Universal Humanism [a compilation]

This book comprises a selection of articles – generally transcribed lectures – of P. R. Sarkar, published over more than twenty years.

In 1955 P. R. Sarkar founded Ananda Marga, a spiritual and social service organization which spread world-wide in the 1970’s. Based on a blending of the spiritual practices of Tantra Yoga and social welfare ideals, Ananda Marga teaches meditation and various yoga practices, as well as running schools, homes and a wide range of social welfare projects.

In 1959, Sarkar, who is also known as Shrii Shrii Anandamurti, extended the scope of Ananda Marga philosophy to encompass certain socio-economic principles, which have become known as Prout – an acronym for Progressive Utilization Theory. This theory blends spiritual with socialistic idealism – a formula familiar in Eastern India, where prominent nationalists such as Vivekananda and Subhas Chandra Bose also made use of the present Ananda Marga slogan – “Liberation of Self and Service to Humanity”. Prout is the social side of a total philosophy that blends concepts of spiritual and social liberation.

The adoption of social activism by a spiritual organization created controversy in India, and attempts were made to suppress both Ananda Marga and Prout. The Central Indian Government made several unsuccessful attempts to ban members of Ananda Marga from employment in the public service, and Sarkar himself was falsely accused of various crimes and gaoled for nearly seven years. The courts finally rejected the charges against him and released him in 1978.

Meanwhile, in 1977 and international organization called Proutist Universal (PU) was launched with its headquarters in Copenhagen. The aims of PU are to propagate the ideals of Prout and to support social movements with similar ideals.

The articles that form the various chapters of this book came from a variety of publication, usually the English translations of earlier Bengali editions. The editors have shortened some of these articles and made some minimal corrections of grammar and syntax to the original translations.

In the editing process, as few non-English words as possible have been retained. But there are some that have no simple English equivalents and are central to Prout concepts. The two most important of these are “Dharma” – which means the essential inner nature or orientation of an entity – and “Sadvipra” – which has been translated as “spiritual revolutionary” but literally means a person with complete moral and intellectual development.

The earliest English edition book was Problem of the Day (1959), from which chapters twelve, thirteen, fifteen and sixteen are taken. This book is the transcript of an inaugural address to the Renaissance Universal (RU) Club. Chapter two comes from the RU magazine Cosmic Society and chapters three, five and nineteen from assorted PU magazines, none having yet been published in book form.

Chapter one is taken from the first chapter of Ananda Marga: Elementary Philosophy; chapters six and seventeen from Idea and Ideology; chapters eleven and fourteen from Abhimata: The Opinion; chapters four, eight, nine and ten from The Human Society Part I; chapter eighteen from The Human Society Part II; and chapter twenty is from Ánanda Sútram, the seminal work on Ananda Marga philosophy and of which Prout forms the fifth chapter. All these books are English translations published by Ananda Marga in West Bengal in the 1960’s and early 1970’s.

More recent contributions are the second section of chapter eight, which comes from a 1981 address to Proutists on women’s rights, and chapter seven, which is taken from the first chapter of Neohumanism: The Liberation of Intellect, published in Calcutta in 1982.

In this latest work on “Neohumanism”, Sarkar give a new perspective to the integration of theories of social and spiritual liberation. He described the development of the embryonic spiritual longing in human beings - “proto-psycho-spirituality” as essential to materializing the “principle of social equality” – the vision of society moving and progressing in unison. He stresses the importance of consistency between the internal and external rhythms of life, describing the process of expanding each form of human ideology or “sentiment” until they match the magnanimity of Neohumanism.

Neohumanism he describes as the sentiment which fully unites spiritual with social idealism. While humanism is broader than geo-centric, cultural or socio-centric sentiments or ideologies, Neohumanism is the state in which “the underlying spirit of humanism is extended to everything, animate or inanimate, in this universe”. It will “elevate humanism to universalism, the cult of love for all created beings of this universe”. Thus Neohumanism could also be termed spiritual or universal humanism, a concept which underlies Prout’s progressive socialism.

It is hoped that the articles in this book will stimulate further interest in Prout and encourage further study of P. R. Sarkar’s philosophy. We can do no better in introducing the book than to repeat Sarkar’s dedication to his work on Neohumanism:

To those who think for all
Who offer others seats of honor and respect
Who venerate others, instead of [[waiting]] to be venerated
To them I dedicate this book with humble esteem and deepest salutations.

Chapter 1	Universal Humanism [a compilation]

Human beings are the highest-evolved beings. They possess clearly-reflected consciousness, and this makes them superior to animals. No other being has such a clear reflection of consciousness. Human beings can distinguish between good and bad with the help of their consciousness, and when in trouble they can find a way out, with its help. No one likes to live in misery and suffering, far less human beings, whose consciousness can find means of relief. Life without sorrow and suffering is a life of happiness and bliss, and that is what people desire. Everyone is in quest of happiness; in fact it is people’s nature to seek happiness. Now let us see what one does to achieve it and whether it is achieved by those means.

In their search for happiness people are first attracted towards physical enjoyments. They amass wealth and try to achieve power and position to satisfy their desires for happiness. One who has a hundred rupees is not satisfied with it, one strives for a thousand rupees, but even possessing thousands of rupees does not satisfy. One wants a million, and so on. Then it is seen that a person having influence in a district wants to extend it over a province, provincial leaders want to become national leaders, and when they have achieved that there creeps in a desire for world leadership. Mere acquisition of wealth, power and position does not satisfy a person. The acquisition of something limited only creates the want for more, and the quest for happiness finds no end. The hunger for possessing is unending. It is limitless and infinite.

However dignified or lofty the achievement, it fails to set at rest people’s unlimited quest for happiness. Those who hanker after wealth will not be satisfied until they can obtain unlimited wealth. Nor will the seeker of power, position and prestige be satisfied until he or she can get these in limitless proportions, as all these are objects of the world. The world itself is finite and cannot provide infinite objects. Naturally, therefore, the greatest worldly acquisition, even if it be the entire globe, would not secure anything of an infinite and permanent character. What then is that infinite, eternal thing which will provide everlasting happiness?

The Cosmic Entity alone is infinite and eternal. It alone is limitless. And the eternal longing of human beings for happiness can only be satiated by realization of the Infinite. The ephemeral nature of worldly possessions, power and position can only lead one to the conclusion that none of the things of the finite and limited world can set at rest the everlasting urge for happiness. Their acquisition merely gives rise to further longing. Only realization of the Infinite can do it. The Infinite can be only one, and that is the Cosmic Entity. Hence it is only the Cosmic Entity that can provide everlasting happiness – the quest for which is the characteristic of every human being. In reality, behind this human urge is hidden the desire, the longing, for attainment of the Cosmic Entity. It is the very nature of every living being. This alone is the dharma of every person.

The word dharma signifies “property”. The English word for it is “nature”, “characteristic” or “property”. The nature of fire is to burn or produce heat. It is the characteristic or property of fire and is also termed the nature of fire. Similarly, the dharma or nature of a human being is to seek the Cosmic Entity.

The degree of divinity in human beings is indicated by their clearly-reflected consciousness. Every human being, having evolved from animals, has, therefore, two aspects – the animal aspect, and the conscious aspect which distinguishes a person from animals. Animals display predominantly the animality, while human beings due to a well-reflected consciousness also possess rationality. The animality in human beings gives them a leaning towards animal life or physical enjoyment. They, under its influence, look to eating, drinking and gratification of other physical desires. They are attracted towards these and run after them under the influence of their animality but these do not provide happiness as their longing for it is infinite. Animals are satisfied with these limited enjoyments as their urge is not infinite. However large the quantity of things offered to an animal may be, it will take only those which it needs and will not bother for the rest. But humans will certainly act differently in these conditions. This only establishes that animals are satisfied with the limited, while the desire of human beings is limitless, although the desire for enjoyment in both is prompted and governed by the animal aspect of life. The difference in the two is due to the possession by the human being of a clearly-reflected consciousness, something which animals lack. The infinite nature of the human urge for absolute happiness is due to their consciousness alone. It is this consciousness alone which is not satisfied with the physical pleasure of possession, power and position – things which in spite of their huge proportions, are only transitory in character. It is their consciousness which creates in human beings the longing for the Cosmic Entity.

The objects of the world – the physical enjoyments – do not quench the thirst of the human heart for happiness. Yet we find that people are attracted by them. The animality in people draws them towards gratification of animal desires, but the rationality of their consciousness remains ungratified since all these are transitory and short-lived. They are not enough to set at rest the unending and unlimited hunger of the human consciousness. There is, thus, a constant duel in humans between their animality and rationality. The animal aspect pulls them towards instant earthly joys, while their consciousness, not being satisfied with these, draws them towards the Cosmic Entity – the Infinite. This results in the struggle between the animal aspect and consciousness. Had the carnal pleasures derived from power and position been infinite and endless, they would have set at rest the eternal quest of consciousness for happiness. But they do not, and that is why the fleeting glory of temporal joys can never secure a lasting peace in the human mind and lead people to ecstasy.

It is only the well-reflected consciousness which differentiates human beings from animals. Is it then not imperative for human beings to make use of their consciousness? If their consciousness lies dormant behind their animality, people are bound to behave like animals. They in fact become worse than animals as, even though endowed with well-reflected consciousness, they do not make use of it. Such people do not deserve the status of human beings. They are animals in human form.

The nature of consciousness is to seek for the Infinite or realize the Cosmic Entity. Only those who make use of their consciousness and follow its dictates deserve to be called human beings. Therefore, every person, by making full use of his or her reflected consciousness, earns the right to be called a human being and finds his or her dharma or nature to be only the search for the Infinite or Cosmic Entity. This longing for the Infinite is the innate quality or dharma which characterizes the human status of people.

Happiness is derived by getting what one desires. If one does not get what one desires, one cannot be happy. One becomes sad and miserable. The clearly-reflected consciousness in people, which alone distinguishes them from animals, seeks the Cosmic Entity or the Infinite. And so people derive real happiness only when they can attain the Cosmic Entity or get into the process of attaining It. Consciousness does not want earthly joys because being finite none of them satisfy it. The conclusion we arrive at is that the dharma of humanity is to realize the Infinite or the Cosmic Entity. It is only by means of this dharma that people can enjoy eternal happiness and bliss.

The characteristic or dharma of human beings is to attain Brahma. It is, therefore, necessary to see whether Brahma exists or not, as it would be futile to attempt to get something which does not actually exist. If Brahma exists, we must know what It is.

Every action a person performs, appears to have been executed by his or her physical organs, the indriyas. These organs or indriyas are ten. And it appears that almost every action that a person performs appears to have been performed because of these ten indriyas. Yet this is not actually so. If the mind does not work behind them, the indriyas by themselves cannot perform any action. It is the mind which works and the ten indriyas are merely the instruments through which the work is executed. The action which originates in mind only finds its external manifestation with the help of the indriyas. To explain this we can take the example of a person looking at a book. It is only the mind which visualizes the book with the help of the eyes. If the mind does not work the eyes will not be able to see the book. For instance, a person in an unconscious state because of anaesthesia or some other reason will not be able to see the book even if his or her eyes are wide open. In such an unconscious state the eyes are not damaged, yet they cannot perform their natural function because the contact with the mind is suspended. This is why under the influence of anaesthesia, the organs or indriyas do not function, although they remain in perfect order. Often, when we are absorbed in thought, we fail to notice a person or recognize a friend standing right in front of us. This is only because, in spite of our eyes being in perfect order and wide open, the mind, which actually performs all actions, does not make use of the indriyas, the eyes. It is the mind which works and the indriyas only help in its external manifestation.

If it is the mind only which works, let us see how it acts through these indriyas. For instance, looking at a book is an action which the mind performs with the help of the eyes. When the mind sees a book, what actually happens is that the mind, with the help of the eyes, takes the shape of something we call a book. This shape which the mind takes is different from the image which is formed on the retina, as the mind can see and become like a book even when the eyes are closed; but the eyes cannot see when the mind does not function. So it is the mind which takes the form of a book during visual perception. This portion of the mind which takes the form of the book is termed citta or mind-stuff. But even if the citta takes the form of a book, there must be something other than the citta which does the work of seeing. The part of the mind which does the work of seeing is called ahaḿtattva or doer “I”. But “I” will not be able to see anything unless “I” exists. So there must be another part of the mind which is different from these two. This third part of the mind is the part which gives the feeling of “I” and is called mahattattva. Without the feeling of the existence of “I” or knowledge of the self, no action can be performed. This feeling of “I” or knowledge of the self comes from mahattattva or buddhitattva. The collective name for these three – citta, ahaḿtattva and mahattattva – is mind or antahkarańa or introversial psychic force. But these three portions of mind are only the outward manifestations of mind. It is with this mind that the action of seeing a book is performed, and this is termed psychic assimilation of rúpa tanmátra.

Tanmátra is a new term and should be explained. The microscopic fraction of a wave radiated from an object and received by the indriyas is called tanmátra or inference. To explain this further, it can be said that the idea of a book is grasped with the help of rúpa tanmátra (the ideatory vibration of the nerves creates an image or figure in the mind) when one looks at the book. But if the eyes are closed or if one is in a dark place, one can still recognize the book by touch. Here the idea of the book is assimilated due to another tanmátra, that is, the tanmátra of touch or tactual perception. Again if someone drops a book out of sight or out of reach, it is possible to identify it as a book through the auditory tanmátra. Citta comes in contact with the tanmátras only when ahaḿtattva wants it to. The act of looking at or identifying the book must be done by ahaḿtattva as citta by itself does not possess the capacity to perform any function. When ahaḿtattva or the part of the mind which works wants to see a book, citta comes in contact with the organs of sight, that is, the eyes. The eyes receive the rúpa tanmátra from the book. This tanmátra which is always present in the environment in the form of waves, strikes against citta through the eyes, which form a sort of door to bring citta in contact with the outside world. Citta then takes the shape of the book, and ahaḿtattva identifies or sees it as per the shape which citta has taken. Similarly, when ahaḿtattva wants to hear something it puts citta in contact with the organs of hearing, the ears. The ears receive the sound tanmátra, which is always present in the physical environment, through the medium of sound waves. Citta, on the impact of this tanmátra, becomes the sound itself, and ahaḿtattva hears that sound. This shows that citta takes the form of whatever ahaḿtattva desires or does. To put it another way, citta manifests the actions which ahaḿtattva performs.

It has already been explained that citta, ahaḿtattva and mahattattva or buddhitattva constitute the mind. Citta only has the capacity to take the form which ahaḿtattva wants. Similarly ahaḿtattva only has the capacity to perform actions. It can only work. There must be something to make it work. That something is mahattattva or buddhitattva, which gives one the feeling of “I”. This feeling of “I” is derived from the mind and this “I” in the mind makes ahaḿtattva and citta perform their respective functions. Without this “I” it is not possible to feel or see a book even if, under the influence of ahaḿtattva, citta takes the shape of the book. But then this “I” is only a part of the mind. That is, there is another “I” which is the possessing “I”, or the “I” which knows that there is a mind. The existence of “I” in the mind only proves that there is another real entity which is beyond mind and which knows the existence of mind. This “I” which is the witnessing entity and witnesses the existence of mind and the existence of buddhitattva or the feeling of “I”, is called átman or unit consciousness. Thus through introspection and concentrated thinking one observes that átman and mind, that is, unit consciousness and mind, are two separate entities.

Átman or unit consciousness and mind are two separate entities, yet they must be related to each other. In the first instance it appears that I am aware of my existence. Then the same “I” that appears to prove my existence makes me work, and a part of my mind called citta takes the form of the book through tanmátras to enable me to see the book. The “I” that gives me consciousness or the “I” which witnesses the existence of my mind and therein of the “I” which gives the feeling “I exist” is átman or unit consciousness. The “I” that gives the feeling of “I exist” and also proves the existence of átman or unit consciousness, is mahattattva. The “I” that works or sees the book is ahaḿtattva and the portion of mind that takes the shape of the book and enables ahaḿtattva to see it is citta. This shows that the same “I” has a different function at each stage. How these different functions of the same “I” come about needs further clarification. The statement “I exist” presupposes the presence of “I” which is the witness of this existence. This witnessing entity is átman or unit consciousness and its presence is established by the feeling of existence that one displays by one’s every action. That this assertion of “I exist” is different from átman or unit consciousness is seen from the fact that this “I” presupposes the presence of my átman or unit consciousness. This feeling proves that unit consciousness is only consciousness and that without consciousness existence is not possible. Without consciousness there can be no feeling of existence. What then is going to witness the existence of “I”? Consciousness is therefore essential to create the feeling of mahattattva or buddhitattva. To be explicit, mahattattva or buddhitattva cannot exist without átman or unit consciousness.

But the witnessing entity and the pure “I” feeling appear to be different functional forms of the same “I”. In fact the “I” that witnesses my existence, also manifests itself as the “I” of “I exist.” The witnessing “I” is unit consciousness or átman and it manifests itself as mahattattva or buddhitattva and thus establishes its own existence. It is the witnessing entity or unit consciousness which on taking up the function of the “I” of “I exist”, is called mahattattva or buddhitattva. Thus unit consciousness is not only consciousness, it also has a quality with the help of which it manifests itself through different functions. This quality is not consciousness, as otherwise it would not be necessary for unit consciousness to manifest itself as mahattattva and express itself as the “I” of “I exist”, which is different from the witnessing entity. Consciousness and its quality are therefore two separate entities in átman or unit consciousness. As this quality is different from consciousness, it must have been obtained from somewhere. There must be some other factor to qualify átman to make it manifest itself as mahattattva. That which gives this quality to átman is called Prakrti. In other words, it is due to Prakrti qualifying átman that it is manifested as mahattattva and gets the feeling of “I”.

Prakrti needs an explanation. Prakrti is the entity which controls natural phenomena. Prakrti is neither nature nor quality. For instance, the quality of burning is said to be the nature of fire. There must be something which gives this quality to fire; just as there is some entity which gives its quality to unit consciousness. That which qualifies unit consciousness is Prakrti and not the quality which is exhibited due to Her influence. Prakrti is a Sanskrit word and is derived pra – kr + ktin and it means to do something in a special way. Unit consciousness establishes its existence only by being qualified by Prakrti. In other words, Prakrti qualifies unit consciousness or átman to give it the feeling of its existence. Energy is required to perform any action. As Prakrti performs the action of qualifying átman or unit consciousness, She is a unique force. She is the principle which qualifies unit consciousness. It is Prakrti who, by Her influence on unit consciousness, gives it the qualities of different functions. Prakrti is a unique force – a principle. But some questions which arise are: whose principle is She, and where does She come from?

Prakrti is the principle of Puruśa, and it is by His own principle that Puruśa is influenced and qualified. As Prakrti is the principle of Puruśa, She must exist within Puruśa. In fact She always does. Unit consciousness and its prakrti can never be separated from each other, just as the burning principle of fire which cannot be separated from fire. Anything which acquires a characteristic quality due to the influence of a principle or force, cannot exist if that principle or force is withdrawn from it. The two will always go together, and so do unit consciousness and its principle, prakrti. Unit consciousness and its prakrti are inseparable like the two sides of a sheet of paper. The only function of Prakrti is to continually create different forms by Her influence over consciousness.

Unit consciousness is the witnessing entity and realizes its existence only when it is qualified to manifest as “I” of “I exist.” The principle of Prakrti which establishes the existence of unit consciousness by qualifying Puruśa is called sattvaguńa, the sentient principle, and the part of mind which is thus formed to give the feeling of “I exist” is called mahattattva or buddhitattva. It will be more correct to say that under the influence of sattvaguńa, unit consciousness manifests itself as mahattattva or buddhitattva.

Every action presupposes existence. Unless I exist, I shall not be able to see. Here also we find that “I” has two different functions or aspects. The first is the witnessing entity or consciousness, which, in order to prove or realize its existence, has acquired the feeling of “I exist,” and the same “I” now performs the function of seeing. The “I” of “I exist” is the buddhitattva which, while seeing something, takes up the function of seeing in addition to establishing the existence of unit consciousness. When unit consciousness is influenced by Prakrti, it manifests itself as buddhitattva. Similarly, the additional ability to perform an action is also caused by the influence of Prakrti on buddhitattva. Prakrti will also be present in buddhitattva as it is only a manifestation of unit consciousness, and Prakrti is bound to be with unit consciousness wherever and in whatever form it may exist. The principle or guńa of Prakrti which gives this quality or capacity to buddhitattva is called rajoguńa, the mutative principle. Thus when buddhitattva is influenced by Prakrti, it displays two functions or aspects. The latter, which it gets from rajoguńa and which gives it the capacity or quality to perform an action, is known as ahaḿtattva. That is, buddhitattva manifests itself as ahaḿtattva when influenced by rajoguńa or the mutative principle of Prakrti.

Every action is bound to have a result in the end. For example, when you look at a book the result is seeing the book. How we see a book was explained earlier. Citta, which is a part of mind, picks up the form-producing tanmátra of the book and itself becomes the form of the book. It is that book that ahaḿtattva sees. Citta takes the form of what ahaḿtattva wants it to be. When ahaḿtattva sees a book, citta becomes that book, and when it hears a sound, citta becomes that sound. Citta therefore is entirely dependent on ahaḿtattva for its form. Citta keeps on changing its form at the bidding of ahaḿtattva. It must then be very closely connected with ahaḿtattva. How citta is formed needs clarification. Citta, as was explained earlier, is a part of the mind, and buddhitattva and ahaḿtattva are the other two parts. Buddhitattva and ahaḿtattva are manifestations of unit consciousness formed due to the influence of sattvaguńa of Prakrti over it and of rajoguńa over buddhitattva. In other words it is unit consciousness which, under the influence of Prakrti, takes up the function of ahaḿtattva in the second stage. Hence Prakrti is present in ahaḿtattva and is bound to qualify it further. In fact, it is due to Prakrti qualifying ahaḿtattva that it manifests itself as citta. The quality of Prakrti which influences ahaḿtattva is called tamoguńa, the static principle. It is as a result of the influence of tamoguńa that ahaḿtattva, or the “I” that performs actions, has to take up the mental image of the result of its action. This means that when “I” see a book, it is “I” that becomes like the book. Another “I” thus comes into being under the influence of tamoguńa. It is this “I” which takes the form of the mental image of the book during perception. This “I” which becomes like the book or takes on the form of the book is citta. Thus it is unit consciousness which gradually manifests itself as citta.

In the preceding paragraphs it was established by logic and reasoning that it is only unit consciousness which, under the influence of the different principles of its Prakrti, gradually manifests itself as citta, and as a result of this, mind comes into being. The existence of unit consciousness is essential for mind, which is only a gradual manifestation of unit consciousness under the qualifying influence of Prakrti. Mind, in fact, cannot be formed without the presence of átman or unit consciousness. But we know that mind is present in every individual. Hence átman or unit consciousness is also present in every individual. There are innumerable individuals in this universe, and as átman or unit consciousness is reflected in each one, there appear to be many átmans or unit consciousnesses. The collective name for all these átmans or unit consciousnesses is Paramátman, Bhúmácaetanya, Brahma or Bhagaván. Just as twelve units make a dozen, twenty make a score, and the collective name for a very large number of soldiers is an army, the collective name for all the unit consciousnesses is Paramátman, Bhúmácaetanya or Bhagaván. The name Bhagaván should not be construed as a mighty human figure with powerful hands and feet. It is the collection of all our átmans. The nearest word in English which may be used for átman or unit consciousness is “soul”, so Bhagaván may also be called Universal Consciousness or Universal Soul. This shows that Bhagaván does exist and that It exists as Paramátman or Universal Soul, Bhúmácaetanya or Cosmic Consciousness, or Brahma, the Eternal Blessedness.

Chapter 2	Universal Humanism [a compilation]

Prakrti or the Supreme Operative Principle, the authoress of multiplicities, has been carrying on Her endless creation or diversity. The beauty, the sweetness and the wonder of this diversity is manifest in every place, in every stratum of creation. Human beings have emerged as the highest beings at an evolved stage of Her creation along Saiṋcara and Pratisaiṋcara. And there are a great many diversities and apparent distinctions within humanity itself.

The people of some countries have dark skin, tall bodies, black irises, black hair, thick lips and flat noses, while the people of other countries have a fair complexion, medium height, blue irises and aquiline noses. There is a remarkable difference, a wonderful diversity, in regard to physiognomy – hair, eyes, skin, nose, lips, etc. – among the inhabitants of the different parts of the world. In fact, this difference between human beings is so staggering that sometimes people are wrongly led to believe that the white people are perhaps superior to the black population, and that the blacks are only a little higher than our animal ancestors on the scale of evolution. As human beings were not able to unravel the mystery of this diversity, they wrongly preached the doctrine of racial supremacy, resulting in hated of their fellow human beings and heartless cruelty, and indulged in savagery and bloody warfare – these were the darkest and the most lamented chapters in human history. Even today in Europe, particularly in Spain and Portugal, and in the USA, South Africa and Rhodesia [now Zimbabwe], one unmistakably notices the curse of this ignorance.

But is racial supremacy a scientific concept? Is it humanly justified? What does ethnology say? What is the origin of humanity? Did the ancestors of human beings of various colours belong to the same stock, or were they different? According to ethnology the human ancestors were the same. From them originated the Aryans, the Austrics, the Mongolians and the Negroes of today. Those first forebears of the human race have been termed Australopithecus in ethnology. On an auspicious day in the remote past, say 1,000,000 years ago, the first human being saw the light of this verdant earth. The Australopithecus group branched out into two categories of creatures – chimpanzees and orangutans on one side, and human beings on the other side.

The first human beings were born in the vast geographical area between the Java Islands and Palestine. The Australopithecus gradually transformed themselves into human form but this great transformation did not take place overnight, nor even in one century, but by slow degrees. Ethnologists, to be more precise, have conceived of an intermediate stage of beings – the Homo Erectus – who are neither Australopithecus nor exactly human beings in form and nature. The fossils of these creatures have been found in different parts of Java, China, and East and North Africa. These creatures of the Homo Erectus species emerged in the unknown past, chiefly during the Pleistocene Age of the earth.

Everything on this earth is subject to the rule of change and progress. Eventually there came about enormous changes in the environment and natural conditions of the earth in subsequent ages, and consequently thousands of species entirely vanished. Because of the immutable law of nature, these species also had to leave this earth forever, without leaving any trace behind.

But before their extinction they left behind their descendants – Homo Sapiens were the first ancestors of humanity.

The different groups of Homo Erectus spread out in different directions. Some of the groups were doomed to extinction in the face of the fierce onslaught of hostile nature, while other groups had the advantage of congenial environments and gave rise to a higher species. Those who were responsible for the advent of the human race could not maintain their survival because they could not adopt themselves to the enormous changes in the natural environment of this earth.

The first Homo Sapiens did not remain tied to one place. In quest of greater ease, comfort and safety in life, they spread out from Eurasia to the Arctic Ocean, from the Bering Strait to Melanesia, and from there again they moved in other directions, to find new homes in unexplored horizons.

Thus the single species of Homo Sapiens scattered itself over different parts of the world. At first the colour and physiognomical differences between the scattered Homo Sapiens were not very prominent. But with the passage of time, as they passed their lives over long periods amidst diverse geophysical conditions, differences in their physical structures became more and more apparent. Thus the apparent diversity in the human world today is the product of natural conditions.

Geographically this planet of ours is divided into a few distinct zones: the snow-covered poles; the hot, sandy and dreary deserts; the roaring and ruffled seas and oceans extending up to the distant horizons; and the silent and motionless, high and intractable mountains. In some places rivers cut vast plains into two; at other places high waves break upon the banks of great lakes with a thudding sound.

Human beings, since their advent onto this earth, found themselves confronted with these types of conflicting natural environments. They had to fight tooth and nail against those particular adverse circumstances to preserve their existence, and that process brought about marked changes in their outward physical structures.

The greater the heat of the sun, the greater the amount of ultraviolet rays in the sunlight. A study of geography tells us why there are differences in the degree of heat of the sun’s rays. Where the sun’s rays fall on earth obliquely, there is less heat of the sun, and where the sun’s rays fall straight on the earth, the heat is greater. In very hot countries white-skinned people find it very hard to live, because their skin, having less of the chemical substance called melanin, is unable to stand much heat. Body skin with a great quantity of melanin in it turns jet black, and obviously a lesser quantity of melanin makes one’s skin white.

If ever white people are forced for some reason to live long in a hot climate, their colour turns brown. In 1939-40, when British soldiers came to India for war purposes, their colour became brown due to the great heat. Naturally, as the skin of these soldiers had to adjust with the hot climate of India, there were some necessary changes in their skin to effect acclimatisation.

In hot countries the irises of people’s eyes are generally black, because more melanin is required to protect the eyeball from the scorching rays of the sun.

The nostrils of people in hot countries are comparatively large and the front of the nose is extended. Why does this happen? Because external heat makes the internal air heated. The body temperature having increased, the internal heat tries to force its way out rapidly. As a result of the rapid exhalation of heavy, hot air, the diameter of the front portion of the nose increases.

People who live in cold countries develop fatty tissues in their bodies. These tissues are particularly helpful in maintaining body temperature. And though their noses are high, their nostrils are comparatively small because if a large amount of chill air enters the body it will inevitably affect the lungs and vocal chord. That is why nature has made the constitution of the inhabitants of cold countries so ideally suited as not to allow a greater than necessary amount of air to enter the body at the time of breathing.

In the same way the variation in natural environment and climate has variously effected other changes in the physical structure of human beings. Some people are jet-black, some reddish white, some yellow, while others are brown. The one species of Homo Sapiens has become divided into four distinct races (living under different circumstances), but basically they all originated from one and the same source – from Australopithecus to Homo Erectus to Homo Sapiens. The same stock is divided into various so-called races – white, black, brown and yellow. These races are as different from one another as the rivers Ganga, Meghna, Padma and Bhagirathi, which spring from one common source, the Gangotri in the Himalayas.

There are four main races in the world today – the Aryans, the Austrics, the Negroes and the Mongolians.

The Aryans first moved from West Asia and migrated to different parts from the Black Sea to the Danube Valley and then to Central and West Europe. They advanced and settled in Iran, Syria, Palestine, Egypt, North Africa and Spain, and along the Mediterranean coast. They spread out from West France to the British Isles, and later spread to Afghanistan, the Indus Valley, the Red River Valley, and Korea and Japan in the Far East.

The Mongolians had China as their main homeland. Later they spread out from the Arctic Ocean to the Bering Straight and to the White Sea. They could not move westward because of the obstruction of high mountains in Asia. So they advanced eastward and southward and reached Burma, Siam (Thailand), Indochina, Sumatra, Java, Borneo, the Philippines and Japan, and joined the original inhabitants of those places.

The Negroes lived near the equator in Africa and New Guinea, near the southern coast of the Indian Ocean. Their descendants are found in South India, the Andaman Islands, the Malayan Peninsula and the Philippines.

Human society comprises these various branches of various races. There is no reason whatever to recognize one race as superior to another race. The external differences in constitution among these human groups cannot alter their basic human traits – love and affection, pleasure and pain, hunger and thirst. These basic biological instincts and mental propensities equally predominate in human beings of all complexions in all countries and in all ages. A mere rustic, unlettered, half-naked tribal mother of an unknown hamlet of Chotanagpur Hills (in Bihar in India) bears deep maternal affection for her young children; in the same way, a well-educated mother of a locality of New York pours out of her heart a great love for her own children. The subterranean flow of love and affection exists in all hearts alike. Every person cries out in pain, everyone feels pleasure when there are occasions of joy and happiness. In different geographical, cultural, social and other environments the lifestyles of different human groups may vary – a few special psychic traits of some of those groups may assert themselves – but fundamentally their mental existence flows along the same channels of ideas and consciousness. Containing the same cosmic momentum and under the same cosmic inspiration, they all have set out for a tryst with the same destiny.

From the unknown past until this day, the various branches of the human society have given rise to different civilizations. The Alpines and the Mediterraneans (two branches of the white race) produced the Hellenic, Sumerian and Egyptian civilizations. The Nordics and the Dravidians were responsible for the Indus Valley civilizations. And the yellow race produced the Chinese and Japanese civilizations. The Red Indians built up the American civilizations.

Black people did not lag behind either. True, compared with other races their contribution to human civilization is less impressive, not because of their racial inferiority, but because the so-called civilized races (for their selfish political interests) deprived them of sufficient scope in their development. Furthermore, the hostile natural environment did not allow introversion of their psychic potentialities. There is still the burning desert of the Sahara right in the heart of Africa, surrounded by sea on most sides, and there is still the deep and impenetrable forest thwarting any easy human communication. This unfavourableness of nature prevented the Africans from looking within and that accounts for their failure to build any civilization in the past. In spite of that, there are immense human potentialities lying dormant in them too. And for that the most pressing need is to develop those possibilities by creating a congenial environment.

There is an admixture of blood of different races. In India, all the four prominent races – the Aryans, the Mongolians, the Austrics and the Negroes – have been inseparably mixed up. The present Filipinos are a mixture of Negro, Mongolian and Aryan races, though the Mongolian elements are predominant. Ethnological research has proved that the present Philippino race grew out of a heterogeneous mixture of people from India, Indonesia, Malaya, China, Africa and Arabia. Similarly, the Japanese race was evolved out of a blood mixture of the Aynus (a sub-branch of white people) hailing from the banks of the Amur River, a sub-branch of the yellow race from Korea, and a hybrid community of browny-black coloured people who migrated from Malaya and Indonesia. The Chinese people are composed of people from South Russia and Central Asia. The population of Great China is a mixture of those different communities.

Only recently Hitler fed the German nation on the spurious notions of Aryan supremacy and incited the vain and arrogant Nazis to fight a horrible war. He raised his arrogant slogan – “The Aryans are not to be ruled but to rule”. But is this chauvinistic and blind concept of Aryan supremacy supported by the science of ethnology? No, this science holds that the modern Germans are not a homogeneous race. They are a mixed race. Thus, if analysed, it will be found that none of the existing human races are free from admixture of the blood of other races. Therefore the talk of “purity of blood” of a race is meaningless, for there cannot be any purity of blood of a particular race. Rather, blood is always pure.

In India, the maximum mixture of blood has been in Bengal. The Bengali race evolved out of the Aryans, Mongolians, Austrics and Negroes. The people of Bihar and Orissa and the Kayastha (a high-caste Hindu community of East India) belong to this Bengali race. In southern India, too, Negro blood came to mingle with the Austric blood, and a new race, the Dravidians emerged.

Thus in the dim past of unknown history, different human groups came in one another’s contact. There was unavoidable intermingling of blood, and ultimately there arose many so-called new races after gaps of long periods. The innate migratory nature of human beings has goaded them to journey from one horizon to another, from one hemisphere to another. For more than one reason, human beings have broken narrow geographical boundaries and set out for other lands and associated with other communities. The direct and indirect causes of their association with other races are roughly as follows:

(1) To preserve their existence, fighting collectively against hostile natural forces.

(2) Through wars, victories and defeats of warriors, and expansion of kingdoms.

(3) For inner attraction because of common religion.

(4) Because of geographical proximity.

(5) For reciprocal trade and other communications.

(6) Through linguistic and cultural exchanges.

The above-mentioned factors brought the various human groups in close contact with one another. And goaded by an innate instinct, they freely mixed among themselves. This contact and close relationship among various groups gave birth to the many so-called races of today.

Ultimately this close association amongst themselves culminated in marital bonds. Many small races were fused into a new race through inter-racial marriages. For instance, in South America, as a result of constant intermingling of the blood of the Negroes, the Europeans and the Indians, a new race has emerged. Similarly, in Colombia and Mexico, a new Mestizo community has come into being as a result of interracial marriages between the Europeans and Indians. That is why it is not proper to attach much importance to differences in respect to noses, eyes, hair, height, etc.

Human society is continually striving to arrive at a synthesis through analysis, some sort of unity through diversity. The natural obstructions of small clans, narrow communal interests, geographical distances and intractable customs and usages – none of these obstacles could hinder the steady and silent movement towards a supreme goal. That is why the policy of apartheid, the vanity of racial superiority, national chauvinism or regionalism – these relative doctrines or social philosophies – could not thwart the progress of human society. The outdated ideals of nationalism are crumbling to pieces today.

The newly awakened humanity of today is anxious to herald the advent of one universal society under the vast blue sky. The noble and righteous persons of all countries, bound by fraternal ties, are eager to assert in one voice, with one mind, and in the same tune that human society is one and indivisible. In this voice of total unity and magnanimity lies the value and message of eternal humanism.

Chapter 3	Universal Humanism [a compilation]

What is progress? “Prakrsta gati ityartha pragati.” Where movement is towards Shubha it is called progress. Where movement is not associated with Shubha it is retardation. For instance, going up the hill or down are both movements, but in different directions.

What is progress in the real sense? Normally, people associate the word progress with scientific progress, but actually, scientific progress may or may not be true progress. The essence of progress is movement towards Shubha.

Human existence is trifarious. It has the physical, the intellectual and the spiritual aspects. There is movement in all three spheres, and therefore there can be progress in all three spheres. The main consideration, however, is what is the goal or the aim of movement? Or in other words, what is the summum bonum of life? The movement which leads from Shubha to Parama-shubha is progress.

Let us examine in what sense the word progress is commonly used in the physical sphere. People think that the use of a motor vehicle in place of a bullock cart, the use of an aeroplane in place of a motor vehicle, or the use of a rocket in place of an aeroplane is progress. To take another example: At first people used to sleep on the ground, then they used charpoy and now they sleep on spring mattresses. This is also considered as progress. In olden days, people used to write on palm leaves and on Bhurja-patra. Nowadays, they write on paper. The prerequisite of progress in all these examples appears to be the attainment of more pleasure in the use of things. In other words, progress is considered synonymous with the enjoyment of more pleasure. There is greater convenience in sleeping on a spring bed than on the ground. Similarly, the aeroplane takes away much of the tedium of travel. So progress is considered as the harbinger of material enjoyment. This enjoyment is not necessarily limited to the physical sphere. It is also available in the intellectual and spiritual spheres. Who is the subject of the enjoyer? It is the mind. The mind experiences physical as well as intellectual pleasure. The experiences of spiritual happiness is psycho-spiritual. There, also, it is partly mental.

If all experience of pleasure is through the mind, it follows that pleasure is born within the vibrational scope of the mind. Progress, then, cannot go beyond the vibrational principle. All existence in this universe is vibrational. Physical and intellectual happiness, both of which are enjoyed by the mind, are therefore both vibrational. In the vibrational field, equipoise and equilibrium are only maintained by the balance of the two opposites, i.e. the positive and the negative. In other words, unhappiness and happiness increase proportionately. Thus, we see that in the physical stratum, the so-called progress of science is responsible for an equal degree of happiness and unhappiness. The use of motor cars in place of bullock carts involves not only greater comfort for the body, but also involves far greater risks of accidents. The use of aeroplanes increases the comfort of travel and the risks in almost equal proportions. Thus, we find that the enjoyment of material pleasure in the physical sphere is neutralized by the negative side of pain.

The experience of pleasure through the mind can be divided into five varieties:

1. Anukulavedaniiyam
2. Pratikulavedaniiyam
3. Avedaniiyam
4. Nirapekśavedaniiyam
5. Aplutavedaniiyam

These are the five forms taken by feelings. All progress is through the experience of these feelings. Wherever there is progress, one or more or all of the expressions of these feelings are present. In the realm of physical progress, we mainly find only two of these expressions, and they are primarily physicopsychic. There is no experience of pleasure in the physical body as such. The experience of pleasure in the physical body means relaxation of nerves. The relaxed nerves emanate the peculiar mental vibration which is called Anukulavedaniiyam. Where there is tension or the striking on the nerves, another kind of vibration is generated which is expressed through Pratikulavedaniiyam. The other three expressions of feelings are not present in the physical stratum. What we call progress in the physical stratum is only the awareness of Anukulavedaniiyam in the physical world. We either fail to see or purposely ignore the corresponding Pratikulavedaniiyam.

There is sometimes a conscious effort to forget this opposite side, and therefore we add the positive marks for Anukulavedaniiyam and place zeros on the debit side and proclaim that we are making progress. In fact, if we could see both sides, we would find that the balance is nil and as a result, we would realize that there is no progress in the physical stratum. It is like a government accepting the recommendations of a commission to increase the pay scale of the employees and to recover the increased expenditure through higher taxation. Will this be called economic progress? Certainly not, for it fails to increase purchasing power. The acceptance of progress in the physical field is only wrong mathematics.

Let us now examine the psychic sphere. In this sphere there are four expressions of feelings: Anukulavedaniiyam, Pratikulavedaniiyam, Avedaniiyam and Nirapekśavedaniiyam. One more distinction from the physical sphere is to be noted. In the psychic sphere, the relaxation or strain of the nerves is not the primary cause of feelings. In the psychic sphere, the main feature is that the sense of mental pabulum increases. The food of the mind increases but not its dimensions. So Anukulavedaniiyam in the psychic sphere would mean that state of the mind which provides more food for it. It would naturally result in a corresponding increase of Pratikulavedaniiyam, also, so that the balance of the pendulum may be maintained in the vibrational sphere. By way of illustration, it may be noted that in ancient times, when human beings were intellectually backward, they also had less emotional disturbances. One who is intellectually deficient is also less receptive to emotional disturbance. Highly intellectual people are extra sensitive in the emotional sphere. They create unnecessary problems out of nothing and waste sleepless nights over them. Thus, as far as Anukulavedaniiyam and Pratikulavedaniiyam are concerned, they balance each other in the intellectual sphere, also.

Relatively speaking, absence of pain or pleasure – which is called Nirapekśavedaniiyam – is in effect psychic suppression or repression. This is an unnatural state of mind and whether it lasts five minutes or ten minutes, five days or ten days or even a period of years, when the control is removed it again bursts forth in the form of Anukulavedaniiyam or Pratikulavedaniiyam. Psychic suppression or repression, therefore, does not lead to progress.

What is Avedaniiyam? In ordinary circumstances, Avedaniiyam is most unnatural. Under this condition, either the function of nerve cells stops or is forcibly stopped. In other circumstances in the mental sphere it may amount to refusal to admit the existence of the mundane world. It is a denial of crude physicality. It is an attitude which holds that whatever exists is only illusory. This is a form of self-deception. It is a state comparable with death. Such an attitude promote nihilism. It is not the property of life to promote nihilism. Therefore, the ultimate effect of Avedaniiyam is also visible in the form of Anukulavedaniiyam or Pratikulavedaniiyam. The expression of this effect will emerge when there is either an internal or external blow on the mind.

Thus we notice that so far as the mental sphere is concerned, there is no progress in it. For instance, it may be true to say that people in India were intellectually backward a thousand years ago as compared with today. The same mental pleasures were not available to them as are enjoyed by the present Indian population. But it is also true that the mental agonies to which the present day population is subjected were not so acute in the past. Thus, after taking into account all the pluses and minuses, we will notice that there cannot be any progress in the realm of intellectuality.

Now, let us examine the spiritual field. There is no Anukulavedaniiyam, Pratikulavedaniiyam, Avedaniiyam or Nirapekśavedaniiyaḿ in the spiritual field. The reason is that as the goal is not finite, the states described in Anukulavedaniiyam, Pratikulavedaniiyam, Avedaniiyam, and Nirapekśavedaniiyam do not exist. Only one form of feeling is expressed in the spiritual realm and this is Aplutavedaniiyam. This expression is either non-lateral or multilateral. Being non-lateral, it does not allow the formation of reactive momenta, and being multi-lateral, it is immune from the effect of reactive momenta. The multilateral expression which is in the nature of Cosmological vibration can be called Samismrta Vedana in Saḿskrta. The non-lateral expression, i.e. the non-subjective vibration, may be called Bahuprajiṋána Vedana, or Bhásottara Vedana. Áplutavedaniiyam functions through pointed psychic existence which is a non-subjective vibration. The speciality of Bhásottara Vedana is that to maintain the equilibrium of the pendulum in this phase negative speed is not required. In the absence of negative speed, every movement is progress. Thus, there is no question of minuses; there are only pluses. This is a movement from negativity to positivity and this, therefore, is the real form of progress.

Samismrta Vedana is psycho-spiritual: the event happens in the psychic sphere but comes in contact with the spiritual sphere. There can be no progress in the physical sphere as the pluses and minuses there cancel each other out. Similar is the condition in the intellectual sphere. But in the intellectuo-spiritual sphere progress is possible. It can also be measured to some extent, but progress in the purely spiritual sphere cannot be measured as we have no measuring scale for that realm.

The so-called physical progress is termed Káma in Saḿskrta. The so-called intellectual progress is termed Artha. “Artha” has a dual meaning: it is used in the sense of purport, as well as in the sense of wealth which solves a pending problem. The progress in the psycho-spiritual field is termed Dharma. And pure spiritual progress, which is progress in the real sense, is called Mokśa. The only difference between the intellectuo-spiritual progress and spiritual progress is that the former can be measured where as the latter cannot. The combined name of Káma, Artha, Dharma and Mokśa is Caturvarga. People should aim at Dharma and Mokśa and not Káma and Artha, as only through the medium of Dharma and Mokśa is real progress possible.

It has been stated above that there is no progress in the physical and intellectual spheres. So should all efforts in these fields be stopped altogether? Should there be no effort to develop physical sciences? No, we shall continue to make efforts in these fields, also. We have only to be cautious about the effects of such efforts on human society, human mind and even human physique. What happens with the so-called progress in the physical sphere is that the speed of life gets a quick momentum which effects the nerves. The effect on the nerves increases the function of the cranium and it results in the weakening of the heart. As a natural consequence, to the extent the physical sciences will advance for physical progress, the diseases of the heart and mind will increase in the same proportion. It will be noted that many so-called civilized people cannot sleep as their nerves are under strain. The diseases which were considered fatal 200 years ago are no longer so nowadays. They have become common diseases today. The fatal diseases in modern times are mostly connected with the heart and nerves. This is the result of so-called progress in the realm of physicality. In the future, the physical structure of human beings will be effected by these factors. The nerves will stiffen and the cranium will become larger. The bones, on the other hand, will become thinner. This will result in a change in the stature of human beings. They will have lean and thin limbs and a disproportionately big head. This change will come soon and fast.

The so-called intellectual progress effects the mind intensely. The nervous system and mind are not the same. The nerve cells are physical and any disease connected with them is, therefore, physical. What we term as madness is either due to nervous disorder or mental disorder or both. The progress in the intellectual sphere will result in a greater clash of emotions and will consequently increase insanity. There will be a noticeable growth of mad people in society. This will make it even clearer that intellectual progress is no progress. The real progress is only spiritual. In the spiritual field, due to the absence of the reactive momenta, there is no retardation, there is only movement forward. This is the nature of true progress.

Spiritual progress can only be attained on a firm physical mental base. Therefore, this physical and intellectual base has to be progressively adjusted to the changing conditions of time and space. Spiritual aspirants have to devise ways to protect themselves from the reactive momenta in the physical and intellectual spheres. In the age when the nerves of human beings will fatten and the cranium will enlarge, the Sádhakas will also be subject to these changes. What, then, is the way to escape? There should certainly be some way to escape the extreme effects of these changes. The cruder waves should be consumed by subtler ones. When the vibrations of pain or pleasure in the physical realm are consumed in the physico-psychic vibrations, the feeling of pain or pleasure will not be so acute, although the physical sphere will remain as large as before. In other words, this process will save the mind from reaction. As there will be no attraction towards pleasure, it will also save one from pain, not fully, but partially. Similarly, in order to escape the reactive momenta, the intellectual waves will have to be transmuted into intellectuo-spiritual ones. This will protect one from the reactive momenta in the psychic sphere to some extent – neither pain nor pleasure will overwhelm the mind. This stage is described in the Gita as “Dukhesu anudvigna manah, sukhesu vigatasprahah”. To the extent the desire for pleasure is less, one escapes from the reaction of pain.

The only true progress for human beings is spiritual progress. The wise will, therefore, concern themselves only with the spiritual sphere. The only concern with the physical and intellectual spheres will be adjusting the base on which spiritual progress will thrive. While concerning themselves with the adjustment in the physical and intellectual spheres, the wise should also continue to consume cruder waves in subtler ones according to the process described above. The absence of such consumption or transmutation in the physical and intellectual spheres is bound to lead to retardation. The wise, remembering that the goal of life is the subtlest goal, will make efforts to reach supreme blessedness. This is the only way to progress. There is no other way. “Nanyapantha vidyate ayanaya.”

