Does Advaita Vedanta allow for dissent within its philosophical paradigm? Advaita Vedanta has a lot of space for debate, but it has no space for violence or non-acceptance of others’ points of view. Through debate, you come to deeper realisations. If you pose a counterview to my view, I would not reject it outright. We will investigate it together. We will have a healthy debate. Vedanta says, explore it within yourself and finally, you will come to realise what the truth of the whole thing is. But are we not told that there is only one truth? Then how can there be room for many points of view? The physicality of truth can be very different, which we call perception. If four people are sitting in a room, they could have different perceptions of the same thing. There are many perceptions of the same reality. People fight over individual perceptions. Yes, there is one reality, but perceptions of that reality by people can be different. The problem arises when I am not ready to accept your perception and say that ‘only my perception is the right perception.’ That’s where we lose it. That’s when humanity gets into the ‘zone of suffering.’According to Indic wisdom traditions, you can have any perception and I respect that. That is one of the reasons why Sanatana Dharma continues to be relevant. You can be a believer of any perception that you feel is right for you. However, don’t impose it on anybody and be respectful of others’ perceptions, too. With that, we can live in a harmonious relationship. That is the foundation of Indic culture. But, we are challenging it and we are suffering because of that. Isn’t it the duty of spiritual masters of various traditions to help people become aware that there are many perceptions of reality, even within their own tradition? In today’s scenario, we need sarva dharma samvad, interfaith dialogues. People from different viewpoints come together and talk to each other. We are also a democratic country. If there is constant interfaith dialogue, it will percolate to the followers of spiritual masters. They will be well-informed, and choose their political leaders wisely. Indic traditional wisdom and knowledge, needs to percolate down to all citizens and not remain the preserve of the elite. If we don’t do it, we are not doing our job properly. We are not evolving as collective humanity. Many people prefer to say that they are spiritual but not religious. In which case, is religion still relevant? Wherever you create organised religion, you will create suffering and war. Organised religion means that someone dictates to the whole group that ‘this is the law,’ and doesn’t allow people to read the dharma for themselves. There are two ways to become wise or illuminated: First, you rely on your self-experience; second, if you are given a certain teaching, you investigate it. You do not take anything for granted. That’s what the Buddha said and Vedanta also says that. Aham Brahmasmi is an experience of Shankaracharya and he is sharing it with you, but don’t believe it until you experience it. Spiritual traditions have always maintained that ‘I teach you something; don’t believe it; go and investigate.’ Spirituality is never about blind faith; it’s about deeper, inner belief. What kind of self experiences can a seeker expect on the path? There is a whole range. You can’t put a number to them; a range of sounds, smells, light and inner expansion or the beyond. Through the five senses, you can experience something and you can also experience that which is beyond the five senses. The nature of experience is not as important as proof of experience. The proof of experience is that you will become softer, more loving and expansive. To me, that is spirituality. This is a way of testing; you could call it self-test mechanics. You experience all the suffering, yet the heart does not contract; it keeps opening. You experience a range of emotions; you become a witness and don’t become a slave of your emotions. -Sonal Srivastava
