Criticism of Upanishads
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Please see the discussion on the talk page. |
The Upanishads have been attacked primarily by Dalit activist Bhimrao Ambedkar. Ambedkar questioned whether the Upanishad philosophy had any influence on Hinduism as a social and political system. According to his analysis , he claims that the Philosophy of Upanishads “turned out to be most ineffective and inconsequential piece of speculation with no effect on the moral and social order of the Hindus.” [1] Among the many reasons why the philosophy of Upanishads became ineffective, he claimed, was that the most prominent one was “The philosophers of Upanishads did not realise that to know truth was not enough. One must learn to love truth. The difference between philosophy and religion may be put in two ways……Philosophy is static because it is concerned only with knowing truth. Religion is dynamic because it is concerned with love of truth".
Dr. Ambedkar based his arguments on the works of these philosophers and claimed that these were the reasons that the philosophy of the Upanishads "proved ineffective". He says “….They were ineffective and powerless to erase the infamy preached by Manu (Manu Smriti) in the name of religion…”
Contemporary and modern scholars criticize Ambedkar's works on researching Hinduism as biased, and his mass conversion of Buddhism as a political stunt.
Lala Hardayal also attacks the Upanishads. He claims that the Upanishads are "full of absurd conceits, quaint fancies and chaotic speculations". He further attacks Hindu religious figures for allegedly dogmatizing the texts without "learning that they are worthless". [2]
[edit] References
- ^ “Philosophy of Hinduism”
- ^ Modern View, July 1912