Chapter 4	Universal Humanism [a compilation]

The inner spirit of the word samája [“society”] is “to move together”. That is, the vitality of society depends on two factors: its existence – a collective creation – and its inherent dynamism. The characteristic of an activating force is that it does not move in a perfectly straight line, rather its movement is rhythmic or undulating; and this rhythm or wave is not monomorphic but systaltic. The force that moves society forward is also systaltic. When the nature of movement of individual life does not hinder the rhythm of collective movement of society, there remains the possibility of forming a society from the collective movement of numerous individuals – there lies the possibility of creating a universal intellectual structure inspired by the brilliance of sublime ideas.

If we try to judge the nature of something by analysing the inner spirit of the word used to describe it, we will have to say without hesitation that humanity has not yet learned how to build a “society” worthy of the name. Even to this day, people have only a very vague notion of the reasons for needing society, let alone of how to build a true society.

Movement means the active effort to destroy an existing structure and construct another. The very effort to destroy old, worn-out systems gives rise to the possibility of creating newer systems and codes. It is wrong to infer that because a force is temporarily static after being attacked it is inert; it still possesses the potential to strike back. Of course the force under attack tends to absorb the striking force in an effort to survive, but it cannot do this successfully. I have already explained why. To retard the systalticity of the movement of the striking force is contrary to the characteristics of force. That is why vested interests cannot hold back the progress of society.

A careful study of the social history of the world will reveal that until now every attempt at prativiplava [counter-revolution] has not only caused enormous psychic and financial suffering and plunged humanity into the mire of gloom and despair, but has also lengthened the period of social contraction. This in turn, in the next phase, has helped to accelerate the speed of the period of social expansion – has inspired the chariot of revolution to advance towards victory with greater momentum.⁽¹⁾

Does this forceful, dynamic movement manifest as a senseless whim, devoid of wisdom? No. In individual life the propensities of an underdeveloped mind appear whimsical to the external world, but in collective life, that is, in social life, there is no scope for whimsical movement. Nor would I say that dynamic movement is always inspired by wisdom. But I will say this: without wisdom, it is impossible to express dynamic movement.

The internal clash of forces provides the dynamic movement with constructive guidance. However, the amount of wisdom that is required to stop the erosion of the internal vitality of the dynamic movement is not manifest in all individuals. There are some people who manifest a great deal of wisdom, but, reasonably speaking, no matter how much that manifestation of wisdom is criticized as being a relative thing, it has some special value of its own. The easiest way to determine this special value is to ascertain its efficacy in the field of application.

Now the word “efficacy” often raises a storm in the philosophers’ teacups, because both materialists and idealists argue in more or less the same way. Here I do not want to say much about the idealists, but I must say that the arguments of the materialists are to some extent contradictory, because the efficacy of something in the field of application can only be judged by a sound mind, and at the time of passing judgement the mind has to be kept above matter. Let me elaborate this point.

Matter is the be-all and end-all of materialism. To a materialist, mind has been created out of matter by a process of chemical transformation, and so it does not have any independent or special significance beyond its materialistic value. Who, then, is to pass judgement on the efficacy of something? Can we justifiably accept the mind as a judge when its very existence is in principle denied? And conversely, if the mind is elevated to the status of a judge, does materialism retain its validity? No, it capitulates to idealism.

There are many other contradictory arguments in the philosophy of materialism, but they are not relevant to the present discussion. However, I do not want to dismiss the world as illusory either, as do the flighty idealists. In my opinion, mind must be given the special importance it deserves.

Although the physical body appears to imbibe ideas, psychologists will surely agree that the mind is the receiver or perceiver of ideas. They will also have to accept that the appraisal of any object in the absolute sense is not possible unless we can find a yardstick – for all times, all places and all people – to evaluate the mind. In the vast multitude of relativities, how is it possible to determine an acceptable absolute measurement for all times, all places and all people? From a little analytical study of the functional differences between the subjective and objective parts of the mind, whether underdeveloped or developed, it is clear that the mind cannot maintain its unit identity without an object. Mind must have an object to contemplate. If that object transcends time, place and person, it will then be possible for the mind to perceive the temporal, spatial and personal factors from a broad angle of vision.

Only a magnanimous and pervasive mind deserves to be called the Macrocosm. The ideological component of the unit mind which provides the initial inspiration for the individual to attain that Cosmic state, is called “morality”. Every aspect of morality sings the song of the Infinite, even in the midst of the finite. In other words, or put more simply, I wish to say that those magnanimous propensities which help to establish one in the Cosmic state are the virtuous principles of morality.

Social life must take morality as its starting point – it must take inspiration from morality. Only then will society be able to put an end to the erosion caused by divisive internal conflicts and to advance towards victory. But before we can start work, we also have to understand the difference between morality and religion, or so-called dharma.

Dharma means the attainment of bliss or the endeavour to attain bliss through regular sadhana in the subtler spheres of one’s nature. This blissful state is considered by wise people to be Brahma [the Supreme Entity], and by devotees to be one’s very soul.

The word dharma is often loosely used for so-called religion. The reason for this is that the founders of almost all the world’s religions propagated their respective doctrines among the common people, claiming them to be the messages of God [i.e., to be dharma]. These founders never followed the path of logic. Whatever their intention might have been, the result was that humanity lost its supreme treasure, its rationality.

In the Middle Ages some selfish people proclaimed to the backward masses, “I am the messenger of God. Whatever I say is a revelation from God,” just to inject fear and terror into people’s minds. Was it beneficial for humanity to have such doctrines imposed on them in this way?

Almost every religion has claimed that only its followers are God’s chosen people and that the rest of humanity is cursed and bound by the chains of Satan. One religion has declared, “Our prophet is the only saviour. There is no escape from mundane sufferings except by taking refuge in him.” Another religion has declared, “I am the last prophet. Prayers must be said before God a specific number of times in a certain manner each day. Special animals must be sacrificed on particular days. These are the wishes of merciful God. Those who follow these injunctions will attain heaven on the Day of Judgement.” Yet another religion says, “Know ye, my son, thy God is the only God. All other gods are false gods.” Just imagine, all these religions preach universal fraternity, and yet this universal fraternity is kept within the confines of their own community.⁽²⁾ Humanity gasps for breath at such preposterous claims of universal fraternity.

Carried away by the grandiose slogans of their respective religions, the followers of these religions have at different times whipped up a frenzy of communal⁽³⁾ hatred and indulged in orgies of genocide. Had their founders seen such sights, they would have hidden their faces in utter shame. Of all the bloodshed that took place in the Middle Ages, a major part was a natural consequence of this communal “universal fraternity”.

Directly or indirectly, religion encourages communalism. “Communalism” means a group [groupist] psychology⁽⁴⁾ based on religion.

In the distant past, long before the Middle Ages, so-called religions repeatedly tried to “show the light” to the simple, ignorant masses, and are still doing so today; and in the process they have in most cases created disasters. In fact, they do not feel any genuine love for humanity. The standard-bearers of these religions have never hesitated to use force of arms, wily intellect or financial power to gain some petty mundane advantage.

That is why I maintain that throughout history religions have proved to be flagrantly unworthy institutions, incapable of providing even the physical necessities of life, let alone spiritual salvation. By preaching disharmony, they have systematically prevented people from understanding that they are part of one integrated human society. And in support of their interdictions, they have cited many irrational precedents – a load of mouldy, rotten, worm-eaten papyrus.

Religion tries to transform the human mind into a state of staticity, because anything static is easily exploited. However, inertia is the exact opposite of the nature of the mind. A knotty problem! The founders of religion wanted human beings to give up their dynamic nature, and out of fear or delusion, unquestioningly accept certain ideas as the infallible truth. To prevent their shallow knowledge from being exposed, some so-called religious teachers avoided answering people’s questions by pretending to observe silence. This got around all the fuss of answering queries, and even gave the person the opportunity to appear sagacious. In order to stifle the inquisitiveness of the human mind, some of these charlatans even used to claim that an inquisitive nature is extremely bad.

Read any so-called religious book: one will seldom find anything resembling tolerance of the religious beliefs of others. I am not saying that one should accept whatever people say, but surely non-acceptance and intolerance are not the same. Why is there a mania for refuting the views of others anyway? If necessary, different views can be compared and presented in philosophical books. The philosophical and psychological loopholes in an argument may be pointed out without being disrespectful. But is the attempt to insult others indicative of magnanimity? In so-called religious books there is a greater tendency to refute the religious doctrines of others than to propagate one’s own ideas. Observing all these machinations, genuine theologists cannot hold religion in high esteem.

Wise people say:

Yuktiyuktamupádeyaḿ vacanaḿ bálakádapi;
Anyaḿ trńamiva tyájyamapyuktaḿ Padmajanmanáh.

Kevalaḿ shástramáshrityaḿ na karttavyo vinirńayah;
Yuktihiina vicáre tu dharmahánih prajáyate.

“If a child says something rational, it should be accepted, and if the Supreme Creator says something irrational, it should be totally rejected.”

“It is undesirable to accept something just because it is written in the scriptures, because if irrational sayings are accepted and implemented, the decline of dharma will be the result.”

The derivative meaning of the word niiti [“morality”] is “that which contains the principle of leading”. It is the starting point on the path of spiritual practices. But this is not the only significance of morality. If morality fails to provide human beings with adequate guidance about how to move towards perfection, it does not deserve to be called morality. As morality is distinguished by its capacity to lead and inspire human beings, it cannot afford to lose its dynamic nature by limiting itself to a specific time, place and person. Morality is a living force, the practice of which makes the mind increasingly contemplative, thereby establishing it in supreme subtlety, in supreme cognition. There is a state from which human beings cannot be led to some other state – the question does not arise. Morality is only worthy of the name if it can inspire human beings to reach that state.

Moralism is not the unrealistic dream of the idealist, nor is it the means of fulfilling the mundane needs of the materialist. Rather it is something that provides people with the possibility of merging their mundane objectivity into supramundane Cognition.

The spirit of morality will have to be instilled in human beings from the moment that they first start to learn the lessons of interaction. By interaction I mean social interaction. Viewed from this perspective, the mind of a child is the best receptacle for morality.

But who will impart moral training or education? Parents find fault with teachers, and teachers in turn argue that they cannot give personal attention to an individual child in a crowd of two or three hundred children. Although it is true that most parents are either uneducated or semi-educated, and while it is not unreasonable to expect that teachers will be well-educated, it is not proper to place the sole responsibility for children’s moral education on the shoulders of their teachers. Increasing the number of teachers in educational institutions may partially solve the problem of moral education, but the key to the solution lies with the parents themselves. In cases where the parents are unfit to shoulder this responsibility, the teachers and well-wishers of society will have to come forward and demonstrate their greater sense of responsibility.

Remember, humanity’s very existence is based on morality; when morality leads human beings to the fullest expression of their finer human qualities, then alone is its practical value fully realized. The concerted effort to bridge the gap between the first expression of morality and establishment in universal humanism is called “social progress”. And the collective body of those who are engaged in the concerted effort to conquer this gap, I call “society”.

Footnotes

(1) For an elaboration on how the systaltic force moves society forward through periods of expansion and contraction, see “The Kśatriya Age” in Volume 2. –Eds. [Footnote used in the Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 2, 1st edition, publication of this article.]

(2) “Community” and “communal” as used throughout this book [in the Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 2, 1st edition, publication of this article, “used throughout these volumes”] generally refer to religious communities. See the definition of “communalism” a few lines below. Also see “The Dangers of Communalism” in Volume 4. –Eds.

(3) For further discussion on group psychology, see “Service Psychology and Group Psychology” in Volume 4. –Eds. [Footnote used in the Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 2, 1st edition, publication of this article.]

Chapter 5	Universal Humanism [a compilation]

The theory which springs out of fundamentals can be materialized with little effort. But that materialization will depend upon the effort, time and opportune moment. When theory precedes practice, however, the theory may or may not be materialized. There are four main factors which are responsible for the failure of any theory.

The first factor is the hypocrite’s psychology. Hypocrites formulate theories without the least intention of materializing them. By exploiting the name of a theory they serve their own purpose and that of their group. But without making any effort to materialize their theories, how will they be put into practice? They are obviously only for show. People formulated many such theories in the past and are still doing so even today. Such hypocrites want to misguide the people by their tall talks alone. Lord Shiva had this to say about such people: “Loka Vyámoha Káraka.” That is, “They create disease in the minds of the people.” Their aim is not to solve society’s problems. Rather, they are the chief cause for the downfall, retardation and sad plight of human society. The present crisis in today’s civilization is due to them. Their theories are based on the psychology and intellectual extravaganza of the hypocrite. You will certainly encounter many such theories in the social sphere, the economic sphere, and other spheres of life. This is not the problem of a single country, but of the entire intellectual world. Again I repeat that the crisis in civilization today is due to the intellectual extravaganza of these hypocrites, these polished satans. Take the mixed economy, for example. Those who have any sense know that it is a farce. It was neither implemented in the past nor will it ever be implemented in future. It is a white lie. Nor are its exponents interested in implementing it, for their motive is simply to dupe the people. Peaceful coexistence is another case in point. It too has never been put into practice, nor will it ever be in the future. Democratic socialism is yet another example. It is as good as golden plaster. Plaster should be made of stone and not gold. Behind all this works the hypocrite’s intellect, one of the four factors responsible for the failure of a theory.

The next factor is the theoretician’s psychology. When theoreticians expound a theory they do not study the world to ascertain its practical application. Blind to what is underneath their feet, and with total disregard for reality, they build castles high in the sky. After some time most of the theoreticians’ philosophies fade into obscurity.

So many theories have been expounded throughout the history of India. Some of them even had some practical application and, to some extent, met with success. But you will notice that, among the five theist philosophies, the Nyáya philosophy (not the Nyáya of Kanáda but that of Gautama) soars high without having any concern for the practical plane. Therefore, no practical cult was possible on the basis of Gautamiiya Nyáya. In medieval India, many scholars of Nyáya uselessly researched year after year the question [[Pátrádhára taela kiḿvá taeládhára pátra? – “Is it oil contained in a pot, or is it a pot containing oil?”]] This has nothing to do with the real world. Some people may wonder why there was not more development in Pathan India, in spite of a high population of scholars. The reason is that Nyáya philosophy, the philosophy divorced from practicality, had too great an influence on life.

There is one more defect in the theoretician’s psychology. Human life is trifarious: physical, intellectual and spiritual. However, the theoreticians remain confined to the intellectual realm, ignoring the physical and spiritual spheres. Thus they make no effort to practically materialize their theories. First, their theories are impractical; second, they make no efforts to materialize them.

The third factor is inefficiency in the field of application. Even if the theory is correct, it is not materialized due to inexperience or other defects.

Sometimes people are efficient in individual life, but totally unsuccessful in collective life. Many great saints lived in India during the Baoddha Yogácára period, but they were only successful in their individual lives. They did not care for the world, neither did they attempt to make people more efficient in their practical lives. Those who are acquainted with the philosophical life of India of those days know that, due to the lack of a proper theory, people were defeated by the philosophy of Shankaracharya. This resulted in an intellectual vacuum in India after Shankaracharya, a vacuum which proved damaging. This vacuum occurred between the death of Shankaracharya and the advent of Maháprabhu.

The fourth factor is environmental difficulty. The expounder of any theory remains engrossed in a particular mental environment. He or she creates a world in the mind and tests the theory on the mental plane. Let’s take Marxism as an example. Its propounder was very perceptive. The theory which he created in his mental environment was correct to a certain degree. But the crust of the earth and the environment of the mind are certainly not the same. The crust is quite hard. When this particular theory was manifested in the practical world, it was a total failure. It was of course correct in the artificially created mental environment, but in practice it was found to be not at all in consonance with the intellectual environment. To give another example: In your psychic world you can imagine that there is no water in the River Ganges, but milk. You can then go to plan how you will make delicious sweets out of that mentally created milk, and how you will export them. But remember, water flows in the Ganges, not milk! Hence, the theory made in a particular environment can be a total failure in practice.

If theory precedes practice many difficulties will be encountered. But when theory succeeds practice it has a practical application. First the apple fell and then the theory was formulated. The apple did not fall according to the theory. Lord Sadashiva was the first to realize that a theory can only have some practical value if it follows practice. He observed all the big and small events of this world to which people attach themselves little knowing the reasons behind them. He eventually discovered the reasons and expounded a theory in consequence. He saw the practical manifestation of the theories governing art, architecture, literature, dance, music, science, etc. For example, after studying the details of a particular style of dancing he formulated a theory. His theory of Tantra was the laboratory notes of a practical scientist. He discovered a particular dance which vibrated the lymphatic glands in such a way that it developed manliness. He called the dance Tandava which is derived from the Saḿskrta word Tańd́u, meaning jumping. Because it is supported by the theory of Tańd́u, it rightly called Táńd́ava. Another dance evokes feelings of softness (Lasya) in the mind due to the way its soft vibrations contract the lymphatic glands. As it softens the mind of people according to the theory of Lasya, its name is Lalita Nrtya. Thus Lord Sadáshiva perceived the spirit behind each action, gave it a theory and propagated it. A theory which follows practice will be successful.

When two successfully proven theories merge, a new resultant in the form of a new theory comes into being. When this resultant is mixed with yet another theory, another resultant is created. Thus, by different syntheses six Rágas and thirty-six Ráginiis came into being. The science of music was formulated in this way. It was successful because theory succeeded practice. Taking “Ta” from Lord Sadáshiva’s Táńd́ava Nrtya and “La” from Párvati’s Lalita Nrtya, a new resultant theory came into being in Indian music called “Tála”.

You must always ascertain which comes first, the theory or the practice. If theory succeeds practice it will definitely be materialized. One of the main variables is the time factor, and that will depend on the effort applied. The greater the effort, the less time required for its materialization. Even if little effort is applied, it will still be materialized, but after a long time.

I have already told you that human civilization is in danger. The chief reason is that in so many cases theory has preceded practice. You must not entertain any of these four factors which hinder a theory’s application.

Chapter 6	Universal Humanism [a compilation]

Spirituality is not a utopian ideal but a practical philosophy which can be practised and realized in day-to-day life, however mundane it be. Spirituality stands for evolution and elevation, and not for superstition in action or pessimism. All fissiparous tendencies and group or clan philosophies which tend to create the shackles of narrow-mindedness are in no way connected with spirituality and should be discouraged. That which leads to broadness of unison alone should be accepted. Spiritual philosophy does not recognize any distinctions and differentiations unnaturally made between one human being and another, and stands for universal fraternity.

In the present environment many fissiparous tendencies are working to divide humanity into mutually-belligerent groups. Spirituality must inculcate sense in human psychology, and develop a natural affinity amongst this species of the creation. The approach of spirituality should be psychological and rational, and should offer a touching appeal to the deepest psychic sentiments of human beings. Human beings should appreciate by a rational analysis their relationship with the Cosmic Entity and recognize the most benevolent kindness of the most beloved Entity. Spirituality should lead human beings to the one Cosmic truth from which they have derived their selves,⁽¹⁾ and which is the ultimate destiny. That ultimate and absolute ideal is the Cosmic ideal – an ideal beyond the scope of time, place and person. It is the Absolute, without and beyond relativity. It stands with its own lustre for all times and for every factor of the Cosmos, may it be a human being or a less-evolved animal. The Cosmic ideal alone can be the unifying force which shall strengthen humanity to smash the bondages and abolish all narrow domestic walls of fissiparous tendencies.

All the sentiment-provoking ideas should be firmly opposed. This does not mean an attack on those sentiments, traditions and habits which are innate in human beings and which do not hamper their Cosmic development. For example, the movement for uniformity in dress for all people will be but a ridiculous and irrational approach. Different selections of dress are the result of climatic factors and corporal necessities. Moreover, dissimilarity in dress is not detrimental to world fraternity.

There will also be many zonal or regional differences as regards other traditions and customs. These should be appreciated and encouraged for the indigenous development of society. But under no circumstances should there be a compromise in principle or yielding to tendencies detrimental to the inculcation of Cosmic sentiment.

The inspiration of Cosmic sentiment will depend upon certain objective physical problems which must be solved on a collective humanitarian basis. In the relative objective sphere the following few fundamental problems must be attempted at [tackled] and solved. These are:

1. Common philosophy of life
2. Same constitutional structure
3. Common penal code
4. Availability (production, supply, purchasing capacity) of the minimum essentialities of life

Common Philosophy of Life

A common philosophy of life demands a clear conception in the human mind that the development of the human personality means an evolution in all the three spheres – physical, metaphysical or mental, and spiritual. Some objective materialist thinkers have held the opinion that spirituality is a utopian philosophy, bereft of practicalities pertaining to actual problems of life. Other thinkers conceived it as a wise and intelligent device to befool the toiling mass. But the logical analysis given above must have clarified to thoughtful readers that spirituality is the summum bonum of life in all its aspects.

Those who think dharma to be an individual’s concern conceive it in a very narrow sense. Dharma leads to Cosmic unity, inculcating in the individual mind Cosmic idealism. Religion, in the sense of dharma, is the unifying force in humanity. Moreover, spirituality provides a human being and humanity at large with that subtle and tremendous power with which no other power can be compared. Therefore, with spirituality as the base, a rational philosophy should be evolved to deal with the physical, psychological and socio-philosophical problems of the day. The complete rational theory dealing with all three phases – spiritual, mental and physical – of human development shall be a philosophy common to humanity in general. This will be evolutionary and ever-progressing. Of course, small details may vary according to the relative environment of the age.

Nationalism is fast getting out of date. Not only has national sentiment given humanity rude shocks in the world wars of the present century, but the social and cultural blending of the present age also shows the domination of cosmopolitanism in world affairs. Vested interests, however, continue to cause certain fissiparous tendencies. There are some who fear loss of their economic or political domination and are directly responsible for these detrimental or retrograde reactions.

Same Constitutional Structure

Despite these obstacles, a social blending of humanity is in progress and needs a common constitutional structure to be evolved to cement the solidarity of the world.⁽²⁾ A world government is also very essential for exercising full control in certain spheres; for example, there should be only one world militia.

The world government should form certain autonomous units, not necessarily national (based on problems of education, food supply, flood control, public sentiment), which should look after mundane and supramundane problems. The boundaries of these units may be readjusted to suit any change in the environment – for instance, development in the techniques of communication. Development in the means of communication brings the different remote parts of the world nearer, and the world, therefore, grows smaller. With this well-developed swifter means of communication, units with bigger areas can work smoothly and efficiently.⁽³⁾

Common Penal Code

A common penal code must be evolved. Legislation must be progressive and capable of gradual adjustment with the prevalent conditions. Any theory which does not hold a parallelism with the ever-changing conditions of time, place and person, is sure to decay and be lost in oblivion. Hence, there must be a never-ending effort for amendment with a view to rectification.

Crimes are acts forbidden by the law of the government concerned, and virtue and vice (puńya and pápa) are the outcome of traditional customs. The sentiments of the lawmakers are very much influenced by the prevalent traditions and customs regarding the concept of virtue and vice of the locality or of the people concerned. The sense of crime, therefore, has a parallelism with the concept of virtue and vice. The idea of virtue and vice is different in different countries. The aspirants of world fraternity should try to lessen the difference and reduce the gap amongst cardinal, moral and human laws. All those actions which help in the growth of the spiritual, mental and physical aspects of human beings in general should come under the category of virtuous deeds, and those actions which go against humanity in its spiritual, mental and physical development must come under “vice”. This conception of virtue and vice applies commonly to humanity in general.

Minimum Essentialities of Life

The availability of the minimum essentialities of life plays a vital part not only in achieving world brotherhood, but also in the development of human personality. This should be tackled on a world footing, and should be based on certain fundamental presumptions. Every human being has certain minimum requirements which he or she must be guaranteed. Guaranteed availability of foodstuff, clothing, medical assistance and housing accommodation should be arranged so that human beings may be able to utilize their surplus energy (energy up till now engaged in procuring the essentialities of life) in subtler pursuits. Side by side, there should be sufficient scope for providing other amenities of the progressive age. To fulfil the above responsibilities, enough purchasing capacity should be created.

If the supply of requirements be guaranteed without any conditions of personal skill and labour, the individual may develop the psychology of idleness. The minimum requirements of every person are the same, but diversity is also the nature of creation. Special amenities should, therefore, be provided so that the diversity in skill and intelligence is fully utilized, and talent is encouraged to contribute its best towards human development. It will, therefore, be necessary to make provision for special emoluments which can cater for special amenities of life according to the age and time. But at the same time, there should be a constant effort to reduce the gap between the amount of special emoluments and the bare minimum requirements of the average individual. The guaranteed supply of minimum requirements must be liberalized by increasing the provision of special amenities pertaining to the age and also, simultaneously, by bringing about a decrease in the provision of special emoluments given to the few. This never-ending effort of proper economic adjustment must ceaselessly continue at all times with a view to assisting the spiritual, mental and physical evolution of human beings, and to let humanity develop a Cosmic sentiment for a Cosmic ideal and world fraternity.⁽⁴⁾

In this socio-economic set-up people are at full liberty in the spiritual and mental spheres. This is possible because the spiritual and psychic entities for which people can aspire are themselves unlimited, and the extent of possession in this sphere does not hamper the progress of others in their quests. But the supply in the physical sphere is limited, and hence any effort for disproportionate or unrestricted acquisition of physical objects has every possibility of creating a vast majority of have-not’s, and thus hampering the spiritual, mental and physical growth of the larger majority. So, while dealing with the problem of individual liberty, it must be kept in view that individual liberty in the physical sphere must not be allowed to cross a limit whereat it is instrumental in hampering the development of the complete personality of human beings; and, at the same time, must not be so drastically curtailed that the spiritual, mental and physical growths of human beings are hampered.

Thus, the social philosophy of Ananda Marga advocates the development of the integrated personality of the individual, and also the establishment of world fraternity, inculcating in human psychology a Cosmic sentiment. The Marga advocates progressive utilization of mundane and supramundane factors of the Cosmos. The society needs a stir for life, vigour and progress, and for this Ananda Marga advocates the Progressive Utilization Theory (Prout), meaning thereby progressive utilization of all factors. Those who support this principle may be termed “Proutists”.

The principles of Prout depend upon the following fundamental factors:

1. No individual should be allowed to accumulate any physical wealth without the clear permission or approval of the collective body.
2. There should be maximum utilization and rational distribution of all mundane, supramundane and spiritual potentialities of the universe.
3. There should be maximum utilization of physical, metaphysical and spiritual potentialities of unit and collective bodies of human society.
4. There should be a proper adjustment amongst these physical, metaphysical, mundane, supramundane and spiritual utilizations.
5. The method of utilization should vary in accordance with changes in time, space and person, and the utilization should be of progressive nature.

Hence, ours is a Progressive Utilization Theory (Prout).

Footnotes

(1) Unit selves, or jiivátmans, are derived from the Cosmic Self. See “Pratisaiṋcara and Manah” for a discussion of the reunion of the two. [In the Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 3, 1st edition, publication of this article, this footnote is replaced by “Unit selves, or jiivátmans, are derived from the Cosmic Self. For further discussion on this concept, see ‘Pratisaiṋcara and Manah’ and ‘Átman, Paramátman and Sadhana’ in Idea and Ideology, 1959.”] –Eds.

(2) For further discussion on a global constitution, see “Requirements of an Ideal Constitution” in Volume 3. –Eds. [Footnote used in the Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 3, 1st edition, publication of this article.]

(3) For further discussion on socio-economic units, see “Socio-Economic Groupifications” in Volume 3. –Eds. [Footnote used in the Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 3, 1st edition, publication of this article.]

(4) For further discussion on minimum requirements and special amenities, see “Minimum Requirements and Maximum Amenities” in Volume 4. –Eds. [Footnote used in the Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 3, 1st edition, publication of this article.]

(5) These principles, named the “Five Fundamental Principles of Prout” by the author, were added to the first edition of Idea and Ideology as it was being printed during November 1959. However, since the author included them as part of this discourse, “The Cosmic Brotherhood”, which was given on 5 June 1959, they are dated accordingly. –Eds. [Footnote used in the Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 3, 1st edition, publication of this article.]

Chapter 7	Universal Humanism [a compilation]

In my previous discourse, I said that human beings reach the culmination of devotion by subjective approach through objective adjustment. I also explained how devotion develops through various psychic expressions. Now we should clearly understand both the introversial aspect (the subjective approach) and the extroversial aspect (the objective adjustment). These should be crystal-clear to one and all.

The inner psychic movement of human beings, their existential awareness, is completely rhythmic. A portion of whatever happens in the outer world, in outer existence, is adjusted with the inner psychic rhythm, and another portion is not. When the happenings in the outer world are not adjusted with the inner psychic rhythm, one feels some distress. You may have experienced in your personal life that sometimes you feel very uneasy in the company of certain people, but you feel quite comfortable with another group. When the rhythm of your movement in the external world, the rhythm of your lifestyle, conforms to your inner psychic rhythm, you feel comfortable. But when these rhythms do not correspond, you feel uncomfortable. For progress in the external world there should be clear guidelines, a clear and well-integrated philosophical base. The society often lacks this; and that is why people tend to lose balance in social life. When those who have developed intellectually come in contact with an uncongenial environment, they find it difficult to adjust.

Present-day humanity has, no doubt, made considerable intellectual progress. But in the external world, there is a lack of adjustment. This is the reason that among the educated people of today the number of lunatics – people suffering from psychic disorders – is on the increase: because there is no adjustment in the speeds of the inner and outer worlds. Not only is there maladjustment in speed but also in rhythm; that is, the pattern of internal psychic rhythm is altogether different from the external rhythm of the objective world. Obviously clash is inevitable, and the impact of this clash is felt much more in the psychic realm than in the physical sphere. As a result, human beings lose their mental adjustment.

Many theories have been propounded in the world. Some of them were concerned mainly with the spiritual world; they had no relation with the rationality of the psychic world at all. Most of these theories have been thrown onto the garbage heap of history. There were some theories that showed some concern for the psychic realm as well, but they too could not develop the mental equipoise of society, and they too were rejected by the people. Some of these philosophies pertaining to the physical realm sounded very fine indeed, but they were not in perfect tune with the hard realities of the objective world. Those philosophies were quite satisfactory in the dreamland of theory, but they had no connection whatsoever with the practicalities of the earth.

Other theories, sounding somewhat pleasing to the ear, have spoken glibly of human equality; but upon application people discovered the ineffectiveness of these theories, because the fundamental principles of these philosophies were contrary to the basic realities of the world. Vaecitryaḿ prákrtadharmah samánaḿ na bhaviśyati [“Diversity, not identity, is the law of nature”]. The world is full of diversities – a panorama of variegated forms and rhythms. One must never forget it. Sometimes the superficial display of these theories has dazzled the eyes of the onlooker, but actually they contained no dynamism. And yet, dynamism is indeed the first and last word of human existence. That which has lost its dynamism is just like a stagnant pool. In the absence of flow, a pond invariably becomes overgrown with weeds, and becomes a hazard to health. It is better to fill this sort of pond with earth. Many philosophies in the past have rendered this kind of disservice to humanity. In the end they have only flung humanity into the quagmire of dogmatism, the breeding ground of innumerable mosquitoes. They did not contribute to the welfare of any human being.

The devotional sentiment is the highest and most valuable treasure of humanity. I have said in Namámi Krśńasundaram that Krśńa is the vaeduryamańi [brightest jewel] of the human heart. This element of devotion, the most precious treasure of humanity, must be preserved most carefully. Because it is such a tender inner asset, to preserve it from the onslaughts of materialism, one must build a protective fence around it, just as people put up a guard-rail around a small tender plant. Now the question is, what is this protective fence? It is a proper philosophy which will establish the correct harmony between the spiritual and material worlds, and be a perennial source of inspiration for the onward movement of society.

Geo-Sentiment

The sentiment that grows out of love for the indigenous soil of a country is called “geo-sentiment”. From this geo-sentiment, many other sentiments emerge, such as geo-patriotism, geo-economics and many other geocentric sentiments, including geo-religion. This geo-sentiment attempts to keep humanity confined within a limited part of this world. But the innermost desire of people is to expand themselves maximally in all directions.

Now, what is the role of devotional sentiment, the most valuable treasure of humanity? It is to transform the sense of worldly existence into the supreme spiritual stance. If a materialistic philosophy contains any narrowness, like the geo-sentiment we discussed, an imbalance is bound to occur between the inner and outer worlds, and psycho-physical imbalance will be inevitable. That is why, in spite of possessing everything, people will remain poor and deprived. In the past this geo-sentiment has caused enormous harm to many individuals and groups of people. Intelligent people must keep themselves aloof from this geo-sentiment and support nothing that is based on it, because it pollutes the devotional sentiment; it degrades human beings and undermines human excellence.

Socio-Sentiment

There is still another sentiment which is more expanded than geo-sentiment – it is socio-sentiment. Socio-sentiment does not confine people to a particular territory, but instead pervades a particular social group. That is, instead of thinking about the welfare of a particular geographical area, people think about the well-being of a group, even to the exclusion of all other groups. And in the process, while they concern themselves with the interest of a particular group, they do not hesitate to violate the interests and natural growth of other groups. Perhaps this socio-sentiment is a bit better than geo-sentiment, but it is not altogether ideal; it is not free from defects.

Socio-sentiment has, in the past, caused much bloodshed and created enormous division and mutual distrust among human groups, separating one group from another and throwing them into the dark dungeons of petty dogmas. Humanity’s movement is then no longer like a broad and flowing river, but like a stagnant pool.

There is still another sentiment – human sentiment. Many persons were born in the past who shed copious tears for suffering humanity. But strangely enough, after their eloquent speeches were over, they sat down comfortably at a dinner table and treated themselves to a delicious meal of hilsa and kaimách fish⁽¹⁾ – as if those fish had not suffered pain and death. This human sentiment has expressly violated the interests of non-human creatures, but its proponents have found nothing wrong with it.

Once I read in a certain book that a great saint used to live only on locusts dipped in honey. That saint did not seriously consider that those little locusts also had vital life force throbbing in them.

Obviously human beings will have to behave rationally; they must maintain their existence while adjusting with the external environment. It is true that living creatures are the food for other living beings (jiivah jiivasya bhojanam); and indeed, the vegetables that we eat every day also have living cells in them. But regarding food, I have expressed my opinion in some of my books.⁽²⁾

This concern for the vital rhythm throbbing in other human creatures has driven people to the fold of humanism, has made them humanists. Now, if the same human sentiment is extended to include all creatures of this universe, then and only then can human existence be said to have attained its final consummation. And in the process of expanding one’s inner love to other creatures, there should be another sentiment behind this human sentiment, which will vibrate human sentiment in all directions, which will touch the innermost recesses of the hearts of all creatures, and lead one and all to the final stage of supreme blessedness.

Vistárah sarvabhútasya Viśńorvishvamidaḿ jagat;
Draśt́avyamátmavattasmádabhedena vicakśańaeh.

–Viśńupuráńa

[This manifested universe is the expression of Viśńu, the latent All-Pervading Entity. Therefore a wise person should look upon everything as his or her own, from an integral viewpoint.]

Humanity’s Greatest Treasure

All molecules, atoms, electrons, protons, positrons and neutrons are the veritable expressions of the same Supreme Consciousness. Those who remember this reality, who keep this realization ever alive in their hearts, are said to have attained perfection in life. They are the real bhaktas [devotees]. When this devotional cult⁽³⁾ does not remain confined to a mere practice, but instead is elevated to a devotional sentiment, a devotional mission, to the realm of devotional ideation – when the underlying spirit of humanism is extended to everything, animate and inanimate, in this universe – I have designated this as “Neohumanism”. This Neohumanism will elevate humanism to universalism, the cult of love for all created beings of this universe.

So the actual task of human beings is to maintain a subjective approach – that is, they will advance psycho-spiritually towards the Supreme Consciousness, inspired by Neohumanistic ideals – while at the same time they must strive for the expansion of humanistic principles and thus establish a social structure based on universalism. Otherwise, their inner psycho-spiritual rhythms will not be able to properly maintain equilibrium with narrow sentiments such as geo-sentiment, and this will have a disastrous effect on society.

As we have already said, the greatest human treasure is devotional sentiment, devotional wonts. This devotional wealth must be preserved; otherwise humanity will lose its most valuable possession. The people of the present-day world have made considerable progress, so now they must not permit this highest human treasure to be destroyed. Whenever we see that the pressure of external circumstances threatens this life essence, we should appeal to the Supreme: “O Lord, please be kind enough to protect our inner vitality from total destruction. Save us from the agony of total loss.”

Footnotes

(1) Expensive fish dishes usually enjoyed by the rich in India. –Trans.

(2) See especially A Guide to Human Conduct (1961) and Caryácarya Part 3 (1965). –Trans.

(3) “Cult” is used here in the sense of “practice” or “process”. –Trans.

Chapter 8	Universal Humanism [a compilation]

We, men and women, are the progeny of the same Supreme Consciousness. Women and men are equally divine and inherit similar and equal rights to life, liberty and expression. The significance of life does not lie only in living. Animals also live. But life to us means something more – rather something much more.

To us life means living for a great cause. Life implies the endeavour to have the freedom to express one’s potentialities in the physical, economic, psychic and spiritual realms. It means real liberty and not license to commit anything good or bad.

In the annals of human history we do find women whose memory glorifies not only womanhood, but the entire human world. In philosophy and spirituality, social reform and educational pursuits, science and technology, they stand second to none. Women are found discussing the riddles of philosophy, solving problems of social and educational reform, and are inspiring men in times of struggle. They have their potentiality no less than men. The difference in natural and biological characteristics between men and women speaks only of coordinated cooperation, not of subordinated cooperation.

Yet the annals of history depict the sad and painful episodes of women’s exploitation throughout the world. To fulfil this sinister design, dogmas were created which led to psycho-economic exploitation. Dogmas were cunningly popularized and women were degenerated to slavery. Psychic exploitation has been infused into the minds of women and many symbols which are religiously observed are nothing but symbols of slavery. In many religions of the world today women are not allowed to become priests in the religious hierarchy.

Women’s exploitation is more or less the same everywhere. Is it not a fact that in many countries even franchise rights were not given equally to men and women?

Even today women are slaves to the male-dominated social order. This is not only bad but deplorable. We should decry such domination of women and their psycho-economic exploitation through the evil design of dogmas. To abolish dogma and liberate women from psychic exploitation, there should be:

1. Free education for all women in all countries of the world.
2. No discrimination in the social, educational and religious realms.
3. The provision of economic and social security to all women. We stand to create a powerful, dynamic and upsurging social consciousness, especially among women, so that they are inspired to rise, abolish dogma and annihilate all symbols of slavery, and usher in a new era of coordinated cooperation and glorious achievement. Let women be the vanguard of a new revolution which humanity must achieve for a glorious tomorrow.

Chapter 9	Universal Humanism [a compilation]

Different groups of people contribute to the building of society in different ways. This diversity carries a special significance for the social structure as a whole. If diversity had not existed, human society would not have advanced even as far as the Stone Age, let alone the present stage of civilization. So we have to impartially consider and support all the diverse ideas, forms and colours which are conducive to fostering personal growth and social development among human beings. If we fail to do so, that section of society which has been built around a particular idea, form or colour will wither and die. I direct this not only to those who think deeply about social welfare, but to all members of society, to impress upon them that no one, through their thoughts, words or actions, should ever condone injustice.

If any physical, psychic, social, moral or spiritual weakness becomes apparent in a particular activity or in any sphere of individual or social life, it is the duty of the other members of society to eradicate that weakness with all the sweetness of their hearts. However, due to a lack of genuine humanism or spiritual outlook, people do just the opposite. The moment opportunists discover a weakness in somebody, they exploit that weakness and devour all the vitality of the person. They even consider it a weakness on their part if they reflect on the sufferings and heartaches of those who are weak.

The Status of Women

As in the societies of most other species, in human society also females are physically weaker than males. Because their nervous systems are weaker, their minds are also slightly weak. Nevertheless women have no less value in human society than men. Selfish men, however, have disregarded the value of women; they have taken full advantage, and are continuing to take full advantage, of their weakness. Although men have publicly declared that women should be respected as the mothers of society, they have actually relegated them to the status of domestic cattle and sheep.

In every sphere of life men have either substantially limited the rights of women, or made the ability of women to exercise their rights subject to the whims and caprices of men. Such an attitude never existed among the primitive human beings who lived at the dawn of human history. Nor had primitive men conceived of the deceitful practice of establishing their supremacy by keeping women in bondage in the name of social purity. Even today among primitive races we do not find significant lack of magnanimity concerning the freedom of women.

By nature human beings are not wicked; rather most people are peace-loving and thus inclined towards personal purity. This inclination of the individual keeps the collective mind pure. Although women enjoy freedom in so-called underdeveloped races, we can observe that there is not even one per cent of the social purity in so-called developed races that there is among those races. When freedom is forcibly curbed a hostile reaction is produced in the mind, and purity rapidly disappears as a result. This is one of the causes of the lack of social purity in the so-called developed societies of today. To try to camouflage this impurity with high-sounding rhetoric or ostentatious religious rituals cannot do any real good for society. Those who want to keep women subservient to men by holding out false hopes or the illusory prospect of heavenly enjoyment in the afterlife, fail to understand that although such false hopes or the lure of heaven may be sufficient to keep women passive or in servitude, no real good can ever come to human society from this. The reason is that if, due to dogma and superstition, half of society is bogged down in a state of inertia, the other half will undoubtedly find progress difficult carrying a heavy, inert burden. In individual life purity is equally necessary for both men and women, and to make this possible real spiritual vision is essential. As long as injustices against either sex exist, purity is impossible.

Everyone should realize that to construct or preserve anything, there must be close cooperative action among the constituent parts. Human beings are not lifeless matter, so not only should all of their collective structures be based on cooperation, but that cooperation must be of a special type. It should not be based on the relation of master and servant, but on mutual cordiality. It should be a coordinated cooperation and not a subordinated one.

What sort of treatment have women received so far? It is very true that women have gradually lost their rights or freedom in certain cases due to lack of competence. There are those who think that, because of this, special abilities are the only criteria for having rights. Such people, however, actually want women to be wageless slaves under the strict supervision of men. But is it merely due to their lack of competence that women have lost their rights? Have not the overflowing sentiments of their hearts also been partly responsible? Have not women, swayed by their emotions, ignored their own petty interests and gradually given everything – even the high social status that fascinates them – to their husbands, sons and brothers? Is it not reasonable to expect human beings (certainly human beings are not animals) to pay proper respect to such humility and large-heartedness? If a guest arrives unexpectedly, who volunteers to forgo a meal to feed the guest? Who deprives herself first when a delicious dish is prepared? Who leaves home to keep house for others, giving up her paternal property rights (regardless of what the law says)? Are not these observations applicable throughout most of the world? I do not say that men are ordinary human beings and that women are angels; I have only focused on women as human beings and mentioned their special qualities. Does a husband, when his wife is ill, nurse her with as much care as she nurses him when he is ill?

If men wish to prevent helpless widows from remarrying by taking advantage of their sentimental female hearts, they convince those widows that they will be reunited with their late husbands after their deaths – so how can they consider remarrying? Shame on such men! Perhaps such tales may make women, already sentimental, even more so. The prospect of being reunited with the spirit of their deceased husband after their death may induce helpless widows to undertake rigorous lifelong penance, and to fast on every ekádashii [the eleventh day after each new moon and full moon]. Are not those who want to keep women slaves to dogmatic ideas guilty of acting against the dictates of their consciences?

The very idea of heaven and hell is sheer nonsense anyway. Such stupid ideas thrived in the minds of those who popularized ancient myths, but they have no capacity to find a foundation in the solid ground of rationality. If, however, in order to humour such fools, I accept the existence of heaven and hell, I might ask, “If the spirit of a wicked husband goes to hell and grazes in the fields as a bull, should his virtuous wife also go to hell after her death, become a cow and start grazing beside him?”

Let us end this digression. The main point of the discussion is this: those who take advantage of people’s simplicity or ignorance are veritable demons in human form, and those who deceive people by exploiting their sentiments of sacrifice are even worse than demons.

Freedom is attained through struggle. No one offers it on a platter, because freedom is not a gift; it is one’s birthright. But as far as the rights which women have lost today, at least so it seems in most countries of the world, a proper socio-psycho-analysis shows, I should say, that women have not really lost their freedom; rather, they have trustingly placed their destiny in the hands of men. This is the plain truth. That is why I cannot but laugh when I see a certain type of snobbish lady, who pretends to be learned, entrust her children to the care of a maidservant or nurse, travel about in a car purchased by her husband, attend meetings, and make lengthy speeches on the freedom of women.

Actually, when there is no question of women’s rights having been snatched away, there is no need for a movement styled on the trade-union movement. Whatever responsibility there may be in this regard, it is entirely that of men. If at all a movement is required, it must be implemented by men themselves. Today men should consider the needs of women and gradually restore to women the rights which women once entrusted to men out of feelings of helplessness or in response to their heartfelt sentiments.

It must always be remembered that freedom, or liberty, and license are not the same thing. The concept of women’s freedom is good, but license should not be encouraged in the name of liberty. Giving license to either men or women could destroy the social structure in a short time. Hence those who are the most vocal in proposing the freedom of women must carefully consider the form this proposed freedom shall take.

When we pay recognition to any simple truth, we should not be carried away by sentimentality. Only rationality based on humanism is acceptable. As children of nature, women should have the same access as men to light, air, earth and water. In fact, it is not a matter of granting rights to women, but rather a case of recognizing their rights. If, however, the recognition of women’s rights is treated sentimentally,⁽¹⁾ it may result in great social disaster.

The law of inheritance: For example, take the right of inheritance. There are diverse views on the subject among different sections of society around the world. Some people favour women having the sole right of inheritance to the complete exclusion of men; others favour equal distribution between men and women; still others give women only some tiny leftovers and in reality keep everything in men’s hands. Behind all these systems there is clearly an attempt to maintain the influence and supremacy of one gender or the other, rather than to demonstrate rational judgement and humanitarian concern.

In fact, a final decision on this issue should be based on the fundamental principle that we will not deprive anyone; we will give equal opportunities to both men and women concerning the right of inheritance. At the same time we will enact laws to ensure the orderly administration and preservation of property in order to reduce the possibility of a breach of domestic peace.

In most countries society is patrilineal. The patrilineal system has some advantage over the matrilineal one. There are two main advantages.

The first advantage stems from the fact that it is not as easy to determine the identity of the father as that of the mother, and in the absence of any direct blood relationship⁽²⁾ the mother’s affection for her children is generally greater than the father’s. Under these circumstances the patrilineal system is much better, for it awakens in the father a proper sense of responsibility for his children and precludes the possibility of the children’s identity remaining unknown or concealed. And the father is compelled by circumstantial pressure to take responsibility for bringing up his children; and therefore makes an effort to properly preserve the structure of the family. (Among less-developed creatures, fathers rarely take care of their offspring due to the absence of this sort of circumstantial pressure.)

The second advantage of the patrilineal system complements the first. Since the relationship between the father and the child is known, the mother naturally does not feel so very alone in rearing the child. The physical and mental structure of a woman is such that even though she may have all the requisite ability to take care of her children, it is extremely difficult for her to bring them up properly and to adequately provide for food, clothing, education and medical care all alone; at the same time she has to keep her children with her or near her, or else it becomes difficult for the children to survive. Therefore if men, instead of women, take the main responsibility for providing food and clothing, while women, after duly attending to the needs of the children, where possible or in cases of necessity earn money by working either at home or outside, neither the children nor society will be adversely affected in any way.

I do not support the supposed wisdom of those who advise women to spend their lives with ladles, [[tongs]] and spatulas, because this is unrealistic. Necessity often compels women to discard this convention. Such a system may suit a handful of rich or upper middle-class people, but it has no value for day-labourers or the poor. Many of those who loudly advocate equal rights and the freedom of women, in reality keep their women behind a purdah or covered with a burka. Even among such families I have noticed poor housewives going to the market with their husbands to buy and sell, or to the fields, farms or coal mines, voluntarily taking on light work. Evidently, they cannot afford to behave ostentatiously and live indolently behind a lace curtain.

However, there are people who, in the name of giving equal rights to women in all spheres of life, want them to engage in heavy physical and mental labour which is unsuitable for them. Such an outlook is deplorable. It must be accepted that the physical bodies and nervous systems of women are not as strong as those of men, so men and women cannot work in identical areas. Apart from this, for physical reasons women cannot work in the same way every day of the month, and during pregnancy and the post-delivery period the ability to work strenuously is severely restricted. These points must not be overlooked.

There are many people who sentimentally think that if a few women are made ministers or members of parliament they will serve as shining examples of equal rights and the progress of women. But is this the correct attitude? Will it not be detrimental to society as a whole if rights are granted, or a principle of accelerating progress is adopted, at the expense of competence? The recognition of rights is a legal matter as well as a collective psychological phenomenon, and the only way to expedite progress is to establish a progressive education system. A woman who becomes a minister or an ambassador in any country is not an index of the real status of the women in that country. To raise the standard of women in society is neither so easy nor so cheap.

