All pods AUDIO · All pods TEXT

Welcome to episode twelve of Prout Consciousness where we will be looking at the second fundamental principle of the Progressive Utilisation Theory, which reads: “There should be maximum utilisation and rational distribution of all mundane, supramundane and spiritual potentialities of the universe”.

Earlier in the series, it was discussed that we human beings carry behavioural patterns weaved from very long evolutionary threads. Such hereditary trends and tendencies may serve us well in our search for securing stability and generating renewed progress but may also lead to traditionalism and the formation of barriers between people that eventually allow for disparities and conflict to set in. Take for instance racism. Various petty conflicts between groups of humans led to the rise and establishment of racism. Racism became a dogma in a line with numerous religious, social, political, economic and other dogmas. Environment, culture and even educational and other social institutions have been main conduits of racism and other dogmas.

Dogmas are ideas stating: “This is the end of thought, there is no further truth.” Quite often the limitations that dogmas want to impose are backed up by taboos and even threats, like: “If you think otherwise you are a sinner deserving to be burnt at the stake.” It happened to Giordano Bruno in the year 1600 in Roma when he refused to give in to the dictatorship of the dogmatic Church. In fact, we are all subjected to various dogmas imposed on us by social and other conventions. For instance, a recent economic dogma says that nobody should interfere with the right to unlimited private property. Similarly, a socio-economic dogma dictates that some people are classified as refugees and others as permanent citizens, and to this effect visa is required to travel on this planet. Prout does not accept dogma. Instead it promotes universalism seeking the optimum synergy of needs and potentialities resulting in progressive dynamics and not stagnancy and retardation. For the maximum utilisation and rational distribution of all types of wealth it is necessary to identify and stamp out dogmas in any area of human concern and replace them with liberating ideas that support all living beings in their effort to progress and attain fullness of life.

How can truly liberating ideas be realised in a world of limitations? In the preceding episode, it was discussed that the physical world is defined by its limitations and that the reality of the limited physical is termed crude. One feature of the physically crude is that it is communicated to us via the sensory—by sound, touch, form, taste and smell. All mundane wealth are crude and register via our physical senses. Mundane means worldly, of the physical world. Beyond that, whatever we find in nature that is subtler and more expansive than the mundane, Prout terms it supramundane. Dewdrops on a plant leaf reflecting sunlight, the delights of a forest walk, the majesty of a large mountain, the grace of birds in flight against gloriously lit skies and a rainbow’s vibrant wonder are all of supramundane nature.

The supramundane is more of a subjective experience than objective fact. Several persons may watch those birds taking flight; one of them may appreciate the science of their flying formation, another may wonder at the poetry of their white plumage ascending against dark ominous clouds, a third spectator may rejoice in the birds’ ecological presence, and so on. The excitement of the emergence of initial metaphysical ideas of constructing a flying machine upon seeing those birds in flight would be of supramundane nature, too. To recurring passengers, being transported by an aircraft may register as a mundane affair but the very first experience of it would appear supramundane to most. Being of such subjective subtle nature, the supramundane stand out and is perhaps akin to what the American psychologist scientist Abraham Maslow termed as human peak experience. The specialty of the supramundane is its link with fundamental spiritual existence, and the various ways it keeps inspiring the arts, the sciences and the human effort itself.

The third main sphere of Prout’s socioeconomics is the spiritual. It is totally subjective and absolute, beyond the relativities of time, place and person. Totally subjective means that no objective factor comes into it. The spiritual is beyond any socioeconomic or other factor such as sex, the ethnic, physical and psychic capacities, etc. It is our inherent oneness and greatness, our belonging beyond time and place, one and the same for all. The border area between the supramundane and the spiritual is termed as psycho-spiritual. It is the key area of human spiritual effort to which other righteous, uplifting and liberating efforts are related, among them our theory of progressive utilisation.

