1

U.G.C. SPONSORED NATIONAL SEMINAR: G.M, BANPUR: KEY-NOTE ADDRESS: 25.3.12

SRI AUROBINDO AND WITTGENSTEIN
ON CULTURE AND VALUE

Ganesh Prasad Das

Philosophy is regarded in the West as a product of situations at a time in the world or a region
of the world. The zeitgeist (the spirit of the age) is seen by the philosopher in all its vistas. He catches
the nodal points of mental operations in different areas of activity and constructs a system of thought
which takes stock of the situation in its entirety and gives it a direction to move and evolve. In the
twentieth century it has been said that philosophy is a critique of other modes of thought. It is the
development of thought in a mode like religion, ethics or science (the dominant modes) that propels
philosophic reflections. Accordingly, philosophy is conceived in the plural as Philosophy of Science,
Philosophy of Religion, Philosophy of Value, and so on. The scenario is quite different with Sri
Aurobindo. Like the rsis of ancient India, his experience encompasses the whole universe. He is
concerned with the growth and rise of consciousness in all its dimensions and manifestations. Only a
yogi of the stature of Sri Aurobindo can apprehend all things of all thought and say vividly and
voluminously in the way he does. His writings constitute a vast sea and we can take out that much,
which we can manage to hold without spilling.

There have been past-masters in philosophy in India and the West as well, who have sought to
see life steadily and see it whole from a point of vantage. From the point of view of relentless logic,
F.H. Bradley in the West found that all thinking about the world is relational thinking and that all
relational thinking involves obdurate contradictions. Bradley is known as an absolute idealist. For
him, the Absolute is alone real. It cannot be apprehended by thought. Thought must commit suicide in
order to apprehend Reality. It is apprehended by immediate experience. So Bradley dispenses with
that function of mind which is discursive thinking.

Adi Samkaracarya of India, who is often compared by scholars with Bradley, is labeled as a
monist. As a matter of fact, he is a non-dualist. Sat-Chit-Ananda, technically termed as Brahman, is
the ultimate reality according to Samkara. Brahma satya jagat mithya is what is said to be the
2

synoptic expression of his philosophy. This gives the impression that Samkara does not admit the
world to be real; he rather explains it away.

Bradley fixed the thinking being at the intellectual level. The most that the thinking being can
do here is set his consciousness well at the level of understanding the world, then drop down the
understanding mind and set the world aside. Samkara does not drop down the intellect, because one
seeks to rise beyond it in and through it (evam budhau para buddhya, as the Gita puts it). The
paramarthika is attained only through the fullness of vyavaharika, that is, up from vyavaharika to
paramarthika and down from paramarthika to vyavaharika.
In Sri Aurobindos perception there is no suicide, surrender or suppression of any human
faculty, physical or mental, or any of its aspects. What is there is freedom of mind, transcendence of
consciousness and their expansion. Although Hegel in the West is concerned with the march of
consciousness or spirit, to be exact, he confines the spirit within logical scaffolding. It has a
dialectical march thesis, antithesis and synthesis that constitutes a new thesis. Sri Aurobindo
observes in his yogic vision the march of consciousness in its natural pace. Sri Aurobindo finds that
the expansion of consciousness has many different levels. Accordingly, he conceives of different
levels of mind, corresponding to which there are different levels of world. The five lower worlds are
Physical, Vital or Life-Force, Mind, Intuitive Mind, Overmind and the seven higher worlds are
Supermind (three layers) and Existence-Consciousness-Bliss (four layers). In the Savitri, Sri
Aurobindo captures the basics of all philosophies, religions and yogic practices. The epic
describes the cosmogony of the universe; from the seven planes of existence, the various grades of
consciousness: Higher Mind, Illumined Mind, Intuitive Mind, Overmind and finally Supermind. He
describes them in vivid detail and unveils the occult geography of the universe (brahmanda bhugola
as Balaram Das of Odishan pancasakha puts it).
Sri Aurobindo teaches that all beings are united in that One Self and Spirit but divided by a
certain separativity of consciousness, an ignorance of their true Self and Reality in the mind, life and
body. It is possible to remove this veil of separative consciousness and become aware of the true
Self, the Divinity within us and all. The unitary consciousness fissures and loses itself in shallowness
of self-interest. This needs to be integrated. Sri Aurobindo shows the path of integral consciousness in
both theory and practice. He had certain aspirations and they are said to be five in number. It would
3