Since rational analysis leads us to the conclusion that the patrilineal system is better than the matrilineal, the system of inheritance should be structured accordingly. Of course, at the time of drafting the law of inheritance, special precautions must be taken so that nothing is framed in the name of the patrilineal system that will make women slaves fighting for their very survival in the houses of their brothers or brothers-in-law. In other words, after recognizing the equal rights of women to use family property as long as they live and to enjoy a lifelong income from such property, the law of inheritance should be based on the patrilineal system.

The dowry system: Many people regard the dowry system, which is followed in various countries today, as being unfair and unjust towards women. But actually this is not so. The question of justice or injustice to women [[does not arise in relation to the dowry system]].

The problem is primarily economic, although there are secondary causes as well. In some societies, where women do not earn money, they are considered an economic liability once they are married. At the time of marriage the parents of the groom therefore extract a substantial amount of money or goods from the parents of the bride in order to maintain the wife for the rest of her life. These are the actual facts behind the dowry system. Similarly, in societies where men do not earn money, the parents of the bride receive a substantial dowry from the parents of the bridegroom. Of course a secondary cause of the dowry system arises when there is a disparity between the number of men and women in a particular country or section of society. So in fact, the parents of the bride give a dowry in a particular society only when the subsistence of the woman is dependent on the income of her husband, or where the number of men is less than the number of women. If it is mainly the women who earn the money or if the number of women is less than the number of men, the situation is reversed.

There are those who mistakenly think that the dowry system will cease once the equal rights of daughters to paternal property are recognized. However, it has been noticed that even in societies where daughters are heirs to paternal property, the dowry system has gradually gained prominence for economic and other reasons. Generally very few daughters these days inherit alluring amounts of property from their parents, so it is completely unrealistic to expect that the parents of the groom will relinquish their claim to a dowry in the hope of receiving inherited property. A few daughters from rich or upper middle-class families inherit very substantial properties and therefore do not have any cause for worry, whether the dowry system exists or not. Even the most unattractive daughter of rich parents gets married very easily due to the power of money.

Social interaction: There are diverse views among those who formulate social codes concerning the free mixing of men and women. It does not require much logic to convince people that the final outcome of free mixing in an undisciplined society is unhealthy. It is also true, however, that the absence of social interaction creates a suppressed longing, a special attraction or an unhealthy curiosity, as does the denial of other desires. This may lead to illicit mixing, which eventually undermines social purity. A system that thwarts social interaction is nothing but an attempt to suppress the mind. Where there is illicit mixing, the only harm done to men is that they degenerate morally, but the damage to women is far greater, because they may be cast out of society in disgrace. Thus on the one hand, men and women will have to be free to mix together socially, while on the other hand, a well-thought-out code of self-control will have to guide their social interaction.

Those who want to keep their daughters away from the influence of modernism, and are therefore reluctant to send them to school and college, perhaps do not realize that long ago the waves of modernism intruded into the privacy of their homes without their knowledge. So their efforts to protect their daughters and themselves by following the custom of purdah and making women wear burkas, are entirely farcical.

The trend of the age is irresistible, for in this too there is dynamism. It is the duty of intelligent people to channelize the trend of the age towards the path of benevolence by applying their intellect. Neither the individual nor the society as a whole is capable of resisting the powerful spirit of the age. It knocks down anyone who tries to thwart it, and proceeds ahead with irresistible speed. Those knocked down and sprawled on the ground stare at it in utter helplessness, with dazed minds and vacant eyes, as it marches by.

Educated and Uneducated

Great injustices are also being perpetrated against so-called uneducated people, although there is no legal basis for this. There is, in fact, a class of self-styled scholars who disdainfully dismiss others as fools, although I do not understand what these people actually mean when they describe themselves as scholars. If, by education, they mean the study of numerous books, then I must say there are countless instances where persons who have only completed their primary education have read more books than many university graduates. Whom shall I then call educated? If the extent of one’s knowledge is assessed by the number of degrees one possesses, a question still remains. How can one say that one has learned something when one has hurriedly crammed a few subjects just to pass one’s examinations and has forgotten everything after a few months or a few years? If education denotes refined taste or restrained behaviour, illiterate people may also possess these qualities. Then again, if education means that people have learned much, remembered much and put their knowledge to practical use in their lives, it can be argued that people may not need to attend school to achieve this. So I have to say that the vanity of self-styled scholars is totally meaningless.

In fact, human beings should not feel vanity about anything in this universe. This is even more true in the field of education than in other spheres of life. Some say, “Whom shall I mix with? Everyone here is a fool,” or “Well sir! There is not a single person here I can associate with,” or “I do not bother going to villages. What is the use? I cannot find anyone to talk to.” There are no grounds at all for such statements, only pure, unadulterated conceit.

Those who have learned a lot by reading books or by hearing lectures should remember when they talk to others, that those with whom they are talking may have far greater knowledge than they in some spheres. An ordinary farmer is not often treated with respect, but the details of rice cultivation are at his fingertips. A statistician who calculates the size of the rice crop may, on the other hand, readily believe that a chair can be made from “rice wood”! So I say that it is the height of foolishness to brag about the extent of one’s knowledge. Rather, such vanity is the living symbol of educational bankruptcy.

Once an erudite Sanskrit scholar said to a boatman as they crossed a river, “You have not been able to answer even one of my philosophical questions. Half your life has gone in vain.” In mid-stream, when the boat was about to sink, the boatman asked the scholar, “Reverend sir, can you please lend me a hand?” The scholar replied, “But I don’t know how to row.” The boatman retorted, “Now your whole life is about to go in vain!”

Generally, so-called scholars cannot express an opinion about the soil composition of a field without first having made a detailed scientific analysis of it. But I have seen an ordinary farmer, Kshetranath Pal (who could not even see properly due to extreme old age), simply pick up a handful of earth and, without hesitation, describe the merits and demerits of the soil, and the various crops that could best be grown in it. Should I call this so-called uneducated man, Khetu Pal, a fool or a scholar? Is his practical knowledge, acquired by many years of hard-earned experience and through the practical application of those years of experience, totally worthless? Should not this knowledge also come under the heading of education? It is most undesirable for the inherent intuition in human beings to be neglected in preference to theoretical knowledge or information memorized by rote.

Educated are those who have learned much, remembered much and made use of their knowledge in practical life. These virtues I call “education”. For such an education, mere knowledge of the alphabet is not very essential. It should, however, be accepted that literacy is extremely useful in recollecting what one has already learned.

In my opinion, it is a great mistake to think that refined behaviour represents education, for the true nature of a person is not limited to his or her external behaviour but is reflected in the extent to which he or she has developed his or her magnanimity of mind. If you consciously or unconsciously bump into someone and say, “Oh sorry,” without enquiring whether the person is hurt, that is enough to show one’s refinement. Although this is a sign of what we call courtesy, it does not reflect genuine magnanimity of mind. The person’s education will only be seen if he or she liberally applies a healing balm to the wound of the injured person – if the offender tries his or her utmost to mitigate the troubles of the injured person, even at his or her own expense. Then even the omission of the words “Oh sorry” will not matter.

Many things that are done in the name of education and refinement are simply hypocrisy. For example, instead of trying to remove the distress of their neighbours, some people merely ask, “What did you have with your rice today?” When the child replies, “Mummy only cooked spinach,” the enquirer merely replies, “Oh what a pity! Your family must be in great difficulty.” As they say “great difficulty” they emphasize the words to give their fake concern a veneer of sympathy. This is hardly an indication of genuine social concern or magnanimity of mind.

The main feature of what, in the modern sense, we call education or civility is that one does not have to take on the burden of others’ troubles; one only has to pay lip-service to them. If people actually do something constructive to alleviate the distress of others, this may hurt their own interests to some small extent; but if people merely take up the cause of others in parliament, they can accomplish two things at one time. First, they will not be put to any trouble themselves, and secondly, they can gain adulation very cheaply. Those who protest against such hypocrisy are extremely vulnerable to accusations of incompetence or of being the agents of vested interests. If hypocrites declare that others are fools, should we accept their pronouncements with bowed heads?

To be civilized means to give a refined form to everything, and it is inseparably connected with education. But if refinement takes second place and hypocritical behaviour becomes the primary means of expression, that cannot be called civilization or education. If a man who is invited to a dinner party only nibbles at the savouries, saying, “I am sorry, I cannot eat any more,” then goes home to devour a hearty meal and later brags that he eats very little, an impression of abstemiousness may be created in the minds of others, but there is a complete lack of straightforwardness in his behaviour. In modern society many aspects of civilization and education are of this sort.

A little while ago we were discussing how difficult it is to distinguish between the educated and the uneducated. Ordinary people wrongly consider that those who baffle the minds of others with their affected erudition are educated. Such fakes are not necessarily university graduates. In fact, many of them try to project themselves as educated by using their wealth or official status. They open clubs or libraries to impress upon others that they should not be equated with the common people. They pretend to understand and know a lot, smile scholastically with closed eyes, and speak sparingly with reserve and gravity to ensure that they do not unwittingly expose themselves!

While on the subject I would like to add that such clubs may be acceptable under some circumstances. Members of a club want to enjoy open-hearted laughter and topics of mutual interest rather than be subjected to uncomfortable formalities. However, on principle I cannot fully support the idea of establishing clubs for particular linguistic groups. If, for example, a club is set up with this intention on the basis of a common language for the sake of avoiding linguistic difficulties, it should not be opposed, but neither should this sort of trend be encouraged. Separate clubs may be formed by special groups of researchers such as doctors and lawyers for the cultivation of particular branches of knowledge. Through interaction and friendly discussion there can be an exchange of important ideas which may result in the rapid growth of a particular science or research project. However, there is at this time a class of self-styled scholars who want to establish separate clubs for themselves for no particular reason. Is there any altruistic motive behind their demand? None at all. The actual reason is that they feel that if they mix with the illiterate masses their social prestige will be undermined. If you investigate more deeply, you will generally find that in such “gentlemen’s clubs” immorality is rampant and wine flows in abundance. Should we, then, consider the members of these clubs to be civilized, cultured and educated scholars while other people are uncivilized, uncultured and uneducated fools? Such silly nonsense propagated in the name of civilization cannot be allowed to continue.

We cannot build a strong society if we discriminate against a section of humanity by drawing imaginary lines of distinction between the educated and the uneducated. People must develop closer and closer links with each other. One heart must gain a warm and deep understanding of another heart.

To make people conscious of their rights in every sphere of life – social, economic, psychic and spiritual – is called [[jiṋána vistára; and to exercise these rights fully is called vijiṋána sádhaná.⁽³⁾]] Neglected people, who have remained ignorant of different branches of knowledge for whatever reason, should be given maximum opportunities to develop. There should not be any discrimination as far as these rights are concerned.

Vested Interests

Vested interests have taken advantage of human ignorance and have penetrated deeply into every arena of society: social, economic, psychic and spiritual. They want to suck dry the entire vitality of humanity. Vested interests do not want the ignorant to see the light of wisdom or the downtrodden to climb up the social ladder; they do not want the hungry to eat proper meals or the superstitious to be freed from their dogmatic beliefs; and they do not want the human race to gain spiritual knowledge and a thorough understanding of science, and thus get the opportunity to progress towards the realm of effulgence.

In order to remove the imaginary line of demarcation between the educated and the uneducated – to eradicate this irrational distinction – the value of human beings must be recognized. Mundane knowledge and spiritual knowledge must be as free as light and air; and like the unhindered flow of a fountain, they must keep society in a dynamic state and be a continuous source of inspiration to one and all.

As regards learning versus ignorance, vested interests intentionally try to perpetuate ignorance among the exploited masses because this provides them with a good excuse to deny the value of human beings. In the economic field, such a hypocritical stand is even more conspicuous and much more despicable. When university graduates make use of their degrees to earn their livelihood, they tend to forget that physically-strong but illiterate people are making a similar use of such assets as they have, that is, their capacity for manual labour. These educated people deprive so-called illiterates of their rights, human dignity and self-respect, and thereby develop a sense of superiority. Similarly, the rich, who inherit huge ancestral properties, accumulate vast amounts of wealth by deceiving others or amass great fortunes whether they invest capital or not, forget that, just like light, air and water, all the mundane resources of the universe are the common property of everyone, and that no property is the personal or paternal property of anyone.

All natural resources are meant to be used for collective welfare. No one has a monopoly over these resources. Some people argue, “When others by their manual labour earn money to provide themselves with food and clothing, why should I not be considered a member of the toiling masses when I earn by my intellectual labour?” In reply I will only say that by dint of intellect you may acquire as much of the boundless wealth in the intellectual or psychic realms as you like. Nobody can object to this. But if the intellect is used to appropriate limited mundane resources such as houses, land, food, clothing, money, etc., will this not deprive hundreds of thousands of people of their basic necessities? You may certainly earn your living by using your intellect, but your salary should be commensurate with the needs of your family, plus sufficient extra to take care of future contingencies, and not a penny more.

It must always be remembered that the value of money lies in its proper use. If more money is accumulated than necessary, it loses its value due to lack of use. To the extent that you keep money idle and valueless, you become responsible for the injustices done to ragged, hungry people. You will have to give value to your accumulated money by utilizing it to provide opportunities for others. So in my opinion, those who do not know how to make good use of money, which is a medium of exchange for mundane resources, are enemies of society. In them the feeling of collective movement, the real spirit of society, is conspicuously absent. They cannot establish human rights by shouting high-sounding slogans.

The sense of human value must be reflected in every action, great or small. And one of the motives, if not the only motive, behind such actions must be the acceptance of humanism in the socio-economic sphere.

Any society which accepts inequality, which wants to perpetuate that inequality by spreading false logic, is not a society worthy of the name. The standard-bearers of such false logic masquerade in the garb of righteousness and try to convince the downtrodden members of society that their economic deprivations – their humiliations, their scarcity of food, clothing and medicine, their exposure to the extremes of heat and cold – are decreed by fate, as inevitable reactions to their past actions.

Some time ago I heard a millionaire speak at a meeting. He was arguing that in modern society the karmaváda [doctrine of action and reaction of the Giitá] should be more widely propagated, because he thought that if people could understand this doctrine of action properly, the countless shrivelled-up human beings languishing in the dustbins of society would no longer blame the capitalists for their miserable condition. They would accept their misfortune with equanimity. Just imagine what a dangerous idea this is! What a wonderful capitalistic argument! Perhaps some academic stooge on the payroll of these self-seeking capitalists may even try to concoct a philosophy to support this proposition. God save humanity from such perverted philosophies!

People’s physical longings are not satisfied until they come in contact with a truly great ideology. Till then, people’s wolf-like hunger is insatiable, as if they are incessantly repeating, “I am hungry, I am hungry.” Their jaws are always open, and the foolish people of this world resign themselves to their own fatalistic beliefs and fall into them. The ferocious wolf-pack devours their flesh and blood and casts away the unpalatable bones. Should we support this wolfish philosophy? The day-labourers, porters and gate-keepers around us who wear dirty rags and have fatigue etched on their faces are not considered human by those who are rolling in luxury.

It is a characteristic of vested interests that they never bother to think of anyone except themselves. They must eat and the rest of humanity only exists to be eaten. They want increasingly more objects for their gratification. Those who earn three thousand rupees a month think that this is an extremely meagre amount, but they never stop to consider the needs of those who earn a negligible thirty rupees a month.⁽⁴⁾ A poor man has to pay his rent, maintain his family, educate his children, buy milk for his babies, and save something to put towards the cost of his daughter’s marriage, all out of thirty rupees. Are these needs only applicable to the upper stratum of society? Are they not the minimum necessities of life? Rich people do not want to consider the needs of the poor, because if they do they will have to make some sacrifices. Where will their luxuries and comforts come from if hunger does not burn the bellies of the poor? Is it not a fine idea if the daughters of the poor go on collecting cow dung forever, and their sons work like slaves in the houses of the rich for generations together? Is this not a fine arrangement? As for the high hopes of the poor, aren’t they ridiculous? Aren’t they out of touch with reality?

No two things in this world are identical, so I am not suggesting that everything should be recast in the same mould. However, for the sake of humanism, for the sake of social justice, equitable distribution of all the wealth of the universe is indispensable, and co-ownership of the world’s resources is the birthright of every individual. Even the slightest attempt to deprive anyone of this right amounts to gross selfishness. As long as certain difficulties, both great and small, exist in the practical world, however, it will not be possible to grant perfectly equal opportunities to everybody in all instances. Apart from this, all people should be granted equal rights and opportunities, except where it is necessary to inspire some people to undertake activities which will directly benefit society, or as a temporary reward for their distinguished contribution to society. In addition, every individual must have equal rights concerning things such as food, clothing, housing, education and medical care, which are absolutely essential for existence.

Some people argue, “The sufferings that people experience today due to lack of food and clothing are the results of misdeeds in their previous lives. Therefore we have no social responsibility for their suffering.” But I argue that on the contrary, if people do have to undergo torments in proportion to their original bad actions, then they may undergo their suffering in a different way in the psychic realm. Without being deprived of food and clothing or being impoverished due to social disparity, people can just as easily atone for their past misdeeds through psychic suffering. Their psychic suffering, however, cannot necessarily be removed by bringing about social justice.

In countries where people have no difficulty arranging food, clothing or medical care, they have and will continue to have psychic clash. In such countries people have to endure the pain of humiliation. They cry at the deaths of their relatives and groan in agony due to excruciating ailments. While these sufferings are beyond the scope of social justice, the problem of individual or collective suffering due to lack of physical requirements can be easily solved by implementing a system of social justice and social equality. So it is useless to blame the past misdeeds or fate of others. Actually, blaming people’s suffering on their past misdeeds is merely an argument used by vested interests to justify their position, because to admit that these sufferings are the result of social injustices implies that everyone is responsible.

A little while ago I said that, because of certain difficulties, both great and small, it may not be possible to ensure the perfectly equal distribution of mundane resources, but what prevents us from at least working in this direction? What is the harm in reducing the gap between wages of thirty rupees and three thousand rupees per month? Of course this will certainly curtail the luxuries and comforts of those who earn three thousand rupees a month, but with that money quite a number of people will have the opportunity to live as human beings. This is where vested interests will perhaps object; this is where they may feel inconvenienced. But why? Is it not proper to provide every individual with the minimum wage necessary to maintain his or her family, plus twenty or twenty-five rupees extra to reward his or her efficiency and sense of duty? This is the way justice can be applied in relation to people’s competence and sense of responsibility.

Human beings are not yet looking towards the actual maladies that afflict society. Various occupational groups have formed societies and associations based solely on a sense of individual or group interest. Consequently they try to solve every social problem only from the perspective of their own interests. They do not want to help solve the problems of the lower echelons of society. Not even one per cent of the energy that is spent to pull people down from the top of society is utilized to elevate those at the bottom. This is the greatest tragedy.

Defective Approaches

It is incorrect to think that no one has ever individually considered this problem in the past. I am not referring here to the social philosophies of the last few hundred years; nor to the social revolutions of that period; nor to the social conscious of different thinkers of that period. In the Middle Ages some people thought deeply about solutions to the problem of social injustice, and a few of them even tried to do something. But neither am I referring to the philanthropic overtures made to the poor by some capitalists. I am referring to those who thought that it was virtuous to plunder the wealth of the capitalists and distribute it among those in need.

The Robin Hoods of the medieval period perhaps thought that this was the best way to eradicate social disparity. But this does not work, so it did not work.

In nearly every country of the world such Robin Hoods have emerged, but they have not been able to solve the problem of social injustice. The main reason is no one can survive on charity. Such an approach only creates a society of beggars. This type of greedy, indolent and inactive society promises even greater poverty in the future. Moreover, plundering the wealth of the rich does not destroy capitalism, because although robbery may reduce the assets of the capitalists, it does not destroy the seed of capitalism. The adventures of medieval heroes may excite some people today, but they cannot be a source of genuine inspiration. It may be possible to snatch away the wealth of the rich by violent means, making them paupers, but this will not permanently prevent them from again becoming rich. Violence begets violence. Hordes of demons who lose their wealth become greedy for human blood, and plot greater conspiracies in the future. The less intelligent thieves are ultimately destroyed by them. The thieves suffer greater punishment at the hands of the exploiters than the exploiters suffer at the hands of the thieves.

Violence does not solve any problem, because whatever poisonous tendencies of the individual and collective minds may be destroyed by violence, the seeds of those tendencies remain embedded in the mind itself. When the pressure of circumstances is relaxed they may again sprout forth, creating even greater evil.

Then where does the solution to this problem lie? A change of heart is absolutely necessary, but such a change will never be possible through violent means. If someone who is tormented by incessant hunger does not express his or her hunger due to fear of the collective force of society or pretends to be free from hunger, it does not mean that he or she has acquired the peace of mind that comes with not being hungry or will not engage in ruthless acts of violence to appease his or her hunger if he or she gets the opportunity.

Some people are of the opinion that only humanistic appeals and no other approach can effect a change of heart. Although the principles of such people may be high, in reality the soil of the earth is extremely hard. Their appeals to do good cannot easily gain support.

What are humanistic appeals, or satyágraha? They are simply a special means of using violence to create circumstantial pressure. We can, in fact, call them the intellectual’s method of using violence. They are a way to make people eager to move along the path of human welfare without resorting to actual violence, relying on legal enforcement, or becoming angry and adopting the path of bloodshed. Or, in simpler language, they are a way to compel people to move.

What is circumstantial pressure? Does it not aim to vibrate the individual or collective mind with the wave of collective welfare through the application of force? In fact, this approach is an attempt to touch the aspect of the human mind which is very tender and capable of responding to humanistic appeals. Thus, those who have finer sensibilities and rational judgement readily respond to humanistic appeals, or satyágraha.

This sort of appeal does not hold much value for those with crude minds. To vibrate the minds of such people it is, and will forever remain, necessary to influence their minds by giving them a rude shock. Otherwise one will have to wait indefinitely for the sensitive violin⁽⁵⁾ strings of some secret recess in their hard minds to be similarly vibrated by high-minded appeals to do good. And meanwhile the existence of the helpless, exploited people, on whose behalf these appeals are being made, will have been reduced to dust.

That is why no matter how much importance was given to the benevolence of the human mind by the Gandhian and Bhudan movements,⁽⁶⁾ or how saintly their propounders may have been, selfish and mean-minded people will never accept their principles. The bleeding sores on the feet of marching protesters will never be able to soften the minds of ruthless exploiters. Gandhism may be an excellent utopian model, but in the harsh reality of the world it is absurd and self-righteous.

Yes, the human mind must be vibrated, and for this one cannot wait for the application of the sentient force or humanistic appeals. Rather, all necessary steps must be taken to create circumstantial pressure. I do not consider it at all improper if exploiters are forced to follow the right path by circumstantial pressure in a totalitarian state or by legal compulsion in a democratic one. However, the primary objective is not simply to use any means available to create a vibration in the minds of exploiters. Proper moral training must also be imparted to keep the waves of that vibration alive, and there must be a ceaseless endeavour in individual and collective life to perpetuate the waves of that vibration. One must maintain one’s zeal so that, with the passage of time, the momentum of the vibration does not slow down. Its vigour and vitality should not turn into stagnation. Staticity should not creep into the hidden corners of the human mind.

Those who depend solely on magnanimity of mind or on humanistic appeals are bound to fail. And those who aspire to establish communistic systems either through legal methods or at bayonet point without changing the hearts of the people, without implementing development programmes and without introducing moral and ideological education to reform people’s bad habits, are also bound to fail. If we do not equate this communism, established at the cost of so much suffering, with robbery, then we must consider it rather worse than robbery, because it suppresses through brute force the natural life-urge for self-expression. It runs contrary to human nature to be suppressed like this. The suppressed human mind will revolt and find avenues to express itself. (If some people want to call this type of expression prativiplava [counter-revolution] they may, but I would not.) People do not like to lose their innate human qualities or spiritual potential, to be reduced to an animal-like existence, only eating and procreating; they cannot live like that.

Yet in order to make people “magnanimous” and “virtuous” through the application of brute force, individual liberty has to be ruthlessly crushed. Total power has to be concentrated in the hands of a particular group or party, and under these circumstances there is no alternative but to deny one’s special value as a human being. To recognize people’s value would only invite trouble, because then people would have to be granted freedom to express their opinions, or at least the right to demonstrate that their opinions are beneficial for society. And if this is accepted, it will have to be indirectly accepted that it is unjust to suppress human beings through brute force. If this is conceded, then the so-called communism which took so much effort to establish would be jeopardized as a result. Within a short time the group or party in whose hands the power was concentrated would be ousted by the collective psychic and spiritual efforts of the masses who had newly attained freedom.

That is why neither Gandhism, nor the so-called communism which is based on brute force, can bring about human welfare.

People will have to adopt a path where there is sufficient scope for humanism or for humanistic appeals to be made, and which at the same time allows for brute force as well as the application of other types of force if necessary.

Genuine Love for Humanity

To build something on the basis of humanism means to build something on the basis of real love for humanity. It is not possible to build a genuine society, one which is truly dedicated to collective welfare, if its most intelligent and active members, or those who are more developed than ordinary people, constantly evaluate their contribution to society in terms of profit and loss. When love for humanity is the primary concern, the question of individual profit and loss becomes secondary. However, I cannot entirely dismiss the question of personal rewards, because if people incur losses their love for humanity may be affected. If one’s personal interest suffers seriously, or if for one reason or other one’s survival is threatened, one should, in a society based on mutual love, have the right to demand redressal. In a healthy society where the only binding ingredient is genuine love, how will it be possible for coercion or legal compulsion to manifest this love, the true expression of society?

I have already expressed my lack of confidence in the success of economic idealists and those who believe that the continual propagation of idealistic philosophies will create an ideal society. Nor can I support those who resort to violence to build society, because there is no doubt that those who are coerced into submission because of their helplessness (sometimes they are not even aware of their fault), will try to resort to violence and bloodshed in retaliation at any moment. In fact, it is the inherent nature of human beings to express suppressed propensities. If some people want to suppress the inherent nature of others, they will have to radically transform that inherent nature itself. The issue in question is based on this fundamental principle. Thus it is a complete waste of time to act on the basis of a short-term plan only.

It is natural for all living beings to search for a way to express themselves fully. Sometimes this expression takes the form of crude physical pleasure, and sometimes that of subtle psychic pleasure.

A little while ago I said that all crude objects of enjoyment are limited in nature, and thus their accumulation by any one individual is not desirable. Let everybody enjoy as much of the subtle psychic world as they can – let them accumulate as many psychic and spiritual resources as they want – but there must be provision for the application of force if needed to prevent any one individual from accumulating excessive physical resources. The application of physical force will, no doubt, deprive people of some of the wealth they have accumulated or decrease their opportunities to accumulate physical wealth in the future. But it is certainly not impossible, through proper education, to transform people’s desire for material pleasure into a desire for psychic pabula. (In fact, the desire for physical or psychic pabula “springs from innate psychic longings. The desires of the crude mind are easily satisfied.” However, I object to calling the desires of the crude mind pure psychic longings.) This type of education is essential in society today.

Such an approach does not deny the world, as do impractical idealists, nor does it attempt to suppress the higher propensities of the human mind, as do materialists.

Unless people’s propensities are directed towards subtle forms of expression, their minds tend to get enmeshed in thoughts of petty enjoyment. People who portray themselves as saviours of humanity and espouse high-sounding philosophies from public platforms at the tops of their voices, while at the same time nourishing within themselves the worms of self-interest, can, in any weak moment, deceive the naive public. This is a perfectly natural thing for them to do. Those who want to build a society based on human welfare without first developing themselves fully through spiritual practices, will not only degrade themselves, they will also cause the degeneration of the whole of society. They will not even be able to trust the people with whom they are working. They may initially try to develop their own capacity in order to attain positions of leadership, but eventually their sole aim will be to dominate others instead of developing themselves. When they realize from bitter experience that it is not possible to utilize the society as a vehicle for establishing their group or party supremacy, or when the suppressed masses rise up and revolt, the evil tendency to suppress the people will certainly awaken in them.

The human mind does not want to be suppressed. It wants to find ways to express itself. The more ordinary people try to resist individual or group dictatorship, the more tyrants oppress ordinary people through violence. Finally, as a result, they do not make the slightest effort to become worthy leaders. Instead they concentrate all their efforts on misappropriating more and more power. The same people who earlier worked for social welfare ultimately come to depend totally on brute force. If any society overemphasizes brute force, the members of that society will start fighting each other and eventually become independent, self-styled autocrats. In such a society the last vestiges of morality will disappear and chaos will prevail.

Those who choose the middle course between morality and violence will not succeed either, unless they make intense efforts to eliminate the scourge of meanness from their minds. They will eventually become like those who advocate the path of violence.

The endeavour to remove inferiority complexes from the mind leads human beings slowly but surely to the Supreme Entity and establishes them in universal humanism. Hence it will not do for those who are determined to solve the problems of humanity to accept inferior ideals; along with this they must also acquire the strength they need to implement their ideals. The active endeavour to acquire this strength is called sádhaná – the sádhaná of the Supreme. It should be borne in mind that no theory will ever bring people salvation. In fact, it is the inner strength gained from spiritual practices which helps to expand the individual mind. The tremendous force acquired from spiritual practices helps to bridge the gap between the harsh realities of human existence and the supreme desideratum of human life. This is an eternal truth, applicable to all spheres of life – social, economic, psychic and spiritual.

A person who runs after petty objects of enjoyment to fulfil his or her personal desires lacks the spirit needed to unite humanity. To unite humanity one must love the divine element latent in every human being which is the reflection of the Supreme Entity. Love does not arise in the hearts of those who are not inspired by or not sympathetic to the lofty ideal of unqualified universalism. It is completely meaningless for people to try to do something constructive if they lack Cosmic ideation – if they have not learned how to accept the most magnanimous, universal, omniscient Supreme Entity as the object of their devotion – because it is an eternal truth that those who have not adopted such an outlook are bound to disappear into oblivion after inflicting a great deal of harm upon themselves and society.

Like any other problem, great or small, there is only one way to solve economic problems, and that is through genuine love for humanity. This love will give people guidance; it will show them what to do and what not to do. It is not necessary to study great numbers of books or to rely upon those who speculate with the future of the silent masses. The only essential requirement is to look upon humanity with genuine sympathy.

Let me give a simple example. Those who are conservative, that is, who do not believe in violence, may argue that in the process of abolishing the zamindary [landlord] system or nationalizing large-scale industries society should pay adequate compensation for everything it acquires. Those who, on the other hand, believe in violence, but do not believe in changing human hearts through spiritual practices and spiritual education, argue that the capitalists have plundered the wealth of society for so long that the question of compensation does not even arise. Those who have genuine love for humanity, however, cannot accept either of those viewpoints.

If large enterprises are acquired by paying compensation, the owners will have to be paid in instalments, which will take a long time. During this period the public will not get much benefit. Seen from this perspective, compensation is not a suitable solution. If, on the other hand, there is widespread confiscation of property, a large section of society may face economic deprivation, and as a result social balance may be lost. Not all those who own land or industry are healthy, able-bodied or young. Many of them are sick, invalids or elderly, and some are widows and minors. If all their property is forcibly confiscated without compensation, what situation will they be in? Furthermore, not all property owners are rich. Many are poor or belong to the lower middle class. Even if the policy of compensation or exchanging one property for another of similar value is not accepted, those who cherish genuine love for humanity will take a sympathetic view of the plight of those who find themselves in difficulty due to nationalization, and will act accordingly. A monthly pension or a lump sum should be allocated to old people, invalids, children and destitute women. Opportunities to earn a decent livelihood must be provided to all those, young or middle-aged, who are able-bodied and healthy, if they have no alternative means of support. Such employment opportunities should take into consideration their abilities as well as their needs.

If a proprietor or an industrialist has invested all his capital in a large industrial enterprise, then after his assets are confiscated he or she should be employed in a similar profession according to his or her ability. If, out of vengeance, some powerful group or individual forces such a person to work breaking rocks or as a porter in a railway station, circumstantial pressure may compel him to resign himself to his fate. Those who have assumed power may derive some sort of sadistic satisfaction from this, but the people who are subjected to humiliation and torture and are forced into an occupation which they find demeaning will die a premature death.

We must not forget for a moment that even those who have continuously exploited others and suppressed their legitimate rights are human beings. The human family includes everyone. We have to move unitedly along the path of welfare by helping everyone to rectify themselves and adapt. If we try to progress while holding on to a feeling of revenge towards those who committed mistakes in the past, we will be following a suicidal path.

Social Progress

Social progress is not and can never be achieved by individual effort. Some people lend their brains, others their hands, and others their legs. If we consider things carefully, to say that the legs are inferior and that the brain is superior, or that the brain has no value – that intellectuals are always exploiters and manual labourers are all that count – are both equally dangerous ways of thinking. The most important point to consider is who has utilized his or her ability and to what extent. Hanuman [the mighty monkey, a devotee of Rama in the mythological epic the Rámáyańa] fetched huge boulders to build a bridge across the sea, while the squirrels collected small pebbles. Yet intrinsically both these actions have the same value. We have no right to question anybody’s sincerity, nor can we scoff at it. We cannot give more appreciation to those who have not utilized their potentialities properly but have done more work than to those who have fully utilized their talents.

Days roll on. Empires, wealth and valorous human deeds ride on the wings of time, creating only brief flashes of brilliance. Against this panorama the efforts of common people, like those of the squirrels, do not receive recognition – they are like stones lost in the shadows of towering mountains. The leaders of society perform outstanding feats which are recorded in glowing letters in the annals of history. The students of later ages do research on them. But the common people, who carried the golden banners of these heroes, disappear into oblivion. If we try to think of all of them, we will never finish. Is it possible to print everyone’s obituaries in the newspaper? Is it possible to arrange commemoration services or to build shrines in memory of everybody? But in my opinion there is no use thinking about whether it is possible or not. Those who are magnanimous will openly recognize the greatness in the outstanding achievements of those who lived in the past, regardless of their intellect, education or rank. Those who through their sweat and blood provide vitality to human society do not need our approbation; but even so, why should we commit a social injustice by ignoring the work they have done, their karma sádhaná?

If the idea “The world belongs to the toiling masses” is accepted as the highest truth, the value of intellectual work will be denied, or, even if accepted, will be relegated to a secondary position. We find poverty among intellectuals as well as among the toiling masses, hence we cannot give exclusive importance to the problems of either class. Rather, before trying to solve the problems of any class, we should first find out what the common economic and psychic needs of everybody are. Then, in a humanitarian manner, in a spirit of universal love, we should set about helping them to progress. We cannot declare that this world is the property of one social class just to satisfy the interests of a particular group.

People must make steady progress in the realms of intellect, art and entrepeneurial action, and this progress should be achieved through the heartfelt cooperation of all social classes. There must not be any discrimination on the basis of education or sex. It will not do to accept any type of social difference as an absolute system or a divine decree. If we accept discrimination, one section of society will develop a superiority complex and another section an inferiority complex. Eventually, due to conflict between the superiority and inferiority complexes, the structure of society will disintegrate. An inferiority complex creates obstacles in the path of human progress, while a superiority complex makes people think that the other members of society are not part of their society. “They are inferior, low, stupid, superstitious fools. In fact, they should be beaten before they are spoken to!” As a result of this psychology a healthy social life is irretrievably lost, and along with this, the natural ties of affection between human beings break as people become estranged from each other.

Some of those who suffer from a superiority complex are intelligent, so they try to conceal their inner sentiments behind congenial external behaviour. But if the so-called inferior people happen to speak a few strong words, the inflated egos of those people get punctured and their real nature stands exposed. It is impossible for them to accept the truth from those whom they have considered inferior. When their logic fails them they begin to use abusive language. They try to recover their lost dignity by cursing the poor for being poor, humiliating the unattractive for being ugly, castigating low-caste people for their low-caste status, and reproaching the young for their lack of experience. There is no need to waste space to show that this type of behaviour clearly betrays their intellectual bankruptcy.

There are some deep-rooted superstitions and prejudices among the older generation that must be eradicated in the greater interest of society, but the older generation does not want to accept this fact. In order to avoid accepting their just defeat they point to their long years of experience. While nobody can deny the value of practical experience, we should remember that the past does not always repeat itself, that is, past experience is not always of much value in the present. Experience helps us to determine the relationship between cause and effect, but in the absence of far-sightedness that experience cannot be effectively utilized. With a change of scene, people must maintain a consistency between past experiences and probable future events when they determine future policies.

The younger generation usually has greater knowledge than the older generation of how circumstances will change in the future, because it is their nature to look ahead, and consequently they focus more attention on the future than their elders. I am not referring here to adolescent sentimentality, but to how far an understanding of the present momentum can help to prepare for the future. The sentimentality of adolescents and very young adults is nothing but impetuosity. This impetuosity itself does not help in determining future policies. Nevertheless I cannot deny that those who are impetuous understand the nature of this impetuosity better than anybody else. This also gives them a greater right than anybody else to determine policies. How much can those who lie inert like a lump of clay understand of the significance of this impetuosity?

When the main aim is to keep formulating policies for social progress, experience cannot be the sole prerequisite for this work. Rather a combination of the past experiences of the older generation and the creative zeal of the young should determine the speed of social progress. We cannot afford to neglect either group. The human race must attain glory by giving due recognition and justice to all.

A society whose leaders have a strong tendency to denigrate others will suffer a great catastrophe. The tendency to look down upon others does not always result from a superiority complex. Many people treat others with contempt to hide their own ignorance. The superiority complex is harmful to society, and this treating others with contempt to hide one’s ignorance is even more harmful. Everyone, irrespective of their education, intellectual attainment, external appearance, internal qualities, social status or age, must remember that those whom they consider inferior know more about many things than they do.⁽⁷⁾

Although I have said this before, I will say it again: seventy-five per cent of the evils in society are the result of the injustices that people commit against each other.

Footnotes

(1) The author defines “sentiment” as follows: “This running blindly without discrimination between the proper and the improper is called ‘sentiment’. One races after the idea that has come into one’s mind, like an unbridled horse, without considering its good or bad consequences. The horse may move along the right path, or it may fall into a chasm. One cannot be certain.” (“Geo-Sentiment” in The Liberation of Intellect: Neohumanism, 3rd ed., 1987) –Trans.

(2) Between father and child there is a blood relationship, but it is not a direct blood relationship; [[between mother and child there is a direct blood relationship because the mother’s]] body has actually nourished the child’s body in the pre-natal state. –Trans.

(3) Jiṋána vistára: the expansion of knowledge. Vijiṋána sádhaná: Vijiṋána is normally translated "science", so a literal translation of vijiṋána sádhaná might be "the cultivation of science". The intended meaning of vijiṋána sádhaná seems to be "the fullest development of knowledge". –Trans.

(4) The monthly salary of a primary-school teacher or lower-division clerk in the late fifties and early sixties. –Trans.

(5) Literally viińá, similar to a sitar. –Trans.

(6) The Gandhian movement, founded by Mahatma Gandhi, was based on the principles of truth and non-violence (satyágraha). The Bhudan movement, launched by Vinoba Bhave, was an attempt to convince landlords through humanistic appeals that they should donate land to poor, landless people. –Trans.

(7) For further discussion on superiority and inferiority complexes, see “The Social Order and Superiority and Inferiority Complexes” in Volume 3. –Eds. [Footnote used in the Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 2, 1st edition, publication of this article.]

Chapter 10	Universal Humanism [a compilation]

The underlying spirit of the word vicára [“justice” in English] is “a particular type of mental process to ascertain the truth”. Although human actions depend on relative principles, whatever appears to be the truth in this relative world, within society, is justice. The greatest benefit of the proper application of justice is that in the struggle between progressive and regressive forces, between good and evil, which is a permanent feature of society, the human intellect has an increasing number of opportunities to choose the path of righteousness.

Administering Justice

Many people say, “When human beings possess so little intelligence, how can they be qualified to sit in judgement over others? No one has the right to judge others.” I do not completely reject this argument, though I will raise the following question: “Is it not injustice if people do not use the intellect they have been endowed with in this relative world?” Judgements may not always be correct, the determination of judicial criteria may be flawed, or the mental faculties or the way of thinking of the judge may create doubts in the eyes of people about whether he or she can be considered an ideal person. Should we therefore abandon the judicial system altogether? No, certainly not. No particular standard for measuring intellectual progress has ever been or will ever be accepted as absolute. Nevertheless, in every sphere of life there must be an ongoing effort to progress from imperfection to perfection. This effort will, if only indirectly, make social progress and all-round welfare more accessible to the human race.

A judicial process ends once a verdict is reached about anything, so a judicial process is not something complete in itself. Only once the verdict is implemented is the full process complete. In other words, the utility of justice in social life is felt only when a penal measure, or better still, a corrective measure, for the concerned individual or group is implemented as per the verdict. But if at any stage the judicial yardstick is not identical with truth beyond a shadow of doubt, no one can deny that special care will have to be taken at the time of passing sentence on the accused in accordance with the verdict given.

I am personally of the opinion that since flaws will always unavoidably remain, no matter how good the judicial system, it is not the intent of nature for one human being to penalize another. Moreover, a detailed analysis reveals that whenever a punitive action is taken to penalize somebody, a feeling of vindictiveness arises in the minds of those administering the punishment, which in turn creates a malevolent mentality. I therefore think that the term “penal system” should be deleted from social terminology. If and when somebody, whether a judge or an ordinary person, takes any type of action against another, it should be corrective, not punitive.

If a system of corrective measures is introduced, criminals, whether they were deeply involved in the crime or not, will have no reason to complain against anyone. Although there may be flaws in the judgement, it will not harm them in any way. A person who is definitely guilty will benefit from a system of corrective measures, and even a person who is not guilty will benefit from such a system.

Thus my opinion is that no innocent person should have the opportunity to think or say, “Although I am innocent, I am being punished because I couldn’t afford a good lawyer” due to flaws in the judicial system. No doubt society will be adversely affected if an offender evades the law and is not arrested by the police due to their incompetence, but far greater damage will be done if an innocent person is penalized because of a defective judicial system.

From the social or human viewpoint, everybody has the right to correct the behaviour of everyone else. This is the birthright of every human being. No scholar can dispute the right of people to correct the shortcomings of those with whom they come in contact. The recognition of this right is indispensable for the health of society.

Thus it is clear that corrective measures are necessary to complement justice. Such an arrangement prevents a government from getting any scope to impose a violent, cruel penal system and an oppressive dictatorship on the masses.

Here lies the basic difference between the administrative system and the corrective system. The severe discipline that is needed in the administrative system to strengthen the framework of society or that of the state is not necessary in the judicial system; rather the judicial system is based on rational, tolerant, humanistic ideas and benevolent sentiments. Thus we see that in many cases there is a fundamental difference between the administrative and the judicial systems. Judges can and will frequently temper the merciless attitudes of the administration with humane reasoning; the verdicts of humane judges will therefore be more acceptable to the populace of a state than the pronouncements of an insensitive administration. If this does not happen it will immediately become clear that either an individual or party is abusing the power vested in them by the state.

The Role of Judges

People judge the mistakes of others to the best of their own intellectual capacities. I do not feel that there is anything wrong in this as long as people keep the ideal of welfare in front of them.

People may judge others, but there has always been and still is a difference of opinion among moralists concerning the final stage of the judicial process: in other words, concerning the extent to which people have the right to penalize others. If a person is tried and no action is taken as a result of the trial, the person in question will not have to face the possibility of a miscarriage of justice. But if in the event of a miscarriage of justice the person is penalized on the basis of the verdict, an innocent person will be made to suffer. In other words, penalizing a person on the basis of a verdict involves considerable risk.

Judges can rarely say with total conviction that one person is guilty and another innocent. Their verdicts are based on the testimonies of witnesses, the evidence and the arguments of lawyers. They have very little scope to verify whether or not the witnesses are telling the truth or whether or not the evidence is genuine. Experienced lawyers often win cases because even an eminent judge becomes confused by their arguments. Moreover, if the experienced lawyers also happen to be retired judges, it will be very easy for them to win over the judge. A judge who previously worked under an experienced lawyer will usually find it difficult to reject his or her evidence and arguments. In other words, such lawyers exert a personal influence over the judge. Of course in most developed countries nowadays retired judges are prevented from practising law. This regulation is highly commendable, and results in the general public getting a better chance of receiving justice. However, there is still no guarantee that people will receive impartial justice, because in practice very few judges are able to verify whether the witnesses are telling the truth or whether the evidence is genuine, or to closely scrutinize the verbose arguments of experienced lawyers.

In order to determine whether the witnesses are telling the truth and whether the evidence is genuine, judges will have to take considerable help from detectives. The workload of detectives will increase as a result, and thus it may be necessary to increase the number of detectives. By merely increasing the number of detectives, however, we cannot expect that this problem will be solved, because if the seeds of corruption are hidden in the detective department itself, it will be virtually impossible to eliminate them. In other words, if detectives take bribes out of greed, the accused or the plaintiff will suffer as a result. While it is necessary for a country to have an adequate number of detectives, it is impossible for a government to recruit a large number of highly proficient detectives. It will therefore be necessary for the investigations carried out by the detectives into whether the witnesses are telling the truth and whether the evidence is genuine to be verified again by the judges.

Judges, however, do not need to take sole responsibility for this work in all cases; part of it may be performed by a jury. This will result in an increase in the importance of the jury system. The only criterion for selecting members of the jury should be honesty. Educational qualifications and social status should not be taken into consideration.

It is preferable that the final responsibility for a judgement rest with the judge, not the jury. So judges should be carefully selected from among those whose strength of character is irrefutable. Generally the number of judges is smaller than the number of police or detectives, and their salaries are higher, so with proper efforts it will not be impossible for a country to procure the competent judges that it needs. Local autonomous bodies should be given the responsibility for selecting the members of the jury; business people, brokers and political leaders or party workers should not be eligible to be jury members.

We cannot expect judges to agree with the jury in all cases because that would limit their authority. Nor should we expect that the members of the jury will make good judges, no matter how honest and upright they may be. Furthermore, after conducting investigations into the event in question, the judge and jury may arrive at different conclusions; it will not be wrong to conclude that the judge’s conclusion should carry more weight. However, it is possible for a judge to be partial, out to satisfy a personal grudge or in collusion with the accused; if so, what should be done? If the members of a jury become suspicious of the judge’s conduct or dissatisfied with his or her behaviour during the course of a trial, the entire proceedings of the case should be brought to the notice of a higher judicial authority before the judge delivers his or her final judgement in court. If the higher judicial authority shares the opinion of the members of the jury, it would be unwise to retain the judge.

Although I do not fully support the way in which justice was administered by the káziis [Muslim judges] in the Middle Ages, it would be useful if judges today emulated their dedication. The káziis took great risk and personal responsibility when they disguised themselves and went to seek the truth at the scene of the crime, or tried to extract a confession from the accused or the plaintiff by using a clever ruse. Such efforts would place greater responsibility on the judges, and thus it might be necessary to increase both their number and their salary. Besides this, it might also be necessary to increase their authority so that they could deliver judgements on the basis of their findings and experience.

However, no matter what efforts we make to ensure fair judgements, we cannot expect them to always be correct. The jury may make a mistake, or both the judge and the jury may make a mistake. Both may acquiesce in injustice due to transitory emotions or excitement. Hence, under no circumstances can a judgement be taken as the final word. So I am constrained to say that if there is any doubt at all about the accuracy of a judgement, no punishment should be given.

From the moral viewpoint also it is obvious that, if they wish to preserve social purity, people only have the right to take corrective measures and not punitive measures. The law that controls every pulsation of human existence has the sole authority to penalize people, and no other. Still, if people could have demonstrated that their judgements were absolutely free from defects or established that their system of punishment was legitimate, there would have been something to discuss. But human beings are incapable of doing this. So for the preservation of society, if people want to take measures against others, those measures will have to be corrective, not punitive. Even if the judicial system is defective, if only corrective measures are taken then there is no possibility of anyone coming to any harm.

Before looking more deeply at corrective measures, it is necessary to closely examine the standard of judges. Those who are permitted to sit in judgement over others and have the power to punish must be closely monitored to see whether any degeneration has occurred in their intelligence, capacity for deliberation, or moral character. From time to time, as and when necessary, reports about the character and conduct of judges may be required by bodies representing the people. A judge who is a drunkard, of dubious character or engaged in any form of antisocial activity has no right to pass judgement on others. I am emphasizing the personal standards of judges because the nature of justice is such that higher priority has to be given to temporal, spatial and personal factors than to legal processes.

In the event of conflict between the criminal code and the moral code, the moral code must take precedence.

While presiding over a trial a judge should not be prejudiced against the accused, but should consider whether he or she has committed a crime or not; and if so, under what circumstances, and whether the crime was committed voluntarily or at the instigation of others. This is the main point for consideration during a trial. The person on whom society has bestowed the solemn office of judge has therefore to be of a higher standard than an ordinary person.

