Author:
Publication: The Week
Date: June 24, 2001
The first Indian who formulated
ideas about the atom as the indivisible particle of matter in a systematic
manner was 6th century BC philosopher Kanada. Katyayana, a contemporary
of the Buddha, put forward ideas about the atomic constitution of the material
world.
The Greek theories of matter closely
corresponded to the Indian theories. Leucippus and his pupil Democritus
(460-370 BC) declared that atoms are the primary building blocks of the
world. Earlier, philosophers believed that one or all of the four elements-earth,
water, fire and air-were the primordial substance of which the world is
made.
In India, the Rigveda Samhita expresses
the first monistic principle as water. The doctrine of the five elements
took place in the Upanishads. Though there have been suggestions of the
"historical possibility of the Grecian world of thought being influenced
by India through the medium of Persia", scholars like Max Mueller and Paul
Dessen say the developments were independent.
Kanada's Vaisesika Sutra is the
main literary source that deals with a number of physical concepts like
space, time and atomism. These were later developed by the Vaisesika and
the Nyaya schools. By 10th century AD the two schools began to be known
as Nyaya-Vaisesika.
In the Vaisesika system of philosophy,
matter is described in its elementary and composite forms, the gunas (qualities)
of the fundamental kanas (quanta) and the dravya (primary substance) of
the universe.
The dravyas-earth (prithvi), water
(jalam), air (vayu), substratum (akasa), time (kalam), space (dik), mind
(manas), radiation (tejas) and self (atma)-are the raw material for world-building.
The first four are divisible and their elementary units are the paramanu
or kana (quanta). These four dravyas together with akasa constitute the
panchabhuta. "The Vaisesika system is a pluralistic presentation
consisting of the material and the non-material, the finite and the ubiquitous,
and the conscious self as well as mind in an ingenious way," says B.V.
Subbarayappa in 'The Physical World: Views and Concepts', forming a part
of A Concise History of Science in India brought out by the Indian National
Science Academy.
"During the development of Quantum
Theory, it became apparent to many scientists that the results of the experiments
were making many suggestions about the true nature of our universe," observes
physicist E.C.G. Sudarshan. "The quantum reality of the microworld is inextricably
entangled with the organisation of the macroworld. In other words, the
part has no meaning except in relation to the whole."
In Hindu tradition, the entire universe
is said to be a manifestation of the paramatma or supreme soul. Hence,
everything contained within the universe is also a manifestation of this
paramatma. The ancient medical treatise Charaka Samhita also upholds this
view. "Physics of lepto-quarks [the infinitesimally small subatomic particles]
and our Upanishads have realised the unitary nature of all things on this
planet," says Prof. B.M. Hegde, vice-chancellor of the Manipal Academy
of Higher Education. "The mind is a subatomic quantum state. Human mind
or otherwise called the human consciousness, is a quantum level thinking.
Just as the seed has the tree in it, the zygote, that little speck of protein
that man is made of the day he is conceived inside his mother's womb, knows
all about every other living thing in the universe."
Hegde draws parallels to the four
levels of consciousness in modern science-the waking, the dreaming, the
sleeping and the quantum consciousness-to shivam, sundaram, advaitam and
chaturtham.
"I do not think physics is as yet
able to fully answer the question, 'what is consciousness?' But I have
great doubts that beautiful old poetic assertions do this either," says
physicist Yash Pal, disagreeing with people who use physics terminology
to postulate that we had the answer to these questions in our ancient texts.
Yash Pal says these assertions are full of mumbo-jumbo, with much appeal
to the supra-natural where the laws applicable to the physical universe
should have no meaning. "A better understanding of consciousness would
ultimately emerge from neurobiology and psychology. Then only it would
be appropriate to quote wise and beautiful generalities from the past.
At the moment they do not explain much but only assert," he says. "But
those who proceed on the basis of 'faith' alone are hard to convince."
