varma - indian psychology - theory and practice

8/10/2019 Varma - Indian Psychology - Theory and Practice

1/29

DRAFT COPY

Indian Psychology: Theory and practice

Suneet Varma

Department of PsychologyUniversity of Delhi

*What do we mean by Indian psychology?

By Indian psychology we mean an approach to psychology that is based on ideas and

practices that developed over thousands of years within the Indian sub-continent. In other

words, we use the word Indian to indicate and honour the origin of this approach to

psychologythe origin of the underlying philosophy, the conceptual framework, the

methods of enquiry, and the technology of consciousness that it uses to bring aboutpsychological change and transformation. It may be useful to make explicit that we do

not use the word Indian to localize or limit the scope of this approach to psychology; we

do not mean, for example, the psychology of the Indian people, or psychology as

taught at Indian universities. We hold that Indian psychology as a meta-theory and as an

extensive body of related theories and practices has something essential and unique to

contribute to the global civilization as a whole.

Psychology as taught at present, all over the world, is still amazingly unicultural. This is

rather remarkable if we consider the intensity and ease of international communications,

and the fact that it is almost half a century since the political decolonization of Asia and

Africa was completed. Though the large component of European and American thought

in psychology is understandable historically, it is not any longer excusable. For it is not

that the rest of the world has not thought about human nature, and it is definitely not that

contemporary psychology has found the one and only correct way of doing so. In this

context, one could argue that Indian psychology will be relevant particularly to Asian,

African, or Latin-American countries which share alternative non-Western world views

about mind, psyche and various psychological phenomena such as healing, health, self, or

personality; but we strongly believe that in spite of all cultural differences, there is a large

common core to human nature, and that, to the extent that Indian psychology deals withthat common core, it should be of interest to all members of the human family.

In short, we do not look at Indian psychology as something that belongs only to India or

the past, but as a rich source of psychological insight and know-how that can be utilised

to create a better future for the whole of humanity.

""""""""

!##$ % &' %( )&'#* +,-+.#&+/ 0.'1 23&.'/4-&5'3 '0 6$ 7'.3+8599+3: ;$ 659.$ ?


2/29

2

What the Indian civilization can contribute to psychology

The unique contribution which the Indian civilization can make to modern psychology

can be looked at as consisting of three distinct elementsa sophisticated and well-

worked out, psychology-based meta-theoretical frame-work, a wide repertoire ofpsychological practices, and a rich treasury of psychological theories. These three are,

obviously, closely interconnected, and it may be clear that none of them can be fully

understood without a fairly complete understanding of the other two. Yet, as language is

inevitably linear, I here a separate short introduction to each of them.

A psychology-friendly meta-theoretical framework

The first major contribution the Indian civilization can make to psychology is a

psychology-friendly meta-theoretical framework. To delineate the underlying theory, the

basic paradigm of the Indian tradition is, of course, a pretentious undertaking fraught

with possibilities of error. The Indian civilization is immensely complex, and, given theabundance of differentoften contraryvoices it harbours within itself, it is hard to state

anything about it that cannot be contradicted with a striking counter-example. And yet, it

is useful to give it a try, for the simple reason that without this background it is

impossible to fully understand its psychological practices and its theories.

When one looks at the Indian civilization as it developed over the ages, it becomes

quickly clear that within it there exists such a huge variety of distinct cultural traditions,

that one may doubt whether it actually makes sense to speak of a single Indian tradition

and whether it would not be more accurate to speak of Indian traditions in the plural. The

doubt is understandable, but we would contend that in case of the Indian tradition,

singularity and multiformity are not necessarily mutually exclusive. A rich variety of

expressions does not preclude the possibility of a common thread, a single foundation

supporting the variety, and we are inclined to think that especially in India such a

common core indeed does exist. In fact, the idea of a single truth supporting a variety of

manifestations is itself one of the core-characteristics of the deep view of reality that

underlies the whole wide gamut of Indian traditions. One of the most-often-quoted

aphorisms expressing this acknowledgment of divergent views in spite of a single

underlying reality is probably: ekam sad vadanti, which means, the truth

is One, but the wise call it by different names. An interesting aspect of this saying is thatthe differences are not described as errors: it is the wise that give different names to the

one truth. Moreover, one would miss the point if one were to take this saying as no more

than a polite exhortation for religious tolerance. It rests on a deep, psychological

understanding of the human condition, which says that reality as it really is, will always

remain beyond our limited mental capacity to grasp, and that each individual can perceive

of that reality only as much as their individual capacity and inclination will allow.


3/29

3

There is another ancient saying which goes a step further. It deals with the different

perceptions that arise from affirmative and agnostic approaches to reality. It saysand

one can immediately see how close some ancient Indian thinkers came to postmodern

constructivismthat not only the name we give to an experience, but even the experience

itself is determined by our set. The a Ud (2.6.1), for instance, says, asann

eva sa bhavati, asad brahmeti veda cet, asti brahmeti ced veda, santam enatato ,

meaning, whoever envisages it as existence becomes (or realizes) it as existence, and

whoever envisages it as non-being becomes (or realizes) that non-existence. It may be

noted that in the Indian tradition such differences are not attributed only to the different

cultural priming; they are attributed primarily to the different type, level and quality of the

internal state of the observer. And this brings us to what might well be described as the

most important difference between the Indian and the Western paradigm.

The differences

Western psychology is largely confined to two dimensions which are both fully

accessible to the ordinary waking consciousnessthe physical and the social. Genetics,

neurophysiology and the cognitive sciences are typical for sub-disciplines with a focus on

the physical dimension, and the various offshoots of psychoanalysis, social

constructivism and cross-cultural psychology could be considered typical for those who

focus on social factors. Between the two, there is still, in spite of many attempts at

softening psychology, a widespread tendency to take the physical dimension more

seriously than the social. Even in the field of consciousness studies, the existence of

physical reality tends to be taken for granted, while the ontological reality of

consciousness and subjective experience is open for discussion. Their apparent existenceneeds some kind of justification, and both are commonly considered epiphenomenal

products of material processes. Related to this, in terms of epistemology, the ordinary

waking consciousness is considered the only acceptable state for the researcher to be in,

and a clear rational mind is taken as the ultimate arbiter of truth. In fact, non-ordinary

states of awareness are primarily associated with drugs and somewhat frivolous new-age

activities. Finally, in terms of practical methodology, objectivity is taken as the ultimate

ideal, and first-person, subjective observations are taken seriously only if they are

embedded in statistics and third-person objective measures to counteract their inherent

weaknesses. Obviously all this is a simplification and there are exceptions to this

patternone could, for example, think of phenomenologybut still, a strong physicalist

bias, an absolute faith in the ordinary waking consciousness and a total reliance on

objective methods are so much part of mainstream psychology that amongst

psychologists, they are commonly considered indispensable elements of the scientific

method.


4/29

4

The intellectual tradition of India starts from radically different assumptions.