be seen that these are in an order of expansion, both horizontal and vertical. His first aspiration was
the freedom of India. The freedom of India was not whole according to Sri Aurobindo. Incidentally
the date of birth of Sri Aurobindo is the date of birth of free India. If his consciousness had operated
from the Supramental level, the freedom would have been whole. He said in his Independence-day
message:
India is free but she has not achieved unity, only a fissured and broken freedom. But by
whatever means, the division must and will go. For without it the destiny of India might be
seriously impaired and even frustrated. But that must not be.
His second aspiration was the freedom of the Asian peoples. Now all the Asian countries are free,
but the economic growth of all of them is not at equal pace. What is important is that these peoples
are not fully integrated. His third aspiration was world unity. This is to be achieved through the
unity between different regions as that between Asian countries. This has so far been not possible in
true spirit of the term. It is said that Gorbachevs call for a united Europe and recent developments of
an E.E.C. (European Economic Community) are illustrative of fulfillment of this aspiration. In a
shortsighted view this may be doubted, but in a farsighted view there is a sign of optimism here. The
fourth aspiration of Sri Aurobindo was the re-emergence of Indias spirituality. It is anybodys
observation that Indian thought has genuinely caught the mind of the thinking persons of the world in
the past and it is doing so in the present. President Obamas paying allegiance to Gandhian thought
may serve as an instance. His fifth aspiration was the evolution of human consciousness from mind
to Truth-Mind. There have been quite a few philosophers and scientists of undisputed standing who
vouchsafe the possibility of a state beyond mind. Scientists like Sir Arthur Eddington, Sir James
Jeans, Erwin Schrodinger, not excluding Einstein and philosophers like Wittgenstein and Antony
Flew are included in the list. Many yogis proclaim that after 1956, the year of the Supramental
Manifestation, there has been a major precipitation in their yoga. Hard problems that have been
tormenting them all over the world have suddenly vanished; common barriers in yoga have been
suddenly removed. We cannot disrespect their words as we may not have experienced these
things. We can say that all the five of Sri Aurobindos aspirations are in the process of
realisation precisely in the manner that he envisaged them.
The modern man suffers at the very core of his being from a total spiritual bankruptcy. The
turbulence and tribulations that we experience in our social, economic, political, religious and ethical
spheres of life are symptomatic of the malady. The root cause of this lies nowhere save in the inner
4

consciousness of the modern man. Does Sri Aurobindo hold any solution to this? Yes, he does.
He points out that what man faces today is not just a social, political, economic, ecological or a
nuclear crisis. It is an evolutionary crisis. The highest power of consciousness at present available to
man, namely the mental consciousness, seems totally incapable of solving these problems. If I say in
the context of the turmoil in the teaching and examination system of today that the right mode of
examination reform is to do away with examinations, this would sound like a prescription to chop off
somebodys head as a cure of his headache! It is simply because we are not able to appreciate that we
raise the dust and we complain that we cannot see! The very accumulation of such obstinate problems
is an indication that the time has come for man to transcend the limitations of his mental
consciousness. When we describe a philosophical or ethical point of view as anthropocentric or
humanistic, we presuppose a static nature of human being in so far as his participation in
consciousness is concerned. I do not know whether those who label Sri Aurobindos philosophy as
spiritual humanism are aware of this. In Sri Aurobindos view:
Man is a transitional being; he is not final. The step from man to superman is the most
approaching achievement of earths evolution. It is inevitable because it is at once the
intention of the inner spirit and the logic of Nature's process.
The Mothers own commentary on this is equally to the point:
There is an ascending evolution in nature which goes from the stone to the plant, from the
plant to the animal, and from the animal to man. Because man is, for the moment, at the
summit of the ascending evolution, he considers himself as the final stage in this ascension
and believes there can be nothing on earth superior to him. In this he is mistaken. In his
physical nature he is yet almost wholly an animal, a thinking and speaking animal, but still an
animal in his material habits and instincts. Undoubtedly, nature cannot be satisfied with
such an imperfect result; she tries to bring out a being who will be to man what man is to the
animal, a being who will remain a man in its external form, and yet whose consciousness
will rise far above the mental and its slavery to ignorance.
Here we are reminded of Leibnitz, who advocated that monads (irreducible units of consciousness
cidanu) are substances of the universe. According to him, monads are of various grades: sleeping,
conscious and self-conscious. Leibnitz is, by and large, understood to mean that inert matter like
match box, microphone and motor car are sleeping monads; non-human animals are conscious and
human animals are self-conscious monads. But this is not what he means to say. The philosophers
classification of consciousness cuts across the physicists classification of objects of nature; there
5

