaumāraṁ yauvanaṁ jarā
tathā dehāntara-prāptir
dhīras tatra na muhyati
“As the embodied soul continuously passes, in this body, from boyhood to
youth to old age, the soul similarly passes into another body at death. A
sober person is not bewildered by such a change.”
Page 3 of 16
2
As per the passing through different bodies during one lifetime, we can also present
arguments for sublimism from science:
According to biology, the bodily cells age and die very frequently. Almost the entire
human body is exchanged every 7 to 10 years. If skeletonism was true, then practically the
entire self would be replaced every 7 to 10 years. This, however, is not a fact. The owner of
a house today is still the owner of her house fifty years from now, although her body has
been replaced five times in this period. If the owner, or the self, is still the same, but the
body is long gone, then the logical conclusion is that the self is not the material body but
something sublime beyond the material body (for further evidence visit
www.sublimereality.com).
If we can agree with the paradigm of sublimism proposed in most Indian schools of
thought, we now have a very useful tool for an essential basic distinction:
Within any school, teachings based on the belief that the self is the
material body must be accepted as illusory, or asat. Sublimism, the
paradigm that the self is beyond the material body is truthful, or sat,
and any teaching that claims to be truthful must include this truth.
The distinction between the real and false self is one of the greatest values of Indian
philosophy and of philosophy per se. It is especially emphasized in Caitanya-Vaiṣṇava (syn.
Gauḍīya-Vaiṣṇava) philosophy. If values and actions are based on an illusory self, they are
illusory values and actions. Therefore, this preliminary distinction is of great importance for
examining human values. What value does any pursuit have, if it serves only the illusory
self, while the real self remains starving? In this regard, before the time of independence of
India, the Founder of the Benares Hindu University, Paṇḍit Madan Mohan Mālavīya, told
Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Saraswatī Thakura, the Founder-Ācārya of all Gauḍīya Maṭhs:
“You are the only person teaching the independence of the soul. We are trying to get
independence for India – that means independence for the body only. Thousands of
sādhus like you are needed all over India!” (Vikasa, 2009. Vol II, p. 78. Paraphrased
from an earlier copy.)
Since materialism advocates skeletonism, it is asat, illusory or untrue. Because untruth
is diametrically opposed to truth, there is no scope of synthesis between materialism and
sublimism. We die at death or we don’t – there is no question of synthesizing the state of
being dead and the state of being alive. If the weed-eating caterpillar wants to become a
nectar-drinking butterfly, it must give up its caterpillar existence – there is no scope of