Indian Philosphy by Brahmasrii Dr K C Varadachari -19

Indian Philosphy
Brahmasrii Dr K C  Varadachari

The modern types of political life and indeed no one can escape from coming to grips with it leads us to accept a philosophy that could in a sense take cognizance of both the individual detachment and messianic aspiration. The cry that the academies should be free from the emotional and other factors entering into the field of political or social life shows the voice of the Monk: the refusal to participate in life to be able to carry on work of the most abstruse and obtuse types is considered to be necessary preparation for life itself so far as the students themselves are considered, but not in respect of the adults who are in charge of the academies themselves. The division of labour has been carried too far: it has also meant that the academies

unfortunately do not care for the dynamic social situation which demands a messianic zeal that would develop perceptions of the new world, dreams that demand to be realized. That is one of the reasons why the academies have become the bye-word for snobbery and scholarship and antiquarianism. These charges are rather harsh and the anti-intellectualism that has pervaded both the fascist and communist types of minds which are socialistic in a sense of being concerned with society which awaits to be conserved or transformed and organized, is mainly due to the slogan of objectivity, which is the principle of cat on the wall which has been played assiduously and cultivated unconsciously by all concerned with education of the youth.
In India this danger has to be averted before it ripens into a rigidity that this tradition of the monk or ascetic is strong is clear: it is the basic dynamism if one may speak of it as dynamism at all, of Mayavada. The Messianic role itself was turned into a monkish business: messianism helped monkhood and this is precisely what Everett Knight has not canvassed. The Indian mind has seen the two types: the mystic and the

religious: the religious and the secular, and has striven to resolve the conflict by an appropriate adjustment of human psychology. The mystic need for cosmic or supra-cosmic freedom and perception of the Oneness of the world is like messianism, for the mystic not merely attains but seeks to communicate his vision to all so that all can participate in that experience, that world. His cry of liberation and Union with all is a basic individualistic-cum-cosmic urge voicing forth its most urgent demand for values to be realized in this world itself. However it is a cry which embraces the option: if possible here if not in Heaven or the cosmic. The religious type is that which engages itself in a series of acts of devotion which are designed to reveal the dependence of man or soul on God. The self-surrender inherent in religious devotion is the seeking of absolute dependence on that supreme person who alone can reveal one’s own true nature and emancipate it from all bonds, of life, of imperfection, of sin and ignorance. This twofold typology is helpful in the mystico-religious search for ultimate or Absolute Reality. However it has been shown that the mystic is not afraid of the impersonal experience of liberty and as such may

hasten to deny the deity which alone can grant it the union which is the passionate embrace of the Infinite. The two routes were well-known to the ancient Upanisadic seekers or seers, who described them as the seekers after vinasa and the seekers after Sambhuti.
Or again in a different typology as the seekers of avidya and the seekers after vidya, meaning the scientists who devote all attention and life to the discovery of the laws of the areas of reality instead of the cardinal principle of Reality as a whole and integral. The Vidya seekers are those who seek the absolute apart from the world and not as controlling, sustaining, supporting and leading the world of souls and Nature to a greater evolution.
The typological disjunction however is a fact that occurs in the world of history or evolution itself. Indeed it is not merely ideological. It is one of the great truths of Marx that he gave blood and life to the bloodless ballet of impalpable categories of Hegelian Dialectic by the messianic drive of the economic homeostasis. So too we find again the embers of religious fanaticism have

been lit and racialism has also through the emphasis on apartheid and self-government of the under-developed and the underdeveloped peoples have put the dialectic in a war of life and death. Thus one can hardly be a scholar merely for he is being dragged into the fray of events and cannot escape reflection and action. However it is one of the facts of our day that academic insulation cannot last long: monkdom is forever gone: forces of life are in total warfare: science and ethics are in moral grips with one another. The Messianic temper is more in the climate or the day and whilst it is time it is for the rationalistic monk to see the light and guide himself and the messiah to the haven of a possible universe, for the messiah is bound to fail in the long run leaving a slogan of rich timbre.

