Spiritualism Vs Materialism - Can they Co-exist?

A good friend of mine asked me a question about "Spiritualism and Materialism", and whether these two can co-exist. Before we dive headlong into long-winded rants as if we know it all, we should ensure that we understand what the terms 'Materialism' and 'Spiritualism' mean, and then see whether they exist, co-exist or are mutually exclusive.

With this pretext, we start with defining "Materialism". In normal day-to-day parlance, Materialism is often identified with pursuit of wealth or following a mindset that focuses on tangible and 'Practical' (aka mechanical, calculative, or corporate) methods to achieve an end with general disregard to cultural feelings or human emotions. If we were a bit pedantic, we shall see that 'Material' relates to the word 'Matter' which is tangible and measurable, as opposed to 'Spiritual' which is intangible and immeasurable  or be understood with common sense. Thus it is easier for us to define 'Material'ism before grasping the idea of 'Spirit' and Spiritualism.

DHARMIC MATERIALISM: Dharmic materialism is the pursuit of wealth, power, and comforts that do not contradict human nature (or Dharma). Dharmic pursuit of Artha (material acquisitions) and Kama (pursuit of Desires) are part and parcel of human life without which progress of human race would be difficult. These acquisitions (of material wealth and desires) should be devoid of greed and should be taken up with an intention to help oneself AND the Society in general. The present generation is witnessing how corporations pursue acquisition of wealth by any means and mode even if it means destruction of general wellbeing of those they claim to help. Dharmic Materialism differs from this type of blind pursuit by following a humanitarian approach to wealth generation and sharing.

ADHARMIC MATERIALISM: Adharmic or "Blind" Materialism refers to a philosophy akin to the 'Charvaka materialism' which believes that 'life' is purely an accident caused by chemical combination; and believes that intelligence, love, anger, and other emotions are purely hormonal reactions that ends when the body dies. (This materialism should not be confused with Artha-Kama pursuit.)

SPIRITUALISM: We all can see and appreciate the 'Material' world as it is easy to measure tangible entities. But we also know that there is some undefined entity (or non-entity) called 'Life' that one cannot see, verify, or understand. Even the best doctor in the world can tell us whether a person is 'alive' or not only by seeing the 'symptoms' of life (e.g. temperature, heartbeat, brain scan etc.) but he/she can never pinpoint to a particular 'substance' and say 'THIS IS LIFE'. Even the best of scanning machines cannot capture a material disconnect between the material body and the 'Spirit' when a person 'dies'. Thus we have to infer that there is something that is 'non-material' that exists in this universe that makes matter move, 'talk', 'feel' and have desires. We do not know what this 'Spirit' is. We can give it various labels like Atma, Paramatma, Jeeva, Ruh, Soul, Life etc... but the fact of the matter is that we still remain ignorant about the nature of this Spirit despite all the labels, discourses and references books we read.

Now that the context is set, we see things fall into place about existence, co-existence or non-existence of material vs. spiritual thinking.

Dharmic Materialism can (and does) co-exist with a Spiritual mindset. Every human being has to have material pursuit for his/her subsistence. Even the most evolved Spiritual thinker - as long as they are a life-form on earth - has to work in order to maintain life in the body. We see that even newborn babies cry for food, or a starving monk has to at least breathe in order to maintain life in the physical body. Thus pursuit of material (matter related) aim towards an end does not clash with Spiritual thinking. The difference between a novice and a spiritual thinker is that a novice sees only ephemeral matter and thinks it is real, while a Spiritual Giant sees the underlying substratum of Consciousness and knows that the world is nothing but names and forms for the same Conscious Continuum..

On the other hand, Adharmic Materialism which denies the existence of 'Soul' outside of Spiritual (or Adhyatmic) context cannot co-exist with Spiritual ideas. As long as a person believes that life is merely a product of chemical combination, he/she is complacent and hence are limiting their pursuit to push and explore the boundaries of the nature of Spirit and have any 'Spiritual' experience. Thus one should outgrow Adharmic material thoughts in order to understand and appreciate Spiritual thoughts.

