Compilation by- Surender Reddy
“A human being is a part of the whole called by us the Universe, a part limited in
space and time. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings, as something separated from the
rest, a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness. The delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us
to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest to us. Our task must be to free
ourselves from this prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the
whole of nature and its beauty.” -Albert Einstein
“Neohumanism includes within its scope not only human beings and animate
creatures, such as plants and animals, but all inanimate entities as well, for the scope of Neohumanism
extends down to the smallest particles of sub-atomic matter.
What is Neohumanism? Neohumanism is newly-explained humanism.
“Humanism” and “humanity” have been very popular words for the last century, but only human beings
have come within the scope of humanism and humanity. This explanation [of the concept] is not
sufficient – it cannot quench the thirst of the developing human society. Why should the love and
affection of developed human minds be restricted to human beings only? Why should it not include all
living beings, including plant life? This is the new explanation of humanism – Neohumanism – for within
Neohumanism the entire animate world is included.
But what is the status of inanimation [the inanimate world] in Neohumanism?
Fundamentally there is hardly any difference between the world of animation and the world of
inanimation. Some people explain that when there is a characteristic of movement within a structure it
is animate, otherwise it is inanimate. But this explanation is not sufficient, because there is a
characteristic of movement within both animate and inanimate objects. Others say that if the source of
this internal characteristic of movement is the unit mind, it is animation, otherwise it is inanimation. But
this is not a perfect interpretation either.
Even, within inanimate objects, as minute as the atom and smaller particles, there
are still smaller particles that maintain their structural unity and struggle against their internal and
external fissiparous tendencies. If the scope of Neohumanism is extended in this way from an extensive
scope to an intensive scope, then we should go deeper into matter – ……….
……….And that golden day is sure to come when that perfect stage of structure, that is, unit
existence in the intra-atomic world, will be reached, when human intuition will realize that the essence
in the sub-atomic world is pure Consciousness.
31 May 1983, Anandanagar P.R. Sarkar

Ecology 2
“Human beings led by self-interest have been neglecting ecology at
every step. We should remember that the sky and air, the hills and mountains, the rivers and forests,
the wild animals and reptiles, the birds and fishes and all sorts of aquatic creatures and plants are all
inseparably related to one another. Human beings are an integral part of that vast common society. No
one can survive to the exclusion of others, not even human beings. If they continue to destroy forests,
kill wild animals and exterminate fishes and birds foolishly, it won’t serve any of their purposes.
Whoever comes onto this world goes. One only survives on this earth for a limited period as stipulated
by nature. Due to the foolishness of human beings many creatures and objects will not survive the
period fixed for them by nature. Prior to their stipulated period of longevity they will be swallowed up
by eternity. Human beings due to their utmost folly have annihilated numerous objects and thus
prepared their own funeral pyre. Such folly on the part of human beings is unbearable. Human beings
must be cautious from now on. They must restructure their thoughts, plans and activities in accordance
with the dictates of ecology. There is no alternative.”
17 June 1984, Calcutta P.R.Sarkar
Internet and Connectivity
……….Through the power of technology age old obstacles to human interaction, like
geography, language* and limited information, are falling and a new wave of creativity and potential is
rising. Mass adoption of the Internet is driving one of the most exciting social, cultural and political
transformations in history, and unlike earlier periods of change, this time the effects are fully global.
…….By 2025, the majority of world’s population will, in one generation, have gone from
having virtually no access to unfiltered information to accessing all of the world’s information through a
device that fits in the palm of the hand. If the current pace of technological innovation is maintained,
most of the projected eight billion people on Earth will be Online.”
From ‘The New Digital Age’, 2013 Eric Schmidt and Jared Cohen
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------
“The more the human mind becomes magnanimous or expanded, the more it
rises above the sentiments of tribalism, communalism [socio-religious sentiment], provincialism, etc.
Often I hear people say that nationalism is an appreciable sentiment and that there is no narrowness in
it. But is this true? Nationalism is also relative, just like tribalism, communalism or provincialism. In some
places it is more worthwhile than tribalism, communalism or provincialism, while in other places it is less
Let us consider, for example, the case of a Portuguese nationalist. The mental object of a Muslim
communalist is certainly larger than that of a Portuguese nationalist, because the former desires the
welfare of a greater number of people than the latter. This is because the number of Muslims in the
world is greater than the number of Portuguese. Judged from this perspective, I cannot denounce the
sentiments of a Muslim communalist in comparison to a Portuguese nationalist. Similarly, it has to be
accepted that the sentiments of a Rajput casteist are broader than those of a Portuguese nationalist,
because the former desires the welfare of more people than the latter. Likewise, the feelings of an
Andhrite provincialist will have to be considered broader than those of a Portuguese nationalist. If one
supports provincialism with seventy-five million Bengalis, it must be accepted that these feelings are
more expanded than the nationalism of most of the nations of the world. (The population of most of the
nations of the world is less than the population of Bengal.)
Hence it is observed that communalism, casteism, provincialism and nationalism are
all of the same defective type. Those who are able to capitalize on one of these sentiments advocate it
volubly. In fact, every one of these sentiments suffers from the defect of ism, and is completely filled
with narrowness, violence, envy, mean mindedness, etc. Those who enter the field of social welfare by
creating divisions between “yours” and “mine”, substantially widen the fissures of fissiparous intellect in
human society.
Those who want to promote the welfare of all human beings, remaining above all sorts
of parochial sentiments, have no alternative but to embrace universalism with their heart and soul –
there is no other way. As universalism is totally devoid of any characteristic of ism, it is not proper to
depict universalism as an ism. If everyone is looked upon as one’s own, no one remains beyond the
periphery of one’s kith and kin. Naturally, then, there is no scope for violence, envy, narrowness, etc. “
From, ‘Problem of the Day’ (18), 1958 P.R.Sarkar
Biosphere-wide Consciousness
Leading Thinker and Author Jeremy Rifkin aspires for a combination of biosphere consciousness
and distributed capitalism; the latter made possible by a combination of backyard energy and global
information and communications technologies (ICT), similar to what is envisaged through Samaj
community-centric economy of Prout and progressive Samasamajtattva, that is biosphere-wide
Consciousness to secure the future of humanity.
(Synopsis of his book ‘The Empathic Civilization: The Race to Global Consciousness in a World in Crisis’)
‘Consciousness’ historically…connects the qualitative changes in energy regimes and
communication techniques with changes in how people understand and organize reality.

