The Philosophy of the Absolute according to Krishnachandra Bhattacharya

116 Pages·1972·18.36 MB·Italian

by  Kurian T. Kadankavil

'
The Philosophy of
the Absolute
t
:I
{
J
A CRITICAL STUDY OF
KRISHNACHANDRA BHATTACHARYA'S
WRITINGS
By
Kurian T. Kadankavil C. M. I.
BANGALORE
1972
1t
l
Dharmaram College Studies No. 10 ,
PREFACE
© Dharmaram Publications 1972
'l'he aim of the present study is to analyse Krishnachandra
Bhattacharya's philosophy of the Absolute. He tried to re
interpret Advaita Vedanta' in terms of ce;rtain Western thought
patterns. Only those who are experts in both Eastern and
Western philosophies can judge properly whether he has suc.
ceeded i his attempt or not. As for this thesis, it aims at
11
analysing Bhattacharya's subtle discussions of his subject and
offering a critical evaluation of them.
I am greatly indebted to many who have helped me in
th,· prrparation of this book. I thank most heartily the faculty
of Philosophy at the Pontifical Gregorian University who
have kindly accepted this dissertation for a doctorate. My
special thanks are due to Rev. Mariasusai Dhavamony S. J.,
the director of this humble work for his sustained interest in
it, his valuable suggestions, comments and encouragement.
I also gratefully acknowledge the various kinds of help I have
received from my revered teachers, friends and colleagues
especially from professors G. B. Burch, Kalidas Bhattacharya,
K. C. Chacko and C. A. Sheppard.
Kurian T. Kadankavil C. M. I.
Dharmaram College,
Printed at
June, 1972.
L. F. Industrial Preu,
Thevara~ Coch~n-13,
J
1\BBH.E\'L\T/( J,\.'1
'l'ABLE OF CONTENTS
Br. Up.
Braf1iidara~1J·'a t:pani.sltod.
C/z. Up.
Chiindogra l !pa11i.1had1 Pa ere
. D
IPQ
International /'ftilo.r11/1ltiral f!J1r1r/o Ir ffll\tU iii
o't:lai. Up.
,1faitr~Ml/~J'a f )r1fl/J/1ad fjltlt of Contents v
Tai. Up. lltt
Tailti1il'!I f lpa11i.1liad 111ltwtion
\ CHAPTER I
1'
TRANSLITERA TlONS Doctrinal Continuity with the Past
a, a, ti, a, Thr Nature of the Interpretational Treatises in General 11
all for long a. (lr11,d11 Basic Concepts from the Scriptures 15
.1/z for ~
The I 11tcrpretation of Vedctnda, Sdrhkf~ya and Yoga 18
Section A
The Ultimate Reality as Consciousness in the Upanishads 19
Au Analysis of Certain Individual Upanishads . . !9
Hhattaeharya's Analysis of Different Psychic Levels . . 24
(Jrrtain Principles Appearing in the Analysis . . 29
Section B
Freedom through Reflective Sponteneity in Sdmkhya . . 30
The Metaphysics of Sdmkhya . . 31
Uhattacharya and the Concept of Reflection in Srbnkhya 34
Section C
Jo'rrrdom as a \Villing-Process in roga 43
Nulll'ccs and Doctrinal elements 43
An Analysis in Terms of Willing 45
A Hrview of the Chapter 4B
CHAPTER II
Uhutlacharya and Different Western Philosophical Systems
'l'lu· '.\lature of these Studies in General 52
Aclvaita and Idealism 53
.
