The word prama' is derived as pra-ma' + d'a + t'a. The meaning of the root-verb ma' is to measure, to fathom. So the etymological meaning of prama is balance. In English the two words equilibrium and equipoise are used in this sense. But there is some practical difference between these two words. Equilibrium is used in the sense of balance in physical strength and equipoise is used in the sense of balance in weight. Suppose there is a tug-of-war between two parties. If both the parties are equally strong, no party is able to pull the other party towards itself, i.e. there is a physical equilibrium between the two parties. Take another case. Suppose there is a one-kilo weight on one side of a scale and on the other side there is one kilo of eggplant. As there is equality of weight on both sides, the scale is evenly balanced. This balanced state in weight is called equipoise. Equilibrium and equipoise are collectively known as prama'.
Just as equilibrium and equipoise – prama' – is indispensable in individual life, it is equally true in collective life as well. The superiority or excellence of the social structure or the culture and civilization of a community of people is derived by the degree of pramá which that community attains in its individual and collective life. It is somewhat strange that although the human beings had come onto the earth about a million years ago and although the human civilization had started about fifteen thousand years ago from now, they could not bring about perfect balance or prama' in the three spheres of individual and collective life. What is more strange is this, that they did not even feel the necessity of establishing prama' in individual and collective life.
For instance, though the western world has made some material progress and tried to bring a certain degree of pramá in the physical sphere, they did not make any sincere effort to establish prama' in the spiritual sphere nor are they doing the same even today. Of course, they made some effort to bring prama' in the psychic sphere by bringing about some development in the intellectual sphere. India is the only country in the world where at least some attempt was made to introduce prama' in the spiritual sphere but it did not reach the state of perfection. Like the West, India also made some attempt to establish prama' in the psychic sphere. But that attempt was not remarkably successful.
If we analyze the history of different communities of people of the world, we notice that despite the tremendous physical, psychic and spiritual potentialities in them the opportunity was not utilized for the establishment of prama' in individual and collective life. This was due to their defective way of life, their dogmas, their defective ideas and practices and the faulty social and economic system. They could not strengthen the human society by developing different branches of knowledge, its culture and civilization, its intellectual and spiritual advancement. In the absence of prama' they could not contribute to human society to the extent they could in developing different branches of human knowledge, in uplifting the standard of culture and civilization, and raising the level of intellect and intuition. [from Prout in a nutshell - 9, February 1987, Calcutta]
Posted by proutist-universal on April 4, 2006 11:35 AM | TrackBack
|
"In economic life there is extreme inequality and exploitation. Although colonialism no longer exists openly in the political and economic sphere, still it persists indirectly, and this should not be tolerated... In this respect you should remember that in economic life, we will have to guarantee the minimum requirements of life to one and all... There cannot be any sort of adjustment as far as this point is concerned. The minimum purchasing requirement must be guaranteed to all. Today these fundamental essentialities are not being guaranteed. Rather, people are being guided by deceptive economic ideas like outdated Marxism, which has proven ineffective in practical life and has not been successfully implemented in any corner of the world. Why do people still believe in such a theory, which has never been proved successful? The time has come for people to make a proper assessment of whether they are being misguided or not." |
|
"Human beings have still not been able to form a human society, and have still not learned to move with the spirit of a pilgrim. Although many small groups, motivated by self-interest, work together in particular situations, not even a small fraction of their work is done with a broader social motive. By strict definition, shall we have to declare that each small family unit is a society in itself? If going ahead in mutual adjustment only out of narrow self-interest or momentary self-seeking is called society, then in such a society, no provision can be made for the disabled, the diseased or the helpless, because in most cases nobody can benefit from them in any way... in that case there always remains the possibility of some people getting isolated from the collective. All human beings must attach themselves to others by the common bond of love and march forward hand in hand; then only will I proclaim it a society." |