Once in far remote antiquity, the Indian philosophy, coming in contact with Greek energy, led to the rise of the Persian, the Roman, and other great nations. After the invasion of Alexander the Great, these two great waterfalls colliding with each other, deluged nearly half of the globe with spiritual tides, such as Christianity. Again, a similar commingling, resulting in the improvement and prosperity of Arabia, laid the foundation of modern European civilisation. And perhaps, in our own day, such a time for the conjunction of these two gigantic forces has presented itself again. This time their centre is India.

The air of India pre-eminently conduces to quietness, the nature of the Yavana is the constant expression of power; profound meditation characterises the one, the indomitable spirit of dexterous activity, the other; one’s motto is “renunciation”, the other’s “enjoyment”. One’s whole energy is directed inwards, the other’s, outwards; one’s whole learning consists in the knowledge of the Self ot the Subject, the other’s, in the knowledge of the not-Self or the object (perishable creation); one loves Moksha (spiritual freedom), the other loves political independence; one is unmindful of gaining prosperity in this world, the other sets his whole heart on making a heaven of this world; one, aspiring after eternal bliss, is indifferent to all the ephemeral pleasures of this life, and the other, doubting the existence of eternal bliss, or knowing it to be far away, directs his whole energy to the attainment of earthly pleasures as much as possible.

In this age, both these types of mankind are extinct, only their physical and mental children, their works and thoughts are existing.

Europe and America are the advanced children of the Yavanas, a glory to their forefathers; but the modern inhabitants of the land of Bharata are not the glory of the ancient Aryas. But, as fire remains intact under cover of ashes, so the ancestral fire still remains latent in these modern Indians. Through the grace of the Almighty Power, it is sure to manifest itself in time.

What will accrue when that ancestral fire manifests itself?

Would the sky of India again appear clouded over by waving masses of smoke springing from the Vedic sacrificial fire? Or is the glory of Rantideva again going to be revived in the blood of the sacrificed animals? Are the old customs of Gomedha, Ashvamedha, or perpetuating the lineage from a husband’s brother, and other usages of a like nature to come back again? Or is the deluge of a Buddhistic propaganda again going to turn the whole of India into a big monastery? Are the laws of Manu going to be rehabilitated as of yore? Or is the discrimination of food, prescribed and forbidden, varying in accordance with geographical dimensions, as it is at the present day, alone going to have its all-powerful domination over the length and breadth of the country? Is the caste system to remain, and is it going to depend eternally upon the birthright of a man, or is it going to be determined by his qualification? And again in that caste system, is the discrimination of food, its touchableness or untouchableness, dependent upon the purity or the impurity of the man who touches it, to be observed as it is in Bengal, or will it assume a form more strict as it does in Madras? Or, as in the Punjab, will all such restrictions be obliterated? Are the marriages of the different Varnas to take place from the upper to the lower Varna in the successive order, as in Manu’s days, and as it is still in vogue in Nepal? Or, as in Bengal and other places, are they to be kept restricted to a very limited number of individuals constituting one of the several communities of a certain class of the Varna? To give a conclusive answer to all these questions is extremely difficult. They become the more difficult of solution, considering the difference in the customs prevailing in different parts of the country — nay, as we find even in the same part of the country such a wide divergence of customs among different castes and families.

Then what is to be?

What we should have is what we have not, perhaps what our forefathers even had not — that which the Yavanas had; that, impelled by the life-vibration of which, is issuing forth in rapid succession from the great dynamo of Europe, the electric flow of that tremendous power vivifying the whole world. We want that. We want that energy, that love of independence, that spirit of self-reliance, that immovable fortitude, that dexterity in action, that bond of unity of purpose, that thirst for improvement. Checking a little the constant looking back to the past, we want that expansive vision infinitely projected forward; and we want — that intense spirit of activity (Rajas) which will flow through our every vein, from head to foot.