Ontologically, the most fundamental reality is not matter, but spirit; or more precisely,

the indivisible unity ofsda, of absolute existence, consciousness and delight. In

other words, the Indian tradition includes psychological phenomena like consciousness

and joy as core-elements of reality, and in fact it takes not physics, but knowledge of the

self (adhytma-vidy) as the fundamental science. Accordingly, the possibility and

cosmic importance of an absolutely silent, transcendent consciousness are hardly ever

doubted, while there are major schools of thought that do doubt the importance and even

the reality of the material pole of existence. While Western science has come to terms

with the fact that there are many different types of physical energies and substances, of

which some are not directly perceptible by the human senses, the Indian tradition takes it

for granted that there are also various types and levels of non-physical existenceentire

inner worlds which are not directly perceptible to the ordinary waking consciousness,

but that are ontologically as real, or even more real than the ordinary physical world.

These non-physical realities are considered to be intermediate planes of consciousexistence between the absolute, silent consciousness of the transcendent and the apparent

unconsciousness of matter. As a result, physical and social factors are accepted as part of

causal networks, but not as the full storyevents are thought to be influenced by a wide

variety of forces that include factors belonging to non-physical realities. Similarly,

epistemologically, a rational mind is appreciated and cultivated, but it is understood that

there are higher sources of knowledge and the possibility of a direct, intuitive

apprehension of truth. Finally, objective, sense-based knowledge is considered a minor

form of knowledge (or even ignorance, avidy) and an immense collective effort has

gone into the development of processes that can make us more open to the subtle worlds,

and especially to the pre-existing inner knowledge, .

It may be clear that these two basic views of reality lead to a very different sense of what

psychology is about, how it is to be conducted, and what can be expected from it. For

those under the influence of the physicalist worldview, psychology deals either with outer

behaviour or with mental processes that happen within the neuro-physiological apparatus

of individual human beings; even those who stress social influences, tacitly assume that

such influences are transferred by physical means. It is taken for granted that

consciousness, whether individually or socially determined, depends on working neural

systems. Non-physical realities are illusionary and parapsychological phenomena are

anomalous. For an eternal soul there is no place (except as a belief of others, not as an

objective reality that exists in itself). Methodologically, one has to rely on statistics and

sophisticated third-person methods of research. In terms of application, one aims at

(behaviourally verifiable) changes in others.


5/29

5

For those under the influence of the Indian system, consciousness is primary. It is taken

to be all-pervasive, and as existing within space and time, as well as beyond both. The

borders of the individual are porous, and the individual consciousness is found to extend

through space and time, to others, to all kinds of inner worlds, and even to what is

beyond all manifestation. As a result, non-physical realities and parapsychological

phenomena fit perfectly within this explanatory framework, and there is no difficulty

accepting an eternal soul as our real self. For research in Indian psychology,

sophisticated first person methods are the natural first choice. In terms of application,

Indian psychology aims primarily at the mastery and transformation of oneself.

When one lists these differences in this manner, the two systems seem to belong to

different worlds, and not only serious misunderstandings, but even a certain mutual

distrust appears almost inevitable. Historically this has indeed been the case. In the Indian

tradition, right from the and the stories of the Pur, the basic ontological

and epistemological assumptions of modern psychology are looked at as beginnerserrors, remnants of an ordinary, naive way of looking at the world that stand in the way

of a deeper understanding of how the human mind, consciousness in general, and even

the physical reality actually work. Seen from the other side, from the perspective of

mainstream psychology, giving up its positivist, constructivist, or agnostic assumptions

looks like a return to a superstitious past, a giving up of the most valuable

accomplishments of the European Enlightenment, a recipe for disaster.

Roads to reconciliation

There are several factors that may, however, help to overcome these difficulties. The first

is that the inability of modern science to deal effectively with non-physical realities andthe divine, may not be intrinsic to science as such. Future generations, who are likely to

have a more globally informed cultural background, may ascribe this inability largely to

the vagaries of European history. It might well be found that in the early years of modern

science, Europe left these inner realms aside, not because it is intrinsically too difficult to

research them in an intelligent and open-minded manner, but simply because they were

too encrusted in the religious environment of the time. It is true that neither alchemy, nor

the later efforts of parapsychology have led to sufficiently concrete results to convince

the sceptics; but that might well be because their studies were hampered on the one side

by the lack of a sufficiently supportive philosophical framework, and on the other by

their failure to develop effective powers within the inner realms they purported to study.

As we will try to present in this volume, the Indian tradition might be able to provide

both. Though the Indian civilization has had its own difficulties800 years of foreign

interference not the least of themsuch a dramatic split between the physical and the

inner domains is not part of the Indian story. In fact, the social structures and mental

attitudes supporting spiritual pursuits in India are much closer to those of European

science than to those of European religion. Even who arguably comes closest


6/29

6

to what in the Christian tradition would have been called a church-father, given his role in

founding centres of religious authority and powerin the end puts personal experience

(anubhava) above tradition. In hisBhagavad the says, for example (18, 66),

Even a hundred scriptural passages will not become authoritative when they, for

instance, announce that fire is cool or dark (Rao, 1979, p. 65). The methods of yoga and

meditation are nowadays primarily looked at soteriologically, that is, as a means for

salvation, as a means to arrive at saor niat least if they are not seen as a

means to arrive at physical health and the survival of a corporate lifestyle. In the culture

of origin, however, they are part of a coherent knowledge system and they are clearly

looked at as a way to arrive at reliable knowledge. This is most clear in the case of

(the yoga of knowledge); but one can easily discern elements of the pursuit of

truth even in karma- and bhaktiyoga (the paths of works and devotion), which also, in

their own way, have methods to reduce the distortions of perception and affect that are

part of the ordinary human consciousness.

The good news then is that modern scientific and ancient Indian approaches to

psychology may not be so much contradictory as complementary. It is true that they are

based on different ontological and epistemological assumptions, that they use different

methods, and to some extent, that they look at different sides of the human enterprise, but

in the end, they are based on the same human urge for true knowledge, pure love,

effective power and happiness. It may not be easy to come to mutual respect and

understanding, but the effort will be worth it, for our preoccupation with knowledge and

power in the physical domain has not solved humanitys problems. On a global scale,

suffering due to poverty, violence and disease is still rampant, and we have added a

considerable risk of sudden environmental self-destruction. One could well argue that theone thing we need most at present is a more comprehensive understanding of our own

nature. As editors of this volume, we would like to argue that Indian psychology can

make a valuable contribution to that endeavour.

Psychological practices

According to a survey commissioned by the Yoga Journal, there were in February 2008,

some 15.8 million practitioners of () yoga in the USA alone, and amongst the rest of

the adult population, another 8 per cent, or eighteen million people, were very or

extremely interested in yoga. Over the years, thousands of researches on yoga and

meditation have been conducted (Murphy & Donovan, 1997; Walsh & Shapiro, 2006),

but according to the latter, this research is as yet rather imbalanced. Most research is

conducted with beginning practitioners, and the vast majority of researches have been

carried out with not more than three -basic techniquesga, vipassana and

Transcendental Meditation (TM). Almost all research is, moreover, in a mode that

cultural anthropologists would call etic, rather than emic. In other words, the research is

done from an outsiders, rather than from an insiders perspective; the techniques are


7/29

7

decontextualized, and their effectiveness is measured in terms that belong to the

theoretical framework of mainstream psychology. This is in itself not surprising, for

measurement involves the use of standards, and in science these standards have to come

from previously conducted research. But the result is that the effects of yoga and

meditation have been measured almost exclusively on variables like blood pressure,

anxiety, depression and extroversion, which have little to do with what would have been

considered relevant in the culture of origin, such as equanimity, compassion, wisdom and

detachment.

