Share this Print this Write to us
(As some of our readers had asked for further clarification regarding Nolini da’s essay on the issues related to conjugal relationship, December issue, 2005, we are including a response to the article by Dr. Alok Pandey, which will further elucidate the points made in it.)
Bold as it is the article cuts through the sentimental cry and emotional overtones of our modern day idealism founded more on a rational humanism rather than on deeper spiritual insights. Nolini da’s span of vision however goes far deeper and higher and therefore he is able to bring out truths from which our modern intellect shrinks and from where our mind comes back baffled. His is the sight of the yogi and the seer who sees the essential truth of things and not as they are presented to us in their present day distorted form. Yet just as behind every appearance, however distorted by forces of our crude vital nature, there is a truth buried deep for its disclosure in time, so also behind the relationship between man and woman as it has evolved over time there is a kernel of subtle truth that waits for discovery in the hushed movements of our inner nature. Nolini da goes straight to the heart of the matter, brings out this truth in its purest essence and presents it to our surface cognition. He also sees that the spirit behind them is divesting itself of the older garb so that it may be born afresh in newer forms more suited to the inner demand of the evolutionary Time-Spirit in our present day humanity. We see this the world over and with everything and in every sphere. As on the battlefield of Kurukshetra, the Time-Spirit is pulling down and devouring all that has grown decrepit and old, things that were once mighty but have now grown weak and ugly. We can no more be blind to the appalling vision of Time the Destroyer or miss its heart rending and nerve-shaking cry, Kalosmi Bhavo Lokschayakrat Pravradho. And so we see this universal decomposition wherein the good, the bad and the ugly is being put together, shredded and churned and mixed and remixed. These are times when new things are being prepared through all this chaos and wait behind the scene for their appropriate hour. But these are also times when taking advantage of the general confusion, the vital forces rush in and try to substitute the imitation for the real stuff, the artificial in lieu of the pure gold. It is the task of seers like Nolini da to point out this mixture to us, so that even when we break the forms of the past (as is now inevitable and necessary), yet we preserve the spirit and at least know what we are breaking and what we are substituting it with. This is precisely the drift of Nolini da’s essay.
However the article may lead to a certain misunderstanding over man-woman relationship as it stands today and as it struggles to get past the shadows of the recent past and towards a more harmonious future. The misunderstanding could arise from two sources. One reason could be the issue of male dominance, something that is fast becoming extinct and the progressive mind of today cannot quite sympathize with such an ideal. Has it not been misused for a number of crimes against women, cruelties of the worst kind perpetuated in the name of male dominance sanctified by religion and society? The second reason for the misunderstanding can be because the modern mind accustomed to the present confusion regards this newfound freedom of men and women as a settled issue, the ideal state of affairs, so to say. It is unable to effectively foresee what other possibilities could be there which Nature yet may keep in her secret folds held back from the limited sight of the human intellect. It is necessary therefore to elaborate a little upon some of these issues as they may appear to us from the standpoint of our present day humanity.
The issue of male dominance is indeed a complex one and what we see of it is certainly not what it was in its original form. Did it indicate an essential superiority? Perhaps not, and Nolini da does indicate this. Though there may have been more great men in terms of number and variety (a thing quite different from any essential superiority) yet this could be because of one of the two reasons. One, the society did not allow the full play of a woman’s selfhood due to lack of sufficient independence. Or else because a woman’s greatness lay in her pushing others to greatness rather than climbing to her own isolated peaks, as if Nature had prepared her for this behind-the-scene role. That is why woman has been often compared in ancient literature to the earth that bears all, sustains, nourishes and nurtures, even brings forth everything so that their possibilities can manifest to their full greatness. As for herself, she chooses to be known by her creature’s greatness. Her individuality is a collective one, so to say. The masculine principle, in contrast, is compared to the sky or the sun that surrounds and protects and sets the paths along which the earth must course. His role in the creation is only indirect. He only casts the seed of deep possibility which but for the earth would not find its fruition. These are of course the two principles in Nature that is one ¾ two for convenience and appearance, one in essence. The biological male and the biological woman is only a pale shadow of this original impulse of division that exists. One is the dispassionate thinker who casts ideas as seed, the silent witness, support and sanctioner. The woman is the nourisher and nurturer, the great creatrix, artist and bride whose many moods of passionate longing, intense fiery creativity and even a terrible fury of destruction are all too well-known. So it is not an essential superiority but a certain capacity. And who can say which is greater where there is only complimentarity? Ancient societies were perhaps based on the recognition of this truth. The two as Knowledge and Power united in a creative Ananda, with which the ancient Indian images abound as in that of Shiva and Gauri, for instance.
