From my early boyhood I was strongly attracted to astronomy and nuclear sciences; it was a search for truth. As a result, I very soon rejected the idea of Christianity. Today I understand that the deeper scientists go into the matter, the more they realize that they are thrown back on themselves, acknowledging that it is man who determines the cosmos to appear according to his own consciousness. That reminds me of what I understand you to be constantly saying.
Although these scientists realize that the earth clock shows two minutes to twelve, and although, as scientists, they should not have prejudices, your vision of the new man does not seem to appeal to them. Do they belong to the same category as politicians? Science is so excitingly interesting, but on the other hand I found that it does not transform at all. What is it good for? Beloved Master, am I wasting my time with it? When I see you laughing I melt with joy.
Satyam Bhairava, the question you have asked implies many questions. First, are the scientists also of the same category as politicians? In a way, yes. The politician is one whose whole desire is to have power; hence anybody whose desire is to have power, particularly over others – they may be human beings or material objects, it makes no difference…. The politician is struggling to have power over people, the scientist is struggling to have power over matter; but the desire is the same, and the mind is the same. So, in one way, they both are in the same boat. But there are many other aspects in which science is totally different from politics.
Politics enslaves living people; hence it is more violent. Science tries to conquer matter; hence it is not a violent search. But science has grown to such complexity that now it is not possible for individual scientists to work on their own; they need immense support from politicians. Their research projects are so expensive that only governments of very rich nations can afford them. So the scientist unknowingly has fallen a victim to the hands of the politicians.
Now the scientist works as a servant to nationalism, to communism, to fascism, to capitalism. He is no more an independent seeker; he is part of a certain political ideology. He works and discovers but he has no control over his own discoveries; the control is in the hands of the politicians. They decide in which direction he should work; otherwise they will not financially support any other kind of project – and their only project is war. So thousands of scientists of immense intelligence, talent and genius have become just slaves of a political mechanism which exploits their intelligence in the service of war and death.
Science can be of great importance if two things are added to it: one is that it should not only be an objective search, it should also open the subjective doors of consciousness. The scientist should not go on working only on objects. He has to work upon the scientist himself.
Up to now the scientist has been denying his own consciousness. It is such an absurd attitude, so illogical and so unscientific, that it brings scientists closer to the so-called, superstitious religions: they believe blindly in a God they know nothing about, and the scientist goes on disbelieving in himself.
The superstition is enormous, unbelievable. If there is nobody inside you, if there is no consciousness in you, then who is going to discover the mysteries and secrets of matter, nature, and life? At this point, science has been behaving in an old superstitious way; it has been imitating religions.