The Changeless Consciousness
The methods of philosophy are usually
certain developments of the logical methods of thinking and rationalistic
processes of thought. Our faculties of understanding, thinking, feeling and
willing are, however, found to be subject to certain fixed categories, such as
quantity, quality, relation and mode, or, to put it concisely, space, time and
cause. On a careful examination it is seen that, even as the findings of
science are not ultimately reliable due to their being influenced by the
changing characteristics of the senses of perception and the instruments of
observation, the philosophical method, as it is usually understood by many, is
not free from certain types of subjection to outward laws. It may be that these
restrictive laws are so intimately related to the constitution of the mind that
it is ordinarily impassable to distinguish between the operation of these laws
and the ways of thinking. But, nevertheless, it is a restriction to the fuller
freedom that is necessary to make any categorical judgment of truth. For we can
never see, or hear, or even think anything outside the limitations imposed on
us by the presence of such fundamental categories of phenomenal experience as
space, time and causation. The moment we think, we think in terms of space,
quantity, extension and succession. This is an old prejudice of the mind, which
it is not able to overcome. This inseparable relation that is mysteriously
established between our essential modes of thought and the laws restricting
them goes by the names of relativity, phenomenality, and the like. And under
these circumstances, truth unchangeable cannot be known. Truth can brook not
limitation of any kind, for it is established not on any other proof of
knowledge or mode of perception, but in itself.
The foregoing analysis reveals the fact
that our entire waking experience, being confined to the heavy operations of
the categories of the understanding, or thinking, is unsuited to any genuine
attempt at the discovery of truth. Our dream-experience fares no better: it is,
in the structure of its activities, similar to the waking experience.
Unfortunately, we know of no other conscious human experience than waking and
dreaming. Thus it is that we often hear it said that truth is not given to the
human mind. Profounder methods of philosophy, such as those adumbrated in the
system of the Vedanta, take into consideration the deeper implications of the
state of deep sleep, which has been very unwisely set aside by most of the
Western philosophers in their analyses. We are bereft of all consciousness in
the state of dreamless sleep, we cannot know ever our own existence then. But
that we do exist in sleep cannot be gainsaid. Our existence here seems to be
asserted notwithstanding the absence of the consciousness of existence! But if
you think carefully you will notice that no assertion of any kind is possible
without some sort of consciousness. And yet, what is it that makes us affirm
ourselves in sleep? Definitely, not direct perception. We have a memory of
having slept and of our having existed prior to our falling asleep. Yesterday I
was, and today I am - thus does the individual assert itself. A phenomenon of
this type discloses the fact of there being a connecting link between the state
preceding sleep and the one succeeding it. The prior and the later states being
involved in consciousness, we cannot, as we have already observed above,
suppose that the link between them can be an unconscious principle. The link,
too, has to be a conscious one. We never assert that we are ignorant beings in
our essence; even a stupid man does not wish to be called so. The essence of
intelligence is continuously affirmed, even unwittingly.
Further, that we have a memory of sleep
shows that a kind of perception was going on even in sleep, for there can be no
memory without a previous perception, and no perception can have a meaning
unless it is attended with consciousness. If memory has a meaning, the
conscious perception that ought necessarily to lie antecedent to it cannot be
denied. We had consciousness, and we existed as consciousness in deep sleep;
but we knew it not. Some mysterious darkness was veiling us. And this veil is
nothing but the inactive latency of the possibility of objective experience in
terms of the phenomenal categories described above.
The Vedanta, thus, takes us beneath the
surface and makes us dive into an ocean where we discover the pearl of truth,
the truth that we are essentially not only conscious existences but
consciousness itself. We are not beings possessing consciousness as an
attribute of ourselves, for then we would be reduced to unconscious bases of a
conscious attribute. This cannot be, because the knower can never be said to be
an unconscious principle. The knower ought to be consciousness, not even a mere
possessor of consciousness as a quality. Our existence then, is an
indescribable splendour surpassing all light and radiance known to us in this
world. Saints and sages point out that words are not meant to describe the
transcendent Being, for all speech, together with the mind, is in the position
of an after-effect and cannot be expected to illumine its own cause and
presupposition. This consciousness, which is our primal essence, cannot be
conceived to be limited in any way for the very idea of the limitation of
consciousness would prove that consciousness is beyond limitation. The idea of
a boundary proves that there is simultaneously the idea of the existence of
something outside the boundary. To set limits to consciousness would be a
self-contradiction; the limitation cannot be outside the purview of
consciousness. Consciousness is infinite.
The consciousness of the continuity of our
personalities through the various vicissitudes and changes of life goes to
prove that it itself is changeless. The fact that it is indivisible proves that
it is infinite. To know this, then, is to know truth. This alone can be the
great uncontradictable experience. This we really are. In knowing
this we know ourselves as we truly exist. This defies all diversity, and,
consequently, all desire, attachment, hatred, anger prejudice, and the
like.
The Underlying Unity
In this connection it would be profitable
for you if I recall to your memory an interesting system of philosophy
expounded in recent times by the famous professor, Alfred North Whitehead, on
the basis of the discoveries made by Einstein in his theory of relativity. It
is the opinion of Whitehead, not a mere fantastic belief but a rational
conviction, the things in the world do not exist as localised bodies or static
substances in a three-dimensional space, but are really certain phases of force
entering into one another and forming a marvellous completeness wherein
everything is a cause and an effect at the same time from different points of
view. In an interrelated cosmic family we cannot say which is dependent on
what, for all are mutually included, and nothing is independent. There can be
no being but only becoming and process in this world of relativity. The
Vedanta, however, goes above the concept of Whitehead and envisages the Eternal
Being existing at the background of the world process. In fact, the conclusions
of the theory of relativity shift the entire position of scientific thinking
and even the commonplace method of popular philosophy, and brings about a
reorientation in the conception of matter, motion and force. The discovery that
perceptions depend on the position and velocity of the observers makes it
impossible for one to state anything as an invariable truth about the things of
the world. Curiously enough, the observers themselves would be relative to one
another, and there would be none to observe even the fact of relativity! Here
we rise to a tremendous intuition, above all thought, and visualise an
incredible infinite which ought to be the real Observer of the whole universe
of relativity. The 'ingressive evolution' of Whitehead gives a hint to a
terrific unity underlying all evolutionary process. Whitehead himself does not
seem to have noticed the great significance of his system - it points to
something beyond what he intended to tell us. We are lifted to the eternal, the
immortal.