I am not ready to accept that a law student who has graduated with distinction from the law faculty of a university will necessarily make a competent judge. While it is undeniable that good lawyers and barristers have knowledge of the law and skill in presenting arguments, this is no guarantee that they will make equitable judges. Instances of equitable justice can be seen in countless large and small events which occur in individual and social life.

When sitting to pass judgement on an offender the first thing for the judge to consider is whether the accused has committed a crime or not. For the purpose of analysing the types of crime committed by a criminal, and whether his or her offences were committed voluntarily or at the instigation of others, criminals may be classified into the following five categories.

(1) Criminals by Nature

Some few men and women are born with a deranged mind. The cause of their mental derangement is concealed within the defects of their body and glands. Such people can be divided into two main groups.

The first group is composed of people who are normally very quiet, but in whom truthfulness and doing good to others are against their nature. They derive malevolent pleasure from lying and harming others. They are generally poor at managing their worldly affairs and incapable of comprehending the difference between good and bad. They act according to their limited mental capacity. Although they are mentally underdeveloped, they are deprived of the same kindness and compassion that other simpletons, due to their innate purity, receive. They take a long time to learn how to walk and talk and to understand simple matters, and they continue to dribble for a large part of their lives. Despite the sincere efforts of their parents and teachers, they fail to acquire any education. Even before they reach adulthood they manifest their base propensities. They generally become petty thieves, not armed robbers. Although they have a bad character, they do not have the courage to perform antisocial activities openly. They commit offences on their own initiative and at the instigation of others.

The second group of born criminals is more dangerous. Throughout their lives they revel in displays of provoked or unprovoked cruelty. They have a natural inclination to kill or maim others. They become members of criminal gangs and commit murder and other horrendous acts. Generally they do not become pickpockets, petty thieves or burglars. They consider such things to be the activities of petty criminals and as such beneath their dignity. In criminal circles they are usually greatly feared. From their mode of thinking or lifestyle, it appears as though they were born only to commit crimes. They consider compassion and conscience to be mere frailties; the importance of such attributes is beyond their understanding. Although they may be slow when it comes to worldly affairs, they are not fools. At the time of committing their instinct-inspired crimes, they give ample proof of their intelligence. They demonstrate their intelligence through their knowledge of osteology and psychology, and by their behaviour when dealing with the police and the public. Even if they are born into a salutary environment, this type of inborn criminal ultimately takes to a life of crime. Women with this kind of nature are quite incapable of leading chaste lives; even if they have good husbands, they often decide to become prostitutes.

The natures and lifestyles of born criminals are as diverse as their crimes. Some pose as honest people and secretly steal and commit robberies. Some gain a lot of money through forgery or armed robbery and donate it to the poor. Some like to prey on helpless victims. Among those who commit crimes because they derive pleasure from it, some do not have the opportunity to earn a living, or if they do, do not utilize that chance to lead an honest life. The natures of born criminals, the lifestyles they lead, and their preferences for particular types of crimes are usually consistent with each other.

Psychologists have learned a great deal about criminals and are trying to research them more. If they receive cooperation from the government, and especially from the police department, they will make rapid progress in the study of criminal psychology. An analysis of criminal psychology is not the subject under discussion, but still it is a fact that born criminals are society’s greatest burden and greatest responsibility. Although such criminals are born with human bodies, mentally they are sub-human. And that is not all: even the physical structure of such people is different from that of ordinary people.

The sweet family environment that is within easy reach of human beings due to their developed intellect and which becomes even sweeter in time due to their natural qualities, is not accessible to born criminals. Even if they are born into a good environment, they cannot fully accept it. Just to satisfy their perverse mentality, they may poison their benevolent fathers out of any misunderstanding, or may brutally stab their loving mothers in the heart. From a viewpoint of normal human behaviour, it would be extremely difficult to treat born criminals as human beings.

Nature normally bestows different strengths and weaknesses on different persons, but this principle takes a deviant twist in the case of these people. Born criminals can understand or grasp many natural phenomena more easily than highly-intelligent or wise people. Many underdeveloped creatures have a greater capacity than human beings to foresee the future, and it can be seen that born criminals also have this ability.

Through the observations and investigations psychologists have made while studying criminal psychology, they have gained a great deal of useful information about born criminals. But until now no physiological or psychological treatment has been developed to reform their nature. Psychologists or physiologists know the cause of their deformities or abnormalities, and they even know [theoretically] how their abnormalities can be cured, but in practice it is extremely difficult to cure them. No country in the world has ever wished to demonstrate any enthusiasm for curing the diseases of these unfortunate people. They live like animals, senselessly performing wicked acts. And like animals, they allow their pointless lives to end with a rope around their necks.

If “a life for a life” is considered an unassailable principle of justice, then there is nothing more to say. But remember that born criminals commit their crimes due to their physical or psychic abnormalities; are not the so-called civilized people who make no effort to cure such born criminals, guilty of the same crime? Does not capital punishment amount to cutting off the head to get rid of a headache? In my opinion to take the life of a born criminal of this type is as much a crime as it would be to pass a death sentence on a patient just because we could not cure the person’s illness. It is the duty of a civilized society to arrange for born criminals to be cured of their ailments. Killing them to lighten the burden caused by their lives is certainly not indicative of a developed civilization.

So in my opinion the trials of born criminals should not concentrate solely on the magnitude of their crimes. Such criminals will have to be regarded with benevolent, humanistic sentiments, and means of curing them must be suggested.

Doctors quarantine those with an infectious disease to prevent the disease spreading to healthy people. Similarly it is necessary to isolate born criminals, indeed all types of criminals, from other people. The treatment of criminals should be undertaken in a prison, or better said, in a corrective centre. Prisons are not for punishment, rather prisons are hospitals for treatment of disease.

Psychologists cannot treat the mental diseases which inflict born criminals all alone; the cooperation of physicians and sociologists is essential. Psychologists will diagnose the mental disease and explain its origins, and they will also play a role in helping cure it as far as possible. Doctors will be responsible for curing the disease through medicine or surgery, insofar as it is caused by physiological abnormalities. Then sociologists will have to arrange for the social rehabilitation of the criminal after he or she has recovered. If psychologists only describe the nature of the disease, or if doctors only diagnose the physiological disorders and nothing more, it will not be possible to accomplish anything productive. Of course at the present time the patient may not make a complete recovery despite the concerted efforts of psychologists and sociologists, because psychology is still in an underdeveloped state. Moreover, doctors have not yet acquired the skills needed to remove the physiological abnormalities responsible for mental disease. And furthermore, the science of sociology has only just emerged; it is developing extremely slowly. However, we must take the above measures for born criminals.

As long as society fails to take such humanistic measures in dealing with born criminals, it is farcical to compel them to stand trial.

One must always remember that born criminals are patients, and that their disease is stubborn. It can of course be cured quite quickly through spiritual practices, and in a slightly longer period through yogic methods, but for this a congenial environment is essential. Prison environments should therefore be made more pure, more humane.

(2) Criminals out of Habit

Where (a) moral integrity is low, where (b) no effort is made to develop mental force, or where (c) social control is slack, people will be influenced by their ripus,⁽¹⁾ and will not hesitate to choose a path which enables them to express their propensities unchecked. Ordinary people manage to keep their base propensities under control through internal moral reasoning, and thus avoid indulging in antisocial activities. But those who lack mental strength often knowingly commit crimes in an almost mechanical way, even though they possess a sense of morality. Such people who possess a sense of morality but lack mental strength normally keep their momentary mental weaknesses under control out of fear of what society might do, and as a result the health of society and the purity of individual life is upheld. But if any one of these three obstacles which keep people from moving along the path of evil becomes weak, people will tend to engage in antisocial activities; in the absence of fear of these obstacles, they will gradually become increasingly addicted to such activities. In this way people get accustomed to performing antisocial activities and finally turn into hardened criminals.

The diseases of habitual criminals are not congenital, so in treating these people there is little place for a physiologist or doctor. However, habitual criminals can easily be treated if they are provided with a proper moral education, a method of acquiring moral strength and a strictly regulated social environment. So during the trials of habitual criminals, the judge should focus more on the provisions of the penal code than on humanitarian sensibility; this approach will benefit society.

No matter how villainous habitual criminals become, and no matter how notorious, they will never be as dangerous as born criminals. Because they possess some sense of discrimination, they should not be automatically pardoned on the grounds of mental illness. They also possess the ability to feign innocence. They behave like saints by day and steal by night; they live like landlords one moment and like armed robbers the next; they are chaste in public and promiscuous in private. Generally the scale of their criminal activities is greater than that of other criminals.

Psychological treatment and strict prison discipline help to a great extent in reforming the nature of habitual criminals. (Of course such criminals must live in a pure social environment as well.)

This type of criminal nature is often formed as an indirect result of people being forced to submit to strict control without being given any moral education or guidance as to how to develop strength of mind. For example, some parents do not impart moral education to their children, and do not help them to acquire strength of mind or teach them how to lead a virtuous life; instead, they beat their children with or without justification. It is the children of such parents who later take part in antisocial activities.

If parents fail to educate their daughters out of fear that they will go astray, fail to provide them with a moral education, fail to help them acquire strength of mind by holding up high ideals before them, and try to forcibly keep their unmarried or widowed daughters confined behind the purdah, naturally the secret desire will awaken in them to leave home and experience the world. As a result they will put on a show of purity in public while indulging in sinful conduct in private. Often they will even break away from the constraints imposed on them and openly engage in antisocial activities.

Although it is extremely difficult to convince habitual criminals to follow the path of spirituality, it may be possible through psychological means.

In most cases they are intelligent, but out of petty selfishness they rebel against society, country and state. Many habitual criminals become politicians in order to further their own selfish ends and cheat the public day after day. Most of the great wars fought in the world have been started by such criminals. The leaders of the criminal community come from this group. Sometimes the unfortunate public grabs hold of these leaders, just as fishermen catch fish in a net and drag them onto the shore, and sometimes these leaders break the net and slip away. Not only is intelligence required to bring these criminals to justice, a great deal of caution and courage is required as well. Black marketeers and adulterators who operate on a large scale should also be included in this group of criminals.

Habitual criminals sometimes also try to influence judges. They intimidate them in the hope of ensuring the successful continuation of their criminal activities. In order to punish habitual criminals, it is necessary to give judges far greater power than they now possess.

(3) Criminals Due to Environment

Many people in society do not become criminals because of physiological or hereditary factors. Nor do they become involved in criminal activities due to the influence of base propensities, or due to lack of education or social control. Yet today civilized society looks down on them because they are criminals when they could have been revered as ideal human beings with impeccable characters if they had been given a proper environment.

They are glaring examples that honest people can become dishonest as a result of environmental pressures. The sensitive, honest son of a villainous father is compelled to participate in antisocial activities out of fear of paternal abuse. This creates a habit which eventually becomes part of his nature. The daughter of a prostitute, despite her best efforts to live a virtuous life, is forced to lead the life of a social outcast due to unbearable maternal abuse or circumstantial pressure. At first we usually censure the parents or guardians for the helpless condition of such women, but the parents are not always completely to blame. Sometimes personal difficulties, such as financial hardship or poverty, compel them to take such steps, even when they know that what they are doing is wrong. Due to circumstantial pressure they encourage their children to do wrong and force them to commit crimes.

Those who denigrate refugees, seeing an antisocial mentality in some of them, will notice on closer examination that it is only because of lack of money that refugees encourage their children to act in an antisocial manner.

But antisocial behaviour is not always caused by lack of money. Where the parents or guardians are evil by nature, they try to infect the other members of their family with their disease. A few days ago I read in the newspaper that an upper-middle-class lady used to encourage her son to steal clothes, etc., from her neighbours by offering him money for cinema tickets if he did – in other words, by applying indirect pressure. When the incident became public, it was discovered that her family was not in financial difficulty. By putting pressure on her son, the lady was infecting him with her own mental disease.

There are many parents who, due to miserliness or whatever reason, deprive their children of delicious food and drink. (If there is some reason for this deprivation, they do not explain it to their children.) They serve such food and drink to others in the presence of their children without explaining to them why they are being deprived. As a result, the children, under the pressure of circumstance, steal to try to satisfy their natural desires.

There are many people who themselves, that is, together with the members of their family, consume delicious food and drink but provide poor-quality food to their servants. The servants subsequently develop the habit of stealing out of greed.

There are many parents who directly encourage their children to fight and abuse others. I have also observed quiet-natured children who often disagreed with the opinions of their parents, being forced to follow their parents’ orders out of fear of physical abuse. In a remote village I once observed a young man, who was a member of a social group which followed the Dáyabhága system,⁽²⁾ abuse his innocent wife and torture her at the instigation of his cruel father, out of fear of losing his right of inheritance.

These are just a few examples of crimes due to environment.

During the trials of criminals due to environment who have not yet turned into habitual criminals, the judge should not attach too much importance to the provisions of the penal code. If, after thorough investigation, it is discovered that particular people or circumstantial pressure have caused these criminals (whatever their age) to take part in antisocial activities, it will be the duty of the judge to remove them from that environment with the help of sociologists and psychologists. Such cases rarely require further corrective measures. But if those who are criminals due to circumstantial pressure become habitual criminals as a result of a long-standing habit, a change of environment alone will not suffice. Corrective measures in accordance with the provisions of the penal code will also be necessary.

Those who are born with fairly healthy bodies and minds, who do not lack knowledge of morality or live an undisciplined social life, or who have not become dishonest as a result of circumstantial pressure, often unwittingly take to the path of dishonesty because they keep bad company. Perhaps as many as ninety-nine per cent of people talk about themselves in the following way: “I do not need to bother about the company I keep, as long as I am good myself. I can remain good in all types of company. I am old enough to understand the difference between good and bad.” In other words, such people do not like to think, or rather feel piqued at the thought, that somebody should try to dissuade them from keeping bad company. Especially if a less-educated person advises a more highly-educated person to avoid bad company, that person will do it all the more. In society people who regard themselves as superior in status, wealth or education generally believe that it is entirely unwarranted for others to give them advice. That is why an educated but wayward son often disregards the good advice of his parents.

The natural characteristics of the human mind, however, tell a different story than what that ninety-nine percent think. A person of any age between seven and seventy is invariably influenced by the company he or she keeps. In other words, where goodness is predominant, bad people will slowly but surely become good, and where the opposite is the case, good people will become bad. Even a saintly person will go astray after a few days of close association with bad people.

Suppose a teetotaller mixes regularly with a group of alcoholics. The frequent anti-teetotaller gibes and the positive portrayals of the wondrous virtues of wine by the alcoholics will one day tempt the teetotaller to taste a little wine. His or her drinking friends will say, “We don’t want you to become drunk. But what’s the harm if you just taste a little! This surely won’t make you a bad person! What a moralist you are! Oh friend, to be such a moralist in the world today is ridiculous!” So one day the teetotaller tastes wine and this becomes the cause of his or her downfall. But on the day the unsuspecting teetotaller took wine, he or she did not realize that from that very day wine would become the cause of his or her degeneration.

Similarly, by keeping bad company people become debauched, slanderers and thieves. Men or women who have to do little or no household work, who fail to cultivate high ideals in life, who are unable to evolve a spiritual outlook, or who do not have to work hard for a living, generally develop an extremely critical nature. By constantly associating with such people, those who possess high ideals or a diligent nature will gradually begin to spend their leisure time in slanderous gossip. If the parents or older members of a family are quarrelsome, the children will also become quarrelsome due to constant association. Similarly, if the women of a family have a highly critical nature, the children will invariably become critical because they will learn how to criticize from their elders. Children will also tend to become depraved if they associate too closely with older children in schools or colleges. When they stay among children their own age, however, they generally play in an innocent, joyous way. Childhood companions should be selected with great care, but young children are incapable of doing this.

The base propensities which lie dormant in everyone are easily stimulated by constant association with bad people. Through the united efforts of parents, people living in the locality and educators, it may be possible to save children from bad company. But it is very difficult to save them from the evil influences which reside in their own homes or preponderate in their neighbourhood. The only way to overcome such influences is to popularize the ideals of dharma, spread moral education and train an honest police force.

In the modern world there is a wide variety of films which excite the passions and have a degrading influence on boys and girls, adolescents and young men and women. Such films create in cinema-goers the desire to emulate in their individual lives the criminal activities, the vulgar expressions of love, or the adventurous behaviour that they see enacted on the screen. This is another example of how keeping bad company causes depravity. Many cinema-goers imagine that the characters that they see on the screen are their actual acquaintances, but when they try to emulate these characters, they discover that the real world is much tougher than the world portrayed by the cinema. If their family ties are weak, if they are their own guardians or if they have no high ideals to inspire them, it will be extremely difficult, although not impossible, to save them from bad influences.

As long as those who become criminals due to keeping bad company are not transformed into habitual criminals, they will return to their normal good behaviour as soon as they give up the bad company. Therefore, during the trials of such criminals, corrective measures should be taken only after giving due consideration to the company they keep and the influence of this company on their behaviour. But in the case of those who have become habitual criminals, simply removing them from bad company will not suffice, because they themselves are their own bad company. For them, stricter measures will be needed.

Nearly all deceitful acts, such as swindling, fraud, gambling, looting, seducing women, and travelling without a ticket, are commonly a result of the influence of bad company.

In prisons also those criminals of this type who have already turned into habitual criminals should be housed with great care, otherwise their disease will spread to others.

(4) Criminals Due to Poverty

Most crimes throughout the world are committed due to poverty, except in countries where the minimum necessities of life have been met. Of course the tendency to engage in antisocial activities because of poverty does not manifest equally in all places or among all people. The degree of such crimes varies according to the moral strength of an individual. But no matter how strongly developed the moral consciousness of a person, if poverty threatens his or her very existence, usually the person will try to attack the prevailing social structure. This being the case, I cannot in the name of human dharma reject the reasons such people give, if they give any reasons at all, in defence of their actions. They demand simply the right to live, and on this human right stands the well-being of society, the justification for its existence.

Throughout history millions of people have died due to artificial famines created by other human beings. While walking along a road, weary, plodding legs have given way and a person has collapsed in a pitiful heap on the ground, yet he or she has refrained from stealing. Although a high standard of morality is one reason why the person did not make a last desperate bid for self-preservation, it is not the only reason. Starving people, particularly if they lose their vitality by slow degrees, do not have the moral courage to fight. Knowing the end is sure, they seek refuge in the arms of death. Basing their way of life on incorrect philosophical and religious teachings, they accept their miserable situation as destiny. Perhaps, at that time, if they were led by a spirited leader and inspired by his or her fiery lectures, or if they received guidance about the course of action to take, they would collectively attack the prevailing social structure. In such circumstances, their actions might perhaps be described as immoral, but they certainly would not contravene the dharma of human existence.

Sometimes honest people, who hate corruption from the depths of their being but fail to keep their mental balance due to the pressure of poverty, resort to crime just to maintain their existence. What will happen in such circumstances if the judge looks only at the crime, or is even slightly indifferent to the questions of cause and effect related to the crime? Such offenders – who may be more honest than most well-fed, well-dressed, so-called honest people – will be thrown into jail and branded as criminals merely because of deficiencies in the system of production and distribution of basic requirements. Due to the bad company there, and overcome with shame, hatred and humiliation due to their punishment, they will gradually turn into habitual criminals after being released from jail.

In areas hit by famine many crimes are committed due to poverty, but as soon as the economy improves the number of crimes decreases. This proves that most of the people in whatever country are not by nature criminals, nor for that matter is the human race in general. People want to be properly clothed and fed and to pass their days happily. They do not want to have the path of their natural development stop at an impenetrable iron door constructed by narrow-minded social-law-givers.

Those who ignore their conscience and repeatedly commit crimes due to poverty, eventually turn into habitual criminals. If somebody steals or robs out of hunger, or is goaded by their propensities into some mean act, it will be the duty of society to find out what the person’s needs are and then remove them in some lawful way. But if society fails to do its duty (I have already said that human beings have not yet been able to create a society in the true sense of the term) and punishes such criminals instead, focusing only on the magnitude of their crimes, all feelings of remorse will vanish from their minds and in their place a sense of desperation will arise. They will feel that since they have already been stigmatized and have nothing further to lose, there is no point in suffering by earning a living in an honest way. They will think, “As I am sinking, let me sink to the depths of hell.” Those who have committed crimes due to poverty (whether due to lack of food or clothing, or physical or mental factors), will blame society for their offences. They will claim that their poverty is the result of a defective social structure, and in most cases this allegation will be true.

If the breadwinner of a family dies a premature death, a dark shadow of poverty will often fall over the family, and it may disintegrate. Its sweetness and purity will be destroyed due to poverty. The young boys and girls will become beggars, increasing the number of parasites in society, or they will become the playthings of antisocial forces, eventually turning into thieves, armed robbers, thugs, pickpockets or agents of some professional beggars’ association. They will become slaves in order to survive. Young widows from communities which follow a double standard of morality will also be compelled or tempted by various forces to lead antisocial lives.

Hence the solution to all these different antisocial activities is hidden in the creation of a sound economic and social structure. The man who is despised as a thief or treated with contempt by society might have been a genius if he had been brought up in a healthy social environment. The woman who is shunned as a prostitute might have been respected as the leader of a women’s organization or honoured as the mother of a famous person, had she received a little sympathy from society in the early part of her life. That is why I contend that those unfortunate men and women carry a burden of sin created through the collective efforts of society as a whole. They are not responsible for their sins, or if they are, their sins are considerably less, or at least no greater, than the sins of selfish, mean-minded people who call themselves honest.

It is doubtful whether the Supreme Creator, let alone humanity, has the right to punish those who commit crimes due to poverty. Still, from the moral standpoint, I cannot support criminal acts. I would suggest that before committing such crimes they should become revolutionaries. It is the duty of those with a good knowledge of morality to guide them in their revolutionary activities. Let them separate the gold from the dross in the fire of revolution.

On the subject of corrective measures for those who become criminals due to poverty, honest people have no alternative but to exhort them to launch a revolution. In this situation the position of a judge is like that of a figurehead; he or she has nothing to say or do. Psychologists and sociologists also have very limited scope for action; the pathways that lie open to them are very circumscribed. The solution completely depends on the firm economic foundation of the different individual countries as well as of the entire world. If anyone is at fault it is every one of the world leaders. Their responsibilities do not end when they gain power by creating false hopes and deceiving the common people with remote and unattainable dreams.

People can score points in intellectual battles by hiding their inefficiency behind grandiloquent speeches, but if they do, the demands of the proletariat, who struggle for existence like animals, will not be heard. They will never be able to forget their hunger and ignore their psychic longings and simultaneously dedicate themselves wholeheartedly to the enormous task of developing their country and building a universal human society in a better way.

Those whose stomachs are full can always forget about the hunger of others. The world has become accustomed to, but has experienced quite enough of, the procrastination and heartless histrionics of such blood-sucking brutes. By inventing crises, they force the needy to commit crimes; by hoarding grains, they cause artificial famines and indirectly incite starving people to steal; and by making people’s circumstances difficult and subsequently enticing them with money, they encourage men to abandon their families and compel women to earn their living in an immoral way. Because they remain above suspicion and appear to be honest according to the laws of the land, which in many countries are enacted for the benefit of the upper stratum of society, ordinary people are unable to raise their voices in protest. It can be said that the only path open to them is the path of revolution.

People look among the leaders of their country for someone to take up the noble task of protecting ordinary, simple people like themselves from the exploitation of blood-sucking brutes. Those who transform ordinary people into beasts by forcing them to live in extremely difficult circumstances are, in my opinion, the ones who should be put on trial. To burden judges with the trials of those who become criminals due to poverty, is to do an injustice to them.

However, it is fallacious to think that the economic structure is the sole cause of crimes committed due to poverty. There are many instances of affluent people also indulging in drink, drugs, gambling, licentiousness, luxurious living, gluttony, etc., in order to forget their psychic problems or to gratify their instincts. Due to their addiction, they lose their wealth and finally get into debt to finance their bad habits. Eventually, when it becomes impossible for them to pay off their debts, they get involved in a wide variety of criminal activities which have a highly deleterious effect on society. Privation is clearly the superficial cause of such crimes, but society is not responsible for this type of privation as it is entirely self-created. It is imperative to take corrective measures to reform such types of criminal. In order to be able to reform them, it is essential to cure them of their addiction.

(5) Criminals out of Momentary Weakness

Another type of crime occurs occasionally. This is a temporary criminal urge, a special type of mental disease which suddenly appears in a certain type of environment and again subsides after a short time. Kleptomania is an example of this kind of mental disease. After committing a crime kleptomaniacs feel ashamed and are anxious to return the property that they have stolen to the owner. They have sudden fantasies about stealing, abducting people, becoming drunk or indulging in decadent activities. But analysis shows that they do not in fact have the slightest personal interest in such things.

Usually weak-minded people who have witnessed larceny, murder or any other crime, are deeply affected by their experience, and due to the ensuing extreme agitation that occurs in their minds, they deviate from the path of common sense. If the feeling of mental agitation recurs due to the influence of temporal, spatial or personal factors, they will immediately commit a crime.

If a person who is not actually a thief constantly thinks about stealing and about the various techniques that can be used to steal, it may happen that he or she will begin to talk in a way that will give people the impression that he or she is really a thief. After witnessing a brutal murder, sometimes such weak-minded people begin to think of themselves as criminals, and under the influence of such thoughts, they conceal some clothing, a dead body or parts of a body, or some other items in their houses, and then start describing the modus operandi of the crime to others. They will say, “I dragged the person away like this; I stabbed him like that;” etc. In such circumstances it will not be surprising if the police regard the person as a criminal and if, after listening to the testimony of witnesses and seeing the evidence, the judge takes action against him or her. In such cases if there is even the slightest defect in the confidential enquiries, the proficiency of the police or the insight of the judge – any of the three – in all probability an innocent person will be punished.

Poverty is the root cause of most crimes, but it is not the only cause. Even if the economic structure is sound, other factors which cause crimes may be present, jeopardizing social peace and discipline. With the eradication of poverty, crimes caused by keeping bad company and by personal difficulties may to some extent decrease, but there will be little decline in the number of crimes committed by born criminals or habitual criminals.

If we undertake a rational analysis of the causes of crimes and a scientific categorization of these causes, what stands out most is the variety of the propensities of the human mind and the weakness or strength of the mind according to changes in time, place or person. As a result those investigating the causes of serious crimes may become confused. The accused could be a criminal who does not fit the previously-established categories. If the crime is grave, it will not be possible to pardon the person or disregard the crime on the grounds that it was committed accidentally or in a moment of weakness.

Crimes Involving Cruelty

Crimes involving cruelty are generally caused by the following factors:

1. loss of judgement due to intoxication or extreme excitement;
2. jealousy over property or wealth;
3. a severe blow to one’s prestige or the influence of any of the ripus;
4. fights over women;
5. serious differences of opinion.

It is possible for a person who lacks mental straightforwardness, though [[that person]] may be a good person, to commit a crime due to any of these factors. But not all crimes are committed in a moment of anger. Even a cool-headed person may be influenced and overwhelmed by any of the factors listed above except the first, and these factors may have disturbed his or her mind for so long that the crime cannot be classified as a crime committed in anger. A cool-headed person with no criminal background may even plan a serious crime as much as six months in advance. The causes of these types of crime, as I mentioned above, lie in the weaknesses of the human mind. The manifestation of malevolent propensities depends on the environment and is subject to differences in time, place or person; sometimes it occurs after a few years and sometimes after a few minutes.

When a crime is committed within five or ten minutes of provocation, the offence is generally viewed with leniency because it was committed in a moment of anger. However, where the thought of committing a crime gradually develops over a long period of time, where the offender deliberately becomes intoxicated in the hope of committing the crime with calm nerves, or where the offender gets others intoxicated in order for them to commit a crime with calm nerves, it is rare for the offender to receive clemency. In reality, of course, the crimes of both groups are equal in magnitude, and from the psychological point of view there is only a slight difference between them.

Benevolent people may wonder how much value corrective measures have for criminals who, for whatever reason, have not turned into habitual criminals but still do not show any sense of remorse after committing a crime; for first-time offenders who have not produced any type of evidence to demonstrate that circumstantial pressure was the reason for their crime; or for those who have not shown any physical or psychological symptoms which would warrant their being declared mentally ill. In such circumstances experienced judges and social well-wishers would take penal instead of corrective measures. From the moral standpoint, we cannot but support this. Yet when we know that weak-minded people, who are slaves to their lower propensities, have committed and are continuing to commit crimes due to circumstantial pressure created by temporal, spatial and personal factors, is it not society’s duty to make them aware of their wrongdoing and help them to learn how to develop their higher propensities and strengthen their minds? And is it not also the duty of society to ensure that this awakening is a corrective rather than a penal process? Of course it is necessary to retain tough penal measures as a part of the corrective system. Moreover, if punishment has an important place in correcting behaviour, people will, out of fear of being punished, avoid drifting along according to the inclinations of their lower propensities. As a result of this environmental pressure, dishonest people will be compelled to live an honest life and society will be greatly benefited. People who have succumbed to the influence of their base propensities will with society’s sanction get the opportunity to become good. And those who are aware of the influence of their own base propensities will also feel encouraged to keep striving to become internally civilized – to become civilized people in a civilized society.

Crime and Politics

Calumny, jealousy, factionalism, indolence, grandiloquence, etc., are all social defects which, given a congenial environment, turn people into great criminals. These human defects are glaringly apparent in the modern world; the reason for this is the proclivity to indulge in politics. Politics today is concerned solely with satisfying the desire for power; all connection with selfless service has been lost. Unless the desire for power loosens its grip on the human mind, the unhealthy proclivity for politics will not be eliminated from modern society.

Seeing the way in which political involvement gradually transforms people into habitual criminals, benevolent people can no longer afford to stand by and watch. All good people should now work together to formulate a comprehensive, well-thought-out plan for the all-round development of society. If the entire human race turns into habitual criminals, if people are no longer ready to listen with tolerance to the opinions of others, or if they sell their treasures of higher intellect to gain power and prestige, the age-old struggle to build human civilization, and all efforts to discover the value of human existence, will go in vain.

Virtue and Vice

In most countries crime is defined with reference to a sense of pápa [vice] and puńya [virtue]. These have their roots in the religions of individual countries. For example, English people customarily believe that suicide is one of the gravest sins. According to the customary belief of Indians, suicide is considered to be a sin, but it is not a grave sin. And the Japanese do not consider suicide to be a sin at all. That is why the penal codes of these three countries are different. In Japan neither suicide nor attempted suicide constitutes a crime, and thus neither is a punishable offence. In India today the attempt to commit suicide is a crime, but suicide itself is not, hence only the attempt to commit suicide is a punishable offence. And in England the attempt to commit suicide and actual suicide are both crimes, hence both are considered to be punishable offences.⁽³⁾ So those who rend the air arguing about virtue and vice are not usually listened to outside their own countries.

Ideas about virtue and vice are based on one or both of the following factors: different religious beliefs, and traditional or contemporary social beliefs created by factors other than religion.

These ideas change not only according to place, but also according to time and person. In ancient India, for example, people used to burn defenceless widows to death without a twinge of conscience. The thought that this might be a sinful or unlawful act never entered their minds. Indians of that time believed that those who opposed sati were being antisocial, unpatriotic and sinful. It would not be correct for us to feel hatred or disdain towards those ancient people, living as we do in a different era. Perhaps those who burnt Joan of Arc to death did not commit a crime according to the concept of virtue and vice prevalent at the time.

Different concepts of virtue and vice may also coexist in one country. For example, for a Shákta [devotee of Shakti] eating meat is not a sin, but for a Vaeśńava [Vaishnavite, devotee of Viśńu] even to see an animal being slaughtered is a sin; he or she cannot even think of eating meat.

Since the concept of virtue and vice is completely relative, it is meaningless to loudly support or oppose the views of a particular community or the laws of a particular country as if they were the absolute truth. Today, therefore, everyone should develop a magnanimous outlook in such matters; otherwise their extreme intolerance will, in the name of spreading religion or of protecting virtue, result, as it did in the Middle Ages, in the entire world being bathed in human blood.

No matter what type of government a country has, it is not desirable for the state to blindly follow particular scriptural injunctions relating to virtue and vice. In this era of popular awakening, it will be impossible for the state to maintain its existence if it commits such an error.

Virtue and vice are psychic expressions which are defined by changes in time, place and person; a type of mental aberration that one person in one place and at one time calls a sin is considered a virtue by another person in another place at another time. Under these circumstances, what should the basis of legal codes be? If legal codes are based on the different concepts of virtue and vice professed by different groups of people, a question will arise: “If two litigants, a plaintiff and a defendant, belonging to two different communities, appear in court, on which community’s legal code will the judicial process be based?” We can therefore see that crime cannot be defined by legal codes developed according to the concepts of virtue and vice followed by different groups of people.

Society will have to define what constitutes a crime and what does not in accordance with a moral standard. I define immorality as that which, in order to further the personal interest of an individual or group, aims to exploit another individual or group or the rest of society, or aims to deprive them of the right to self-preservation. Behaviour based on such immoral intentions is a crime.

If the concept of virtue and vice of a particular person or a particular time is taken as absolute, the opportunity to introduce corrective measures into the law will be severely limited and restricted, and this will severely retard the dynamism of that society, leading to chaos and collapse. This is what happened to the ancient Egyptian, Roman, Greek and pre-Buddhist Vedic societies. If there had been no scope for reforming the Indian legal system in this way, sati would still be practised today. This is because, according to ancient beliefs, cremation by sati was considered to be a virtuous act. Every rational person will therefore support giving scope to alterations and additions to legal codes.

In India, too, as soon as the social codes of the Vedic Age lost their flexibility due to the intransigence of Aryan vested interests, the Buddhist revolution took place. This significantly raised the consciousness of the people. In a later period, people of all religious affiliations – Buddhist, Jain, etc. – automatically accepted the idea that changes in the social code were desirable, that the concept of virtue and vice would inevitably change according to the needs of the age. Thus we see one kind of social system in the age of the Paráshara Saḿhitá, another in the age of the Rámáyańa, yet another in the age of the Mahábhárata, and still another in the age of the Manu Saḿhitá.⁽⁴⁾

Those who think that they can arbitrarily impose their judicial system or legal codes on people with the help of the power of the state, regardless of differences in time, place or person, are mistaken. The principles underlying the legal codes will have to be based on people’s social needs and not on the whims of an individual or group or the biases inherent in a particular concept of virtue and vice.

Society is a dynamic entity. It has to progress by endlessly struggling to break through ever-changing barriers. It has to equip itself in different ways to respond to changing conditions and new challenges. Society cannot afford to forget that the type of struggles it had to go through in the past will not be the same as the struggles it has to go through in the present, and that the struggles of today will not be the same as those of the future. Thus, as the environment changes, newer and newer codes of justice will have to be formulated on the basis of the moral code. The duty of those who frame legal codes is to fully recognize the essential characteristics of life and not violate the interests of individuals, groups or society as a whole. Otherwise the codes will be seen as unnatural and will not be accepted, which means that the state will have difficulty in implementing them effectively. (For example, during the British rule of India, the Sarda Act⁽⁵⁾ was not properly enforced due to a lack of education.) If a large section of the society is confronted with the possibility of being considered criminals in the eyes of the law, they will engage in deceitful conduct and other antisocial acts to avoid punishment. Thus the standard of morality will decline considerably. Therefore, if such codes are ever formulated, the state will lose its credibility and become the laughing-stock of society.

If somebody commits a violent crime, generally he or she will not receive any sympathy from the public. But if somebody chooses the path of violence to protest against practices which are abhorred by his or her fellow citizens, he or she will, in all likelihood, enjoy popular support.

The Judicial System

Although the system of capital punishment is unacceptable from the moral viewpoint, people do sometimes resort to this custom under specific circumstances. It does not contain any corrective measures and has no purpose other than to instil fear into people’s minds. Therefore the practice of taking a life for a life out of anger cannot be accepted in a civilized social system. Even if somebody is a genuine criminal who has no public support (no matter how notorious a criminal he or she may be, he or she is still a human being), should not he or she have an opportunity to become an asset to society? It is possible that although the person fails to evoke our sympathy because of the seriousness of his or her crimes, he or she may sincerely repent and be prepared to dedicate the rest of his or her life to the genuine service of society. Furthermore, if those who commit crimes are afflicted with a mental disease, is it not our duty to cure them of their disease instead of sentencing them to death?

Most civilized countries follow the line of reasoning that criminals who commit a crime on the spur of the moment are to be treated with comparative leniency. Other types of criminals as well can hope, on the same line of reasoning, to receive comparatively good treatment. Should decapitation be prescribed as the cure for a headache?

Some people argue that if criminals who commit serious offences are not given capital punishment, they will have to be sentenced to life imprisonment, because few countries have the facilities to cure them of their mental disease. But such a decision may cause overcrowding in the prisons. Is it possible for the state to provide so many people with food and clothing? Rather I would ask, “Why should such criminals live off the state at all?” The state will have to see to it that it receives suitable work from them. And after the completion of their sentence, the state should sincerely make arrangements to find them employment so that they will be able to earn an honest living.

A prison should therefore be just like a reform school, and the superintendent should be a teacher who is trained in psychology and who has genuine love for society. Hence a jailer should possess no less ability than a judge. To appoint a person to this post on the basis of a degree he or she has earned from some university or according to his or her capacity to please a superior, would be most detrimental. If those charged with antisocial activities and sentenced to prison experience daily injustices, feel a lack of open-heartedness from others, or receive less food and poorer-quality food than that sanctioned by the government, their criminal tendencies and maliciousness will develop and manifest all the more.

In this context yet another thought comes to mind. If a criminal is imprisoned for a serious crime, what will happen to his or her dependents? They will still have to somehow go on living. The boys of the family may join a gang of pickpockets and the girls may take to prostitution. In other words, by trying to punish a single criminal, ten more criminals may be created. Thus when sentencing a criminal, one will have to take into consideration the financial condition of the members of his or her family, and the state will have to provide them with the means to earn an honest living.

If the judicial system is to be totally accessible to the public, ordinary people will have to be able to afford it. Therefore one of the most important things to do is to increase the number of judges.

It is true more or less everywhere in the world that judges, due to pressure of work, are often compelled to adjourn cases. I do not completely oppose the practice of adjournment, because at times an adjournment can be advantageous to innocent people. But it can be of equal value to criminals who get the opportunity to tamper with evidence, to influence witnesses and to find false witnesses. This cannot be denied. Experienced judges know if and when it is necessary to adjourn a case in the interests of the public, but if the public interest is not served by this measure, no judge in all conscience should adjourn a case simply due to pressure of work. It is therefore essential to increase the number of judges.

Increasing the number of judges is not, however, an easy matter. It requires a thorough examination and careful selection of candidates. Relatively simple and ordinary cases can even be entrusted to responsible citizens. To deal with such cases it is not a bad idea to employ honorary magistrates. However, these honorary magistrates will also have to exhibit a highly-developed sense of responsibility at the time of discharging their duties. In countries where they are selected from among business people who have made a quick fortune or from among known sycophants, they will be mere liabilities to the people. I once heard a story about an ever-so-learned judge who delivered judgements for and against defendants according to the nostril his clerk used to inhale snuff. Needless to say, whoever passed sufficient money to the clerk would win the case. As members of a civilized society in the twentieth century, we would like to see such an occurrence as a story from the past, not as a feature of modern life.

The Need for a Spiritual Ideal

The proverb “Prevention is better than cure” may be applied to all aspects of life. It is undeniable that, when we see the variety and seriousness of crimes increasing with the so-called advancement of civilization, it becomes necessary for crime-prevention policies to be given greater importance than remedial action. Civilized people today should be more interested in preventing base criminal propensities from arising in human beings in the first place, than in taking corrective measures to cure criminals’ mental diseases.

“Good” or “bad”, “virtue” or “vice” from the worldly standpoint not withstanding, people act in order to attain happiness. We judge people’s actions as “good” and “bad”, “virtue” and “vice”, only after evaluating those actions in terms of a goal and steps to reach that goal.

It is true that the majority of people are not born dishonest. Although there are differences among people insofar as their goals and their efforts to reach their goals – differences caused by defects in their bodies’ various glands – I do not believe that this situation cannot be corrected through collective effort. If one’s goal is a pure and pervasive one, then the defects in the process of attaining the goal can never transform a person into a sub-human creature. And if these efforts are in harmony with people’s psychology, this will be extremely beneficial. As a result many people will harmonize the rhythm of their diverse ideas and ideologies and progress together, thereby gradually transforming the inherent individualism and disparity of social life into one symphonic chord, one unified rhythm, which will become the genuine prototype of a healthy human society.

This idea of oneness is fundamentally a spiritual idea. Individually and collectively human beings will have to accept the Supreme and the path to realize the Supreme as the highest truth, and this will have to be recognized as the highest goal of human life. As long as human beings do not do so, the human race will find it impossible to implement a sound, well-thought-out plan of action for social progress. No penal or social code, no matter how well-planned, can liberate society. Without a spiritual ideal, no social, economic, moral, cultural or political policy or programme can bring humanity to the path of peace. The sooner humanity understands this fundamental truth, the better.

Virtue and vice are both distortions of the mind. That which may be considered good in one particular temporal, spatial or personal environment may be considered bad in another. A country generally bases its penal code on the concept of virtue and vice which prevails in that country, and the concept of virtue and vice in turn is based on accepted religious doctrines. In my opinion virtue is that which helps to expand the mind, by whose assistance the universe increasingly becomes an integral part of oneself, and vice is that which makes the mind narrow and selfish. And the realm to which the mind of a person engaged in virtuous activities travels, is heaven, and the realm where the mind of a sinner races about in a wild frenzy, is hell.

I do not see any reason to discuss the ideas contained in the various religious scriptures.

A Universal Penal Code

Finally, it is my sincere belief that, except for those social problems which are caused by geographical factors, the solution to all complex social problems may be found by implementing a universal penal code, one which is applicable to all humanity. It is not desirable for different laws to bind different peoples, countries or communities. All human beings laugh when they are happy, cry when they are sad and mourn when they feel despair, and all need food, clothing and housing; so why should people be separated from each other by artificial distinctions?

The constitution of the world should be drafted by a global organization recognized by the people, otherwise the possibility exists that at any moment a minority in a country might be persecuted. Everyone knows that when a revolutionary is victorious in the political struggle of a country, he or she will be considered a patriot, and when a revolutionary is defeated, he or she will face death and be branded as a traitor despite his or her innocence. In nearly every country the law is based on the opinions of powerful people, and their autocratic style cannot be questioned. But is such a situation desirable? Does this not undermine civilization? That is why I contend that laws must be drafted by a global organization, and, further, that the supreme authority to judge or to try a person should be vested in that organization. If that global organization then refrains from interfering in the internal affairs of countries, powerless groups or individuals will be forced to lead the lives of virtual slaves, in spite of written assurances that they are free.⁽⁶⁾

Footnotes

(1) The ripus, or śad́aripus (six enemies), are underlying mental weaknesses which cause immense harm to people. They are: káma (physical desire); krodha (anger); lobha (avarice); mada (vanity); moha (blind attachment or infatuation); and mátsarya (jealousy). –Trans.

(2) In the Dáyabhága system the heirs’ right of inheritance is subject to the discretion of the father, who has the right to disinherit any of the heirs. –Trans.

(3) After the Suicide Act 1961 was passed by the British Parliament, it was no longer an offence to commit suicide under English law. –Trans.

(4) These books contain mainly stories and codes of conduct. (While they have all provided social and ethical guidance to Indian society in their respective periods, only the Rámáyańa and the Mahábhárata continue to be extremely popular today.) –Trans.

(5) The Sarda Act was intended to prevent the marriage of girls below the age of fourteen. –Trans.

(6) For further discussion on a global constitution, see “Requirements of an Ideal Constitution” in Volume 3. –Eds. [Footnote used in the Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 2, 1st edition, publication of this article.]

Chapter 11	Universal Humanism [a compilation]

The actual significance of the word sáhitya [loosely, “literature”] is inherent in the word itself. Sáhitya is defined as that whose characteristic is to move with (sahita = “with”) the trends of life. Sáhitya, literature, is not the invention of the superficial side of social life, nor is it the colourful spell of fantasy. Rather it is the portrait of real life, an external expression of the internal workings of the mind, a bold and powerful expression of the suppressed sighs of the human heart. In order to preserve the sanctity and prestige of its name, literature must maintain a rhythm that reflects the dynamic currents of society.

The word sáhitya can be interpreted in another way as well: sa + hita = hitena saha, “that which co-exists with hita [welfare]”. Where there is no inner spirit of welfare, we cannot use the term sáhitya. The creations or compositions of those who proclaim, “Art for art’s sake,” cannot be treated as sáhitya. Indeed, welfare which pertains to the mundane world is relative; its definition may also change according to changes in time, place and person. But the aspect of the term hita which leads human beings towards the absolute truth is one and the same for all ages and all countries.

In order to communicate with people at different stages of development who have different ideas, the same concept of welfare has to be expressed through different branches of knowledge. The grand, benevolent flow of ideas with the common people on one side and the state of supreme bliss on the other, is called literature; for in every particle, in every rhythmic expression of this benevolent thought process, the supreme bliss is lying dormant.

Thus literature is that which moves together with society and leads society towards true fulfilment and welfare by providing the inspiration to serve. The statement “Art for art’s sake” is not acceptable; rather we should say, “Art for service and blessedness.”

In every expression, in every stratum of this universe, however crude or subtle, only one recurring theme occurs, and that theme is the attainment of bliss. In the artistic movement towards welfare both the attainment and the bestowal of happiness find simultaneous expression. When sáhityikas⁽¹⁾ dedicate themselves to the service or sádhaná [sustained practice] of literature, they have to let their creative genius flow in this stream; they have to purify all that is turbid, all that is impure in their individual life in the holy waters of their universal outlook and then convey it sweetly and gracefully to the heart of humanity. In this lies the fulfilment of their service, the consummation of their sádhaná.

If the sweet, benevolent sentiment of individual life fails to inspire collective life, we cannot consider their creations as art. Those who are unwilling or unable to consider sáhitya as a form of service and sádhaná, should not try to lay the blame on the collective mind, hiding their own impure thoughts behind their grandiloquence and bluster. They should not claim that they are simply painting a picture of society, that this portrayal is their sole responsibility, and that society will find its own direction under the pressure of circumstances. A discriminating judgement will term such so-called sáhityikas as literature-dealers or pot-boilers, instead of creators of literature, for they are not moving along the path of benevolence. Their business outlook merely views society as the buyers of their books.

The Responsibility of a Sáhityika

The aim of all artistic creation is to impart joy and bliss. Those who serve the people by bestowing this bliss cannot in their daily lives remain aloof from commonplace events, from pleasure and pain, smiles and tears. Literature must remain inseparably associated with the men and women of the soil of this earth, and the sáhityika is also one of them.

People seek deliverance from the whirlpools of darkness; they aspire to illuminate their lives and minds with light all the time. All their actions, all their feelings, express an inherent tendency to move forward; therefore, if at all they are to be offered something in this regard, the creator of art cannot remain idle or inert.

On their journey through life human beings may sometimes stop short in fear or apprehension. Sometimes their knees give way and they sit down fatigued and frustrated. At such times the responsibility of the gifted sáhityika becomes all the more significant. And when sáhityikas sing songs inspiring them to move forward, they have to be very cautious in one respect: after every artistic creation they must look back carefully to determine whether those for whom they sang their marching songs are capable of moving forward with them, whether their thought-waves are touching the core of the people’s hearts, whether their service is really doing them good. In the literary world the crown of glory goes only to those who are constantly aware of their responsibilities as sáhityikas.

Real sáhityikas are not only beacons of the present, they are also minstrels of the past and messengers of the future. They are capable of providing proper leadership for the future only after they have grasped the relationship, the flow, between the past and the present. The past, present and future must be beautifully interwoven in their compositions; only dreaming of a bright future will not suffice. One must remember that all the potentialities of the future lie embedded in the womb of the present in seed form, just as the blossoms of the present bloomed from the seeds planted in the past. So artists should not only use their creative talent to portray the present flawlessly, but should also continue to explore the possibilities of the future with a benevolent mind.

All the possibilities that sáhityikas periodically present to the world, they should present as the healthy outcome of the present. The natural consequences of these possibilities should also be explained perfectly and flawlessly. The relation between the present and the future must be properly portrayed by presenting the causes and effects at every stage. The natural result of kárańa [cause] is known as kárya [effect] at a particular time or place or on a particular person. We should never lose sight of this, even for a moment, because it is the link between these two, cause and effect, that brings people into intimate and sympathetic contact with the purpose of the writer. In the absence of this sympathetic affinity and this dynamic unity, the readers will not be able to identify themselves with any literary compositions. Whatever we may call the writers of such compositions which have no relationship with the collective psychology, we certainly cannot call them sáhityikas. At best we may call their writings compositions, but certainly not sáhitya.

