Civilization would not exist w/out India

[Guest guest]

Friends: I have put together a small writeup relating to correcting

misrepresentations about India. I hope it will be of some use.

Thank you.

Sincerely,N.S. Rajaram

 

INDIA AS A CREATIVE CIVILIZATION

The idea of India as an imitative civilization that borrowed

everythingis

based on colonial stereotyping and obsolete theories.N.S. Rajaram

Unfounded assumptions

It is a widespread belief, especially in the West, that

Indiancivilization

developed mainly by borrowing from others and not through innovation

and

creative endeavor. This, however, is a recent view, one that can

betraced

to the motivated scholarship of the European colonial period and its

immediate aftermath. The reality is that throughout history,

exceptduring

the colonial period, peoples of all nations have looked to India as

themost

creative and original of civilizations. To be specific, medieval

andancient

scholars from Arabia, Spain, China and even Greece- all

acknowledgedtheir

indebtedness to Indian science. For example, a medieval Arab

scholarSa'id

ibn Ahmad al-Andalusi (1029-1070) wrote in his Tabaqat al-'umam, one

ofthe

earliest books on history of sciences:

"The first nation to have cultivated science is India. ... India

isknown

for the wisdom of its people. Over many centuries, all the kings of

thepast

have recognized the ability of the Indians in all the branches

ofknowledge.

"The kings of China have stated that the kings of the world are five

in

number and all the people of the world are their subjects.

Theymentioned

the king of China, the king of India, the king of the Turks, the king

ofthe

Persians, and the king of the Romans.

"... They referred to the king of India as the "king of wisdom"

becauseof

the Indians' careful treatment of 'ulum [sciences] and all the

branchesof

knowledge."The Indians, known to all nations for many centuries, are

the metal

[essence] of wisdom, the source of fairness and objectivity. They

arepeople

of sublime pensiveness, universal apologues, and useful and

rareinventions.

"... To their credit the Indians have made great strides in the study

of

numbers and of geometry. They have acquired immense information

andreached

the zenith in their knowledge of the movements of the stars

[astronomy]...

After all that they have surpassed all other peoples in their

knowledgeof

medical sciences ..."

When the necessary allowance is made for the exuberance of the

writerand

even some exaggeration, it is clear that no one until the coming of

the

modern Europeans (and their Indian disciples) questioned the

antiquityof

Indian science. In his book al-Andalusi goes on to give details

ofseveral

Indian texts on astronomy and tells us that the Arab scholars used

themin

preparing their own almanacs.

Not only Medieval Arabs, even some early Christian scholars recognized

Indian contributions. Writing in 662 AD, when the Byzantine Empire

wasits

height and it was thought that there was no knowledge beyond Greek

knowledge, Sebokht, the Bishop of Qinnesrin in North Syria observed:

"I will omit all discussion of the science of the Hindus [indians],

apeople

not the same as Syrians, their subtle discoveries in the science of

astronomy, discoveries more ingenious than those of the Greeks and the

Babylonians; their valuable method of calculation [the decimal

system];

their computing that surpasses description. I wish only to say that

this

computation is done by means of nine signs. If those who believe

because

they speak Greek, that they have reached the limits of science

shouldknow

these things, they would be convinced that there are also others

whoknow

something."

The reference of course is to the famous place decimal system using

zero

invented by the Hindus. (It is often called the Arabic numeral

system,but

the Arabs themselves called it the Indian system acknowledging their

indebtedness to India.) In fact the Greek (and the Roman) method of

computing and solving equations was cumbersome in the extreme

whencompared

to the method used by Indians. Mathematics as we know today would

hardlybe

possible without this invention- probably the greatest single advance

inthe

history of mathematics.India's contributions I: material

This brings up a basic issue about India's contribution: while the

worldhas

by and large acknowledged it in the spiritual realm - like Yoga,

Vedantaand

Buddhism - there is widespread belief that the Indians were

otherworldly

and did not pay attention to material progress. This is far removed

fromthe

truth. In addition to mathematics and astronomy (more of which

later),India

led the world in ferrous and non-ferrous metallurgy, until

theindustrial

base was deliberately destroyed by the British. Indian steel was

deemedthe

best in the world well into the eighteenth century. (Steel is an

Indian

invention.) Indian textiles have been prized throughout history,

untilit

was suppressed by the British, though it is now being

graduallyregained.

This being the case, why does this image of India as largely

animitative

civilization still persist? (This though is mainly in the West-

notAsia.)

Three reasons can be given: (1) colonial stereotyping; (2) Marxist

domination of intellectual life in the post-colonial period; and (3)

incompetence of scholars.

The colonial image is gradually eroding but the Marxist formulation

ofIndia

as an imitative culture is the result of what Marx himself wrote about

India: "India has no history. What is called history is only the

recordof

successive intruders." Marx of course knew nothing about India, but

his

statement became sacrosanct to Marxist scholars who continue to

dominatethe

intellectual scene in India as elsewhere.

This brings us to the third cause, scholarly incompetence. Scholars

ofthe

colonial period whose works still constitute standard references

onIndia,

were mostly bureaucrats and missionaries and lacked the

scientificknowledge

needed to appreciate true achievements. This is generally true

ofhistory of

science. Einstein himself complained more than once that most

historiansof

science were linguists who really did not understand the

problemsscientists

were grappling with. It is hardly surprising that charges of lack of

scientific capacity and originality on the part of Indians is made

bythose

who are themselves scientifically ignorant- like nineteenth

centuryEuropean

theologians and linguists continuing down to their modern

Indianfollowers.

It is interesting to contrast their views with those of

competentscientists

who studied ancient India- that is to say the views of people who were

competent to express opinions about science. This will help shed

lighton

the true fact- of prejudice and unfounded charges used as a fig leaf

to

conceal their own scientific ignorance.

