Dissolution is merely the Changing of Form—the resolving of an Effect into its Preceding Cause (real or relative). iii. What is Evolved must have been Involved; the Cause (real or relative) must contain the Effect; the Effect must be the reproduction of the Cause (real or relative).
As we have seen, from the beginnings of the Hindu Philosophical thought, there was manifested an almost intuitive desire to go back and through the phenomenal aspect of things—back through the things which bore names, even though these things were conceived of as universal principles— back still further, and further, until at last was to be found that which was not capable of further analysis or refinement—and which could not even be called a Something—and which the Hindu mind has always called that, because no other term could be applied to it without ascribing attributes or qualities—that which would be left even after all the universe had been thought away in the refinement of metaphysical speculation. The early thinkers asked the questions: “When the universe disintegrates, what is it that absorbs it? What is the Reality behind, and under the world of change and destruction? Upon what permanent foundation does the universe of impermanency rest?”
The old legends tell of the Hindu philosophers thousands of years before the Roman Empire, asking the ultimate questions, such as: “What is there that will still exist though there be no universe; no heavens; no gods; no anything?” The answer agreed upon by the sages being “Infinite Essential Space.” And so space was considered as a Reality that could not be thought away even by the use of the most powerful imagination. But their conception of space was not that of an immense, infinite Nothing—for the Hindu mind abhors ideas of Nothing, and will not admit that Anything can proceed from Nothing— instead, their idea of Essential Space was that of an Actual Reality—an Absolute Substantial Reality from which all Things were manifestations, emanations, expressions, or thoughts.
They thought of Infinite Essential Space as a No-Thing, but not as Nothing. To them Space was not only “an infinite capacity for extending objects,” which is the physical aspect of it— but something more—an Infinite Bare Abstract Subjectivity, which the human mind was compelled to admit in all of its conceptions, and yet was unable to think of as “in-itself.”
In the second place, the early Hindu thinkers were compelled to admit the Reality of Motion, as an aspect of the Ultimate Reality. They reasoned that there was manifested an Activity which proceeded from that, and which evidently was not merely a phenomenal manifestation but rather an inherent and essential aspect of Itself. They held that as all Activity arises from Motion, therefore the Essence of Motion must inhere in that. And so they formulated the idea that Absolute Essential Motion was a second aspect of that—but in their conception of that Absolute Essential Motion they regarded it as of such infinite degree of power and rate of vibration that to all human thought it must be regarded as Absolute Rest—Motionless Motion consisting of vibration of such a high rate and degree that to the highest human consciousness it would appear as absolutely at rest, just as a rapidly whirling wheel seems to stand still. Therefore the Hindu’s second aspect of that may be stated as Absolute Essential Abstract Motion-at-Rest, if the term is permissible—something that is unthinkable “in-itself.”
In the third place, the early Hindu thinkers were compelled to recognize the Real Existence of a Law which was manifested in all the phenomena of the Universe, and which was constant, fixed, unchangeable and possessing all the attributes of Reality.
They could not reason, think, or imagine this Law out of existence, nor could they conceive that it had ever Not-Been, else they would be committing the absurdity of assuming that the fundamental facts recognized by the reason could ever, at any time in the past, not have been—for instance, that the principles of Geometry of Space ever could have been not-true; that mathematical principles and the laws of logic ever could have been untrue and nonexistent; in short, that things which were perceived to be superior to change and time, and which manifested all the elements of reality, ever could not have been, or ever could have been otherwise than they are. Therefore, the philosophers were forced to recognize Absolute Abstract Law as a third aspect of that—their conception being of an Abstract Absolute law which was impossible of being understood “in-itself,” but which existed as an aspect of that, and which governed all of the phenomenal manifestations of Motion, or Matter, or even of Its own expressions in the shape of the Laws of Nature, in which shape it manifests in the phenomenal world.
The Law was sometimes regarded as the will of that.
