|
The God of the Scientist IT is meaningless to hold
that a scientist must necessarily be an atheist. There is no need to cite instances
of the past. Leaving aside the examples of The
reasoning faculty, the intellectual power of the mental being is the instrument
by which the scientist carries on his search after truth. If he wants to remain
strictly faithful to reality as it appears, then he cannot exceed the realm of sense-perceptions.
But without reason he will simply indulge in chimeras and build castles in the
air which are but deformations of: sense-perceptions. Bergson the philosopher,
however, opines that the intellect by itself cannot go beyond the domain of
sense-knowledge, because it comes into being and exists in the field of the
senses by way of a necessity and as a reaction of the senses to their objects.
The intellectual faculty develops in man so that he may handle material things
properly and effectively. The so-called universal truths or laws of Nature that
the scientist discovers by virtue
Page – 293 of
his keen intellect have their chief advantage in enabling one to deal with the
external world with considerable ease. That is why the scientist is blind to
any other mystery than that of Matter. This is a defect pertaining to and inherent
in his nature. Be that as it may, we have still to say that the intellect has
attained its acme in the scientist. The speciality of the intellect has found
its best manifestation in him. On the basis of the wealth of sense-perceptions
and by their analysis and synthesis and by observation and experimentation, to
arrive at a universal law as wide as possible marks the special genius of the
scientist. The
mysteries of Nature that have been discovered by scientific methods are not the
last word or the whole of her truth. However, it may be said: “There is no
other means of arriving at the realistic truth. By treading any other path we
can get into the worlds of imagination, poetry, illusion and delusion, surely not
into the world of realities.” We shall have occasion to say something about the
possibility of other ways of knowledge and enquiry into the truth. For the
present, we shall try to investigate whether the scientific method can lead us
any further. And the scientists who have made such an advancement
in knowledge – where have they arrived and what is the value of their work? We
have already mentioned that sense-perception is the basis of scientific
research. The whole gamut of scientific knowledge is founded on it. And the
scientist cannot violate or overpass the canons of science. Still there is one
thing more and here we deal with the limits and limitations of human knowledge.
But how can science or the scientific methodology assert that it has alone
found the clue to the essence and nature of knowledge and truth? The question
can be asked whether the theism of Einstein or Planck is the ultimate
consequence of their scientific intellect or a reflection of some other
non-scientific faculty. A class of continental scientists says that the religious
sentiment and the puritanism of the scientists of the
Page – 294 that
they will not feel happy unless they can introduce a few Biblical expressions
even into the table of logarithms. However
that may be, it must be admitted that the theism of the scientist may also be
the natural and spontaneous out come of his scientific intellect. It is not necessary that it
should originate from some primitive faculty apart from reason. The purely
scientific intellect and the theistic spirit may belong to the same mode of
human consciousness. The sense of infinity, the sense of magic and wonder are
common to both; thus the two may be congruous and commensurate, although the
purely religious spirit, the soul's seeking for the Divine and the type of
theism proper to the scientific mind are different in nature and orientation
and are independent of each other. From
the standpoint of norms and. ultimate values that science brings forward,
reasoning does not occupy the most important place. Science presumes to arrive
at a logical conclusion from observation of facts of Nature. The advantages
and benefits that we get from science are its material side. But there is
another aspect of the scientific intellect which is incorporated into it as its
fragrance and beauty, like that of a fruit or flower. What is that thing?
Different scientists have expressed it in different ways. But all expressions
centre round the same truth. Science avowedly seeks to arrive at the truth
within the framework of reasoning by weighing and measuring the material limbs
of Nature, confining itself strictly within the four corners of material
Nature. But the one thing which, if not manifest even at the outset, has
gradually blossomed and taken hold of the scientist, that has from the
beginning existed as a hidden inspiration behind the veil, is the sense of a
profound mystery, the touch of an infinite eternity, something inexpressible,
something to be wondered at, an unmanifest that cannot be defined yet can be
felt, a glimpse of a conscious existence: that has been called the supreme
unity by some; others have called it the Pure Reason, yet others have
Page – 295 called
it the highest law or dispensation while there are people who prefer to call it
consciousness or awareness. Such a sense and perception and. experience does
not fall under the strict field of scientific research, but the scientist is
surrounded, as it were, by a subtle atmosphere, a halo wherefrom proceeds his
inspiration for research, for clues, for the vision of truth. Do we not see
that all great scientists possess this turn of temperament, an opening, as it
were, into other subtle realms? Perhaps many are merely compilers,
cataloguers, but those who have discovered something genuine and have been able
to unveil some secrets of Nature emanate the fragrance and radiance I speak of,
beyond the reasoning faculty. When Kepler looked at the sky through his
telescope to observe the course of the stars and the planets, he was deeply
absorbed in the experience of something vast, infinite, strange and mysterious.
Was it not then at this golden moment that it flashed like lightning through
his mind that the orbits of the planets were elliptical and the Sun is at one
focus of these apparent ellipses? Is not this incident as strikingly wonderful
as the discovery of the law of gravitation made by In
fact, it is merely a notion or a mental complex that the scientific knowledge
is solely or chiefly the outcome of the reasoning process. Many of the
scientists are perhaps of the opinion that it must be so, but the fact is
otherwise. Discovery means the removal of a veil and that too all on a sudden.
