(SAaplev - £

cMallez, cMlnd
& (So/isciousnvss
 MATTER, MIND AND CONSCIOUSNESS

It can hardly be disputed that possession of higher mind

distinguishes man from rest of the living species. The rational and self-
reflective mind of the humans bears the key to all that they have achieved.

That is why, a systematic investigation into the nature of Mind has been

one of the main concerns in natural sciences, Psychology, Philosophy

and Religion. There are many a views with regard to the origin and nature

of Mind, the relationship between Mind and Matter on the one hand,
and Mind and Self on the other. For convenience of analysis, these views

can be brought under three broad categories. There are some who take
‘matter’ as the most basic, and ‘mind’ and ‘consciousness’ as the later
evolUtes. They are the physicalists. There are others who subscribe to

the antithetical view that ‘consciousness’ is most fundamental and

‘matter’ is the derived evolute. Again the dualists plead either in favour

of body-mind dualism or matter-spirit dualism. These schools discuss

about the origin and nature of ‘mind’ by way of expounding their views

about evolution.

The physicalists take ‘matter’ as most basic particular of the world.

Though they differ with regard to the details of their explanations, there

is consensus in certain fundamental respects. The common postulates

on which the physicalists models are broad based are : (a) Material

(16)
particles are the basic building blocks of the universe, (b) Consciousness
is an epiphenomenon. (c) Everything evolves out of ‘matter’ and gets
reabsorbed in the material component, (d) Law of causality contains the

key to the ‘why’ and ‘how’ of the creation process.

With regard to the nature of the ultimate constituents there are two

broad philosophical views. Some opine that they are four in number,
i.e., earth, water, fire, air and others recognise ether as the fifth

constituent. The natural scientists, on the other hand, have arrived at

more than one hundred twelve fundamental particles as the ultimate

substances out of which the whole universe along with diverse particulars
have come into existence. What is really significant is not the number of

ultimate constituents but the view that the non-material evolutes like
‘mind’ and ‘consciousness’ are construed to be the derivative of matter.

Charvaksubstantiates the physicalist’s model by the analogy that, as red

colour appears as an emergent phenomenon when beetle leaves, beetle

nuts and lime are put together whereas redness is not the property of
any of the constituents/ consciousness’, though not the original property

of any of the fundamental elements, appears as an emergent property

when the fundamental elements come into particular configuration. He

considers ‘mind’ as a function of the ‘body’ and ‘consciousness’ as

emergent property of ‘matter’. The concept of consciousness as an

autonomous ontological entity is rejected point-blank on the simple
ground that it is not available through sense-perception. Hume denies

(17)
the existence of self precisely on this ground.

When I enter most intimately into what I call myself,

I always stumble on some particular perception or

other, of heat or cold, light or shade, love or hatred,

pain or pleasure. I never can catch myself at any

time without a perception, and never can observe

anything but the perception.1

Needless to say that the physicalists, the atomists, take perception

as the only valid means of knowledge and causal explanation as the only
valid mode of explanation. Perception being the only means of having
access to reality, anything non-sensuous is construed as non -existent

and unreal. All valid proof and disproof can be undertaken only in the

domain of the phenomenal. Similarly, every phenomenon is explained

in terms of the causal antecedents. Given the antecedent, the effect

follows and given the consequent, the antecedents can be inferred

retrospectively. According to the causal model, there is restrict

determination with regard to what happens. There is no room for choice.

The present is the result of the past and the future is that of the present.
There is no novelty in the creation. The totality of past being given, the
present could not be otherwise, and if one knows the present completely,

the future can be known in advance.

1. Hume, D. An essay concerning human understanding Oxford, London, 1972.

(18)
 The essence of mechanical explanation, in fact, is
to regard the future and the past as the calculable
functions of the present and thus to claim that all is

given. On this hypothesis, past, present and future

would be open at a glance to a superhuman intellect

capable of making the calculation.2

The mechanist’s view of universe leaves no room for teleology or

explanation in terms of purpose-. Even the ‘free will’ of an individual is

considered as a myth. The mind is said to be a function of matter. Mental
functions are understood as the neural events in the nervous system.

Darwin’s view of evolution gave a jolt to the traditional thinking of

the people which was theocentric and had far reaching consequences in

social and philosophical domains. Darwin opined that the evolution of

all living entities can be traced to a common stock. There is no reason

why human beings should be proud of their divine origin when facts point

to the contrary. Immediate ancestor of man is the ape and the whole

evolution of life can be traced to jelly fish. The history of evolution is

characterised by the increasing adaptation of species to the environment.

Those species who have greater capacity for adaptation, survive in the
struggle for existence and those species who fail to adapt themselves in

the changing circumstances become extinct. According to Darwin

2. Bergson Henry, Creative Evolution, Macmillan, London, 1912, page : 39-40.

(19)
environment plays a vital role in shaping the evolution any process. The
interaction between species and the environment has twofold

consequences, viz., elimination of traits that are inessential in the struggle

for existence and growth of those traits that are essential. In course of
evolution not only certain new traits evolve but that certain traits gradually
become weak and consequently become extinct. For example, some tail

like structure at the extreme of the spine is nothing but the remains of

the ape characteristics which the humans had in the remote past before
evolving in to human structure. The process of elimination of inessential

characteristic features and retention of essential features, together

explain the process of natural selection given by Darwin. In Darwinian
scheme the evolution of mental traits and consciousness which gives man

an added advantage for self-regulation are nothing but natural phenomena

that came as the resultants of long periods of adaptation with the

environment.

Lamarck offered another competing theory according to which new

traits are acquired not by the process of nature but by conscious effort
on the part of the species. For example, a giraffe which originally did

not have a long neck, through years of evolution, came to have an

elongated neck because of the conscious effort on the part of the species
to stretch their neck in order to reach the leaves on the higher branches.
The constant effort to stretch the neck resulted in the evolution of new
physical feature, i.e. a long neck. This acquired characteristic is again

(20)
transmitted to the later species. There are certain aspects in respect of
which Darwin and Lamarck mutually differ. For Darwin, the variations

in the traits are due to the differences caused in the cells by the interaction

of the species with the environment and the demand of adaptation.

