Nature of absolute Bliss: Maharaji Kripalu explains that all kinds of debates regarding the attainment of Bliss can basically be divided into two categories: spiritualism and materialism. If we understand these two in depth, these various debates can be indisputably resolved. Now, let us first consider the materialistic viewpoint.

The materialists and agnostics say that the origin, maintenance, and dissolution of the universe takes place according to the laws of nature and that the concept of God is the product of a weak mind. They say that ‘God’ is the creation of man, not that God created man, and to bring God into the picture is foolishness. They claim that this world is created of the four basic elements: earth, water, fire and air.

They say that every individual desires happiness, and it will be obtained when he obtains those worldly objects that fulfill his desires. They say that it is an experienced fact that happiness cannot be obtained without getting the objects of one’s desires.

Yet materialists cannot guarantee that obtaining the objects of one’s desires will quench desires forever. If desires reappear doublefold and fourfold after some time, this attempt is as naive as trying to put out a fire by pouring fuel into it. If they claim because the fulfillment of material desires leads to the experience of happiness, then we can openly challenge this claim that fulfillment of desires leads to only momentary happiness and is immediately followed by the emergence of even stronger desires. Thus, material objects can never put an end to material desires. There is no example in the history of materialists who, after obtaining a certain amount of worldly objects, have reached a state of complete fulfillment or desirelessness. That is impossible. The disease of desires is such that it escalates every moment.

Just as scratching the itch caused by eczema gives temporary relief, but results in an even worsened condition. Thus, attaining the objects of one’s desires seems to give happiness but this happiness is limited. In a short time the desire reappears in an even more formidable form. The fact is that the attempt to quench desires by providing the fuel of material objects results in the creation of greed for more (Jyon pratilabh… Ramayan); whereas the nonfulfillment of desires leads to anger. In other words, unhappiness emerges with the emergence of desire. No materialist can escape this inevitable consequence of material desires. Ved Vyas says, “Yatprithivyam vrihi…”(Bh. 9/19/13)

If all the objects of this world were easily available to a single man, the disease of his desire would still keep on increasing. So it is ridiculous to expect that material objects would put an end to desires.

The materialists also claim to have made great progress. They say, “All routes through land, water and space have been opened up. We can go wherever we please. We have created hydrogen and atomic bombs. Things that were considered impossible to attain are now easily available. People were formerly barbaric but are now civilized. Diseases of the body have been controlled to a great extent as compared to the past.” All these statements are true, and we are willing to accept things even beyond that. But, can a materialist answer this question: “Is there even a glimpse of inner peace and happiness to be found as a result of all this progress? Is there a corresponding increase in such values as truth, nonviolence and humanity?” If not, then shouldn’t this so-called progress be labeled as mere deception? In spite of material development, the decline of peace and happiness is something that is visible to all. No expert could say that, in the future, the world will not be a victim of its own materialistic progress. When the result of the progress of materialism is the destruction of the materialist himself, then the dream of peace and happiness through material achievements is something which is millions of miles away.

This means that material progress does nothing to purify the heart, and without this, any hope of peace and happiness is in the air. Therefore, the advancement of materialism alone cannot bring about inner peace and happiness. If a mad person is let loose in a palace having all facilities, he will cause harm both to the building and to himself. Similarly, when the mind is not pure, materialism is bound to be used for destructive purposes. Peace and happiness are internal and cannot be brought about by any amount of external effort. Therefore, the method of satisfying desire by giving it the desired object is wrong. However, it cannot be denied that material objects are required for the necessities of life and the maintenance of the body. Now, let us discuss spiritualism.

The Vedas say, “Raso vai saha…” God Himself is Bliss, and only by attaining Him a soul could become Blissful.”

“Tamev viditvati…” (Ved) “The cosmic ocean can only be crossed with His Grace and by knowing Him. There is no other way.” But the materialist or positivist still argues about the existence of God and asks whether the verdict of the Vedas could be accepted in this regard or is there some other proof? A positivist says that he does not accept anything unless it can be directly perceived. He cannot go by blind faith. Now, we come to a disagreement between the theist and the positivist which needs to be settled.

Ask the positivist if he has seen his inner self. He will say ‘no,’ because the soul is a subtle and Divine entity that can be observed only by the Saints. Again, has he seen the mind or intellect? He will reply ‘no’ because they are too subtle and are beyond perception. Now, ask the positivist to gain knowledge of a single letter of the alphabet only by seeing it. This is impossible, because pronunciation and recognition of letters requires prior acceptance of verbal evidence. What this proves is that the positivist cannot gain knowledge of a single letter of the alphabet by direct perception. Now ask him to prove that his father is in fact his father. He cannot do so because he was not physically present at the time. Now, by his own method he can neither prove himself, nor who his father is, nor the existence of the mind and soul. Then what kind of theory is this ‘positivism’? Can you perceive the power of perception with your eyes? No. Then how do you expect to prove everything through perception? When you first visited a country or a particular town, how did you have faith in its existence in order to make an effort to go there? Do you scientifically examine the food you eat, the water you drink or the air you breathe before utilizing it? Do you think that the management of countries is possible by this philosophy of positivism? If you are adamant that you won't accept anything without first perceiving it, you may need a mental checkup before expounding positivism, because of your illogical persistence.

Can anyone grasp the spoken words with the eye? No, because spoken words are not the subject of the eye. Now, when the subject of the ears cannot be grasped by the eyes, then how can we expect the mind, which is beyond the senses, to be grasped by the senses? Also, the subject of the intellect, which is beyond the mind, cannot be grasped by the mind either. Similarly, anything beyond the intellect cannot be grasped by the intellect. Thus, we can see the limitations of direct perception.