30 Thinkers on Indian Civilization: Sri Aurbindo

Dr. Vijeta Dr. Vijeta

epgp books

 

The text is divided into following parts:

 

·         Introduction

 

·         Sri Aurobindo on Renaissance of Hinduism

 

·         Sri Aurobindo and British Rule

 

·         Sri Aurobindo on Nationalism

 

·         Aurobindo‟s Theory of Passive Resistance

 

·         Conclusion

 

·         Summary

 

Learning Objectives: From this content, one shall be able to know about the Sri Aurobindo‟s view on Renaissance of Hinduism and British rule. Along with it, through this text, one may know about the Aurobindo‟s concept of passive resistance and nationalism.

 

Introduction

 

In the 19th century, India came under the British rule. Due to the spread of modern education and growing public activities, there developed social awakening in India. Along with the social and political ideas, one can see the rise of Hinduism and Indian nationalism. New Hinduism became the tool of national consciousness in India, but this consciousness was broad enough to include Muslim, Parsee, Christian and other minorities in India. In the beginning of the 20th century, nationalism became more aggressive and anti-colonial. Sri Aurobindo Ghosh was instrumental in giving radical content to nationalism in India.

 

Aurobindo was born on August 15th, 1872, in Calcutta. His father, a man of great ability and strong personality, had been among the first to go to England for his education. He returned entirely anglicised in habits, ideas and ideals, so strongly that Aurobindo as a child spoke English and Hindustani only and learned his mother-tongue only after his return from England (Aurobindo, 1972).

 

He died in Pondicherry in 1950. He had the advantage of both an Occidental and Oriental education and his efforts at synthesis and integration make almost the whole of his life. Both his Synthesis of Yoga and his Integral Philosophy are applications of what is called Vijnanayada in Sanskrit, and stand in contrast with the analytical and dialectical approaches which dominate the West.

 

Sri Aurobindo on Renaissance of Hinduism

 

Aurobindo carried forward the development of Neo-Vedanta and declared that the true message of Vedanta was self-less action or Karma Yoga. In the theory of Karma Yoga, a person was enjoined to perform his duties without aspiring four the fruits thereof. So the Gita thought us to fight against injustice because life is a series of struggles. Aurobindo was of the opinion that there was a need of renaissance of Hinduism which called for the awakening of the Indian soul which was in deep slumber. It could achieve its glory through the philosophy of Vedanta which gave more importance to spirituality than to science. The West glorified science but science is a light within a limited room and not the sun that which illumines the world. The spirit of every human heart had to be awakened to revive the glory of Hinduism. Hinduism should change the rags of the past so that its beauty might be restored. It must alter it bodily appearance so that her soul might be newly expressed. According to Sri Aurobindo, the new goal of new Hinduism was to pave the way for emergence of Indian nationalism and to harmonise the word and the spirit. He held that the genius of the Hindu was note for pure action but for thought and aspiration realized in action.

 

Sri Aurobindo and British Rule

 

Aurobindo was a harsh critic of the British in India. He did not agree with the opinion of the moderates that it was a divine dispensation. He said that it was a curse for the majority of the Indian people because foreign rule in India sapped moral and mental energies of the Indian people. The British rule ruined the economy of India and did not allow the later to develop as an Independent nation. It disorganized the Indians into a crowd, with no centre of strength or means of resistance. Indian industries and trait were ruined and agriculture devastated. The British government in Indian was the worst type of bureaucratic despotism motivated by plunder and domination. India was held in subjection for the benefit of the British ruling classes. The British claim of a good government was false and a good and efficient government was no substitute for self government and freedom. It was the contention of Aurobindo that the spirit of India could be freed only by securing complete independence of the country. Freedom from foreign was an inalienable right of the people. The evil effects of the British rule could be eradicated only by overthrowing it. Its continuance would further worsen the situation in India.

