|
"Only the harmony of science and religion will bring harmony and peace to mankind" (Swami Vivekananda, 1863-1902)
This was the motto of a conference which took place from 24th to 30th November 1996 in Pune, state of Maharashtra, in India. To give a
report on it is somewhat difficult.
More than 700 delegates from four continents were gathered together, who had the choice of participating in about five sessions at the same time. It
was no easy task for them to overlook the diversity of these Sessions which were arranged by various organizations.
This was mainly done by:
MAEER’s (Maharashtra Academy of Engineering and Educational Research)
Maharashtra Institute of Technology (MIT), founded in 1983, affiliated to Pune university
the Shri Ksheetra Alandi Parisar Vikas Samitee (Society for betterment of environmental
conditions of Alandi).
Furthermore it was co-organized by:
The Indian Philosophical Congress (IPC, 71st annual meeting)
Maharashtra Tatwajnana Parishad (MTP The Union of Philosophers of Maharashtra,
13th meeting, meeting's language was Marathi)
Akhil Bharatya Darshan Parishad (DPS, Indian Philosophers Union, language was Hindi)
Afro-Asian Philosophical Conference (AAPC)
The Federation Internationale des Sociétés de Philosophie (FISP).
So it was a conference containing sub-conferences within it, which could not be exactly separated from each other. Among the invited were not only
philosophers but also scientists, Indologues, religious heads and scientists of religion, environmental professionals, economists and representatives of the feminist movement. So one found "scientists with
philosophical attitude" and "religious heads with social responsibility" all of whom were expected were to act as a catalyst for achieving the aims of the conference. The aim was to create a new World
Civilization based on Earth care and Earth unity as a contribution towards an attitude of global unity in peace and harmony.
The conference proposed by the Indian Council of Philosophic Research (ICPR) was dedicated as a commemoration of the 700th anniversary of
"Sanjeevan Samadhi", Saint Jnaneshwara who was a philosopher as well as a poet and a religious reformer. Chairman of the World Philosophers Meet was professor Vishwanath D. Karad, founder and
director of MIT, Honorary Chairman was Dr. Claes Nobel a relative of Dr. Alfred Nobel and Chairman of United Earth, which he founded 1974 in New York. Professor S. S. Barlingay, one of the best known Indian
philosophers of the elder generation, was responsible for the concientious preparation of the Meet.
After the opening ceremony some discussions were held in the plenum on environmental difficulties, security of peace, new world ethics and an
appreciation of Saint Jnaneshwaras life and work. At the same time a parliament of religions started, where representatives of the main religious movements presented the main teachings of their beliefs concerning
visions of peace. IPC started its work on metaphysics, theory of gnoseology, ethics, social philosophy, history of philosophy and religion. At he same time the AAPC, MTP and DPS assembled. In addition special
lectures were held such as the Jnaneshwara Tukaram Endowment lecture on the topic of "Universal Peace". Over and above that, special symposiums took place under the headings, "Feminist Movement
and Society", "Science and Philosophy" and the symposium of FISP "Secularisation and Cultural Traditions".
The conference showed clearly that the Indian public is very aware of the global problems, that there is a large diversity of religious life in India
and that there is a very vivacious kind of philosophic discussion, where although the approach to traditional thinking continues,it is done so with an emphasis on the new, interesting aspects which are a reaction to
the questions of our time. The three supporting columns (Science, Religion and Philosophy) were the connection within the great variety of these particular sessions.
1. The high spot of the opening ceremony
was without doubt the speech of the XIV. Dalai Lama of Tibet, who pointed out the geographical and cultural diversity of our planet and the necessity for pluralism of philosophy of life. He said that the movement to create a world-religion and an uniform world culture is based on fear of each other, because due to our ignorance, we feel threatened. But it is exactly this great variety of cultures and religions which give us the opportunity of realising that we are individuals and universal subjects.
