This rejoinder to Meera Nanda’s above article is from Srikant who argues the contrary. (Is this perhaps the same Sri Kanth who has posted previously to SCIY?)


Rejoinder to Meera Nanda's article: “Postmodernism, Hindu Nationalism and Vedic Science”

By "Srikant"
 




May 13, 2005

In an article ‘Postmodernism, Hindu Nationalism and Vedic science’ in the Frontline magazine (December 20,2003 – January 02, 2004), Meera Nanda criticizes the Postmodernists for their inadvertent support of the Hindutva points of view that present an integrating perspective of modern science and the Vedic wisdom.

First the author presents a general idea about Postmodernism. It is described as a mood or disposition that is opposed to the ‘Enlightenment’, which is considered as the core of modernism. The ‘Enlightenment’ in this context is explained as “a general attitude fostered in the 17th and 18th centuries on the heels of the Scientific Revolution.” Its aim was “to replace superstition and authority of traditions and established religions with critical reason represented, above all, by the growth of modern science. The Enlightenment project was based upon a hope that improvement in secular scientific knowledge will lead to an improvement of the human condition, not just materially but also ethically and culturally.”

The author says that the Postmodernists are disillusioned with this ‘triumphalist’ view of science that claims dispelling ignorance and making a better world. In a mood of despair they question the possibility of this ‘Enlightenment’ leading humanity to progress towards some universal truth. They seem to prefer local traditions even if they are not led by rational criteria and make room for sacred and even the irrational. And they are attracted to the ideas of the ‘social constructivist theories of science’, put forth by some schools of thought originated in Edinburgh, Paris, etc., who basically assert that modern science, which was considered as moving closer to objective truth about nature, is only just one culture-bound way to look at nature. They consider that the content of all knowledge is socially constructed and the supposed ‘facts’ of modern science are ‘Western’ constructions reflecting dominant interests and cultural biases of Western societies.

The author seems to be perturbed by the fact that the Indian critics of science, especially those led by the neo-Gandhians, other well-known intellectuals and even those who were with the traditional left-wing causes, are moving towards Postmodernism. The author points out that it has also numerous sympathizers among ‘patriotic science’ and the environmentalist and feminist movements.

In this article cluttered with biased attacks on Hindutva, the author also makes sweeping statements as follows: “In reality, everything we know about the workings of nature through the methods of modern science radically disconfirms the presence of any morally significant gunas, or shakti, or any other form of consciousness in nature, as taught by the Vedic cosmology which treats nature as a manifestation of divine consciousness. Far from there being ‘no conflict’ between science and Hinduism, a scientific understanding of nature completely and radically negates the ‘eternal laws’ of Hindu dharma which teach an identity between spirit and matter.”


Science is Not a Closed System

The above-mentioned passage highlights the author’s belief that scientific inquiry has reached its culmination and has discovered the whole truth and one can declare the above ‘fact’ from the present knowledge of science.

‘The Hindu’ Magazine (June 11, 2000) had published an interview with Sir Roger Penrose. (Introducing the scientist, the following note was given: “Sir Roger Penrose, Professor of Mathematics at the University of Oxford, renowned for his contributions to three distinct fields of modern scientific inquiry, who has devoted much of his career to unifying the physics of the large - the general theory of relativity - with the physics of the small – quantum mechanics - into a single comprehensive theory. In this endeavor, he has collaborated with some of the greatest minds of the 20th Century including Stephen Hawkins. Penrose’s third major passion has been the workings of the human mind and whether these can be reproduced in the form of artificial intelligence. In an exclusive interview with Nikhil Padgaokar in New Delhi, Penrose shares his views on these subjects and on the challenges they pose this century.)

Now let us examine the reputed scientist’s view about the present position of modern science. While discussing on the nature of human mind and computation, the following question was asked:

“You do not however question the notion that whatever is going in the mind can indeed be explained in terms of physical laws.”

