Unit 1 Topic 6 of 8
Worldview: what Indian traditions share
Syllabus Worldview
Every psychology rests on answers to questions it rarely asks out loud. What is real? What is a person? How can we know anything? What is a human life for? A modern Western textbook usually answers without saying so: what is real is matter and energy, a person is a body with a brain, and a good life is a healthy, well-adjusted one.
The Indian traditions answered these questions differently, and they also disagreed with one another. This page explains what a worldview is and the themes most Indian traditions share. It then compares the Indian and modern Western pictures, and asks what research says these beliefs actually do to people. The next page, Perspectives on reality, shows how the classical schools disagree about what is ultimately real. Many words on this page, such as dharma and karma, return in every later unit.
What a worldview is
Key concept
worldview
Everyone carries deep assumptions about how things are, usually without noticing them, as a fish does not notice water. These assumptions answer four large questions: What is real? How can we know it? What is a person? What is life for?
Koltko-Rivera (2004) defined a worldview as "a set of assumptions about physical and social reality that may have powerful effects on cognition and behavior". Assumptions are taken for granted, not tested. Effects means that a worldview shapes what people notice, think, feel and do. People learn their worldview from their culture, religion and language, which is why cultural psychologists study it closely.
Closest Indian idea darshana ('view'), and drishti (a view or outlook).
About the definition
The wording comes from the abstract of Koltko-Rivera's article in Review of General Psychology (2004, volume 8, pages 3 to 58), as stored in a research index. A longer phrase often credited to him, about "what is and what ought to be", could not be checked, so this guide does not use it.
Johnson, Hill and Cohen (2011) describe six linked parts of a worldview, each shaped by national and religious culture. Indian philosophy already had words for most of them. The pairing in the table is this guide's teaching aid, not the authors' own.
| Part of a worldview | The question it answers | Indian term for the same question |
|---|---|---|
| Existential beliefs | What is real? | tattvatattvaतत्त्वsay: tuht-tvuhLiterally: that-ness; from tat, thatA tattva is a basic principle of reality, one of the building blocks a school uses to explain the world. Sankhya counts twenty-five of them.Western link Close to an 'ontological category' or a basic element of reality. The difference: Sankhya's list puts the mind among the material principles, not beside them.Full entry in the glossary, a basic principle of reality |
| Ways of knowing | How do we know? | pramanapramanaप्रमाणpramāṇasay: pruh-maa-nuhLiterally: means of right knowledge; measure (pra + mā-, to measure)A pramana is a valid means of knowledge: a reliable way to know that something is true, such as perception or inference.Western link Close to a 'source of knowledge' in epistemology. Indian lists include testimony and, in some schools, yogic perception, which Western science does not count.Full entry in the glossary, a valid means of knowledge, such as perception |
| Values and morals | What is right? | dharmadharmaधर्मsay: dhuhr-muhLiterally: that which holds or supports; from dhṛ-, to holdDharma is the right way of living: duty, ethics, and the order that holds society and the world together. It depends partly on one's role and stage of life.Western link Close to 'ethics', 'duty' or 'moral order'. The difference: dharma joins personal ethics, social roles and cosmic law, and it depends on context.Full entry in the glossary |
| Ultimate goals | What is life for? | mokshamokshaमोक्षmokṣasay: mok-shuhLiterally: release, freedom; from muc-, to freeMoksha means liberation: final freedom from the cycle of rebirth and from suffering. It is the highest of the four aims of life.Western link Close to 'salvation' in religion, or to 'self-transcendence' in transpersonal psychology. The difference: moksha is freedom through knowledge or insight, not a reward from outside.Full entry in the glossary (liberation) and the four aims of life |
| Rules for behaviour | How should I act? | The duties of dharma; the restraints (yamayamaयमsay: yuh-muhLiterally: restraint, controlThe yamas are the five moral restraints that begin the eight limbs of Yoga: non-harming, truthfulness, not stealing, sexual restraint and non-possessiveness.Western link Close to ethical codes, and to self-control in psychology. The difference: the yamas are the first step of a mental training, not a separate set of rules.Full entry in the glossary) of Yoga |
| Language and symbols | How do we say it? | Sanskrit, Pali; sacred sounds such as Om |
Key concept
ontology
The first question, what is real, has a technical name. Ontology is the study of what exists. Is the mind just what the brain does? Is consciousness something basic, like matter? Is there a lasting self, or only a flow of experiences? These are ontological questions. The syllabus phrase "perspectives on reality" means the different ontologies of the Indian schools, which the next page compares.
A psychologist's ontology decides what there is to study. If consciousness is only brain activity, you study the brain and behaviour. If consciousness is a basic reality, careful reports of inner experience count as evidence too.
Closest Indian idea tattva (a principle of reality), and the debates between the darshanas about what is real.
A worldview also decides, quietly, what counts as healthy (Rao and Paranjpe, 2016, contrast a Western ideal of good adjustment with an Indian ideal of equanimity, the steady person the Bhagavad GitaBhagavad Gitaभगवद्गीताBhagavad Gītāsay: bhuh-guh-vuhd gee-taaLiterally: song of the Blessed LordThe Bhagavad Gita is a 700-verse dialogue inside the Mahabharata. Krishna advises the warrior Arjuna, who is in crisis before a battle.Western link Often read as a counselling text: a person in crisis talks with a guide. Unlike most Western therapy, the guide also gives moral and spiritual teaching.Full entry in the glossary calls the sthitaprajnasthitaprajnaस्थितप्रज्ञsthitaprajñasay: sthi-tuh-pruhg-yuhLiterally: one whose wisdom stands firmThe sthitaprajna is the Bhagavad Gita's picture of an ideal person: steady in wisdom, calm in success and failure, free of a narrow ego, and compassionate.Western link Close to Maslow's self-actualising person or to emotional stability. The difference: the ideal is a settled way of being, not continued growth and achievement.Full entry in the glossary), what counts as good evidence (see the scientific-paradigm debate), and what people blame when things go wrong: karma, God, luck or their own effort. The evidence section below shows why that last choice matters.