Furthermore, the tolerance of others, is our test of as to how much we accept and respect ourselves and our natural conditions, and to which degree we
are able to develop the consciousness of our own reality. Exchange and co-operation with the other beings brings to light and enrichment to mankind, and this is the base which facilitates the survival of endangered
species and enables our own species to live a life worth living on our common home planet. Certainly we humans are nothing but short-term visitors on earth, like tourists, and we should leave this place undamaged
for our descendants who will want to enjoy it too. The Dalai Lama said that earth is a much safer place without man and referred to the menace to all existence on earth due to human activities. All beings strive for
welfare and try to avoid pain, but only man is able to think and to connect altruism and wisdom concerning the evolution of humanity, and it is high time we should do so. He said that he hoped that the conference
would contribute to developing mutual understanding and compassion for the next generation in order to bring to light peace and harmony to the world.
Earlier, Swami Vishvesha Teertha, prior of Pejawar Mutt in Udupi (the monastery has a Vishnuit tradition back to the 13th century and represents the
dualistic direction of Vedanta philosophy) solemnly opened the conference building which was newly built in honour of, and named after Saint Jnaneshwara, the Saint Jnaneshwara World Peace Library. He asked for
co-operation between philosophy and science for serving effectively to achieve peace. One should be inspiried by the teachings of Saint Jnaneshwara and activate the ethic values within for developing a creative
society devoted to God.
Dr. Claes Nobel demanded, as did many other speakers during the conference ,for us to give up our selfish interests. Philosophers and scientists should
work on new ethics, so that the Age of Peace could begin with the third millennium. He developed the vision of a new world civilization and referred to Albert Schweitzer´s motto "Reverence for
Life". He drew attention to environmental questions, to the extinction of species and asked that breaking of the laws of nature should cease, because not far in the future, nature may destroy man. Life is a
great miracle and very fragile, he said. Peace on Earth is possible if humanity adapts to nature as a means of finding our way back to a life where we are at peace with ourselves and our environment. Survival of
mankind and of the Earth depends on the individual endeavours of all of us, every little contribution may result in great effects if we co-operate. The New World ethic should be most of all a renunciation of
violence in thoughts, speech and activity - all of which should be based on truth.
Dr. R. A. Mashelkar general director of the Indian Council for Scientific and Industrial Research pointed out that science has a big part to play in
the solution of conflicts, but mostly the quality of life should be bettered by compassion which is much more important than connecting minds via the Internet.
An memorable experience at the opening ceremony, was the speech of Dr. Maulana Wahiduddin Khan, founder of the Islamic centre New Delhi, referring to
the idea of peace in Islam. He started with the welcoming address "Salem aleikum-Peace with you" and made it clear that Muslims are harmless members of society; those who are not peaceful are not Muslims
because they are opposed to the main idea of the Koran. Only the peaceful are admitted by Allah in paradise. ( Note to this contribution: "Fundamentalists" in Cashmere have set a price on his head. Dr.
Khan is holding further talks with representatives of other religions.)
The key note address was written by Dr. Karan Singh (Delhi). He made it clear that we have to be aware of the nature of man if we want to find the
answer to the question "is man able to live in peace"?. The dimensions of peace should not be understood as parallel-lines, but as intersecting circles. He is optimistic with regard to the human
capability for peace because he believes in the divinity of man. This is the inner spiritual thread that connects all mankind, despite their birth, race, religion and social status.
He named five aspects of peace: Peace inside man, peace inside families (included equal rights for women and harmony between the generations), social
peace and harmony in society, international peace between nations and peace on Earth (peace between man and nature). Peace between nations as peaceful contact with nature is no mere utopia in our time but an urgent
necessity, especially in the face of the destructive potential of present weaponry. Only when mankind succeeds in living together peacefully and harmoniously, can the existence of human life on Earth be guaranteed.
A holistic view of the world and human responsibility corresponds to the understanding of immanence and transcendence of divinity of the Hindus. Man is neither powerless before nature, nor has he the right to reign
self-satisfied over the Earth, but he is blessed with the gift of consciousness and it is his duty to use it for his own inner development and the welfare of the world.
2. During the sessions in the plenum
dedicated to peace, environment and the personality of Jnaneshwara, stress was laid upon the dangers of the actual situation in the world which, at the present time, are more serious than at the time since the two world wars. Time is pressing for transformation because further delay may irreversibly contribute to the process of world's destruction. Most complaints were with regard to the loss of values and the various ecological problems. For resolving the problems and for speeding up the process of the unity of mankind, an interaction of science, philosophy and religion with politics and education was called for. In one discussion, Humanity was declared as the only true religion whose aim it should be, to make this planet our real Mother Earth. In this context, the contribution of M. Uesseler (Berlin, former Magdeburg) on conflict management and peace education was read.
