|
|
||
|
Home | Hindi | Kabir | Poetry | Workshop | BoloKids | Writers | Contribute | Search | Contact Shop Online |
|||
|
Hinduism
Then Gargi Vacaknavi – “O Yajnavalkya, of which they say, it
is above the heaven, it is beneath the earth, that which is between
these two, the heaven and the earth, that which the people call the
past, the present and the future, across space is that woven, like
warp and woof?” Some questions, which provoke the innocent mind, may provoke the mature mind also. A child may ask some questions which are related to the curiosity of the adult as well: why the stars twinkle, why the moon shines, why the sun rises, why the night comes, where do we come from, where do we go, etc. In fact from the beginning mankind has been struggling with these problems. To resolve this curiosity, they had to increase their intellectual powers. Philosophy and science are the result of this intellectual process. The subjects, which cannot be handled in the laboratory, can be understood by means of the imagination. The curiosity regarding the universe comes under this category. The tradition of Indian science and philosophy is quite old. Here, with the understanding of life started with the understanding of the objects, which affect our life. The Vedic thinkers tried to understand the beginning, growth and end of life, and they tried to learn the truth, which controls not only our life, but the related planets too. The strange thing is that Indian literature started with deep philosophy and science; later on the Brahmanas and Puranas explained things by using mythology. Maybe, to reach the people at large, science and philosophy began to seek the help of mythology. The Vedic philosopher reached the result which was not known to the western philosophers for a very long time. They called the universe Brahmanda, and the earth a globe (golak), and with that, the stars and the Milky Way, the sun and the moon, dyow and sky. In Brihadaranyaka Upanishad, the questions related to the universe, time and space are very important. In this paper I am concentrating on the discussion between Gargi and Yajnavalkya. The questions asked by Gargi are related not only to philosophy, but also to science. In the fourth section of the third chapter of that Upanishad, Gargi asks simple questions, which makes Yajnavalkya angry. The first talk is like this.
Then, Yajnavalkya gets angry. 1 This discussion may not have satisfied Gargi, but it gives some clues to the knowledge of Space Technology. Most part of the earth is covered with water, and water is the source of life and air is called the friend of water (apam sakha). This is the pranashakti of life. And that is why the loka of vayu (air) comes after jala (water). After vayu comes antariksha, but antariksha not in its modern sense. Antariksha is the source of the relations with other planets. That is why Gandharva comes after antariksha. The rays of the sun are called Gandharva, so Gandharva is where the sun’s rays cross. After that comes Aditya, in whose light the other planets shine. After this comes Chandra loka, scientifically and psychologically related to us. Then comes Devaloka. The word Dev comes from the div dhatu, which means “to shine.” Actually, what is called “antariksha” in modern space science is like the dyow of the Upanishad. Surya is called Indra, so in place of Surya, it is called Indra loka. The sun is the center of the universe. Gayatri mantra also worships the sun. Now, the universe, including the sun, is the virat roopa, which is Prajapati, and the controller of everything is Brahma. Brahma loka comes at last. So this is the formula:
There is a doubt whether they thought that the earth was the center of the universe. If it were so, it would be a big mistake. The doubt concerns the meaning of “otaprota.” Does it mean “covered with” or “filled with”? or warp and woof. Languages change with the times. Another thing is that Vedic philosophers were looking at the universe from the earth. That is why their imagination starts with the earth. Certainly, it was not a correct formula. That is why Yajnavalkya got angry. But Gargi was not defeated. She came up with another set of questions.
The word akash is made up of a+kashate (verb), which means
what shines completely. This means, what makes others shine. In Latin,
space means “spatium,” which means “to lie upon.” In Chinese Buddhism, “agha”
which comes from Sanskrit, means both visible matter and invisible
emptiness. (cf. Y. Raguin, Terminologie). In Chinese stories also, there
is discussion about jala, vayu and akash. 3 In Chandogya Upanishad, there is the question, what is the gati of loka? The answer is “akash.” Raymundo Panikkar says, ”Space may be conceived as the continent that makes any content possible, because it is as much container as content.” This means that what science calls “ether” is akash: only light passes through it, not sound.
Space and time are a unit because in space we can go back, but not in time. When time and space pass through us, they look different, but they are connected to each other. If we consider the question of Gargi, we can understand the relation between akash and kal. In Atharva Veda also there is a mantra (17.1.19), which says: “There is sat in asat, there is sat in bhuta, bhuta is reborn in bhavishya, and bhavishya is in bhuta. In kal there are gati, nivrti and sthiti.”
This is the sutra or formula, which explains the relation between space, time and sthiti. This is also the modern scientific theory that accepts this relation between time, space and sthiti. This proves the truth that in non-existence there is existence. Modern science also supports the integration of ether, time and space . Once this is grasped, one can be sure that a thing can come from nothing. Contemporary scientists know that the universe is controlled by rules. Whether these rules are eternal (sanatana) or not can be understood on the basis of what was the sthiti before brahmanda and what it will be in future. Some scientists think that the planets are moving away from one another. But there was a time when they were quite closer. And it means that when the planets began to move away from one another, the time space relation also started. This was the utpatti of brahmanda. There are many theories about this in modern science.
