Radhakrishnan’s Political Philosophy
Gopal Krishna Gokhles’ ideal thought for political is to make it spiritual. Mahatma Gandhi who believe Gokhle as his ideal teacher who tries to implement morality into politics. On his political philosophy the impact of Gandhism is so clear, and his view of life is also religious. He wrote that “Politics is only commercial form of religion”. Modern life is trapped in complex and in dangerous situation. Modern man is prey of various kinds of mental anxiety, battle, and mental illness and unprotected. Religion is best remedy for disordered life by bringing them an order for life. The definition of religion is to find the final truth and give a vision to look at the world through the eyes of absolute oneness. Religion should free from mechanical worship, ritualistic traditionalism, faker worshipers of God. He firmly wants that human should not blindly believe into the imaginary logical – illogical thoughts of Religious person. And he should leave behind it all this things and looks in his own religion by developing the insight of alien and ret redness spirit. In the all realms of life men should develop spirit of religious tolerance, Love and also generosity. The meaning of religion is not to carry on the bygone age social traditions and unwise social torture. As it accepted in many Indian societies. Radarkrishnan’s view on Religion is that it is very subtle, serious and a personal thing. The experience of religion is naturally look complete ones. It is a fruit of hard turmoil and a work of complete loneliness. It can be proved by the life of Saint’s and great minds. From that point soul illuminated and then the difference of physical and inanimate is no longer there. In the other words religious experience means in experience of sensitive soul its whole presence, its truthful expression of action and reaction. Its expression can measure from Truth, Holiness and Beauty. Religion wants to focus on external world and moral and spiritual values and the coordinate between the worlds. Then man can understand that the spirit of man lies in physical order, and he free from the sentiments like loneliness, sadness and failure. Through service of generosity men can grow his religious spirit. Radhakrishnan said that “Religion is not blank slate, not it is historical fate, nor it is physiological logic or escape from life. It is not the product of dispirited world. It is the main part of human nature. It is the source of human spirit. It is also very sensitive on subject of world’s unknown things. Religion is the expression of the love, generosity for the colleague and for the other animals. In society where men are religious there life changes so differently”. Religion means coordination of values and bundle of experience. Its goal is to make human life thoroughly lighted. In materialist impiety or Intellectual logic cannot protect human from mental harassment and mental disorder. And for that it is necessary to have a coordination and unification of religious expression. Religion means “Every human and its entire presences’ action.” But Radhakrishnan not clarified about capacity of human power and whole form of how to activity and it’s action? His philosophical orthodoxy can introduce form his own speech that Religious experience is self based, self understood, and self lighted. If we agree to his hyperbolic expression, then this thing can looks surprised that the entire nations, and its culture there are billions of people are left away from this experience. There are some difficulties in Radhakrishanan’s religious humanitarian view. A devote can be satisfied but the intellectual person can’t be. Apart from there is no clear meaning one can get about entire human and his actions. And also about human personality, intellect, sensitiveness, and moral values are activated at single time.
Radhakrishnan was follower of religious humanitarianism. In the western humanitarianism started in the form of scientific naturalism and opposite of reaction of god. And that brings reputation to social and moral values and it accepts human unity. At the end its idealism is not to consider. But Radhakrishnan pointed out the two weakness of humanitarian philosophy. First it believes that there has been big difference between life and his nature, and also moral or natural values. From this, it is impossible to get mankind’s understanding and its completeness. The theme of moral life is to take control over the correlated between generally moral nature. Second weakness is that it denies the spiritual final truth. They made the main definition of humans way of life is scientific psychology, and subtle nationalism. It doesn’t provide spiritual foundation to the service and its idealism which they happily welcome. It doesn’t give the space for the things like afterlife and which that can help to change his life. On the other hand Radhkrishanan to built spiritual foundation for moral values. Unlike Barbate and Thomas Moore humanitarian views but Radhkrishanan wanted to rebuild the spiritual humanism. He believes in Eastern world’s subtle religious which emphasis on to leave behind everything philosophy and qualities heal to build a social sustainability. That is why he strongly recommends having coordination between European Humanitarian reflections. And Asia’s Religious universal view. From his point of view it necessary for modern moral less human to give him religion, science, and the humanitarian coordination. Mankind kind have console form this thing and also from the basis thing he built flawless social system.