In the lectures concerning Saint Jnaneshwara, above all, the relevance of his famous commentary on the Gita for our time was emphasized. In
his lecture, R. Balasubramanian (Pondicherry) explained the theoretical and metaphysical basics of Advaita-Vedanta philosophy whereby he used the complete correspondence between Saint Jnaneshwara and Shankara as a
starting point.
In contrast to this, Fred Dallmayer (USA) explained the originality of Saint Jnaneshwara and of the Warkiri movement of pilgrimage which is closely connected with him. In this context H. Rüstau
and K. Eichner (both Berlin) presented their contribution.
In further lectures, parallels were shown between Saint Jnaneshwara and other medieval Indian and European philosophers.
Among others, K. Wolf
(Berlin) presented the Bengali mystic Chaitanya in a social-religious report, and G. Wicklein (Berlin) talked on Meister Eckart, a direct contemporary of Saint Jnaneshwara, whose philosophical views have much in
common with the aforementioned. K. R. Sundarajan (Bonaventura, USA) talked on the meaning of self-consciousness in Vedanta philosophy of Ramanuja (1017 or 1050-1137).
The knowledge of manifested soul (jiva), of his individual mental Self (atman) and his relation to the ultimate spiritual Self (brahman) is a key note
of Vedanta philosophy. Sundarajan explained that following Ramanuja, the three ontological principles brahman, atman and prakrti (native matter) are in close relationship, but as personifying brahman, they contain
immanent characteristics. The self-consciousness of the souls is based on these characteristics. Souls - free in their actions and responsible for them - were created by God while he was playing voluntarily
(Lila) . The way to redemption from karma and the wandering of souls leads, after Ramanuja, to self-conscious and responsible action free from an egoistic relationship on one side and permanent care of community
with brahman by devotional love on the other.
3. In an endorsement lecture,W. Halbfaß (Philadelphia) spoke on "The Meaning and the Pursuit of Happiness-Indian and Western
Perspectives". He put forward the proposal that there is a basic contrast between Indian and Western thinking in the meaning of happiness, and concluded that there are differences in the valuation and emphasis,
because the Indian ideal of happiness is less reliant on earthly enjoyments than "in the west". But in Europe, too, the utalitaristic comprehension of happiness was not less contested, i. e. by looking at
Kant. On the other side, the Indian thinkers also took for granted that natural human movement is directed towards attaining happiness and avoiding suffering.The materialists in India have by no means
justified the movement towards earthly happiness, which are demonstrated by the four goals of life; artha (economic success), kama (sensual enjoyment), dharma (moral movement) and moksa (redemption). Even though in
the Indian tradition, the movement towards redemption was more underlined than the movement towards earthly happiness, one has to be warned from concluding that the Indian way of thinking is totally different from
the European. Halbfaß referred to the transformation of the understanding of happiness in India as well as in the west, but he admitted that at the present time, egoism, consumption, movement to profit etc., are
much more outwardly expressed in the countries of Europe and Northern America.
4. Feminist movement and society. Among the contributions to this symposium and in the discussions within them, the different conditions of life
and human existence in the various regions of Earth were confronted with and were visible to a particular degree.
Rivca and Haim Gordon (Beer-Sheva, Israel) doubted the validity of the statement that feminism is an alternative view of the world. Every view of the
world has to be based on freedom for everybody and on ontological metaphysics. To her, a lot of the time feminism is connected to exclusivity and dogmatism, reflected amongst others, by the feminist critics of the
spiritual heritage of mankind who regard the patriarchal order as an expression of male thinking. But there is no separate truth for women. Views of the world are not possible in connection with one sex only,
because they have to be able to grasp the whole complexity of human existence and the whole abundance of human thinking, even if it was developed by males.
Freedom and social implications i.e. , were pondered over very deeply:
It is true that the question of the oppression of women was not put forward
to the necessary extent, but freedom is by no means a question of sex. Gender based attitudes towards the world should never be used merely for attaining political aims. On the other hand, political in-fighting
leads finally to passivity without a philosophy of life. It is necessary to enter the political arena, the most important stage for attaining freedom, so that a view of the world can develope which is full of ideas.