“I do not believe that whatever is going on is beyond the scope of science. However, it does lead me to believe that we have to go beyond existing science. Science today can only approximately emulate what is going on in the mind, which suggests that there is something else going on out there in our conscious thinking and perception and whatever else is involved in mentality. So we need something other than computation, but I am not saying it stands outside the scope of some future science. Whatever that future science is – and we can point to the direction it may take – it will have quite a different character from the science of today. What we have today cannot come to terms with what mentality is.”

Another question asked was this: “In your writings one detects three basic sets of concerns – the mind, mathematics and the laws of physics. In your opinion, are they all three different aspects of the same phenomenon or structure, or are they entirely distinct and unrelated in your thinking?’

He answers: “In my second book, The Shadows of the Mind, I have drawn a diagram, which reflects this trinity of notions. On the one hand, we have the physical world, then we have the mental one of our perceptions, understanding and free will. The third notion is the world of absolutes – a platonic world of the truth, the beautiful and the good – and, in particular of mathematical absolutes. I am prepared to accept that all these things have some form of absolute existence, which we can relate to in some way. It has to do with our awareness. Mathematics, of course, is intrinsic to our understanding of the physical world, and may even control it. These are all mysteries, and the third mystery is how our mind comes about when we have the right physical structures. We have to look at these three things together and get a holistic picture of how they relate to one another.”


Fadists and the Explorers

There are two types of people who champion the cause of science – science enthusiasts or faddists and active explorers. The former often revel in closing the doors of science in the name of science and the latter who have made great contributions for the advancement of science and having the humility and true scientific spirit, keep the doors of science wide open.

Mark the words: “and the mystery is how our mind comes about when we have the right physical structures.” A spider makes a web or a bee makes its comb with exact mathematical precision and a sparrow builds its nest with an artistic excellence. At their stage of physical structure the ability simply expresses in them in the natural course. One can simply say it is all ‘instinct’. But just an utterance of a word is not an explanation. It is a ‘mystery’ to a true inquirer, and a true scientist will patiently work to unravel any such mystery. He knows there is nothing irrational. There are only gaps. A dog or cat goes out and eats grass when it has some stomach problem without any doctor’s advice. The knowledge comes to them. Without experimentation, but through meditation the knowledge of suitable medicinal herbs came to the consciousness of the great explorers of yore who gave form to the science of Ayurveda. This system of medicine has been flourishing because its efficacy has been verified through generations after generations. This is also quite rational. Because, besides the analytical capacity, the human mind has also a faculty called intuition, which still remains a mystery for science to solve. Analytical faculty of mind is easily applicable but intuition often needs cultivation. Denying blindly that which we do not understand will not annihilate a fact. Inquiring scientists would never make such sweeping and unfounded remarks as. “Far from there being ‘no conflict’ between science and Hinduism, a scientific understanding of nature completely and radically negates the ‘eternal laws’ of Hindu dharma which teach an identity between spirit and matter.”

Mind has emerged at the stage of human structure, and when it becomes receptive or made receptive, for which meditation is prescribed as a method, the faculty of intuition gets activated and knowledge naturally comes to the mind. Through intuition profound knowledge came to the Vedic Rishis. Are the unique intellectual ideas in the Upanishads to be just relegated as mere ‘religious’ views? Topmost scientists and philosophers of the world look at them with great admiration and reverence.


Yoga as a Science

Yoga in its own right is a science because it has a precise methodology. Yogic science prescribes three steps pratyahara, dharana and dhyana. Prayahara is withdrawing the mind from the external world, dharana is fixing on that which is being explored and dhyana is exploration into what is being sought. This is a verifiable science, not a belief. You tell some one that water is formed of hydrogen and oxygen. And if that man stubbornly opposes saying it is a superstition because two invisible gases can never form water, which is visible, you are helpless. At the most you can tell him to go and first to have some preliminary knowledge about chemistry and then experiment himself. Still if he maintains it is all mere superstition, it is better to leave him and mind your own business. Spirituality is a verifiable science and if one is prepared to do the experiment then only one can know whether there is an immanent Spirit or not. When one drinks water one quenches one’s thirst, but one cannot by that act quench another’s thirst. The other person can shout from the top of his voice that water can never quench anybody’s thirst. And the world will dismiss such a person as of unsound mind and ignore him. It is common knowledge that when a person undergoes even the basic disciplines of yoga he experiences the reinforcement of his physical, mental and spiritual faculties. Yoga and spirituality are sciences of human evolution having a methodology like any experimental science. It can be safely dismissed as due to mere ignorance when one demands that Hindu Dharma should conform to the criteria of the constantly changing and imperfect modern science, which the author says “radically disconfirms and negates the ‘eternal laws’ of Hindu dharma, which teach an identity between spirit and matter” to prove its validity!

