History of Science, Philosophy and Culture in Indian Civilization: Arya Samaj and the Vedic Worldview (Volume VII, Part 12 )

Email

Whatsapp

Facebook

Pinterest

Twitter

Copy link

The volumes of the PROJECT ON THE HISTORY OF SCIENCE, PHILOSOPHY AND CULTURE IN INDIAN CIVILIZATION aim at discovering the main aspects of India's heritage and present them in an interrelated way. These volumes in spite of their unitary look, recognize the difference between the areas of material civilization and those of ideational culture. The Project is not being executed by a single group of thinkers who are methodologically uniform or ideologically identical in their commitments. In fact, contributions are made by different scholars with different ideological persuasions and methodological approaches. The Project is marked by what may be called. "methodological pluralism". In spite of its primarily historical character, this Project, both in its conceptualization and execution, has been shaped by scholars drawn from different disciplines. It is for the first time that an endeavour of such a unique and comprehensive character has been undertaken to study critically a major world civilization like India.

This volume explores the various aspects of the Vedic texts, philosophy, dharma and the way of life from the highly original and revolutionary perspective of Swami Dayanand Saraswati and the Arya Samaj. It presents a Vedic worldview that is in accordance with the wisdom of the ancient Indian seers, and stands in sharp contrast to many of the widely popular beliefs and practices of Hinduism, held to be true by the masses and most scholars. These include some fundamental issues like the content and purpose of the Vedas, idol worship, the concept of avatars, caste-by-birth and the socio-religious rights of women. It further provides an understanding of Vedic monotheism and Traitavada, and themes such as the duties, rituals and the belief system ordained by the Vedic dharma.

The book also carries a brief documentation of the life and legacy of Swami Dayanand Saraswati and the emergence and spread of the Arya Samaj. It explores their impact on different aspects of the modern Indian society, culture and national life, such as the freedom struggle and its revolutionary movement, uplift of Dalits, women's emancipation, and education. It thus sketches a multifaceted narrative of a glorious contribution to the mid-nineteenth and early twentieth century Indian renaissance.

The book comprises fifty articles divided into seven sections, each of which can be useful on its own to scholars interested in a particular domain. Together, they make for a comprehensive enquiry that casts a new light on many issues of crucial importance to the Indian mind and life.

D.P. CHATTOPADHYAYA, M.A., LL.B., Ph.D. (Calcutta and London School of Economics), D.Litt., (Honoris Causa), studied, researched on law, philosophy and history and taught at various Universities in India, Asia, Europe and USA from 1954 to 1994. Founder-Chairman of the Indian Council of Philosophical Research (1981-1990) and President-cum-Chairman of the Indian Institute of Advanced Study. Shimla (1984-1991), Chattopadhyaya is currently the Project Director of the multidisciplinary over hundred volume Project of History of Indian Science, Philosophy and Culture (PHISPC) and Chairman of the Centre for Studies in Civilizations (CSC). Among his 37 publications, authored 19 and edited or co-edited 18. He has also held high public offices, namely, of union cabinet minister and state governor. He is a Life Member of the Russian Academy of Science and a Member of the International Institute of Philosophy, Paris. He was awarded Padma Bhushan in 1998 and Padma Vibhushan in 2009 by the Government of India.

RAM PRAKASH, M.Sc. (Hons.), Ph.D. (Chemistry), D.Sc. (Honoris Causa); currently, Chancellor, Gurukula Kangri Vishwavidyalaya, Haridwar. Fulbright Fellow at Holy Cross College, Worcester, Massachusetts, USA (1989); UNESCO Fellow at Charles University and Praha, Czechoslovakia (1971-1972); Pro Vice-Chancellor, Kurukshetra University (1981-1984); retired as Professor from Panjab University, Chandigarh (2002). Published about 100 research papers in Chemistry and 12 books (authored 9 and edited 3). Among the books authored are Veda-Vimarsh, Yajna-Vimarsh, Satyarth-prakash-Vimarsh, Pandit Guru Datta Vidyarthi, Guru Virjananda Dandi, The Vedas. Edited, Pandit Guru Datta Vidyarthi by Lala Lajpat Rai, Works of Pandit Guru Datta Vidyarthi, Dandiji ki Jivani. Served as Member. Parliament (Rajya Sabha 2007-2014); State Minister, Haryana (1991-1993); Member, Haryana Vidhan Sabha (1991-96). Received several awards for literary and social contributions.

JITENDRA RAMPRAKASH, M.A. (Philosophy, Psychology). Worked on theories of creativity for Doctoral thesis. Poet, Theorist. Former TV & Radio Presenter, Professor of Media Studies. Trained nearly two dozen TV channels, consulted for various organisations, produced poetry-albums, edited and translated books of poetry. Presented papers, lectured at national and international conferences, institutes, universities. Poems and translations published in various anthologies and literary magazines.

It is understandable that man, shaped by Nature, would like to know Nature. The human ways of knowing Nature are evidently diverse, theoretical and practical, scientific and technological, artistic and spiritual. This diversity has, on scrutiny, been found to be neither exhaustive nor exclusive. The complexity of physical nature, life-world and, particularly, human mind is so enormous that it is futile to follow a single method for comprehending all the aspects of the world in which we are situated.

