3

Maharshi Kanada created a stir in the world of philosophy by propagating his school of Vaesheśika Darshana. It was indeed a great commotion in the world of thought of those days. He declared, Karańábhávát káryábhávah – “Where there is no cause, there is no effect.” That is, each and every effect has a cause, which we may or may not know. He explained that this Cosmic Mind which is manifested in the form of countless molecules, atoms, protons, neutrons, etc., must have a cause – to deny the cause is the height of intellectual folly. That Entity which controls the association of these particles is Iishvara. Thus Maharshi Kanada brought about a great revolution in the world of thought. This great scholar of Gándhárbhúmi (the present-day Afghanistan) was both a philosopher and a scientist.

There is no doubt that the theory of the law of causation was an extremely novel idea in the world of philosophy of those days, but it is also true that we must trace the source of the first effect, that is, trace the first cause, in the process of causation.

The Vaesheśika school of philosophy has accepted Iishvara in clear terms. So if one contends that the first effect or the first cause of the law of causation emanates from Iishvara, even then one pertinent question remains – how did this concept of Iishvara arise in philosophical analysis? And is this Iishvara a witnessing entity or a philosophical entity? Is it a causal entity or an instrumental entity? The Vaesheśika school of philosophy is not at all explicit on these points.

Moreover, some other points should also be clarified, such as: what is the relation between Iishvara and the molecules, atoms, neutrons and protons of the universe, and by what authority does Iishvara exercise His supervisory control over them? If this is not clearly explained, then the Vaesheśika school of philosophy becomes dualistic,⁽¹⁾ and no longer monistic at all. If it is dualistic, then how does one entity come in contact with another? So in the Vaesheśika school of philosophy, Shiva cannot be realized. The diffused light of the Vaesheśika philosophy creates only illusions, and those illusions become a confusing labyrinth that diverts people from their goal and misleads them to a dead end where they beat their heads on granite walls and moan, “O Lord, I cannot comprehend You by this metaphysics! I know You are the life of my life – but by this philosophy I have not been able to realize it. These theories have produced only a garland of tears in my silent heart. I have been blessed with a valuable human body, but shall I forever cry – ”

Páśáńa devatá pújiba baliyá
Bahudúr hate esechi caliyá
Dioná dioná carańe t́heliyá
Kapála amár manda.
Mánaver práńe kámaná apára
Bhaya nái Prabhu phiráio ná ár
Shudháiba shudhu kii doś ámár
Ghuce yábe dvidhádvandva.

[From afar I have come to worship a stone god;
Do not turn me away from Your feet –
How wretched is my fate!
Endless are the desires of the human heart;
I am not afraid, but Lord, do not disappoint me –
Tell me only, what is my fault?
How can I remove this confusion?]

A defective philosophy leads people along a defective path. I have already said this and, in connection with the Vaesheśika philosophy, I say it again.

4

Around the middle of this period of philosophy, the Miimáḿsá school arose. The propounders of this Miimáḿsá school took upon themselves the responsibility to detect and remove the defects and inconsistencies that had developed, due to the unevolved state of human intellect, in the explanation of the responsibility between the Creator and His creation. As there is no cessation in the flow of creation, similarly the Creator is without pause. Some philosophers fully accepted this truth, some partially accepted it, while others did not admit it at all. According to their respective intellects, they imposed various restrictions and limitations – some with cause and some without – on the limitlessness of the Creator.

Some philosophers propounded their doctrines merely for the satisfaction of their readers, while others painted their theories in glowing colours like a rainbow whose colourful rays appear suddenly in the firmament of logic to dazzle the eyes of the onlookers – and the next moment disappear behind the silver clouds.

But in one respect all the propounders of the Miimáḿsá school are the same – that is, in their verbosity and their skill in debate.

Of those philosophers of the Miimáḿsá school who attained special prominence as propounders of the Uttar Miimáḿsá philosophy, Ácárya Bádaráyań Vyása, Ácárya Gaoŕapáda, Ácárya Govindapáda and Shriimat Shankaracharya are the pioneers. Ácárya Jaemini became famous as the propounder of the Púrva Miimáḿsá philosophy.

