Self-Realization in Vedic Psychology and Self-Actualization in Humanistic Psychology

This paper explores the conceptual parallels and divergences between self-realization in Vedic psychology and self-actualization in humanistic psychology, particularly in the works of Abraham Maslow and Carl Rogers. While both frameworks emphasize human growth, transformation, and fulfillment, they differ in their ontological grounding: self-actualization culminates in personal authenticity and creativity within the human plane, whereas self-realization transcends the ego and culminates in the discovery of the true Self (ātman) and its eternal relationship with the Divine. This comparative study highlights the complementarity of the two models, while also showing how Vedic psychology extends beyond the humanistic horizon into metaphysical liberation.

Modern psychology, particularly humanistic psychology, emerged in the mid-20th century as a response to the reductionism of behaviorism and the pessimism of psychoanalysis. Figures like Maslow and Rogers proposed that humans possess an innate drive toward growth, wholeness, and fulfillment, culminating in self-actualization.By contrast, Vedic psychology, grounded in the Upaniṣads, Bhagavad Gītā, and Bhakti traditions, posits that the human being’s essential drive is not merely psychological or biological but spiritual.

The true goal of life is self-realization (ātma-jñāna or mokṣa): the awakening of the soul’s eternal nature beyond the body and mind.

Humanistic Psychology and Self-Actualization

Maslow defined self-actualization as the fulfillment of one’s potential, famously represented at the peak of his hierarchy of needs. Characteristics of self-actualized individuals include creativity, autonomy, acceptance of self and others, and deep appreciation of life. Rogers emphasized the fully functioning person—authentic, open to experience, guided by an inner locus of evaluation, and capable of unconditional positive regard.

Both models affirm the human capacity for growth, integration, and flourishing, highlighting psychological health not merely as absence of pathology but as fulfillment of potential.

Vedic Psychology and Self-Realization

In contrast, Vedic psychology regards the material personality—the body, mind, and ego—as coverings of the true Self (ātman). The Bhagavad Gītā (2.20) describes the eternal self:

na jāyate mriyate vā kadācinnāyaṁ bhūtvā bhavitā vā na bhūyaḥ

ajo nityaḥ śāśvato ’yaṁ purāṇona hanyate hanyamāne śarīre

“The soul is never born, nor does it ever die. It has not come into being, does not come into being, and will not come into being. The soul is unborn, eternal, ever-existing, and primeval. It is not slain when the body is slain.”Footnote 1:

This verse emphasizes that realization of one’s eternal identity (ātma-jñāna) is distinct from psychological fulfillment. Self-realization unveils the transcendental nature of the soul, unlike self-actualization which refines the personality.

In bhakti traditions, self-realization is deepened further as the discovery of the soul’s relationship with the Divine.

The Caitanya-caritāmṛta (Madhya 20.108) declares:

'jīvera svarūpa haya kṛṣṇera nitya dāsa'—'The living entity’s constitutional nature is to be the eternal servant of Kṛṣṇa.'Footnote 2:

Here, realization extends beyond the self as an eternal ātman to recognizing one’s eternal relational identity with the Divine.

Parallels Between Self-Actualization and Self-Realization

1. Growth Orientation: Both models emphasize human potential and the unfolding of higher capacities.

2. Authenticity: Rogers’ ideal of congruence resonates with the Vedic emphasis on satya (truthfulness) and living in accordance with one’s dharma.

3. Peak Experiences: Maslow noted mystical 'peak experiences,' which parallel the bliss of samādhi or devotional ecstasy (bhakti-rasa).

Key Differences

1. Ontological Horizon: Humanistic psychology remains within the psychological and social realm; Vedic psychology transcends into metaphysics and liberation.

2. Ego vs. Ātman: Self-actualization refines and fulfills the personality, whereas self-realization dissolves ego-identification and uncovers the eternal soul.

3. Ultimate Goal: Maslow’s model culminates in creative authenticity; the Vedic model culminates in liberation (mokṣa) or divine love (prema-bhakti).

Integrative Insights

A synthesis of these approaches suggests that humanistic psychology can serve as a preparatory stage for Vedic self-realization. Psychological wholeness (self-actualization) provides stability, maturity, and openness, which can then be directed toward the higher quest of transcending the ego and realizing one’s eternal nature.

While Maslow and Rogers provide profound models for human flourishing within the existential-psychological realm, Vedic psychology extends the vision of growth toward ultimate transcendence. Self-actualization and self-realization are not mutually exclusive but can be seen as stages on a continuum of human and spiritual development: the first brings authenticity to human life, the second reveals eternal truth beyond it.

References

1. Maslow, A. (1968). Toward a Psychology of Being.

2. Rogers, C. (1961). On Becoming a Person.

3. Bhagavad Gītā, 2.20.

4. Prabhupāda, A. C. Bhaktivedanta. (1972). Bhagavad-gītā As It Is.

5. Caitanya-caritāmṛta, Madhya 20.108.

6. Sharma, A. (2001). Classical Hindu Thought: An Introduction.

7. Cornelissen, R. (2006). Indian Psychology and the Concept of Self.

Jambavati