ORIGIN OF LIFE ON EARTH

REFERENCE I Basic timeline

The basic timeline of a 4.6 billion year old Earth, with approximate dates:

    3.8 billion years of simple cells (prokaryotes),

    3.4 billion years of stromatolites demonstrating photosynthesis,

    2 billion years of complex cells (eukaryotes),

    1 billion years of multicellular life,

    600 million years of simple animals,

    570 million years of arthropods (ancestors of insects, arachnids and crustaceans),

    550 million years of complex animals,

    500 million years of fish and proto-amphibians,

    475 million years of land plants,

    400 million years of insects and seeds,

    360 million years of amphibians,

    300 million years of reptiles,

    200 million years of mammals,

    150 million years of birds,

    130 million years of flowers,

    65 million years since the dinosaurs died out,

    2.5 million years since the appearance of the genus Homo,

    200,000 years of anatomically modern humans,

    25,000 years since the disappearance of Neanderthal traits from the fossil record.

    13,000 years since the disappearance of Homo floresiensis from the fossil record

REFERENCE II

Ref.  http://origins.swau.edu/papers/life/javor1/default.html

(ORIGIN OF LIFE: A LOOK AT LATE 20TH-CENTURY THINKING.)

Theories to explain the presence of life on Earth.

The earliest historical records indicate that man has recognized the qualitative difference between living and non-living matter, and since then there never has been a shortage of theories to explain the presence of life on Earth. Yet the origin of life remains one of the greatest challenges to naturalistic interpretations.

According to Nobel laureate Max Delbruck, "... there has been an immense conceptual gap between all present-day life and no life," and the "how" of the transition of earth from no life to life is "perhaps the fundamental question of biology"

Nevertheless, the immense conceptual gap between life and non-life is neither recognized nor admitted by many evolutionary theorists. A 1978 review entitled "Chemical evolution and the origin of life" begins with these words: "Perhaps the most striking aspect of the evolution of life on earth is that it happened so fast'.

More recently, the first chapter of a college textbook on the molecular biology of the cell contains this summary statement: "Living cells probably arose on earth by the spontaneous aggregation ( massing together or clustering of independent but similar units, such as particles, parts, or bodies) of molecules about 3.5 billion years ago".

Regardless of their degree of optimism or enthusiasm, evolutionary theorists are forced to propose explanations for the spontaneous generation of life from non-living matter. In order for biological evolution to begin, some starting material is necessary. This need is met by the postulates of chemical evolution.

When the outlines of modern theories of chemical evolution (the natural processes on a "prebiotic earth" which gave rise to the first living matter) were formulated by A.I. Oparin and J.B.S. Haldane in the 1920s, very little was known about the biochemical intricacies of living matter. Consequently, there was plenty of freedom to postulate mechanistic processes by which organisms could come into existence.

Modern theories of chemical evolution found in current monographs and textbooks developed over a span of approximately 60 years. They suggest that early Earth was covered largely with a warm, slightly alkaline ocean. Though rich in carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, ammonia, methane, hydrogen, and nitrogen, the atmosphere definitely did not contain atomic or molecular oxygen. Ultraviolet light from the sun, geothermal energy from volcanoes, shock waves from thunder, and cosmic radiation acted upon gases of the primitive atmosphere causing the formation of bio-monomers such as amino acids, sugars, purines, pyrimidines, and fatty acids. These substances polymerized to form the prototypes of more recent proteins, nucleic acids and cell membranes. In time they coalesced (to unite so as to form one mass, community, etc.) to form the first protocell, a collection of polymers enclosed in a membrane. Eventually these protocells became increasingly complex, until the first true living cell was born.

Why life cannot arise spontaneously

Some general considerations take the topic of the origin of life beyond listing various theories of chemical evolution and a discussion of their inadequacies. First, there is the tacit assumption by evolutionists that matter possesses some sort of internal drive which pushes it to self-organize into living structures. It is as if molecules constituting bio polymers would confer some sort of benefit to their constituent atoms.

