I grew up in a society where these ideas are a part of the vernacular.
Nobody thought about them separately, at least not consciously. I do not know,
over the years, during the period of my growing up, whether or how they shaped
the society as it was then. I would like to believe they should have, given the
fact that they lasted for thousands of years. Time tested at their core, these
ideas/concepts must have touched the inner light of ultimate truth of all
mankind. If they are true, intellectually or spiritually are they strong enough
to guide an individual’s life (bring a sense of purpose, giving direction), are
they broad enough to influence a whole society and form the backbone of its
socio-political structure leading the society to a glorious existence? Given
our current historical knowledge, these ideas originated in Indian subcontinent
and thrived there for centuries. History, as we know today, tell us that at a
point of time Indian society did thrive wondrously but has over the years
decayed and fizzled out losing out to European Industrial Revolution and young
vigorous geo-political religious fervors that arose in the Middle-East-Arabian
Peninsula. Why, How and most important, if these ideas cannot contribute to the
betterment of mankind should we even consider them? These are the questions, nobody has an answer.
Not even modern science. Most of my adult professional life, I spent in a
society where as a by product of globalization and enlightment of the 20th
century I saw a resurgence of an interest in these ideas, at least in public
discourse, and in some significant influential pockets of the society. Yes the
general mass is not aware of them, nor do they care, yet I see that they do
live a good productive life and in many ways better than the Asian societies
(including India) which embraced them. Where is the gap? Is this what Meji realized
when he started to transform the Japanese society by borrowing/copying western
ideas. He did adopt Western political, social, and economic institutions in a
short time but at an individual level he remained true to the centuries
old ideas. Is Japan better for that? What about modern China, South Korea, are
they not doing similar thing, following the same path. Will they be better off
than the western countries in the long run? What about India, why can’t they change,
do they need to change or are they too slow to change? Do they not want a better society where there
is no poverty, country is powerful, respected throughout the world ? These and
many other similar questions are in my head but let’s not get there. For now,
let me try to give a brief, of my understanding (personal interpretation) of
these thousands of years old ideas.
Basic Belief: Everything and all existence is
connected, cyclical and composed of two things, the soul and the body or matter.
The body dies, but not the soul which it assumes to be the eternal reality,
indestructible and bliss. This eternal soul called Atman never reincarnates, it
does not change and cannot change.
Saṃsāra is the mesh of emotional structures which
connect one soul to the other. These emotional structures are created because
of your existence in a particular point of time. An example would be the
emotional structures by which we are bound to our parents (father-mother), to our
friends, colleagues, cousins, to a stranger (as an existentialist will say) and
so on. These structures are constantly changing, evolving and are of varying intensities.
As we embark on the journey of our soul, some relationship gets cut off, new
ones get built, old ones evolve. Samsara exists because multiple souls exist
and no individual soul is capable of existing on its own. All souls exist and
are connected (be it human or animals or plants) and are ultimately fragments
of the eternal soul called Atman, it does not change and cannot change. It is
these connections (and their constantly changing evolution during the souls journey)
are what I would call Samsara.
Maya: Is the understanding of anything that has real,
material form, human or non-human but warped with emotion. It is not the truth,
but the understanding of an individual soul of a thing (material..human or non
human) based on the emotional state of that soul at that point of time. Since every
soul is different and unique fragment of Atman, they see the same thing in
multiple ways. Depending on circumstances, Maya can be used in both positive
and negative ways. Example would be if somebody dies we can say that ‘everything
is maya’ i.e. the person who died is really not dead it just that he discarded
his body and moved on. This helps in the healing process of our emotion. On the
contrary one can fall in love with a person (without reciprocal love) and act
accordingly leading to one’s destruction. In actuality it is maya, the love
does not exist. Maya is different from the idealism , where the proposition is
that a thing(object) exist because I have seen them ( like an object say Pen
exists only when I have seen them). Maya does not doubt the existence or not
existence of anything. It simply refers to our understanding of reality as a unique
and embellished with only our emotions.
Dharma: The purpose of life is not defined when we
are born, it is inherent property of the soul which gets its uniqueness from
it. The flowering of that purpose in the context of time when the soul exists
on earth is determined later, during the soul’s existence on earth. Whatever
maybe, a soul will always do whatever he or she is suppose to do (or gives its
uniqueness). This is dharma. If a soul’s purpose of life is to be a criminal
then he/she will be one and that is it’s dharma, on the contrary if a soul’s purpose
is too do good , he/she will do that. It
is the thing that regulates the course of change by not participating in
change, but that principle which remains constant. It does not say what
is right or wrong. It does not say what should done and what should not be
done. It simply says that a one will do what he/she is born to do. That is
his/her dharma. A Man born as man should act/live like a man , a woman born as
a woman should act/live like a woman. If woman tries to act/live like a man
then it is adharma. Connection between souls (Samsara) can survive if every
soul acts in dharma (criminal or not criminal) because there exists automatic
balancing mechanism. However, the samsara breaks apart when there is too much
adharma and thus external forces is necessary to restore order.
Ahimsa: Is to not wish harm to any living creature — not
even to any lifeless object. It is an attitude of universal benevolence.
