3. The "Why" of "What" and Unity of Soul

Q3.
In a simplistic manner, it seems that the sages had figured out a model of universe which matches some aspects of the model that science proposes. That says great things about the power of thinking and observation that they possessed. However, in this day and age, when science has a more refined model, and a more refined way of explaining it, why go back to the older model?

What is most intriguing is the model for consciousness and the "thinker of thoughts". Science is not able to explain that, and until it does, one would consider that part to be a conjecture on the part of sages. Certainly, going inward provides peace and calmness but does that mean that there is a soul and there are common bonds among all human beings?

A3.
A very fundamental question indeed : "Thinker of Thoughts"....or, "Who is the Knower" - and "How can one Know the Knower"...

Sages did not develop a line of reasoning. Consequently, they did not develop a theory, nor did they conjecture anything. They simply reported what they "experienced" or "observed". It is a different matter if one thinks they were just making it up, or that they were under illusion. One would never know.

But, what is known is that these experiences and observations are repeated by several of them over and over again (over hundreds of years) - in various forms - all saying the same thing. Some of which is proven by Science through material observations, and rest is not. So, it is not unreasonable to believe what is already proven by Science is to be accepted, and what is not proven yet - one has to be skeptical about.

But, in all this - there is clarity on their part about their "experience". They challenge us NOT to believe them - but to "live" them - "experience it ourselves". And that is the end of it. They are simply telling us "what is" - and prod us "to find out for ourselves".

Science may one day succeed in answering the question, and we hope it does - during our life time (whatever may be the answer). Sages tell us there is also another way to find out - which they did - and reported what they found. They did not provide any reason - because they did not have to. Or, may be they did not even know what the reasons could be. They could have been clueless. Thanks to Science that the thread of reasoning can be developed to understand the "why" of "what".

Peace and Calmness were furthest from the minds of the sages when they decided to go inwards (The current thinking on meditation implies peace of mind, but that was not their purpose). Sages wanted to go inward to find out what is there - if at all anything. I am not sure if they had any peace....it was the adventure...the discovery....the thirst for knowing the knower.......in wanting to answer the very question you are asking.

So, in summary : They have not reasoned that the soul exists, or that there are common bonds among living souls. They have just observed. And they challenge us - whether we reason it or not - to experience it. They are ambivalent about whether we believe it or not (their followers may not be). In fact, all of the Vedic philosophy culminates into experiencing and practising (living) the truths - because that is the only thing of value. Making the mind "believe or not" is only a game, is stimulating and entertaining - sounds good - but, has no value. And also, as a result, their focus was on living a good life (independent of their philosophical/spiritual/religious beliefs). Atheists fit right in. We don't have to "believe". We only have to "live". That is why when some say they want to do "good" - that is sufficient. And no more is required of life.

And they had no intention of making it (what they found) into a religion or a cult or a belief system. They simply reported, in great awe, what they discovered - and urged others to do the discovery themselves - because it was beautiful, blissful, delightful......

But.......

Humans took these core beliefs and expanded them. It was with this fundamental understanding that everything became sacred for them. Hence, one can see why almost everything in Hinduism became sacred. To the point of insanity.....

And that kind of insanity (or fanaticism) shows in all religions. Rather than taking a "holistic" view of the world, they have all taken a narrow view. Partly because it is easy, and it suits the purpose of amassing power over the masses, and makes themselves feel superior. But, mainly because they just don't know better.

And it is because of this reason that I am sympathetic to Hinduism (and other religions as well). I have realized that we should take a high road - and give people the benefit of the doubt, because they do not know better. They mean well, but their beliefs are still primitive (I feel like a King here!). If a child does not understand Rocket Science - we understand. We strive to create an environment where one will understand it - if one wants to. We don't need to beat him up, or argue.

I suspect, I will find the same kind of situation in other religions. May be, their fundamental revelations were in line with what the Upanishads say (Truth is One), but masses have misinterpreted them. This yet remains to be seen......but, I have not lost my faith in discovering similar ideas in other religions as well. May be, the whole world is debating what is observed on the surface of the ocean - because that is what is easily visible - without realizing what lies in its enormous depth. On the surface is what we observe as religion and science today - at this point in time (out of a life of several billion more years?) - while much of the depth remains unexplored. May be, it is natural that we are prisoners of what we know today, and conclude that what we do not know today cannot be the truth.

But, back to your questions - the "Thinker of Thoughts" is not known yet. But, for that matter, Science does not know a lot about the Universe yet. There is yet a LOT to know. And that is a good thing - keeps life interesting and challenging. So, even if we do not know the ultimate truth, we have billions of years to find out - "why".

The existence of a soul, and the "unity" of life is not proven (even though, people have arguments on both sides) - only observed and experienced, according to the sages. If that does not make us believe in it, it would certainly give us a pause - something to think about - for sure. Not whether it is true or not, but - could it be true?