While reflecting on the scope of existing research on yoga and meditation, there is

another issue that warrants careful consideration. It is true that India has developed an

astounding variety of structured methods to do yoga and meditation. There can also be

no doubt that it is worth studying these techniques, and that one should not do this only

by etic, but also, or even especially, by emic approaches. The methods of yoga should be

understood on their own terms, and ideally not only in their gross effectiveness but interms of the underlying spiritual and psychological processes. But even a sympathetic,

insiders look at these techniques will not give us the whole story. Amongst the Indian

psychological practices that could benefit humanity, there are not only such formalised

methods and techniques, but there is also an implicit, informal know-how that is orally

transmitted from teacher to student within the guruya (the -master

disciple relationship), or passed down from generation to generation in the form of social

institutions, customs, and culturally prescribedbut individually adopted and adapted

attitudes and inner gestures. When we look at yoga not only as a way to find the Divine

but also as a way to bring our entire life more in harmony with the highest we can

conceive and experientially realise, then it becomes clear why these informal, implicitaspects of yoga play such a big role in the Indian civilization, and why they are so

interesting for modern psychology. An anecdote from E. Richard Sorenson (2008) may

illustrate the point. Sorensen relates an experience he had in a Tibetan monastery where

most of the monks were young, and where he had noticed earlier that the novices were

always eagerly rushing to share whatever special tidbit [sic] might have come their way

(whether material or ideational) (p. 46). As he relates:

One day, while having lunch with a group of novices, a burst of mirth snared my attention. An

adolescent novice had just selected, as if solely for himself, the largest apple off a plate. Bursts of

laughter from the others, no verbal comment, just hilarity, as several then did much the same,usually with some special fillip or perspective of their own. There was no obligation to be either

different or the same ... they were just nuzzling at a trait all had seen outside.

The interesting part is that amongst these youngsters, there were no pejorative remarks or

outbursts of self-righteous indignation. Egoism was for them not something natural and

tempting, yet socially unacceptable, but an utterly hilarious trait they had so far noticed


8/29

8

only in the behaviour of people outside their own community. Presuming there is no

major genetic difference in such matters, it is clearly worthwhile to study what it is

exactly that made sharing the natural baseline for these children. It seems extremely

unlikely that such a fundamental difference can be brought about by formal exercises or

explicit instructions.

Regarding the spiritual core of the Indian psychological tradition, there is amongst

professional psychologists a similar tendency to focus on formal practices and specialised

techniques. Yet, in the Yoga of Patajali, the undisputed authority on yoga,

only one of its many deals with (yogic postures), and the Bhagavad

hardly mentions strongly structured practices at all. Even in our times, some of the

greatest sages of modern India, like Ramakrishna Paramahansa, Sai Baba of Shirdi,

Ramana Maharshi and Sri Aurobindo, did not advocate the use of highly structured and

formalized techniques at all. They worked instead through a focussed, specialized

application ofin itself quite simplepsychological processes and powers. There is anenormous variety of those, and even though all the great gurus had their own favourites

for example, Ramakrishnas absolute devotion to the Divine Mother, or Ramanas

sustained and unremitting focus on the question, Who am I?they typically adjusted

their method of teaching to the needs of each disciple at any given moment.

The literature contains many different lists of desirable inner attitudes and gestures.

Typical examples might be: a silent, non-judgemental self-observation; a growing

surrender to the highest one can conceive; a sustained aspiration towards the Divine

(whether in terms of knowledge, work, love, or oneness); a systematic development of

traits like equanimity, calm, patience, vigilance, kindness, compassion, love, joy,harmony, oneness, wideness; small inner gestures of self-giving, consecration, openness,

silence, surrender; the relocation of the centre of ones consciousness inwards and

upwards. As yet, it is hard to say with certainty, whether such non-sectarian, informal

paths will dominate the future of Indian psychology, or the more formalized

techniques that have played such a big role in the preservation of the tradition into the

present. What seems clear to us is that there is an urgent need for research in both.

Psychological theories

Indian psychology has dealt with most areas in which mainstream psychology is

interested, and in many of them it has something unique to add. As we will see, there is a

special, common quality to the contributions it can make to all these different fields. If

we start with the structure of the personality then we find that the Indian tradition has

developed the concept of ra, which stands somewhere in between the Western

concepts of ego and self-concept. But besides this egoic centre, which belongs to the

ordinary waking consciousness, the Indian tradition has also developed a detailed

nomenclature for many other, more subtle and non-egoic centres of consciousness; and it


9/29

9

has even worked out, especially in certain Buddhist schools, how a consciousness can

exist without any centre whatsoever. Similarly, the Indian tradition has found below the

surface of our waking consciousness not only the dark unconscious that depth

psychology has explored, but a whole range of subtle as or layers of consciousness,

that each have their own characteristic nature. It has even worked out many different

ways of realizing in ones experience (or perhaps one should rather say, in ones being)

a Transcendent beyond all nature. It has found that all these inner layers, types, and

centres of conscious existence have their specific influences on the surface personality,

and that a direct access to them can, with sufficient training, enable levels of freedom,

peace, joy, compassion, and understanding much beyond what is possible in the ordinary

waking state.

In the field of cognition, we see a similar pattern. On the one hand, there is a detailed

theoretical understanding of ordinary, sense-based cognition, mostly described as a

system of , or knowledge-producing events. Different schools developedsomewhat different theories about these mattersand they made much of their

differencesbut there is actually quite a large common base. It is noteworthy that the

philosophical school of the -ika, which specialised in issues of epistemologyand methodology, came to conclusions that are similar to modern thought in many

respects. However, just as we saw in the field of Self and Personality, the ordinary sense-

based cognition was not enough for the Indian tradition, and it developed besides a

detailed understanding of intuition, inspiration, revelation, and various other types of

intuitive knowledge for which there are not always equivalent terms in English. The

sheer complexity of the terminology, the subtle but significant differences between the

various terms, and the stress on concrete methods to develop and refine these variousforms of intuitive knowledge may give an idea not only of the enthusiasm and energy

with which these possibilities have been explored, but also of the rigour, precision and

attention for detail with which this work was undertaken. The study, cultivation and

perfection of these subtle, not sense-based forms of cognition, might well deserve to

become one of the major thrust areas of Indian psychology, as their development may

lead to the creation of appropriate research methodologies for a whole new field of

psychology.

Another major area of interest in psychology is that of emotion and motivation. To fully

understand the various Indian theories of emotion, one has to go back to what should

perhaps count as one of the greatest discoveries of the Indian traditionthe idea that the

nature of ultimate reality can be described as an indivisible unity of Sat, Cit and,

or Existence, Consciousness, and Delight. While in mainstream psychology, it is

generally presumed that happiness is dependent on the satisfaction of individual needs

and desires, this theory asserts that delight is inherent in existence, even though it can be

clouded in humans by their ignorance (av). In other words, suffering is attributed to


10/29

10

ego-bound deformations and limitations of the over-individualized human consciousness.

Seen from this angle, the satisfaction of desires may give temporary relief, but the road to

lasting and unconditional happiness and wisdom runs through detachment from the ego,

and a rediscovery of ones knowledge of, love for, and oneness with the ultimate reality.

