View source for Dharmika Metaphysics for Lokasangraha

==== The Indian Ontological View of Reality ====
The Indic worldview emerges from a civilization spanning thousands of years. It is a tradition that is living, vibrant and unbroken across the ravages of time. Because Indic worldview is diametrically opposed to the Western worldview imposed upon us today, it has the potential to completely change how we view the world, the nature of existence, and our fundamental ideas of what constitute purposeful living - if and when we study the Indic thought carefully and experience it through practice.

As per Nisbett et al., (2001), Asian thought is holistic because it focuses on the context in which an object is situated, and emphasizes on the dynamics between the object and the context. Asian thought makes place for both experiential knowledge and formal logic and is holistic in its purview. It analyzes and integrates smaller components into a comprehensive, sustainable whole.

Consciousness-as-such is central to the Indic worldview. It is the substratum, the underlying interweave of both the manifest and the unmanifest. It is from Consciousness that creation manifests itself and dissolves back into. It goes by various names in the principal scriptures (''śāstras'') of ''Sanātana Dharma'' - namely ''Brahma'' or ''Sat-Cit-Ānanda''.

As opposed to the Western physicalist view, which continues to look at consciousness as a derivative of neural processes, in Indic thought it is the one, continuous Reality that is present in all states of being, from which all life emerges and plays out. According to verses in the ''Chāndogya Upaniṣad'', the human being is an integral part of the entire larger cosmos, which itself is an expression of Consciousness. While recent empirical studies are beginning to point out that plant and animal lives seem to be imbued with consciousness, the ''Upaniṣads'' have spoken of this long ago.

This Consciousness is of the nature of ''Sat'', meaning it is unchangeable across the three periods of time. It is ''Cit'', meaning it is dynamic consciousness and the potent, unmanifest seed of creation itself. It is ''Ānanda'', which is unbroken infinitude or bliss, beyond the realms of momentary mental joy that we know of.

The attainment of this state is not to be considered as philosophy alone but has been the lived reality of many ''Ṛṣis'' in deep meditative states. The attainment of Consciousness-as-such is in fact the highest goal (''Mokṣa'') of human life in the Indic worldview.

This unmanifest principle is represented in the cosmos as ''Ṛta'', the cosmic order that governs universal processes. It is the design through which Sat, or the Truth manifests as Being. In the human plane, ''Dharma'' is the analogue for ''Ṛta''. If ''Ṛta'' is the cosmic design, ''Dharma'' is a societal design cognized through the meditative experiences of the ''Ṛṣis'' who were able to access ''Ṛta''.

While ''Dharma'' is a highly nuanced term, it includes all the socio-cultural mechanisms and restraints that serve to refine human subjectivity to allow this species to access Sat and thereby a living that is deeply fulfilling.

==== Relationship with Self ====
In Advaita Vedānta which is one of the six schools of Indian philosophy, Ādi Śaṅkarācarya, places the following two fundamental principles of cognition -

# There is a Reality which is Consciousness-as-such, which is one’s true nature but is obscured by the limitations of embodied cognition.
# ''Avidyā'' is a fundamental cognitive error that veils my understanding of Reality ''(āvaraṇa)'' and projects an illusion as reality ''(vikṣepa)'' (Rao & Paranjpe, 2016).

In this section we take the ''Vedāntic/Sāṃkhyan'' understanding of the Self. In contemporary psychology, emphasis is given to the ego identity as the continuous cohering aspect of human personality. This ego identity is bound by repressed desires and moral injunctions which often leads to a fragmented experience of the world around.

In the ''Vedāntic''/Indic worldview, there are three aspects to the self. There is the empirical self which corresponds to the ego identity, bound by the experiences of the body-mind complex. This ''jīva'' is an integral part of the cosmos and traverses across different lifetimes, time and space coordinates, to finally dissolve in Consciousness-as-such, in a state which is beyond thought and cognition. It acts, enjoys and cognizes. It has impeccable will and the creative power of intent to achieve whatever it seeks to ''(saṅkalpa śakti)'' (Rao & Paranjpe, 2016, pg 168-171).

The ''jīva'' has a specific goal which channelizes the power of its will in one direction - of stilling all thought and refining its subjectivity to realize Consciousness-as-such ''(Brahmaṇ)''. All practices that we know of in systems such as ''Yoga'' and ''Āyurveda'' are aimed at supporting this goal alone.

