Bipolarity and Its Consequences for Evolution

By Henk Sundara de Weijer

(This article is a summary of a series of seven lectures given by the author at CNS Sweden)

INTRODUCTION

Religion, as well as science, considers the universe as the unfoldment in one single event, resting upon one single primal element. Religion calls this element God, for science it is Energy. In the following text I have tried to uncover a different path. The Indian philosopher Shrii P.R. Sarkar describes the nature of Nature as a balance between the two Macro-poles of Consciousness and Energy. If his idea is correct evolution might have unfolded in a decentralized manner, so down-up, and initiated as well as guided by creative, tiny little bipolar micro-agents (microvita). Randomness, that evolutionists consider to be the main catalyzing agent for the speed of evolution, will be replaced by interaction of the attraction of the two Macro-poles of Nature and the activity of the creative micro-poles. The consequences of such a new approach are far reaching.

BIPOLARITY

Whether young or old, we all have been taught a number of basic skills. Once we learned how to cut, peel and eat an apple, without cutting our fingers too often. This and other basic skills have become an intrinsic part of us. Now we don’t think any longer how to carefully and precisely perform each detail; it has become, implicit silent knowledge. The explicit knowledge of our teacher has been transformed into our individual implicit knowledge. Where our implicit knowledge ends, we don’t know, but it ends somewhere. We may know how to breathe, but we don’t know how to let our blood flow or our nails grow. How deep we perceive our internal actions depends on our individuality. When Adi Shankaracarya (788-821) was five years old he said:

“Cidananda rupa, shivo ham, shivo ham”
Eternal bliss am I, pure consciousness, pure consciousness.

In “Introduction à la métaphysique” the French philosopher Henri Bergson wrote: “Despite their apparent differences of opinion philosophers do agree on the fact that two different ways exist to know a thing. The first is that one walks around it; the second that one enters into it.”

“Thus something ‘absolute’ can only be given by intuition, while all the rest is at the level of analysis. Here we call intuition the sympathy by which one moves into the interior of an object to coincide with what it possesses as unique and cannot be expressed. On the other hand analysis is the action by which the object is reduced to already known elements, which means elements common to that specific object and other objects. So, to analyze means, to express a thing into functions of what it is not.”

Much in the same way as we arrive at deep implicit knowledge, we also gain explicit knowledge. The precise, abstract, analytical and empirical approach of science differs little from the precise, phenomenal and experiential approach of mystics, like the young Adi Shankaracarya. And what a surprise, in the eye of the cyclone meetings occur! Max Planck, 1858-1947, the well-known German physicist, said in an interview: “I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative of consciousness.”

The deep experiential, inner approach of mystics like Adi Shankaracarya, Jadunath Sinha, Sri Aurobindo from India, Kitaro Nishida from Japan, meister Eckhart from Germany and many others lead them to the realization that the essence of the universe is love, bliss or Consciousness. As a result of analysis and observation science concluded that the essence of all matter is Energy. Are these views only seemingly opposed, but in reality complementary? If they are complementary we need a new paradigm, uniting these two approaches.

In India both atheism and theism embraced Consciousness and Primal Energy as the basic elements of the universe. In “Ananda Sutram” the Indian philosopher Shrii P.R. Sarkar wrote: “Although they are two for the sake of argument, they can under no circumstances be separated… None of them can stand without the other.” So, everything that exists is a composition of Consciousness and Primal Energy. This does not necessarily mean that both get expression at the same time. For instance, in subatomic wavicles and atoms Consciousness lies dormant and Primal Energy gets expression, while in amoebae and more complex biological units consciousness gets expression. Not only amoebae but all biological units are built upon large amounts of atoms, so in them Primal Energy, as well as Consciousness, gets expression. (Fig 1)

If the universe has been built upon two essential ingredients it is certainly not illogical to assume that both ingredients are in juxtaposition, rather than subordination. Such juxtaposition also includes two separate moments of maximum expression and a development, evolution, from minimal to optimal expression. But the two poles are in close and direct relation with each other, which implies that in a certain location and at a certain moment either Consciousness or Primal Energy gets full expression. How can Consciousness get full expression if it doesn’t first get shelter in a formal base? This can only mean that Primal Energy gets expression first, to be followed by Consciousness. This evolution from minimal to optimal expression of Primal Energy, followed by the gradual expression of Consciousness, is called the Cosmic Cycle of Creation. This evolution is in accordance with both the nature of the flow from minimal to optimal and the nature of both poles moreover decentralized and down-up, rather than top-down.