\11
vii
Section l
Section I I
Bhattacharya and Kant
The Concept of Negative Attention
Page
Page
'l'lie ( :c·11tral J'r(JIJ!em of the Critique nJ l'ure Rmsnn .. A Pn1°vlrw of the 'Some Aspects of Negation' 98
56
The Twofold Deduction in 'Transce11deutal Deduction' N111111tlvn Attention in Hindu Literature 100
Resume 58
NtiMAllon as the Correction of Misconception or as
Bhattacharya's Position 61
Illusion 101
The Notion of Self 62
The Knowability of the Self 62 Section I I I
The New Orientation 63
Remarks The Objective Attitude in Philosophy
65
67 Different Attitudes ia Thought 105
Section II Ohjrl:t or Objectivity in Science and Philosophy 105
l.111<lc and Metaphysics in Objective Thinking 106
Bhattacharya and Hege]
Mrtaphysics as a Symbolic Activity 107
The Starting-Point for Hege]
Or11rral Observations 108
Bhattacharya's View of Starting-Point 69
The Concept of Negativity in Hegel 71
Section IV
Bhattacharya's View of Negativity 72
Anekanta - The Manifoldness of Truth
74
The Hegelian Concept of the Absolute ..
77 An Outline of Bhattacharya's Article ori Jaina Anekanta 110
Bhattacharya's Position with Regard to the Absolute ..
The Self Beyond the Hegelian Dialectics 78 Individual Issues Further Explained 1 I I
80 Uhattacharya's Contention 114
The sevenfold Predication of Jaina Logic 114
CHAPTER III
Different Interpretations of the Sevenfold Formula 117
The Absolute as the Indefinite
Hhattacharya's Position; Jaina Logic as Implying the
A Pre-view of the Chapter
Concept of the Indefinite 118
83
The Value of Different Views 120
Section I
Cicneral Observations 122
The Concept of Philosophy
The Role of Faith and Intuitiol'I Section V
The origin of the Philosophical Activity 85
The Concept of the Indefinite
The Philosophy of Advaita Vedanta 85
A Summary of "The Concept of Philosophy" 86 'l'hr Concept of the Indefinite in Logic 123
Philosophy and the Higher Grades of Thought 86 Thr C.Luestion of the Indefinite by Implication 126
The Role of Negative Attention 87 Thr. Way to Alternation 127
Remarks and Conclusions 94 Observations 127
95 General Remarks 128
I
I
II
vm
ix
CHAPTER IV
The Absolute as Subject Page
~•n 1117 of The Subject as Freedom 166
The Distinction between the Metaphysical Page r1t111 1rntl the Subjective
168
Object and Subject uh
169
I\ Sammary of the Philosophy of the Spirit 130
An Explanation of Certain Crucial Statements 132 Section I I
Spiritual Psychology: a Substitute for the 135 Alternative Forms of the Absolute
Metaphysics of Object
Objectivity as the Symbol of the Real Subject 135 . m1nuy of the Doctrine of 'Alternative Forms
of the absolute'
137 172
Spiritual Psychology and Spiritual Introspection lh•
Ah1olute of Knowing
The Question of Objectivity and the 138 ftt 178
Ab1olutc of Willing
178
Subject's Freedom Th•
Alnolute of Feeling
179
Different Stages in Spiritual Progress 138 Th11 ( lo11ccpt of Alternation
181
The Nature of Freedom at Various Levels of 138 lhnrnrks
183
the Subject's Experience
Grades of Subjectivity; Bodily Subjectivity 138 CHAPTER VI
Psychic Subjectivity 140
The Absolute and the Changing Patterns of Truth
Spiritual Subjectivity 144
The Subject as Freedom 146 Mnme Possible Reasons for the Obscurity in
Bhattacharya's Writings
A Distinctive Phase in Bhattacharya's Philosophy 152 187
Certain General Remarks and Observations 153 'l'hr. clement of Originality in His N co-Vedanta 187
154 The Possibility of Presenting His Writings as a
Logically Connected Philosophical System
188
CHAPTER V
'l'hc Extent of the Subjective in the Interpretational
The Absolute as Alternation Presentations
195
Certain Fundamental Principles of the Inquiry The Question of the Knowability of the Self
196
158
'l'he Arbitrary Characterization of the Speakables
196
Section I ,\rp 1111 Judgments in Philosophy Symbolic in
Character?
