Ordinarily we think that a blind man lives in darkness. No, there is no darkness for a blind man. Darkness is as much a perception of the eyes as the light. You cannot say to a blind man that light is opposite to darkness because that, too, will be unintelligible to him. A blind man can know light only by becoming able to see. Thinking cannot become seeing.
In reference to this, one thing must be said. In India we have called philosophy darshan. Darshan means seeing. We have not called philosophy thinking; we have called it seeing. In Europe the term philosophy carries another connotation. Philosophy means love of knowing, love of thinking. There is no parallel term in Western languages for darshan.
A new term has been coined by Herman Hesse. The term is appealing. The new term is philosia: the love of seeing. Sia means to see. Philo means love, and sophy means thinking. So philosophy means love of thinking. We have no term in India for it. We cannot translate the word philosophy into any Indian language. Our term is darshan. It means seeing, not thinking, but seeing.
Seeing comes not through the mind, but at the moment the mind is annihilated, the moment the mind is not, the moment the mind ceases. Every type of seeing – either of science or of philosophy or of religion – is an outcome of the state of no-mind.
We have known the example of Archimedes. He was thinking and thinking, and came to no conclusion. Then he was lying in his bathtub. Suddenly, something was seen. He ran out of his house naked. He had seen something, and he ran into the street crying, “Eureka, eureka! I’ve found it, I’ve found it! I’ve achieved!”
If you ask an Einstein or a Picasso or a Hesse, they too will say that something has been seen; whether in poetry or in painting or in scientific discovery, something is seen. And the moment of seeing is not the moment of brooding, the moment of seeing is not the moment of logical thinking. Logical thinking is held in abeyance. The logical mind is not working, and suddenly, something overpowers you, something comes to you – or you go somewhere, somewhere beyond the human limits. Then you know; knowing is there.
So do not create dichotomies. First you create dichotomies, then you create problems, then you go on solving them. And then of course, as a logical consequence, theologies are created and there are theologians, teachers, professors, gurus, and the whole nonsense, the whole nuisance. So to me, there is no problem. The problem itself is false.
You said that God is the creative process. Then why are things created? What is the purpose of creation, or is it something that just exists?
If God exists as a person then the question why becomes relevant. If God is a person then we can ask, “Why have you created the word?” But God is not a person; God is a process. You cannot ask the process, “Why do you exist?”