Hunter-gatherer societies were all oral cultures and thus only existed in geographically-limited
small groups and identified themselves symbiotically in terms of that group. Spiritually, these societies
believed in local gods who were only known to others through oral tales.
The development of writing, as well as hydraulics and irrigation, allowed agricultural
societies to better organize themselves so that a larger geographic area and a larger population could be
controlled. Hydraulic power was labour-intensive, requiring large populations of subservient people.
With scripts, there was a shift from a mythological consciousness to a theological consciousness;
individuals thought of themselves less in terms of a small, local group and more with a monotheistic
religion, which included a personal relationship with a god.

Decentralization followed the collapse of the Roman Empire, as each town operated a water or windmill
and the printing press distributed literature, empowering more people. Autobiographies started to be
written, more people married for love rather than other arrangements, and the concept of privacy,
democracy, and market capitalism was more prevalent. People began to organize themselves more into
nation-states. Steam and fossil fuels became the dominant energy regime and electronic
communications, like telegraphs, radios, telephones, and television, became the dominant means of
communication. With vastly more interaction with other people and cultures, there was more emphasis
on studying people and psychology. Personal investments, social exploration, and creativity became
highly valued.
…… Rifkin extrapolates the changes in energy regimes to predict a shift in production towards
renewable sources like wind and solar power under distributed (i.e. personal) management. Rifkin also
extrapolates the changes in communication to predict a proliferation of wireless, mobile personal
communication that allows people to be constantly connected to others regardless of distance,
language, or other barriers. This will evolve people's sense of empathy to create a biosphere-wide
consciousness and a mode of production he calls distributed capitalism. Rifkin believes this new system
will allow people to solve more complex issues, such as climate change and pathogenic pandemics,
focus more on quality of life (rather than materialistic) issues, and value collaboration over competition.
Source: Wikipedia, 2014
“The human race has only one culture. I am not prepared to accept that there are
numerous cultures. But then, this much can be said: the dances, songs, pronunciations and festive
celebrations of various groups of the human race have their local peculiarities. These local peculiarities,
or differences in manners and customs, cannot be considered separate cultures.

