By P.R. Sarkar
(10 December 1987, Calcutta) – Human society is one and indivisible. But today, due to superstition, dogmatism narrow-mindedness, separatism and all kinds of “isms” human society is splitting into numerous parts. Against this background, in order to build the human society it is necessary to adopt the path of synthesis, which originates from the psychology of service and welfare. While attempting to build an ideal society, some people rightly adopt the path of synthesis, and other people wrongly adopt the path of analysis, either unknowingly or out of some selfish motive. But it is necessary to mention that although through the path of analysis one’s self-interest may be served, and even the group interest may be temporarily served, but the path of analysis cannot be conducive to human welfare on a permanent and comprehensive basis. It should be clearly understood that the path of synthesis is absolutely necessary for the collective welfare of human society.
Let us examine what synthesis and analysis mean. The true spirit of synthesis lies in establishing unity in diversity on the basis of a universal ideology – in uniting many diverse parts into a homogeneous whole. On the other hand, the very effort to split the one and indivisible whole into many component parts is the path of analysis.
The sociologists are well aware of the fact that there are apparent differences amongst human beings due to environmental, physiological, geographical and personal (depending on one’s reactive momenta) differences. I say “apparent” differences because though these differences are based on relative factors, essentially human society is one and indivisible. Now, if someone takes advantage of these apparent differences and wants to divide the otherwise indivisible human society, it should be said that such a person has adopted the path of analysis. This sort of psychology is anti-human. Human welfare can never be achieved by this path.
Let us take an example. Suppose a certain man, say Ram Babu, has two sons – Jadu and Madhu. It may be possible that due to environmental, personal and other reasons, one son may be educated and another uneducated. But apart from this question of education, there is a common bond between them – they are the sons of the same father. If someone takes advantage of the apparent differences arising from environmental factors, and wants to create a rift between the two, it means that he or she has adopted the path of analysis. But if one ignores these apparent differences and considers them as the sons of Ram Babu, that will be the path of synthesis. This sort of analytical approach, which tends to divide one into many, can never lead to any lasting or permanent welfare because this analytical approach, which tends to divide one into many, can never lead to any lasting or permanent welfare because it ultimately leads to separatist tendencies. These, in their turn, end in the destruction and annihilation of a homogeneous unit. So those who want to promote human welfare should reject the path of analysis and wholeheartedly adopt the path of synthesis. Otherwise, they will ruin the human society.
You might have noticed that many political parties try to maintain their existence by propagating the separatist tendencies amongst differing human groups. Those who do this very often brand other political parties as separatist. Obviously, such an effort on their part is intended to ensure their own existence and to hoodwink the unwary public. Common people, because of the wilful machinations of such political forces, do not understand who the real separatists are. In such cases group interests become more important than the collective welfare of humanity. Thinking of their narrow group or party interests, they curtail the legitimate social, economic and political rights of others, and thus become a great obstacle to the all-round growth of humanity.
I have said many times in the past that no one in this world is to be neglected. But while doing something activated by group interest, if some people are neglected or their development is obstructed, should this be tolerated? No. This, the path of analysis should be discouraged by all means, while the path of synthesis has to be adopted in all sincerity. Only the path of synthesis inspires many entities to move ahead in unison.
In Bengal, out of group or party interest numerous groups are being created in the one Bengali race by taking advantage of the minor variations of caste, community and economic position. This sort of analytical outlook – which divides one race into many groups out of self-interest – is highly detrimental. Instead of promoting unity and prosperity among the Bengalees, the path of analysis is creating further divisions among them. Those who truly have the collective interest of Bengal in their minds will have to adopt block-level planning. Simultaneously, the people must be united on one platform through the synthetic approach.
So, we notice that in the sphere of society building, there are two distinct psychologies. One is service psychology, which inspires people to promote collective interest. The second is group psychology, which only tries to promote the limited interest of a small group. Those who are guided by service psychology do not like to separate politics from morality. Their thoughts and ideas remain far above narrow group interests. On the other hand, those who are guided by group psychology want to establish the authority of their group and impose their interests on others. This leads to interpersonal and inter-group conflict. Only the synthetic approach leads to unity and cohesion amongst numerous individuals and groups. The followers of the analytical path often become vocal revolutionaries, and become extremely active to establish their raj (kingdom) entirely without niiti (morality). Thus out of these two distinct types of psychology two social outlooks arise: those who are guided by service psychology have a synthesis outlook, and those who are guided by narrow group interest or self-interest adopt an analytic outlook.
Those guided by group psychology are like ravenous tigers. Of all the different types of flesh, human flesh is said to be the most delicious. That’s why the tiger that has once tasted human flesh will raid a village if it cannot get human flesh in the jungles. If it happens to see human beings nearby, it will immediately attack them without bothering about domestic cattle. Where the analytical approach is ingrained in people’s social psychology, separatist tendencies flow through their bones, blood and marrow. Such people become extremely avaricious for human flesh. That’s why those who have rejected the path of synthesis and are guided by group psychology and have accepted separatism as a political creed, are lying in ambush to catch any group for their blood. Beating the drum made from the skin of their victims, they announce to the world that they have annihilated the separatist elements.
Those of you who ardently believe in PROUT should be vigilant in this regard. You should remember it is not the barrel of a gun but the spiritual force of human beings that is the real source of power. Human beings want selfless service. PROUT is dedicated to the service and welfare of one and all. You should immediately build a one and indivisible human society without further delay by popularizing PROUT.
The spirit of service comes from the spirit of serving the Supra-Mental Entity. Where the spirit of serving the Supra-Mental Entity is lacking, there cannot be any service spirit in any emanation or any manifestation of creation. So pro-spiritual psychology is essential for a happy and integrated social order.
From A Few Problems Solved Part 8
Copyright Ananda Marga Publications 2012