|
The
Evolutionary Process
These ideas have something to do with the
knowledge of the structure of things, Samkhya. This knowledge, will make us
wake up a little to the situation in which we are today, and we would then be
anxious to know what would be our future, and what we could do under the
circumstances here to improve ourselves in the direction of our movement or
ascent higher. Why should we not take to the practice of Yoga, if Yoga means
the effort to evolve into the higher realms of living, towards the final attainment
of ultimate perfection, which alone can make us satisfied fully? Who on earth
can forego the practice of Yoga if this is the state of affairs, and why should
anybody tell us that we should do Yoga? It would be clear like daylight to
everyone, once the knowledge of the structure of things is gained.
The practice of Yoga is not what is
important; it is the need that one feels for the practice of Yoga that is
important. That comes first, and the practice follows afterwards. If we do not
feel the need at all, whence comes the practice? We do not feel the need,
because we are totally ignorant. We are living in a fool's paradise, under the
impression that everything is fine, when, in fact, everything is dead wrong.
The universe is moving rapidly, like a fast running railway train, towards its
destination, and we are as if sealed in this vehicle, this moving train. We
cannot keep quiet. We have to move with the train that moves, because we are in
it; we are in the universe that moves, and we have to move. So, we are not
stable, independent indivisible isolated beings as we appear to ourselves. We
are not self-identified individualities. Rather, we are masses of a process; we
are bundles of a movement. This is because of the fact that we cannot be
stable, self-identified indivisibilities in an evolving universe. Therefore,
great thinkers like Gautama Buddha were tirelessly telling us that we could not
touch the same water in a river, the next moment. Every second we are touching
new water in a flowing river. Likewise, when we are touching our own body,
after a few minutes, perhaps, we are touching something different. It is not
the thing that we saw, or was there, a few minutes before. When a train is
moving, we see new objects every second, because it is passing through areas
not covered already.
The universe is moving, and this
unavoidable movement of the universe is called evolution. Whether or not it is
the evolution as described by Darwin or Lamarck or the Upanishads, it makes no
difference. There is such a thing called evolution, which is another name for
the necessity felt by the finite to move towards the infinite. Nothing finite
can rest content with its own self. Nobody likes limitations of any kind. We do
not like bondage. We resent it whole-heartedly. We do not like any kind of
restriction imposed upon us by anything from outside. This is the cause behind
the struggle for freedom, because we are limited in every way. The body is a
limitation. My existence here is limited by the existence of people outside in
the world, and there are other limitations of a social and political nature,
about which we are not happy. Because, who likes to be limited, restricted,
bound in a prison, as it were? We want to be free birds. We want to have a say
of our own in everything. This is not possible in this world. The real freedom
that the soul is asking for is unavailable in this finite world of finite
individualities and limited patterns of experience.
We are too much enmeshed in prejudices
psychologically, and even rationally. Even as there are emotional and
sentimental prejudices, we have intellectual and rational prejudices. They may
all look highly reasonable things, but they can be self-assertions of
personality. They look reasonable, because the mind and the reason have been
tied up by knots to such ways of thinking; and they are called the idols of the
cave and idols of various other types mentioned by a learned man of England,
Francis Bacon, by which what he means is a prejudice of the mind and a
stereotyped movement of the way of thinking into which we are born from our
childhood. Our parents have told us something and our schoolmasters and
professors have said something else. The society tells us yet another thing. We
are born in a particular nation, which has its own ways and modes of thinking,
and its own ideologies according to which it has to work. These are the ways in
which we get brain-washed right from childhood. We have to de-condition
ourselves if we have to practise Yoga. Any kind of a conditioned mind is unfit
for this purpose. We should shed all these preconditions and notions that we
are such-and-such, and this and that, that we are particular religionists, that
we are Hindus or Christians or Muslims, that we are monks or householders, or
even that we are men or women. These are the prejudices which are hard-boiled
things, and they cannot leave us easily. They are a part and parcel of our
consciousness. Existence is the same as consciousness, and our prejudiced
existence has become one with our consciousness, so that we cannot even detect
that we have any prejudice in our minds. Everything looks fine, and we seem to
be spotless in our ideas and ideologies. That is why we have been told again
and again that a teacher is necessary here on the path.