One need not feel bewildered by the variety and complexity of the worldly phenomena. After all, both from traditional wisdom and our daily experience, we know that our own nature is not quite alien to the structure of the world. Positively speaking, the elements and forces that are out there in the world are also present in our body-mind complex, enabling us to adjust ourselves to our environment. Not only the natural conditions but also the social conditions of life have instructive similarities between them. This is not to underrate in any way the difference between the human ways of life all over the world. It is partly due to the variation in climatic conditions and partly due to the distinctness of production-related tradition, history and culture.

Three broad approaches are discernible in the works on historiography of civilization, comprising science and technology, art and architecture, social sciences and institutions. Firstly, some writers are primarily interested in discovering the general laws which govern all civilizations spread over different continents. They tend to underplay what they call the noisy local events of the external world and peculiarities of different languages, literatures and histories. Their accent is on the unity of Nature, the unity of science and the unity of mankind. The second group of writers, unlike the generalist or transcendentalist ones, attach primary importance to the distinctiveness of every culture. To these writers human freedom and creativity are extremely important and basic in character. Social institutions and the cultural articulations of human consciousness, they argue, are bound to be expressive of the concerned people's consciousness. By implication they tend to reject concepts like archetypal consciousness, universal mind and providential history. There is a third group of writers who offer a composite picture of civilizations, drawing elements both from their local and common characteristics. Every culture has its local roots and peculiarities. At the same time, it is pointed out that due to demographic migration and immigration over the centuries an element of compositeness emerges almost in every culture. When, due to a natural calamity or political exigencies people move from one part of the world to another, they carry with them, among other things, their language, cultural inheritance and their ways of living.

In the light of the above facts, it is not at all surprising that comparative anthropologists and philologists are intrigued by the striking similarity between different language families and the rites, rituals and myths of different peoples. Speculative philosophers of history, heavily relying on the findings of epigraphy, ethnography, archaeology and theology, try to show in very general terms that the particulars and universals of culture are 'essentially' or 'secretly' interrelated. The spiritual aspects of culture like dance and music, beliefs pertaining to life, death and duties, on analysis, are found to be mediated by the material forms of life like weather forecasting, food production, urbanization and invention of script. The transition from the oral culture to the written one was made possible because of the mastery of symbols and rules of measurement. Speech precedes grammar, poetry prosody. All these show how the 'matters' and 'forms' of life are so subtly interwoven.

The PHISPC publications on History of Science, Philosophy and Culture in Indian Civilization, in spite of their unitary look, do recognize the differences between the areas of material civilization and those of ideational culture. It is not a work of a single author. Nor is it being executed by a group of thinkers and writers who are methodologically uniform or ideologically identical in their commitments. In conceiving the Project we have interacted with, and been influenced by, the writings and views of many Indian and non-Indian thinkers.

The attempted unity of this Project lies in its aim and inspiration. We have in India many scholarly works written by Indians on different aspects of our civilization and culture. Right from the pre-Christian era to our own time, India has drawn the attention of various countries of Asia, Europe and Africa. Some of these writings are objective and informative and many others are based on insufficient information and hearsay, and therefore not quite reliable, but they have their own value. Quality and view-points keep on changing not only because of the adequacy and inadequacy of evidence but also, and perhaps more so, because of the bias and prejudice, religious and political conviction, of the writers.

Besides, it is to be remembered that history, like Nature, is not an open book to be read alike by all. The past is mainly enclosed and only partially disclosed. History is, therefore, partly objective or 'real' and largely a matter of construction. This is one of the reasons why some historians themselves think that it is a form of literature or art.

However, it does not mean that historical construction is 'anarchic' and arbitrary. Certainly, imagination plays an important role in it. But its character is basically dependent upon the questions which the historian raises and wants to understand or answer in terms of the ideas and actions of human beings in the past ages. In a way, history, somewhat like the natural sciences, is engaged in answering questions and in exploring relationships of cause and effect between events and developments across time. While in the natural sciences, the scientist poses questions about nature in the form of hypotheses, expecting to elicit authoritative answers to such questions, the historian studies the past, partly for the sake of understanding it for its own sake and partly also for the light which the past throws upon the present, and the possibilities which it opens up for moulding the future. But the difference between the two approaches must not be lost sight of. The scientist is primarily interested in discovering laws and framing theories, in terms of which different events and processes can be connected and anticipated. His interest in the conditions or circumstances attending the concerned events is secondary. Therefore, scientific laws turn out to be basically abstract and easily expressible in terms of mathematical language. In contrast, the historian's main interest centres round the specific events, human ideas and actions, not general laws. So, the historian, unlike the scientist, is obliged to pay primary attention to the circumstances of the events he wants to study. Consequently, history, like most other humanistic disciplines, is concrete and particularist. This is not to deny the obvious truth that historical events and processes consisting of human ideas and actions show some trend or other and weave some pattern or another. If these trends and patterns were not there at all in history, the study of history as a branch of knowledge would not have been profitable or instructive. But one must recognize that historical trends and patterns, unlike scientific laws and theories, are not general or purported to be universal in their scope.