Lamarck holds that even acquired traits are passed on to the subsequent

generation. According to Lamarck, the emergence of new traits and

physical features are due to the conscious efforts of the organism to live
and grow through constant use or disuse of certain organs. So, the changes

effected in the organism are not due to the mechanical influence of

circumstances, but due to the exercise of consciousness and will.

The scientists like Eimer advocate the theory of Orthogenesis in

order to explain evolutionary change in terms of direct influence of the
environment. He differs from Darwin in so far as the former considers
the variation to be the result of indirect influence of environment through
process of elimination. According to Darwin, as the irrelevant,
characteristics are gradually eliminated, the relevant and necessary
characteristics are strengthened. But the advocates of orthogenesis
maintain that changes are effected in the organism on account of
continuous influence of external environment in a particular direction.

Hugo De vries offer a slightly modified version of Darwinism in

maintaining that emergence of a new feature is not on account of the
gradual changes but due to abrupt emergence of new organ caused by
simultaneous changes. Series of changes in different parts cause sudden

(21)
variations that explains the abrupt appearance of new character or new
species.

The theory of emergent evolution was advocated by Alexander and

C.L.Morgan. Alexander builds his grand metaphysical system by

integrating the philosophical views of the past and scientific thinking of

his contemporary time. According to Alexander, everything physical,

psychic and spiritual have evolved out of space-time coordinate. Space-

time constitutes the ultimate causal womb out-of which the whole

universe has evolved. Alexander, unlike other mathematicians, doesn’t

take time as the fourth dimension but as integral to space. Mere space
without time would be conceivable but not experiencable. Whenever one
experiences something extended in space, it’s existence is also felt as a

duration in time but space need not be conceived in terms of filled

content. He talks of space and time that are devoid of any content

whatsoever. What one experiences in space and time are available in

sense-experience and thought. But pure space and time are the object of
intuition and beyond the reach of sense-experience and reason. The
experience of objects in space and time are empirical determination of

pure space and time. By space he means an infinite space. But here, the

infinite is not the negation of the finite but the continuity of the finite.
Similar is the case with the time. Infinite space and time can be imagined

in terms of unending continuity of finite extension and duration. The

points in space and particular events in time are abstracted out of the

(22)
continuum . He further enunciated the inseparability of space and time

in pointing out that, had there been no space, time would be repetition

of isolated nows. It is space which gives continuity to time. Similarly, it

is the time that lends continuity to objects in space. One cannot have the

idea of a completed line unless different parts of it are perceived

successfully and conceived as the parts of the whole. A point in space is

real at a point of time and a point of time is real in so far as it is understood

in terms of an event in space. In other words, a space is conceived as a

filled time and a time is conceived as a filled space. According to

Alexander not only the physical events but also mental expressions are

meaningful with regard to space-time coordinate. As a naturalist, he is

of the opinion that all mental acts of perception, remembering, willing

are ultimately definable in terms of neural processes that are real in

respect of certain point of space and certain period of time.

Motion is intelligible only with reference to space and time and is

responsible for emergence of different objects. Space-time have twofold

characters. One is pervasive or invariable and the other is non-pervasive

or variable. The pervasive characters are the essential properties of the

objects which owe the reality to space and time which are also self-

pervasive. They are also universal and a priori in so far as they are

inseparable parts of the particulars. They are categories like identity,

relation, substance, quantity, motion, etc. They are the universals that

follow from the space-time coordinate. The non-pervasive character are

(23)
found in some objects, not in all and in the same object for some time

and not always. Alexander very meticulously demonstrates how different

categories arise out of different space and time. The qualities are variable

and come into being as the space-time continuum break them into finite
modes. Motion is the first emergent of space and time. Matter is

conceived by Alexander as a particular configuration of motion in space

and time. The variable qualities, found in the object, are the result of
motion. From matter life emerges by a process of configuration of
elements that are in motion. Matter and life are not divorced nor it is the

case that matter is the basic and life is a later evolute, but that life is
coexistent with certain configuration of matter. It is rather that after

evolution of life or mind, it enlivens and regulates matter. Mind or mental

functions are possible only on the part of a body which is of the nature
of most complex configuration. If mind is to be functionally defined as a.

pattern of actions, it takes action (conation) as more fundamental than

cognition (knowing) and affection (feeling). The mental activity is to be

understood as a system of complex responses experienced by the

individual within. When it is observed from outside, it is of the status of

a physical phenomenon, so that, that which is inwardly mental is

experienced as a neural process or physico-chemical process by an
outside agent. Physical and the mental refer to two ways in which same

given is experienced. Alexander goes a step further in conceiving values

as creation of mind when one reflects on reality. The moral values like

(24)
‘truth’ and ‘goodness’, the aesthetic values like ‘beauty’ and ‘ugliness’

are not objectively real independent of mind but are the creation of mind
when they interact or reflect on reality. Reality as such is neutral. Values

result when a given configuration in space and time are judged by a mind.
They are neither subjective in the sense that they do not owe their origin

to mind only nor are they objective in the sense that they are independent

of human mind. But they result from mind-object interaction. The values
owe their origin the knower and the known as a whole.