This facilitates decision-making in the fight for justice, equality and freedom in everyday life. Many feminists reject this however as being patriarchal. Mrs. Gordon criticized the lack of courage of many women to
take part in political activities which are often the basis to the claim of an alternative feminist philosophy of the world. To her, the political activities of women are the best instrument for overcoming the
oppression of women. It is important to use the political arena for fighting any oppression, including the oppression of women. Gordon named two sources for her reflections: philosophical studies, particularly the
philosophy of existence, and experiences in fighting for the rights of Palestinians in Gaza.
Similarly Sujata Dawale (Mumbai) concluded that the development and welfare of human society can only be established by the union of men and women in
conjunction with equality of the sexes. She said that women are the most exploited beings on earth and put the question as to why women put up with it. Women taking action in politics are very rare, although in
India, many regulations exist for allowing women to take political decisions. In the Indian parliament, 33% of the seats are reserved for women and in the state of Maharashtra special measures were taken for women
with regards to education, law of inheritance and property. 65% of urban labourers and 80% of rural labourers are women, exploited by husbands and employers. Impressively she described the situation of Indian women.
She tried to point out the causes for the permanent decline in the status of women during the history of human society and proposed to develop information-, education- and legal-measures to transform the situation.
Mona Abousenna (Egypt) emphasized a lack of information within feminism. The Feminist movement in Asian and African countries cannot lean on a
background of information as their counterparts in Europe. On the other hand, one can observe a strong movement against the access to information in the "west" . She laid emphasis on the
contribution made by the feminist movement in provoking the cultural system which is responsible for the various oppressions of women. She mentioned "culinary" reasons as one of the causes of limiting
female creativity to "kitchen and children": Women in hunter's and gatherer´s society had amongst other things, the task of protecting the fire and to doing the cooking. Now, as fire
no longer has to be protected, it is more easy to liberate women from this cramped situation where they are responsible for actively arranging their social environment.
In her contribution on feminism and culture, Pushpa Bhave (Mumbai) drew the attention to another aspect. Feminism brings our attention mainly to the
social area, the cultural needs. This means that we need to put the question as to how far the "western"-characterized feminist movement should be established in countries like India and to what extent
this is desirable. She concluded that India has to develop its own feminist movement, descended from its own culture. This depends upon critical analyse being made of the own historical tradition of women's position
in society . Emancipation in India has to start with the women being aware of their own position in society before discussion with the "western" feminist movement can start and characteristically,
integration achieved. On the one hand, the Indian doctrine of reincarnation has to be considered under the aspect of which birth as a woman is understood as punishment for bad karma (the effect of past actions). On the other hand there are many positive approaches for equality of women among the Indian reformers, in the thinking of Swami Vivekananda and Mahatma Gandhi. But she drew the attention to the oppression of women by women, mainly in the relations between mother-in-law and daughter-in-law. Bhave made clear in her lecture, that intercultural arguments are based on specific, cultural self-understanding which perhaps has only just started in many countries of Asia and Africa.
5. A high percentage of the Indian delegates who took part in the World Philosophers Meet had come to the
annual meeting of Indian Philosophic Congress. This union of Indian philosophers was founded in 1925 at the suggestion of S. Radhakrishnan (1888-1975), one of the most important Indian philosophers and statesmen
of independent India in our times. The Indian Philosophical Congress met every year in unique continuity, organized each year by a different university. It is not possible here to take a closer look at the
numerous contributions of discussion held in the usual section. In several lectures, the idea of the unity of the world was pointed out as based in the whole of the Indian philosophical tradition, i.e. the lecture
of Ramakant Sinari, Mumbai, who explained that, in the tradition of Indian mystics, the idea of a transcendental cosmo-centric order of the world (brahman) was brought to a synthesis with atman the anthropo-centric unity, both of which form a union from the ontological point of view since brahman,
the world and human consciousness were identified.
Ananda Reddy (Pondicherry) explained Sri Aurobindo´s view of the universe which is the objectivation of the Absolute: the Divine has released
the universe out of Himself to achieve the consciousness of Him-Self in the process of Being. Aim of this process is the gradual unity of the created with the creator. Earth is the material centre of this process
and its meaning exists in the manifestation of the secrets of the Divine as being descended from the Divine by involution, and going up to Him as evolution.
