Of late it has
become a fashion
to condemn all
that is
traditional.
This tendency
started with the
new independence
that India has
begun to enjoy.
The entire past
of India has
been
historically
studied and
though much of
it was admired
it was felt that
this ‘discovery
of India’ left
out
significantly
any contribution
from the past.
Of course
science in India
died long ago
and philosophy
which survived,
survived only as
a relic of a
great past, but
without any
promise of life
in the future.
Strangely too,
it was with the
advent of
European
scholarship that
India began to
learn that her
whole life has
been riddled
with or stifled
with a belief in
the
inevitableness
of human or
world destiny.
The concept of
inevitableness
is a scientific
law based on the
principle of
causality. The
effect is
inevitable or a
necessary
occurrence if
the cause is
present. Indian
thought is said
to breathe this
inevitableness
of life-events
and the
helplessness of
man in the
presence of this
chain
unbreakable of
casual process.
The early Vedic
theories were
said to be
optimistic
because they
reveal that the
people thought
and acted as if
all things are
possible, though
it was through
prayer and magic
and co-operation
with and by
Gods, or natural
powers. The
whole period of
the Brahmanas
breathes this
optimism of man
to conquer and
subdue Nature
and her gods.
The Upanisads
are said to turn
inwards and
speak of the
bondage to the
causality of
karma. The fear
of the effects
arising from
certain kinds of
action (karma),
ritual or
non-ritual, gave
rise to the need
to solve the
problem of the
inevitable. Thus
philosophy or
religion through
introspection of
the causes of
our bondage and
analysis of
action led to
the discovery of
the Self or
All-Self and
Over-self. The
problem was
verily that
relating to the
inevitableness
of causal
continuity and
the solution was
sought in the
field firstly of
abolition of all
action, then in
the detachment
of desire from
results of
action, thirdly
in the vision of
the whole world
being the
Activity of One
Supreme Spirit
and to act in
conformity with
that knowledge
an realization
of that Activity
is to be free
from the
experience of
bondage and
inevitableness
and to enjoy
Freedom and
immortality.
Buddhism which
pleaded for the
life of freedom
itself laid down
the basic
condition that
life as we are
living it is a
life of
inevitableness
of sorrow and
misery. No one
seeks to solve a
problem unless
he is confronted
with it. Thus it
was laid down by
him that the
first or primary
condition of
entry into the
path of the
Buddha is the
knowledge that
all is misery,
(sarvam dukham).
This is tied up
with the
knowledge that
all our
activities
propelled by
desire (trsna)
or hankering
produce bondage
and despair and
sorrow. The life
of freedom is
freedom from
desire. To make
desire universal
or altruistic is
no solution to
the problem of
sorrow. It
raises other
issues such as
group sorrow or
group calamity
or collective
sorrow. The
individual being
a member of the
group is
involved in this
sorrow though it
may appear that
he had but
dismissed it
from himself.
This too is not
quite true since
when a group
breaks up the
individual
member then
begins to get
the results both
of the
collective
activities of
desire as well
as his own.
The problem then
becomes more
acute than ever
and its solution
baffles
understanding.
Buddha preached
that the life of
man is sorrow
and if he lived
as he was living
then his future
was bound to be
a vale of
sorrow. This is
the logic of
human living. A
different method
of living should
be adopted and
that is to
withdraw from
all desire for
clinging to the
perishable
things of life.
If optimism
means that one
can go on
merrily enjoying
and desiring and
expanding the
areas of
enjoyment and
desire, and
hoping that the
world we live in
is a glorious
world (of lila
or dance and
laughter and so
on), then
Buddhism does
not think so.
The
forwarding-looking
nature of
Buddhism is
precisely
regarding the
men who have
abandoned or
renounced all
desire,
individual,
familial, social
and all. The
Sangha of
Buddhism is of
those who have
renounced all
attachments and
desires for
everything and
at all levels. A
new community of
‘naughted’ ones
however emerges
and they seek to
live the life of
‘naughted beings
(sunyata),
egoless and
desireless,
seeking no
future as they
too are
perishable.
Jainism also
renounced desire
for life as
desire. Desire
is basically
individual and
restricting and
binding and its
effects have the
nature of
habituating man
to a life of
bondage to them.
Even food and
family and
friendships have
this binding
nature and
materialization
of man. Its deep
spiritualism
entailed the
abandonment of
all attachment.
