Study Notes
PARAGRAPH 11
A second affirmation which our mind naturally accepts as the consequence of the first postulate, is that by the supreme consciousness and the supreme power of this omnipresent Divinity in its perfect universal knowledge and divine wisdom all things are ordered and governed in their fundamental relations and their process. But, on the other hand, the actual process of things, the actual relations which we see are, as presented to our human consciousness, relations of imperfection, of limitation; there appears a disharmony, even a perversion, something that is the contrary of our conception of the Divine Existence, a very apparent denial or at least a disfigurement or disguise of the Divine Presence.
EXPLANATION
We accept omnipresent divinity as our first affirmation. As a consequence of this affirmation our mind accepts the supreme consciousness and the supreme power of this omnipresent Divinity. In its perfect universal knowledge and divine wisdom all things in the universe are ordered and governed in their fundamental relations and their process.
On the contrary we see relations of imperfection, of limitation. There is disharmony, perversion. All these things apparently deny or at least disfigure or disguise the Divine Presence.
There arises then a third affirmation of the Divine Reality and the world reality as different in essence or in order, so different that we have to draw away from one to reach the other; if we would find the Divine Inhabitant, we must reject the world he inhabits, governs, has created or manifested in his own existence. The first of these three propositions is inevitable; the second also must stand if the omnipresent Divine has anything at all to do with the world he inhabits and with its manifestation, building, maintenance and government: but the third seems also self-evident and yet it is incompatible with its precedents, and this dissonance confronts us with a problem which appears to be incapable of satisfactory solution.
EXPLANATION
As a consequence of the first two a third affirmation arises. That is, we affirm that the Divine Reality and the world are different in essence or in order. They are so different that in order to reach the one we have to draw away from the other. Either we choose the Divine Inhabitant and reject the world or choose the world and reject the Divine.
The first proposition is inevitable. The second also must hold good as the omnipresent Divine has something to do with this world, with its manifestation, building, maintenance and government.
The third proposition seems to be self-evident and apparent. But it is incompatible with the other two. This disagreement poses a problem for which we are unable to find a satisfactory solution.
PARAGRAPH 12
It is not difficult by some construction of the philosophic reason or of theological reasoning to circumvent the difficulty. It is possible to erect a fain´eant Deity, like the gods of Epicurus, blissful in himself, observing but indifferent to a world conducted or misconducted by a mechanical law of Nature. It is open to us to posit a Witness Self, a silent Soul in things, a Purusha who allows Nature to do what she will and is content to reflect all her order and all her disorders in his passive and stainless consciousness,—or a supreme Self absolute, inactive, free from all relations, unconcerned with the works of the cosmic Illusion or Creation which has mysteriously or paradoxically originated from It or over against It to tempt and afflict a world of temporal creatures.
EXPLANATION
We can bye-pass this difficulty by inventing some philosophical reasoning, or some theological reasoning. It is possible to conceive of a passive god like the gods of Epicurus (Epicurus was a Greek philosopher who believed that Gods have no influence on human lives; he rejected the existence of an immortal soul; we can gain knowledge of the world only by relying upon our senses) who are indifferent to a world governed by mechanical law of Nature.
We can conceive of a passive, silent Witness Self (Purusha) who does not participate in the actions of Prakriti. Or we can think of a supreme Self absolute, free from all relations unconcerned with the works of cosmic Illusion or Creation whose origin seems to be a paradox; we can take all the creations as an illusion imposed on the Self (Mayavada).
But all these solutions do no more than reflect the apparent dissonance of our twofold experience; they do not attempt to reconcile, neither do they solve or explain it, but only reaffirm it by an open or covert dualism and an essential division of the Indivisible. Practically, there is affirmed a dual Godhead, Self or Soul and Nature: but Nature, the Power in things, cannot be anything else than a power of the Self, the Soul, the essential Being of things; her works cannot be altogether independent of Soul or Self, cannot be her own contrary result and working unaffected by its consent or refusal or a violence of mechanical Force imposed on an inertia of mechanical Passivity.
EXPLANATION
All these solutions create division rather than reconciliation. They do not explain the conflict between the Divine and the world we live in. Rather they reaffirm the opposition by dualism, an essential division of the Indivisible. They affirm a dual Godhead, Soul and Nature (Sankhya philosophy).