While tracing the upward march of evolution, Alexander points out

there is a tendency (nisus) from the lower to the higher. Motion comes

out of space-time coordinate and gives rise to matter in turn. Matter

evolves into life and life into mind or consciousness. In the evolutionary

process something new comes into . existence because of the creative

function of mind which is infinite. So, it is logically plausible to suppose

that, since time is the guiding principle, the evolution shall not stop at

this point and that mind will evolve into still higher state. The existence

of mind points to something still beyond itself, which he termed as a

Deity. The evolution of Deity, according to Alexander, has its support

from the psychological fact of our religious sentiment which points to

our inherent tendency to reach out to something higher. This religious

experience points to the evolution of Deity out of mind and

consciousness. In evolution the higher is the more organised, refined

and subtler than the lower. So, Deity will exhibit greater, harmony,

(25)
perfection and subtlety. As per the principle of evolution, the higher
guides the lower. So, the Deity is understood as a principle that regulates
mind which, in turn, regulates matter and so on. Alexander then goes on

to distinguish between Finite Deity and Infinite Deity. The finite Deity is
one whose body is constituted by finite space-time coordinate. A finite
Deity is the God of religion in a polytheistic system where plurality of

Gods is conceived. The Infinite Deity has for its body the space and time

in entirety. As everything takes place in space and time the Infinite Deity
is the regulative principle of the whole universe. God, as the Infinite

Deity, is not to be confused with mind or consciousness. As mind is

subject to the relation with the body, the Deity is subject to the relation

with all unit-minds or consciousness. The whole world process is

teleological in the sense that everything material or non-material has the

tendency to rise higher and higher. In this process new realities emerge
Mind is an evolute in the mid point of evolution. Existence of God is

justified by the fact that every individual has the religious feeling of

reaching out to the beyond.

Henry Bergson’s reflections on evolution contained in his magnum

opus ‘The Creative Evolution’ is a milestone in philosophy of evolution.

He expounds the notion of change by his celebrated notion of vital force
(elan vital) . According to Bergson, it is the life force that lies at the bottom

of all reality and can explain reality in it’s entirety. Before enunciating

the philosophy of evolution, he directs polemics against other existent

(26)
 *

theories which he classified into two broad categories, viz., Mechanism

and Finalism. The mechanists are those who explain change or evolution.
by the principle of causality whereas the finalists explain everything in

terms of purpose. In case of the former, it is the past that determines the
present and the present determines the future whereas in the case of the
latter, it is the future that determines the present and present determines

the past. According to the mechanists or the physicalists, given the

antecedents, the effect follows. The present is born out of the conditions

of the past. Given the past, the present could not be otherwise. There is

no room for freedom. There is strict determinism. It means if one has

the knowledge of the present in* its totality, then the shape of things in
future can be predicted beforehand. The whole evolutionary process is

subject to strict causal laws. Bergson points to the inadequacy of all

theories of evolution holding that they can not .explain evolution as

anything creative or novel. Though the present grows out of the past,

our experiences tell us that very often there is emergence of something

altogether novel or creative

It is a fact that evolution is not merely mechanical or repetitive, but

points to the emergence of something new or creative. He cites the

instance of the evolution of a complex organ like ‘eye’ in developed

creatures like man and a mollusc Pecten. It is a fact that both man and

pecten, though follow two divergent parts of evolution, having no

commonness with regard to the antecedents, develop complex organ like

(27)
an eye consisting of minute physical components like retina, cornea, etc.
As per the mechanistic hypothesis, the same set of antecedents give rise

to same set of consequents. Then how is that altogether different sets of

circumstances give rise to organ which is so complex and delicate in its
structure. Had it been something very simple and unitary, it could be

attributed to chance or certain stray factors. The evolution of eye Which

involves mutual adaptation of so many subtler components, could not

have been the result of so very different circumstances. Bergson argues
that this is explainable by the supposition of an original vital impulse

which is the primordial principle of all existence. It gives the sole impetus

which only, can account for evolution of things that are novel and creative.

Though both man and pecten share the common vital force, it is possible

that, though they follow two independent and different lines of evolution,
have the identical need to act upon the circumstances. In such case, the
plan of action is to see. A sense organ, after all, is nothing but an outward

expression of an inward urge. Since they share the common impetus and
have the identical need, it gives rise to almost identical sense organs.
The evolution is from unity to multiplicity, from one to many. Elan vital,

which was undifferentiated and unitary in the beginning, undergoes the

process of self-differentiation or division and evolves into manifold

particulars. He compares life-force to a snow ball which swells as it

advances. The same Elan Vital follows different lines of evolution and
expresses itself differently depending upon the suitability and constraints

(28)
of the material environment. The story of evolution is nothing but the
continual attempt of elan vitalto express itself in and through the limiting
influence of the matter. The story is one of conflict between the life and

non -life principles. In certain cases, the matter dominates. As a result,

the life force remains dormant, i.e. in the state of torpor. The so called
‘matter’ refers to the state where elan vital is dormant but is not

nonexistent. In certain lines of evolution the elan vital expresses itself in

form of instinct in the lower animals where the life'force expresses itself

in form of sensation and locomotion. The animal existence is

predominantly instinctive. All the activities of an animal is guided by

instinctive determination. The same life-force expresses itself as torpor
in matter, instinct in animals and as free will, choice, and rational

reflection in human beings, it is termed as ‘Intellect’ by Bergson. The

evolution of intellect or a thinking mind is a significant phenomenon in
the evolutionary process because it gives one the capacity for self­

regulation. Instinct is guided by the knowledge of matter whereas the

intelligence is guided by the knowledge of form. But Intellect can not
help one know the ultimate reality (Elan Vital) which is of the nature of

an undifferentiated flux. Both sense -experience and intellect give us the

knowledge of a fragmented reality. By sense experience we feel the part

and the intellect helps us to conceptualise about the finite.

. (29)
 The intellectuality of mind and materiality of things
are but two co-related aspects of the same inverse
movement of life.3

The whole can be known only when Intellect makes room for

Intuition which can only grasp the reality as a whole in it’s state of

unbroken unity. Mind is useful and necessary in so far as one is called

upon to think, plan and act in the practicalities of life . Intellect or mind,
because of it’s inherent limitation, gives a partial or distorted view of

reality and a disjointed view of time. Time, at the core, admits of no

distinction between past, present and future. It is of the nature of Duree

(duration) wherein, the past, present and future melt into one unitary
experience, where parts loose their identity in the experiences of the

whole by Intuition. Intuition, as a faculty can only know the reality in a

temporal mode called Duree (duration).