There is no evidence that this is the case. Atoms and molecules respond to only one type of drive; that is, to exist in the lowest possible state of energy. Bio molecules are examples of exactly the opposite; they are complexes of atoms in a high energy state. If atoms had a choice, they would rather get out of being part of the high energy configurations called proteins and nucleic acids.

All mechanistic explanations of origins have two deficiencies.

One difficulty is in explaining the source of biological information, which ultimately dictates the structure and function of bio polymers. It is clear that chance cannot provide this information.

A second consideration which renders all mechanistic explanations invalid is that life processes are non-equilibrium events. If by chance all necessary bio polymers and small metabolites could have been produced in the primordial ( original; elementary) environment, brought together and enclosed in a membrane, a non-living cell would be the result. In the very process of assembly, reactants and their catalysts would be brought together, providing opportunity for individual chemical reactions to reach equilibrium.

There is such a concentration of living organisms on Earth's surface that it is difficult to locate any area that is sterile. Obviously, life had to start somehow.

The existence of a supernatural Intelligence who is capable of designing and creating the various living organisms found on Earth is inconceivable to the modern secular mind which is accustomed to explaining phenomenon by natural processes. But this is precisely the lesson to be learned from our chemical evolutionary efforts. Our inability; not only to create living matter but even to suggest how such could come into existence; forces us to admit that the existence of life demands the existence of a Creator.

REFERENCE III

Ref.  http://www.biology-questions-and-answers.com/origin-of-life.html

(The Origin of Life, Questions and Answers)

3. When did life appear on earth?

It is estimated that life on earth emerged about 3.5 billion years ago, thus 1 billion years after the formation of the planet.

4. Historically how has the origin of life on earth been explained?

The most recurrent explanation for the phenomenon of life on earth is the mythological. People from various parts of the world developed explanatory myths about the origin of animals and human beings. Some of those myths were incorporated into religions and almost all religions have metaphorical or transcendental explanations about the origin of life on the planet.

With the development of science new explanatory attempts have emerged. Notable among them are the spontaneous generation hypothesis, or abiogenesis, that asserted that living beings were created from nonliving material, the cosmic panspermia hypothesis, theory that life on earth is a result of seeding from the outer space, the autotrophic hypothesis, according to which the first living beings were autotrophs, and the heterotrophic hypothesis, the most accepted nowadays, that affirms that life emerged from heterotrophic cells.

At the end of the 1980s decade a new hypothesis known as the RNA world hypothesis was presented. This hypothesis asserts that primitive life had only RNA as genetic material and as structural molecules that later turned into DNA and proteins. The RNA world hypothesis is strengthened by the fact that RNA can play a catalytic role, like enzymes, and by the finding that some bacteria have ribosomes made only of RNA without associated proteins.

5. What is the spontaneous generation hypothesis?

The spontaneous generation hypothesis, or abiogenesis, asserts that life on earth has come from nonliving material. For example, the fact that with time rats appeared around waste was considered in the past a confirmation of this hypothesis. Some supporters of spontaneous generation associated it with the existence of an active principle that would be the source of life, a theory known as vitalism.

6. How did the experiments of Redi and Pasteur refute the hypothesis of spontaneous generation?

To refute the spontaneous generation hypothesis many experiments were performed. Francisco Redi, in 1668, verified that maggots appeared on meat only when there was exposition to the environment; within closed environments, they did not appear. In 1862, Louis Pasteur working with swan-neck flasks refuted the abiogenesis hypothesis definitively. In this experiment Pasteur demonstrated that boiled (to kill microorganisms) nutritive soups put in swan-neck flasks (with a curved down mouth so microorganisms could not enter easily) did not contaminate with microorganisms while the same soups within flasks with open upwards mouths were contaminated in a few days. The fact that both flasks were open refuted the argument of the vitalists that the vital elan could not enter the flasks. Pasteur broke the swan-necks of the flasks to demonstrate that proliferation of microorganism could happen if these beings were able to reach the broth.