In the section of religion, Abdul Matin (Dhaka) answered, by means of exact investigations and statistic references on political, educational, cultural
and traditional areas, the question of the position of Islam in everyday life in Bangladesh and concluded that Islam is less significant as generally supposed .
In the context of ethics and social philosophy, Bhuvan Chandel (Chandigarh) talked about the idea of a just and secular society as presented by
Platon´s and Karl Marx´ models of society. M. Dragona-Monachou (Rethymnon, Greece) made a link with FISP´s 1991 symposium in Nairobi by pointing out the urgent need of universal ethics
to step up to post-modern orthodoxy, neo-pragmatism and ethical relativity. To her, these universal ethics have to be based on human rights.
Particular attention should be given to the symposium of science and philosophy
organized by ICP. Lively discussions occurred here on the relationship between philosophy and science, where the scientists who were present participated with great enthusiasm. Amongst other things, one point of the discussion was: "does philosophy merely pose questions, or if it is able to give answers, too?" Repeatedly the importance of philosophy for science was underlined.
Yash Pal, for many years chairman of the University Grants Commission and National Research professor (Delhi), talked on science and global
consciousness. For him, science is today able to answer questions which have been asked for centuries such as: " who am I, what is the meaning of life etc"., which are not based on religious
revelation. It makes deeper sense of leading back to our ancestors, even to the first original-cell ,even if we can only do this incompletely today.
The longevity of many species is not result a of confrontation, but from co-operation and symbiosis with other species.
This knowledge should
influence our personal and social behaviour. The language of life is written by few letters and this language is the same for all beings. This makes the miracle of variety of life even greater. In earlier times,
people lived isolated from each other in small groups. Nevertheless it is astonishing that the basic questions were posed everywhere in a similar way. This basis leaves us with the conclusion that the other is only
relatively different from ourselves. This effort leads to knowledge of oneself and stabilizes the inner-being. The capacity to feel comfortable in the midst of diversity, without giving up our own individuality can
rarely be found these days. By this Yash Pal underlined that cosmic or global consciousness does not mean giving up individual consciousness or self estimation, but includes granting this right to others, too.
The development of such an attitude is not only desirable but necessary for maintaining human existence and represents the climax of democracy; it may
enable us to make use of the work of science and technics without becoming a tool of our own tools (Thoreau). Yash Pal referred in this context, to Nehru´s claim of scientific temperance: a scientific
temperance will not automatically spread in every country which holds a lot of scienctific and technological knowledge. Concerning globalization he added critically, that a development arose through the developement
of modern transport- and communication-mediums, and the predominance of few industrial countries has brought the economical, social and cultural outline of all countries into line. The actual one-sided process of
globalization has created tension and distracts from global consciousness because it is based on the idea that the whole world is nothing but a market for goods, ideas and the life-style of a few countries. Modern
communication and educational systems too, are supporting this process. From the outside, the majority of countries is dominated by a few, within, a system of defence is going to be built in analogy to the immune
system of our biological organism. This leads to international tension and to an internal weakness of the countries involved, as a result of the over-dimensional defence system. It is true that defence systems
are needed but if they get too strong this leads to disease and destruction.
Therefore external influences contain a danger of destruction - directly, or by means of the aroused mechanisms of defence. But biological, as well as
social systems, develop symbiotic configurations or oppress selectively the reaction of defence. The periods of time needed for the disposition of society may be shorter than on the biological level, but in any
case, they are larger than those in which technology is changing. The second part of our century has faced us with challenges which are very different from all previous experiences. But they are nevertheless
managable. Finally, global consciousness is unavoidable as the only ethics for the future, which makes Yash Pal to an optimist in the long run, because we still have is a chance to overcome the problems.
T. V. Pillai (Pondicherry) expressed in his lecture, his belief in the unstoppable advance of knowledge, whereas Vijai R. Asrani (Mumbai) concluded
that because of the ambiguity of the enormous technological , scientific progress made in our century concerning matter and human body, it is necessary in 21st century, to research the human mind. He was linking
with traditional Indian ideas, particularly to Yoga, and did not exclude that de-coding the secrets of human mind may lead to a "theory of everything" and to the final search of science.