Pessimism is
writ large in so
far as it states
the problem of
sorrow and
bondage and
materialism
clearly as the
content of the
life of man, and
to get rid of
this is
desirable.
Both Buddhism
and Jainism
agree to hold
that it is
possible and
desirable to get
rid of this type
of living
through the path
of detachment,
reversing the
mode of desire
and finally
abolishing it.
Herein lies the
optimism and
good news that
man can give up
the life of
sorrow and
attain a life of
beatitude by
renunciation of
the life of
desire.
Renunciation of
life-values of
man is the only
means towards
the realisation
of true
beatitude.
Not in this
context of life
can man realize
his freedom and
his true
undiminishing
happiness.
This is equally
true of the
Vaisesika and
Nyaya and
Samkhya schools
of thought,
which hold that
the goal of man
is freedom from
sorrow, and that
this sorrow is
the result of
our bondage to
desires for the
material world
and its several
formations or
modifications.
Knowledge of
desire’s
processes and
goals is
necessary to
renounce desire
itself. To turn
desire Godward
or towards
freedom
inevitably leads
to abandonment
of it in its
usual
manifestation as
the fulfillment
of the needs and
demands of the
body and
society.
That there has
been an
excessive bias
towards the life
of life-negation
is clearly one
of the
fundamental
charges that can
be leveled
against the
Buddhist and
Jaina views of
life which more
than any other
for a millennium
and more
influenced
Indian life. The
monk-bhiksu-cult
of renunciation
was glorified;
and in Vedanta,
thank to the
influences of
this view,
Sannyasa became
the most exalted
asrama state.
Men sought to
end up in
Sannyasa and it
was held up as
the ideal of
human life. Such
an exaltation
denied man’s
life of its
values and made
it insignificant
as compared to
the life beyond
man. Religion as
the
preoccupation
with the future
life became the
sole and
increasing
concern,
depleting all
value from the
life of man.
Even the service
of man was for
his transcending
and going beyond
to the life
celestial or
super-terrestrial.
The pessimism
characteristic
of this
temperament is
surely in
respect of this
world, the world
of matter and
man. The
optimism is in
respect of the
other-world
attainment where
the problems of
this world are
said to be
liquidated. The
consciousness of
men was educated
to look forward
to another world
as the goal of
our present
endeavours. This
surely leaves
the field of our
religious
thinking mainly
pessimistic in
respect of our
present
condition. Could
not change in
the values of
life work out a
better prospect;
man must be
changed; his ego
has to be
modified and
subordinated to
the Overself or
God; his nature
itself undergo
change in order
to be able to
see more than
his senses see
and his desires
prompt; a new
kind of desire
free from
ignorance and
limitation is
the
satya-samkalpa
or divine will
that will be the
feature of the
greater man. It
is not
impossible to
have such a
being on this
earth. If this
is possible then
the pessimism
could be
counteracted.
But men are
offering
resistances and
indeed one of
the most
optimistic
experiments made
has been to
bring down
heaven to earth,
to make or
transform earth
to the status of
heaven dreamt
of. The Kingdom
of God on earth
must be a
compeer of that
of His in Heaven
– this dream is
undoubtedly of
capital
importance in
the hope of a
new world and a
new man. A
survey of the
whole range of
Indian
philosophical
systems reveals
that this great
aspiration and
dream is not
held to be
capable of being
achieved in this
earth-consciousness.
This is surely
pessimism.
However the
whole question
is whether there
is the
possibility of
transformation
of the earth
consciousness or
earth itself
into Heaven? We
cannot produce
milk out of
petrol or silver
out of silica or
cloth out of
air; then can we
produce heaven
out of earth?
Can the laws of
solids avail
with liquids or
gases? Is the
disparity so
great and
opposed that one
cannot produce
the other? This
is the question.
If we answer in
the affirmative
there is
pessimism, if in
the negative,
there is
optimism.
Thanks to the
genius of the
Christian
thinkers who
have sought to
make the
impossible
effort of making
this earth safe
for the
Heaven-born, men
like Jesus, it
has become one
of the major
works of modern
man to realise
the Utopia,
whatever its
stature and
structure and
function, in the
context of this
world. The
approach to this
transcendental
realization on
this earth for
earth
consciousness is
undoubtedly the
inspiration of
much of our
modern Indian
thinking also.
That it is not
purely a western
Christian
concept of ideal
is all that they
have been at
pains to shew.