7. What is panspermia?

Panspermia is a hypothesis that describes life on earth as not originated from the planet. The idea is that the first living beings that colonized the earth came from outer space, from other planets or even from other galaxies by traveling in meteorites, comets, etc. According to this hypothesis even the type of life now existent on earth could have also been seeded intentionally by extraterrestrial beings in other stellar and planetary systems.

8. What is the autotrophic hypothesis on the origin of life?

The autotrophic hypothesis on the origin of life asserts that the first living beings on earth were producers of their own food, just like plants and chemo synthetic microorganisms.

10. What is the most accepted hypothesis about the origin of life on earth? How does it compare to the other main hypotheses?

The heterotrophic hypothesis is the strongest and most accepted hypothesis about the origin of life.  

The spontaneous generation hypothesis has been excluded by the experiments of Pasteur. The panspermia hypothesis is not yet completely refuted but it is not well-accepted since it would be necessary to explain how living beings could survive long space journeys under conditions of extreme temperatures as well as to clarify the manner by which they would resist the high temperatures faced when entering the earth's atmosphere. The autotrophic hypothesis is weakened if one takes into account that the production of organic material from inorganic substances is a highly complex process requiring diversified enzymatic systems and that the existence of complex metabolic reactions on the primitive earth were not probable.

9. What is the heterotrophic hypothesis on the origin of life?

According to the heterotrophic hypothesis the first living beings were very simple heterotrophic organisms, i.e., not producers of their own food, which emerged from the gradual association of organic molecules into small organized structures (the Coacervates). The first organic molecules in their turn would have appeared from substances of the earth's primitive atmosphere submitted to strong electrical discharges, to solar radiation and to high temperatures.

16. What are coacervates?

Coarcervates are small structures made of the aggregation of organic molecules under water solution. By electrical attraction the molecules join into bigger and more organized particles distinct from the fluid environment forming a membrane-like structure that separates an internal region of the coacervate from the exterior. The coacervates might divide themselves and also absorb and excrete substances. It is believed that these structures may have been the precursors of cells.

Reference IV
Ref. Scientific American, September- 2009.

(This reference gives relatively latest position on the status of “Science” on the research of origin of life on the earth. It states that “Crating a life” is the necessary step in understanding the origin. So far no news in ‘success’ of creating a life, though some claim to have reached close to it).)

The actual nature of the first organisms and the exact circumstances of the origin of life may be forever lost to science. But research can at least help us understand what is possible. The ultimate challenge is to construct an artificial organism that can reproduce and evolve. Creating life anew will certainly help us understand how life can start, how likely it is that it exists on other worlds and, ultimately, what life is.

What is LIFE?

Scientists have long struggled to define “life” in a way that is broad enough to encompass forms not yet discovered. Here are some of the many proposed definitions.

1.  Physicist Erwin Schrodinger suggested that a defining property of living systems is that they self-assemble against nature’s tendency toward disorder, or entropy.

2.  Chemist Gerald Joyce’s “working definition,” adopted by NASA, is that life is “a self- sustaining chemical system capable of Darwinian evolution.”

3.  In the “cybernetic definition” by Bernard Korzeniewski, life is a network of feedback mechanism

Journey to the Modern Cell

After life got started, competition among life-forms fueled the drive toward ever more complex organisms. We may never know the exact details of early evolution, but here is a plausible sequence of some of the major events that led from the first proto-cell to DNA- based cells such as bacteria.

1 EVOLUTION STARTS

The first proto-cell is just a sac of water and RNA and requires an external stimulus (such as cycles of heat and cold) to reproduce. But it will soon acquire new traits.

2 RNA CATALYSTS

Ribozymes—folded RNA molecules analogous to protein-based enzymes—arise and take on such jobs as speeding up reproduction and strengthening the proto-cell’s membrane. Consequently, proto-cells begin to reproduce on their own.

3 METABOLISM BEGINS

Other ribozymes catalyze metabolism—chains of chemical reactions that enable proto-cells to tap into nutrients from the environment.

4 PROTEINS APPEAR

Complex systems of RNA catalysts begin to translate strings of RNA letters (genes) into chains of amino acids (proteins). Proteins later prove to be more efficient catalysts and able to carry out a variety of tasks.