There is a famous saying in Tamil that illustrates this point.. The saying goes as follows:

Maratthai Maraitthadhu Maa-mara yaanai

Maratthul Maraindhadhu Maa mara-yaanai.

Paratthai Maraitthadhu Paar mudhal boodham.

Paratthil Maraindhadhu Paar mudhal boodham.

Literal meaning:

The Elephant was hiding the wood,

The Wood then hid the Elephant.

The five elements (Earth, Water etc) hid the Cosmic Intelligence.

The five elements remained hidden in the Cosmic Intelligence.

Inner meaning:

When a child sees a wooden Elephant, he/she will exclaim "WOW!!! An Elephant!!!" for he/she sees only the shape of the Elephant and does not pay heed to the material it is made of (i.e. wood.) But when the same child grows up - to be, say a carpenter - he/she will discard the shape of the object and look at the wood and say "Oh! This is good quality teakwood!! It is perhaps from Indonesia." Here the person is the same (the child grew to be an adult), and the object (wooden Elephant) also has not changed. What has changed is the outlook and maturity of the person.

So also, a spiritual infant sees this material world (made of protons and electrons) and thinks "Oh!! This is a beautiful world, or This is a dangerous world.. He is rich, I am poor. He is tall, I am short. He is fair, I am dark. He is angry, I am sad etc." But when Spiritual wisdom dawns and the little boy becomes a Carpenter who understands wood (i.e. a Spiritual infant becomes a Gnaani who understands the nature of Consciousness), He will say "All this is Consciousness, there is no permanence to the superficial qualities as they are ephemeral."

Thus Understand Brahman - another Label to the Supreme Consciousness that is the underlying Substratum to the universe... and when you see the Substratum, the Elephant no longer remains... What remains is pure Consciousness, and Contentment.. :)

BRAHMAN, The Absolute, is the Only Reality.

Here is a Discussion I had initiated in forum I belong to. There usually is a common perception that the Jeevatma and Paramatma are different entities that will 'eventually' merge leading to - what is called - moksha or Self realization..

Question: BRAHMAN, THE ABSOLUTE, IS THE ONLY REALITY. If the individual soul (jeeva) is accepted as Brahman, it has reality because Brahman is real. If we argue that the individual soul is different from Brahman, then reality is denied to such an individual soul. How can we reconcile this?

Answer: In the above statement, Brahman is first termed "Absolute". The moment something is "Absolute", there cannot be more than one of it. e.g. there cannot be two temperatures that refers to Absolute Zero. You may use different scales, but you are still refering to the same Absolute temperature. Right? Thus, Sanathana Dharma teaches us that the Universal Consciousness is Absolute, and does not undergo modification.

Other religions have a top down approach where, the Absolute (aka God) is first defined, and explanations are given to justify the statement. For a beginner, it can only be *assumed* that there should be is Absolute Reality (or a Substratum) from which this visible and invisible universe(s) have emerged from. This is purely a logical deduction (for a beginner). As one can observe that any material that exists in this universe HAS TO BE the product or effect of some cause. The Universe is a continuous transformation, and is a beautiful play of Energy. In Samskrit, there is a beautiful definition for this, "Sarvam Shakthimayam Jagath", which means, the Entire Universe is nothing but Pure Energy.

We all know that matter is frozen energy, or energy is mobile matter. We also know that Positive and Negative charges (Protons and Electrons) come together in a freakishly disciplined way - and in large numbers - to form different elements. Thus positive and negative charges, when combined with each other, and with the help of heat (agni), and pressure (vayu) etc forms matter.
It is also known that Hydrocarbons are the basic building blocks where an unexplained phenomenon called 'life' can manifest. This 'life form' is distinguished from other inanimate/inert matter by it's unique quality called 'Consciousness'. This consciousness is possible in matter which has hydrocarbons, and has water content in them. These oraganic conglomerations of matter are called 'organisms'.

