The Universe and Man

By Swami Ramakrishnananda

Comprises six lectures delivered by Swami Ramakrishnananda, a monastic desciple of Sri Ramakrishna. The reader is sure to profit from the Swami's penetrating insight into the nature of Reality.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Sri Ramakrishna Math, Chennai
• Release date: May 9, 2012
• ISBN: 9788178235707

Book preview

1

The Universe

The universe, both inner and outer, has been the subject of modern science and philosophy. Chemistry, physics, zoology, botany, geology and astronomy treat more or less of the outer universe. Chemistry wants to find out the elements whose innumerable combinations have brought into existence the countless objects that make up the universe, while physics tries to discover those laws that regulate it. Zoology treats of the animal kingdom, while botany deals with the vegetable kingdom. Geology tries to find out the inner formation and nature of our earth, whereas astronomy, in right earnest, seeks to know all about the heavenly bodies, their relative distances, the period of their revolving motions and so on. In fact it wants to know all about the universe. Physiology enters inside our physical self. There it discovers how foodstuff is transformed into blood, how the latter is made to circulate all over the body by the contraction and expansion of the heart, how in the course of its circulation it meets the wants and excretes the waste of all the tissues and organs of our body. Psychology in turn treats of our finer self, the mind. And philosophy finally dives still deeper and wants to know something about our souls and their relation to the universe.

So, science is struggling hard to unravel the mystery of creation; let us see with what success. It has proved beyond all doubts the indestructibility of matter. It has analysed the human mind and believes in the unextended immaterial nature. It has no definite answer about the nature of our souls. As regards a creator, it is either sceptic or agnostic. So far as this aspect of its researches is concerned, the result is not at all satisfactory. But in course of time, it may be expected to define more clearly its ideas respecting mind, soul and God.

Let us, however, see whether science at any time will be able to know all about the universe. All scientific researches are based upon ordinary sense perception, which holds the outer universe to be an independent existence, i.e, something quite independent of mind. Whether we are conscious of it or not, it exists. It also holds that we derive all our knowledge about it through our sense-organs and garner it in our minds. Now, it is also a fact that the universe is infinite in every way, for we can never imagine the limit of space in which it is located. If we start in a railway train with incredible velocity to find out the end of space in any direction whatever, it will not be possible for us to come to the limit even at the end of several years, for there will remain space enough to travel still further. Material particles being both infinitely scattered and indestructible, the universe which is made out of them must also be infinite and indestructible as well, although sometimes it may remain in a manifested and sometimes in an unmanifested condition. But it is always eternal and infinite in its nature.

Now, as regards our physical self, we are merely three and a half cubits in length. In regard to our mental self also, we are limited. We know many things, indeed, but there are many more things that we do not know. Hence our minds are circumscribed on all sides by impassable walls of ignorance. But it may be argued that the mind has an infinite potentiality for knowledge; its power for expansion is infinite. That may be, but we must hold that as it stands at present, it is finite. Suppose it knows all about this world of ours in one day, about our moon on the second day, about some heavenly body every succeeding day. Still, even after the lapse of a million years, its knowledge about the universe must remain limited, since there will remain innumerable worlds still unknown, peopling the infinite bosom of space.

Now, a finite quantity, however big it may be, must be infinitesimally small when compared to infinity, as infinity must be infinite times bigger than that; and in higher mathematics, whatever is infinitesimally small is regarded as zero. So even with so much facility for knowledge, our information about the universe will always remain insignificant, not worth mentioning. It is also a fact that a partial knowledge of a thing is worse than no knowledge of it, since we are apt to mistake the part for the whole.

Once, four blind men wanted to have some idea of an elephant. So they requested the mahout to allow them to touch the animal and thus form an idea of it. The mahout was good enough to grant their request. The first man went and touched the huge belly of the animal and was satisfied with the thought that he knew the elephant. The second man went and touched one of its legs and came away content with his knowledge. The third man went and touched one of its ears and believed he had a complete idea of the elephant. So also the fourth man went and touched its trunk and came away satisfied. Afterwards, with the knowledge thus gathered, they began to compare notes regarding the nature of the elephant. The first man said, ‘I have known the elephant, it is like a big basin of water.’ The second man exclaimed, ‘How can that be? I have also touched it; it is like a big pillar.’ To this the third man replied, ‘Both of you are mistaken. I have also touched it; it is like a big winnowing basket.’ The fourth man laughed to hear all these and said, ‘Friends, you astound me by your novel ideas about an animal which I also have had the privilege of touching and feeling. I have known it to be like a very thick club, almost tapering to a point downwards.’ Each one stuck to his own idea, and they would not be reconciled till the matter was brought and placed before the driver, who, on hearing the different versions, had a good laugh at them and at last said: ‘My friends, it is a pity that all of you have mistaken the part for the whole. Your idea about an elephant is, therefore, wholly wrong. It is better to confess one’s own ignorance about it rather than to declare that it is like a pillar, a basin of water, a winnowing basket, or a very thick club.’ Thus saying, he gave them a description of it and all the four were ashamed of their stubbornness.

This story illustrates clearly the scientist’s position regarding the knowledge of the universe. His finite mind, in spite of its potentiality, is quite inadequate to grapple with infinity; hence his idea about the cosmos will always be insufficient and vague, and his incessant struggles to know it will always be fruitless, Such a thing is never desirable, and this is certainly not the method to acquire perfect knowledge of the universe. So we must give up this scientific or objective method based upon sense perception, if we want to have a true and perfect knowledge of it.

Going back as far as any