The interpreters, commentators and annotators of the Uttar Miimáḿsá school held widely different views on most matters, but all of them accepted Brahma as the ultimate reality. Regarding the created world, some fully admitted it, some vaguely accepted it, some admitted it only reluctantly, while others did not accept it at all. According to them this creation is simply a procession of illusions. That the world appears to exist is in itself an illusion; the mind which considers the world as real is an illusion; and the person who possesses this illusory mind is also an illusion. Only Brahma exists, nothing else. The illusory entity called Máyá is creating all these illusory ideas. Máyá is false; She does not do anything in reality, only in appearance. Since Máyá is unreal, Her existence also is false. She is Aghat́ana ghat́ana pat́iiyasii – She is capable of making unreal things appear to be real. But she does not exist either. There exists only one entity, Brahma and nothing else.

Aśt́akulácalasaptasamudráh
Brahmapurandaradinakararudráh;
Na tvaḿ náhaḿ náyaḿ lokah
Vyarthaḿ kimapi kriyate shokah.

“The eight great continents, the seven vast oceans, Brahmá [the Creator of this universe], Indra [the lord of energy], Súrya [the sun-god] and Rudra [the god of death] – all these are unreal. Nothing exists, neither you nor I. So why do you vainly consider anything to be your own and increase the bondage of your attachment?”

The irony of this is that the propounders of these theories built impressive temples and monasteries in the false, illusory world; they extracted large fortunes from the false, illusory world; they wrote numerous books on false, illusory palm or birch leaves – and they devoted all their time and energy to the propagation of their false doctrines of Máyá in this false, illusory world.

If the entire world is false, then it has no value, and the Creator Himself loses His importance. In the absence of the creation, the existence of the Creator is also jeopardized. Shiva loved this created world with all His heart. Education, medicine, social code, music, dance, rhythm, percussion, intuitional science – Shiva taught all these to His loving children. He took them on His lap – caressed them and pinched their cheeks – and with His own hands He showed them everything. Had He considered this world to be false, He would have certainly turned His face away and neglected it – but then Shiva would not have been Shiva as we know Him. He would have been in fact shava [a corpse]. Máyáváda [the Doctrine of Illusion], one of the interpretations of the Uttar Miimáḿsá philosophy, completely forgot the very existence of Shiva: it made a vain attempt to establish itself by undermining the foundation of Shiva’s ideology. And the strangest thing is that the pioneer of the Doctrine of Illusion himself was declared to be the avatára of Shiva! Ultimately the Uttar Miimáḿsá Doctrine of Illusion had to admit defeat before the vastness and universality of Shiva’s personality. Thus in spite of all its verbosity and eloquence, it could not provide any philosophical base for the development of an extraordinary leader. The later scriptures written on the basis of this Doctrine of Illusion instilled in people’s minds apathy and indifference to the world, which was completely opposed to the essence of Shaivism. The Uttar Miimáḿsá philosophy, the Doctrine of Illusion, though it may pound its head against its own unyielding walls, will never be able to catch even a glimpse of the glory of Shiva.

5

About 2500 years ago, when the sun of Árśa Dharma was about to set, when it was limited to a series of cruel sacrifices and ritualistic ostentations, without any devotion or idealism, a simmering discontent brewed in the hearts of honest, intelligent and rational people. They could not express their suppressed agony – that this lifeless, substanceless dharma was like a fruit without any pulp, unable to satisfy the deep hunger of the human heart. In fact, in most cases it was only a handful of people, motivated by the instinct of greed, who were beating the drums of dogma and ruthlessly exploiting innocent people.

Many tried to infuse fresh vitality into this stagnant and turbid pool of social life. Those who deserve special mention are Maharśi Brhaspati (popularly known as Charvaka), Vardhaman Mahavir and Gautama Buddha.

