Universal Oversoul

• Brahmanic doctrine; very close to truth of Supreme

94:3.4In cer­tain phases the con­cept of the One Uni­ver­sal Over­soul as the to­tal­ity of the sum­ma­tion of all crea­ture ex­is­tence led the In­dian philoso­phers very close to the truth of the Su­preme Be­ing, but this truth availed them naught be­cause they failed to evolve any rea­son­able or ra­tio­nal per­sonal ap­proach to the at­tain­ment of their the­o­retic mono­the­is­tic goal of Brah­man-Narayana.

94:3.5The karma prin­ci­ple of causal­ity con­ti­nu­ity is, again, very close to the truth of the reper­cus­sional syn­the­sis of all time-space ac­tions in the De­ity pres­ence of the Su­preme; but this pos­tu­late never pro­vided for the co-or­di­nate per­sonal at­tain­ment of De­ity by the in­di­vid­ual re­li­gion­ist, only for the ul­ti­mate en­gulf­ment of all per­son­al­ity by the Uni­ver­sal Over­soul.

94:3.6The phi­los­o­phy of Brah­man­ism also came very near to the re­al­iza­tion of the in­dwelling of the Thought Ad­justers, only to be­come per­verted through the mis­con­cep­tion of truth. The teach­ing that the soul is the in­dwelling of the Brah­man would have paved the way for an ad­vanced re­li­gion had not this con­cept been com­pletely vi­ti­ated by the be­lief that there is no hu­man in­di­vid­u­al­ity apart from this in­dwelling of the Uni­ver­sal One.

94:3.7In the doc­trine of the merg­ing of the self-soul with the Over­soul, the the­olo­gians of In­dia failed to pro­vide for the sur­vival of some­thing hu­man, some­thing new and unique, some­thing born of the union of the will of man and the will of God. The teach­ing of the soul’s re­turn to the Brah­man is closely par­al­lel to the truth of the Ad­juster’s re­turn to the bo­som of the Uni­ver­sal Fa­ther, but there is some­thing dis­tinct from the Ad­juster which also sur­vives, the mor­ontial coun­ter­part of mor­tal per­son­al­ity. And this vi­tal con­cept was fa­tally ab­sent from Brah­manic phi­los­o­phy.