CREATIVE, CATALYZING AGENTS

Down-up evolution can either be based on the already mentioned randomness or on extremely small creative, catalyzing agents (microvita) with a vector that is either directed at the pole of Primal Energy or at the pole of Consciousness. In “A new science of life” Rupert Sheldrake describes this dilemma as follows: “The hypothesis of formative causation accounts for the repetition of forms, but does not explain how first forms were initiated. This unique event can be ascribed to chance, or to a creativity inherent in matter, or to a transcendent creative agency. A decision between these two alternatives can be made only on metaphysical grounds and lies outside the scope of the hypothesis.” In his view formative causation depends on the connection between a morphogenetic germ – a characteristic part of a particular morphic unit- and its surrounding morphogenetic field. The energy fields that physics deals with are composed of force particles. For example, the extremely small forcefields of the strong nuclear force are composed of gluons and those of gravity, though not yet observed, are the gravitons. These forcefields are uniform and non-creative, because “Energy is a blind force. What is to be done or what should not be done, this sort of conscience is lacking in energy.” 1 Sheldrake does not describe the building stones of morphogenetic fields, but the conclusion can only be that, although such fields are not creative, they do have an influence on the formation of biological forms.

Darwin (1809-1882) concluded that an explanation about the origin of life was a bridge too far for him and his time. Trying to come up with a solution would only be detrimental for his theory of evolution. In a letter to Hooker he wrote: “It is merely rubbish, to think at present of the origin of life; one could as well think of the origin of matter.” It cannot be denied that new forms arose in the past, are occurring at this very moment and are being passed on, much in the way that Jean Baptiste Lamarck (1744-1829) described through “inheritance of acquired characteristics”. His theory was hotly debated and rejected by most biologists. In 1988 John Cairns observed that micro-organisms E.colli, in order to survive a new environment, were able to change their genes and pass this characteristic on to their offspring. Cairn and his colleagues were also able to repeat the process in which adaptive mutation occurred.

According to Shrii P.R. Sarkar the cause of non-living as well as living structures are microvita. “Billions of microvita produce a single atom. ….Not only carbon atoms, but all other kinds of atoms are the creation of microvita.” 2 and “Which is the starting point of life or vitality? These microvita are the carriers of life in different stars, planets and satellites– not carbon atoms or carbon molecules. These living creatures with their mysterious movement create minds and bodies, living bodies in different celestial bodies, and they also destroy minds and physical bodies, or developed or underdeveloped corpor, in any corner of the universe.” 3

If everything in this universe is a combination of Consciousness and Energy, microvita cannot be an exception. Although they, according to Shrii P.R. Sarkar, don’t have a structure, they too have to be based on this bipolarity. They are creative, catalyzing agents, smaller than the size of a nucleon (which is 10^-15 m) and they know what needs to be done and what not. Neutral microvita build all kinds of atoms, not only carbon atoms. Negative microvita start functioning in matter and move towards mind. They catalyze formations of simple and complex biological units, but after the lifetime of cells these negative microvita also catalyze their decomposition. Positive microvita build up mind and also start functioning from mind down, towards physical matter. Negative microvita start functioning in matter and move towards, and also take part in, mind. While positive microvita take an active lead in the direction towards more consciousness, negative microvita do so in the opposite direction, towards a decrease in consciousness and towards matter. So the structure of micro-organisms, which are living entities, is based upon atoms and consequently they are also composed of neutral, negative and positive microvita. What about virions? The building stones of virions are also atoms, and neutral microvita, but different from micro-organisms, they additionally have only negative microvita.

Microvita don’t have a structure, but different denominations do exist. How is that possible? First of all their goal of action is different and secondly they differ in the way they move. Without going into detail three different kinds of movement can be distinguished: systolic movement, clockwise and counter clockwise spin and standing waves. Apart from that amplitude, wavelength and speed may vary.

CRUDE AND SUBTLE LAYERS IN MATTER AND MIND

We have all been brought up with the dualism of matter and mind. If matter and mind are not separate and have some kind of interaction, they must have something in common. It has been concluded before that everything in this universe is composed of Consciousness and Primal Energy, so both matter and mind cannot be an exception to this rule. Everything in this universe has been built with a two-layered structure, each layer composed of three elements. Each of these layers, and their individual components may be expressed or dormant. One layer is called the subtle, the other one is the crude layer.
(Fig. 2 and 3)

Atoms only possess a crude layer, while protozoic as well as metazoic structures, are equipped with a crude and a subtle layer. Bodiless minds will have to do with only a subtle layer. Now, what is the underlying structure of the crude and subtle layer? The crude layer, of for instance a hydrogen atom, consists of three components: subatomic wavicles, Primal Energy and (neutral) microvita. The building blocks of all biological units are atoms and consequently they are also composed of wavicles, vital energy and (neutral) microvita. But even simple eukaryotic cells are autopoeisic entities with an already extremely complex structure containing units of atoms, molecules, a complex cell wall, protoplasm, nucleus and organelles. The subtle layer of such cells consists of three components: Mind (which is the overall group of microvita, controlling all lower layers), microvita (groups of microvita controlling each individual unit) and vital energy. Disembodied souls only possess a subtle layer, although they temporarily may be connected to one, two, three or four single fundamental factors. Note that these factors remain single and don’t get united.
(Fig. 4)

