Reason and Religion

Swami Satyapriyananda*
* Assistant Secretary, Ramakrishna Mission Swami Vivekananda’s
Ancestral House and Cultural Centre, Kolkata

“Reason and religion” has a conjunction connecting two dissimilar

terms “reason” and “religion”. To my understanding, “reason” is the
middle term in the series: instinct, reason and intuition. Instinct is the
only domain in which animals function; human beings being rational
animals combine in themselves both instinct and reason. Of course, a
rare few open the gates of intuition and have intuitive experience of what
is beyond sense experience. Religion may be viewed as the middle term
in the series: science, religion and spirituality. Where science ends religion
begins, and where religion ends spirituality begins. Alternatively, and
perhaps more correctly, we can think of the Science of sciences by which I
mean the principles of scientific approach which forms the basis of all the
sciences, and the Science of religion or Vedanta which forms the basis of
all religions. While the science of sciences spread out into various
Sciences without one science being in conflict with another, the science of
religions or Vedanta gave birth to various religions which often come into
conflict on account of deviating from strict scientific principles. That is why
we have harmony in sciences and disharmony in religious beliefs, tenets,
books, creeds, etc. It is also a dilemma between intensity and extensity:
intensity paving the way for fanaticism (my religion alone is correct; my
god-head alone is the saviour) and extensity making for liberality of views.
In Sri Ramakrishna, we have a combination: deep as the ocean and broad
as the skies. There is no way to reconcile blue with red, for they are
different colours. And if we have to equate x with y, then from the point of
the relation of being equal, the two sides must tally. And if they do not
tally, it should be understood that the common bases must be considered
in the equality and the divergent points discarded. The common example
given is “This Devadatta is that Devadatta”, “this” and “that” connoting
different times and places are contradictory, and the only common idea is
“Devadatta”. So the equality simply states “Devadatta = Devadatta”,
excluding the ideas “this” and “that”. That is what some religious
believers are not bold enough to do. Religionists must remember that it is
a fight between religious belief and irreligion; the sooner the conflict
between religions is removed, the better. This reluctance to reconcile
preserves the conflict and subjects religions to criticism of one not
conforming to another unlike the sciences, all of which have a basic
concept, for example, that the rate of flow is potential difference divided
by resistance. There are other such common scientific principles which
apply to sciences in general. The other common example is that the rate
of increase of a material in a fixed region is equal to the rate of inflow
minus the rate of outflow plus the rate of production minus the rate of
depletion. Again, without being so rigid on the concept of conservation of
mass and energy, science is willing to agree that energy can be
transformed from one form into another and that matter and energy are
inter-convertible. But religious followers are not usually liberal and the
result is fanaticism and bloodshed with the lofty religious ideals losing
their emphasis. But those who have reached the end of the road in
religious journey all agree: “All jackals howl alike”, as Sri Ramakrishna
said.
Religions consider that all branches of secular knowledge including
the sciences are but secondary and do not remove sorrow, affliction,
misery, delusion, etc born of ignorance. They maintain that ‘That by which
the Imperishable One is known’, alone is primary knowledge and superior
to all secular knowledge including the sciences. Therefore, there has been
an eternal quarrel between science and religion: religion claiming to be
the supreme knowledge and science cutting to pieces religious beliefs and
dogmas based on its shining power of reason thus proving that religious
beliefs and tenets are not infallible. There is, therefore, an urgency to
justify religion on the basis of reason even as science is justified on the
basis of reason. Is this possible at all, and, if not, why? At the beginning of
the 19th century, it was almost feared that religion was at an end. “Under
the tremendous sledgehammer blows of scientific research, old
superstitions were crumbling away like masses of porcelain. Those to
whom religion meant only a bundle of creeds and meaningless
ceremonials were in despair; they were at their wit’s end. Everything was
slipping between their fingers. For a time it seemed inevitable that the
surging tide of agnosticism and materialism would sweep all before it.
There were those who did not dare utter what they thought. Many thought
the case hopeless and the cause of religion lost once and for ever. But the
tide has turned and to the rescue has come — what? The study of
comparative religions. By the study of different religions we find that in
essence they are one.” (Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. 1, p.
317). We will see how, later on.
At this stage we must recall what Swami Vivekananda said about
religions with a book and religions without a book: It is only religions with
a book that have withstood the test of time. However, it is the books
which being in mutual conflict cannot by themselves reconcile the
differences in belief systems that they present to the followers of that
religion. These books cannot be arbiters in the dispute. The only way to
reconcile these differences between religions, in the language of Swami
Vivekananda, is to go to that point of time when religions began. The only
harmonious religious point of view is what is presented by Vedanta, the
mother of all religions. What is religion? Religion consists of philosophy,
mythology and rituals. For the common man who does not have the
capacity to reason and take the help of philosophy, rituals are like so
many drills and he feels happy about it. Mythology consists of several
examples of righteous living practised by men of eminence. In all these,
even one religion differs in the beliefs of the different sects under it, not to
talk of differences between religions. So much so, there are many sects in
Hinduism, Catholic and Protestant in Christianity, Shiahs and Sunnis in
Islam, Mahayana and Hinayana in Buddhism, and Digambar and
Swetambar in Jainism. These gross differences even in Hinduism
prompted Swami Vivekananda to discuss the common bases of Hinduism.
And in the context of the several world religions now extant and those
that are yet to come, it is Vedanta and its practical application in daily life
that can reconcile differences, even as a mother reconciles the differences
amongst her children. While it appears reasonable to require religions to
justify themselves based on reason as do the sciences, it is unreasonable
to expect this for the simple reason that the domain of operation of the
sciences is sense data, correlation, statistical analysis, and framing of the
law of causation, for use in technological developments, which are all in
the domain of maya defined as timespace-causation or name and form.