The calculation of time has been of hoary ancestry. It is possible to see that there has been a rational in the measurement of time. The basic needs for improvising a measure are (i) the necessity for its being easily measured unit, (ii) the necessity for its being universally objective (iii) the necessity for evolving a type of absolute measure practically useful and absolute in a sense though it may be relative too.
The relation between measurement that is spatial movement and time which is duration taken for an event to happen has been well known. Velocity of a body is measured by the distance between the points to be traversed or taken as space and the duration or time taken to traverse it. d/t = v. So too t = d/v and d=v*t. Time is the interval duration or duration taken to traverse a distance at a particular uniform speed. Three things then have to be fixed for this purpose. What is  
that event or phenomenon which can be observed as the points for the distance? This is provided by the interval between sunrise and sunset. Whether the earth moves round itself or the Sun moves round the earth, the fact of sunrise and the absolute uniformity of the phenomenon makes it an objective fact, universal to all peoples. The next step was to observe the equal duration of the night time and day time. Thus all concepts depended on the division of time into day and night having about the same duration.
The second fact that was brought to the notice of the ancients was equally striking. The Moon which is an object of great interest to man revealed the phenomenon of regular waxing and waning. The fullest brilliance and wholeness was seen as the culmination of the waxing. The same period was observed for the waning which started with the fully moon culminating in the total disappearance of the Moon and his subsequent appearing which was designated as the New Moon. These two periods were sound to be on the reckoning of the days and nights about equal, each period comprising of 15 daytimes and 15 night times. Both periods thus comprised 30 daytimes and 30 night

times. The total was thus 60. This was about exact though it was recognized also that it was less than the 60 by approximately one night or day time.
Thus we find that the day time was divided into 30 parts or ghatikas (as in a fortnight) and the night time was also divided into 30 parts. The total day comprised 60 ghatikas. (this was again subdivided to make 60 vighatikas for each ghatikas: Similar is the division of the hour into 60 minutes and the minute was divided into 60 seconds. This shows the influence of the lunar monthly reckoning on the divisions of time regarding the hour and minute as it has been shown to be in respect of the Indian time measure of ghatikas and vighatikas.)
A third kind of measure was also thought of. This was in respect of the Solar revolution so to speak. The Earth goes round the Sun. Or rather it was found that the sun moves northward and southwards of the central line called the equator. The time taken is measured by two major halves such as the northern path and the southern path.

Ancient Upanisadic thought has called the Uttarayana the northern path of the Sun and the daksinayana the southern path of the sun.
This is a year (samvatsara). The number of lunar rotations during this period was found to be 12. The number of fortnights (full moon and new moons included) is 24. The Seasons which are previously reckoned as four each comprised 6 new moons and full moons combined. The number of days was found to be 360 (including both day times and night times). This number is approximate as in the case of the number of days in a month.
Broadly we can see that 24 is the number in relation of the moon (fortnights) to the Sun, 12 being the half we find that the hora or hour system of reckoning adopts the 12 and 24 as well as 6 as the unit of time. Thus there are six seasons in Indian year. Twelve months in the year and each day has 24 hours.
However the two systems based on 12 and 24 on the one hand and 15 and 30 on the other must have come to a clash. The adoption of a unitary duration as

not effected. The mixture of both the reckonings is seen in the calendar times we have as also in the clock time.
Thus one day = 24 hours = 60 ghatikas
One hour – 60 minutes
One ghatikas – 60 vighatikas
30 days (about) – One month
12 months = One year = 24 fortnights
6 seasons = one year
The result is that the two systems are not uniformly followed even by them. The 12 and 24 and 60 get mixed up. There is however a clear enough attempt to link up the earth-moon-sun movements in order to give us a measure of time which is at once easy, objective, observable.
This is the traditional basis of time measures such as day, month, and year taking the relationship between Earth and its own rotation or sunrise and sunset, the relationship between the Moon’s rotation round the earth calculated in terms of earths self-rotational days (or in terms of the waxing and waning of the moon itself), and the rotation of the earth round the Sun (or the northern and southern passage of the sun with reference to the equator).