Albrecht Weber was a leading nineteenth century Sanskrit scholar from

Germany. At a time when the relationship between Indian and Greek

mathematics was being seriously debated, he went on to assert that

theVedic

mathematics was borrowed by the Indians from the Greeks following

Alexander's invasion. His actual statement was that there was

"nothingof a

literary-historical nature standing in the way of the assumption of

ause

[by the Vedic mathematicians] of the teachings of Hero of

Alexandria."Hero

of Alexandria is now known to have been living in 62 AD! Even in

Weber's

time Hero was known to be later than 200 BC. Now of course we know

that

Vedic mathematics must have existed long before 2000 BC. This is

clearfrom

archaeology.There is more to this that goes to highlight the

creativity and

originalityof Indian mathematics. After more than twenty years of

research, the

distinguished American mathematician and historian of science

A.Seidenberg

showed that Greek, Egyptian and Old-Babylonian mathematics

arederivatives

of the Vedic mathematics known as the Sulbasutras. In 1962, he

reachedthe

following epoch making conclusion:

"... the elements of ancient geometry found in Egypt [c. 2050-1800 BC]

and

Babylonia [c. 1900-1750 BC] stem from a ritual system of the

kindobserved

in the Sulbasutras."

Fifteen years later, in a famous paper, appropriately titled 'The

Originof

Mathematics' Seidenberg elaborated further on his

revolutionarydiscoveries:

"The arithmetical tendencies here encountered [in Vedic mathematics]

were

expanded and, and in connection with observations on the rectangle

ledto

Babylonian mathematics.

"A contrary tendency, namely, a concern for exactness of thought (or

the

myth of its importance), together with a recognition that

arithmeticmethods

are not exact, led to Pythagorian [Greek] mathematics."

In other words, both of the world's great systems of mathematics,

whichare

seen as the basis of Western civilization, namely, Greek and

Egyptian-Babylonian, owe their existence to ancient Indian (Vedic)

mathematics. In the face of this to argue that Indian civilization

didnot

originate anything is a colossal misrepresentation based on obsolete

and

discredited theories. In fact, it is well known that the

Chinesethemselves

heavily borrowed from India in fields like astronomy and mathematics.

It is a similar story when we turn to astronomy. William Dwight

Whitneyand

other linguists of the colonial period claimed that Indian astronomy

was

based on the Greek- a position still reiterated by many scholars. A.B.

Keith, another linguist of the colonial period gave out the view that

Indians had borrowed their astronomy from some 'Semitic source'

without

specifying which one. It is illuminating to contrast Keith's

(andWhitney's)

statements with what Jean-Sylvain Baily, a leading French astronomer

hadto

say about the astronomical achievements of the Hindus:

"... the motions of the stars calculated by the Hindus before some

4500

years vary not even a single minute from the tables of Cassine and

Meyer

[used in Europe in the nineteenth century]. The Indian tables give

thesame

annual variation of the moon as that discovered by Tycho Brahe-

avariation

unknown to the school of Alexandria and also to the Arabs who

followedthe

calculations of the school. ... The Hindu systems of astronomy are

byfar

the oldest and that, from which the Egyptians, Greeks, Romans and

eventhe

Jews derive the knowledge."

This, it is worth noting, is by a great astronomer- not some colonial

bureaucrat or missionary scholar who knew some Indian language. And

this

view was echoed by John Playfair, Astronomer Royal at the University

of

Edinburgh.India's contributions II: spiritual

In the spiritual realm, no one seriously disputes India's

contributions,

though even these are often distorted. While it is unnecessary to

gointo

details of yoga, meditation and others, it is worth noting that

eventhese

have potential for concrete applications. For example, the

greatlinguist

Panini gave the concept for meta-language - and constructed one -

thousands

of years before computer scientists began exploring the same idea.

Noone

has been able to match him to this day. Similarly, Patanjali, in his

Yogasutra, gives rules for testing the correctness of proofs

ofstatements

and proof theories centuries before mathematicians began to ponder

about

these fundamental problems. It is worth noting that one of the central

problems of modern physics (Quantum Physics) is the problem of

realityand

consciousness. This was anticipated by Vedic seers thousands of

yearsago.

The great physicist J. Robert Oppenheimer wrote:

"The general notions about human understanding. which are illustrated

by

discoveries in atomic physics are not in the nature of things wholly

unfamiliar, wholly unheard of or new. Even in our own culture they

havea

history, and in Buddhist and Hindu thought a more considerable

andcentral

place. What we shall find [in modern physics] is an exemplification,

an

encouragement, and a refinement of old wisdom."

In this context it is worth emphasizing that India's contribution of

Buddhism to China (and other countries of the region) is by no means

insubstantial. These civilizations would hardly exist without the

Indian

contribution in all aspects of culture- from science and technology,

the

arts, philosophy and spirituality. In his book The Art of

SoutheastAsia,

Philip Rawson writes:

"The culture of India has been one of the world's most

powerfulcivilizing

forces. Countries of the Far East, including China, Korea, Japan,

Tibetand

Mongolia owe much of what is best in their own cultures to

theinspiration

of ideas imported from India. The West, too, has its own debts. But

the

members of that circle of civilizations beyond Burma scattered

aroundthe

Gulf of Siam and the Java Sea, virtually owe their very existence to

the

creative influence of Indian ideas. No conquest or invasion, no forced

conversion imposed them. They were adopted because people saw they

weregood

and that they were good and that they could use them."

In the face of this history and this reality, it is not merely wrong

buta

grotesque misrepresentation to portray India as civilization that only

received from outside. The truth, as every serious student knows is

the

exact opposite: India has always given a great deal more than she has

received. Civilization as we know today would not exist without India.