could be sleeping, conscious and self-conscious monads among what we call the natural species of
human animals.
It is very pertinent here to be clear about the sense of some the terms, which Sri Aurobindo
draws from the tradition, but does not use them in their traditional sense. Firstly, the term spiritual
does not mean merely cultural or moral. In his own words,
Spirituality in its essence is an awakening to the inner reality of our being, to a Spirit, Self,
Soul, which is other than our mind, life and body, an inner aspiration to know, to feel, to be
that, to enter into contact with a greater reality, beyond and pervading the universe, which
inhabits also our own being.
Secondly, yoga does not mean extraordinary physical postures and breathing exercises as it
is popularly understood. Yoga is the blanket term for a range of mainly
psychological disciplines used in India tor bringing about a change in human consciousness. The
word yoga has the same root as the English word yoke. Yoga is a disciplined process of inner
development which attempts to yoke the individual soul with the more-than-human, the divine, the
perfect. Sri Aurobindos yoga regards the body, the life energies and the mind to be the instruments
of the soul and seeks to perfect them. It does not lead to dissolution but gives man a new birth and
enables him to play his part in the cosmic evolution as a channel of the Divines Will in the
becoming. In Sri Aurobindos words,
The ascent to the divine life is the human journey, the Work of works, the acceptable
Sacrifice. This alone is mans real business in the world and the justification of his existence.
Without it he would be only an insect crawling among other ephemeral insects on a speck of
surface mud and water which has managed to form itself amid the appalling immensities of
the physical universe.
Thirdly, evolution, as it is widely understood, is a biological concept used in the West to explain the
gradual emergence of more and more complex forms, an emergence beginning with unicellular
organisms and culminating in man as we find in Darwins advocacy. It is
Sri Aurobindos distinctive contribution when he shows that yoga and Evolution are but
two perspectives of a single process. To quote a few lines from an old guard of Advaitism, Mahadev
Shastri,
The ancient Aryan have traced the evolutionary process in detail, and they fall in with the
modern science as to the view that the human form has been gradually evolved out of the
6

animalBy the time that the evolution of human form has after passing through a long
transition period, reached that stage at which it no longer admits of any appreciable further
development what we call mind begins to show signs of its existence by processes which
constitute gems of the thinking faculty.
Fourthly, another seminal term is Supermind. Sri Aurobindo has himself explained
that the concept Supermind was not entirely his new discovery. The Vedas of India posit the vision of
it as Satyam Ritam Brihat - the True, the Right, the Vast - and it is symbolised as
the Sun of Knowledge shining in the highest heaven.
But some people of the positivistic school argue that the Supermind is not something that is
going to be accessible to us in the near future, at least not in our lifetime. Its coming is still in the
distant future, and how distant we do not know for certain. But, in the mean while, we have urgent
problems confronting us on all sides to tackle with. There are problems like hunger, poverty, lack of
housing and medical care, some of which are very ably highlighted by the Nobel laureate Amartya
Sen. Children are dying in hundreds of thousands every year for want of nutritiously adequate food.
Then there are the terrors of a nuclear holocaust, of population explosion, of pollution and ecological
disaster, etc. etc.; the list is endless. Would it not be unwise to busy ourselves at this juncture with
something as vague and distant as the Supramental consciousness when we are threatened by
so many of these problems?
This has been explained by Sri Nolini Kanta Gupta, an exponent of Sri Aurobindos teaching.
He points out that men have attempted social, political, economic and moral reforms from time
immemorial. It is not that reformers and well-wishers have appeared on earth for the first time now.
Many of them did get busy with the task of getting something done in the physical and material
world. But they found that achieving something in the material world such as procuring food for
each and every person, clothing and housing, is also an ideal. But the mystery is that it is not always
the ideal nearest to the earth which is the easiest to achieve or the first thing to be done. Do we not
see before our very eyes how some very simple innocent social and economic changes are difficult to
carry out - they bring in their train, quite disproportionately, gestures and movements of violence and
revolution. This is so because we seek to cure symptoms and not to touch the root causes of the
disease. For even the most innocent-looking social, economic and political abuse has at its base far
reaching attitudes and lifes urges that have to be sought out and tackled first. Even in mundane
matters we do not dig deep enough or rise high enough. We must first realise that: No material
7