With the ideal of perfect detachment and complete equanimity, a series of intriguing

questions arises, which have occupied some of the best minds in Indian history, regarding

the possibility of action for someone who has completely overcome all desire, preference

and attachment. If such unmotivated action is possibleand most schools of Indian

thought agree that it isthen what kind of action can that be?

In the field of emotion, a special place deserves to be given to the ideas of Bharata (400

200 BCE) on aesthetic enjoyment. Bharata starts with the fascinating question, why

people enjoy watching tragic plays in spite of the fact that they already know beforehand

that watching such plays will make them cry. Considering the emotions that spectators

and actors suffer and savour, he arrives at the subtle theory of rasa, the basic taste,which triggers the original delight hidden in all things.

It is commonly held, especially amongst American authors (for example, Walsh &

Shapiro, 2006) that there are several areas of psychology where the Indian tradition has

little to contribute. Though this is in itself perfectly plausible, it does not hold for the

most commonly quoted examples. In all four areas where Walsh and Shapiro, for

example, think that the meditative traditions have little to contributechild-

development, psychodynamics, psychopathology and psycho-pharmacologythere is in

fact detailed theoretical knowledge available within edic and Siddha literature. In

all four fields, the Indian tradition has paid attention to very similar social and physicalfactors as are taken into account in Western psychology; but there is, besides, an

additional interest in influences on more subtle planes. In child-development, for

example, influences from previous lives and the unique soul-quality of the child, the

, are acknowledged as major contributors to the childs character and

development. A similar multilevel understanding is part of the Indian way of looking at

psychopathology, and the developmental stages later in lifethe four The

misconception that there is no Indian contribution to any of these fields, is in all

likelihood due to the same peculiar way in which Western psychology has studied the

Indian tradition that we mentioned earlier. Mainstream academics have either looked at

the decontextualized techniques of yoga and meditation, or at the other extreme, at

equally decontextualized philosophical systems. The surrounding culture, as actually

practiced, and the mediating theorieswhich are both very well developed in India

have so far not received the attention they deserve.


11/29


12/29

12

own unique set of qualities, but also their own truth of action, their own rules of conduct.

Both concepts are based on the underlying sense that the individual is not just a cluster of

self-concepts and tendencies to behave according to pre-established patterns, but a

spiritual being, a soul who has taken birth for a definite purpose, a purpose which it has

to find and fulfil.*

Methodology in the Spiritual Realm

As Paranjpe (2008) notes:

Trained in modern Western models, for a majority of psychologists today, doing

psychology has come to mean, most commonly, either of two types of approaches: (1)

running subjects in an experimental paradigm, and test results by analysis of variance,

or (2) use instruments, mostly meaning paper-and-pencil tests to collect data and

interpret these through correlational or multivariate statistics. Anything other than this

does not seem to qualify as psychology; it lacks the kind of evidence one is accustomed

to accept . To the extent that emotions are a matter of individual experience, theproblem of ascertaining their nature stumbles over what philosophers have termed the

the problem of other minds. The private nature of emotional experience would forever

keep them out of the range of public verification. Access to rasa, however, is a different

matter insofar as they are supposed to be a generalized form of emotions which are

brought into the public domain. Any spectator of a drama can share an aesthetic mood

such as mirth or pathos and experientially verify its nature. The rasa theorists clarify,

however, that such verification is limited to aesthetes or rasikas who possess similar

aesthetic sensibilities orsahdayat, and are not wrapped up in their own egoic concerns.

Insofar as the devotional mood (bhakti rasa) is concerned, one could set up a program of

presentation of such a mood in powerful singing of poems composed by highly acclaimed

devotees known as bhakti-sagt. Shared experience of the putative creation of the

devotional mood in such a situation can be an experiential demonstration.

All knowledge-seeking endeavours can be understood with the help of three issues: (a)

The assumptions about the nature of reality under study (ontology); (b) the relationship

between the knower and that which is to be known (epistemology); and (c) the methods

to be used for acquiring knowledge (methodology). In the late 19th

century, academic

psychology emerged emulating physics, the queen of sciences. The natural science

approach served as its model, and psychology aimed at objective, value-free,

quantifiable, and generalizable knowledge. From the 1970s onwards it was increasingly

felt that the natural science paradigm did not serve well the goals of psychology. Todaythe discipline consists of diverse research paradigms based on differing ontologies, and

concomitant epistemologies and methodologies. No system of psychology can be

complete unless it includes the spiritual dimension of existence, and contemporary

psychology has begun to take this profound aspect of existence more seriously.

"""""""""""

!##$ % &' %( )&'#* +,-+.#&+/ 0.'1 23&.'/4-&5'3 '0 6$ 7'.3+8599+3: ;$ 659.$ ?


13/29

13

Indian systems of psychological knowledge have for millennia emphasized the essential,

spiritual nature of human beings, and the need to integrate the spiritual with everyday

life, in order to attain a meaningful and fulfilled existence. Outlined below are the

contours of an Indian paradigm of knowledge, one which holds the spiritual realm as an

essential part of existence/reality.

Inquiry in the spiritual realm

Ontology

The Indian tradition holds that there are two major planes,sa, of reality:

(a)rthika The transcendental reality which is considered to be non-changing

and universal. It can be experienced in this life under certain conditions like sam.

This can be approximately termed as the spiritual realm or praxis.

(b) rika The empirical reality which is apprehended through the sense

modalities. This can be approximately understood as the material praxis which includesall physio-psycho-social aspects of mundane existence.

Epistemology

(a)thika The knower and known are one and the same as in the dictum ah

(I amBrahman).

(b) vyavahrika The subject and object dichotomy is upheld (knowledge of the object

is within the reach of the knower).

Methodology

(a) Experiential;

(b) Empirical

(a)arthika This involves s(spiritual praxis) under the supervision of a

or (seer). Ultimate authority in India is vested in practice, and is held as belonging,

not to ancient books nor their learned expositions, but to those who have personal

experience of spiritual truth. It is a living vision that transforms the inner life, faculties

and powers of the person who attains it. S also denotes making, and thusimplicates transformation of self. It involves or detached truth seeking,

sensitiveness, , earnestness, viveka, discrimination, and realization of the

constraints and limitations emanating from egoism and acquisitiveness. In general, three

paths, ga, of spiritual realization are in practice: the path of (knowledge), of

karma (action), and of bhakti (devotion).


14/29

14

(b) vy The major means of this type of knowledge include the following:

- pratyak(perception)

- (inference)

- (comparison)

- (verbal testimony)

- tti (postulation)

- anupalabdhi (non-cognition)

It may be further noted that certain aspects of the Indian paradigm continue to be living

realities, and new frameworks continue to evolve, both in terms of theory and practice,

for example, Sri Aurobindos Integral Yoga which emerged in the twentieth century. Sri

Aurobindo (1972) identified and described four forms of knowing:

Our surface cognition, our limited and restricted mental way of looking at our self, at our

inner movements and at the world outside us and its objects and happenings, is so

constituted that it derives in different degrees from a fourfold order of knowledge... . A

knowledge by identity, a knowledge by intimate direct contact, a knowledge by

separative direct contact, a wholly separative knowledge by indirect contact are the four

cognitive methods of Nature.

Cornelissen (2011) has elaborated these four types of knowledge as follows: (1)

knowledge by indirect separative contact (= scientific knowledge of the outer reality); (2)

knowledge by direct separative contact (= objective introspection of inner processes); (3)

knowledge by direct intimate contact (= experiential knowledge of inner processes); and

(4) knowledge by identity (= intuitive knowledge).

