CONSCIOUSNESS, PERCEPTION, AND DESCRIPTION OF REALITY

In the final part, we shall see the process of perception as described in Indian philosophies. We shall also see the possible objections to Direct Realism of Indian thought and their replies. Chittaranjan Naik offers proofs for the existence of the Self in his books and we shall see them here.

PERCEPTION, SEEN AND UNSEEN CAUSES, KARMA, AND DIRECT REALISM OF INDIAN TRADITIONS

The instruments of perception are in this three-fold embodiment. Even though the Self has the capacity to reveal objects by virtue of its intrinsic effulgence, Maya obstructs its power of revealing. A clearing appears in the innermost covering of Maya; the middle layer actively reaches out to the object helped by the instruments of perception; and the outermost layer comprising the physical body is the seat of experience. Perception is an inside-to-outside process. Perception and experience of the world occur with a clearing in the veil of Maya.
The clearing appears by the Wheel of Causation operating in nature (Prakriti). This causality is of two kinds: the seen and the unseen. The seen (and immediate) operates between physical objects determined by the nature of the objects themselves. However, only those actions with a moral dimension result in unseen (and delayed) effects. The effect of an individual’s moral actions, either virtuous or transgressive, is Apurva, meaning something arising new. Its effect surfaces at a future time with appropriate fructifying conditions.
The total unfructified Apurvas of an individual is the individual’s past karma (or Adrshta); the accumulated effects of past actions for future fructification. There is perfect synchronicity between the world that an individual being perceives and the individual being’s past karma. The Law of Causation (or Wheel of Dharma) projects the manifested world in accordance with the collective past karmas of individual beings. The physical body is the seat of this experience and the regulated uncovering of the innermost veil of Maya determines which part of the world the individual will experience. The overarching Law of Causation that Indian tradition espouses does not violate the physical laws that operate between objects by virtue of their physical natures (dharmas). The causal force of Dharma Chakra acts as an unseen ordering force.

THE INSTRUMENTS OF PERCEPTION

In Advaita, perception is by the sense organs (jnanendriyas) contacting the object in the universe. The faculty of perceiving the universe cannot be an object of the universe because it would make the perceived quality of an object into a representation of the quality existent in the faculty itself. Each sense-organ senses a substance (or element) by the latter’s distinctive quality; The five substances or classical elements (tanmatras) are ether, air, fire, water, and earth and the distinctive qualities are sound, touch, form, taste, and odour respectively. The five elements, unknowable through empirical science, are abstractions beheld by an unimpeded consciousness. The mixing and aggregation of the five elements is panchikaranam (quintuplication) to form the mahabhutas.
These five classical elements are commensurate with the five sense organs and everything perceived in the universe must be by means of them. This is true even with our mental conceptions of objects; for an object of mental conception and its corresponding object in the universe are the same object appearing in a different condition of its existence. The Indian tradition would thus hold the elements of the Periodic Table as compounds of the five classical elements that compose all objects of the universe.

THE PERCEPTUAL PROCESS

Perception is by the removal of the covering of Maya (avidya or nescience) over the individual self, allowing the conscious light of the Self to reveal external objects. The mind, in a process called vrtti, assumes the form of the target object of cognition during a conceptual act. The mind forms a vrtti both when it mentally constructs an object or when it contacts an external object to assume its form. Perception is thus a composite process in which the Self, the mind, and the sense organs together establish contact with the object.
Thus, the attributes perceived such as color, and taste are not subjective qualities but are objective qualities inhering in the objects themselves. In the Indian theory of perception, there is no transformation of the object. Once the mind and sense organs contact the object and assume the form of the object by forming a vrtti, there would be nothing in between the self and the object to hinder the conscious luminosity of the self from revealing the object in its true form.
The mind and sense organs become distorting filters only when they have a defect hindering them from assuming the form of the object. When such defects are absent, there would be transparency between the Self and the object; revealing the latter in a true manner. Thus, perception reveals the object in its actual form. Such contact is instantaneous since the consciousness that appears within the body is the same consciousness that exists without the limiting adjuncts of the body and in conjunction with all objects. Hence, perception is nothing more than the removal of the covering of Maya over the individual consciousness to reveal the conjunction that already exists with the object.