What can be a greater giver of peace than renunciation? A little ephemeral worldly good is nothing in comparison with eternal good; no doubt of that. What can bring greater strength than Sattva Guna (absolute purity of mind)? It is indeed true that all other kinds of knowledge are but non-knowledge in comparison with Self-knowledge. But I ask: How many are there in the world fortunate enough to gain that Sattva Guna? How many in this land of Bharata? How many have that noble heroism which can renounce all, shaking off the idea of “I and mine”? How many are blessed enough to possess that far-sight of wisdom which makes the earthly pleasures appear to be but vanity of vanities? Where is that broad-hearted man who is apt to forget even his own body in meditating over the beauty and glory of the Divine? Those who are such are but a handful in comparison to the population of the whole of India; and in order that these men may attain to their salvation, will the millions and millions of men and women of India have to be crushed under the wheel of the present-day society and religion?

And what good can come out of such a crushing?

Do you not see — talking up this plea of Sattva, the country has been slowly and slowly drowned in the ocean of Tamas or dark ignorance? Where the most dull want to hide their stupidity bv covering it with a false desire for the highest knowledge which is beyond all activities, either physical or mental; where one, born and bred in lifelong laziness, wants to throw the veil of renunciation over his own unfitness for work; where the most diabolical try to make their cruelty appear, under the cloak of austerity, as a part of religion; where no one has an eye upon his own incapacity, but everyone is ready to lay the whole blame on others; where knowledge consists only in getting some books by heart, genius consists in chewing the cud of others’ thoughts, and the highest glory consists in taking the name of ancestors: do we require any other proof to show that that country is being day by day drowned in utter Tamas?



The ancient history of India is full of descriptions of the gigantic energies and their multifarious workings, the boundless spirit, the combination of indomitable action and reaction of the various forces, and, above all, the profound thoughtfulness of a godly race. If the word history is understood to mean merely narratives of kings and emperors, and pictures of society — tyrannised over from time to time by the evil passions, haughtiness, avarice, etc., of the rulers of the time, portraying the acts resulting from their good or evil propensities, and how these reacted upon the society of that time — such a history India perhaps does not possess. But every line of that mass of the religious literature of India, her ocean of poetry, her philosophies and various scientific works reveal to us — a thousand times more clearly than the narratives of the life-incidents and genealogies of particular kings and emperors can ever do — the exact position and every step made in advance by that vast body of men who, even before the dawn of civilisation, impelled by hunger and thirst, lust and greed, etc., attracted by the charm of beauty, endowed with a great and indomitable mental power, and moved by various sentiments, arrived through various ways and means at that stage of eminence. Although the heaps of those triumphal flags which they gathered in their innumerable victories over nature with which they had been waging war for ages, have, of late, been torn and tattered by the violent winds of adverse circumstances and become worn out through age, yet they still proclaim the glory of Ancient India.

Whether this race slowly proceeded from Central Asia, Northern Europe, or the Arctic regions, and gradually came down and sanctified India by settling there at last, or whether the holy land of India was their original native place, we have no proper means of knowing now. Or whether a vast race living in or outside India, being displaced from its original abode, in conformity with natural laws, came in the course of time to colonise and settle over Europe and other places — and whether these people were white or black, blue-eyed or dark-eyed, golden-haired or black-haired — all these matters — there is no sufficient ground to prove now, with the one exception of the fact of the kinship of Sanskrit with a few European languages. Similarly, it is not easy to arrive at a final conclusion as to the modern Indians, whether they all are the pure descendants of that race, or how much of the blood of that race is flowing in their veins, or again, what races amongst them have any of that even in them.

However, we do not, in fact, lose much by this uncertainty.

But there is one fact to remember. Of that ancient Indian race, upon which the rays of civilisation first dawned, where deep thoughtfulness first revealed itself in full glory, there are still found hundreds of thousands of its children, born of its mind — the inheritors of its thoughts and sentiments — ready to claim them.

Crossing over mountains, rivers, arid oceans, setting at naught, as it were, the obstacles of the distance of space and time, the blood of Indian thought has flowed, and is still flowing into the veins of other nations of the globe, whether in a distinct or in some subtle unknown way. Perhaps to us belongs the major portion of the universal ancient inheritance.