There was so much impact of Gandhiji’s philosophy of Non- Violence and Satyagrahra on Radharkrishanan. He hated mostly the Power, Attack, Evil of Imperialism philosophy, which is why he wants religion to be a foundation of philosophy. One realistic or intellectual social system can only sustain on the values of Truth, Justice and the Equality of Freedom. Violence gives the birth to enemy, and hate to Attack. As the disciple of Gandhi Radhakrishnan believes that community and the national problems can completely resolved by on only one condition – to develop the process of love and give it the power. It means that it is necessary to give men moral wisdom and social scientific meaning of love to stop human’s caricature nature and corrupted ways of life. According to Gandhi’s pure sentiment philosophy Radhakrishnan believes at the end victorious soul only can win over power, torture, and attack.
According to him freedom is a key of creative power and evolution. Man is like God’s soul so it is essential to make a progress of human physic, mind, soul, and its power and its realms. From which one can experience spiritual personality. The form of men’s endless activates and from the expression of spiritual creativity is foundation of cultural greatness.
Freedom has two points of view: one is the individualism and second one is liberalist. To control means a real freedom. Hobbes in his book ‘Librithen’ wrote that there is no obstacle comes between progresses is the real freedom. But the German scholastic have a different notion on freedom. According to Hegel the soul of universe (Brahma) is a complete form of freedom. Levels of Political and Social freedom means to give a society to develop form useful ways which helps to develop human life’s strength. For this reason Radhakrishanan’s intellectual progress was on under the complete scholasticism culture. That is why he aggress Hegel’s view on freedom. He wrote that “The freedom which human expects is not only a lack of control. This kind of freedom is not acceptable and unrealistic. Radhakrishnan is supporter of democracy and it’s natural in his part that his judgment on the individual social freedom is acceptable. He has also accepts the views of Hegel, Green’s sentiment scholastic notion. The social welfare in an Asian countries and its progress which is gone on effect to make it happen, it is necessary to consider reference with time and need. According to Radharkrishanan’s view on the sentiment consideration it looks more appropriate. But he not completely accepts Hegalism. He has also faith in Kant and Spenser’s view on freedom is that man’s only consumption the freedom until he never attacks on the others freedom. He wrote, “ A free society one is which where every individual has the freedom to live his life in his one way, on his freedom there would be only one compulsion is that he will not attack on the others freedom.
Democracy is the philosophy and the work culture of political freedom. And its goal is to create such kind of systems where human can have experience the freedom. Political democracy will be successful only when man can develop a certain kind of qualities. Fundamentally democracy depends on the way of human life and his dignity or acceptances of his rights. Democracy will be successful only when sentiments like, generosity, humbleness and in life where we have to consider ourselves to take a back seat for others. The command of people from which democracy experienced the personal freedom and the general welfare idealism between them try to create a kind of condition. Radhakrishnan believes the values of the democracy, and he is eager to experience those values in the life. He wrote that “In the real term democracy is the self- governance of the society. To rule very little is the best way of rule. And the every government is the tool of self- governance. Under the democracy common man’s desire is God’s desire, but it is not possible for the common desires to take decision on the technical subject. Examples like improvement in economical trades and Indian constitutional problems. In many other countries democracy is falling because it is not the proper democracy. Until it is only an ideal thing. When we consider democracy is the rational philosophy then our opinion is that each human has different from other so we have to respect and when we trading with others we have to consider this. Then we don’t try to differentiate person’s from his sex or his business. As ever person is pure then at the end everyone has a freedom to develop his own personality. Democracy doesn’t mean that we all our equal. Men born deferral regarding physical and intellectual power. Every era human is different from each other. And this also true that there is not a single social system can provide complete unity. To take advantage of good time is depended on man who lived on which social environment and his reaction against it. But the equality of chance is good social idea. Democracy is not natural state but is one ideal where trough employment and education we can crate it. If the voters mind would be developed and the politicians have honesty then and then only it will be successes. How much it looks worst regarding idealism but if we leave behind it’s a prodigal absolutistic, it is far better than any other ancient government system. From the democratic debates, intellectual logics and its understanding we can bring the effective social economical and administrative changes. It is absolutely opposite form the ruling methods where the thoughts are cruelty and forcefully hump on men. Democracy never gives the permission to destroy one’s opposites. The state’s legislative violence it never permits other forces or violence methods is never matches to democratic state of mind. And the Radhakrishanan opposes those kinds of democratic nation’s methods where they are trying to fit the notions like Meditation and Working skills (Karma) under on mechanical term.