The
life-negating
philosophies of
Buddhism and
Jainism and
Advaita mayavada
Vedanta which
have been most
influential
during the past
two millennium
have had
wonderful
success and
their ‘optimism’
of lifting
people away from
the morass of
this world had
succeeded beyond
all
expectations.
Many wonderful
souls have
achieved this
liberation from
this world.
However there
have been men
like Trisanku,
Visvamitra and
Rbhus and the
great Ciranjivis
eternally
youthful or
immortals in
Indian
traditional
though and
history who have
sought to live
the ideal life
hereon this
earth. Therefore
this was
reiterated and
made the
dominant note in
recent Indian
philosophy. This
is but the
recapitulation
and remembrance
of the Vedic
optimism and
alchemic promise
of
transformation
of man into his
divine nature
and the founding
of the Universal
Sangha of
liberated and
divinized men
whose thought
and action and
emotion were
integrated in an
universal
purpose of
Harmony. The
Vedic Prayer of
living together,
growing
together,
rejoicing and
learning
together is in
terms of
universal love
and brotherhood
and peace that
is indivisible.
Sri Aurobindo’s
message of
integral
Knowledge, a
knowledge that
rises from
identity of
thought-action-emotion,
is a basic
optimism of the
Vedic kind and
in a sense going
beyond that in
so far as it now
concerns not
man’s relation
to the Gods but
men everywhere.
A new vision is
a need, a new
dynamis is
necessary to
make our
optimism
justifiable and
not merely a
dream. The world
has need of
that. Have our
philosophers
found that
either in action
or in thought?
It may be
conceded that
Indian
Philosophico-spiritual
thought has
discovered that
such a dynamic
vision and
change are
incapable of
being engineered
by the
rationality of
the sensory and
reflective
projections of
science. Today
obviously many
persons think
that ‘optimism’
belongs to
science which
has not only
discovered the
know-how of
things but also
the know-why of
things. A world
view of the old
and the
traditionalist
being
pre-scientific
it is today
clear that a
world view of
science in all
its aspects also
can be adequate.
Here is science
widening the
horizons of man,
having made man
overcome the
impediments and
limitations to
which his powers
of the body have
confined him. He
is today cheered
by the prospect
of being the
master of
Nature. His
indomitable
courage and
feeling of
superiority over
nature have made
him the captain
of his soul and
the promise is
that man shall
not be creature
of natural
forces, waiting
on nature for
everything,
neither sun nor
moon nor rain
nor mountains
nor deserts can
offer resistance
for he can
himself bring
into being the
conditions which
those celestial
powers create
only when the
seasons and
daytimes and
others come
about. Man’s
independence
over this
environment is a
result of the
scientific
advance which
has helped him
to create them
and control the
according to his
whim and fancy
or according to
the need of his
race.
This is the
‘optimism’ of
being not a
creature of
nature but a
creator of
Nature. Optimism
then can be
described not
merely in terms
of a hope but of
a realization of
‘creatorship’
and abandoning
or discarding
the sense of
‘creatureliness’
that has been
the chief
characteristic
of religion.
Religions have
always harped on
the idea of
‘creatureliness’
of man, and the
impossibility of
man becoming
ever the
creator. Indeed
at one stage it
has transpired
that man has
been considered
to be so much of
a creature that
it has been said
that ‘not even a
blade of grass
moves but for
the will of
God’s and man’s
helplessness has
been taken as
the very nature
of his
existence; call
it
‘dasabhutatva’
or slavery to
God, call it
‘waiting on
God’, akincata
(non-anythingness),
all these
religious
attitudes deny
man’s capacity
to change
anything in the
Nature.
Science fights
against this
creatureliness
of man. In this
science is
direct
contradiction to
the spirit of
religion.
However whilst
this fact has
been clearly
recognized by
Materialism
(Russian
dialectical
materialism in
the modern
days), it is not
faced by the
European
Countries which
yet feel that
science can be
subordinated to
religion, which
is another way
of saying that
religion can be
subordinated to
science, and we
may somehow be
both creators in
respect of world
shaping in
respect of our
needs and
comforts and
freedoms, and
creatures in
respect of
transcendental
goals, if needed
we do relegate
all that vast
area of
existence beyond
the grave.
Indeed we shall
try our level
best to postpone
that departure
from this area
by developed
science which
will help
conquest of
death.