Like Sir Roger Penrose, the eminent nuclear physicist Werner Heisenberg, also leaves wide open the doors of science when he says, “…the concepts of ‘soul’ or ‘life’ certainly do not occur in atomic physics and they could not, even indirectly be derived as complicated consequences of some natural laws. Their existence certainly does not indicate the presence of any fundamental substance other than energy but it shows only action of other kinds of forms, which we cannot match with the mathematical form of modern atomic physics. It follows that the mathematical structures of atomic physics are limited in their applicability to certain fields of experience and that if we want to describe living or mental process, we shall have to introduce yet other concepts which can be linked, without contradictions with our existing system of concepts. It may also become necessary to limit the range of previous concepts of atomic theory attaching specific new conditions to them. In both cases we would regard such an extension as a broadened form of atomic theory and not as a theory describing any fundamentally different events. If we accept such a wide definition of atomic theory we can immediately see how far removed we are from its completion.” Yet, it is strange that some people try to force us into a belief that science has reached its zenith and it has once for all rejected the ‘immanent Spirit’!

And Max Planck, one of the founders of modern nuclear physics, rather begs the science enthusiasts to be more sensible and give consideration and due respect to the larger issues for the advancement of knowledge, in the following words: “As a physicist, i.e., as a man who has devoted to the most matter of fact branch of science, namely the investigation of matter, I am surely free of any suspicion of fanaticism. And so after my research into the atom I say this to you: there is no such thing as mater per se! All matter originated from and consists of a force, which sets the atomic particles in oscillation and concentrates them into minute solar systems of the atom. But as there is neither intelligence nor an internal force in the universe we must assume a conscious intelligent spirit behind the force. This spirit is the basic principle of all matter…”

Thus the doors are kept open by the stalwarts of science and the science moves ahead. Here we must give special attention to the following statement of Werner Heisenberg while considering the further advancement of scientific knowledge: “It follows that the mathematical structures of atomic physics are limited in their applicability to certain fields of experience and that if we want to describe living or mental process, we shall have to introduce yet other concepts which can be linked, without contradictions with our existing system of concepts.”

Human brain has a certain structure and potentials and faculties. Scientists have pointed out that since thousands of years there has not occurred any mentionable structural change in the human brain. It follows that it can discover what it requires irrespective of the time factor, employing these potentials and faculties. The structure of the human brain and its faculties in the Vedic times could not have been different from that of the 21st century human brain. And many inexplicable facts relating to it can be observed to those who have the mind to wonder and the eyes to see, and, of course, not to those who are sitting in some ivory tower and telling us what science is! Little Clint of Kerala began his paintings just when he was only two years old and before his passing away at the age of eight he drew about twenty thousand pictures in color and B&W, including that of Gods and Goddesses, landscapes, etc!. There is a permanent arrangement to display his paintings in Trivandrum. Normally it would take years of analytical study and training to draw such paintings. Analytical study adopted by science is only one method of acquiring knowledge. Human brain has other methods to acquire knowledge. The Vedic master-minds used both the analytical and intuitional methods for acquiring wisdom. There are mysteries which science cannot solve with its present knowledge. An open-minded true scientist will gladly take them, as the eminent biologist Julian Huxley says, as clues to explore into deeper facts of life and universe.