These time measures are objective and not subjective and indeed it is possible to conceive that other planets and their corresponding movements might also be included. Thus we can see that the number twelve refers to the 12 year Cycle of Jupiter, round the zodiac, and 30 year cycle of Saturn round the zodiac or Sun. The ancient do not seem to have thought of the outer planets which have been since discovered. The 84 year cycle of Uranus is interesting, so too the neptunian and plutonian years.
Thus our clock time may be considered to be traditional well established linking up the mathematical uniformities demanded by all for conversion purposes. Though mechanical there is no doubt that later the relativistic scheme was accepted as not only useful but necessary and true. The criticism of Bergson that this mathematical time is practically useful but not real does not illegitimise the nature of time itself as having both an objective measurability and subjective experienceability which need not coincide. All persons especially the astronomers were aware of the fact that the sunrise at 6 a.m. at one place need not be sunrise at another place to the East or West of that place.

Similarly the time on the earth at 6 a.m. Standard earth time and need not be 6.00 a.m. Martian or Venusian or Lunar time. Thus time whilst being relativistic does not abolish itself or render itself illusory.
The divisions of time as pointed out earlier have a hoary tradition and mankind has through its astronomers and scientists accepted this fact. We may devise a centum or metric system for time also. That would verily be arbitrary having no connection with real time as measured by the Earth’s diurnal rotation, lunar or solar measures1. The rationality and objectivity of measures of time cannot be disputed. The divisions of time have theoretical as well as practical foundation. We have tried to show how astronomical factors which do influence our organic and mental lives have determined the twelve fold, twenty four fold, six fold, thirty fold and sixty fold divisions. These have been synthesized or integrated in a sense but one can see that this has not happened fully since the consistent use of the twelve and twenty four or the thirty or sixty
1 Celestial Influence: Rodney Collin, Vincent Stuart. London.

has not be effected. A unified theory on this matter has not been achieved.
Now we turn to the organic time or living time. Biological changes take place regularly time is reached in terms growth of the organism, such as ovulation, insemination, embryonic development and birth, maturation, old age and death. The fruition of course of each life unit reveals its trying to perpetuate itself in its progeny through which its own life seems to be continued. Observing the processes of growth it has been found that they bear relation to the astronomical times that we have discovered. Some of these processes regularly are related to the astronomical phenomena of day-night times, bright fortnight-dark-fortnight times, the seasonal times and so on. Indeed not merely the linkage with the three major factors of our terrestrial life such as Earth, Moon and Sun, but also the planetary times seem to determine the organic factors, Obviously the ten-month time for conception and birth is also a factor. However it was held that on this basis there was a time when they had a ten-month year but it was discarded rightly for the development of foetus has been seen in the case of extraordinary

personalities to have taken twelve lunations, and not ten.
The other factor corresponding to a cycle of lunation is of course the woman’s menstrual periods-monthly periods as they are rightly correlated. That there is a connection between the lunar cycle and the organic changes within the body of the grown up female or procreative function seems to be indicated. Mental changes at this period do correspond to heightened imagination, impressibility and other factors which are either canalized into creative work or procreative erotic life.
The duality of birth and death corresponds with the light and night of the day. The near duality of waking end sleeping times is another correspondential point between the earth’s diurnal rotation and organic life’s two conditions. This duality is further seen in the two major seasons (uttarayana or birth of plants and so on and the daksinayana or aging and death of plants).
Organic time is closely linked up with the psychological time also. The dualities of pain and

pleasure, sukha and dukha, is linked up with the duality of sita and usna (cold and heat), and further is gain (labha) and loss (alabha), victory (jaya) and defeat (apajaya), Mind itself is shown to be dialectical in its oscillations between the two concepts of being and non-being having and not-having, immanence and transcendence, and so on. Paksa and pratipaksa (subject and contra-subject) is a basic determinant of all thought processes that progress towards apprehension and comprehension of reality.
The two moments of time, of thought, of feeling, of becoming, all reveal a basic diunity (unity of two). Thus the creative time of Bergson though conceived psychologically reveals twofold frenzy which he brings out in his Two Sources of Morality and Religion implicit though it has been although in his earlier works. Upwards ascent and downward descent katabolic and anabolic processes are the very nature of time. But how to correlate these with the organic time or astronomical or clock time that is the question. This is undoubtedly difficult but not insuperable.