The ‘optimism’
in this
direction has
unlimited
extension. We
have conquered
speeds and
broken
sound-barriers
and
light-barriers
too presently:
we have probed
into the depths
of space and
matter: we have
been able to
understand and
demonstrate the
infinite
possibilities of
inter-atomic
forces and
energies. Indeed
we have been
able to turn
each one of the
discoveries into
instrument of
further probing
and conquest of
Nature. Nature’s
yield up of
knowledge has
exceeded all our
expectations. We
have today the
assurance of
unlimited
progress for man
and his
existence in
this world. It
is all for man
and by man and
all the world is
in one area of
opportunities
for infinite
exceeding.
No wonder Indian
Philosophic
thought centered
round the
‘creatureliness’
doctrine with
its concomitance
of fate and
karma appears to
be an altogether
unrealistic and
outmoded.
Indian
philosophy
however in some
aspects never
completely
accepted the
creatureliness
doctrines of
religion and
bhakti. That is
one of the main
reasons why the
Advaita
Philosophy with
its affirmation
of the
‘creatorship’
principle of the
individual
showed
attractiveness
to minds who
have been
convinced that
creatureliness
is only one half
of the reality
whereas the
creatorship is
the other half
of the reality
of the
individual. The
double nature of
the individual
has been
recognized by
the ancient
seers. However
at one stage,
they have
insisted that
‘creatorship’ of
the individual
would be just
expression of
his imaginative
thought that
produces
delusive
creations or
inventions which
might involve
the individual
in bondage to
them. Love of
one’s own
creations or
inventions could
be a bar to
progress and
might bind one
more thoroughly
than ever.
Creatureliness
however has the
advantage of not
getting into
this cocoon of
one’s own
weaving. Man
must achieve a
stature which
will make his
creatorship
immune from the
bondage which
the creations
prepare for him.
This appears to
be one of the
possible
meanings of the
doctrine of
bindingsness of
all activity
(which is
creative or
inventive). When
however he can
discover his
oneness with the
Supreme Creator
of the Universe,
then his
activities
become truly
creative without
reactiveness and
bondage. It is
the belief of
the ancients in
Indian thought
that this
connection with
the Supreme
which is man’s
other aspect of
being can be
achieved
immediately and
now and here.
Even
creatureliness
to the Creator
and Creator only
is helpful to
this discovery
and realization.
This one-pointed
dependence or
creatureliness
to God or the
Spirit Universal
links up the
creature to the
creator and
helps
creativeness
that is New and
ever expanding.
This is the
discovery of the
optimum
possibility of
the individual
and is that
which justifies
optimism.
It is when this
possibility of
Yoga with the
Divine or
Brahmasayujyam
is denied that
one is
irrevocably a
pessimist. The
doctrine of
jivanmukti shews
in its dynamic
aspect this
realization of
the oneness in
all one’s parts
with the Divine
and yet it
intimates the
other aspect
that the life
beyond this body
is not less
creative than
the life in this
body; indeed one
derives the
fullness of
perfect
creativity in
God for God and
till infinite
possibility here
and hereafter,
on earth as also
in heaven.
Thus it is not
quite right to
affirm that
pessimism is the
dominant note of
Indian
Philosophy. A
restrained
optimism has
always been the
note of Indian
thought and it
has never been
its claim to
affirm an
uncritical
optimism or an
equally
uncritical
pessimism. It
has been
realistic enough
to recognize
that man’s
immortal soul
and self which
is its reality
will never be
content to be a
mere creature of
circumstances
and environments
either of this
world or of the
other. Its
yearning sense
is for the
Infinite
creativity and
mastery of self
and all and its
goal has been
Infinite
undiminishing
bliss here and
yonder.
It has known
however that not
by any other
path than that
of knowing the
Supreme Purusa
or Person of God
can there be the
attainment of
creatorship that
makes one pass
beyond all
limitations and
grants to him
the sense of
right living and
right doing
which will not
cast shadows on
reality or on
oneself or on
others. By the
sacrifice of
oneself to the
Divine, by one’s
integral
offering of
oneself to the
Divine fully and
subordinating
and identifying
one’s being and
imagination and
thought sense
and ego with the
creative Nature
of the Divine
does one really
transcend the
frightening
prospect to the
world doomed
otherwise to
self-destruction
or suicide and
worse.
Nanyah pantha
ayanaya vidyate
