In this century, a gap has developed between the available scientific knowledge and the mindset of the leading thinkers of the world. This mindset was formed by the three nineteenth century great thinkers Marx, Freud and Darwin.
Nineteenth century science was reductionist, where as twenty first Century Science is synthetic (Prof. Paul Davies). The present theories are open-ended and capable of multiple equally valid interpretations (Nobel winner R. Feynman). Biology, Physics, Anthropology, Brain - Science are the cutting edges of modern science. A paradigm – shift has occurred in these sciences affecting the whole field of culture and different knowledge systems. Fritjof Capra wrote “And since emergence is an integral part of the dynamics of open systems…….(the species) develop and evolve. Life constantly reaches out into novelty. Creativity is a key property of living systems,” 1
A child of Judeo- Christian and Greek culture, the Euro-centric modern knowledge –systems dominating the whole world are unable to cope with the findings of modem sciences. Nor is the Vedic –Culture or Chinese culture in a better position though many Western thinkers are seeking solace in these alien fields.
Buddhism rightly attracts lots of modern scholars and writers. Thus writes Prof Anne Harrington, “On some level, we believe in evil as a basic capacity always lying dormant in us, waiting for the right provocation to come out….. Unlike Buddhism, we generally do not believe that we have the resources within, to purify our selves without help”.2
Exclusivism and hierarchy are the two evils which demonize societies when violence becomes their legitimate favorite weapon. Mercifully, Buddhism is free from the first evil and has propagated compassion based on nonviolence as a creed. Buddha’s stress on celibacy and his dependence on the donations received from the rich and powerful introduced some distortions by legitimizing hierarchy and Patriarchy. Anthropology throws light on societies that were non-hierarchical. (The Amazonian civilization is not hierarchical).
Historians and philosophers have failed to trace out the genealogies of Buddhism and Jainism in India as they have failed to grasp the glories of the Anwikshiki civilization of the pre-Vedic days. The activities of Gandhi and his most illustrious disciples, Lohia and J.P, can not be understood without tracing out their genealogies rooted in the remote past of India.
No more is the controversy regarding the importance of Nature or Culture incapable of solution. Nature is definitely the deciding factor and our present culture which goes against the laws of nature (as discovered by the latest evolutionary – scientists) is slowly reversing the process of human evolution. The bigness of the human brain which is responsible for all the glories of the human family is getting affected and forces of nature are active in reducing the size of the human brain. Within the last 28,000 years, human brain has lost 15 – 20% of its bigness. Thus the question that menaces our mental sky is whether human species is heading towards becoming a monkey like creature.3 (Complex connectivities of neurons also get affected when the number of neurons suffer a steep fall; this affects the capacity of the brain).
In addition to these two unhealthy tendencies of exclusivism and hierarchy, European civilization also nurtures the attitudes of fatalism, hostility and competitiveness. European thinkers made the mistake of considering all these unseemly tendencies as natural and so, universal ones. Not only Christianity (GODISM), Hegelism, Marxism and capitalism all exhibit the intense attachment to the theories of some sort of invisible laws or forces, directing the course of humanity. They are not like Anwikshiki (Yoga, Samkhya and Lokayat), Buddhism and Jainism which give full importance to human will, social values and brain exercises.
Hostility, which the myth of God and Satan illustrates, colours the cultures and philosophies of the West and the East (Iran). Anthropology tells us that there were peaceful civilizations like the Semai which were free from the feeling of hostility.
Similarly competition is not present among the Pueblo Indians (Einstein), whose society has been described in detail by Ruth Benedict in her book ‘Patterns of ‘Culture’. Buddhism and Jainism laid stress on compassion rather than competition. In the book ‘Early India, Ramila Thappar categorically denies the presence of the concept of hostility in early Indian culture. Fatalism was a trait that led to the Karmic theory of rebirth in late Vedic India. This lent justification to the caste system and the system of untouchability. Pre-Vedic India was free from these evils.
Darwin’s ideas had great influence on the culture and philosophy of the world. Freud, Marx and Darwin: all were votaries of violence, strife, and competition. Today, science has rejected the concept of ‘infallibility of its theories’. This automatically excludes the theories of Marx and Freud from the field of science.