The molecular biologist P. Bhargava (Hyderabad) illustrating impressively his own special field, pointed out the responsibility of scientists for
maintaining peace and listed 21 points of how science can support this issue.
At the end of the symposium, a round-table discussion was held where the internationally known nuclear physicist E. C. G. Sudarshan (Austin, USA), Yash
Pal and Abdul Rahman (former president of International Council for Science Policy Studies) and a scientific historian participated.
6. During the symposium of FISP "Cultural Traditions and the Process of Secularisation",
it was made clear how, in different ways, appropriate to the varying, historical traditions, secularisation was interpreted. Despite this, all participants taking part, rejected religious fundamentalism.
Joanna Kucuradi (Ankara, general secretary of FISP) begann with the term of laicism, which was defined by her as a historical principle for the order
of public affairs, which had its origin in European Enlightenment but is relevant to other cultures, too. In conjunction with the aspect of modernisation, it includes equality of all citizens before the law and is
independent of their religious affiliation. In a secular state, all standards have to be derived from Human Rights and not from religious-cultural traditions. Therefore the state has to be liberated from religious
influences as conditio sine qua non.
M. Dragona-Monachou interpreted secularism as non-religious and not in the context of atheism or anti-religiosity.
To J. Mayer (St. Catharines, Kanada), secularism means according to "western" interpretation, the separation of church and state and was
developed from the Protestant claim for liberty of interpretation of biblical tradition, and as liberty of expression of the Christianity faith. Today, secularism in the west is understood above all, as a rejection
of all religions and their intrusion into the private-sphere. In comparison with this, in India, secularism is understood to be religious tolerance and respect for other beliefs. Mayer compared secularism as
rejection of religiosity, to secularism as a process which is needed when a strong orientation towards the next world enters into religion. In contrast to this, attention has to be given to this world again.
Secularism is based on the idea of immanence as a transcendence of the divine. Today secularism has the task of including religious doctrines and religious institutions in the solution of world-problems, and
contributing to fortifying a respect of life, justice and equality of human beings. But estimation of this world should not lead to a negation of the next world. Taking all of this into account,
secularisation was defined as a positive power whereas secularism, as a negative force because of its negation of reality of transcendence.
While Mayer claimed Indian spirituality radiated all over the world, S. S. Barlingay (Pune) approved of the liberation of the state from every form of
religious dogma and enlarged it to mean liberation of every dogma, by appealing to Nehru´s definition of secularism. Secularism means for Barlingay, giving no space to religion and determining
behaviour by the intellect only. Secularisation is a process wherein it is made clear for each man, that everything surrounding us belongs to this world only. Barlingay then turned towards the question of the origin
of religion, where he went into its gnoseological roots. There are not two worlds, the sacred and the profane, but only one world on which man reflects. The explanation of birth and death, in particular the
reflection on death leads to the idea of the next world. Our grasp of life is human, and the world man lives in is part of nature to which he returns when he dies. But the humanity may return to whence it came from,
as a consequence of the universal power, uncontrollable by man. This limitation should be realised: human life can only be carved in human world and humans should not bother about life after death in the next world.
All religions are rooted in questions of relations to the next world and to the universe, only ignorance has made them non-secular. It is one of the tasks of secularism to recognize the common essence of all
religions, and it is task of secularisation to bring this to realization. For Barlingay, it is very important that historians and philosophers support this process.
Marietta Stepaniants (Moskau) pointed out, that a secular society is free of every interconnection with a particular religious dogma but attends to the
respect of religious values. She then turned to mysticism. A secular community allows more room for mystical faith because it grants the freedom of a individual relationship with the divine. Mysticism on the other
hand, contains a large potential for supporting peaceful co-existence of humans and cultural dialogue, because it is opposed to every kind of religious dogmatism and fundamentalism. It fortifies the belief in
human betterment, and teaches the unitification of humans too, by underlining the unity of all being in the divine. Negation of national arrogance is derived from this, too.
As a summary, it was said on this symposium, that it is necessary in the face of present tendency, to turn away from secularism, and that philosophers
should occupy themselves more in future with the relationship between cultural traditions and secularism, and develop ethical positions which bring forward the process of secularisation.