5 PROTEINS TAKE OVER

Proteins take on a wide range of tasks within the cell. Protein-based catalysts, or enzymes, gradually replace most ribozymes.

6 THE BIRTH OF DNA

Other enzymes begin to make DNA. Thanks to its superior stability, DNA takes on the role of primary genetic molecule. RNA’s main role is now to act as a bridge between DNA and proteins.

7 BACTERIAL WORLDS 

Organisms resembling modern bacteria adapt to living virtually everywhere on earth and rule unopposed for billions of years, until some of them begin to evolve into more complex organisms.

My Comments:

It seems from the above references that the formation of life through the Coacervate structures, as suggested by Oparin is still the most accepted theory so far. It is also mostly held that the generation of life is from non-living matter. According to Nobel laureate Max Delbruck, "how" of the transition of earth from no life to life is "perhaps the fundamental question of biology" yet to be answered.

LIFE DEFINITION: Scientists have long struggled to define “life”. There are some of the many proposed definitions but yet no all accepted definition.

“The actual nature of the first organisms and the exact circumstances of the origin of life may be forever lost to science. But research can at least help us understand what is possible”. When fact based deductions are impossible, science should resort to logic based rational hypothesis. In a book like 'MIND POWER' and other publications written by Swami Vijnananand and published by Manashakti before 25 - 30 years, we will find such hypothesis not only for creation of life but also subsequent evolution till human being as of today. The role of MIND is the key in the process.

Vijay R. Joshi.

Desires Determine the Destination.

 Desires Determine the Destination.

-          “If I wish I can smoke a cigarette, but I can’t wish to wish”. A quote, source is unknown.

-          “We die only when are ready to die”. From ‘Will to Live; by Dr. Hutschnecker.

-          The universe is itself the manifestation of the Divine Mind, which willed,

       “एकोहम बहु स्याम” "I am One, let “Me” become many!" as per the advaita doctrine (Rev. Adi Shankaracharya), the birth of the Universe is by the will of Devine mind.

Right from a trivial incidence of smoking to not only life and death, but also to the creation of Universe, the Desire can be considered as the driving force behind any happening. So let us try to understand in some details this important motivating force.

Definition of Desire, (Ref. Merriam Webster Dictionary).

1: Conscious impulse toward something that promises enjoyment or satisfaction in its attainment.

Synonym of DESIRE

Desire, wish, want, crave, and covet.

Desire - stresses the strength of feeling and often implies strong intention or aim (desires to start a new life).

Wish - sometimes implies a general or transient longing especially for the unattainable (wishes for world peace).

Want - specifically suggests a felt need or lack (wants to have a family).

Crave - stresses the force of physical appetite or emotional need (craves sweets).

Covet - implies strong envious desire (covets his rise to fame).

Academic discussion. (http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/desire/)

Experts in the field have deliberated on different aspects in the field of ‘desire’. One such useful reference is Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

It is seen that though lot of research is in progress, the conclusions are not able to deduce facts which a layman can easily understand.  For the interested readers it may be worth to refer the entire original article.

‘To desire is to be in a particular state of mind. It is a state of mind familiar to everyone who has ever wanted to drink water or desired to know what has happened to an old friend, but its familiarity does not make it easy to give a theory of desire. These varied states of mind (which has different types of desires) have all been grouped together under the heading of ‘pro attitudes’, but whether the pro attitudes are fundamentally one mental state or many is disputed. Desiring is a state of mind that is commonly associated with a number of different effects: a person with a desire tends to act in certain ways, feel in certain ways, and think in certain ways. If Nora desires tea, for example, then Nora will typically make herself a cup of tea; if she does not get herself some tea right away she will nonetheless typically feel the urge to do so; she will find the thought of tea pleasant and will find her current lack of tea unpleasant; she will find her thoughts repeatedly turning to the idea of tea; she will judge that tea seems like a good idea; and so on. These various effects have been the focus of efforts to develop theories that are theories of desire’.

