Three mathematical notes on Rajiv Malhotra's lecture at IIT Mumbai

April 20
3 mathematical notes on your lecture at Mumbai
Harsha shares three critical notes on a recent lecture by Rajiv Malhotra at IIT Bombay:
"....
1. When you say, that the digits of pi were calculated using adhyatmic vidya. But, if you actually look at how the Kerala school did it, they do it by using the Taylor series for the sin and cos function. This is an impressive achievement, and predates the European school, by a couple of centuries. Adhyatmic vidya is itself much more important. But in this case, we shouldn't conflate the two.

2. On your comment on the speed of light, I think it is very important for you to say in your speech that this is speculative. Even Subash Kak, the original researcher does not definitively state this in his article. He presents some evidence, but leaves it to the reader at the end. Personally, I think there is nowhere near adequate evidence..

3. On vedic maths, it is important to note that what is presented is not special by today's standards. Most of the calculation rules would be considered elementary today. On the other hand, if there was evidence that these were in
the vedas, it would be interesting. But the  Shankaracharya's verses do not refer to the Vedas. Here is Prof Dani's take on it, who also makes these points.

4. As a strategy, mentioning these more speculative things in your speeches, isn't helpful to your cause. For someone who is not an expert, it would be just as impressive to mention the more established contributions which haven't been popularized (like the Taylor infinite series for sin an cos anticipating calculus) as mentioning the not more shaky claims.

... Already, the field is inundated with a lot of claims like proof of Goldbach conjecture (an open problem even today) using Vedic mathematics.

Also, someone one who is not sympathetic to your project would disproportionately emphasize these weaker claims. See this for instance, Rajnath Singh isn't correct, but Mr. Bal is chosing a particularly weak opponent, someone who cant accurately portray the known contributions...."
 
Rajiv comment: 
1) I agree with him on the value of pi calculated as a series - but I disagree with him that it should be called "Taylor" series. Agreed that we cannot show any DIRECT role for adhyatma-vidya in this. However, the practice of sadhana was part of the training, and hence at least indirectly part of the methodology of discovery.

2) Regarding the speed of light, I must disagree with him. Unlike value of pi which can be calculated strictly theoretically without use of measuring instruments, the velocity of light is not a theoretical derivation. Yet (and
this is the point I wanted to make), there is no evidence of measuring instruments available to get such a value in those times. So how did they "guess" such a value? My thesis is given in pages 221-234 of BD. Sanskrit mantra
theory is based on integral unity that can be "seen" (not in the normal sense of the word) in the rishi-state. A few examples are given in that chapter of BD where ancient texts indicate physical properties of objects that are remarkably accurate, but there is no evidence of physical measurement being carried out. Had the rishi discoverers used lab instruments, they would be writing about them
and teaching it to students. But they never mention what we today consider to be instruments. Except one instrument - the mind in higher state of consciousness.
So it is my "speculation" that velocity of light was an example of such discoveries. It might surprise many of you that modern Western neuroscience is now (re)discovering many facts about the mind using advanced yogis and tibetan buddhist meditators. This is going to be the subject of some volumes I have been working on that I hope to complete. The use of adhyatma-vidya as methodology of
discovery is not to be dismissed just because it does not fit the criteria of "science" as known today.

3) On Vedic maths: I do not think of the math being promoted as something directly based on vedas. But the man who promoted it starting a century ago claimed that he was "inspired" by vedas. So it could be an indirect influence of vedas. Similarly, the great modern mathematician Srinivasa Ramanujan attributed
his genius discoveries to Goddess Lakshmi, who he insisted had brought these breakthroughs to him in visions. His biographers failed to pursue this aspect
adequately, presumably out of fear of being branded as unscientific. But how does one explain such a scientific mind making a claim that seems so unscientific? I would not dismiss it out of hand. Modern science knows very
little about the mind, especially the potentials beyond "normal" states.

