Sanatan Dharma: Vaidik Gateway to the Next Century

Part I

WASTE CULTURE OF SCIENCE

1

Warning of the Scientists

The famous physicist of the modern era, Stephen Hawking, had said that by the end of this century, we should settle our civilisation on any other planet. This means that there is a possibility of the extinction of human civilisation on earth.

This statement shouldn’t be taken lightly, nor should it be ignored assuming it to be merely a joke. It says a lot. This indirectly implies that by the end of the century, the earth will not be worth living. The message is clear but indirect. Here, the question is whether it is still worth living. Honestly, the planet is in a mess, and the situation is only getting worse.

The above statement also carries a hint of fear. This fear isn’t baseless; rather it is based on solid grounds. But did Hawking know the reason behind this? Maybe he did, but he didn’t explain further. Otherwise, he would have mentioned that the real rationale behind this statement is his own science. Can anyone ask how? The answer is that science helped man destroy the earth by making him a consumer. Scientists may deny responsibility by disagreeing with the answer. But are they denying their responsibility as humans? Are they not a part of society? Can they avoid such questions? No, they can’t. After all, like ruler’s responsibility (raaja dharma) to citizen’s duty (naagrika dharma), scientists, too, must adhere to some kind of righteousness (dharma). The establishment of a marketplace indeed encouraged the wishes of mankind, but what encouraged these marketplaces? It was science. A businessman is greedy in the pursuit of his profit, but the desire of a buyer also never ends. Desire and greed do not have endpoints. And when combined, it’s like adding fuel to fire. The wishes of a man are unstoppable, and these keep increasing if encouraged. Science has flared man’s wishes by continuously fulfilling them. The supply kept meeting the demand, and even then, the market remained unsatisfied, but the earth was continuously depleted.

The land on which our ancestors had established a pleasant civilisation, the culture that had been living delightfully for thousands of years, has all been rendered uninhabitable by a few centuries of science. Given the circumstances, who should be considered more aware: our ancestors or us? The home that is uninhabitable is useless even if it is made of gold or silver, inscribed with diamonds all over and equipped with all modern amenities. In a family environment, the people living in the home are responsible, not the home.

Today’s scientists and intellectual groups do not strive to understand the prevalent outcry and act particularly ignorant towards the matter. Could Hawking not have phrased it to say that science and market have rendered the earth uninhabitable? Regardless, we can very well state that science should be called ‘the knowledge of consumption’. However, the scientist, while talking of shifting our civilisation to other planets, hasn’t clarified whether he is referring to just humans or all of nature. If he means nature, that certainly can’t be shifted. So, of course, he means just humans. What kind of selfish and narrow mentality is this? This is the key difference between the modern civilisation of science and the eternal (Sanatan) Vaidik cultural civilisation. Sanatan Jeevan Darshan cares about all life forms and talks about Brahm to Brahmand (creator to creation). By the way, Mr Scientist, do you not know that the existence of humans is not possible all by itself?

It is said that there have been devastations in the past and human life faced extinction multiple times. Whatever the reasons for such cataclysm in the past, this time, we ourselves will be responsible for our annihilation. It is both ironic and tragic. We believe ourselves to have far more knowledge and access to information than our ancestors and yet we have turned a blind eye to the truth about our end. This is very painful. It reflects both our inertness and insensibility.

Sanatan culture had included a way to avert such problems by identifying them thousands of years ago. The Vedas were created on the basis of these original assumptions. It is described in detail from the Rigved to the Atharvaved. Even without going deep into the philosophic details of the mantras included in the Vedas, we can easily draw an understanding about the matter from the traditional culture of our normal lives.

Sanatan culture owes its healthy state and longevity to our love for nature. Nature has been at the root of our civilisation since the beginning of time. It has been a part of our cultural belief. We need to look through Sanatan history to know about it, understand the details of Sanatan culture to be able to identify it, read Sanatan literature to understand it and observe the life of a Sanatan human to believe in it. Although they all seem to be quite simple, the depth lies in the underlying message.