The article mentions “Desires feature prominently in theories of mind, action, free will, and morality (and more!) And, since there are no established approved theories for all these, the ‘Desire’ too is surrounded with lots of controversies”.

Let us turn to some other views which deals in-depth with ‘desire’ which is related to non-matter i.e. Mind.

DESIRE the reason for Being and Having.

The origin of Desire.

Do you know what your desire is right now? It is for sure that you want something because the mind is continuous stream of desires. Desire has the power to achieve anything, but where from the desire crop up? The moment desire is identified, you can act; but before this moment, where from it emerges? What is the origin?

Vedic Conception of Sound in Four Features - PARA, PASHYANTI, MADHYAMA, VAIKHARI.

(Originally published in "Tattva Prakasha" Volume 1, Issue 7; available online at www.indiadivine.org/)

The origin of sound is described in four stages as below. The origin of the desire can be considered to follow the same path as sound. (Replace the world 'sound' with the word 'desire')

Para. (परा) - Para is the transcendent sound. Para means highest or farthest, and in this connection it indicates that sound which is beyond the perception of the senses. On the stage of para there is no distinction between the object and the sound. The sound contains within it all the qualities of the object.

Pashyanti. (पश्यन्ती ) - Pashyanti is the second level of sound, and is less subtle than para. Pashyanti in Sanskrit means "that which can be seen or visualized". This sound is intuitive and situated beyond rigidly defined concepts. On the stage of pashyanti , speech is intuitively connected to the object. There is near oneness between the word and the experience described. Pashyanti is the finest impulse of speech. The seat of pashyanti is in the navel or the Manipur Chakra. When sound goes up to the naval with the bodily air in vibratory form without any particular syllable, yet connected with the mind, it is known as pashyanti.

MADHYAMA (मध्यमा) VAIKHARI (वैखरी) - Vaikhari is the grossest level of speech, and it is heard through the external senses. When sound comes out through the mouth as spoken syllables it is called as vaikhari.

Madhyama is the intermediate unexpressed state of sound, whose seat is in the heart. The word Madhyama means "in between" or "the middle". Madhyama refers to mental speech, as opposed to external audible speech. It is on this level that we normally experience thought.

In the manifestation process, after sound has attained the form of pashyanti, it goes further up to the heart and becomes coupled with the assertive intelligence. At this point it manifests itself in the form of vibratory mode madhyama. Only those who are endowed with discriminative intelligence can feel this.

Illustration – In case of desire of food the stage wise description could be as follows.

Para: -       From no desire stage to the generation of some impulse of restlessness.

Pashyanti: - Search for the cause of the impulse, search indicates the feeling of      hunger, say breakfast.

Madhyama: – Self talk viz. what type of food is preferable within the available   options? What do I prefer out of 4-5 options?  Shall I go for veg sandwich?

Vaikhari: –    You reach a restaurant and order for the veg sandwich.

Karma chakra, the instinct behind PARA.

(The Law of Cause & Effect, By Subhamoy Das, About.com Guide).

What is the cause even behind Para? As per the Karma theory it is your past accumulated Karma.

Your Karma is your own Doing. Every person is responsible for his or her acts and thoughts, so each person's karma is entirely his or her own. Western world see the operation of karma as inevitable pre-determined. But that is far from true since it is in the hands of an individual to shape his own future by schooling his present. The law of cause and effect forms an integral part of Hindu philosophy.

The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Current English defines ‘karma’ as the "sum of person's actions in one of his successive states of existence, viewed as deciding his fate for the next". In Sanskrit karma means "choice based action that is undertaken deliberately or knowingly". This also dovetails self-determination and a strong will power to abstain from inactivity. Karma is the differentia that characterizes human beings and distinguishes him from other creatures of the world.

The theory of karma harps on the Newtonian principle that every action produces an equal and opposite reaction. Every time we think or do something, we create a cause, which in time will bear its corresponding effects. It is the personality of a human being with its positive and negative actions - that causes karma. Karma could be both the activities of the body or the mind, irrespective of the consideration whether the performance brings fruition immediately or at a later stage. However, the involuntary or the reflex actions of the body cannot be called karma. So the instinct behind your desire is the past karma. Once the desire is emerged, a person has option to act. How this choice is made?