In a small country lying in the eastern corner of the Mediterranean Sea, beautiful and adorned by nature, and garlanded by well-formed and beautiful-looking islands, lived a race of men who were few in number, but of a very charming aspect, perfectly formed, and strong in muscles and sinews, light of body, yet possessing steadiness and perseverance, and who were unrivalled for the creation of all earthly beauties, as well as endowed with extraordinary practicality and intellect. The other ancient nations used to call them Yavanas, but they called themselves Greeks. This handful of a vigorous and wonderful race is a unique example in the annals of man. Wherever and in whatever nation there has been, or is, any advance made in earthly science up to the present day — such as social, martial, political, sculptural, etc. — there the shadow of ancient Greece has fallen. Let us leave apart the consideration of ancient times, for even in this modern age, we, the Bengalis, think ourselves proud and enlightened simply by following the footmarks of these Yavana Gurus for these last fifty years, illumining our homes with what light of theirs is reaching us through the European literature.

The whole of Europe nowadays is, in every respect, the disciple of ancient Greece, and her proper inheritor; so much so that a wise man of England had said, “Whatever nature has not created, that is the creation of the Greek mind.”

These two gigantic rivers (Aryans and Yavanas), issuing from far-away and different mountains (India and Greece), occasionally come in contact with each other, and whenever such confluence takes place, a tremendous intellectual or spiritual tide, rising in human societies, greatly expands the range of civilisation and confirms the bond of universal brotherhood among men.


We seize a man and deliberately do him a malicious injury : Say , imprison him for years …………. A man breaking into my home and stealing my wife’s diamonds , I am expected as a matter of course to steel ten years of his life ,torturing him all the time . …. But the thought less wickedness with which we scatter sentences of imprisonment , torture in the solitary cell and on the plank bed and flogging or moral invalids and energetic rebels , is as nothing compared to stupid levity with which we tolerate Poverty .                                                            

 The crying need of the nation is not for better morals ,“cheap bread” temperance liberty ,culture , redemption of fallen sisters and erring brothers nor the grace ,love and fellowship of trinity, but simply for enough money. And the evil to be attacked is not Sin, suffering ,greed , priest craft ,kingcraft, demagogy, monopoly ,ignorance , drink, war pestilence , nor any other of the scapegoat which reformers sacrifice but simply poverty .                                                         

But the successful scoundrel is dealt with very difficulty and very Christianity. He is not only forgiven ,he is idolized ,respected made much of all but worshipped.                        

The seven deadly Sins ? Yes the deadly seven ! Food , clothing , firing , rent ,taxes , respectability, and children . Nothing can lift these seven milestones from Man’s neck but ………Poverty . A crime ? Yes………….

crime are virtues besides it all the other dishonors are chivalry itself by comparison . Poverty blights whole cities ; spreads horrible pestilence; strikes dead the very souls of all who come within sight, sound or smell of it . What you call crime is nothing …….. There are not 50 genuine professional criminals in London. But there are millions of poor people , abject people , dirty people, ill fed, ill clothed people.                                       

 “ I had rather be a thief than a pauper. I had rather be murderer than a slave .I don’t want to be either; but if you force ,the alternative on me , then ,by heaven I’ll choose the braver and more moral one .I hate poverty and slavery worse than any other crime what so ever.

Imprisonment as it exists today ,is a worse crime than any of those committed by its victims; for no single criminal can be as powerful for evil, or as unrestrained in its exercise , as an organized Nation.”

…… people who have ascertained the truth about prison have been driven to declare that the most urgent necessity of the situation is that every judge magistrate , and home secretary should serve a six month’s sentence in eoginto ; so that when he is dealing out and enforcing sentences he should at least know that (what) he is doing

No Classes ! No Compromise !!

Under the Socialist movement there is coming a time and the time may be even now at hand , when improved conditions or adjusted wages will no longer be thought to be an answer to cry for labor; yes when these will be but an insult of the common intelligence. It is not for better wages, improved capitalist conditions or a share of capitalist profits that the Socialist movement is in the world; it is here for the abolition or wages and profits and for the end of capitalism and private capital. Reformed political institutions boards of arbitration between capital and labour ,philanthropies and privileges that are but the capitalist’s gifts- none of these can much longer answer the question that is making the temples ,thrones and Parliaments of the nation tremble. There can be no peace between the man who is down and the man who builds on his back. There can be no reconciliation between classes; there can only be end of classes. It is idle to talk of goodwill until there is first justice, and idle to talk of justice until the man who makes the world possesses the work of his own hands. The cry of the world’s workers can be answered with nothing save the whole product of their work.



