1. Mahavira the Mathematician

2. Bhaskaracharya

3. On Sarasvathi and Kali

4. On recognizing the past: the Kerala School

5. Murugan

6. Logic of non-Western science

7. The science of Grammar and Panini

8. The Carvaka School

9. Nammaazvaar  1-5 - On Forms of God

10. Indic Epistemology

11. Epistemology - 2

12. Theory of Epistemic Relativity

13. Anekantavada - Classical Jain and Modern Vedantic Pluralism

14. Anekantavada 2

15. The Grand Unified Field Theory

16. Science and Technology prior to contact with the West

17. More on the Grand Unified Field Theory

18. Encounter with Modern Science

19. Jagdish Chandra Bose

20. More on the Grand Unified Field Theory

21. More on the Grand Unified Field Theory

22. Acharya Prafulla Chandra Ray

23. Srinivasa Ramanujan

24. Meghnath Saha

25. Satyendranath Bose

26. Homi Jehangir Bhabha

27. E. C. George Sudarshan

28. Vasudev Mangesh Kenkre

29. Science in India

30. Foreign Factors

31. Lord Siva and the Burning of the Triple Cities - Sundarar

32. Rudram - Eighth Anuvaka

33. Xuangzang

34. Ancient Hindu civilisation and mathematics

35. Al Biruni

36. Metatheism

37. Sexuality Blinds the Eyes and Closes the Mind - Sundarar

38. William Jones

39. William Carey

40. Henry Thomas Colebrooke

-------------------------------------------------------------

.

.

Mahavira

"Salutation to Mahavira, the Lord of the Jains, the protector whose four
infinite attributes, worthy to be esteemed in all the three worlds, are
unsurpassable."

These are not words from a prayer book, but the opening line in a work on
mathematics by a Jain mathematician with the same name as the 24th
Thirthankara of his tradition. And he goes on to say:
"I bow to that highly glorious Lord of the Jains, by whom, as forming the
shining lamp of the knowledge of numbers, the whole of the universe has been
made to shine."

In this statement Mahavira expresses a profound truth: namely that the
physical world functions in accordance with mathematical laws (numbers).

This recognition emerged in the Western world in the 17th century in
post-Copernican science when Galileo famously said century that the laws of
nature are written in the language of mathematics. We note here that
Mahavira, the Indian mathematician, had said pretty much the same thing in
the above quote, and with a touch of reverence too, already in the 9th
century.

Mahavira was from the south of India: Karnataka. Ganitas?sangraha is his
major work. It was translated into (classical) Telugu, perhaps the first
mathematical work in that language. Unlike most other people who worked on
such matters at the time, Mahavira did not deal with astronomy; he was
essentially a mathematician.

The treatise consists of nine chapters. It begins with an introduction that
defines the mathematical terms in the book, and goes on to consider
arithmetical operations, fractions, areas, volumes, etc. Mahavira was one of
the first Indian mathematicians to introduce the lowest common multiple
method for the addition of fractions. Today this is taught routinely to
school children all over the world. He also presents formulas for the
summation of some series, and gave a formula for the volume of a sphere.

It has been said by some commentators that Mahavira merely rehashed the
works of earlier investigators like Aryabhata and Brahmagupta. He did not
claim more when he described himself as a mere compiler of mathematical
truths which had been gathered by many great and holy sages of the past.

However, such re-formulations and re-publications of standard results played
a very important role in the continuation and further development of
science, especially at a time when there were not many books, nor large
dissemination modes.

Secondly, Mahavira's insight discerned a very significant result which was
to play a crucial role in mathematics a millennium later. It related to
this: When we multiply a number by itself, the result is called its square.

It is also generally known that whether the number in question is positive
or negative, the square is always positive. Thus 2 times 2 is 4, and minus 2
times minus 2 is also 4. Thus, as one says, the square root of 4 may be + 2
or -2.

Given this, we may ask: Can we talk about the square root of a negative
number? This is a more profound question than would seem at first glance.

Perhaps the first person in history to have considered this question was
Mahavira. In the context of the roots of quadratic equations, he stumbled
upon (what we now call) imaginary numbers, but he discarded them. It must be
recalled that even a thousand years later, mathematicians felt that one
should abandon square roots of negative numbers because, as Cauchy said,
"one does not know what meaning should be attributed to it." This is why E.
T. Bell wrote: "The first clear recognition of imaginaries was Mahavira's
extremely intelligent remark in the 9th century that, in the nature of
things, a negative number has no square root."

In Mahavira's work algebra is always tied up with practical problems. Here
is one such: "One fourth of a herd of camels was seen in the forest; twice
the square root (of the number in the herd) had gone to mountain slopes; and
three times five camels were found to remain on the bank of a river. How
many camels were there in the original herd?" [See if you can figure out the
answer: 36].

Here is a sample of the poetic language Mahavira used in some problems:
"Into the bright and refreshing outskirts of a forest, which were full of
numerous trees with their branches bent down by the weight of flowers and
fruits, trees like jambu, lime, plantain, areca palms, jack trees, date
palms, Palmyras, punnangas, and mango trees .... the various quarters of
which were filled with many sounds of crowds of parrots and cuckoos found
near springs containing lotuses with bees roaming around them; into the
outskirts of such a forest entered with joy a number of weary travelers.
There were sixty three numerically equal heaps of plantain fruits put
together and combined with seven more of the same fruits, and these were
equally distributed among twenty three travelers so as to have no remainder.
Now tell me how many plantains were there in each heap."

Such passages remind us of the time when science, literature,and religion
went hand in hand. The great scientific thinkers were also religious,
spiritual, and literary people.

V. V. Raman
October 31, 2005

"Lovely and dear Lilavati with fawn's eyes, tell me what are the numbers
resulting from the multiplication of 135 and 12?" Nowadays we would simple
ask: "135 x 12 = ?" But it is in such a personalized and poetic way that we
read the problem in a book attributed to Bhaskaracharya (also known as
Bhaskara II) who was another illustrious mathematician and astronomer of
classical India. He was born in Bijjada Bida (Karnataka). But his reputation
spread far and wide. Scholars studied and commented upon his works even in
as far a place as Patna. In our own times, historians of mathematics
continue to discuss and analyze Bhaskara's writings and contributions.

At least six of Bhaskara's manuscripts have survived, of which three are
quite famous. The first, known as Lilavati from which the opening question
is taken, is probably named after his daughter, although some have suggested
it might have been his wife. One version of a moving legend associated with
its composition runs somewhat as follows:
Astrologers had predicted that there would be no moment in Lilavati's life
that would be auspicious enough for her marriage. Bhaskara, an astrologer
himself, made extensive computations; and he calculated on the basis of her
horoscope a precise congenial moment at which Lilavati could be betrothed
without fear of an ill-starred married life. He now constructed a device
consisting of a bowl with a hole, which was left floating in a bucket of
water. Water gradually began to enter the cup. The instant at which enough
water seeped through to sink the bowl would be the right moment when the
formal step for Lilavati's wedding was to be taken.

Young Lilavati, so goes the story, was so fascinated by the device that she
bent over to gaze at the gradual trickling of the water into the cup. While
she was in that state of wonderment, a pearl broke loose from an ornament
she was wearing, and fell into the bowl, blocking the hole and obstructing
further entry of the water. The carefully reckoned instant could no longer
be caught. Bhaskara was as dejected as his daughter.

In fact, when she was married, Lilavati's husband died soon. To cheer her
up, the mathematician-father decided to dedicate a major work to her. He
assured her that while marital thrills don't last for long, she would be
remembered for ever on account of that work. Lilavati's name has indeed
become immortal, since it is associated with Bhaskaracharya's classic in the
history of mathematics.

We do not know how far the Lilavati legend is true, but it is charming
enough to be retold in whatever version. What we know for sure is that
Bhaskara also wrote a mathematical masterpiece called Siddhantasiromani with
three parts, of which the first one is sometimes taken to be Lilavati.

Lilavati has 13 chapters, dealing with arithmetical operations, plane
geometry, simple interests, and basic algebra. The work introduces the
decimal system of numeration and prescribes rules for multiplication and
division by zero. Bhaskaracharya was one of the first to realize that the
result of division by zero would be infinity, not zero as his contemporaries
had thought. This is a deep insight. Some of the problems in this work give
us an idea of the social and economic framework of the period: for there are
references here to slaves, to the monetary equivalence between females and
oxen, to the common rates of interest on loans, etc.

Centuries later, the Emperor Akbar heard about the work, and in 1587 he
instructed Aby al-Fayd Faydi to bring out a Persian translation of the work.

The second important work attributed to Bhaskara is the Bijaganita,
literally: "seed arithmetic." Here negative numbers are considered, using,
like Brahmagupta, the analogy of debts, while positive numbers are compared
to assets. Bhaskara explains how surds may be added together, showing, for
example, that the square root of three plus the square root of twelve is
three times the square root of three. He also states the general principle
by which irrational numbers may be added, multipled, divided, etc. The roots
of irrationals are considered. The Bijaganita also discusses indeterminate,
simultaneous, as well as quadratic equations in more than one unknown. This
work was also translated into Persian.

Siddhantashiromani discusses mathematical astronomy and also the geometry of
the sphere. In 1858, Bapudeva Sastri published a paper in the Journal of the
Asiatic Society of Bengal in which he argued that Bhaskara had clear
insights into the key notions of the differential calculus more than four
centuries before Newton and Leibniz. This was challenged by W. Spotiswoode,
and promptly forgotten. In the 1990s this controversy was revived, and now
it is generally agreed by many scholars that Bhaskara did have some of the
fundamental concepts that eventually gave rise to the calculus centuries
later in another part of the world. If there are had been the appropriate
infrastructure to debate and develop his ideas, a full-blown calculus might
have emerged in India.

V. V. Raman
November 2, 2005

Sarasvathi is an aspect of the Lord. Thats how our saints have described and thats how we have seen her. She is a Being, a separate distinctive Being, not a river.

In Hindu iconography she is depicted as a Goddess holding a book and a veena, both representing cultural refinements - culture being the mind rising and flowering. But this is not the subconscious or the intellectual mind, rather the rising of the superconscious mind, the flow of the self-god. And it does indeed flow like words and music or vibrations. This iconography of Sarasvathi was just perfect to describe this aspect of the One Lord.

The river sarasvathi is also taken as one of the icons of the Goddess, and both share the same name. We simply named the river after her. Perhaps this led to the confusion. To be sure the Goddess existed long before the river came about
and long after the river has disappeared. Again to be sure, that river is not even the most important one in Hinduism. That distinction goes to the ganga. Recall in our daily mantras;
"gange, yamune, sarasvathi,
sutudr stomagam sacata..

The sarasvathi river is mentioned only third in importance, and still this verse concludes with 'ganga snanam samarpayami', not sarasvathi. Hindus have to delink the Godess Sarasvathi from the river sarasvathi to get the right perspectives of the religion.

Neither did our rishis receive the vedas sitting on the banks of this river. That may be a romantic notion. It would be better to think that the vedas were revealed from Tibet to Kanyakumari, and from Assam to Kabul, and even further than that into the cold slopes of Kazakhstan. It was also revealed to regular housewives while cooking or doing other mundane chores, not even meditating. It was revealed to a whole host of people, from maids to woodcutters to the cowherd. Not quite romantic huh? But what veda we got today was only those that were recorded for posterity.

Hindus worship the gods following their sects and sampradayas or their ancestral connection with certain temples or gods. I dont think worship of
specific gods has any jaati linkage, though yes, some groups may have their favourites.

All Hindus worship Sarasvathi. This is a better idea to hold rather than just brahmins worship her. All Hindu children pray to Sarasvathi. In all Bali schools
Sarasvathi is worshiped EVERYDAY. Sarasvathi worship cuts across sectarian and jaati lines for sure. Almost all of us have an icon of Sarasvathi in our home shrines.

Yesterday I conducted a homa and abishegam for Lord Muruga, being the first day of Skanda Shasthi. I listened to the chants carefully, and yes, not only Lord Subrahmanya, but all the gods are honoured;
Ganapati, Agni, Rudra, Sarasvathi, Vishnu, Brihaspati, etc. In Hindu prayer-rituals there is no sectarianism! That is the rule, else the priests wont do the pujas.

Kali is not black nor fierce looking nor brings death. On the contrary she is golden skinned, exceedingly beautiful, enchanting and mesmerising, tall about 5' 10", very slim probably 55kg, wearing a red saree with a green sleeveless blouse, her long hair let loose and nearly touching her ankles, wearing a crown, armlets and a flower garland. What a sight to behold. A queen! She appears to be about age 40.
Of course she can take other forms too. She blesses everyone all the time, gives spiritual knowledge and only does that, nothing fierce at all and she destroys nothing.

Shiva alone brings decay, death and destruction and in that process gives moksha as his grace. No one else.

Pathmarajah

Ethnocentrism has been a characteristic of most great civilizations. The
Greeks, the Chinese, the Hindus, the Arabs, all imagined themselves in their
respective glory days to be unique in some ways, perhaps superior to others.

So during the first few centuries of modern science many European thinkers
imagined that they were the first to discover the scientific mode, and that
others had done little, if any, in the field of scientific research.

At the same time, starting with the European Enlightenment in the 18th
century, scholars began to probe into humanity's cultural legacies. From the
untiring quest of such scholars much of ancient history, from Greek and
Egyptian to Chinese, Hindu, and Arab science came to be uncovered from their
long-forgotten relics. This was and is a slow process. But already in the
early 19th century, when it was discovered that the concept of the zero had
originated in India, Laplace, one of te greatest mathematicians of the age,
wrote: "The ingenious method of expressing every possible number using a set
of ten symbols (each symbol having a place value and an absolute value)
emerged in India. The idea seems so simple nowadays that its significance
and profound importance is no longer appreciated. Its simplicity lies in the
way it facilitated calculation and placed arithmetic foremost amongst useful
inventions. the importance of this invention is more readily appreciated
when one considers that it was beyond the two greatest men of Antiquity,
Archimedes and Apollonius."

The quest for the forgotten past has continued, not only through archeology
which unearths and reconstructs lost civilizations but also by deciphering
ancient scripts and translating fading manuscripts in leaves, parchments,
and such. One of the results from such efforts was reported by the British
scholar Charles Whish in 1835 in the Transactions of the Royal Asiatic
Society of Great Britain and Ireland. Whish wrote about mathematicians in
Kerala whose significant works had been all but forgotten. He also asserted
that some of their ideas were essentially the fluxions of Newton: the
derivatives that form the core of differential calculus which is at the core
of practically all modern higher mathematics. He went on to unravel in the
ancient manuscripts the equivalent of what we now call infinite series,
particularly of some trigonometric functions and of pi. Whish's discoveries
were so revolutionary in their interpretation and so demanding in their
claims that they was set aside and ignored.

More than a century later, some Indian historians of mathematics referred
back to this paper and pursued the matter to greater depths. More
importantly, they have brought all of this to the attention of the larger
international establishment.

Unfortunately, in the meanwhile, historical scholarship had morphed into
quarrels over priorities: Indian scholars, in their understandable anger at
Western marginalizing of their culture and heritage, accused the European
mindset as ethnocentric in interpretations of history; European scholars, in
their difficult-to-erase conviction that their own civilization was the one
that had developed the results of modern science and mathematics, accused
others of excessive claims, fueled by chauvinism rather than facts.

Leaving aside these controversies which are certain to be resolved in due
course, it seems to be now established that the contributions between the
13th and the 16th centuries of what is called the Kerala school of
mathematics were path-breaking. To that school belonged such creative
mathematicians as Madhva of Sangamagramma who formulated the notion of limit
to infinity (a key concept in calculus), Nilakantha who derived an infinite
series for pi/4 (the so-called Gregory series), the astronomer Paramesvara
who wrote extensively on planetary motions, Jyesthadeva's 16th century text
Yuktibhasa in Malayalam, rich in astronomy and mathematics. One Hindu
historian has suggested that their results were transmitted to European
thinkers via Portuguese missionary-scholars, and inspired the Scientific
Revolution.

It is fashionable these days to pay frequent and explicit homage to the
Islamic world as the root of modern science. Beyond its factual basis, many
political forces are at play in drumming up this view. The facts of history
may be blown up or belittled, depending on who writes the history, and for
what purpose. In this context, the time has come to publicize to the world
more vociferously that some of the seeds for those roots were sown in India.

The eloquent, persuasive and scholarly publications of some Indian
historians of science have been gradually accomplishing this in recent
years.

What matters ultimately - or should matter, as I see it - is not national
boost or cultural pride but setting the record straight. After all, great
thinkers, be they scientists or mathematicians, poets or philosophers, have
sprung over the ages from every culture and creed, and they all deserve to
be acknowledged in just and fair ways for their contributions, since they
all deserve humanity's collective respect and homage.

The Tamil word Murugan means beauty, youthfulness divine etc,. Murugan is the God with these aspects. Subramaniyam, Kanthan, Velan, Kadampan, Karthigeyan, Kumaran, Saravanan etc., are other names for Murugan. Each name has its own meaning.

Arumugan is another name. It means One with six faces. Lord Siva has six faces but only five are apparent. Arumugan is Siva in manifestation with six faces. Sixth face is called Athomugam. Others are Esanam, Ahoram, Thatpurusham, Vamathevam, and Saththiyosatham. Hence Murugan is sometimes
referred to as Arumugach Sivan, meaning Siva with six faces.

Murugan is seated on peacock with His consorts, Valli and Theivanai and holding Vel and Seval(cock). Valli, Theivanai and Vel denote ichchai, kriyai
and jnanam respectively. The cock or seval crows in the early hours of the morning when the dawn breaks in and darkness vanishes. It denotes the advent of God's Grace and the disappearance of the darkness of pasam of the souls. The peacock on which He is seated denotes the liberated soul. The snake in the leg of the peacock denotes anavam which is not annihilated even at mukthi but looses
its power or grib on the soul.

Murugan is described as Tamil God in the literatures of Tamil land. Like Murugan, Tamil is a beautiful language with 'youthfulness and vigour'. The
Tamil vowels are classified as vallinam, mellinam and idaiyinam. Each of these groups has six letters akin to the six faces of Murugan. The eighteen vowels
are comparable to His eighteen eyes. The twelve consonants are comparable to His twelve hands.

The Tamil epic Kanthapuranam speaks of the manifestation of Siva as Murugan, His marriage, and His fight against evil and wickedness symbolised as asuras. Like a teacher He wispered Omhara Mantra (OM) to Siva and hence He is called Sivaguru. By worshipping Murugan, we will be blessed with jnanam or knowledge, beauty, youthfulness, courage etc,.

THE TEMPLES OF LORD MURUGA:

1. THIRUPPARAMKUNTRAM

It is near Madurai. It is here that Lord Muruga married Theivayanai.

2. THIRUCHENDUR

It is near Tuticorin. It is here that Lord Muruga stayed before and after killing Soora Padman.

3. PALANI

It is in Madurai District. The thirtha of Saravan Poihai is here. The shrine was installed by a sage called Bohar.

4. SWAMIMALAI

It is 6 Kms west of Kumbakonam. It is here that Lord Muruga unfolded mantras to Siva.

5. TIRUTTANI

It is 75 Kms North west of Chennai. It is here that Muruga married Valli.

6. PAZHAMUTHIRCHOLAI

It is located near Madurai. It is the last of the six important temples.

visit
www.geocities.com/shivaperuman
www.geocities.com/shivaperumant
www.geocities.com/arumuganavalar

Fall 2003 by Pingree, David.

Nilakantha made a number of observations of planetary and lunar
positions and of eclipses between 1467 and 1517. Nilakantha
presented several different sets of planetary parameters and
significantly different planetary models, which, however, remained
geocentric. He never indicates how he arrived at these new
parameters and models, but he appears to have based them at least in
large part on his own observations. For he proclaims in his
Jyotirmimamsa - contrary to the frequent assertion made by Indian
astronomers that the fundamental siddhantas expressing the eternal
rules of jyotihsastra are those alleged to have been composed by
deities such as Surya - that astronomers must continually make
observations so that the computed phenomena may agree as closely as
possible with contemporary observations. Nilakantha says that this
may be a continuous necessity because models and parameters are not
fixed, because longer periods of observation lead to more accurate
models and parameters, and because improved techniques of observing
and interpreting results may lead to superior solutions. This
affirmation is almost unique in the history of Indian jyotisa;
jyotisis generally seem to have merely corrected the parameters of
one paksa to make them closely corresponded to those of another.