Such differences in the local manners and customs of human beings cannot be removed
by the force of law or by dictatorial rule. If attempts are made to destroy local manners and customs,
languages, and other social conventions in the name of national unity, human unity, or national
sentiment, in all likelihood that will result in the escalation of mutual distrust and violence, which will
lead collective life down the path of destruction.
I am in favour of social synthesis. In my opinion, the more intimately people associate
with one another and the more closely one corner of the earth comes to another corner, the more local
specialities in customs and manners will create newer forms as a result of frequent intermixing. The
flowers of different gardens will be gathered together and transformed into a bouquet. The beauty of
the bouquet will be no less than the beauty of the individual flowers; rather it will be more beautiful.
The melody of Dhrupada will be transformed into Kheyal, while classical music will be changed into
kiirtana, bul, bht iylii, jrii, darbeshi, etc.
If different countries or if people of so-called different communities show enthusiasm for
increasing social interaction and matrimonial relations, within a very short time social synthesis can be
achieved. To some extent we notice the positive effects of such synthesis in cosmopolitan cities.”
From, ‘Problem of the Day’ (23), 1958 P.R.Sarkar

Singular bio-psychic basis of all Languages
Between the points of no magnitude there is a flow of cognition. In that fluidal flow of
cognition, bubbles are created. These bubbles are the bubbles of ideas. In the Cosmic emanation of the
Supreme, when these bubbles touch the unit “I feeling”, then unit ideas are created as a result of close
proximity to the Cosmic Ocean. These are the reflections or refractions of Cosmic ideas. When these
ideas concern the unit, the unit “I” tries to express them through its own psycho-physical structure. It
endeavours to express its unit desires and longings according to the capacity of the vocal cord and its
hormone secretions. These reflections or refractions of ideas are expressed either within or without. The
expression within is called “inner voice” and the expression without is called “outer voice.” These
expressions within and without are collectively called language.
According to structural, environmental, climatic and racial differences, languages are
expressed in different forms, thus we get different languages. So far as the refraction of the bubbles is
concerned, the language of the universe is the same, was the same and will remain the same forever.
The language of the “inner voice” is always one and indivisible. Only in the outer manifestation do
we get so many languages. In the expressed world linguistic differences have a little value, but in the
inner world they have no meaning, no import and no value.
20 February 1989, Calcutta P.R.Sarkar
World Language and Script 6
…. so the necessity of a world government, also, will be profoundly felt. Gradually the
people in one region of the world will have to interact more with the people in various other regions,
and in the course of this interaction they will have to try to understand one another better.
The human race has numerous languages. Each language is our language, the
language of all of us. In this context sentiments such as, “My language; your language” or, “Indigenous
language; foreign language” are extremely defective. Only this much can be said: that we have many
languages, but I can express myself in one or more than one language among them.
Although all the languages of the world deserve equal respect, a common language for
the convenient exchange of ideas among people of different regions of the world will have to be
selected. The most widely spoken language in the world will have to be accepted with an open mind as
the vishva bh *universal or world language+. As long as the world government is not vested with full
administrative authority over the entire world, different states in various parts of the world may, at their
convenience, accept the world language or any other local language as their official language.
What-ever language may be accepted as the official language by any particular state, it
will not be proper to allow any slackness in facilitating the study and teaching of the world language.
Under no circumstances can we keep ourselves cut off from the rest of the world like frogs in a well. Or,
staying away from our other brothers and sisters throughout the world in the name of nationalism,
under no circumstances should we die, breaking our heads in darkness.
Although, at present, English is the world language, all languages are subject to birth
and death. So it cannot be said that English will continue to enjoy the same status for eternity. The most
widely spoken language in the world in any particular age will have to be acknowledged as the world
language of that age. For the general convenience of the people of the world, the necessity of a world
script is not as great as the necessity of a world language. But then, it cannot be denied that learning
languages will be easier if the different languages of the world are written in one script.
Among all the scripts prevalent in the world, the Roman script is the most scientific. But if
this script is used for all spoken languages, certain practical difficulties will arise. Besides this, people are
partial to their regional scripts. In my opinion it is better if the decision whether to use the Roman script
for different languages or not is left to the people who speak those languages. The greater the number
of people who learn the Roman script as the world script, the better it is.
There is no rule that the script of the world language of a particular age is to be the world
script of that age. Rather, the script which is judged to be the most scientific script of the particular age
will be the world script. The study of the world language of the age should be undertaken in that very
From, ‘Problem of the Day’ (21-22), 1958 P.R.Sarkar