Permanency of the Social Institutions

It is one of the illusions of each generation that the social institutions in which it lives are, in some peculiar ‘sense’, “natural ” , unchangeable and permanent. Yet for countless thousands of years, social institutions have been successively arising , developing, decaying and becoming gradually superseded by others better adopted to contemporary needs…….

…. The question ,then , is not whether our present civilization will be transformed ,but how it will be transformed?

It may be considerate adaption , be made to pass gradually and peacefully into a new form . Or , if there is angry resistance instead of adaption ,it my crash , leaving mankind painfully to build up a new civilization from the lower level of stage of social chaos and disorder in which not only the abuses but also the material, intellectual and moral gains of the previous order will have been lost.



Democracy is theoretically a system of political and legal equality . But in concrete and practical operation it is false, for there can be no equality , not even in politics and before the law , so long as there is glaring in equality in economic power. So long as the ruling class owns the worker’s jobs and the press and the schools of country and all organs for the moulding and expression of public opinion; so long as it monopolise all trained public functionaries and disposes of unlimited funds to influence elections , so long as the laws are made by ruling class and the courts are presided over by members of that class, so long as lawyers are private practitioners who sell their skill to the highest bidder and litigation is technical and costly , so long will the nominal equality before the law be a hollow mockery.

In a capitalist regime the whole machinery of democracy operates to keep the ruling class minority in power through the suffrage of working class majority, and when the bourgeois government feels itself endangered by democratic institutions, such institutions re often crushed without compunction.

Democracy does not secure ” equal rights and a share in all political rights for every body , to what ever class or party he may belong ” (Kautsky) It only allows free political and legal play .For the existing economic inequalities …………. Democracy under capitalism is thus not general, abstract democracy but specific bourgeois democracy ………. or as Lenin terms it ————- democracy for bourgeois .


The present social order is a ridiculous mechanism ,in which portions of the whole are in conflict and acting against the whole. We see each class in society desires, from interest , the misfortune of the other class , placing in every way individual interest in opposition to public good. The lawyer wishes litigations and suits , particularly among the rich; the physician desires sickness .(The latter would be ruined if every body died without disease, as would the former if all quarrells were settled by arbitration.) The soldier wants war ,which will carry off half his comrades and secure him promotion; the undertaker wants burials;monopolists and forestallers want famine ,to double or treble the price of grain; the architect , the carpenter, the mason , want conflagration, that will burn down a hundred houses to give activity to their branches of business. Every man’s, worman’s and Children’s business runs on the basis some one else business “running out”. The Insecurity in this world is daunting and quiet unimaginable.

The People of India will never learn. Azad, Rajguru, Bhagat Singh did not want to become ideal that people come to get blessings. It’s really quiet shamefull if not mocking to these great people who have died for such an important reason. It’s mocking in the sense that people from everywhere come to recieve blessings so “My son passses his exam” or to pray “That I get the Job”. This is why Bhagat singh left faith on this religion. Not only does it develops the habit of asking for materilistic causes but it also is the root for most major susperstitions. There will be no one in that crowd that will boldly say that “Make my son like you, let him fight for our country”.


That’s why I say, and many before me have repeated that Religion was, is and never will be the anwser of India. I am no follower of Athesim or for that matter Agnosticism(Infact I’m a strong believer in the almighty), But Either of these might be tolerated, but materialism is utterly inadmissible. But tell you truth, it’s not really the individual’s fault because this submissions to ‘superiors’ and ‘authority’ is imposed on ‘lower’ classes by divine will. It’s almost as if it’s in their Blood. No one actually wants to be Free. People say that India is Democratic country, a republican for that. On every corner someone is being dictated by some one superior and more powerful than themselves. And not only that, they actually are letting themselves be dictated. An owner of a corner store pays land tax for actually being able to run his store there, then he pays half of his income to the local Don’s so his store is “Protected”. Then that Don pays half his income to the local cheif of police to keep him “Protected”. Then the cheif of police, just to show his favors, ignores all the raid’s and all charts sheets against a bigger Don. Then That Don pays someone else to keep his unsouly life protected and this goes on unitl it basically reaches the C.M., the Cheif Minister or as I like to say Crime Minister.

