Five Years of Theosophy

by Unknown

Sutratma—the Eternal germ of the manifested universe existing in the field of Mulaprakriti. ————-

In truth, Prakriti and Purusha are but the two aspects of the same ONE REALITY. As our great Sankaracharya truly observes at the close of his commentary on the 23rd Sutra of the first chapter of the Brahma sutras, "Parabrahmam is Karta (Purush), as there is no other Adhishtatha,* and Parabrahmam is Prakriti, there being no other Upadanam." This sentence clearly indicates the relation between "the One Life" and "the One Element" of the Arha-philosophers. This will elucidate the meaning of the statement so often quoted by Adwaitees—"Sarvam Khalvitham Brahma" ** and also of what is meant by saying that Brahmam is the Upadanakarnam (material cause) of the Universe.

—T Subba Row

————- * Adishtatha—that which inheres in another principle—the active agent working in Prakriti.

** Everything in the universe is Brahma. ————-

Morality and Pantheism

Questions have been raised in several quarters as to the inefficiency of
Pantheism (which term is intended to include Esoteric Buddhism, Adwaitee
Vedantism, and other similar religious systems) to supply a sound basis
of morality.

The philosophical assimilation of meum and teum, it is urged, must of necessity be followed by their practical confusion, resulting in the sanction of cruelty, robbery, &c. This line of argument points, however, most unmistakably to the co-existence of the objection with an all but utter ignorance of the systems objected to, in the critic's mind, as we shall show by-and-by. The ultimate sanction of morality, as is well known, is derived from a desire for the attainment of happiness and escape from misery. But schools differ in their estimate of happiness. Exoteric religions base their morality on the hope of reward and fear of punishment at the hands of an Omnipotent Ruler of the Universe by following the rules he has at his pleasure laid down for the obedience of his helpless subjects; in some cases, however, religions of later growth have made morality to depend on the sentiment of gratitude to that Ruler for benefits received. The worthlessness, not to speak of the mischievousness, of such systems of morality is almost self-evident. As a type of morality founded on hope and fear, we shall take an instance from the Christian Bible: "He that giveth to the poor lendeth to the Lord." The duty of supporting the poor is here made to depend upon prudential motives of laying by for a time when the "giver to the poor" will be incapable of taking care of himself. But the Mahabharata says that "He that desireth a return for his good deeds loseth all merit; he is like a merchant bartering his goods." The true springs of morality lose their elasticity under the pressure of such criminal selfishness; all pure and unselfish natures will fly away from it in disgust.

To avoid such consequences attempts have been made by some recent reformers of religion to establish morality upon the sentiment of gratitude to the Lord. But it requires no deep consideration to find that, in their endeavours to shift the basis of morality, these reformers have rendered morality entirely baseless. A man has to do what is represented to be a thing "dear unto the Lord" out of gratitude for the many blessings He has heaped upon him. But as a matter of fact he finds that the Lord has heaped upon him curses as well as blessings. A helpless orphan is expected to be grateful to him for having removed the props of his life, his parents, because he is told in consolation that such a calamity is but apparently an evil, but in reality the All-Merciful has underneath it hidden the greatest possible good. With equal reason might a preacher of the Avenging Ahriman exhort men to believe that under the apparent blessings of the "Merciful" Father there lurks the serpent of evil.

The modern Utilitarians, though the range of their vision is so narrow, have sterner logic in their teachings. That which tends to a man's happiness is good, and must be followed, and the contrary shunned as evil. So far so good. But the practical application of the doctrine is fraught with mischief. Cribbed, cabined, and confined, by rank Materialism, within the short space between birth and death, the Utilitarians' scheme of happiness is merely a deformed torso, which cannot certainly be considered as the fair goddess of our devotion.