Darwin’s theory of competition has been proved to be a partial truth. ‘Not strife and competition, but co-operation and interactions are the prominent factors in the field of evolution’, say the present scientists, exploring the emergences of complex entities like life, brain and consciousness.
Prof. of Biology, Lynn Margulis (the University of Massachusetts) writes, “From where comes the useful variation upon which the (natural) selection acts? - I claim that most significant variation comes from mergers. A merger between microbe and animal cell or microbes and plant cell … mergers result in the emergence of new and more complex beings.”4
She calls this process of merger symbiogenesis. Many of the scientists exploring the theories of evolution are calling it a self – generating process. Somehow, the elements involved in the evolution process spontaneously combine to produce a new entity undreamt of by its creator because the properties possessed by the new entity’s components have absolutely no resemblance to the unpredictable properties (qualities) of the novel product.
A leading scientist of the U.S, a visiting professor of the Santa Fe institute, writes “We let all the organisms interact with one another in the context of a dynamic environment and the selective criteria simply emerge naturally. To any one of these organisms ‘Nature” in the computer, is the collective dynamics of the rest of the computerized organisms there. The world inside a computer can be every bit as wild and wooly as the world outside……………..We created in our computers ‘universes’, that were complex enough to support processes that, with respect to those universes, have to be considered to be alive. These processes behave in their universes, the way living things behave in our universe.”5
J. Doyne Farmer, a physicist, an external professor at the Santa Fe Institute, is another scientist, who has conducted experiments on evolution.
He rightly points out, “More than ever, it’s becoming impossible to contemplate seriously any philosophical or social question without understanding recent developments in science.” 6
Explaining his thoughts on evolution, he writes”, We were interested in the logical possibility for this (evolution) to happens in an artificial world, simulated in side a computer, following chemical laws that were similar to those of the real world….. At first, things were totally chaotic, but, somehow; over the course of time, complex structures began to form. …. We see that there is a general tendency to get things more organized….”. 7
W. Daniel Hills is the co-founder and the chief scientist of ‘Thinking Machines’. He is editor of several scientific journals. He, too, has shown great interest in the process of evolution.
W.D Hills distinguishes between the engineer’s and nature’s way of getting things done. Nature moves from chaos to order spontaneously and automatically.
As C. Langton says there is no central agency, no controller directing nature. All elements, involved in nature’s process, enjoy complete freedom.
Francisco Varela (Professor of Cognitive Science and Epistemology at the Ecole Polytechnique in Paris) treads the same path. He says, “This phenomenon (the evolutionary path of Nature) is something so productive that it does not cease creating entirely new realms: life, mind and societies. Yet these emergent selves are based on processes so shifty, so ungrounded, that we have an apparent paradox between the solidity of what appears to show up and its groundlessness”. Mr. Varela confessed that he has dedicated his life to the under standing of this process of Nature.
To come to D Hills, he expresses surprise and excitement when he simulates the process of evolution in his computer, “If you step back a zillion years, you can look at the history of life on Earth as fitting into this pattern (of organization). First, fundamental particles organized themselves into Chemistsy. Then chemistry organized itself into self-re-producing life. Thus life organized itself into societies, bound together by language….”8
To quote D.Hills again “I am trying to reproduce within the computer the process of evolution, with the goal of getting intelligent behaviors out of machines… I think that something is happening now – and will continue to happen over the next few decades – which is incomprehensible to us, and I find that frightening and exciting.” 9
All these scientists are sure about one thing. They are sure about the way the process works, but they are not sure about the future products of evolution.
To summarize the findings of these scientists discussed above in the words of Stuart Kanf man (Professor of Bio-Chemistry, Penny Sylvania University). “We have discovered the fact that in the evolution of life very complex systems can have convergent flow, not divergent flow… the impulse was to find order for free. As it happiness, I found it and it’s profound.”
What are the conditions that guide millions of random elements to form complex entities? It naturally surprises scientists who have found that instead of chaos which we normally expect in such situations, a complex entity emerges.
The first condition is perfect freedom of one and all. There should be no interference in the evolutionary process. But freedom is an individual value. Bertrand Russell Says,” Freedom may be increased either by maximizing power or by minimizing wants.” The proper word that can describe the appropriate condition for evolution to take place can only be described by the word ‘non-violence’. (Freedom of all the constituting elements is possible only when there is the ambience of non-violence).