The Subjective as Unreal 197
'1'111th Ml Self-Revealing
Sankara's Doctrine of Maya 198
I >lllicultlr.s Inherent in Dbtinguishing Different
Remarks
162
Attitudes in Thought
Correction of Error as a Logical Process 164 198
Remarks 'l'hr. Problem of the Transition from One Attitude
164
of Thought to Another
165 199
'l'hr Obscurity in the Conception of the Indefinite
200
x
Page
Thr ( lonfusion of Objectivity with Subjectivity
200
F•dth in the Higher Grade of Thought
202
"The Concept of Causality
INTRODUCTION
203
The Question of Supra-Reflective Consciousness
206
The Subjective Functions as Prototypes of the
'UI tinntemporary Indian Scene
Forms of the Absolute
207
The Possibility of Alternation It\ Jihllosophy as in her political development India today
208
Beneficent Aspects of the Theory of Alternation 111111{ through a new era in her history. While doing so she
208
Selected Bibliography ... H 1todc of her past achievements and looks forward, with
Index 210 fallh In her children, to rising to the heights of wisdom. This
218 t\fW frt'mcnt of change and development in philosophy started
1111 IU the private endeavour of a few gifted individuals but
fllthrl' tlS a movement. With the beginning of the publication
ur
I hn St1cred Books of the East in 1875 by Max Muller, a renais
ltt111·•, we may say, had set in. Ever since, there have been
t111•11nwrable comprehensive and scholarly accounts of Indian.
phllo111phy, written in English, the language of higher educa
tion nml scholarship in modern India. The peculiar environ
m1111t created by British domination, the consequent struggle
filr political independence and the need for a religious revival,
mnde teachers and university professors of the time realize
thnt they must urgently, equip themselves to retrieve what had
hrc11 neglected in the cultural patrimony of their motherland.
Jn this calculated struggle to salvage our ancient cultural
harltage the attention of scholars was turned in different
dlrrctions. As Muirhead, the editor of Contemporary Indian
1'/1il"sophy remarks 1 these scholars fall mainly into two general
l(t'oups i.e., those who .devote themselves to the exposition of
lhn great Vedantic tradition as they have understood it and
nuulc it the basis of their own life's work, and those who,
t•rHcrving the Indian tradition and spirit, seek to give new
1111,.rpretations to the original classical works. Kalidas Bhat-
1111 h1·yn in an editorial introduction 2 divides the modern
l11clln11 writers on philosophy into four groups: i) those who
Atlr111ptr.d new criticism of Western philosophy from the point
I Muirhead and S. Radhakrishnan, ed., Contemporary Indian Philosophy
( l.1111cl1111: Ucorge Allen & Un win Ltd. 1936), p. 16.
:l Kali<las Bhattacharya, ed., Recent Indian Philosophy (Calcutta: Pro
ll't'•Nivr l'uhlishers, 1963), p. vii.
,,
~·-· ,,
3
INTRODUCTION
" INTRODUCTION
tnrrM nrc only in non-essentials." 4 G. Burch also speaks
of \'irw ol' the old Indian systems ..•• in a thoroughly original , t lf\1111' vdn. "Obviously there is a perennial philosophy
way; ii) those, on the other hand, who employed the best trnl h h one and wise men must see it. ... But equally
part of' their scholarship and intelligence in novel interpreta 'n111ly \here is no perennial philosophy, since it is notorious
tions, an<l sometimes in critical study, of the different Indian ~~
' 'h11 molt distinguished philosophers disagree with one
systems; iii) some less original, but perhaps more scholarly lt•••htl'
nn the most fundamental questions."5 Radhakrishnan
who were writing objective histories of Indian philosophy with it
almost in identical terms. He maintains that intelle
,_
copious reference to original Sanskrit ;;ind Pali texts ; iv) a o~,1, whtlom is one and the same at all times and for all men,
''
few who were noted for their original philosophizing, almost 10 the different philosophical traditions can meet and
all of whom were conversant with Western and old Indian
.Ytl rnr.t. But they need only to meet. They need not be
philosophy. f\11•d
top;ether to bring about a unified vision of reality. In
t•h111· words he holds the view that India should preserve and
In K. C. Bhattacharya we notice a happy union of all ••~Plop her own tradition in her own way.6
these trends except the third. The main source of inspiration
The Indian Philosophical Congre.ss establisaed in 1925,
for a philosophical revival in India seems to have been the
""''''" hs first president Rabindranath Tagore, .had no other
reluctance of the West to recognize that India also has a very aim 1h1\ll to offer a common platform to philosophers through·
rich philosophical heritage. In fact the few Western scholars
IUt India and thus to develop a common consciousness that
who took some interest in the study of Eastern literature were
lndlA should protect her own position in the philosophical
mostly historians and orientalists or the so-called antiquarians. world. All were conscious that a great deal of spadework
Hence our scholars have keenly felt the nerd to show that the
would be necessary before this covetable position was
glories of Indian philosophy arc not those ol' a bygone epoch
nrhlcvcd. There would have to be a lot of hard work before
and that its importance is not that of a historical lllonument.