Epochal Literature and Coastal Literature

As already mentioned, marching together with the thought of benevolence is termed sáhitya. Literature which is based on a feeling of benevolence, and which without severing its relationship with us completely, is marching so far ahead of our time that we are not really in step with it, is called tat́astha sáhitya,⁽²⁾ rather than yuga sáhitya [“epochal literature”]. It is close to us, but always slightly eludes our grasp. As this category of literature is ahead of its time, it lasts longer than epochal literature, but it is less significant, I feel, in fulfilling the needs of a particular era.

The outstanding characteristic of epochal literature is that it expresses in clear terms the demands of a particular era; it moves hand in hand with the collective psychology. It conveys in the language of the time every large or small, important or unimportant matter of the human mind afflicted with the problems of that age. If this epochal literature, which is created expressly to fulfil the needs of the era, becomes more dynamic than the people of the age despite its sincere and benevolent intent, it loses its characteristic of moving together with them; it loses all its value. Such literature cannot earn its reputation like coastal literature, and thus all the dreams of the sáhityika end in frustration and failure.

In order to fulfil the demands of the time, good literature must move in unison with society, maintaining control over its own speed. Sáhityikas may move a step or two ahead, for they are the guides of society; but they should not move too far forward, and of course, moving backwards is out of the question.

Movement is the characteristic of life, and so everything must move. Those who have lost their inherent dynamism are indeed dead. The right to preserve, build and rebuild society is the duty only of those who are moving, not of those who are motionless, who are dead. Sáhityikas cannot fling humanity into the stagnancy of death, for in that case they would show themselves to be lacking in benevolence. So, moving together with the people, they will continue to sing their marching songs; they will go on filling the human mind with the sweet nectar of eternal life.

The Sáhityika as the Seer of Truth

The majority of what is termed sáhitya in the world today is mere composition, not literature. Sáhityikas must prove their sense of responsibility with every stroke of their pens. Command over language and ideas is not sufficient. Something more is needed: the power to delve deeply into any matter, the earnest effort to identify with the minds of all, that is, to use one’s mind to assimilate the minds of others into one’s own mind. To put it simply, sáhityikas must be seers of truth. Those who possess a little superficial knowledge of life and merely juggle language cannot produce ideal literature. In the language of the Vedas, a sáhityika is called a kavi [seer]. Only seers of truth can create true literature, for the task of a sáhityika is to point towards the future, and the ability to look into the future belongs to the seers of truth alone.

Those who think that their only responsibility is to portray the past, present or future are not sáhityikas, for mastery over the three dimensions of time is determined by the power to [subjectively] link them together. Those who cannot forge this internal link can never create the proper relation between the past and the present or between the present and the future; none of their portrayals of the past, present or future are capable of finding their complete expression. Therefore, as I have said above, it is better to call these writers mere authors instead of sáhityikas. It is such authors who indulge in utterances such as “Art for art’s sake.” A little examination will reveal the harmful effect of this idea on human society.

The world is the thought projection of the Cosmic Mind, so there is no question of even a momentary pause in the eternal flow. Whether people desire it or not, society has to move forward through ceaseless environmental changes. Literature is the psychic expression of human dynamism. Literature has been created due to the needs of this dynamic humanity, so it cannot be static, nor will it ever become static in the future. The thought-provoking factors that underlie the social picture created by the brush of the artist, that underlie the current of thoughts expressed by the sáhityika, change, and so the artist and the sáhityika should always work keeping a vigilant eye on those changing factors. Although the momentum of society depends on a variety of factors, it is largely determined by psychic and cultural transformations.

Psychological Transformation

Changes in mental outlook are a natural phenomenon, yet such changes do not always take place in the same way; in the past they were different from those of today, and in the future they will be even more different. Human beings must throw themselves into the task of solving the mundane problems that arise as they meet their various needs in the real world, and the solutions must be appropriate to the mundane problems. In this endeavour the speed of the mind is sometimes slow and sometimes fast. The psychic speed of human beings about ten thousand years ago was certainly much greater than it was about one million years ago, when the first human beings had just appeared on this earth. The primitive mind used to move at quite a slow speed; for generations together primitive people used to spend their lives in the same environment, solving the same types of problems. For tens of thousands of years they subsisted on shrubs and weeds and used stone tools and weapons; such was the standard of their civilization. After that came the period of eating animal flesh, and it took those ancient people about two or three hundred thousand years to accustom themselves to this new habit. After the discovery of fire they did not even learn how to use salt on roasted meat very easily.

But today, when we look back and examine the period from ten thousand years ago to five thousand years ago, we find that the speed of human progress had greatly accelerated. At intervals of every two or three hundred years some new discoveries were made. As a result of frequently facing new challenges, the human mind underwent revolutionary changes: animal husbandry gave way to agriculture and scattered communities evolved into more compact societies. Yet in the period from ten thousand years ago to five thousand years ago, nowhere do we find a well-knit social order, although we do find comprehensive efforts to build a society. The Vedas present a vague picture of the varied advances made during that five thousand year period which, judged by modern standards, cannot be called rapid progress. The Vedas are the literary reflection of the psychic characteristics of that time. In that age, when rays of light gradually began to pierce the darkness, people started to realize the need to move together more rapidly. In some of the mantras and hymns of the Vedas, particularly in the Saḿgacchadhvaḿ mantra,⁽³⁾ the seed of this collective dynamism was sown.

The old world passed away, yielding to the new, and the speed of the social momentum greatly increased. Even before the historically famous Buddhist Age, well-constructed and dynamic societies had evolved in China and Egypt, yet the dynamism of these societies cannot be regarded as the second stage of progress. The reason for this is that in spite of the fact that they came after the Vedic civilization, they were actually similar to it [in terms of progress], although they had intrinsically distinctive characteristics.

The society of the Buddhist Age speeded up the progressive rhythm of the Vedic Age. The Vedic social system got caught up in various clashes and counter-clashes and finally reached a state of stagnancy and avoidance of clash. The Buddhist Age imparted new dynamism to the feeble, faltering steps of the Vedic Age by awakening new vigour and adding to the impetus for advancement, thus accelerating the momentum for human progress far more even than during the Vedic Age. That is why, in the literature of this era, we find a more constructive, vibrant social picture than in the literature of the Vedic Age.

The greater the clashes in human life, the faster the development of the human mind under circumstantial pressures. As a result of the increasing complexity of life and the tremendous number of problems during the last two centuries, the progress of society has gained unusual momentum. Whether one likes this progress or not, it has developed naturally and will continue to do so. The momentum created by the last two world wars has been forcibly dragging society forward, as though human beings have become obsessed with conquering time. Due to its tremendous speed, the advancement of humanity has been losing its balance: while achieving success on the one hand, it has faced evident failure on the other. The resulting bankruptcy and failure is glaringly apparent in every line of post-war literature – there is not a spark of bold vision anywhere. Making good capital out of this failure, sáhityikas busy themselves earning money. It is as if humanity is bent upon negating all the traditions of the four-centuries-old Mauṋgalkávya, the time-honoured Rámáyańa and Mahábhárata, revered poets such as Shakespeare, Milton, Vidyapati and Chandidasa, and those works which unite both the educated and the uneducated such as the Rámacarita Mánasa. Although contemporary society is moving with increasing speed, it is incapable of preserving its balance. Sáhityikas have been giving expression to this loss of equilibrium with their pens, thus conveying to their readers that they, too, are part of the unbalanced flow.

Cultural Evolution

Cultural evolution has also brought about, and is continuing to bring about, a considerable change in society. This change is taking place more or less uniformly in almost all the countries of the world. Cultural evolution cannot be considered bad, for although defects in some societies are infecting others, nevertheless interaction does have an immensely positive aspect: the human race, knowingly or unknowingly, is gradually building a new human culture through mutual cooperation.

The different expressions of life are termed “culture”. The greater the mutual contact and exchange of ideas between peoples of different countries, the closer they come to one another in the cultural sphere. The old, worn-out walls of literary tradition are in many places crumbling, and in other places have been smashed to smithereens. As a result a new kind of international literature is evolving, and this is certainly an auspicious augury for the future. But even the auspicious developments which result from natural clashes and counter-clashes may eventually end in frustration and failure due to humanity’s folly. In the absence of honesty, simplicity, spiritedness and genuine human love, internationalism may remain solely the caprice of the sáhityika. The harshness of reality may not be tolerable to the sáhityika, and therefore we cannot surrender human destiny to his or her whims. Sáhityikas must not become intoxicated with the colourful spell woven by their imaginations, nor should they drive humanity to despair by dwelling on the failures of the practical world and singing songs of frustration.

Sáhityikas must be closely attuned to the changes in both psychic trends and cultural evolution which remould the social structure. And not only sáhityikas, but all creators of art, should express a universalistic outlook through their pens or brushes. If artists or sáhityikas do not do that, we must conclude that their artistic talents have degenerated. In fact, their contributions will then be nothing but rubbish which may be fit for fertilizer, but if dumped nearby becomes hazardous to public health.

Artistic endeavour may be justified only when it results in the all-round development of society. If the sáhityika’s inspiration propels the social movement in a particular direction denying all other aspects of society, we cannot call it literature, because there is no real sentiment of benevolence behind his or her creation. A flow of ideas that is not complete in itself is never capable of leading practical life towards fulfilment and perfection.

Struggle Against Obstacles

Before wielding their brushes or pens, real artists or sáhityikas should understand clearly which way society is moving and why it is moving in that direction, what are the fundamental causes of its inherent weakness, and from which doctrines the depraved propensities which are infecting the society emanate. And merely understanding will not suffice; artists may have to resist the surging current of destruction single-handedly.

Yadi tor dák shuńe keu ná áse;
Tave eklá cala re...

[If none to my call pays heed,
Then alone must I proceed.]

Keeping this refrain in mind, they must continue in their relentless effort to fight against the seemingly indomitable might of hundreds and thousands of obstacles which are deeply rooted in age-old superstitions that are firmly entrenched in petty selfishness. Their pens may break into pieces, their brushes may be compelled to draw only lines of water on the canvas, and their histrionic flows may end in mute protests, yet their efforts must continue unceasingly. Each of their petty defeats shall be strung together as pearls in the garland of victory.

When for age after age society spins in the murky eddies of evil and vice, when individual and collective knavery masquerades as intelligence, when hypocrisy, bribery and fraud are the yardsticks for measuring the ability to lead – it is then that the genuine followers of Bháratii [the goddess of learning] must struggle on in spite of constant humiliation. Only taunts and insults will be their fate. Those who are afraid of these insults are incapable of offering anything really lasting to humanity. How can people who lack moral strength, under whose feet the soil is not hard and strong, invite anyone in to a cool, refreshing shelter and impart happiness to them? It may be possible to drag oneself through life by sucking the blood of others like social parasites, but this will not bring fulfilment to either sáhityikas or their readers.

The artist or sáhityika who assumes the responsibility of leading humanity along the path to light from the caverns of darkness will have to heed the road signs on that path. It is not possible to guide others with mere cheap, superficial knowledge, like a half-baked pandit who reads a half-a-dozen books and then spouts a few mouthfuls of grandiloquence, and who has obtained a doctorate by plagiarizing others’ works. Rather it is necessary for the sáhityika or artist to have a keen and vigorous insight, without which all their endeavours will prove fruitless. Merely juggling words or depicting defects in society will not satisfy the hunger of the human mind – and such creations of art are indeed valueless for social progress as well. One must know the path, and one must also know how to move on it. If those who have not comprehended what the form of society will be, allow the trends of the past that have shaped the present to proceed unchecked, they can never lead society to the path of perfection. They will in fact thrust society into darkness in the name of social reform; they will encourage license in the name of freedom. Instead of modelling a woman after the ideal of a goddess, they will mould the image of the goddess after the ideal of a harlot.

Sáhityikas are epoch-makers and so they are the sages and seers of society. They cannot afford to forget their dignified calling even for a moment. They are the messengers of the mute masses, the guardians of society. Their slightest mistake may result in catastrophe, and even a small amount of caution may open up many new possibilities. So a person whose thought and expression is not restrained had better not meddle with the practice of art.

Intimate Relation with the People

I have just stated that it is through finding a balance between psychic and cultural trends that literature proves its worth. Intellectual trends and cultural evolution cannot exist in isolation from the individual or humanity as a whole, for both intellectual and cultural developments concern humanity. And humanity does not mean merely a few favoured persons in the upper stratum of society, like the special delicacies placed on top of the pile of rice offerings to the gods in the temples. Rather humanity means those people who, like the pile of rice, have borne the weight of those delicacies on their heads. Actually, viewed from a proper sociological perspective, those special delicacies should not represent any particular elite person or people at the peak of society, rather they should be regarded as the combined expression of the collective mind.

Those artists who guide that collective expression towards more and more subtle forms will have to maintain an intimate relation with the psychological and cultural structures of the people, with the práńa dharma⁽⁴⁾ [innate characteristics] of their existence. They must not disregard or neglect them even for a moment. If artists remain preoccupied with floating like balloons in the sky and forget the ordinary people, all their creations will end up in smoke after merely flashing for a moment before the eyes. Their writings will not make any lasting impression on the pages of time.

Building the Road to the Future

When changes in society are accelerated due to intellectual or cultural factors, the creations that take birth in the aftermath of a particular situation or in the perspective of a particular tendency are certainly fit to be called literature; but this sort of literature later loses its practical value due to the rapid changes taking place in society. However, those who think that this sort of epochal literature will eventually become valueless are also wrong, for it will not only be recorded in the pages of history, but it will also hold a special value for the sáhityikas of the future. From it they will get an idea of the social trends of particular periods.

Those who scorn epochal literature should know that the sweetness of coastal literature is inherent in the many forms, in the richness of thought, of this epochal literature. The endeavour of the yuga shilpii [artist of the era] alone can resist a powerful degeneration or a great catastrophe. There the creators of coastal literature are only mute spectators. They will continue to interpret morality, but their ability to awaken the spirit of dynamic heroism is considerably limited. The creator of epochal literature goes on constructing the road by excavating earth and shattering rocks and stones, while the coastal sáhityika, perched on the summit of a mountain, makes sketches of that scene and at intervals explains the science of road building.

As society’s dynamism increases, the span of time in which epochal literature remains effective decreases. Due to the accelerating speed it becomes exhausted within a very short time. But in this there is no cause for regret, because the very task of building the road continues, and its relationship with coastal literature also remains intact.

Epochal literature is mainly concerned with time, place and person. So if there is the slightest increase in the effort to triumph over any of these three relative factors for whatever reason, the speed of society as well as that of epochal literature will be accelerated. Although coastal literature maintains these relative factors within its scope, it does not confine itself to their rhythmic movement. That is why the momentum of coastal literature is extremely vague – verging on motionlessness – and thus we call it tat́astha [“coastal”].

The absolute truth is beyond the scope of time, space or person and is also beyond expression. It is therefore not possible to create any literature at all around it. But the golden line with which the absolute truth has united the unit mind, originating from the relative factors of time, space and person, with its eternal soul – that much of the line, at least, which we can to some extent express with the language of our heart – is what is called tat́astha sáhitya [“coastal literature”]. The line which is neither sea nor shore but is touching both is tat́a [the coast]. That which maintains the relation between the two, between the temporal and the eternal, by standing on this coastline, is called tat́astha.

Popular Language

If we call the creator of epochal literature a sage, then we shall call the creator of coastal literature a seer. The sage goes on establishing coordination and adjustment, stage by stage, among time, space and person, and the seer goes on establishing contact between time, space and person and the Entity which transcends all of them. Epochal literature deals with the minute details of the common people’s daily lives – their hopes and aspirations, sorrows and joys – using language that can easily touch their hearts. That is to say, the creator of epochal literature must give great importance to the people’s popular language. But if the people’s language is not given much importance in coastal literature, it will not cause much inconvenience. If Tulsidas in his Rámacaritamánasa and Chandidasa in his Padávalii had used the then scholarly Sanskrit language, could they have wielded so much influence over the people? Similarly, the popular language of any part of the world as a vehicle of epochal literature does not carry very much weight in another part of the world, or with people speaking another language. There are quite a number of well-written English and Bengali books about the history and culture of Rajasthan, but how much can the people of Rajasthan, speaking Rajasthani, be benefited by them? Perhaps the poetic genius of Michael Madhusudhan Dutt could have produced remarkable English compositions, but the marked extent to which his genius found expression in the Bengali language – the way a wonderful epochal literature came into being – perhaps could not have been achieved in the English language. It is not that epochal literature has to be written in the popular language alone, but sáhityikas should write their compositions in their own mother tongues as far as possible.

I have already said that the need for popular language, however, is not so very strong or rigid in respect of coastal literature. I see no reason to be unduly concerned if books about any subtle theory or principle, or any complicated science, are written only in the principal languages of the world, for if they were written in the popular local language, there would be only a few who could study them. But then I would say that those sáhityikas who think that their works will be less in demand if produced in their local languages, and thus instead create literature in the more widely-known languages, cannot be called true sáhityikas, for they lack the spirit of moving together with all. Rather, it will be more appropriate to call such writers pot-boilers or literary businesspersons.

The Symbol of the People’s Hopes

It is through clashes that power finds expression. In a life which is averse to fight, where there is little urge to fight, the expression of life also remains vague and indistinct. Human intellect is awakened through natural, social, psychic and economic struggles. Those who desire to awaken their intellects should not be afraid of struggle.

The social, economic and psychological principles of human life change from age to age. Armed with the strength of past experiences, human beings seek to create their future wealth. This is an undeniable fact. Those who keep their eye on the future and try to create something by cutting off the past will utterly fail, for literature or art can only justify its existence by maintaining a relation between the past and the future. Art or literature which appears suddenly and haphazardly, only to vanish just as haphazardly, leaves everything in turmoil. Due to changes in the wake of its sudden appearance and disappearance, society no doubt achieves some gains and sustains some losses, but we cannot accept these changes as the fulfilment of any constructive endeavour.

Sáhityikas are seers of the truth, so naturally we should not expect anything haphazard from them. In their contributions we want to see keenness of intellect, wise discrimination and the sweet touch of a sympathetic heart.

Where society is caught in a whirlpool of superstitions and prejudices, where it has lost its vision in the darkness of ignorance, there sáhityikas and artists will have to come forward, even if they have to take risks to do so. They will have to show the path to others with a flaming torch in their hand. It is not proper for them to remain inert and inactive, out of fear of stumbling. It is only by waging a ceaseless struggle against all opposing forces that they will lead humanity forward. For their offence of outspokenness, the vested interests of the different sections of society may threaten them menacingly, but they must remain undaunted by this. As the symbol of the hopes and desires of millions of people, they will have to hold aloft the possibilities of the next era, after transcending the limits of this one. This undertaking involves every bit as much responsibility as it does hard work. Artists will have to take into account the natural means of expression of human aspirations, and portray the ideal in a manner which is easily understandable to the masses.

The Language of the Era

Sáhityikas who are born in a particular age or environment cannot completely transcend the influence of that environment and create literature based on an altogether different idea or different language. Human taste is advancing through changes; not only is language and its style of expression changing, but language is gradually losing its simplicity due to more complicated modes of thought. I am not referring here to sáhityikas’ unnecessary endeavours to create linguistic intricacies and complexities. Whether they like it or not, due to unavoidable necessity, they are gradually being compelled to use more and more complex language. This state of affairs existed in the past, exists in the present and will continue to exist in the future. So taking into account the peculiarities of the underlying ideas and language, the insightful critic can very easily detect the lapses of the sáhityika. The language of one era will become archaic or awkward in the next: no epic verse can be composed today with the simplicity of Valmiki’s language. The use of denominative verbs as in the era of Michael Madhusudhan Dutt would only provoke laughter in this age. The ideas and language of Bharatchandra’s Vidyásundara received great approbation from the cultured people of that time and used to be recited with great appreciation in the royal court. The poet, too, was honoured with a royal title in recognition of his work. But today the ideas and language of this work are considered obscene and it is deemed unfit to be read by society.

Even words that the sáhityikas of today unhesitatingly use will perhaps one day be considered indecent by civilized society. But sáhityikas are absolutely helpless in this regard, for it is impossible for them to completely shake off the thought and language of their era. In spite of the expansion of their vision over all the eras, their physical existence remains embedded in a particular age. How is it possible for them to cut themselves off from the influence of their era, whose light and air, soil and water, fruits and flowers, have saturated their whole lives? Chandidasa in his Shriikrśńa-Kiirtana⁽⁵⁾ portrayed Radha far more crudely than Gyanadas and Govindadas did in their literary creations, and yet in simplicity and sincerity Shriikrśńa-Kiirtana is impeccable, regardless of how it is evaluated in the royal courts of literature.

The Taste of the Age

An era advances through the physical, psychic and causal strata. The hands may not move as fast as the feet, and the intellect may move a thousand times faster than the hands; therefore at any one time, a different era may be unfolding, and sometimes is unfolding, in [each of] the different strata of life of an individual or a society. Before we start passing judgements we should remember this fact, otherwise we may do injustice to sáhityikas and artists.

It is necessary to have different kinds of yardsticks for measuring different things. Those who are impressed by the unique artistic expression of the Konark temple sneer in contempt at its obscene sculptures. From the viewpoint of the modern era they are perhaps correct, for their minds are conditioned by modern taste. But we must not forget that those sculptors possessed within themselves the expressions of [other eras], that their artistic creations are an eloquent testimony to those expressions.

With the dawn of civilization humanity’s artistic mind was developed, and people expressed themselves through the media of arts and crafts. Primitive humans depicted in stone the images of the birds or animals they hunted as well as the images of their own internal conflicts. Small groups of people constantly thought of reinforcing and increasing the strength and number of their respective groups in order to gain victory in their battles, and thus in the art of those days phallus worship appears as the symbol of numerical maximization. This phallus worship, which was prevalent among the primitive non-Aryans, was given a new philosophical interpretation by the refined Aryans and transformed into Shiva-liuṋga.⁽⁶⁾ In spite of the subtlety or refinement behind this philosophical interpretation, the more developed people lacked the simplicity of taste of the primitive people. However, the expressions of both groups have become offensive to the taste of the people of today. Of course, these are the results of epochal changes.

If two eras are expressed simultaneously through artists’ hands and feet, thoughts and visions, their contributions may be enriched with all the sweetness of their hearts and minds, but there will be no harmonious balance between their creative expressions and their inner sensibilities. The thought-waves of the sculptors of the Konark temple could not flow towards subtlety at the same speed as their chisels and hammers.

The Message of Human Fulfilment

The genius that evolves from age to age through the process of introversion and extroversion of the intellect does indeed bear the message of the fulfilment of human potentiality. At every step the warm breath of its labour and fatigue finds its true expression; no one has the power to withstand this force. Those who want to transform their psychic wealth into inertness and inaction may perhaps obstruct this force of expression for a while, but the inner momentum of its dynamism will not be in the least impaired. The very next moment it will break through all the dams created by the obstacles with a force increased a thousand-fold. That is why I say that it is through the fight against opposing forces that the intellect is awakened.

It is in fact this consciousness, so beset with obstacles, which has laid the foundations of human civilization, infused literary judgement with a refined outlook and flavoured life with the nectar of Cosmic bliss. In every era literature has brought about different steps, different phases, of evolution of svabháva [humanity’s true nature] through the unique union of shreya [blissful spiritual union] and preya [sensory pleasure]. That which is antithetical to human nature, no matter how assiduously one might attempt to paint it with the colours of the imagination, can never be embraced by humanity. If we liken coastal literature to a party dress and epochal literature to everyday wear, we will have to call this kind of impractical fantasy a dress of silvery tinsel. It has no use in real life, nor has it any relation to human nature.

In order to give full expression to the continuous flow of humanity’s true nature, insight, power of expression and boldness – all three – are necessary. The creation of ideal literature is not possible for those who are always ready to yield to the pressures of the crowd. To manifest that svabháva, one will have to give a clarion call to the common people to struggle against the forces that want to suck dry their vitality. Those voices which lack such bold heroism will simply whine and whimper doggerels in the name of poetry – they will try to save themselves from the responsibility of reality by counting the stars in the heavens.

All are moving forward; no one has come to sit idle, and so everyone will have to march ahead in harmony with all, maintaining a fine adjustment with the flow of life. Whether in thought or in action, in all spheres of life the fundamental characteristic of humanity is to move ahead. Where there is inertness, there is darkness. So one must not give the least indulgence to inertness in the spheres of thought and language. Inertness is just another name for blind attachment to the past. For the sake of benevolence, for the sake of bliss, this attachment has to be cast aside.

If an idea is likened to iron, then the dynamism of language shall be the touchstone. One must always be vigilant to see that the iron does not lose contact with the touchstone. So before giving expression to any elevated idea, sáhityikas must seek out this touchstone and bring it under their control. Many people have ideas which do not blossom due to lack of mastery over language. Those who have ideas must develop their power of expression through continued practice and effort, and those who possess the power of expression must make efforts to awaken their latent insight. The sáhityika must possess both expression and insight – if there is no iron, the touchstone is meaningless.

By power of expression I do not mean merely individual skill with language; rather I mean the irresistible force of the mind and heart. If boldness and courage are lacking, the language will tend to move with diffident steps, with hesitant deliberation. Such timid language cannot express independent thinking due to the impacts of various factors: the prevalent social superstitions; the static bondages of the existing religions; the pressures of political philosophies; the false pride of communalism, provincialism and nationalism; and narrow-minded political ideas. Thwarted by these impacts, weak language either stops moving or expresses itself with extreme diffidence, following the policy of “Kill the snake, but save the stick also.” The root cause of this weakness lies in the cowardice of individuals and in blind attachment to the past. Sáhityikas have to assert themselves thunderingly, give a stirring call to the people and, setting aside all the garbage of impurities with a bold mind and strong arms, clear the path leading to human emancipation. They must be pioneers on the path to fulfilment.

Here there may be a little confusion with regard to the dynamism of language. My exact meaning is that language, too, moves forward, keeping pace with the speed of thought. At times the language of those whose thoughts cannot freely move forward under the weight of ignorance or prevalent superstitions, is also very forceful and dynamic. Even the language of those who compose doggerels glorifying the greatness of a family, caste or pilgrimage, at times appears to be attractive and impressive. One can also write a thesis in powerful language on petty matters such as “A Sneeze”, “A House Lizard”, or, before preparing for a journey, on “Why It Is Best To Go North, Not East”; but I refuse to accept such language as truly dynamic language, for it bustles about within the iron railings of superstition and attachment to the past. It has speed but no movement. A deep analysis will show that for all its acrobatics, it has not moved even a step forward. Yoked to the millstone of superstition like the bullock at an oil mill, it may have proudly walked around the whole day covering more than fifty miles in brisk strides, but it could not move a step forward.

The Unfoldment of Human Potential

Throughout their whole existence human beings eagerly try to develop mentally. They cordially welcome whatever is conducive to that development and strive to understand the unknown; and whatever is antagonistic to that development they reject with all their hearts, though circumstantial pressure may force them to submit to it temporarily. But in the latter case, as soon as an opportunity presents itself, they rise in revolt to deliver themselves from the clutches of those antagonistic circumstances. Human nature has been like this at all times and in all ages. Thus whenever we need to do something for humanity, we should do it keeping this essential human characteristic in mind. The author’s literature and the artist’s artistic creation are dedicated to the service of humanity, and the sáhityika and the artist must always deeply remember this. They should express their subject or theme in a way that will not impede people’s development. Interest must be created through natural expression.

The suggestion of subtle hints, interest and humour that exist even in the crudeness of ordinary life have to be adroitly held up before the eyes of the people – a touch of its colour must be conveyed to their minds.

It is easy to talk, but difficult to act; for in spite of mental characteristics being the same in all persons, they are expressed differently at different times, at different places and in different persons due to variations of saḿskáras [mental reactive momenta] or environmental peculiarities. If the artist’s mind can be made to touch the innermost hearts of others – if their human sentiment can be synchronized with others’ sentiments – then alone can people determine which path will be truly beneficial for them, which road will lead to the greatest realization of their potentialities. If the potentiality for individual or collective development is not clearly understood, the psychic wealth of humanity may be misused at any moment.

Literature can beautifully convey to those who have the potentiality for leadership how to develop that leadership properly and how to build that benevolent leadership on a firm foundation. But leadership is not only found among the good. Thieves, armed robbers and knaves also have their leaders, and there are also leaders in reactionary movements. So if those with the potential for leadership, who are anxious to express their leadership qualities, derive suggestions from the sáhityika about how to enhance their personal prestige through malevolence and wickedness instead of through true benevolence and welfare, they may be influenced to choose the evil path. People are desperate to develop themselves, so if they are not guided onto the path of welfare by the sáhityikas, they will follow the path of evil. They have no time to count the waves as they sit on the shore of the sea of time. They do not and they will not sit quietly, suppressing their desires and propensities in the hope that some day someone will come and direct them onto the path of benevolence.

Human beings want free and untrammelled expression of their innermost thoughts and feelings. Few people have the capacity to judge the way this expression takes place. Some ability, no doubt, develops at a later age as the result of many trials and tribulations, but it is completely absent in childhood, in adolescence and in early youth. So during this period people readily accept glittery, superficial art and literature as an outlet for their self-expression. They do not ponder over it seriously, for they do not even understand the necessity of deeper reflection or analysis.

In this connection it is necessary to add that if two different paths, one good and one bad, are presented to people as a means to express the same idea, they will gladly choose what they think to be the easier one instead of the more complex one. So no matter how benevolent the ideas of the sáhityika, if they are not presented with exuberant delight and overflowing joy, then even though they may be acceptable to some, they will remain ever disagreeable and indigestible to the general masses. These observations may have some significance even for coastal literature, but for epochal literature they are of paramount importance. If literature is not presented through the medium of joy, then it cannot really be accepted as literature at all, because in spite of being guided by the thought of benevolence, that thought is unable to take practical shape. Such literature only increases the price of the book, but it cannot in any way increase the value of humanity.

When a presentation is made through the medium of joy, people have the opportunity for comprehensive enjoyment, and the sympathy of the writer makes direct contact with the hearts of his or her readers. Such an excellent presentation is not possible if the writer lacks genuine human feeling. Good or bad, friend or foe, a chaste lady or promiscuous woman – all are human to the author. The author will have to be responsive to the aspirations of their hearts, and must try to give proper expression to their inner thoughts and sentiments. He or she will try to depict their happiness and sorrow, hopes and desires, and treat every big or small clash and counter-clash of their affliction-ridden lives as an expression of the human heart. To sáhityikas, no profession or propensity is either dignified or lowly; they will only present all these before the people in their true perspective so that the audience, after becoming acquainted with them, may make their individual and collective lives more meaningful. Under no circumstances must the artist or the sáhityika portray humanity as an object of hatred or ridicule. Even the character of a promiscuous woman or a thief must leave on the minds of the readers an impression of sympathy, charged with profound pain.

When artists lack such bold large-heartedness, they view humanity and the world through the spectacles of superstitions. They are incapable of truly acquainting human beings with each other or with the world, because these spectacles of superstition or prejudice distort their vision so much that they are unable to understand the true perspective of anything.

Weak-minded sáhityikas often try to stirringly exhort their readers with forceful language in order to camouflage their own inherent weaknesses before the public. They think that they will prevail due to the strength of their language, but this is a grave error on their part. Perhaps a few fools may be deluded for some time, but ultimately, recognizing the malevolent repercussions of such literature, people will scrupulously avoid it. A careful examination will enable anyone to discover the flagrant emptiness that always lurks behind such high-sounding utterances. Generally speaking, the more the sáhityikas’ vision is clouded by the blind delusions of communalism, provincialism or nationalism, the more this sort of literature will pour out from their pens.

Decency and Indecency in Art

Also, there is a serious difference of opinion among artists and sáhityikas with regard to decency and obscenity in art. The conservative among them, or the connoisseurs of art and literature, are somewhat like the supporters of the cult of varńáshrama [casteism]. They think that a slight deviation from the established tradition will tarnish the purity of art or literature. Excessively worried about matters of caste and outcaste, about the analysis of decency and vulgarity in art or literature, they lose sight of its main objective. If while writing and drawing or using the chisel and hammer they become entangled in the wranglings of so-called ethics and morality, they cannot make any contribution to any section of the people. If you open a book to find that it contains only moral sermons, you will have a headache before you read even five pages of it. If in a motion picture only moral ideas are paraded over and over again to the exclusion of everything else, the public will never appreciate that film.

The conclusion of all of this is that the thought of public welfare alone should be the motive force behind all artistic and literary creation, and that thought will express itself only through artistic joy – only then can subtle intellect awaken in crude minds. So when artists or sáhityikas have to create such a flow of delight as they move forward, they cannot afford to cling to any fastidious notions of so-called purity or impurity, for this will retard their progress. Excessive prudery, like mysophobia, will obstruct their movement.

Mysophobic, conservative writers will compose poems about the sea, mountains and moonlight, will paint literary pictures of the drawing-rooms of the aristocratic Ballygunge elite, but it will offend their pens to write about the endless humiliations, the low standard of living and the vulgar dirtiness of the neglected, uneducated society in the villages, because these matters are unpleasant. The abominable life of corrupt women, the obnoxious environment of the slums, the carnal cravings of antisocial human beasts – all these they seek to avoid, because they are unacceptable by the standards of “decency” and “decorum”.

The human mind has many ideas and propensities that are normal and natural. But mysophobic artists or sáhityikas, with their touch-me-not-or-I-might-lose-my-purity mentality, want to avoid all these. They think that these propensities, if given a place in literature, will jeopardize society. I cannot support this orthodox, rightist mentality.

Yet those who are leftists in the world of art are even more dangerous. The defect of the rightists is their inaction and that of the leftists is their hyperactivity, which is based on selfishness. It seems as though they are deliberately seeking out the dark and dirty aspects of life and, like flies, growing fat on the secretions of society’s festering sores. It must be remembered that flies do not heal sores, rather they exacerbate them, because it is the pus of these sores that provides them with their vital juice. So the filthy aspects of society are the only capital on which these artists and sáhityikas subsist.

If art or literature is created around the base propensities of the human mind, people will naturally gravitate towards it in large numbers, and the creators of such literature will earn a great deal of money from it; indeed, this is the only aim of their artistic creation. Engaged in the quest of evil, obscenity and vulgarity, they also [like the rightists] lose sight of the primary goal of art.

In light of the above, I would say that in matters of decency or indecency the middle path is the best; that is, we must not deviate from the ideal. At the time of pursuing the path of benevolence we shall not bother as to whether the brush, the pen or the chisel has touched and taken on decorum or vulgarity, decency or indecency, during its march ahead. If we do, we will stray from our path.

I am not prepared to accept any hard and fast rule that literature must be created focusing on good citizens alone, nor am I inclined to agree to the policy that crude and mean people have to be presented to the readers or viewers as low or vile. In my opinion, artists must be completely sympathetic to whatever they create. Those who are inferior and neglected, helpless and destitute – whom society considers to be infernal maggots – are the very people who are the most unrepresented in the salons of literature. They are mute, and so the heavy responsibility of expressing the sentiments that are hidden in their tormented minds has to be borne by the artist. The sáhityika or the artist has to take the responsibility of enabling them to rise up and sit in the same row with the rest of society, after dusting off the dirt from their bodies.

Mundane and Transcendental Love

Many people complain that a major part of modern literature is full of the whimperings of cheap erotic love. I cannot but agree with their complaint. Such allegations can be brought not only in the sphere of literature but in every sphere of art. After seeing Bombay-made films it seems as though the youth in our society has nothing better to do than to busy itself with so-called love – as though every college girl of every respectable community is engaged in amorous escapades, throwing all decency and decorum to the wind. In fact the mentality of those artists and sáhityikas who only depict this type of situation is completely inert like that of a eunuch.

Whatever the profound, philosophical implications of the word prema [“love”], the true characteristic of love is supra- physical – beyond the bondage of any limitation. When artists become absorbed in the essence of love and try to convey it to the people through their language, rhetoric and subtle suggestions, the sweetness of their artistic genius reaches the apex of expression. But then this creation of the artist cannot be regarded as popular literature or art, because the subtle sense which is capable of comprehending that transcendental feeling is, in fact, undeveloped in most people. We do find at places in the literature of Rabindranath Tagore some semblances of this pure, supra-physical love, but whenever Rabindranath tried to give expression to it, he became unintelligible to the masses. The transcendental thoughts and ideas of the sweet, graceful shlokas [couplets] of the Upanishads are also incomprehensible to the common people.

This sublime love has established itself for all eternity beyond the limits of time, space and person. Infinite love is the ultimate ecstatic expression of finite love. This sense that artists try to awaken in the popular mind, when they devote themselves to the task of establishing the link between the finite and the infinite, between the mundane and the transcendental – this awareness, though not purely transcendental, is of the greatest importance in the realm of art. Because it gradually leads that sweetness of the human mind which is apprehensible to ordinary intelligence to a dreamland that is beyond the senses. Rabindranath’s poem “Úrvashii” is a composition of this type. There is no dearth of physicality in the poem, nor is it difficult to understand, and yet its crude material expression gradually expands into a subtlety beyond understanding.

Love that is completely physical is not love at all according to philosophy. Therefore philosophy will not, and perhaps should not, entertain such love at all. But can an artist ignore it? An ordinary person feels pleasure or pain in every great or small incident of life. Even love concerned with the body cannot be completely isolated from pleasure and pain. How then can the artist, whose job it is to portray human happiness and sorrow, who is dedicated to giving form to the impact of human grief and pain, hopes and desires, neglect physical love? Regarding this, no artist or sáhityika can dispute the statement of Rabindranath:

Ore kavi sandhyá haye ela,
  Keshe tomár dhareche ye pák
Base’ base’ úrdhvapáne ceye,
  Shuńtecha ki parakáler d́ák?
Kavi kahe, sándhayá ha’la bat́e,
  Base áchi laye’ shránta deha
Opáre oi pallii ha’te yadi,
  Ájo hat́hát d́áke ámáy keha.
Yadi hetháy bakul taruccháye,
  Milan ghat́e tarúń-taruńiite
Dut́i áṋkhir pare dut́i áṋkhi,
  Milite cáy duranta saḿgiite.
Ke táháder maner kathá laye’
  Viińár táre tulbe pratidhvani,
Ámi yadi bhaver kúle base’
  Parakáler bhálamandai gańi.

[“O poet! evening has come.
Your hair is streaked with grey.
Are you listening to the call of the other world,
As you sit and gaze at the sky?”

“Ah yes, evening has come,” replied the poet.
“And here I sit, with limbs tired and frail,
Waiting for a sudden call from yonder village –
A call that might come even today.

“If here under this shady bakul (sweet-scented olive) tree
Two young hearts meet in longing,
And two pairs of eyes seek to merge as one
In the eloquent melody of song,

“Who will play on the strings of the vina,
Who will echo the strings of their hearts,
If I sit on the shores of the ocean of time
And ponder the virtue and vice of my life?”]

Here it must be noted that artists must seek to exhibit to people the simple form of truth, sweetened with the sweetness of their hearts. But it is a matter of great regret that a class of modern artists, in the realms of poetry, novels, cinema, drama, etc., employ all their artistic talents for the sole purpose of kindling people’s crude sensuality, instead of portraying human propensities with the idealistic outlook of a true artist – what to speak of portraying their subtle human feelings. Without supporting conservatism, I would say that this class of artists is truly a blot on society.

Plays and Dramas

Some time ago complaints were frequently heard from lovers of plays that no accomplished playwrights have appeared since the great poet Girishchandra, and that although other branches of literature have rapidly developed, plays are gradually dying out. Their complaints cannot be easily dismissed; rather they deserve the attention of the play-loving populace, the playwrights and actors, and the well-wishers of society. Why are good dramas not being produced? Why say that good plays are not being produced? Is the dramatic literature modelled with the touch of a rare genius like Rabindranath not good? Perhaps by “good plays” the complainants mean “box-office plays”, and it is precisely because most of Rabindranath’s plays are lacking in box-office appeal that they do not take them into account.

In literary parlance we may divide plays into two categories: first, the box-office play, and second, the witty stage play of high literary excellence, which demands a little extra intellect to understand and which in English literature is called “drama”. The first, the box-office play, is a part of epochal literature, and so it is necessary for the writer of such a play to be fully conversant with the problems of the contemporary era. It is only when it gives just expression to current problems through songs and dance, uproar and tumult, laughter and tears, joys and sorrows, that a play becomes a box-office hit. Even slight or sizeable lapses in characterization and treatment of conflict do not in the least diminish popular appreciation of this class of presentation. Light-hearted audiences of mediocre intelligence go home happy after laughing, crying and enjoying songs and dances for some time; they do not feel like criticizing or commenting on the underlying ideas and language of the presentation. So playwrights, too, have to wield their pens in accordance with the demand of their patrons, the common people. If they have any drawbacks or shortcomings of their own as sáhityikas or artists, they can easily disguise them through cheap humour, so that what they have written for the public may justify its existence by offering them a little jollity.

The form and presentation of most of the films of modern India, particularly those with the Bombay trade-mark, pertain to this category of presentation. There is nothing to ponder or comprehend about these plays; there is hardly any question of reality or unreality in them either. If they contain any expression of the age, well and good; if not, there is no harm.

As I have already said, however, a play may be considered successful only if it combines excitement with the vivid portrayal of the era. But for this portrayal of the problems of the age in the drama, it is essential for the playwright to have a clear concept of the age in which he or she lives. Those who have this are, indeed, genuine artists; in their presentations there is a wonderful blending of the public demand and the artist’s talent.

Most of the compositions of Rabindranath do not fall into this category of plays. He was a real poet and so his dramas, although not neglecting the demands of the age, always sought to remain outside the purview of the era. Thus his dramas were seldom popular in the theatre, where most spectators go for a little amusement and not to appreciate the niceties of literature. However, they received the unstinting approbation of real connoisseurs of art and literature. Those members of the audience who were unable to properly appreciate the subtle nuances of his dramas on the stage, nevertheless experienced an indescribable joy when they read those same dramas. This type of dramatic presentation, which in English is called “drama”, is called nát́áyana in Sanskrit. Playwrights draw their vitality from this very nát́áyana.

It is noteworthy that some of these dramas written somewhat in the style of box-office plays, enjoy greater popularity even than box-office plays. From this it is evident that, although the common people are fond of riotous hilarities, they have in them a dormant aesthetic sense which may be aroused through song and dance as well as through the portrayal of pleasure and pain, laughter and mirth. Of course, with the increase in the number of educated people with literary taste, drama, too, is becoming a stage success in many countries. Previously theatre owners suffered appreciable losses when Shakespeare’s dramas were staged. But now, with the increase in the number of literature-lovers, Shakespearean dramas have far surpassed even box-office plays in popularity.

Most of the compositions of the great poet Girishchandra fall into the category of plays, for he was associated with the professional theatre. He was well aware that if dramas were staged, they would not receive any appreciable reception in the society of his time, and thus he took to writing plays. He himself was a reputed actor, and so the theatre-goers greatly admired all the characters in almost every composition he wrote. Yet it must not be forgotten that although he had to write plays for the sake of his professional career, he had within him a deep, aesthetic, poetic genius, and so most of his plays had a touch of drama, a suggestion of supra-sensibility. In fact, judging Girishchandra’s compositions with an impartial mind, it must be admitted that he chose the middle path between drama and plays. As he expressed in his own language:

Álgá táre bol ot́he ná;
T́ánle cheṋŕe komal tár.

[Loose strings no tune impart,
But tension tears the tender strings apart.]

I cannot wholly agree with those who say that no good dramas have been produced since the death of Girishchandra; but then I cannot absolutely disagree with them either. Rather I would say that since Girishchandra we have had quite a number of good dramatists as well as good actors, but we have not seen genius like Girishchandra’s; he was a rare combination of a powerful actor and a successful dramatist.

Song and Dance in Plays and Dramas

Among modern critics we can observe a sizeable difference of opinion regarding the necessity of song and dance in plays. There is no doubt that background music greatly helps to create a dramatic atmosphere. Background music cannot, however, be said to fall exactly in the category of songs and lyrics; it is just a subtle device to help the mind apprehend the sentiments portrayed; there is nothing natural or unnatural about it. People go to the theatre knowing that they are going to watch a dramatic performance, and they feel no difficulty in accepting music as a natural part of the plays. But I cannot accept that songs must be in plays. Let there be an abundance of songs and dances in those plays which are written to elicit cheap applause from the audience, or let wholly unnatural songs be forced into the mouths of the hero and the heroine as explanations of each event or situation; but while writing dramas one must be extremely careful about this. There are plays in which, after a tragic event such as the death of a dear one, the bereaved mother or wife starts singing a plaintive song, and that, too, to the accompaniment of rhythmic musical instruments. Those who do not analyse this objectively may perhaps be moved to emotion by such a song of lamentation, but those who are connoisseurs or lovers of literature will leave the hall in utter disgust; it is not only unreal, it is absolutely offensive to the taste. Even heroes and heroines who did not know each other at all before, are seen singing a duet. Did they rehearse the song beforehand?

Truly speaking, with the exception of musical plays, it is necessary to exercise restraint and good judgement before introducing songs in other dramatic presentations. We can tolerate the character “Conscience” singing a song in a musical play, for Conscience is an allegorical role. But in the mouths of the hero and heroine, any song that is incidental to the story is absolutely unbecoming and out of place. No matter how richly imbued the song is with thought and sentiment, it is not at all desirable to use it to indicate the future of the dramatic plot. People do sing and dance in the course of their daily lives; such songs and dances do depict their joys and sorrows, hopes and despair, but they sing and dance in particular circumstances. The plaintive song is sung long after the mournful event – with the dead body on their laps, they do not sing sorrowful tunes over it. Upon receiving any happy news, people shout or jump for joy, but they do not start dancing according to the accepted rules, with proper posture, gesture and rhythm. Song and dance may be introduced in a play portraying people’s daily lives, but one must be cautious that they do not appear unnatural to the discriminating readers and spectators.

A drama is concerned with the subtler portions of the mind, and so the songs of dramas have to be imbued with elevating thoughts and sentiments. Just to maintain the purity of classical music, a drama cannot indulge in substandard compositions. The songs in a play are composed in order to attract the popular mind, and hence there is nothing to be said against them. But one must be careful that the songs do not contain the seeds of malevolence.

Short Plays and Mystery Plays

Today people are extremely pressed for time; they do not have much leisure to read or watch plays. The relentless urge to triumph over time has gradually obsessed the human mind. Hence playwrights, and directors too, are obliged to adopt a policy of compromise and adjust to public demand. A short play does not have the same scope as a longer play to vividly portray life, or to effectively represent the conflicts of the characters. Nevertheless, today more stress is being given to short plays, since for most people the value of time has considerably increased.

It is impossible for a short play to be as wide-ranging as a long play. That is why almost all playwrights who try to do that fail. In a short play it is impossible to deal with the story of the characters’ whole lives; even a particular event or conflict cannot be fully dealt with and done justice to. One must be satisfied with presenting only a small part of any situation or theory. It is only by combining several playlets that the playwright can properly portray any situation, problem or ideology; several one-act plays joined together can thus give a good idea of the multifarious life of society.

The success of a play, particularly a mystery drama, depends largely on the creation of suspense. Unless the theme is very complicated, the readers or spectators do not feel particularly disturbed if the suspense is introduced in the very beginning; their feelings of appreciation remain unaffected. But if the plot is complicated, it is desirable to give the reader or audience time to form a rough idea about it before introducing suspense, instead of introducing it at the very beginning, as this will help them to appreciate it more. Otherwise, if the audience has not even understood the suspenseful situation, it is impossible to create in them the desire for release from the suspense. Instead people will spend most of their psychic energy pondering over what they do not understand in the complicated plot instead of being curious about what is coming next.

In my opinion this applies equally to both screen and stage plays. The difference between them is that the author of a screen play derives assistance from the art director or the studio technicians, whereas the author of a stage play does not. The latter has to arrange the environment through the dialogues of the characters.

Short Stories

The range and scope of short stories are exactly the same as those of plays, but short-story writers must know the technique of presenting a long story concisely. Suspense is equally effective in short stories as in plays; dramatic skill is essential for the writer of those short stories which come in the category of sketches, because a sketch holds an intermediate position between a story and a play. Some critics think that sketches also come within the category of plays, and I do not see any reason to contradict their opinion. Actually the most significant difference between a play and a story is that the characters in a drama act and talk before the readers or the audience in living form, whereas in a story or a novel it is the writer who talks, either personally or through his or her mentally created characters. The chief characteristic of a play – be it an opera, ballet, drama, play, shadow play, etc. – is that it contains expressions of living characters.

