Indian Philosphy by Brahmasrii Dr K C Varadachari -16

Indian Philosphy
Brahmasrii Dr K C  Varadachari

Why should we know ourselves? This question seems to be on the lips of almost every present day young man. There was a time when it was thought that the duty that every man owed to himself in life was to know oneself. The Delphic Oracle spoke but a platitude of ancient times. Today however it has became important to raise this question again. We wish to know the world, the universe both in its physical aspect and in its social nature so that we may be able to live more efficiently and happily. Indeed we wish to extend the frontiers of our knowledge so that we may be able to master the universe. The hope of science is verily the unlimited extension of human knowledge and also the unlimited extension of one's duration in the world. Physical immortality is a goal that has been most attractive if not fascinating prospect. Kayakalpa of yore achieved both by means of rasayana and yoga seems  
to have had a short term but man has not ceased to entertain the dream. In Europe the three-score and ten, and in India satamanam or hundred years have been exceeded by certain peoples who had the good fortune of living well till one hundred and fifty. The knowledge of oneself thus has been not quite the problem - rather it is problem of living well during the period of living whatever may be the duration.
Thus the perspective of the modern man has changed. What with the invasion of the technological age that promises the millennium of happiness in all its four parts the very pattern of individual and social and political life has been changing. Nothing of the past seems to be adequate to this new pattern. Call it the phase of Kali or the phase of the lower mind or call it the birth of the integral mind, the break up of the mind of man has been rather continuous and speedy.
It must be asked then how man will be under the challenge of knowing himself. The need is, as I have said, to live somehow and hope for a better world adjusted by the wisdom of the human head and heart. Not until this fails - and it need not for failure is not

inevitable - will man be able to seek a meaning for himself. The meaninglessness of life as he finds it, lives in it, and grows in it if he can, alone will make the discovery of oneself imperative.
Many men – including scientists – have been arguing against the threat of the atom-bomb and such other inventions. Some have seen in this new threat an opportunity for religious values. But it is somewhat naïve and indeed it is a return to a kind of response that was tried previously – religion can be an atavistic response especially when it is not capable of revealing the purpose of human existence.
Today we have turned our backs on the ancient goal of liberation from the human bodily existence and the society in which we grew. Liberation today is the liberty to have access to abundant life. Indeed very much early even it was well known that the goal of life is meaningless to mankind unless it can promise an abundant life here and now and God's Kingdom of happiness without sorrow is capable of being realised here. The appeal of most modern religions is to this aspect of life and today more than ever even the claim

for revival of religious attitude is in respect of such a realisation of abundant life for all. This aspect may be considered to be the contribution of west to religion. Whilst mysticism may be considered to be the worship of the Transcendent and the longing for the perfect and eternal life the characteristic trait of religion seems in the main to be the longing to brine down that eternal quality or as much of it to play in the lives of men here and promote concord, happiness even of the physical level, harmony and a sense of humanity and rationality. This description is of course rather general but some or the western scholars are prone to say that religion is not the characteristic of the East whilst mysticism is its character. It is clear then that religion must be this worldly whereas mysticism is other worldly. Religion seeks liberation in and of this world whereas mysticism seeks liberation from this world.
This neat kind of distinction between religion and mysticism is not acceptable to India. The tendencies of both are available even here, the spirit of St Thomas

Aquinas as seen in his prayer1 is about as constant the nature or the Indian bhakta or devotee. However the emphasis on the bringing down the Kingdom of God on earth as it is in Heaven is a call for transformation of earth consciousness itself and the attempt of some modern religions to fashion and shape and idealise that as the goal of man (parama -purusartha) is much more ambitious than the love of God for the sake of going beyond to our eternal condition or realizing our true self or merging ourselves in the vast Eternal Being beyond all change and flux and time and space.
1 St Thomas Aquinas's prayer (quoted from St Thomas Aquinas: Gerald Venn p.62) "O God, in whom is every consolation, who discern in us nothing that is not your gift, grant me when the term of this life is reached the knowledge of the first truth, the love of the highest Good. Give my body, most generous giver of rewards, the beauty of clarity, the swiftness of agility, the aptness of subtlety, the strength of impassability; Add to these the affluence of riches, the influence of delights, the confluence of good things; that so I may rejoice, above in your consolations; below in the pleasantness of the place, within in the glory of soul and body; about me in the delightful company of angels and of men. With you most merciful father may my mind discover the illumination of wisdom, my efforts, the praise of triumph, there where, with you is the escaping of all dangers, the distinction of mansions, the concord of wills, where reigns the amenity of spring, the lucidity of summer, the richness of autumn, the quiet silence of winter, grant me God life without death, and joy without sorrow, there where reign supreme freedom, true security, secure tranquility, joyful bliss, blissful eternity, eternal beatitude, the vision, and the praising of truth, yourself, AMEN.