What exactly is the spiritual then? This Latin word pertains to an ancient idea of a universal breath—spirit—of fundamental or divine existence expressing itself while flowing endlessly throughout the creation from eternity to eternity. Modern science defines it as pure consciousness of which all of creation is manifested. Numerous words are used to describe its nature: eternal, boundless, limitless, blissful, the first cause and many more. This ultimate reality is all-pervading, ever-present, true for all of us and beyond any personal, spatial and temporal differences.

While some occupy mainly one or at the most two of these main spheres of existence, all of us have it in us to progress in all three of them. And even those of us who live mostly in, say, the physical world, may nurture dreams and desires of expanding our existence into the psychic and the spiritual. “In the living being there is a thirst for limitlessness,” commented the propounder of Prout, Shrii Prabhat Ranjan Sarkar. The search of living beings for fulfilment goes on in all three spheres of existence.

It may be asked, how would the spiritual, which is largely abstract to most of us, be part of socioeconomics? The old Greek word οικονομία [eikonomίa] means “household management”. So what kind of household is Prout that includes the spiritual? Well, the concept of spiritual habitat is rather ancient actually. The great master and early propounder of human society and culture, Sadashiva, lived thousands of years ago in India. He opined that “Cosmic consciousness is our father, the cosmic force of creation is our mother, and the threefold physical, psychic and spiritual world is our homeland.” Prout’s socioeconomics is in agreement. The human search for proper management of the vast, diverse household of all living beings goes beyond the isolated physical or psychic to embrace the spiritual and all of that threefold existence.

Does Prout then recognise those subtle and sublime potentialities because they are of real benefit to physical socioeconomics, or is Prout part of some sect that glorifies the supramundane and the spiritual perhaps at the expense of mundane life and pleasures?

Obviously, the reality projected by a system reflects on the values of that system. Capitalism is driven by individual enterprise, socialism by visions of equality. So, what is it that makes Prout tick? The core values of Proutist socioeconomics are neither particularly personal or social. They view both self and society—individuality and collectivity—through the fourfold lens of expansion, flow, service and attainment:

• Expansion means expanding one’s individual and collective being. Both for the primitive and the sophisticated expansion of mental and intuitional faculties is fundamental to development and success.
• Flow involves practical life and its continuous adjustment with variety and change; to function well and purposefully in a diverse and ever-changing world. For its continuous sustenance, one’s life flow requires a purpose both here and now and beyond; every person and society society should have both short-term, medium-term and also long-term goals to keep one’s motivation and will power flowing.
• Service means the realisation of subtler individual and collective potentialities, such as compassion, selflessness, conscience and presence. Service can be performed in all spheres of life—at work, at home and in society—and in any area of concern—security, economy, education and so on. 
• Attainment is the common factor of all human efforts, the universal multiple and supreme goal of life. To attain the sum of all progress is the desire and wish of all and the natural outcome of a life lived well. 

Humans beings are eager to expand their existence, be in flow, render service and attain greatness. With the increasing realisation of the subtle and sublime, people would no longer run after physical resources mostly but first of all use their world wisely in order to realise all of it. Episode 14 discusses the need for adjusting human activity and environmental resources properly.

Here we may simply note that Prout does not claim or explain the supramundane and the spiritual. Other philosophies and practices do that. What Prout does is to enable all to progress in those spheres, too, to develop and move steadily not only in the physical world but towards still more comprehensive fulfilment. The supramundane and spiritual keep feeding that process; they provide subtler and sublime sustenance and nourishment outside of the limited physical. Reciprocally, when properly managed the physical world provides the basis for further subtle and sublime progress that the physical itself cannot provide. Both the crude and what lies beyond it are mutual and integral to the all-round progress of living beings.