The Samkhya philosophers contend that neither pure matter nor

pure consciousness alone can explain the evolutionary phenomena in

their totality. They postulate two ultimate principles to explain change
and evolution, i.e., The conscious principle {Purusa) and the material

principle (Prakrti). According to Samkhya, prakrti is the causal matrix

from which the world of manifold particulars have evolved. It is the

3. Ibid, page-217.

(30)
uncaused cause. Purusa, the conscious principle, is conceived as neither
the cause nor the effect but without it Prakrticannot evolve into the world.
Purusa is of the nature of pure-consciousness. Though it doesn’t

participate actively in the process of creation it remains a mere witness

of the evolutionary process. It’s existence is enough to create commotion

in Prakrti which initiates the process of evolution. Prakrti, being material,

is unconscious but it is perennially active. Prakrtiis Constituted by three

gunas, Sattva (the sentient principle), Rajas (the mutative principle) and
Tamas (the static principle). The sentient factor is the principle of

unfoldment. Rajas is the principle of motion. It is both mobile and

stimulating. Tamas is opposed to Sattva in so far as it is a principle of
envelopment and opposed to Rajasin so far as it arrests activity. It is the

principle of inertia in things and beings. Though they are mutually

belligerent, they exist in a state of harmony before creation. Prakrti refers

to a state when Sattva, Rajas and Tamas exist in a state of harmony.

Creation begins only when there is semblance of contact between Purusa

and Prakrti because of the former’s reflection in the latter. In this state

there is no conflict but there is a continual motion (change). The change

is homogeneous because in this state the gunas change into their own
types. The evolution begins when each guna tries.to predominate over
the others. In other words, creation begins when there is a transition

from homogeneous transformation (svarupaparinama) to heterogeneous

transformation (virupa parinama). Since Sattva, Rajas and Tamas are

(31)
the constituents of Prakrti, everything that evolve have these three gun as.
Therefore, everything, gross or subtle, animate or inanimate, mobile or
immobile exhibit properties of Sattva, Rajas and Tamas. The differences

among the created particulars depend upon the relative dominance of

the gunas on them. It is indeed the Prakrti that evolves into the

multiplicities. The first evolute of Prakrti is Mahat, the macrocosmic mind

which includes everything. It’s microcosmic counterpart is which

is the faculty of discrimination. Buddhi is not to be confused with pure

consciousness because it is an evolute of Prakrti. As Sattva is
preponderant in Mahat, it reflects Purusa. As a result, it becomes
apparently conscious and functionally conscious. The individual in whom
Buddhi predominates, exhibits the properties of righteousness (dharma),

Knowledge (jnana), Renunciation (vairagya), supernormal powers

(aiswarya). The next thing to evolve is Ahamkara. It gives one the sense
of ‘ I-ness’ ‘Mine ’.and ‘Thine’, on account of this ‘I-ness, one has the

sense of agency while doing an action. As one thinks oneself to be the

doer of actions, one remains bound to the results of actions, good or

bad. It is on account of Ahamkara that one remains subject to the karmic

bondage, i.e. dualities of pleasure and pain. When Mahat, which contains
the reflection of Purusa identifies itself with ‘ Ahamkara’. Purusa appears
to be moving just as the moon appears to be moving in a clear moving

water. Samkhya conceives that the state of Ahamkara is alternatively

predominated by Sattva, Rajah and Tamah. Dominance of Sattva results

(32)
in sattvikor vaivaharika Ahamkara which in turn gives rise to five sensory
organs, five motor organs and mind. The dominance of Tamah gives rise

to Bhutadi. As a result, five subtle essences, tanmatras (the essence of

sight, smell, taste, touch and sound) are created which, in turn, give rise
to five gross elements. The sabda tanmatra gives rise to the gross element

ether (akasa) which serves as a medium for the movement of sound. The
sabda tanmatra and sparsa tanmatra together give rise to the gross

element air (maruta), having the qualities of both sound and touch.
Sabda, sparsa and rupa tanmatra together combine to give rise the gross

element light (tejas) which possesses all the qualities of sound, taste and

colour. Again Sabda, sparsa, rupa, rasa together with the gandha
tanmatras produce the gross element earth( Awfi), which has the qualities

of sound, touch, colour, taste and smell. Thus one finds that

preponderance of tamah on Ahamkara produce five subtle elements

[pancatanmatra) which, in turn, produce five gross

elements(pancamahabhutas). The dominance of rajas in Ahamkara

results in taijasa which do not give rise to any evolute in particular but
help vaikarika and bhutadi to give rise to different evolutes. As stated

before, mind, in the scheme of Samkhya, being an evolute of Prakrti, is

subject to the influence of Sattva, Rajas and Tamas. The evolution of

Mind is very crucial in the sense that it is not only the internal sense
organ by which the individual comes to know the state of happiness and
sorrow but also regulates the function of five sensory-motor organs.

(33)
Depending on the relative dominance of the gunas every mind is unique

and as a result, the personality of every person is unique. The way one

thinks and acts depends on one’s nature and state of mind which is
ontologically determined by the relative influence of gunas. As long as

the gunas have sway on the mind, the action of the individual lead to
bondage. The karmic bondage is nothing but the bondage due to the

gunas of Prakrti. Liberation is possible only when through the power of

discrimination (viveka jnana\, one discriminates between self and not
self. As bondage is the result of wrong identification, liberation is the

result of proper discrimination. Knowledge helps one discriminate and

discrimination helps one attain liberation. Liberated individual is one

whose mind functions not by the prompting of the gunas but the nature

of consciousness (Purusa).

Samkhya and Yoga are allied disciplines in so far as Samkhya

develops the metaphysics and Yoga develops the practice. Samkhya

system contains a theoretical explanation of the nature of the self

(individual Purusa), the transcendental self (cosmic Purusa), the causes

of bondage and means of liberation. Yoga philosophy devotes itself to

explication of the ways of attaining the highest state. Like Samkhya, Yoga

explains bondage as the result of wrong identification of Purusa with

Prakrti. In the state of bondage, Purusa appears to undergo the

experience of pleasure and pain depending on the modification of Citta.