Un-conscious Mind and the Karma choice:   (Ref. Spontaneous Evolution Questions & Partial Answers from brucelipton.com)

There are two parts to the mind: the conscious, creative mind connected to Source, and the subconscious which is a record-playback device programmed by developmental experiences. While we believe and perceive we are running our lives with our conscious mind, neuroscience now reveals that more than 90% of our behaviors are controlled by our programmed subconscious mind. Most of the thoughts and actions we assume are “our own,” are really the “invisible” and largely unquestioned thoughts and beliefs of others (accepted by us). So, constant effort with full awareness is essential to improve the karma.

We should not do what we like but do what is right. The analysis of desires based karma can broadly be done in two type viz. Sreyas and Preyas, as follows.

Types of the Karma. (Ref. Book, “Sreyas – Preyas” Published by: Swami Vivekananda Yoga Prakashana)

In the journey of life we often find ourselves standing at the junction of two paths, the good and pleasant [Sreyas and Preyas]. The quality of our life depends upon what we chose between the two. We need to exercise this choice in our day to day life until we reach moksha, the ultimate Freedom. Choice has to be made between good and pleasant. What appears pleasant in the beginning may not be good and vice versa.

Preyas is pleasant, which is attractive, tempting. Sreyas is good, which serves our highest purpose. That which is wholesome may not appear desirable in the beginning. Preyas is opposite of Sreyas. Preyas may look very nice in the beginning but may bring misery later.

Preyas seems to make us happy temporarily but later on causes misery. To understand, comprehend this truth requires some space, patience, some leisurely time to contemplate.

Men rush to objects like moths rush to the fatal attraction of the flame and destroy themselves. Objects first attract, bind and then destroy- may not be immediately like a flame destroys a moth but gradually. Indulgence is like slow death. Take the example of drug addicts. Initially one feels ecstatic but slowly when the person is hooked, he encounters untold misery till he is extinct.

Beware! What appears beautiful may not be so in reality! There are so many attractions in this world like power, position etc. Attractive objects give us some pleasure temporarily then trap us. We get trapped like an addict. The drug gets into the chemistry of the body making a person helpless. A weak mind opts for Preyas. Most of the people opt for Preyas and sometimes in the garb of Shreyas.

If one opts for spiritual knowledge for material benefits then even that comes under the category of Preyas.  All the sins in this world are committed due to attraction, Preyas. When one is possessed by lust, anger and greed then it is for sure that he had been following Preyas. Kama (lust), krodha (anger), dwesha (jealousy), these three vices is gateway to hell.  If there is something that pleases your ego then it is Preyas, not Sreyas.

Sreyas may not look so attractive in the beginning but later on it shows you are Sacchidananda. In the beginning it is difficult. It involves a lot of tapas, control of sense-organs. A person who advises us not to be the slave of senses may look like an enemy, though he may be our own teacher. Shreyas and Preyas sometimes come mixed up and may be difficult to separate one from the other. Preyas may come in the garb of Shreyas making us happy temporarily but real Shreyas is that which gives us everlasting happiness. People who give license to our fancies may appear very desirable but they are not. A person needs to see clearly what is proper and what is improper. Otherwise one has to suffer later on.

It is not only human beings who seek pleasure, all the creatures on this earth do. Even animals are pulled by the forces of ahara, nidra, bhaya and maithuna. Food, Sleep, Fear and Sex these are the basic urges both in human beings and animals alike. Our thirst does not get quenched by satisfying these desires. It increases more and more. It is an unquenchable thirst. A person following the path of Shreyas sees through and through this. Not that he develops a negative attitude towards the objects but he sees their limitation.  

Preyas:  Pleasant, Attractive, Tempting, May look very nice in the beginning but bring miseries later. Attractive objects give us pleasure temporarily and displeasure in the long run. Anything which pleases person’s ego may be Preyas.