On the general point of not mixing more credible claims with less credible ones, I am in full agreement. I judge each context based on the audience and what would motivate them... I would like this to be the first place in India where serious scientists take up R&D on adhyatma-vidya. Why let western institutes have a monopoly on researching our tradition's methodologies?]

Narayana comments:
"...This is with reference to Rajivji's third point, regarding 'being inspired' by the Vedas. The discovery of Benzene ring by visualising the structure in a dream. Not only that but Kekule was believed to have come up with the tetravalent nature of carbon by visualising it in a dream. Western 'scientists' and their Indian acolytes (whom Rajivji refers to as ideological sepoys) dismiss visions of Indian sages and Vedic science but readily believe such 'stories'
when put out by, well, 'Western scientists'!
Read VOXINDICA 

Rajiv comment: yes. Thats what Uturn is.

Ashok asks:
"...the 18th chaupai of Sri Hanumaan Chalisa, where the distance of the Sun from the Earth has been described clearly. Yug (12000) Sahastra (1000) yogan (8 miles) par bhanu. Comes to 96,000,000 miles, which I understand is reasonably close. Of course the earth's orbit is elliptical, so the distance will vary during different parts of the year..." 

Partha responds:
"...Sant Tulsidas whom many of us consider a reincarnation of Valmiki, lived in the 16th century, by which time information about the Sun's distance from the earth could be claimed to have been communicated worldwide, from wherever it was first learnt by whatever means. That the Sant wrote his Ram Charit Manas entirely without biblio-aids and that he practically visualized whatever he wrote should be used as an important rider, when we talk of this scientifically near-accurate astronomical data being given by him in his Hanuman Chalisa. He has also used units from olden times (Yojana, Yug etc)..."

Come adds:
"..There are references to the Sun-Earth distance in other Indian scriptures, going back to the Vedas, at least according to ancient commentators. Some scientists including Rupert Sheldrake have shown that there are other methods to acquire knowledge about nature than the modern "scientific method", ..."

Rajiv comment: Rupert Sheldrake is a prominent UTurner and should not be cited as reference for saying things he has appropriated. We must stop acknowledging as source the person(s) who stole ideas and covered up. 

tvikhanas notes:
"...To add to Rajivji's point, a staggering and undeniable example of adhyatmic influence on science is Panini's grammar. The core of this grammar "Shiva sutras" is named so because it was revealed to Panini by Shiva himself. People have remarked how wonderful the grammar is and it keeps revealing amazing new facets when examined from modern viewpoints. A researcher recently found that
the certain choices made in constructing Shiva Sutras when cast as optimization problems turn out to be the best possible solutions (A Mathematical Analysis of Panini's Shivasutras by Wiebke Petersen).

If this seems some how less remarkable, then say a proof of Fermat's Last Theorem from 1500 BC, it's because we have also internalized western view that "linguistics" is an inferior and less fundamental science compared to maths or physics along with many other ill-founded ideas. Indian tradition in fact considers Vyakarana far more important than equivalents of mathematics, metallurgy etc which perhaps explains its survival against impossible odds.

As a side note, western view towards linguistics is also evolving, mainly due to study of Sanskrit and also due to advent of computers. It is interesting to note that technical study of Sanskrit grammar is picking up again in the West. There are "mathematical linguists" like Petersen quoted above, along with Computer Scientists like Gerard Huet who have initiated major projects on parsing Sanskrit. I recently learned that there is a whole area of assigning formal semantics to natural languages in which Gerard Huet with his Sanskrit project is an important member...." 

RMF Summary: Week of January 16 - 22, 2012

January 17

C. Alex Alexander's review of BEING DIFFERENT *Refreshingly original Perspective of Dharmic Faiths * *by C. Alex Alexander* I agree with the first two positive reviews of Rajiv Malhotra's recent book,...