PHYSICAL BODY

The gross physical body does not figure in the contact theory of perception, at least when the perception is free from defects. This exclusion is the greatest strength of the theory and not an omission. Perception reveals the object in its true form because of the non-involvement of the physical body. The embodiment of the Self comes as a cognitive condition (a mental idea) and not a physical process. The Self, a pure witness, is unchanging and immutable. The Self’s affections from bodily functions are a simulacrum, a cognitive conditioning, that sees a parallelism between the bodily functions and the affections of the embodied self. Affections of the Self are affections of the inner layers of the body (subtle body). The latter, because of their proximity to the conscious Self, display the properties of being conscious just as an object appears to have light when it is only reflecting the light falling on it.
A faulty perception is primarily due to an adverse state of the individual’s Adrshta (karma). This reflects either a defect in the instruments of perception (internal defect) or in adverse situations (external defect) preventing perception. The defect of the physical organ is also a simulacrum. The body is the seat of experience for the Self to take its place as an actor through which an individual being experiences the fruits of its past karma. It experiences the fruits of its past karma; also, it performs karma with the window of free will. Equipoise is when the body is transparent to perception. Thus, bringing the body back to a state of equipoise through surgery, like cataract surgery for dim vision, constitutes a recovery of transparency.

THE SENSE ORGANS

Each sense-organ is a subtle part of the element with which it is commensurate. The sense-organ is the element itself as it appears split up through the prism of erroneous cognition. Thus, the ear, skin, eye, tongue, and nose are subtle parts of ether, air, fire, water, and earth respectively. The sense-organ is no different than the element that stands revealed during perception. Thus, perception is a transparency to the world despite the body standing between the subject and the object. The body only appears to be standing between the subject (Self) and the object due to the same erroneous cognition causing both the embodiment and the internal senses.
In embodiment, the gross physical sense organs are the seats of the subtle sense organs. The individual being attributes the power of sensing objects to the gross physical sense organs instead of to the subtle senses. The instruments of perception include also the mind. If the sense-organs reach out to an object but the mind is attentive to some other object, perception of the object does not occur.
In Western traditions, the main problem with the stimulus-response theory of perception is, in effect, the problem of consciousness. It is impossible to perceive an object without there being consciousness of the object. As a logical consequence of assuming a stimulus-response model of perception, consciousness would logically belong to the sphere of noumena which is a delusional non-existent realm, as we have seen earlier. Contact theory overcomes the logical conundrums of representation systems.

OBJECTIONS TO DIRECT PERCEPTION AND POSSIBLE PROOFS

Amongst many arguments, one important is the important time-lag phenomenon. Light travels at a finite velocity, and so there is always some time interval between the reflection or emission of light from a physical object and the light’s reaching our eyes. For a distant star, the time interval may be so considerable that, by the time the light reaches our eyes, the star may no longer exist. If something no longer exists, we cannot now perceive it, let alone directly perceive it. Hence, the conclusion is that Direct Realism is false.

However, all the premises are theory-laden with the assumptions of the theoretical framework of science, namely that:
(i) light travels with respect to an observer, and
(ii) we perceive objects because of a stimulus-response process.

The arguments, therefore, suffer from stating propositions that are in question.

Another argument against Direct perception says that we must perceive all its parts at once to perceive an object. But we, at best, can perceive only a spatial part of it. Direct Perception, by perceiving only a part of the whole cannot make a claim about the whole. However, the premise is false because the whole is not the sum of the parts but is a distinct object different from the sum of the parts. Thus, it is not the perception of the totality of all the parts that will amount to the perception of the object. One perceives an object when the universal (of which the object is a particular) comes into perception. For example, to perceive a cow, universal ‘cowness’ is important. The assumption of perception of all parts of the object would lead to an infinite regress. Each part will have more parts to perceive and so on, ad infinitum. Universals, a necessary structural element of objects, correctly identifies both the attributes appearing in one’s immediate awareness and not in one’s immediate awareness.

EXPERIMENTS TO PROVE THE INDIAN TRADITIONAL THINKING

Chittaranjan Naik offers an ingenious experiment called the ‘Simultaneity Experiment’ to address the major objection of time lag against direct perception. The finite velocity of light leads to certain paradoxes like the shrinking of the size of an object and the stretching of time at light speeds. Infinities arise at the speed of light even as aging slows down. It is a huge paradox to understand that though it takes billions of years for light to travel from a distant star to a measuring telescope; for the particle of light, the travel has been instantaneous. If Consciousness is like light itself, then the immediate perception also may become more understandable.
The speed of light has always been from the source of light to another object, but never from the source of light to the sentient observer who would observe the light instantaneously. A nuclear explosion at 44,000 miles or so from Earth, instruments for measuring the speed of light from the event to a space station above Earth, and sentient observers recording the event on their watches on the same station; are the paraphernalia for the experiment. If the Indian thinking is correct, the sentient observer would detect the nuclear explosion instantaneously and much earlier than the instruments. This is a challenge for any future experiments which can change the present scientific-philosophical paradigms.