Duration itself has the characteristics of twofold process. The interlacing of these two processes is what we witness in the organic life. This is a fact to which Bergson did not pay sufficient attention. Despite his earnest pleading for an intuitive language he had himself begun to apply the mechanical analogies of the lower order dialectic. The recognition of the existence of many dialectics according to the grade of being that is necessary Dialectic or dialectical thinking of two-fold frenzy or integrative disjunctive unity or conjunctive duality all these apply to the basic interdependence of the reality systems.
Time is essentially linked up with space in the mechanical and astronomical systems. Time is essentially linked up with the twofold processes of organic life and mental life. The unity of the reality systems is seen in the interdependence of these process and movements. Space itself becomes the organism within which time incorporates itself. Surely these are closed or finite systems, we cannot hazard to say anything about open systems. Since space itself undergoes changes or transformations duration also does. Thus though it has been recognized that time is a

measure relative to the point of references and time may also be considered to be diverse yet it is clearly a case that time is an enduring element in experience.
To evolve an absolute time means to have a measure that is taken from the most inclusive system of Reality as a whole. But it may well be asked whether it has the dimensions of past, present and future that we grant to time or the dimensions of past, present and future that we grant to time or the dialectical frenzy or moments or space. In a sense the very unity of space and time and motion or growth that we have makes time a kind of substance or dravya which has properties of its own in conjunction with space and motion and growth. Thus logically absolute time seems to a contradiction. However if we can discover an absolute velocity of light or assume it, it may be just possible to think of an absolute time though this would mean time that is capable of being used to measure all other times such as the terrestrial, astronomical, evolutionary and organic and mental and intellectual. Such a concept was evolved for the Cosmic time of Brahma which is almost said to be the centre of reference for all measures of all bodies both in terms of their motions

and growths and organic processes. Brahma Kalpa thus is the concept of absolute time and this was found to be capable of being discovered in terms of the individual‘s psychic time in samadhi translated usually as trance but really it refers to the union with Brahman of the individual soul or in other words when the soul realizes its life or time in terms of the Brahman (the soul and self of the whole universe and all souls) round whom it moves (salokya) and taking the same form (sarupya) and by having gained that union of inseparable movement or enjoyment (sayujya).
Timeless existence refers to this ultimate absolute relationship in which the usually conceived temporal patterns do not occur. One experiences as it were a kind of absence of time itself. The changeless state is said to be the timeless state and one almost presumes that both space and time cease to exist when one enters the ultimate Reality status. However it is seen that this is the source of all time and space and as such status has within itself both or all three processes in suspension. Thus we have a trinity of the space-time-motion (change) corresponding to the Alexandrian space-time-deity, the last perhaps implying both

movement change and growth and evolution in one world, which emerge it appears when space and time integrate or rather which are recognized as the ground of or abstractions from movement itself, Kala or time is coeval with reality and is nearer to it than space.
Indian thought has thought of space (akasa), time (kala) and dharma (motion or law of all being) an essential the reality. They are capable of being related to the other triplicity sattva, rajas and tamas. Tamas is space, Rajas is time, Sattva is the Dharma or law of being or it is possible to think of rajas as motion and sattva as time. But these are not necessary at all.

The symposium proposed is an attempt to claim that all cultures and civilizations have a spiritual foundation. It is unlikely that all cultures and civilizations have a spiritual foundation. That they ought to have a spiritual foundation if they have to survive or have the capacity to grow fully is another point. Further the world culture is having dubious meaning as some sort of training into a pattern of life that has been decided upon by a community. We know that of late ethnologists and anthoropologists have been studying primitive culture and have indeed been anxious to preserve such cultural traditions. Civilizations too are institutions which have for the individual and his community provided certain lines of development for their continuance and persistence and perpetuation. Both cultures and civilizations do not therefore have a definite connotation as being valuable. They are just pattern which have  
been forged as desirable and are relative to the needs emphasized by the community as a whole.
Culture as refinement is quite a different thing and is what character is to an individual. However we know that culture and civilization have to be differentiated as high or low by the direction of the ends or goals that they have placed before them selves. Indian thought has basically analysed the human goals and indeed men move or are rather moved by one goal and can be typologically distinguished from others. There are thus men moved by wealth-motive (acquisitive), and there are men who are moved by desire for happiness (hedonistic) and comfort. The modern cultures which have been growing are centered in the business of integrating these two basic motives through the concept of power of procuring both for every man. Our civilization is less in respect of psychic development than in respect of material welfare and comfort. Our sciences which are the wheels of modern culture (as in ancient times crafts have been) have shewn that the goal of man is well-being. We are quite a long way from our ancient ideals of right-living and free-living and free-living. Indeed there is today a