One tradition or many?
The textbooks themselves warn against speaking of one Indian worldview. Rao and Paranjpe (2016, p. 9) write: "Indian thought is not monolithic." S. K. Kiran Kumar goes further: "There is no single Indian way of thinking. We have great and little traditions; ancient and modern, rural and urban, classical and folk. Each language, caste and region has its special worldview" (2008, p. 21).
The course textbooks also have a slant. Most of their sources are Sanskrit texts by educated elites, mostly Hindu, with Buddhist and Jain material alongside. Islam, Sikhism, Christianity, the religions of AdivasiAdivasiआदिवासीādivāsīsay: aa-di-vaa-seeLiterally: original inhabitantsAdivasi, 'original inhabitants', is a name for India's tribal peoples. Many live in forest and hill regions, with their own languages, religions and ways of life.Compare Close to 'Indigenous peoples' in other countries.Full entry in the glossary (tribal) communities and DalitDalitदलितdalitasay: duh-litLiterally: broken, crushed, oppressedDalit is a name used by and for people from the castes that were once treated as 'untouchable'. Many prefer it to older insulting labels because it names the oppression they faced.Full entry in the glossary thought barely appear. Rao and Paranjpe build their own model on Advaita VedantaAdvaita Vedantaअद्वैत वेदान्तAdvaita Vedāntasay: uhd-vai-tuh vay-daan-tuhLiterally: not-two; non-dualAdvaita Vedanta teaches that the true self (atman) and ultimate reality (Brahman) are one. The feeling of being a separate person comes from ignorance.Western link Often called monism. Advaita writers prefer 'non-dualism': reality is not two, but it is not described as one countable thing either.Full entry in the glossary, the school that holds there is only one reality, and on Yoga, which they call the "foundation base" of Indian psychology. So when a textbook says "the Indian view", ask which school it means. Durganand Sinha added a second warning: "From ancient texts and scriptures to contemporary attitudes and behaviour of Indians is a big leap fraught with dangers of erroneous over-generalizations" (Sinha, 2015, ch. 8). The themes below are shared by many schools in some form. They are not doctrines every school, or every Indian, accepts.
Themes most Indian traditions share
Rao and Paranjpe (2016, section 2.8) put two ideas at the centre: "Both dharma and karma are foundational concepts of the traditional Indian worldview. They permeate the conceptual systems of almost all schools of Indian thought."
Rta: an ordered universe
In the Rig VedaRig Vedaऋग्वेदṚgvedasay: rig-vay-duhLiterally: Veda of verses; ṛc, a verse of praiseThe Rig Veda is the oldest of the four Vedas. It is a collection of 1,028 hymns to gods and powers of nature, arranged in ten books.Full entry in the glossary, rtartaऋतṛtasay: ri-tuhLiterally: what moves in order; truth, orderRta is the Vedic idea of cosmic order: the law that keeps the seasons, the stars and right human conduct in harmony.Western link Close to 'natural law', or to the Greek idea of the cosmos as an ordered whole. The difference: rta joins physical, moral and ritual order in one idea.Full entry in the glossary means two things at once: truth, and an unbreakable order of events in the universe (Rao and Paranjpe, 2016, section 2.2). The sun rises, the seasons turn, and right human conduct belongs to the same order. The universe is "a cosmos and not chaos" (Paranjpe, 2011, p. 417). Rta is close to the scientist's idea of laws of nature, with one difference: it is moral as well as physical, so right conduct is part of the order of things.
Rao and Paranjpe also separate two kinds of truth, satyam and satsat and satyamसत्, सत्यम्sat, satyamsay: suht, suht-yuhmLiterally: sat: being, what truly is; satyam: truthRao and Paranjpe use sat for an absolute truth that can never be shown false, and satyam for what has been found true so far and stays open to revision.Western link Like the difference between a metaphysical certainty and a scientific finding that holds only until it is refuted, as in Popper's idea of falsification.Full entry in the glossary. Satyam is what has been shown true so far and stays open to revision, like a scientific finding. Sat is truth that can never be shown false. Advaita says it is found only in a higher state of consciousness, by realisation rather than by experiment, so science cannot test it. The same word sat, "being", returns in Sat Chit AnandaSat Chit Anandaसच्चिदानन्दsaccidānandasay: suht chit aa-nuhn-duhLiterally: being (sat), consciousness (cit), bliss (ānanda)Sat Chit Ananda means 'being, consciousness, bliss'. Vedanta uses it to describe Brahman and the true self, which is also the source of lasting happiness.Western link Loosely close to eudaimonic wellbeing and to peak experiences in humanistic psychology. The difference: ananda is held to be the nature of the self, not a state that comes and goes.Full entry in the glossary, a description of ultimate reality you will meet on the next page.
