Shakti and Shakta: Essays and Addresses on the Shakta Tantrashastra c19.5
Shakti and Shâkta: Essays and Addresses on the Shâkta Tantrashâstra c19.5
- Language
- English
c19.5.1
Now, with reference to the scientific aspect of the subject, I show you that in three main particulars, modern western physics and psychology support Indian philosophy, whatever such support may be worth. Indeed, Mr. Lowes Dickinson, in an acute recent analysis of the state of ideas in India, China and Japan observes that the Indian form of religion and philosophy is that which most easily accommodates itself to modern western science. That does not prove it is true, until it is established that the conclusions of western science to which it does conform are true. But the fact is of great importance in countering those who have thought that eastern ideas were without rational foundation. It is of equal importance to those two classes who either believe in the ideas of India, or in the particular conclusions of science to which I refer. The three points on this head are firstly, that physicists, by increasing their knowledge of so-called "matter", have been led to doubt its reality, and have dematerialized the atom, and, with it, the entire universe which the various atoms compose. The trinity of matter, ether and electricity out of which science has hitherto attempted to construct the world, has been reduced to a single element—the ether (which is not scientific "matter") in a state of motion. According to Sâṅkhya, the objective world is composed of the Bhûtas which derive ultimately from Âkâsha.
c19.5.2
I do not say that scientific "ether" is Âkâsha, which is a concept belonging to a different train of thought. Moreover the sensible is derived from the supersensible Âkâsha Tanmâtra, and is not therefore an ultimate. But it is important to note the agreement in this, that both in East and West, the various forms of gross matter derive from some single substance which is not "matter". Matter is *dematerialized*, and the way is made for the Indian concept of Mâyâ. There is a point at which the mind cannot any longer usefully work outward. Therefore, after the Tanmâtra, the mind is turned within to discover their cause in that Egoism which, reaching forth to the world of enjoyment produces sensorium, senses, and objects of sensation. That the mind and senses are also material has the support of some forms of western philosophy, such as that of Herbert Spencer, for he holds that the Universe, whether physical or psychical, is a play of force which in the case of matter we experience as object. Mind as such is, he says, as much a "material" organ as the brain and outer sense-organs, though they are differing forms of Force. His affirmation that scientific "matter" is an appearance produced by the play of cosmic force, and that mind itself is a product of the same play, is what Sâṅkhya and Vedânta hold. The way again is opened for the concept, Mâyâ.
c19.5.3
Whilst, however, Spencer and the Agnostic School hold that the Reality behind these phenomena is unknowable, the Vedânta affirms that it is knowable and is Consciousness itself. This is the Self than which nothing can be more intimately known. Force is blind. We discover consciousness in the Universe. It is reasonable to suppose that if the first cause is of the nature of either Consciousness or Matter, and not of both, it must be of the nature of the former and not of the latter. Unconsciousness or object may be conceived to modify Consciousness, but not to produce Consciousness out of its unconscious Self. According to Indian ideas, Spirit which is the cause of the Universe is pure Consciousness. This is Nishkala Shiva: and, as the Creator, the great Mother or Devî. The existence of pure consciousness in the Indian sense has been decried by some thinkers in the West, where generally to its pragmatic eye, Consciousness is always particular having a particular direction and form. It assumes this particularity, however, through Mâyâ. We must distinguish between Consciousness as such and modes in consciousness. Consciousness is the unity behind all forms of consciousness, whether sensation, emotion, instinct, will or reason. The claim that Consciousness as such exists can only be verified by spiritual experience. All high mystic experiences, whether in East or West, have been experiences of unity in differing forms and degrees.
c19.5.4
Even, however, in normal life as well as in abnormal pathological states, we have occasional stretches of experience in which it becomes almost structureless. Secondly, the discovery of the subliminal Consciousness aids Shâstric doctrine, in so far as it shows that behind the surface consciousness