This process is also known as ''antaḥ-karana śuddhi'' or ''citta-śuddhi,'' achieved through a deeply concentrated form of contemplation and meditation. Every mechanism in Indian culture or ''Sanātana Dharma'', seeks to nurture and facilitate ''citta-śuddhi''. It is aimed at giving us a taste of what refinement of our innate tendencies (''saṃskāras'') and conscious reallocation of cognitive resources inwards, feels like. It also shapes how we act, or how we utilize our free will as human beings.

Our actions or karmas tend to leave impressions which take root in the unconscious as seeds that will sprout in the future. This ties into the idea that we must keep coming back across lifetimes to fulfill these desires. As Deshpande (1979) observes, time in Indic thought is cyclical, running through creation, sustenance and dissolution. This principle warrants restraint and care rather than sanctioning indulgence. The practice of refining one’s subjectivity to release oneself from the impressions of actions is not only emphasized, but is embedded into the rituals and customs of the civilization.

Earlier we had spoken of how life experiences may hand us out maladaptive patterns of thinking and feeling. ''Yogic'' processes such as ''Pratyāhāra'' aim at re-patterning and assessing in long periods of silent observation, the psychodrama that plays out within us. They clear out cognitive errors and alter our entire perception of reality and living.

The second critical aspect of the Self is what we know as the ''Ātman''. It can be understood as a non-physical, witnessing, objective entity which is beyond the knower and the enjoyed and is rather the enabler of these very processes. It is the witnessing Self or the ''Sākṣī'' which is in essence, nothing but ''Brahmaṇ'' or Consciousness-as-such. It is in this unsullied state that ''Sat'' and ''ṛta'', I.e. Absolute Truth can be accessed. ''Brahmaṇ'', is then the third and the final aspect of the Self, the home of the ''jīva'' (Rao & Paranjpe, 2016, pg 129-133).

What is unique about this worldview is that in the refinement of individual subjectivity and awareness, the collective is nurtured by the very presence of such an evolved person, which takes us into the next exploration.

==== Relationship with Others ====
As per Triandis (1990), collectivist cultures emphasize on dependence, conformity, group goals, duties, and long-term thinking. Because the Indic worldview stems from the backdrop of the presence of Consciousness-as-such in every life form, it advocates the virtues of oneness, empathy and seva or selfless service.

Our society therefore has evolved as one based on duties rather than on individual rights. It was built on the principle that if we fulfill our duties with due respect, our rights are automatically safeguarded. This is the premise that ''dharma'' advocates and strives to uphold.

The Indian civilization has devised an enduring framework of organizing life which permeated into all its layered social institutions. The ''puruṣārthas'' or the four goals of life are meant to guide and define all our individual and social pursuits. The foremost is ''dharma'', which sustains, upholds and anchors the other ''puruṣārthas''.

It is dynamic and ever-evolving to adapt to the changes in society. But it has the attainment of prosperity (''abhyudaya'') and the attainment of the highest good (''niḥśreyasa'') at its center (Rao & Paranjpe, 2016, pg 50-51).

A ''dhārmika'' worldview does not operate at the cost of other beings. It functions for alignment, well-being, order and sustainability. ''Dharma'' is both social “ethics” which define one’s duties towards the world around and it is one’s own innate nature or purpose that one is asked to fulfill during this lifetime.

''Artha'' is human activity directed towards acquisition of goods for satisfaction and fulfillment of the individual and collective, within the boundaries of ''dharma''. ''Kāma'', is our pursuit of pleasures and desires, once again within the framework of ''dharma''. Think of the value frameworks and the lifestyle guidelines given at each stage such as the and we will see how restraint and free will coexist in this society.

''Mokṣa'' (self-evolution) remains a silent calling and pursuit in most of our lives, even as we pursue ''artha-kāma''. The idea of a higher goal, a larger vision and greater freedom not to indulge but to experience higher states of consciousness, is embedded into the daily life and fabric of people in the Indic civilization.

Earlier we had alluded to how language is the basis for cognition. ''Saṃskṛta'', the ancient language of India, derived from sublime states of consciousness by the ''ṛṣis,'' is constructed to facilitate cognitive excellence. For example, the very structure of the language shows a deep understanding of linguistic patterns and cognitive processes. The advent of modern-day education has led to an internal fragmentation of the individual. The key to establishing harmony also lies in unlocking the doors to what ''Saṃskṛta'' holds and bringing it back into education and practice.

Modern theories such as cultural evolution of intelligence by Prof Michael Muthukrishna also allude to how cultural processes and transmissions across generations contribute to enhancement of one’s cognitive resources and facilitates decision-making, innovation and expression of intelligence within the population.