organisation is capable of bringing a solution to the miseries of man. Man must rise to a higher level
of consciousness and get rid of his ignorance, limitation and selfishness in order to free himself from
his sufferings.
In the 20
th
century, the word integral was coined, totally independently, four times, in each
case around a certain cluster of shared ideas: (i) Sri Aurobindo- Integral Yoga (publication began in
1914), (ii) Pitirim Sorokin- Integral Society (publication began in 1910, final publication in 1930),
(iii) Jean Gebser- Integral Aperspective (1930s, first published in 1949), (iv) Frithjof Schuon- Integral
Metaphysics (1986).
Consequent upon the big event of globalisation, which is largely Americanisation, the
economy, politics and culture of countries undergoing this all-devouring process, the American brand
of integralism has come to the fore thereby creating a smoke screen around Sri Aurobindos
integralism. Let me put the scenario as M. Alan Kazley sees it. Currently, especially in America and
on the Internet, the word Integral, and the Integral Movement, is defined almost totally within the
context of the philosophy and personality cult of the American autodidact Ken Wilber. This leads to
the following problems:
1. (a) The choice between the intellectual and ideological conservatism of yet another
New Age religion, which is strongly defined by Wilberian or Post-Wilberian themes,
or
(b) A shapeless buzz-word that means nothing, but popular in integral forums.
2. As a result of the above, an intellectual, practical and spiritual narrowing, leading to a
trivialisation, or misrepresentation of earlier definitions, e.g., those of Sri Aurobindo,
and others like Jean Gebser.
3. Lack of spiritual insight due to over intellectual approach surrendering to modernity
and consequent denial of or explaining away of realities and experiences.
4. Lack of true understanding or appreciation of Bhakti (surrender to the Supreme) that
this is the central element of almost every authentic spiritual path.
8

5. A total non-integral approach to spirituality based on a synthesis of Californian feel-
good holistic life-style and a Westernised secularised non-threatened (i.e., non-
metaphysical) and intellectual approach to Buddhism.
One European philosopher, who is a near contemporary and who thinks in the approximate
wave length of Sri Aurobindo is Ludwig Wittgenstein. The past-master and father of two traditions of
logico-linguistic philosophy, Wittgenstein is very critical of European culture. His views are
contained in a book entitled Culture and Value published posthumously by his literary executors. The
culture of a country consists in its science, religion, philosophy, literature, music, arts, social
behavior, ceremonies and observances, which the citizens of that country build for themselves by
thinking, imagination and deliberation. The social observance followed through generations
uninterruptedly settles down as a tradition. Of these facets of culture, philosophy happens to be the
most preponderant one and indeed central to them all. It governs and organises all the facets including
itself into whole giving it a purpose and a direction towards the achievement and activisation of the
purpose. According to Sri Aurobindo, what is required is the vision of the whole and the synthesis of
all the true affairs of mind. The true affairs of mind, he says, are knowledge, science, art, thought,
ethics, philosophy, religion. Wittgenstein compares a culture with a big organisation which assigns
each of its members a place where he can work in the spirit of the whole and it is perfectly fair for his
power to be measured by the contribution he succeeds in making to the whole experience. This
holistic vision is constructed and imparted by none other than philosophy.
In this connection, a distinction may be made between speculation-philosophy and action-
philosophy. I have deliberately chosen the expressions in order not to confound them with speculative
philosophy and philosophy of action respectively. Indeed, all philosophy is speculative or
ratiocinative and no observation or experiment does furnish any data to count for or against a view in
philosophy. Philosophy of action is a branch of philosophy of analysis that seeks to study the logic of
concepts relating to human action. Sri Aurobindos system of thought comes under action-
philosophy, as almost all the systems of thought of India do. Indian philosophy, Sri Aurobindo
remarks, abhors mere guessing and speculation. It is otherwise the case with European philosophy. It
is a pursuit apart from life in the words of Sri Aurobindo, or, what is the same, it is a kind of
excursion from life, in the words of the Wittgensteinean scholar David Pears. Wittgenstein, who is
steeped in the European tradition, himself says, I am not interested in constructing a building, so
much as having a perspicuous view of the foundations of possible building. This only shows that
9

philosophy is conceptual but does not show that the conceptual pursuit should be only about the
factual rather than about the ideal. The philosopher can call to command a clear view of language
of description as well as of language of evaluation. But the philosopher is expected to do it with
concern for the general and the possible, not for the particular and the actual.