Dharma: what holds things together
New Sanskrit word
dharma धर्म
Dharma comes from the root dhr, "to hold, to support". The MahabharataMahabharataमहाभारतMahābhāratasay: muh-haa-bhaa-ruh-tuhLiterally: the great (story of the) BharatasThe Mahabharata is a very long Sanskrit epic about a war between two related royal families. The Bhagavad Gita is one part of it.Western link Often compared with Homer's Iliad. It is much longer, and it contains whole books of moral and philosophical teaching.Full entry in the glossary, the great epic, calls it "that which holds a society together". It covers duty, right, justice, virtue and morality (Rao and Paranjpe, 2016, sections 2.7 and 2.8).
Some duties apply to everyone: Manu's law-book lists ten, including truthfulness, self-control and not stealing. Others depend on a person's social group and stage of life. This second kind, VarnashramaVarnashramaवर्णाश्रमvarṇāśramasay: vuhr-naash-ruh-muhLiterally: class and stage of life (varṇa + āśrama)Varnashrama is the traditional scheme that sets a person's duties by their social group (varna) and their stage of life (ashrama).Western link Close to a mix of social role theory and life-span development theory. The key difference: the duties are set by tradition and seen as part of a cosmic order (dharma).Full entry in the glossary dharma, is the subject of Unit 4. Rao and Paranjpe argue that translating dharma as "religion" is a mistake, because it is lived practice, not a belief system. In Buddhism the Pali form, Dhamma, usually means the Buddha's teaching, and "dhammas" are the basic elements of experience.
Nearest Western idea Close to 'ethics', 'duty' or 'moral order'. The difference: dharma joins personal ethics, social roles and cosmic law, and it depends on context.
For psychology, dharma means behaviour follows rules as well as natural causes, and Rao and Paranjpe argue that psychology should study moral rule-following instead of setting it aside "in the name of value-free science". Research shows how far this sense of duty reaches. Miller, Bersoff and Harwood (1990) found that Indian participants judged a failure to help as morally wrong whether the need was life-threatening, moderate or minor; American participants mostly did so only when a life was at stake. The idea also has a dark history: varnashrama dharma became tied to castecasteLiterally: from Portuguese casta, breed or lineageA caste is a hereditary social group in India. People are born into it and traditionally marry within it. Castes were ranked, and lower-ranked castes faced exclusion and discrimination.Compare Close to social class or to an ethnic group, but caste is fixed at birth, kept by marriage within the group, and was given religious justification. Psychologists study caste prejudice much as they study racial prejudice.Full entry in the glossary privilege and untouchability, which Rao and Paranjpe, and Unit 4, treat critically.
Karma: action and its results
New Sanskrit word
karma कर्म
Karma first means action of body, speech and mind, and in Indian usage it "clearly implies free will" (Rao and Paranjpe, 2016, section 2.6). The doctrine adds a law: every action leaves a trace, a samskarasamskaraसंस्कारsaṃskārasay: suhm-skaa-ruhLiterally: putting together, refining; impressionA samskara is a mental impression left by past experience or action. Samskaras shape later habits, reactions and desires, often without our knowing.Western link Close to a memory trace, a habit or a schema. The difference: samskaras are thought to carry over from past lives as well.Full entry in the glossary, pictured as a seed that bears fruit when conditions are right, in this life or a later one. "The doer of good becomes good," says the Brihadaranyaka UpanishadUpanishadउपनिषद्Upaniṣadsay: u-puh-ni-shuhdLiterally: sitting down near (a teacher); upa + ni + sadThe Upanishads are philosophical texts at the end of the Vedas. They ask what the self is and how it relates to the whole of reality.Western link Sometimes compared to Plato's dialogues, because they teach through questions and conversation. The key difference: their aim is direct experience of the self, not only a sound argument.Full entry in the glossary. No action goes without its result, and no one receives a result they did not earn.
Halbfass (1991) said the law of karma has done three jobs: "(1) a principle of causal explanation (of factual occurrences); (2) a guideline of ethical orientation; (3) the counterpart and stepping-stone of final liberation" (quoted by Paranjpe, 2011, p. 417). It is not fate: the Mahabharata calls effort the field and fortune the seed, and says that in the end effort matters more (Gaur, 2011, p. 410).
Nearest Western idea Close to moral causation, or 'you reap what you sow'. The difference: in most schools karma is an impersonal law that works across lives; theistic schools say God oversees it, but even there it is not a judge's verdict on a single life.
Samsara: birth, death and rebirth
samsarasamsaraसंसारsaṃsārasay: suhm-saa-ruhLiterally: wandering, flowing onSamsara is the cycle of birth, death and rebirth that beings go through, driven by karma. It can also mean worldly life in general.Western link Close to 'reincarnation' or 'transmigration'. Mainstream psychology does not accept rebirth; a few researchers, such as Ian Stevenson, studied reports of past lives.Full entry in the glossary is the cycle of repeated birth and death, and punarjanmapunarjanmaपुनर्जन्मsay: pu-nuhr-juhn-muhLiterally: birth again (punar + janma)Punarjanma means rebirth: the belief that after death a being is born again in a new body, according to its karma.Western link Close to 'reincarnation'. Mainstream psychology treats it as a belief to study, not a fact; it matters for understanding how many Indian clients make sense of life events.Full entry in the glossary means rebirth. Rao and Paranjpe write that the idea "is an integral part of the traditional world view shared by almost all schools of Hindu, Buddhist, and Jain thought with the exception of the materialist followers of Cārvāka" (section 2.6). For most Hindu schools the self is reborn. Buddhism denies a lasting self, so what continues is "the collection of traces of past karma" (section 5.2).
