Subjective Evolution of Consciousness - Chapter Six

Śrīla Śrīdhar Mahārāj: What subjects are you studying?
Student: Philosophy and religion.
Śrīla Śrīdhar Mahārāj: In which university?
Student: San Francisco State.
Śrīla Śrīdhar Mahārāj: You are a student of religion and philosophy. Have you studied Hegel? Hegel’s philosophy is sometimes described as panentheism. Panentheism proposes that God is present in all things, but in contrast to pantheism it affirms that God is also an independent being above and beyond all things. Hegel is also known for Perfectionism. He says that the nature of the Absolute is both conditioned and unconditioned combined. The truth develops through thesis, antithesis, and synthesis, and by this method everything progresses. According to Hegel, the Absolute is by Itself and for Itself. And he also used the German equivalent of the expression “die to live.” These were his chosen expressions.

Such expressions are very useful for those in the theistic line. If you want to live a progressive life you will have to die as you are. Your ego must be dissolved and then the real inner or finer self will come out. This is a good philosophy to have appeared amongst the Westerners. The concept of die to live comes in the line of Vaiṣṇavism. Hegel has also said that the Absolute is “by Himself’’ and “for Himself.” “For Himself” means that the Absolute Truth is the Supreme Enjoyer. In the Bhagavad-gītā Krishna says:

ahaṁ hi sarva-yajñānāṁ
bhoktā cha prabhur eva cha
na tu mām abhijānanti
tattvenātaś chyavanti te
(Bhagavad-gītā 9.24)

This is the most vital point to establish God as a person. He is the enjoyer. If anything is enjoyed, the enjoyer will hold the supreme position. This cannot but be. Everything is meant for His enjoyment. And He is the supreme. “By Himself” means that the absolute is supreme – everything is meant for His satisfaction. This is a necessary truth; it is not questionable. And also, His existence is subjective.

No object can exist without a subject. No thing can exist without a thinker. There must be a thinker. For example, what is a fossil? As we examine it we observe color and the hardness of stone, but these qualities are simply thoughts within us – a thinking stage. What is color? A concept within our consciousness. So any kind of existence presupposes a subject or consciousness. This is the crux of the argument. No object can exist without a subject. And no subject can exist without an object. There is the thinker and the thought. If there is a thinker, he must be thinking something – so an object is there. And if there is an object, then whatever attribute it has must be reflected in the consciousness of a subject. Otherwise no existence is possible. Do you follow?

Student: Yes. It is very clear.
Śrīla Śrīdhar Mahārāj: These are all Hegel’s original conceptions, his contributions to philosophy. He was a very important philosopher. And for a Western thinker, his philosophy was very near to that of the Eastern thinkers. In many respects, Hegel’s philosophy is very close to Rāmānuja’s philosophy.
Of course, there are many important Western philosophers. Kant’s philosophy is very influential. Are you familiar with Kant?
Student: Yes.
Śrīla Śrīdhar Mahārāj: Have you studied Descartes?
Student: Yes, somewhat. He said, “I think, therefore I am.”
Śrīla Śrīdhar Mahārāj: He is said to be the father of modern philosophy. Then there is Berkeley: he is an extreme subjective thinker. Locke, Hume, Mill, Berkeley, Johnson, Kant, Hegel – all these are important Western philosophers.
Student: I prefer to study Eastern philosophy. Śrīla Śrīdhar Mahārāj: What kind of Eastern philosophy do you study? Sāṇkhya? Yoga? Nyāya? Vaiśeṣika?
Student: Zen Buddhism and Taoism – Chinese philosophy.
Śrīla Śrīdhar Mahārāj: Confucius came from China. Before Buddhism, Confucius was present in China. Then gradually moving West we find Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle. Have you studied them?
Student: Yes, I have studied them a little.
Śrīla Śrīdhar Mahārāj: The concept of Parallelism forwarded by Plato is also accepted in Vaiṣṇava philosophy to a certain extent. According to Plato, the forms we experience are a reflection of ideal form. This was his understanding of how the forms we perceive are a perverted reflection of the original spiritual world. That is the theory of Parallelism of Plato.
Student: Can you please explain more about the parallels between Hegel’s philosophy and Krishna Consciousness?
Śrīla Śrīdhar Mahārāj: In Hegel’s philosophy, truth progresses through thesis, antithesis, and synthesis. The truth moves in a crooked way. In the philosophy of Krishna Consciousness, the word vilāsa means “playful movement.”

