You have rightly said the following words in this connection viz."So we search for new ways, new aspects of the truth more in harmony with our environment. And we question each other and debate and quarrel and evolve any number of 'isms' and philosophies. As in the days of Socrates, we live in an age of questioning, but the questioning is not confined to a city like Athens: it is worldwide".
There are two ways of answering such questions, I mean the deductive way and inductive way. Mortality of man is established by either of the above ways. In deductive way we take it for granted from reliable source, 'Man is Mortal.' But in the inductive way we approach the same truth by our poor reasoning of 'observation and experiment.' By observation we can see that Gandhi dies, Fotilal dies, C.R. Das dies, Patel dies and therefore we conclude that man dies or, "Man is Mortal". Then again in the same deductive way when we reason that man is mortal, and find that Jawaharlal is a man and thus conclude that Jawaharlal is mortal.
Truth means Absolute Truth. Relative truth is conditional and when the conditions fail, the relative truth disappears. But Absolute Truth does not exist on conditions it is above all conditions. So when we speak of truth, we may take it for the Absolute Truth. And when we speak of approaching the Truth by new ways, we may take it for granted what we want to approach the Truth [text missing] by the inductive way.Absolute Truth is described in the Vedas as Satyam Param Dhimahi—the summum bonum. And from this Absolute Truth everything emanates. "Janmadyasya yatah". This Absolute Truth is described in the Vedic literatures as Sanatana or Eternal. And the philosophy or science which deals in such eternal subjects is described as Sanatana Dharma. [text missing]
Therefore, we have first to find out the Eternal Absolute Truth by some new ways(?) and then we have to find out the new aspects of Absolute Truth in harmony with our present environment.
The present environment is undoubtedly different from the old. And if we compare the present with the old—we can very easily discover that
1. People in the present age are generally short living. The average duration of life being 70 years or so.2. They are generally not very simple. Almost everyman is designing and crocked.3. They have no scope for high thinking because they are perplexed with different relative truths.4. Unfortunate as they are in this age their problems remain unsolved for the whole life even though they are tackled by their leaders. They make the best effort to solve a problem but unfortunately the same becomes more acute and stringent.5. And above all, people in this age are always distressed by famine, scarcity, grieves and diseases in an increasing ratio.
In the old days life was not so much conditional and encumbered. The simple problems were then the problems of bread, clothing and shelter which were solved by the simplest process. By agriculture they used to solve the bread, clothing and shelter problems and industrialisation was unknown to them. Thus they had no idea of living in big palatial buildings at the cost of sacrificing the boon of humanity. They were satisfied to live in the cottages and yet they were perfectly intelligent. Even the famous Chanakya Pandit who was the Prime Minister of India during the reign of Chandragupta, used to live in a cottage and draw no salary from the State. Such simple habits did not deteriorate his high intelligence and dignity and as such he had compiled many useful literatures which are still read by millions for social and political guidance. Thus the simplicity of Brahmanical culture was an ideal to the subordinate others of the society and in the Deductive way the subordinate orders, namely the [text missing] the Ksatriyas, the Vaisyas and the Sudras would follow the instruction of the cultured Brahmin. Such ways of approaching the Truth is always simple, plain and perhaps the most perfect.