COSMOLOGY, EVOLUTION AND THE POSITION OF MICROVITA

Microvita are essential parts of all chemical and biological matter. At which point do they enter evolution and when do they take up their active role? Before answering those questions we need to know that according to Shrii P.R. Sarkar microvita “…will undergo…expansion and hibernation at boiling temperature.” 4 According to the generally accepted New Cosmology after the Big Bang the temperature in the universe was considerably higher than 10^15K, a million billion degrees Kelvin. Microvita entered our Cosmos before Planck time, which is 10^-44 s after t=0 (the moment of the Big Bang). This temperature is so high that microvita can only expand and hibernate. In the next 300.000 years quarks, protons, photons and electrons were formed, but the temperature of this hot plasma remained too high for the unification of protons and electrons. The universe gradually cooled down to 3000K and a new era, called recombination, began. Neutral microvita, being much less sensitive to temperature than the negative and positive denominations, woke up from their inactivity and united electrons with the present protons. Hydrogen atoms were no longer ions, protons lacking their electron, but became the first simple, yet complete atoms (Fig. 5).

Indian philosophy mentions evolution in the physical sense. According to Samkhya philosophy (also called atheistic Yoga): “.. the gross elements of earth water, light air, and ether are transformed into various inorganic things, vegetable organisms, and animal organisms,…” 5 The position of these elements in relation to physics is not explained. Shrii P.R. Sarkar writes: “Let us see how life gets expression within the physical unit structure. These physical structures are composed of five fundamental factors, – ethereal, aerial, luminous, liquid and solid – …” 6 In 1983 an anonymous writer in the USA linked these five fundamental factors with sub-atomic particles. 7 He proposed ethereal = the vacuum field of energy, aerial = force particles, luminous = photon, liquid = electron + related particles and solid = the family of six quarks. 8 In “Eternal Dance of Macrocosm” Michael Towsey proposed ethereal = the vacuum field of energy, aerial = dark matter, luminous = photon, liquid = electron particle, solid = quarks. Because both suggestions are not really in agreement with cosmology a slightly different approach is needed. My proposition is a set of categories and subcategories. The origin of all matter is waves. The primal wave possessed infinite wavelength and consequently zero amplitude. Translated in philosophical terms this means, infinite energy and a dormant expression of consciousness. (Fig. 5)

(Fig. 6) “The very start of the animated stage is the beginning of the process of Prati-Saincara. The crudest solid is the final stage of Saincara.” 9 Saincara is the first stage of evolution, Prati-Saincara the second, also called the returning stage. Atoms (= solid factor) appear the end of the first stage of evolution, located at the nadir of the Cosmic Cycle of Evolution. Microvita catalyze the development towards their form and consequently atoms are not only the end of the first stage of evolution, but also the rudimental first stage of the animated phase. Although they are not the initial stage of life, they certainly are the building stones of biological structures. The first atoms, hydrogen, are composed during the epoch of recombination, heavier atoms until iron in supernova and the rest of the natural elements in hypernova. Atoms can respectively be smelled, tasted, seen, touched and heard by our senses. Unless we are in a special yogic state we will not be able to perceive the isolated waves of the first stage of evolution.

CONCLUSION

This article is nothing but a small and first introduction to a new approach of evolution. According to Shrii P.R. Sarkar the creative agents of evolution, but also of chemical and biological structures, as well as minds, are microvita of different nominations. The sketch I have made is rough and although I have tried to be accurate, many grave objections may be advanced against the, so far, only speculative ideas laid down here. In order to grow beyond this phase and develop this sketch into a full fledged theory huge amounts of spiritual, intellectual and physical research need to be initiated and accomplished, but also tests need to be designed. I apologize for the imperfections in this writing, but if my contribution has excited to begin your own precise research of whatever nature, I shall be more than satisfied.

1 P.R. Sarkar, (1984-3)Microvitum in a nutshell, Ananda Marga Pracaraka Samgha. p140
2 ibid, p19
3 ibid, p4
4 ibid, p61
5 Jadunath Sinha, (2006-4) Indian philosophy, vol II. Motilal Banarsidass, Delhi.
6 P.R. Sarkar, (1984-6) Idea and ideology. Ananda Marga Pracaraka Samgha, Calcutta. p7
7 M.B. Townsey. (1986) Eternal Dance of Microcosm. Proutist publications, Copenhagen.
8 ibid
9 P.R. Sarkar, (1993-8)Idea and ideology, Ananda Marga Pracaraka Samgha, Calcutta. p19