Sunteți pe pagina 1din 5

Gmail - Response to Dr.J V NArliakrs questions

Dr. S. Ramakrishna Sharma <>

Response to Dr.J V NArliakrs questions

1 message

Dr.BVK Sastry (Gmail) <> Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 12:19 AM



Please take a look at the response made by me for the questions of Narlikar. If you have any additions to make,
please let me know. Then this can be posted on to the group.


BVK Sastry



The questions raised by Prof. J V Narlikar are valid in the backdrop of the way the vedic resources are explained in
the current period and certainly demand a logical, rational scientific answer. I make an effort to address the issues
raised point wise and present a pointer on where the error rests in this analysis. This could also be a pointer to the
future directions in Samskrutham and documents penned in Samskrutham as the technical language for

The summary observation is this: The real tradition of studying Samskrutham needs to be restored back from the
approach of ‘Vedanga Vyakarana’. This will bring out the clarity of ‘Bhaashaa’ and Chandas’ – the key to understand
the Vedic science and technology. At present, this tradition is vitiated by the paradigm of studying Sanskrit as a
historic, Indo Aryan language family from the origins of biblical land on the authority of the story of ‘Tower of Babel’ .
The day the key to Samskrutha varnamaalaa ( alphabet prime set) as ‘connecting threads to consciousness and life
energy’ ( Atma –Prana) according to Shikshaa shastra tradition is understood, the right exits open up. It is only then
the prequalification to debate what is vedic science begins!


1. What is the scientific content of the Vedas?


BVK Sastry: This comes out from the investigation of the Mind-Matter-Consciousness trio related paradigm. The
authentic reference for this transformations is in Purusha Sukta Rigveda X-90. Modern science is locked and limited
in Matter. Modern Psychology is locked and limited in the Mind (Manas) part. Traditional schools are not explaining
the proper technicality of the Sanskrit technical words and paradigms of vedic science construction. Nay, the issue is
marred by inaccurate translation of the source works which make the sacred spiritual works to be read like historic
poetry ( on the model of Old Testament ?!)!

A better rearticulated question from Purusha Sukta for investigation would be the following:

a) Chandramaa manaso jaatah - How Mind comes from Moon ? what is this ‘Chandarmah, interpreted as
‘ one single earth satellite in science’ to do with billions of human mind ?

1 of 5 1/6/2010 10:16 AM
Gmail - Response to Dr.J V NArliakrs questions

b) Chakshoh suryah : How is human eye linked to the star we call ‘Sun?

c) Purusha evedam sarvam, yadbhootam yat cha bhavyam : What is that one single concept-entity, which
is the entity of transformation and energy of transformation of the entire cosmos – from past dimension of
time to present and passing to future, in a lossless clean complete way ? And can the translation of
‘Purusha’ as ‘Male /Human’ resolve the issue here ?

Even if one assumes that ‘Veda’ is nonsensical, let that be the null hypothesis and investigation be made to the
question raised. Once this part is understood, then the rest of the secret of ‘yajna’ which explains the science and
technology of Mind-Matter-Consciousness deliberated in vedic tradition will become clear.


2. Can astronomical allusions of the past and the present be used to date ancient writings or events, as is
usually done in support of the scriptural history of the Indian subcontinent?


BVK Sastry: Maybe, May not be. It all depends on who is using what text for alluding and drawing the conclusions !
What one needs to understand from Veda is ‘How a given period lived a vedic understanding and transmitted it’. For
realizing veda itself, there is a different method. So what is one looking at here?


3. Were any supernovae observed in India during the Siddhantic Period, the golden period of Indian
astronomy? If not then how reliable Indian astronomy would be in spite of the ignorance regarding the
rare cosmic phenomena that were recorded in contemporary China?


BVK Sastry: It is a matter of investigating in to the records of Indian history. As noted earlier, the goal of
astrologers was not to document the sky events of the land. Lack of documenting is not a conclusion for


4. Why did scientific activity decline after the Siddhantic Period, if at all the period may be referred to as scientific?


BVK Sastry: Historic reasons, shift in priority of answers for the question : ‘Why am I living in this world?’ What
should I do for Salvation’ ? Only some enlightened souls used science as a special path for realization of the
Supreme. All texts of science and technology – in Indian context, in Sanskrit declare that the exploration of discipline
is for the goal of final salvation and pleasing god. When faith overtakes or creates imbalance in the scientific temper
of the scholar/ society, the result is seen in the cultural flavors and economies.


