Chapter 3 - Integral Unity and Synthetic Unity
a. In this chapter, the author defines Integral unity "which means that ultimately only the whole exists; the parts that make up the whole have but a relative existence."
Whereas Synthetic unity "starts with parts that exist separately from one another, for example, in classical physics the cosmos is viewed as an assemblage of separate elementary particles. The problem then becomes how to make them cohere by outside forces (rather than seeking a coherence that is inherent)."
Later, the author uses the term bandhu to explain "the interlinking among the various faces of the reality, such as sounds, numbers, colours and ideas, and this interlinking is bandhu. All the arts and sciences are interrelated and may be seen as manifold ways in which human nature expresses itself." [12]
b. Freedom: The concept of "freedom" is beautifully expressed by the author in both the dharmic and the western framework. The reason for such difference in perceptions is also explained.
The dharmic perception of "freedom" is explained in terms of the following categories:-
i. Freedom to learn from within oneself.
ii. Freedom from conditioning and karma.
iii. Freedom from history and institutional authority.
iv. Freedom to choose a personal path (svadharma).
v. Freedom of choice of deity (ishta-devata).
The western perception of "freedom" is explained in the following manner:-
i. "Much of the western thinking presupposes an inherent tension between self and other at both the individual and collective levels. Such tension breeds a deep rooted anxiety about the way things are and the feeling that some external change is needed."
ii. "Hence, the western ego ferociously asserts itself with futile and dangerous attempts to manipulate the external world. The stronger the ego grows, the more anxious it becomes about what it does not possess, its very nature being to remain ever discontent."
iii. "The western idea of freedom has been defined by looking externally for a remedy for dukkha."
iv. This explains why the west is always looking to "expand its empire" and why the erstwhile colonial powers had such pride in their "possessions". It also shows that "the west has been driven not by freedom but by the mandates of its self-image which require infinite expansion in a finite world. This is neither sustainable, nor scalable to include all humanity." [13]
The reasons for this widely different perception of "freedom" by westerners and Hindus may be attributed to the fundamental differences between Christianity and Hinduism. "Original sin gave Christians the notion of individuality that is stained by sin and hence lacking freedom. The solution, a free gift of grace, is deferred until the individual attains the beatific vision in heaven. Alternatively, in the second coming of Christ in the end times, those saved by Jesus will attain it collectively. In either case, freedom can never be fully present, so anxiety persists."
On the contrary, "real freedom in the Hindu and Buddhist sense is only attainable in the present moment as a result of inner work, but this notion was often lost sight in the west as it chased an illusory freedom lost in the past and projected into the future."
c. Influence of Christianity: It is important to understand the impact of Christianity on all spheres of life, not only during the dark ages, but also on later movements in the history of the west. In the same vein, the author describes five major `synthetic' movements in the history of the west - starting from the emergence of Rome which established Christianity as a state religion and ending with the colonialist expansion – during which Christianity provided the moral justification.
While discussing the period of enlightenment, the author makes some profound observations on secularism which spawned the conflict between science and religion:-
i. "Descartes found himself caught in the crossfire between Galileo and the church. In 1633, he had to withdraw from publishing a book because it supported Copernicus's theory."
The dichotomy faced by Descartes is brilliantly expressed "Descartes the scientist believed in the machine model of the body operating under the laws of physics, but Descartes the devout catholic believed that the soul was free to obey or disobey god's commandments and face the consequences on the Day of Judgment."
Thus, a compromise was reached between these two irreconcilable views.
"He sought to resolve the conflict by formulating a mind/body dualism, according to which the body operates on material laws, whereas the soul and mind are entirely different substrates which operate as per the church doctrines."
"Thus the domains of science and the church were each defined in such a way that there was no overlap and hence no conflict."
However, this sham of secularism was so superficial that it becomes apparent to any keen observer.
"The enlightenment and subsequent modernist movements sought to throw off the dogma of Christianity in favour of a secular state, but here again the internal divisions …… created instability and confusion. For the scientific revolution was not free of the old history centrism (inherent in Christianity) and the ego projection."
ii. The author reiterates the same point in chapter 6 by saying that "This conflict ridden science/religion substrate is illustrated by the curious mixture of secularism with biblical myth or superstition in the works of many famous western thinkers – both in science and in philosophy. This aspect of their work is often excluded in secular discussions."
"Francis bacon – considered the prophet of modern science sought a return to the state of Adam before the fall, a state of pure and sinless act with nature and knowledge of her powers…… a progress back to Adam."
"Isaac newton was a fervent believer in the millennium and spent much of his time interpreting biblical philosophy."
"In Thomas hobbes' leviathan, the bible is cited 657 times and there is a similar trend in his other major political works."
The list of such examples – whose pretense of secularism was so shallow – is endless.
"Even Marxism, while attacking western religion, implicitly borrowed its underlying structure and grand narratives."
Bertrand Russell writes "The communist party - in the Marxist scheme - corresponds to the biblical church, the revolution to the second coming and the communist commonwealth to the millennium."
iii. The superficiality of this "schism" between science and religion becomes more apparent when deal with the period of colonialism.
"At the same time, both the sacred and the secular participated in the colonization, for although antithetical on the surface, both emerged from a religious and cosmological substrate in which strains of historical revelation and the forward march of science were mixed together."
KK
**************************************
http://beingdifferentbook.com/
To join the Yahoo egroup that has been set up specifically to discuss this book, send an email to: RajivMalhotraDiscussion-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
**************************************
No comments:
Post a Comment