The discoveries of the successive generations of Madhava's 'school'
continued to be studied in Kerala within a small geographical area
centered on Sangamagrama. The manuscripts of the school's Sanskrit
and Malayalam treatises, all copied in the Malayalam script, never
traveled to another region of India; the furthest they got was
Katattanat in northern Kerala, about one hundred miles north of
Sangamagrama, where the Rajakumara Sankara Varman repeated Madhava's
trigonometrical series in a work entitled Sadratnamala in 1823. This
was soon picked up by a British civil servant, Charles M. Whish, who
published an article entitled "On the Hindu Quadrature of the Circle
and the Infinite Series of the Proportion of the Circumference to
the Diameter in the Four Sastras, the Tantra Sangraham, Yocti
Bhasha, Carana Paddhati and Sadratnamala" in Transactions of the
Royal Asiatic Society in 1830.2 While Whish was convinced that the
Indians (he did not know of Madhava) had discovered calculus - a
conclusion that is not true even though they successfully found the
infinite series for trigonometrical functions whose derivation was
closely linked with the discovery of calculus in Europe in the
seventeenth century - other Europeans scoffed at the notion that the
Indians could have achieved such a startling success. The proper
assessment of Madhava's work began only with K. Mukunda Marar and C.
T. Rajagopal's "On the Hindu Quadrature of the Circle," published in
the Journal of the Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society in
1944.

So while the discoveries of Newton, Leibniz, and Gregory
revolutionized European mathematics immediately upon their
publication, those of Madhava, Paramesvara, and Nilakantha, made
between the late fourteenth and early sixteenth centuries, became
known to a handful of scholars outside of Kerala in India, Europe,
America, and Japan only in the latter half of the twentieth century.
This was not due to the inability of Indian jyotisis to understand
the mathematics, but to the social, economic, and intellectual
milieux in which they worked. The isolation of brilliant minds was
not uncommon in premodern India. The exploration of the millions of
surviving Sanskrit and vernacular manuscripts copied in a dozen
different scripts would probably reveal a number of other Madhavas
whose work deserves the attention of historians and philosophers of
science. Unfortunately, few scholars have been trained to undertake
the task, and the majority of the manuscripts will have crumbled in
just another century or two, before those few can rescue them from
oblivion.

For a description of the table of chords, cyclic quadrilaterals, two-
point iteration, fixedpoint iteration, and several other
mathematical terms mentioned in this essay, please see Victor J.
Katz, A History of Mathematics : An Introduction (New York:
HarperCollins, 1993).

2 Note that the Tantrasangraha was written by the Nilakantha whom we
have already mentioned, the Yuktibhasa by his colleague and fellow
pupil of Damodara, Jyesthadeva, and the Karanapaddhati by a resident
of the Putumana illam in Sivapura in 1723.

David Pingrce, a Fellow of the American Academy since 1971, is
University Professor in the department of the history of mathematics
at Brown University. He teaches about the transmission of science
between cultures, and his publications include many editions of
astronomical, astrological, and magical works in Akkadian, Arabic,
Greek, Latin, and Sanskrit. Most recently he has written "Arabic
Astronomy in Sanskrit" (with T. Kusuba, 2002), "Astral Sciences in
Mesopotamia" (with H. Hunger, 1999), and "Babylonian Planetary
Omens" (with E. Reiner, 1998).

© 2003 by the American Academy of Arts & Sciences

When we speak of science, we generally refer to physics, chemistry, biology
and the like. Science is, more generally, a methodological analysis of any
aspect of our world of experience. One important dimension of our experience
is language. The ways in which languages evolve and are imprinted in the
human brain are matters for scientific inquiry. Of no less interest in our
efforts to understand languages are the structures and rules undergirding
them. Inquiry into these aspects and the consequent generalizations (laws)
constitute a science in itself: linguistics. This science had its origins in
India. The most ancient thinker whose name is associated with the science of
grammar is Panini.

Systematic analysis of Vedic hymns suggests that their authors were
meticulously following principles of prosody. Clearly, such rules existed
more than 35 centuries ago in India. Just as there can be no grand temple or
cathedral without an understanding of the laws governing structure and
balance, metrically perfect poetry would be impossible without an
understanding of the structure and symmetry of words and language. Analyses
of language must have been carried out in India since very ancient times.
The works of generations of scholars on this subject culminated in a classic
treatise called Ashtadhyayi (Eight Chapters) by Panini. This work explains
what the roots of the words are, the declension of nouns, how compound words
are to be split, and everything that forms part of the integrity of
Sanskrit, revealing the logic of the language, as it were.

Because of its stature, Panini's work (4th or 5th century B.C.E.) cast into
obscurity more ancient works which may have also codified the language. To
this day, it reigns supreme in the world of Sanskrit studies. Any formal
course in the language presents at least some of the rules enunciated by the
immortal grammarian.

Like other regulations which establish order, Panini's classic froze the
language with its stringent rules. Though some have disagreed with some of
the rules, none dared to go against the master. What is impressive from a
historical perspective is that millennia before any other culture even
thought of studying the anatomy and physiology of a language, Panini's work
did it masterfully.

The chapters of the book consist of nearly 4000 aphorisms which describe and
prescribe the canonical forms of Sanskrit. The remarkable terseness of the
aphorisms is helpful in committing them to memory. Some have suggested that
Panini himself may have given the language the name Sanskrit which literally
means that which has been cultivated or perfected, in order to distinguish
it from vulgar speech (Prakrit).

Panini's insight was the recognition that the words of a language spring
from certain basic roots by means of inflections and other modifications.
This is not unlike the discovery of chemists that all substances arise from
the combination of certain basic elements. Panini listed some 2000 roots for
Sanskrit. He distinguished the rhythmic enunciations (chandas) of hymnal
poetry from normally uttered speech (bh?a). He also noted that the
infinite modes of linguistic expression can be systematized through a finite
number of rules and exceptions. This again is not unlike the recognition of
physicists that the countless particular natural phenomena can be tracked
down through a finite number of natural laws and principles. No wonder
Panini is regarded as the greatest grammarian of ancient India: the only
country that had grammarians in ancient times.

In an essay on Sanskrit, John Ellsworth remarked that "For a comprehensive
grasp of linguistic facts, and a penetrating insight into the structure of
the vernacular language, this work (Ashtadyayi) stands probably unrivaled in
the literature of any nation."

The discovery of Sanskrit by European scholars in the 18th century was a
major milestone in the intellectual history of humanity, for it led to
deeper understandings of languages, interconnections among ancient peoples,
and investigations into the cultural heritage of humanity from global
perspectives. No less remarkable is the 20th century discovery that Panini's
linguistic analysis embodies profound insights into natural language.

Investigations into the structure of computer programming languages and
their grammars have revealed forms (the so-called Backus-Naur forms) which
seem to be implicit in Panini's work of centuries ago. In the view of some
specialists in the field, the Ashtadyayi is very relevant in some contexts
of theoretical computer science. It has also been suggested that Panini's
grammar inspired the formulation of algebra in India.

All this is not surprising when we realize that complex fields in
mathematics and science rest on conceptual formulations which lay bare the
deeper order and components from which the experienced world arises.

Furthermore, we recognize through Panini that beyond the plays, poetry and
philosophy that enrich it, Sanskrit also has implicit in its core
fundamental truths about language and communication which serve as
life-giving bonds for society and civilization. Panini was truly a great
sage of ancient India.

The impression one gets from most books and public statements on Indic culture is that its thinkers were and are primarily occupied with
transcendental reality, its role in human life, and how one is to attain an awareness of it. But this is only a partial vision of Indic cultural history. When try to get a fuller picture of the range and variety
of Indic thoughts and systems over the centuries, we find that contrary philosophical reflections have also emerged in India. Scholarly works on the
history of Indian thought normally devote a few pages to systems which reject traditional authorities on spirituality; some even denying God or anything supernatural.

One of these schools, attributed to a personage by the name of Carvaka, is known for its uncompromising materialism. It ridicules and rejects
the spiritual refrain in Indic culture. For the members of the Carvaka school, the only channels of our knowledge are sense perceptions. They
contended that everything else is only inference. And they went on to argue that inference is not always reliable. Long before David Hume, the
Carvakas attacked inductive reasoning, questioning the logic of extrapolating and generalizing from what we know directly to be true only in particular
cases. They recognized the role of induction, as also its pitfalls, in the acquisition of knowledge.

For the Carvakas, all that mattered was matter itself. They conceded that there was consciousness, but to them this was another manifestation of matter. Jivatman and paramatman were gibberish, they maintained. A person dies, and that is the end of it: No spirit and no re-entry into
another body. Rituals serve no purpose but to feed the priests.

A natural consequence of this philosophy was a hedonistic ethic: As long as we live, let us make the best of it. Pleasure should be the ultimate
goal of all enterprise. Every unenjoyed moment is a wasted moment. Those who preach that we should renounce the world because of pain and suffering want to throw the baby with the bathwater. There is pain and suffering in life, it is true; but there is also thorn in every rose. Does it mean we should
ignore the rose? Should grain be discarded because husk comes with it?

These ideas sound very alien to the normal modes of Hindu thinking, yet they are as Hindu as any other. All through Indian history, thinkers with
such heretical views have come up now and again, moving counter to the common current. However, in the view of most respected Hindu scholars of the
twentieth century, these were exceptions rather than the rule. As Radhakrishnan pointed out, "The characteristic of Indian thought is that it has paid greater attention to the inner world than to the outer world."

But some have suggested that one reason for this could be that other perspectives were seldom permitted to become part of the mainstream.

One scholar who has studied the history of the Cravaka movement and written extensively on it, noted that the proponents of this view were "heavily censored as heretics by the law-givers and others." Nevertheless, the calls and categories of the Carvaka school were never totally silenced,
though they never came to be asserted effectively.

Radical and heretical thinkers like the Lokayatas (as they were also called) sometimes broke away and established new religions or they became brief
chapters, if not footnotes, in books on Indian philosophy.

It is entirely possible that Carvaka was but a symbol, a name for a whole group of people who did not take the routine rites and rituals seriously; for whom feast and frolic were more meaningful than prayer or pilgrimage. As to Carvaka himself, he is even less real than that of the great rishis, for
there is hardly any writing that can be directly attributed to him.

It has also been argued that while the pundits spoke metaphysically, the common people more often than not subscribed to a materialist view of the world. The classical commentator Madhvacarya wrote: "The mass of men, in accordance with the sastras of policy and enjoyment, considering wealth and
desire the only ends of man, and denying the existence of any object belonging to a future world, are found to follow only the doctrine of Carvaka. Hence another name for that school is Lokayata.." This term may mean "of the people" or "of the world."

The relevance of the Cravaka school lies in this: that for the good or for the bad, modern positive sciences generally adopt the Carvaka worldview
in that it regards reality as only that which can be perceived through the senses. Supernaturalism has no place in it. Some historians have argued that
if thinkers belonging to Carvaka school had succeeded in asserting themselves, and their ideas had been embraced by many serious investigators, the spark of modern science might well have been lit up in the Indian subcontinent long before it did so in Western Europe. [This is not unlike the view that if India had embraced communism in its early years,
it could have become stronger and more advanced than China by now.]

In such a if-then history, if the materialist school had prevailed, modern science as we understand the term today would have spread from India to the
rest of the world, rather than the other way around.

avaravar tamatamatu aRivu aRi vakaivakai: each in accordance with their own capacity for understanding.

avaravar iRaivar ena adi adaivarkaL: will worship BEING in the archetypal form presented to them and attain Him.

avaravar iRaiyavar kuRaivu ilar: there is nothing wrong in the different archetypal presentations of BEING.

iRaiyavar avaravar vitivazi adaiya ninRanaree: each in his own way worships the deity he chooses and will finally attain BEING.
 
Commentary:
This verse describes beautifully one of the central tenets of Agamism and which will make it conquer the world in time to come by the OPENESS it enshrines and INDIVIDUAL DIFERENCE in metaphysical pursuits  it accommodates. While tribalism favours a COLLECTIVE mentality in which UNIFORMITY is enforced even at the pain of death,  Agamism in being against tribalism favours individualism in the practice of religion. Each individual has his UNIQUENESS and intellectual and emotional needs and BEING presents Himself in a archetypal Form most suited to that individual in current predicament. Like a kind and excellent teacher who comes down to the level of the student he teaches so that an UNDERSTANDING can be brought about successfully so does BEING,  the most excellent Guru. He discloses Himself in so many archetypal forms high and low so that it would MAKE SENSE to the individual and hence somehow he kept in the understanding of BEING, no matter how primitive it is. 
 
So these numerous archetypal presentations are NOT TO BE SCORNED and made and object of mockery and pointless ridicule. Certainly there are High and Low in this but however as the DEEP STRUCTURE of all such archetypes we have the SAME BEING. There are no different gods but only ONE GOD, the BEING who chooses to PRESENT Himself in countless number of shapes just to help to individuals. BEING is not only the FORMLESS and abstract Brilliance and in which he appears for the gifted but also the so many minor deities that the less gifted individuals use to understand BEING. 
 
Nammaazvaar, as do Karaikkal Peyar Tirumular and a host of others, states quite categorically that there is nothing wrong at all in any one of deities.  No archetypal presentation is to be scorned at for all of them all equally the presentation of the same BEING. Behind Krishna and Rama, behind Muruka and Vinakaya or even Muniswarar, we have the SAME BEING as the Deep Structure, the underlying reality. And BEING will pull unto Himself all in His own way no matter what archetypal presentations evokes sanctity in an individual. 

There is no THE archetype or THE way -- there is always an OPENESS , the emergence  of the historically NEW  and hence DEMAND that  we  BE OPEN. And in this way Agamism is OPPOSED to the regimenting religions that believe in conversions and collective uniformities. Such demands are a VIOLATION of the  RIGHT  individuals have to reach BEING in his own personal way.

If not todaytomorrow this will be the demand of the people and hence the growth of Agamism. The world is moving in that direction --  against regimentations, against collectivisation and against the standardisation of believe systems. 
 
What Agamism favours is INDIVIDUALISATION, allowing of PERSONAL religion, allowing each individual to be formed and informed in a way BEING chooses. It is a form of life where there is NO taking as the most authoritative a scripture or the words of a religious genius but rather BEING Himself to lead the individuals in his own way-- avaravar viti vazi and in a non collective but immensely personal manner. 
 
Hail to Nammaazvaar for articulating this essence of Agamism so eloquently.

Whether it is about a matter of our belief, assessment of a situation, or
view on an issue, we speak on the basis of the knowledge that we possess.
Our worldview results from our religion, readings, science, and everyday
experiences. It rests on our knowledge of things, persons, places, and all
the information we have received. Like the money in hand, we don't always
inquire into how we came upon the knowledge we possess, or into the validity
of its source. What we take for granted may be only flimsily valid on
rational grounds, or even downright incorrect. Yet, we feel comfortable with
it. A systematic inquiry into these is the branch of philosophy called
epistemology. Many controversies arise because people seldom examine the
bases of their knowledge and beliefs.
In the Western tradition, some ancient Greek and Roman thinkers, like
Empiricus and Seneca, examined the reliability of accepted truths The
skeptic Pyrrho's famous statement that "Nothing is certain, not even this
statement," is intended to convey the tentativeness of human knowledge. In
the West, a fresh impetus for epistemology came in the eighteenth century
from the writings of David Hume, Immanuel Kant, and John Locke.

In India, epistemology goes back to the Vedas, and to their philosophical
offshoots. Indian philosophers distinguished between what we come to know
through our senses (pratyaksha) and knowledge which is remote from the
senses (proksha). The first is empirical and rational knowledge. Everything
we learn from books, people, and teachers is of this type. It is called
apara-vidya. Such knowledge is about history and geography, art and
culture, and everything we ordinarily know. It is interesting and useful.

However, all apara-vidya relates to matters transitory and impermanent.
The other kind of knowledge is about that which never perishes. It tells us
about the essence of things. This is the knowledge that spiritual aspirants
seek, and many feel they acquire when they engage in prayer and meditation.
This type of knowledge is called para-vidya and is related to the spiritual
substratum of which mystics speak. It is said to be acquired through divine
testimony. One does not grasp para-vidya cerebrally. It is something that
one experiences and is deeply convinced about.

Para-knowledge corresponds to Gnosticism in the Western tradition, which is
also based on esoteric practices, and on the thesis that by these means the
human soul can pierce through the intervening opaque worlds. Like para,
Gnosticism strives to find our way back to our source. Thus, the para view
speaks of an unfathomable mystic undercurrent, of higher knowledge and
indescribable transcendence. As it says in the Mundaka Upanishad "That which
is ungraspable, without family, without caste, without sight or hearing,
without hands or feet, eternal, all-pervading, omnipresent, exceedingly
subtle, that is the undecaying which the wise perceive as the source of all
things."

This recognition of knowledge as belonging to two quite different categories
is an insight that can clarify a good deal of confusion. Hindu thinkers
understood that while it is possible to resolve intellectual disagreements
on certain kinds of issues, when it comes to knowledge about the
transcendent (para-vidya), no amount of logic or proof can be convincing or
incontrovertible. Ultimate mystery can only be revealed at the deepest
personal level. Its authenticity is to be apprehended rather than
comprehended, and it cannot be conveyed through words and reason.

Indian epistemologists also stated that we derive knowledge from four
different sources: First, we have codes of law (smriti) which give knowledge
about what is permitted and what is not. Then, we have the senses
(indriyas) which give us knowledge about the existence and properties of
things, such as that silk is soft, the sky is blue, there is music in the
air, the rose is fragrant and sugar is sweet. Then we have knowledge about
festivals, the days for fasting, and so on. This knowledge comes from
tradition or aitihya. Finally, when we know that it is going to rain because
there are dark clouds above, or that something must have happened to an
absentee who is normally there, we have inferential knowledge or anumna.

Treatises on Hindu epistemology are generally elaborations and modifications
of these basic concepts.

In the Mahabharata one character says that he sought a reason for everything
and had very little faith, that he used to utter words based on plausible
reason. He says that he had always been an unbeliever, skeptical of
everything, and though really ignorant, he used to be proud of his learning.
This suggests that reasoning, belief, faith, skepticism, and the like were
part of daily discourse in classical India. Examination of the reliability
of knowledge is an essential pre-requisite for science. This necessary
condition for science was clearly there in India. But it is not a sufficient
condition. Other factors, like the printing press, observational
instruments, measuring devices, and quantitative analyses of nature are also
needed for modern science to emerge. These were to come only later in
history.

V. V. Raman
November 9, 2005

The distinction between appearance and reality is an old philosophical puzzle. The Chinese philosopher's uncertainty about whether he is a man who dreamt he was a butterfly or a butterfly imagining itself to be a man encapsulates this puzzle. In the Hindu context, this is generalized in the
Shvetshvatara Upanishad: mayam tu prakritim viddhi: Know, however, that the world is maya.

The philosopher-saint Shankara elaborated on this idea. He stated that the Real is universal and indivisible in its totality. This thesis is called monism or non-duality (advaita). But the perceived world is
characterized by multiplicity rather than oneness. But how does the one appear as
many?

Shankara explained this by saying that the essence of ultimate reality is normally veiled from our grasp because of a number of constraining factors which are imposed on matter and mind through our senses. The result of these blinding factors is the creation of an illusory world of multiplicity to which normal human experience is invariably and inevitably subjected.

This appearance of distinctions between the many when they is in fact one and only one is known as maya, often translated as illusion. This is a key concept in Indic epistemology. Shankara's analysis has been
subjected to many commentaries and interpretations. Here I give my own reflections on this profound view.

In so far as maya is a veil that screens the true nature of reality, it is often regarded as something negative. In one of his popular song-poems, often sung very movingly, the saint-poet exhorts us to give up the thirst
for material possessions and to devote our minds to the Real, to accept the fruits of our karma, and not get drowned in delusions instigated by the passion and lust that come from the sight of a female body. A man's
life, he says, is as uncertain as rain drops on a lotus leaf. He reminds us that the
world is a prey to disease and grief.

Such a negative view of the experienced world prompts some people to reject
the world of appearance and look for the Real. It has been said that this negative attitude to of maya has often been over-stressed by Hindu religious exponents, leading to a devaluation of the world of experience. Life becomes irrelevant, misleading, and unworthy of concern in the larger context of spiritual pursuits. Some modern commentators have argued that this
is a misinterpretation of Shankara, and have insisted that Shankara's philosophy has had no negative impact at all on Hindu economic progress and scientific creativity.