But the Power in Nature cannot be other than that of the Soul. Nature cannot work independently of the Purusha. It requires the consent or refusal of the Purusha. Nature cannot impose her violent mechanical Force on the Passive Purusha.
It is possible again to posit an observing inactive Self and an active creating Godhead; but this device cannot serve us, for in the end these two must really be one in a dual aspect,—the Godhead the active aspect of the observing Self, the Self a witness of its own Godhead in action. A discord, a gulf between the Self in knowledge and the same Self in its works needs explanation, but it presents itself as unexplained and inexplicable. Or, again, we can posit a double consciousness of Brahman the Reality, one static and one dynamic, one essential and spiritual in which it is Self perfect and absolute, another formative, pragmatic, in which it becomes not-self and with which its absoluteness and perfection have no concern of participation; for it is only a temporal formation in the timeless Reality.
EXPLANATION
Again we can create a division between an observing inactive Self and an active creating Godhead (Inactive and active Brahman). This also does not give us the solution as these two are really one in a dual aspect. A gulf is created between the Self in knowledge and the same Self in its works. This gulf remains unexplained and inexplicable.
We can posit a double consciousness of Brahman, one static and one dynamic; one essential and spiritual in which it is Self perfect and absolute; another is formative (assuming forms), pragmatic in which it becomes not-self. It is considered a formation subject to time against the background of timeless Reality.
But to us who even if only half-existent, half-conscious, yet inhabit the Absolute’s half-dream of living and are compelled by Nature to have in it a terrible and insistent concern and to deal with it as real, this wears the appearance of an obvious mystification; for this temporal consciousness and its formations are also in the end a Power of the one Self, depend upon it, can exist only by it; what exists by the power of the Reality cannot be unrelated to It or That unrelated to the world of its own Power’s making.
EXPLANATION
Assuming that we, as human beings, are only half-existent (not fully real), half-conscious (in a dream state), yet the fact remains that we live in this world which is supposed to be the Absolute’s half-dream (as per Mayavadins). Yet we are compelled by Nature to treat this world and our lives in it as real. For us the conception that all creations in this world are only temporal (subject to time) constructions erected on the Reality appears to be a mystery.
Because what we consider temporal consciousness and its formations are also in the end a Power of the one Self (Brahman). They depend on it and exist by it. Therefore, what exists by the power of the Reality cannot be unrelated to it. It is also true that the Brahman, the Reality cannot be unrelated to the world which is nothing but its own Power’s making.
If the world exists by the supreme Spirit, so also its ordering and relations must exist by the power of the Spirit; its law must be according to some law of the spiritual consciousness and existence. The Self, the Reality must be aware of and aware in the world consciousness which exists in its being; a power of the Self, the Reality must be constantly determining or at least sanctioning its phenomena and operations: for there can be no independent power, no Nature not derived from the original and eternal Self- Existence.
EXPLANATION
If we admit the fact that the world exists by the supreme Spirit then it must be true that the ordering of various actions in this world and their relations must also exist by the power of the Spirit. The law that governs the actions of this world must be the law of the spiritual consciousness and existence.
The world consciousness exists in the being of the Self. Therefore the Self, the Reality must be aware of the world in its consciousness. It is the power of the Self that must be constantly determining or atleast sanctioning all the phenomenal actions in the world. Because there cannot be any other power that governs this world than that of the original and eternal Self-Existence (Brahman).
If it does no more, it must still be originating or determining the universe through the mere fact of its conscious omnipresence. It is, no doubt, a truth of spiritual experience that there is a status of peace and silence in the Infinite behind the cosmic activity, a Consciousness that is the immobile Witness of the creation; but this is not the whole of spiritual experience, and we cannot hope to find in one side only of knowledge a fundamental and total explanation of the Universe.
EXPLANATION
It is a fact that the Divine Reality has its conscious omnipresence. Therefore, it must be originating or determining the universe. It is a truth of spiritual experience that there is a status of peace and silence in the Infinite behind the phenomenal actions of the world; there is an immobile Witness Consciousness behind all creation. But this is not the whole of spiritual experience. This partial experience alone cannot give us the fundamental knowledge and total explanation of the Universe.