==== Relationship with Nature ====
The attitudes towards nature in India and the West are deeply rooted in the cultural fabric of these civilizations. In the West, we had earlier looked at Rene Descartes and his mind-body dualism. We also have Francis Bacon who posited man as the Lord of nature.

In India or ''Bhārata'' on the other hand, we have the ''upaniṣads'' which tell us that the human being is an integral part of the world of animate and inanimate beings; and that Consciousness as an immanent, underlying principle throbs in all life forms, be they simple or complex. We are but a manifestation of the same Conscious principle, an extension of the creative powers of nature (Rao & Paranjpe, 2016, pg 44-46).

This puts us in a space of co-existing with and respecting the processes of nature as sacred. ''prakṛti'', the ''saṃskṛta'' term for nature, literally means that which is the source of creation. She is worshiped as a deity. Each aspect of ''prakṛti'', in ''Bhārata'', is associated with a powerful deity from the time of the ''Vedas''. Humans have engaged in a give-and-take relationship with nature, which in turn upholds cosmic order and processes. We are not owners but caretakers of the natural order. It is imbued as a sacred duty in our civilization ethos.

Culture serves to preserve nature. For example, several folk festivals such as ''saṅkrānti'' or ''pongal'' are celebrated in honor of the deities who ensure that the cosmic cycles are upheld to nourish the earthly realm. Villages in India have long followed a lifestyle that is self-sustaining and moves in a symbiotic relationship with nature (Rao & Paranjpe, 2016, pg 44-46).

Today as we look at discourses surrounding sustainability, there is perhaps nowhere else to turn but an understanding of nature that is ''dhārmika'', that is anchored in sacred ecology in a sense of awe, respect and deep gratitude.

==== To Conclude ====
We set out to understand the state of the individual and global mind today, and we need to look towards a civilization that has been around since the longest time, for viable solutions. We also put out why we need an emic lens to analyze what we have, over the etic perspectives we have been used to. How do we bring this about other than through a lived and experienced cognitive shift to begin with?

It was therefore essential to understand the processes of perception and cognition and how they are intrinsically linked to the macro-ecosystem of the native culture. We analyzed the present worldview that has been imported into our educational systems. We then entered the most critical part of the piece, where we looked at the civilizational perspective of reality and Self.

By now we would have gained an overview of why ''Sānatana Dharma'' has solutions implicit and explicit in its ontological principles and its cultural practices to complex problems of the world; and why we need to reclaim our way of viewing the world, the Self, and nature roo-and-shoot, without any form of divorce from its metaphysical origins and goals.

Perhaps it is time we had a relook at our definitions of happiness, and relationships with nature and fellow beings, from a lens that centers on purpose and harmony.

==== References: ====

* Baron, R. A., & Mishra, G. (2016). ''Psychology - Indian Subcontinent Edition'' (5th ed.). Pearson.
* Deshpande, M. (1979). History, change, and permanence: A classical Indian perspective. In G. Krishna (Ed.), Contributions to South Asian studies 1 (pp. 1–28). Delhi: Oxford University Press
* Mishra, R. C. (1997). Cognition and cognitive development. In J. W. Berry, P. R. Dasen, & T. S. Saraswathi (Eds.), Handbook of cross-cultural psychology, Vol. 2: Basic processes and human development (pp. 147–179). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
* Mishra, R. C. (2000). Perceptual, learning and memory processes. In J. Pandey (Ed.), Psychology in India revisited – Developments in the discipline, Vol. 1: Physiological foundations and human cognition (pp. 94–150). New Delhi: Sage.
* Nisbett, R. E., Peng, K., Choi, I., & Norenzayan, A. (2001). Culture and systems of thought: Holistic vs. analytic cognition. Psychological Review, 108, 291–310.
* Nisbett, R. S., & Miyamoto, Y. (2005). The influence of culture: holistic versus analytic perception. TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences, 9, 467–473.
* Pandit, S. A. (2022). ''Introduction to Psychology''. SAGE Publications.
* Rao, K.R., & Paranjpe, A. C. (2016). ''Psychology in the Indian Tradition''. Springer.
* Triandis, H. C. (1990). Cross-cultural studies of individualism and collectivism. In J. J. Berman (Ed.), Nebraska symposium on motivation, 1989 (pp. 41–133). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press

Authored by Lakshmi Sivaraman.
Published by Brhat.[[Category:Health and Wellness Sciences]]