2

Nature

Nature and Humans

Nature is the mother, life-giver and feeder of humans. She is Yashoda as well as Devaki. Human life flourishes in nature’s lap. She gladly accepts our childish and innocent mischief. The secrets of life lie in nature. It has imparted spiritual consciousness to sages and saints. We should accept the fact that at some level, nature and humans complement each other. Man looks at nature for his own expression. Now, would one want to harm one’s mother and life-giver? Only a fool would do that. This is why the importance of Mother Nature is mentioned in all our scriptures, speeches of sages and divine verses of saints. In Matsya Purana, stating the importance of nature, one hundred sons have been equalled to one tree. Knowing this significance, Sanatan Jeevan Darshan emphasises the importance of conservation of nature. Also, every other culture or civilisation should practise it. Unfortunately, they don’t.

There is a meaningful idea for the conservation of nature in the Atharvaved (Bhoomi sookt 12.1.35), which states, ‘Hey, Mother Nature! I shall only consume from you as much as you can replenish. I shall never injure your heart or your power of life.’

This oration has always been taken as an oath by the followers of Sanatan culture. As long as man kept this promise made with nature, he was fine. But as he transcended it, subversive and disruptive forms of nature emerged. The natural destruction all around is its consequence, which, unfortunately, is not being given due importance as a matter of concern today. Even Hawking, in his statement, did not suggest how humans should improve and handle this, but recommended that we flee instead, which is rather inappropriate.

Can anyone be saved if the saviour himself becomes the destroyer? This is precisely the situation between earth and humans. Always remember that nature does not discriminate, while we play with nature unnecessarily, which results in floods, earthquakes, landslides and droughts. We are no longer unaware of the various kinds of adverse effects on human life caused by climate change. Even the melting of glaciers affects areas situated far away from them.

In the end, it can be said that human beings cannot have a relationship of detachment or contention with nature. It can only be of love, harmony, balance and understanding. There is a limit to nature’s suffering. After that, humans should be ready to face the consequences. Keep in mind that we are a product of nature, not the other way around.

River Saraswati and Pralay

The meaning of the word pralay (cataclysm) is quite interesting—when nature is not in lay (synchronised), resulting in the merging of the world into nature. For a human, it will be called apocalypse. But this is incorrect. Here, our world gets destroyed, but the rest of the world, which is essentially nature, survives. However, everything gets submerged. Hence, in most of mythology, pralay has been associated with water, whereas there can be more reasons for it as well as different types of disasters. By the way, the spiritual interpretation of pralay is: nature is submerged and absorbed into the Brahm. So far, we have seen and heard of only nature bringing about cataclysm, but now even the modern-day human has started to do so.

How much truth is there in mythology? There are always two groups of people who comment on this matter. One considers itself to be ultra-intellectual and cites science but is fundamentally leftist. They call mythology imaginary. While defining their idea of mythology, there is more emphasis on myth. And then there is the other group, which is associated with faith and believes in every word of the stories it hears. One’s disbelief and another’s faith both have a sense of extremity, which is unacceptable. To be honest, there is some truth in all these stories and descriptions. However, they seem unbelievable during their literal presentation and poetic renditions.

Did pralay ever come? Yes. It should be taken in the sense that even today, we keep using the word often to describe events, such as catastrophic storms, floods, etc. It simply implies that there is heavy rain, a storm or flood, which has caused terrible damage. This does not mean that everything is finished. Pralay would have come similarly in the Vaidik period too, and would have been far more horrific, dreadful and destructive than man in those days could imagine. Of course, many may not have survived, but those who did would have shared their experience with future generations.

Saraswati is the most revered and holiest of rivers mentioned in the Rigved (2.41.16). It is depicted as a ‘raging river with a strong wave’. Saraswati has been called the supreme among the rivers. The second most important Rigvedic river, Sindhu, also known as Indus, is mentioned only after Saraswati. Today, Saraswati does not exist. Hence, there was confusion in the later period about whether Saraswati was just a fictional river or was mentioned only in the Vedas as the goddess of rivers. Now it has been proven that the Saraswati did exist and there were reasons for its extinction and these reasons have a lot to tell and explain.

The Saraswati River was the most prominent river of the Vaidik period, and hence its detailed description is included in Vaidik literature. Saraswati is remembered as a river even fiercer than the Sindhu. The river’s current was intense during its period of glory. It has been called the river of Paravataghani. It has also been described as a river that breaks embankments or changes its current (Rigved 6.61.2). Saraswati has been prayed to for not forcing us to move elsewhere by uprooting our livelihood on its banks (Rigved 6.61.14). And then it must have happened, which Vaidik Aaryas would not have imagined.