Despite the scientific veneer of modern man, he is essentially living in an anthropo-centric world, man-centered rather than God-centered life. The man-centered world of humanism has a tendency to refute the important things, that we can realise anything and indeed we can plan our lives ourselves and do not need to have the faith, the belief or even the help of the highest spiritual force, namely God. If ancient sacrificial mysticism finally sacrificed God and made results come out of sacrifice itself without reference to gods or God, modern scientific mysticism is a revival of the same atheistic (or even euphemistically called agnostic) attitude that dispenses with the spiritual life of man, his God and all that it entails.
We have always had in history the two ways of approach the theistic or God-centered or whole-centered (Purnanubhava) science, economics, ethics, yoga, and liberation, and attainment and the atheistic or man-centered, part-centered, science, economics, ethics, yoga and liberation and attainment or perfection. The latter is apakva, imperfect and never perfectible. The process of history has been a periodically dialectical swing from one extreme to the other. And a

third path has always been open to those who saw beyond the God-centered world that mediated between the transcendent Reality and the man-centered world of Nature. The discovery of the self has oscillated between finding it in nature as part thereof, or as part of God and in either case it meant a partial realization. The whole truth about the self is incapable of being grasped as long as there is rightly or wrongly a dissatisfaction about either of the above solutions. There is a transcendent sense of self-existence that remains dissatisfied. This dissatisfaction is born not out of any cussedness or even the feeling that man is more than man, but out of the realisation that in nature and in society, in earth centered consciousness there is hardly to be had the sense of existence or being or living. This arises even when the theistic temper is on. Indeed the realisation of God enforces the transcendence of the human and his social and natural world. That is why to know oneself one has to know God and only when God is known as transcendent to and not merely immanently the world and men, is there the real possibility of a liberated existence. Pragmatic approaches or political idealisms not withstanding the high peak of Vedic

thought has a far-vision whereas the modern astronomical temper too is surfeit with near-vision.
The Vedic seers saw clearly that we have to transcend the human and the natural and perceive both human and nature from the standpoint of the Divine. The concept of God in tantra reveals this dynamic sacramentalism revealed in the poises of the Divine as Being and the Divine as Power or Creativity or Mother. That it was later expanded to cover the meaning of the extraordinary multiplicity of posers and creations and statuses or gods and goddesses reveals how the One may be considered to appear as the many not fictitiously but really and truly, not for deceit and ignorance but for revelation and expression and redemption. The Pancaratra Agama is unique in this respect in so for as it introduces a concept of supreme import and this concept entails the realization of the five-fold status of God - four in his descent (avatar) and one in his transcendence, towards which all souls are being led through these descents and by these descents.

It is the realization that the one Godhead is indeed from which all other godheads arise - to which Sri Krsna refers significantly /yad yad vibhuti mat sarvam Srimadurjitam eva va / tad tad evavagaccha-tvam mama tejomsa sambhavah // X.41. and says also that all this by one part of Himself – eka amsena - is established.
The Divine Godhead as transcendent is the goal of man; and the realisation of that Divine Godhead in His descents as the Creator, sustainer, withdrawer, redeemer ruler of all, as Samkarsana, Pradyumna, and Aniruddha, as the historical descents within and among men and the world – known much more as avatars in general usage (rudhi), whose last full descent is said to be Sri Krsna (though others include Buddha) and in the heart and in the icon (arca), is the pathway or how the Divine who is transcendent stoops to lead the humble seeker after the nisseyas. The arca, harda (antaryamin), vibhava (avatar) and vyuha (cosmic lord) form thus the leaders of man whom man can worship and serve and know. It is these four forms that act as the Vedic Agni to take us to the Visnu, the parama, and the Purusottama, beyond the ksara and the Aksara.