The mind is enmeshed in various types of
inborn traits which are not necessarily compatible with the nature of things.
This universe, this world, this large atmosphere around us, is not constituted
of bits of matter or isolated units that have no connection with one another. 'Universe'
is a very appropriate word to signify this atmosphere. It is the opposite of
chaos. Chaos is a confused medley of particulars which have their own ways and
move in their own directions, having absolutely no relation with one another.
But, 'universe' is a word which signifies arrangement of things, and order in
that arrangement, where the particulars are characterised not merely by
external connections, but also by an internal relation. The definition of what
an internal relation is, as, distinguished from an external connection, can be
illustrated by an example. People forming the body of parliament in a country
have a connection with one another, because they form one corporate whole
called the parliament. They have naturally a relationship with one another, but
this relationship of the units constituting the body of parliament can be
broken any day by various methods of political manoeuvring about which everyone
knows so well. Thus, there is no real internal relationship of the members of
parliament as between themselves. A man may resign his post as a member of
parliament. Even when he functions as a member, internally he is not related to
anyone. He is an independent person. Here, the connection of them all with the
parliament is an external connection. An internal relationship is an inviolable
connection, whereas an external connection is such that it can be snapped if
necessity arises.
Our relationship to the universe is not
like the relationship of the members of a parliament or a corporate body. Our
relationship to the universe is internal, inviolable, inexorable and eternal;
it cannot die. We are related to the universe for ever and ever, and we can
never sever this relationship at any time. Well, we may consider the limbs of the
body as inviolably related to the body, but even this organic connection of the
limbs of the body to the structure called the body is of an inferior type. This
is so, because a part of the body can be severed. We can cut off the arm of a
person, or any other limb of a person, by amputation, and the relationship of
this part to the body will cease, but with no amputation and under no
circumstances can we sever our relationship with this world or the universe. No
amputation is possible here. No kind of severance of relationship of the
particulars or individuals is possible under any circumstance in respect of
this vast universe. We are eternally related to it since ages, and in the
scheme of evolution, if we have risen to this level of humanity by rising from
the bottom, we did exist before we were human beings. The prior existence of
the individual in other bodies or other species of beings is proved
automatically by the fact of the evolution of things, and this fact also proves
post-existence for the individual.
Evolution is a fact, and mankind is
certainly not the ultimate pinnacle of the process of evolution. If there has
been evolution from lower levels to the present level, then it also has to be
there from the present level to even higher levels. We did exist centuries and
aeons before, and we will continue to exist aeons hence also. We are eternal
units of this large structure called the universe. We are not citizens of this
world at all. We belong neither to Orissa nor to Madras. What puny, petty ideas
we have got in our minds! I am a Maharashtrian, I am a Punjabi, a Tamilian, a
Keralite.and so on! How low have we come! How shameful is our existence when we
think of these little things as our real marks of identification! In truth, we
seem to belong to a large structure, a universe which is behind us and ahead of
us through various realms of being. Even while we try to conceive of this
structure, we will have consternation every moment of time. We will be looking
around on all sides trying to figure out where we are standing at all. "Am I of
this world? Am I in this world? Am I in a world at all or am I somewhere else?" - Faced
with these questions, one is bound to be shocked; one will not be able to say
anything. Such would be one's wonder and consternation at this little insight
into the nature of the universe and one's own relationship to it. So, this
little picture of the structure of things or the nature of the universe may be
regarded as a preface or an introduction to certain other details that we may
have to know about the universe itself.
Purusha
and Prakriti - Nature of the Original Split in Brahman
It is true that the large structure of the
universe is so vast that it extends behind us in the lower levels and it
stretches ahead of us into the higher reaches of evolution. But, there are
minute details associated with the analysis we have made, about which also we
should know something, in order that we may be left with no doubts in our minds
about the practice of Yoga. Before we step into the realm of Yogic practice, we
should be free from every kind of intellectual doubt and emotional tension.