It was held that just as all phenomenal manifestations of Matter must be an appearance, reflection, expression, or emanation of the first aspect of that—Absolute Essential Space; so all phenomenal manifestations of Physical Energy or Force, or Power must be an appearance, reflection, expression, or emanation of the second aspect of that—Absolute Essential Motion; and all phenomenal manifestation of Universal Laws must be an appearance, reflection, expression, or emanation of the third aspect of that—Absolute Abstract Law. But these three aspects were recognized as but different views of the One Reality, and not as three “parts” or “principles,” or “persons.” It was not a Trinity, but a One viewed from three viewpoints. As to the abstract conceptions of these three aspects—so far removed from phenomenal manifestations, it is scarcely a matter of wonder that Western thinkers have thought that the Hindu metaphysicians taught that “All is Nothing,” so high did their conceptions soar up into the thin and rarefied air of transcendental philosophy. But the “No-Thingness” of the Hindu is very far removed from the “Nothingness” of the Western Mind.
The Western thinker often expresses surprise that Life and Mind are not included in the list of aspects of that, by the Hindu thinkers. But the latter considered the Mind and Life of the phenomenal world as merely reflections or appearances of the being of that, and not as any of the aspects of It—that is, as phenomenal counterparts or reflections of the whole Being of that, rather than of any of its aspects. They could not conceive of the being of that as possible without an Infinite Existence and Knowing, but they made a subtle distinction, and would not say that “lived” or “thought” (these being phenomenal manifestations and attributes), but simply said that “is,” the statement of Real Being carrying with it the conception of Infinite and Absolute Life Existence and Knowing, of which Life and Mind are the phenomenal reflections.
From this Hindu Root-Thought of the One Reality—that— proceed all of the various conceptions regarding the Universal Substance—the Universal Energy—even the Universal Soul–the highest conception being that they all proceed from that, and that that is thinkable when all these secondary conceptions are thought away. That is the one thing behind which and beyond which the human mind is unable to think—which the human mind cannot think out of subjective existence, for it is the very foundation, or the background, of Thought itself. And it will be found that that is back of all conceptions of Deity, personal or impersonal—all god conceptions emanate from this fundamental conception. The best Hindu teachers have always held that that was incapable of being expressed in words— was unthinkable and unspeakable in terms of description— that to “define It was to limit It, and thus consequently to deny It”—it transcends the power of the human understanding and imagination, and is beyond the range and reach of human thought. But yet, the human mind, if it thinks of the subject at all, is inevitably compelled to conceive of the existence of that. It cannot be thought out of subjective existence in the consideration of the nature of Things, any more than can the “I” be thought out of existence by the individual when thinking of personal things. It defies the power of description, and yet must be postulated as existing. When we reach the consideration of the various philosophies and religions of India we shall see the structures that men have attempted to erect upon this basic foundation, and under all of them we shall discover the same elementary conception of the Ancient Hindu Teachers, although often almost covered up and hidden by the temporary structures built thereon. And these structures will pass away as have all of man’s theories and creeds—but so long as human thought exists these Fundamental Truths must be accepted as basic and necessary. And if you will examine the philosophies and religions of the Western world, you will find that same basic foundation under them all—if this were not so they could not stand.
The above mentioned Fundamental Truths of the Hindu Philosophy regarding that are regarded by their best thinkers to be axiomic and beyond doubt or question. In order that you may understand the reasoning manifested through the subsequent lessons, when the various conceptions are considered, it would be well for you to acquaint yourselves thoroughly with the above lines of reasoning of the early Hindu sages. You will find that once well-grounded in them you will be able to consider any metaphysical or philosophical question with a new clearness of thought and discrimination. They are the Axioms of the Hindu Thought, which were formulated many centuries ago by the keenest philosophical intellects of which we have any record. And they are well worth the careful consideration of everyone who wishes to think along philosophical lines.
It will be noticed that in the formulation of the above mentioned Fundamental Principles of the Hindu Philosophies, the early teachers considered the problem exclusively from the standpoint of Pure Reason, and independent of any religious teachings or the voice of religious authority. This occurred not because the early teachers wished to express their disbelief in the prevailing religions of their day, but because they felt that Truth must be above the exercise of mere Faith, or acceptance of doctrines and dogmas issued upon the bidding of real or assumed authority. They felt that man had been given Reason wherewith to examine for himself into the great problems of life, being and the universe—Reason which was not required for the needs of the struggle for material existence, but which was evidently evolved for the purpose of purely intellectual work and function—and, this being so, it became the duty of advanced men to exercise this Reason to the utmost—to inquire of its highest reports and conclusions, and then to abide by the results of the inquiry.