growing consciousness for a righteous world. Righteousness then does not inherently a fact of either wealth or happiness. Those who speak as if material prosperity will ipso facto bring in the age of righteousness or justice and those who speak of happiness as the just goal of man are finding that we want a different goal to be superposed to control the wealth and comfort incentives. But the clarity of perception as the nature of dharma or righteousness or dharma is not yet had. Righteousness or justice is a term which is bandied about as if it is but a form without matter, and that matter is to be supplied to it by wealth and desire for happiness or objects which procure them and the means required to procedure the objects of this category.
Man’s true culture or development takes place when he passes through these satisfactions of cravings of his nature, and he has come to realize the necessity for knowing himself as an independent personality, free from the incessant dependence on the wealth-happiness cycle. Most of our modern trends of thought and culture are aiming at the proper distribution and production of this cycle of artha and kama. Dharma has

come to mean just means of this distribution. However the human individual is getting himself pushed into all sorts of institutional formations both cooperative and collective and has become at once the person to whom justice is being done and who will have to be the individual who will mechanically get it in the process and realize it also. It is in this process of squeezing the individual into all sorts of procrustean patterns, that man discovers his own real nature as different from all that had contributed to his pleasure and comfort. Bondage to these being the one thing that enforces his compulsory loyalty to them, he seeks to find himself by freeing himself from these ends of life, wealth and happiness.
It is verily a triumph to say that no until one has become aware of one’s bondage to the ordinary and common ends of life wealth, power and happiness (in more trenchant terms, wealth, wine and women), will one really arrive at that culture which is the process of releasing the individual or oneself from the thraldom that appears as justice. In a civilization in which there is hardly an attempt to bring about this awareness but every attempt is made to encourage the bondage to the

‘basic’ needs of life, such as the above, not to speak of increasing the quantum of such supplies of ‘basic’ needs or the minimum of them, as decided by social justice, there is hardly any doubt that it will have to awaken with a rude shock and terror at the self-defeating nature of its enterprise. History is strewn with the derelicts of such cultures and civilizations as of individuals. The moral that one can draw from the of the historical cultures and civilizations is that without the vigilant subordination of wealth, wine and women, or artha and kama, to the supreme aim of continuous liberation of the self from its dependence on these, there is bound to be a collapse of our civilization also.
Liberation-incentive is as strong and firm in man though it comes to full force only when maturity of experience arises. The liberation incentive expresses itself firstly negatively as vairagya or renunciation, which is a result of discrimination which is not got merely by study but by painful experiences. Without this basic revolution from the lower ends of life there is hardly any possibility of even taking up the higher ends of life. The latter does not even enter the view of man.

In a sense the liberation-incentive is closely tied up with the need to discover oneself. This is the beginning of a conscious culture and a self-directing civilization.
So far mankind has been advancing unconsciously impelled and governed and reason has entered into the several phases as a handmaid colour wants. The time has come for a self-directed conscious evolution. May be it may be necessary to go higher up in the scale of our consciousness and demand the operation of a disinterested reason and higher than reason which is purely spiritual with its directives of truth, intelligence and liberty gotten delight, not depending on objects other than that highest self or God.
Till now there have been god-centered cultures and civilizations. But the gods themselves have been stepped down to the level of our wants. A culture that does not step down God to the level of man but brings up to the level of God is a truer culture and such a civilization is a truer and happier civilization.

The march of true civilization constantly discovers through its mighty and pioneer spirits the drive towards the Ultimate God. This is a continuous inner history of mankind, lived through its luminous self realizing selves, who constantly free man from his physical and mortal chains.
To such a band Sri Ramana belonged. All honour to Him.