It is the task of action-philosopher to set the ideal, characterise it, distinguish it from and
establish its supremacy over other ideals. Although he cannot point to any particular situation as
being the ideal one as per his depiction as it is logically impossible to do so, he can very well point to
a given situation as not being the ideal one. If we conceive in this way, the following similar
observations of Sri Aurobindo and Wittgenstein regarding the state of culture and civilisation of the
humanity at large in the present century, then we would find that they must be espousing not too
dissimilar ideals. Sri Aurobindo observes that the life of mankind is still nine-tenth of barbarism and
one tenth of culture. According to him, civilisation is harmony of spirit, mind and body and
barbarism is that cycle of civilisation in which the self is entirely identified with the body and
physical life. Wittgensteins succinct observation is, I have no sympathy for the current European
civilisation and do not understand its goals, if has any.

The ideal is perfection. Perfection is not, however, to be identified with as much good as it
could be. It is the Good. The Good is a trans-empirical or supracosmic value. We can say with
Plato that God is Good, not vice versa, of course, as that would constitute a limitation of God,
conceptually at least, to only one aspect of the world. The world has other aspects like existence, truth
and beauty, which are also severally and collectively in God. We can, therefore, say too that Good is
Divine. Both Sri Aurobindo and Wittgenstein are at one with respect to their vision of the ideal. Sri
Aurobindo pronounces in his Vedas and Upanisads that The whole aim of a great culture is to lift
man upto something which at first he is not, to lead him to knowledge though he starts from an
unfathomable ignorance. He says elsewhere that God is the name of some great soul and self of
Truth, Good and Beauty given by us. Divine has a supra-cosmic existence. Wittgenstein says, What
is good is also divineThe good is outside the sphere of facts. (He wonders whether his cultural
ideal is a new one remembering perhaps Platos aphoristic expression, God is Good.) The ideal
before the human aspirant is said to be supra-cosmic. It must not, however, be supposed to exist or
subsist or hail from any shadowy cosmos as it is thought to be with Plato, who is otherwise admired
by Sri Aurobindo. The ideal is to be manifested in and through this cosmos, in which we, the human
10

beings, live, move and have our being. This is a living ideal. This ideal tends to be manifested in
principle in every aspect of every being and yet remains as an ideal. This is what Sri Aurobindo calls,
the Life Divine. The ideal or Perfection or Good or Divine which Sri Aurobindo terms as supermind
is no hypostatized entity. Sri Aurobindo clarifies that Perfection has to be worked outout of
imperfectionTo work out this end for ourselves and for humanity is the object of our yogic
practice. The ideal is not thus a-cosmic, but cosmic in this sense. Still, it is characterised as supra or
beyond cosmic in order that the process of evolution and progress down from matter upto supermind
through life and mind may remain as a perpetual one. Wittgenstein clarifies, The way in which you
use the word God does not show whom you mean but rather what you mean.

Man aspires and strives to rise upto the divine and the divine too ascends to participate in the
process and descends down when it finds the ground suitable and ready for the same. Life Divine is
thus a dual and mutual state of affairs. This Divine is not, however, anthropomorphic, nor is it
anthropocentric. To think it in this way is to limit the process of evolution and deny its true import. It
is a fact that the process of evolution has reached the stage of mind at present, but it is not its acme. It
must go on and go beyond. It is also a fact that those who possess mind are human beings and it is
they who are to prepare themselves for the next stage of evolution. Even from the point of view of the
whole, human beings are only the transitional phase of evolution and the mind is its middle term.

We have marched forward, willy-nilly, into the 21
st
century. It appears that our mental
preparations for the journey do not keep pace with the passage of time. A New Years Day message
of the Mother in 1970 read, The world is preparing for a big change. Will you help? This message
reads fresh even today after a lapse of 42 years. Indeed, this is ever fresh as these two simple
sentences precisely reflect the whole of Sri Aurobindos philosophy of integral monism. It is said that
a drop of practice is worth more than an ocean of theory. Now the all-important question that stares at
us for our response is: Has Sri Aurobindo remained only of academic interest to us or have his
ideals been put into practice?