Buddha opposed those ritualistic religions in clear language and advised people to follow the path of morality. He said, “Prepare yourself and truth will spontaneously manifest itself before you.” Buddha did not say anything specifically about Iishvara, his views about átman were vague, and he clearly rejected the Vedas; for these reasons the doctrine of Buddha was branded as atheism.

It is true that Buddha did not explicitly mention Iishvara, but it is also true that he never denied Iishvara. He was once asked, Kim Bhagavata atthi [“Does God exist”]? Buddha did not answer. He was again asked, Kim Bhagavata natthi [“Then does God not exist”]? Again Buddha remained silent. At this, three types of people formed three different ideas about Buddha. One group thought that since Buddha did not answer the question about the existence of God, he must be an atheist. Another group thought, since Buddha did not answer the question, “Does God then not exist?” then he must be a theist, a believer in God. And yet another group, the third group, thought, “God’s existence is beyond the saḿkalpa and vikalpa of the human mind, and so beyond the scope of atthi and natthi [existence and non-existence], and for that reason Buddha preferred to remain silent.”

Já teṋi boli te tabi tál
Guru bob se shiiśá kál
Bhańai Káhńu jina raan bi kaesá
Káleṋ bob samvohia jaesá.

Regarding jiivátmá [unit consciousness], Buddha did not use the term jiivátmá or any such word, but he uttered one sentence, Attáhi attánaḿ natha. This sentence may have two meanings. One meaning is, “One is the lord of one’s own self,” and the other is, “Átman is the lord of átman.” The second meaning perhaps is more acceptable because in the Prákrta language the word appan is generally used to indicate one’s own self, while the word attá is mainly used in the sense of átman, or soul. Thus one cannot conclusively prove that Buddha did not accept the existence of átman; there is sufficient scope for controversy on this point.

It is true that Buddha did not support the Vedas. But while preaching his philosophy he remarked, Eśa dhamma sanantana – “This is the eternal dharma.”

Buddha clearly and firmly supported the doctrine of rebirth. In fact, no doctrine before him had placed as much stress on the theory of rebirth as his did. One who accepts the theory of rebirth is bound to accept the existence of átman also. If the átman is non-existent, then who will take rebirth?

The theory of nirváńa or mahánirváńa⁽²⁾ I prefer not to discuss here because this does not come within the scope of our discussion. Here I have merely addressed myself to the doubt one may have about Buddha’s atheistic beliefs. Now let us discuss the relation between the ideals of Shiva and the doctrine of Buddhism.

Although there is a controversy about Buddha’s theistic or atheistic beliefs, there is no doubt about his concept of morality. In fact, in every sentence of Buddha’s teachings, in every rhythm of his vibrations, his moralism radiates unblemished light, pure effulgence. Before him, no one had tried to illumine the minds of people with the brilliant rays of this kind of moralism. He advocated the Eight-Fold Path [Aśt́a Shiila] as a path of human progress, to lead people from animality to humanity. This Eight-Fold Path consists of (1) Proper Philosophy, (2) Proper Determination, (3) Proper Speech, (4) Proper Occupation, (5) Proper Exercise, (6) Proper Work, (7) Proper Memory [i.e., meditation] and (8) Proper Attainment of Samádhi. He exhorted people to follow these progressive steps, and his teachings without doubt laid a solid base for human morality.

But it should also be remembered that although morality is the base of sádhaná, it alone cannot provide the necessary means for onward movement on the spiritual path. Morality is neither the goal nor the predominant impetus of human life. Without discussing the theistic or atheistic character of Buddhism, it can be said that it is a way of life based on morality.

Human beings are always moving. They moved in the past, they are moving now, and they will also move in the future. Their movement will never cease; it is pauseless motion. Now, those who are on the move must have a goal before them, and they should also establish some kind of relationship with the environment around them. A goal is necessary because it is the goal which attracts people towards itself. And there should be a proper environment to provide the necessary inspiration on the path of their movement. In Buddhist philosophy this is conspicuously absent. Instead, people become rather indifferent to the world. This sort of negative attitude towards everything breeds cynicism. If we accept the Shúnya of Shúnyaváda as the ultimate reality or Naerátma Shakti as the ultimate reality, in that case it becomes difficult to establish a rhythmic harmony between this Shúnya and a vibrant ideology. Yathá Shúnyavádináḿ Shúnyaḿ Brahma Brahmavidáḿstathá – “As Shúnya is to the Shúnyavádin Buddhist, so Brahma is to the Brahmavádins [the followers of Brahma]”. With these words the supporters of Máyávada interpreted Buddhism in their own way and denied the very essence of human life by comparing Brahma to a valueless zero.