In any case, one may also give an altogether different interpretation of the maya doctrine. Maya may be interpreted, not as a pessimistic appraisal of perceived reality, but rather as recognition of its intrinsic nature: Namely, that notwithstanding its appearance of being real and the ultimate,
what we take to be real is not so in fact. This is not unlike what modern science has revealed. Whether it is the sun's motion across the heavens, the colorful arc that spans the sky, or the solid matter we touch and feel: these are not quite what they seem to be. Their intrinsic nature is very different from the impressions they create. The thing to remember, and one that is ignored all too often, is that it does not follow that what is illusory is necessarily trivial, uninteresting, evil, or useless.

Whether through biological or cultural evolution, appearances which are not
faithful representations of the real, have turned out to be extremely valuable, useful, insightful, enriching, and even necessary in many instances. Maya has resulted in many passing insights and enjoyments which
may well be the reason why, evolutionarily speaking, they arose in the first place. Indeed, it turns out that not only are illusions inevitable in the context of everyday living, many significant elements of culture and civilization rest on grand illusions. Maya serves us very well in our
lives, and is at the root of many of our enjoyments, institutions, intellectual
exercises, and societal interactions. Certain aspects of maya have even helped us gain a deeper understanding (or visions of higher categories) of reality. Let us consider some of these.

Art is aesthetic maya. Literature is emotional maya. Democracy and communism
are political maya. Mythology is inspirational maya. Mathematics is logical
maya. History is patriotic maya. Religions are spiritual maya.

Philosophy is speculative maya. Science is fruitful maya. These are all maya in
the sense that on closer scrutiny they turn out to be only superficial truths.

It would seem that humanity is condemned to be in a world of maya.

But then, as a species we are condemned to many other constraints as well. The
recognition of this fact need not provoke a disdain or disrespect for life's experiences. Rather, it can cause a deeper experience of life.

Knowing that a work of art - whether a painting or a poem - is only a make- believe, need not diminish our appreciation of it. The maya concept seems to be a deep
insight into the nature of what we take to be the truth.

In 1905 Albert Einstein gave to the world his Special Theory of Relativity
which says that the result of any measurement of length, time interval or
mass will be relative to the reference system, i.e. it will depend on
whether what is measured is stationary or moving with respect to the
observer. This is of enormous significance in our understanding of the
world. One dramatic consequence of Einstein's theory is the mass-energy
equivalence, a result that is monstrously exemplified in nuclear explosions.
Many long centuries ago, Jain thinkers in India propounded a similar idea in
epistemology. I call this the Theory of Epistemic Relativity. According to
it, whatever knowledge we perceive as truth depends on our perspective,
i.e. it is relative to our observing system. No matter how objective we
think our appraisal of a truth is, ultimately there is the inevitable factor
of perspective, called naya. In short, every statement of truth is anchored
to a framework.

This profound insight of Jain thinkers flowed from the recognition that
reality is characterized by plurality or non-oneness (anekatva): Whatever we
consider has multiple facets. Consider, for example, the following: Is
technology good or bad? Should we negotiate or not with terrorists? Is a
particular religion the only true religion? In all such questions, there
will always be more than one answer, and in each instance the answer will
depend on the perspective of the person who answers it.

This doctrine is known as anekantavada, the not-one-doctrine. It arises from
two basic recognitions: one philosophical, and the other physical. The
philosophical insight is the duality of contradictory categories implicit in
many contexts, such as joy and sorrow, knowledge and ignorance, light and
darkness, which. are often attributes of the same entity. The physical
insight is that not only the world, but its components consist of countless
characteristics. Our reflection on any aspect of the world could focus on
one or another of these, and accordingly lead us to one or another
conclusion, as allegorized in the tale of the six blind men and the
elephant.

Anekantavada rejects absolutism. It becomes particularly relevant in issues
relating to the human condition, i.e. topics relating to history, religion,
philosophy, politics, and the like. In all these cases there is a
multiplicity concerning an issue.
Then again, quantum physics tells us that in the microcosm, we can never be
certain about the features of a quantum entity before a measurement is made.

Whether an electron is wave or particle will be determined only after it is
observed. This is known as Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. A similar
metaphysical uncertainty principle was stated by Jain thinkers. They said,
in effect, that when it comes to ultimate questions, such as whether there
is a God or not, whether there is extra-corporeal consciousness or not, the
best that one can say is that it is perhaps the case and perhaps not, until
one has the actual experience. This principle is known as sy?v? or the
maybe-doctrine.

These ideas received many extensions and interpretations. But their simple
essence is that one cannot claim one's own vision of anything as embodying
the total or the absolute truth. These ideas are not just theoretically
interesting but become important and essential in discussions of political,
moral, social, and religious issues. We have to bear in mind that our claims
and assertions in these contexts are relative to our perspectives. This
ancient Indic idea is sometimes touted as a great new insight of
post-modernism by some Western thinkers.

It is important to understand that anekantavada does not imply that any and
every belief counts or that one should attach equal weight to every dogma or
doctrine. It merely reminds us that no matter what view one holds on
controversial issues, that view is a function of the perspective from which
one considers the issue. Thus, if we ask the question, "Does God exists?"
some might say Yes, and some No, because not everyone comes to the issue
from the same perspective. Or again, some would say that Jesus is the only
Savior, others that Allah is the only God, yet others that Vishnu is the
Supreme God, and so on. Each person is right from his or her own
perspective.

Niels Bohr once said, there are two kinds of truths: the small ones and the
great ones. A small truth is one whose opposite is false. That milk is white
is true; that it is black is clearly false. But a great truth is one whose
opposite could also be true, as in the matter about whether democracy is the
best form of government, or whether technology is good for humanity, or
whether scientific knowledge is good for faith.
These Jain insights are the very opposite of true-believerism which upholds
one particular perspective as absolute to be accepted by or enforced on
all. True-believerism is at the root of ideological bigotry, religious,
political, and nationalistic. People embracing anek?av? are not likely
to be as intolerant or virulent as those who have not awakened to its truth.

Introduction - Part 1

One of the most distinctive doctrines of modern Vedanta, expressed in
the teachings of Ramakrishna Paramahamsa and the works of Swami
Vivekananda, as well as the writings of numerous other representatives
of the contemporary Vedantic tradition, is its doctrine of the harmony
of religions. Although it has its roots in the ancient Vedic teaching
that, Eka?vipra bahudha vadanti¨Reality is one, though the wise
speak of it variously.?(Rig Veda 1.164: 46c), such a pluralistic
vision is not as pronounced in the works of the traditional Vedantic
acaryas as it is in modern or "Neo" Vedanta. The traditional forms of
Vedanta, such as Advaita, Vishishtadvaita, Dvaita, and others, seem far
more concerned with establishing their own views and refuting those of
others than with arguing that there is some truth in all positions.

In this paper, I will argue that the modern Vedantic emphasis on the
harmony of religious and philosophical views is anticipated in the
Indic traditions not so much in the traditional Vedantic schools of
thought as in the Jaina tradition. Specifically, the Jain doctrines of
the multiplicity and relativity of perspectives, anekantavada,
nayavada, and syadvada, will be shown to exhibit a view of reality and
an attitude toward religious and philosophical diversity very much in
keeping with a modern Vedantic understanding of the harmony of
religions.

In terms of my own orientation to these issues, I come to these
questions as one who follows the tradition of Ramakrishna and
Vivekananda and supports its doctrine of religious pluralism. At the
same time, I am conscious of recent legitimate criticisms of this
position. My search has been for resources from within the Indic
traditions by which pluralism can be defended, and my conclusion is
that Jainism is promising in this regard.

Modern Vedanta, Its Orientation toward Religious Diversity, and Its Critics

When I say "modern Vedanta" I am referring specifically to the
tradition that traces itself to the life and teachings of Sri
Ramakrishna Paramahamsa and that is carried forward by the order of
monks, nuns, and lay supporters making up the organization known in
India as the Ramakrishna Mission and in the West as the Vedanta
Society. But more broadly, I would also take it as legitimate to
include within this expression thinkers who have been demonstrably
influenced by this tradition, like Mahatma Gandhi and S. Radhakrishnan
in India and Aldous Huxley and Huston Smith in the West.

The chief distinction between modern Vedanta and more traditional
forms, such as Advaita, Vishishtadvaita, and Dvaita, is the emphasis
which modern Vedanta places on direct experience?r anubhava?s the
ultimate source of spiritual authority. In modern Vedanta, the Veda is
conceived as the record of the experiences of the enlightened sages, or
rishis, and its authority to have only a provisional nature, acting as
a guide to the nature of ultimate reality, a guide no longer needed
after one experiences nirvikalpa samadhi through the practice of one or
more of the four yogas: karma yoga, jñana yoga, bhakti yoga, and raja
yoga. As Anantanand Rambachan has pointed out in 'Accomplishing the
Accomplished and The Limits of Scripture', this is quite distinct from
the traditional view that the Veda is an independent and sufficient
prama?r basis for the knowledge, or jñana, that leads to?nd indeed
constitutes?iberation, at least according to an Advaitic understanding
of moks?. One might say that, for modern Vedanta, experience confirms
the truth of the Veda, whereas for traditional forms of Vedanta, the
Veda confirms the truth that is, the veridical nature of experience.

Another important distinction between modern Vedanta and the
traditional forms of Vedanta is that modern Vedanta conceives of itself
as a synthesis or summation of all earlier forms, seeing Dvaita,
Vishishtadvaita, and Advaita, for example, as corresponding to specific
stages of spiritual evolution toward the goal of moksha. Both of these
aspects of modern Vedanta are significant when analyzing its doctrine
of religious pluralism.

Modern Vedantic religious pluralism has been famously expressed, using
a wide variety of vivid metaphors, by Ramakrishna, the founding figure
of this tradition, who is widely known for such statements as, "I have
practiced all religions£rinduism, Islam, Christianity and I have also
followed the paths of the different Hindu sects. I have found that it
is the same God toward whom all are directing their steps, though along
different paths he who is called Krishna is also called Siva, and bears
the name of the Primal Energy, Jesus, and Allah as well the same Rama
with a thousand names god can be realised through all paths. All
religions are true. The important thing is to reach the roof. You can
reach it by stone stairs or by wooden stairs or by bamboo steps or by a
rope it is not good to feel that one's religion alone is true and all
others are false. God is one only and not two. Different people call
him by different names: some as Allah, some as God, and others as
Krishna, Shiva, and Brahman. It is like water in a lake. Some drink
it at one place and call it ?al,?others at another place and call it
pani, and still others at a third place and call it water. The
Hindus call it ?al,?the Christians water, and the Mussulmans
?ani.?But it is one and the same thing. Opinions are but paths.

Each religion is only a path leading to God, as rivers come from
different directions and ultimately become one in the one ocean all
religions and all paths call upon their followers to pray to one and
the same God. Therefore one should not show disrespect to any religion
or religious opinion." (Nikhilananda 1942: 60, Richards 1985: 65)
Mahatma Gandhi similarly writes, "Religions are different roads
converging upon the same point. What does it matter that we take
different roads so long as we reach the same goal? In reality there
are as many religions as there are individuals, all believe in the
fundamental truth of all great religions of the world. I believe that
they are all God-given, and I believe that they were necessary for the
people to whom these religions were revealed. And I believe that, if
only we could all of us read the scriptures of different faiths from
the standpoint of the followers of those faiths we should find that
they were at bottom all one and were all helpful to one another."
(Ibid, 156, 157)

Such views are so central to and so widely associated with modern
Vedanta, and modern Vedanta, in turn, is so often the medium through
which Hinduism is expressed, particularly to Western audiences, that
religious pluralism has come to be held by many, both Hindu and
non-Hindu, as the Hindu view of religious diversity, and even as the
most distinctively Hindu of beliefs, serving to contrast Hinduism with
proselytizing traditions that often insist upon the exclusive truth and
salvific efficacy of their own revelation. If I may add a personal
note, it was also this very view that was one of the things that I
found most attractive about the Hindu tradition, and which drew me to
its study and practice.

Recently, though, this view has come under considerable attack from
within the Hindu tradition due to certain detrimental effects it is
held to have had on the community over the course of the last century.
The idea that "all religions are the same" is not only demonstrably
false; but it also leads to a certain kind of intellectual laziness and
disregard for what is distinctive about one's own traditions. Many of
today's Hindus, it is claimed, are unaware of the vast riches of their
own tradition in part because the idea of "radical universalism"?s one
critic, Frank Morales, has called it has led to a watering down of a
sense of Hindu distinctiveness. Moreover, this is seen to make Hindus
more vulnerable to unscrupulous conversion efforts on the part of
communities that are far more conscious of their own distinctiveness,
and far more aggressive in promoting their own ideals than are the
Hindus, who follow a doctrine of "live and let live" regarding
religious difference precisely because of the modern Vedantic doctrine
of religious pluralism. Because of the perceived vulnerability to
conversion that radical universalism is seen to create, there are
critics who go even further and claim there is a Christian conspiracy
at work, pointing to the influence of Unitarianism on Swami Vivekananda
(via his earlier involvement, prior to meeting Ramakrishna, in the
Brahmo Samaj).

One response to such criticism, of course, is that it misses the mark.
The claim of modern Vedanta is not that "all religions are the same."
To again cite Gandhi, "Religions are different roads converging upon
the same point." Difference is acknowledged.

It is also odd to see pluralism as an idea that Christian missionaries
would want to promote. If Hindus include pictures of Jesus Christ and
his mother in their home altars, is this an indication that they are
becoming Christian? Or is it a distinctively Hindu kind of religious
act, which many Christians would find deeply offensive? If anything,
pluralism would appear to stem the tide of conversion. In response to
the evangelical claim that the Hindu has not yet "found Jesus," the
Hindu can reply, "Of course I have. He's right here in my home altar
with Lord Vishnu, Lord Shiva, and Ma Kali. I have them all. Do you?"

I am also inclined to see the spread of religious pluralism among
liberal Christian intellectuals like John Hick and David Ray Griffin as
a Hinduization of Christianity, as more conservative Christians have
charged, rather than seeing its promulgation within the Hindu community
as a Christianization of Hinduism. Clearly influence can move in both
directions. While there is historical truth in the claim that
Vivekananda probably was influenced by Unitarianism, three further
facts need to be noted. First, Unitarianism is hardly an evangelical
form of Christianity. Many would claim it is not even Christian,
because of its rejection of the central doctrine of the Trinity, and
many Unitarians today do not regard themselves as Christian at all.

Indeed, some regard themselves as Pagans or as Buddhists. Secondly, by
far the most influential Unitarian thinker of the nineteenth century,
Ralph Waldo Emerson, was heavily influenced by Hinduism, an influence
which led directly to the transcendentalist movement in America which
included such figures as Henry David Thoreau who, in turn, influenced
Mahatma Gandhi. Finally, Ramakrishna, the true fountainhead of modern
Vedanta was very unlikely to have been influenced by Unitarians at all.
His interactions with the Brahmo Samaj happened relatively late in his
life, after the famous period of his sadhanas, during which he
developed his ideas about pluralism on the basis of having experienced
the same samadhi as a result of following the practices of a wide
variety of Hindu traditions, plus Christianity and Islam. It is upon
the direct realization experiences of Ramakrishna, arrived at through a
variety of means, that modern Vedanta bases its doctrine of religious
pluralism.

Dr. Jeffery D. Long
Assistant Professor of Religious Studies
Elizabethtown College
Elizabethtown, PA 17022

Phone: 717-361-1507
Fax: 717-361-1390
E-mail: LongJD@...

If the point of the criticism, however, is that religious pluralism, or
universalism, has been misunderstood as saying that "all religions are
the same," and that this view has had the detrimental effect that its
critics charge, then I must agree with them. But unlike the critics of
religious pluralism, I take this to mean not that we must reject
pluralism as a foreign growth within the body of Hinduism, but that we
must very carefully re-articulate this idea in a way that will not
produce such misunderstandings or negative effects. Such is the larger
project behind this paper.

Traditional Precedents for Modern Vedantic Religious Pluralism

The charge that modern Vedantic religious pluralism is a foreign
import, an effect of the influence of the West on nineteenth and
twentieth century Hindu thought, while having some validity, disregards
the degree to which pluralism has been an undercurrent of the Hindu
tradition since the period of the Rig Veda. I have already cited the
famous Vedic statement that reality is one, though the wise speak of
it variously. There is also the statement of the Bhagavad Gita: Ye
yatha mam prapadyante tamstathaiva bhajamyaham, mama vartmanuvartante
manushyaha, Partha, sarvashaha, Ò human beings approach me, so I
receive them. All paths, Partha, lead to me. (Bhagavad-G?4:11)
Many pluralistic statements of this kind are scattered throughout the
sruti and smr iti literature. And there are, of course, the many
pluralistic assertions from the medieval period of such figures as
Kabir and Guru Nanak, claiming, in anticipation of Sri Ramakrishna and
Gandhi, that the path one takes or the name one chants is of less
consequence than the sincerity of one's devotion to one's chosen ideal,
and that it is this devotion which leads to liberation.

The need of the hour, however, is not a list of quotations from the
Hindu tradition that affirm the validity of many paths to a common
goal. The need is for a logical and systematic argument for pluralism
as an entailment of an internally coherent, compelling worldview that
can address the range of possible objections to religious pluralism,
such as the question of how many traditions which make substantially
different claims can all be seen to lead to the same end preferably, an
argument rooted in the Indic traditions.
If one looks to traditional forms of Vedanta, however and this lends
credence to the anti-pluralist side of the current discussion one does
not find, despite the pluralistic sentiments one finds expressed in a
variety of places in the Vedic literature, a systematic argument for
pluralism of the kind affirmed in modern Vedanta. To be sure, one
finds, in Shankara's Advaita and the Smarta tradition with which it is
affiliated, the idea that there are many possible ishtadevatas toward
which one may direct bhakti for the sake of mental purification,
preparatory to the jñana that is provided by the Veda, the shabda
pramana. It is possible that from the practice of pañcayatana puja, or
worship of the devatas Ganesha, Shiva, Shakti, Vishnu, and Surya, there
emerged the practice of incorporating the deities of many religions
into one's worship, offering bhakti not only to the Vedic deities, but
to the Buddha, Jesus Christ, and others as well.

But one does not find in Advaita Vedanta, as traditionally conceived,
the idea that all paths to realization are equally adequate. There is
finally one realization that leads to moksa and one valid prama?r
realizing it. There is also one paramartha satya, one ultimate truth,
and that is that nirguna brahman is the sole reality, all else being
illusion, or maya.

This is in sharp contrast with the Vishishtadvaita of Ramanuja
according to which Ishvara and the world are real, the ultimate unity
which they form brahman being organic in nature, and Ishvara and the
world bearing a relationship to one another analogous to that of soul
and body, jiva and sharira, respectively. And this, in turn, is in
contrast with the Dvaita of Madhva, for whom distinctness, not unity,
is of central significance, and for whom the difference between
Ishvara specifically Visisadvaitand the individuals in the world is of
paramount importance, being indispensable for bhakti, which has the
importance in the systems of both Ramanuja and Madhva that jñana does
in that of Shankara. This is a far cry from Swami Vivekananda's
affirmations about the equally valid and efficacious character of the
karma, jñana, bhakti, and raja yogas. Each thinker has a distinctive
view that he regards as true and to which he goes to great lengths to
defend from the others.

Jainism: Candidate for a Traditional Indic Systematic Defense of Pluralism

A systematic argument for a pluralistic worldview is not, however,
altogether lacking in the traditional Indic darsanas. It is my
contention that the closest thing to the modern Vedantic form of
religious pluralism in the Indic tradition and the best candidate in
the Indic tradition for a systematic worldview that can ground modern
Vedantic claims in this regard is the Jain doctrine of multiplicity, or
anekantavada, with its corollaries, the doctrine of perspectives, or
nayavada, and the doctrine of conditional predication, or syadvada.
According to anekantavada, reality is complex. It has many facets
characterized by qualities that are of a seemingly contrary nature.
There is that in reality which persists and is continuous over time.

It is this which makes possible notions such as identity and substance.
There is also that in reality which is impermanent and changeable,
giving rise to such notions as time and process. From the Jain
perspective, an adequate account of reality is one which dismisses
neither of these aspects as illusory, but which integrates both into a
holistic worldview. The most obvious objects of critique here are
Advaita Vedanta, which affirms that nirguna brahman alone is real and
that all else false that is subject to change is an illusion, and
Buddhism, which affirms that impermanence is the ultimate reality and
that all sense of self or personal identity over time is an illusion.