Brian Godwin, Professor of Biology, Open University (G.K) agrees with the famous philosopher White head when he says that evolution is the ‘creative advance into novelty’. About Darwin he writes”, Darwin stresses conflict and competition which does not square with the evidence.”. He thinks that the Calvinist view influenced Darwin who believed in progress and struggle. He uses the metaphors ‘play’ and ‘dance’ to express what nature does. Brian Godwin makes an insightful remark when he says”, there is too much work in our culture and there is too much accumulation of goods. The whole capitalist trip is an awful treadmill that is extremely destructive. …. This is why indigenous cultures are beginning to be recognized for their values, because they were not accumulating goods…. Nature and Culture then come together.”
When we examine the whole galaxy of findings of these experimenting evolutionary scientists, nature’s method of evolution comes out, loud and clear… For millions of years nature brought about changes in the original species by observing two conditions scrupulously. They are 1). Freedom of all in every situation (Non-violence only can provide such freedom. 2). Absence of greed so that all the components that converged to form a new entity, only use as much material and energy as they need. The inequality in the use of energy by them is only 1:2 (The brain uses twice the energy per volume compared to other human organs).
Primitive societies (which, because of the factors of geography, were of the gathering type rather than the hunting type), were societies where women were having the decisive role (‘Matricentric Societies’ as defined by Erich Fromm).
All the philosophies of pre-Vedic India (Anwikshiki consisting of Samkhya, Yoga and Lokayat), Buddha and Mahavir categorically assert that the two most mind – disturbing tendencies are violence and greed. It is unfortunate that Anwikshiki, the philosophy guiding the people of the Sindh valley, has not received the proper attention of historians and philosophers (Anwikshiki is discussed later).
Human mind stopped growing when the hunters gained prominence in society because of their capacity for violence. The human societies which had their existence in the vast grass lands of different continents survived by domesticating and killing animals. The study of the genetics of the migrating humans and the archeological discoveries of the killer weapons of the late stone age (Upper Paleolithic age) provide us with a picture of the culture of that age, which explains how Patriarchy over came the Matricentric Societies.
Archeology and genetics both inform us that an unusual situation prevailed in the Indian subcontinent, To quote the famed geneticist of Harvard, Spencer Wells, “Even before the current era of globalization, the world had its killer apps… grouped into a common cultural phenomenon, known as the Late Stone Age (the Upper Paleolithic). India is unusual, since there is actually very little evidence of the upper Paleolithic age there… at least there are abundant tools from earlier periods. The supper Paleolithic provides no tell-tale signs until very late in the day….” 10
Ex-Prof. of Archeology (JNU), Shereen Ratnagar, writes in her book ‘The other Indians’ that in India, early agricultural societies predominated and the nomadic communities had little influence in society. Nomadism was a fringe phenomenon in India till the Aryan advent. She rightly says that without a paradigm- shift in thinking, justice cannot be done to the M.H. ( Sindh ) civilization.
That the Mahenjodar - Harappa civilization was without killer weapons indicating the absence of wars is a fact, accepted by the leading archeologists and historians. This was a unique phenomenon in those days of blood soaked murderous empires in other parts of the world. That domestication of animals did not take place in ancient India can be inferred from examining the list of animals available in the seals of the Sindh (M.H.) civilization. Elephants, bulls tigers, water buffaloes, rhinoceros are not capable of domestication.
Archeologists have not found traces of palaces or temples in the Sindh civilization. There is enough evidence to prove that the M.H. Civilization was a Matricentric civilization. Philosophers and historians, Indians and Westerners, have selectively ignored the evidence available regarding the matricentric nature of this civilization. Probably it was the only advanced Matricentric civilization in the world.
Most of the seals of this civilization are of women, not men. Non-violence applied to all species can only become a value in a gatherer – centric society, not in a hunter- centric society. Yoga, Samkhya and Lokayat philosophies known as Anwikshiki were totally against all types of violence. (The Vedic warriors who came to India ate animal flesh with relish and so Charbak denounced them as ghouls and demons). No other country in the world preached non violence with so much zeal in such a big area in all ages. Kings and Gods enjoy prominence only because of their power to reward and punish. No kings and Gods existed in the M.H. civilization because not power, but love and compassion were emphasized by the Yoginis.
