Dear Je,
I watched the four videos on Neo-Vedanta one after another. Until now, I had never thought of Vedanta as being divided into Neo-Vedanta and Old Vedanta. I had always believed that Vedanta was fundamentally a single philosophical tradition. It is only from a historical perspective that one can understand how such a rebirth has taken place within Vedanta.
However, when discussing Vedanta, we generally do not adopt a historical perspective. Vedanta deals with truths that transcend time. Those who study Indian history are, for the most part, leftists. Because of that, they are unable to understand the place of Vedanta. I have not come across any contemporary scholar who has spoken or written about the immense contribution Vedanta has made to Indian history.
Viewed in that light, the difference between the two Vedantic traditions appears to be very significant. Old Vedanta was fundamentally centered on the idea of human liberation (moksha). Its sole aim was spiritual realization. Neo-Vedanta, on the other hand, can be said to have evolved by embracing certain fundamental values such as democracy and human equality, while also engaging in dialogue with modern science.
The new Vedanta has moved forward by abandoning many of the institutional rigidities of the old Vedanta. Through your article, I came to see that the new Vedanta is the philosophical doctrine that has exerted the greatest influence on Indian thought. I had already held that view, and it has now been reaffirmed.
Today, there is virtually no one speaking about Vedanta in Tamil. Those belonging to the old Vedantic tradition merely emphasize devotion and rituals. What is unfortunate, however, is that even those in the Neo-Vedantic tradition have drifted toward an emphasis on devotion, worship, and yoga.
In this context, it is deeply satisfying that you are presenting Neo-Vedanta in its intellectually rigorous form.
Thank you.
Selvamuthukumaran