The historian of Indian philosophy Surendranath Dasgupta observed, as Rao and Paranjpe (2016, section 2.6) quote him, that there has "seldom been before or after Buddha any serious attempt to prove or disprove the doctrine of rebirth"; it was taken for granted, as science takes causality for granted. Rao and Paranjpe say the psychiatrist Ian Stevenson's case studies "suggest the possibility" but do not prove it. Mainstream psychology treats rebirth as a belief to study. Psychologically, it stretches a life's time frame: injustice may be corrected, and self-knowledge reached, in the end.
The four aims of life
New Sanskrit word
purushartha पुरुषार्थ
The purusharthas are four aims of life: dharma (right living), arthaarthaअर्थsay: uhr-thuhLiterally: aim, purpose; object, meaning; wealthArtha is the life aim of wealth, work and material security. It is one of the four purusharthas and is a worthy goal when pursued within dharma.Western link Close to economic and security needs, or to work and career in psychology. The difference: artha is a duty and a value, not only a need.Full entry in the glossary (wealth and power), kamakamaकामkāmasay: kaa-muhLiterally: desire, longing, love; from kam-, to desireKama is the life aim of pleasure, love and desire. It is one of the four purusharthas and is accepted as good when it follows dharma.Western link Close to 'desire', 'libido' or 'hedonic pleasure'. The difference: kama is a proper life goal inside a moral order, not a drive to be either freed or repressed.Full entry in the glossary (pleasure and love) and moksha (liberation), linked to the stages of life, the ashramasashramaआश्रमāśramasay: aash-ruh-muhLiterally: place of effort; hermitage; stage of life (from śram-, to strive)An ashrama is a stage of life. Tradition names four: student (brahmacharya), householder (grihastha), forest-dweller in retirement (vanaprastha) and renunciant (sannyasa).Western link Close to life-span stage theories, such as Erikson's eight stages. The difference: the ashramas are moral duties tied to life aims, and they end with spiritual preparation for death.Full entry in the glossary of Unit 4. Rao and Paranjpe call the scheme "more of a prescription of what life should be like, rather than a description", and stress that it "does not imply a kill-joy perspective on life": India produced classic texts on wealth (the Arthashastra) and on love (the Kama Sutrasutraसूत्रsūtrasay: soo-truhLiterally: threadA sutra is a very short sentence that holds a teaching in a few words. Whole texts were written this way so that students could learn them by heart.Western link Close to an aphorism or a numbered list of propositions. Unlike most Western aphorisms, sutras were meant to be read with a long commentary.Full entry in the glossary).
The scholar A. K. Ramanujan noticed that dharma, artha and kama depend on place, time, character and social role, while moksha is release from all relations (Kiran Kumar, 2008, p. 24).
Nearest Western idea Close to models of human needs and goals, such as Maslow's hierarchy. The difference: the aims form a moral framework in which ethics guides the others, not a ladder of needs.
Suffering and the search for release
Indian thought takes suffering as a starting point. The Buddhist word is dukkhadukkhaदुक्खsay: duk-khuhLiterally: uneasy, hard to bear (Sanskrit duḥkha: 'bad space'; opposite of sukha)Dukkha means suffering or unsatisfactoriness. In Buddhism, the first noble truth is that life as usually lived is marked by dukkha.Western link Close to 'suffering', 'distress' or 'dissatisfaction' in psychology. The difference: dukkha includes a quiet unease even in pleasant states, because they do not last.Full entry in the glossary, explained in full on philosophy and psychology. In the Mahabharata, King Yayati finds that his desires grow the more he feeds them, like fire fed with fuel. Rao and Paranjpe (2016, section 2.9) see three features in the Indian approach: it weighs joy and suffering across a whole life, it searches inward at the one who suffers, and it aims to remove suffering at the root. The commentator Vyasa wrote about it like a doctor: the painful passage through life is the disease, the mixing of consciousness with matter is the cause, and learning to tell them apart is the cure.