You may take it to mean that the Absolute is absorbed in play. And that is expressed through crookedness. Aher iva gatiḥ premnaḥ svabhāva-kuṭilā bhavet: A serpent moves in a crooked way; similarly, the movements of the Absolute are not straight, but crooked. Vilāsa, or the conception of līlā – the divine Pastimes of the Lord – is something like that. This is similar to Hegel’s opinion in which the truth develops in a crooked way through thesis, antithesis, and synthesis. There is thesis, then its opposite, and then again they unify and create a new thesis. Then again antithesis, and again a greater harmony in synthesis.

In this way truth is dynamic; it develops and makes progress. Hegel was the deepest thinker among the Western philosophers. Of course, other German scholars like Max Muller were also deep thinkers. In fact, Germany had such great appreciation and fondness for Indian culture that certain ancient books that can no longer be found in India may still be found in Germany. The Germans were never the colonial masters of India, but still they were extremely inquisitive to know about the cultural books of India. In spite of the war, many rare, ancient Indian books that can no longer be found in India are still safely preserved in Germany.

Student: I had a question regarding the philosophy of Berkeley. According to Berkeley the world is in the mind. It seems that the Berkeley theory tends to negate the existence of this world. It tends to argue against any type of reality.
Śrīla Śrīdhar Mahārāj: But Hegel has come to relieve Berkeley somewhat. Someone may challenge Berkeley: “I may think that there is a hundred dollars in my pocket, but if I search my pocket, will I find it there?” Hegel says that it must be there somewhere in the Universal Mind. That is Hegel’s standpoint.
Student: Then it is present somewhere.
Śrīla Śrīdhar Mahārāj: And that wave comes gradually. This was my argument regarding Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākur’s Jaiva Dharma. Have you read that book?
Student: No, I’m not familiar with that book.
Śrīla Śrīdhar Mahārāj: In that novel, the characters who speak on spiritual life are apparently imaginary. The different persons in that book – Brajanātha, the Bābājī, and others – seem to be imaginary characters discussing spiritual life. But I once explained that what is in Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākur’s mind, what he has written in Jaiva Dharma, is not imagination. At one time or other, the persons and events he mentions must have existed, and these things will again have to come into existence. Do you follow?
Student: I’m not sure.
Śrīla Śrīdhar Mahārāj: What Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākur saw in his mind must exist somewhere in this world, sometime in the future, or sometime in the past. That very thing he describes in an apparently fictional way actually existed. Let me give you an example. When I speak, the sound moves at a certain speed. That sound can be heard later in another place. The same is true in the case of light, isn’t it?
Student: Yes.
Śrīla Śrīdhar Mahārāj: So Śrī Chaitanyadeva, with his divine sound, chanted here and performed saṅkīrtana. He preached and the velocity of that divine wave is still going on. And now in some place in a universe, it may be found. Do you follow? Am I clear?
Student: I think so.

Śrīla Śrīdhar Mahārāj: The velocity of that light is going on; it is not lost. In the same way, the sounds I am now pronouncing are not lost; they are traveling for some distance through time and space. Whatever I see, that wave of light, is also traveling. The radio broadcasts from World War II – that war period, the war vision – is also there in space somewhere, vibrating at a certain rate. That vibration was once here, but now it somewhere else. It is floating in some plane of reality in time and space. If I throw a flower into the waters of the Ganges, then it is carried away by the current. If I can move with more speed than the current, I can find that flower somewhere else far away in the river. So the velocity of light – eyesight velocity – moves 186,000 miles in a second. If it is possible to move faster than the speed of light, then we can overtake the wave of visual events that are carried by that light. It is possible.

In a similar way, what exists in the plane of imagination now must have existed in reality at some time in the past or future, but it is now found somewhere else. It is said that the pastimes of Krishna move from one universe to the next in the same way that the sun moves from one time zone to the next. Now morning is here; five minutes from now, sunrise and morning will take place somewhere else. In this way, it is always sunrise somewhere. Here or there, the rising sun is to be found somewhere on the Earth. If we can move at the speed of the sun, then for us it will always be sunrise.

What came within the mind of Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākur, what he may have described in an apparently fictional way, must exist somewhere in the plane of reality, in the past or in the future. It is reality, not imagination.
Everything is real. It is not imagination. What I see in my dreams is now false. But in some former lifetime, in my past I experienced that reality. I had that sort of vision, and that has come to me now as a dream. It was a fact, and only now is it a dream.

What is in the mind may be abstract to us, but in the Universal Mind, everything is concrete. Whatever exists within the plane of imagination must be, and can be traced somewhere.