(34)
In Yoga system, Cittarefers to the totality of Buddhi(intellect), Ahamkara

(ego), Manas (mind). In all cases of cognition, conation and affection, it

is the Citta that plays a vital role. In every case of cognition, Citta takes

the form of the object. Citta vrttiis nothing but the modification of Citta,

which impels one to action. On account of Citta, the individual

appropriates the sense of pleasure and pain to oneself. Since, Cittais an

evolute of Prakrti, it is inherently unconscious but appears to be conscious

on account of the Purusa’s reflection in it. As a result, Prakrti which is
unconscious appears as conscious and Purusa which is inactive appears

as active. Yoga enumerates the five fundamental Vrttis, modification of

citta, viz., pramana (veridical cognition), viparyaya (erroneous
cognition), vikalpa (imagination), nidra (sleep), smut/(memory). Besides,

Citta, being the evolute of Prakrti, is subject to the relative dominance '

of gunas. Yoga enumerates five different states of mind which arise

because of the influence of the gunas. There are five fundamental states
of Citta, viz., the state of restlessness (ksipta) where mind is extremely
unstable on account of the predominance of the mutative principle

{rajas)\ the state of torpidity, (muddha) where mind tends to be inert,

indolent and ignorant, distracted state (viksipta), where in sattva is
dominant but rajas continue to have its sway; state of concentration,
(ekagra), where mind is relatively composed on account of the dominance

of sattva, and state of no commotion or modification (niruddha). The

first three stages are detrimental to the practice of yoga whereas last two

(35)
are conducive. Yoga is construed as a state wherein there is absolute

cessation of modification of Citta4. In other words, Yoga conceives of a

state where mind continues to exist without any modification whatsoever.

Yoga philosophy conceives of eightfold limbs of yoga (astanga yoga),

viz., Yama :- Ahimsa (non-injury in thought, word and action), Satya
(pursuit of truth), Asteya (non-stealing), Brahmacarya (control over

passions), Aparigraha (restraint on greed) and Niyama:- Sauca (internal

and external purification) Santosa (contentment)", Tapah (practice of

austerity), Svadhyaya (studyof scriptures), Iswara-pranidhana

(contemplation on the Divine); Asana (comfortable physical postures)

which make the body and mind congenial for practice of Yoga; Pranayama

(the practice of breath control; involving inhalation, retention, exhalation)

which is a basic prerequisite for mind control, pratyahara (withdrawal

of mind from external objects), Dharana)the flow of mind in singular

direction); Dhyana (contemplation on the object of ideation); Samadhi

(the state of absolute concentration) where the Citta becomes one with
the object, and loses its identity in the objects of ideation. The state of
Samadhi is attained again in two stages. In the initial stage Citta retains

the consciousness of the object. As a result, the sense of duality is not

altogether transcended. It is the state of determinate trance (samprajhata
samadhi). In the state of indeterminate trance (asamprajnata samadhi),

the consciousness of the object is completely done away with. There is

4. Yoga Citta Vrtti Nirodhah.

. (36)
nothing before Citta to take it’s form. As a result, there is no modification

whatsoever. This is a state of absolute freedom where self is restored in

it’s own nature and is immune to the influence of the gunas of Prakrti.

Sri Aurobindo, acclaimed as a Neo-vedantin, gives a novel

explanation of evolution very much in consonance with vedantic vision.

He takes consciousness as basic and primordial. The highest Reality is

of the nature of Sat (truth), Cit (consciousness) and Ananda (Bliss) which
creates the world of diversity by His blissful sport. One appears as the

many. The creation of the reality out of Saccidananda is termed as

involution which is nothing but the descent of the Divine. Pure

consciousness undergoes the process of self-limitation. As a results,

there is creation of Mind, Life and Matter. Mind represents a stage where,

on account of ignorance, mind fails to cognise the unity beneath the

diversities, the universal in and through the particulars. Life represents

still a grosser state where there is a tendency for further differentiation

and formation of multiplicities. In subsequent stage, mind takes the form

of matter wherein each constituent is independent and different from

the rest. In and through stages of descent, consciousness persists. But in

the lower stage, it is maximally dormant. It is so dormant that matter

appears to be unconscious. The so called matter is noting but the grossest

state of consciousness. The descent of the divine is followed by the
process of ascent in which matter makes upward journey and evolves in
to higher and higher forms of existence. Matter evolves into Life and

(37)
Life into Mind in and through the evolutionary process. Consciousness
which is dormant in the state of matter, becomes progressively manifest.
There is an innate urge on the part of the sleeping consciousness to return

to its original state. The emergence of Life from Matter represents a

subtler state where matter is more refined and organised. The emergence

of Mind from Life is very momentous because here one feels the

attraction of the Divine more intimately and explicitly. When there is

cry from the below, there is an answer from the beyond. Mind tries to

transcend its limitation. As a result, there is a descent of Super-mind

into Mind. Thereafter, there is complete transformation of Mind, Life

and Matter; as they remain completely divorced of ignorance. Mind, by
itself, cannot comprehend the Infinite because of it’s native limitation.

It operates in the domain of finite and is guided by the logic of finite.

That is why, the descent of the Super-mind becomes necessary. Though,

Mind in the subtle state, takes the form of Intuition, it is very often

infected by the limitation of the mind. The integral Yoga evolved by Sri
Aurobindo not only helps the Mind to evolve into the Super-mind but
invokes the latter to descend into it and impregnate it. Hence, the highest

attainment is the result of not only the outreaching tendency of the mind

but also the voluntary descent of the Divine, the Supramental Mind or
the Gnostic Being.