In other words, the ancient law was based on a truth. It is the truth of the relation between the masculine principles that, though essentially one, are each different in their respective movement. Or we may say that they are two mutually complimentary poises of the one consciousness. That poise or part (depends upon how we look at it) which observes and sanctions, lays down the broad lines or, in other words, sets the course, was the masculine element in nature. The other part that executes, throws itself out in a manifold movement, creating and bringing forth new elements as conceived by the masculine in his ideal state so that they may each grow and prosper, yet in harmony and rhythm with the course set out by the Purusha is the feminine principle. Man and woman were seen as the respective symbols of each. Their respective functions were laid down in accordance with this cosmic law so that the collective life of humanity can be in tune with the cosmic rhythm. And it worked well so long as each did his utmost best in preserving the true representative character. That this got distorted subsequently like everything else is a sad fact. That the old harmony and smooth functioning of the two principles joined together with love and mutual labour has somewhere down the line been replaced by a clash of egos and brute cruelties, bitter quarrels, inhuman suppression and forced obedience and all other perversions is also another sad story. Yet must we know what it originally stood for, so that a new balance can be created, in a more enlightened way. Or else the balance can be totally broken and set aside as the Time-Spirit seems to be doing. The cosmic law itself may change, the Spirit may adopt a different stance in another age. Who can fix the limits; who can foresee all its possibilities?
Nolini da goes on next to throw some light on the possibilities. But before that, he tells us the evolutionary spin off from the old arrangement and how this helped in the evolution of certain qualities in a woman, qualities that are most certainly rare and divine such as genuine love, chastity, self-control, subservience and regulation of the lower instincts, self-forgetfulness, forbearance, quiet strength, etc. Here we must once more understand that male dominance is a modern term that has been coined to express certain current experiences of humanity in the mutual relationship of man and woman. Much as woman lib is a relatively modern concept devised to express a certain sense of anguish in the modern woman hoping to redefine her role in society. But what was it like when the whole thing started? Was she a subservient slave in the original arrangement? Or was she a sahdharmini (the one who treads the path of dharma together with the man implying thereby that the masculine principle sets course on the path of dharma, the feminine principle follows or should follow)? Needless to say, this is the old form of arrangement and has to go. As a seer, he has most certainly seen its end. But what he has also seen (and that’s what our blind emotions do not see) is that the human vital is likely to substitute this old arrangement with something that may well be dangerous not only to the woman and her inner development but also to the society as a whole. In fact, he has nothing against the urge for individualization and the union of two individuals; rather, he sees it as the ideal condition, but then he makes it abundantly clear that such a situation would need an inner purification of both, a union of two souls and of two realized beings, and not merely a coming together of two egos who each clamour for vital food and space to satisfy their impulses and desires. It is the danger of this false god taking advantage of the confusion and crowning itself as the new deity that is his cause of concern. The old was also imperfect, even perhaps grossly imperfect and therefore it has to go. That is not contested. What is being contested is the nature of the new that would replace the old. That this prevision was more than true and this caution abundantly justified is clear from the recent identity of the modern woman. True she has broken free from the man and that is good, even very good, but has she not consented to become a willing object of sense pleasure for men (not one man but many, what Nolini da calls as a nationalization borrowed from the Bolsheviks? You have to only look around with open eyes and you would see what it means. To put it semi-seriously, woman in her new found liberty unfortunately followed the path of the very men against whom she revolted. She imitated men, almost copied someone who was not worth copying. The stories of her success became even greater than the story of men’s success and in every field that too, yet it is the same old story with little variation. For with ambition and its unbridled fulfillment, with the taste of vital freedom and an extra large space for the ego, their came rushing in all the vital propensities suppressed and controlled for so long, the tendency to evil and whatever else. Therefore the comparison between the ideals of Sita and that of Cleopatra and Catherine, which perhaps are at times misunderstood. And let me add that the ideal of Sita and Savitri were not placed before humanity in some dark ages. Rather they were one of the most enlightened ages of mankind. It is against the invasion by the false glare of the vital gods and their subtle falsehood that Nolini da is cautioning us and the dangers of an unbridled expression of vital instincts in the name of liberty and freedom. Yet, as is evident from the ensuing paragraphs, he knows the change is coming and despite the dust and the storm of confusion, it carries in it a flicker of light. Rather, he admits that it is our habitual notion that sees it as something necessarily dark, yet, it (this complete independence of women) may not be so. Only he lays bare certain lines and tendencies along which it can be possibly worked out, as well as, certain difficulties and dangers of this experiment which nature intends to undertake.