Big Bang Theory This theory was initially proposed by a Belgian priest Abbé Lemaître. He carried the argument of expanding universe to its logical ultimate conclusion in 1931 and proposed that at some time in the past the universe was crowded into a very small volume. Lemaître referred to this state of the universe as the primeval atom and assumed that it was instantaneously created. Subsequent workers, particularly George Gammow, showed that the primeval atom would have been extremely hot - hot enough to explode in a “big bang”. This big bang would have expelled the material of the primeval atom outward. The expansion we see today is the residual motion of this violent event which took place at the beginning of the time. The model of the universe stemming from the proposal of Lemaître, as modified later by others is commonly called the big-bang universe. It automatically incorporates the red-shift law and also satisfies the cosmological principle. 5 Steady State Theory In this model, the universe is pictured as being, on the average, unchanged with time. It would have neither beginning nor end. This does not imply that small changes at some localized position, like evolution of a star or galaxy, could not occur, but it does require that new stars and galaxies would have to appear at the same rate others are dying out. This process would keep the mix of old and young systems the same in the future as we observe it now. 6 Oscillatory Universe Theory This is an alternative to the Big-bang theory. Assuming that the universe contains enough mass that gravitational forces will be great enough to halt the expansion. The matter of the universe under its own gravitational field will begin to collapse. Eventually, all the matter in the universe will again be reduced to its elementary forms. The primeval atom of Lemaître will be formed again. Two possibilities then arise. The universe may remain a small, dense object forever, or perhaps the reconstituted object will bounce back into expanding universe with fireball and formation of new galaxies and stars. Some time later the expansion will again be halted, and will set in once again. The universe will continue its expansion and contraction many times – it will be an “Oscillating universe”. In the oscillating universe, time is endless and beginningless. 7 If we look at this in the light of Vedic philosophy, as in the Nasadiya sukta, there is the shadow of the big bang theory ”There was no sat, no asat, no akash, only something gahana gambhira.” What was it? Whether it was water or something like that or not, there was no death, no amrit, no day nor night, only apraketasalila.
Then for apraketasalila, tadek (supreme power) has controlled his mental energy and given birth to Kama.
Maybe this was the sphota. Maybe this was the biggest bang. The second theory holds that time and space are always the same thing. They do not change. In Atharva Veda, Ucchishta sukta, there is this imagination of purnasrishti from purna brahma.
This Poornsrista control the earth like axel of the wheel The third theory that the universe grows up to a point and starts decreasing: that is, pracarana and sankocana. Atharva veda talks about two different types of girls, one of whom spreads the thread and the other collects. There is neither spreading or collecting completely. This is the way to explain pracarana and sankocana.
and
Now, the question is, who has started this universe? All religions accept the place of God. This power can be anyone or anything. But Indian philosophers have imagined an akshara brahma (tadek or swayambhu), which is bodiless. In The Universe and Dr. Einstein, Lincoln Barnett says: “In the evolution of thought, one fact has been impressively clear, there is no mystery beyond itself. All high roads of intellectual, all byways of theory and conjecture lead ultimately to an abyss that human ingenuity can never span, for man is enchained by this very condition of his being, his fitness and his involvement in nature.” This means that there is something above this world, which cannot be sorted out by science and man. Gargi wanted to learn about that. Modern scientists like Raja Ramanna try to understand this sutra. “We consider knowledge obtained purely by observation, i.e. observable world, as a set of Achit. Another set will exist which is entirely devoted to knowledge depending on ones state of consciousness which we call the set of Chit. The following possibility exist:
If we continue the argument based on set theory, i.e. Sa d Sb and Sb d Sa then Sa is identical with Sb. Can I interpret to mean that whether the body creates consciousness or consciousness resides in appropriate body is tautological statement. Beyond these two sets, there exists another set which includes absolute symmetry containing all knowledge, be it of the observable nature or the intuitively felt. This set is the very origin of the things and includes such concepts as what physics call 'Grand Unification'. It is perhaps justified in calling this set Isvara set. We also note that it is the departure from absolute symmetry that gives rise to the subset chit and achit. In earlier philosophy, this was termed as Maya.” 8 By understanding these sutras, we can understand the cause of chit and achit and what is Brahma. Stephen Hawking too believes in the place of God. In the Upanishads, God is called a-kshara, a-sthula, an-anu, a-hrsva, a-dirgha, a-lohita etc. Yajnavalkya says that Brahma is the one who is inside akash, but akash does not know him. His body is akash, but he can control akash.
In ether or akash, light can cross and soundlessness grows into a situation which may be called nirguna. That may be the reason that Brahma is imagined as nirguna. In another sense, Brahma is opposed to Brahmanda. This virodha creates santulana. That is why Stephen Hawking says –
At last we can say that the reality of the universe, which is still a problem for the scientists was thoroughly discussed by Indian philosophers long back. They are very close to the modern theory. If we want to know more about our modern research, we should re-learn ancient Indian philosophy and remember that in that philosophy a woman (Gargi) played a part.
– Dr.
Rati Saxena
References
SPACE in Buddhist Perspective, Ven Losong
Nyime, Concepts of Space anicient and modern .. Ed. Kapila Vatsyayan.
page-40 |
|
|
|
|
Analysis |
Architecture |
Astrology |
Ayurveda |
Book Reviews |
Buddhism |
Cartoons | Cinema |
Computing |
Culture |
Dances |
|
Home | Hindi | Bolography | BoloKids | Kabir | Poetry | Quotes | Workshop | Writers | Contribute | Search | Contact |
|
|