Modern science helped liberate human mind from dogmatic religious concepts of the West. It was begun as a reaction in the West against the thralldom imposed on the human mind by an organized structure of religion that suppressed all inquiry. Any student of history knows how cruel that suppression was. And the author tries to equate those conditions to the free intellectual climate that prevailed in India! Freedom of inquiry is the hall mark of Indian culture. One should have at least read the renowned historian A.L. Basham’s book The Wonder that was India. Such books would help one to avoid making wild statements disparaging Hindu culture. The brains of the explorers of the Vedic times were as alert and structurally as efficient as the brains of the scientists of our times and they employed them very well as they had enjoyed thorough freedom of inquiry. They discovered many facts of life and universe through their own methods of exploration – through analytical study as well as intuition. Let those who have an open mind and patience explore into the various branches of knowledge they possessed – the philosophy and traditional sciences that shed light on the deepest dimensions of life, wonderful mathematical precision and engineering skill involved in their architectural styles, sculptures, astronomy, the marvelous nuances of the dance forms, the literary excellence!


A Scientist’s Views on India’s Ancient Wisdom

Let me quote here a few passages from a book, in which one ordinarily cannot expect any reference about the ancient sages of India. This book is entitled Dialectical Materialism, written by Professor Alexander Spirkin. The book was published in 1983 by Progress Publishers, Moscow. In the blurb of the book, Professor Spirkin is described as follows: “Professor Alexander Spirkin is a well-known Soviet philosopher and psychologist. He is a corresponding member of the USSR Academy of Sciences and director of the Department of General Problems of Dialectical Materialism at the Academy’s Institute of Philosophy. He also heads the section of the methodological problems of cybernetics in the Scientific Council for Cybernetics of the Presidium of the USSR Academy of Sciences and the bioelectronics section of the A.S. Popov All-Union Society of Radioengineering, Electronics and Communications.”

Now, let us see what such an eminent scientist has to say about the sage explorers of India. I am quoting the whole passage. A repeated reading of it and its assimilation will help some of our West-oriented intellectuals to remove their mental blocks. On the page 339 of this book, the scientist says: “The sages of ancient India discovered astonishingly subtle and profound psycho-biophysical connections between the human organism and cosmic and subterranean processes. They knew much that even today is beyond the ken of European scientific thought, or that it ignores, often trying to conceal its helplessness by asserting that oriental wisdom is mere mysticism, and thus showing its inability to distinguish the rational but not yet fully understandable essence from various figments of imagination. It is sometimes difficult for us to penetrate the profound language of symbolic forms in which this wisdom is couched, to get at the essence of that wisdom. A full understanding of these complex problems can be achieved only in the broad context of history and culture. Historical experience offers us some instructive lessons for the present day. If we look around thoughtfully at the path humanity has passed, it is not difficult to see that the minds of the makers of culture have been guided by the desire to achieve an understanding and a rational transformation of the human being himself, his bodily and spiritual organization, the preservation and strengthening of his health. Socio-political, philosophical, religious, moral, aesthetic and all cultural efforts in general have tended towards this goal.

“The culture of the ancient Orient affirmed not only ideas of man’s dependence on the supernatural forces that were external to him; there was also a tendency to cultivate certain rules of behaviour in relation to these forces, including techniques of training the body in relation to these forces to regulate and perfect bodily and spiritual processes. Various systems of exercises linked with religious beliefs were evolved to change the state of the mind, the consciousness, to achieve complete unity with the universe, to become one with the energy of nature. These techniques for influencing one’s own organism through the mechanisms of psycho-physiological self-regulation and control - techniques that are much in fashion today – could not have survived for centuries and have penetrated other cultures with a different ethnos, if they had not contained some real knowledge of the most subtle and hidden structural. Energo-informational neuro-psychical and humoral potentials, which even now sometimes seem fantastic to the analytical European mind, particularly when it is fettered by stereotypes.