Whenever literature properly utilizes the opportunity to relate any actual incident or imaginary event cohesively and adroitly, such a creation is called a long story. In Sanskrit a long story is called kathá, and a short story is termed kathániká. The responsibility of the novelist, however, is a great deal more onerous than that of a story writer, for in novels the systematic narration of a story is not the sole or primary element; psychological analysis as well as the conflicts of the characters must also find proper expression. To compose coastal literature around stories is extremely difficult, if not impossible; but in novels it is quite possible. Novels are a form of fiction, or kathányása [sometimes called upanyása]. (It is difficult to find exact equivalents in Sanskrit for these two words, “novel” and kathányása. The word kathányása, current in languages such as Bengali, Hindi, etc., means “to place together, to juxtapose”. There is some confusion about the meaning of the word in Bengali and Hindi. In some Indian languages the word kádambarii is used for kathányása; this is probably due to it being related to the Sanskrit book entitled Kádambarii. Novels never existed in ancient Indian literature, and thus there is no Sanskrit term for this word.)

Generally we see that the human thinking capacity becomes somewhat dull in the wake of a major catastrophe. This accounts for the present psychic state of the human race which, as a result of two major wars which took place within a short period of time, is suffering from various miseries and tribulations. Humanity is at present unable to think, read or comprehend anything serious. Even artists and sáhityikas who are capable of thinking or discussing serious matters do not feel any urge to do so, thinking that if they do, they will not get any encouragement or patronage from the public. To say that there are no artists today is completely incorrect; there are still some, though they lack vitality. What is scarce is not artists but patronage and encouragement. Even if we accept that a real artist does not create art in the hope of receiving encouragement, I would say that even when artists undertake to create something propelled by their heart’s emotion or engaged in the endeavour to lose themselves in the expression of their art, it is necessary to provide them with the things they need in order to express their vital force. The lack of such a provision means that both artists and their art meet a premature death. So instead of blaming artists, rudely condemning their worthlessness, one has to admit this paramount truth: that since we ourselves are incapable of thinking or understanding anything serious, we are actually pushing the truly creative, high-quality artists towards destruction.

Poetry

The essence of poetry or poetic literature is its penetrating appeal, where the feelings of the heart are the main thing. Whatever is narrated in prose in simple, direct language, if expressed in poetry will be tinged with sentiments from the core of the heart and with subtle suggestions of the unknown. The readers are required to understand the dynamic relation between the past and the future through the feelings of their hearts. That is why poetry cannot be comprehended by merely listening or by reading; to understand it one must touch the poet’s heart with one’s own heart.

These days humanity has lost its aesthetic appreciation for poetry as a result of torments caused by the harsh blows of reality. Poetic literature, particularly the epic, has become completely obsolete. And yet when human beings first attempted to determine the relation between the natural and the supernatural, when the subtle aesthetic sense awakened in them for the first time, the basket of literature was filled with cowrie shells⁽⁷⁾ of poetry. But today these cowries are obsolete – they have no value in the market – and poetic literature, too, is in the process of decay. Few people buy poetry books to read. Yet during the spring of youth, when the ebullience of the heart is pronounced, adolescents still read poems and try to explain them to others or recite them with all the sweetness of their hearts. But with advancing age, when the once sensitive mind, smitten by the blows and counter-blows of the world, becomes hardened like an over-burnt brick, charred in the fire of worldly ordeals, then its capacity to appreciate poetry is reduced to nothing. People come to like only those things that have some relation with reality, and the ebullience of the emotion of the heart no longer has any appreciable value. Of course there are exceptions, but generally we find that the poems that elderly people recite are invariably those that they had memorized during their early youth. In order to survive poets are now tending to compose realistic poems. This is not altogether bad, for at least in this way poetic literature may find the path to longevity.

Lyrics

The poverty of lyricists is not so marked at present, since the market for songs still exists due to the cinema, radio, stage and recordings. Although what lyricists receive as remuneration is nothing compared to their labour, still their prospects are far better than that of poets. Any serious lyrics are heading for destruction – all that is left is the showy glitter of language. The purity of rágas or ráginiis [classical melodies] has been lost, and what remains is merely the glamour of adulterated, non-classical tunes; from the viewpoint of lyrical value, modern songs are gradually heading towards bankruptcy.

Essays

Similarly, there is no current demand or appreciation for essays with serious themes. People today want light and attractive essays. Thus to satisfy this demand, novelists and essayists have started writing charming compositions in which seriousness has no place. Essayists take small or great themes, from the lowest to the highest, and tell their stories lucidly with a few flashes of erudition here and there. The writers of such narratives or descriptions have no recognized standard before them, nor do they make any constructive endeavour to create one. Writers seem to give more importance to linguistic jugglery than to their main theme which is thus relegated to a secondary position. When the contents of a composition arouse a sense of literary appreciation or express the author’s sense of responsibility, only then can such a composition be called an ideal essay.

While more superficial compositions lack profundity of thought, authors of serious compositions must acquire the skill of narrating in an absorbing conversational tone. Many good novelists lack this ability, and hence they fail to write attractive compositions.

Children’s Literature

There is yet another form of literature which is gradually gaining importance, and that is children’s literature. Here the author’s sense of responsibility and proficiency is more important than in any other branch of literature. Every sentence of children’s literature should have a wonderful power to attract the mind and a crystalline simplicity, and should embody an attempt at open-hearted expression. The author has to explain through language and ideas how to live a pure straightforward life.

The child’s mind is filled with fanciful imagery, and so the sáhityikas will also have to spread their wings and soar in the sky of imagination. However, they cannot afford to indulge in intricacies and complexities during their visionary ascent. The thirst for the distant and the earnest zeal to know the unknown that abides in the child’s mind must be satisfied by drawing pictures of magical lands and relating colourful fairy tales. What is “real” or “natural” is not so important. What is more important is to carry the child’s mind along in the current of joy, and in the process to acquaint the child with the world in an easy and simple manner. The harshness of reality should not be portrayed – the child will not want to read about it or listen to it. “The prince of the mind with his wings outstretched in the azure sky, soars to the kingdom of the old witch beyond the worlds of the sun and the moon. He ties his Pegasus to the golden branches of the pearl tree and heads off in search of the sleeping princess in the silent, serene palace. He gets a tip as to where to find the magic wands of life and death, and rouses the princess from her centuries-old sleep. Then he finds out everything he can about the den where the demons sleep and sets off into the world to become a hero...” Picture after picture, colour after colour, must accompany the words; this is what the child’s mind craves.

Among those who are a little older, that is, boys and girls in their early teens, farces and satires are quite successful. In these children can find ideals that are conducive to the formation of their characters. But for those who are comparatively young, simplicity will be the guiding principle in whatever is written. Overindulgence in wordplay, flowery language, figures of speech, or long, didactic preaching will turn children’s literature into trash.

Lullabies

A much neglected aspect of children’s literature is the lullaby, which generally falls in the category of verse. As a form of literature it also has its own special characteristics. The lullaby portrays the visionary environments in which all children’s literature should dwell; but the unfolding of the story takes place much more rapidly in lullabies. The child sees picture after picture in his or her mental mirror and slowly falls into the bosom of sleep. So the composer of lullabies has to be an accomplished painter at heart:

Shánta haye’ shońre khoká
Bale’ geche tor dádá,
Kine’ debe duit́i ghoŕá
Kálo ár shádá.
Sakál beláy sháda ghoŕáy
Beŕábe tumi caŕe’,
Kálo ghoŕáy caŕbe yakhan
Belá yábe paŕe.

[“Hush, my child, listen!” said your brother tonight.
He’ll buy you two horses, one black and one white,
You’ll ride the white in the morning bright,
And ride the black one in the failing light.]

The mind of the child gets lost in the horses, their colours, the time of day, and the joy of riding on horseback, and while musing over these pictures, he or she slowly and gradually falls asleep. It is important that lullabies should convey the inspiration to develop heroism and knowledge, but there should be no frightening ideas in them. If any fear is created in the children’s minds even inadvertently, it cannot be regarded as a lullaby.

Through such verses a child can easily become acquainted with nature in a way which makes the world delightful and captivating to them:

“Boltá ghumáy, bhomrá ghumáy, ghumáy máchi,”
Shiulii phuler gácht́i bale “Ámi jege’ áchi”
Khoká – “Shiulii kena jáge?”
“Jhaŕe paŕbe ha’le bhor,
Sei samaye sońár khoká ghumt́i yábe tor.”

[“Asleep, asleep, all asleep
The wasp, the flea and the bumble-bee.
Awake am I, awake I keep.”
Says the shiulii-flower (coral jasmine) tree.
Child: “Why does the shiulii stay awake?”
Mother: “Because the blossoms will fall at daybreak,
And at that time, my darling, you will awake.”]

Indispensable domestic duties may also be taught through the medium of delight, as in such verses:

Chi chi chi chi ránii rándhte shekheni,
Shuktonite jhál diyeche ambalete ghi,
Jyat́háimáke bale jhole mashalá doba ki?
(Ár) Parmánna reṋdhe bale phyán phelba ki?
(Edike) Bhojbáŕite khoṋj paŕeche ekhan upáy kii?

[Alas, alas, hasn’t Rani learned the cooking art?
She puts chillies in shukto,⁽⁸⁾ ghee in ambal tart!⁽⁹⁾
Asking Auntie, “Shall I put spices in broth?
From the sweet rice porridge, shall I drain off the froth?”
While the guests wait for dinner, hungry every one,
Now what’s to be done, oh what’s to be done?]

Often through these rhymes even the weary, long-suffering images of oppressed people may be vividly expressed, and contrasted with the pomp and glamour of prosperous society. But this, too, should be expressed in a light-hearted fashion:

Khukur doba biye ámi Hat́t́amálár Deshe
Tárá gái balade caśe,
Hiirey dáṋt ghaśe.
Ruimách-pat́ol táder bhárebháre áse,
(Kintu) Khukuke ánte gele
Khukur shváshuŕii
Pichan phire’ base.

[Khuku will be wed in the wondrous land of Hat́t́amálá,
Where they till their fields with oxen and bulls,
And brush their teeth with diamond-powder;
Where there’s fish and green gourd by the basketful.
But going there to fetch Khuku,
Her mother-in-law scorns her by turning her back.]

Thus these neglected folk-lyrics and lullabies have enormous value in the formation of children’s character. Enlightened sáhityikas should pay attention to this aspect of literature also.

Towards the Transcendental Entity

As the sense of subtle aesthetics developed in human beings in the course of evolution, a desire to create art also awakened in them. The artist’s ideal is to be established in transcendentality beyond the bounds of the sensory world. So artists, or more precisely, worshippers of fine art, have to be spiritual aspirants if they want to move in the right direction. The cultivation of fine arts by those who have not developed spiritual sentiment or accepted the spiritual ideal as the goal of life is merely a mockery. Only those who look upon all worldly things from a spiritual perspective can realize in everything the blissful Transcendental Entity. The greater the realization of this Transcendental Entity, the greater the understanding of one’s oneness with that Entity, and thus the greater one’s success in the creation of art.

The successful creation of art is absolutely impossible for those who do not seek that subtle Entity, even though they possess some capacity to create. Such people’s thought processes go adrift, like a sailboat with a torn sail. Their mental aberration is reflected in all of their writings, which ultimately become strange and grotesque.

Besides this, in the individual lives of such artists there occurs a serious catastrophe. In the battle between their transitory sense of aesthetics and their desire for material happiness, their strength of character gets destroyed by the tension between the subtle and the crude. That is why we find that in the history of the world those who lacked purity or spiritual ideals and spiritual austerity, no matter how great their genius as poets, sáhityikas or artists, no matter what reputation they earned in their respective fields of art, could not command respect and prestige as human beings in society due to their loose characters. It is due to lack of strength of character that the talents of many good singers, actors and other kinds of artists have prematurely withered away before attaining full development.

As mentioned above, the greater the contact with transcendentality, the greater the success of the artist, for knowingly or unknowingly the human mind is seeking transcendentality. People yearn for the unknown; they cannot remain content with the known. Thus where there is an endeavour to create art merely out of the events of daily life, it does not appeal to the intuitional faculty of the human mind.

Can there be an artist without genius? Is art the result only of sincere endeavour, of hard labour? Quite a knotty question! I think the answer lies in the inherent spiritual thirst of human beings. In other words, a genius is born into this world with a powerful innate spiritual hunger, whether he or she realizes it or not. For those who do not have this spiritual hunger, the endeavour to become artists by effort and labour alone is absolutely useless. But then, if a person who has no creative genius succeeds in kindling his or her spiritual urge and desire for the infinite, it will not be impossible for him or her to develop genius.

Naturalness and Unnaturalness in Art

Another question which has started to be discussed is the question of naturalness in art. According to many, art should faithfully express itself in the same natural way that, for example, people normally eat, sleep and talk; otherwise, they say, it will be defective. In the field of drama much emphasis is being given to this idea these days. This has also affected recitation and other forms of artistic expression. But I cannot fully agree with this view.

Depending upon the theme and nature of the topic, the introduction of diversity in theatrical expression is quite natural. To express crude ideas one must resort to crude language, crude gestures and crude forms of expression in daily life. These, however, cannot be employed to give expression to subtle feelings. For this a particular language, a particular diction and particular gestures will be necessary. Then it will be easy to appreciate the beauty of the dramatic performance at its face value, instead of looking at it as an expression of naturalness.

Actually, the vivid presentation of the artist’s ideas is of primary importance, and to achieve this any means should be adopted. We should not be too concerned with naturalness or unnaturalness; none of the illustrious actors of the world have ever worried about this point. The dogmatic assertion about the importance of naturalness in art has not come from the mouths of important personages of the theatrical world, but from petty people with superficial knowledge.

The combination of language and mudrá [gesture] that makes acting successful must be fully utilized by the actors. To maintain naturalness one should not use confused or incoherent language or make the characters gesture-less and awkward. In individual life, in our so-called natural state, we seek to express our inner ideas, and often the communication of these ideas to others is secondary. In a dramatic performance, however, this communication is of primary importance.

Music

The same holds true for music. The combination of giitá- vádyá-nrtya [song, instrumental music and dance] is called saḿgiita [“music”]. When a song is composed only to express the laughter and tears of ordinary life, it is not very difficult to convey this to the ears and hearts of the people; the song discharges its responsibility well enough using ordinary language and melody. But where the feelings and sensibilities are deep and subtle – where one has to create vibrations in the molecules and atoms of the body, in the chords of the heart – the music has to follow an extraordinary path. Hence, to those who are incapable of ingesting the subtle feelings of the science of music, the álápa [introductory portion of a classical piece] will be nothing but prálápa [delirious raving].

If music must descend to the ordinary level of life to conform to the desire for naturalness, then pre-eminence will be given to doggerels, and the sweetness and charm of real music will become extinct. Indeed, the music that is in vogue in the world today in the name of popular music is nothing but doggerels of this type, though expressed in better language. Language, rhythm and melody are indispensable parts of a song – one cannot exclude any one of them. (The difference between a song and instrumental music is that songs are comprised of rhythm, melody and language, but in [Indian] instrumental music rhythm is predominant, melody is subordinate and language is absolutely nil.)

Dance and Recitation

Dance is customarily divided into two categories: gestural and rhythmic. Many people are loathe to accept that gesture-less, rhythmic dance can be considered dance at all. If one looks at the characteristics of dance, one must admit that both gestures and rhythm are important components of a dance: the gestures give expression to the inner sentiment, and the rhythm gives it dynamism. If dance has only gestures but is devoid of rhythm, it is called pantomime, not dance. And dance devoid of gestures is merely a form of physical exercise – it is not art.

The greatest difference between recitation and acting is that in acting there is both language and gesture, while recitation consists of language only. Thus in acting there is greater scope for the expression of refined aesthetic taste than in recitation.

Painting and Sculpture

For architecture a perfect mastery of the science of engineering along with knowledge of art is necessary; thus there is a wonderful blending of the crude and subtle arts in architecture. No matter how great the suggestion of subtle aesthetic sense in architecture, it never has the scope to be unnatural. Yet it is in painting and sculpture, which are considered to be the subtlest of all the arts, that we find the true expression of the wonderful aesthetic quality of the human mind. In the calm stillness of a painting or sculpture, everything has to be vividly expressed – laughter and tears, hopes and fears, gestures and language. Indeed, painting and sculpture beautifully bridge the gap between the mundane and the supramundane.

In painting and sculpture, as in drama, the question of naturalness or unnaturalness arises, and here, too, the same answer holds true: the mode of expression must be chosen to suit the sentiment expressed. In fact, to raise the question of naturalness or unnaturalness in painting is absolutely unfitting. At the time of giving physical expression to his or her mental image, the artist is not bound to reproduce a particular part of the body according to physiological science. Giving form to a thought or idea is what is important; the artist is not a teacher of physiology. Bringing thought or idea into the world of form is his or her artistic sádhaná.

Society’s Responsibility towards the Artists

Artists and sáhityikas are the guides of society, and it is society’s sacred duty to keep a watchful eye on their ease and comfort and to help them preserve their existence. This sense of duty is all the more necessary where art and literature is practised as a part of social service, not as a profession. People can on no account evade their responsibilities towards the artist, since art and literature are dedicated solely to the service of the people. Where the state belongs to the people or is run according to their will – that is to say, in a democratic state – the government, as the representative of the people, should take on this sacred responsibility.⁽¹⁰⁾ When the government is facing difficulties due to financial stringency, or where due to a particular policy or any other cause the state is reluctant to give encouragement to art, people outside the government in the broader community will have to directly shoulder the responsibility.

If we consider the financial condition of those who are cultivating the different fields of art today, we find that those who are practising music are the most solvent. Not to mention cinema, radio and recordings, musicians on the whole have ample opportunity to earn money by displaying their skills at social gatherings and variety shows.

[Yet] except for a few prominent individuals, the condition of the majority of dancers and instrumentalists is not at all good; it is worse than that of singers – although dance and instrumental music are far subtler than vocal music.

Reciters, too, have very little scope to earn money. Many talented reciters stop their artistic endeavour due to lack of sufficient encouragement by society.

People may perhaps think that these days actors and actresses are riding on a wave of popularity. This may be true for a handful of people, but not for the majority. Only those who have earned their reputation in the cinema or on the professional stage have a good income and indeed they do very well; but for actors of mediocre talent the scope to earn money is quite limited. No one is willing to give new actors and actresses a chance. Even if they are given the opportunity to perform, the wages offered to them will not even be adequate for their subsistence. Most directors do not want to take risks with new, young actors and actresses. Producers and distributors find it more convenient to increase the sales of their films by using old and seasoned stars. Most producers with experience in the film industry have little knowledge about techniques and standards in the art of filming and so they also do not come forward to help new artists. Therefore, on the whole, in all the countries of the world the only hope for newcomers with acting talent is the professional stage. Amateur theatre is in a decrepit condition due to its failure to compete with cinema except in countries where it receives appreciable state aid. So it is not possible for it to accommodate new artists.

If dramatic art is to develop properly – indeed, if it is to be kept alive at all – then every country must adopt a strong policy. The first step of this policy will be to build up fully- or partially-government-aided theatres in every major village and city, which will be exempt from amusement taxes. Of course, people should expect that the government will adopt a liberal policy and award full freedom to connoisseurs of art in the selection of the subject matter of the plays. And if the condition is imposed that no political groups shall be allowed to use plays as media for their party propaganda, this will be a welcome measure. When the number of theatres increases and dramatic performances become popular, there will be a greater demand for dramas. This will certainly encourage talented authors to write dramas. It is because plays do not sell well that powerful authors do not want to write dramas. If plays receive proper remuneration, then there will certainly be a change in the outlook of authors. Furthermore, if the number of theatres increases, playwrights will no longer have to depend upon the generosity of a few big theatre magnates; for if plays prove their worth in the theatres, playwrights will not have to worry about how to sell them.

One more step, in my opinion, that may be taken in order to encourage playwrights, is to give them financial help in the form of a daily honorarium for the number of days their plays run on the stage, regardless of whether it is a professional stage or a non-professional stage. This will give playwrights the opportunity to earn money whenever their plays are staged, and thereby free their minds from the cares of subsistence. Then they will be able to apply their minds to writing more new plays for society.

Gone are the days when poetry was a commercial proposition. Books of poetry sell even less than dramas and it is hard to say how far the slogan “Read more poetry” will help. But I think we can expect good results if we introduce the custom of presenting books of poems at social ceremonies and festivals. Poets may even feel sufficiently encouraged if a variety of books of poetry are selected as textbooks for higher classes. Each book will be written by a single poet because if the poems of different poets are compiled in one book, none of the poets will reap any financial benefit.

Encouraging Painting and Sculpture

Painting and sculpture, the two subtlest art forms, are the most lacking in popular encouragement and sympathy. It may be argued that in countries where idolatry is prevalent, sculptors have been able to preserve their art due to popular support, and the problem of their subsistence is thus being solved without government aid. Is this not, some say, the most significant sign of popular support? I cannot persuade myself, however, that the people of idolatrous countries are connoisseurs and patrons of sculpture. There is no doubt that the people of such countries buy images from the image-makers, but they do this due to the inspiration of their religion and not out of love for art. If love of art were their motivation, then they would certainly not throw those symbols of art into the water after worship.⁽¹¹⁾ The situation is different where people buy images of metal, wood or stone to permanently establish a deity in their homes; but there, too, the buyer’s intention is not to encourage art. Although they pay some attention to the beauty and sweetness of the image, they do not give a free hand to the sculptor to create it as he or she wishes and the artists’ work remains confined within the boundaries of the religious eulogies to particular gods; they seldom have any opportunity to display their own original ideas. Hence the observation that the people of idolatrous countries patronize art by buying images is not correct – they only help to preserve a particular class of artists.

In order to encourage the art of sculpture, sculptors should be given full freedom as artists, or else their creations will be mere made-to-order, commonplace things. These artists should be free to sculpt images of human beings, animals, natural objects and all natural and unnatural events. Then, freely giving shape to new ideas, they will go on producing new gods every day, and the dhyána mantras⁽¹²⁾ of the gods will evolve around the products of their art. Then alone will art find its justification. The artists’ creations will not remain confined within the four walls of the temples, but will rather be in close contact with the common people in all spheres of social life. Statues, deities and other creations will attain a place in every field of life – in homes, drawing rooms, clubs, schools, parks, and indeed, everywhere. Sculpture must also be popularized by occasionally holding exhibitions.

Image-makers do receive some patronage, whether or not it is thanks to idol worship, so that category of people do have a chance to make a living, but as regards those who practise painting, there is no longer any such opportunity. Nevertheless, at one time small groups of painters emerged in different lands. In Bengal, for instance, there was a community of people who took to painting as their trade; they were known in society as painters or pat́uyás. Of course, while painting gods and goddesses they had to work according to the specifications embodied in the sacred hymns and thus had very little scope for original expression. However, apart from these divine images, they used to paint many other things as well, taking full advantage of their freedom and opportunities. People used to patronize these pat́uyás in the same way as they did other artisans. When they went shopping they would also buy one or two pat́s [paintings] painted by the village artists. But those days are now gone. Today such paintings have lost their prestige due to various psychological and economic factors. With the development of sophisticated techniques of printing, it has become far too easy for people to collect all sorts of cheap and showy pictures. This has afforded opportunities to a few reputed artists to earn money, and they, in turn, have no doubt provided opportunities to other traders to earn money as well, but in the process they have uprooted the pat́uyá community from society.

Lack of proper appreciation is one of the causes of the destruction of this art form, if not the chief cause. The people of India have failed to appreciate the pictures painted by the village artists, considering them to be very ordinary or even unnatural. Instead they buy, at higher prices, pictures of the same kind or inferior quality, which are painted by reputed artists from distant lands. Previously people looked down on the paintings of Jamini Roy as pictures of Kalighat, but when a famous gentleman from a far-off country showered unstinting praise upon these very Kalighat pictures, the local people deigned to take a little interest in him. Jamini Roy should have received long ago the recognition which he has today.

Actually, most people have consistently ignored the merits and demerits, the speciality and charm of paintings, and that is why it is incumbent on the state or cultural institutions to keep this form of art and its practitioners alive. Furthermore, they must awaken in the people an aesthetic sense; that is, it is the duty of these institutions to teach people to appreciate art. The names of the artists Nandalal Bose and Aban Thakur are well established today; yet I think people would have taken much longer to recognize them had Rabindranath not preceded them.

To buy original paintings is often beyond people’s means, and so, in spite of their love of art, they are generally satisfied with inferior substitutes; in other words, they decorate their homes with copies. Artists do not usually benefit financially from this, and indeed very often they suffer losses – and not only financially. To remedy this, art galleries should be maintained in all major clubs and libraries; original paintings could then be lent to the members in exactly the same way as books are loaned from the libraries. In this way artists, especially new ones, would receive great encouragement. Clubs and libraries could even take a venture and print the most popular pictures.

Authors’ Publishing Cooperatives

When we consider the most numerous and prolific sáhityikas today, we find that their literary efforts have generally not been able to solve the problem of their subsistence. In most cases the sugar of their profit is being gobbled up by ant-like publishers. We hear everywhere that there is a slump in the book market, and the royalty rates for new writers is not even discussed. If those pioneers of society, who portray the past in the present and the present for future posterity, who paint a picture of the future for the people of the present, are forced to starve or half-starve, this will certainly not be to the credit of human society. It is unthinkable for these creative geniuses to have to curse their own fate.

In my opinion sáhityikas themselves will have to find the solution to this problem. They should publish their books themselves on a cooperative basis. It is not possible for insolvent sáhityikas to operate this business individually, nor is it desirable, for then they might develop a capitalistic, materialistic mentality. Nor is it desirable to constantly blame governments without reason; indeed, if the book publishing business falls into the hands of the government, sáhityikas may suffer more harm than good. The publishing business must be kept completely in the hands of organizations other than governmental ones, or else literature will cease to be literature and will be transformed into the bulletins of various parties, as has been, and is, the case in many countries of the world.

The Critics and Patrons

All have the right to criticize artists or their art – artists who do not like criticism have no future. But it is also appropriate to say a word or two about critics. First, their criticisms should help artists, not discourage them or belittle them. Secondly, those who criticize others should also be well-versed in art and literature. To pass opinion without having studied or written anything oneself, after merely going through a few books of criticism, is nothing but officious meddling and interference. Such critics, who lack adequate knowledge, indulge in literary gasconades based on superficial views, and are able to get away with it. (Such sham and hollow intellect has no value when people comment on science writings, or on philosophical writings or other kinds of scripture; for it will ultimately be exposed.) So even sincere and discriminating artists who are truly willing to change often feel greatly disturbed by such criticism.

In this connection there is one more important point to make: those who could not succeed as authors themselves, even after writing dozens of books, are the most vocal in criticizing others. In other words, they betray their own repeated failures through their criticism. It is futile to expect any help or constructive guidance from this class of so-called critics. In all spheres of life it must be remembered that if one seeks to display one’s authority, one also has to shoulder responsibility. We have the right to walk on the streets, and so we also bear the responsibility of keeping them in good order by forming a municipality. Those who love art and artists should criticize them with a sympathetic mind. In such criticism there may even be caustic censure of serious and sizeable flaws, yet behind all this the sympathetic feeling of the critic’s heart should be easily understood by any sáhityika or artist; then the artist may easily accept the critic. Indeed, today we need this type of critic.

These days Sáhitya Sarasvatii [the goddess of art and learning] is mortgaged to Lakśmii [the goddess of wealth], for the value of the goddess of learning now depends upon the favours of the goddess of wealth. Whatever the quality of the writing, if the publisher is well-established, the book will sell well in the market due to effective advertising. Thus the indigent sáhityika suffers humiliation as he or she cringes at the doors of reputed publishers; and publishers are quick to exploit this situation in their favour. Due to publicity stunts and propaganda, it has become impossible for the common people to know which book is good and which is not.

There is a flagrant dearth of developed critical literature or critical magazines in every country of the world. Books sell in the market on the strength of publicity skills, or on the strength of how they excite the lower human propensities, or in some cases by their crude ability to provide entertainment for the common masses. That is why we find that books published by the authors themselves, regardless of how good they are, do not sell well in the market. On the other hand, books which excite people’s sexuality, whatever might be their content or language, sell extremely well. Every reader knows that books such as those of Sasadhar Dutt’s Mohan series or Dinen Roy’s Rahasyalaharii series sold much better than any of the good-quality books of Bengali literature. Thus sales are not a criterion for judging the superiority of a book. It is therefore a great problem for the readers, purchasers and library directors to select books, and there will be no solution to this problem as long as high-quality critical literature and critical reviews are not available.

Caught in the eddies of commercial and party cliques, sáhityikas have to face yet another disadvantage. Literary criticism, whether right or wrong (though in my opinion all samálocaná is just samálocaná⁽¹³⁾ and should always be constructive), must acquaint the readers with the writer. But where literature is not given proper recognition for any particular reason or where the writer is kept remote from the readers and does not receive an introductory review, the situation is very difficult for the writer. It is to avoid such problems that today’s writers have started knocking at the doors of reputed publishers. This is certainly not a healthy sign for the world of literature.

Powerful people have exploited sáhityikas in various ways, taking advantage of their indigence. This has been going on since ancient times. In those days even kings and emperors encouraged court poets, giving them gifts of tax-free properties, and in that way bought their head and their hands. Talented sáhityikas or artists frequently had to do uncongenial jobs under circumstantial pressure for the amusement of their patrons. To satisfy the whims of their licentious patrons, they had to compose obscene poems and sculpt obscene statues and images. To make their patrons’ enemies look contemptible, they had to besmirch their names with scandals and calumnies. To extol the dress, colour, family, caste, class and ancestry of their patrons, they had to resort to lies and fraud and cite the revelations of the gods as substantiation. The same condition has continued even today. With very few exceptions, most sáhityikas belong to the lower stratum of society. In spite of their desire to work independently, most of them have pawned themselves, from the grey matter of their brains to the very tips of their fingers, to particular people and organizations. Even those who appear from their writings to be bold and spirited, have, under circumstantial pressure, become the playthings of political parties.

In contrast to olden times, today the different countries of the world have allocated numerous awards for sáhityikas. But that is where the danger lies. Every government, whether monarchical, republican or autocratic, is run according to a particular ideology, and so there is little chance for the government to suddenly become impartial in bestowing awards on sáhityikas. Naturally it will judge the merits and demerits of the sáhityikas in accordance with the bias of its own party, and consequently sáhityikas will be compelled to sacrifice their ideals to feed their stomachs.⁽¹⁴⁾ These observations are generally applicable to different types of governments, but especially to democratic states, for in democratic states ideological clashes are more in evidence, and hence the need to propagate ideologies is also more acute. That is why democratic states want to use sáhityikas as propaganda tools. Needless to say, such made-to-order writings cannot be called literature at all – political propaganda can never be called literature.

If a government sincerely wishes to give encouragement to good and honest sáhityikas, it should form a board of non-political educators to give awards. This task could also be performed by the universities for, on the whole, universities still maintain their non-political nature. Nevertheless the appointment of a non-political board is preferable, for these days there is an increasing tendency among universities to flatter political leaders in the hope of getting an increased government subsidy or grant. By liberally awarding doctorate degrees to ministers and their deputies, regardless of whether they deserve it or not, the impartiality of the universities is being gradually eroded.

There is one kind of critic who become extremely upset when sáhityikas attach themselves to a particular literary group; they say that since literature is for all, why should a sáhityika be attached to any particular group? I, however, hold a different view. The ideal of literature is to promote the welfare of all, but the path this endeavour will take cannot necessarily be the same for everyone. What is there to grumble about if those sáhityikas whose mode of service is similar, choose to work in a group? Those who object to the formation of literary groups and societies that dub themselves “Anti-so-and-so” lack tolerance as well as civic sense. Sáhityikas may also form “Pro-so-and-so” groups, and no one should object.

Acquiring Proper Knowledge

The greatest obstacle to the collective progress of the human race is the ignorance of the individual mind. Knowledge is for all – it should be available to all and free like the light and air. It is undeniable that the most powerful medium for the dissemination of knowledge is a good book. That the value of an object is assessed in the field of application is undoubtedly true. And so the greatest means of assessing the value of knowledge is its successful application in the practical field. We cannot accept purely theoretical knowledge as true knowledge – either it is self-delusion or a luxury. Even recognized knowledge loses its value if, after we acquire it, we stow it away like a pile of sacks in a corner of our mind. Of course, if some people lack the ability to express through language either their own feelings or the knowledge that they have acquired through study, I have no complaint against them. Yet I would say that an artist should try to convey whatever he or she knows to the hearts of the people in an easily understandable manner. Anyone who does not do this is, in my opinion, not properly conscious of his or her social responsibility. Of course, it is quite a different matter if a person suffers some sort of inconvenience or disadvantage in this regard. Those who prove their sense of social duty by placing their feelings properly before people are indeed artists; they are truly distinguished sáhityikas.

The sole cause of the internal weakness of human society is its ignorance. The superlative intuition that removes this ignorance is nothing but the thought of the Cosmic Mind. Art or literature is one of the sources from which common people get the opportunity to become established in the Cosmic Mind. If the mind of one fails to know the minds of others, if the minds of many are not comprehended by the mind of one, then how is the establishment of unity possible? The sádhaná of the artist or the sáhityika has been continuing throughout the ages, and its aim is to see one among many and lead the many to the path of one. In this effort there is no imposition, no legal injunction, no imperious pressure by any administration, only a sweet and cooperative relationship. Though separated into many countries, many states, many religions, many communities and many languages, the human race is an indivisible entity. Every human mind is but the diversified individual manifestation of that same indivisible Cosmic Mind. Today we look forward to the advent of that artist, that sáhityika who will convey this truth to the hearts of humanity in a still sweeter language, still more strongly and deeply.

The human race is moving at an irresistible speed. Today humanity wants to forget those whose works have centred around various kinds of fissiparous tendencies. Human beings want to channelize the full range of their vision towards the bright future – a future which will transcend all individual or group interests, all territorial limits of countries and states, and transform the individual fates of many people into one destiny. Human beings no longer want to rely on so-called providential favour.

Individual heroism is about to lose its vibrant spirit. Nowadays people have learned that if the thrill of victory is due to anyone, it certainly belongs to humanity. About seven hundred years ago the Asian poet Chandidasa, from an obscure corner of Bengal, sang about the same great possibility:

Shuńa he mánuś bhái,
Sabár upare mánuś satya
Táhár upare nái.

[O human beings, my brothers and sisters,
Humanity is the highest truth,
There is nothing beyond it.]

Today not even the Pacific Ocean between Asia and America is difficult to cross. The people of Asia and America are touching each other’s minds and have learned to accept each other sympathetically as their own. Europe, Africa, Australia, Mercury, Jupiter, the stars, the comets, the constellations – none of them are alien to the others, none are distant from the others. Gradually everyone has begun to realize the vibration of the one integral mind.

It is my firm conviction that the future of humanity is not dark. Every human being will reach that inextinguishable flame that is forever alight beyond the veil of the darkness of the present – and reach it they must. Those who carry the message of that effulgent light will be forever revered by all humanity. I see in the sáhityikas and artists of today the potentiality to become such memorable and venerable people, and that is why I hold them in great regard. The American poet Carl Sandburg has said:

There is only one man in the world and his name is All Men.
There is only one woman in the world and her name is All Women.
There is only one child in the world and the child’s name is All Children.⁽¹⁵⁾

In exactly the same strain, in perhaps sweeter language, the same idea has been expressed by the Asian poet Satyendranath:

Jagat juŕiyá ek játi áche
Se játir nám mánuśa játi;
Ek prthiviir stanye pálita
Eki ravi-shashii moder sáthii.

Shiitátapa, kśudha-trśńár jválá
Sabái ámrá samán bujhi;
Kaci-káṋcáguli d́áṋto kare’ tuli
Báṋcibár taŕe samán yujhi.

Dosar khuṋji o básar báṋdhi go
Jale d́ubi, báṋci páile d́auṋá;
Kálo ár dhalo báhire keval
Bhitare sabái samán ráuṋá.

Báhirer chop áṋcaŕe se lop
Bhitarer rauṋ palake phot́e.
Bámuń-shúdra, brhat kśudra
Krtrim bhed dhúláy lot́e.

Ráge anuráge nidrita jáge
Ásal ḿánuś prakat́ hay;
Varńe varńe náhika visheś
Nikhil bhuvan Brahmamaya.

[There is only one race in the world,
And that is the human race,
Nourished with the milk of the same Mother Earth,
Dwelling within the same compass of the sun and the moon.

The same heat and cold, hunger and thirst,
We all equally feel.
Together we raise tender green plants and make them strong.
We all struggle to preserve our lives.

We seek friends and comrades and build happy homes,
We all drown in water, we all thrive on land.
Black and white are merely external hues –
Internally the blood of all is red.

By penetrating below the surface,
The true inner nature is instantly revealed.
The Brahman and the outcaste, the great and the small,
Are all artificial distinctions that ultimately crumble to dust.

When love awakens in sleeping souls,
Then true human beings will emerge.
There is no difference between one colour, one race, and another
For the entire universe is pervaded by one Infinite Consciousness.]

Human beings of today, in chorus with Chandidasa, Sandburg and Satyendranath, will move together shoulder to shoulder towards an exalted human oneness, towards the highest fulfilment of their individual lives.

Niviŕ aekye yáy mishe’ yáy
Sakal bhágya sab hrday;
Mánuśe mánuśe náiko prabhed
Nikhil mánav Brahmamay.

[Inseparably united, all faiths and hearts will merge.
For there is no distinction among human beings –
The whole humanity is an expression of the Supreme One.]

Footnotes

(1) There is no equivalent word for sáhityikas in English. Sáhityikas are those who write with the thought of the welfare of all humanity uppermost in their minds. –Eds.

(2) “Coastal literature”. Tat́astha, “coastal”, refers to the “coastline” or “shoreline” between the temporal and the eternal (see the section “Building the Road to the Future”). –Eds.

(3) The spirit of this mantra is that all human beings are inseparably united. For the complete mantra and the English translation, see “Social Psychology”, “Ananda Marga – a Revolution” or “Problems of the Day”; for the author’s line-by-line explanation of the mantra, see “Saḿgacchadhvaḿ” in Volume 3. –Eds.

(4) See “Práńa Dharma” and “Deprivation of Práńa Dharma” in Volume 2. –Eds.

(5) Compiled by the late poet Vasanta Ranjan Roy Vidwadvallabha.

(6) Philosophically, Shiva-liuṋga refers to the Entity from which all things originate. For further discussion on Shiva-liuṋga, see “Tantra and Indo-Aryan Civilization” in Discourses on Tantra Volume 1, 1993. –Eds.

(7) Cowrie shells were once used as money. –Eds.

(8) A vegetable dish which is not meant to be hot or spicy. –Eds.

(9) A sour sauce-like disk which never contains ghee. –Eds.

(10) See also the later section The Critics and Patrons. –Eds.

(11) As is the custom with, for example, the statues used during the annual Durgá Pújá festival. –Eds.

(12) A Sanskrit verse listing the attributes of a deity, to be used for visualizing that deity in meditation. –Eds.

(13) Samálocaná is normally used to mean “criticism”, but more precisely means “proper criticism”. –Eds.

(14) See also the earlier section Society’s Responsibility towards the Artists. –Eds.

(15) This is part of the last stanza of “Timesweep”, published in Honey and Salt, 1963. –Eds.

Chapter 12	Universal Humanism [a compilation]

To the great hero Shrii Subhash Chandra Bose
whom I did love and whom I do love even now.

1

Parama Puruśa [Supreme Consciousness] is my Father, Paramá Prakrti [Supreme Operative Principle] is my Mother, and the universe is my homeland. We are all citizens of this universe. The universe is the thought projection of the Macrocosmic Mind, and it is in the extroversial and introversial phases of the Cosmic imaginative flow that the creation, preservation and destruction of all entities continues.

When an individual imagines an object, then that person alone, and no one else, is the owner of the object. For example, when an imaginary human being roams about in an imaginary green field, the imaginer, and not the imaginary person, is the owner of the field. The universe is the thought projection of Brahma [the Supreme Entity], so the ownership of the universe lies with the Supreme Entity, and not with His⁽¹⁾ imagined beings.

None of the movable or immovable property of this universe belongs to any particular individual; everything is the common patrimony of all, and the Father of all is Brahma. All living beings can enjoy their rightful share of this property, like members of a joint family in the Dáyabhága⁽²⁾ system. As members of a joint family, human beings should safeguard this common property in a befitting manner and utilize it properly. They should also make proper arrangements so that everyone can enjoy it with equal rights, ensuring that all have the minimum requirements of life to enable them to live in a healthy body with a sound mind.

We must not forget, even for a single moment, that the entire animate world is a vast joint family. Nature has not assigned any portion of this property to any particular individual. Private ownership has been created by selfish opportunists, as the loopholes in this system provide them with ample scope for self-aggrandizement through exploitation. When the entire wealth of the universe is the common patrimony of all living beings, can the system in which some roll in luxury, while others, deprived of a morsel of food, shrivel up and starve to death bit by bit, be said to have the support of dharma?

In a joint family every member is provided with adequate food, clothing, education and medical treatment, and amenities, as per their individual needs, according to the financial capacity of the entire family. If, however, any member of the family appropriates more grains, clothes, books or medicines than he or she requires, will that person not be the cause of distress to other members of the family? In such circumstances his or her actions will be certainly against dharma – certainly antisocial.

Similarly, the capitalists of this modern world are anti-dharma, or antisocial, creatures. To accumulate massive wealth, they reduce others to skin and bones gnawed by hunger and force them to die of starvation; to dazzle people with the glamour of their garments, they compel others to wear rags; and to increase their own vital strength, they suck dry the vital juice of others.

A member of a joint family cannot be called a social being if he or she does not possess the sentiment of oneness with the other members, or if he or she does not want to accept the lofty ideal of joint rights and the principle of rationality. According to true spiritual ideology the system of private ownership cannot be accepted as absolute and final, and hence capitalism cannot be supported either.

2

Considering the collective interests of all living beings, it is essential that capitalism be eradicated. But, what should be the proper method to achieve this end?

It cannot be denied that violence gives rise to violence. Then again, nothing can ensure that the application of force without violence, with the intention of rectification, will necessarily bring good results. So what should be done under such circumstances?

Nothing would be better, if it were possible, than the eradication of capitalism by friendly persuasion and humanistic appeals. In that case the peace of the greater human family would not be much disturbed. But can it be guaranteed that everyone will respond to this approach? Some people may say that a day will come when, as a result of repeatedly listening to such appeals and gradually imbibing them over a long time, as well as through proper mental and spiritual education, good sense will prevail among the exploiters. This argument is very pleasant to hear. Such attempts are not reprehensible. But is it practicable to wait indefinitely for good sense to prevail among the exploiters? By then the exploited mass will have given up the ghost!

Though the humanistic approach works in some cases, in most instances it does not produce any result; and even where it does work, it takes a very long time. So, wherever necessary, capitalism must be forced to abandon its ferocious hunger by taking strong measures. But it cannot be assumed that even these measures will be completely successful, because those who appear to be under control due to fear of the law will adopt other ways to fulfil their desires. Black marketing, adulteration, etc., cannot be totally eradicated by threats or by arousing fear of the law.

Thus, stronger measures will have to be taken; that is, tremendous circumstantial pressure will have to be created. To create this sort of circumstantial pressure, the application of force is absolutely necessary. Those who believe that the non-application of force alone is ahiḿsá [not to hurt anyone] are bound to fail. No problem in this world can be solved by adopting this kind of ahiḿsá.

3

I cannot support the attitude of those who denounce capitalism at every opportunity, because this allows capitalists to become alert and invent more scientific and devious ways to exploit the people. Those who lack a constructive ideology will never be capable of destroying capitalism, even if they speak sweet words, use threats, or create circumstantial pressure.

4

The ambition to become rich by exploiting others is a type of psychic disease. In fact, if the infinite longing of the human mind does not find the proper path leading to psychic and spiritual fulfilment, it becomes engaged in accumulating excessive physical wealth by depriving others. If any member of a joint family appropriates food from the family food store by using physical or intellectual force, he or she becomes the cause of misery to others. Similarly, when capitalists declare, “We have amassed wealth by our talent and labour. If others have the capacity and diligence, let them also do the same; nobody prevents them,” they do not care to realize that the volume of commodities on the earth is limited, whereas the requirement is common to all. Excessive individual affluence, in most cases, deprives others of the minimum requirements of life.

The incapability to recognize the requirements of others because of insensitiveness is a psychic disease. Those afflicted with this disease are also members of the vast human family; they are also our brothers and sisters. So, either by making humanitarian appeals or by creating circumstantial pressure, arrangements will have to be made to cure them of their ailment. It would be a great sin even to think of their destruction.

5

Even if extreme steps, such as threats and circumstantial pressure, are taken, can it be said that the nature of those with vested interests is going to be reformed? Rather, they will always search for suitable opportunities to launch a counter-revolution.

To protect the common people from the clutches of exploitation, as an initial measure we will have to create circumstantial pressure, but to reform the character of these ailing people, long-term arrangements will also have to be made for their psychic and spiritual education. Human society is ready to wait indefinitely to reform their character by psychic and spiritual methods, because by then their fangs will have been broken, and by creating circumstantial pressure, their capacity for exploitation will have been snatched away.

6

Another excellent example of vested interest is the caste system! Once a section of people established its supremacy over others through the power of superior knowledge and intellect. Even today the descendants of that section of people want their social supremacy and opportunities for exploitation to continue unchallenged.

7

We cannot neglect even a single living being in this creation, nor can we ignore the smallest part of the universe. So, as far as possible, the industrial system should be organized according to the principle of decentralization.

Industrial development in one part of the world cannot satisfactorily eradicate poverty or unemployment in another part. Therefore, in the industrial system, it is necessary to build up numerous self-sufficient units, at least for those industrial and agricultural commodities which are considered to be essential for maintaining life. Otherwise people will have to suffer tremendous hardships during war and other abnormal circumstances. With the development of transportation and communication, the size of these units can be expanded.

8

In the field of industry, the necessity of both small-scale and large-scale industries will have to be accepted. For example, the requisite amount of yarn needed to meet the demand for cloth in a self-sufficient unit may be produced by many big yarn mills. Here the production of yarn can be treated as a large-scale industry, and with the help of this industry, numerous small-scale industries will prosper. Viable weavers’ cooperatives can be established, centred on each yarn mill. Weavers will then get the opportunity to weave cloth while remaining in their own homes. They will no longer be required to leave their homes at the call of a distant large-scale industry. At the same time the weaving industry will not suffer even during times of war, because everything will be within easy reach.

The acceptance of both small-scale and large-scale industries does not mean that old machinery is to be encouraged. With the development of science, advanced machinery will have to be utilized. The attempt to stop the use of sugar by advertising the benefits of molasses, or to campaign against mill-made cloth by extolling the virtues of khadi, is senseless. As long as advanced mechanization and scientific decentralization have not been adopted, molasses, hand-spun cloth and similar enterprises should be encouraged, and their importance to the rural economy must be accepted.

Where industrialization is intended to plunder profits, obviously the policy of decentralization is not likely to be supported. But where industrialization is intended to meet the requirements of society, there can be no objection to the policy of decentralization.

9

In fact, the use of advanced scientific technology means rapid mechanization. Conservative people vociferously criticize this mechanization. Actually, such mechanization within a capitalistic structure inevitably brings more misery, in the form of unemployment, to the common people. That is why conservative people oppose it.

Those who want to promote public welfare without antagonizing capitalism will have to oppose mechanization. This is because when the productive capacity of machinery is doubled, the required human labour is decreased by half, so the capitalists retrench large numbers of workers from their factories. A few optimists may say, “Under circumstantial pressure other ways will be found to employ these surplus labourers in different jobs, and the very effort to find these alternatives will accelerate scientific advancement, so the ultimate result of mechanization under capitalism is, in fact, good.” This view, though not useless, has no practical value, because it is not possible to arrange new jobs for retrenched workers as quickly as they become surplus labourers due to rapid mechanization. Surplus labourers are ruined, bit by bit, due to poverty and hunger. A few among them try to keep body and soul together by resorting to petty theft, armed robbery, profligacy and other sorts of antisocial activities, but this situation is certainly not desirable.

In a collective economic system there is no scope for such an unhealthy situation; in this system mechanization will lead to less labour and more prosperity. With the double increase in the productivity of machines, the working hours of labourers will be reduced by half. Of course, the reduction in working hours will have to be determined keeping in view the demand for commodities and the availability of labour.

In a collective economic system the benevolent use of science will bring about human welfare. It is possible that as a result of mechanization no one will be required to work for more than five minutes a week. Not always being preoccupied with the problems of acquiring food, clothing, etc., people’s psychic and spiritual potentialities will no longer be wasted. They will be able to devote ample time to such activities as sports, literary pursuits and spiritual practices.