THE EVIDENCE FOR THE SELF

Chittaranjan Naik (On the Existence of the Self) gives detailed arguments to prove the existence of the Self. He demonstrates that goal-oriented actions emanate from a unique power of the Self (also known as kriya shakti) beyond the laws of physics. Naik dismantles the idea that the physical universe forms a causal closure (a strict cause and effect working purely at a physical level). He also shows how influential Western philosophers like Hume and Kant buried the idea of the soul in Western traditions. In fact, Socratic and Descartes’ dualism are more in line with Indian traditional philosophy. Socrates and Plato held the belief, like Indian traditions, of a distinct indestructible and eternal soul separate from destructible matter. The rejection of Cartesian dualism led to increasing confusion in Western philosophy continuing to date.
Kriya Shakti is the power of consciousness that can cause movement and effect changes in physical bodies. In materialism, this power has its source in the mechanisms of the physical body and the brain. Indian traditions ascribe this power to an intangible incorporeal substance existing within the body. Physicalists tend to dismiss both free will and any substance (soul or mind) exercising this free will over physical objects. However, the physicalist account of perception brings into question the very existence of physical objects. In Indian philosophy, the perceived world is the real world. Even for Advaita Vedanta with a provisional acceptance of such realism, the perceived world is still the real world.

‘ORDER’ AND VERIFIABILITY CRITERIA

In thermodynamics, the terms ‘order’ and ‘disorder’ are closely related to entropy which is a measure of the thermal energy in a system that is unavailable for doing useful work. All physical processes within a closed system involve an increase in entropy or decrease in order; this is an inviolable law of physics. According to some people, entropy can decrease in pockets, apparently defying the second law, but is extremely unlikely (like the odds of shaking the parts of a watch and having them fall into place as a working timepiece).
Evolutionists attempt to show how ordered complexity can indeed arise from natural phenomena over long periods of time, occurring one small step after another. However, whether a clock comes into existence or disintegrates, the thermodynamic entropy of the system always increases. Even in evolution, the thermodynamic law of entropy stays intact. Obviously, scholars confuse the notions of entropy and order as defined in thermodynamics with the common-sense notion of order.
Naik looks at the phenomenon of ‘order’ as a change in spatial dispersions of matter from an initial chaotic (or random) state to a final state of a spatially ordered configuration. This creates a sense of order in our minds. His strong hypothesis is that order of this kind would never come about through the operations of physical laws alone. This ‘order’ has nothing to do with thermodynamic entropy or thermodynamic order.
There are many million instances of such ordered complexity every second arising from disordered dispersals of matter. Brand new cars, clocks, beehives, microchips, aircraft, and giant buildings come into existence all over the planet every second. Order comes out of disorder on a regular basis, yet we fail to notice it amazingly. In all the examples above, there is one thing in common: the creation of order out of disorder springs from the presence of living beings. Clearly, life tends to disrupt the operations of the physical universe.

Any hypothesis in Indian traditions needs verifiability for acceptance (unlike the falsifiability criterion of science). The verification criterion that the author chooses to employ uses difference in probabilities between the following two cases:

1. The probability of the creation of an ordered spatial configuration when they are subject purely to physical laws.

2. The probability of the creation of an ordered spatial configuration when there is the intervention of living beings.

He then shows by mathematical arguments in detail that when matter is subject purely to physical laws, the probability of the material parts coming together in some ordered configuration tends to zero. But in the presence of human intent, suddenly the probability of the material parts coalescing into some ordered configuration begins to approach the value of one. Thus, one will have to presuppose that the human being cannot be merely an aggregate of the physical bodily parts but also consists of an incorporeal (intangible) substance possessing the capacity for intentional action.
This correlation, or vyapti in Indian logic, enables one to infer the presence of the soul from the presence of goal-oriented actions. For, where there is an intentional action, there is always a soul present as the source. Yet, in contemporary discourse, intention does not have the pride of place as an ontological principle. It simply is a manifestation of some underlying physical state in the brain or body. The ‘explaining away’ is not through a logical elucidation but by asserting a dogma. The dogma lulls the mind into thinking that the phenomenon cited for the inference of the self is a mere appearance leaving the reader confused regarding the nature of the proof.