There is the worship of the temple icon which is the perceptible outer object whose presence and awakening within the heart posits the second descent - this is what is described as the realization of the Kingdom of God within, and capable of being so established in the hearts of all. Yogis realize God within themselves in their hearts, as the Inner Ruler Immortal. The realisation of God as Avatar or historical personality with a divine mission to establish righteousness everywhere is much more difficult. Indeed it is only the Grace of God that makes the yogis perceive him as the Divine personality - Indeed Sri Krsna says that ignorant men treat him as just a man not knowing his divine nature - whose birth and activity are divine - janma karma ca me divyam. A Prahlada knew Vamana as an avatar, a Hanuman recognized Rama, Vidura knew Sri Krsna to be the Godhead - apart from the Rishis and Gods.
To serve Him in the world is indeed a glorious service and leads to the realisation of the Cosmic Deities of the three spheres of Bhur Bhuvah and Svar, and the great trinity spoken of in the Agamas. Above it one comes across that mysterious power called the

Mother who throughout has been present as the protecting angel of the soul that had surrendered, and she is the Godhead who takes us across to the ultimate Realisation of the Transcendent – tamasah parastat, tad visnor paramam padam –the Brahma nirvana. This vision includes all that science may seek, religion aspire for and mysticism embrace. Surrender is the path, the method, and indeed ends in that unitive experience with God in all His fivefold nature, integrally. Sri Krsna taught this yoga in Pancaratra, and it is clear that the echoes of this doctrine are found in sections in all religions. We out to be satisfied with nothing less that the ultimate that is the Indian way, the integral way, the only way – nanyah pantha ayanaya vidyate.

