Chapter Six: The Indian Renaissance. In this chapter we will examine four of the principles discussed in the earlier chapter in relation to the Indian context. (The principle of balance is discussed in a separate chapter.)
Ambedkar was not alone in seeing the incapacity of the Indian mind to break away from the dead letters to the living word. A very important thinker in that direction was Sri Aurobindo, whose thought is often compared to the Catholic[?] thinker, Pierre Teilhard de Chardin. Aurobindo who was known to the British as a fierce freedom fighter, retired from active politics and spent his efforts to bring the Indian mind back to the creativity for which it was once known. The difference between the two essentially was that Ambedkar connected resistance to change to as arising from the caste system which was sanctioned by the sacred texts. Ambedkar was himself a Dalit and knew the bitterness of caste. Aurobindo was a Brahmin[?] and was himself deeply rooted in the Brahmin tradition. Sri Aurobindo, while admitting the deadening of the Indian mind and Sprit could not identify its cause as the Hindu theological views imposed through its caste system. Aurobindo tried to bring about a synthesis of Hindu and Western liberal views. However, these two worldviews were contradictory as the caste system implied theoretical rejection of liberty, equality and fraternity, which were basic notions on which liberalism rested. The attempt to revive the creativity of the Indian mind without forcing it to come to terms with causes of its paralysis was an artificial one. For Ambedkar who was existentially too deeply rooted in caste as a victim, it was not possible to separate creativity from oppression and Indian creativity from India's ordinary people. Asian Human Rights Commission Back to [Demoralization and Hope]
No comments:
Post a Comment