Without the subtle and sublime, the isolated crude soon enough becomes a dismal affair. Like food without salt, an army devoid of discipline, intellectuals with no sense of inquiry and commerce bankrupted of quality goods and services, life deprived of the subtle psychic and sublime spiritual is pointless. The meaning of life is continuous progress towards still greater attainment of all that life has to offer, and therefore it is impossible and inhuman to remain caught in the bondage of something limited. The subtle and sublime certainly come to play significant roles wherever learning, training, research, conceptualisation, morality, creativity, aesthetics, civilisation and culture continue to enrich human life. 

This much about Prout’s maximum utilisation. Now we turn to examine the theory’s concept of rational distribution of wealth. First, let us remind ourselves that various systems have their particular ways of distributing wealth and resources. Most people are somehow familiar with the distribution models of capitalism and socialism. The way of capitalism is by market speculation; goods and services are distributed at prices set to generate a maximum of owner profit, and those prices fluctuate according to notions of supply and demand within capitalism’s spectrum of private economic exploitation. Socialism, on the other hand, has economic equality as its delusory ideal. But as already discussed, the physical and psychic worlds offer no equality. Everything is different there, no two things or ideas are exactly alike. Therefore, instead of saying that everybody are entitled to an equal share, Prout states that everybody are equally valuable and should be treated as different members of the same universal family. Equality has nothing to do with the physical and psychic worlds of eternal variation and diversity, to which the socioeconomics of Prout relates. Equality is a spiritual truth and not a physical or psychic factor, and wealth should therefore be distributed rationally so as to provide uniquely for each one of us. Prout’s model of rational distribution is as follows:

• First, ensure that everyone is guaranteed the minimum requirements of life. The reason why Prout deems it rational to furnish all with life’s minimum necessities is that the universal potentiality of infinite progress is found in all. All of our humanness—our compassion, conscience and vision—inform us about this need to set all on the path of true progress.
• Second, as the income of people increases, the reach of their minimum requirements should also increase so that the gap between the affluent and the common people is bridged.
• Third, special amenities should be provided to meritorious persons to enable them to render greater service to society. Prout advises to allocate special wealth for those with special qualities, and such provision of special amenities should serve the common interest and not only benefit a chosen few.
• Four, besides increasing the special amenities of meritorious people, a maximum of amenities should be made available to common people as well. There will still be a gap between the maximum amenities of the common people and those particular to the meritorious but there should be constant efforts to reduce this gap.

Amenities are things that improve the quality of life. They are not equivalent to salary raises and promotions. The word amenity means “to fulfil the desire” and “to make the position easy”. Let’s say you are a school teacher with too much to do and too little time to prepare for class. If the institution allows you to prepare properly, and not only have a packed teaching schedule that fills up all of your work time, it would probably help a lot. This is a basic need and not an amenity. Whereas if you are provided with in-service training, lunch, easy communication to and fro work and other conveniences then we are talking amenities. Whatever satisfies our physical and psychic longings in addition to ensuring life’s basic necessities are amenities. Being a practical theory, Prout seeks the constant increase of socioeconomic dynamics by setting off various forms of amenities against life’s minimum necessities and takes the extraordinary social value of the output of the meritorious into account as well. Shrii Sarkar offered a few observations:

Previously, people used to dig a well to get drinking water, and then they carried the drinking water to their houses. Later, water tanks were constructed, and these days drinking water comes through pipes. In this way, the amenities of life have increased and life has become easier. The aim to get water is the same but the system of getting it has become more effortless and more convenient. Another example: Suppose school children receive the minimum requirements of life. If they are provided with free snacks, this amenity will be over and above the minimum requirements. Again, in most trains there are first and second class compartments. In first class, special facilities are standard, and if free tea and coffee are made available in the second class compartments it will be considered an amenity.

A great many people experience considerable stress and strain, and should be freed from this tension. For example, rural people worry about their crops. If rains are late or altogether fail, production will suffer; if the climate is too hot or too cold, seasonal crops will be adversely affected. People should be freed from all these stresses and strains. This can be achieved through the provision of super-natural amenities which can be developed artificially through science and technology. For example, improved agricultural techniques and the construction of small-scale dams to conserve water and improve irrigation can help relieve poor rural people of stresses and strains. So far, Shrii Sarkar on amenities.

