It is always interesting to probe into the mystery of Manas ( Mind ). The workers in the field of applied sciences like Psychology and Psychiatry are trying to trace out the mystic nature of it. The dispute of mind versus matter or body had been very prominent in the west. The superiority of one on the other or the very existence of either of the two has been questioned by the opposite camps. The materialistic like Hobes, Hakel, Marx, Lemaitre, Toland, etc. belong to the school who never believed in the existence of matter like Manas or soul. While the supporters of western spiritualistic schools like Hagel, Leibnitz, etc. are not prepared to accept the independent existence of the materialistic world. So we find both extremes in western philosophy. The fomentation of this dispute to such an extent in the western philosophy is due to their helplessness in not distinguishing between two separate factors of life viz, consciousness ( Atman) and Psyche ( Manas ). The issue has been muddled by merging the two factors into one unit. Had the interlinking aspect of manas in relation to body and soul been recognized in the west, the question of whose or whose not, would not have crept to such deep colors.
In Ayurveda, manas is a dravya? and it is known acetana. Is it, therefore, physical ? Many are lead to conclude the nature of manas as physical because it is a dravya and as well as acetana. Such an implication is generally inferred by a layman, because generally in the society a dravya is regarded as physical, and from acetana dravya it is commonly presumed that it should by a non-living physical entity. This type of inference is mostly due to the fact that in modern science substance, denotes something having physical nature with the underlying chemical or physical properties like weight and extension, and expressible in terms of measurements. In academic discussion, however, the dravya does not necessarily stand for the substance as modern science defines it. The definition of dravya in Indian school is different than that met in modern science. They do not recognize something like adhyatmika dravyaguna sangraha as Charaka has described. The modern term of matter at the most can be substituted with the Indian word of ‘Bhutas’ because matter means that which is the material cause of the world and in up ads the five bhutas are recognized Upadankarana.