We should not forget that here Nolini da is not discussing the issue of a woman’s plight under man as a modern day feminist or social activist would do. The gaze of a seer is calm and steady and therefore it can penetrate deeper into the hidden nooks and crannies of human nature and the beautiful sentiments and appealing words through which we cover up our darkness. Also let us not forget that the modern mind often has a tendency to interpret certain great ancient formulas of truth along the lines of his thought and experiences in the present. That is only natural and understandable. But then, for this very reason, it is necessary to put the picture right and in the correct perspective so that we can see the spirit behind the form. It is very easy to be repelled by certain forms of living that do not agree with our own or to cry in anguish over things that seem to betray our own sense of right and justice and truth. It is far more difficult to penetrate beyond and behind the first appearances and see things just as they are in their right measure without adding strong emotional colours and sentimental flavours to it. Thus, one may see in the image of Sita and Savitri nothing more than a doormat. But what such a person fails to see is the intrinsic strength of a Sita who is none else but Durga in her subdued mood, subdued not by Ravana, the Rakshasa but by Rama, the divine in man. And who else is Savitri, the willing and diligent serf of all but Kali who is one with Wisdom, Compassion and Love. For centuries such women have inspired men. Yet this very thing that brought out the best in a woman in certain aspects of her nature prevented the full flow of a woman’s selfhood. And that raises the question of the number and variety of ‘great women’. Of course Nolini da does not answer this issue fully in this article, though he has taken it up elsewhere. Here, his main concern is the social implications, on children etc of this new arrangement that discourages conjugal bonds and encourages freedom in relationship. There are of course some other subtle hints, for example, of intermingling of types and their advantages. In fact, here Nolini da very clearly seems to favour this trend and says in so many words. Let us see how he leads us to the concluding observations:
“Such an arrangement (conjugal bond, lineage, clan, rigours of collectivity) may be helpful for the stability of society but not so for its mobility, for the advent of new types of geniuses in society. If the conjugal bond snaps, that is to say, if that ceases to be the chief factor, if the descendents are freed from the clutches of the customs of family, tradition habitual notion then there is a possibility of increase in diversity and span of new creation in society.”
He even goes on to address the problem that may arise from such a snapping for the children (foresight?) and even gives a solution to it:
“…how and where (in the absence of an affectionate home) will the heart of a child become witty and invigorated? The answer is, woman need not forsake her children even when freed from the conjugal bond. As man is now the head of a family, in the same way woman will at least occupy the same place if man is ousted from his place. A house will then remain a house. It is not that there will be no home in the absence of a conjugal bond, but it will be a different kind of house – whether it be the house of a single woman or communal house belonging to more than one man and woman.”
Is it not a deep foresight for our law-makers (that a child essentially belongs to a woman) and a prevision of things to come (a house with more than one man and woman)?
And yet it needs ‘a living and awakened intellect, a concrete realization of truth’. Such an ideal cannot be shaped ‘mechanically by crushing and trampling the human being as a material thing’ as the Bolsheviks would. Nor can it be done through the heat of ‘a vital passion and an excitement of the idea’ as a section of the Vaishanava sect attempted. Not a rehash of the old, not a blind rush into building the new form that is a worse degradation from the old, but truly, truly a new creation, a creation based on inner truth ¾ this is the real import of Nolini da’s message. He suggests as our means to accomplish this, ‘a very profound initiation, a boundless education, a complete purification and sadhana. Otherwise it will be a topsy-turvy,… breaking and cracking, a chaos or else a scandalous living’. How very true, a prevision indeed! Would one call it pushing humanity backward or preparing it for an evolutionary march ?
He ends with that flicker of hope that is there behind all this present chaos and darkness and invites us to see it with him. What this flicker is, is of course not disclosed but left to be uncovered through the march of time. Perhaps the family unit itself had become a closed circle hampering the free and unfettered evolutionary march. Perhaps we need to break free from every small circle or intermediary group units that nature had created so far, units such as the family, custom and society, religion and common culture and of course the latest in the list of evolutionary group units that is the nationality. These have served their term and purpose and though still needed for the mass of mankind, increasingly there is fast growing a certain type of humanity that is more and more global in outlook, wide in their thought and feelings. They do not accept the conventional limits or boundaries of association and seek a larger unity, a greater whole. Where are they going to find it? Not through the enlargement and aggrandisation of the ego-self but through the discovery of the true Self within, the soul of the individual, the true individuality, or to use an ancient Indian image, not only by rediscovering the Narayana within the Nara, not just as an individual achievement (for that has been already accomplished several times by mystics the world over) but as a collective achievement by discovering the Vasudeva, the indwelling godhead who resides in and presides over all things. To discuss this in all its details would go beyond our present scope. The purpose of this article is simply to fill in some of the links of thought that may seem left out to a reader not in sympathy with the great word of wisdom coming out through Nolini da’s pen that moves from one great idea and truth to another as an eagle’s leap of sight. As to the rest, it is only the Time-Spirit that can reveal what lies hidden in its folds of light, inaccessible to our ordinary human seeing yet grasped by the sight of seers of whom Nolini da is most certainly one.
(Dr. Alok Pandey has been working in the field of psychiatry with a spiritual approach for more than 15 years. He has developed a working concept of integral health and integral psychology which he is using in his life and practice. He is one of the founders of SAIIIHR).