What is the exact thing which man seeks and when will his seeking come to an end? This has been one of the major problems. When he seeks to find satisfaction or happiness in things of the world, he finds that such satisfactions have a transient nature and further that they do not satisfy one completely. They seem to lead one on to others than themselves. Material things, life and even rationality or mind of imagination do not seem to be completely satisfactory for they bear within themselves the possibility of their annulment. As the great logicians remarked all things seem to be riddled with contradiction or should we say be devilled by their own opposites. That is why it was seen that the Real permanent is not to be had in the world of matter or motion or life or mind. All things are carrying within themselves their certificates of death and disintegration, in whatever way those two may  
manifest themselves. To dismiss this as logical sophistication and assure ourselves that whether permanent or transient life must be for enjoyment or happiness is of course one way of escaping from the contemplation of the future. Opportunism has a great attraction to human minds, even though the best is sure to come to an end and the worst may take its place. The dialectical or polar tension is a fact that life and reason demonstrate.
Thus man’s yearning for that which can satisfy or help fulfilment is eternal. This yearning for that which can fulfil is usually called the quest for perfection but then this perfection is thought of as of the order of pattern of life or of mind or of man. Wherein lies man’s perfection or that which more truly can be spoken of as the principle which makes one feel completely satisfied and for ever this is the question.
It is said that if one knows oneself that is the perfection. Self-realisation is said to be an all-solvent of the problem eternal unrest. This self-realisation is sought for introspectively in meditation or dhyana or Samadhi. It leads one on to something that transcends  
all thought and truth and even one's personality or ego. Some others take self realization to be the realization of the rational self which is in so far as it is rational, a universal self, or common self of all on the plane of reason. Some others take it to be self – realization in the community of human beings and institutions. Thus family, religions sects, or church or state is that which in objective reality forms the basic means for self-realization. One finds that the self thus socialised or communitised or statised even when such socialisation or communitisation or statisation is based on so called rational principles bedevils the whole process in the dialectical see-saw and precariously imperils the self that seeks its realisation, for every realization is followed by de-realization.
Man’s self is not complete within itself so long as the self that knows and hugs to is made to be what it is, a social term or ego. No other ego however eminent can fully complete the search for the soul that is in unrest.
It is true that man is insufficient in himself, and feels himself to be insufficient in the world of matter and   
life and mind and in society. What then is the quest for It is a quest for that principle of completion or that which can complete the soul when it becomes attained. Who will remove this basic insufficiency in the individual? The very nisus at the heart of every individual is the need to attain sufficiency. This is the power behind the religious quest. It may be diverted to goals such as truth, consciousness or power or other men and things or beauty even and goodness, but the measures of their being the principle of sufficiency or completion are determined by their ability and capacity to do so.
The object of all religious endeavour or its ultimate endeavour is that principle that helps completion of oneself. That is it is that which fills a person completely occupying him in all his parts and grants a harmony of being which no other principle or principles or a whole collection of them can fill. Thus the ultimate object of human quest and one may perhaps add of all that exists is the full or Purna; it does not imply that one knows or can know whether and how it is full in itself, but that it fills to the very brim every soul that aspires. In this sense then does the Veda use the  
name Purna to the Ultimate Deity: Purnam adah Purnam idam, where He is or God is that in full or becomes full. Therefore we have to recognise that the object of religious quest is that filling principle to the brim of being and thus quenches all search for anything else. This is the meaning of self-realization which is only to be had in the Godhead and not in one's own fragmentary or partial being or amsa. We have to find our amsi or that which completes and restores to wholeness our being.
Such a principle of Fullness or Purna as God is very satisfying as granting an explanation to the search interminable in the world of life and matter and mind and society and transcendence.
Having thus defined the call of religious quest as the call to discover that which can complete one's being and all wholly, it is our next business to consider whether the objects of religion offered to us by religions are such principles. Following the same method adopted earlier it can be shown that the representations of God for human worship and satisfaction are incapable of granting total satisfaction.  
There are persons who would represent the Godhead in or by some symbolic object. Trees and animals and utensils of natural phenomena are worshipped as God. Though each one of them had perhaps saved or protected for a while from disaster or from some calamity there developed superstitions which have proved such religion to be inadequate to the reason and deeper intuitions. Nor have painting and idols as representative signs of numinous objects inclusive of wonder and awe helped to satisfy the human yearning for completion. An ancient maxim that men become what they worship has proved such inadequate objects to be not only the grave of all progress and attainment but led to deteriorating effects and regress.
Religious object by some has been stated to be the inner principle of man. The kingdom of God is said to be within. God is said to be installed in the hearts of all creatures. To discover him and live by is light and grace is said to be religion. It is clear that it does not provide for the problem of completeness – attainment as the Self to be know as also the Universal Self but  
also precariously solipsistic and dependent on the life of the body. The antaryami worship is very valuable and is the basic form for both ethics and religion, as the centre of conscience and inner voice. But the life of the body entails the concept of transcendence of the antaryamin in and through and inclusive of it.
The Religious Object is claimed to be the prophet, messiah, avatar or some leader who by his services to mankind has got apotheosized or lifted up to the status of the Godhead. Such men too however eminent proved unsatisfactory to the religious consciousness which got a temporary satisfaction but had to revise its notion of Godhead when such persons passed off leaving their footprints on the sands of time. Their immortality is a posthumous immortality, an immortality in the memory of a people or a nation or a cult.
Nor is the worship of the Gods or God who had made the creation as a whole and who runs the cosmic show sufficient and satisfying as it depends on the cosmic process. There is a beyond creation. Thus the concept of a Creator-sustainer, Redeemer God does  
not satisfy the inmost demand for an Ultimate God whose Being is greater than all the four forms that we have enumerated.
Therefore that the Ultimate Transcendent beyond all our conceptions and processes is the one all-satisfying principle, all filling principle or Person is known.
Hindu Spiritual thought has through all ways of knowing arrived at this Ultimate Being, beyond all perception, beyond all reasoning, beyond all minding and knowing and even intuiting - na caksur gacchati, na vag gacchati, na mano, na vidmo na vijanimo etad anusisyat - says the Kenopanisad.
The Ultimate supports and elevates the lower forms of conception of its existence or lower statuses of its own dynamic formulation to the mind of the souls.
Thus it gives a comprehensive formulation of Deity and man's ascent from the lowest to the Highest by sublimation and transformation of the lower to the integral Nature of the Ultimate.  
Hinduism does not reject the lower for it answers to some fact of reality of the All existence. It in and through the lives of the souls threads them together as the One that appears as all these manifold forms and names and all.
Thus the One truth or Reality that embraces all is the Highest formulation of the Integral Hinduism.
The most interesting analysis of the ways of knowing reality and at once the most simple is given by those who uphold the four ways of knowing: the perceptual, inferential, analogical or correspondential, and the revelational. There are others who hold that there are the rememberential (smrti), traditional (itihasa), historical (puranagama) which could not be brought under the former classifications, since these depend upon the person knowing himself but on others and in that sense some would like to make revelational knowledge not personal but received from some one else. But we can surely have a direct institution ourselves and that experience may have none of the characteristics that we have associated with other ways of knowing with regard to the scriptural knowledge. Medicating on the scriptural revelation (Veda as such) one lights on an experience which is unique, self-
revealing and spiritual and it is not to be identified with the remembered traditions or even historical facts. This could be known only in personal spiritual experience – it in that sense almost appears to be a direct revelation of meaning even as the object is the direct appearance to the senses or the mind in perception, or the direct awareness of the vyapti in anumana or the direct awareness in upamana or the similarities in the objects, present or non-present or present and non-present.
Having regard then to the quality of our present experiences we can classify our knowing into two broad divisions: one for self (svartha) and another for others (parartha). This classification is accepted in Indian Logic only with regard to inference. The svarthanumana is inference for oneself which may or may not need all the five premises or proposition (pratijna), reason (hetu), example (udaharana) generalization (dristanta) upanaya (application) and conclusion (nigamana) which are needed for pararthanumana (inference for others). Experience and demonstration of that experience are two different things. But a complete knowing process would involve not only that we know but that we would communicate the same knowledge to others. Else