From a Jain perspective, these views both exhibit the fallacy of
ekantata one-sidedness, or failing to take into account the contrary
point of view. The truth of any claim, according to the Jain
tradition, is dependent upon the perspective, or naya, from which one
makes that claim. Advaitins are correct syat that is, in a certain
sense, or from a certain point of view then they affirm the reality of
the changeless and eternal sat-chit-ananda. Buddhists are also correct
syat in a certain sense, or from a certain point of view then they
affirm the reality of impermanence. In other words, a fundamental
truth about the universe undergirds both perspectives and the spiritual
practices that are based upon them. They are only false inasmuch as
each excludes the other.

This Jain approach to the multiplicity of religious and philosophical
perspectives is strikingly similar to, and in harmony with, claims that
one finds in numerous places in the teachings of Ramakrishna that the
relative universe of change, in which the difference between devotee
and devata obtains and bhakti yoga is the surest path to liberation,
and the absolute of the Advaitic path of the Brahmajñani, are equally
real, that these are only different, but equally valid, ways of
conceiving reality, thus making the spiritual practices based upon them
equally valid paths to realization. To be sure, there are tendencies
in the teachings of Ramakrishna and more so in the writings of
Vivekananda?o subordinate the Dvaitic to the Advaitic, the relative to
the absolute. But Ramakrishna is not always consistent about this, and
his devotion to the Divine Mother is such that it is hard to think of
him as a pure Advaitin. I am not saying that Ramakrishna was
influenced by Jainism. I suspect the direct influence of Jainism on
Ramakrishna's thought was minimal, if not non-existent. But I believe
that if one seeks to translate Ramakrishna's understanding of reality
as it bears on religious pluralism into a systematic philosophy in a
traditional Indic idiom, one would come up with something very much
like anekantavada.

One difficulty which modern Vedanta faces with regard to any attempt
to include this elegant Jain system of logic into its worldview in
defense of its doctrine of religious pluralism is the fact that the
more traditional forms of Vedanta were not only not always pluralistic,
but that the acaryas of all the major schools explicitly rejected the
Jain view in their commentaries on Badarayana's Brahma Sutra. If,
however, one examines their reasons for doing so, one finds that they
have consistently mischaracterized the Jain view as being that contrary
predications can be made of an entity in the same sense and at the same
time, in violation of the law of non-contradiction. This, however, is
not what the Jains say. The Jains, rather, are quite explicit in
claiming that a condition for affirming the truth of contrary
predications is specification with regard to time, location, etc. with
regard to the quality in question. The traditional Vedantic rejections
of anekantavada, like contemporary critiques of pluralism, suffer from
the defect of missing the mark.

Conclusion

In conclusion, I would argue that if modern Vedantins in the tradition
of Ramakrishna wish to defend the doctrine of religious pluralism from
criticisms either of its internal incoherence or its inconsistency with
more basic Vedantic claims, then we would do well to adopt some version
of anekantavada into our discourse. Anekantavada can ground the claim
of modern Vedanta to contain all of the essential truths of the
traditional forms of Vedanta, such as Advaita, Dvaita, and
Vishishtadvaita, by specifying the dimensions of the larger reality
with which these more traditional forms are concerned. By seeing all
these dimensions as aspects of one larger holistic reality, the claim
that all the varied spiritual paths based on each of these systems of
thought are equally efficacious can be grounded.

I think, however, that the traditional form of Vedanta that resembles
the total view of reality affirmed by modern Vedanta the most is
Ramanuja's Vishishtadvaita. This may be a surprising claim, given the
overwhelming tendency of most modern practitioners of Vedanta to
identify themselves as Advaitins. But my suggestion is not that all
modern Vedantins must identify themselves as Vishishtadvaitins. It is,
rather, that one can be an Advaitin if one likes or a Vishishtadvaitin
or a Dvaitin, or, for that matter, a Christian or a Buddhist or a
Muslim. But what it means to locate oneself in Ramakrishna's
tradition, with its pluralistic claims, is that one sees one's chosen
spiritual path, whatever it may be, as taking place within a much
larger context best described not by one tradition alone, but by the
sum total of all. The fact that this sum total just happens to
resemble Ramanuja's Vishishtadvaita does not invalidate any other path.

Nor would it be valid to infer that a Vishishtadvaitin, simply by
virtue of being a Vishishtadvaitin, is further along the path to the
ultimate goal.

The hope ultimately driving such a project the project of
incorporating anekanta-vada into the worldview of the Ramakrishna
tradition is that it can address objections to religious pluralism with
a logical rigor heretofore unavailable to it, and that it can do so by
drawing upon resources within the Indic tradition.

Dr. Jeffery D. Long
Assistant Professor of Religious Studies
Elizabethtown College
Elizabethtown, PA 17022

That was an informative post by Dr. Long, noble in its aim and
exemplary of Hindu dharma. One cannot find any fault in it.

On a separate tangential issue, and its not a critique of that post,
most of the Hindu scholars in the 20th century have been trying to
evolve a 'grand unified field theory of metaphysics', much like the
Stephen Hawkins' hopelessly slipping holy grail chase to uncover a
theory that unifies quantum and stellar physics.

Even this is not new. The propounders of the shad dharsanas too tried
to codify the indic teachings into tight philosophies but in the end
all those schools collapsed leaving vedanta. Then the vedanta schools
gave rise to several philosophies, but each one deconstructed the
other. Then the Meykandar siddhanta school of the 12th century
deconstructed all of the earliers schools, and it stands unchallenged
today.

Most Hindus do not realise that philosophies such as advaita,
visisadvaita, dvaita, etc have all been deconstructed and that these
deconstructions have not been deconstructed for 800 years. Only one
philosophy stands today in Hinduism. What has been deconstructed
cannot be part of the grand unified theory, or modified anekantavada.

Yet many Hindus still cherish and follow these various theories,
partly due to ignorance, and partly due to faith in it. But to hear
Hindus acharyas speak of these defunct theories is like hearing a
professor still teaching Dalton's Theory and Alchemy, completely
oblivious to the developments of quantum mechanics.

Dont get me wrong; I do NOT believe in the rationalist and
pluralistic Meykandar school of thought. To me personal revelations
and experiential knowledge is above any veda or rationale, it is
syadvada, and I am a monistic theist. This puts me outside any school
of thought and therefore not susceptible to deconstruction.

And not that the Meykandar school is right; it simply stands by
default. Since all else has been deconstructed, what is left must be
right, right? I dont agree with this.

Needless to say, jain, buddhist and carvaka philosophies too were
deconstructed.

There is another obstacle; these siddhanta systems have classified
religions and philosophies as agach chamayam(inner) which includes
the Hindu sects, agap pura chamayam (outer) which includes buddhist,
jainism and sikhism and finally pura chamayams (alien) which includes
christianity, islam as well as primal and minor diety worship. This
classification has basis in the teachings of the bakti saints,
considered shruti. It will be hard to overcome this.

I may have missed the mark too. I just gave it a shot though.

Regards.

Pathma

The impressions of superficial European observers of India of the 17th and
18th centuries were often not very positive. True, after the discovery of
Sanskrit, Kalidasa, the Gita and the Upanishads, some European thinkers
were inspired by the lofty thoughts these works contain. However, most
Westerners found the beliefs, worship-modes and life-style of the Indian
people to be so different from what they were accustomed to that they
imagined that the Hindoos (as we were called) were really a backward lot.

In fairness, and without condoning their ignorance and insolence, it may be
noted that a good many people from India, even in our own times, form a
great many deprecatory, condescending, and distorted opinions about Western
culture and civilization which they judge from the trivialities and trash
that they see on TV screens and daily news.

In any case, there is still a widespread belief that prior to the advent of
the British, Indians were really relatively unsophisticated. One reason for
this impression is that after the industrial revolution, technological
advances and gadget-inventions accelerated in the West, and in terms of
creature comforts available to the average citizen, the West does seem more
advanced. There are at least two reasons for this: First, a knowledge of
modern physics (electro-magnetism) and chemistry (properties of materials)
is essential for efficient energy-converting systems which are at the root
of modern technology. Secondly, the Asian and African colonies of Europe
provided vast amounts of capital for Britain and Europe.

Even if one were to argue that India benefited in a number of ways (trains,
roads, modern universities, liberation from Islamic potentates, etc.) as a
result of her contact with the British, the financial price the country paid
for all this, let alone the cultural marginalization, was horrendous: The
resulting monetary loss transformed one of the richest and most productive
countries in the 18th century into a poor nation by 1947. When the British
left India, her wealth had been drastically and systematically drained to
fatten the coffers of the "mother country."

Many historians have laid bare all these sordid facts. In particular the
scholar-historian Dharampal has written extensively on this, and about
science and technology in India prior to the advent of the British. He
exposed the economic plunder that India suffered during its colonial period.
More importantly, he delved into the reports and records of by-gone years
which are still in the archives of British museums and libraries, and which
reveal many aspects of Indian technology in the 18th century. For example:
J. Z. Holwell wrote in 1767 that "Inoculation is performed in Indostan by a
particular tribe of Bramins, who are delegated annually for this service
from the different Colleges of Bindoobund, Eleabas, Banaras, &c. over all
the distant provinces; dividing themselves into small parties . They plan
their traveling circuits in such wise as to arrive at the places of their
respective destination some weeks before the return of the disease."

In 1774, Lt. Col Ironside gave a detailed description of how one
manufactured paper in India: "The manufacturer purchases old ropes, cloths,
and nets, made from the sun plant, and cuts them into small pieces,
macetates them in water, for a few days, generally five, washes them in the
river in a basket, and throws them into a jar of water lodged in the ground;
the water is strongly impregnated with a lixivium of sedgimutti (an earth
containing a large portions of fossil alkali) six parts and quick lime seven
parts ."

Capt. Thos Halcott, writing on the Drill Husbandry in South India, observed
(1795) "Until lately I imagined the drill plough to be a modern European
invention; a short time ago, riding over a field, I observed a drill plough
at work, very simple in its construction, which . I find it in general use
here, and has been so since time immemorial."
In 1795 Benjamin Heyne, writing on Iron Works in Ramanakapettah, quotes
Captain Presgrave who described bar iron made in India as "of most excellent
quality, possessing all the desirable properties of malleability, ductility
at different temperatures and of tenacity for all of which I think it cannot
be surpassed by the best Swedish iron."

In 1820 Alexander Walker wrote: "They (Hindoos) have been long in possession
of one of the most beautiful and useful inventions in agriculture. They have
a variety of implements for husbandry purposes, some of which have been
introduced into England in the course of our recent improvements. They clean
their fields by howing and hand weeding; they have weeding ploughs, which
root out and extirpate the weeds."

These are just some examples. By a sad subversion of perspectives, the high
opinions of at least some European observers of Indian science and
technology during the 18th century were slowly transformed in the course of
the 19th century into a dismal picture. One reason could have been that as a
result of European onslaught, technology declined in India during this time.

Perhaps another was that the interest of Western scholars shifted from
technology to philosophy in India.
In any case, a people's self-image is formed by the reading of history.

History can make us feel good or otherwise, depending on which aspects of
the past one focuses on.

Scholars are divided as to whether there is one universal science that
transcends race, religion, nationality and culture, or whether science too,
like religion and philosophy, is a function of culture and geography.

Generally speaking, creative and productive scientists and those who have
seriously studied physics, chemistry, and astronomy, and are attuned to the
worldviews that have derived from these, hold on to the first perspective.

People who view science from the outside and are moved by its negative
impacts on mind and society, and outraged by the colonialist cruelties
inflicted by Western imperialism upon non-industrialized societies, tend to
argue that modern science is a Western construct whose goal has been to
exploit Asia and Africa.

This controversy draws considerable academic interest. But no matter what
philosophers and postmodernists say and write from their ivory towers, all
member countries of the United Nations teach their children post-16th
century science, and take pride when one of theirs is elected Fellow of the
Royal Society or awarded a Nobel Prize for science. In India, thousands of
people are initiated into modern science, and countless Indians are
contributing richly to what is mistakenly called Western Science.
How did all begin? Here we have to recognize an unpleasant historical fact.

The British were the first to give Indians a push into modern science. And
one of the persons responsible for this is the much-maligned Thomas
Babington Macaulay, a prolific and grandiloquent scholar, brilliant essayist
on historical and literary themes, and supercilious British thinker of the
19th century who, in 1835, won the debate on whether schools in India
should continue teaching Sanskrit and vernacular languages, or substitute
these with English for at least a section of the society so as to enable
them to absorb the thoughts and science of the West, mold their minds to
think like Europeans, and develop in them an arrogant disdain for their own
culture and heritage. Macaulay was not as much interested in Christianizing
as in anglicizing, and modernizing Hindus. Macaulay's dream
was successful in at least some layers of English-educated Hindus.

The British needed anglicized Hindus to run their bureaucracy and legal
infrastructure: it was too costly to bring white sahibs from England for
their ever-expanding governmental machinery. They also needed men trained in
chemical, mechanical, and civil engineering for manufacturing materials,
running factories, and constructing roads to maintain British capitalist
trade. Thus, by the close of the 19th century, the British had established
170 colleges in India, including industrial, engineering, and allopathic
medical schools.

At the same time, British scientists conducted explorations, as much for
practical purposes as out of scientific curiosity. Thus began thorough
geological, botanical, and geographical surveys of India, leading to such
results as maps India and of various regions, classification of flora and
fauna, measuring the heights of mountains and hills, lengths of rivers, etc.

Archeologists dug to uncover the buried past and interpret remaining relics
and scripts. Many individuals, such as William Lambton who was "the first
botanist to draw up a systematic account of the plants of India," Charles
Oakeley who erected the first modern observatory in India (1792), and
others, deserve to be remembered in this context. Not many have even heard
of Robert Fortune who transplanted tea into India, resulting in enormous
economic wealth for the country even after the British left.

As a result of British scientific intrusions, the fire of intellectual
inquiry which has always been there in India, but which, for various
reasons, had simmered down for some time, was rekindled once again. Thus, in
the closing decades of the 19th century, graduating from the new colleges
and universities founded by the British, fresh crops of alert thinkers with
new ideas and investigators with modern scientific worldviews began to
emerge in Bengal, Madras, and Maharashtra: the first three provinces where
universities were established in the 19th century.

Galilean-Newtonian science would have seeped into India, as it did into
Russia in the 18th century and into Japan in the 19th, without the colonial
hurt. But sadly for India, it was the British who jolted India to the winds
of change that were enriching Europe. And they did this while inflicting
political oppression, economic exploitation, and cultural humiliation. This
makes it difficult for us to whole-heartedly recognize whatever good the
British might have done, even unwittingly. But it is a fact of historical
curiosity that the determination of one man - T. B. Macaulay - to introduce
English into Indian schools transformed the course of Indian culture and
history in unimagined ways Even India's current pre-eminence in
out-sourcing and the related economic benefits are linked to the knowledge
of English that Indians possess. In a world where scientific literature is
predominantly English India enjoys a special advantage too.

The first Indian to have made a mark in international science in modern
times was Jagdish Chandra Bose. He was the only Asian to be invited to the
International Congress of Physics of 1900. Here he presented a paper on "the
Similarity of Responses in Inorganic and Living Matter." The thesis of this
paper was revolutionary in that it regarded the transition from inorganic to
the organic as a continuum, rather than as a quantum jump from one kind of
matter (non-living) to another (living). He developed these ideas in a book
entitled, Responses in the Living and Non-living.

Bose did not just dream up his ideas. He was a first rate experimentalist:
the first in the Indian tradition to device ingenious instruments for
observing, detecting and measuring. These are indispensable elements for
modern science. Bose was fascinated by plants, and he was convinced,
contrary to the prevailing opinion, that plants had a sophisticated
response-mechanism which was very much like the nervous system. His
researches on this problem led to publications with such titles as "Plant
Response as a Means of Physiological investigations," and "Nervous mechanism
of plants." In this context, he did many significant experiments on root
pressure and capillary action in sap. His book, Plant Response contains many
of the fruits of his work on these phenomena. This book was received very
favorably by the international scientific community. The journal Nature,
reviewing it, wrote, "A biologically equipped reader will experience dazzled
admiration for the logically progressive way in which the author builds up,
not in words, but actually on a complete functioning plant from three simple
conceptions."

Though his interests in plant physiology were deep, Bose was first and
foremost a physicist. In fact, it was his interest in electromagnetic
phenomena that led him to a systematic study of plant behavior. In this
transition, he unwittingly laid the foundations for to a new field of
science: biophysics.

Bose performed experiments on the reflection, refraction, and polarization
of very short wavelength electromagnetic waves. His results, published in
1895, won him recognition in the international scientific community. He
explored the possibility of wireless telegraphy: a field that was to
revolutionize human civilization. Long before it happened in many other
places, it was at the Town Hall in Calcutta that one of the first wireless
devices was demonstrated. Perhaps there is a plaque there commemorate this.

Bose's biographer Subrata Dasgupta points out that Rabindranath Tagore
spread Bose's fame in India, basing himself on the enthusiastic
exaggerations of the Irish Indophile Margaret Noble, leading to some awkward
and unwarranted claims on behalf of his hero. Nevertheless, Bose's
achievement in the transmission of radio waves deserves a more prominent
place in the history of science than is normally accorded to it.

Upon his return from England in 1897, Bose became a professor of physics at
the Calcutta Presidency College, until he retired in 1915, at the age of 57.

Soon thereafter he founded a scientific research center which he named
Bij? Mandir: Bengali for Temple of Science. For J. C. Bose regarded the
study of natural phenomena (science) as equivalent to the worship of God.

Erasmus Darwin, the grandfather of Charles Darwin, had written a poem in
1802 entitled, The Temple of Nature, and Louis Pasteur had used a similar
term for the research laboratory.

The Bose Institute (as it came to be called) was inaugurated on November 30,
1917 on the occasion of its founder's 59th birthday. Its goal was not only
the advancement of science, but also the diffusion of scientific knowledge.

Bose saw an emerging synthesis between physics and biology. "The
investigations to be carried out in the Institute," he said, "are for the
fuller and further investigations of the many and ever opening problems of
the nascent science which includes both Life and non-Life."

Bose also had the vision of an institute that would bring scholars from all
over the world in the true spirit of internationalism as well as of Indian
heritage. He said, "I am attempting to carry out the traditions of my
country which, so far back as 25 centuries ago, welcomed scholars from
different parts of the world within the precincts of the ancient seats of
learning at Nalanda and Taxila."

J. C. Bose had a deep devotion for his country and an abiding love for its
traditions, but as one touched by the knowledge and wonder of modern
science, he could not reconcile himself to simply repeating what his
ancestors had said and done, however splendid they might have been. He
called on his people to look forward, to explore the world around, and to
see how they could build a new world without sacrificing the one they had
inherited. "We have still a great and mighty future before us," he reminded
his countrymen, and added that we should not just "brag of what our
ancestors have done but ... carry out in the future something as great, if
not greater, than they."

in response to Dr. Loga

> during the 800 years of Meykandar's Botham what the Indian Acaryas have done is to IGNORE it rather than attempt to deconstruct it.

True. They have all ignored it. But thats because there is nothing much they can do about it, but ignore it, or relinquish their heritage sampradaya, which they have not been graced to do.

On the other hand, it is the Lord's Concealing Grace. Jokes aside and think about it! Its true. They cannot see.

Anyway, 'avan arulale avanthal vanangi'. "It is by His Grace that one worships Him'. Appar too sings that it is the Lord who turned his face towards Him.

As you may already understand, one cannot choose to worship Lord Siva. You have to be 'chosen' to worship Him, or follow His Path. Only when one is ready is one chosen by the Lord to worship Him. Until such time, everyone can worship any God of any religion, and its absolutely allright.

But when one is chosen to worship Lord Siva, one loses one's free will, although the soul may take a while to realise that, and continue to exert his will,
thinking he is actually accomplishing something. One of the things that happens for the mature chosen soul is that, oh, very slowly, all his relationships with people will breakdown, without exception, no matter what he does. And without realising it,
that soul will be living like a monk without a care or want, but in the world. Is it not so?

In this sense, for Saivism, it is absolutely necessary for the existence of the other sects, sampradayas and schools of thought - to cater for the vast
masses of different inclinations and subconscious minds. The existence of non Hindu religions too is necessary, as well as various forms of primal and minor deity worship. We are told that all these religions are Lord Siva's own, including [god forbid ] Islam. And this is the greatest message we have for the world!

This therefore makes Saivism the most tolerant of all religions and sects and the least proselytising of them all.

With this, we can also understand the siddhantic classifications of agach chamayams, agap pura and pura chamayams and see the logic of it and understand this siddhanta system's own full acceptance of all faiths without any condescension.

Insofar as this, All is in order. There is not one thing out of place.

Regards.