The issue of verifiability

The issue of verifiability has been discussed at length by the present author in an earlier

publication (Varma, 2005). The lay person, as well as most psychologists, have a very

limited understanding of the nature and workings of science. The analysis of the meaning

and ways of science is offered by a group of philosophers who go by the name of

philosophers of science and this sub-field of Philosophy is referred to as Philosophy of

Science. After the overthrow of the tyranny of the Church in Europe by the late 19th

century, science had emerged as the new voice of authority, one based on reason.

Philosophers and scholars were eager to find out the secret behind the success of Physicswhich transformed through its applications, in the form of technology, the very way of

living. The first view of science which emerged goes by the name of Logical Positivism

to know positively by following a logical procedure. In this view, science consists of

merely following a fixed formula-like procedure which leads to sure knowledge. This is

the view held by the majority of us, that science is simply a matter of following a time-

tested method.


15/29

15

Later analyses of science revealed that no such single absolute procedure of obtaining

certain knowledge exists. The only aspects which are common to all scientific

endeavours are the principles of induction and deduction to be able to generalize on the

basis of specific observations and then apply the generalizations to make specificpredictions. But there is nothing special about these two procedures humans apply them

in most walks of life. Thomas Kuhn (1970) demonstrated that when we compare

scientific activity existing in different periods of history, it turns out that they have a

different nature altogether - both in terms of the assumptions about the subject matter that

is being dealt with as well as concomitant methods appropriate to uncover the workings

of the reality under study. Thus Einsteins conceptualizations of mass was radically

different from that of Newtons (assumptions about subject matter), and whereas Newton

carried out specific experiments (concomitant method) to test his ideas, Einstein engaged

in what he referred to as thought experiments which involved no empirical observations

as such. Yet, both are considered highly scientific. Here, we must note that Kuhn (1970)strongly emphasized that for a scientific theory to be held as valid, we must be in a

position to verify the claims being made therein.

Still later Paul Feyerabend (1991) noted on the basis of his systematic analysis of the

workings of science that:

1. The events, procedures and results that constitute the sciences have no common

structure.

2. Scientific successes cannot be explained in a simple way.3. The success of science cannot be used as an argument for treating as yet unsolved

problems in a standardized way.

4. Non-scientific procedures cannot be pushed aside by argument.

5. There can be many different kinds of sciences.

Feyerabend (1991; viii) made a stronger point thereafter that what counts as valid

knowledge is based more on political power structures, rather than actual validity of the

offered viewpoint:

First-world science is one science among many; by claiming to be more it ceases to be an

instrument of research and turns into a (political) pressure groupPeople all over the

world have developed ways of surviving in partly dangerous, partly agreeable

surroundings. The stories they told and the activities they engaged in enriched their lives,

protected them and gave them meaning. The progress of knowledge and civilization -

as the process of pushing Western ways and values into all corners of the globe is being


16/29

16

called - destroy these wonderful products of human ingenuity and compassion without a

single glance in their direction. Progress of knowledge in many places meant killing of

minds.

We have to be very clear about the basic issue at this point. The hallmark of scientific

enquiry is that knowledge-claims are subject to verification. When a researcher asserts

that a force called gravity exists, it can be apprehended or made available to experience.

Any individual can drop objects from a height, measure the acceleration of the object as

it approaches the ground and thus verify if it accelerates at the rate of 9.82 m/s !. Thus all

claims to knowledge must be subjected to this procedure it must be available to

experience and through a systematic procedure multiple observers can access the same

experience and come to a consensus about its characteristics. Now, when a states

that the experience of samdhi (Oneness/cosmic Consciousness) is real, we tend to scoffat him, but when the scientist says that the electron exists we accept it as a matter of

faith. The fact of the matter is that if we actually wish to experience an electron, that is,

become convinced of its existence we will have to study physics for many years (perhaps10 to 12) and carry out a large number of experiments ourselves. The same procedure has

to be carried out by every person who wishes to encounter the electron. In fact,

consensus on the nature of all scientific knowledge is arrived at in this manner. But the

startling fact is that the basic approach of the is no different. To experiencesamdhi(the knowledge-claim) one has to follow as systematic a procedure involving meditation

as well as the observance of various austerities, and after a long period of time (possibly

10 to 12 years) one experiences the state characterized as samdhi in the concernedliterature. Now this knowledge has found a place in the scriptures because a large

number of individuals carried out the requisite procedures and eventually the experience

of samdhi became accessible to their consciousness. Consensus was thus arrived at. Inthis way we can clearly see that the yogic methodology is essentially the same as what

we call the scientific approach the former attempts mapping of the outer world and the

latter the inner world.

We may further note that modern science itself has informed us that we hear sounds in

the frequency range of 20-20000 Hertz (approx.). Below and above that, sound exists but

we cannot hear it. But other species have access to frequencies which are inaccessible to

us. Similar is the case with vision. Thus, the range of the normal human senses is not a

basis for generating a picture of what exists. The same argument can be extended to the

realm of consciousness. We do not doubt that our range of awareness is qualitatively and

quantitatively different from animals and there is a great deal of variation across species.

In fact, there may be a great deal of variation in the very nature or stuff of

consciousness within the human species itself. This would then explain why the mystic

experiences the world in a different way as compared to others. Simultaneously, this view


17/29

17

would also be able to account for the difference in consciousness of the psychotic. On the

basis of the arguments outlined above, the basic tenets of Transpersonal Psychology

(new) assume a greater validity in contrast to the claims made about psychological reality

in traditional mainstream psychology (old). These are as follows (based on Tart, 1975;

28):

1) Old: Physics is the ultimate science, the study of the real world. Dreams,

emotions, and human experience in general are all derivatives.

New: Psychological reality is just as real as physical reality. And modern

theoretical physics indicates that the two are not so far apart.

2) Old: The individual exists in relative isolation from the surrounding

environment. We are essentially independent creatures. (And so we can seekto control the world as if we are not part of it.)

New: There is a deep level of psychological/spiritual connection among all

forms of life. Each individual is a cosmic creature, deeply embedded in the

cosmos.

3) Old: Our ordinary state of consciousness is the best, most rational, most

adaptive way the mind can be recognized. All other states are inferior or

pathological. Even mystical states are suspect, often seen as bordering on

the pathological (e.g., regression).

New:Higher orders of feeling, awareness, and even rationality are possible.

What we call waking consciousness is really more like waking sleep, in

which we use but a small fraction of our awareness or capacities.

4) Old: Seeking altered states of consciousness is a sign of pathology or

immaturity.

New: Seeking to experience different states of consciousness, is a natural

aspect of healthy human growth.

5) Old: The basic development of personality is complete by adulthood,

except for neurotics, people with traumatic childhoods, and the like.


18/29

18

New: Ordinary adults exhibit only a rudimentary level of maturity. The basic

healthy adult personality is merely a foundation for spiritual work and the

development of a far deeper level of wisdom and maturity.

The last point above makes it very clear that an individuals experiences of spiritual statesare an indication of a higher level of growth taking place which is not only desirable but

also necessary if we are to attain full personhood, and this does not preclude divine

possibilities.