Because of their lack of intimate acquaintance with the original non-violence preaching Mahabharata and its kernel, the Bhagawad -Gita most of the thinkers who have analyzed the Mahabharata, failed to do justice to the only non-violence preaching book in the world, embodying the values of a Matricentric Civilization. To quote D.D. Kosambi, “The earliest dated mention that could possibly represent the Gita is by Hsiuen Chuang early in the seventh century, who refers to a Brahmin having forged at the king’s order such a text (supposedly of antiquity) which was then ‘discovered’, in order to foment war” (‘The Historical development of the Bhagwat Gita’ in the book ‘History and Society: Problems of interpretation’). The ‘discovered’ book was evidently Mahabharata containing the Gita. Ramila Thappar, who praised the sanity of the Indian civilization because of the absence of the concept of enmity in Indian culture (in the preface of her, book ‘Early India’) could have found the proper cause in ‘non-violence’ and Maitri (fraternity), being the premier values pervading the Pre-Vedic society, had she utilized her vast knowledge to probe deeper. It was she, who made the pertinent remark that Indian culture is basically not spiritual, but atheistic and the integration of Dharma, Artha and Kama is advocated in the Mahabharata. Amartya Sen, also thinks that ancient Indian culture was atheistic. Thappar ignored the fact that the Mahabharata categorically states that Artha and Karna are only the ancillary products of Dharma and so our duty is to follow Dharma only. Vyasa says ‘I have raised my hands and am shouting again and again that Artha and Kama are the products of Dharma and so, Dharma only has to be served faithfully without fear of the risk of losing property and even life’ (Last Canto of the Swargarohan Parva: Verses 62 and 63). The original Mahabharata known as ‘Jaya’ contained only 8,800 verses (Adi Parva). In those days ‘Jaya’ meant victory over the negative emotions (Jainism). Later 91,200 silokar were added to ‘Jaya’ to convert a book preaching non- violence to a book preaching violence. The famous ancient rhetorician ‘Anand Bardhan’ has described Mahabharata as a book of SANTA RASA, a book of peace (not of BIRA or RAUDRA RASA which glorify ‘war’): Refer Dr. Sukumari Bhattacharya’s essay ‘Mahakavya Mahabharata’ in her book ‘Prachina Bharata’ in Bengali. In the Adi-Parva, the verse No.16 of the first canto states that the aim of the Mahabharata was to acquaint people with Dharma and its meaning. It is said in the Adi-Parba again that Vysa, wrote the Mahabharata from the perspective of Dharma (First Canto: a verse without number between No.29 and No.30 (Gita press Mahabharata). Again in Canto No.62, (Verse No.12) it is written that Mahabharata is written to give advice regarding ‘Artha’ and ‘Dharma’. Artha as explained in the first Canto may mean ‘meaning’ instead of wealth. ‘Meaning’ seems to be the more appropriate word because the Mahabharata as a whole gives the greatest importance to Dharma and its meaning (Non-violence). Again in verse No.23 of Canto 62, it is called Dharma Sastra. The primary Dhaima is explained as ‘non-violence’ (Adi-Parva Canto ‘verses -13, 14 and 15). In the Santi Parva ‘non-violence is stressed in the merchant (Tuladhara) and Jajale story. Gita’s second Canto criticizes the hedonistic sacrifices commended in the Vedas. Archeologists (also Thappar) assert that Hastinapur was not a city but a big village in those days. In the Second Canto, the Gita criticizes the Vedas for their elaborate enjoyment-wealth-aiming ritualistic sacrifices. Hsiuen Chuang is right is saying that a sort of cultural forgery converted a book preaching ‘non-violence’ into a book preaching ‘violence’. There is not enough space in this essay to list even a tiny portion of the nonviolence asserting verses in the Mahabharata.
Pre-Vedic knowledge- system known as Anwikshiki (Lokayat, Samkhya and yoga) is atheistic, materialistic and rationalistic in character. Anwikshiki bears the stamp of its matricentric outlook. The Bhagawad Gita in two verses (Slokas) makes it clear that the Purusha (the male principle) has played no role in evolution. It is Nature only which, in its original and emergent form, created an advanced being like woman / man endowed with complex organs and tendencies like brain and consciousness. Gita uses the words Apara-Prakruti and the Para Prakruti (Here Purusha or the male principle finds no mention) to denote the original matter and emergent entities like mind and consciousness. These two together embody the life principle.11 Only a matricentric society can devise such a nature-based (the female principle only) philosophy.