These two things should be cast out like devils. Intellectual doubts and
emotional tensions are our greatest enemies in our spiritual pursuit. All
doubts must be cleared either by studies, or by resorting to advice from one's
own teacher, or both. That this vast universe was once a large mass,
indivisible and undifferentiated in its nature, is something that every
religion tells us. The Bible, the Upanishads, why, even modern science - all tell
the same thing, practically - that the universe was one indistinguishable
undivided mass of matter. Science tells us that it was an atom. The universe
was an atom originally, and it split into two, or it became four. It became
eight, it became sixteen, it became thirty two, sixty four, endlessly
million-fold, unthinkably multifarious and multitudinous, as it is now. This is
whatever modern physics will tell us. In the beginning was the word, says the
Bible. So is the proclamation of the Upanishads and the Vedas, and every
scripture practically. Biology tells us that there was one cell originally. We
were originally a single cell or a mono cell or a uni-cell. And this one cell
split into two to give us a bi-cell, or splits into four to give us a quarter
cell, and so on. I met a physician in Bombay, a great expert. He told me, "Swamiji,
today medical science is coming to the very same conclusions which the
Upanishads proclaimed thousands of years back. The universe was one or started
with one single undivided being. We also say the same thing now. One single
unit of individual, a little drop, or perhaps something smaller than a drop,
something more minute than what we may call a cell - this is the origin of the
large body of the human being". And the doctor told me that if this little cell
was minutely analysed scientifically it could tell us how long the body
evolving from it would live, the experiences it would pass through, and every
other detail till the death of the individual. It all has been decided in this
little cell. And what else does the Upanishad tell us! The great Will of the
Supreme Being is the original determinant of all the individuals of the
universe: even a sparrow cannot fall without the will of God; a leaf cannot move
without the will of the Supreme. We cannot eat a thing unless it is permitted
by the Law of the Cosmos. Now, this seems to be the origin of things, a single
undivided unity which, as our masters tell us and scriptures proclaim, somehow
appeared to have divided itself into two. It has not really split itself into
two. Because, if it had really become two and hundred and so on, it cannot
become one again, and there would be no chance of our reaching God. But, the
fact of the possibility of attaining liberation and the chance of attaining God
just at this moment should be adequate proof of there not being a real split;
and the Vedanta philosophy goes so far as to say that the split is something of
the nature of the split that takes place in dream. There is a bifurcation, a
modification, a multiplication into individualities and particularities in the
dream world. But, it does not really take place; because, when we wake up from
dream, the particulars get absorbed into the unity of our mind as if they had never
existed at all, notwithstanding the fact that we saw the particulars. So, this
is a distinguishing feature of the Vedanta philosophy, which makes a departure
from the other doctrines by emphasising that if there had been a real
bifurcation or division in the original unity, there would be no chance of
liberation of the individuals. In that case, we would be always divided from
God.
We cannot even think of unity if the idea
of unity had not been implanted in our minds. A finite which is really finite,
cannot think of the infinite. The idea of the infinite cannot arise in the
finite brain, because the two are contradictions. But the idea of the infinite
does arise in our mind, and we cry to break the boundaries of the finitude and
reach an endlessness of being horizontally as well as in quality. So, it may be
true that God did not cease to be God when He created the world. He is still
the same God that He was and He shall be the same God in future too. God is
eternal. He is not a changing substance, or an object that ceases to be itself
in becoming an effect. This is a highly intricate and interesting philosophical
point. This universe, that was one and that is one, does appear as a multitude,
but not suddenly. It becomes two at first. This becoming of the one into two is
what the Samkhya refers to as Purusha and Prakriti, consciousness and its
object, the spirit within and the world outside. The original bifurcation or
division is of the one being into the seer and the seen, the subject and the
object. The one becomes two, as we may say. There was a state of being which
was there prior even to this division of the one into the seer and the seen,
namely, a consciousness of Being. We have to stretch our imagination to feel
what this state would be like, because even the awareness that one is, is a
kind of limitation on absoluteness. The state of absoluteness is not even the
self-awareness or consciousness of one's being, the feeling "I am", but
something transcendent to it, far beyond it. Subsequently, it is the state of "I
am" - ness; Aham Asmi, as the Upanishad
puts it. Posterior to this universal self-awareness is the division of the one
into the twofold so-called realities of consciousness and its object, Purusha
and Prakriti. The Samkhya, in its classical form, talks much of these two
principles - Purusha and Prakriti. There are only two things in this universe.
Nothing else. Consciousness and what is not consciousness. There cannot be
anything else. There is a perceiver and there is the perceived. This is classical
Samkhya, of which the practical implementation is supposed to be Yoga.
|