The end of suffering is mokshamokshaमोक्षmokṣasay: mok-shuhLiterally: release, freedom; from muc-, to freeMoksha means liberation: final freedom from the cycle of rebirth and from suffering. It is the highest of the four aims of life.Western link Close to 'salvation' in religion, or to 'self-transcendence' in transpersonal psychology. The difference: moksha is freedom through knowledge or insight, not a reward from outside.Full entry in the glossary, but the schools describe it differently. For two of the classical schools, NyayaNyayaन्यायNyāyasay: nyaa-yuhLiterally: rule, method, standard; 'that into which a thing goes back' (ni + i-, to go)Nyaya is the Indian school of logic and of the theory of knowledge. It studies how we can know things correctly and how to argue well.Western link Close to logic and epistemology in Western philosophy. The differences: Nyaya also aims at liberation, and its inference always includes an example from experience.Full entry in the glossary and MimamsaMimamsaमीमांसाMīmāṃsāsay: mee-maam-saaLiterally: desire to reflect; inquiryMimamsa is the school that interprets the Vedas, mainly their rules for ritual and duty (dharma). Its founding text is Jaimini's Mimamsa Sutra.Western link Close to hermeneutics, the theory of interpretation, applied to sacred rules. It also resembles legal reasoning about how to read a law.Full entry in the glossary, it is the total absence of suffering. For Advaita it is knowing oneself as one with ultimate reality, which can happen while still alive (jivanmuktijivanmuktiजीवन्मुक्तिjīvanmuktisay: jee-vuhn-muk-tiLiterally: liberation while living (jivan, living; mukti, release)Jivanmukti means being liberated while still alive. Advaita Vedanta holds that a person can reach freedom in this life and go on living and acting in the world.Western link Loosely close to Maslow's description of self-actualising people, or to lasting peace after deep insight. The difference: jivanmukti is defined as freedom from the separate ego, not as the fulfilment of one's potential.Full entry in the glossary). For Sankhya and YogaYogaयोगsay: yo-guhLiterally: joining, yoking; discipline; from yuj-, to yokeYoga is both a school of philosophy and a set of practices that train body, breath and mind. Its classic text is Patanjali's Yoga Sutra.Western link Often compared with mind-body or mindfulness-based interventions. The key difference: classical Yoga is a full ethical and spiritual path, not only a technique for health.Full entry in the glossary it is kaivalyakaivalyaकैवल्यsay: kai-vuhl-yuhLiterally: aloneness, isolation (kevala, alone)Kaivalya is the final goal of Sankhya and Yoga: the 'aloneness' of pure consciousness (purusha), freed from all mixing with mind and matter.Western link No close match. It loosely resembles 'pure awareness' or witness consciousness, but kaivalya is a lasting freedom, not a passing state.Full entry in the glossary, consciousness standing alone. For Jainism it is freedom from karma with infinite knowledge. For Buddhism it is nirvananirvanaनिर्वाणnirvāṇasay: nir-vaa-nuhLiterally: blowing out, extinguishing (nir + vā-, to blow)Nirvana is the goal of Buddhism: the end of craving, hatred and delusion, and so the end of suffering. The word means 'blowing out', as of a flame.Western link Sometimes compared to deep peace or the end of desire. Calling it 'annihilation' is a common Western mistake; Buddhist texts call it the highest happiness.Full entry in the glossary, the "blowing out" of craving. And many devotees in the devotional schools would rather be reborn, to go on loving God.
Consciousness, nature and time
Three more themes complete the picture.
Consciousness at the centre. In Rao and Paranjpe's model, "the person is embodied consciousness". Most Indian schools separate consciousnessconsciousnessLiterally: Latin conscire, to know togetherConsciousness is awareness: the fact that we experience anything at all, such as seeing a colour, feeling pain or knowing that we exist.Indian link chit, purusha or atman (pure consciousness), as distinct from chitta and manas (the mind and its contents).Full entry in the glossary from the mind (manasmanasमनस्say: muh-nuhsLiterally: mind; from man-, to thinkManas is the everyday mind. It receives what the senses bring, links it together, and wavers between options. It is a tool of the self, not the self.Western link Close to 'mind' as a processor of sensory input, or to attention and working memory. The key difference: manas is not conscious by itself; the self gives it awareness.Full entry in the glossary and its partners): the mind is an instrument, and consciousness is what makes it aware. Views still range, in their phrase, "from 'embodied' to 'embrained' consciousness". For Nyaya-VaisheshikaVaisheshikaवैशेषिकVaiśeṣikasay: vai-shay-shi-kuhLiterally: concerned with particulars (viśeṣa)Vaisheshika is the school that sorts everything that exists into basic categories. It taught that physical things are made of tiny atoms.Western link Close to Greek atomism and to Aristotle's list of categories. Unlike Greek atomism, it counts selves and minds as separate substances.Full entry in the glossary consciousness is only a quality of the self, and for the materialists it comes from matter. In most schools, first-person experience counts as real evidence about the mind.
Humans within nature. The UpanishadsUpanishadउपनिषद्Upaniṣadsay: u-puh-ni-shuhdLiterally: sitting down near (a teacher); upa + ni + sadThe Upanishads are philosophical texts at the end of the Vedas. They ask what the self is and how it relates to the whole of reality.Western link Sometimes compared to Plato's dialogues, because they teach through questions and conversation. The key difference: their aim is direct experience of the self, not only a sound argument.Full entry in the glossary describe all creatures as coming from a single Being, and Jain thought says, "Wherever there is life, there is consciousness" (Jain, 2008, p. 55). Rao and Paranjpe call the typical Indian attitude "man-in-nature" rather than "man-over-nature". They also admit: "Indiscriminate mining and deforestation in various parts of India now reflect the same exploitative attitude toward nature as in many other parts of the world." The historian Ramachandra Guha (1989) criticised Western environmentalists for romanticising "Eastern" ecological wisdom.
Time in cycles. The Rig Veda'sRig Vedaऋग्वेदṚgvedasay: rig-vay-duhLiterally: Veda of verses; ṛc, a verse of praiseThe Rig Veda is the oldest of the four Vedas. It is a collection of 1,028 hymns to gods and powers of nature, arranged in ten books.Full entry in the glossary hymn of creation ends in doubt: "perhaps he does not know". Later texts describe repeating ages, the yugasyugaयुगsay: yu-guhLiterally: yoke; age, eraA yuga is a great age of the world. Indian tradition describes four ages that repeat in cycles, with goodness declining from the first to the last.Western link Close to cyclical views of time in ancient Greek thought, unlike the straight-line time of modern history and science. 'Yuga dharma' is close to the idea that norms depend on their historical setting.Full entry in the glossary, within vast periods called kalpaskalpaकल्पsay: kuhl-puhLiterally: an arrangement; a cosmic periodA kalpa is a vast cosmic period, called a 'day of Brahma', made of a thousand cycles of the four ages (yugas). After it the cycle of creation begins again.Western link No close match in psychology. It contrasts with the Western picture of time as an arrow, moving forward toward progress.Full entry in the glossary. Rao and Paranjpe set this against the Western "Time's Arrow" and the belief in "perpetual progress". The economist Kapp (1963) argued that cyclical time discourages people from believing they make their own history. No study was found that tests either claim.