<<<<00>>>>
Formerly, Professor of Philosophy, UU
& Senior Research Fellow, ICPR,
Rutayani, 396, Paika Nagar,
Bhubaneswar-751003.

11

U.G.C. SPONSORED NATIONAL SEMINAR: G.M, BANPUR: KEY-NOTE ADDRESS: 25.3.12

SRI AUROBINDO AND LUDWIG WITTGENSTEIN
ON CULTURE AND VALUE
Ganesh Prasad Das

Samkaras Advaita is termed as Kevaladvaita. Many thinkers after Samkara found the latters version of Advaita
unsatisfactory and offered alternative versions. Sri Aurobindo holds one such version and it is prevalent under the title of Integral
Monism. These alternative versions of Advaita do not refute the basics of Advaita philosophy; they only differ from Samkara in some
respects or other in respect of its elucidation and emphasis on certain ideas rather than certain others. Samkara seeks to integrate ideas
of all sorts in his elucidation and to place them properly in the context of the Advaitic world view. The alternative elucidations
emerged, more often than not, due to lack of proper understanding of Samkara. Anyway, classical philosophical systems need to be
thought afresh at the turn of big events and put in the contemporary idiom for it to be relevant for the healthy growth of man and the
society he lives in.

In the 20
th
century, the word integral was coined, totally independently, four times, in each case around a certain cluster of
shared ideas: (i) Sri Aurobindo- Integral Yoga (publication began in 1914), (ii) Pitirim Sorokin- Integral Society (publication began in
1910, final publication in 1930), (iii) Jean Gebser- Integral Aperspective (1930s, first published in 1949), (iv) Frithjof Schuon- Integral
Metaphysics (1986).
Consequent upon the big event of globalisation, which is largely Americanisation, the economy, politics and culture of
countries undergoing this all-devouring process, the American brand of integralism has come to the fore thereby creating a smoke
screen around Sri Aurobindos integralism. Let me put the scenario as M. Alan Kazley sees it. Currently, especially in America and on
the Internet, the word Integral, and the Integral Movement, is defined almost totally within the context of the philosophy and
personality cult of the American autodidact Ken Wilber. This leads to the following problems:
1. (a) The choice between the intellectual and ideological conservatism of yet another New Age religion, which is
strongly defined by Wilberian or Post-Wilberian themes, or
(b) A shapeless buzz-word that means nothing, but popular in integral forums.
2. As a result of the above, an intellectual, practical and spiritual narrowing, leading to a trivialization, or
misrepresentation of earlier definitions- e.g. those of Sri Aurobindo, and others like Jean Gebser.
3. Lack of spiritual insight due to over intellectual approach surrendering to modernity and consequent denial of or
explaining away of realities and experiences.
4. Lack of true understanding or appreciation of Bhakti (surrender to the Supreme) that this is the central element of
almost every authentic spiritual path.
5. A total non-integral approach to spirituality based on a synthesis of Californian feel-good holistic life-style and a
Westernised secularised non-threatened (i.e. non-metaphysical) and intellectual approach to Buddhism.
Sri Aurobindo is the advocate of Integral Yoga. We know that Swami Vivekananda also advocates the integration of four
Yogas. They are the great thinkers of Indian renaissance and are trying to revive the ancient Indian tradition in the contemporary idiom
in order to cater to the contemporary need. The contention is that the European tradition with its feet strong in science and technology
cannot fulfill the aspirations of man. Such fulfillment is possible if we follow the path of Advaita as restated by Sri Aurobindo.
Ludwig Wittgenstein is a past-master of European philosophy of the 20
th
century and a near contemporary of Sri Aurobindo.
He provides a critique of the science and technology based European culture in his book Culture and Value. He observes, I have no
sympathy for the current European civilisation and do not understand its goals, if it has any. According to Sri Aurobindo, civilisation
is a harmony of spirit, mind and body and barbarism is that cycle of civilisation in which the self is entirely identified with the body and
physical life.

<<0>>

Formerly, Professor of Philosophy, Utkal University &
Senior Research Fellow, I.C.P.R., Rutayani,
396, Paika Nagar, Bhubaneswar-751003.