The greatest mistake made by the famous archeologist John Marshal was in identifying a three headed horn-bearing man in Yogic posture surrounded by animals, with the Rig Vedic God Siva in his Pasupati Posture. Gita makes it clear that ‘Tapaswis’ physically resemble Yogis but they are much inferior to the Yogis (Gita 6th Canto 46th Sloka), Yogis practice the exercises of body and brain, with the supreme aim of achieving a tranquil mind. ‘Tapaswis’ indulge in penance, meditation and worship to enhance their miracle-working powers and to ascend to the celestial regions after death. Power and miracles are taboo for Yogis. Pre-Vedic Yogis were concerned with the life on this earth. They never bothered about their after-life.
Rudra, later known as Siva is a minor Rig Vedic God. As Indra, the premier Rig-Vedic warrior God became unacceptable as the supreme God to the local people due to his nefarious role in raiding local habitations and killing Rishis, the priests elevated two minor Gods, Vishnu and Siva of the Rig-Veda to top places. Prof. Sukumani Bhattacharya writes about Siva. “He is described as Kapardin (with matted hair (RVI:114: 1,5) Babhru (reddish brain in complexion (R.V 11 :33:5, 8). He has a golden necklace round his neck (RV 11:33:10); he is strong –limbed, terrible and tawny (R.V 11: 33: 9).12
She also writes in the articles Rudra – Siva (1) & (2), “…. The bow (Rudra’s) is golden and he kills by the thousands (AV XI:02:12). In the Yajurveda , Satarudriya hymn throws light on his character, “Homage to the cheater, the swindler, to the lord of the burglars……..’, …….he is the cruelest among the Gods (Manu Samhita 1:10:20). Taitariya Brahmin describes him as animal – slayer and Jarasandha offered human sacrifices to Siva. Satapatha Brahmin says “Rudra is hankering after that cow, which is killed here in this hall.” 13
Siva was a great hunter. The Buddha, a true Yogi, in his eight fold Aryan Path proscribes hunting and selling intoxicants as they go against the fifth principle of the Eightfold Aryan Path ‘Right Livelihood’. Siva loved intoxicants. He was compared to Dionysus by the Greeks who came to India. A Yogi’s main creed is ‘non-violence’ (Yama) and he should be thoroughly Apollonian (Temperate) in his temperament. To call the violence and intoxicant loving Siva a Yogi simply because he adopts the Yogic meditative posture is just like calling a murderer another Gandhi, simply because he resembles Gandhi in his appearance and apparel. It is strange that the unconscious use of Orwellian language by a great archeologist (who is not expected to have much knowledge of Indian culture) has been accepted as gospel truth by almost all the historians of India. Parsuram was a mass murderer. He was a Tapaswi, not a Yogi, though he looked like a Yogi. Sri Krushna, called Yogeswara in the Gita, is a successful cunning warrior, not a Yogi. His presence in the Gita is because of a Pandit’s forgery as described by Hsiuen Chuang in his travelogue.
The Sindh civilization was an atheistic one. It had no Gods. The Yogi in the seal was not Siva, the omni-potent, destructive, intoxicant -loving Vedic God. He was kind only to his devotees. A Yogi shuns power and strives for tranquility of mind and is full of compassion for all living beings. God Siva was an animal slayer and a greedy meat eater. He was surely a great warrior of the Patriarchal Vedic -Aryan society. The Yogi in the M. H. seal is a lover of animals, the upholder of the Yogic Yama values (Non- violence, Truth Asteya and Aparigraha which are the values of this matricentric society). Buddha and Mahabir, though they were members of a patriarchal society, were the cultural heirs of this Yogi who exuded loving kindness (Karuna) and (Maitri) (fraternity and solidarity) towards all living beings (Patanjali Yoga Sutras).