Here it's worth noting that charvaka and related schools (which propose materialistic model of the Universe) may claim that consciousness is produced by chemical combinations. If it is so, then the "I"-ness which is constant throughout one's life does not change with change in harmone levels. (The consciousness is same in waking, dream and deep sleep, and during happiness, anger, and depression alike.)

Here, consciousness, which is unchangeable, and unlimited identifies itself with matter to which it is figuratively 'attached'. Consciousness is never dependent on matter for it's survival (this will be known only in Thuriyam state (Deep meditation) where PURE consciousness alone exists, with absolutely no awareness of 'external' objects.)

[Here, I take cue from Yogasutras of Patanjali (as a pramana), to describe the various states of the Experiencer (Dhrashta) - aka consciousness. ] The Experiencer is the Unchanging, Absolute. It views the physical world via a connection called the ego. The Ego, is at best a virtual entity that acts as a pivot, binding the Experiencer to the material body. The virtual entity (Ego), relies on the Mind, Intellect, sense-organs and organs-of-action to go about 'its' duties.

But, On the face of it, it may seem that there are many realities in the universe but they all have one underlying reality called Brahman.

This is because, there cannot be two "Absolute Realities" existing simultaneously (or even contiguously). i.e. One Reality cannot be contradictory to Another. (If it is so, then they cannot both be called Real.)

Thus, different view-points of an Absolute Reality can, must, and will exist. These are called 'relative' reality (or Rtham) IF there are two incompatible versions of the same reality, then one of them (or sometimes both of them) will not be true.

"What color is the sky ?", asked the teacher.
A tiny hand shot up. "Blue", said the boy.
"No," said the little girl, "the sky is really black. We see it as blue."
The teacher smiled and gave each a candy.
She then looked up at the sky, which was a vast expanse of Space.
It was neither black, nor blue, not had any colors it could call its own.

The Sky is blue, Vs. the Sky is black... Both these "apparent realities" are false as ether (or space) cannot have a color of it's own. Similarly, just as Akasha (ether) has no quality, and yet is seen as blue owing to perception. The Absolute (Brahman), which has no qualities, is seen as one with attributes and qualities by spiritual infants.

Vedanta - Do not get distracted by polemics.

With humble bowings to Sri Adishankaracharya, I begin my post today.

When it comes to Atma-Vichara (Quest for the Self), beginners to the subject usually mistake arguments for questioning. They get into polemical discussions or sophistry to prove their half-baked understanding. The Indian School called NYAYA, which was compiled by the Great Sage - Gauthama, helps us to understand the nature of Enquiry or discussion.

A serious student of Vedanta should be familiar with NYAYA shastra (Epistemology), Vaisheshika (Particle Physics), Samkhya, Yoga, and also of some understanding of (Vedic) Quantum mechanics and (Vedic) Psychology.

Vedanta is not a philosophy that just soothes the ego, and gives a feel-good factor. Vedanta dissects the ego, and also gives a proper understanding of the Self, and the Universe (in relation to the Self.) To the best of my knowledge, I have not seen a system of philosophy, or a branch of religion that compares to Vedanta in it's approach to Rational analysis of the Self, and the Universe.

Philosophers of all ages have argued vehemently to prove a point that they thought was the most valid. Partly, this was owing to their upbringing (or tradition) as we call it. Some of them had valid insights into a particular aspects, but were not effective in conveying their points. And yet others, had direct experience of Reality, and also had the means and mode to convey this information in a clear and lucid manner.

Sri Adishankaracharya, inorder to discourage philosophers from quarrel-mongering, composed the following hymn. This is a shloka from the famous Shivananda-Lahari.

Gato va, Mrithpindo va, Anurapi cha, dhoomo'gnir achalah
Pato va, tanthur va pariharathi kim ghora shamanam...
Vrutha kanta kshobham vahasi tarasaa tharka vachasaa
Padhaamboja bhaja shambor parama saukhyam vrajashudhi.
-- Shivanandha Lahari (6)


Meaning: The various examples used by logicians, like Pot (and space), clod of earth, atom, smoke, fire, or mountain, cloth, and thread etc, which of these can save you from the face of death? You are unnecessarily wasting the water in your throat. Do bow to the lotus feet of Lord Shiva which alone purifies your mind.