Political equality is useless until there is no guaranteed economical provision. Only economical justices can give complete satisfaction social freedom, and land equality. And at the end as person of religious humanitarian Radhakrishnan try to focus on such kinds of social systems from where everyone will get guaranteed economical justices. He accepts ideals of social democracy. He wrote “I am totally accepts the equal society, I have belief that these kind of systems opposing the highest religion. In reality religion demands to find such kinds of systems by trying to create social democracy, and prosperity or provisions of distributing schemes, in reality it is religious sentiment. For this reason Radhakrishanan was not being as a ‘Socialist’, he took the side of not being as a socialist but he adheres the important of social democracy it’s ides on property. As like Tony and Lark he also believes in the two value one’s right on the property is evaluated form his own work. He wrote that “Prosperity or power are the tools upon which social ownership depends economical for moral life, it seems dangers to development of brotherhood. Economic prize is differing from social serves. The rights of making money it depends on social responsibility and its progress. From these tools or above standers profit it consider as the illegal by taxing we can control over high profit. Taxation is legal but if forcefully we acquired the property is cruel.” Radhakrishnan is in the fever of economical decentralization but he states that acquiring the personal wealth into at the making of it social at a time. But his revivalism states can be justified that in ancient Indian society in where proportional justice philosophy was there. He wrote that “As in the ancient Indian society proportional justice was there, not only workers, farmers but also barber, Washermen, swapper and watchmen were also get the percentage of production from farming. From this idealism we can study on them from today’s environment.
Though Radhakrishnan believes in religious humanitarian and for that he hated those who trying to boost Marxist Socialism. This is the reason why he opposes Marxist Philosophy. As accepting the philosophy of religious understanding, on the other hand he opposes philosophy of depression and struggle. Competitive materialism, materialistic power and its emphasis more than it needed. More and more it is allegation of materialistic process. In addition to this Russian Bolakeshism tradition which opposes the traditional religion but it though it in reality it becomes now mystical religion and cult.
The problem of castism is creates so much trouble and upset modern an Indian society and also political thoughts. On the subject Radjskrishanan was regarded as traditional but not given reaction. He aggress the psychological and social aspects of casteism. He said that casteism accepts human’s spiritual equality, and for that it is democratic. Additional to this he also states that under this system person form on his own will he agreed to his own responsibility form that it reflects and develops personality. Casteism is opposite from social atomic nature and it accepts elementary notion. This accepts knowledge, administrate courage, productivity also social services and its intellectual understanding it. From the Radhakrishanan’s view on the system of casteism it accepts the all social works from single window, and it justifies the system of opportunity. I have some doubts about Radhakrishanan’s view of accepting the casteism and Hegel’s interpretation of cooperation face. Now to accept as democratically philosophy which accepts revivalisms political it has very interesting reflection. But Radhakrishanan criticizes the casteism disruptive nature, which is now we can easily see in the Indian society. It hinders the path of smooth society. But also he also accepts in the social system law firm group and it’s utility. Social goal can be proofed from many ways. At the end every person of society can give his contribution for social development.