Murray Bookchin writes that he agrees with Munford who wrote that it was woman who probably “…..accomplished those masterpieces of selection and fertilization which turned wild species into the prolific and richly nutritious domestic varieties, it was woman who made the first containers, the weaving baskets and coiling the first clay pots.” 14
Again writes Murray Bookchin, “It is she (women) who turned sharing into a hallowed communal imperative, not merely an episodic or marginal feature… Her stake in civilization was greater than that of the predatory male… But ironically… her potentialities have been brutally diminished but ever present as a voice of conscience in the bloody cauldron that men have claimed for their civilization.”
Murray Bookchin continues, “The bearing qualities nurtured in this Neolithic village are perhaps no less significant than its materials and achievements….Judging from the building sites and graves, there is little evidence, if any, that social inequality existed within these communities or that warfare marked the relationship between them”. 15
Occasional sexual relationships with outsiders were not forbidden in this matricentric society. The Mahabharata provides many episodes where this type of sex relationship existed. The happy Uttara-Kuru society mentioned in the Sabha Parba and Anusashan Parba, Swetakeu’s resentment when his mother freely selected a sexual partner other than her husband, Jabala – Satyakama story, the acceptance of different sex partners by king Jajati’s daughter, the seven Ucchaba-Sanket Ganas (Tribes) amongst whom women occasionally enjoyed sexual freedom, as described by Deviprasad Chattopadhya in his book ‘Buddhism : The Marxist Approach: Some problems of Early Buddhism, Bali’s wife’s acceptance of Rishi Dirghatama as her sex partner, king Kalmashapada’s acceptance of Vasista as his wife’s sex mate (Patriarchy becomes partly visible in husbands ordering their wives to have sex with men chosen by him) are instances indicating the fact that Patriarchal values had not taken deep roots in this society.
Unlike Chimpanzees who prefer multi-mating system in copulation, human females prefer monogamy by selecting children- caring males as their life- partners. The freedom they enjoyed in Matricentric societies was occasional mating with a preferred outsider.
‘Once it (concealed ovulation) had evolved, the species switched to a monogamous mating system in which concealed ovulation worked to keep a single male at home. Given the flexibility of human sexual strategies and our ability to fine-tune our behaviour to different circumstances, it may be that women exploit these two benefits (monogamy and concealed ovulation that can confuse paternity) under different circumstances (Jolly-1999) ……” Refer the book, ‘A mind of her own: The Evolutionary Psychology of women: Mothers Matter most: women and Parental investment’ by Prof. Anne Campbell: Psychology Department, Durham University.
Lokayat philosophy was denounced by the Vedic Patriarchal society because they accepted the old practice of equal sexual freedom for women. The value ‘Brahmacharya’ or celibacy was added to other Yama values only after patriarchy became prominent in the social structure of the Indian communities. (The evidence comes from Jainism which did not accept Brahmacharya as a great value till the arrival of Mahavir).
Among Dravidians, Matricentric practices continued functioning in the most prominent community of Kerala, the Nairs, even in the twentieth century. (Leading historians agree that the Sindh civilization was a gift of the Dravidian people). Rationalists denounce Yoga because they don’t know that the original Yoga and Samkhya were totally rational in character (Kautilya). Karmavad, miracles and mysticism had no place in original Yoga. Yoga and Samkhya were against all types of hierarchy, exclusivism, fatalism and the feeling of enmity. The matricentric society of the lower Paleolithic age continued in India and matured into an urban civilization.
Tirukural is a famous book of the Dravidians. Rajgopalachari expresses surprise at Kural; placing non-violence at a higher level than truth. A great scholar Ka Naa Subramaryan, thinks it to be a book of the Jains. He ignores the famous maxim in the Mahabharata Adi-Parva that ‘non-violence is the greatest Dharma’ and Anwikshiki’s (Yoga, Samkhya & Lokayat) emphasis on non-violence as the greatest value. So Tirukural’s stress on non-violence is fully conforming to the important tenets of Hindu religion which is a tapestry of various strands. (Adi-Parva contains a myth where a Tapaswi was penalized by YamaRaja for putting more stress on truth than non-violence).