“Oriental culture is full of beliefs about the role of the way of life and its various components – breathing techniques, the ability to commune very subtly with nature, acupuncture, cauterizing, and other ways of influencing the biologically active centers of the organism, herbo-medicine, diagnostics by means of the iris of the eye, pulse and olfactory diagnostics, consideration of the position of the earth in relation to the celestial bodies in medicine, the time of year and day and of the properties of water in relation to the state of the earth strata and the character of its flow in connection with the geo magnetic phenomena – all this and much else has contributed to the great wisdom of the Eastern peoples, the wealth of their culture and man’s place therein, their understanding of the mechanisms of regulation of his life activity and vital potentials. Thus already in the distant past, in the mists of mythological world views the precious crystals of knowledge, tested by the experience of centuries, of skills in beneficially influencing man’s body gradually accumulated. How could people of those far off times know so much without any experiments or apparatus about the conditions and factors that regulate the course of the vital processes and the character of the interaction between man and nature, particularly the influence of the celestial bodies, the sun and the moon and various radiations proceeding from outer space and the bowels of the earth!? And all this was taken into consideration both in diagnosing and in treatment! Does this not go to show an astonishingly high level of culture that should arouse our admiration, gratitude and desire to study! This knowledge could not have retained its vitality if it had not again and again been confirmed by practice.”

It is regrettable that while a scientist in a distant country could make such a disinterested, objective and deep assessment of the relentless explorations of knowledge that had taken place in India, some of our writers choose to brand those valiant explorers together as a superstitious folk and block enquiry and research on this great mass of knowledge that we inherit from them! Here we must again give special attention to the following statement of Werner Heisenberg while considering the further advancement of scientific knowledge: “It follows that the mathematical structures of atomic physics are limited in their applicability to certain fields of experience and that if we want to describe living or mental process, we shall have to introduce yet other concepts which can be linked, without contradictions with our existing system of concepts.” The above passages of Professor Alexander Spirkin clearly indicate this mass of knowledge that evolved in ancient India if researched and filtered (no doubt much dross has also been gathered around this knowledge through the ages) would supplement the concepts necessary, as Heisenburg says, which can be linked with modern science for a deeper understanding of life and universe.

It is not the “mixing up of the mythos of the Vedas with the logos of science” as the author says, but the historical necessity of a synthesis to expand the present-day scientific concepts that is taking place today. While this integration proceeds, in the initial phase naturally there will be imperfections and shortcomings, which will gradually be rectified and a greater amalgamation will take place eventually that would benefit humanity. The author says it “must be of great concern not just to the scientific community, but also to the religious people, for it is a distortion of both science and spirituality.” On the other hand, it offers great opportunity for both the people of science and religion because it will be well heeding the following warning of Albert Einstein: “Science without religion is lame; religion without science is blind.” It will bring about the expansion of concepts.

There should not be a compartmentalization of knowledge that comes to humanity from one source or the other. We must constantly look for areas of unity, which will be advantageous to mankind. The following observation of the renowned mathematician and philosopher Alfred North Whitehead on the clash between religion and science, published in the book Science: Method and Meaning (New York University) is very thought-provoking in this context: “We would believe nothing in either sphere of thought which does not appear to us to be certified by solid reasons based upon the critical research either of ourselves or of competent authorities. But granting that we have honestly taken this precaution, a clash between the two on points of detail where they overlap should not lead us hastily to abandon doctrines for which we have solid evidence. It may be that we are more interested in one set of doctrines than in the other. But, if we have any sense of perspective and of the history of thought, we shall wait and refrain from mutual anathemas. We should wait; but we should not wait passively or in despair. The clash is a sign that there are wider truths and finer perspective within which reconciliation of a deeper religion and a more subtle science will be found.”


Scanty Knowledge of Indian Philosophy

The author of the essay seems to be out rightly rejecting the Vedantic concept that “matter and spirit are not separate and distinct entities, but rather the spiritual principle constitutes the very fabric of the material world” and criticizes the presentation of the gunas in a book published by VHP, which refers to it as something fundamental to the universe. It is the scanty knowledge of Indian philosophy that often prompts one to present such profound concepts as the gunas as some puerile idea that dawned in some primitive mind, as the author seems to think.