One truth, many views
The Rig VedaRig Vedaऋग्वेदṚgvedasay: rig-vay-duhLiterally: Veda of verses; ṛc, a verse of praiseThe Rig Veda is the oldest of the four Vedas. It is a collection of 1,028 hymns to gods and powers of nature, arranged in ten books.Full entry in the glossary says: "Truth is one, but the wise speak of it in different ways" (1.164.46). Rao and Paranjpe add: "This is not to suggest that intolerance among believers in various faiths has not existed in India, for it has."
New Sanskrit word
anekantavada अनेकान्तवाद
The Jain tradition made pluralism a method. Anekantavada, "the doctrine of many-sidedness", holds that reality has many sides, so any single statement captures only part of it: "Anekant, thus, reconciles seeming differences and conflicting views" (Jain, 2008, p. 56). Nayavada says a judgment is true only from a particular standpoint. syadvadasyadvadaस्याद्वादsyādvādasay: syaad-vaa-duhLiterally: doctrine of 'in some respect' (syāt)Syadvada is the Jain method of adding 'in some respect' to every claim. It shows how a statement can be true from one view and false from another.Western link Close to conditional statements and to many-valued logic. Unlike scepticism, it does not deny knowledge; it asks every claim to state its standpoint.Full entry in the glossary adds the qualifier syat, "in some respect", to every claim, in seven forms, to show that standpoint. For example: in some respect the pot exists (as a clay pot, here and now), and in some respect it does not (as a wooden thing, or somewhere else).
Nearest Western idea Close to perspectivism, the idea that knowledge depends on standpoint. Unlike strong relativism, Jains hold that there is one reality, seen from many sides.
Indian and modern Western worldviews compared
Writers on Indian psychology often set "the Indian worldview" against "the Western worldview". The table gathers their contrasts, with the catch in each.
| Question | Modern Western science, as Indian authors describe it | Indian traditions | The catch |
|---|---|---|---|
| What is ultimately real? | Everything is physical; mainstream psychology has "a strong physicalist bias" (Cornelissen and colleagues, 2014, p. xiii) | Consciousness is basic in AdvaitaAdvaita Vedantaअद्वैत वेदान्तAdvaita Vedāntasay: uhd-vai-tuh vay-daan-tuhLiterally: not-two; non-dualAdvaita Vedanta teaches that the true self (atman) and ultimate reality (Brahman) are one. The feeling of being a separate person comes from ignorance.Western link Often called monism. Advaita writers prefer 'non-dualism': reality is not two, but it is not described as one countable thing either.Full entry in the glossary, Sankhya-Yoga and Jainism | CharvakaCharvakaचार्वाकCārvākasay: chaar-vaa-kuhLiterally: uncertain (one guess is 'sweet-tongued', caru + vac); the other name, Lokayata, means 'directed at the world' (loka + ayata)Charvaka, also called Lokayata, is India's materialist school. It held that only matter is real and that perception is the only sure way of knowing.Western link Close to materialism and empiricism in Western philosophy. Like modern physicalism, it explains the mind as a product of the body.Full entry in the glossary was materialist; Western philosophy has idealists and dualists |
| Mind and body | Descartes' dualism; today, the mind as what the brain does | Consciousness, mind and body, with the mind as go-between; in SankhyaSankhyaसांख्यSāṃkhyasay: saang-khyuhLiterally: enumeration, countingSankhya explains everything with two realities: pure consciousness (purusha) and nature (prakriti). In Sankhya, the mind belongs to nature, not to consciousness.Western link Close to mind-body dualism, as in Descartes. The key difference: Sankhya puts the mind on the material side; only pure consciousness is separate.Full entry in the glossary the mind is material | Sankhya and Jainism are dualist too, just not like Descartes |
| Causes | Physical causes; strict physicalism has no room for intentions | karmakarmaकर्मsay: kuhr-muhLiterally: action, deed; from kṛ-, to doKarma means action, and also the result that every action brings back to the person who did it, in this life or a later one.Western link Close to moral causation, or 'you reap what you sow'. The difference: in most schools karma is an impersonal law that works across lives; theistic schools say God oversees it, but even there it is not a judge's verdict on a single life.Full entry in the glossary: lawful causes that include intentions and moral results | Much psychology does study intentions as causes |
| Time | An arrow; steady progress | Great repeating cycles | Little evidence on how either belief affects people |
| The person | "a bounded, unique, more or less integrated motivational and cognitive universe" (Clifford GeertzClifford Geertzsay: gurtsAmerican anthropologist (1926 to 2006). He argued that the Western idea of the person as a bounded, unique individual is unusual among the world's cultures.Full entry in the glossary, 1974) | Shaped by relationships and context; a true self beyond the ego | Karma makes the individual the unit of merit, a kind of individualism; Spiro (1993) said Geertz overstated |
| Individual and group | The independent self (Markus and Kitayama, 1991) | The interdependent selfinterdependent selfA way of seeing oneself as part of a web of relationships, with family, group and duties at the centre of who one is, rather than a separate set of personal traits.Indian link the self as defined through family, community and dharma, the duties of one's role.Full entry in the glossary: "Hindu experienced self is more structured around we, ours, and us" (J. B. P. Sinha, 1982) | Indian research finds both individualist and collectivist trends (Sinha and Tripathi, 1994) |
| Nature | Something to master (Bacon) | Humans within nature | India today also exploits nature |
| Knowledge | Senses and reason, from outside, in the waking state | Several means of knowledge; higher knowledge in higher states | Charvaka accepted perception only; James and phenomenology are Western exceptions |
| Aim of life | Becoming: growth | Being: liberation | Wealth and pleasure are Indian aims too; the West has its mystics |
Sources for the comparison
Rao and Paranjpe (2016), sections 1.4, 2.1, 2.5, 2.6, 2.10, 2.11 and 4.4.1; Cornelissen, Misra and Varma (2014), p. xiii; Markus and Kitayama (1991), Psychological Review, 98, 224 to 253; Spiro (1993), Ethos, 21, 107 to 153; Kiran Kumar (2008), p. 23.