 

Sri Aurobindo on Nationalism

 

After the partition of Bengal, there was a tremendous upheaval in the country and a large number of the people joined the Swadeshi movement led by the radical group of the congress party and Aurobindo joined the same. He was a philosopher of new party. He said that Swaraj, Swadeshi, National education and Boycott were four method of new party. For him, „Swaraj‟ meant complete independence because he argued that a political agitation was launched to secure a few seats in bureaucracy and in assembly but to secure right of self-government to the people. „Swadeshi‟ meant using the product that were manufactured in our country only as national education stood for imparting education to Indians that suited to their temperament, needs and culture. „Boycott‟ meant not using the products manufactured in England. All these four methods were necessary to train the people in national spirit and to be architects of liberty. Thus, for Aurobindo, new politics stood for self-development and self-help. He hoped that it would inculcate the spirit of nationalism in people.

 

Aurobindo‟s concept of nationalism was based on Vedanta philosophy which saw unity and oneness in man and God. There was an essential unity in India despite the existence of the outward differences because the spirit of unity and oneness pervaded it. For her rejuvenation, India needed “Shakti” or the power that was physical, moral, material and spiritual. The power or strength of nation depended on the unity of her nation. Aurobindo was critical of those who claimed that due to cultural, racial and linguistic diversity and divisions in the Indian society, India could never become a nation. He pointed out that if we carefully studied that history of Europe and England of the last two centuries, we would realize that there condition was way from different from India. But England and many other countries of Europe had emerged as nations. India would also succeed to form as a nation because it was a law of history. He held that without political freedom, through advancement of the country was not possible. He was of the opinion that education played a key role in the development of national consciousness in the country. He pointed out that there were certain essential elements in the formation of nationality. These essential elements were geographical unity, common past, a powerful common interest impelling towards unity and certain favourable political conditions which enabled the impulse to realize itself in an organized government. Its goal was to establish a single and united existence. According to Sri Aurobindo, a common enthusiasm coalescing with a common interest was the most powerful promoter of nationality. He pointed out that there existed the necessary conditions for the growth of nationalism in India because Indians had been slowly realizing the importance of national unity and offering united resistance to foreign rule. Aurobindo recognised the importance of villages in Indian life and pointed out that unlike in the West, where the city was the centre of political action, in India village was the backbone of national persistence. Indian villages were democratic, autonomous and self- governing. Therefore, regeneration of the village was important for the regeneration of India. He said that village should retain its autonomy and self-government but at the same time, should seek to promote national cohesion. Hence, he held that the days of independent village had gone and must not be revived. National unity could only be achieved when the rural population was developed into a mighty, single and compact democratic nationality. The ideal of national swaraj must be modelled on the old village community which was self-sufficient, autonomous and self-governing.

 

Aurobindo‟s concept of nationalism was based on Vedanta philosophy which stood for unity between man and God. He used Hindu religious ideas and symbols. He realized that the ideal of Indian nationalism was largely Hindu in character but he pointed out that this nationalism was wide enough to include the Muslim, his culture and tradition. He said that the Hindu should win Swaraj for himself as well as for the Muslim. A large part of his theory of nationalism was based on awakening the dormant spirit of nationalism that as latent in the soul of the India. The struggle against the foreign rule would enable it to achieve self realization.

 