Student: Although everything is, in one sense, in the mind, still, when I feel hot and I find that others also feel hot, I conclude that it is hot. It seems that according to Berkeley, this is just going on in my mind.
Śrīla Śrīdhar Mahārāj: You have to understand the fundamental truth that what is hot to you may be a cold environment for some other organism. It is a question of degree. Our experience of coolness and heat depends on our degree of tolerance. What is cool to us may be hot to another. In this way we have to adjust with the idea of reality; what is hot to me may be cool to another. Reality is one thing for human beings; it is something else entirely for insects, worms, and other organisms. What is bright to us is dark to another. What is bright to an owl is dark to us. Do you follow?

Student: Yes.
Śrīla Śrīdhar Mahārāj: Creation is of a variegated nature. The experience of our eyes and ears is different from the experience of others whose senses are different from ours. What we can hear, others cannot hear. But our ears cannot detect subsonic or ultrasonic sounds. Our ears can detect only a limited spectrum of sound. Our vision is also limited. We can see neither infrared nor ultraviolet light. Our feeling, our sense of touch, is sensitive to an extremely limited degree. So all realities are co-existent; reality is adjusted according to our own experience. Something feels cool to me; that very thing is hot to another. In this way it is “hot” or “cold” according to our subjective experience. And so “our reality” will exist. So what is perceived by the mind is not imagination; it is reality. What is imagination to me is reality to another. The rising sun and the setting sun can be perceived simultaneously from different angles of vision. Within the whole creation all experience is co-existent.

What you now feel to be cool you can easily feel to be very hot by the will of the Supreme Lord. By His will, everything is possible. Everything depends on Him. He is the ultimate cause. What you consider as intolerably hot, you will be forced to feel as intolerably cold in a minute, if God so wills it. Everything depends upon His will. And that is coming here in either a modified way, in a general way, or in a particular special way according to His whim. In this way there may exist a gradation in how He manifests His will, but His will is the prime cause of everything. And He is above law. We must be conscious of that. Then we will be able to explain anything.

Student: So He is something like a hypnotist.
Śrīla Śrīdhar Mahārāj: Yes, He is a hypnotist. Everything depends on the sweet will of the Absolute. Everything is designed and destined by Him. Everything is in His hands.

The absolute center is by Himself and for Himself. He alone knows the purpose of everything. No one else. He alone knows His ways; no one else can know His ways. We may know only as much as He wants us to know. And that also can change by His sweet will. So He is completely free, an autocrat.

And that supreme autocrat can be captured only by love, not by knowledge. His ways are uncertain. How will our knowledge help us to understand Him? Knowledge may be useful in understanding a thing if it follows a fixed law and has a fixed nature. But the Absolute is an autocrat; at any moment He can change all the laws. Then how shall we know the Infinite? In trying to understand the Absolute Truth, all our previous experience becomes null and void. At every second He can show us a new color. No degree of knowledge can make any clear statement of truth about God. Knowledge is futile in regard to the Infinite. First He is moving in one way, then another. On what basis will we make our calculation? His position is always changing by His sweet will.

His heart can be captured only by surrender. Through surrender alone we may please Him. And if He likes, He may make Himself known to us, but even then we may only know that portion of His personality, only that much about Him, that He cares to reveal to us. The designer of reality is an autocrat; He is above law. We must consider this carefully. He who is designing this universe is above law. He is not under the jurisdiction of any law. He does not have any fixed nature. At any time, He may change His position according to His sweet will. And whatever He wills, that must come about.

Student: Bertrand Russell says that if there is a God, He must not be good. God Himself is not bound by law, but if we violate the law of God, we suffer. If God were good, He could have created all the souls of this world above law.
Śrīla Śrīdhar Mahārāj: If he says that, then that means that he wants to become the God of Gods. To Mr. Russell we say, “The Absolute Truth is unknown and unknowable. How can His ways be known? He is an autocrat. And you want to impose your crooked, meager, finite experience upon the Universal Truth! Your experience is the limited of the limited. And you want to thrust that small experience onto the unlimited whole? It is a most deplorable argument based on an assertion of faulty knowledge. From your finite position you want to know the measure of the whole Infinite, and then criticize Him. What is the foundation of your criticism? From what basis are you approaching the Infinite to criticize Him? How much do you know about Him?

“If you see a mother chastising her son, and you see only that portion of her behavior, you may conclude that she is very cruel. But you do not know the affection with which the mother cares for the child. You are not aware of how she feels for his future good. You are unaware of all this. You may say that she is punishing the son and that she is therefore cruel, but you do not know the context of her behavior. Every incident must have its future and its past, and you must carefully trace that out before passing any judgment or making any remark.