And there were other reasons inspiring these early thinkers to formulate schools of philosophy, which should run along side by side with the religious teachings of the race. These wise men foresaw the rise of dogmatic religious teachings, or theology, fostered and nurtured by a priesthood which would profit thereby, the end being that the populace would have borne upon them a mass of dogma and so-called “authoritative” teaching, ceremonies, ritual and creeds utterly foreign to the essence of the true faith, and which would end by smothering true religious philosophy by the cover of ecclesiasticism. This fear has been found to be well grounded, by the experience of men in all times and lands—the growth of organized churches and priesthoods having invariably been accompanied by a decrease in the philosophical freedom and clearness of thought, and a perversion of the original teachings of the religion in question. Such seems to be the laws of church organization and the crystallization of creeds. And, so, these ancient sages wished to establish a co-ordinate branch of thought—one founded on Pure Reason rather than on Faith and Authority—and which would tend to keep pure the teachings and bright the flame of Truth, even when the pall of ecclesiasticism would descend upon the Hindu Teachings, from time to time.
And this precaution has tended to keep true philosophical thought alive in India for over five thousand years—fifty centuries. From time to time the religious teachers and leaders would become more and more orthodox, and ritual, form, ceremonies and creeds would cause the people to forget the Ancient Wisdom. Gods, demi-gods and supernatural creatures and beings of all kinds would take the place of the thought of that in the minds of the people, and that would appear only as a shadowy and nebulous background to the personifications of Deity, and the numerous Avatars, or Incarnations of the Divine. And so religious forms would flourish and the religious spirit would wither and fade away. Then there would be sure to arise some Heretic or Dissenter—Protestant or Reformer— who would return to the ancient teachings and philosophies of the Fathers, sounding again the old note of that, and the employment of Pure Reason as a basis for Faith, rather than the ecclesiastical formalism and dogmatic theology upon which so much so-called “religion” is based. These reformers would attract many of the thinking people to them, who would be followed by a number of the less intelligent ones, and a new school, or form of religion would be adopted, and if based upon sound reasoning and practical precepts would grow and flourish and prosper as did the old denominations. But sooner or later the apathy and numbness of old age in church life would come to the new school also, and then would rise another schism or reform. And so, on through the centuries, school after school has arisen—schism after schism has sprung into existence— each having its birth, rise, decline, death and decay—and each having as its source of inspiration the Philosophy of the Fathers, which had been handed down principally by tradition and legend, the Oriental memory being remarkable in this respect, the teachings of many centuries ago having been handed down intact from teacher to pupil, by pure memory, even unto this day.
After the lapse of several centuries, there began to be numerous bits of writing on the part of the Hindu poets and others, into which naturally crept mention of the early teachings and philosophy, much of it being related in a style coloured and tinged with the poetic fancy of the writer. Then, after a time, learned teachers would form schools of teachings and thought from which would arise philosophical writings on the part of their followers. In this way arose the Upanishads, that wonderful collection of ancient Sanskrit writings, in which is contained scraps of the highest philosophical thought and wisdom that ever emanated from the mind of man. If one has the Master-Key of the fundamental teachings, such as we have mentioned in this lesson, he may read from the Upanishads an elaboration and exemplification of these doctrines that will prove a source of the greatest delight to him, and which will result in the opening up of his mind to the highest and most elevating thoughts. The boldness and daring whereby some of these old thinkers pursue an idea to its logical conclusion is a revelation to the mind trained in the cautious and time-serving methods of many of the Western philosophers of the past. Surrounded on all sides by orthodox religions and peoples, the writers of the Upanishads did not hesitate to reason out a line of thought, even if thereby the entire dogmas of the prevailing religion would be swept away. And, stranger still, India has ever been almost entirely free from religious persecution and tyranny, and even a powerful priesthood has never been able to overcome the inherent Hindu prejudice in favour of allowing all comers a free use of the philosophical arena in which to display their mental and spiritual might and muscle.
As we shall see, the differences in the schools of philosophy arise chiefly by reason of the attempt to interpret the process and methods where “the One becomes Many”—that is, upon the questions of the Origin, Nature and Destiny of the Soul, and its relation to the One. With the Fundamental Principles in mind, we will find it interesting to follow up the Hindu thought on this subject, in its many wonderful turns and windings, its by-paths and side-journeys, in all of which many bits of valuable truth may be picked up. But, before closing the lesson, let us call your attention to the fact that none of these leading divisions of philosophical thought have ever thought it necessary to “prove” the existence of the soul—this question was considered answered by the consciousness of every individual, and all attempt to “prove” it was considered folly—the Hindu mind never has had any Doubt on this subject. The Buddhists attempted to prove that the soul was not a true entity, but this was merely a metaphysical hair-splitting.