Read the table with care. The authors themselves admit, "Obviously all this is a simplification and there are exceptions to this pattern" (Cornelissen, Misra and Varma, 2014, p. xiii). "The West" includes Descartes and physicalists, but also idealists, phenomenologists, William James and Christian mystics. "India" includes schools that disagree on almost every row, across castes, regions and religions. And texts are not behaviour: what old books say does not tell us what Indians believe today.
What these beliefs do: the evidence
Worldviews shape what people treat as causes, what they hope for and how they cope. In India the best research concerns how people explain illness and misfortune, often in terms of karmakarmaकर्मsay: kuhr-muhLiterally: action, deed; from kṛ-, to doKarma means action, and also the result that every action brings back to the person who did it, in this life or a later one.Western link Close to moral causation, or 'you reap what you sow'. The difference: in most schools karma is an impersonal law that works across lives; theistic schools say God oversees it, but even there it is not a judge's verdict on a single life.Full entry in the glossary or God's will.
Karma, illness and recovery
Ajit K. DalalAjit K. DalalIndian psychologist at the University of Allahabad who studied health beliefs and folk healing, and wrote a widely used history chapter on psychology in India.Full entry in the glossary and his colleagues at Allahabad studied how patients and accident victims explain what happened to them, a question for attribution theoryattribution theoryAttribution theory studies how people explain the causes of events, such as their own success, an illness or an accident. The explanation they choose affects how they feel and act.Indian link karma, which gives a ready explanation for misfortune that links it to a person's own past actions.Full entry in the glossary.
| Study | Who took part | What the researchers found |
|---|---|---|
| Dalal and Pande (1988) | 41 accident victims, interviewed one and three weeks after the accident | Explanations by karma and God's will were linked with psychological recovery. A sense of personal control was not a good guide to recovery |
| Agrawal and Dalal (1993) | 70 male Hindu patients after a first heart attack | Beliefs in karma, God and a just world went with better recovery. Blaming the illness on God went with poorer recovery and mood a month later; blaming oneself showed the reverse |
| Kohli and Dalal (1998) | 132 rural women treated for cervical cancer | Most explained the illness by fate, God's will or karma. These beliefs had no clear link with recovery |
| Dalal (2000) | A review of five Indian hospital studies | Patients "consistently attributed their illness to karma and God's will", and beliefs shaped treatment choices, but there were "no consistent linkages" with adjustment |
Reading these studies
The samples are small and the designs correlational, so they show links, not causes. Several findings come from published abstracts as stored in a research index, as do the figures given below for White, Norenzayan and Schaller (2019) and White and Willard (2025). The abstract of Dalal and Pande (1988) does not say in which direction karma explanations were linked with recovery, so this guide does not say either.
The pattern is mixed. Karma and God explanations are common among Indian patients and sit comfortably beside medical treatment. Their link with wellbeing is sometimes helpful, sometimes harmful and often absent, because, Dalal (2000) suggests, their meaning shifts with the illness and the setting. What is clear is that karma beliefs are not simply fatalism: they can give an event meaning without stopping a person from acting. Legare and colleagues (2012) likewise found supernatural and natural explanations living side by side in the same people.
Karma, fairness and inequality
Is karma just a belief in a just worldbelief in a just worldThe belief that people generally get what they deserve and deserve what they get. Psychologists study it because it can comfort people and also lead them to blame victims.Indian link karma, which also says no action goes without its result. Research shows the two beliefs overlap but are not the same (White and colleagues, 2019).Full entry in the glossary? In three studies with almost 9,000 people in Canada, India and the United States, White, Norenzayan and Schaller (2019) found that karma belief overlaps with just-world belief and religious practice but is "not reducible to" them, and predicts on its own how people explain misfortune.
Karma can also pull two ways. With about 6,000 people in India, Singapore and the United States, White and Willard (2025) found that karmic thinking went with beliefs that justify existing inequality, yet reminders of karma made people more generous, though only towards people whose need was not their own fault. The first finding echoes an old criticism. B. R. AmbedkarB. R. Ambedkarsay: uhm-bayd-kuhrIndian jurist, economist and social reformer (1891 to 1956), born into a caste treated as 'untouchable'. He chaired the committee that drafted India's Constitution and attacked caste and its religious justifications.Full entry in the glossary listed "the heartless law of karma" among the instruments of torture used against the Untouchables, teaching people born into "lower" castescasteLiterally: from Portuguese casta, breed or lineageA caste is a hereditary social group in India. People are born into it and traditionally marry within it. Castes were ranked, and lower-ranked castes faced exclusion and discrimination.Compare Close to social class or to an ethnic group, but caste is fixed at birth, kept by marriage within the group, and was given religious justification. Psychologists study caste prejudice much as they study racial prejudice.Full entry in the glossary to accept their suffering as deserved. Rao and Paranjpe quote him and call this "the worst application of the Doctrine of Karma" (section 2.7). A fair account teaches karma's comfort and its political use together.