The element mercury - the only metal that is in the liquid state at ordinary
temperatures - played a central role in ancient Hindu alchemy.
Interestingly, the first great chemist of the modern era became one of the
foremost authorities on mercury compounds, whether mercurous or mercuric.
His name: Prafulla Chandra Ray.

He came from a village school in what is now Bangladesh: Just as
Mohanja-daro, the seat of the most ancient civilization in the Indian
subcontinent is no longer part of India, the birth-places of a good many
great scientists and writers of old Bengal are not in India any more.

Though true scientists in those days - nor for that matter in ours - speak
in terms of Bengali botany and Madrasee mathemamatics, they did understand
the value and relevance of the new science for the welfare of their people.

Ray expressed this symbolically by casting off his suit and tie upon his
return from England in 1888, and adopted simple and graceful Bengali attire.

English education need not necessarily make one a Macaulayite. It can also
transform one into a more enlightened person of whatever nationality.

Ray had received a doctoral degree from the University of Edinburgh in
analytical chemistry, working on amorphous mixtures and the nature of
molecular combinations. Upon his return home, he had some difficulty finding
a suitable position, but eventually he became the first Indian professor of
chemistry in India. He did so well in this capacity that the government gave
him enough funds to have his own research laboratory: again the first in
India. Here he continued with his explorations of mercuric salts, and tried
to discover a new element: Mendeleef's periodic table still had some gaps.

Though his various papers on the mercury compounds were published in the
Journal of the Asiatic Society, they received attention from the prestigious
British journal Nature.

Ray was also interested in organic chemistry because it is related to the
food we eat. He knew that food adulteration was common practice among the
merchants. Adding water to milk may not be serious, but when ghee (clarified
butter) and mustard oil were contaminated with undesirable ingredients, it
could be quite dangerous for health. So Ray undertook meticulous chemical
analysis of the purest ghee and mustard oil that he prepared in his
laboratory, and compared these with what was available in the market, with
shocking revelations.

Ray felt that science should be more than a labor of love of knowledge. It
must be nurtured by forming future scientists, and it needs to be used for
the benefit of one's countrymen and of humanity. So Ray trained students,
and came to be called the founder of the Indian Chemical School.
Like Lavoisier and Leblanc in 18th century France, Ray wanted to put to use
his knowledge of chemistry. So, with only a modest capital he established
chemical companies like Bengal Chemical and Pharmaceutical Works, Bengal
Pottery Works, Calcutta Soap Works, and Bengal Canning and Condiment Works.

Besides manufacturing articles, these provided jobs for thousands of people.
His industrial undertakings brought him lots of money too. But he gave it
all away for charities and scholarships. Thus, this great ascetic-scientist
spent much of his talents and resources for the benefit of his people.

One day, Ray happened to see Marcellin Berthelot's Les origines de
l'alchemie, and was inspired to write a few papers on this. He shared them
with the eminent French chemist who encouraged him to write a treatise on
the subject. Thus it was that Ray's two volume classic on the History of
Hindu Chemistry emerged, based on objective analysis of a plethora of extant
Sanskrit works. Ray traced the development of Chemistry in India into four
distinct periods: ancient times (1500 BCE - 800 CE), a transitional period
(800 to 1100), the Tantric period (1100 - 1300), and finally the period of
iatro-chemistry (1300 - 1550). This was historical scholarship at its best,
a search for the past, no nationalistic flag-waving or complaining about
Western scholars.

Ray received many well-deserved honors in his life time. Such was this great
rishi of modern India, dedicated to the pursuit of science and silently
serving his countrymen. He was a genuine scholar, great philanthropist, and
man of uncommon simplicity. People like him combine whatever is best in
India's rich tradition with whatever is good that the West (and other
cultures) offer. They represent the best of India, both of the past and of
the present. Such are the ones who will be leading India as she marches on
into the unknown future.

At the Science College in Calcutta, there used to be the room where P. C.
Ray lived for many years. It was as sacred a spot as any shrine, for it
recalls the presence of one who was dedicated to science and service.

V. V. Raman
November 25, 2005

Once in a while, a genius appears in the firmament of world history like a blazing comet, shines brightly and disappears, leaving behind a trail that can't be forgotten by future generations. Such were Michelangelo and Mozart, and such was also the mathematician Ramanujan, except that the latter's
creations are not within reach of everybody. Ramanujan lived for only 32 years, but he left behind mathematical results of supreme significance, evoking awe and admiration in those who can decipher the theorems that issued forth from his head like multicolored scarves from a
magician's hat.

Ramanujan was born in a modest family in a small town in South India. He was drawn to the magnificent world of numbers and proofs at an early age. A book called Synopsis of Mathematics which he borrowed from the local library added to his love for the subject. He took peculiar delight reciting pi and the square root of two to strings of decimal places. But he was no good in English, and flunked the required courses because he couldn't handle English orthography and syntax.

Ramanujan was married at 21, and became a quill-driving clerk, not unlike Einstein at the Swiss patent office a few years earlier. In his spare time,
he dabbled in higher mathematics. At 23, he published a paper on some properties of Bernoulli numbers. A certain mathematically literate
Ramachandra Rao could not figure out the genius's abstruse symbols and theorems. He directed the young man to G. H. Hardy, the famous Cambridge
mathematician of the era.

This led to a correspondence with Hardy to whom Ramanujan sent morethan a hundred results without proof or explanation. Reacting to some of Ramanujan's results, Hardy wrote, "I had never seen in the least anything like them before. A single look at them is enough to show that they could
only be written down by a mathematician of the highest class. They must be true because, if they were not true, no one could have the imagination
to invent them". Indeed, in mathematical creativity Hardy ranked Ramanujan higher than David Hilbert: the greatest mathematical giant of the period.

Hardy invited the young Hindu to Cambridge. But orthodoxy and Ramanujan's mother wouldn't let the Brahmin youth cross the polluting seas. They say
that a goddess brought to the mother the vision of her son shining in an assembly of Westerners, and commanded the lady not to stand in the way of her son's sailing overseas. So he was let go to Cambridge.

In Cambridge, Ramanujan came into the mainstream of mathematics, and realized sadly that some of his insights were not entirely new: Other extraordinary minds, like Euler and Jacobi, had come upon them long before.

But he continued to make new discoveries and contributions to such esoteric fields as highly composite numbers and elliptic functions.

No narration of Ramanujan's life would be complete without the 1729 story.

The only math one needs to know for this is that when a number is multiplied by itself thrice, we get its cube. Thus, for example, 2-cube (2^3) is 2 x 2 x 2 = 8, and 7-cube (7^3) is 7 x 7 x 7 = 343. The sum of two cubes is the number we get by adding two cubes. Thus 3^3 + 5^3 = 27 + 125 = 152.

Now here is the story. Once, Hardy remarked casually to Ramanujan about the number (1729) they happened to see on the license plate of a cab they took, calling it a dull number. "Not at all," replied Ramanujan instantly, "It's the smallest number that can be expressed as the sum of two cubes in two different ways: 1729 = 10^3 + 9 ^3 = 12^3 + 1^3. Such split-second recognition of the property of a randomly seen number was but a mild
instance of Ramanujan's unusual mathematical intuition.

We have lots of personal information on Ramanujan's life: more than on any other Indian mathematician, ancient or modern. Thanks to probing biographers, we know about his wife and mother and grandmother, his father and teacher and brother: their relationship with him, the pressure they put on him, their sympathies for him, and such. We know details about his last year when he was dying of tuberculosis, his continuing creativity, about his jealous mother, frightened wife, and his brother who sought financial aid from Hardy after Ramanujan died.

All that occurred more than fourscore years ago in a world that was very different from ours. The great mathematician was stubbornly orthodox in
his ways and wishes, imbued, as he was, in local fears and superstitions, often referring to a village goddess as the source of his insights. In that world,
astrologers predicted the imminent death of our bed-ridden hero, and advised that his wife should leave him for a while for his recovery as per the
dictates of the stars; and relatives wouldn't attend his cremation because he hadn't been cleansed of the impurity caused by his travel abroad.

Ramanujan's life evokes some chilling thoughts. What would have happened to the stupendous creativity of the man if Hardy hadn't brought him to
Cambridge? How many precious brains go down the drain right now in India, of her countless neglected and impoverished children: Hindu or Muslim, Dvija,
Shudra or Dalit?

V. V. Raman
November 28, 2005

In the l9th century physicists developed a technique by which one can
identify what chemical element is present in a distant source by carefully
examining (by means of a spectroscope) the light emanating from it. This
method of analysis opens up the possibility of knowing the composition of
stars and of our own sun. It was undoubtedly a most important scientific
breakthrough.

Gradually one came to expect, on the basis of their properties, the presence
of certain elements in the sun. However, not all these seemed to be there.

In particular, rubidium and cesium which were expected to be in the sun's
chromosphere were conspicuously absent. This remained a mystery until
Meghnath Saha came to the scene and solved the puzzle.

When Saha was assigned to teach a course on thermodynamics, it occurred to
him that perhaps one could combine thermodynamics and (the then emerging)
quantum mechanics to a study of matter in stars where the temperatures are
extremely high. Thus, his interest turned to astrophysics. Now he is said to
have undertaken a systematic study of the Monthly Notices of the Royal
Astronomical Society of 25 years. While engaged in this, an insightful idea
occurred to him: In chemistry one talks about the dissociation of molecules
at high temperatures: that is, molecules break up into their component
atoms. In atomic physics, one speaks of ionization: atoms are stripped of
their electrons at very high temperatures. Saha worked out a theory based on
this analogy. His theory gave a measure of the ionization in a hot gas as a
function of temperature and electron pressure.

The relevance of all this was in the study of the spectra of light from the
sun and stars, a topic that is of great importance in understanding the
nature and composition of stellar bodies. Saha's important results on this
subject were published in a classic paper entitled On Ionization in the
Solar Chromosphere in the prestigious Philosophical Magazine in 1920. The
problems considered in this paper were of enormous moment, and had been
suggested by Niels Bohr to some of the brightest physicists of the time.

In 1919, when Saha went to Europe for two years, he spent five months at the
Imperial College in London where he discussed his ideas with A. Fowler and
E. A. Milne, leading astrophysicists of the time. He then traveled in Europe
where he had occasion to interact with such giants of the time as Max
Planck, Arnold Sommerfeld, and Albert Einstein. These meetings also inspired
him to establish scientific research institutions in India. Some leading
German physicists did experiments to confirm Saha's theory. This gave
further boost to the theory.

In physics, natural phenomena are explained in terms of certain general
laws, principles, and equations. Thus we have Newton's law of gravitation,
the principle of matter-energy conservation and Bernoulli's equation for
fluid flow. Other famous equations are Euler's equations of rotational
dynamics, Maxwell's equations in electromagnetism, and Boltzmann's equation
in thermodynamics. In astrophysics, we have Saha's equation. Thus Saha is
immortalized in physics.

Upon his return to India, Saha was appointed professor of physics at
Calcutta University. Because he did not find sufficient support for his work
here, he moved to Allahabad where he spent the next fifteen years. During
this period, he also developed an interest in ionospheric physics.

Saha was also an activist. He played an important role in the Indian Science
Congress. He established the United Provinces Academy of Sciences, which
grew into the National Academy of Sciences. He also initiated the Indian
Science News Association, and the National Institute of Science. He started
the influential journal Science & Culture which has been publishing
countless articles on science and culture over the decades.

During India's freedom struggle, Saha was among the scientists who devoted
their full attention to their technical fields, and did not spend as much of
their time and energy in fighting the British. Saha was not particularly
sympathetic to the khadi movement in which Gandhi and his followers called
for a boycott of British goods in favor of developing cottage industries.

Saha and others feared this would slow down India's industrial progress.
After India's independence, however, Saha turned his attention to the
social, economic, political, and educational problems confronting the new
nation. He now worked hard to rid his people of ancient superstitions and of
astrology, though not very successfully. Under his leadership, an institute
of nuclear physics was established in Calcutta in 1950, which came to be
named after him after his demise. In 1953, Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru
asked Saha to chair the Calendar Reform Committee to bring about some
uniformity among the 30 different calendars then used in India. Saha also
served as a Member of the Indian Parliament. Such was the life and work of
this great physicist who probed into the workings of stars from here below.

V. V. Raman
December 2, 2005

Light is one of the most common elements in the field of our everyday
experience. In many ways it is still a mystery. And yet, during the past few
centuries, thanks to the efforts of physicists, we have come to know many
not so apparent aspects of light: that it is made up of electromagnetic
waves, that it travels faster than any physical body ever can, that it has a
corpuscular nature which we called the photon, and more. Among the
physicists who have unveiled some of these properties of light is Satyendra
Nath Bose.

Bose showed his brilliance in mathematics from a very early age. Like many
classical scientists, he too had deep interest in poetry, as much in English
poetry as in the works of his own Bengali poets. It is said that Bose used
to memorize long passages of Tennyson when still very young. At the
Presidency College in Calcutta he was the brightest in a galaxy of
brilliant students which included Meghnad Saha.

Recognizing the importance of scientific publications in European languages
in those days, Bose studied, aside from physics and mathematics, French and
German. This proved to be very valuable when a professor allowed Bose (and
his friend Saha) to use his books on advanced physics, some of which were in
German. Thanks to these, Bose became well versed in the then current topics
in physics, such as the quantum theory of Max Planck, the Relativity theory
of Albert Einstein, and the atomic model of Niels Bohr and Arnold
Sommerfeld. As much to master the material as to do a service, Bose and Saha
translated Einstein's papers on Relativity into English. A couple of young
Bengalis translating German papers into English: this was a great example of
the international character of modern science; it happened decades before
the cultural apartheid which postmodernism has been trying to impose on
science.

Bose began to work on related problems, and published a "Deduction of
Rydberg's Law from the Quantum Theory of Spectral Emission." Because of
professional political rivalries, conditions at Calcutta University were
becoming somewhat uncongenial for Bose. So he left for Dacca in 1921 to
teach physics at the newly established university there. Although resources,
especially laboratory equipment and library facilities, were not as great
there as in Calcutta, Bose continued his theoretical researches there.

Genius often works under the available conditions, instead of fruitlessly
complaining about the surroundings or the paucity of resources.

In 1924 Bose wrote his famous paper on "Planck's Law and the Light Quantum
Hypothesis," which he sent to Einstein for comments and possible
publication. Einstein saw through its merits right away, translated it into
German, and had it published in the prestigious Zeitschrift f?sik, with
the following significant comment:
"In my opinion, Bose's derivation of the Planck formula signifies an
important development. The method considered here yields also the quantum
theory of ideal gases..." This classic paper led to the recognition that the
photon and other particles obey a particular type of statistic, and led to
the term boson to describe such particles.

Bose traveled to Europe and met some of the illustrious physicists of the
golden era of quantum physics. Upon his return to Dacca, he became full
professor, and in this capacity, aside from teaching and doing research, he
also guided many young physicists in their investigations. In 1945, Bose
returned to Calcutta where he occupied a prestigious chair for over a
decade. During this period, he taught and traveled to Europe regularly to
attend conferences, take part in meetings, renew acquaintances, etc. At the
same time, he also worked on some aspects of Einstein's unified field
theory: attempts (in those days) to unify gravitation and electromagnetism.

In 1956, Bose moved on to Santiniketan as Vice Chancellor of the University
which had been established by Rabindranath Tagore. It is said that his
efforts to infuse more science in its curriculum were not very successful.
He came back to Calcutta after hardly three years there.

Bose was a versatile person. Besides theoretical physics, he also worked on
experimental science and in chemistry. He had an abiding interest in music.

It is stated in one of his biographies that "Bose was capable, with equal
ease, to talk about research on edible mushrooms with a botanist, or discuss
the pre-Revolution conditions in France, or read the history of the French
Revolution in the original." He translated French stories into Bengali. He
was dedicated to teaching science in the vernacular.
Bose received several honorary doctorates, the Padma Bhushan (the highest
honor bestowed by the Government of India), Fellowship of the Royal Society,
etc. He was a scholar in the best sense of the word, a lover of art and
literature, a creator in science, a true representative of whatever is best
in the Indian love of learning. His name will always be associated with one
of the most subtle properties of light.

Today India is among the nations that have reached a sophisticated level in
the field of nuclear physics and atomic energy. Much credit for this is due
to Pundit Jawaharlal Nehru, India's first Prime Minister. He had great
foresight and understanding of the importance of modern science in today's
world. Equally, the dedication of Homi Jehangir Bhabha stimulated the
development of nuclear energy in India.

Homi Bhabha was born in a well-to-do Parsee family in Bombay where he
studied at Cathedral High School. He went to Cambridge in 1927 to train for
a career in mechanical engineering. But his interests turned to physics, and
he became a research student at the famed Cavendish Laboratory which was
then under the direction of Ernest Rutherford. He received his doctoral
degree in physics in 1935. During his stay abroad, Bhabha traveled to
several research centers in Europe, and met eminent physicists like Enrico
Fermi, Wolfgang Pauli, and Niels Bohr. He was more than a physicist. He
played on the piano and developed further his taste for Western classical
music. He was known to transmit his enthusiasm to those who came in touch
with him. He also did many paintings himself.

In Cambridge, Bhabha was fortunate to do physics at an exciting period. His
tutor in mathematics was Paul Dirac, one of the giants of twentieth century
theoretical physics. Bhabha's own work in physics began with a paper on the
absorption of high energy gamma radiation by matter. The mathematical
expression which he derived for the probability of positrons being scattered
by electrons is known as the Bhabha scattering formula. With W. Heitler he
explored the mathematical aspects of cascade showers in cosmic rays: these
are high energy elementary particles which were discovered in the upper
layers of the earth's atmosphere and were believed to have originated in the
distant recesses of the cosmos.

In 1938 Bhabha suggested an experimental confirmation of Einstein's time
dilation formula by studying the decay of a muon in cosmic rays. This was a
matter of great significance as the theory of Relativity, though
mathematically elegant and conceptually beautiful, was still in need of
experimental verifications, given that very fast-moving particles are not
common. Bhabha also worked on nuclear physics.

One of the mysteries of the
atomic nucleus was that it contains particles (protons) carrying the same
kind of (positive) electric charges; yet it is extremely stable. One would
expect the positive charges to repel one another. This problem led to the
theory of the strong interaction (a new kind of force that exists within the
nucleus). In the mid-1930s the Japanese physicist Hideki Yukawa developed a
theory of nuclear forces, according to which nuclear forces result from the
exchange of subnuclear particles. Bhabha suggested the (now widely accepted)
name of meson for these (previously called) Yukawa particles. It has been
said that his work during this period was "sufficient ... to have earned him
a lasting reputation as a theoretical physicist."

In 1939, when Bhabha was on vacation in India, World War II broke out. He
could not return to England. He took a job at the Indian Institute of
Science in Bangalore where he came under the influence of C.V. Raman. In
1944 he presented to a Parsee industrialist the idea of founding a research
institution where only advanced physics would be taught and explored. The
result was the Tata Institute of Fundamental Research which was first
established in Bangalore, then moved to Bombay in 1945. Bhabha was also
involved with the establishment of the Indian Atomic Energy Commission
(1948) which was to become the Department of Atomic Energy in 1954. As he
was a well recognized and highly respected scientist in the international
arena he could accomplish a great deal in this projects. The personal esteem
he enjoyed among Western physicists made it easier for countries like France
and England to enter into nuclear collaboration with India. Since he
combined scientific talent with administrative capabilities, Bhabha chaired
many committees and headed many organizations.

He served as President of the
First International Conference on the Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy (1955),
and as a governor of the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna. He
was a member of the Organizing Committee of the Twelfth Pugwash Conference
that was held at Udaipur in 1964 on the theme: Current Problems of
Disarmament and World Security. It was appropriate that an eminent Indian
scientist played a role in the cause of peace in a world threatened by
nuclear weapons. In the words of the eminent Polish physicist Leopold
Infeld, "Homi Bhabha played an honorable role" in the discharge of his
responsibilities to the international forum.

Bhabha was an Indian physicist and world citizen. His love of culture
extended to art and music, for though he was a lover and practitioner of
science, he was no less a lover of life: one who indulged in whatever was
best for the mind and the spirit. His premature death in an airplane crash
in 1966 was a grievous loss for India.

V. V. Raman
December 7, 2005

Ultimately the physical world consists of matter and energy which
continuously transform. What causes these transformations? Physicists have
traced all the transformations in the physical world to four fundamental
forces or interactions. These are known as gravitational, electromagnetic,
weak, and strong. One of the goals of physics is to reduce these to a single
fundamental force: that is to say, to develop a (mathematical) theory which
derives all the four from a single source.