The four principles that were extolled as the Four Noble Truths in Buddhist doctrine are: (1) There is suffering, (2) There is a cause of suffering, (3) There is cessation of suffering, (4) There is a way to the cessation of suffering. Now, if suffering is accepted as the fundamental truth, and avidyá is accepted as the cause of all miseries, then who is their creator? This basic question remains unanswered. According to psychology, happiness and suffering are two particular states of mind. Just as there cannot be happiness or suffering in the absence of the mind which experiences them, how can we accept suffering as a Noble Truth without accepting happiness and without accepting the mind? In truth, is this not a negative attitude towards life? But Shiva was positive in all respects – from His toes to His matted locks. Every aspect of His existence glittered with the glow of positivity. The sweet touch of His firm and tender personality made life overflowing with delight. In the mirror of pessimism, His effulgence, His radiant splendour, can never be reflected. In the aura surrounding Shiva’s personality, the darkness of pessimism is bound to lose its existence. Thus the glory of Shiva’s personality can never be realized within the framework of pessimism.

6

Just as the popular discontent with the ritualistic ostentations of the so-called dharma found expression in Buddhism, so emerged the philosophy of Jainism. Both these religions were in open revolt against the karmakáńd́a [ritualistic portions of the Vedas], but they were not so opposed to the jiṋánakáńd́a [philosophical portions], because these were quite popular with spiritual aspirants. Sádhaná or intuitional practice was almost unknown to the common masses; they were content with the Vedic rituals and with the guidance of a particular class of people, and mistakenly accepted this as the path of dharma. Both Buddha and Vardhaman Mahavir [the founder of Jainism] vehemently opposed the ritualistic sacrifices, especially of animals, and both of them protested against the hostile attitude of the so-called dharma towards morality. Although Buddha declared ahiḿsá [the doctrine of non-violence] to be the height of dharma, he also greatly emphasized morality; whereas Vardhaman Mahavir gave importance to ahiḿsá but was not emphatic about morality.

Philosophically both of them espoused the theory of nirváńa, although with some distinction. Buddha’s concept of nirváńa was jiṋána nirváńa,⁽³⁾ whereas Mahavir’s concept of nirváńa was karma nirváńa.⁽⁴⁾ Both sought to lead people along their paths, but Mahavir could not evoke as great a response from the people as Buddha, with his stirring call of compassion. Although Vardhamán did not altogether deny the existence of the world, he was somewhat detached from practical life.

The Jain religion, based on rigorous austerity and renunciation, tended to ignore, to some extent, human life and its pains and pleasures in the practical world. But Shiva was just the opposite. He inspired and motivated people to move forward in all spheres of life, and He also came forward personally to lead them.

7

Whether Buddhism or Jainism is atheistic or theistic, good or bad, is not at all the topic of discussion here. Although they opposed the ritualistic religions of their day, they never transgressed morality; they always adhered to a moral code. The materialistic philosophy of Charvaka, however, in opposing the ostentatious religious practices, denied moral principles and human values.

Yávajiivet sukhaḿ jiivet,
Rńaḿ krtvá ghrtaḿ pivet.

[As long as you live, you should live happily –
Even if you have to go into debt, you should eat butter!]

What type of statement is this? This kind of remark will propel people to the depths of animality, where each person will mistrust others, and exploitation will roll the wheels of its chariot over the ribs of human beings. This kind of materialism is simply exploitation in the physical and mental spheres. Not only that, it transforms people into pleasure-seekers and finally destroys all their inner treasures. The very foundation of human life will be demolished.