knowledge would be incommunicable utterly. This proposition unfortunately is widely held, though it is specially said to be true of perception and revelation. Logicians do believe in demonstrating their conclusions by means of proofs, even as poets believe in vividly portraying the uncommon similarities and indeed the greatest poet is defined (perhaps not at all quite happily) as one who is the master of a million similes, conceits and so on.
Thus just as there is a svarthanumana, there is a svarthupamana which is a direct awareness of similars between any two objects or experiences, and the logician and poet do know this: even as they have to prove and illustrate their experiences of uniformities or invariable concomitances, and similarities in their creations. A poet shares his knowledge of the upamiti (correspondential knowledge) with his audience.
It is no doubt true that this is not so easily perceived in the case of pratyaksha and sabda. It however cannot be said that perceptive knowledge is incommunicable or uniformulatable in terms of language: what is incommunicable or uniformulatable in

each case is the affective state which may vary from mere prehensive activity, pleasant or mildly present or unpleasant, to one of intense emotion pleasant or unpleasant. Knowledge is always definite or capable or being fully described: which may vary from mere predication which involves the processes of recognition and comparison of qualities and generals or universals and actions and relative non-existence or existence in space and time to the representation of the form of the object seen in either language or gesture or more properly in pictures or pictographs which is the beginning of plastic arts and paintings. The latter form is surely as valid as the language or logical propositions. The aesthetic communication is said to be an art-product: but knowledge it is that is really being communicated by one who wants a demonstration of it. Knowledge is known only by its being represented. Thus pratyaksa-knowledge is communicable through arts and is for others (parartha-pratyaksa): Whether it is properly done or not is a matter for the tests of truth. There is a manner of real experience which eludes the sense-organs which the art-craft reveals but mere sense experience is communicable and verifiable

through pictographs or drawing or representation in some form. This is not to annual the distinction annul the distinction between art and science, doing and knowing, though no such absolute distinction could be made between the two. Sometimes the only test of knowing is doing; demonstrating that one knows is a part of the test. Whether we call this verification or proof of perceptual knowledge is certainly not identical with inference: the test is not coherence as such or correspondence as such, but a formulation or representation which corresponds with the original object as perceived by another (or others) who is called upon to share the knowledge. It is because verbal formulation is symbolic representation where the symbols have to be fully grasped by the person to whom one seeks to communicate the perceptual knowledge of the object, that it becomes difficult to find a common language so to speak. Where this is found as in the masters of language or communication and in his audience or listeners who are fully equipped with the delicate uses of words (sophisticated so to speak), the perceptual knowledge is capable of being communicated with extraordinary fidelity. Literary artists