Similar efforts had been made before: For example, the theory of gravitation
arose from an effort to explain the motion of the planets round the sun, of
the moon round the earth, and the fall of an object to the ground: all as
being caused by one and the same force. Or again, one tried to explain the
attraction of a needle to a bar magnet and the flow of a current through a
wire as due to one and the same force. This is the so-called electromagnetic
force.

E. C. George Sudarshan is among the physicists who tried to synthesize the
weak and the electromagnetic forces. His (mathematically sophisticated)
contribution to this so-called electroweak theory is of paramount importance
in 20th century physics.

Soon after completing his undergraduate studies in Madras in the early
1950s, Sudharshan became one of the privileged few in India's newly emerging
cadre of scientists at the famous Tata Institute of Fundamental Research in
Bombay. Here he had the opportunity to interact with and learn from some of
the foremost leaders of physics who visited the place. While still in his
early twenties, Sudarshan developed mathematical techniques to estimate the
masses of cosmic ray particles from experimental data. He critically
examined John von Neumann's work on the foundations of quantum mechanics.

Among the visiting physicists who were impressed by young Sudarshan was
Robert Marshak who invited him to the University of Rochester for doing
doctoral work. Given the politics that come into play in bureaucratic
set-ups, Sudarshan could not accept the offer right away, but he did manage
to go to that University a couple of years later, in 1955. His work as a
graduate student served as a springboard for an important formula in
elementary particle physics: the so called mass-formula.

In the course of his research, Sudharshan made a fundamental discovery in
the theory of the weak interaction, mentioned above. He had a golden
opportunity to present this at a conference in 1957 which had been convened
by his advisor Marshak. That meeting was attended by many senior physicists
of the time, including some Nobel laureates, and it was not deemed
appropriate for a graduate student to speak there. Later that summer, he
discussed his crucial idea with some other physicists of repute. His own
insights, enriched by Marshak's, were presented finally in a conference in
Italy. But before the proceedings of that conference were published, more or
less the same results had appeared in print with some additional points,
authored by two Nobel-prize winners: Richard Feynman and Murray Gell-Mann.

Sudarshan has published innumerable papers and books. His first book,
co-authored with Robert Marshak, was an Introduction to Elementary Particle
Physics (1961). This is one of the earliest books on the subject. It was
promptly translated into French, German, and Russian. Sudarshan contributed
to the theory which permitted the existence of faster-than-light particles,
called tachyons (by Gerald Feinberg).

In our own times few professors and practitioners of science have much
interest in the philosophies of our tradition. They are content and creative
in their technical fields, and like specialists elsewhere, they would rather
not venture into other domains. There are many good scientists in the Hindu
world who go to temples and do their prayers and pujas, sing bhajans and
periodically renew sacred threads, but generally speaking, they keep all
this quite separate from their sciences.

Indeed, most modern scientists consciously keep away from metaphysical
matters For them, religion is a matter involving rites and rituals, which
are enriching and meaningful, but have little to do with science, whether
theoretical or experimental.
However, Sudarshan, a scholar of stature in the world of physics, is also a
thinker who has delved into the Upanishads and Vedanta. He moves with ease
among scientists and lay people alike, exchanges technical ideas with fellow
scientists, converses knowledgeably with philosophers, and has rubbed
shoulders, metaphorically speaking, with sages and saintly men. He is also
blessed with sparkling wit.

His mother tongue is Malayalam. He was born in a Christian family, and he
embraced Hinduism. He has been recognized in the world of science and also
honored by the organizers of the International Vedanta Conference. He has
written technical treatises in his field, and also a most penetrating book
called Doubt and Certainty which probes into the nature of scientific
knowledge with much wit and wisdom.

V. V. Raman
December 12, 2005

Scientists in modern India come from every region of the country. It is true
that in the first stages of modern science they were primarily from Bengal
and Tamil Nadu, but today we have scientists from Kerala to Kashmir and
everywhere in between. Therefore, to conclude this series on Indian
scientists - of whom there are a great many more than I have mentioned - I
will write about a remarkable physicist who hails from the Konkan tradition
in Goa. Thus, unlike most, he has a Portuguese-Indian background. He still
recalls "the tall doors and long classrooms of the college buildings which
were but the vacated edifices of the Liceu Nacional Afonso de Albuquerque,
the beautiful trees in the quadrangle, and the dashing spiraling steps that
dropped down to the Corte d'Oiteiro." And he remembers having studied under
teachers bearing such names as Ant? Vaz and Lawande Jr. The name of this
physicist is V. M. Kenkre.

His early passion was poetry and literature, and this has not left him even
now. But a juvenile distaste for mathematics was transformed magically,
drawing him to the hard sciences. He graduated with a degree in electrical
engineering from IIT (Bombay), and then went on to do theoretical physics at
the State University of New York in Stony Brook.

After receiving his doctoral degree in statistical mechanics, Kenkre began
to delve into condensed matter physics. Over the years, his fertile mind has
drawn him to an incredibly wide range of topics, always probing them with
uncanny mathematical skill. In an age of extreme specialization when a
specialist knows more and more about less and less until he knows everything
about nothing, Kenkre has been digging deeper and deeper into more and more
subjects, knowing a good deal about many things.

A mere listing of the fields in which Kenkre has worked and published papers
could cause the head of the non-scientist to reel. It would be like listing
the 108 Upanishads to someone utterly unacquainted with Sanskrit or Hindu
thought. Thus, to name but a few, Kenkre's scientific writings have dealt
with nonequilibrium statistical mechanics, solid state physics, quantum
transport theory, sensitized luminescence and exciton/electron dynamics in
molecular solids. He has explored cross-disciplinary topics such as
photosynthesis, and worked on unconventional topics of interdisciplinary
interest like the statistical mechanics of granular materials, and the
theory of sintering of ceramics under microwaves. In addition to all this,
he has worked on self-trapping, solitons, and nonlinear phenomena, on the
theory of scanning tunneling microscopy, nuclear magnetic resonance in
confined geometries, transport of charges, excitons, and polarons, energy
transfer and dynamic disorder in molecular aggregates, vibrational
relaxation in liquids, fractals, master equation and random walk techniques,
nanostructures, formation/tunneling of Bose-Einstein condensates, flow and
stress distribution of granular materials, ecological systems, growth
phenomena, and laser damage. [Sigh!]

More recently, he has applied statistical mechanical methods that are
traditionally used to study atoms colliding with atoms and transferring
their states to study, disease-bearing mice encountering other mice on the
landscape and transferring infection
(e.g. Hantavirus). He uses nonlinear science and transport theory to
investigate the motion and aggregation of animals (mice, birds, mosquitoes).

Not many scientists in the forefront of any field have worked on so many
different topics as Kenkre.

Perhaps because of his early Goan/Portuguese connection, Kenkre was also
instrumental in the founding of The Consortium of the Americas for
Interdisciplinary Science. This instituion is equally a consortium for
intercontinental science, for it provides a forum for scientists
(principally physicists) from both Latin America and North America to
interact and collaborate. India could be proud that one of her sons helped
found an institution that serves international scientific cooperation in a
distant world.

Kenkre is poet and philosopher too, and above all, an enlightened thinker.
He reflects on the difference between serious disagreements in the arena of
science and conflicts in religious contexts with a touch of sadness: "I am a
physicist by profession. We are always engaged in conflicts about the way we
think about the structure of a nucleus or the origin of a spectral line.
Being human, we are unreasonably and egoistically attached to our
convictions. We argue with passion. We rave and rant. But to defend or
promulgate our beliefs, we never kill. And yet, the moment we divest
ourselves of our scientists' hats and replace them with our religious
trappings, calling ourselves a Hindu, a Muslim, a Jew, or a Christian, we
become maniacal, homicidal. I have always been mystified by how this
transformation occurs." Not many thinkers speak out so frankly on this sorry
state.

Another remarkable attribute of Kenkre, the physicist, is that he is an
exceptionally good teacher and lecturer, with great command of the language
and great wit and humor too. Even while talking on a serious subject, he can
inject an appropriate light-hearted aside. Sometimes he introduces these in
his scientific papers.

Two things are clear: There were creative scientific thinkers in classical
and ancient India; and for more than a century now Indian scientists have
been making significant contributions to modern science. Yet, there are some
serious confusions among some intellectuals of our age as to what science
is. One of the adverse consequences of postmodernism is the relativization
of values and knowledge. Philosophers who write on science tend to have a
different view than the practitioners of science.

Until India's political independence from the British, most Indian thinkers
went along with the idea that modern science was a crucial breakthrough from
ancient science, and has led to some essentially new results and worldviews.

Now, in response to the cultural denigration of the Non-West by the West in
the 19th century, and inspired by postmodernist Western thinkers who
challenged the hegemony of science in rational inquiry, two new movements
have gained strength in India, which have a good many sympathizers in the
West. The first of these contends that ancient Hindus had come upon modern
scientific results by modes which are beyond the comprehension of the
so-called moderns. This view springs from the doctrine that the Vedas and
other sacred writings contain everything there is to be known, including the
results of calculus and techniques of computer science. In this context, it
is only fair to point out that similar positions are taken by thinkers in
other traditions also. Thus, one Jewish scholar has claimed that the Book of
Genesis contains a coded version of the theory of relativity, while
according to a Muslim scholar, the Holy Qur'an contains nuggets of modern
physics.

A related conviction is that there existed sophisticated technology in
ancient India. Episodes in the Hindu epics are quoted as proofs that
ballistic missiles and flying machines were part of ancient Hindu
technology. In the 19th century some claimed that there were steam
locomotives in ancient India. In the early decades of the 20th century, the
view was propagated that the likes of Max Mueller had stolen Vedic science
which led to the re-discovery of relativity and quantum mechanics.

The other school subscribes to the view that modern science is the clever
construct of colonizing Europe whose purpose was to exploit Africa and Asia
the best it could, in every manner and through every means.

Some Western intellectuals think they are being very broad-minded when they
argue that respect must be shown to the Non-West by allowing it to continue
with its own versions of science. What is objectionable in this cultural
largesse is that they appropriate the modern scientific methodology to their
own culture, and openly relegate pre-modern ones to non-Western peoples.

This is somewhat like a Hindu in the twelfth century who, while using the
decimal system for himself, praises the Romans for their fascinating number
system which uses the letters of the alphabet, and asking the West to
continue with the same. The fact of the matter is, the decimal system is
Hindu only in its origin, not in its appeal or applicability. This is
equally true of modern science. Whether she is Hindu or Arab, Chinese or
Nigerian, once she is introduced to it, a scientist becomes a member of an
international community.

These two forces, one claiming or proclaiming that the results and
worldviews of the so-called Western science had already been discovered by
ancient Hindus, and the other rejecting Western science as no more than an
exploitative scheme, are mutually incompatible. For, if the findings of
modern science are simply local creations with no universal content or
validity, how could these have been independently discovered millennia ago
in an altogether different culture?

Those who share the view that science is a trans-national enterprise of
validity and value that could benefit all humankind reject the notion that
science is a just a conspiracy intended to exploit people. More seriously,
they would be concerned about such a myopic vision of science because, if
adopted, it will only keep the Non-West for evermore in a state of relative
backwardness in the field of creative and productive science.

A generation or two ago, the thesis of the non-universality of modern
science wasn't there. If it had been proposed, most Indian scientists would
have rejected it. Not one of the scientists mentioned in my essays would
have accepted it. But not so today. There are two reasons for this. One is
that, as in the West, the vast majority of productive scientists in India
are too engrossed in their specialized disciplines to argue with
philosophers and cultural commentators. The second is that any challenge to
these ideas is branded as a defense of Western hegemony, or as a servile
voice of the enslaving West which has not only exploited the Non-West
materially and economically, but continues to do so culturally by poisoning
the minds of the young with notions of the superiority of Western science.

Fortunately for India, neither the Indian government nor Indian scientists
accept such theses.

V. V. Raman
December 2005

India is known for her casteism which is based on such notions as purity of
birth, commensality, and endogamy. These tend to segregate the members of a
society into separate groups. And yet, India is also the nation where there
has been a greater infusion of alien blood than in many other places. From
the most distant times there have been invaders who have plundered the land,
intruders who have settled own, as well as traders and travelers who have
come and gone. Often, India has also been touched in positive ways from
visitors from foreign territories, whether invited or uninvited. India
learned more than any other nation and before many others that in the long
run an influx of people into a country tends to enrich rather than diminish
it.

Perhaps it was the Babylonians who introduced astrology into India, though
some believe this had Vedic roots. The Greeks might have brought in
sculpture, though some think this could have been in India prior to
Alexander. It has been said that the Huns sired chivalrous Rajputs. The
Persians introduced the sitar. Muslims brought India cap and kebab, and some
fine poetry and architecture too. The Turks introduced halva and prompted
Urdu. We owe our chili to the Portuguese. Even the British ushered in a few
good things, and left back the English language for good. Though
historically they often divided and ruled, in India they united and left.

Every visitor to India, whether a passing traveler or a long-range occupant,
has left a foot-print, and has also benefited from India in significant
ways. There is something magical in the country's cultural and spiritual
landscape that captivates the heart of all who step on Indian soil.

Countless aliens have admired the cave-paintings in Ellora and Ajanta, and
watched and wondered at our joyous festivals. They have been moved by
gracious Indian hospitality, impressed by the tolerance implicit in Hindu
doctrines, and awed by the colorful spectacle of Hindu weddings. In
classical times, alien scholars admired and learned from Hindu philosophical
systems, appreciated Indic literature, and authored learned commentaries on
these. Non-Hindus may not be allowed entry into some Hindu temples. But over
the centuries a good many mlecchas have admired the magnificent architecture
of the grand sacred structures of the tradition, and written extensively on them. Among such people were monks, missionaries, scholars, and social
activists.

These foreign factors exemplify an international spirit by which people go
beyond their native lands to work and serve in alien contexts. Indians have
been doing this in good measure in recent decades, but in centuries past
more foreigners came to India in this spirit than did Indians voluntarily.

Though most of them were allured by personal economic gains, or for their
own national self-interest (as with Indians in our own times), there have
also been a few who undertook such commitments out of genuine interest in
India. Some were mere commentators - whether critical or admiring - on what
they saw and experienced. Others translated Indian wisdom into their
languages and spread India's visions to distant shores. Yet others came to
India and established hospitals, schools, and colleges which have served
India in important ways.

We often hear about the sinister schemes and proselytizing programs of
missionaries. But we rarely acknowledge the contributions of Jesuits to
education and science in India. Condemning the wrongs they did is
appropriate. But this need not hold us from acknowledging the good they have
done. The colleges associated with the names of the saints Loyola, Joseph,
Stephen, and Xavier have produced (and continue to produce) some of the best
graduates in India.

Many Western authors have written eloquently on the greatness and glory of
Indic civilization. There aren't as many Indian authors who have
reciprocated in kind. In our own times, such writings are considered
inappropriate. I have been reprimanded for having said positive things about
a British Tamil scholar: My critic reminded me that the man was a Christian
missionary, and therefore there was no need to remember his contribution,
whatever it be, to Tamil.

We live in a period of history when conflicts between cultures and
civilizations find expression in a hundred ways. We read about the evil and
exploitation that alien hordes have inflicted on the people of India - which
is very true. But we read little about the positive contributions of aliens
to India. And there have been. Not everyone may have intended the good that
came about. Some did things for selfish, even mischievous reasons, but in
the end it was India that benefited. In any event, it is of interest to
remember some of the people who served India whether consciously or
unwittingly. It is in this spirit that I would like to reflect in the next
few essays on some of the foreigners who have become part of in India's
history, one way or another.

Hedonism Hastens Death

Embodiment comes with the five senses which feed the soul with sensory information and bind the soul towards the physical world and which is not the only world.  The fixation of the soul to the sensory is like stealing the soul from its genuine vocation and which is a journey in the metaphysical realms and which lies in the world but beyond the sensory.

The bondage to the physical and hence a hedonistic philosophy of life where sensual indulgence is taken as the best and only way to live, turns out to be a form of life which hastens the arrival of death and hence the decay of the physical body.

But why is this so?

The hedonistic way of life not only celebrates the physical forgetful of the metaphysical but also in that makes more active the POISON of Malam and which can be dislodged only by the metaphysical illuminations. The POISON exists in the form of Mummalam, the aaNavam Kanmam and Maayai and which are compared to the three castles in which live the Asuras brandishing swords and like the fiery snakes which pour out the killer poison.  Thus the physical world has within it the concealed presence of these killer sanke Asuras and remaining bonded to the sensual is in fact remaining in the company of such forces and becoming victims to them and at which point the untimely death strikes one. While enjoying the materialistic ways of life of the senses, we also invite premature death where the laughing mouth ends up as something with shining white teeth on a skull. The hedonistic pleasures also feed the killer poison and quite unknown to the individual.

But why shouldnít we take it that this is how the world is, that there is death as an inevitability about which we can do nothing at all and resign ourselves to it enjoying the pleasures of life to the maximum while still alive and the opportunities are there ?

Well Sundarar differs and suggests that there other options available to us.

First we can avoid premature and painful death and live long and in good shape as many sages and Siddhas have demonstrated. Secondly we can AVOID death altogether by attaining Moksa where the soul is FREED of ever becoming embodied again and hence being thrown into death again by another  birth.

But how these are possible?

We have to worship BEING-as-Siva who singes to ashes the three castles of Malam through the Fire of Njaanam, metaphysical illuminations. BEING is there always active where while presenting the physical world for the convenience of the souls for learning more readily , He also presents in the depths the metaphysical and which world is FREE of the killing Asuras, the poisonous snakes and such other killer forces.  The metaphysical world is DIVINE and as the soul gets drawn into it or allows itself to be drawn into it, it becomes PURE and CLEAN and hence FREE of the killer forces. It attains Moksa when in addition to this it matures fully in metaphysical wisdom so that Malam is wiped out completely form it. When the Malam is fully dislodged from the soul, there is NO MORE REASON for physical embodiment and hence does not get thrown again into physical embodiment, a bodily birth

2.
arittu nameel aivar vantiGku aaRalaippaan poruddaal
ciritta palvaay veNdlai pooy uurppuRam ceeraamun
erikoL tutti vaaL arakkar vanjca matil muunRum
eritta villi etirkoLpaadi enpatai adaivoomee

Meaning:
With embodiment comes the five senses which like highway robbers robs the soulís true way of life making it meet death hastily where the smiling face becomes the white-teethed mouth in the cremation grounds on the outskirts of the city.  Now all these only because in the way of sensual pleasures there are Asuras like fire-spitting poisonous snakes brandishing swords and in the citadels of the Mummalam of this way of life. Now in order to avoid such a miserable end, let us hasten to the temple of EtirkoLpaadi where stands Siva who can singe to ashes these citadels of poison with His bow that aims at them the Fire of Metaphysical Illuminations.

Namah Somaya cha Rudraya cha

Salutations to Him who is with His consort Uma and Him who destroys illusions.

EXPLANATION
Here Soma is translated as Siva/Shakti, or with Uma as His other half, or Ardhanarishvara. Usually there is more than one meaning to these words, and therefore Soma is also translated as 'the moon glow of the mystics vision', which would be obvious to the meditator.

When in meditation, looking afar, up above the sahasra chakra, we see a pale blue sky with the moon at high noon. This is Soma. Its/His spreading rays (Cipivista aka Vishnu) bathes us in His Glory. This explains the crescent moon on the head of the One Lord in His icon, as Somanatha.

Indra was a great drinker of Soma; before his confrontation with Vritra he drank rivers of it to gain the strength needed to overcome the fearsome dragon who obstructed the fertile flow of the waters. Agni also consumed it in large amounts. Soma was what gave the Vedic gods their strength and immortality.

The rig veda (8.48) states, "We have drunk the Soma; we have become immortal; we have gone to the light; we have found the gods."

This sutra is often taken to show that soma is a juice or ambrosia; but it really means that Soma is a Lord who has penetrated the stilled mind of the worshipper, who has been filled with the joy of Soma, a condition of enlightenment, the state of immanent satchidananda.

Rig 6.13.1
When Soma flows (the glow of the moon in meditation) it makes the mind pure. The moon-glow, Cipivista, drenches the mind, makes it clear, and provides all kinds of medicines for ailments. The clear and stilled mind is the mind of Rudra. This clears the confusion as to who, or what is Soma.

FROM THE RUDRAM
Namaste astu Bhagavan Visvesvaraaya Mahadevaaya,
Triyambakaaya Tripurantakaaya Trikaagnikaalaaya Kaalaagnirudraaya Nilakantaaya Mrtyunjayaaya,
Sarvesvaraaya Sadasivaaya SrimanMahadevaaya namaha.