Let us also take a look at the premises that are running in this post and sub questions that arise out of that. And my
responses are placed right below the point.

Premises running in the post:

P1) All knowledge, regardless of its nature, is already contained in the Vedas


BVK Sastry: This is a statement that is taken out of context. It is like populace statement that ‘God takes care of
everything’, meaning there by ‘God’, if there is one as perceived /beliveed by speaker, as perceived by the
speakers context , has no better business than doing what the speaker decide –desire-direct to do! Does this

2 of 5 1/6/2010 10:16 AM
Gmail - Response to Dr.J V NArliakrs questions

statement mean that the’ knowledge’ of how solar system works is as much present in Vedas just as how a cancer
cell functions in the body causing malefic growth?

In short, without properly defining the context, the specific communication by the words ‘Knowledge’, ‘Veda’ in
above statement is a nice sweet non-entity! Proceeding on such incomprehensible model for further argument is not
a valid approach in logical argumentation.


P2) The questions are laymans curiosity.


BVK Sastry: These are not certainly laymans curiosity! These are profound questions that need attention.


P3) Prof. Narlikar does not want to restrict the search for answers to just the history of science in India but
in fact challenges the entire history of India or the interpretation thereof


BVK Sastry: This openness is good and welcome. And clarity on this point certainly will help all. This is elaborated
a little later.


P5) Narlikar questions the credibility of the Vedic Mathematics if it contains the essentials of higher mathematics,
algebra and geometry.


BVK Sastry: The word ‘Vedic’ as affix to ‘Mathematics’ in the work alluded to has been widely debated. And the
consensus has been that the ‘quick working tips’ derived from the inspiration of vedic statements and related need
not be technically ‘Vedic’. It is like telling that binary mathematics is inspired from the inspiration of vedic shanti
mantra ‘Poornamadah poornamidam’ or from the ‘Shunya’ ( nihilistic’ concept in Buddhism) !

Marketing language needs to be discounted out in such debate.


P6) Prof. Narlikar would like to know more about technology.


BVK Sastry: And by what technical term would vedic tradition call ‘technology’? The technical word for technology
is ‘Upa-Veda’ = Applications built around Veda ( =Knowledge, Dharma = Welfare, sustenance). Once this is clear,
then the exploration should be in upa-veda segment for technology. ‘Tantra’ is a part of upaveda and has special

Modern technology is focused on ‘Matter – Properties - Interactions’ (Dravya -Guna -Karma). Mind and Spirit (or
any thing beyond Matter’, < say God or Ghost, Feeling, consciousness > is technically kept out of the realm of
technology or pure science debates. The issue of human curiosity on ‘Why? Why not? How’ in a several aspects
does not make all studies amenable to ‘scientific claim’ or be covered in a discipline of science.

And the word ‘Dravya’ here is a sub category under ‘padartha’. He technical scope of ‘Drvaya’ in Nyaya –
Vaishehsika school ( and also bhagavadgita explaining Prakruti) covers five cosmic principal elements called
Mahabhootas, Mans, Ahamkara, Kaala and direction. It is a larger definition with specific technicality . In modern
science, the definition of Matter does not map to ‘Dravya’ or Padartha’. Thus, lack of common ground understanding
vitiates all the translation built on this error; and consequent research proceedings. Same is the stand on the

3 of 5 1/6/2010 10:16 AM
Gmail - Response to Dr.J V NArliakrs questions

translation of the word ‘ Prusuha’ as ‘Consciousnes’ without specifying the State of consciousness as jagrat, svapna,
sushupti, turiya.

In vedic traditions, the discipline specific distinction of upa-veda = Application of Knowledge is made by differences
in the from investigation and deployment of matter related properties and interactions for specific goals. Thus the
study of ‘Dravya guna vijnana’ in Ayurveda is different from the ‘Dravya guna karma’ in yajna , tantra and the like.

An understanding of this concept calls for clarity of the technical term ‘Dravya, Padartha’ and the process of
causation-effect-cosmology in the Veda and Upaveda. This law is of a higher order than what the current sciences
are handling and bound by. This is explained alter.


P7) Narlikar says what we require is an unambiguous key to the code to interpret what looks like a superficial
poetic description that the Vedas and the scriptures resemble in order to arrive at a technical interpretation, if
these hold scientific knowledge as is alleged.