The Road to Human Unity

In general, Indian depictions of human-beings focus on their inherent goodness

deriving from the divine essence at the core of each person. The history of the sub-

continent reveals how during different periods, people from diverse ethnic and religious

backgrounds, including the marginalized, managed to live together in harmony. This is

not to deny that conflicts are not common place in this regard India has had its share of

war and violence but what seems more unique is the way differences between groups

have been minimized, and at times even transcended. Thus the Parsis continue to have a

prominent place in society, the Syrian-Christians retain their independent identity, as do

the Sikhs and Muslims, to name just a few. In the post independence era, the Dalai Lama

fleeing from Chinese oppressed Tibet was welcomed, supported and provided with a

home in India, which allowed him to create a base for Tibets struggle for autonomy in

India.

The academic question then is What is it in the Indian ethos that permits co-existence,

mutual respect, and harmonious living of different groups? Part of the reason may have

something to do with the Hindu worldview derived from the monism of the Advaita

Vedanta emphasizing the origin of all existence in the one Truth, God or Brahman. This

leads to the acknowledgement of the oneness of humanity and simultaneously the

recognition of the Gods of all religions as rooted in the same Brahman. Thus Krishna

notes in the Gita Whomsoever you pray to, you pray to me? by no way making

claims to the supremacy of the Hindu God, but that all resides in Brahman. More

generally, a genuine spiritual outlook fosters greater harmony and promotes a healthy and

vibrant co-existence. It thus becomes important to examine what is it in spirituality thathelps in reducing conflict.

Academic psychologists have shied away (with some notable exceptions) from enquiry in

the spiritual domain, but interestingly, many among the founders of academic Psychology

in India led double lives they practiced Psychology as a western science in their

professional lives, but in their personal lives they derived guidance and insights from


19/29

19

traditional scriptural sources. Not only that, they even published in non-academic

settings, writing on the efficacy and potency of Indian spiritual Psychology. I suspect that

the situation today may not be very different. At this point it may serve us well to be

reminded of the Mahabharata as a treatise par excellence depicting the nature and

dynamics of group conflicts.

A cursory glance at the history of social movements on the sub-continent reveal that over

the centuries, some of the most prominent movements have had a spiritual foundation as

their inspiration one that emphasizes the oneness of all humanity and which paves the

way for lowering barriers along religion, caste, as well as gender lines. In particular,

Buddhism as a socio-political movement, the Bhakti movement, the advent of Sikhism,

and Mahatama Gandhis mobilization of the masses for attaining independence, stand out

as shining examples which enabled people with diverse social identities to come together.

In contemporary India, many of the ashrams and spiritual communes provide us with

vivid illustrations of people from diverse backgrounds in terms of nationalities, race,religion, caste, class, gender and age living and working together in great harmony, and

at times mingling with local communities promoting inter-dependence. Such places stand

out as islands in the ocean of conflict rampant all around us. One outstanding example of

this is Auroville, a commune comprising of more than 4500 people from 53 different

nations. Located in Tamil Nadu, Auroville is essentially an experiment on collective

living which may serve as a model for future societies

It appears that the spiritual perspective on social psychological processes may serve to

complement the social-identity theory for if inter-group conflicts can be reduced by

enlarging the social categories used for identity, the spiritual dimension would serve tocapture the experiential dimension of widening the categories which allows us to accept

the other (out-group member) as one of us (in-group member). Thus D. Sinha (1998, p.

20) notes:

The interrelatedness of the whole of humanity is stressed not only when one is enjoined

to do good to others and regard the universe as ones relation (basudhaib kutumbkam) but

in the Upanishadic doctrine of ever expanding ego or the self, where one begins with

concern for oneself and gradually expands ones ego to encompass ones community and

ultimately the entire world. Similarly in one of the verses of the Mahabharat it is stated

that for the sake of the clan one gives up the individual (person), for the sake of the

village one gives up the clans, for the sake of the country (janpada) one gives up the

village, and for the highest good one gives up the earth. Concern for others has been

given the highest place and the target is the larger group.


20/29

20

The Bhakti Movement in India

Hindu and Muslim communities interacted over a period of several centuries at several

levels, viz. religious, intellectual, political and commercial. There was a mutual

influence of the two communities on one another, especially in the arena of religion,

where they were compelled to interact. At the same time, it may be noted that both

religions had amidst their fold, non-orthodox mystics who very similar to one another,

and who interacted with each other culminating into what has been referred to as the

Bhakti Movement . Thus Hadayetullah (2009) notes:

The Bhakti Movement a religion of devotion is a combination of the efforts of Hindu

and Muslim mystics who, in their highest spirituality, transcended all distinctions

between man and man religiously, as well as socially. The religious message of these

bhaktas or the great souls of God was characterized by such universality that their

message was accepted by Hindus and Muslims equally. Further, the rank and file of their

disciples was swelled by Hindus and Muslims indiscriminately. In other words, the

Bhakti Movement created an atmosphere of harmony and concord in the religious life of

medieval India (p. xiii).

The interaction of Hindu-Muslim ideas through bhakti mysticism produced a number of

great mystics in India during the medieval period. The characteristic feature of these

bhakta-mystics was that by no orthodox criterion could they be identified as purely

Hindu or Muslim. They were the whole-hearted devotees of One God; they found no

distinction between man and man, such as Hindu and Muslim; and they considered so

called religious observances, rites and ceremonies as useless for actual spiritual progress.

In short, the type of bhakti mysticism which these devotees formulated and propagated

was a simple religion of devotion (bhakti) to God which required no outward

performance of what are called religious duties, but needed only a pure heart and a sense

of absolute surrender to a beloved God. As these bhaktas considered themselves whole-hearted lovers of God, the essence of their religion was love for God (p. ix).

Kabir Das

The greatest of all these mystics, who were products of an environment engendered by

the interaction of Hinduism and Islam, was Kabir Das (1440-1518) of Varanas (also

known as Banares), North India. Kaibir occupies a unique position in the history of

Indian national heroes, for he is one of the few figures to emerge from the history of

Indian religion during the medieval period. Kabirs greatness lies primarily in his

sustained efforts to unite the Hindus and the Muslims, who had been antagonistic to one

another for centuries. Kabir came to realize that the quarrel between Hindus and the

Muslims was fundamentally based on religion. And it was religious prejudice and bias

which prevented the two communities from developing a sense of unity and harmony,

even though they were living together in the same society. Therefore, in order to achieve

his mission, Kabir overtly denounced both Hinduism and Islam.


21/29

21

Kabir held that that the traditional form of Hinduism as well as Islam was only a creation

of Hindus and Muslims themselves, for, he maintained, the One God, Allah or Rama, has

created only one human race without making any distinction between man and man.

Further, Kabir argued that since there is only one God, regardless of the different names

used for Him, and one human race, there could not be many religions. By breaking down

all denominational differences based on religion, Kabir tried to formulate a new religion

and spirituality, consisting of good elements from both Hinduism and Islam; and Kabir

hoped that his views, based essentially on bhakti, would be acceptable to both Muslims

and Hindus.

In his life-long endeavour to unite Hindus and the Muslims, Kabir went to great lengths

keep himself above all established religions; and thus he never identified himself as a

Muslim or a Hindu. Hadayetullah (2009; p. xx). notes:

The only available evidence of his identification is that of a weaver of Banares. Thus,

having kept himself above the level of Hindu-Muslim religious categories, Kabir found

himself justified in denouncing both Hinduism and Islam with equal severity. He

maintained perfect neutrality and showed no soft heart or preference to either religion.