He then considers four major objections to his thesis that proceed from the dogma and show them as unsustainable:

1. Intentional action is a result of the body’s mechanism

2. The actions performed by computer-controlled machines disprove that goal-oriented actions require the presence of a soul

3. It is possible for all kinds of objects to achieve accidental creation

4. Natural Selection can create complex objects

Random dispersions of matter do not rearrange themselves into ordered dispersions of matter when left to themselves and to the laws of physics. The probability of it occurring would be so minuscule that it would likely take a million years or a billion years for the result to actualize in the world. Yet, when human beings with the intent to produce such ordered dispersions of matter are present, these events do occur many times over; even millions of such ordered dispersions every month or every year. There is a correlation along with temporality of the highest order (when A comes before B, the correlation is near one; when B comes before A, the correlation is near zero). Such correlations prove A causing B; in this case, the soul causing ordered physical matter from disorder.

Evidently, the presence of human beings introduces something more to the situation than the behaviour of material objects operating solely under physical laws. One needs to pre-suppose the presence of some entity, namely the Self or soul, as a resident within the body of the human being. Ordinarily, this would suffice to prove the existence of the Self because it constitutes a valid inference.
Yet, the contemporary world views intentional or goal-oriented action as a manifestation of some underlying physical process in the body or brain. The invariable correlation between goal-oriented actions and the presence of living beings (the origin of the goal-oriented actions) points to the existence of an element, namely the soul, within living beings. Thus, purely physical causes and physical processes cannot explain goal-oriented actions. It follows then that the physical world does not form a causal closure.
Naik meticulously lays the foundational basis of Indian logic based on Nyaya with which he refutes Western philosophers arguing against the concept of soul and substance. He discusses in detail how Western philosophers such as Hume and Kant influentially discarded the notion of the soul which led to many inconsistencies in Western philosophy. However, their arguments were flawed and deficient. Descartes’ dualism was in fact more in line with Indian thinking and explained reality better. The uniform rejection of Cartesian dualism by Western philosophy was unfortunate but more importantly, equally flawed as Naik shows in detail.

CONCLUSIONS

The problems in Western philosophical traditions arise due to many factors: the conflation of the concepts of soul, consciousness, mind, and the self; the confusion of the relation between mind and matter; and making philosophy subservient to scientific dogma. Indian traditional philosophies, with slight variations, are extremely clear on the primary irreducible nature of Consciousness (also called the Self, Brahman, the Soul); the relation between mind and matter; the nature of the individual self and the world; the nature of perception; and the purpose of philosophy (or the Darsanas).
It is a fallacy (a colonial story internalised by most Indians today, a classic case of colonial consciousness) to believe that science did not have importance in Indian traditions. Indian traditions are clear again that science applies to the world of matter (Prakriti) and not to explain or understand the nature of the Brahman or Consciousness. Indian and Western philosophical traditions run on two parallel tracks consequently. Western traditions stay hegemonic in their belief that only the West has the undeniable right to speak about humanity; Indian traditional scholars remain cocooned in their own safe world unaware of Western discourses which clash with their ideas strongly and yet dominate the world of ideas.

Dialogue seems to be almost impossible.

Karma and reincarnation are an extremely integral part of Indian thought. The lower and higher truths are important in understanding Indian traditions with their rich and varied customs, rituals, gods, and traditions. The greatest strength of Indian culture was the rituals. It was the great genius of our rishis and sages of the past who created a ritual-based society that fulfilled the need for a harmonious society and a route to individual moksha. The entire corpus of Indian thought strives to tell human beings that freedom is possible for everyone; freedom comes by many routes; freedom does not involve stopping any ‘secular’ activity; and freedom is never a pressure to convert.

Indian culture has always been about experience and knowledge. It is an amazing facet of Indian soil that almost all the spiritual giants, both past and contemporary, speak the same language after attaining moksha. Adi Shankara, Vidyaranya, Ramana Maharishi, Nisargadatta Maharaj, Meher Baba, Ramakrishna Paramhansa, and Swami Chinmayananda are just some whose sayings and writings show a consistent similarity in the experience of the Self after dissolving the limiting embodiments. There has only been a confirmation of what our rishis said in the Vedas and Upanishads. This itself should tell us how Indian philosophy becomes a tool for intense personal transformation.
Philosopher Vishwa Adluri says that the quest for all of science, technology, spirituality, and philosophy across time and space has been to find immortality in a mortal frame. Indian philosophy, illustrated and represented to a large extent by Advaita Vedanta, perhaps sorted the issue ages back. The Upanishads, Bhagavadgita, and the scriptures reiterate the immortality of the Brahman in every mortal frame.