7. The frame of the Parliaments of Religion
was very large one. Objective presentations of particular religions stood beside religious confessions. Tanaji Acharya (London) maintained that dharma, translated in India as "religion", is something universal, humanistic and scientific and therefore highly superior to religion. In another contribution, Sahaja Yoga was praised as the sole means of achieving world peace: the inner transformation of mankind through the integration of religions, and the merging of religion and science is vitally important for world peace. Vijay Kumar, an engineer from Delhi, described the vision of God he had on 3rd august 1993 at 2.15 a.m. in a scientifically, serious manner. Thanks to the mental power he was given on this occasion, he contacts God regularly by through different media and reports on it via the Internet.
8. Final remarks
As regards content, the conference was overwhelming.
168 summaries of lectures (without symposia, special lectures and events in the plenum) were
submitted to the organizers before the opening of the meeting. Great stress was laid in all discussions on questions of peace, environment and harmony.
Problem areas, which are rarely discussed in Europe, such as the humanity-threatening arsenal of nuclear weapons, or social and psychical causes of
tensions and conflicts, were discussed there from the point of view of different areas of science (in direct exchange with outstanding personalities of religious life).
Repeatedly, solutions were presented to actual, existential, humanity-threatening problems:encouraging mutual tolerance by means of intercultural
exchange (an idea which has no difficulties in gaining ground in India because of the capacity to synthesize Hinduism with its acceptance of most different religious ideas); inner tranquillity of the individual as
pre-requisite for peaceful co-existence with others and for peace between nations; getting over egoism, greed, the claim to privileges; the necessity of working out global ethics and spreading the results; excluding
the oppression of man, by man by disregarding the laws of nature. Again and again the change of life-style was seen to be a must.
Global consciousness, respectively universal ethics, were not understood as an uniform world-religion but as a universal, action-oriented list of
values, which aims to behave respectfully towards nature and to live in equality with each other, including subjective individuality and religious pluralism. The transformation of the inner-self of the individual
was described as a path leading to this goal: if one lives in peace with one-self, peace with others will follow from this. But on this issue, doubts seem reasonable because inner- and outer-peace beget each other,
and inner-harmony and balance alone seem rarely sufficient to overcome social injustice on the national and international level.
Frequent hints at transcendentalism were found in the contributions of speakers of different religious movements, but without implicating direct
religiousity. The search for truth, turning our sights to the higher-self in each of us, were connected to the awareness of individual responsibility and a humble attitude towards nature. Most of the speakers were
aware of the difficulties in achieving these aims, but since visions are needed for human activities, their mentioning of these facts was not in vain.
Important accents, referring to reality, were already laid on the opening ceremony by carrying the flags of all countries on earth in alphabetical
order - starting with Afghanistan and ending with Zaire - while praying for peace in that country.
The organisers succeeded in getting together knowledgeable and competent scientists from all over the world to exchange very diverse questions. The
atmosphere of the conference was characterized by a great openess. It is worthwhile pointing out the excellent organization of the conference, particularly in the face of its diversity and size. The delegates were
looked after in an exemplary manner, including meals from breakfast to dinner. Technical staff, students and teachers of MIT achieved the trouble-free running of the event. It can be taken for granted that as with
all conferences in India, each day finished with a cultural programme of the highest quality, and in the big assembly tent every evening, the inhabitants of Pune were informed in Marathi of the highlights of the
day. The whole conference was shaped by the enormous engagement of the organizers who knew to fill many people with enthusiasm for their ideas, and to win their co-operation. Naturally, it is of great importance
here that Jnaneshwara was one of the founders of the Warkari pilgrim movement, which is an important part of Hindu religious life in Maharashtra.
The conference ended with a ceremony of laying the foundations of the Peace University in Alandi, assisted by an official representative of UNESCO who
had travelled to Pune for the end of the conference.
As a rule, conferences are short-lived in their consequences. They bring an enlargement of knowledge - in this case particularly for the authors of
this report on the amount of history of medieval and contemporary Indian philosophy - but resolutions, taken as a result of discussions, are rarely carried out. The organizers of World Philosophers Meet however,
have written to all delegates in the mean time and have asked for proposals as to how to continue the work, and to form the Peace University, so consequences, far greater than the conference, may come into effect.
top
|