January 17 Article: Applying BD ideas to compare India and China Maria[] is an example of someone raised Christian but who REJECTED that faith. This rejection is NOT to be confused with "appreciating dharma" while retaining one's Judeo-Christian identity, or keeping the identity issue ambiguous at least publicly. She lives in India, and has followed my work for many years. She recently sent me the attached article that she has published, in which she quotes my ideas on Indians' loss of self-hood to contrast this with China. I mention this India/China contrast in many talks across India, and especially the youth and the corporate leaders resonate with this issue. January 18 State of Formation web site features 4 blogs by.. http://www.stateofformation.org/ This is an important site for religion. Right on their home page they have 4 blogs by me. Part 1 went up a day ago and already... Yogesh asks if Zoroastrianism can be considered a dharmic faith. Rajiv: Frankly, I have not examined it enough to be sure. My hunch is that it served as the bridge from which dharma got exported to the Middle East during the Persian Empire, and there it gradually turned into the Abrahamic Monotheism. Every time you hear that Monotheism started with Judaism, you must challenge it with the established fact that Zoroastrianism had this notion developed earlier, and that Persians (Zoroastrians at that time) were very influential in the Middle East. You dont need to go beyond just this claim, i.e. avoid claiming Vedic influences on Zoroastrianism. This is enough to checkmate the chauvinism of Monotheism. Once the "chosen people of Monotheism" is debunked with the example of Zoroastrianism, you can then take the conversation further. January 19 The Bodhisattva's Brain: Buddhism naturalised Subramanya posts: "... professor Owen Flanagan, claims that if Karma & Punarjanma are discarded then Buddhism can become something that can be very acceptable to secularists, atheists etc... The Bodhisattva's Brain: Buddhism naturalised ... Owen Flanagan is James B Duke Professor of Philosophy at Duke University. Rajiv's comment: ... Stephen Bachelor is another prominent example of westerners who started out as very loyal Buddhists, many even taking wows and getting formally initiated and teaching it to other western disciples, etc. But over time they have diluted and eventually erased those aspects which make Buddhism NON DIGESTIBLE INTO WESTERN UNIVERSALISM. I was in Delhi several months ago when i heard that he was to give a talk at India Int'l Center, so I decided to attend it. The room full of Indian scholars, intellectuals, Buddhist monks, and they were going gaga over how the westerner had spent all his life praising their tradition, learning sanskrit, visiting sites in India every year for research, and so forth. The typical inferiority complex many Indians have. Here he again summarized his thesis that has appeared in his books to explain "secular Buddhism".For a quick snapshot of his latest views, please read the short article.. During the Q&A, I was the ONLY person in the audience who raised uncomfortable issues with his talk, while others were thanking him profusely. .... I said that the "overall project of many western Buddhism scholars has been to de-Indianize Buddhism, in order to make it generic, and then eventually re-contextualize it within Western thought." This really shook him up, as these folks are not accustomed to being challenged by Indians on scholarly grounds. After the event was over, he wanted to casually chat with me and find out who I was, .... After he left, the Indian cronies remaining in the room started asking me why I was not being grateful to "our esteemed guest". January 19 Digestion process in Archeology and Vedic Science srini Q1. The negation of Aryan Invasion Theory by Indian scholars was first criticized by Indian leftists and western scholars with even the worst ad hominem attacks on people like Dr NS Rajaram. Now leftist historians like Romila Thapar are coming around to saying something like there was no invasion but a steady trickling of Aryans into India. Do you see this as a form of digestion while continuing to hold on to Aryan race theory? Where do you see this going and in the light of BD, is there a case for how Indian archeologists and scholars should approach this problem of credibility in western scholarly circles without being trashed? Rajiv response: Aryan invasion was replaced by Aryan migration long ago. But it does not alter one bit the foreign Aryan vs. native Dravidian divide as explained in BI. Celebrating this shift is misleading