1h11 misunderstanding on both sides could .be removed. Accor-
It is still relevant to the present age. "The world ought to be
111111< to K. C. Bhattacharya, the West was, and to a certain
'.I told how we in India had been philosophizing in the fir$t three
nlrnt is, to the present day, under the impression that Indian
decades and a half of this century and under what handicap
1h1111ght is mystical and not rational. He writes: "And the
and with what amount of success." 3 What Kalidas Bhatta Vttry name of philosophy has sometimes been denied to Indian
charya implies here is the fact that ·western-educated India,
111rrnlation on the ground, apparently established historically,
having lost her living continuity with her ancient philosophi
lhnt the oriental intellect is not sufficiently dry and has not
cal thinking, was practically helpless to do anything except
tnt'9e11\inc virility enough to rise to anything higher than
lean heavily upon the fundamentals of Western thought, and
ic1utr.1que imaginative cosmogonies." 7 Bhattacharya is of the
consequently produce an Inda-European synthesis rather than
11 l n lon that when history thus sits in judgment on Indian
original thinking or Indian philosophy worth the name. Even
11phllo1ophy the duty of an Indian student of Vediinta is not to
in such a confused situation there were champions who clearly I" "I"""~
historical dissertations but to bring that wisdom of a
saw the value of understanding the East as East and the West
as West, not in order to raise insurmountable barriers between
"-. I'. 'I'. Raju, Idealistic Thought ef India (London: George Allen and
them but to allow the spirit to have its free expression of the
self-same reality. As P. T. Raju puts it, "The spirit of man \l11wl~1 1 KI. tdeli.d, a1s9 5B3)h, aptt. a3c3h2a.r ya, ed. Krishnachandra Bhattacharya Memorial
is the same everywhere in spite of differences of outltiok. The rohml' ( 1\mal ner: Indian Institute of Philosophy, 1958), p. 27.
h Muirhead, ed. Cont.emporary Indian Philosophy, p. 334.
7 Krishnachandra Bhattacharya, Studies in Philosophy (Calcutta: Pro·
3 Ibid., p. viii. ll'"r.-iv~ Publishers, 1956), I, 2.
~,"
J
/,I
I
I
I INTRODUCTION
i
l»•go11r· 1·p11ch into contact with modern problems.a At the same INTRODUCTION 5
hr~
li1tlf' liclicves that the attempt can be made only if India I l111•w11rt h Burch of Tufts University has taken the
Rt'ls rid of her prejudice that Western thinking is mere hair t1f' lhi; philosophy of Bhattacharya as his sabbatical pro-
splitting. One has to come back to the commendable attitude 1 11 U11 luu only words of praise for him and considers him
rtr
of' the ri#s: "Let noble thoughts come to us from every side."9 tho 11outstanding thinkers of modern India". 13 Prof.