The development of civilisation, originating from the forest, first took place on the banks of Saraswati. Because Saraswati is the first and the most hailed river in the Vedas, it must have been a period of agricultural development. No one knows the reason, but no civilisation ends like this. However, from the evidence and description found in Vaidik literature, it appears that before the disappearance of the Saraswati, it was flooded. It was no less than a pralay. Whatever was left and those who survived began to settle on the banks of the Indus River. This is why the city structure seems so advanced and developed in the Indus Valley Civilisation. This also puts an end to the dilemma of historians as to how the people of the Indus Valley were able to build such evolved cities. This was achieved by employing their experience gained from developments at the banks of the Saraswati.

There are many reasons cited for the catastrophic flood of Saraswati. Some scholars suggest it is due to the sudden flow of water at the end of the last Ice Age. During that time, culture was still developing and man was still learning how to survive. He frantically harvested the Saraswati region, which resulted in landslides and flood. As per Rigved (2.12.2), there was an earthquake, which disturbed the Himalayan region, changing the river’s course. After the Saraswati’s flow was blocked, the water in the origin area of the Saraswati started flowing into the Yamuna and Ganga. This is also why Saraswati is said to meet invisibly at the confluence of the Ganga and Yamuna.

It is important for us to know what the Vaidik Aaryas understood on the banks of Saraswati. Aaryas learnt a lot from that experience and then included it in the Vedas. Nature was appreciated and was made the basis of Jeevan Darshan, presenting the importance of nature conservation in rituals and traditions. Since then, Vaidik Aaryas lived a happy life for thousands of years. But within a few centuries, humans have destroyed a large part of nature. In this context, referring to Hawking’s statement, it can be said that we are bringing annihilation on earth, but this time, it will be inconceivable.

3

Science

Nature and Science

We all know about nature, but how much do we know science? Science is the systematic knowledge and learning that comes from thought, observation, study and experiment. The term ‘science’ is used for a branch of knowledge that is established and organised by fact and theory. It can be said that systematic knowledge of any subject is science. But we forget that science revolves within nature, and nature is so mysteriously variable that even science has to keep changing its concepts. Thus, science is present across civilisations and cultures, but the natural mysteries that Indian sages had revealed thousands of years ago were considered to be fanciful imagery not very long ago. Modern Western science considers revelations made by Indian sages to be its discovery. Exploring Indian science is a complex task. It is blended in religion and philosophy. To understand it, one has to go deep. The science of the West is superficial and revolves around consumption, whereas Indian knowledge is Jeevan Darshan; it is about spirituality and keeps us close to nature.

The universality of any science or philosophy can be tested only against the laws of nature. We are all a part of nature; we are non-existent outside it. Therefore, we have to follow the laws of nature to survive. How can any such system (living or non-living), which does not conform to nature, exist within nature? Our ancestors knew this. But we, people of the science age, have turned a blind eye to it. Any system or ideology that is established or forcibly glorified by disregarding the laws of nature can show its influence for some time by creating the illusion of being meaningful. But inevitably, it disappears—just like how a wall of sand dissolves and becomes non-existent in the same sand—after a certain point. This is the only mistake of science. It is, however, not a small mistake, but a suicidal one.

Science means the existence of special knowledge. But of what? It is the knowledge of nature itself. The knowledge that we treat as the ultimate truth is really just the trends, qualities and power of nature. We derive happiness by merely redefining these attributes of nature as per our convenience. But we never acknowledge the fact that science is derived from nature, while nature is not derived from science. And whenever we attempt to explore the mysteries of nature, our curiosity turns into greed and we start exploiting the knowledge we have gained. This is what makes this special knowledge an agent of destruction. Here, we are selective while choosing the type of knowledge we want to gain by focusing on momentary profits. We ignore the fact that there is more to nature’s offerings than satisfying our greed. Nature maintains balance and does not tolerate imbalance. It declines to accept those who choose to steer against it. Just as aquatic beings do not survive outside water, only those who abide by nature, adhere to its rules and mould themselves accordingly, are able to exist. That is because nature does not adapt to our will, we have to adapt to it.

The term ‘science’ is not very old. Even Isaac Newton did not consider himself a scientist. Most researchers of the past were related to philosophy. And nature can be understood better with the help of philosophy than science. Till nature was seen through the lens of philosophy, human civilisation kept evolving. However, as soon as we started to see nature from the perspective of modern science, it turned disastrous.