The Goverment of India is too wooden , too iron ,too inelastic, too antidiluvian to be of any use for modern purpose. The Indian Government is indefensible. It actually and quiet seriously doesn’t care about the population of India.




Men! whose boast it is that ye


Come of fathers brave and free,


If there breathe on earth a slave,


Are you truely free and brave?


If ye do not feel the chain


When it works a brother’s pain


Are ye not base slaves indeed


Slaves unworthy to be freed?


Is true Freedom but to break


Fetters for our own dear sake,


And , with leathern hearts , forget


That we owe mankind a debt?


No! true Freedom is to share


All the chains our brothers wear ,


And, with heart and hand , to be


Earnest to make others free!


They are slaves who fear to speak


For the fallen and the weak;


They are slaves who will not choose


Hatered, scoffing and abuse,


Rather than in silence shrink


From the truth they needs must think:


They are slaves who dare not be


In the right with two or three


Revolution does not necessarily involve sanguinary strife, nor is there any place in it for individual vendetta. It is not the cult of the bomb and the pistol. By Revolution I mean that the present order of things, which is based on manifest injustice, must change. Producers or labourers, in spite of being the most necessary element of society, are robbed by their exploiters of their labour and deprived of their elementary rights. The peasant who grows corn for all, starves with his family; the weaver who supplies the world market with textile fabrics, has not enough to cover his own and his children’s bodies; masons, smiths and carpenters who raise magnificent palaces, live like pariahs in the slums. The capitalists and exploiters, the parasites of society, squander millions on their whims. These terrible inequalities and forced disparity of chances are bound to lead to chaos. This state of affairs cannot last long, and it is obvious, that the present order of society in merry-making is on the brink of a volcano. The whole edifice of this civilisation, if not saved in time, shall crumble. A radical change, therefore, is necessary and it is the duty of those who realise it to reorganise society on the socialistic basis. Unless this thing is done and the exploitation of man by man and of nations by nations is brought to an end, suffering and carnage with which humanity is threatened today, cannot be prevented. All talk of ending war and ushering in an era of universal peace is undisguised hypocrisy.

India will be rasied, not with power of the flesh, but with the power of spirit; not with the flag of destruction, but with the flag of peace and love. Call up the divinty with in you, which will enable you to bear hunger and thirst, heat and cold. Sittig in luxurious homes, surrounded with all comforts of life, and doing out a little amateur religion may be good for other lands, but India has a truer instinct. It intuitively detects the mask. You must give up. Be great. No great work can be done without sacrifice …

Lay down your comforts, your pleasures, your name, fame or position, nay even your lives, and make a bridge of human chains over which millions will cross this ocean of life. Bring all the forces of good togther. Do not care under what banner you march. Do not care what be your colour, but mix all the colours and produce that intense glow of white, the colour of love. Ours is to work. The results will take care of themselves.

I do not see into the future; nor do I care to see. but one vision I see clear as life brfore me, that the ancient mother has awakened once more, sitting on her throne rejuvenated, more glorious than ever. Proclaim the voice of peace and benediction.

Evils are plentiful in our soceity, but so are there evils in every other society. Here, the earth is soaked sometimes with the widows’ tears; there in the west, the air is rent ith the sighs of the unmarried. Here, Poverty is the great bane of life; there, the life-weariness of luxury is the great bane that is upon the race. Here, men want to commit suicide because they have nothing to eat; there, they commit suicide because they have so much to eat.

Evil is everywhere; it is like chronic rheumatism. Drive it from the foot, it goes to the head; drive it from there, it goes somewhere else. It is a question of chasing it from place to place; that is all. Ay, to try to remedy evil is the true way. Our philosophy teaches that evil and good are eternally conjoined, the observe and the reserve of the same coin. If you have one, you must have the other; a wave in the ocean must be at the cost of a hollow elsewhere. Nay, all life is evil. No breath can be breathed without killing some one else; not a morsel of food can be eaten without depriving some one of it. This is the law; this is philosophy.