This was, in fact, the ideal intellectual climate which phil.oso llVUH\fY Diu, a keen critic of Bhattacharya believes that he
opfh tihcaisl cdeisnctuusrsyi.o ns in India sought to create from the beginning ~-• lhe reputation of being an acute thinker and an
ill Writer." 14 P. T. Raju has a section on Bhattacharya
"'fl
/Ntlion Idealistic Thought. 15 He is of the opinion that "his
Besides the organized effort of the Indian Philosophical
,_lllH'h1uya's) thought is almost like a citadel with impreg-
Congress there were other numerous individual attempts to ,.- 11 liH'tlflcations." 16 Although the editor of Studies in Philo-
revive and promote interest in the study of Indian philosophy. •4'
1 U11pl11ath Bhattacharya, the philosopher's eldest son,
The Inclan Institute of Philosophy established in the early decades Mfeull his father's system his third son Kalidas Bhattacharya
17
of this century at Amalner, Gujerat was one among such
individual ventures. ,., much admiration for it an<! has taken upon himself the
tluty
of <level oping its last phase further. Hence it is needless
••Y
to that Bhattacharya enjoys a high reputation among
Bhattacharya joined this Institute as its director and held llull•u thinkers.
the post from 1933 to 1935. Seven of his articles were first
published in the Philosop!iical Quarterly (from 1925-1966), a very ,f,. l/IJ l"i.fe and Works
important philosophical periodical published by the Institute,
mentioned above.
The following biographical note is mainly based on the
leleount given in the Memorial Volume mentioned in footnote
2. Bhattacharya's Posilion among the Indian Thinkers Nt1, !I. As the saying goes, in philosophy which attempts to
1mr11·ay the world sub specie aeternitatis, biographical details,
Bhattacharya's disciples and those who were in personal however striking, seem incidental. Yet a fair acquaintance
touch with him regard him as the greatest philosopher of with lhc person and the circumstances in which he has shaped
modern India. 10 This doe~ not mean that all these admirers hh clestiny throws some light on his ideals.
are in complete agreement with his philosophical position, for
many of them such as J. N. Chubb, D. M. Datta, Rasvihary Krishnachandra Bhattacharya was born the eighth child
Das, T. V. R. Murti and P. J. Chaudhury held radically of it Hrahmin family of Serampore, Hughli (Bengal) on May 12,
different points of view. Anyhow hardly anyone would deny
that Bhattacharya was a very keen logician and a subtle meta. · I:.! C:eorge B. Burch, "The Search for the Absolute in Neo-Vedanta,
Th11 l'hilosophy ofK. C. Bhattacharya," International Philosophical Quarter{y2
physician. D. M. Datta has chosen only three Indian thinkers VII, No. 4, (1967).
to include in his account of contemporary philosophy. Of these l'.1 George B. Burch, "The Neo-Vedanta of K. C. Bhattacharya,"
t•irl., V, No. 2 (1965), 304-316.
three Bhattacharya is presented as a keen metaphysician. I·~ C..:f. Rasvihary Das, "Acharya Krishnachandra's Conception of
11 11hll111ophy," The Journal ef the Indian Academy of Philosophy, 2, No. I & :
1 IUl1'I), I 13. ·
8 Ibid .. I, 2.
9 Rig Veda, l, 89, l. U11111lmlv-, V--II, No. 4 (, 1~"3F2)a,c t3, 87T-h3o96u.g ht, and Existence" The Philosophical
RevieIwO efG Meeotarpghey sBic. sB, uIrXc,h ,N o".C 3o n(1t9e3mlip),o rpa.r 4y3 6V. edanta Philosophy 1," The II i!ii IRbaidj.u, , pI.d e3a7l3is.t ic Thought of India, pp. 354-375.
Calc1u1t taD U. nMiv.e Drsaittyt,a ,1 9T5h0e) ,C phpie.f 1CIu4r-re1n3t5s .a fComtemporary Philosophy (Calcutta: llupl1l7l &K Caoli.d na.sd .B) hattacharya, Object Content and Relation (Calcutta: Das
·• --· -·-------, Alternatir•e Standpoints in Philosophy (Calcutta: Das
(lupin & Co., 1953).