To harm anyone in the slightest way, even by disrespect, will harm the person
doing the action as well as the one receiving it. The perfect practice of
ahimsa, then, is very rare. For though not many people would actually kill
their fellows, it is common to find people slashing at one another with angry
words, or with contemptuous glances. Ahimsa is not pacifism. The
precepts of Ahimsa require that war must be avoided, with sincere and truthful
dialogue. Force must be the last resort. If war becomes necessary, its cause
must be just, its purpose virtuous, its objective to restrain the wicked, its
aim peace, its method lawful. War can only be started and stopped by a
legitimate authority. Weapons used must be proportionate to the opponent and
the aim of war, not indiscriminate tools of destruction. All strategies and
weapons used in the war must be to defeat the opponent, not designed to cause
misery to the opponent; for example, use of arrows is allowed, but use of
arrows smeared with painful poison is not allowed. Warriors must use judgment
in the battlefield. Cruelty to the opponent during war is forbidden. Wounded,
unarmed opponent warriors must not be attacked or killed, they must be brought
to your realm and given medical treatment. Children, women and civilians must
not be injured. While the war is in progress, sincere dialogue for peace must
continue. Ahimsa is a multidimensional concept, it is inspired by the premise
that all souls are connected to one another is a part of a larger self Atman;
therefore, to hurt another being is to hurt oneself.
Shanti: Is inner peace, a state of being spiritually
at balance, with enough knowledge and understanding to keep oneself strong and
in equilibrium in the face of discord or stress. Shanti is very dynamic, an
example would be when one is riding a moving bicycle he/she is at peace, in
perfect balance, shanti. As soon as the cycle stops that balance is lost, shanti
is broken. Shanti is inner peace. When one leads a life on the path of dharma
and is completely at poise with whatever he is doing then he is at shanti.
Shanti is not an end state of satisfaction.
If one reaches satisfaction, knows what to do next and sets upon doing
it in perfect harmony , then he/she is at shanti. It is state of equilibrium,
balance and poise.
Purusha and Prakriti : Literary Purusha means male
and Prakirti means nature, mostly associated with female, though not directly.
In its purest form it is that which is created. There is no conflict between
purusha and prakriti, no dialectics. These ideas exist without any beginning and
in duality and encompass the all of our consciousness. They bring the wholeness
of the existence. Purusha, pure and distant, is beyond subject and object. One
cannot understand purusha, for that would make it an object. Purusha cannot
know or understand anything either, for that would make purusha a subject.
Purusha simply just is. But, because of the presence of prakriti, purusha gets
attracted to nature in the way a man is attracted when he watches a beautiful
woman dancing. He cannot help but try to get closer. Then purusha becomes
trapped inside prakriti, purusha gets more and more entangled in prakriti. Soon
purusha forgets that it was ever separate and ceases to struggle to regain its
freedom. Purusha is the soul, the Self, pure consciousness, and the only source
of consciousness. Since purusha is pure consciousness, it follows that
prakriti is unconscious. Prakriti is everything that is changing. Prakriti is
not just the physical aspects of the universe that we can sense; it is our very
senses themselves - our thoughts, memories, desires, and even our intelligence.
Prakriti is everything that is that isn't conscious. Consciousness resides only
in purusha, or more properly, as purusha. Purusha is the principle of
pure consciousness, while Prakriti is the principle of matter, where Purusha is
the masculine in every living being as consciousness, while Prakriti is the
feminine and substrate which accepts the Purusha. Prakriti is the
feminine aspect of existence, the personified will and energy of the Supreme
(Brahman). Prakriti is the potency that brings about evolution and change
in the empirical universe. It is the "primal motive force". It
is the essential constituent of the universe and is at the basis of all the
activity of the creation.
Brahman: There is no God , but there is Brahman, or
God and Brahman is the same. We can only realize linear time dimension necessitating
the existence of start and end of time. Bharman is the start of time and it is
also the end of time.
The
description of Brahman: "Not this, not this" (Neti, Neti); for there
is no other and more appropriate description than this "Not this."
Now the
designation of Brahman: "The Truth of truth." The vital breath is
truth and It (Brahman) is the Truth of that.
—
Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 2.3.6
Brahman cannot be thought of, cannot be seen, doesn’t not have
any form, shape or matter. It can only be realized. Brahman connotes the highest Universal Principle, the Ultimate Reality in the universe. It is the material, efficient, formal and final cause of all that
exists. It is the pervasive, genderless, infinite, eternal truth
and bliss which does not change, yet is the cause of all changes and is the
final end state of all changes. Brahman as a metaphysical concept is
the single binding unity behind diversity in all that exists in the universe.
Brahman is the Indestructible and Supreme Spirit. It is present in every
atom of creation, but remains there as the Viewer, not affected by creation.
Within Vedanta,
there are two distinct schools of thought, advaita and dvaita. The advaita, or
nondualist, school of thought teaches that the individual soul is Brahman,
and that our goal is to realize our oneness with It and merge back into It. It
teaches that Brahman is the only reality and that there is no
separation between the soul and Brahman. Any apparent separation is
illusion.
The dvaita (dualist) school, on the other hand,
teaches that the soul and Brahman are separate, distinct
beings, and that Brahman has a form and personality, vs. the advaita
belief that Brahman is formless Spirit. Dvaita Vedanta
acknowledges two principles; however, it holds one of them (the sentient) as
being eternally dependent on the other. The individual souls are depicted as
reflections, images or shadows of the divine, but never in any way identical
with the divine. Moksha(liberation) therefore is described as the realization that
all finite reality is essentially dependent on the Supreme. The first reality is the Brahman and the
second reality is that of dependent but equally real universe that exists with
its own separate essence. Everything that is composed of the second reality,
such as individual soul, matter, and the like exist with their own separate reality.
The distinguishing factor of this philosophy, as opposed to monistic Advaita
Vedanta, is that God takes on a personal role and is seen as a real
eternal entity that governs and controls the universe.
I am a believer in
the simplistic idea of Atman(soul) and Brahman as being one and same and
existing within us and many (in all living beings) , and whole purpose of our existence
is to merge with this Atman as the ultimate reality.