Therefore, the only thing we can do is to understand that all this work against evil is more subjective than objective. The work against evil is more educational than actual, however big we may talk. This, first of all, is the idea of work against evil; and it ought to make us calmer, it ought to take fanaticism out of our blood.

The struggle never had meaning for the man who is free. But for us it has a meaning, because it is name-and-form that creates the world.

We have a place for struggle in the Vedanta, but not for fear. All fears will vanish when you begin to assert your own nature. If you think that you are bound, bound you will remain. If you think you are free, free you will be.

That sort of freedom which we can feel when we are yet in the phenomenal is a glimpse of the real but not yet the real.

I disagree with the idea that freedom is obedience to the laws of nature. I do not understand what it means. According to the history of human progress, it is disobedience to nature that has constituted that progress. It may be said that the conquest of lower laws was through the higher. But even there, the conquering mind was only trying to be free; and as soon as it found that the struggle was also through law, it wanted to conquer that also. So the ideal was freedom in every case. The trees never disobey law. I never saw a cow steal. An oyster never told a lie. Yet they are not greater than man. This life is a tremendous assertion of freedom; and this obedience to law, carried far enough, would make us simply matter — either in society, or in politics, or in religion. Too many laws are a sure sign of death. Wherever in any society there are too many laws, it is a sure sign that that society will soon die. If you study the characteristics of India, you will find that no nation possesses so many laws as the Hindus, and national death is the result. But the Hindus had one peculiar idea — they never made any doctrines or dogmas in religion; and the latter has had the greatest growth. Eternal law cannot be freedom, because to say that the eternal is inside law is to limit it.

There is no purpose in view with God, because if there were some purpose, He would be nothing better than a man. Why should He need any purpose? If He had any, He would be bound by it. There would be something besides Him which was greater. For instance, the carpet-weaver makes a piece of carpet. The idea was outside of him, something greater. Now where is the idea to which God would adjust Himself? Just as the greatest emperors sometimes play with dolls, so He is playing with this nature; and what we call law is this. We call it law, because we can see only little bits which run smoothly. All our ideas of law are within the little bit. It is nonsense to say that law is infinite, that throughout all time stones will fall. If all reason be based upon experience, who was there to see if stones fell five millions of years ago? So law is not constitutional in man. It is a scientific assertion as to man that where we begin, there we end. As a matter of fact, we get gradually outside of law, until we get out altogether, but with the added experience of a whole life. In God and freedom we began, and freedom and God will be the end. These laws are in the middle state through which we have to pass. Our Vedanta is the assertion of freedom always. The very idea of law will frighten the Vedantist; and eternal law is a very dreadful thing for him, because there would be no escape. If there is to be an eternal law binding him all the time, where is the difference between him and a blade of grass? We do not believe in that abstract idea of law.

We say that it is freedom that we are to seek, and that that freedom is God. It is the same happiness as in everything else; but when man seeks it in something which is finite, he gets only a spark of it. The thief when he steals gets the same happiness as the man who finds it in God; but the thief gets only a little spark with a mass of misery. The real happiness is God. Love is God, freedom is God; and everything that is bondage is not God.

Man has freedom already, but he will have to discover it. He has it, but every moment forgets it. That discovering, consciously or unconsciously, is the whole life of every one. But the difference between the sage and the ignorant man is that one does it consciously and the other unconsciously. Every one is struggling for freedom — from the atom to the star. The ignorant man is satisfied if he can get freedom within a certain limit — if he can get rid of the bondage of hunger or of being thirsty. But that sage feels that there is a stronger bondage which has to be thrown off. He would not consider the freedom of the Red Indian as freedom at all.