BVK Sastry: The unambiguous code is already there and has always been there, open for all in the tradition right
from ancient times, right in Panini, Patanjali, Charaka, right up to Sayana Madhava .It is vibrant in the Gayatri
mantra and the Nyasa tradition of rituals. It is the post colonial Sanskrit studies which distorted this by ‘Sayana
Madhava’ wisdom by substitution of the wisdom of Prof. Max Muller, Monier Williams . The current generation
asking questions about Veda are the inheritor’s of colonial wisdom ; and certainly having confusions. Why?
Because, the Sayana Madhava wisdom does not map and fit in to the Darwinian model and colonial perception of
historic Vedas. Sayana is not serving ‘Her Majesty’s messenger in the form of East India company!


P8) Now when we find that a date of the compilation of the Vedas, some of the scriptures and the events
mentioned therein cannot be fixed with any certainty, Narlikar questions if accurate and credible dates can so be
fixed for them with the help of the astronomical allusions as did Lokmanya Bal Gangadhar Tilak?


BVK Sastry: ‘Date of compilation of Vedas’ – is the starting point of this confusion! The right way of articulation is:
How a certain historic period lived and interpreted Vedas. For how long the Vedic hisdom has ben lived on this planet
and how do we find the imprints of it. We are interpreting Vedas in a particular way, just as colonial period, Sayana
Madhava, Charvakas and Buddhists in early period, Yaska, Vyasa, Valmiki did in their times. The Vedas as ‘Eternal
remain as they were and as they are’.

For a sub question here, do we have the ‘Original Vedas /Shruti /Revelations’ in the same way as it was some three
thousand years ago, the other way of articulation is :

If Vedas are eternal, immutable as the tradition claims to be, is there a way to directly access, validate the Vedic
resources of today by other independent means , beyond oral tradition, manuscripts and the like? And if Vedas are
‘Realized in this way, would they be matching to the existing ‘vedas’ as we have? Answers differ.

A point for investigation is how to realize Vedas – the ‘Sadhana for Veda Darshana’. There are clear directives for
this in tradition, open for all, per effort one is willing to put forth. One may take some time to read Kavya Kantha
Vasihsta Ganapathi’s life events, who brought to limelight two great personalities : Sri Ramana Maharshi and Sri
Aurobindo. Apart from that he has also written a preface to ‘Chando darshan’ by Brahmarshi Daivrata of goakrna of
20th century. (book published by Bharatiya Vidya bhavan).

Any entity that is claimed to be of eternal nature ( =Nitya, Avinaashi) , like ‘Vedas’ can be/ should be able to be
realized in the past , present or future in the same way by following a prescribed path. Any thing that is historic and
lost in time can not be repeated – be it Gods Avatar or historic event in the same way. Why? Because the time
coordinate has changed. This is what Buddhist masters say : One can not the dip the same hand in the same river
twice ! It is precisely this argument that is used to differentiate how ‘BhagavadGita’ and ‘Vishwaroopa darshana’ is a
historic event –experience of Vedic Truth at a certain historic locale. So it can not be repeated. But Veda can be

4 of 5 1/6/2010 10:16 AM
Gmail - Response to Dr.J V NArliakrs questions

realized any where, by any one following the prescribed path; and experience should be the same for all!


P9) The third question leads us to as to whether any supernovae were observed in India during the
Siddhantic period. Narlikar asks so because if astrological and astronomical details in India are all that
accurate as they are alleged to be then why it is that nothing is found in this regard in the scriptures. This
absence becomes more conspicuous when we find that some of these celestial phenomena occurred at
the golden era of Indian Astrology.


BVK Sastry: It is an interesting point to investigate : What was the focus of Indian Jyotisha ? as a vedanga and as
a prediction tool. Did these disciplines have a way or a purpose to document celestial events ? Or were they
interested in some other purpose ? Which of the traditional agencies were responsible to maintain a historic
documentation of sky events ? Certainly worthy of investigation!


P10) why scientific activity declined after the Siddhantic period in India


BVK Sastry: The redefined focus of Indian society on Spirituality and religiosity rather than science and material


P11) Are Vedas only a part of Shrutis? Why did the ancients have to guard knowledge from the common


BVK Sastry: What is the artificial distinction here between Veda and Shruti ? The setting of prequalification for
appropriate knowledge is not ‘discrimination’! And the entire benefit of veda for populace, irrespective of caste,
creed nationality, gender resounds in the shanty mantras and ‘Trailokyam mangalam kuru’ prayer at the mandirs in
the Suprabhatams. This prejudiced talk of ‘knowledge blockade’ is colored interpretation of tradition in colonial and
political models. Social evils need correction, even when practiced in the name of god, Government or Justice!


5 of 5 1/6/2010 10:16 AM