To understand the difference between nature and science, there is a clear example of scientist Stephen Hawking. Science had declared a cap on the years of his life after he was diagnosed with an incurable disease. But he lived longer than expected. This is just one example of nature that science has failed to understand.

Waste of Science

Nothing is immortal in nature. Only change is eternal. It means that nothing is permanent in nature; it does not produce anything everlasting. Whatever has been created will one day be destroyed. Whoever has come, has to go. This destruction never ends, only its form and usability changes. According to science, energy cannot be destroyed. But nature has been following this mantra since the beginning of time. Everything is changing in a cyclic manner.

Nature, too, is not stable and keeps changing its forms. It can be said that variability is nature’s basic characteristic. Change is a continuous process in nature and everyone has to go through it. In nature, we know that only when something ends does anything new take birth. If the new comes without the old being gone, we can imagine what the situation will be after some time. So this cycle is quite interesting. All of us are useful for each other—some beings are food for us and we are someone else’s food.

This is the difference between nature and science. Everything is useful in nature, while the stuff produced by science becomes waste at some point. What is waste? Anything that becomes useless after being utilised is considered to be waste. The consumption of science generates a lot of waste, which never decomposes or decays. This is waste not only for humans, but for nature as well. In nature, anything that is unusable to one is usable to another.

Have a look around and you will realise that waste is piled up all over. We clean our houses and throw away the waste outside, which then gets transported outside cities to a dumpyard where it forms a massive mountain of garbage. Try to observe railway stations and look outside a train. There are numerous bottles, plates, cups, spoons, polythenes and several other packaging items littered all over. We don’t have ways to decompose them. Even the suggested solutions to such problems present a new problem of producing fresh waste materials. All products of science become unusable at some point and ultimately become waste, which exists for a very long time. It doesn’t get destroyed, as it is not usable in any form. Every natural thing, on the other hand, ultimately either becomes soil or gets mixed in soil. All components of a tree turn into manure for the tree itself. Even waste materials from a human body serve as compost for the process of agricultural production. Bodies of all living beings get ultimately mixed in soil. This is nature’s best attribute and it keeps the universal cycle running.

Our Sanatan culture is even more special in this matter. Here, arrangements have been made to merge the dead body into five elements. We do not keep unusable dead bodies decorated, nor do we render useless that part of the land permanently by burying them. How many tombs can be made? What would have happened to the world if everyone started building pyramids to house their deceased ancestors? Our culture realised this fallacy and handed the dead body back to nature as quickly as possible.

In fact, there is so much waste spread all over that earth will not be worth living on one day. The culture of science is a culture of waste. After littering the land and the ocean, we have started spreading waste throughout space as well, and are now searching for new planets to pollute.

Hospitals treat people for diseases, but we are overlooking the diseases born out of hospital waste. We are not able to figure out what to do with unusable mobiles, computers, old cars and planes. The chemicals released from factories are permanently polluting ponds, rivers and seas. No attention is paid to harmful pollutants produced by these factories. They are either released in the air or flushed away in ponds and rivers. The waste generated from our attempts to recycle waste is itself a chronic problem. The process of evaporation and later rainfall is natural. But there is no recycling process for harmful chemicals that are discharged into waterbodies. They are ever-present and permanently damage the environment.

On the other hand, in Sanatan culture, all traditional customs and festivals use natural goods. Our gods are built using clay or carved from stone. Most of the items used on auspicious occasions and everyday life were made from leaves, soil, iron and wood. We used to brush with neem twigs, called datum, and wash hands after using the toilet with mud and ash. We did not populate our life with caustic soap and plastic brushes. For food as well, after earthen utensils, we used only those metals that could be recycled. Everything was fine till copper and iron were abundantly used. But the introduction of steel accelerated the destruction of the environment. Similarly, in agriculture, only livestock was used and everything produced by cattle was agricultural utility. These methods sustained us, but the mindless pursuit of a good harvest brought in chemical fertilisers, which consequently damaged the land.

To see how much humans have destroyed earth, visit the Himalayas and witness the mountains of garbage piled up on the slopes.

Humanism in Science

If science is the knowledge of humans, it should revolve around humans and humanism. But it doesn’t. To understand this, let’s first think a little differently and remember some