According to our philosophers, freedom is the goal. Knowledge cannot be the goal, because knowledge is a compound. It is a compound of power and freedom, and it is freedom alone that is desirable. That is what men struggle after. Simply the possession of power would not be knowledge. For instance, a scientist can send an electric shock to a distance of some miles; but nature can send it to an unlimited distance. Why do we not build statues to nature then? It is not law that we want but ability to break law. We want to be outlaws. If you are bound by laws, you will be a lump of clay. Whether you are beyond law or not is not the question; but the thought that we are beyond law — upon that is based the whole history of humanity. For instance, a man lives in a forest, and never has had any education or knowledge. He sees a stone falling down — a natural phenomenon happening — and he thinks it is freedom. He thinks it has a soul, and the central idea in that is freedom. But as soon as he knows that it must fall, he calls it nature — dead, mechanical action. I may or may not go into the street. In that is my glory as a man. If I am sure that I must go there, I give myself up and become a machine. Nature with its infinite power is only a machine; freedom alone constitutes sentient life.

The Vedanta says that the idea of the man in the forest is the right one; his glimpse is right, but the explanation is wrong. He holds to this nature as freedom and not as governed by law. Only after all this human experience we will come back to think the same, but in a more philosophical sense. For instance, I want to go out into the street. I get the impulse of my will, and then I stop; and in the time that intervenes between the will and going into the street, I am working uniformly. Uniformity of action is what we call law. This uniformity of my actions, I find, is broken into very short periods, and so I do not call my actions under law. I work through freedom. I walk for five minutes; but before those five minutes of walking, which are uniform, there was the action of the will, which gave the impulse to walk. Therefore man says he is free, because all his actions can be cut up into small periods; and although there is sameness in the small periods, beyond the period there is not the same sameness. In this perception of non-uniformity is the idea of freedom. In nature we see only very large periods of uniformity; but the beginning and end must be free impulses. The impulse of freedom was given just at the beginning, and that has rolled on; but this, compared with our periods, is much longer. We find by analysis on philosophic grounds that we are not free. But there will remain this factor, this consciousness that I am free. What we have to explain is, how that comes. We will find that we have these two impulsions in us. Our reason tells us that all our actions are caused, and at the same time, with every impulse we are asserting our freedom. The solution of the Vedanta is that there is freedom inside — that the soul is really free — but that that soul’s actions are percolating through body and mind, which are not free.

As soon as we react, we become slaves. A man blames me, and I immediately react in the form of anger. A little vibration which he created made me a slave. So we have to demonstrate our freedom. They alone are the sages who see in the highest, most learned man, or the lowest animal, or the worst and most wicked of mankind, neither a man nor a sage nor an animal, but the same God in all of them. Even in this life they have conquered relativity, and have taken a firm stand upon this equality. God is pure, the same to all. Therefore such a sage would be a living God. This is the goal towards which we are going; and every form of worship, every action of mankind, is a method of attaining to it. The man who wants money is striving for freedom — to get rid of the bondage of poverty. Every action of man is worship, because the idea is to attain to freedom, and all action, directly or indirectly, tends to that. Only, those actions that deter are to be avoided. The whole universe is worshipping, consciously or unconsciously; only it does not know that even while it is cursing, it is in another form worshipping the same God it is cursing, because those who are cursing are also struggling for freedom. They never think that in reacting from a thing they are making themselves slaves to it. It is hard to kick against the pricks.

If we could get rid of the belief in our limitations, it would be possible for us to do everything just now. It is only a question of time. If that is so, add power, and so diminish time. Remember the case of the professor who learnt the secret of the development of marble and who made marble in twelve years, while it took nature centuries.

Dualism recognises God and nature to be eternally separate: the universe and nature eternally dependent upon God.

The extreme monists make no such distinction. In the last analysis, they claim, all is God: the universe becomes lost in God; God is the eternal life of the universe.

With them infinite and finite are mere terms. The universe, nature, etc. exist by virtue of differentiation. Nature is itself differentiation.

Such questions as, “Why did God create the universe?” “Why did the All-perfect create the imperfect?” etc., can never be answered, because such questions are logical absurdities. Reason exists in nature; beyond nature it has no existence. God is omnipotent, hence to ask why He did so and so is to limit Him; for it implies that there is a purpose in His creating the universe. If He has a purpose, it must be a means to an end, and this would mean that He could not have the end without the means. The questions, why and wherefore, can only be asked of something which depends upon something else.