Sankaracharya - Milton Singer - University of Chicago

[Guest guest]

Namami Sankaraachaaryam, sarvalokaika Poojitham

 

With permission blessings and grace from HH Swamy Vijeyendra

Saraswathi garu of Shri Kanchi Kamakoti Peetham Paramacharya and

miracles

 

Sankaracharya

Milton Singer

University of Chicago

When I was in Madras in the winter of 1954-55 I heard references on a

number of occasions to Swami Sankaracharya which greatly aroused my

curiosity. Some of these references were made by avowed followers of

the Swami, others by the critics, but all singled him out as person

of unusual position and attainment. (My) interviews (with him) were

among the highlights of my visit to India and still stand out with

great vividness.

For an American, the setting of the meetings under a green tree in

the garden of the Conjeevaram Mutt was in itself most charming and, I

may say, misleading since I did not at the first interview recognize

the Swami still under the tree until my companions had prostrated

themselves before him. But the most memorable part of these

interviews was the Swami himself. On both occasions he showed a very

lively curiosity about the outside world and asked me about where I

had been, who and what I had seen, what foreign languages I knew, and

similar questions. He also showed a very strong interest in the

American Indians, their history, diet and customs. In these

questions, and more so in his answers to my questions about Hinduism,

the Swami showed a most unusually clear and can did mind. From him I

believe I learned more about the essential foundations of orthodox

Hinduism than I had learned from a two-years previous study of the

subject. In fact, this holy man had a view of the foundations which

would be more congenial to an anthropologist than to the Western

study of religion and theology. For according to the Swami, the

distinctiveness of Hinduism does not rest in its philosophy, ethics,

or theology, things which tend to be common to all schools and all

religions. Hinduism adds to these a hereditary discipline based on

family and caste, and the growth of decline of Hinduism is directly

dependent on the social disciplines. The Swami referred to these

social disciplines as the `sociological foundation' of Hinduism.

While he showed considerable concern about the recent weakening of

these disciplines, he nevertheless felt that there was good prospect

for activating the religious non-Brahmins to maintain them along with

the Brahmins.

This way of looking at Hinduism brings together in a very

illuminating manner many apparently disparate things that I had seen

in India and gave me a most intimate insight into Hindu institutions

and ideas.

The Swami's intense seriousness and active concern for the future of

Hinduism was refreshingly mixed with a wry humour and detachment. At

one point in our conversation when I asked him about the obligation

of the people to see him regularly at the Mutt, he said that the

allegiance to Sankara Mutt is no specific and definite as in the case

of some other Mutts and wistfully remarked that there are some people

who never come to see him. At another point, in talking about the

Dravidan movement, he suggested that my study of South Indian Culture

would be incomplete if I did not interview at least one of the

leaders of this movement.

Before I west to India I had heard and read much about the great

`soul force' of its holy men and saints but I had assumed that this

was something in the ancient past. And it was not until I had met

Sankaracharya that I realised it was still part of the living force

of Hinduism today.

During my first interviews in Madras in 1954, people in different

walks of life spontaneously expressed warm appreciation of Swami

Shankaracharya of Kanchi as a spiritual leader. He was often referred

to as H.H. ( " His Holiness " ). Since on that first trip I was

interested in the social organization of Hinduism in the area, I

asked Dr. V. Raghavan, the Professor of Sanskrit at the University of

Madras, whether he could arrange a meeting with the Swami.

Dr. Raghavan was able to arrange an interview for me with the Swami

at his ashram in Conjeevaram. My description of this interview and of

a later one in Madras city at the home of a follower will be found in

my book When a Great Tradition Modernizes: an Anthropological

Approach to Indian Civilization. Chicago: University of Chicago

Press, (1972) 1980, pp. 86-89, 341-42.

The Swami's intellectual vigour and coherent views of the problem of

poverty in India, and of the future of Hinduism and its relation to

industrialization made a deep impression on me, especially during the

first interview at Conjeevaram. Sitting on the ground, leaning

against the trunk of a large shady tree, and surrounded by a group of

disciples, also sitting on the ground in a semi-circle, the Swami

explained that India's poverty might be helped by gifts of land to

the land-less, by community development, and by Five-years Plans.

Ultimately, however, he thought that the problem was " a spiritual "

one and called for a change in the life-style of the four classes in

Indian society. He said that if the Brahmins and working classes

renounced their desire for " luxuries " and foreign goods in favour of

a more simple life which followed their traditional " family

disciplines " , then the other two classes would be able to develop

the " arts " of civilization.

The Swami did not think that the popular criticism of case, ritualism

and other-worldliness was historically accurate or realistic.

Indians, he said, have always been an active and practical people,

who have fought many wars and developed numerous arts. The doctrine

of the unreality of the world is an abstract theory which refers

to " a higher level of experience " and does not discourage practice

and activity. " We do not stop eating because we believe in the atomic

theory of matter. " The future of Hinduism does not depend on such

beliefs, he said, but on its " sociological foundations " , that is, the

ability of some classes, even non-Brahmins, to maintain the

traditional " family disciplines " . So long as they do so, he declared,

even an industrialist can be a good Hindu.

As far as his own life-style was concerned, he said that a simple

diet of leaves, fruit and milk was sufficient and healthy for him.

Who will doubt this at a celebration of the Swami's centenary?