~
(1
IN'l'R<JDUCTION INTRODUCTION 7
I
: fl:
Ill/,, Iii$ L1tltcr Kedarnath Bhattacharya was a man ofslen Jtrgoirding his religious life, it is recorded that he did not
1/, dn· 111ra11s witl1 a numerous family to maintain and was hardly lnw any particular practices of the Hindus, but had a pro
in ;i p<1si1 ion to bear the educational expenses of his children. "ncJ 1ympathy for those who did. 18 Hence both conserva
:l
Fro111 very early years Krishnachandra showed unusual sharp- JYr11111tl progressives claimed him alike. Although a rationalist
i 11ess or mind and love of learning. From Presidency College, by philosophic temper, he had a great respect for his heredi
i' Calcutta he graduated in 1896 with triple honours in English, hHV mthodoxy and the traditional approaches to the temple
Sanskrit and Philosophy. After taking his M.A. degree in Hr Uod. Yet a consciousness that he could not emotionally
Philosophy with high distinction he entered the government Hlpond to them and act accordingly always hannted him.
Educational Service in 1~97. Experience in this field encour
aged him to take the examination for the Premchand Roychan~ ~ 1#11 Style
11!/ studentship in 1901. He was awarded it by the University in
! I lis style was condensed and abstruse with very few
the expectation that he would produce some original work. In
llhutrations and analogies. This is the opinion of almost all
1904 he submitted his thesis "studies in Vedanta. It was published
lh11 great critics who happen(;d to write about him. D. M.
by the university in 1907. This book remained for years the
only published work to his credit. lhtlla <'1uotes Radhakrishnan as saying: "To criticize his
(Uattacharaya's) views is to understand them and to under
As a member of the Education Department of Bengal State ll1rnd them is to think over them again and again." 19 Another
he taught philosophy in alm(.)st all the government colleges in writer in the Preface to the Memorial Volume again remar1s:
Bengal. He resigned this post inJ1111c J<J:l:l, and in July, the "I k wrote as if for himself and did aot think very much for
same year, joined the Indian Institute or Philosophy, Amalner, Ids readers." P. T. Raju in his criticism says: "Many arc
as its director. On his return to Calcutta University in Sep tTpcllcd by his writings and leave them with the suspicion
tember 1935 he was appointed Professor of' Philosophy, t l111t they are being mystified .... One feels that the author
and held the chair for two years before his retirement c·111t!cl have made them less taxing to the sincere reader." 20
as officiating Principal of Hughly College in 1937. After Yrt one gets the impression that his mind is crystal-clear about
that he spent his days in Serampore reading practically noth thr subject he deals with. Bhattacharya's nephew in his bio
ing because of his failing eyesight, and yet writing a lot and Wl'Mphical sketch in the Memorial Volume expresses his conviction
discussing philosophical problems with his sons and friends thnt: "Once the forms of his expressions and the idioms of his
until his death on December 11, 1949. thought are grasped, his writing, th0ugh they are difficult,
hr.come comparatively easy." 21
Though he led a very austere life he was a man of many
interests. He loved to read the English humorists of his time, "The style of Bhattacharya is as stiff as that of Radhakri
and English poetry, particularly the poetry of Milton. He •11111111 is simple," writes D. M. Datta. He continues: "The
enjoyed listening to classical music. Though he loved to t1t•111llarity of Bhattacharya's style is that, though his words
travel, he never went outside India. Through these varied •111' Nlmple and mostly untechnical, yet his sentences do not
occupations one could notice in this great professor an inward l'11tdly yield their meaning." 22 Another point that makes
ness which indicated that he had some imp'brtant question of
his own struggling for a solution in his mind. He was warm 111 Cf. K. Bhattacharaya, Memorial Volume, p. iv.
l'I C:I'. D. M. Datta, "Two Indian Philosophers," The Aryan Path,
and generous by temperament but rather shy and almost
!J1111r, l'J:l'.i), 394-398.
'afraid' of publicity. He seldom sat down to put his views on W R:iju, Idealistic Thought ef India, p. 354.
paper unless pressed by extra-professional obligations to do so. ~'I K. Bhattacharya, Memorial Volume, p. v.
