Page 439 - Complete Works of Dr. KCV Volume 1

The criticism of fanciful psychology and unnecessary metaphysics is a criticism that will not be justified from the standpoint of Indian thought or even modern thought, because the metaphysical theory is absolutely adequate for any religious consciousness and some basis of procedure which shall avoid great complications of mythical symbolism is what is provided by Patanjali. He avoids the extraordinary proposals of Vedanta of the evolution of elements and merely accepts them to have proceeded from one common substance, the Prakriti and then he avoids the implications of causal connection between the Isvara and the evolution of the world or even its appearance. He takes only those absolutely necessary factors which make for an uninterrupted course of Yogic practice, for the light that comes in freedom is unriddling, dissolving and vouchsafes direct apprehension of all Reality. Till then metaphysical theories about God and the individual may stand. The minimum of metaphysics is what one finds in Patanjali and not unnecessary complications. As to fanciful psychology we have surely instances of the extraordinary lengths to which conjectural relations can be formulated. In fact it follows the lead of inner introvert experiencing more than observation of outer expressions and the physiological bases. This building up of psychology, though it is open to grave charges of misinterpretation from a physiological and behaviouristic angle, is indeed true to its mystical instinct and purpose. It is the mysticism of Unity of all life that is the mystic's greatest and profoundest metaphysical principle formed out of a greater vision and experience.
In Patanjali in fact there is no metaphysical bearing but only the instruction as to the profoundest depths of being and attainment. God is necessary and only as a spiritual guru is He to be appealed for help on the path of Yoga.
But the criticism of Mr. Leuba is not altogether wrong. But he ventures to state that "an ethical purpose and practice is, nevertheless not logically demanded by the goal of Yoga; for honesty, friendliness etc. are irrelevant to one who seeks utter detachment in isolation. Cultivating friendliness and rejoicing with those who rejoice are demands hardly in agreement with a desire for suppression of personality. This is one of the incongruities that betray the confusion of thought from which this system suffers".* This criticism far from being right is positively wrong, because all mystics by virtue of their aspiration to alter the circumstances in which they are placed,