Kabirs distaste for sectarianism can also be seen in the fact that, unlike many bhaktas, he

refused to organize any sect of his followers. His understanding of one race and a

universal brotherhood of human beings prompted him not only to reject and denounce the

Hindu caste system, and all sectarianism that was fostered by either Hindus or the

Muslims, but also to refuse to constitute a sect of his own followers.

Kabirs Concept of the Unity of GodKabir denounced idolatory, image worship and polytheism. He thus taught the unity of

God (in Hadayetullah, 2009; p. 204):

Brother ! From where have the two masters of the Universe come ? Tell me, who has invented the

names of Allah, Ram, Keshab, Hari and Hazrat ? All ornaments of gold are made of a unique

substance. It is to show to the world that two different signs are made, one is called Namaz, while

the other is termed Puja. Mahadev and Muhammed are one and the same; Brahma and Adam are

the one and the same. What is a Hindu ? What is a Turk [Muslim] ? Both inhabit the same earth.

One reads the Veda, and the other the Quran. One is a Mawlana and the other is a Pandit. Earthen

vessels have different names, although they are made of the same earth. Kabir says: both are

misled, none has found God.

Thus, Kabir tells us that the Hindus and the Muslims are only different manifestations

of the same substance. Therefore, they are the children of one God. In Kabirs words

(in Ziad, Rao & Virmani, 2008; p. 24):


22/29

22

Kabira kua ek hai, pani bharen anek

Bhaande may hee bhed hai

Our paani sab may ek

Says Kabir, the well is one, though water is filled by many.

The shapes of the vessels (our bodies) are different.

But the water (consciousness) is one.

Kabirs Concept of One Humanity

Kabir preached the equality of all human beings. He took great pains to articulate his

views about the unity of human beings. He held that while all the religious differences are

only fortuitous the essential humanity is always the same. Kabir thus speaks of one

humanity in the following words (in Hadayetullah, 2009; p. 210):

I and you are of the same blood, and one life animates us both; from one mother is

the world born; what knowledge is that which makes us separate.

All have come from the same country and have landed at one ghat (place), but the

evil influences of this world have divided us into innumerable sects.

From whence have Hindus and Turks come ?

By whom have these been started ?

Finally, in line with his concept of one human race, Kabir forcefully and with reasonedarguments, denounced the Hindu caste system. In his efforts to convince the Hindus

about the reality of one humanity, Kabir traced the beginning of the human race to Adam

and says (in Hadayetullah, 2009; p. 211):

Adam who came first, did not know

Whence came mother Eve.

Then there was no Turk nor Hindu;

Then there was no race, no caste.

If thou thinkest the maker distinguished castes:

Birth is according to these penalties for deeds.

Born a Sudra, you die a Sudra;

It is only in this world of illusion that you assume the sacred thread.

If birth from a Brahmin makes you a Brahmin,

Why did you not come by another way ?


23/29

23

If birth from a Turk makes you a Turk,

Why were you not circumcised in the womb ?

If you milk a black and white cows together,

Will you be able to distinguish their milk.

Saith Kabir, renounce family, caste, religion, and nation,

And live as one.

Walking with Kabir

In her remarkable autobiographical essay Walking with Kabir, Virmani (2010) points out

that Kabir helps us in realizing the schisms in our own way of thinking and the violence

and dishonesties that are part and parcel of our egoistic self-structure. Thus we tend to

perceive the world in terms of us and them and engage in what Erik Eriksoan has

termed as pseudo-speciation, i.e., we are more human than members of the other

group. This is the basis of all differences between individuals and communities and is the

source of all conflict and violence. We thus see how this inner reality links with our outer

one, how a dishonesty and violence at the individual level unfolds into pogroms and war

at the larger level, as we other whole communities while defending our collective egos

of sect or nation.

Buraa jo dekhan mein chalaa, buraa na milyaa koi

Jo man khojaa aapna, mujhse buraa na koi

I set out to find evil and found no evil one.

I searched my own self and found no one as evil as I.

[Virmani, 2010; p. 1]

Virmani (2010; pp.1-2) further notes:

The metaphor of a home unfolds in deeper and deeper ways, but one immediate reading

points to the walls of identity we build to separate us from them. Kabir pushes us out of

these comfort zones, our carefully constructed identities and self-images, which quite like

our houses, are material, located and very fragile. They need to be constantly defended

and protected from the quakes and storms of change and time. We dont have to jettison

all our frameworks or forms, but surely we should be able to step out of them from time

to time and with a certain lightness, wonder and even humour, observe our own

particularity within a multiplicity of others.


24/29

24

Kabir inspires us to transcend cross-cultural boundaries, and to make our ego boundaries

more porous which in turn makes us more open-minded. Kabir helps us in traversing

hearts and minds, crossing bridges of understanding, despite difference.

Kabir haldi peeyari, chuna ujjwal bhaiRam snehi yun mile, donon varan gavai

Kabir says, turmeric is yellow

Limestone a brilliant white

Two lovers of Ram met thus

both shed their own colours!

[Virmani, 2010; p. 3]

Further, Kabir pushes us to confront how religion leads to a division in society, and how

this then ties in to rituals, on the basis of which different religious identities are asserted.

But it is not that all rituals are useless and futile:

One must appreciate the power and attraction rituals can hold, as seasonal place markers

of what we hold valuable, as aesthetic reminders of values we want to dedicate ourselves

to, as moments of shared community with like-minded seekers. I see how easily we

become judgmental. Somehow our rituals are always more palatable than theirs.

Sometimes the rituals weve embedded our lives in are not even visible to us as rituals,

while theirs appear offensive in their blindness and superstition. Through this

journey I developed a more complex and empathetic understanding of ritual. I now

recognize how Kabirs exhortation is not against scripture, ritual or the community per

se. His argument is that without the life force of powerful personal experience and critical

self knowledge, we can at best clutch onto scripture, ritual and community as ways to

secure our insecure egos. Then all these become empty props, meaningless enactments

that can strengthen social exploitation and divisiveness (Virmani, 2010; pp. 3-4).

Kabir continues to live in parts of North India and of Pakistan via his poetry which is

often invoked and serves to empower individuals as well as whole communities. The

word bhakti (devotion) also means participation. In the folk music of the villages of

India, where during the all-night satsangs (in the company of like-minded seekers) and

jagrans (staying awake through the night, in a religio-spiritual context) the bhaktipoetry

of Kabir and other mystic saints is sung and lived, various boundaries begin to dissolve those between singer and listener, between singer and song, between self and other,

between self and God.

Laali mere laal kee, jit dekhun tit laal

Laali dekhan mein gayee, mein bhee ho gayi laal.


25/29


26/29

26

In the context of the West, Smith (1997) in his profound work on early Christianity,

speaks of the impact of Jesus on his immediate followers, in explicit detail. He notes that

the people who first heard Jesus disciples proclaiming the Good News (Jesus Christ, Son

of God, Saviour), were as impressed by what they saw, as they were by what they heard.

They saw lives that had been transformed men and women who were ordinary in every

way except for the fact that they seemed to have found the secret of living. They evinced

a tranquility, simplicity and cheerfulness that their hearers had nowhere else encountered.

Here were people who seemed to be making a success of the very enterprise everyone

would like to succeed at that of life itself.