10

The necessity of the trade union movement, to safeguard the interests of workers, cannot be denied. To guide this movement along the proper path, appropriate steps must be taken.

Generally it is observed that trade union leaders do nothing to make workers conscious of their responsibilities in comparison to the extent to which they try to create in workers an awareness of their rights and demands. The best way to rectify this situation is to clearly accept the right of workers to participate in the management of industrial, trade and commercial enterprises. In this regard idealistic sermons or moral preaching will not bring positive results.

Another great defect in the trade union movement is that its leadership does not always remain in the hands of true manual labourers or other workers. Political leaders with party interests tend to dominate trade unions. Their primary objective is to promote the selfish interests of the party, not the welfare of the workers.

11

Industry, agriculture, trade and commerce – almost everything – needs to be managed, as far as possible, through cooperative organizations. For this, special facilities will have to be provided to cooperative organizations whenever necessary. Adequate safeguards will have to be arranged, and slowly private ownership, or the system of individual management, will have to be eradicated from specific areas of agriculture, industry, trade and commerce.

Only those enterprises which are difficult to manage on a cooperative basis because they are either too small, or simultaneously small and complex, can be left to individual management. Similarly, the responsibility for those enterprises which cannot be conveniently managed on a cooperative basis because they are either too large, or simultaneously large and complex, can be undertaken by the immediate state government (in the case of a federation), or by the local body (in the absence of a federation).

It is desirable that the management of industrial, agricultural, trade and commercial enterprises not be in the hands of the central government or the world government (after the establishment of the world government). If it is, the common people will not get the direct or even the indirect opportunity to participate in the management of these enterprises. In such cases capitalists, opportunists or self-seeking politicians can easily take control of them and misappropriate public wealth.

12

In all human actions the tender touch of humanity should be present. Those with the tendency to not deprive others cannot, on the grounds of justice and equity, accept the principle of private ownership. The economic structures in the world today, however, are not based on human rights. In order to recognize human rights, one will have to be ready for revolutionary changes, and one will also have to welcome them. The socialization of landed property, industry, trade and commerce – almost everything – is the major objective of this revolution.

Here, in this context, I deliberately have not used the term “nationalization”. Just as the slogans, “Landlords are not the owners of the land” and, “Industrialists are not the owners of the factories” are incorrect, similarly the slogans, “Land belongs to those who push the plough” and, “Factories belong to those who wield the hammer” are also incorrect. The people in general are the real owners of all the wealth in this world, and that is why I have used the term “socialization”.

Among those who support the elimination of private ownership, some consider that adequate compensation should be paid before taking over landed properties, factories and commercial enterprises. Others consider that, until now, the capitalist owners of such enterprises have perpetuated immense exploitation, so the question of compensation cannot arise. If the payment of compensation continues for a long time, it is very true that the rapid welfare of the people will not be possible. Hence, the proposal to purchase the properties of capitalists cannot be supported.

It is also true that the owners of such properties are not always physically fit or financially well off. The owner of a property may be a helpless widow or an extremely old invalid. In such cases, certainly, a pension should be arranged for them. Of course, if the owner of a property happens to be a minor, then, definitely, a stipend has to be arranged for his or her upbringing and education! Even in the case where the owner is a strong and healthy man, if there is no other means of livelihood, suitable opportunities will have to be made for his income, according to his qualifications and capacities. This is the proper humanistic arrangement.

13

Those who shudder at the sight of various social vices and lament, “Everything is lost; righteousness is gone; morality has vanished…” should realize that among all the causes behind this so-called all-round degeneration, social injustice is the principal one.

Because of injustices against women with respect to their social rights and because women are economically crippled, a section of women is compelled to take to prostitution. Although there are many causes of this profession, these are the main two.

Ananda Marga recognizes that women are as dignified human beings as men. Ananda Marga, in addition, wants to encourage women to be economically independent of men. The system in which characterless men swagger about in society while fallen women are denied proper opportunities despite their sincere desire to lead an honest life, can never be supported by justice. Women who desire to lead an honest life must be given a respectable place in society.

14

The dowry system is yet another glaring example of social injustice. In my book Human Society [Part 1], I have already mentioned that the dowry system has two major causes: the first is economic, and the second is the numerical disparity between women and men.⁽³⁾ With the decreasing economic dependence of women on men, the inequity of the dowry system will cease to exist. But to expedite this process, it is essential to propagate high ideals among young men and women. Our sons and daughters are not commodities like rice, pulse, salt, oil or cattle that they can be haggled over in the marketplace.

15

The cry, “Peace! Peace!” has become a craze in the world today. Can anything be achieved by such cries? There is no way to establish peace except to fight against the very factors which disturb peace. Even in the personal life of every human being, there is a constant fight between the benevolent and the malevolent intellect, or between vidyá and avidyá. At times vidyá triumphs, while at other times avidyá wins. In social life, too, this fight between vidyá and avidyá continues.

Vidyá has to fight avidyá, and in this fight wherever and as long as vidyá remains triumphant, there is a special type of peace which may be called sáttvikii shánti [sentient peace]. Similarly, wherever and as long as avidyá remains victorious in this fight, there, also, a special type of peace prevails which may be called támasikii shánti [static peace]. Thus we find that peace is actually a relative factor.

Absolute or permanent peace cannot occur in collective life because the created universe, which is embedded in the process of saiṋcara [extroversion] and pratisaiṋcara [introversion] is, in fact, dominated first by Avidyá [extroversial force], and then by Vidyá [introversial force], respectively.⁽⁴⁾ When the existence of the universe is rooted in the existence of these two, then permanent peace (támasikii or sáttvikii as the case may be) in the universe would mean the cessation of the activities of either Vidyá or Avidyá, or both. This is why it has to be said that collective peace in the universe cannot occur except in the case of pralaya,⁽⁵⁾ and the concept of pralaya is illogical. However in individual life human beings can certainly achieve absolute peace through sadhana. From the worldly viewpoint I consider this state to be the pralaya of individual life.

Where government servants are strong, static, antisocial individuals maintain a low profile. Then a special kind of peace prevails in a country, and this I call “sentient peace”. Where government servants are weak, righteous people bend their heads before the dominant influence of antisocial individuals. This is also a kind of peaceful state, which I call “static peace”.

Static peace is definitely not desirable. Suppose a particular group of people belonging to a particular region oppress or attack another group of people of the same region or of some other region. In such circumstances, if all others simply remain mute spectators or resort to the path of negotiation, compromise or mutual settlement as the only solution, it should be clearly understood that they are encouraging static peace.

Now, suppose a man seems to have good relations with his neighbours, but it becomes apparent that he is about to murder his wife, what should be the duty of the neighbours? Will they remain tight-lipped, sit quietly with their arms folded, and dismiss the situation as purely a domestic affair, thereby making the murder of the woman easier, and thus assist in establishing static peace? No, that is not the dictum of human dharma. On the contrary they should rush to the house, break down the door, save the woman, take suitable action against the male tyrant, and in this way come forward to establish sentient peace.

Likewise, if any country perpetrates atrocities on its minorities or attacks a weak neighbouring country, then the other neighbouring countries should, if necessary, resist the oppressor with the force of arms, and thereby come forward to establish sentient peace.

Thus, those who are keen to establish sentient peace must endeavour to acquire strength. It is impossible for goats to establish sentient peace in the society of tigers.

Regrettably, it has to be said that those who hold the view that non-violence means non-application of force can neither establish sentient peace, nor defend their hard-earned freedom. Their declaration of non- violence may be deceitful, or a diplomatic manoeuvre to conceal their weaknesses, but it will never be possible to establish sentient peace through this type of approach.

16

Every atom and molecule of this universe is the common property of all living beings. This has to be recognized as a matter of principle. After recognizing this fact, statements such as, “This is indigenous and that is foreign”, “So-and-so is qualified for the citizenship of such-and-such country while others are not” and, “Such-and-such community will get certain political rights, neither more nor less than that”, are totally irrelevant. In fact, such statements nakedly expose the vested interests. Where the people of one country suffer due to lack of land or food, while those of another country have abundant land and plentiful food, what else is it but a type of capitalism!

All people have the right to travel and settle anywhere and everywhere they like and live as dignified human beings – this is their birthright. If certain groups in any country refuse to accept this fundamental right of human beings, then it is to be understood that their slogans for peace are nothing but mere hoaxes intended to hoodwink the people. What to speak of this tiny earth, every planet, satellite, star, meteor and galaxy is the homeland of human beings! If anyone wants to deprive people of this birthright, human beings will have to establish it by force.

Sab deshe mor desh ache
Ámi sei desh laba bújhiyá

[All countries are my native land;
I shall select my own homeland.]

17

The absence of collective outlook is the root of all evil. The strong are perpetrating atrocities and injustices on the weak; powerful human groups are exploiting powerless ones. Under such circumstances it is the duty of virtuous people to wage war on the oppressors. It is no use sitting quietly, waiting indefinitely for moral preaching to bring results. All virtuous people will, therefore, have to become united. At the same time preparations will have to continue to fight against the demons.

Those who perpetrate atrocities on collective life or on a particular human group, cannot be pardoned. In such cases pardoning not only reflects weakness, it also encourages injustice, because the oppressors become more tyrannical. In individual life, if an innocent person is oppressed by dishonest people, the person, if he or she so desires, may pardon the oppressors, just to test his or her capacity for tolerance or for some other reason. But if the oppressors torture a human group, in that case no single individual, as the representative of the group, can pardon them, and actually that person has no right to do so. If the representative acts beyond his or her jurisdiction, that person will be denounced by the group he or she represents. So it has to be said that pardoning is a practice for individual life only, not for collective life.

18

The more the human mind becomes magnanimous or expanded, the more it rises above the sentiments of tribalism, communalism, provincialism, etc. Often I hear people say that nationalism is an appreciable sentiment and that there is no narrowness in it. But is this true? Nationalism is also relative, just like tribalism, communalism or provincialism. In some places it is more worthwhile than tribalism, communalism or provincialism, while in other places it is less worthwhile.

Let us consider, for example, the case of a Portuguese nationalist. The mental object of a Muslim communalist is certainly larger than that of a Portuguese nationalist, because the former desires the welfare of a greater number of people than the latter. This is because the number of Muslims in the world is greater than the number of Portuguese. Judged from this perspective, I cannot denounce the sentiments of a Muslim communalist in comparison to a Portuguese nationalist. Similarly, it has to be accepted that the sentiments of a Rajput casteist are broader than those of a Portuguese nationalist, because the former desires the welfare of more people than the latter. Likewise, the feelings of an Andhrite provincialist will have to be considered broader than those of a Portuguese nationalist. If one supports provincialism with seventy-five million Bengalees, it must be accepted that these feelings are more expanded than the nationalism of most of the nations of the world. (The population of most of the nations of the world is less than the population of Bengal.)

Hence it is observed that communalism, casteism, provincialism and nationalism are all of the same defective type. Those who are able to capitalize on one of these sentiments advocate it volubly. In fact, every one of these sentiments suffers from the defect of ism, and is completely filled with narrowness, violence, envy, mean mindedness, etc. Those who enter the field of social welfare by creating divisions between “yours” and “mine”, substantially widen the fissures of fissiparous intellect in human society.

Those who want to promote the welfare of all human beings, remaining above all sorts of parochial sentiments, have no alternative but to embrace universalism with their heart and soul – there is no other way. As universalism is totally devoid of any characteristic of ism, it is not proper to depict universalism as an ism. If everyone is looked upon as one’s own, no one remains beyond the periphery of one’s kith and kin. Naturally, then, there is no scope for violence, envy, narrowness, etc.

19

The more time is passing by, the more the glare of casteism, provincialism, communalism and nationalism is fading away. The human beings of today must understand that in the near future they will definitely have to accept universalism. So those who seek to promote social welfare will have to mobilize all their vitality and intellect in the endeavour to establish a world organization, abandoning all plans to form communal or national organizations. They will have to engage themselves in constructive activities in a straight-forward manner, instead of resorting to duplicity and deceitfulness.

Many people say that divergent national interests are the only impediments to the formation of a world organization, or a world government. But I say this is not the only obstacle, rather it is just a minor impediment. The main obstacle is the apprehension of local leaders that they will lose their leadership. With the establishment of a world government, the total domination which they exercise today in their respective countries, societies and nations will cease to exist.

Divergent national interests and popular scepticism may stand in the way of the formation of a world government. To allay baseless fears from the minds of the people, this task should be carried out step by step. Obstacles will have to be negotiated with an open mind, and the world government will have to be strengthened gradually, not suddenly. For example, to run the world government, two houses may be maintained for an indefinite period. The lower house will be composed of representatives from various parts [countries] of the world, elected on the basis of population. The members of the upper house will be elected country-wise. This will provide opportunities to those countries which cannot send even a single representative to the lower house due to their small population, because they will be able to express their opinions before the people of the world by sending their representatives to the upper house. The upper house will not adopt any bill unless it has been passed by the lower house, but the upper house will reserve the right to reject the decisions of the lower house.

Initially the world government should go on working merely as a law-framing body. The world government should also have the right to make decisions regarding the application or non-application of any law, for a limited period, in any particular region.

In the first phase of the establishment of the world government, the governments of different countries will have only administrative power. As they will not have the authority to frame laws, it will be somewhat difficult for them to arbitrarily inflict atrocities on their linguistic, religious or political minorities.

20

With advances in technology, the mastery of human beings over space and time will continue slowly to increase, so the necessity of a world government, also, will be profoundly felt. Gradually the people in one region of the world will have to interact more with the people in various other regions, and in the course of this interaction they will have to try to understand one another better.

The human race has numerous languages. Each language is our language, the language of all of us. In this context sentiments such as, “My language; your language” or, “Indigenous language; foreign language” are extremely defective. Only this much can be said: that we have many languages, but I can express myself in one or more than one language among them.

Although all the languages of the world deserve equal respect, a common language for the convenient exchange of ideas among people of different regions of the world will have to be selected. The most widely spoken language in the world will have to be accepted with an open mind as the vishva bháśá [universal or world language]. As long as the world government is not vested with full administrative authority over the entire world, different states in various parts of the world may, at their convenience, accept the world language or any other local language as their official language. What- ever language may be accepted as the official language by any particular state, it will not be proper to allow any slackness in facilitating the study and teaching of the world language. Under no circumstances can we keep ourselves cut off from the rest of the world like frogs in a well. Or, staying away from our other brothers and sisters throughout the world in the name of nationalism, under no circumstances should we die, breaking our heads in darkness.

Although, at present, English is the world language, all languages are subject to birth and death. So it cannot be said that English will continue to enjoy the same status for eternity. The most widely spoken language in the world in any particular age will have to be acknowledged as the world language of that age.

21

For the general convenience of the people of the world, the necessity of a world script is not as great as the necessity of a world language. But then, it cannot be denied that learning languages will be easier if the different languages of the world are written in one script.

Among all the scripts prevalent in the world, the Roman script is the most scientific. But if this script is used for all spoken languages, certain practical difficulties will arise. Besides this, people are partial to their regional scripts. In my opinion it is better if the decision whether to use the Roman script for different languages or not is left to the people who speak those languages. The greater the number of people who learn the Roman script as the world script, the better it is.

There is no rule that the script of the world language of a particular age is to be the world script of that age. Rather, the script which is judged to be the most scientific script of the particular age will be the world script. The study of the world language of the age should be undertaken in that very script.

22

Compared to the world language, the necessity of a world script is much less, while a world dress is not necessary at all. Why only a world dress? In my opinion even the national dress of different countries is not desirable.

People select their dress in accordance with the local climate and environment, depending upon their physical needs and professional requirements, hence it is better not to criticize anyone’s dress. For example, the normal dress in eastern India and East Pakistan [Bangladesh] is lungi, dhoti [men’s lower-body garments] and punjabi [a style of men’s shirt], but men wear trousers, as required, while working in factories. Likewise, in north-western India and West Pakistan [Pakistan], while the traditional dress is páyjámá [loose-fitting pants] and sheroyánii [another style of men’s shirt], peasants never wear this dress while ploughing the fields. Under such circumstances, the question whether one dress is good and another is bad does not arise.

23

The human race has only one culture. I am not prepared to accept that there are numerous cultures. But then, this much can be said: the dances, songs, pronunciations and festive celebrations of various groups of the human race have their local peculiarities. These local peculiarities, or differences in manners and customs, cannot be considered separate cultures.

Such differences in the local manners and customs of human beings cannot be removed by the force of law or by dictatorial rule. If attempts are made to destroy local manners and customs, languages, and other social conventions in the name of national unity, human unity, or national sentiment, in all likelihood that will result in the escalation of mutual distrust and violence, which will lead collective life down the path of destruction.

I am in favour of social synthesis. In my opinion, the more intimately people associate with one another and the more closely one corner of the earth comes to another corner, the more local specialities in customs and manners will create newer forms as a result of frequent intermixing. The flowers of different gardens will be gathered together and transformed into a bouquet. The beauty of the bouquet will be no less than the beauty of the individual flowers, rather it will be more beautiful. The melody of Dhrupada⁽⁶⁾ will be transformed into Kheyal,⁽⁷⁾ while classical music will be changed into kiirtana, bául, bhát́iyálii, járii, darbeshi,⁽⁸⁾ etc.

If different countries or if people of so-called different communities show enthusiasm for increasing social interaction and matrimonial relations, within a very short time social synthesis can be achieved. To some extent we notice the positive effects of such synthesis in cosmopolitan cities.

24

The population of the world is rapidly increasing. Naturally, many people have become extremely alarmed about this. In capitalist countries there are sufficient reasons for such alarm, because in these countries the increasing population means greater poverty for the people.

In a collective economic system, however, there is no reason for such alarm. In the event of shortages in the food and accommodation of an entire population, people, through their collective efforts, will convert uncultivated regions into new cornfields [arable land], increase the productivity of the soil by applying scientific methods, and produce human food from the earth, water and air by chemical processes. If the earth becomes depleted of resources, the people of the world will rush to other planets and satellites in search of new land.

In capitalist countries, if people adopt birth control methods to avoid financial hardship in their families, there is nothing to be said against them. However, using birth control methods which deform the bodies of men and women or which destroy their reproductive capacity forever, cannot be supported, because in such cases a severe mental reaction may appear in them at any moment.⁽⁹⁾

25

Science is moving fast – it is moving ahead and it will continue to move ahead. Nobody can check the advancement of science by criticizing it. Those who try to make such attempts will themselves lag behind – they will be rejected by the modern world.

Human beings will definitely be able to increase human longevity by scientific techniques. In certain special cases they will even be able to restore life to dead bodies. The endeavour to expedite the advent of that auspicious day of science is certainly an important part of social service.

One day human beings will also learn how to produce human babes in science laboratories. Perhaps then it will be possible for human beings to place an order for their children and to get children according to their choice. Why should these laboratory babes lag behind modern humans with respect to intellectual and spiritual wealth! Those opposed to science today challenge, “Let human beings demonstrate that they can produce living entities!” By producing laboratory babes, the human beings of the future will give a befitting reply to this challenge.⁽¹⁰⁾

The development of intuition will make human beings more spiritually inclined. What Saguńa Brahma [the Qualified Supreme Entity] is directly doing today will be done increasingly by the human beings of tomorrow. In that age the reproductive capacity of the human body will gradually cease to exist.

26

Party politics is one of the factors which stands, or tries to stand, in the way of human unity. In fact party politics is even more dangerous than disease-causing germs. In party politics all the refined attributes of the human mind, such as simplicity and the spirit of service, slowly but surely get totally destroyed. Party affiliation commands more respect than individual ability; service to self, not service to people, is the main motto; ministerial office, rather than human welfare, is considered superior; and mass deception, political somersaults, etc., are most common phenomena.

Instead of rectifying themselves, politicians want to accomplish everything through their grandiloquence. By identifying the weaknesses in others and by resorting to bombastic language, they incite one section of people against another so that they can usurp the seat of power and cling to it. Human beings will have to remain vigilant against persons of this type.

Politicians want to poke their noses into every aspect of life: social, religious, educational, literary, etc. Under the hypnotic spell of power, politicians remain oblivious of the fact that experience and wisdom in various spheres of life cannot be acquired by merely mouthing high-sounding slogans from public platforms.

27

Honest and benevolent individuals should carefully steer clear of party politics. The question may arise, In the absence of party politics, will honest individuals succeed on their own in forming governments or in serving the state? Is there any necessity for organized endeavour? In answer to this question I will say that those who are honest, who really want to promote human welfare, and who believe in a world government and the ideals of Ánanda Parivára [a blissful, universal family], must possess the spirit of mutual cooperation. They may form themselves into boards exclusively for the purpose of rendering social service collectively (and not for fomenting politics), but it will not be proper for such boards to contest elections.

People should cast their votes for deserving human beings – not for the lamppost holding the party ticket.⁽¹¹⁾

To further the interests of the party, party politics may publicly oppose something which is often secretly encouraged. Communalism, provincialism, casteism, etc. – none of these are considered bad for the sake of party interests. The only identity of human beings is that they are humans – living beings. Party politics strives to keep people oblivious of this fact – it tries to pulverize the psychic wealth of human beings under the steamroller of party interests.

28

The fight between vidyá and avidyá will continue as long as the creation exists. Politicians averse to spirituality will never be able to stop this fight by delivering high-sounding speeches from public platforms or by releasing white doves. To fight against avidyá, human beings will have to become powerful. For this, the power of weapons, psychic power and spiritual power – all three – are required.

Those who are professional hypocrites will never perform spiritual practices. Even if they deliver high-sounding speeches on spirituality to further their own interests, they will not be able to inspire the common people to adopt spiritual practices, because they themselves lack the required strength of character. Bitterly disgusted with the deceitfulness of such leaders, the common people will not get any of the ingredients necessary to increase their psychic wealth. Finally politicians will come to depend solely on the strength of arms. Thus it is found that brute force alone is their only refuge.

29

The common people can be temporarily bewildered by the chicanery of party politics, and this is especially so when politicians happen to be good orators. By the power of their oratory, politicians try to escape from the consequences of their misdeeds. It is noticeable that politicians, to further their party interests and to enhance their individual power and position, do not hesitate even to cause suffering to millions of people. Perhaps, out of a sense of duty, the common people should impeach (in a court of justice) culpable politicians.

By merely delivering a few fiery lectures before less intelligent common people, the protagonists of party politics tear apart all the hopes and aspirations of the common people and undermine their prosperity. Various bizarre ideas jumble the minds of the common people, and they become dumbstruck.

30

The fight between vidyá and avidyá will go on forever; so the necessity of more or less police and military will also go on forever. But then, when the world government is established, this necessity will decrease.

As there is always fight between vidyá and avidyá, more or less class struggle, too, will continue forever. Hence those who day-dream that, after establishing a classless society, they will be able to enjoy a sound slumber with their arms and legs outstretched, will be totally disappointed.⁽¹²⁾

31

It is essential to keep the educational system meticulously free from the clutches of party politics. The financial responsibility for the educational system lies with the state, but the absolute right regarding formulating courses of study, evolving teaching methodology, preparing curricula, etc., should remain solely with educationists or the universities, but it cannot dictate to them. It may send proposals for due consideration, but it cannot exert pressure for their acceptance.⁽¹³⁾

The same applies to the broadcasting networks, cinema, etc., which are crucial for imparting mass education. It is not permissible for these to be converted into the victory drums [propaganda machinery] of party interests.

32

The question may arise, Is it possible to establish the world government and Ánanda Parivára without struggle? In reply I will say, “Yes.” The greatest social welfare for the human race will be accomplished if those who aspire to establish the world government or Ánanda Parivára engage themselves only in constructive activities and selfless service, instead of wasting their vital energy in the vortex of politics, or in political conflicts. They will have to go on rendering social service with steadfast commitment, without any ulterior motive in their minds.

Those states which cooperate with such missionaries in their social service activities will be considered to be desirous of establishing the world government or Ánanda Parivára. The common people of those states which do not cooperate will become agitated, and these agitated people will form the world government or Ánanda Parivára through revolution. For this, the missionaries need not enter the dirty arena of party politics.

Those who want to cure society of disease will have to keep an eye on every individual, because collective purification lies in individual purification. Otherwise, by delivering high-sounding speeches from political platforms, it will not be possible to raise the collective standard of living.

Only psychic and spiritual education can create sadvipras. Only those who are established in Yama and Niyama⁽¹⁴⁾ – who are imbued with Cosmic ideation – I call sadvipras.

Political leaders cannot create sadvipras by haranguing people from public platforms – this demands righteousness and the practice of self-purification in personal life. Furthermore, what type of people come to deliver lectures from these platforms? Are they not the ones resorting to mud-slinging for the sake of party politics? Most of them are blinded by their obsession for power, so what can they teach others?

Andhenaeva niiyamánáh yathándháh

[They are just like the blind leading the blind.]

33

As a system of government, democracy cannot be accepted as the highest and best. Among all the systems human beings have been able to devise so far, democracy can be considered to be the best of a bad lot. If human beings can devise a better system in future, it will be proper to accept it wholeheartedly. Many defects in democracy have been discovered by human beings who have already started rectifying them.

In a democratic system securing the highest number of votes is proof of a person’s eligibility. However this eligibility is not adequately examined in all cases. In my opinion the popularity of a candidate securing the highest number of votes needs to be tested again if he or she polls less than half the total number of votes cast. In this test arrangements will have to be made so that people can vote either for or against the candidate. If the candidate polls more favourable votes, only then will he or she be declared elected.

No candidate should be declared elected without a contest. Rich and influential people can compel other candidates, by financial inducements or intimidation, to withdraw their nomination papers. So in cases where it is found that there is only one candidate, the popularity of the candidate will have to be tested. If the candidate fails in this test, the candidate and all those who withdrew their nomination papers will forfeit the right to contest the subsequent by-election for that constituency. This means that they will have to wait until the next election.

Although the system of seat reservation⁽¹⁵⁾ is against democratic principles, temporary arrangements for seat reservation, if desired, may be permitted for backward communities.⁽¹⁶⁾ But generally it is found that among the representatives of backward communities, the number of competent persons is very few. Hence the right to contest reserved seats should not be limited to those belonging to a particular community. At the time of the primary election of the candidates for the reserved seat, however, only those belonging to the community for which the seat has been reserved will enjoy the right to vote. That is, two people will be nominated for the one seat in the primary election. Later, either of the two will be finally elected by the vote of the general public. If, in the primary election, only one candidate is nominated – that is, there is no other contestant – in that case his or her popularity must be tested before the general public. Only if a backward or minority community clearly demands seat reservation will it be adopted, otherwise not.

A candidate must declare his or her policies in black and white. After an election, if it is found that a candidate is acting against his or her declared policies and this is proved to be the case in court, his or her election will be cancelled.

The slogan “adult franchise” is, of course, very pleasant to hear, but the fact that voters without political consciousness weaken the governmental machinery cannot be denied. In the interests of the general public, it is desirable that uneducated and less-educated people do not have the right to vote.

Democracy is a mockery in a country of uneducated people. In such a country cunning, fraudulent persons very easily secure or purchase the votes of illiterate people. Moreover, the general public in such a country is easily misled by the propagation of casteism or communalism.

The success of democracy depends upon educated, sensible voters. Hence, in a democratic country, the spread of education is of the highest priority. For the convenience of the general public, the educational system must be free of cost. No overbearing government pressure should be exerted on the educational system, otherwise the party in power will continue to propagate its ideas through the medium of education. Frequent changes in the government will also result in frequent changes in the educational system, consequently the entire system of education will be jeopardized.

No ism except universalism can be allowed in the educational system. The thirst for knowledge will have to be awakened among students, and reverence, devotion, orderliness and discipline will have to be taught as well. Along with this, a scientific outlook will have to be inculcated. If veneration for science is awakened, superstition will not find any room in the minds of students, nor will high-sounding isms bewilder them. Students will easily acquire the qualities to become sadvipras later in life.⁽¹⁷⁾

34

The samája cakra [social cycle] moves on. After the Shúdra Age [the age of manual workers] comes the age of warriors – that is, the Kśatriya Age; next comes the Vipra Age [the age of intellectuals]; then the Vaeshya Age [the age of capitalists]; and then, after shúdra revolution,⁽¹⁸⁾ in the second parikránti [peripheric evolution] of the social cycle, comes a new Kśatriya Age – the age of the kśatriyas who led the shúdra revolution. The social cycle moves on in this manner. By merely espousing idealism, its rotation cannot be checked.

One age follows another in succession. The end of one age and the advent of another can be called kránti [evolution]. The period of transition at the end of one age and at the beginning of another can be called yuga saḿkránti [transitional age]. And we can call one full rotation of the social cycle – that is, from one shúdra revolution to the next shúdra revolution – parikránti. In every age a particular varńa⁽¹⁹⁾ [social class] emerges, both as ruler and as exploiter.⁽²⁰⁾

The universe and the society belong to all. Every dust particle of the universe is the common patrimony of each and every one of us, so it is not at all proper to allow a particular social class to perpetuate its rule. The peripheric evolution of the social cycle will continue, and along with this the fight of the sadvipras against the supremacy of each social class will also have to continue.

Society belongs to all, but its leadership will be in the hands of sadvipras. The responsibility for leading society cannot be left in the hands of the kśatriyas, because they will try to enforce kśatriya rule. They will exploit the non-kśatriyas and chew the bones and marrow of the weak. Nor can the responsibility for leading society be left in the hands of the vipras, because they will try to establish vipra rule. They will exploit the non-vipras and chew the bones and marrow of the non-intellectuals. Likewise, the responsibility for leading society cannot be left in the hands of the vaeshyas, because they will try to impose vaeshya rule. They will exploit the non-vaeshyas and chew the bones and marrow of the toiling mass. Shúdras cannot undertake the leadership of society. Hence the victory mark⁽²¹⁾ of the successful shúdra revolution indeed embellishes the forehead of the kśatriyas.

The responsibility for leading society can only be entrusted to the sadvipras because they are well established in Yama and Niyama – they are imbued with Cosmic ideation. The social cycle will surely rotate, and as a rule the dominance of the kśatriyas, vipras and vaeshyas will take place in succession. But if sadvipras control the nucleus of society, these social classes may attain some degree of prominence in social life, but they will never be able to become the absolute rulers.

Sadvipras will never have any rest. They will have to continue fighting tirelessly. This fight is the life of living beings. In the absence of this fight, the creation will cease to exist. Sadvipras are vipras, kśatriyas, vaeshyas and shúdras all in one, hence the leadership of the sadvipras will mean the victory of every social class.

35

All movements are systaltic. If the phase of contraction is made more stringent by the application of force, a forward galloping jump occurs in the following phase of expansion. Evolution which takes place as a result of this forward galloping jump is properly called viplava [revolution]. Similarly, if the phase of expansion is prolonged by the application of force, then the following phase of contraction will undergo greater inertia.

If any age reverts to the preceding one by the application of force – that is, if the Vaeshya Age reverts to the Vipra Age or the Vipra Age reverts to the Kśatriya Age – we can call this vikránti [counter-evolution]. Similarly, the movement of the social cycle by a backward galloping jump can be called prativiplava [counter-revolution]. Neither counter-evolution nor counter-revolution lasts long.

Today, in the modern world, the Kśatriya Age and the Vipra Age are still evident in some undeveloped countries. In most developed countries the Vaeshya Age is prevalent. In a few countries a new Kśatriya Age has emerged following shúdra revolution, and in one or two places we can even see indications of the emerging Vipra Age.

36

A correct spiritual ideology is the only solution to the problems confronting the world. From this perspective we can call Ananda Marga ideology the philosophers’ stone. Just as the philosophers’ stone is meant to transform everything into gold, Ananda Marga ideology can, most definitely, find a just and rational solution whenever it is applied to any problem.

37

Human longings are infinite. If these infinite human longings are allowed to run after objects of worldly enjoyment, conflict among human beings is bound to take place. As material wealth is limited, over-abundance for one leads to crippling scarcity for others. These infinite human longings can be fulfilled only through psychic and spiritual wealth. Brahma has generously arranged infinite psychic and spiritual wealth for human beings; humanity will have to properly utilize that wealth.

Unity and benevolent intellect lead human beings towards supreme fulfilment. Reading voluminous treatises on philosophy will be of no use in awakening this benevolent intellect. For this, one will have to sincerely follow Yama and Niyama in individual life. To establish unity, the society will have to select an ideology which remains unassailed by any spatial, temporal or personal differences. That is why only Cosmic ideology will have to be adopted as the polestar of life.

I have already said that those who are established in Yama and Niyama – who are imbued with Cosmic ideation – are genuine sadvipras. They alone can represent human beings. They alone can serve living beings selflessly. People will recognize such sadvipras by their conduct, dedication to selfless service, dutifulness and moral integrity.

These sadvipras will firmly declare, “All human beings belong to one race. Everyone has equal rights. Human beings are brothers and sisters!” These sadvipras will sternly warn the exploiters of society, “The exploitation of human beings cannot be allowed!” and, “Religious hypocrisy cannot be tolerated!” Giving a clarion call to the fragmented human society from beneath the saffron flag, the symbol of service and sacrifice, they will proclaim at the top of their voices, “Human beings of the world, unite!” And they will sing in chorus:

Saḿgacchadhvaḿ saḿvadadhvaḿ saḿ vo manáḿsi jánatám,
Devábhágaḿ yathápúrve saḿjánáná upásate.
Samánii va ákútih samáná hrdayánivah,
Samánamastu vo mano yathá vah susahásati.

[Let us move together, let us radiate the same thought-wave, let
us come to know our minds together,
Let us share our wealth without differentiation, like sages of
the past, so that all may enjoy the universe.
Let our aspirations be united, let our hearts be inseparable,
Let our minds be as one mind, so that we live in harmony and
become one with the Supreme.]

Footnotes

(1) Brahma is the composite of Puruśa and Prakrti, and is therefore usually spoken of philosophically in neuter gender. Here the author uses “His” (and in the following paragraph, “Father”) for Brahma to emphasize the paternal relationship that exists between Supreme Consciousness and living beings. –Trans.

(2) In the Dáyabhága system the heirs’ right of inheritance is subject to the discretion of the father. For a more detailed discussion of the author’s views on inheritance, see the chapter “Ideal System of Inheritance”, Caryácarya Part 1, 1956. –Trans.

(3) For further discussion on socio-economic units, see “Socio-Economic Groupifications” in Volume 3. –Eds. [Footnote used in the Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 3, 1st edition, publication of this article.]

(4) See The Status of Women in “Social Justice”. –Eds. [Footnote used in the Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 3, 1st edition, publication of this article.]

(5) For a more detailed discussion of the author’s cosmological system, see Idea and Ideology, 1959. –Trans.

(6) Philosophically, pralaya means annihilation. In individual life pralaya refers to spiritual emancipation, not physical death. –Trans.

(7) Dhrupada is the earliest and purest form of classical music in northern India. –Trans.

(8) Kheyal is a later blended form of classical northern Indian music. –Trans.

(9) These are various styles of Indian music from Bengal. Kiirtana (which originated in Bengal) is devotional chanting; bául is folk music sung in a particular devotional style; bhát́iyálii is folk music sung by boatmen, usually while rowing on rivers; and járii and darbeshi are localized styles of folk music. –Trans

(10) For further discussion on population growth, see “Population Growth and Control” in Volume 3. –Eds. [Footnote used in the Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 3, 1st edition, publication of this article.]

(11) The first test-tube baby was born in the USA in 1978. –Trans.

(12) In some countries, such as India, party tickets, authorizing approved candidates to contest from particular constituencies, are issued by political parties prior to elections. The “lamppost” refers to an undeserving candidate favoured by the party. –Trans.

(13) Here the author is criticizing the aspirations of a section of communists. –Trans.

(14) For further discussion on education, see “Education”, and “Some Hints on Education”, “Some Education Policies” and “Education and Neohumanism” in Volume 3. –Eds. [Footnote used in the Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 3, 1st edition, publication of this article.]

(15) Yama and Niyama are the cardinal principles of human morality. See A Guide to Human Conduct, 1957 [in the Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 3, 1st edition, publication of this article, “ ‘The Place of Sadvipras in the Samája Cakra’ or A Guide to Human Conduct, 1957”], by the author. –Trans.

(16) “Backward communities” refers to those communities which have not had access to social services and education. Generally only the members of such communities have the right to contest reserved seats.

For a discussion on how to solve the problems of backward communities, see “Elevating Backward Classes” in Volume 3. [Additional line used in the Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 3, 1st edition, publication of this article.]

–Trans.

(17) For further discussion on democracy, see “The Future of Democracy” and “Dialectical Materialism and Democracy” in Volume 2, and “Democracy and Group-Governed States” in Volume 4. –Eds. [Footnote used in the Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 3, 1st edition, publication of this article.]

(18) Shúdra revolution occurs when the warriors and intellectuals are reduced to the level of manual labourers as a result of exploitation during the Vaeshya Age [in the Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 3, 1st edition, publication of this article, “See ‘Shúdra Revolution and Sadvipra Society’ in Volume 2”]. –Trans.

(19) The Sanskrit word varńa means “colour”. Here it refers to the predominant psychic colour, or psychic characteristics, of each of the four social classes in the social cycle. (The psychic colour of the shúdras is said to be black; the kśatriyas, red; the vipras, white; and the vaeshyas, yellow.)

Also see “Mental Colours” in Volume 2. [Additional line used in the Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 3, 1st edition, publication of this article.]

–Trans.

(20) This applies to the kśatriyas, vipras and vaeshyas. The shúdra varńa neither rules nor exploits the other social classes. –Trans.

(21) “Victory mark” refers to the Indian custom of smearing a special mark, usually made with the right thumb after it has been dipped in sandal paste, on the forehead of those celebrating victory. –Trans.

Chapter 13	Universal Humanism [a compilation]

Social advancement is the triadic blending of thesis, antithesis and synthesis. When a particular theory or thesis loses its competence and power to effect the collective welfare, an antithesis is created against the prevalent theory. As a result of clash and cohesion between these two opposing forces a resultant is created, and this resultant is called synthesis. Is it true that the welfare of society is only possible in the stage of synthesis? When those who have the duty and responsibility for materializing social welfare neglect minorities or the people in general, the synthesis of a particular age transforms itself into the thesis of the next age.

The underlying principles that are relevant to the question of social justice are: the universe is a moving phenomenon, like a moving panorama; everything in this empirical world has its roots in relativity; and everything is moving within the orbit of time, space and person.

In the stage of synthesis a particular social, economic and political theory may be beneficial in a particular place or to a particular group, but this is no guarantee that the same theory will prove equally beneficial with changes in time, space and person. In changed circumstances oppressed people, who pass their days in distraction and despair as victims of social injustice, put up an antithesis against the synthesis of that period. Numerical majority and physical might are not the sole prerequisites for the emergence of an antithesis. If the oppressed are an intellectual group, then no matter how few their numbers, they can put up an antithesis. As soon as the antithesis is created the former ideology ceases to be a synthesis. It becomes the thesis in the next phase. So, in the second phase, an antithesis will again emerge against that very thesis. In this phase, as long as a synthesis does not emerge, unabated struggle will continue. Theoretically, synthesis is not the absolute factor, the final clash or the last word, for thesis, antithesis and synthesis take place within the bounds of relativity.

According to PROUT, changes take place in a cyclic order. In some era of the past the toiling masses were dominant. At that time there was no human society or civilization, and even the concept of the family was almost non-existent. Such a period was called the Shúdra era. After this Shúdra era came the Kśatriya era, or the age of the warriors. As a result of clash and cohesion, the dawn of the Vipra era became discernible on the horizon of the social cycle. When the warriors, those with Herculean strength, started ignoring and hurting the sentiments of the Vipras or intellectuals, the Vipras evolved an antithesis against the thesis of the Kśatriya era out of vindictiveness and revenge. But the saga of exploitation and suffering knew no end. When the Vipras started an offensive against the bourgeois class, the dissatisfied and disgruntled bourgeoisie launched a crusade against the thesis of the Vipra age. When the once disgruntled classes began to engage in exploitation, profiteering and black marketeering, thriving off the life blood of others, then the exploited, oppressed and rebellious people started a bloody revolution for the destruction of the bourgeois class.

Such movement of the social cycle will never cease, will never stop. Sadvipras or spiritual revolutionaries will inspire and mobilize the crusading human spirit against barbarity, injustice and rapacity and help accelerate the speed of antithetical social movement. Afterwards, during the stage of synthesis, they will take the leadership of society into their own hands. If proper adjustments are maintained with time, space and person, the Sadvipra inspired synthetic age will be permanent. In a society governed and administered by these Sadvipras, the synthetic structure of society will remain intact, although different eras may come and go. The Shúdra era will come but there will be no exploitation by the Shúdras. The Kśatriya era will come, but exploitation by the Kśatriyas will not be possible because of the synthetic order prevailing in society.

Only Sadvipras can constantly maintain proper adjustment with time, space and person. Those who propagate materialist philosophies, but are are morally and spiritually conscious, are quite incapable of constantly maintaining such proper adjustments, for all changes take place within the purview of relativity. Those who have accepted the Supreme Entity as their goal – those who really believe in universal humanism and reflect universalism in the fullest measure – are alone capable of constantly maintaining proper adjustment, for under the influence of a spiritual ideal their temperaments become great and benevolent. Due to their benevolent idealism and mental development they naturally look upon all with love and affection. They can never do any injustice in any particular era or to an particular individual. Sadvipra society is both the aspiration and demand of oppressed humanity; dialectical materialism is fundamentally wrong and defective.

In all countries and at all times, Sadvipras must wait until the emergence of an antithesis against any particular thesis. So long as an antithesis has not evolved, Sadvipras will go on working throughout the world to bring about the psychological background for the antithesis of the next phase. The moment the auspicious dawn of renaissance or synthesis comes, Sadvipras will take the reins of the leadership of society into their own hands.

The welfare of society is not possible through dialectical materialism. Dialectical materialism may be suitable and appropriate for the well-being of human society in a certain age, but in the very next era it may prove to be a brutal instrument of exploitation and destruction. Prout is the only solution, for it recognizes and accepts the necessity of changes in time, space and person. It will go on constantly maintaining ratio. The policies and programmes of Prout formulated for a particular era, for a particular place and for particular people will not remain fixed in new conditions and will adjust with changes in time, space and person. Such are the fundamental principles advocated by Prout. Thus, dialectical materialism cannot do any good for human society and may only have some use for a particular era, time or person.

Let us now discuss democracy. It is claimed that democracy is government of the people, by the people and for the people. After the Shúdra era power passed into the hands of tribal chiefs. In the course of time clan leaders became feudal kings. The theory of democracy was born out of feelings of revolt against the tyranny of the monarchy exercised by these feudal kings. The history of democracy is very ancient. History teaches us that it originated during the reign of the Licchavii Dynasty in ancient India. Being so ancient, it is not surprising that democracy has some defects.

Let us now analyse the assertion, “Democracy is government by the people”. In a democracy, do people have the requisite education and consciousness to judge what is right or what is wrong, what they should do or what they should not do? Does the power of understanding and judgement come as soon as one attains a prescribed age? Is age the yardstick of wisdom and education? Alas, this happens to be the accepted fact! If those who talk big about the democratic system read the history of the Licchavii Royal Dynasty they would learn that in those days not everyone had voting rights. Only the Licchavii leaders, not the people in general, could exercise and enjoy adult franchise.

Democracy can only be effective and fruitful where there is no kind of exploitation. Every person has certain minimum requirements in life which must be guaranteed. There may be a little adjustment in these minimum requirements as per differences in time, space and person. The people of Kashmir may need a great quantity of warm clothing. Therefore, they should be provided with more woollen clothes than the people of Bihar. The minimum requirements vary with the change of era and time. In ancient times, people were satisfied with a dhoti, a shirt and a pair of wooden sandals. Not only that, they did not even feel the need for shoes. But today a suit is an absolute necessity. In olden days people would travel long distances on foot, but today a cycle or motor car has become essential.

Minimum necessities must be provided to every individual. There is no limit to these minimum requirements. Every progressive society should bear in mind that the minimum requirements will go on increasing day by day. In the not too distant future a day will come when every individual will acquire a rocket. Then, for example, it will be very common for one’s father’s house to be on this planet and one’s father-in-law’s house to be on Venus.

The social system that will come into being, keeping parallelism and harmony with time, space and person, will be called progressive socialism. Our Prout is that very progressive socialism. Society will have to make provisions to ensure an increase in the living standard of every individual. When progressive socialism is established within the framework of democracy, then democracy will be successful. Otherwise, government of the people, by the people and for the people will only mean government of fools, by fools and for fools.

Mass education is one of the basic necessities for the successful and effective running of democracy. In some cases even educated people unjustly abuse their voting rights. People cast their votes at the insistence and inducement of misguided local leaders. To approach a polling booth like a herd of cattle to cast votes in ballot boxes is meaningless. Is this not a farce in the name of democracy? Thus, the spread of education and proper knowledge is essential. Education does not only means literacy or alphabetical knowledge. In my opinion, real education means proper, adequate knowledge and the power of understanding. In other words, education should impart an awareness of who I am and what I ought to do. Full knowledge about these things is what education means. Merely having some acquaintance with the alphabet is no education.

Literacy certainly serves some purpose. I am not saying that literacy is absolutely useless and lifeless. There are some countries in South America where only literate people enjoy franchise. Political parties in these countries launch literacy campaigns and people naturally cast their votes in favour of those parties which have made them literate. Thus, the government remains free from all responsibilities and expenditures in this regard. But this system cannot serve its full intended purpose. First, it is not reasonable to think that mere literacy will awaken full wisdom about what to do and what not to do. Second, if the responsibility of literacy is left to political parties, then those political parties will spread their respective party propaganda popularizing themselves among the people. People will become intellectually bankrupt, and this curse will undermine their rational judgement and discrimination. Nevertheless, education is of prime importance. Without education democracy can never be successful.

Morality is the second fundamental factor for the success of democracy. People sell their votes because they lack morality. There are some countries in the world where votes are bought and sold. Can we call it democracy? Is it not a farce? Democracy cannot succeed unless 51% of the population rigidly follow principles of morality. Where corrupt and immoral persons are in the majority, leaders will inevitably be elected among these immoral people.

Today there are too many obstacles on the path of morality. Urban civilization is one of the chief reasons of moral degeneration because many people are compelled to live undesirably in small, congested places. This is inimical to morality in individual life. Solitary living for some time is essential for the cultivation and development of morality. Where the population is very dense, milk and vegetables are in short supply, and these are indispensable for healthy survival. When the demand is more than the supply, adulteration goes unchecked. To meet the deficit in the supply of milk, people mix water with it. To meet the demand for diamonds, imitation diamonds are produced, because the demand is more than the supply. Cities become dens of corruption because of antisocial elements, but generally such things are not noticeable in villages. In villages everybody knows everyone else. Everybody knows the livelihood of their neighbours. But even after twenty years of living in a city people seldom get acquainted with their neighbours. They don’t even know that there are many swindlers lurking in their midst. However, the slogan, “Go back to the village” alone will not suffice. City life has a great attraction for people generally so they run to cities for their livelihood. To stop this trend intellectuals and others will have to look for their livelihood in villages. The supply of cheap electricity and the expansion of cottage industries in villages are of paramount necessity today. By cottage industries I do not mean outdated, primitive handicrafts. Cottage industries must be efficient, modern mechanized units. From the economic viewpoint decentralization is an absolute necessity. With the exception of heavy industries and essential government offices, all industry should be shifted to the vil lages. To stop overcrowding in the cities this is the only feasible approach. Villages are not congested, so antisocial people will not be able to hide themselves there. If they try, the police can easily detect them.

In a democratic society immorality is a big issue which cannot be avoided. Some people say that if mustard seeds are sprinkled over any person possessed by a ghost, the ghost takes to its heels. But if the ghost hides in the mustard seeds themselves, then of course there is not the ghost of a chance of escape from the ghost. Similarly, the ghost of immorality lies hidden in today’s democratic system. Democracy induces sentiments like provincialism, communalism, casteism, etc., which are devoid of morality. Suppose that in a certain constituency person A represents a majority community, but B, C, and D are capable and competent representatives. In such circumstances, representative A is sure to fully exploit the majority community by kindling casteism or narrow-minded communal sentiments in order to win elections. Such antisocial activities create suspicion in people’s minds and thus deal a staggering blow to their morality. In some democratic systems social discrimination becomes so rampant that different groups and parties find ample scope to propagate and disseminate their defective ideas and fissiparous sentiments. So we see that morality, which should be the basic factor of democracy’s victorious march, goes unprotected. Thus in a democracy some people indulge in casteism and extract maximum advantage from it. Political parties also nominate those persons who belong to majority communities as their representatives. The masses, being uneducated, cannot see through these games.