Indian philosophy, to reiterate, has never been a dry intellectual exercise and holds a definite purpose to propel humans into the highest realms of bliss and happiness. It is an optimistic philosophy giving hope to every sentient being in the world. Karma and reincarnation are parts of the necessary scheme to achieve salvation. It is individual effort only which takes us to the Truth. The Gita gives immense hope by emphatically telling us that we start off from wherever we leave in the previous birth. Not one single step goes to waste.
Man, God, and Nature are but superimpositions upon the one Brahman (Consciousness, Self, Purusha) with the essential attributes of Awareness, Existence, and Bliss. Consciousness is everywhere-immanent and transcendental. The whole idea of evolution in Indian philosophy, and which Indian thinkers like Sri Aurobindo and Swami Vivekananda repeatedly stressed, is the struggle of matter to reach the state of pure unity. In this scheme, even animals as sentient beings are manifestations of the same Consciousness. Indian traditions are not in conflict with evolution at any point. The universe does not stand apart from this Brahman. Consciousness is finally a state of pure sentience where all dualities (opposites of nature) and the triads (seer, seen, and seeing; knower, known, and knowledge; and so on) disappear.
Atheists shoot down the concept of an all-powerful God sitting high in the heavens by many arguments. Indian Darshanas did the same thousands of years back with Swami Vivekananda calling the idea of such a God juvenile. The only way to reach is to uncover the layers of ignorance, also called illusion or Maya, surrounding the Atman. This Maya is composed of the body, mind, intellect, space, time, matter, energy, cause, and effect – everything that science deals with.
The Self is ever free, but only appears embodied by an erroneous mental cognition. The erasure of this cognition leads to Self-realization and freedom. A freedom that was always there, but was hidden in the layers of the body. The potential for freedom exists in every individual irrespective of time, place, sex, religion, caste, creed, ethnicity, culture, or any personal identity. The words of a realized soul look so remarkably similar despite great distances in time and place that one must accept that the Unity reached by a Nisargadatta is no different from that of a Ramakrishna; and the means are only self-effort.
The Universe has a purpose, and that is to help the individual attain liberation. Of course, with regard to action, nothing matters with respect to the state of the Universe. Thus, in the realm of the material world, all action is irrelevant. However, with respect to the alaukika or the transcendental, action unfettered by desire is the ‘right’ action and can create the correct conditions to remove the cognitive error and gain the liberating knowledge of Moksha. This was the overwhelming message of Adi Shankara’s Advaita. The paradigm of Indian philosophy directly challenges Western thought which stays faithful to scientific developments.

The unique aspect of Indian arts, music, poetry, sciences, cultures, and philosophies is an intense ‘spiritualization’ of its activities. Every single route – grammar too, can be a means to liberation. This is clearly missing in Western thought. Sadly, most traditional Indian scholars are simply indifferent to outside philosophies. They do not either acknowledge Western systems or do not understand them because of unconnected terminologies. Many concepts of Western philosophy do not make sense to Indian philosophers. Yet, they keep silent. Unfortunate, because Indian philosophy can seriously mount a challenge and give answers to many questions plaguing Western philosophy. A more vigorous enterprise by Indian scholars will not only be a precursor to a change in thinking in the sciences but also serve to reinvigorate the Indian tradition. It would also allow Indian tradition to reclaim its rightful place in the contemporary world.

In a vital Constitutional debate, Sanskrit as a medium of instruction across the country lost by a single vote to English when tied at 50-50. It is nice to speculate now how differently our country might have evolved had Sanskrit won. The colonials left, but ‘colonial consciousness’ persists in all our departments, especially humanities, as Dr SN Balagangadhara says. The English language played its major part here undoubtedly, as we think, speak, and write in English. The Western narratives in philosophy remain unchallenged as we automatically take the latter to be true. Our philosophies stood silently, serenely, and strongly, transcending all other philosophies for centuries as the latter struggled and fought trapped in a maze of inconsistencies and confusions. Perhaps it is time for them to look up and, as a first step, realize that there is an alternative giving a better understanding of reality and human purposes.

