Rajaji’s interpretation of classical liberalism

Rajaji and I promote slightly different versions of classical liberalism. The difference is small and subtle. He actually thinks that there is a spiritual harmony that should underpin society, and that such harmony can arise from the Vedanta. I disagree that the idea of spiritual harmony in society is necessary in order for it to work harmoniously. In my view the idea of spiritualism must be kept entirely separate from public policy. It can well form part of one's public life. One can talk about one's faith (or lack of it). But its influence on policy must be entirely avoided.

This extract from Rajaji's book, Hinduism: Doctrine and Way of Life (1959) illustrates this difference in approach.

Now, let me also add that most classical liberal philosophers did hold to a faith in God (of some sort, whether dualistic or non-dualistic). And so, having a faith is not incompatible with classical liberalism. But I would caution us from trying to inject our faith into government policy. That's a point which most classical liberals understand well enough, so it is not generally a problem. FTI's religious freedom policy is an excellent articulation of the classical liberal approach.

Now for Rajaji's views:

(I've broken up his excessively long paragraphs into palatable chunks)

What is felt, however, by large sections is that while regulation is necessary, the economy re­sulting from it should be so designed as not completely to stifle individual liberty and indi­vidual initiative and kill the sense of joy which issues out of the exercise of that liberty and in­itiative. Some have no hope of this reconcili­ation and deny its possibility. But others stoutly maintain that it is quite possible and that there is an economy that can combine the necessary over-all regulation with the basic freedom of the individual.

The question, then, is whether there is any ground for hoping that we can devise and make people accept a culture or an ethic that can ef­fectively operate in this manner. Can we devise and promote a religious faith that will assist large-scale regulation of the life of the individual for the benefit of the community? It may be admitted at once that it is not an easy task, even if it be assumed as possible of achievement, now to found a new religion to serve a particular secular purpose. But Vedanta, for which the writer claims the virtue of ap­propriateness to the new economy, is not a new religion. It figures in the most ancient calendar of faiths, and it is the living faith which guides the lives of three hundred millions of men and women. The common folk living in the greater part of Asia profess religions and moral ideas very closely related in origin to the religion and the moral ideas of India. Although the West has for long accepted Chris­tianity, the faiths that inspired the litera­ture and philosophies of Greece and Rome were faiths that in a large measure absorb­ed and assimilated Vedantic currents from India. An exposition of the basic principles of Vedanta may, in addition to giving adequate information to those who are interested in the religions of the world, secure some attention from important persons concerned in reorder­ing the world in secular matters.

[Note: I do not believe that the Vedanta is necessary for a society to hold on to basic values. A well balanced regulatory regime will increase already existing incentives for values. I hark back to Adam Smith's work, as well as basic repeated game theory for this insight. Sanjeev]

Addendum

Here's an interesting set of books on Rajaji (from Chandra's blog)