Statistics is a tacit admission of ignorance. We cannot say that a

thing will happen; only we can say that there is a probability that a certain
thing will happen. Religion and religious experience, on the other hand,
are extra-sensory experience which is experienced in the inner recesses
of the heart, and spoken and exchanged in silence. In support, let us
recall: aváïmanasagocaram, vákyamanátæta, and yato váco nivartante
aprápya manasá saha. So, in my view, the methods of science cannot
apply to religion, though religions can be expected not to be in conflict
with reason as far as reason goes. Kindly mark the expression “as far as
reason goes”. As to the inability of reason and argumentation to reveal
Truth, we have, (Kaôhopaniøad, 1.ii. 8 and 9): ananyaprokte gatiratra
násti aîæyán hyatarkyamaîupramáîát; naiøá tarkeîa matirápaneyá. Sri
Ramakrishna tells ‘M’: “Don’t reason anymore.”

On the futility of reason, we have in the Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna, pp.

88-89:
(Master to M.) “Is there any book in English on reasoning?”
M: “Yes, sir, there is. It is called Logic.”
MASTER: “Tell me what it says.”
M. was a little embarrassed. He said: “One part of the book deals with
deduction from the general to the particular. For example: All men are
mortal. Scholars are men. Therefore scholars are mortal. Another part
deals with the method of reasoning from the particular to the general. For
example: This crow is black. That crow is black. The crows we see
everywhere are black. Therefore all crows are black. But there may be a
fallacy in a conclusion arrived at in this way; for on inquiry one may find a
white crow in some country. There is another illustration: If there is rain,
there is, or has been, a cloud. Therefore rain comes from a cloud. Still
another example: This man has thirty-two teeth. That man has thirty-two
teeth. All the men we see have thirty-two teeth. Therefore men have
thirty-two teeth. English logic deals with such inductions and deductions.”
Sri Ramakrishna barely heard these words. While listening he became
absent-minded. So the conversation did not proceed far.

Or, “Can one know God through reasoning? Be His servant, surrender
yourself to Him, and then pray to Him.” (ibid., p. 107).

Or, “Bhakti is the one essential thing. Who can ever know God through
reasoning?” (ibid., p. 157).
Or, consider the reflection of ‘M’ at the end of his very first argumentation
with the Master: “This was M.’s first argument with the Master, and
happily his last.” (ibid., p. 81).

Reasoning can be done up to a point and then the mind itself

disappears not to talk of reasoning! “The jnani sticking to the path of
knowledge, always reasons about the Reality, saying, ‘Not this, not this’.
Brahman is neither ‘this’ nor ‘that’; It is neither the universe nor its living
beings. Reasoning in this way, the mind becomes steady. Then it
disappears and the aspirant goes into samadhi. This is the knowledge of
Brahman. It is the unwavering conviction of the jnani that Brahman alone
is real and the world illusory. All these names and forms are illusory, like a
dream.” (ibid., p. 133).

