Gita Rahasya -Tilak 134

Karma Yoga Sastra -Tilak



that is, "saintly persons always consider as authoritative the dictates of their own Conscience". Controlling the mental impulses by concentrating the mind on a single object is the province of the Patanjala Yoga, and as this Yoga-Sastra has been in vogue in India from very ancient times, it was at no time necessary to teach our people the method of making the mind peaceful and quiet, and doing that which the Mind considered as proper, whenever there was any doubt about any matter. It is stated in the various Smrtis at the very commencement, that the Rsis who wrote them, used always to define righteousness and unrighteousness after first completely concentrating their minds[1] and the method of thus consulting the dictates of Conscience on any matter also seems at first sight extremely easy. But when one minutely considers what is meant by a ' pure mind ' from the philoso- phical point of view, this facility of the matter disappears ; and on that account, our philosophers have not based the edifice of Karma-Yoga on it. We must now consider what this philosophical point of view is; but before I do so, I will here explain briefly how the Western Materialistic philosophers have refuted this Intuitionist theory. Because, although the reasons adduced by the Materialists and the Metaphysicians may be different, yet as the result arrived at by both is the same, I shall first deal with the arguments of the Materialists,- in order that the importance and the propriety of the arguments of the Metaphysicians should be the better understood by my readers.

As the Intuitionist School has, as mentioned above, given, the highest place to Conscience Pure, it is clear that the objection against the Materialistic philosophy or morals,, namely, that they do not attach any importance to the Reason of the doer, does not apply to the Intuitionist theory. But when one minutely considers what is to be called the ' Pure Conscience' in the shape of a Mental Deity which dis- criminates between the Right and the Wrong (sad-asad-viveka- buddhih), it will be seen that other unconquerable difficulties arise with reference to this theory also. Nobody need be told that whatever thing is taken considering it in all its bearings, and finding out whether or not it is performable or unperformable, doable or not-doable, or whether or not it will be advantageous or pleasant, is a thing which is not done by the nose or the eyes or any other organs, and that there is an independent organ, namely, the Mind, which serves that purpose. Therefore, doability or non-doability, righteousness or unrighteousness are things which must be determined by the Mind, whether you call it an organ or a deity. If that were all that the Intuitionist school said, nobody would find any fault with it. But, Western Intuitionists have gone far beyond that.


References And Context

  1. (Manu. 11) ;