Sreyas: Good, Serves our highest purpose, it may not appear desirable in the beginning. May not appear so attractive in the beginning but in the long run it will realize our real welfare. It involves lot of efforts and perseverance.

Types of desires (Needs)

(Ref. McLeod, S. A. (2007). Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs - Simply Psychology. Retrieved from http://www.simplypsychology.org/maslow.html.)

Maslow stated that people are motivated to achieve certain needs. When one need is fulfilled a person seeks to full fill the next one, and so on. 'It is quite true that man lives by bread alone — when there is no bread. But what happens to man’s desires when there is plenty of bread and when his belly is chronically filled? At once other (and “higher”) needs emerge and these, rather than physiological hungers, dominate the organism. And when these in turn are satisfied, again new (and still “higher”) needs emerge and so on. This is what we mean by saying that the basic human needs are organized into a hierarchy of relative prepotency'.

Expanded model.  It is important to note that Maslow's five stage model has been expanded to include cognitive and aesthetic needs (Maslow, 1970a) and later transcendence needs (Maslow, 1970b).

1. Biological and Physiological needs - air, food, drink, shelter, warmth, sex, sleep, etc.

2. Safety needs - protection from elements, security, order, law, limits, stability, etc.

3. Social Needs - Belongingness and Love, - work group, family, affection, relationships, etc.

4. Esteem needs - self-esteem, achievement, mastery, independence, status, dominance, prestige, managerial responsibility, etc.

5. Cognitive needs - knowledge, meaning, etc.

6. Aesthetic needs - appreciation and search for beauty, balance, form, etc.

7. Self-Actualization needs - realizing personal potential, self-fulfillment, seeking personal growth and peak experiences.

8. Transcendence needs - helping others to achieve self-actualization.

The growth of self-actualization (Maslow, 1962) refers to the need for personal growth that is present throughout a person’s life.  For Maslow, a person is always “becoming” and never remains static in these terms.  In self-actualization a person comes to find a meaning to life that is important to them.

Maslow offers the following description of self- actualization: 'It refers to the person’s desire for self-fulfillment, namely, to the tendency for him to become actualized in what he is potentially. The specific form that these needs will take course varies greatly from person to person. In one individual it may take the form of the desire to be an ideal mother, in another it may be expressed athletically, and in still another it may be expressed in painting pictures or in inventions'. Maslow identified 15 characteristics of a self-actualized person. 

Characteristics of self-actualizers:

1. They perceive reality efficiently and can tolerate uncertainty;

2. Accept themselves and others for what they are;

3. Spontaneous in thought and action;

4. Problem-centered (not self-centered);

5. Unusual sense of humor;

6. Able to look at life objectively;

7. Highly creative;

8. Resistant to enculturation, but not purposely unconventional;

9. Concerned for the welfare of humanity;

10. Capable of deep appreciation of basic life-experience;

11. Establish deep satisfying interpersonal relationships with a few people;

12. Peak experiences;

13. Need for privacy;

14. Democratic attitudes;

15. Strong moral/ethical standards.

Behavior leading to self-actualization:

(a) Experiencing life like a child, with full absorption and concentration;

(b) Trying new things instead of sticking to safe paths;

(c) Listening to your own feelings in evaluating experiences instead of the voice of tradition, authority or the majority;

(d) Avoiding pretense ('game playing') and being honest;

(e) Being prepared to be unpopular if your views do not coincide with those of the majority;

(f) Taking responsibility and working hard;

(g) Trying to identify your defenses and having the courage to give them up.

Although we are all, theoretically, capable of self-actualizing, most of us will not do so, or only to a limited degree. Maslow (1970) estimated that only two percent of people will reach the state of self-actualization.

Holy Gita.

.

Chapter 3, verses 39, 40 and 41.

O Son of Kunti (Arjuna)! Constant enemy of wise men is the un-abatable flame of desire, by which wisdom is concealed. 3/39.

The senses, mind, and intellect are said to be desire's formidable stronghold; through these, desire deludes the embodied soul by eclipsing its wisdom. Therefore, O Best of the Bharata Dynasty (Arjuna) first discipline the senses then destroy desire, the sinful annihilator of wisdom and Self-realization.  3 /40-41.