Speaking on the ‘Necessity of Religion’ Swami Vivekananda says:

‘Thus, a tremendous statement is made by all religions; that the human
mind, at certain moments, transcends not only the limitations of the
senses, but also the power of reasoning. It then comes face to face with
facts which it could never have sensed, could never have reasoned out.
These facts are the basis of all the religions of the world. Of course we
have the right to challenge these facts, to put them to the test of reason.
Nevertheless, all the existing religions of the world claim for the human
mind this peculiar power of transcending the limits of the senses and the
limits of reason; and this power they put forward as a statement of fact.’
(Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. 2, p. 61).

Science admits multiplicity in the perceived world and all attempts

at unification still leave the multiplicity intact. The quest for fundamental
particles may not even be at an end! (See endnote 1). Science cannot
dissect a living being and show the existence of the kundalini or the
Atman or the absence thereof, for these are perceived in meditation, a
discipline foreign to science. For science, meditation is at best only a
stress relieving method; for religion, however, meditation is the ultimate
step which takes one to the ultimate experience of Truth. While religions
admit that the ultimate Truth is beyond sense experience, they too take
all the trouble ironically to explain this manifest world, only so a beginner
does not feel stranded by denial of the sense perception which he has,
and the absence of intuitive cognizance of the ultimate Truth which he
has not had yet. Just as a scientist would not walk into a restaurant and
ask for ten Avogadro numbers of H-two-O molecules and flabbergast the
waiter, but rather ask for a glass of water in the language the waiter
understands, even so the man of religion believing and perceiving God
residing in the heart of all will live and move about just as any other
person. He is a changed person within. It is like a person seeing water in a
desert with the knowledge that it is after all a mirage; there is no
substance in it. That Vedanta treatises are the most sublime of sciences
can be understood by studying the exhaustive treatment given by these
texts, leading the aspirant to the final conclusion regarding the ultimate
Truth. That it is a fascinating study, none who has attempted can deny.
There are, however, prerequisites such as yama and niyama for
undertaking Vedantic study, which need not be there in scientific study.
Yet, the ideas adhikárin, viøaya, sambandha, and prayojana are common
to all study.

Curiously, the scientist may interpret sense data in a way that is

totally opposite to our perception: though the sun and the moon appear to
go around the earth, the astronomer claims that the earth is rotating on
its axis as a result of which it appears that the sun and the moon are
going around the earth. Though we do not feel that the earth is rotating,
yet it is claimed by the astronomer that the earth is revolving. Indeed,
appearances are deceptive. While science can predict the trajectory of
stones and even of heavenly bodies, yet it cannot say anything definite
about sub-atomic particles and is quite content to say that the electron,
for example, can be found in a region, called the orbital, around the
nucleus with a probability of 99%, and not in a definite orbit as was
thought earlier. Again, science, despite tall claims, is at its wits end to
predict where a common house fly will alight next! Life adds something
incalculable. When we talk about the atman which is smaller than the
smallest, as also larger than the largest — space losing relevance, and is
Consciousness Itself, science and scientific methods should consider such
knowledge out of bounds.

In the Universal Message of the Bhagavad Gita, Vol. 1, p. 249,

Swami Ranganathanandaji Maharaj quotes from Professor Fritjof Capra’s
third book, Uncommon Wisdom (pp. 42-43) where the Professor refers to
his conversation with Werner Heisenberg, the great discoverer of the
Principle of Uncertainty in Quantum Physics: ‘When I asked Heisenberg
about his own thoughts on Eastern Philosophy, he told me to my great
surprise not only that he had been well aware of the parallels between
Quantum Physics and Eastern thought, but also that his own scientific
work had been influenced, at least at the sub-conscious level, by Eastern
Philosophy. ‘In 1929, Heisenberg spent some time in India as the guest of
the celebrated poet Rabindranath with whom he had long conversations
about science and Indian Philosophy. This introduction to Indian thought
brought Heisenberg great comfort, he told me. He began to see that the
recognition of relativity, interconnectedness, and impermanence as
fundamental aspects of physical reality, which had been so difficult for
himself and his fellow physicists, was the very basis of the Indian spiritual
traditions. “After these conversations with Tagore,” he said, “some of the
ideas that had seemed so crazy suddenly made much more sense. That
was a great help for me.”’ It is this that emboldened Heisenberg to state
his uncertainty principle. The sad outcome of learned reasoning by the
best minds is revealed in the unfortunate history of abandoned theories
lying here and there like bleached skeletons! (See endnotes 2 and 3).