and poets are admired precisely for their ‘fidelity to nature’. We call that word-painting.
Thus it is clear that though men are aware of this distinction between svartha and parartha it is only the parartha that is socially valuable and in a truer sense a test of perfect knowing. Musical critics who cannot sing or songsters who cannot sing or execute their inexpressible songs are species of non-knowers-arrested knowers-arrested half way to knowledge of their subjects. So also painters who cannot paint or artists who are just art-critics and nothing more are of this category.
A poet combines the genius of the artist with the vision of the reality which he sees much more than the ordinary seer or observer. He observes more than the ordinary man, who sees the peculiar identities which are not within the province of the ordinary logician or scientist, though it would be profoundly good for the latter to accustom themselves to see the unities and identities of a different order, and the correspondential which is possible to a trained imagination. The true poet is the poet of truth not merely of imagination, for

imagination is precisely a way of knowing reality beyond the presented or rather behind the presented. It is wrong type of sophistication which insists upon the poet being as far from reality as possible, without knowing or even imagining that the reality to which the poet shall conform or is obliged to conform is more truly true of reality or reveals a fuller articulation of that Reality or reveals greater dimension or larger number of dimensions than presented in the human tri-dimensional or bi-dimensional reality of the pratyaksa, and four dimensional anumana (inference).
There is therefore the well-attested experience of poets which is appealing and satisfying and even amazingly inspiring in contrast with which the logical intellect appears barren, unsatisfying and certainly not appealing. It is not by adding emotion that we get the quality of the poet but by a more conspicuous totality of understanding – the intellectual liberation from the presented and the uniform necessary connections, it is indeed an entrance into novelty that the Upamana-consciousness-knowing or upamiti grants. But greater than the poetic intuition is the Divine revelatory knowledge that comes to one as the bodying forth or

the deliverance of the Truth itself into the consciousness; it is a liberating effect that one gets through all one’s being. Perception gives us a liberation of a kind, anumana liberation of a different kind, upamiti already a participation in the spiritual unity and identity of all; but it is Sabda, the voice and meaning and even spiritual perception or presentation of the Reality in its wholeness that is altogether surpassing in its comprehension to the lower ways of knowing that gives us the truth. It is thus Truth that ultimately triumphs: it is this truth that also leads to the wide luminous expanses of the Reality (Satyam Brihat, Rtam Brihat). It is that which makes wide the pathways of Reality. This divya anubhava is over-whelming. This anubhava makes many pause and chew the cud of bliss: and some indeed become so thoroughly inspired and God-mad that its inexpressibility is taken for granted. At least the inexpressible is known to the inexpressible in logical forms, or in forms of correspondences and sculptural and painting and representational art.
Man yearns for expression and the expression lags behind the reality. Reality is more than man’s comprehension and knowledge of the dimensions of

being. Yet the Sabda claims to intimate the Reality and asserts that one who knows the Brahman becomes Brahman. Mystic experience is of several ranges and in each it finds the Brahmic experience verified and enjoyed-known and entered into. The only manner by which the Sabda can be an intimation and communication or the Transcendent Brahman or Reality is through the Veda-seen and entered into by Rishis, the mantra-drastas. This is also the meaning of the famous sutra of Badarayana: Sastra-yoni-tvat: The Veda is the parartha-Sabda, the inner Veda – adhyatma yoga finds in the transcendental experience of Unity with Brahman in whom one loses oneself utterly where in the mind reaching returns not, nor eyes nor any sense organ or what is expressed in another sense whom the mind nor eye nor speech reaches or return baffled and dazzled. The Yogis reach it in their turya or fourth state or Samadhi, the Rishis in their sublimest devotion and enjoy the supremest ecstasy, an overflowing knowledge in its utter liberation from all limitations which the lower ways of knowing like perception, inference and poetic fancy impose on the ultimate knowledge. It is they in their claim to speak the

truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth have given to mankind (out of their kindness so many say) Vedas in order to demonstrate the existence of the dream of the poets, (a dream which is perhaps far short of the Reality rather than the overworked imagination of the dreaming poet) confirming in truth the adage that truth is stranger in fiction as seen in the criminal stories from real life.
Thus we should conceive of the four ways of knowing to have both the subjective or personal (or for oneself, svartha) and the demonstrative and objective (or for others, parartha). This will entail certain consequences. To emphasize any one of them at the expense of the other is to miss the whole meaning of the process of knowing.