In the second chapter of ‘Artha Sastia’ Kautilya spares no words to praise ‘Anwikshiki’. Its knowledge is so important that it enables its knower to examine and establish the worth or otherwise of all others systems of knowledge like Vartha, Danda-Niti and even Trayi (the three Vedas Rik, Yaju and Sama). Anwikshiki is thoroughly rationalistic and is far away from miracles and mysticism. S. RadhaKrishnan in ‘Indian Philosophy’ part-II (introduction) writes that Anwikshiki was prevalent in India up to 100 B.C. After 100 B.C., Upanishadic philosophy known as ‘Darsana’ replaced Anwikshiki among the elite. Twenty first century sciences lay great stress on positive emotions rather than reason (Russell and Damasio). Anwikshiki (stressing both positive emotions and reason) was the philosophy of Praxis. Darsanas, embodied in the Upanishads lay tress on abstract entities like Soul and Brahma. They neither emphasize rationality nor positive emotions. They are based on esoteric knowledge, mysticism and miracles because of which Guruvad becomes important. They preach fraternity and equality values in the abstract where as Anwikshiki stresses those values in the concrete. (Refer Lohia’s essay ‘Abstract and Concrete and his remarks on Sankara)’. No wonder, the iniquitous caste system and untouchability were prevalent in the Upanishadic age. The practice of non-violence and non-greed, the essence of Anwikshiki, require no teacher’s assistance. Anwikshiki was against the caste system and untouchability. It preached men -women equality.
In the Matricentric society of the Sindh valley, the stress was on Yama values .This later gave rise to the myth of the Dharma gradually declining, as one age gave way to another age. In the Satya Yuga, Dharma was perfect. There was no system of sacrifice (Santi Parva Canto-232, verse No.32). A Single Value ‘MAITRI’ equivalent to non-violence and non-exploitation (Fraternity for all) was enough for the elite; there was no need to strive for any other value. (Santi Parva Canto -60 verse-12).
The Patriarchal myth prevalent in Palestine is described in the Bible. Here the greatest value is ‘obedience’. ‘Disobedience’ is the greatest sin. (No wonder, the senior students of India indulge in the worst form of ragging to teach the juniors the primary patriarchal value of ‘obedience’). The contrast between the two types of civilizations is obvious. Human tragedy started with the Patriarchal values of violence and greed becoming more and more powerful, ultimately leading to war, genocide and the decimation of innumerable species of plants and animals. Socialism can fructify only in a Matricentric value – based society. (Every violence-based revolution has failure, inbuilt in its hierarchal power structure). Capitalism based as greed and violence is a curse of humanity. Its worst sin is the destruction of the environment.
That the M.H. civilization was an egalitarian civilization, is vouchsafed by the leading anthropologists and historians. Thus writes archeologist Prof. R.S. Vist.
“The argument that literacy was confined to a few people is not correct. The same seals, beads and pottery were found every where in the castle, the middle town and the lower town of the settlement at Dholavira, as if the entire population had wealth… It appears to be an egalitarian society”.16
R. Rajgopalan writes”, Now 350 skeletons from five major sites don’t show any significant differences. There are also no royal tombs. It is possible that the Indus civilization was maintained at an advanced level without social classes, central authority and warfare.” 17
Patriarchal civilizations which were dominated by the hunter group, utilized their brain power to invent newer and fiercer weapons of warfare. Matricentric societies of the Sindh valley utilized their power of intelligence to discover better ways of providing more and more civic amenities to the people. Ayurveda and Yoga were the two systems discovered by women. Yoga was discovering the pleasure principle embedded in the neo- cortex and monitoring the activities of individuals and societies accordingly. Ayurveda was the discovery of the healing principles of plants and processed metals either singly or in combination. Neither was based on the belief in divine help, leading to miracles. Intense rationalist thinking and experiences were their only guides. Kings having powerful armies, with their nobles and priests were the privileged classes in the Patriarchal societies of Egypt and Mesopotamia. In the Sindh valley the highest position in society was enjoyed by Yoginis, and Yogis (Gymno – sophists: Megasthenes). In the Santiparva (Mahabharata), the greatest exponent of Samkhya is a lady known as Sulabha. She seems to be a Yogini who was leading a life free from family cares. She proved to have more knowledge than the greatest philosopher king of those days, Janaka. 18
The discoveries in the field of science show that human brain has three layers: the reptilian Brain, the limbic brain (mammalian) and the pre-frontal cortex (owned only by the human beings). Every layer of brain has its sources of pleasure. The most developed part of the brain, the pre-frontal cortex, controls the violent tendencies of the limbic brain (Particularly the Amygdala).