Yet, Vedanta is a science because it is in conformity with the two

basic scientific ideas based on reason: 1) that the particular is explained
by the general and the general by the more general and so on until we
come to the most general, and 2) the cause of anything is in itself and not
outside of itself. As regards the first idea, Vedanta presents Brahman as
the highest generalization of all existence. Says Swamiji: ‘We are all
human beings; that is to say, each one of us, as it were, a particular part
of the general concept, humanity. A man, and a cat, and a dog, are all
animals. These particular examples, as man, or dog, or cat, are parts of a
bigger and more general concept, animal. The man, and the cat, and the
dog, and the plant, and the tree, all come under the still more general
concept, life. Again, all these, all beings and all materials, come under the
one concept of existence, for we all are in it. This explanation merely
means referring the particular to a higher concept, finding more of its
kind. The mind, as it was has stored up numerous classes of such
generalisations. It is, as it were, full of pigeon-holes where all these ideas
are grouped together, and whenever we find a new thing the mind
immediately tries to find out its type in one of these pigeonholes. If we
find it, we put the new thing in there and are satisfied, and we are said to
have known the thing. This is what is meant by knowledge, and no more.
And if we do not find that there is something like it, we are dissatisfied,
and have to wait until we find a further classification for it, already
existing in the mind. Therefore, as I have already pointed out, knowledge
is more or less classification.’ (Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda,
Vol. 1, p. 370). The all-inclusive class from which all other sub- and sub-
sub-classes emanate is Sat-citánanda.

The second idea is: ‘the explanation of a thing must come from
inside and not from outside’. (Ibid., p. 370). ‘Another idea connected with
this, the manifestation of the same principle, that the explanation of
everything comes from inside it, is the modern law of evolution. The whole
meaning of evolution is simply that the nature of a thing is reproduced,
that the effect is nothing but the cause in another form, that all the
potentialities of the effect were present in the cause, that the whole of
creation is but an evolution and not a creation. That is to say, every effect
is a reproduction of a preceding cause, changed only by the
circumstances, and thus it is going on throughout the universe, and we
need not go outside the universe to seek the causes of these changes;
they are within. It is unnecessary to seek for any cause outside.’ (Ibid., p.
371-72). ‘That the explanation of a thing comes from within itself is still
more completely satisfied by Vedanta. The Brahman, the God of the
Vedanta, has nothing outside of Himself; nothing at all. All this indeed is
He: He is in the universe: He is the universe Himself. “Thou art the man,
Thou art the woman, Thou art the young man walking in the pride of
youth, Thou art the old man tottering in his step.” He is here. Him we see
and feel: in Him we live, and move, and have our being.’ (Ibid., p. 374).

Since in the ultimate religious experience Brahman alone is real and

the world unreal or illusory like a dream or unsubstantial, then one can
imagine the uncomfortable place of science and technology! Recall what
Swami Vivekananda wrote to the Hale Sisters (Complete Works of Swami
Vivekananda, vol. 8, p. 166):
 “I never taught
Such queer thought
That all was God — unmeaning talking!
But this I say,
Remember pray,
That God is true, all else is nothing,
This world’s a dream
Though true it seem,
And only truth is He the living!
The real me is none but He,
And never, never matter changing!

The relation between Brahman and the world is not one of pariîáma
(real transformation) as when milk turns into curd, but one of vivarta
(unreal superimposition) as when a rope is mistaken for a non-existent
snake. And all our childish play in the domain of maya will come to naught
when we wake up to the Reality. The food eaten in a dream will not satisfy
us, or will it? As one cannot and should not disapprove of scientific
findings without actual experimentation, so too one cannot and should not
discount religious experience without going through the proper procedure.
If even one person has had religious experience, then science should take
that data into consideration. That one data itself will be the proof of
religious experience being possible for everyone else also. Why is Vedanta
the mother of all religions, the Universal Religion?, because it has given
birth to so many religions. Says Swami Vivekananda about what he learnt
from his Master: “that the religions of the world are not contradictory or
antagonistic. They are but various phases of one eternal religion. That one
eternal religion is applied to different planes of existence, is applied to the
opinions of various minds and various races. There never was my religion
or yours, my national religion or your national religion; there never existed
many religions, there is only the one. One Infinite religion (i.e., Vedanta,
like the Science of sciences) existed all through eternity and will ever
exist, and this religion is expressing itself in various countries in various
ways. Therefore we must respect all religions and we must try to accept
them all as far as we can. Religions manifest themselves not only
according to race and geographical position, but according to individual
powers.” (Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. 4, pp. 180-81).