And again, the question of Reincarnation, or Rebirth of the Soul, always has been accepted as an almost self-evident fact on the part of the Hindu thinkers, and it has been held that the glimpses of recollection that every person experiences, and the fragments of “memory of past lives” that nearly all if not every one of the Hindus are conscious of, takes the matter out of the ordinary realm of philosophical speculation. To the Hindu mind Reincarnation Rebirth or Metempsychosis is as much an accepted fact of life and nature as is Birth and Death—it is never Doubted, and the Hindu mind passes on to a consideration of the “Why” and “How” of the problem. For one hundred centuries the Hindu religions have accepted Reincarnation—for fifty centuries Hindu philosophy has included it among the proven facts of life. It is regarded as a part of the universal phenomena! and as forming a part of the natural law, and to be studied in that branch of human thought and education, rather than in connection with the Fundamental Principles. To the Western mind this seems odd—but the Hindu consciousness sees it in a different light. No Hindu Philosophy or Religion ignores or denies Reincarnation any more than it denies Thought.
The essence of the Inner Teachings has always been the Reality and Being of one universal spirit principle, from which all other life, being, principles were manifested by emanation, reflection or otherwise, and which manifestations had their only real being in the one source. We ask you to remember, always, this one fundamental principle of the Inner Teaching, for without it you will lose your way in the labyrinth of Hindu Philosophy, while with it you always will have the Light which will illumine The Path of Knowledge.
While, from the first, there was ever the dispute about the “Why” or “Reason” of the Emanation, Reflection or Manifestation— there never was any dispute about the fact of the manifestation, or nature of the universe of phenomena. And, arising from this axiomic doctrine, there arose that feature of the Hindu thought which regarded the phenomenal universe as an illusory world, producing the pain and dissatisfaction that comes from the fact of separateness from the Source. Hence arises that which the West has called “the Pessimism of the Hindu thought,” but which even the Western religious philosophies reproduce in their conception of “this life below being one of sorrow, sin and unhappiness,” of the “better world” awaiting those who escape the present one with a record of good deeds and the proper faith and belief. The Western conception of “the world of Sin and Sorrow” is no less pessimistic than the Hindu conception of the “world of Ignorance, Illusion and Separateness from the One.” The thought that the phenomenal world is one of sorrow and unhappiness, and lacking the bliss of some other plane of being beyond it, is a universal conception of the human mind— common to the race.
And the religions of India, like those of the West, teach that escape and “salvation” from this “world of sorrow” is possible to those who accept the doctrines of their church, and who live “good” lives. But the Hindu philosophies go further than the religions of either East or West, and point out that Emancipation, Freedom, Release from Samsara, or the Chain of Existences—or “Salvation” to use the Western term—may be obtained by an Understanding of the Truth; a Realization of the Real Self; a Perception of the identity of the Individual Spirit with the Universal Spirit (“Tat tvam asi,” “That art thou!”); and the killing out of Desire for Material Life and Objects, and a concentration of the whole mind upon The One.
And this oneness of Reality—this doctrine of the manifestation of The Many, and of the Universe, as an emanation, reflection or phenomenal appearance of the One, is the Inner Teaching underlying all of the many forms of the Hindu Philosophy and Religions. And you will find this Inner Teaching running like a silken thread through all the beads of the systems of philosophies and religions of India, from high to low, as we proceed. Plainly asserted and insisted upon in the Monistic forms of the Vedanta; apparently contradicted in the outer form of the Sankhya; apparently ignored and supplanted by Nihilism in Buddhism; disguised by personifications in the Orthodox Religions of India—still ever we shall see this Inner Teaching of the one running through each and all, in spite of appearances. The one is the background; the Foundation and Support; and the Roof, of all Hindu Philosophical and Religious Thought, and will be seen always by those whose vision is sufficiently clear, and who know where to look.
And so, now passing on to the consideration of these various systems, we must ask you to be ever keen to perceive the Inner Teaching under its manifold disguises, names and veils. Be not deceived by the outward appearance, but look ever behind the veil—for there ever abideth The truth.
Special Message II.
