Sachchidananda 'The Life Divine' Book I,Ch.9, 10, 11, 12

Track Running Track 902

Now let us come back to …this is only because I promised last time that there was a statement in the Taitriya Upanishad where what is available to man is described in the field of happiness. This is the conquest of happiness. Now I said that we shall now enter into dialogue with the materialist and I said first of all there are two basic propositions of the materialist which I described last time. First of all I had said that materialist has an easier field, where he can simply kick the football and prove that matter exists, so he has a very easy field to prove, you don’t need to argue in long, long , long train of reasonings . A mere kick of the football is sufficient to prove matter exists. You can’t deny the fact that matter exists, you open your eyes and you see matter, matter exists. The second argument of his was that what you call consciousness, is simply a result of the functioning of physical organs, therefore what is primary is not consciousness but the movement of organs which are physical. So his argument is consciousness is the product of the physical movement of organs, − so consciousness is not original, it’s a product. As in the example which I had given – the steam is the product of piston movement not the other way round and the materialist friend is a rustic as I said the last time who stands at the platform, looks at the engine and is convinced that piston is the cause of the steam and he doesn’t have the patience to wait for your argument by which he can be taken into the engine and he can be shown that piston itself is the result of the force of steam, therefore he commits a mistake of judging only from outside and being too much in a hurry to do something else. He doesn’t have time even to look into further argumentation. So first of all we have to tell the materialist in our dialogue – please wait, do not merely stand outside the engine, you go inside the engine. I will try to show you something else. Normally the materialist is not ready to entertain even this kind of a statement. He is too much in a hurry, but sometimes rationalist believe and they want to convince you that they are rationalists. Now that is the starting point where you can have a dialogue. The moment he says look I am materialist but I am a rationalist and the moment he says rationalist you have a kind of a hook, then you can ask a question what do you mean by rationalism? Because now he is put into a dock, what does he mean by rationalism? His answer is a rationalist is one, who accepts any beliefs when it is proved. It’s a very simple answer that rationalist is one who holds or accepts the belief when it is proved. So the word proving is a very attractive word and the whole world today everybody whenever there is question of argumentation anything which is corrected with rationalism it is always connected with this idea of the proof, so materialist says that my position is based upon rationalism because it is based upon a proof. Fine, then I ask him, proceed with your proof so as I said that his field is very easy he can simply kick the foot ball and says here is matter. You can see it therefore I have proved matter exists. Now I turn into a dialogue with him is that all that you have to prove or you have proved, your case is finished. He said, yes. My case is proved. You just open your eyes see me kicking the football this is matter. Is it all that you want to say that matter exists, nothing more than that then gradually when I put my question several times he adds one word to his statement, which is very interesting. He has proved matter exists then he says, matter alone exists. Now this is a very important qualification, a materialist is not one who merely believes that matter exists. If that was his position there is no denial of this fact. You need not disagree with him no argumentation him. The sting of materialism is the statement that matter alone exists, and even what we call consciousness is nothing but a consequence of matter. It’s a result of the movement of physical organs, so if somebody says what is materialism, a true statement of materialism is matter alone exists. Fine, we shall come back to this statement little later.

I again have another statement of a dialogue. What is the proof that matter exists and matter alone exists. Your physical perception open your eyes, when your physical senses open then they give you evidence of what exists. Fine, I do see the football I can’t deny the fact. I can’t deny that matter exists, but when I go to a physicist who is a master of the knowledge of matter he tells me what this football is, what this matter is and surprisingly he tells me that this is not what matter is what you see this is what the physicist tells me matter is not what you see. This is something which is composed of a number of atoms, which we are not able to see at all. Physically you are not able to see these atoms which are there but the physicist tells me there are atoms and asks the question do you see the atoms. Your first proof of matter was that you can see by your physical senses. Can you see by physical senses the atoms, this is more difficult for the materialist to prove that you can see atoms physically. Now he moves farther that even these atoms are not what they appear to be. First of all matter is not what it appears to be. Even atoms which are still remoter are not really what they are. Atoms can be still further analyzed and in each atom you find a big solar system. There are nucleuses around which there are so many electrons which are moving with a tremendous speed and all this is nothing but energy which physically cannot be seen at all that is certain. The energy which is here in all this matter is something which you cannot see physically at all, therefore now the materialist has to change his position. His first proposition was that what you see physically is a proof of what exists. When I bring him up to this point now he has to change his position. He has to say that although energy cannot be seen. Energy is the presupposition on the basis of which all that you physically see can be explained. Although energy cannot be seen, it is that energy which you have to assume to be existing in order to explain what you can see physically.

We use cookies in this webiste to support its technical features, analyze its performance and enhance your user experience. To find out more please read our privacy policy.