According to the Sankhya philosophy, one of the six paths of exploration mentioned in the Vedas, there are three major conditioning forces in Nature which are the basic modes causing all forms of actions and reactions and the manifestation of the phenomenal worlds from a subtle Reality, whether we choose to call it Energy or Brahman. They are the three gunas. (One who has the patience to explore will find that these are very well coordinated fields of knowledge which can contribute to modern science the new concepts to expand its horizon. At least a moderate study would have prevented this author from making so casual a reference about the gunas. What is required today is bridging of the gaps between the ancient knowledge and the modern scientific perspective. That requires inquiry, not blind contempt or rejection.) According to the Sankhya view, before cosmic evolution begins these three modes of Nature are in a state of equilibrium. One can say the universe is in a state of zero manifestation, as some of the modern scientists prefer to present this state. Let us now look into some views of modern science on cosmic evolution. Stephen Hawkins in his Brief History of Time mentions on the basis of Hubbles space telescope observations that “there was a time called the big bang, when the universe was infinitesimally small and infinitely dense.” (Compare this statement with the Upanishadic words about Reality ‘anavo-raneeyam, mahato-mayeeyam’ – smaller than the smallest, bigger than the biggest.) He says that under such a condition, the laws of science will have no relevance if there were events earlier than this time and: “Their existence would be ignored because it would not have any relationship with events that have happened after the big bang.”

This is the view of the scientist. But the ancient seekers could not thus ‘ignore’ anything and they endeavored to explore everything. As mentioned above, according to the Sankhya philosophy, before the cosmic evolution begins the three modes of Nature are in a state of equilibrium. Through a certain mode of scientific presentation Stephen Hawkins tries to prove that the total energy of the universe is zero. He says: “In the case of a universe that is approximately uniform in space, one can show that this negative gravitational energy exactly cancels the positive energy represented by matter. So the total energy of the universe is zero.” While discarding the Western religious view that the universe is an arbitrary creation of God, Stephen Hawkins points out that in the process of the evolution of the world there does not appear any arbitrary interference of God but it evolves “in a very regular way according to certain laws”. He concludes that even in the initial phase it is logical to think that certain laws might have been responsible, not an arbitrary God. He states, “It therefore seems equally reasonable to suppose that there are also laws governing the initial state.”

However, the ancient explorers of India discovered that the fabric of the universe is not an insensate energy, but it is an Intelligence-Energy substratum that manifests itself as the universe. Certainly the Reality has its laws in the manifestation. The physical scientist of the nineteenth century thought that the universe was built up of an infinite number of independent, indivisible and insensate atoms. This belief was eventually replaced by the awareness of the sub-atomic energy particles, which keep themselves in a state of dynamic movements both creative and destructive, as the basis of the universe. We should remember the fact that centuries before the modern scientists discovered the energy basis of the universe the explorers of India had announced this. They said that universe has an intelligence-energy basis.

Before the Big Bang (a state Hawkins prefers to neglect) one can presume, as the Sankhya philosophy states, these three modes of Nature – thamas, rajas and sattva were in a state of perfect equilibrium. ( It offers a good field of enquiry for modern science to probe into the subtle facts involved in these three modes of Nature.) While the universe was thus in a state of zero manifestation, the Reality, as the Upanishads say, remained itself potentially as anavo-raneeyan and mahato-maheeyaan - smaller than the smallest and bigger than the biggest, a language the modern nuclear physicist will not find much difficult to follow.

The manifestation begins from this state, it is said, by the breaking of this equilibrium of the gunas and along with it the process of evolution sets in. The Sankhya system declares that there is thus a Law involved in the manifestation of the universe and its evolution. Universe is not an arbitrary creation of a whimsical God. It is the manifestation of an Intelligent-Energy ‘suchness’ (or ‘Beness’ as Stephen Hawkins prefers to call it although he does not have an idea of the Intelligence involved in Energy.) From the present state of scientific knowledge it is an open question for science whether Intelligence or Mind is involved in energy. Sir Roger Penrose leaves it for future concepts to explore into this question. And as Professor Alexander Spirkin considers the science to explore and find an answer. Heisenberg says we have to introduce other deeper concepts for the further expansion of science. In this context, deeper studies on the findings of India’s sages would enlarge the horizon of today’s scientific knowledge.