Both violence and greed lead to the disturbance of the pre-frontal cortex and the present unhappy affluent communities in the developed societies harbour a large percentage of mental patients only because of the widespread prevalence of violence and greed in their societies. Yoga is a system which has developed methods to be rid of these two evils that endanger mental health. The Yogis (Samkhya and Lokayat philosophers are also Yogis) aspire for Sukha i.e. happiness. Anthropologists affirm that the happy societies that existed among indigenous communities were free from one or two of the evils ‘violence’ and ‘greed’. The Yogis aim at achieving natural pleasure connected with the pre -frontal cortex (Sukha) and have succeeded in having tension – free tranquil brains as confirmed through the laboratory tests in the US.
(Read the book ‘Destructive Emotions’).
Buddha and Mohavir’s guides were the women and men of the pre-Vedic societies.
“Each teacher of the ancient period in India, including Buddha and Mahavir stated that he followed in the footsteps of others who went before them.”19
The message of nature is clear. Either we develop a civilization free from violence and greed or face the prospect of reversing the process of evolution. The ominous warning has already come. Human brain has lost 15-20% of its neurons in the past 28,000 years. If brain shrinking crosses the critical point, we may lose our critical and creative abilities.
The M.H. Civilization can show us the right path chalked for us by nature. We need an integration of Western science with the knowledge of values and social systems developed by Anwikshiki culture in India. Neither India nor the West can alone devise a proper plan for the saving of the species. The suicidal - life style of the present leads towards destruction. The elites of the world should shed their arrogance and turn into members of a single caravan. Buddha, Gandhi and Christ are not out-dated thinkers but the torch bearers, though some portions of their teachings have to be shed. We must follow the principles guiding the evolutionary march of nature which brought into being the matricentric societies in the past. Ecological sciences are making us conscious of our mistakes. Sectarian religions, dictatorial ideologies, fanatically – followed, emotionally –integrated collectives like the ethnic groups and state- dominated nations are today destroying the life-saving emotions of love and compassion. If they cannot be reformed or rejected, human species may not live to witness the twenty second century. No country can dismantle its war and greed – based life way, institutions and apparatus unless this becomes a global phenomenon. The whole of humanity must be involved in this venture. Much depends on the understanding and activities of the elite of the developed and developing nations. Can they rise to the occasion and save humanity by shedding their bias of the superiority of their knowledge systems and gain wisdom by studying the only developed matricentric urban society of the world in the Sindh valley. Science is the greatest gift of the West. In the field of human relations we have much to learn from the non-patriotic, world- fraternal India of the pre-Vedic days which was free from all types of superstitions and prejudices present in the primitive egalitarian indigenous societies and also in the later caste / class –ridden patriarchal societies in the whole world (including the vicious untouchability tarnished-Vedic and post-Christ India).
REFERENCE :-
1. The hidden connections (book): The Nature of life (Chapter).
2. Visions of Compassion: A Cross – Cultural Dialogue with Buddhism.
3. (Ancestor shows Human Brain Shrinking: The Times of India 15-09.2010).
4. Gaia is a Tough Bitch.
5. A Dynamic Pattern.
6. The second Law of organization. The Third Culture (Book).
7. The second Law of organization.
8. Close to the Singularity.
9. Close to the Singularity
10. The Journey of Man. --------------- A Book by Spencer Wells
11. The Bhagawad Gita – Verse 4 & 5 – 7th Canto).
12. The Indian Theogony.
13. The Indian Theogony : Rudra- Siva (1 & 2).
14. The Ecology of Freedom: The outlook of Organic Society.
15. The Ecology of Freedom:- The outlook of organic society.
16. The Rise and Rall of a Harappan City : By T.S. Subramaniam (Frontline 18.06.2010).
17. Indus Valley (NBT).
18. Mahabharata (Canto-320).
19. Eternal India by Binoy Kumar Behl (Frontline – Aug.24-2007).
MY ADDRESS:-
Bagwat Prasad Rath,
3rd Line, Roith Colony,
At/PO/Dist. – Rayagada –2
PIN- 765002, Odisha.
E. mail- bagwat_prashad@rediffmail.com
www.samalochanal.blogspot.com
www.samalochana.blogsome.com
Revised Article
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment