Versatile Genius

Gold Mine of the Vedas

(By Dr. Raja Ramanna)

(Sri Kapali Sastriar Memorial Lecture delivered on July 27, 1985 at Madras.)

(Dr. Ramanna is Chairman of the Atomic Commission, a Sanskritist of note, whose interests in Music are original and creative. He embodies in himself the happy reconciliation between Science and Spirituality.)

I was at first not quite willing to accept the difficult task of saying anything of value to commemorate the birth centenary of Shri Kapali Sastry in spite of the kind and affectionate invitation from my old friend Shri Anjaneyulu. For one thing, I had not read the works of Shri Kapali Sastry and besides I was developing a fear that if I speak any more on Indian philosophy or Sanskrit I would just be found out.

Three things changed my mind. First, was the insistence of Shri Anjaneyulu, the second the revelation of the inspring works of the great Savant Kapali Sastry—Shri Anjaneyulu was good enough to send me his complete works which I read for the first time and have not quite recovered from its intellectual impact. Lastly and certainly the least, the feeling of challenge from some of the comments on an article I wrote in the "Hindu" entitled 'Logic; Shankara and Subramanya Iyer', which the paper, however, published under the title 'Advaita & Science' for reasons best known to themselves.

I will dispense with the last motivation by just saying that the criticisms were by routine people who have a routine view of complex things. On re-reading my paper many times, I feel that even if there was nothing new or strange in it, there was in it atleast a new exposition of old things. This is of some significance especially because very few Indians know about their own ancient works, however glorious they be, and those who do, are more interested in interpreting it according to some Sampradaya one of them being imitating outmoded western ideas. Shri Kapali Sastry's best essays are inspired in indignation by such writings.

On reading some of the works of Shri Kapali Sastry specially on the Vedas, I found it elevating not only for its erudition and scholarship but for his refreshing freedom of interpretation. These essays cannot but be master-pieces being written by one who is rare today—a person of deep learning and understanding and who happened to be in the enlightened presence of the Saint Aurobindo himself.

That the Veda is not just the outpourings of a primitive people, whatever its poetic value, is argued with such clarity and details that it is difficult to believe that anybody could question its spiritual and philosophical content however much it is obscured by time. The philosophy it contains is not for obtaining a M.A. degree in our Universities nor is it like a treatise by Kant or Hegel or even Shankara for that matter, but philosophy it is.

On this occasion, I would like to share my thoughts on an old problem having some relation to the writings of Kapali Sastry. In fact, I started writing about it even before Shri Anjaneyulu sent me the complete works. I found to my great happiness that I was indeed performing an 'arati' to his thoughts without knowing it.

I have chosen the subject of Intution, asking whether it is possible for a human being to make statements of profound value without a process of deduction conscious or unconscious or is all Intuition merely the reflection of some unconscious integration process of the existing knowledge which can then lead to new knowledge and new symmetries. For convenience we will call the first of these as Intuition of the first kind and the latter of the second kind. It is the second kind that is acceptable to scientists, but actual facts do indicate that Intuition of the first type also exists. Since I cannot make such statements without giving examples, I proceed to do this:

It can be recalled from our studies in school how things which even if they look obvious are still given a formal proof. This is due to the work of Euclid and is a good example for training people to understand the meaning of a formal proof. For example, when two lines cross each other the opposite angles are equal. The fact seems too obvious as to ask for a proof, specially when the human brain is best conditioned to appreciate Euclidean geometry. But mathematicians say, however trivial the matter, a proof based on more elementary postulates is necessary even if it is to make them only feel comfortable. Proof of more complicated things by mathematical analysis certainly ensures that within the frame work of the postulates, mistakes do not creep in and unnecessary restrictions do not hamper growth. It may be recalled that the postulate that parallel lines meet at infinity, restricted geometry for centuries. It was only systematic mathematical studies which broke these shackles and the very useful branches known as non-euclidean geometry, of great significance in physics, came into existence.

The history of mathematics is replete with examples where the statement was first made and the proof came much later. There seems to be some mystery in all this. Early Indian mathematicians gave only the result and never the proof. It is possible that in these works the author perhaps had a proof or a demonstration but did not think it important to give details. European mathematics is also full of instances where the statement came first and the proof filled in later. How did the statements flash to the mathematician? It may just be that the brain being conditioned by intense periods of mathematical activity permits a flash of important new theorems (Intuition of the second kind). The case I now bring to your attention is nearer home and more exciting and suggests other possibilities. As you all know, Srinivas Ramanujan had the gift, nay the genius of conjecturing difficult theorems. It is only now proofs are being found for his conjectures, and what is more curious is that these proofs contain mathematics which just had not come into existence in Ramanujan's time. It cannot just be Intuition of the second kind. It is closer to Intuition in a mystic sense. In a recent lecture by the distinguished mathematician, Prof. K. G. Ramanathan¹⁹ on the work of Ramanujan, it was pointed out that Ramanujan conjectured very complicated and beautiful formulae, some of which he proved himself, some were proved by others and many are yet to be proven. His "lost" papers discovered a few years ago in a box left by the late Prof. Watson (why he kept them so long without publication is mysterious) is full of very important mathematical results some of which have received proofs only recently. What is important is that these proofs require new developments in mathematics, developments of which Ramanujan knew nothing and came into existence long after his death. Here is an example of such a result chosen at random from the paper of Prof. Ramanathan:

The left hand side is a continued fraction and the right hand side is a product.

A curious example of thinking "ahead of time" is the sloka from Indian logic. It is by Viswanatha²⁰ (early 17th century—Nyaya Vaisesika School). The 121st and 122nd slokas state:

परत्वं चापरत्वं च ििद्वघ परिकीर्तितम्
दैशिकं कातिकं चापि मूर्त एव तु दैशिकम्
परत्वं मूर्तसंयोगभूयस्त्व ज्ञानतों भवेत्
अपरत्वं तदल्पत्वबुति क्यादितीरितम्

"Distance and nearness are described as being of two kinds, viz. spatial as also temporal. The spatial kind abides only in limited things. Distance arises from a notion of preponderance of the conjunction of limited things and nearness is said to arise from a notion of its meagreness.

The commentator of this sloka writes:

"Distance and nearness, which are the extraordinary cause of the convention that a thing is far or near, are being described: Distance etc. The spatial, etc.—Spatial distance arises from the notion that a thing is removed by a larger measure of conjunction with limited things. Similarly nearness arises from the notion of a small measure of it. Here the ablative case-ending is required to indicate the starting point. As, Prayaga (Allahabad) is farther from Pataliputra (Patna) than Kashi (Benares), and Prayaga is nearer to Pataliputra than Kurukshetra".

The distinguished translator-cum-commentator is obviously confused by the purport of the statement and yet had he known set theory he would have found the meaning of the sloka to be quite straight forward. Set theory is no more than a little 100 years, but the sloka was written during the early 17th century. It does not necessarily mean set theory was known to the Navya Nyaya logicians but the basic idea is clearly expressed and the most generalised definition of length is given. This may not be Intuition but we have to appreciaate the fact that there are many modes of thought, however remote they be from each other, can lead to the same conclusion.

I have given two examples of correct ideas derived in circumstances very different from the accepted methods i.e. by deduction. Now I wish to propose that if this is possible in a highly organised discipline such as mathematics or logic, it must be more true of philosophy. It is after I had written these words, the works of Kapali Sastry became known to me and the first few pages of the great essay 'Lights on the Veda' were enough to say I was on the right lines.

The importance of the essay of Shri Kapali Sastry entitled 'Lights on the Veda' can hardly be over-estimated. When speaking of the Vedas, particularly the Rig Veda we are speaking of something composed atleast nearly 4500 years ago. For those who are students of literature the consequences of aging is obvious when we realise how remote is the language of Chaucer compared to modern English. Chaucer is only a few hundred years old. That people can still understand the Vedas atleast obscurely if not clearly, itself brings out the greatness and universality of these ancient thinkers. The difficulties of interpreting the Vedas arise not only from its antiquity but obscurity is built-in for very specific reasons. Shri Kapali Sastry points out that though externally the Vedas use a language of ritual and sacrifice, it is essentially a cover for expressing great spiritual thoughts. In fact, in Tamil,²¹ the Vedas are known as "Marai" which means "hidden". The language of sacrifice and ritual is used for expressing something deeper but what the historical facts were which led them to such a system is difficult to say. There are indeed many ways of expressing deep thoughts. Music is one but not definitive, Mythology is another.

We take note that unbelievable care was taken by the Rishis to see that it was handed down from generation to generation by very special methods to avoid distortion or interpolation. Sanskrit is an extremely phonetic language built on highly scientific lines. It is a language built on roots which themselves have esoteric meaning and it is possible by introducing various orderings to develop a system to ensure that the purity of the writings is handed on from generation to generation by word of mouth. No other writings in the world have come down to us in such purity. If the ancient writers took all these precautions, why then, should they have exerted themselves to this extent merely for a text book on ritual.

Another problem in understanding the true meaning of the Vedas is the complications created by the various commentators over the centuries. It is surprising that no works of any commentators have come down to us until we reach the time of Sayana which is as late as the 13th/14th century. Sayana, a great scholar, whose interpretations of the Vedas are fundamental to any student of the Vedas clearly says he is not interested in its spiritual contents but admits it does exist. He was more interested in ritual. Nevertheless, in a most scholarly and academic work he has brought out the methods of interpreting the Veda through phonetics, grammar and etymology. His contributions which are of immense value to all Vedic scholars, seem to have suggested to western writers to conclude that because Sayana concentrates on the ritual side, all Vedas must therefore be connected with only ritual and sacrifice. This seems to have been echoed by Indian scholars in recent times as was the fashion particularly in the early part of this century. Shri Kapali Sastry tears to pieces this approach in a way which is most devastating not because his writings are rough, but on the contrary because they are so full of logic and written in a style of great literary merit.

We are concerned here with the fact that the Vedas assume deep spiritual meaning and are composed through a form of trained 'Intuition'. Like music, where extemporisation is perfected by years of training Intuition in the same way can be developed into an instinct. Kapali Sastry²² himself writes of this and I quote from three different places:

"The Vedic age is not at all presumed to be an age of Reason and intellectual development and what we call exact sciences as we know them but it was undoubtedly one of Intuition, an age of the mystics who had developed certain lines of self-development and culture of the Spirit and had their own technique of the Yogic art, and methodised their system of building the inner life."

"Besides, it is a mistaken conception that spiritual experience, intuitive insight, occult knowledge, inspiration and similar non-rational acquisitions of some of the so-called primitive races are either fancied and therefore not valid, or if valid they belong to a later period when man advanced in general knowledge of himself and his environment and lived in a better civilised state with the comparative comforts of life that economic improvement brings. But some of the ancient pre-historic peoples have had profound knowledge of Nature in certain spheres which our learned critic himself admits in these words. 'The most ancient fancies sometimes startle us by their strikingly modern character, for insight does not depend upon modernity'."

"Supposing that our present civilisation practically perishes for the most part, as a consequence of some catastrophe in Nature, or by a catalysm brought about by Nature's stupendous work in the monstrous brain of man producing a reasonable number of atom bombs would it be right for future generations to deny altogether the actual fact of the scientific culture, the intellectual advancement and general progress of civilisation of our times?".

As mentioned somewhere in the complete works, Sri Aurobindo asks the interesting question: had Indian culture disappeared like the Egyptian and Greek cultures and European scholars had to translate the following sentence: "Laxmi and Saraswati refuse to dwell under one roof what would have been their reaction. Since they had no Puranic culture they would probably have convinced the world that it means "Dawn and Night are two irreconcilable chemical substances whereas we know that it obviously means "wealth and learning seldom go together".

