Schools of Hinduism Advaita Vedanta Yoga and Tantra

Religion

There are few opportunities to provide a genuine fusion between religion and science. Buddhism and Hinduism may offer the richest opportunities for the scholastic exploration of the intersection between these two seemingly disparate disciplines. The Advaita Vedanta, in particular, points the way towards a holistic epistemology. Providing both metaphysical and scientific grounds for understanding universal phenomenon, the Advaita Vedanta can become a shared paradigm between science and religion. This fusion that Advaita Vedanta provides between the fields of science and religion reflects its underlying philosophy of nondualism. Sriraman and Benesch, for example, point out that the Advaita Vedanta "offers possibilities for resolving…the Cartesian dilemma" or the body/mind question (39). Similarly, Advaita Vedanta highlights the paradoxically linked roles of the observer and the observed in any traditional scientific experiment in which "subject, object, and situation have become inseparable," (Sriraman and Benesch 39).

Although its hallmark -- and its root word -- is nondualism, there is an ironic manifestation of the Advaita Vedanta. The greatest irony of Advaita Vedanta is the practice or attitude of renunciation. Central to Advaita Vedanta as it has been practiced throughout Hindu history, renunciation implies a denial of the material world because it symbolizes the cycle of birth, death, and rebirth. To escape the suffering that characterizes life on this planet, the aspirant must seek moksha and liberation. Advaita Vedanta's most famous teacher Shankara has been known to say that students must have an "intense yearning for liberation from this world" (Nelson 67). It is for this reason that Advaita Vedanta might not be the best philosophy on which to base an ecological policy (Nelson). At the same time, the concept of nondualism implies that all aspects of physical life, and all of nature, are sacred. The Advaita Vedanta represents several joyous paradoxes: the one paradox is the coexistence of science and religion; the other is the coexistence of renunciation and engagement with the world.

The paradox of renunciation vs. engagement is critical to Advaita Vedanta, characterizing its core components. As Tiwari notes, renunciation (sanyasa) "becomes the only valid way of living in harmony with the metaphysical identity of the individual Self with the Supreme Brahman," (p. 10). Therefore, renunciation enacts the metaphysical oneness between the Self and Brahman, the universe. Renunciation, as in living an ascetic lifestyle, ironically reaffirms the unity between mundane and spiritual existence. "Far from robbing life of its values, it rather re-establishes them on a new foundation for spiritual life," (Tiwari 10). Renunciation is not just about renouncing worldly goods and pleasures, though. As Tiwari points out, Advaita Vedanta does not define renunciation in any clear or rigid terms and to do so would be counterproductive.

Nelson points out the problematic paradox of renunciation, which is inarguably is a core component of Advaita Vedanta theory and practice. If spirit and matter are one, and there is no hierarchical relationship between the two -- then what purpose does renunciation serve? It would seem contradictory to advise a path of renunciation if the world is an emanation of Brahman. Practicing renunciation effectively creates a duality between the mind and matter. Renunciation is setting apart the will of the person from the natural urges of the physical body. Renunciation also occurs when the practitioner is supposed to become more mindful of the unity of all things that are perceivable and imperceptible.

As Nelson puts it, "the Advaitin's fear of the world leads to a radical antipathy to change and multiplicity," (68). The natural universe is characterized by both change and multiplicity. Therefore, the Advaitin demonstrates a possibly unhealthy antagonistic relationship with the natural world.

Advaita Vedanta also presents a peculiar challenge for science ethics: is it best to ignore environmental degradation under the assumption that nature is an illusory manifestation of the genuine plane of existence represented by Brahman? Or does the metaphysical the unity of Atman and Brahman require a proactive and politically active response to environmental destruction? Environmentalists have frequently alluded to Advaita Vedanta, claims Nelson, to show that an ecological ethic requires a radical shift from dualism to monism. Monism implies that anything that hurts the earth also hurts human beings. Moreover, if human beings are not hierarchically superior to the land, then humanity theoretically shares an "essential identity" with all life (Nelson 64). Advaita Vedanta theoretically encourages a sense of reverence for nature. In practice, however, Advaita Vedanta does no such thing. Nowhere in the Vedas is there specific reference to the relationship between a human being and the natural world. Such a relationship does not exist, because both human beings and nature are equally as much a part of Brahman. While this metaphysical construct would make human beings and nature equally valuable in the grand scheme of things, it does not mandate any specific ecological ethical behavior.

Nelson notes that the "dominant Western mindset" is of course far more destructive than that of the Advaita Vedanta. The Western worldview is "especially detrimental to ecological concern" because of the prevailing core belief of duality (61). Duality is embedded in the cosmologies of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, all of which have concepts of heaven and hell. Using this dualistic cosmology, a dualistic metaphysic and ethics is created. In turn, a dualistic metaphysic and ethic supports the vision of a universe in which spirit is separate from, and better than, matter. Nelson refers to "transcendental dualism," a paradigm in which matter is separate from and inferior to spirit. Advaita Vedanta does not have this worldview but still allows for a lack of cohesive environmental ethics (Nelson).