Explaining the 14 Lokas: The OSI Model.

I was reminded of a lecture our local group attended by a Swamiji from Chinmaya Mission who was visiting Canada last month. In the due course of the lecture he mentioned about the 14 lokas (which are Satya Loka, Tapo loka, Janaloka, Maharloka, Suvarloka, Buvarloka, Bhuloka, Atala, Vithala, Suthala, Talaathala, Rasaathala, Mahaathala, and Paathala in descending order.) While explaining the seven lokas above he mentioned that Bhuloka was this earth, Bhuvarloka was above the Sun, Suvarloka was above the polestar etc. A friend of mine, asked if this was actually physical locations or just metaphors that really did not exist.. Later, when comparing notes after the lecture, some argued that it REALLY existed - as it was mentioned in the puranas, while others called it humbug. (I am sure this is one of the famous doubts that 'intellectuals' often get.) I took a shot at it, and explained my understanding of the LOKA models in layperson terms. Hope it makes sense.

Most of us are aware of the famous OSI Model which makes communication between hetrogenous machines possible.




The Model begins with the physical layer which rests on the physical link that's "visible and tangible" to everyone. Then comes more subtler layers which are neither "real", nor "mythical metaphors" but purely concepts that can be explained as layers to make it easier to understand. If someone says, the data-link layer is 2 inches above the physical layer, and that the transport layer is 4 inches above the datalink and so on it would be laughable. These are neither "above" nor "below" anything. Thus, I can only show you the physical cable that connects two computers but cannot pinpoint to the different layers around the layers even if I take a magnification lens and search till end of eternity.

Extending on this simile, when two "applications" need to talk, it cannot directly do so. An application will send it's 'thoughts' to the lower layer, till it hits the physical level. Once it reaches the physical level it is conveyed "up the chain" by the other 'computer' and when the message reaches the other application and acknowledgement is done, the process is said to be complete.

In our case, the TOP level application is the same. An idea arises in the PARA, and this is conveyed via Pratyag, Madyama and Vaikhari (audible sound, produced by VAKH - the organ of action.) This sound waves travel via a medium (Space), till it is picked up by the physical layer (eardrums), conveyed to the sense organ (shravana indriya), this is conveyed to the manas, then to buddhi, then to ahamkara and finally to the Consciousness. IF any one of the links is missing (i.e. my voice does not reach you, or you cannot interpret what I say, or your mind is 'elsewhere' or you are unconscious) then the communication (loop) is broken or incomplete. This simile can be extended to all levels (sight, sound, touch etc.) Thus, every interaction or knowledge transfer that takes place goes from Consciousness to Consciousness - but takes a convoluted path and passes through physical links (this giving rise to misunderstandings and misinterpretations.) In Deep meditation, when there is absolute control of one's thoughts, one can directly pass on information with minimal or zero aberrations.(This is a topic for the future.)

The whole exercise of Advaita is to alienate the seven layers, fourteen lokas, five bhuthas, three kaalas, three gunas, three shariras, five koshas, twenty four thattvas, and whatever else is not that ONE. Then and only then will you become THE ONE.

Vedanta - The Beginning..

The most authoritative and comprehensive text on Vedanta is the Vedanta Sutras or the Brahma Sutras.

The author of Brahma Sutras is Badharayana. Bhadarayana's Vedanta Sutra comprises of four chapters. The first chapter (Samanvaya Adhyaya) unifies Brahman, the second (Avirodha Adhyaya) refutes other philosophies and tells us why Brahma Sutra is authoritative over the others, the third (Sadhana Adhyaya) deals with practice (Sadhana) and methodologies to "attain" Brahman and the fourth (Phala Adhyaya) deals with the effects of Self-Realisation.