Reasoning steps in later to establish the discovery on a firm footing, at the
most it makes slight alterations here and there, adds or subtracts a few
necessaries, clarifies the discovery and gives precision to it. In the matter
of all true knowledge and ultimate certitude the inner perception and intuition
come first and what provides the major premiss to the logical syllogism is
beyond reasoning. Nevertheless it must be
admitted that however subtle and high or even theistic and religious may be
this scientific
Page – 296 faculty
it has not come up to the level of genuine integral spirituality. Many
philosophers must have had easily and naturally some realisation of this kind.
The intuition of infinity in. the philosopher Spinoza and in the scientist
Einstein is of the same quality and status – impersonal, abstract, a
mathematical infinitude, an x as it were. The scientist has reached the acme of
his specific faculty as a result of the sublimation of his sense-perception,
the philosopher by the sublimation of his conceptual ideation. But both are
unable to surpass the boundary of the brain and the intellect. The true
spirituality lies in exceeding this limit – in piercing through the six centres,
as the Tantras would say. The amor intellectualis Dei of Spinoza may
signify the theism of the scientist, but it has not reached the status of spirituality. We
do not know how many have given due regard to this remarkable fact that the
rational mind of modern times, inspired by the spirit of science which has
turned towards spirituality for whatever reason, is often attracted to the pure
Vedanta or the Buddhistic philosophy of India. The chief reason for this
appears to me to be this that the truth and the essence of religion are looked
upon as anthropomorphic by the scientist. The scientist can hardly accept this
position. For, the very speciality of the scientific procedure is to keep aside
the human factor from human knowledge. A particular knowledge bears the stamp
of the knower, but science aims at knowledge independent of its knower. Now the
scientific attitude from its summit declares, “I do not know the unknown and
the unknowable that is beyond.” This learned ignorance which is called agnosticism,
and is, in a little altered form, known as scepticism – that is the legitimate
consummation of scientific rationalism. But when one looks upon this unknown
and unknowable with religious reverence, one says, "Therefrom speech
returns baffled along with the mind." This is verily the Brahman, beyond speech
and mind; and its other name
Page – 297 is
then Nihil.. Mind can understand mind or its absence or disintegration. It is
extremely difficult for it to comprehend anything that is apart from these two
extreme terms. It is not so difficult for the rational mind to accept the
spiritual doctrine of 'not this, not this'; but the other aspects of spirituality
– the truth about divine Forms and Incarnations, about Purushottama, the
supreme Being, even the transmigration of the soul, – all these are senseless
enigmas to reason-bound mind. The triune principle of Existence, Consciousness
and Bliss of the Vedanta is such a general, neutral and indefinite principle
that it seems to be intuited and felt by the pure intellect when it climbs up
to its acme. In other words, at the highest level of the brain, as it were,
there takes place the first revelation of spirituality, a glow and reflection
amounting to the perception of a formless infinite, whose true nature is
separately or simultaneously an existence, consciousness and bliss or a
non-Being pregnant with all the essence of Being. The
scientific intellect has thus reached a certain theism
and the poet and the artist also have reached similar levels through different
ways of approach. The aesthetic taste of the artist, the sense of intense
delight in the beauty of the cosmic creation is not born of the intellect but
is allied to it, and falls within the category of the mind – it is a thing that
belongs to this side of the boundary of consciousness, which we have to cross
to attain to the true spiritual world. The twilight consciousness is, as it
were, on the border-line; it belongs in its rhythm, gesture, gait and
expression still to this shore-land rather than the other, howsoever
may the artist aspire for the shore beyond. No doubt, I speak of the creations
of artists in general. There are rare artists whose creation embodies genuine
spiritual experience and realisation. But that is a different matter – it
concerns the purely spiritual art. Ordinary works of art do not belong to that
category and derive their inspiration from a different source. With regard to
philosophy something similar
Page – 298 might
be said. Most of the Indian philosophies, such as the philosophies of Shankara,
Ramanuja, the sage Kapila and Patanjali are but intellectual expressions of
different spiritual visions and realisations. If it be so, then is it not
possible for science also to become a vehicle or expression of spiritual
realisations? This may not have materialised up till now; generally or to a
large degree perhaps an attempt of the kind was made in the line that is known
as occultism, and which was called alchemy by the ancients, but the effort
ended in a spurious system of rites and ceremonies. No doubt this knowledge,
even at its best, falls short of the Higher Knowledge, Para Vidya; still there
was a time when the Inferior Knowledge, Apara Vidya, was accepted as a
stepping-stone to the Higher. "Exceeding death by Avidya (Ignorance) one
has to enjoy immortality through Vidya (Knowledge)" – "Avidyaya
mrtyum tirtva vidyaya amrtam asnute." But
whatever may have been the past, is there any possibility for the most
materialistic science of to-day – the ultramundane knowledge – to become
directly and integrally united with the supreme spiritual Knowledge? If there
is any possibility, then wherein does it lie? We have elsewhere said that it
will be possible only when we shall learn to collect data for scientific
discoveries and to search after truth not only with our physical senses but
also with subtler and inner senses, and those subtler and inner senses will
wake up and become a part and parcel of our nature only when the outlook of the
scientist will get liberated from its materialistic bias and allow itself to
be widened, deepened and heightened and transformed on the way to its being
finally established in the pure consciousness of the Soul and the Self.
Page – 299
|