Banerji (2013) discussed about the “Orientalism” and today it is considered an over-simplification. The chapter of colonization in world history has given way, successively, to the age of nationalism and now, the global age; and in all these, the legacy of post-Enlightenment Europe continues to unfold for better and for worse. Today, in this more refined analysis; one may see four distinct discourses co-existing in the colonial national-interchange. These four acted both independently and in a braided fashion, sometimes as an amalgam. All these can be thought of as emerging from the European Enlightenment. We would give them the names of Enlightenment Positivism, Positivist Racism/Ethnocentrism, Romantic Orientalism and Dialogic Orientalism. This is the first overarching discourse of post-enlightenment colonialism. Positivism in this Enlightenment sense does not make any distinction between human beings, colonizer or colonized. It moves towards the equalization of the field. The second discourse is connected to the first. It may be called Positivist Racism. Positivist Racism/Ethnocentrism also starts with the precept that Reason is the primary defining attribute of human beings. In this sense, it is also definitional in its approach to Humanity, but it construes non-white, non-western people, as racially and civilizationally different and inferior. Along with these, as their necessary inverse, come two other discourses. They constitute the field of Orientalism. The first of these could be called Romantic Orientalism. This starts by acknowledging the “Enlightened West” to be defined by Materialism, and then projects its Other, the domain of Romanticism and Spirituality onto the ”the Orient”,—that is, the colonized. The colonized is that other because s/he fills the lack of Euro-America, its lost spirituality, rejected because not a part of its definition of the Human. Thus the fascination of the other as the romantic, exotic, primitive, spiritual native (in our case, Indian) characterizes Orientalism. But Orientalism is also conflicted. Just as the discourse of Positivism expresses itself as a binary, Orientalism carries an internal conflict which divides it into two discourses. One of these is mainstream Orientalism, that which was so well captured by Edward Said. This is what characterizes “Oriental” or “non-western” people as those who will remain and are meant to remain creatures of imagination and spirituality, not capable of political self-determination or rational epistemology. They are therefore, essentialized and subordinated; yet simultaneously glorified, put on a pedestal, but only in a museological and touristic sense. They will thus remain the west‟s living preserves of its own archaic race memory and anthropological proof of the evolutionary progress of its enlightened civilization, for the wonder, exploration, exploitation and enjoyment of its own citizens. The fourth discourse is a variant of Romantic Orientalism; it may be termed Dialogic Orientalism. This is constituted by the awareness among those within the West who perceive the origin of the Other within their own culture, who believe that spirituality is part of the definition of the Human, which has been suppressed and neglected in the development of the progressive “logocentric” discourse of the Enlightenment. This anthropological deformation needs to be corrected. Engagement in dialogue with the living potential of that in non-western cultures can transform and enrich the world, and create a new future.

 

Aurobindo’s Theory of Passive Resistance

 

Aurobindo thought that method of passive resistance, which was used by the Irish nationalists, would be ideal for India. Hence, he developed theory of passive resistance in a series of articles published in the weekly called “Bandemataram”. Passive resistance meant the resistance to authority of the government in an organised manner and through peaceful means. The use of arms was not allowed in passive resistance. According to Aurobindo in India, attainment of political freedom was the goal of passive resistance. Freedom in India was necessary to stop the drain of wealth and to carry out the social reforms. The programme of Swadeshi, national education, boycott and establishment of arbitration courts was the programme of self development. But this programme, on its own, would not be in a position to secure political freedom for India. Political freedom could only be secured by organised passive resistance carried out on a large scale. This policy was followed by Parnell in Ireland. Its main object was to paralyse the functioning of the government by withdrawing support and cooperation to the government.

 

Methods of Passive Resistance: According to Aurobindo Passive Resistance worked on two levels. At the first level, it encouraged the people to pursue the methods of self-development such as Swadeshi and national education and at the second level; it sought to exert pressure on the government to concede the demands of the people. According to him, in the passive resistance, the following measures would be undertaken to achieve success:

 

  1. Refusal to assist the government.
  2. Refusal to pay taxes to the government.
  3. Boycotting the products manufactured in the foreign countries.
  4. Boycotting the government schools and colleges and law courts.
  5. Starting our own schools, colleges and arbitration courts to train the people in the method of self-help and national independence.

 

Sri Aurobindo was of the opinion that to pursue the policy of passive resistance effectively, we should develop a well-knit, political organisation, linking province to province and district to district. This organization would represent the national will of the people. The main purpose of passive resistance was to make law unworkable by a general and organised disobedience. It was his opinion that conflict was the heart of passive resistance and it brooked no meek submission to authority. Aurobindo pointed out if the government did not consider the legitimate demands of the people, the people would go underground and take recourse to sabotage and terrorism. Terrorism might perish of inanition; coercion was its food.

 

Conclusion

 

Sri Aurobindo‟s political ideas could be divided into two phases: in the first phase, he expounded the concept of Indian nationalism and developed the theory of passive resistance. In the second phase, as a great sage of India, he wrote extensively on the ideal of human unity and essential characteristics of Indian model of state building. Thus, in the first phase, he was a militant eager to liberate his motherhood from the bondage and in the second half; he was a great sage who sought to give message to the world in the ideals of the human unity and nationalism to achieve the goal.