Trikaagnikaalaaya is translated as 'one who alone holds awareness of God, Soul and the World'.

EXPLANATION
The many Hindu philosophies are attempts to understand the nature of these 3 entities, although we are told by Kutsa, that only He, Rudra, knows, and the relationship between these 3 entities cannot ever be known (explained) by others.

CONCLUDING VERSE IN THE RUDRAM

Praanaanaam Grantirasi Rudro
O Rudra, you are even the veil that comes between us!
Maa Visaantakah Tenaan nenaa apyaa yasva.
Let that which separates us be consumed by you!

EXPLANATION
Here we are told in the last verse, the final prayer before the Shanti mantra, that there is a He (the Lord), we (the souls), and a veil that separates Him from the souls, and that this 'veil' is the Lord Rudra Himself. He veils, is His veiling Grace! The prayer is that let the veil be consumed, and that let there be no separation. This is a prayer for moksha. The Rudram by itself, without the attendant chamakam, is unequivocally, a prayer for moksha.

Pathmarajah

167. Xuangzang (Hsiuen Tsang)

In the 7th century, when Buddhism was a powerful cultural force among the educated classes of China, it was common for Chinese pilgrims to come to India to pay their respects to the founder of the religion. During the reign of the Emperor Kao-Tsung of the Tang dynasty several works were published by Chinese scholars on their travels to India. Many of them are lost, but some have survived. The most famous of those scholars was Xuangzang whose name has been transliterated in a dozen different ways. He was eager to collect as much knowledge and books on India as he could to add to the growing corpus of works on Buddhism in his native country. Xuangzang started his journey in 605 C.E. He broke the rule imposed by the local king which prohibited the Chinese from crossing the boundaries of their country because of the troubled political situation in China at the time.

The cities, deserts and valleys which this learned explorer crossed are impressive. They include the Gobi desert, the Hindu Kush, Purushapura (Peshawar), Takshashila (a Mahayana Buddhist kingdom), and Kashmir. We are moved to tears by the lost treasures when we read that he found 3,000 Theravada monks in what is now Afghanistan. Conquering hordes committed cultural genocide of the Buddhist basis of that region. Its impact continues down to our own times.

Xuangzang went on to Mathura, whence he turned north to Thanesar and regions in the upper Jumna and Ganga, and to south to Kanauj, one of the flourishing capitals of India at the time. The pilgrim entered some of the most famous sites, such as Ayodhya, Prayaga, Kausambhi, Kapilavastu, Kusinagara, Pataliputra, and Rajagriha. Xuangzang tells us that some ten thousand monks were affiliated to the fifty monasteries in Pataliputra, and hundreds of monasteries were in ruins. He reports having seen temples consecrated to Hindu deities also. He secured admission into Nalanda University: the most famous institution of learning of the time, which was endowed with the gifts of successive kings. He left behind vivid descriptions of its splendor. The entrance exam for the university used to be very diffficult: barely 30 % of the applicants were successful. Xuangzang studied Sanskrit as well as Hindu and Buddhist philosophies under Shilabhadra and Buddhabhadra.

Nalanda was only one of several major universities in ancient India. Some others were the ones in Takshashila, now near Islamabad; Somapura, now in
Bangladesh, destroyed by Turkish marauders; Valabhi in Gujarat, Vikramshila in Bihar and Ratnagiri in Orissa. Xuangzang explored the south, going as
far south as Kanchipuram. He refers to countless monasteries and thousands of Mahayana monks there, and to a famine in Sri Lanka which consumed many people. He went to Konkanapura (near modern Hyderabad) and Maharashtra, and talks about the caves of Ajanta. It is hard for us to imagine how when roads were not well-laid, and motels were non-existent, a man covered that much territory, carrying manuscripts all the way back home. He was away from his native China for at least seventeen years.

The world would have left all this in the obscurity of the buried past were it not for two scholars and an archeologist: Stanislas Julien translated Xuangzang's book into French in 1857, and Thomas Watters brought out in 1905 an English version under the title Journey to India in the Great Tang
Dynasty. This book prompted the archeologist D. B. Spooner to undertake the project which unearthed the relics of Kanishka Stupa which is said to have
been more than 600 feet tall. In recalling our history we seldom express our gratitude to the scholars who have resurrected our past.

It has been recorded that aside from a great many works on Hindu philosophy and Buddhism, Xuangzang carried back with him statues of Buddha made of gold and sandalwood, and that he was received with much honor in his native land where a special pagoda was built to house his scholarly acquisitions. The
precious manuscripts have lasted more than a thousand years!

We have a few biographical details about the great Chinese scholar. He came from a family imbued in Confucianism. He himself is said to have become a
ritualistic Confucian as a lad of eight. Later, following the steps of his older brother, he became a Buddhist monk. In 918, political upheavals drove
him and his brother to a different region of China whose ruler was a Buddhist. His travels began from here.

The skull of this great man is still preserved. It was in China for a long time, and in 1956 was brought into India by the Dalai Lama who presented to the Indian government. Today it is in a museum in Patna. Xuangzang is honored and revered both in India and in China.

The life and work of this pious pundit tellingly illustrate the contributions that scholars make to the dissemination of culture and the transformation of societies.

V. V. Raman
January 16, 2006

 

Ancient Hindu civilisation and mathematics
By Dr R.N. Das

The ancient Hindu sages discovered the miracles of modern scientific tools. Believe it or not, the following are the glorious examples of them.

I. The Concept of Zero
The concept of zero came from the revered Hindu sages in Vedic times thousands of years ago.
Without the concept of zero the binary system is blind. No counting, no commerce or no computer business. The earliest documented “date” was found in today’s Gujarat [BC 585-586] in an inscription on Sankedia copper plate. In Brahamaphuta—Siddhanta of Brahamagupta (7th century CE), zero was lucidly explained. Muslim invaders from Central Asia crossing the Hindukush mountain ranges invaded Bharat 1300 years ago and plundered its beauty, riches, books, thrones and what not. They plagued the holy land with sword, loot, arson and rape and destroyed and ravaged the whole land in the name of jehad and “Allah”. There was no Steven Spielberg (Schindler’s List) like cinema director who could document this sordid past of our history. There was no patent system at that time. Might was right. They considered those substances of robbery maal-e-ganimat (booty looted from kafirs to be distributed among themselves and friends of theirs) and thus inculcated those invaluable theorems of mathematics, astronomy and geometry in Arabic books in around 770-1200 CE. From there, those extraordinary concepts were carried to Spanish Europe in the 8th century. However the concept of zero was referred to as shunya in the early Sanskrit texts of the 4th century BC and was clearly explained in Pingala’s Chand Sutra of the 2nd century too.

II. The Contribution to Astronomy
Hindu sages told modern scientists how to map the sky in terms of glaring stars almost 4000 years ago. Copernicus published his theory of revolution of the Earth around the Sun in 1543 AD only. But our Aryabhatta in the 5th century had stated that the Earth revolves around the Sun in these specific words: “Just as a person boarding on a boat feels that the trees on the banks are moving, people on the revolving earth also feel that the sun is moving”. Such illustrious teaching of astronomy was rarely seen in the contemporary writings of the Greek astronomers. In his Aryabhatteem, he clearly stated that our Earth was round and it rotated on its own axis, orbited the Sun and was suspended in the space. It also explained that the lunar and solar eclipses occurred by the interplay of the shadows of the Sun, the Moon and the Earth.

III. The Law of Gravity
The Law of Gravity was known to the ancient Hindu astronomer Bhaskaracharya. In his Surya Siddhanta he noted: “Objects fall on the Earth due to force of attraction of the Earth. Therefore, the Earth, planets, constellations, the Moon, and the Sun are all held in the galaxy due to this great cosmic attraction.”

It was in 1687—1200 years later—that Sir Isaac Newton discovered (re-discovered?) the Law of Gravity, which was already invented by the greatest Hindu astronomer Bhaskaracharya, of course which was written in the holiest language, Sanskrit.

IV. The Invention of Trikonmiti
The word geometry seems to have emerged from the Sanskrit word gyaamiti, which means measuring the Earth. And the word trigonometry is similar to trikonmiti meaning measuring triangular forms.
Euclid was famous for the invention of geometry in 300 BC whilst the concept of trikonmiti had emerged in 1000 BC in Bharat. It is evident lucidly from today’s “practice of making fire alters (at homagni kshetra) in different shapes, e.g., round, triangular, hexagonal, pentagonal, square and rectangular”. It was part and parcel of daily pujas and homagnis in ancient times. The treatise of Surya Siddhanta (4th century) described in fascinating details about trigonometry, which was introduced in Europe by Briggs 1200 years later in the 16th century.

V. The Invention of Infinity
The value of “Pi” was first invented by the ancient sages of Bharat. The ratio of circumference and diameter of a circle is known as “Pi” which gives its value as 3.14592657932...
The old Sanskrit text Baudhayna Sulbha Sutra of the 6th century BC mentioned that above-mentioned ratio as approximately equalled to that of Aryabhatta’s ratio [in 499 BC] worked out the value of “Pi” to the fourth decimal place as [3x (177/1250) = 3.1416]. Many centuries later, in 825 AD, Arab mathematician, Mohammed Ibn Musa admitted: “This value of “Pi” was given by the Hindus (62832/20,000 = 3.1416).”

VI. Baudhayna’s Sulbha Sutra versus Pythagoras’s Theorem
The famous Pythagoras’s theorem states: “The square of the hypotenuse angled triangle equals to the sum of the two sides.” This theorem was actually discovered by Euclid in 300 BC but Greek writers attributed this to Pythagoras. But the irony of fate is that our so-called intellectuals (indeed Macaulay’s sons who have forgotten their old but rich and glorious ancient Hindu heritage) had also accepted that theorem as a contribution of Pythagoras. They never read or tried to know that Baudhayna’s Sulbha Sutra which has been existing for many thousands of years (written in the Sanskrit) had already described lucidly the theorem as follows: “The area produced by the diagonal of a rectangle is equal to the sum of the area produced by it on two sides.”

VII. The Measurement of Time or Time Scale
In Surya Siddhanta, Bhaskaracharya calculated the time taken by the Earth to revolve around the Sun up to the 9th decimal place. According to Bhaskaracharya’s calculation it is 365.258756484 days.
Modern scientist accepted a value of the same time as 365.2596 days.
The difference between the two observations made by ancient Hindu sage Bhaskaracharya just by using his super brain (in the 4th century AD) and today’s NASA (National Aeronautic and Space Agency) scientists of America by using super computer (in the 20th century AD) is only 0.00085, i.e., 0.0002 per cent of difference.

The ancient Bharatbhoomi had given the world the idea of the smallest and largest measuring units of Time. In modern time, only Stephen Hockings, Cambridge University Professor of theoretical physics, had the courage to venture into the abysmal depth of the eternity of Time. Astonishingly, our ancient sages taught us the following units of time:

a. Krati =34,000th of a second
b. Truti =300th of a second
c. 2 Truti =1 Luv
d. 2 Luv = 1 Kshana
e. 30 Kshana =1 Vipal
f. 60 Vipal = 1 Pal
g. 60 Pal = 1 Ghadi (=24 Minutes)
h. 2.5 Ghadi = 1 Hora (=1 Hour)
i. 24 Hora = 1 Divas (1 Day)
j. 7 Divas = 1 Saptah (1 Week)
k. 4 Saptah = 1 Maas (1 Month)
l. 2 Maas = 1 Ritu (1 Season)
m. 6 Ritu = 1 Varsha (1 Year)
n. 100 Varsha = 1 Satabda (1 Century)
o. 10 Shatabda = 1 Saharabda
p. 432 Saharabda = 1Yug(Kali Yuga))
q. 2 Yuga = 1 Dwapar Yuga
r. 3 Yuga = 1 Treta Yuga
s. 4 Yuga = Kruta Yuga
t. 10 Yuga = 1 Maha Yuga (4,320,000)
u. 1000 Maha Yuga = 1 Kalpa
v. 1 Kalpa = 4.32 Billion Years.

Therefore, the lowest was 34,000th of a second known as krati and the highest of the measurement of the Time was known as kalpa, which equalled to 4.32 billion years. Is it not amazing? Are you not feeling proud to be a Hindu descendent? Swami Vivekananda, the modern sage of Bharat, stated in his famous sermons compiled in his Rousing Call to the Hindu Nation, “Take pride in Hinduism; pronounce yourselves as a descendant of a Hindu. Boast to be a Hindu and give a clarion call to rouse the Hindu nation from its lethargy and slumber.”

VIII. The Invention of Decimal System
It was the ancient Bharatbhoomi that gave us the ingenious methods of expressing all the numbers by means of 10 symbols (decimal systems)—an invaluable and gorgeous idea that escaped the genius of Archimedes and Apollonius, two of the greatest Greek philosophers and mathematician produced by antiquity (100-130BC).

The highest prefix used for raising 10 to the power in today’s mathematics is “D” for 1030 (for Greek Deca).While as early as 100 BC Hindu mathematicians had exact names for figures up to 1053.

a. Ekam = 1
b. Dashkam = 10 (101)
c. 1 Shatam = 100 (102)
d. 10 Shatam = 1 Shahashram = 1000 (103)
e. 10 Dash Shahashram = 10,000 (104)
f. Laksha = 100,000 (105)
g. Dash Laksha = 10,00,000 (106)
h. Kotihi = 10, 00, 0000 (107)
i. Ayutam = 100,000,000 (109)
j. Niyutam = 100,000,000,000 (1011)
k. Kankaram = 10,000,000,000,000 (1013)
l. Vivaram = 10,000,000,000,000,000 (1016)
m. Pararadahaa = 1017
n. Nivahata = 1019
o. Utsangaha = 1021
p. Bahulam = 1023
q. Naagbaalaha = 1025
r. Titlambam = 1027
s. Vyavasthaanapragnaptihi = 1029
t. Hetuhellam = 1031
u. Karahuhu = 1033
v. Hetvindreeyam = 1035
w. Sampaata Lambhaha = 1037
x. Gananaagatihi = 1039
y. Niravadyam = 1041
z. Mudraabalam = 1043
aa. Saraabalam = 1045
ab. Vishamagnagatihi = 1047
ac. Sarvagnaha = 1049
ad. Vibhutangaama = 1051
ae. Tallakshanaam = 1053

Is it not amazing to know that the ancient Hindu sages used to remember them just by using their outstanding memory power or was there some super computer known to them also, which we are quite unaware of?

In Anuyogadwar Sutra, written 100 BC, one numeral had been shown to be raised to as high as 10140 which is beyond our outmost stretches of imagination. All of our remaining hidden treasures, which had not been destroyed or stolen by the foreign mercenaries and invaders, were written in Sanskrit, mother of all languages, which should be revived. It is our legacy to inherit such rich property that our forefather had left for us by their meticulous observations over thousands of years ago.

All hidden treasures are written in Sanskrit, which we are quite ignorant of and our so-called Macaulay’s sons are trying their best to prevent us from knowing about our glorious past. Sir Monier-Williams rightly said: “Hindus are perhaps the only nation, except the Greeks, who have investigated independently and in true scientific manner, the general laws that govern the evolution of languages.”

There was no patent system at that time. Might was right. They considered those substances of robbery maal-e-ganimat (booty looted from kafirs to be distributed among themselves and friends of theirs) and thus inculcated those invaluable theorems of mathematics, astronomy and geometry in Arabic books in around 770-1200 CE.

More than this, the Hindus had made considerable advances in astronomy, algebra, arithmetics, botany and medicine, not to mention their superiority in grammar, long before some of these sciences were cultivated by the most ancient nations of Europe.

Indeed, Hindus were Spinozists 2000 years before the birth of Spinoza, Darwinians many centuries before the birth of Darwin, and evolutionists, centuries before the doctrine of evolution had been accepted by Aldus Huxley’s of our times, and before any word like evolution existed in any language in this world.

We should take a vow to work together to search those hidden treasures out, propagate the notion that Sanskrit is not a dead language. Sanskrit is the elite of the elitist, classic of the classics and it should be revived once again. We will again sit in the seat of the world assembly with our head held high and with pride. I would like to draw the final touch with the quotation from Swami Vivekananda, “I do not see into the future nor do I care to see. But one vision I see clear as life before me, that the ancient Mother has awakened once more sitting on her throne rejuvenated, more glorious than ever. Proclaim her to all the world with the voice of peace and benediction.”

(The writer is Associate Professor, Department of Medicine, Manipal Teaching Hospital, Pokhara, Nepal,
E-mail:dar_rabindranath@hotmail.com)
 
[URL=http://www.organiser.org/dynamic/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid
=114&page=31]http://www.organiser.org/dynamic/modules.php?name=Content&pa
=showpage&pid=114&page=31[/UR L]

Many have heard of Samarkand on the Silk Road which stands proudly in the
ancient country of Uzbekistan, once ruled by the ruthless conqueror Timor Lane.
A brilliant scholar, scientific thinker, and observer of alien mores was born
in that region, whose short name was Al Biruni. Few beyond a small circle of
scholars had heard of him before the 19th century. Today an Institute of
Oriental Studies bearing his name is in Tashkent, housing precious manuscripts.
Al Biruni was a man of great accomplishments.

He is of interest to India because he left a book, based on his impressions of
some parts of the subcontinent such as he had gathered from conversations with
local scholars his own observations, and serious study. The book had a long
title whose English translation by E. C. Sachau (1887) is called, Al Biruni's
India: An Accurate Description of All Categories of Hindu Thought, As Well Those
which are Admissible As Those which must be Rejected. The work includes
summaries of Indian religion and philosophy such as Al B understood them. He
described a section as a critical study of what Indians say, "whether accepted
by reason or refuted," displaying the mindset of superficial commentators on
alien cultures, however intelligent or learned,. But the book is full of
information about the India of those times. Al Biruni studied Sanskrit and it is
clear that he read works in that language. He talks about the alphabet of the
language, its grammar and its literature. He was a keen observer and careful
scholar. He talks about Hindu marital mores. He also recognized that Hindu
scientists had observed a correlation between the phases of the moon and ocean
tides. He refers to the caste system for sure, as also the associated rules and
regulations. Foreign accounts help re-construct social history.

Al Biruni went to India as an advisor to the ruthless plunderer Mohammed Gazni.
While the master was pillaging, the counselor was studying rivers and mountains,
the water current strengths and the thickness of sediments.

We learn from Al Biruni that in early 11th century there was a magnificent
temple at Somnath where three hundred musicians sang and five hundred girls
danced. When Ghazni came with his entourage, he fought the local people,
plundered the temple treasures, and broke the murti there, in accordance with
the iconoclastic injunction of his faith. When Gazni destroyed this temple, many
in the Islamic world applauded it as an act similar to what their Prophet had
done when he destroyed the pagan goddess al-Manat of Muslim mythology. Poets
like Omar Khayyam were among those who celebrated this.

Al Biruni talks of the Hindu notions of God, both among the educated and the
uneducated, and explains why Hindus attributes several eyes to God thus: "..if
an uneducated man hears that God comprehends the universe so that nothing is
concealed from him, he will at once imagine that this comprehending is effected
by means of eyesight; that eyesight is only possible by means of an eye, and
that two eyes are better than one; and in consequence he will describe God as
having a thousand eyes..."

He discusses aspects of Hindu philosophy, talks about lokas and the Samkhya
system, explains transmigration of souls, and quotes from the Gita and the
puranas. He talks about idol worship and suggests that its origin may be in the
desire to worship the dead.

On Hindu science, he says: "The number of sciences (in India) is great, and it
may still be greater if the public mind is directed towards them at such times
as they are in the ascendancy ..." He mentions the Hindu place value system, and
refers to Hindu works on astronomy and mathematics. He talks about Hindu weights
and measures. He describes alchemy and witchcraft as "sciences which prey on the
ignorance of people." This astute comment is as valid today as when he wrote it.
Al Biruni's survey is extensive, including such diverse topics as scripts,
places of pilgrimage, rites, legal systems, fasting days, and more.

Al Biruni's translations of Hindu astronomical handbooks and of Patanjali did
much to propagate the learning and lore of India to the world beyond: to the
Middle East and eventually to Europe.

He lists the Vedas and the Puranas, and refers to the conviction of the people
that "everything which occurs in other books is found also in this book (The
Mahabharata), but not all which occurs in this book is found in other books."
This is what ancient and some modern Christians claimed about the Bible and
Moslems about the Koran.