Any philosophy of education would very much depend upon the concept of what a man is. There are many views about what man is, though there seems to be a large amount of agreement as to what the spiritual part of him or the soul-aspect is. The person whose education it is with which we are concerned is an embodied creature or spirit. There seems to be no doubt about the actual condition of the consciousness he has. It is limited or conditioned, ignorant in many directions, and partial or fragmentary knowledge is all that he gets. There is also a wide area of agreement in respect of the knowledge that is got by him through his sense-organs and through his logical abilities. The purpose of Indian thought is to liberate man from his  
fragmented existence or knowing by a radical shift from the sensory or inferential processes to the utilisation of the spiritual or direct cosmical or, as the Modern Sage Sri Aurobindo styles it, the integral immediate knowing by the self. Even here though there have been some differences as to the theory of knowing between the Vedantic Schools, there is no doubt that mystical knowing – a knowing or grasping of the unity in diversity without annihilating the diversity but granting a more secure reality to the diversity in the Unity – is what can be a fundamental educable ability in each individual.
Man is an evolving being. The word ‘evolving’ may mean just the process of continuous ascent to higher and more adequately adapting form of living. This is certainly not the idea behind much of Indian Thought – by which I refer primarily to Vedantas. But there is no doubt that if evolution is the process of growing out of or manifestation of the immanent spiritual nature gradually from the veils of ignorance and material formation, the soul as spiritual regain its nature, as a fully conscious or universal consciousness which is indeed also a consciousness both subjectively to freedom from Nature and its ignorance (mukti or

moksa) and objectively of Nature (the bondage that it was). Jainism and Buddhism also are agreed about this ‘transcendence’ or ‘conquest’ which is incognitive terms known as knowledge (Jnana). To know Nature itself as a field of Divine Action which is only action done in the knowledge that All in the Nature and Souls is of the Divine is the end. There are several points of coincidence between the Medieval East and West or the traditional East and the traditional West. The emphasis on self-discovery or the discovery of the self as the spiritual entity which ought to be freed from the Nature or body or be the intrinsic value of itself which has been lost in the pursuit of Natural ends, is a point of great importance.
We have to reckon three entities, Universal, the Individual and Nature or God, Soul and Nature. The inseparable relationship between these three is accepted by the Visistadvaita of Ramanuja and all that we are aware of is that these inseparable relationships have to be interpreted rightly. A wrong emphasis on any one or the other of the categories due to preoccupations with one or the other of the categories has led to a lot of confusion and delusion. The

individual qua individual is seized with the purpose of becoming aware of the Universal, central to his meaning and existence or his ‘self’ and of knowing himself as the expression or function or dharma or prakara of the Universal Spirit. The intimate conviction that the individual is charged with the purpose of discovering within himself the Universal Spirit for which purpose he acts in a cosmic manner that is in a disinterested self-surrender to the Divine as the Visva or the All, leads him to the realization that he is the body of the Divine. Education in this consciousness is to draw out the essential principle of Divine Oneness or the One abiding, supporting and controlling Deity in All in oneself. Monotheism reconciles itself in the Polytheism of the other individuals because it begins to perceive that the One Divine can and indeed does appear and indeed exists as the many Gods.
Universal Religion is possible only when men begin to realize that God is One who is also many or having infinite personalities or functions, each of which is infinite, indescribable or holy. As with our Idea of the Concrete Universal Godhead realized by all sages and mystics, despite differences of language and

experience, as real and necessary for individual realization and freedom from intestine conflict and World-Freedom and Peace, so also the realization of the identity in nature as functions of the One Divine Spirit or God or Brahman is a necessity. This is again possible only when each soul is considered to be an end in itself as Kant put it because it is ‘eternally seized or indwelt by God’. As such is a bhagavata (having the Divine), and not merely as a means. In the West also this same idea is deep-rooted and the Political life of the West (and its instrumental theory of Nature as means) reveals that recognition. Indian thought can grant this inward respect for all individuals and to life itself a deeper character and greater amplitude. There is not much fundamental difference in the ideas but in the technique of realization. The beliefs in the possibility of transformation of Matter itself as capable of being (and holding that it is always such) and instrument of the Divine and a field for the manifestation of the Divine is dominantly pursued by the West, and Hegel has given it a great impetus. For Hegel Nature is Objective Spirit; State is the temporal Absolute, the individual is a means for the Realisation of the Absolute