These are the pitfalls of modern Vedic interpretation.

Let us take the Vedic hymn which says "Night and Dawn of auspicious form, I invoke to seat them on the sacred grass at this our solemn worship (sacrifice)".

नमेषासा सुपेशसास्तं यत उप हूवये
इदं नो बर्बाहसासदे

We now quote Kapali Sastry's interpretation of this sloka which is most enlightening. His essays are full of such instances.

"In the mystic discipline of these ancient sages, there are alternations of Day and Night both of which are equally important for the perfect fulfilment of the purpose of sacrifice. It must be noted that the Day and Night are symbols in the esoteric system of the Vedic sages, of the alternations of the Divine and human consciousness in us. The Night of our ordinary consciousness, says Sri Aurobindo, holds and prepares all that the Dawn brings out into conscious being. Day also in another way represents broad open light, the light of Consciousness in which the worlds and planes and their Powers are beheld severally and in toto, while Night represents a concentration and self-absorption in the consciousness, an intensity of self-gathering in what we may call the immobile, static existence in which there is nothing else to be seen, but in which the all is absorbed; the Truths, the planes and their Powers and the Gods and all beings and things lie latent and hidden and seem to be non-existent as it were. Such alternation in the consciousness was a necessity in the mystic discipline of the Rishis for the perfection towards Immortality that was their aim. Hence Day and Night nakta-usas, of distinct auspicious forms, supesasa, are called upon to be present. Though this seems to be a personification of day and night as deities, the idea is clear in the mind of the Rishi that both the states must be made possible for him in his endeavour. The Day-consciousness shall not dazzle him and make him forgetful of the Night in whose womb lies the Day. The Significance of invoking both together which are apparently of different hues, white and black, and can never co-exist lies in the fact that in the Vedic Yoga both are equally important and be made familiar to the being of the Rishi in whom both the forms, the twin sisters, Day and Night—can abide. It is this twin aspect of the Consciousness with necessary variation in its connotation that is the origin and support of the dictum of the Upanishad that both "Knowledge and Ignorance" must be known together. "He who knows That as both in one, the Knowledge and the Ignorance, by the Ignorance crosses beyond death and by the Knowledge enjoys Immortality". We may note in passing that this concept of Day and Night is expressed figuratively in the famous passage of the Gita that what is day to the Wise is night to the common man and vice versa. The Isha Upanishad text quoted above clearly says with reference to the knowledge and Ignorance and Birth and non-birth, to be known together, that we "have heard it from the Wise ones of yore". Who else could these Wise ones be but the mystic of the Vedic Wisdom, dhirah?

"This, then, is the significance of the Rishi', invocation to the Day and the Night to be present at the sacrifice and take their places in the seat made ready for the advent of the Gods to the sacrificial Hall in the inner Mansion of the larger and wider being of the Rishi".

Is it not unfortunate that the Vedas which is is a gold mine of thought is hardly ever read. The old learned keep it to themselves because it is a tradition, the younger ones know nothing of it. The non-Hindus do not take it seriously because it is considered sacred by the Hindus. It is only some European scholars who tried to make something of it since they wanted to find their roots in the great-Indo-Aryan civilization of yore, but would give it no spiritual credit because it did not come under the Christian fold.

Thus the oldest literary works of man lies in a museum unappreciated and not understood. Should we not, Indians irrespective of our caste, creed or religion do something about it? Is it not exicting to do research in this vast and virgin field instead of writing about English literature—a crowded, nay over-crowded field leaving restricted scope for originality? I would even suggest T. V. quizzes on the Veda on what they really mean. For this we cannot find a more suitable place than Madras known as it was at one time for its scholarship in Sanskrit, History and Mathematics. Should we not revive this scholarship that we have lost in a wave of self-destructive caste politics?