Let me make the matter clear to you by
another observation. You are acquainted with principle of gravitation, a law by
which bodies attract one another in a particular manner. The centres of gravity
should be relative, because there is attraction of everything towards
everything else, under the governance of the same law. Not only material
objects and masses of matter but even we as bodies are relative centres of
gravity, determining one another in characteristic as well as existence. That
there is an internal relationship among bodies, which is exhibited in the form
of gravitation and attraction, indicated that the bodies of the universe are in
some mysterious way held together by a single force-we may call it the
universal centre of gravity. Unless such a centre is accepted, the system, the
order and the method observed in the working of the universe cannot be
explained. Mystic philosophers are used to say that this cosmic centre is
everywhere, with its circumference nowhere. We may call this the God of the
universe, if we so wish.
We know the world; but what about that by
which we know it? How can we know the knower? The great sage, Yajnavalkya,
prominent in the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad, makes a significant reference in his
immortal instructions to his consort, Maitreyi, to the awe-inspiring existence
of the Self which is the seer and the knower of all things, but which itself
cannot be an object of anyone's knowledge. This Self is not an element among
many others in the world, for it is the observer of the elements. The two
different elements-beginning from two common objects up to the individual as
set against the universe - cannot be known except by a consciousness which is
all-embracing. The intimacy that subsists between the knower and the known is
accounted for by the objects being phases of Vishayachaitanya, or
consciousness in a state of configuration. We understand, then, that matter is
nothing but spirit discerned by the senses.
A great French philosopher once sat
contemplating on the problem of human experience, on the methods of arriving at
truth, and on the possibilities of confronting errors at every step in this
hazardous attempt. He thought: May be that I do not see clearly, nor think
rightly. It may be that I am forced by some imp to think wrongly and to observe
imperfectly and distortedly. It is likely that nothing that I see or know is
certain or capable of being designated as an uncontradictable truth. Everything
may be doubtful. I may doubt the existence of my body, of the world or even the
validity of the very processes of my thought. There is only a sea of doubt,
nothing else. Well, accepting this position tentatively, can I come to the
conclusion that the true state of affairs is that there is only doubt, doubt
about even my own self, and nothing beyond? Though it may be a fact that I have
the right to doubt or disbelieve everything, I have definitely not warrant to
doubt that I doubt. The fact of doubting itself cannot be doubted. The doubter
is indubitable. The doubter exists as an uncontradictable fact. I am, and this
cannot be doubted.
And I know that I am finite. I have an
innate feeling that I have to be perfect, that I should achieve unconditional
perfection. Naturally, this means that I should be unrestricted and be
wanting in nothing. In short, I wish to possess the infinite, and I can
conceive of it as an idea. Now, this idea of perfection, of infinitude, has
arisen in me, and this idea, being an effect, must have a cause which is at
least equal to it. The idea arises from me, and therefore I am the cause of it.
The idea, having relevance to the infinite, presupposes my own existence as
having a similar relevancy. An idea of the infinite cannot be supposed to arise
from a finite cause. I should be essentially infinite. We may give this
stupendous Being any name, it matters little. That there is an intimate
relation between the essence of the subjective knower and the reality of the
objective universe cannot be doubted. In fact the two are one and form a
unitary being. Reality is non-dual.
For purpose of clarity in understanding, we
may explain the constitution of the universe as in many respects similar to
that of our own body. Our body is not an indivisible whole; it is made up of
discrete organisms, called cells. Each cell is different from the other, with
gap in between, and yet we have a definite feeling that we are one impartite
personality. The consciousness that is immanent in us as a single being is
responsible for this feeling. Such a feeling expanded to the cosmos would be
the feeling of God. This God-consciousness stands opposed to the individual
body-consciousness in that the latter has an object to be known outside it,
while the former is an integral fullness, a plenum outside which nothing can
be. In the assertion of the cosmic I, everything existent or conceivable is
included.
A great hymn of the Rig-Veda, called the
Purusha-Sukta, or the Hymn of the Cosmic Man, visualises in a grand poetic
image the Supreme Being as endowed with thousands of limbs, thousands of heads,
eyes, feet, and so on. All that was, is and shall be is said to be comprehended
within this Almighty Purusha. The idea behind this majestic vision is that the
universe is one body, and even as the different limbs of our body are
integrated in our personal and individual consciousness, the different limbs of
the universe-including our own bodies - are integrated as sublimated essences in
the Almighty, whom we call God, Isvara, the Essence, the Substance, the
Reality, etc. A correct understanding of the significance of this concept of
truth will at once reveal to us our position in the universe, our relation to
others, and our supreme duty in life. What can be a higher duty and a
responsibility than to strain every nerve of ours in attaining this
consummation of our existence in the Absolute! Where can be a goal other than
this for us to achieve in the different walks of our life? Viewed in this
way - and there can be no other way worth the name - the foremost duty of the
human being is anything that is directly or indirectly connected with the
realisation of this highest end. We live for this, we move towards this, and we
have our being in this. When we know this, and this feeling enters deeply into
our hearts, we live the true life, and we are blessed.
|