in the temporal and the objective. This is a lesson which East might take in order to explain an immanent transcendence possible and open to the soul, whereas the West must realize that the world is not an end in itself nor even the conquest of Nature but the means for the living realization of the Souls as one supreme body of the Universal, spiritual and essentially valuable to the Divine per se. Collective life directed towards the exploitation of Nature and pursuit of needs of the body-physical, which mystic thought in East and West has shown to be a deviation of the pursuit, does not but lead to a sharing of the world at best. It has of course brought up problems of distribution and population etc., which have to be solved in a collective rational way. Those problems whilst urgent from the point of view of the ordinary man need of course a global vision and perception and reasoning freed from the prejudices of the individual or national and racial kinds. The Universal however is not exhausted by the collective security means and measures. It promises a new dimension to being itself which would liberate it from the pursuit of distributions and exploitations for pleasure, more the knowledge. If we shall certainly know man as

a peculiar and significant unity of the Nature and God, for the realization of their significant and eternal unity or inseparability, it would reveal man to be not merely a creature torn between the two but also to be a synthesis and fulfilments as the child of the Divine pair. The reconciliation of Nature and God in Man, through the perception or awareness of the Divine in Nature and in all other souls as their significance and meaning, is a truth that may be characteristically and in different ways and traditions be shown to seekers. This does not abolish the unique qualities of the traditions but lifts up the possibility of a universal intelligent understanding of world tradition.
The Universal’s participation in a collective effort by individuals aware of and vigilantly acting in and for the universal values of the Divine who gives meaning to Nature and the individuals is an education which would enfold the twin truths of drawing out the spiritual and the universal immanent in each and the evolution of the natural by a gradual process of transmutation and translation of the individual and the hedonistic organizations or organs so as to take over the universal functions to which he is the heir.

East and West have agreed on certain fundamentals so far as the mystics are concerned. Whilst the emphasis on the monotheism and the monistic view have been dialectical poses opposing the polytheism and pluralism, this real opposition has and can be overcome when the reason of each individual synthesizes in the spirit of the Mystic Wisdom of the Vedanta and Plato that the real monism must enfold and describe the pluralism, and monotheism should explain and grant strength to Polytheism. Rational Mysticism in education which suggests the universal of our problems is, it appears, capable of doing the job. But a large metaphysical and psychological understanding must be a prelude; and teacher’s needs must have this supreme qualifications. Educational Psychology has to be grounded not so much on science of physiology as on axiology.
There is no opposition between the East and West, though during the period after the advent of Science there has been preoccupation with Nature and Economics and the appreciation of the poverty of individuals which, it was discovered, it is necessary to relieve. The preoccupation with the spiritual was that

the real sufferings of the people were thoroughly forgotten. This is as much a snare as the mother preoccupation with the Natural or the individual. Our present condition is that we are preoccupied not so much with the individual as such but which his very existence, his survival. Intelligent people have discovered that this cannot be solved by a programme of economy or politics, and were faced with the problem of hope in the ultimate global wisdom of all men. Does Religion (and Education) promise this? So far the religions have not; on the other hand, they have developed new impervious ideologies and have had recourse to the most extravagant myths. A new educational theory must start over again the process of liberating the individual from old and stagnant but no less impervious ideologies and make him the seer of the universal, and the embodiment of the universal. This is the substantial freedom that education can encourage to discover and practice.
I agree with the view that we have no doubt that doctrinal differences may exist and be held if viewed in the right perspective, and all that men and teachers of the unesco can do is to supply this fundamental and

foundational pattern: Man is the body (particular, individual, function) of the Universal Spirit (Ultimate, Brahman, God, Truth, etc.). So is the Nature (the World, Matter, Energy, Field). The Process is the realization of the Universal by the individual (embodied in Matter or Nature). He is the meeting place or junction of the Universal Nature and Universal Spirit. He grants significance and objectivity to both. The three are inseparable – a triunity. Nature is dependent, instrumental, objectivity of the Universal Spirit. All men are equally, though uniquely, bodies or functions of the Universal Godhead. They have a dual responsibility, not only to act in and for the Divine but also for the welfare and unity of all others of whom they are aware through Nature at first and through God at the end and in fullest realization.


Om Tat Sat

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


Post a Comment