We could ask a thou­sand ques­tions in a world of uncer­tainty, but let us frame just two: Where is the world really head­ing? Does man feel bet­ter in it than in days gone by, or not? To give the two-word answer with lac­on­ic brev­ity: down and no.

Down

Inter­est­ingly, sci­ence and the tra­di­tion­al reli­gious world view fore­tell a sim­il­ar end for the world. At the plan­et­ary level, the Sun, as it turns into a red giant, will con­sume the Earth togeth­er with the life upon it, while at the cos­mic level the great col­lapse will put an end to all mani­fest­a­tion. Com­pared with nat­ur­al sci­ence's pic­ture of anni­hil­a­tion, the reli­gious world view holds out little more prom­ise. Chris­ti­an eschat­o­logy com­pounds the already cheer­less story of the world's anni­hil­a­tion with a fur­ther, threat­en­ing moral bur­den, the Last Judge­ment, softened only a little by the hoped-for pos­sib­il­ity of sal­va­tion. In plain words, by the account of sci­ence and theo­logy alike, this world is head­ing towards its end, because both think in terms of lin­ear time. The Indi­an tra­di­tion, which oth­er­wise thinks in cycles, illus­trates this tend­ency towards decay with an apt image: time, like a giant ser­pent, threatens to swal­low the world, with past and future as the jaws of this fear­some creature.

No

Wheth­er we feel bet­ter than in days gone by is a hard ques­tion to answer. This is not merely about well-being, though even that is no simple thing to meas­ure. Attempts are made to meas­ure con­tent­ment in rela­tion to income, secur­ity of employ­ment and live­li­hood, expect­a­tions and many other human factors, with mod­est suc­cess. It is enough for us to put the ques­tion to two seg­ments of human­ity. Let one seg­ment be, say, a hun­dred people, and the other 3.6 bil­lion. Today the wealth of the hun­dred richest people on Earth equals the com­bined mater­i­al means of the poorest 3.6 bil­lion. And I ven­ture to say that one whose daily share is only a hand­ful of rice and a few sips of water is not neces­sar­ily more dis­con­ten­ted than one who is already bored even with truffles.

Poor is not he who has little, but he who longs for much.

Meta­phys­ic­ally, man does not feel good. Who­ever feels good does not think meta­phys­ic­ally. And this is not a judge­ment but a state­ment of fact. Until man suc­ceeds in return­ing to the prim­or­di­al har­mony, he can only feel bad. Gran­ted, so many people, so many ways of answer­ing the banal ques­tion: How are you? Des­pite the inher­ent lim­its of mater­i­al exist­ence, many answer favour­ably: fine, bet­ter and bet­ter, not too bad…

Most people, in the course of their lives, struggle not with the prob­lem of cos­mic loneli­ness, the onto­lo­gic­al absurdity of exist­ence or the near-impossib­il­ity of catch­ing illu­sion in the act, but with far more pro­sa­ic con­di­tions. Man may feel good out of ignor­ance, too, but bey­ond a cer­tain spir­itu­al level con­tent­ment pre­vails once more, now in its high­er octave. Once, when a mas­ter came home from a pil­grim­age, his dis­ciples pressed him: How did you feel at the holy places? Just as any­where else – came the lac­on­ic reply, which not only dis­armed the polite yet slightly silly curi­os­ity but also revealed a deep real­isa­tion. But how­ever con­ten­ted, say, a yogi or a saint may be, com­pared with how happy he could be in full­ness, surely even he is dis­con­ten­ted.