:!~ Dalla, The Aiyan Path, VI (1935), p. 3'.J5.
I
!
:ii
,I
I'
II
ii TNTRODUCT ION 9
INTRODUCTION
I
I' llliottli1<'1iarya's writings difficult to understand is the total
;I lfl' (I.e., chapter 6) tries to make a critical evaluation of
al1s1·111·c of references and allusions which might have enabled
athllornphical position.
1 h1· l'<'adcr to perceive him in the historical setting and under
sta11d him through comparisons. Rasvihary Das in his , 'l'h" following paragraphs indicate the general outline of
criticism of Bhattacharya's concept of philosophy expresses the tht111
t'l11pters.
I same view. He writes: "Krishnachandra's writings were very
II terse and required repeated perusal for proper appreciation Like every other modern Indian philosopher Bhattacharya
and his very subtle ideas did not admit of easy comprehen trlrd to be faithful to the ancient Indian philosophical
1111,
sion." 23 "The principal difficulty in understanding his , ,flhlon. Hence the first chapter is an attempt to show
philosophy," writes G. B. Burch, "is the austerity of his written ....
I dol'll'inal continuity of his philosophy with the historical
style. He out-Kants Kant and out-Hagels Hagel, his favorite
Western philosophers, in incomprehensibility."
24
One of the a vowed aims of his philosophical writings was
His Works
to present the Advaita Vedanta philosophy to the Westen'! world
111 Ill <i."n thought patterns. The second chapter, therefore,
His major works are published in two volumes under the lt'kl to compare his philosophical presentation of the Advaita
title Studies in Philosophy (Vol. I, 1956; Vol. II, 1958 Calcutta: with the different philosophical systems of the West.
,1. Progressive Publishers) edited by his eldest son, Gopinath
Bhattacharya, with a textual analysis. In the preface to the
The third chapter presents the so-called first phase of
first volume the editor writes: "There remains over an
11 immense mass of manuscripts which will, perhaps, remain ltlrnttacharya's philosophical position. 25 Herc he argues that
1h11 abolute which an objective attitude in philosophy can
unpublished for all time to come." C. Burch wrote in Review
I lll'l'ivc at is an objective indefinite. Objective means that the
ef Metaphysics in l 963 that. his "unpublished works i 11cl ude ....
11111 thought gives its content a self-subsistence. It is indefinite
various articles, and a pile of miscellaneous and largely
IH•rnuse no proper definition of it is conceivable.
unfinished manuscripts now partly destroyed by children and
termites." Our present study is based on the works published
Haunted by the thought that the objectivity might be
in the above-mentioned volumes and the references in the
11111·eal the philosopher adopts a subjective attitude. The
thesis are to pages and sections in them.
Mhrnlute that is freed from all conditioning would be the sub
.lrl'I I hat is freedom itself. The fourth chapter, therefore, deals
4- Plan ef Our Study wI I h this view of the absolute.
The aim of this thesis is to present a comprehensive view
To be a subject or object is a specification of conscious
of Bhattacharya's philosophy of the absolute. The first two
llt U, Hence thought again tries to transcend all these asp~cts
chapters are meant to serve as an introduction and background
'11lijrct' and 'subject'. This transcendental attitude in philo
11f
for the proper understanding of his philosophical standpoint.
•••pliy l·nds up in a transcendental consciousnc.ss. Bhattacharya
The next three chapters give a detailed account of his con
ap1·1 Ilks it as an alternation of a triple absolute, namely, truth
I ception of the absolute or the ultimate reality. The final
:1.:1 The suggestion of the diff,rent phase; in Bhattachary1's thought
I 23 Das, Journal of Indian Academy of Philosophy, 2 (1932), p. 1. iii NI 11p1><·:m:d in an article by G. B. Burch in the International Philo;ophical
24 Burch, IPQ, VII (1967), p. 614. (J1 .. 11t11.'J', Vol. 7, No. 4. It is an attempt to give a general outline of
11111111.1< l1.1rya's philosophy through a discussion of his various articles.
-:....=.";=-s