Sreegopal Basumallik Fellowship Lectures for 1927. Introduction to Vedanta Philosophy

And, for aught we know, the Change or "disturbance", if we so call it, need not be confined to the bounds of the so-called phy- sical universe only ; for, afterall, the universe, the cosmic system, may be one, and the bounds that one commonly assigns bet- ween the physical and the spiritual, between the spiritual and the biological may be only practical, "pragmatic", and, to some extent, arbitrary [...] and it is vain and futile to seek to derive one class by the (Atter; just as colour is not sound, Dint rice rrrsts, so thought is not the object of thought —fsse is not perrepi ( to take the negation of the famous Berkeley-an dictum)` and the question of the relative value of thing and thought. [...] Now, we may take it that in the universe of the plain man —who as we meet him has, no doubt, tasted the fruit of the forbidden tree, and is no longer plain in the pristine sense— the question we asked ourselves at the outset of the present lecture is not too "ethereal" to find a place. [...] For example, in empirical psychology, consciousness may be adopted as a fundamental concept ; or in physiological psychology the following statement by Perry may especially hold : "Where the motion of the physical sciences is the determining one, and this is very commonly the case, the world gets itself divided into the physical and the psychological realms, the former being employed as the standa [...] Instead of the stuff' being, like water of the two ►ses the product of mind and matter, it is- the latter that are evolved by the agency or activity of the mother stun: This, therefore, is the undefined fundamen- tal in relation to both mind and matter.