In contrast to Maslow Gita prescribes self-control in a different manner

The self-controlled person, moving among objects, with his senses free from attachment and malevolence and brought under his own control, attains tranquility.

~ Bhagavad Gita 2/64.

Three Kinds of desires can form the basis of Karma.

Satwik (सात्विक), Rajasik (राजसिक) and Tamasik (तामसिक) desires may result in Satwik, Rajasik and Tamasik karma respectively.

According to the ways of life chosen by a person, his karma can be classified into three kinds.

The satvik karma, which is without attachment, selfless and for the benefit of others.

The rajasik karma, which is selfish where the focus is on gains for oneself.

The tamasik karma, which is undertaken without heed to consequences, and is supremely selfish and savage.

The Discipline of Unattached Action

According to the scriptures, the discipline of unattached action (निष्काम कर्म) can lead to salvation of the soul. So they recommend that one should remain detached while carrying out his duties in life. As Lord Krishna said in the Bhagavad Gita: "To the man thinking about the objects (of the senses) creates attachment towards them; from attachment comes longing; and from longing crops up the anger. From anger comes delusion; and from delusion loss of memory; from loss of memory, the ruin of discrimination; and on the ruin of discrimination, he perishes".

How can one be designed to have natural inclination of Satwik desires? Or inbuilt tendency to practice un-attached actions which Holy Gita terms as Nishkam Karmayoga (निष्काम कर्मयोग)?

Good things happen to Good people.

"बहुत सुकृताची जोडी म्हणुनी विठ्ठली आवडी"

You would develop liking for ‘good’ if you have acted for benevolence cause in the past. Your desires have origin in your past behavior, says the doctrine of saints. All those who wish to have good desires should resolve to practice benevolence in their daily life routine.

'Social Service' i.e. Benevolence – Why for everyone’?

This booklet is a compilation of articles written by Swami Vijnananand - The first thinker of 'New Way' philosophy. (Free down load available at Manashakti web site - www.manashakti.org) These articles were then published in Free Press Bulletin (India) during 1969-70. The booklet delineates rationally the point of 'social service' in the real sense of the term. Such a social service i.e. Benevolence is the inner requirement of a person, being the need of soul; which ultimately helps to keep the 'mind in peace' and lead tension-free life. Whatever be the category or profession - right from highest authority, officer, executive, rich, ambitious to ordinary worker, even sick, ailing, or student or say - atheist, believer, religious,-  'social service', if adopted as a 'way of life' by understanding its rationale, it will lead to the eternal benefit of individual and society.

By natural inclination we are selfish, self-centered. The Tamasik, Rajasik desires are inherently active. Deliberate nurturing efforts are required to develop liking for Satwik desire based karma. Gita recommended status of ‘the self-controlled person’ which is possible only on strong belief based hard efforts. Here; after putting in whole hearted efforts, the prayer comes to help.

Most of the religions have accepted the light as a medium of prayer. ‘Manashakti’ seekers also perform Flame Meditation which is normally scheduled at 7-30 p.m. with prayer followed by 12 minutes flame concentration. The prayer written by Swami Vijnananand includes words which are as follows:

“O Light, you end darkness. You are the Sun. You define the day. You create the morning glow. May your revitalizing form make me pure outside and inside. May my vices vanish into the dark! May I get rid of arrogance and ignorance! Give me the strength to cooperate. May this awakening in our surroundings have divine desires”!

Critical self-introspection, acceptance of own faults and be ready to willingly suffer the unpleasant consequence of own karma is the essence to make a progress in our life. Our noble desires only can fetch us noble reward. Swami Vijnananand not only preached the importance of self-purification but practiced this concept in his life till the last moment. His desire of highest self-purification is reflected in the prayer he has written on the opening page of all the books he wrote.

“Pardon me not, God,

Punish me for every fault,

For a single unjust pardon,

Will liquidate almighty Lord”!

 हरी ओम तत्सत ब्रम्हार्पणमस्तु I I 

 Vijay R. Joshi.