Conclusion
Radhakrishna is a famous scholar of religion and contributor to India’s bright future. He did not establish any systematic method for man to follow; his strength lies in the tasks he performed and his deep visions Neither can we perceive him as a social worker or politician As a man of principles, his purpose was to up uplift Dharma. Through his tasks we cannot make out whether he had connection with politics, socialism or humanism. He has scarcely elaborated on the means to deal with social and political concerns. However, he deserves full right to be among those who have contributed to the “New India” and political reforms, because he did work on issues as social justice, universal peace and ethical principles. Shankar Radhakrishnan stating the culmination of the philosophy of Kant Spinoja and their equivalence is accepted.
To the western community, Radhakrishna is well known as an interpreter of India’s bright vision. However, his views and tasks are not inspired by Vivekanada and Ramtirtha. What we find most in him is his scholar nature. In his presentations on various platforms he compared India and Western thoughts. Indian philosophers have contributed hugely in this field. To explain the Upanishads, they made use of the principles of Bradley. Different philosophers have contributed in different ways to interpret the Geeta. The ideas of even foreign philosophers as Alexandre have been taken into consideration for the upliftment of man.
Lectures of Radhakrishna which were disseminated after the year 1908 are recognized even today in the eastern and western cultures. He has secretly given more importance to western concerns, western religion and principles. Even if the eastern and western cultures may have few things in common, they still remain at two different extremes and have different values.
The contribution of Radhakrishnan to political thoughts is that he supported religious ways to resolve the problems of mankind. He had advised a new kind of humanism. Its basis holds that religious values should be given primary importance in life. But Radhakrishnan was not a narrow minded fundamentalist. What he means by religion is the feelings of friendship, companionship, co operation, liberation and also tolerance and admittance of the fact there is the flame of God inside every human being and the same is man’ basic nature. Rdhakrishnan is among those people who advocated in a lively manner, the re-establishment of religion awakening.
In regard to Radhakrishnan’s political thoughts, it can be stated that he has supported individualistic
faith or belief. He can be called individualistic and he is ever active in his efforts towards regeneration of moral and spiritual values. He can also be called individualistic in the sense that he has put emphasis on the spiritual equality of human beings and has stated that man can be so elevated through intellectual teachings that he goes on accepting freedom, intellect, development and friendship. He believes that education can help develop conscientiousness and liberalism in community too. Radhakrishnan is eager towards development of intellect, education, and scientific activities. In this sense, there are similarities between him and radical philosophers. But the philosophy of Hegel, Kant and Bradley have enormous influence on Radhakrishnan. He believes in the primacy of social responsibilities. He also accepts the constitutionalism in relation to society. Like an Aristotelian, he states that the activities of state develop and elevate human life. This way, he is a follower of individualistic faith. the important element of his thought is, the quest for values of soul. He repeatedly maintains that spiritualism is the only anchor of the pitiable and poor man.
Summary
In short, one can say that as a philosopher, the manner in which Shree Aurobindo has contributed towards the philosophical perspective of the society by promoting the cause of yoga, has been very well received by one and all, and whole heartedly appreciated; but with respect to overall human development, a confusion has been created, largely due to Shree Aurobindo ‘s manner of presentationby increasing and decreasing the order. And as a teacher, the idea he tried to propagate, that of free, liberal teaching, is not an acceptable concept in itself. In Pondicherry, though, an institution called ‘Shree Aurobindo international study centre ‘ has adopted the mentioned concept of liberal teaching to impart education to its students - there, no child is restricted, no child is forced to accept any particular field of study; rather, every student is free to choose either studies or games, and allowed to study and finish his educational tasks at his desired pace, depending upon his mood; but then, such a method, such a concept of delivering education cannot be universally adopted. Formal education can only in the correct direction when its objective, syllabus, teaching techniques, time of study, everything can be ascertained, fixed and set to a schedule. In the absence of these, no society can run its educational programs in a systematic manner. It’s quite evident that free, liberal education cannot be the benchmark, the standard for general education.
