Upanishadic Neti Neti And Hegelian Dialectic

Upanishadic neti, neti, not this, not that, and Hegel's dialectic, while distinct, share a common thread: the use of negation and movement to arrive at a deeper understanding of reality. Though Hegel's dialectic focuses on developing concepts through thesis, antithesis, and synthesis, neti, neti is a process that enables an inquirer to arrive at the ineffable nature of Brahmn, Ultimate Reality .
Hegel's dialectic is a method of philosophical inquiry positing that reality progresses through a dynamic interplay of opposing forces: a thesis, a proposition or idea; its antithesis, a counterproposition; synthesis, a new proposition that reconciles the two. Brihadaranyaka Upanishad employs neti, neti to describe the nature of Brahmn, the ultimate reality. While there are dissimilarities between Hegelian dialectic and Upanishadic neti, neti, both systems are unanimous on one count: rejection of absolutist ideas.
Nothing can be called the ultimate truth because even the so-called truth is never the universal truth – neti, neti. What perpetually eludes us is the Ultimate Truth. According to Nyaya Shastra, there are only subjective truths and relative realities.
Spiritual quest must never stop. It should go on and on. “Tujhe paa lene mein woh betaab kaifiyat kahan/ Zindagi woh hai jo teri justajoo mein kat gayee.” In other words, it's always better to travel than to arrive. Hegel believed that to negate is a man's intellectual fate. Both Hegel and Upanishads must be understood and appreciated in today's context of obstinacy, to use Foucault's phrase, when every religion insists that it's the only chosen path and every belief system calls itself the best and flawless.
Both Hegel and Upanishads believe in transcendence of ideas and existing truths. Marcel Proust believed there was no end to spiralling ascendancy of quality. It's like perfection. You can only strive for it, but you can never become perfect. One, therefore, needs to keep improving and evolving till the last breath. To be an absolutist is to close all doors to Truth. Religions and their moral codes are periodic and relative truths. What appears to be absolute today may turn out to be dubious tomorrow. So, when we insist that what we know is the absolute truth, it blocks further inquiry and exploration into the nature of reality and different ways people experience Ultimate Reality.
As veils lift, more profound mysteries, echoing ongoing nature of spiritual and intellectual exploration, are revealed to those who continue to inquire. As we peel away layers of ignorance or illusion, we will find that there are always more layers to uncover, and that journey of understanding and knowledge is an ongoing process. Hegelian dialectics and Upanishadic wisdom emphasise that true understanding is not a destination but a continuous journey. Once we understand Hegelian dialectic and imbibe the spirit of Upanishads, we can expand the scope of our knowledge and understanding. It'll also mellow us, inculcate universal empathy and enhance our ability to engage in dialogue. For some, it may facilitate satori.
“That there could be an eternally elusive Truth forever beyond my grasp has humbled and spiritualised me,” Shams-e-Tabriz said once upon a time.

Authored by: Sumit Paul