Our present owes its roots to scientific developments that have been taking place at an enormous rate during the past two centuries. Above all this in an age of electricity – whose discovery synchronized with the discovery of the planet Uranus by Herschel. It synchronized also with the first revolution in Modern Times of an ideology, however unplanned or unsatisfactory, “The French Revolution that started with the slogans of Liberty, Equality and Fraternity”. Thus three events transpired together, the scientific, the astronomical and the social or statal; and if astrology be believed, this coincidence may be due to the new or novel action of the powers of Uranus on this planet and on the lives of men and nations. Uranus is the planet of revolution, electricity, invention and genius. It is the planet of unity and rebirth and Order (Rta) Cosmic and Divine. For Uranus is Varuna. His bipolar activity –  
one on the adhyatmika side and the other on the adhibhautika side, - yokes the present age to the Evolutionary theory. We may see in the lives of the most brilliant discoverers and inventive geniuses that this planet Uranus is somewhere very dominant in their horoscopes. Mystics as a rule have this planet dominating their lives1. Equally when Neptune was discovered there happened a clear indication that forces of a superterrestrial nature were released on this planet to quicken the evolution of men even to the destiny of the goods. Aerial inventions and aerial navigation became almost a rule, and by the same token on the astral side and adhyatmic side, we have a deepening sense of mystery of the Unconscious Unity in all, the cosmic memory, as Jung would say, becoming a factor in the lives and thoughts of men. It is again no queer incident in the history of the human race that large spiritual societies guided by masters of wisdom, and godmen like Sri Ramakrishna and others were born in India and elsewhere to key up the pace of the transformation of man in two-fold directions, such
1 Dr. Besant, J. Krishnamurthy, Sri Aurobindo, Swami Vivekananda, etc. cf. Alan Leo’s Hundred Horoscopes.

as ‘technical transformation’ of our material environment or rather efficient material and scientific life on the one hand and an efficient and large spiritual unfolding on the other side. The great interest in the psychological and psycho-analytical sciences in modern times has indeed played a supreme part and men no longer go by the outer symptoms of disease or personality but by the inner coherence of personality-factors. Further there has arisen an awareness in the minds of men that an age of scientific technocracy cannot go together with isolated and primitive thoughts and instinctive crude adaptations to novel developments. That way leads to disaster. A1 machinery cannot be handled by C3 minds. An earlier age when the scientific discoveries were not made by superior and inventive minds was an age of A1 brains with C3 machinery. Now that such a state of affairs has been reversed, the insecurity of the modern man has become more patent. No culture can permit itself to be annihilated by machinery, for culture is always the dominance of mind over matter, plan over chaos, it ‘is a life-form that is the direct manifestation of Spirit’. Mind 2
2 World in the Making: Count H. Keyserling.

cannot rule matter unless it can probe into the secret recesses of itself on the one hand and on the other into the secret processes of matter. Growth in knowledge of matter is directly proportional to the inwardness achieved by mind. For Mind and matter are in reality sustained by a third, Absolute Spirit whose manifestations (subjective and objective) are these. By the route of matter we shall arrive at the Spirit but these processes cannot happen unless the route of matter is accompanied by the lower mind according to its own route”. 3
Thanks to the discovery of (lost or) ancient civilizations (like that of Mohenjodaro, Ur, etc.) the new and wide distribution of the truths of all religions and faiths, a growing uniformity in the content of knowledge of all minds, brought about by the phenomenal growth of newspapers and other means of communication including the radio-developments, wireless and others,

Om Tat Sat

( My humble salutaions to Brahmasri Sreeman Dr K C Varadachari ji for the collection)


Post a Comment