Upanisadic theory of creation (cosmogony) stresses the origin of

the whole creation to Brahman which is of the nature of Sat (truth), Cit

(38)
(consciousness), Ananda (Bliss). Truth is defined as that which is non-
sublatable.5 Since the experiences of dream (swapna) are sublated in the

waking (jagrata) and waking is sublated when one attains the Highest

state {paramartha), all that we experience in dream and waking, are

pronounced as a asatya or mithya. Consciousness is not an attribute of

Brahman but constitutive of it. It is not that, Brahman is conscious but

that Brahman is of the nature of consciousness. It is Bliss because one

who attains this state experiences blissfulness. The Upanisadie thinkers

maintain that Brahman not only creates the manifold particulars but

sustains it and eventually absorbs the multiplicity unto it, just as a spider
spins out the web and again reabsorbs it unto itself. One expresses itself
in form of many and is again absorbs everything unto it. Therefore,

Brahman is rightly the creator, preserver and destroyer of creation. The

creation is the result of the desire on the part of Brahman to become
many6. It is also said, the world came into being as He desired7. Brahman

did not create the world out of nothing nor did He create the world as

an external agent. . He creates the world in the sense that He Himself

becomes the world. That which was undifferentiated in the beginning

becomes differentiated.

5. Satyam avadhitam.
6. Ekoham Vahusyam, Br. 1.4.3.
7. Sah aicchat, Br. 1.4.3.

(39)
 At that time this (universe) was undifferentiated by

name and form...8

Brahman, the nucleus of the macrocosm is immanent in every

particular as its nucleus. One appears to be different because of the

peculiarity of the structure in which It inhabits just as the air which is

one, entering this world, becomes varied in shape according to the object

it enters, so also the self.9

As the immanent essence. It is same in every particular though it

appears different. In Upanisads one also finds how different fundamental

elements along with the vegetative and the living world came into
existence.

.... from this self, verily ether arose, from ether air,
from air fire, from fire water, from water the earth,

from the earth the herbs, from herbs food, from

food the person.... 10

The subtle becomes grosser, the One becomes many, the

undifferentiated becomes differentiated, the nameless and formless

assumes names and forms. The human being is a complex, consisting of

8. Taddhedam tarhy avyakrtam tan nama rupabhyam era vyakriyata, Br, 1-4-7.
9. Katha, 2-2-9.
10. Tasmad va etasmad atman akasas sambhutah,
akasad vayuh, vayor agnih, agner apah, adbhyah, prthivi, prthivya osadnibhyo
annm, annat Purusah............. (Taitt, 2-1-1)

(40)
the body, senses, the mind, the intellect and the self. Since Brahman is
infinite. It is not exhausted by the finite expressions of It. Hence, He is

both immanent and transcendent. Every individual contains the self which

is potentially Infinite. There is innate urge on the part of the self (atman)
to attain Brahmanhood which is of the nature of Sat, Cit and Ananda.

But, on account of avidya (nescience), the self identifies itself with the
senses, the mind, the intelligence. As a consequence, it remains subject
to dualities of pleasure and pain. Since bondage results from the ignorance
of the individual about the Self, knowledge perse, makes one liberated11.

The body has been compared to a chariot.

The self is the master of the chariot, the intellect is

the charioteer and mind, verily is the bridle

(pragraha). The organs are called as horses and the

objects are considered as paths.12

An ignorant person runs after the pleasurable (preya) whereas the

wise looks for the preferable (sreya). Knowledge is attained only when
one has the right illumination. There is no antithesis between matter and

consciousness. The matter, the body, the senses,-the mind, only point

to different degrees of manifestation of consciousness. Yama, while

instructing Naciketa, observes that the atman which is non-different from

11. Sa Vidyaya Vimuktaye

12. Atmanam rathinam Viddhi..................
Stmendriyamanoyuktam bhakteya lmrmaniisinah, Katha 1.3 .4.5

(41)
Brahman is to be distinguished from it’s cruder expressions. Hence, the
aspirant must learn to discriminate pure consciousness from It’s varied
manifestations.

Beyond the senses is the mind ; above the mind is

its essence (intelligence), beyond the intelligence

is the great self, beyond the great self is the

unmanifest.13

To know the atman is to know the Brahman. Hence, the highest

knowledge is the self-knowledge by obtaining which all ignorance

disappears just as the sun rising, the fog disappears. The individual has
to tread the path of sreya through the three -fold methods of sravana,
manana and nididhyasana by which the knots of ignorance get

unloosened. One transcends the limitations of body, mind and

intelligence and the self shines and rejoices in its own native state. Since,
in the Upanisadic ontology, mind mediates between matter and self,

the knowledge of self remains beyond the reach of mind. Kenopanisad

gives logical explanation for unknowability of Brahman. Brahman being

the very means, all cognitive and affective faculties become functional.

So, there remains the obvious oddity of knowing it as the object of

knowledge. How can the means of knowledge be the object of knowledge.

13. Indriyebhyah param mano manasas sattvam uttamam, sattvad adhimanah atma,
mahato’vyaktam uttamam, Katha 2.3.7

(42)
 ....By what should one know, that by which all this

is known? By what, my dear, should one know the

knower ?14

.... You can not see the seer of seeing , hear the
hearer of hearing, think the thinker of thinking and
understand the understander of understanding. He

is your self which is in all things 15

That which is not expressed by speech but by which

speech is expressed That which is not thought by
the mind, but by which, they say, mind is thought
(thinks)... That which is not seen by the eye but by

which the eyes are seen.... That which is not heard

by the ear but by which the ears hear that, verily

know thou, is Brahman and no what (people) here
adore.16

14 tat kena kam vijanlyat ? yenedm sarvam vijanati, tan kena vijamyat,
................................

vijanataram are kena vijaniyad iti, Br. 2.4.14.