Specifically, there were two qualities in which their lives abounded. The first of these

was mutual regard a total absence of social barrier a sense of genuine equality.

Second, they had laid hold of an inner peace that found expression in a joy that was

radiant. Life for them was no longer a matter of coping. It was glory discerned. Theywere released from the burdens of fear, guilt and the cramping confines of the ego.

Smith (1987) asserts that Pauls famous description of Christian love in the thirteenth

chapter of First Corinthians is not meant to be interpreted in terms of an attribute one was

already familiar with in the West. His words describe the extraordinary qualities of a

specific person, Jesus Christ. In phrases of sublime beauty it describes the Divine love

that Paul conceived Christians would feel towards others once they had undergone the

experience of Christs love for them. Pauls words (in Smith, 1987; p. 335) have to be

interpreted as a description of a unique capacity which fully manifested for the first time

in the flesh, only in person of Jesus Christ:

Love is patient; love is kind; love is not envious or arrogant or rude. It does not insist on

its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; it does not rejoice in wrong doing, but rejoices

in truth. It bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. Love

never ends. (I, Corinthians 13:4-8)

Loving-kindness and Compassion in Buddhism

In Threvada Buddhism the prime attribute of enlightenment is wisdom (bodhi), meaning

profound insight into the nature of reality, the causes of anxiety and suffering, and the

absence of a separate core of selfhood (Smith, 1997). From these realizations flowautomatically the Four Noble Virtues: loving-kindness, compassion, equanimity, and joy

in the happiness and wellbeing of others. From the Mahayana perspective karuna

(compassion) cannot be counted on to be an automatic fruit. From the beginning

compassion must be given priority over wisdom. Meditation yields a personal power that

can be destructive if a person has not deliberately cultivated compassionate concern for

others as the motive for arduous discipline. A guard I would be to them who have no


27/29

27

protection, runs a typical Mahayana invocation; a guide to the voyager, a ship, a well, a

bridge for the seeker of the other shore. The theme has been beautifully elaborated by

Shantideva (in Smith, 1997; 256), who was a poet-sage quite like Kabir:

May I be a balm to the sick, their healer and servitor until sickness never comes again;

May I quench with rains of food and drink the anguish of hunger and thirst;

May I in famine of the ages end their drink and meat;

May I become an unfailing store for the poor, and serve them with manifold things for their

need.

My own being and my pleasures, all my righteousness in the past, present, and future, I

surrender indifferently,

That all creatures may win through to their end.

Concluding remarks

In this way we obtain a glimpse of the extra-ordinary transformative potential of love . To

begin with, to reside more and more in a state of love is in itself an extremely positivestate of being, one most conducive to health and well-being. And this also has a profound

impact on ones dealings with others, as these are characterized by a posture of giving

and serving, devoid of any ulterior motives of gaining something. A groundedness in love

is perhaps the most essential quality which must be present in the being of a helping

person/spiritual healer. This quality cannot be obtained by any external study or degrees,

and can be acquired only through intense self-work (sadhana). The role of love in the

healing of psychological wounds and hurts, and the transformative power of love is only

beginning to be fully appreciated by psychologists and social workers, in India and

elsewhere.

But most important in the present context are the insights provided by Kabir, Jesus, and

the Buddha amongst others, for attaining individual and collective transformation,

leading to a lasting human unity and global peace. Such a state of affairs, of course,

encompasses increasing goodwill between all of humanity residing in the vast number of

countries on Earth. We must replace conflict and antagonism with reconciliation and

goodwill. We must uphold the values of universal harmony and brotherhood, leading to

an ethos of positive coexistence. In this way we can truly create an era in which all

people enjoy the fruits of peace and happiness, and celebrate their limitless dignity and

potential. In this way we may pave the way for the realization of a world of love and ofpeace, a peace which is more than a mere interlude between wars.


28/29

28

In closing, I am reminded of the words of Guru Nanak, the founder of Sikhism, and one

of the greatest champions of human unity:

Subsae baandu haath rae

Subko humara salaam

Nanak hamara naam rae

Ekta hamaara kaam

I hold everyones hand in an eternal bond,

And I salute to all.

Nanak is my name,

And uniting people is my sole aim.

References

Das, G.N. (1996).Mystic songs of Kabir. New Delhi: Shakti Malik Abhinav Publications.

Gnoli, R. (1956). The aesthetic experience according to Abhinavagupta. Rome: Instituto

Italiano per Il Medio ed Estremo Oriente.

Hedayetullah, M. (2009). Kabir: The apostle of Hindu-Muslim unity. Delhi: Motilal

Banarsidass.

Jain, U. (1994). Socio-cultural construction of emotions. Psychology and Developing

Societies, 6, 151-168.

Kapur, K. (1998).Literary theory. New Delhi: Prentice Hall.

Lynch, D.M. (1990). The divine passions: The social construction of emotions in India.

Delhi: Oxford University Press.

Masson , G. & Patwardhan, M.V. (1970). Aesthetic rapture: The rasadhyaya of the

Natyashastra. Poona: Deccan college

Misra, G. (2004). Culture, self and emotions: the case of antecedents of emotion

experiences.Indian Psychological Abstracts and Reviews, 11, (1) 1-27.


29/29

Murphy, M. & Donavan, S. (1997). The physical and psychological effects of meditation.

Sausalito, CA: Institute of Noetic Sciences.

Pandey, K.C (1959) Comparative aesthetics Vol. 1 Indian Aesthetics. Varanasi:

Chakhambha Sanskrit Series.

Paranjpe, A.C. (2008). In defence of an Indian approach to the psychology of emotion.

Unpublished paper.

Paranjpe, A.C. (1998). Self and identity in modern psychology and Indian thought. New

York: Plenum.

Peck, Scott M. (1978). The road less traveled. London: Arrow Books.

Rao, S.K.R. (1979). Consciousness in Advaita. Bangalore: IBH Prakashana for SriAbhinava Vidyatheerta Swamigal Scientific Research Academy

Shweder, R. A. & Haidt, J.(2000). The cultural psychology of emotions: Anciet and new.

The cultural psychology of emotions. In M. Lewis & J. Hoviland, (Eds.) Handbook of

emotions. (pp. 397-414). New York: Guilford Press.

Sinha, J. (1961).Indian psychology: Emotion and will (vol. 3) Calcutta: Sinha Publishing

House.

Sinha, D. (1998). Changing perspectives in social psychology in India: A journeytowards indigenization.Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 1: 17-31.

Smith, Huston (1997). The worlds religions.New Delhi: Harper Collins India.

Sorenson E.R. (2008). The emptying of ontology: The Tibetan Tantric View. In H. Wautischer

(Ed.), Ontology of consciousness: Percipient action (pp. 5-78). Boston: MIT Press.

Virmani, S. (2010). Walking with Kabir. Seminar, January Issue, # 605.

Walsh, R. & Shapiro S.L. (2006). The meeting of meditative disciplines and westernpsychology: A mutually enriching dialogue.American Psychologist, 61(3), 227-239.

Wampold, B.E. (2001). The great psychotherapy debate: Models, methods, and findings.

Mahwah, New Jersey & London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Ziad, H., Rao, V. & Virmani, S. (2008).In every body Kabir. Bangalore: Shrishti.

varma - indian psychology - theory and practice

Documents