Does karma make people fatalistic?
The sociologist Max Weber, the economist Kapp (1963) and the psychologist David McClelland (1961) claimed that karma, or Hindu values more broadly, made Indians fatalistic or weak in the drive to achieve. fatalismfatalismLiterally: Latin fatum, what has been spoken, fateFatalism is the belief that events are fixed in advance, so human effort cannot change them. It is often wrongly said to follow from belief in karma.Indian link daiva, fortune or destiny formed by past actions. Indian texts usually pair it with effort and say effort matters more.Full entry in the glossary of this kind would mean an external locus of controllocus of controlLiterally: Latin locus, placeLocus of control is how far a person believes that what happens to them depends on their own actions (internal) or on outside forces such as luck or fate (external).Indian link the Mahabharata's discussion of human effort and fortune (daiva), which says that in the end effort matters more.Full entry in the glossary. Durganand Sinha found that the claim "has not yet been conclusively supported by empirical studies", and concluded: "Fatalistic religious beliefs by themselves do not necessarily inhibit commercial and economic growth. The manner and source of interpretation of these beliefs may be far more important" (Sinha, 2015, ch. 8).
Social position matters more than doctrine. Children from disadvantaged castes were more external in their locus of control than high-caste children (Das and Panda, 1971), and underprivileged students credited success to God, luck or a teacher's kindness but blamed themselves for failure (Sinha, 1980). What looks like fatalism may reflect a real lack of control.
Non-attachment, rebirth and the gaps
Pande and Naidu (1992) built a scale of anasaktianasaktiअनासक्तिanāsaktisay: uh-naa-suhk-tiLiterally: non-attachment (an + āsakti, clinging)Anasakti means non-attachment: acting and enjoying life without clinging to things or to results. Indian psychologists study it as a source of calm and happiness.Western link Close to 'non-attachment' in mindfulness research, and to acceptance in acceptance-based therapies. The difference: it is rooted in duty (dharma) and service, not only in managing emotion.Full entry in the glossary, non-attachment, from the Gita's description of the steady person. Under stress, people low in non-attachment reported more distress and poorer health; it was the "most significant predictor of symptoms". Unit 5 returns to it.
Lamba and colleagues (2021) found that among 105 older Hindu pilgrims at the Kumbh Mela, stronger belief in rebirth and more meaning in life went with lower anxiety about death. The study is small and measured everything at once, so it cannot show cause. It fits terror management theoryterror management theoryA theory in social psychology that says people hold on to their cultural worldview partly because it protects them from the fear of death.Indian link belief in rebirth, which one Indian study linked to lower death anxiety in older pilgrims.Full entry in the glossary, which says cultural worldviews protect people from the fear of death.
The gaps are large. No studies were found on belief in mayamayaमायाmāyāsay: maa-yaaLiterally: measuring or creative power; magic, illusionMaya is the power that makes one reality appear as a world of many separate things. It is often translated 'illusion', which is only part of its meaning.Western link Close to the gap between appearance and reality, as in Plato's cave. The difference: the world is not unreal in daily life; it is only not the final truth.Full entry in the glossary, Advaita's idea that the world of many things is an appearance, or in cyclical time. Meditation research tests practices, not beliefs (Unit 5). And there is only one small Indian study of rebirth belief.
Why this matters for a psychologist
- In counselling. A client who says "it was my karma" is offering an explanation, not necessarily giving up. Ask what the belief means to them before judging it, and listen for its darker use: blaming oneself or others, or accepting injustice as deserved.
- In research. Measure beliefs; do not assume them from ancient texts. Separate belief from social position, and remember that a one-time survey cannot show cause.
- In reading the textbooks. When a claim is called "Indian", ask which school it comes from; when "the West" appears, ask whether the picture is fair.
- In the rest of the course. The next page compares what the schools say is real. Unit 2 studies the schools' means of knowledge, Unit 3 the self, Unit 4 the stages and aims of life, and Unit 5 anasakti and the practices that grew from these worldviews.
Try this
Priya, an MSc student in Chennai (an invented example), wants to show that 'karma is just the just-world belief with an Indian name'. She plans one questionnaire that mixes karma items with just-world items, adds them into a single score, and gives it to 200 college students in one city.
What does the research by White, Norenzayan and Schaller (2019) suggest about her claim, why can her design not test it, and how should she redesign the study?
Show the reasoning
White, Norenzayan and Schaller (2019) found that karma belief overlaps with just-world belief and religious practice but is "not reducible to" them, and that it predicts on its own how people explain misfortune. So Priya's starting claim is probably wrong. Her design also cannot test it. Adding both sets of items into one score assumes that they measure one belief, which is exactly the question. The two ideas also differ in content: karma treats intentions and moral worth as causes, works across lives and assumes free will, while the just-world belief is a bias about fairness in this life.
A better design measures karma belief and just-world belief with separate scales, and also measures religious practice and social position, such as caste and income, because Indian research shows that social position shapes how people explain success and failure. She can then ask whether karma belief still predicts how people explain a misfortune once the other measures are taken into account. Sampling from more than one city and religious background would show whether the pattern holds beyond one group. And because a one-time survey shows links, not causes, she should describe her results as associations.