15. na drster drstaram pasyeh, na sruter srotaram srnuyah, na matermantaraiA
.................

manvithah, na vijnater Vijnatararh vijaniyah, esa ta atma sarvantarah.: (Br, ‘

3-4-2)
16 YedVaca nabhyuditam yena Vag abhyndyate ’

Yanmanasa na mamte yenahur mano matam '

Yac caksnsa napasyatiyena caksumsipasyati..... ’

Yac cchrotrenana srnotiyena srotram idam srutam
‘ tad eva Brahmatvam Viddhi nedaiii yad idam
upasate. ’ (Kena, 1 - 5, 6,7,8)

(43)
 But the Upanisads don’t end up with agnostic notes. Brahman can
not be known in the way in which other particulars are known. The
finite can not have the Infinite as its object of knowledge because there

remains the obvious anomaly of the Part knowing, the Whole. The Part
can know the Whole only when it becomes the Whole. The knower of
Brahman becomes the Brahman17.

Tantra literature contain explicit and detailed directions about the

ways in which one can attain the Highest state rather than theoretical

debates and exposition of them. The theoretical explanations are given

to the extent they provide clarity to the spiritual aspirant, so that it can
be practised. But in the writings of shrii P.R. Sarkar one finds an
exhaustive enunciation of the theory of creation. His magnum opus

Ananda Sutram can be taken as a source book on Tantra and ‘Idea and

Ideology’ contains a philosophical exposition of it. He addresses ultimate

Reality as Braman‘Siva’, ‘Purusottama’interchangeably.

Purusottama (the Supreme Consciousness) is the

nucleus of the universe.18

As above, so below. Every object big or small, animate or inanimate

has a nucleus. Even an atom has the structure of the cosmos in a miniature

17. Brahmavid Brahmaiva bhavati.

18. Paramasivah Purus ottamah VMvasya Kendram.
Ananda Sutram, Ibid, 1-4.

(44)
scale. Parama Siva or Purusottama, being the nucleus of the universe,

the whole creation comes out of It. When conceived without the creation,

the first principle is considered as Nirguna, non-attributional. But when

seen in relation to the universe, it is conceived as attributional or qualified

by attributes, Saguna Brahman. When Brahman is conceived both in

relation to itself and the world, can be seen as a composite of both Siva

(supreme consciousness) and Sakti(creative Principle).19

They are not two, but two fold aspects of the same entity. As the
mere witness (saksii), it is the Siva. As the nucleus, it lies hidden in every

structure20. But as the creative agent it is the Prakrti. Prakrti, literally

means, that which causes the variety.21

The Sakti or Prakrti (the operative principle) is not different from

the Siva (the conscious principle) but is the very potency of the latter.22

Action results only when prakrti, the inherent

tendency of the transcendental Purusa, gets scope

of expression. The two factors, Purusa and Prakrti,

though dual in theory are singular in spirit. Their

19. Siva Saktyatmakam Brahman.

Ananda Sutram, Ibid, 1-1.
20. Pure sete itiPurusah
21. PraKaroti iti Prakrtih
22. Sakti Sa Sivasya Sakti, Ananda Sutram, Ibid, 1-2.

(45)
 collective body is just like that of fire. One can not

think of fire without its special thermal value, in

the same way one can not think of Purusa without

Prakrti in the collective body of BrahmanP

Prakrti is constituted by three gunas such as Sattva (the sentient

principle), Rajas{the mutative principle) and Tamas {the static principle).

When there was no creation, the three gunas were in a state of harmony

moving in infinite directions crisscrossing one another and forming

triangle of gunas. On account of the sheer desire of Purusa to
metamorphose itself into the world of diversity Prakrti, which is nothing
other than the innate tendency of the Purusa, becomes functional. The

creation begins from one of the vertex of the triangle with the Supreme

Consciousness (Purusottama) at the centre and there is relative

dominance of one guna over the other. In the primordial state, the

predominance of sattva creates -the Cosmic Mahat which contains the

feeling of mere existence. This marks the creation of the Cosmic Mind.

With the domination of rajas in Mahat which is characterised by feeling

of agency or ‘I do’, the cosmic ‘Doer I’ is created and there after with

the predominance of tamah, a part of the cosmic Mind gets objectivated

in form of ‘done I’. The cosmic Mahat, Aham and Citta constitute the
cosmic Mind. The process through which the pure consciousness

23. SarkarP.R, Idea and Ideology, Ananda Marga Publication, Calcutta, 1959, P. l.

(46)
undergoes the process of crudification by its own act of crudification is

termed as Saincara (the centrifugal activity of the cosmic Nucleus). The

process of Saincara doesn’t stop at the creation of the Cosmic Mind,

consisting of cosmic Mahat, cosmic Aham and cosmic Citta. On account

of the increasing dominance of Tamas, the five fundamental factors are

created. The subtler becomes increasingly cruder. The subtlest of the

five fundamental factors is ether {akaiatattva) which permits the
movement of sound {sabda) and emanates of sabda tanmatra (subtle
essence of sound) which is received by the auditory organ. With the

continuing domination of tamas, air {vayutattva) comes into existence.

Gradually the formless assumes form. The process of crudification
commensurates with the decrease of inter-atomic space and increase in

chemical affinity. The vayutattva generates both Sabda and sparsa

tanmatra perceivable both by auditory and tactual organ. The next to

evolve is the luminous factor (Tejastattva) which serves as a substratum

of sabda, sparsa and rupa tanmatra experienced by the organ of auditory,

tactual and visual organ. Out of the luminous factor the liquid factor
(apatattva) comes into being which permits the Waves of sound, touch,

sight and taste. The Apatattva is experienced through the tanmatras of

sabda, sparsa, rupa, rasa by the auditory, tactual, visual and gustatory
sense. The liquid factor, under the increasing domination of Tamas takes

the form of solid factor (ksititattva) in which there is maximum chemical

affinity and the inter-atomic and intermolecular space is maximally

(47)
decreased. It serves as a substratum for the movement of the waves of

sound, touch, sight, taste, smell experienced respectively by auditory,

tactual, visual, gaustatory and olfactory organs. With the formation of

the solid factor, the process of crudification reaches it’s point of

culmination. There is no scope for further crudification. But tamahguna
of Prakrticontinues to exert it’s domination on the solid factor which is

nothing but the metamorphosed form of the primordial consciousness.