Just now we discussed the subtle and sublime. Prout is not only a model of universal employment, minimum requirements, maximum amenities for all and special amenities for the meritorious. It also envisions a time when the struggle for daily subsistence will be much less taxing than at present and peopleʼs lives will be increasingly easier and more enjoyable. In this perspective, both amenities asked for and not asked for will play a role, Shrii Sarkar suggested. Amenities that relate to human instincts and desires are amenities asked for. For example, if the residents of a neighbourhood or a village decide that they want to repair their main road it would be an amenity asked for. But if some villagers suggest to upgrade the children’s playground, or, say, beautify their locality in particular ways, then some would perhaps not immediately understand its value until they experience it. Another example: Say there is a particular show rumoured to be really wonderful and otherworldly. Your employer offer all employees free tickets to the show, which you enjoy to such extent that it awakens an entirely new interest and inspiration in you, accompanied by feelings and visions you hardly knew existed. Such a subtle amenity, whose value is understood only after it has emerged as reality, would be an amenity not asked for. As human beings and their society advances, supramundane and psycho-spiritual amenities not asked for will contribute increasingly to directing individual and collective energies in still more profound and rewarding ways. 

Among other things, this series offers that Prout promotes limits to private wealth accumulation and large-scale distribution of wealth towards the minimum necessities of all. Does this make it a form of socialism? No, not if socialism means “society for the society’s sake” and a system where all members of society are placed on equal economic footing. There is no “from each according to their ability, to each according to their needs” in Prout. Instead, there is progress for all; everybody has to put in effort and develop, there is a call for maximum utilisation of one’s potentialities. This has led some to brand Prout as progressive socialism with emphasis on the concerted effort for all-round progress. However, I prefer not to use the term socialism but rather “progressive social order”. At any rate Prout is not society for society’s sake but society for the sake of individual and collective progress.

Evidently, Prout stands for a proper social order characterised by upright morality, universal participation and the common goal of all-round progress and not only some sort of well-being for some. As for the rest, Prout’s social ideals has nothing to do with mixed economy, the welfare state, democratic socialism or materialist socialism, for that matter.

We conclude this episode with observations by Prout’s propounder. When introducing the principle of maximum utilisation and rational distribution for the first time in 1959, Shrii Sarkar stated:

“The minimum requirements of every person are the same, but diversity is also the nature of creation. Special amenities should therefore be provided, so that diversity in skill and intelligence is fully utilised and talent is encouraged to contribute its best for human development. It will therefore be necessary to make provision for special emoluments, which can cater for special amenities of life according to the age and times. But at the same time there should be constant effort to reduce the gap between the amount of special emoluments and the bare minimum requirements of the average individual. The guaranteed supply of minimum requirements must be liberalised by increasing the provision of special amenities pertaining to the age and also simultaneously bringing about a decrease in the provision of special emoluments given to the few.”

In 1961, Shrii Sarkar further stated:

“The wealth and resources available in the crude, subtle and causal worlds should be developed for the welfare of all people. All elemental resources – the solid, the liquid, the luminous, the aerial and the ethereal – should be fully utilised. This endeavour will ensure the maximum development of the universe. … There should be rational distribution of the accumulated wealth of humanity. In other words, apart from meeting the indispensable minimum necessities of all, the necessities of meritorious people and those with special requirements must also be met.”

In this episode of Prout Consciousness we have examined the second fundamental principle of Prout: “There should be maximum utilisation and rational distribution of all mundane, supramundane and spiritual potentialities of the universe.” Episode 13 explores Prout’s third principle and its call for maximum utilisation of individual and collective potentialities. That is all for this episode, thank you and goodbye for now.