REFERENCES AND FURTHER READINGS

1. History of Western Philosophy by Bertrand Russell
2. Fundamentals of Indian Philosophy by Ramakrishna Puligandla
3. Presuppositions of India’s Philosophies by Karl H. Potter
4. Essentials of Indian Philosophy by M. Hiriyanna
5. The Story of Philosophy by Will Durant
6. The Mystery of Consciousness by John Searle (1990)
7. koenraadelst.blogspot.com/2013/08/when-did-buddha-break-away-from-hinduism/ Koenraad Elst
8. https://vivekavani.com/swami-vivekananda-quotes-evolution/ Collected quotes of Swami Vivekananda from his Complete Volumes on evolution
9. Sri Aurobindo’s Theory of Spiritual Evolution by K. Pratap Kumar https://www.ijream.org/papers/IMC18713.pdf
10. The Man Who Knew Infinity: A Life of the Genius Ramanujan by Robert Kanigel.
The book is a beautiful account of the life of Ramanujam. He attributed his deepest insights into mathematics to the grace of his village deity. This irritated his atheist mentor in England who could not understand the proofs of theorems on many occasions. Ramanujam simply skipped many intermediate steps and explained that it was intuitive at a certain level. It used to be a challenge to spend hours in trying to reach the proofs of Ramanajum who did not bother with many intermediate steps. The most important point here is that the clash between ‘science’ and ‘religion’ (the problematic conversion of Hindu traditions as religions is another matter) never existed in Indian culture. There is no dichotomy when a rocket scientist breaks a coconut in the temple.
11. Natural Realism and Contact Theory of Perception: Indian Philosophy’s Challenge to Contemporary Paradigms of Knowledge by Chittaranjan Naik.
Bookauthority.org ranks it as one of the best books on Indian philosophy. This seminal book is the basis for these essays and the former is necessary for understanding Indian philosophy and how it contrasts with Western philosophy and how it interacts with the ‘other’ watershed areas like science and ‘religion.’
12. On the Existence of the Self: And the Dismantling of the Physical Causal Closure Argument by Chittaranjan Naik
13. Apaurusheyatva of the Vedas by Chittaranjan Naik in (https://pingaligopi.wordpress.com/2022/10/29/apaurusheyatva-of-the-vedas-by-chittaranjan-naik-2/)
14. The Nyaya Theory of Knowledge: A Critical Study of Some Problems of Logic and Metaphysics by Satishchandra Chatterjee.
A wonderful book explaining the Indian systems of logic that strive to explain the reality of the world around us. It shows how Indian logical systems differ significantly from Western logical systems that focus more on rules and constructions of sentences than explaining the world.
15. Methods of Knowledge – According to Advaita Vedanta by Swami Satprakashananda.
A classic text explaining the Advaitic position on the means of acquiring knowledge in surprisingly a lucid and easy style.
16. Eight Upanisads vol-1 & 2 by Swami Gambhirananda.
A great resource for understanding the Upanishadic wisdom in simple yet beautiful language.
17. Back To The Truth: 5000 Years Of Advaita by Dennis Waite
18. What Do Indians Need, a History or the Past? A challenge or two to Indian historians by S.N. Balagangadhara
19. The Nay Science: A History of German Indology (2014) by Vishwa Adluri and Joydeep Bagchee
20. Cultures Differ Differently: Selected Essays of S.N. Balagangadhara (2021) edited by Jakob De Roover and Sarika Rao
21. The Heathen in His Blindness: Asia, the West, and the Dynamic of Religion by SN Balagangadhara.
A classic text where Dr. Balagangadhara explains his notions of religions and traditions in detail. It shows clearly how the entire process of converting our traditions into religions is at the root of all ‘religious’ frictions in India.
22. Do All Roads Lead to Jerusalem? The Making of Indian Religions. Co-author: Divya Jhingran.
Scholars and lay people did not understand the above book fully but that did not prevent the scholars from vehemently opposing the ideas of Dr. SN Balagangadhara. The allegations included Dr. Balagangadhara’s ‘more than justified belief’ in the power of secularized Christian discourses. This is a slimmer and simplified version of the above book written along with Divya Jhingran.
23. Reconceptualizing India Studies by SN Balagangadhara Rao.
This book is about many problematic issues in the studies involving India and her past (Indian society, traditions, and its evils like the ‘caste-system’, ‘religious fundamentalism’, ‘corruption’, ‘poverty’, and so on). A deep ‘colonial consciousness’ is the cause of this violence that prevents us from looking at the West from our perspective. More importantly, we look at ourselves from a Western perspective, a fact that we do not know and do not even want to know.