The continued domination of the static principle (tamas) exerts pressure
{vala) on the solid structure. This gives rise to two conflicting forces.

The interial force seeks to maintain the structural solidarity of the unit
structure and the exterial force which disintegrates the structure. In the

solid structure, the interaction between the interial and exterial forces

manifest in form of energy (prana). In the ongoing conflict between the

interial and exterial force, sometimes the interial force dominates over
the exterial force and sometimes the exterial force dominates over the

interial force resulting in two distinct consequences. When the interial

force becomes dominant, the nucleus is formed in the unit structure.

This nucleus maintains the internal solidarity or cohesion whereas if the

exterial force wins, then the unit structure disintegrates. It may so happen
that one part of a unit structure is dominated by the interial force and
the other part of it by the exterial force. The part where interial force

dominates, a nucleus is created. As a result, the structural solidarity or

identity is retained and the part with regard to which the exterial-force

(48)
dominates gets dissociated from'the original structure. When the exterial
force is dominant and tamas exerts further pressure, the solid structure
bursts forth or explodes as it were. This phenomenon is termed as

Jadasphota. As the consequence, the solid factox may converted to

subtler factors. This is termed as negative Saincara. On the other hand,
where a unit structure is created on account of the dominance of the

interial force, it initiates the process of the centripetal movement, a

process by which matter evolves into life, life into unit-mind and unit-

mind into cosmic Consciousness. With the formation of the unit-structure

begins the formation of the counter movement, i.e. Pratisaincara. Every

physical structure contains the five fundamental elements such as ether,

air, fire, water, earth and each has it’s controlling nucleus. As all these
five fundamental factors constitute one unit, there must be a controlling

or presiding nucleus of these five different nuclei. The coordinated state

of energy is called Pranah (vital energy) which is the moving force in the

process of evolution. In other words, when the five fundamental factors

exist in appropriate configuration, a congenial atmosphere is created for
the evolution of life . Energy (prana) transmutes itself into Vital energy

(pranah) . The manifestation of vital energy depends squarely on the

facts that the interial force is dominant and that there is a congenial

environment.

The manifestation of Pranah depends on two

essential conditions. First, the resultant of prana

(49)
 must be an interial force, and secondly, there must
be a congenial environment. For want of a congenial
condition in the present-day world, a number of

giant animals of the remote past have either been

transformed into smaller species or vanished

altogether.24

Pratisaincara or evolution is a movement from crude to the subtle

and the movement is centripetal in nature. Vital energy refers to the

coordinated state of the winning interial forces. A structure presided

over by prana , a portion of the physical body may get pulverised on

account of jadasphota. When such pulverised components are

transformed in to a factor subtler than the five fundamental factors there

is emergence of microcosmic mind, anu mana. Vital energy is a blind

force and therefore, lacks sense of purpose or direction. The unit mind

regulates the vital energy in the unit structure. Thus one finds that matter

evolves into life and life evolves into unit-mind. As the cosmic mind was
created in the process of Saincarawith three distinguishable aspects such
as Mahat, Aham, and Citta, in the process of Pratisaincara. Unit-mind is

created, with Citta, Aham and Mahat as its integral aspects. The first

evolute out of matter is Citta, the objectivated portion of unit-mind.

The unit- citta is devoid of the sense of 1 do ’ because it is not manifested

(50)
yet. In course of evolution, a part of Citta become subtler and helps the
unit structure to imbibe the sense of agency or I do. The Pratisaincara
proceeds by the inherent momentum created by the attraction of the

cosmic Nucleus,(Purusottama). With the appearance of Ahamtattva the

individual attains the ability to give an added momentum to the pace of
progress but if this capacity is wrongly exercised, the individual may

have a downfall and there is negative Pratisaincara. In the march of

evolution, there is progressive expansion of the individual psyche caused

by threefold factors, i.e., physical force, created by physical clash,

psychic force, created by psychic clash and spiritual force generated by

longing for the great. Life evolves out of the womb of the Matter. There
is evolution of Citta and Ahamtattva on the physical base. In case of plants

and animals Mind is dormant. They evolve by the attraction of Cosmic

Nucleus. So, there is no room for negative Pratisaincara. But with the
evolution of Ahamtattva the individual can choose either to move faster

towards the destined goal or more backward and take the form of a
physical structure. In fact, the human mind is subject to two opposite
forces , viz, Vidya, and Avidya. On account of the fact that mind evolves

out of matter and passes through the life of plant, animal and matter,
there is the natural urge for material pleasures . As there is perennial
attraction of the cosmic, there is a longing to be more and more perfect.

When , on account of greater psychic clash, the unit mind is subject to

progressive expansion (vistara), there is evolution of Mahat tattva, in

(51)
which the sense of 7 do’ is sublimated in the sense of lI exist . The
coordinated state of unit-Maha ttattva, unit-Ahamtattva and unit- Citta,

is called as the unit mind. In the state of Ahamtattva, there is still the

feeling of individuation and mind remains under the influence of gunas

or vrttis when Mahat tattva becomes still subtler, it becomes one with
the unit-consciousness (atman). The unit-Mind becomes one with the

cosmic-Mind. The cosmic-Mind is created in the state of Saincara. In

Saincara, there is a continual influence of Tamah (the static principle)

whereas in Pratisaincara there is the increasing dominance of sattva (the

sentient principle), Saincara is an analytical movement guided by the

centrifugal activity of the cosmic Nucleus. It is the process in which the

one metamorphoses into many, the subtlest (Purusottama) is

metamorphosed into the crudest (the solid factor) . Pratisaincara is the,

synthetic movement guided by the centripetal activity of the Cosmic
Nucleus, the process through which the many are tend to become one;

the crudest (solid) evolves into life, mind and eventually gets

metamorphosed into Pure-Consciousness.

(52)