There is but one Truth. All so-called “truths” are but some of the many aspects of the one Truth. Truth is “that which is.” That which “is” must exist in reality, verity, and certainty—must exist as a fixed established principle, law and state of being. Truth is present everywhere; is infinite power; is infinite intelligence; is the foundation and background of the universe. Truth is but one though men call it by many names. Truth is God divested of the idea of personality. Truth is not material; neither is it mere energy, as the physical scientists conceive it; neither is it mind, as men understand the term. Truth is Spirit and nothing else. Spirit is Truth and nothing else. Truth and Spirit are identical.
All else is Untruth.
Just what Spirit is, is impossible of expression in words, for words are designed to express relative things, and the Absolute cannot be expressed or defined by relative terms. As Spinoza has said, “To define God, is to deny Him.” Enough to know that Spirit Is. You will remember the words of Jesus, who said: “God is Spirit.” There is no qualification in the sense of asserting that God is a Spirit, that is, one of a number of Spirits. The statement is plain, positive and unmistakable in its assertion. God is spirit, itself. That is, that God and Spirit are identical. There cannot be two Spirits any more than there can be two Gods. And there cannot be two Truths, any more than there can be two Spirits, or two Gods. For God, and Spirit, and Truth are identical— merely words to represent and symbolize the one Reality. Other than Truth, there can be only Untruth.
Spirit—God—Truth! These are the three terms expressing the one idea. The words Spirit or Truth are preferred by many metaphysicians to the term God, for the reason that the latter has become confused in the minds of many who have used it, and who imply the existence of the attributes, qualities and natures of personality to God. Truth is the conception of God in His highest aspect—His aspect of Being, divested of the attributes and qualities of personality, which have been added to Him by many people who dwell upon the plane of personality, and who fail to perceive Him in His transcendental Being.
Truth is that which Is, and Spirit is that which Truth is. Truth is Spirit; and Spirit is Truth. There is no Spirit but Truth; and no Truth but Spirit. These are axioms which must be learned and realized by you before you may enter into an understanding of the operations attendant upon the understanding of Truth.
Our meditation for the coming month is as follows:
“Truth is all there is—All else is untruth!”
In order to grasp the spirit of the words of the meditation, we must remember the above statements concerning the identity of Truth with Spirit; and of Spirit with God, divested of the attributes of personality.
Truth is all there is—all else is Untruth. And Untruth is that which is not—the essence of Nothingness, Illusion, Error, and Maya. Peace to Thee.
The Third Lesson. The Sankhya System.
In the great system of Hindu philosophy known as The Sankhya System, we have one of the oldest forms of philosophical conceptions known in that land of old systems of thought. While it is customary to ascribe to Kapila, who lived about 700 b. c., the honour of having originated this great system of thought, still Sanskrit scholars have discovered the fundamental portions of Kapila’s teachings in the older writings of the race, and the probability is that the teaching itself is many centuries older than Kapila, and that he merely arranged the fragments of older systems into a clearly defined school of philosophy, discarding the outside accumulations that had gathered around the older teachings, and emphasizing certain fundamental principles that had been overlooked. At any rate, traces of the teachings now known as the Sankhya System may be found as far back as 2000 b. c., and the fundamental conceptions probably run back still further. The term “Sankhya” means “correct enumeration” or “perfect classification.”
The basic proposition of the Sankhya system is that there exists in the universe two active principles, the interaction of which produces the activities of the universe, including those of life—the play and interplay of the two manifesting in countless forms, combinations and infinite variety. These two principles are known as (1) Prakriti, or the primordial substance or energy, from which all material forms and energies evolve; and (2) Purusha, or the Spirit Principle, which “ensouls” or seeks embodiment in Prakriti, and thus gives rise to all the various forms of differentiation, from atoms to man; and which is not conceived of by the Sankhyas as forming one Universal Soul (as do the Yoga scholars), but which is held to be composed of countless “spirit atoms,” monads, or individual spirits—which Units as a whole compose a Unity of Units, which may be considered in the light of a Principle.
There are many points of difference between the various conceptions of the real nature of Purusha and Prakriti, particularly on the part of Western writers on the subject, some of which are totally at variance with the beliefs and conceptions of the advanced Hindu adherents of this philosophy. We shall consider each of the three leading conceptions in turn, pointing out the errors where they exist.
Preview — First chapter