Sir Julien Huxley, the neo Darwinist and eminent biologist makes some thought-provoking observations in this contest in his essay ‘Philosophy in a World at War’. He says, “The notion that there is something of the same nature as human mind in lifeless matter at first sight appears incredible or ridiculous.” However, he points out that electricity was once considered as a form of energy external to the atom, but later it became clear that electrical properties are most essential to matter. He says: “One may suggest that the same sort of thing has happened with mind. All the activities of the world-stuff are accompanied by mental as well as by material happenings; in most cases, however, the mental happenings are at such a low level of intensity that we cannot detect them; we may perhaps call them ‘psychoid’ happenings, to emphasize their difference in intensity and quality from our own psychical or mental activities. In those organs that we call brains, however, the psychoid activities are in some way, made to reinforce each other until, as is clearly the case in higher animals, they reach a high level of intensity; and they are the dominant and specific function of the brain of man. Until we learn to detect psychoid activities of low intensity, as we have learned to do with electrical happenings, we cannot prove this. But already it has become the simplest hypothesis that will fit the facts of developmental and evolutionary continuity.” This hypothesis of a great modern scientist shows that science is not a closed affair as the author of the article would like to make us believe. This also shows that the Vedantic idea of the involvement of mind in matter remains an open question with eminent scientists, and not something to be inadvertently rejected as the author does. It is unfortunate that the ignorance of some people mislead many because it gets publicity.


Verbiage cannot be a Substitute for In-depth Ideas

Mere lavish use of worn out words and verbiage some people think they can market their opinionated views. It is an in-depth vision that is required. After all, is science the only way to know the deeper facts of life and the universe? The German biologist Prof. Dr. Joachim Illies raises the following points in an article “Does Universe Hold Other Intelligent Beings”, published in the Universitas:

“Is science really the only authority from which we expect answers to our questions? There are pre-scientific experiences, unconscious certainties, hopes and conjectures, and especially the vast energy center of emotional life. All these media are, just like science, antennae for feeling our way in the world we live in. Even the certainties of science did mostly originate in a flash of genius, a hunch, and intuition; and it was often only after this that the scientist went to work, painstakingly elaborating the logical proof for what he had known all along. Let us, therefore, learn this from the great discoverers and research workers, not to scorn the power of our own intuitive feelings which supplement that of our universally valid reason.”

Let us keep in mind the following advice of Werner Heisenberg to an assembly of science students: “Take from your scientific work a serious and incorruptible method of thought; help to spread it because no understanding is possible without it. Revere those things beyond science which really matter about which it is so difficult to speak.” The ancient explorers of India, those who gave form to the Vedas, the Upanishads and the Puranas delved deep into that which is ‘so difficult to speak’. Modern world has to discover it anew.

(The several grotesque and distorted arguments of the author, like the ‘Narcissism’ of Hindu culture and statements representing the most noble and perennial Vedic ideas, as instruments of self aggrandizement, etc., are ignored because they appear to be vicious and challenge even one’s commonsense.)

The Postmodernists are on the right track. Their disillusion with the so-called ‘Enlightenment’ of the Scientific Revolution is justified. This sort of ‘Enlightenment’ will create, as we have seen, only terrible weapons of mass destruction, domination, exploitation and it will convert human life into a mindless machine, unless, as Sir Roger Penrose hopes, a future science with a quite a different ethos emerges from the science of today, for he says “What we have today cannot come to terms with what mentality is.” All those with an open mind like Professor Alexander Spirkin and a host of modern scientists today are becoming aware of the fact that profound, unbiased and sincere inquires and explorations conducted by the ancient sages of India can provide the necessary new concepts for this transformation of modern science. As Professor Alexander Spirkin says it “should arouse our admiration, gratitude and desire to study!” When we shed our present lethargy and go deeper into their discoveries we shall certainly be contributing to the emergence of that ‘future science with a heart ’. Let the Postmodernists follow the footsteps of Max Planck, Einstein, Heisenberg and great sages of all lands for the evolution of a saner and humane world.