 

Aurobindo‟s concept of nationalism was based on Vedanta philosophy which saw unity and oneness in man and God. There was an essential unity in India despite the existence of the outward differences because the spirit of unity and oneness pervaded it while his theory of passive resistance was influenced by the Irish home rule movement against the British rule. It is to be noted that Aurobindo‟s ideas on resistance could be considered as precursor to the Gandhian theory of Satyagraha. He was of the opinion that with the development of passive resistance movement, the aspirations of the people would grow and they would acquire the capacity to actualize nation national self consciousness and national will in their way to day activities.

 

Summary

 

Due to the spread of modern education and growing public activities, there developed social awakening in India. Along with the social and political ideas, one can see the rise of Hinduism and Indian nationalism. Sri Aurobindo Ghosh was instrumental in giving radical content to nationalism in India. Aurobindo carried forward the development of Neo-Vedanta and declared that the true message of Vedanta was self-less action or Karma Yoga. In the theory of Karma Yoga, a person was enjoined to perform his duties without aspiring four the fruits thereof. So the Gita thought us to fight against injustice because life is a series of struggles. Aurobindo was of the opinion that there was a need of renaissance of Hinduism which called for the awakening of the Indian soul which was in deep slumber. Aurobindo was a harsh critic of the British in India. He did not agree with the opinion of the moderates that it was a divine dispensation. He said that it was a curse for the majority of the Indian people because foreign rule in India sapped moral and mental energies of the Indian people. The British rule ruined the economy of India and did not allow the later to develop as an Independent nation. He said that Swaraj, Swadeshi, National education and Boycott were four method of new party. For him, „Swaraj‟ meant complete independence because he argued that a political agitation was launched to secure a few seats in bureaucracy and in assembly but to secure right of self-government to the people. „Swadeshi‟ meant using the product that were manufactured in our country only as national education stood for imparting education to Indians that suited to their temperament, needs and culture. „Boycott‟ meant not using the products manufactured in England. All these four methods were necessary to train the people in national spirit and to be architects of liberty. Aurobindo‟s concept of nationalism was based on Vedanta philosophy which saw unity and oneness in man and God. There was an essential unity in India despite the existence of the outward differences because the spirit of unity and oneness pervaded it. Aurobindo thought that method of passive resistance, which was used by the Irish nationalists, would be ideal for India. Passive resistance meant the resistance to authority of the government in an organised manner and through peaceful means. The use of arms was not allowed in passive resistance. According to Aurobindo in India, attainment of political freedom was the goal of passive resistance. Freedom in India was necessary to stop the drain of wealth and to carry out the social reforms. The programme of Swadeshi, national education, boycott and establishment of arbitration courts was the programme of self development. But this programme, on its own, would not be in a position to secure political freedom for India. Political freedom could only be secured by organised passive resistance carried out on a large scale.

you can view video on Thinkers on Indian Civilization: Sri Aurbindo

REFERENCE/SUGGESTED READINGS

 

  • Aurobindo, S. (1972): Sri Aurobindo. Sri Aurobindo Ashram. E-text based on Sri Aurobindo Birth Century Library in 30 Volumes Vol. 26.
  • Aurobindo, S. (1992): The foundations of Indian culture. Sri Aurobindo. Aurobindo Ashram. E-text based on Sri Aurobindo Birth Century Library.
  • Banerji, D. (2013): Sri Aurobindo, India, and ideological discourse. International Journal of Dharma Studies. Vol. 1(1).
  • Campbell, R. L., & Staniford, P. S. (1978) : Transpersonal anthropology. Phoenix: The Journal of Transpersonal Anthropology, 2(1), 28-40.
  • Ghurys, G.S. (1986): Caste and Race. 5th ed.,Popular Prakshan, Bombay, 1986.
  • Halliburton, M. (2002) : Rethinking Anthropological Studies of the Body: Manas and Bōdham in Kerala. American Anthropologist, 104(4), 1123-1134.
  • IGNOU (2004): Social and Political thought in modern India. Sita Fine arts Pvt. Ltd. Press. ISBN-8126611553.
  • Laughlin, C. D., & Richardson, S. (1986): The future of human consciousness. Futures, 18(3), 401-419.
  • Raina, M. K. (2002): Sri Aurobindo (1872–1950). Prospects.Vol. 32(3).