Yávajjivaḿ sukhaḿ jiivaḿ násti mrtyoragocarah;
Bhasmiibhútasya dehasya punarágamanaḿ kutah.

[As long as you are on this earth, live in happiness – there is
nothing after death.
How can a body which has already been burnt, return?]

In the Vedas there is a ritual portion (karmakáńd́a, composed of mantra and Bráhmań [regulations for yajiṋas]) and a philosophical portion (jiṋánakáńd́a, composed of Árańyaka and Upaniśada). Although the ritual portion may be used to increase ignorance or exploitation, the knowledge portion cannot be so easily utilized for that purpose, and should not be rejected outright. Many profound human values are embedded in these scriptures. Moreover, even if there is any philosophical controversy, one will have to establish one’s position through logic and rational argument, through váda, jalpa and vitańd́á. Rude and indecorous language is not at all tolerable.

Trayovedasya karttárah
Bhańd́a dhúrtta nishácaráh

[The authors of the three Vedas
Are hypocritical, cunning and ghoulish.]

What an indecent remark! In condemning the showy rituals, the author has degraded himself.

It is easily proved that this material world is composed of five fundamental factors. If anyone denies the existence of the ethereal factor, then present-day science and technology becomes ineffective.

Caturbhyah khalu bhútebhyah caetanyamupajáyate;
Kinvádibhyah samatebhyah dravyebhyah madashaktivat.

According to Charvaka’s philosophy, the human mind or human consciousness is a fifth factor born out of a mixture of four factors – solid, liquid, fire and air. It was compared to certain substances which start to ferment with the addition of another substance, and thus cause intoxication. This quality of intoxication was then considered to be an additional factor. Or it was compared to people chewing catechu – they mix lime with the catechu to produce a red colour which stains their lips, but this red colour is not something new. The Charvaka philosophers forgot that if the collection of the four fundamental material factors produced consciousness, then the potentiality of consciousness was certainly already inherent in those four factors, and upon their combination that potentiality becomes an actuality – just as the red colour born of the mixture of catechu and lime, was already in potential form in that catechu and lime and was manifested when those two substances were mixed in proper proportion. Out of nothing something did not emerge.

Thus Charvaka’s philosophy, instead of challenging the ostentatious religions with clear logic, vainly attempted to triumph with irrational jugglery of words. Any rational person knows that there are three kinds of proof of knowledge – direct perception, inference, and authority. Through these logical proofs the various branches of knowledge such as the humanities and sciences have advanced, are advancing, and will continue to advance in future. But the Charvaka philosophy did not accept any proof other than direct perception:

Pratyakśyaeva pramáńaváditayá
Anumánád́e anaḿgiikáreńa prámáńyábhávát.

That is, such a philosopher “will not accept the existence of his grandfather because he did not see him” – he saw his father, but not his grandfather. One who has never travelled outside India cannot accept the existence of the city of London. One who has not seen the Vedic scriptures will not acknowledge their existence. What sort of philosophy is this? Hearing such a theory, even the roadside bulls will roar with laughter!

Even though from such a materialistic philosophy people do not expect anything leading to their mental and spiritual development, at least in the physical sphere, they may expect something beneficial – the fulfilment of their mundane needs such as clothes, medicine, shelter, education, etc. But they will not even attain these, because when the people who are responsible for the fulfilment of these mundane needs are not moralists, when they do not stand on the firm foundation of morality, how will they provide for people’s worldly necessities? While trying to serve people, selfish thoughts will certainly hover in their minds, and they will live in constant fear that others might snatch power from their hands or take revenge for their deliberate misdeeds. Thus the materialists will not even be able to fulfil the physical necessities of the people; rather by sowing the seeds of doubt, distrust and violence in people’s minds, they will pollute the earth’s atmosphere and people will suffocate in this poisonous smoke.

To do something good, one must have an idealistic mind. How can materialists accept this essential rule of the mind if they do not accept the superiority of mind over matter? Thus neither in theory nor in practice can materialism promote the least welfare of the human race.