Al Biruni noted that "The Hindus believe that there is no country but theirs, no
nation like theirs, no kings like theirs, no religion like theirs, no science
like theirs,...no other race of man but theirs, and no created beings besides
them have any knowledge or science whatsoever." He added that "the heathen
Greeks held much the same opinion (about themselves)."

I have coined the word Metatheism to describe the essence of Hinduism as gleamed from Sacred Tamil.
 
Metatherism and Tantrism
There seems to be a great confusion on understanding the essence of Hinduism caused by the Hindutvas who seem to project  Brahmanism as Hinduism with the evil VarNashrama Dharma implicitly sanctioned under the guise that it is Hindu Dharma where as a matter of fact it does not exist at all even as part of Vedas and certainly as part of Sacred Tamil.

The Witzel and company in denying that the Hindus worship God ( with a capital G) are also grossly ignorant of the essence of Hinduism where they don't seem to understand that Hinduism is Metatheistic and not at all monotheistic or polytheistic. We have to set right this understanding on both sides and here a study of Sacred Tamil comes in very handy. I do want to deny the presence of such ideas in the Vedas and so forth but the Hindutvas, in their messianic attitude to promote Brahmanism, which is a distortion of true Hinduism, have overlooked at it.

As Dr N, Kannan of esuvadi also agrees we have to anchor our studies of Hinduism with the three basic concepts and which are LIVED by the simple and na? Hindu-s and which have nothing to do with the Brahmanism or Hindutva.  These concepts are Metatheism, Icon Thinking and Pedagogic Hermeneutics.

In my studies of Sacred Tamil as well Rig Veda, especially Purusha Suktam I have drawn attention to these and how they are related to SumeroTamil cultural elements.

I now want to select some texts from sacred Tamil to substantiate these notions further. As we use these concepts more and more in our studies, a serous misunderstanding about Hinduism among the Westerners will be corrected, I think.

The Metatheism in TirukkuRaL
The first verse in KuRaL, already leads the way. In 'akara mutalla ezuttellaam, aati Bahavan mutaRRee Ulaku' we already have quite clearly that BEING(God) is One and that He is the most primordial of all the deities. In the word 'aati bahavan' the qualification of Bahavan with aati (the most primordial) we have already allusions to different deities (bahavan) with One standing as the Ati, the most primordial.

Metatheism in Tirumular
The most famous words of Tirumular are quite unambiguous about Metatheism, The first verse itself begins 'onRavan taanee, iraNdavan innaruL' (BEING is One but becomes TWO as Siva-Sakti, the aruL) . We have also the famous "onRee kulamum oruvaneet teevanum" (The whole of humanity is One and BEING(God) is One. There are many other places where he describes all these metaphysical notions quite deeply.

Manikka Vasakar & Sundarar
When Manjkka Vasakar says 'eekan aneekan iRaivan'  he is very clear:  Being is eekan, One but at the same time aneekan, many, an understanding that is also captured brillinatly by Sundrarar: in the follwing verse:

Tevaram 7 :7

vaazvar kaNdiir tammuL vanjca maanttiiree
yaavaraalum ilakazap paddu iGku allalail viizaatee
muuvaraayum iruvaraayum mutalvan avaneeyaam
teevar kooyil etirkoLpaadi enaptai adaivoomee

Meaning
The five senses with which the body comes are deceitful in disclosing only the physical world and covering up the metaphysical, Thus ignorant of the metaphysical depths, the people do many foolish things earning the ridicule of the general public  and remaining with the Malam that brings about a very painful and miserable death. Now before this happens to us let us hasten to the temple of EtirkoLpaadi where BEING discloses Himself as the Primordial Power of the whole universe and where He also discloses Himself as the androgynous  form Siva-Sakti  of Himself as well as the major icons of Rudra Brahma and VishNu. (This metatheism holds the key towards enjoying the ambrosia of longevity good health and so forth). Here the line muuvaraayum (the three), iruvaraayum(the Two) mutalavan (the Primordial Power)  is also the He the One ( avaneeyam).

Namazvar:
I can go on to Appar Sambantar and so forth but I shall conclude this brief note with what I consider the best statement on Metatheism that comes form Namvazvar:

Nammaazvaar 1-5

avaravar tamatamatu aRivu aRi vakaivakai
avaravar iRaivar ena adi adaivarkaL
avaravar iRaiyavar kuRaivu ilar; iRaiyavar
avaravar vitivazi adaiya ninRanaree

BEING discloses Himself in numerous archetypal forms to accommodate the different capacities for understanding of the people. And the people too will assume that that particular presentation of BEING is BEING itself and worship and attain Him thus. And because each archetypal presentation is of the SAME BEING, there is nothing wrong in any of these forms. Each individual is destined to attain BEING in his own way no matter what kind of archetypal presentation he may choose to worship.

avaravar tamatamatu aRivu aRi vakaivakai: each in accordance with their own capacity for understanding.
avaravar iRaivar ena adi adaivarkaL: will worship BEING in the archetypal form presented to them and attain Him.
avaravar iRaiyavar kuRaivu ilar: there is nothing wrong in the different archetypal presentations of BEING.
iRaiyavar avaravar vitivazi adaiya ninRanaree: each in his own way worships the deity he chooses and will finally attain BEING.

The full text at: http://arutkural.tripod.com/tmcampus/vaymozi-1.htm

Sexuality Blinds the Eyes and Closes the Mind
Sundarar, the one who married twice and walked around as the groom aøl along his life, is certainly well qualified to speak about sexuality that founds the basic family life. He notes here that as long as one remains bound by the sexual pleasures such a way life affords and which can be very satisfying in its won way, has the consequence of BLINDING the person towards the metaphysical and hence the visions of BEING and seeking Him with love and affection.

The sexual kind of love establishes a BLINDNESS  a narrowness of vision, it makes the soul an egg closed within itself and thus contended as it is with domestic bliss. This closure of the mind makes the soul IGNORANT of the deeper and metaphysical reaches of the world and hence towards leading a religious way of life. The ordinary sexuality binds the soul to the body and the bodily pleasures  making it quite indifferent to the metaphysical possibilities that are also its possibilities.

There is an emotional blockage of the mind arising from the bent of the soul towards seeking and enjoying sexual pleasures. It is very clearly recognized that sexual dynamics can be very powerful in that it can make the soul close itself towards the physical and thus not making any attempt towards breaking loose from this magical hold and venturing freely and bravely into the celestial realms and be in the company of the gods.

Now as most of those who have lead family are quite aware ,as was Sundarar, there is a dark side to it, along with some kind of bliss there are many problems and which create a domestic politics where there is a war of kind between the male and female. After the initial romance cools down, there comes to prevail a power struggle where the husband seeks complete control over his wife and the wife also does like wise. This leads either to the breakdown of the marriage or at least each becoming psychologically independent of each other. It looks as if along with processes in nature that bring together a male and female together to establish a family life, there are also processes that lead to its disintegration and which make them now FREE to indulge in metaphysical life.

Now this also appears to be for a good reason. A man and woman tied down to the sexual also remain BLIND to the metaphysical and hence remain easy victims to untimely DEATH and all the miseries such a physical engagement bring along with it. They remain BLIND to the metaphysical world and hence to the metaphysical illuminations only which will CLEAN their body and soul of the POISON that lurks within the physical.

It is such individuals who become now OPEN to the celestial world completely disenchanted  with the sexual life. It is such people who would hasten towards the TEMPLE to be with BEING and in that also in the celestial world.

8.
inbam uNdeel tunbam uNdu eezai manai vaazkkai
munbu conna moozaimaiyaan muddai manattiiree
anbar allaal aLikoL konRai adikaL adiceeraar
enpar kooyil etirkoLpaadi enpatai adaivomee

Meaning:
In this poor domestic life (and earthly life in general) along with happiness there are also sorrows and miseries. Those caught up in this are people, as already mentioned earlier, not only ignorant of the metaphysical life but are also closed in mind like the eggs. Unless people free themselves from this mental closure and open up to the celestial world and become lovers of BEING, they will not reach the feet of Siva who wears the KonRai flowers that symbolize love and compassion. So those who are of this frame of mind hasten to the temple of EtirkoLpaadi and enjoy worshipping BEING as such there.

William Jones was a scholar and linguist. Before he was twenty, he gained more
than a working knowledge of Hebrew, Persian, and Arabic, besides Greek, Latin,
French, Italian, Spanish, and Portuguese. He authored a "Treatise on the
Maritime Jurisprudence of the Athenians," as well as one "On the Manners of the
Arabians before the Time of Mahomet" before he went to India. They say he wrote
down Shakespeare's Tempest from memory in its entirety.

Jones came to Calcutta in 1783 as a Supreme Court judge. He soon discovered that
some of the European residents in the city wanted to meet periodically and
discuss matters of scientific and scholarly interest. This prompted him to
organize a club barely a year after his arrival, and called it "The Asiatic
Society." This Society inspired the what we call Indology today, with all its
positive and negative consequences.

A policy of the East India Company was to not interfere with the sacred laws and
regulations of the Indian people. A commission was established to come up with a
code based on Hindu laws and customs. In this context William Jones began to
study Sanskrit. He would rise before dawn and religiously spend an hour studying
the language. He soon began to delve into the literary, philosophical and legal
treatises in Sanskrit, from the Hitopadesa to Manu. William Jones' deepest
desire was to " know India better than any other European ever knew." Jones
rendered into English Jayadeva's Gita Govinda. His translation of Kalidasa's
masterpiece as "Sacontala or the Fatal Ring: An Indian Drama" was read not only
in England, but in Europe too. In Germany Shakuntala was a smashing success.
Goethe, Herder and many others were drawn to Sanskrit and to Indian thought
largely due to the works of Jones and others who published through the Asiatic
Society.

Jones told a friend he would rather be a valetudinarian than leave the Sanskrit
mine unexplored. He developed such love and respect for Sanskrit that he
described it famously as being "more perfect than the Greek, more copious than
Latin, and more exquisitely refined than either, yet bearing to both of them a
stronger affinity .. than could possibly have been produced by accident." He
declared to a friend that he was "charmed with knowing so beautiful a sister to
Latin and Greek." The epithet `sister' was prescient in that philology as a
subject was yet to emerge when Jones was writing this.

In fact, the observation suggesting possible relationships between Sanskrit and
Greek was one of the earliest expressions of philology which was to blossom in
the 19th century by the efforts of scholars like Friedrich Schlegel and Frantz
Bopp. One man's deep interest in Sanskrit provoked a whole new field of
scientific investigation.

Jones also undertook to bring out "a complete Digest of Hindu and Mohammedan
laws, after the model of Justinian's inestimable pandects, compiled by the most
learned of native lawyers, with an accurate verbal translation of it into
English." Today we sometimes write Sanskrit in English (Latin) characters. This
method of transliteration was invented by Jones. While working on his project
he developed an interest in botany, leading to his taxonomy of Indian flora and
fauna. He also learnt to appreciate Indian music, another topic on which he
wrote.

William Jones had planned to stay in India until the end of the century to gain
"a complete knowledge of India." But the tropical climate did not suit his wife,
Anna Maria, and she had to sail back to England. Jones was to follow her in two
years. He continued working on the Digest. But he caught a liver infection, and
died at the age of forty-eight. He was given a formal burial in Calcutta: troops
marched in solemnity, the artillery band played music, and saluting guns were
fired from Fort William. Jones loved India deeply. "I never was unhappy in
England," he once confided to a friend, "but I never was happy till I was
settled in India." A.J. Arberry wrote on the occasion of Jones' bicentenary:

"London in the late eighteenth century was far too narrow and shadowy for a
stage for the manifestation of his (Jones') brilliant spirit. In India, with a
new world of knowledge and experience to explore, his mind, which recognized no
frontiers of race or colour, and accepted no limits of interest or capacity, was
free to pasture at will over the rich broad plains of wisdom human and divine.
There he knew himself, for there he realized himself. .. We look forward with
anxious hope to the time that his vision of a world at peace and
understanding...shall at last become reality."

In a world where Eurocentrism and the colonialism of yester century are amply
discussed and condemned, one may note that not everyone born in Europe in the
18th or 19th century was a bigot or an imperialist who looked down upon Indian
culture. Some Western scholars had high regard for it, and they contributed to
the re-birth of a modern India which is now poised to play a major role in the
affairs of world of the 21st century.

V. V. Raman
January 20, 2006

Historical causality is most intriguing. It cannot be repeated, and no
prediction can be made on its basis. All we can say à posteriori is that one set
of circumstances led to another totally unexpected set. The interconnections in
the causal web that stirs the human world are far too complex to be tracked
down. Thus, for example, there is no way anyone could have predicted that the
first newspaper to be published in India, indeed in Asia, would be initiated by
a cobbler born in Northamptonshire in England. Yet this was in fact the case.

William Carey was born in a small town in England. He worked as a shoemaker till
the age of 21, the equivalent of a mochi untouchable in the Hindu framework He
joined the Baptist Church. and was inspired by the thought of spreading (his)
God's word. In 1792 he published a book called, "An Enquiry into the Obligations
of Christians to use Means for the Conversion of the Heathens." Here he pointed
out that of the roughly 731 million people of the world, 557 million were
non-Christian. He was genuinely concerned about the moral and spiritual plight
of the "heathens." The book had an enormous impact on Christian missionary
movements all over the world. One of Carey's biographers described it as "the
first and still the greatest missionary treatise in the English language."

It must be noted that this book was written at a time when the British
Government in India was scrupulously following the policy of non-interference
with the religious beliefs and practices of the people in the colony. According
to an order issued by the government, there was to be "no compulsory conversion,
no interference with native habits, and no cow-killing in Hindu quarters." This
principle may seem like an expression of the respect for the religions of Hindus
and Moslems. On the contrary, it resulted most probably from their desire not to
bring in Western thoughts and values into the country for fear of awakening the
minds of the people to new ideas.

The East India Company refused Carey license to land in India, and no British
ship would let him in. But the missionary managed to find places for himself and
his family in a Danish vessel, and reached Calcutta in 1793, the year after the
publication of his first book. Carey moved to Bandel (then a Portuguese
territory) and began his study of Bengali in right earnest. Soon he mastered the
local language well enough to translate the Bible into Bengali. He earned a
reasonable sum by working in an Indigo plantation, but spent most of the money
for the students and teachers of the missionary school he had founded. But even
with all his dedication of time and money, Carey had difficulty converting the
Hindu and Muslim Bengalis to Christianity.

In 1800 he moved to Serampore (then a Danish territory) where he built a church,
founded a school, and started a printing press rolling. He continued to preach
every day, in his church and in public places, drawing attention from curious
onlookers. By the end of the year there was some effect. A carpenter by the name
of Krishna Chandra Pal (who had been treated by an English doctor) decided to
become a Baptist. This created a minor scandal in the village, but for the first
time in the history of hoary Hoogli, a Hindu was baptized in its waters on
December 28, 1800.

Carey went on to study other Indian languages. In 1801 he became professor of
Oriental Languages at the Fort William College in Calcutta. Here he translated
the Bible into several Indian languages, and wrote grammars and dictionaries of
Bengali, Telugu, Punjabi, etc. A manuscript of his Sanskrit diction-ary was
consumed by fire. All in all, thanks to Carey's endeavors, it was announced in
1832 that "the Serampore Press had printed 212,000 volumes in forty languages."
It is said, and this is truly impressive, that Carey was responsible for
translating the Bible or portions thereof into more than 35 languages and
dialects including Bengali, Sanskrit, Oriya, Hindi, Marathi, Punjabi, Mewari,
Telugu, Konkani, Pashto, Lahnda, Gujarati, Awandhi, Nepali, Bagheli, Marwari,
Harauti, Kumaoni, Sindhi, and Khasi. At least for exploring the diversity of
Indian languages and dialects, Carey deserves credit. He also initiated a number
of magazines and newspapers in India. The Samachar Darma in Bengali was the
first modern newspa-per in any non-European language.

It is a sad record of Hindu history that it was due to the outrage of people
like Carey and of the Hindus he provoked that one began to recognize some of the
abominable practices that were then current. For example, sometimes one drowned
a female child in Mother Ganga at Saugor to fulfill a vow or express gratitude
to the goddess for a favor. Carey argued that this had no support or sanction in
Hindu scriptures, and persuaded Lord Wellesley to ban it. The methods and
impacts of Christian missionaries have been sometimes strange, sometimes
beneficial, and always irritating to Hindus who love their religion. In that
love, they are sometimes blind to what is wrong in their system.

V. V. Raman
January 23, 2006

Have you ever wondered how the world came to know about Bhaskara's Siddhanta
Siromani? It was from Henry Colebrooke's work on that classic. So let us recall
something about the man.

Thousands of Britishers used to come to India in the heyday of British
imperialism, as petty clerks and men in uniform, as high officials and
commercial agents, and in other capacities also. Of these, some were of a
scholarly bent of mind. Such people took more than a curious alien's interest in
the customs and traditions of the land they were in. They probed into the
country's cultural and literary treasures in an effort to understand them at a
deeper level. One of these was Henry Colebrooke of London who, at age 17,
landed on Indian soil in 1782.

Colebrooke did not quite enjoy life in Calcutta where most British settlers did
little in their spare time beyond drinking, gambling, and gossiping. He had only
the utmost contempt for such compatriots of his. During an assignment in the
town of Purnea in Bengal, Colebrooke collected sufficient information to write a
book entitled, "Remarks on the Husbandry and Commerce of Bengal." This was
understandable in the context of the British interest in India at the time,
which was the acquisition of economic advantages. Colebrooke did not shrink
from criticizing Britain's monopo-listic exploitation of India which the
governors of the East India Company did not quite appreciate.

As years rolled by, Colebrooke began to develop an interest in Sanskrit and its
lore. He mastered the language to such a degree as to be entrusted with the
responsibility of completing William Jones' unfinished opus on Hindu law. In
this context, he published his first scholarly paper on Indology. It was
entitled, "Duties of a Faithful Hindu Widow." In 1798 he translated
Vivadadhangarnava of Jagannath Tarkapanchanan as the "Digest of Hindu Law on
Contracts and Successions." This work was published in four volumes. Colebrooke
refused to take any monetary compensation for his labors on his important work.

In 1805, after serving the East India Company in several capacities, and while
still holding the position of President of Court of Appeals in Calcutta,
Colebrooke became professor of Sanskrit at Fort William College. Here he taught
Sanskrit and Hindu law to Englishmen in the employ of the Company. He published
an authoritative work on Sanskrit grammar. It was the first of its kind in
English that took into account ancient classics on the subject, recognizing the
authority of local scholars. It has been said that this work "foreshadowed many
of the discoveries of the as yet unborn science of comparative philology."

The same year, Colebrooke also published his essay "On the Vedas or Sacred
Writings of the Hindus," a work that served to enlighten scholars and laymen in
Europe as well as in India for many generations. Europeans were startled to
discover that such ancient works existed in the world, let alone the wisdom and
the poetic beauty they contained.

Colebrooke was also the first to bring out English versions of a number of
ancient Hindu writings on mathematics and the sciences, in particular a work
entitled, "Algebra and Arithmetic and Mensuration, from the Sanskrit" (1817). He
wrote a commentary on Bhaskara's Siddhanta Siromani. There is hardly a book on
the history of mathematics that does not mention this work. References to
Colebrooke's interpreta-tions are still made in scholarly discussions of Hindu
mathematics.

Some of the more fanciful claims of Hindus as to the antiquity of their
literatures (hundreds of thousands of years) as also the rhapsodic praise of
some European enthusiasts led some to suspect that Sanskrit was perhaps a clever
concoction of the priestly class to keep the masses in awe. But Colebrooke was
no romantic adulator of the ancient treasures he had come in contact with.
Rather, he was a keen and objective student of a rich heritage, a scholar who
had a scientist's curiosity and precision. His writings served the cause of
Indology more than those of people who made unrealistic claims.

The contributions of people like Colebrooke are worthy of recognition. Were it
not for such scholars, much of India's wisdom would have remained hidden in the
ivory tower of Sanskrit punditry, and Hindu culture would have been within reach
and appreciation of only a select few who happen to be born in the upper
echelons of the tradition. Thanks to them, India's science and literature have
been carried beyond the shores of India where millions more have been touched by
them.

Upon his return to England Colebrooke bequeathed his Sanskrit manuscripts to
India House in London where they have served the world of scholarship. Even back
home in England, he continued with his writings and publications. In his later
years, he lost his faculty of vision. It is interesting that though in spirit
and output he was primarily a scholar, Colebrooke also occupied many
administrative positions in the course of his life. He was even a good marksman,
having learned shooting as a sport.

V. V. Raman
January 25, 2005