“Now I will tell you my discovery. All of religion is contained in the

Vedanta, that is, in the three stages of the Vedanta philosophy, the
Dvaita, Vishishtadvaita and Advaita; one comes after the other. These are
the three stages of spiritual growth in man. Each one is necessary. This is
the essential of religion: the Vedanta, applied to the various ethnic
customs and creeds of India, is Hinduism. The first stage, i.e. Dvaita,
applied to the ideas of the ethnic groups of Europe, is Christianity; as
applied to the Semitic groups, Mohammedanism. The Advaita, as applied
in its Yoga-perception form, is Buddhism etc. Now by religion is meant the
Vedanta; the applications must vary according to the different needs,
surroundings, and other circumstances of different nations. You will find
that although the philosophy is the same, the Shaktas, Shaivas, etc. apply
it each to their own special cult and forms.” (Complete Works of Swami
Vivekananda, Vol. 5, pp. 81-82).

That religion has a scientific base is evident from the immensely

scientific and absorbing presentation of it by Swami Vivekananda in those
sublime lines which can constitute a practical in our lives. The name of the
experiment is: “Each soul is potentially divine.” The aim of the experiment
is: “The goal is to manifest this divinity within by controlling nature both
internal and external.” And what is the procedure? “Do this either by work
or worship or psychic control or philosophy, by one or more or all of these
and be free.” This “being free” is the conclusion of the experiment. What
constitute the precautions to be kept in mind in this experimentation?
“Doctrines or dogmas, or rituals or books, or temple or forms, are but
secondary details.” It is in these secondary details that religions are at
loggerheads. Minus that, all religions are paths to realize the divinity
within by controlling nature external through science and technology, and
nature internal by work, worship, psychic control or philosophy, one or
more or all of these. And in the opinion of Swami Vivekananda, he is a
true follower of Sri Ramakrishna who combines in himself all the four
yogas above-mentioned.

Endnotes:
1. From the internet:

In the modern theory, known as the Standard Model there are 12

fundamental matter particle types and their corresponding antiparticles.
The matter particles divide into two classes: quarks and leptons. There
are six particles of each class and six corresponding antiparticles. In
addition, there are gluons, photons, and W and Z bosons, the force carrier
particles that are responsible for strong, electromagnetic, and weak
interactions respectively. These force carriers are also fundamental
particles.

Are Quarks and Leptons Structureless?

All we know is that quarks and leptons are smaller than 10-19
meters in radius. As far as we can tell, they have no internal structure or
even any size. It is possible that future evidence will, once again, show
this understanding to be an illusion and demonstrate that there is
substructure within the particles that we now view as fundamental.

2. From:
http://platetectonics.pwnet.org/story_tectonics/what_theory.htm
A theory is by definition a statement based on a logical group of
observations used to explain a group of observable facts. Newton’s theory
of gravitation is just such an example. However, just
because we have a theory, it does not mean it is the truth.
History is filled with abandoned theories. The fact is that theories
are vulnerable and can be revised or abandoned by new observations.
This is exactly what happened in 1968 when virtually every geologist in
the world was convinced that the continents were fixed in their current
positions. Facts emerged and this belief has given way to the current
theory of plate tectonics.
Theories are built from the bottom up through inductive reasoning
logically classifying thousands of individual bits of evidence and ordering
them into categories of plate types and top-down deductive reasoning
until a hypothesis is fashioned.

3. Quote from Civilization’s Quotations: life’s ideal by Richard Alan

Krieger:
The progress of science is strewn, like an ancient desert trail, with
the bleached skeleton of discarded theories which once seemed to
possess eternal life. — Arthur Koestler