Thirdly, social, economic and political consciousness is also indispensable for the success of democracy. Even educated people may be misguided by shrewd and cunning politicians if they are not sufficiently conversant with social, economic and political issues. Democracy can be successful only when people imbibe these three kinds of consciousness. Without this awareness, the welfare of the society is not possible either in theory or in practice. Intellectuals, therefore, must never encourage unrealistic ideas of this sort.

But even if these three requirements for the success of democracy are met, the real welfare of the society is not possible by dialectical materialism or by democracy. The only solution is an enlightened, benevolent dictatorship – that is a morally and spiritually conscious dictatorship. Moralists, though in a minority today, have no reason to worry. Once society is led by people who are intellectually and intuitionally developed, there will certainly be no scope for exploitation and injustice. Now a question may arise. If in a nation or country every person enjoys human rights, why should a particular person have voting rights while others do not? After all, this world is the common inheritance of all, and every human being has the right to enjoy and utilize all mundane, supramundane and spiritual resources. But just because everybody has the individual right to enjoy everything, it does not follow that everybody has the individual right to run the administration of a country. For the good and the welfare of the people in general, it is not fitting to leave the onus of the administration in the hands of all. Suppose a certain couple have five children. All of them are happy and comfortable in the family. But if the children, on the plea of being in the majority, suddenly claim full authority and the right of the management of the family, is it feasible? Say they call a meeting and pass a resolution that all the glasses and crockery should be smashed. Can we call it a wise resolution? Let me give you another example. Students compared to teachers are always in the majority. Now if the students, on the plea of being in the majority, put up the demand that they them selves should set the examination and be the examiners, can that demand be granted? So you see, democracy is not a very good or simple system. But unless an alternative, better and more agreeable theory or system is evolved, we will have to accept democracy in preference to other systems, and make use of it for the time being.

Chapter 14	Universal Humanism [a compilation]

Primitive human beings had no society and the whole set-up was individualistic. Even the concept of family was absent. Life was brute and non-intellectual. Nature was the direct abode and physical strength ruled the day. The strong enjoyed at the cost of the weak, who had to surrender before the voracity of the physical giants. However, the sense of acquisition had not developed in them, and they worked manually, and there was no intellectual exploitation in that age. Though life was brute, it was not brutal.

If shúdras be defined as those who live by manual work or service, this primary stage of nature’s brute laws could be named the Shúdra Age, because all were manual workers. The reliance on physical power gradually led a chosen few to lead the rest by the strength of their muscles. They were the leaders of the shúdras.

Simultaneously, the family developed. And the above-mentioned leadership, once based upon the superiority of muscles, passed on from the father to the son or from the mother to the daughter, partly due to the momentum of fear and power commanded, and partly because of superiority of animalic breed.

Superior strength requires the assistance of other superior strengths in the neighbourhood for all to maintain their status. Generally such superior neighbours belonged to the same parenthood or were related through matrimonial ties. Gradually the leaders by physical might started a well-knit group, and ultimately formed a class known as the kśatriyas. The age when the power to rule, or supremacy in arms, was the only material factor that mattered, was the Kśatriya Age. The leaders of the Kśatriya Age were Herculean, huge giants who depended on the supremacy of personal valour and might, making little or no use of intellect.

With the development of intellect and skill as a result of physical and psychic clash, physical strength had to lose its dignified position according to the growing intensity of intellectual demand in the kśatriya-dominated society. One had also to develop skill in the use of arms, and even for this the physical giant had to sit at the feet of some physically-common men to learn the use of arms and strategy. A reference to the mythology of any ancient culture reveals numberless instances where the hero of the day had to acquire specific knowledge from teachers. Subsequently this learning was not confined to the use of arms only but extended to other spheres, such as battle-craft, medicine and forms of organization and administration, so essential for ruling any society. Thus the dependence on superior intellect increased day by day, and in the course of time real power passed into the hands of such intellectuals. These intellectuals, as the word implies, justified their existence on intellect only, performed no labour themselves, and were parasites in the sense that they exploited the energy put in by others in society. This age of domination by intellectual parasites can be called the Vipra Age.

Even though the vipras came into the forefront by the use of their marked intellect, it is more difficult than in the case of the kśatriyas to maintain a hereditary superiority of intellect. In an effort to maintain power amongst the limited few, they actively tried and prevented others from acquiring the use of the intellect by imposing superstitions and rituals, faiths and beliefs, and even introducing irrational ideas (the caste system of Hindu society is an example) through an appeal to the sentiments of the mass (who collectively cannot be called intellectual). This was the phase of human society in the Middle Ages in the greater part of the world.

The continued exploitation by one section of society resulted in the necessity for the collection and transfer of consumable goods. Even otherwise, need was felt very badly for the transport of food and other necessities of life from surplus parts to deficit parts. Also, in the case of clan conflicts, the result of the resources of one community or class versus another gained importance. This aspect was confined not only to the producers but also to those handling the goods at various stages up to the point of consumption. These people became known as vaeshyas, and ingenuity and summed-up production began to enjoy supremacy and importance, till an age was reached when this aspect of life became the most important factor. These vaeshyas, therefore, began to enjoy a position of supremacy, and the age dominated by this class is said to be the Age of Vaeshyas.

Individualistic or laissez-faire sense develops [into] capitalism when the means of production pass into the hands of a few who are more interested in personal exploitation. At this stage it can be said that the instinct of acquisition has developed tremendously. The thirst for acquisition instigated them to [develop] the psychology of complete exploitation of the human race also, and this resulted in a class by itself. In the race for greed and acquisition not all could survive, and only a few remained to dominate the society in general and the economic set-up in particular by their capital. The great majority were either duped into believing that they would be allowed to share such resources, or were neglected and left uncared-for for want of strength and did not survive the race. Such people in society ultimately occupy the place of exploited slaves of the capitalists. They are slaves because they have no option other than to serve the capitalists as labourers to earn the means of subsistence.

We may recall the definition of shúdras as persons who live by manual work or labour hard for their livelihood. This age of capitalism is the age when the large majority of society turn into such shúdras. This develops into dejection and dissatisfaction on a large scale because of an internal clash in the mind, because the psychology of society is essentially dynamic in nature and the mind itself exists as a result of constant clash. These conditions are necessary and sufficient for labourers, whether manual or mental, to organize and stand up against the unnatural impositions in life. This may be termed “shúdra revolution”. The leaders of this revolution, also, are people physically and mentally better-equipped and more capable essentially of overthrowing the capitalistic structure by force. In other words, they are also kśatriyas. So, after a period of chaos and catastrophe, once more the same cycle – Shúdra Age to Kśatriya to Vipra, and so on – recommences.⁽¹⁾

In this cycle of civilization one age changes into another. This gradual change should be called “evolution” or kránti. The period of transition from one age to another can be said to be yuga saḿkránti – “transitional age”. One complete cycle from the Shúdra Age evolving through the other [three] ages is called parikránti.⁽²⁾

Sometimes the social cycle (samája cakra) is reversed by the application of physical or psychic force by a group of people inspired by a negative theory. Such a change is, therefore, counter-evolution – that is, against the cycle of civilization. This may be termed vikránti. But if this reversal of the social cycle takes place, due to political pressure or any other brute force, within a short span of time, the change thus brought about is prativiplava, or “counter-revolution”. It is just like the negative pratisaiṋcara of Brahma Cakra.⁽³⁾ Thus the progress and march of civilization can be represented as points of position and as the speed of approaching Puruśottama, respectively, by a collective body in Brahma Cakra.

The world is a transitory phase or changing phenomenon within the scope of the Cosmic Mind. It is going in eternal motion, and such a motion is the law of nature and the law of life. Stagnancy means death. Hence no power can check the social cycle of evolution. Any force, external or internal, can only retard or accelerate the speed of transition, but cannot prevent it from moving. Therefore progressive humanity should cast off all skeletons of the past. Human beings should go on accelerating the speed of progress for the good of humanity in general.

Those spiritual revolutionaries who work to achieve such progressive changes for human elevation on a well-thought, pre-planned basis, whether in the physical, metaphysical or spiritual sphere, by adhering to the principles of Yama and Niyama, are sadvipras.

The principles of Yama are ahiḿsá, satya, asteya, aparigraha and Brahmacarya. Ahiḿsá means not causing suffering to any harmless creature through thought, word or deed. Satya denotes action of mind or use of words with the object of helping others in the real sense. It has no relative application. Asteya means non-stealing, and this should not be confined to physical action but [extended] to the action of the mind as well. All actions have their origin in the mind, hence the correct sense of asteya is “to give up the desire of acquiring what is not rightly one’s own”. Aparigraha involves the non-acceptance of such amenities and comforts of life as are superfluous for the preservation of the physical existence. And the spirit of Brahmacarya is to experience His [the Supreme Entity’s] presence and authority in each and every physical and psychic objectivity. This occurs when the unit mind resonates with Cosmic will.

The five rules of Niyama are shaoca, santośa, tapah, svádhyáya and Iishvara prańidhána. Shaoca means purity of both physical and mental bodies. Mental purity is attained by benevolent deeds, charity, or other dutiful acts. Santośa means “contentment”. It implies accepting ungrudgingly and without a complaint the out-turn of the services rendered by one’s own physical or mental labour. Tapah means efforts to reach the goal despite such efforts being associated with physical discomforts. Svádhyáya means study of the scriptures or other books of learning and assimilating their spirit. The whole universe is guided by the Supreme Entity, and nothing that one does or can do is without His specific command. Iishvara prańidhána is an auto-suggestion of the idea that each and every unit is an instrument in the hands of the Almighty and is a mere spark of that supreme fire. Iishvara prańidhána also implies implicit faith in Him irrespective of whether one lives in momentary happiness or sorrow, prosperity or adversity.⁽⁴⁾

Only those who by their nature adhere to the above ten commands in their normal and spiritual conduct are sadvipras. Such a morally- and spiritually-equipped sadvipra has to perform a fundamental and vital duty to society.

In the cycle of social evolution, during each age before it is succeeded by another age, one particular class enjoys the position of domination and superiority. Such a class, while in political power, has every chance of exploiting the society. History has shown that this is not mere chance, but has been repeating itself. Now the duty of the sadvipra is to see that the dominating class does not take recourse to exploitation. The four classes – shúdra, the toiling class; kśatriya, the warrior class; vipra, the intellectual class; and vaeshya, the capitalist class – have remained well defined in the cycle of human civilization, and the gradual domination and decline of each class shall continue to occur in this cycle.

Life is a dynamic principle, and the movement of the samája cakra continues without any break or pause. The cycle cannot be checked, as stagnation implies death. The function of a sadvipra shall, therefore, be to see that the dominating or the ruling classes do not have any scope for exploitation. The moment one class turn into exploiters, the life of the majority becomes miserable; a few enjoy at the cost of many whose lot is only to suffer. More than that, in such a state of society both the few and the many get degenerated. The few (exploiters) degenerate themselves due to [an] excess of physical enjoyments and the many (exploited) cannot elevate themselves, because all their energy is taken up in mundane problems and all their mental waves are always tending to attain psycho-physical parallelism, thus getting day by day cruder. Hence, for the physical, mental and spiritual welfare of the administrator and the administered of the society as a whole, it is essential that no one be given any scope to exploit the rest of the society.

Sadvipras are not inactive witnesses. They are active participants to see that no person or class exploits the rest. For this they may have to resort even to physical violence, because the sadvipras will have to strike at the source of the power [of the class] which is tending to become the exploiter. In case the kśatriya class are becoming exploiters, the sadvipras may have to resort to physical force, and in an age where the intellectual or vipra class are dominating, they will have to bring about a revolution in the intellectual field. In case the vaeshyas are dominating, the sadvipras may have to contest and win elections, because the vaeshya class rules by democracy, and the democratic set-up enables them to accumulate undue gains.

Footnotes

(1) A period of chaos and catastrophe ends when kśatriya leadership re-emerges, signifying the start of the next Kśatriya Age. For a more detailed discussion of this process, see “The Shúdra Revolution and the Sadvipra Society” in Human Society Part 2 by the author. [In the Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 3, 1st edition, publication of this article, this footnote is replaced by “Also see ‘The Shúdra Revolution and the Sadvipra Society’ in Volume 2.”] –Eds.

(2) See also the definitions of parikránti in the author’s Problems of the Day, section 34, and Ánanda Sútram, Chapter 5, Sútra 7. Eds.

(3) Brahma Cakra is the Cosmic Cycle of creation. The “negative pratisaiṋcara of Brahma Cakra” refers to the devolution of human beings to animals, plants, or even matter. –Eds. [Footnote used in the Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 3, 1st edition, publication of this article.]

(4) For further discussion on Yama and Niyama, see A Guide to Human Conduct, 1957. –Eds. [Footnote used in the Prout in a Nutshell Volume 1 Part 3, 1st edition, publication of this article.]

Chapter 15	Universal Humanism [a compilation]

The inevitable consequence of vaeshya exploitation is shúdra revolution. When the vaeshyas, maddened with excessive greed, lose their common sense completely and forsake their humanity totally, then for shúdra revolution the opportune time has come. However, it cannot be said that shúdra revolution will automatically occur just because an opportune time has come. Proper conditions relating to place and person will bear much of the responsibility.

Revolution takes place when, from the economic perspective, only two classes remain in society: the exploiting vaeshyas and the exploited shúdras. But if there are no vipras and kśatriyas from a mental standpoint – in other words if there are no people who, though shúdras from an economic standpoint, are vipras or kśatriyas from a mental standpoint – shúdra revolution will not be possible. It is not the work of people who have a shúdra mentality to bring about revolution. They avoid struggle; they are playthings of the vaeshyas.

At the high point of the Vaeshya Age, the vaeshyas easily manipulate the shúdra-minded shúdras. If the kśatriya- and vipra-minded shúdras lack spirit, they will also be bought by the vaeshyas’ money. Thus shúdra revolution ultimately depends on shúdras who have sufficient spirit and are mentally vipras or kśatriyas.

Obstacles to Revolution

Those who want to bring about proletariat revolution with the help of manual labourers only will not succeed unless they take into consideration the mentality of the people involved. Shúdra-minded people do not understand their own problems; they do not even have the courage to dream about solving them. No matter how well labour leaders explain the problems to them or how fiery their lectures on the need for struggle be, it will not have any influence over their minds. They will spend their time eating, drinking, and getting violently drunk. They cannot think about who in their families is eating properly or getting an education or not. If their bosses increase their wages, they will merely spend more on their addiction; their standard of living will not be raised. That is why I say that such people do not and cannot bring about a shúdra revolution. It is not only undesirable but also foolish for those who want to bring about revolution to depend on such people; their static nature will thwart its movement, their cowardice will prematurely extinguish the fire of revolution.

Besides this type of mentality, national and religious traditions also often thwart revolution. It is extremely difficult for kśatriya- and vipra-minded shúdras to go against such traditions, let alone shúdra-minded shúdras. People become averse to revolution due to the following ideas: “Whatever is fated will happen; does fighting accomplish anything?”; “Our days are somehow passing by, so why should we trouble ourselves?”; or incorrect interpretations of the niśkáma karmaváda [doctrine of desireless action] of the Giitá or other scriptures.

In fact, a subtle analysis will reveal that the policy of establishing a welfare state on a democratic base is also an obstacle to revolution; as are the ideals of Gandhism and the high-sounding theory of democratic socialism.

The Bhúdán movement is also a reactionary movement in this way. Although I have high regard for the founders of Gandhism and the Bhúdán movement – as men they are second to none – their philosophies are extremely harmful for poor people.

Some of the philosophical interpretations of janmántaraváda [the doctrine of transmigration of souls, or reincarnation] also oppose revolution; that is, they argue, “You are starving in this life because you committed many sins in your last life, so what is the point of launching a movement? Destiny cannot be changed.”

That is why I have said that kśatriya- and vipra-minded shúdras will bring about the people’s revolution. For this, these shúdras will have to be thoroughly prepared, suffer a lot and make great sacrifices. They will have to fight against opposing groups and doctrines.

The Pioneers of Revolution

It is very easy to talk big about revolution. Audiences may be awestruck and applaud, but to actually bring about a revolution is not at all easy.

Those kśatriya- or vipra-minded shúdras who are the pioneers of revolution will have to learn to be disciplined, take proper revolutionary training, build their character, be moralists; in a word, they will have to become what I call sadvipras. A sadvipra will not launch a movement against honest people, even if he or she does not like them. But a sadvipra will definitely take action against dishonest people, even if he or she likes them. In such matters it will not do to indulge any kind of mental weakness.

Such strict, ideological sadvipras will be the messengers of the revolution. They will carry the message of revolution to every home in the world, to every vein and capillary of human existence. The banner of victorious revolution will be carried by them alone.

Moralists and spiritualists can be found among all types of people, regardless of whether they are rich or poor. Everyone knows that the idea that rich means honest is completely false. But most sadvipras will come from the middle class. By “middle class” I mean the vipra- and kśatriya-minded shúdras.

One may ask whether rich people who are moral and spiritual can be sadvipras or not. In reply I will say yes, they can be. But in order to be sadvipras they will have to come down to the level of the middle class, because they cannot live in indolent luxury on capital acquired by sinful means. In order to follow the principles of Prout,⁽¹⁾ they will have to fight against sin and injustice, and in order to conduct such a fight properly, they will not be able to keep their wealth – they will have to become middle-class.

The meaning of the word sadvipra is “a person who is a moralist and a spiritualist and who fights against immorality”. Earning money in a sinful way or accumulating great wealth is against the fundamental principles of Prout. It will be quite impossible for people who are not following the fundamental principles of Prout to bring about shúdra revolution.

One may also ask whether poor people can be sadvipras. In reply I will say that yes, they can be. But only poor people who have the minds of kśatriyas or vipras can bring about a revolution, and such poor people I call the middle class. That is how I explain the term madhyavitta samája [“middle class”].

I do not agree with those who are of the opinion that people who do not work physically but intellectually are middle-class. I do not agree either with those who believe that those whose income is neither high nor low are middle-class. If we were to accept this second interpretation of “middle-class”, I would have to point out that the income of many shúdra-minded shúdras who perform manual labour in society is higher than that of many kśatriya- or vipra-minded shúdras.

If anybody objects to the use of the term “middle class”, or if anybody says that “middle class” refers to those who have an average amount of wealth and that therefore the pioneers of the revolution – the kśatriya- or vipra-minded shúdras – may or may not be middle-class, I am prepared to use the term vikśubdha [disgruntled], instead of “middle-class”, to describe the revolutionary shúdras. The vikśubdha shúdras are a constant source of uneasiness for the tyrannical vaeshyas. The capitalists are not afraid of labour unrest, but they are afraid of the labour leaders, the vikśubdha shúdras.

The capitalists like democracy as a system of government because in the democratic system they can easily purchase the shúdra-minded shúdras who constitute the majority. It is easy to sail through the elections by delivering high-sounding speeches. No difficulties arise if election promises are not kept later on, because the shúdra-minded shúdras quickly forget them.

It can be unequivocally stated that if only educated people instead of all adults were given the right to vote in any country, the governmental structure of most democratic countries would change. And if sadvipras alone had the right to vote, there would be no difference between the real world and the heaven people imagine.

In a capitalistic social system or in a democratic structure the situation of middle-class people (the vikśubdha shúdras) is generally miserable. This is because they are the greatest critics of capitalism and the strongest opponents of exploitation. An increase in the number of vikśubdha shúdras in a society is an early omen of a possible shúdra revolution. It is therefore the duty of those who want to create a world free of exploitation to help to increase the number of vikśubdha shúdras. It will be harmful for the revolution if these people die or are transformed into shúdra-minded shúdras. All the sadvipras in the world should be vigilant to make sure that the number of vikśubdha shúdras does not decrease due to unemployment, birth control, or other bad practices or policies.

Democratic Change

Revolution means a great change. In order to bring about such a change it is not inevitable that there will be killing and bloodshed. If the kśatriya-minded vikśubdha shúdras are in the majority, or are most influential, however, the revolution will indeed come about through bloody clashes. Iit cannot be unequivocally stated that a revolution can never be brought about through intellectual clash, without bloodshed – it is possible, if there are a large number of influential vipra-minded shúdras among the vikśubdha shúdras. But we cannot have much hope that this will be the case; so it has to be said that the liberation of the people generally involves bloodshed.

Some people claim that they will be able to bring about socialism or communism or the liberation of the people through democratic methods. Generally speaking, a welfare state is based on the same principles. They often say that England, France and some other democratic countries are progressing towards socialism. But I would ask, what is the use of tortoise-like progress such as this? Many countries which do not follow a democratic system have brought about the welfare of their population with greater speed than has Great Britain within a democratic structure, over a period of hundreds of years. In this situation speed is the most important factor.

Countries that exploited their colonies used to make efforts to promote the welfare of their population within the democratic structure, but if they had wanted to contribute to social welfare and had stayed outside the democratic framework, preferring instead the path of shúdra revolution, they would have progressed faster, and without exploiting any colonies. In fact, in a democratic structure the people’s progress is very slow. It cannot be called revolution; rather it is evolution, that is, gradual change.

If undeveloped countries avoid the path of revolution and choose the path of slow change, or deliberately ignore the defects in democratic socialism or in the concept of a welfare state, the welfare of their people will never be anything but castles in the air. In order to secure votes in a democratic structure, the assistance of thieves, thugs and other antisocial elements is required. These antisocial elements certainly do not support candidates selflessly. They expect that when their candidate becomes a minister he or she will then turn a blind eye to the antisocial behaviour of their supporters.

One of the most important basic features of socialism is cooperative bodies. Cooperative bodies cannot survive unless the state administration is run by honest citizens. Similarly, a socialistic state cannot survive unless the cooperative organizations are run by honest citizens. Hence if the public does not have a very high moral, spiritual and educational standard (an average standard or above average standard will not suffice), we cannot expect to find worthy people as representatives, as ministers, or as directors of cooperative bodies. Dishonest directors of cooperative institutions will steal money; dishonest ministers will indirectly support such activities; and weak-minded ministers will deliberately avoid looking into those activities out of fear of losing their ministerships, or in hopes of securing votes in the future. If such abuses continue, it will never be possible to build up cooperative institutions, corruption will never be flushed out of the courts and secretariats, and socialism will never be established.

It is extremely difficult, although not totally impossible, to attain the high moral standard necessary to establish socialism within a democratic structure. Thus while democratic socialism is theoretically not bad, we cannot hope that it will ever be possible in the real world.

Post-Revolution

Whether they have kśatriya intellects or vipras intellects, the vikśubdha shúdras who take over the leadership of the shúdra revolution are kśatriyas in terms of their courage, personal force and capacity to take risks. After the shúdra revolution the leadership of society passes to the vikśubdha shúdras, at which point their kśatriya qualities become still more strongly expressed. In the post-revolutionary period they cannot be called vikśubdha shúdras; by that time they have become the kśatriyas of the second rotation of the social cycle.

The moral, spiritual fighters who keep an eye on the kśatriyas to ensure they do not descend into an exploitative role in the future, are called sadvipras. If the kśatriyas descend into exploitation, the sadvipras will fight them and establish the Vipra Age in the second rotation of the social cycle. If the vipras descend into exploitation, they will also fight against the vipras and initiate the Vaeshya Age of the second rotation. And if the vaeshyas descend or wish to descend into an exploitative role, the sadvipras will inspire the vikśubdha shúdras and bring about a second shúdra revolution.

The social cycle will rotate continuously. Nobody can stop its rotation. If the post-revolutionary Kśatriya Age is called thesis, the steps taken by the sadvipras against the kśatriyas who descend into exploitation are called antithesis. The post-revolutionary Vipra Age which evolves out of this conflict is called synthesis. If, in a later period, the vipras wish to descend into exploitation, the steps that the sadvipras take against them are called antithesis. Therefore the post-kśatriya Vipra Age cannot be called synthesis at that time. It can be called the thesis of the next stage.

Nobody can stop the rotation of the social cycle, not even the sadvipras. They stay in the nucleus of the social cycle, wakefully and vigilantly observing the process of rotation. One after another, one age follows the next: Vipra after Kśatriya, Vaeshya after Vipra. The sadvipras cannot stop this process.

After the establishment of the post-revolutionary Kśatriya Age, the sadvipras will have to keep a vigilant eye on the kśatriyas so that they, as the representatives of kśatriya society, only rule and do not descend into an exploitative role. When they show signs of beginning to exploit, the sadvipras will immediately create an antithesis to end the Kśatriya Age. They will do the same thing in the Vipra and Vaeshya Ages. In other words, they will not allow society to follow the process of natural evolution. They will bring about social revolution whenever necessary.

So the sadvipras will have no rest. A time will never come in the life of a sadvipra when he or she will be able to sit back in an armchair and say, “Ah, I have nothing to do today. Today I will have a nice rest.”

Sadvipra Society

So far in the first rotation of human history on this earth, no sadvipra society has been formed. In most countries the last stage of the first rotation is in progress. In a few countries the post-shúdra-revolution Kśatriya Age has been established, and here and there the first indications of the Vipra Age are beginning to emerge. As there is no sadvipra society, the social cycle is rotating in a natural way.

In every age the dominant social class first governs, then starts to exploit, after which evolution or revolution takes place. Due to the lack of sadvipras to lend their help, the foundations of human society fail to become strong.

Today I earnestly request all rational, spiritual, moral, fighting people to build a sadvipra society without any further delay. Sadvipras will have to work for all countries, for the all-round liberation of all human beings. The downtrodden people of this persecuted world look to the eastern horizon, eagerly awaiting their advent. Let the blackness of the new-moon night be lifted from the path of the downtrodden. Let the new human beings of a new day wake up to a new sunrise in a new world. With these good wishes I conclude my discourse.

Footnotes

(1) Progressive Utilization Theory. See Idea and Ideology, 1959. The Five Fundamental Principles of Prout:

(1) No individual should be allowed to accumulate any physical wealth without the clear permission or approval of the collective body.
(2) There should be maximum utilization and rational distribution of all mundane, supramundane and spiritual potentialities of the universe.
(3) There should be maximum utilization of physical, metaphysical and spiritual potentialities of unit and collective bodies of human society.
(4) There should be a proper adjustment amongst these physical, metaphysical, mundane, supramundane and spiritual utilizations.
(5) The method of utilization should vary in accordance with changes in time, space and person, and the utilization should be of progressive nature.

–Trans.

Chapter 16	Universal Humanism [a compilation]

Modern minds are often perplexed by the fear and doubt of the extinction of the human race within a short period. People deem that civilization is passing through a very critical phase and there is no possible escape from its total annihilation. But this can’t happen.

Both individuals and society are dependent on three factors for their existence, viz., Asti, Bhati and Ananda. Dwelling place, food, clothing, education and medical facilities are the sine qua non for Asti or existence. The term Bhati means Vibhati or development and progress. The mere earthworm for instance, has existed for hundreds of millions of years, yet it does not signify existence in the true sense of the term. That is to say, there has to be Bhati, progress and development. Eating, drinking and being merry cannot represent a true life. It would be an encumbrance, a boredom.

For the all-round development of an individual or a society a goal is needed. But for this determined goal the direction and purpose of development will remain confused. A bud blooms into a flower; this is what you may call its development. The purpose of Bhati or development is the attainment of Ananda or bliss. The term Ananda connotes infinite happiness, the equipoise of pleasure and pain, the perfect mental peace.

The absence of any of the aforesaid factors may cause a great consternation or convulsion in individual or social life. The earth came into existence [[crores]] of years ago. Though from the archaeological point of view it is still in its infancy, one day or the other it is bound to meet its Waterloo. This will naturally mean the extinction of the human race. Is it so?

The destruction of a particular planet or solar system does not mean the end of the human race. There are numerous other stars and planets in the universe. With further development of science and by the help of inter-planetary rocket systems, human beings will move to other planets. What is a dream today will become a reality tomorrow. It is the inherent desire of an individual and the collective body which takes a concrete shape. It was an age-old desire of human beings to fly in the sky like birds. The aeroplane was a product of this desire. Desire is the mother of action. In coming days, you will see such rockets which may enable human beings to travel to other planets. And if one day these planets and stars also perish people will move to other planets. It may also be argued that a day may come when due to constant radiation of heat and light the temperature of the entire universe may become the same, that is, the thermal death of the universe may occur. In the absence of external heat the universe may cease to exist. This means that humanity will also perish. But it can’t happen. There can’t be a thermal death of the universe. The solidification of the object will result in Jadasphota. Tremendous heat will be released due to the Jadasphota or exploding apart of a particular planet, and new galaxies and stars will be formed out of it. There is therefore, no cause to fear. The earth may one day become extinct but humanity can’t cease to exist. You can rest assured of Asti.

Numerous factors are needed for the development of a group of people. But the following six are the most important of them.

There should be a spiritual ideology in the life of both the individual and the collective body. Much of your energy is misused due to the ignorance of your own self and the destination towards which you are moving. This misuse of energy is bound to cause destruction.

The second factor for the progress of society is spiritual cult, a Sádhaná process. Everyone has got a physical structure. The problem with every individual is to produce more and more ectoplasmic stuff by the body and then to convert it into consciousness. There should be a proper process for this conversion. Spiritual cult consists of the conversion of the five rudimental factors into ectoplasmic stuff and then into consciousness through a special scientific process. This is a process of metamorphosis. Spiritual cult therefore, is indispensable. But only spiritual ideology and spiritual philosophy will not do.

The third factor which is a blending of Asti and Bhati is a socio-economic theory. There should be a priori knowledge regarding the social structure, the distribution of wealth and its growth. For want of this knowledge there can’t be a solid ground for the construction of the social edifice.

The fourth one is social outlook. All living creatures in this manifest universe are the children of the same Cosmic Entity. They are the progeny of the same Supreme Progenitor. Naturally they are bound in a thread of fraternal relations. This is the central spirit. A socio-economic theory is of no use but for this fraternal feeling. The implementation of this theory is an impossibility without Sádhaná.

The fifth factor for the progress of society is for it to have its own scripture. There is a need for the company of elevated persons (satsauṋga) in all spheres of life.

The authority whose contact means satsauṋga for you is the shástra. That which elevates society by dint of sháśana is called [[shástra]]. We should have a shástra of our own. The last but not the least important factor for the progress of society is for it to have its own preceptor.

The entire social structure is dependent on these six factors. Bhati is meaningless without them. The weakness of one among them may jeopardize the very existence of Bhati.

From ancient times many groups of people came into existence. Some of them somehow managed to drag on, some became extinct and some continued to exist in a metamorphosed form. About one thousand five hundred years ago, Arabs were very developed in science. But they were defeated by the Islamic wave, for they were lacking in the six aforesaid factors, while the latter had at least five of them. The same is the case with Egypt. It was fully developed in the spheres of art, architec ture and science. It is the Egyptians who made the pyramids which needed subtle geometrical knowledge. Moreover, they were also very advanced in the sphere of civilization. Despite this, they could not prevent their defeat. Today’s Egypt is the Egyptian form of Arab civilization. The cause of the death of its older form was the lack of the aforesaid six factors.

The Christian or Roman civilization was also considerably higher on the ladder of development. Yet they were lacking in social outlook. There were no feelings of fraternity and equality. The slave system was rampant and human feelings were on the wane. Furthermore, the lack of a proper socio-economic theory generated a kind of fascist mentality in them. Those rolling in luxury and adverse to labour became indolent. Naturally they were defeated by a stronger and more strenuous force. The destruction of the Greek and Chinese civilizations was also caused by the lack of the factors of Bhati. The Aryans could defeat the indigenous Indians only due to the latter’s lacking in the factors of Bhati. They had several factors of Bhati but there was no preceptor and hence they were defeated.

In the future also, for want of the six factors of Bhati, the extinction of a concerned group of people is sure to happen. But where these factors are present, there the movement is to wards Ananda or divine bliss, and due to this movement the chance of their elimination becomes nil. Such groups which have the six factors in their possession will be able to produce Sadvipras. Sadvipras are those whose all efforts are directed towards the attainment of Ananda. They are also conscious of Asti and don’t lack in the six factors of Bhati. They are strong in morality and are always ready to wage war against immoral activities.

Tapah Siddhi is an impossibility without the six factors of Bhati. Those who strictly adhere to the principles of morality, are ensconced in Tapah, and are ready to wage a war against immoralists are sadvipras. Only those Sadvipras are safe from destruction and extinction who can work for the welfare of the human society. Therefore, it becomes the prime duty of all people to make themselves and others Sadvipras. By Sadvipra it is not meant those who practice Mala-Jap or Práńáyám. In Práńáyám also there are three stages – Purak means to inhale; Kumbhak which is to hold the breath and recak which to exhale. The Práńáyám of the Sadvipras will be to inhale the entire universe in Purak, to keep it within in Kumbhak and then to exhale it after mixing it with their own greatness and good will in Recak.

Sadvipras will wage a ceaseless struggle against immorality and all sorts of fissiparous tendencies. Those who pose as Dharmic but are bashful with the spirit of fight cannot be called Sadvipras. Shiva was great because his Trishul was always ready to strike at the immoralists. Krishna was great because his arrows were meant to curb the anti-human and immoral elements. He also encouraged the moralists to wage war against the immoral ists. They were not only Sadvipras but also the parents of Sadvipras – the great Sadvipras.

These Sadvipras are always busy in the task of promoting the elevation of human beings. When this earth will become old they will lead human beings to other planets by directing scientific endeavours.

Some people fear that atom or megaton bombs may one day cause the extinction of the human race. But such fears are ill-conceived and meaningless. It is human intellect which is responsible for their production and so naturally intellect is superior to its products. It may one day invent such weapons which may render ineffective even atom or megaton bombs. The cry for disarmament, therefore, will strengthen the destructive capacity of the atom bombs. It may lead humanity towards it total annihilation. It is, therefore, a great obstruction, an impediment in the progressive development of the human society. We need more powerful weapons than atom or hydrogen bombs. Sadvipras will manufacture such powerful weapons. If the human race is to survive, if millions of innocent lives are to be saved, it becomes the duty of the apostles of peace to utilize more powerful weapons than what they have at present.

Sadvipras will never lag behind in making scientific experiments. When the earth will become uninhabitable for human beings they will shift them to other planets.

Food shortage is not a new problem. Only Sadvipras and not the politicians and experts can save the world from it. They will produce such tablets which will be substitutes for food grains. By making a useless fuss over problems one will not ease the trouble. The spirit to fight against all odds alone can solve the problems confronting human beings. March ahead and wage war against all difficulties, every impediment. Victory is sure to embrace you. Difficulties and encumbrances cannot be more powerful than your capacity to solve them. You are the children of the great Cosmic Entity. Be a Sadvipra and make others Sadvipras also.

Chapter 17	Universal Humanism [a compilation]

5-1. Varńapradhánatá cakradháráyám.

[In the movement of the social cycle, one class is always dominant.]

Purport: Since no well-knit social order had evolved in the distant past, we may call that age the Shúdra Age; in those days all people survived by their manual labour. Then came the age of clan leaders – the age of the strong and the brave – which we may call the Kśatriya Age. This was followed by the age of intellectuals, which we may call the Vipra Age. Finally came the age of capitalists, the Vaeshya Age.

When the warriors and intellectuals are reduced to the level of manual labourers as a result of exploitation during the Vaeshya Age, shúdra revolution occurs. The shúdras have neither a well-knit social order nor sufficient intellect to govern society. Hence, the post-capitalist administration passes into the hands of those who provide the leadership in the shúdra revolution. These people are brave and courageous, so they begin the second Kśatriya Age.

In this way the Shúdra, Kśatriya, Vipra and Vaeshya Ages move in succession, followed by revolution; then the second cyclic order begins. Thus, the rotation of the samája cakra [social cycle] continues.

5-2. Cakrakendre sadvipráh cakraniyantrakáh.

[Located in the nucleus of the social cycle, sadvipras control the social cycle.]

Purport: Those who are staunch moralists and sincere spiritualists, and who want to put an end to immorality and exploitation by the application of force, are called sadvipras. They do not belong to the periphery of the social cycle because they are to control society remaining firmly established in the nucleus of the social cycle.

The social cycle will no doubt rotate, but if, due to their dominance, the warriors in the Kśatriya Age, the intellectuals in the Vipra Age or the capitalists in the Vaeshya Age degenerate into rapacious exploiters instead of functioning as benevolent administrators, the sacred duty of the sadvipras shall be to protect the righteous and the exploited and subdue the wicked and the exploiters through the application of force.

5-3. Shaktisampátena cakragativardhanaḿ krántih.

[Accelerating the movement of the social cycle by the application of force is called “evolution”.]

Purport: When warriors degenerate into exploiters, sadvipras will establish the Vipra Age by subduing the exploiting warriors. Consequently, the advent of the Vipra Age, which should have occurred through a natural process, is expedited by the application of force. A change of ages in this way may be called kránti [“evolution”]. The difference between evolution and svábhávika parivarttana [natural change] is only this: in evolution the movement of the social cycle is accelerated by the application of force.

5-4. Tiivrashaktisampátena gativardhanaḿ viplavah.

[Accelerating the movement of the social cycle by the application of tremendous force is called “revolution”.]

Purport: When a particular age is replaced by the successive age within a short time, or when the application of tremendous force is necessary to destroy the entrenched hegemony of a particular age, then such change is called viplava [“revolution”].

5-5. Shaktisampátena vipariitadháráyáḿ vikrántih.

[Reversing the movement of the social cycle by the application of force is called “counter-evolution”.]

Purport: If any age reverts to the preceding one by the application of force, such a change is called vikránti [“counter-evolution”]. For instance, the establishment of the Kśatriya Age after the Vipra Age is counter-evolution. This counter-evolution is extremely short-lived. That is, within a very short time this age is again replaced by the next age or the one after it. In other words, if the Kśatriya Age suddenly supersedes the Vipra Age through counter-evolution, then the Kśatriya Age will not last long. Within a short time either the Vipra Age, or as a natural concomitant the Vaeshya Age, will follow.

5-6. Tiivrashaktisampátena vipariitadháráyaḿ prativiplavah.

[Reversing the movement of the social cycle by the application of tremendous force is called “counter-revolution”.]

Purport: Likewise, if within a very short time the social cycle is turned backwards by the application of tremendous force, such a change is called prativiplava [“counter-revolution”]. Counter-revolution is even more short-lived than counter-evolution.

5-7. Púrńávartanena parikrántih.

[A complete rotation of the social cycle is called “peripheric evolution”.]

Purport: One complete rotation of the social cycle, concluding with shúdra revolution, is called parikránti [“peripheric evolution”].

5-8. Vaecitryaḿ prákrtadharmah samánaḿ na bhaviśyati.

[Diversity, not identity, is the law of nature.]

Purport: Diversity, not identity, is the innate characteristic of the Supreme Operative Principle. No two objects in the universe are identical, nor two bodies, two minds, two molecules or two atoms. This diversity is the inherent tendency of the Supreme Operative Principle.

Those who want to make everything equal are sure to fail because they are going against the innate characteristic of the Supreme Operative Principle. All things are equal only in the unmanifest state of the Supreme Operative Principle. Those who think of making all things equal inevitably think of the destruction of everything.

5-9. Yugasya sarvanimnaprayojanaḿ sarveśáḿ vidheyam.

[The minimum requirements of an age should be guaranteed to all.]

Purport: Hararme pitá Gaorii mátá svadeshah bhuvanatrayam. That is, “Supreme Consciousness is my father, the Supreme Operative Principle is my mother, and the three worlds are my homeland.” The entire wealth of the universe is the common patrimony of all, though no two things in the universe are absolutely equal. So the minimum requirements of life should be made available to everybody. In other words, food, clothing, medical treatment, housing and education must be provided to all. The minimum requirements of human beings, however, change according to the change in ages. For instance, for conveyance the minimum requirement may be a bicycle in one age and an aeroplane in another age. The minimum requirements must be provided for all people according to the age in which they live.

5-10. Atiriktaḿ pradátavyaḿ guńánupátena.

[The surplus wealth should be distributed among meritorious people according to the degree of their merit.]

Purport: After meeting the minimum requirements of all in any age, the surplus wealth will have to be distributed among meritorious people according to the degree of their merit. In an age when a bicycle is the minimum requirement for common people, a motor vehicle is necessary for a physician. In recognition of people’s merit, and to provide the meritorious with greater opportunities to serve the society, they have to be provided with motor vehicles. The dictum “Serve according to your capacity and earn according to your necessity” sounds pleasing, but will yield no results in the hard soil of the earth.⁽¹⁾

5-11. Sarvanimnamánavardhanaḿ samájajiivalakśańam.

[Increasing the minimum standard of living of the people is the indication of the vitality of society.]

Purport: Meritorious people should receive more than the amount of minimum requirements allocated to people in general, and there should be ceaseless efforts to raise the minimum standard of living. For instance, today common people need bicycles whereas meritorious people need motor vehicles, but a proper effort should be made to provide common people with motor vehicles. After everybody has been provided with a motor vehicle, it may be necessary to provide each meritorious person with an aeroplane. After providing every meritorious person with an aeroplane, efforts should also be made to provide every common person with an aeroplane, raising the minimum standard of living. In this way efforts to raise the minimum standard of living will have to go on endlessly, and on this endeavour will depend the mundane development and prosperity of human beings.

5-12. Samájádeshena viná dhanasaiṋcayah akartavyah.⁽²⁾

[No individual should be allowed to accumulate any physical wealth without the clear permission or approval of the collective body.]

Purport: The universe is the collective property of all. All people have usufructuary rights but no one has the right to misuse this collective property. If a person acquires and accumulates excessive wealth, he or she directly curtails the happiness and convenience of others in society. Such behaviour is flagrantly antisocial. Therefore, no one should be allowed to accumulate wealth without the permission of society.

5-13. Sthúlasúkśmakárańeśu caramopayogah prakartavyah
vicárasamarthitaḿ vańt́anaiṋca.

[There should be maximum utilization and rational distribution of all mundane, supramundane and spiritual potentialities of the universe.]

Purport: The wealth and resources available in the crude, subtle and causal worlds should be developed for the welfare of all. All resources hidden in the quinquelemental world – solid, liquid, luminous, aerial and ethereal – should be fully utilized, and the endeavour to do this will ensure the maximum development of the universe. People will have to earnestly explore land, sea and space to discover, extract and process the raw materials needed for their requirements.

There should be rational distribution of the accumulated wealth of humanity. In other words, all people must be guaranteed the minimum requirements. In addition, the requirements of meritorious people, and in certain cases those with special needs, will also have to be kept in mind.

5-14.
Vyaśt́isamaśt́isháriiramánasádhyátmikasambhávanáyáḿ
caramo’payogashca.

[There should be maximum utilization of the physical, metaphysical and spiritual potentialities of unit and collective bodies of human society.]

Purport: Society must ensure the maximum development of the collective body, collective mind and collective spirit. One must not forget that collective welfare lies in individuals and individual welfare lies in collectivity. Without ensuring individual comforts through the proper provision of food, light, air, accommodation and medical treatment, the welfare of the collective body can never be achieved. One will have to promote individual welfare motivated by the spirit of promoting collective welfare.

The development of the collective mind is impossible without developing proper social awareness, encouraging the spirit of social service and awakening knowledge in every individual. So, inspired with the thought of the welfare of the collective mind, one has to promote the well-being of the individual mind.

The absence of spiritual morality and spirituality in individuals will break the backbone of the collectivity. So for the sake of collective welfare one will have to awaken spirituality in individuals. The mere presence of a handful of strong and brave people, a small number of scholars or a few spiritualists does not indicate the progress of the entire society. The potential for infinite physical, mental and spiritual development is inherent in every human being. This potentiality has to be harnessed and brought to fruition.

5-15. Sthúlasúkśma kárańo’payogáh susantulitáh vidheyáh.

[There should be a proper adjustment amongst these physical, metaphysical, mundane, supramundane and spiritual utilizations.]

Purport: While promoting individual and collective welfare, there should be proper adjustment among the physical, mental and spiritual spheres and the crude, subtle and causal worlds. For instance, society has the responsibility to meet the minimum requirements of every individual, but if it arranges food and builds a house for everyone under the impetus of this responsibility, individual initiative is retarded. People will gradually become lethargic. Therefore, society has to make arrangements so that people, in exchange for their labour according to their capacity, can earn the money they require to purchase the minimum requirements. In order to raise the level of the minimum requirements of people, the best policy is to increase their purchasing capacity.

“Proper adjustment” also means that while taking service from a person who is physically, mentally and spiritually developed, society should follow a balanced policy. Society will take physical, intellectual or spiritual service from a person depending upon which of these capacities is conspicuously developed in that person. From those who are sufficiently physically and intellectually developed, society will follow a balanced policy and accordingly take more intellectual service and less physical service, because intellectual power is comparatively subtle and rare. From those who are physically, mentally and spiritually developed, society will take maximum spiritual service, less intellectual service and still less physical service.

As far as social welfare is concerned, those endowed with spiritual power can render the greatest service, followed by those endowed with intellectual power. Those having physical power, though not negligible, cannot do anything by themselves. Whatever they do, they do under the instructions of those endowed with intellectual and spiritual power. Hence the responsibility of controlling the society should not be in the hands of those who are endowed only with physical power, or in the hands of those endowed only with courage, or in the hands of those who are developed only intellectually, or in the hands of those with worldly knowledge alone. Social control will have to be in the hands of those who are spiritually elevated, intelligent and brave all at the same time.

5-16. Deshakálapátraeh upayogáh parivarttante te upayogáh
pragatishiiláh bhaveyuh.

[The method of utilization should vary in accordance with changes in time, space and person, and the utilization should be of progressive nature.]

Purport: The proper use of any object changes according to changes in time, space and person. Those who cannot understand this simple principle want to cling to the skeletons of the past, and as a result they are rejected by living society. Sentiments based on narrow nationalism, regionalism, ancestral pride, etc., tend to keep people away from this fundamental principle, so they cannot unreservedly accept it as a simple truth. Consequently, after doing indescribable damage to their country, their fellow citizens and themselves, they are compelled to slink away to the backstage.

The method of utilization of every object changes according to time, space and person. This has got to be accepted, and after recognizing this fact, people will have to progressively utilize every object and every idea. For instance, the energy which a powerful person utilizes to operate a huge hammer should be utilized through scientific research to operate more than one hammer at a time, instead of wasting the energy to operate just one hammer. In other words, scientific research, guided by progressive ideas, should extract more and more service from the same human potential. It is not a sign of progress to use outdated technology in an age of developed science.

Society will have to bravely confront different types of obstacles, large or small, that are likely to arise due to the use of various resources and materials created by progressive ideas and developed technology. Through struggle, society will have to move forward towards victory along the path of all-round fulfilment in life.

Pragatishiila upayogatattvamidaḿ sarvajanahitárthaḿ sarvajanasukhárthaḿ pracáritam. [This is the Progressive Utilization Theory, propounded for the happiness and all-round welfare of all.]

Footnotes

(1) On 13 October 1989 the author gave the discourse “Minimum Requirements and Maximum Amenities” (Proutist Economics, 1992), and instructed that the essential ideas contained in this discourse should be added to the present chapter. These ideas were summarized by the author as follows: “(1) Minimum requirements are to be guaranteed to all. (2) Special amenities are for people of special calibre as per the environmental condition of the particular age. (3) Maximum amenities are to be guaranteed to all, even to those who have no special qualities – to common people of common calibre. Maximum amenities are to be guaranteed to all as per environmental conditions. These amenities are for those of ordinary calibre – the common people, the so-called downtrodden humanity. (4) All three above are never-ending processes, and they will go on increasing according to the collective potentialities. This appendix to our philosophy may be small, but it is of progressive nature and progressive character. It has far-reaching implications for the future.” –Eds.

(2) In 1959 the author gave five principles in English known as the “Five Fundamental Principles of Prout”. They were published as part of the discourse “The Cosmic Brotherhood” in Idea and Ideology. Subsequently, in 1961, the author dictated Ánanda Sútram, whose fifth chapter contains, as we see here, sixteen Sanskrit sútras, or aphorisms. Aphorisms 12 to 16 correspond to the Five Fundamental Principles given earlier in English. In this edition of Ánanda Sútram, the author’s original English of each of the Five Fundamental Principles has been printed below the corresponding Sanskrit aphorism. (Though in each case it is the author’s English, it has been presented in square brackets because it was not originally given in the context of this book.) What follows every other Sanskrit aphorism in this chapter and other chapters is a translation of the aphorism rendered by the editors. Thus the bracketed English below the Sanskrit in each of Aphorisms 12-16 is not a translation as such. Note that the word samája in Sútra 5-12 is normally translated “society”; “collective body” appears in the English. Parivarttante in Sútra 5-16 is normally translated “does vary” (present indicative); “should vary” appears in the English. –Eds.