“In your case, how much are you limited in relationship to the Infinite? To what extent can you understand Him? Your capacity for knowing the Infinite is very meager. No one should attempt to make any remark about the infinite will on the basis of his own limited capacity. That is injudicious, and suicidal to a man of understanding.”

Student: I have heard it said that according to Vedic ontology, the soul is marginal. Do the jīva souls in the marginal or taṭastha position have knowledge that there is an upper and a lower world, that there is suffering in the material world and divine service in the spiritual world?
Śrīla Śrīdhar Mahārāj: A jīva soul has adaptability of both sides; marginal means “endowed with adaptability towards both the spiritual and material worlds without participation or any experience of either.” The marginal soul (taṭasthā-jīva) has only seed adaptability towards both. He is situated in the margin between the spiritual and material worlds, and the margin strictly means that one is in a position to analyze adaptability. He can go towards the spiritual world and he can come towards the material world. The possibility of either is there in potentiality, but he is left to exercise his freedom. Because the soul is a conscious unit, he has free will. Freedom is inseparable from consciousness. A conscious unit and freedom are one and the same. Conscious atom means endowed with freedom. Without freedom, it is matter.

Student: The soul has freedom, but does it have knowledge of the different aspects of reality?
Śrīla Śrīdhar Mahārāj: Because the soul is very small, his freedom is also imperfect; a soul in the marginal position is very vulnerable. Freedom does not mean absolute freedom. Because the soul’s existence is small, his freedom is defective; there is the possibility of committing a mistake. Freedom of the minute soul does not mean perfect freedom. Complete freedom would be perfect reality, but the minute soul is endowed with the smallest atomic freedom. This is the position of the atoms of consciousness, and this is why they are vulnerable. They may judge properly or improperly; that is the position of those who are situated in the marginal position. If the soul were not endowed with the freedom to determine his position, we would have to blame God for our suffering. But we cannot blame God. The starting point of the soul’s suffering is within himself.

The suffering of the soul in bondage is similar to the suffering of one who is addicted to a drug. Before one begins taking intoxication, the first step towards addiction is curiosity. Then after one has taken intoxication for a certain amount of time, he cannot do without intoxication. Our attachment to māyā, or misconception, is like addiction to a drug. At first we are curious, but when we become habituated to the intoxication of misconception, we are forced to continue using that intoxicating substance. Before beginning the habit it might never have begun. But once you have begun, as much as you cultivate an addiction, the intoxication will devour you.

The first cause of our entanglement with material nature was our mixing with māyā in a play of curiosity. But as much as we make friends with her, so much she comes to devour us. In this way we are in the clutches of māyā. But in the beginning our involvement was very slight, like one experimenting with drugs. The beginning of our play with māyā involved the voluntary misuse of our free will, and that has led us to this present stage where māyā has devoured us. Māyā means our attraction for intoxication: where there is love of exploitation, there is māyā. And truth is the opposite of exploitation. Truth is found in dedicating everything for the center, for Krishna.

Student: If in the marginal position (taṭasthā) the soul has exposure to both reality and illusion, why doesn’t he have enough discrimination to come to the right path?
Śrīla Śrīdhar Mahārāj: He has no real depth of discrimination; only a little discrimination. But it is there. However small it may be, it is there.
Student: Can he also go to the spiritual domain of the Lord?
Śrīla Śrīdhar Mahārāj: Yes, and some souls do go to that side. Some go to that side, and some come to this side. The soul has independence. Not all come to one side or the other. Then there would be some compulsion. But there is no compulsion. It is a free choice; some are coming to this side, and some are going to that side.

Student: Is there any knowledge that can come from outside, or is it possible for the soul in the marginal position to get help from an outside agent?
Śrīla Śrīdhar Mahārāj: At every stage in our existence, outward help is present. But in the undifferentiated stage of spiritual existence in the marginal plane, only higher agents can help. An ordinary saintly person cannot detect the defects or transcendental qualities in the undifferentiated soul. Such help is the work of a higher personality. Only God Himself or an exalted or empowered saintly person can help a soul in that condition. Suppose you have a newborn baby. Only a doctor who is a specialist with advanced knowledge can treat the newborn. But when the child is a little grown up and can talk, he can explain the symptoms of what is paining him. At that time, an ordinary doctor may help him. Ordinary saints cannot help us in every stage of life. They can guide us and help us only up to a certain standard. But the Lord Himself and those highly empowered saints who are closely connected to Him can help us in any stage of our spiritual development.