This is the first of seven articles on the search for meaning, for happiness and God. This series reflects the teachings of Paramhansa Yogananda, and also specifically, the lifelong efforts of Swami Kriyananda (a direct disciple of Yogananda) to see the cup of modern consciousness as half full, instead of half empty. This is a message of "Hope for a Better World," to use the title of one of Kriyananda's books.
Part 1 - To What End,
Creation? Survival?
Introduction: Before I begin, I’d like to start with
some acknowledgements and references. My spiritual teacher, Swami Kriyananda
(SK), wrote nearly 150 books in his long and productive life (1926-2013). One
of his first books was originally published under the title “Crises in Modern
Thought.” Later revised and expanded, it was renamed, “Out of the Labyrinth.” In
this book, SK grapples with the 20th century issue of meaninglessness -- a
cultural and philosophical malaise which brought much suffering, both physical
and mental, to millions (and a lot of meaningless art--see also his book, “Art
as Hidden Message”). For those interested in going into this subject far more
deeply and lucidly than I can here, I recommend this book highly (and its
sequel, “Hope for a Better World”). Both can be purchased online, or from the
publisher (www.CrystalClarity.com),
or from my favorite bookshop, www.EastWestBookShop.com (or an Ananda center
near you!). The culmination of these two books comes in a re-write of
Yogananda’s thesis, or personal mission statement: a ghost-written book he
called “The Science of Religion” but which Swami Kriyananda re-wrote with the
title: “God is for Everyone.”
In his own life story, originally titled “The Path” in 1979,
but also revised and expanded thirty years later (2009) with the title, “The
New Path,” SK describes the turning point in his life (at age 21) when walking
out under the stars on the beach, desperate to understand the meaning of life.
Using the only tool at his disposal and with which he felt secure--his
reason--he concluded that as he is conscious and asking himself these questions
about the purpose of life, so too God, if He exists, must be a larger version
of himself: or, to sum it up: Consciousness Itself. As he, SK, exists, God must
exist. As he is conscious, God must be Consciousness itself. Until his dying
breath, SK would repeat this story to audiences time and again. He often would
choke up in the telling, so deeply moving and life changing was his
realization.
Matter or Consciousness? Or, does it matter? As SK would
put it time and time again throughout his life in lectures and writings: either
nothing is conscious, or everything is conscious. Extending that, I would add
that either life is meaningless or life is meaningful. Skeptics, scoffers and
materialistic scientists maintain that consciousness arises from the electrical
and chemical activities of the brain in its fevered attempts to survive and
prosper. Thus, for them, consciousness is merely a useful function and has no
intrinsic meaning in itself. It is as useful to us as, they might aver, the
trunk of an elephant is to the elephant. This is what, I believe, SK meant by
the phrase “nothing is conscious.” Put another way, the materialistic view is
that consciousness is a mere functional byproduct and not the very essence or
the source of matter. They might say, if they had a sense of humor (and often
they do not), “It doesn’t matter.”
I once read an article in National Geographic that explained,
quite unselfconsciously that human love and romance were “merely” responses
stemming from these core “Darwinian” impulses! The article went to great
lengths to explain the chemical processes involved. It was sad, or perhaps
silly, actually, but this form of explanation is the accepted dogma of science
and of culture today. In many so-called intellectual circles, it is an accepted
dogma that all human activity has its origins in the impulse to survive and propagate!
(Speak for yourself, I say!)
But these pseudo-philosopher-scientists are not being logical or
true to their own rigorous methods of reasoning and experimentation. If you
want to remain logical and objective you must by sheer logic alone agree that
Darwinian compulsions, while factual, do not limit other influences or
possibilities. These impulses could just as logically be but aspects of a
bundle of influences and elements related to the interplay of matter and
consciousness. Just as we have “lower” animals so too we, humans, may possess
lower impulses as well as higher ones. The two might, at times, be in conflict,
but, at other times, in cooperation. Darwinism need not be the final statement
on the meaning and function of life. It is not exclusive. It simply points out
a demonstrable (and useful) fact of
sentient life.
Is there not more to human life and its motivating impulses and
myriad activities and interests (and, demonstrably to animal life, at least the
more highly developed species)? Is the possibility of higher consciousness, of
preexistent intelligence really such a threat to science? Why don’t they just
admit it’s outside the purview of their interests or present ability to measure
or predict (with the possibility of being forever outside their control!). Just
look at human emotions, even in a single day, going from angry to forgiving.
A cup half full. Is it not at least just as possible
that the material universe is a manifestation of consciousness as it might be
that consciousness is the product of electrical and chemical processes? That it
seems to us that the brain and nervous system are prerequisites for mental
processes, does not logically preclude the possibility that behind the
development and evolution of such sophisticated organisms lies a hidden but
guiding intelligence, like the oak tree hidden in the seed. Sensitive awareness
and sophisticated analysis of high functioning or unusual (but demonstrable)
mental processes discloses conditions and instances where cognition and
consciousness exist independent of the body and its organs.
There’s no point disputing the existence and value of the
impulse to survive or to procreate, but primal impulses cannot answer the
question, “Why?” Or, “What for?” Whatever may the compelling impulse to survive
and procreate, organisms, both human and otherwise, don’t necessarily spend an
enormous amount of time or energy dwelling on these impulses. It’s not unlike
defining the human body as a composting mechanism: a rather narrow and pedestrian
point of view, and of limited utility. Why, in any case, does the instinct for
either arise to begin with? What’s so great about surviving and propagating? As
I like to put it, “We don’t get out alive” in this world!
Given the depth and profundities of our very inquiries, and
those of humankind down through the ages, moreover, it is at least slightly
more likely that consciousness is the bedrock source of matter, not the
other way around! On what basis and for what Darwinian purpose would we, and
untold numbers like us, be having this conversation? Why has this conversation
been repeated in every generation since the dawn of human history?
Part 2 - What is Happiness? stay tuned........
Swami Hrimananda!