If materialism ever comes to power, its macabre dance will perpetuate its temporary reign of terror by creating a fear complex in the peoples’ minds. Crushing the finer sensibilities of the human mind, it will convert people into living dead. At best, human beings will become like domesticated animals in the zoo, where they get full meals and move about within the boundaries of the park, listening to monotonous music as entertainment. But they will never have the opportunity to sing freely themselves, with full-throated voices; or to cross the boundary fence, and, walking on the soft carpet of green grass, enjoy the sweet fragrance of the vast world outside. Who wants to become an animal in a zoo like this?

Young animals will never be content to remain inside such a zoo, even though the best food and a rather secure life are guaranteed to them; whenever they find any opportunity, they will cross the boundary and escape. They will have to be forced inside the fence with bayonets. Otherwise, they will never remain inside.

But materialism is most dangerous when it tries to suppress mental expansion, when it creates obstacles in the transformation of mind from crude to subtle – when it blocks the passageway of human development from the graceful beauty of the mind to the spiritual sweetness of the soul. Materialism tends to forget that the crude physical body and its vital energy are not the whole of human existence – that the most priceless assets of human beings are their psychic wealth, their spiritual treasures, and their most beloved entity, Parama Puruśa, the Lord of their life.

Mor nay shudhumátra práń
Sarvavitta rikta kari yár hay yátrá abasán;
Yáhá phuráile din shúnya asthi diye shodhe áhár nidrá
sheś rń;
Bhebechi jenechi yáhá balechi shunechi yáhá káne
Sahasá geyechi yáhá gáne
Dhareni tá marańer beŕágherá práńe;
Yá peyechi yá karechi dán
Marttye tár kothá parimáń;
Ámár maner nrtya katabár jiivan mrtyure
Launghiyá caliyá geche cirasundarer surapure
Cirakál tare se ki theme yábe sheśe kauṋkáler siimánáy ese!
Ye ámár satya paricay
Máḿse tár parimáp nay;
Padágháte jiirńa táhá náhi kare dańd́apalguli
Sarvasvánta náhi kare pathapránte dhúli
Ámi ye rúper padme karechi arúp madhupán
Duhkher bakśer májhe ánander peyechi sandhán
Ananta maoner bańii sunechi antare
Dekhechi jyotir path shunyamay ándhár prántare;
Nahi ámi vidhátár brhat parihás
Asiim aeshvarya diye racita mahat sarvanásha.

[The entire wealth of my life will not be exhausted when my
journey ends;
At the end of my days my bare bones will repay my life’s debt of
food and sleep.
What I have thought, what I have known,
What I have said, what I have heard,
What songs my lips have sung –
This life of mine cannot be contained within the bounds of death,
And all I have received, all I have given in this world –
How can it be measured?
How many times has the dance of my mind
Crossed the boundaries of life and death
Into the divine realm of beauty eternal?
Will this all end forever in a skeleton?
My true identity cannot be measured in terms of flesh.
Will everything be exhausted in the passage of time and of
footsteps,
And at the end of the road – only dust?
In the lotus of forms I have tasted the sweetness of the Formless
One,
In the bosom of sorrow I have found bliss,
Inside my heart I have heard the voice of infinite silence,
In the blinding darkness of the void I have seen the path of
light.
I am not simply a great joke of fate
Was I created from boundless wealth, merely for annihilation?]

Materialism is the most dangerous – indeed, suicidal – philosophy. The other defective philosophies, which are not devoid of morality, view Shiva from afar as a mysterious personality, but materialism is both defective and devoid of morality. That is why materialists do not recognize Shiva, did not recognize Him, and will not recognize Him. Even seeing Him before their very eyes, they will never understand who Shiva is.

Footnotes

(1) Dualistic because there is a duality between the controller and the controlled. –Trans.

(2) The Buddhist concept of liberation. –Eds.

(3) That is, that one could attain nirváńa by adopting the path of knowledge. –Trans.

(4) That is, that one could attain nirváńa by detaching oneself from all mundane activities. –Trans.