but common among many indian scholars craving for some victory. Whether they came as invaders or peacefully makes no difference to the claim that sanskrit and its classical texts are of foreign origin and hence Hinduism is an alien imposition upon Dravidians, Dalits, etc. Archeology was one crucial discipline not colonized until a few years ago, when US institutions formally took over a prominent center in Baroda, from which they have gained primary access to all sites and artifacts. This was done right under the noses of hindutva leaders and funded by some prominent hindutva leaders. Dilip Chakrabarti of cambridge, a leading ally in this fight against colonizing indian archeology, wrote many letters to officials explaining the problem. I sent these letters to prominent leaders who promised results. but these leaders made noises only for their own visibility and to show off that they had become "intellectuals", and not a single thing got dont after all the meetings and burst of online noise. Dilip and I gave up in disgust. ... N S Rajaram's followup: "As the person in the eye of the storm of the Aryan-Dravidian debate (as well as the Vedic-Harappan debate) let me say that I received support from all quarters-- Hindutva and non-Hindutva, Hindus and non-Hindus (mostly scientists), this was both over the AIT and the Ayodhya dispute.     The one exception has been the Hindu religious leaders. Even over Ayodhya they failed to look at the evidence that I had compiled AT THEIR REQUEST for a presentation. That presentation never took place. But this didn't stop the Kanchi Acharya from giving a long interview in Rediff acknowledging THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE for a previous temple at the site!     It has been the same story when it comes to 'science'. The late Admar Mutt seer invited me for suggestions to start his 'Purna Prajna Research Institute'. ..  ... ...   This kind of lack of professionalism is the bane of Hindu outfits. Just compare the Hindu University of America with even a small Christian institution. Can any Hindu be proud of the HUA?    I have given several talks on Science and Vedanta to scientific audiences in several places in India and at places like MIT, University of Manchester, Cambridge, etc, and the response has been gratifying. (I am giving one at the Indian Institute of Science on February 3). But supposed 'Vedic and Vedanta' audiences (mostly self-styled) shun me. This is because of their ignorance of science and fear that their claims in the name of 'traditional scholarship' may be exposed.    They all invoke Schrodinger's name but don't really know what he said much less understand what he meant. He was talking metaphysics-- not that the equation could be derived from Vedanta. (Their Vedic science-- like vedic mathematics, neither Vedic nor mathematics.) By and large I have found traditional scholars disappointing-- they seem to think that quoting Sanskrit shlokas is proof.    I find it interesting that Hindu religious leaders and Indian leftist intellectuals seem to suffer from the same complex-- they crave acceptance by Western, especially Whites as 'liberal'. This sense of inferiority extends even towards pseudo-whites like Indian Christian leaders.  ..." This one below is a very important thread, and we carry Rajiv's responses almost completely since it explains the asymmetrical mechanics of digestion. January 19 Vatapi and Inculturation/Digestion While reading BD, it reminded me of an amusing puranic story of Agastya and Vatapi that I heard as a kid. The story goes something like this: "Vatapi was the younger brother of the Daitya Ilvala, the ruler of the city of Manimati. He was a shape-shifter. His brother was denied a boon by the sage Agastya, and hence the brothers became the enemies of Brahmanas. When any Brahmana guest arrived at the palace, Vatapi would transform into a ram. Ilvala would then cause the meat of this ram to be served to the unsuspecting guest. Once the Brahmana had eaten his fill, Ilvala would utter a magical incantation, and say, "O Vatapi, come out!". Vatapi would then emerge whole and alive from the belly of the guest, killing that Brahmana in that process. When the sage Agastya again visited the city of Manimati, the brothers tried to pull the same trick on him. However, the wily sage, rubbed his stomach and said, "Vatapi Jirnobhava" or "May Vatapi be digested!", before Ilvala could utter the magical incantations, and Vatapi was slain. Chastened, Ilvala gave many gifts and made peace with th sage." Now this story can be compared with the digestion process. The evangelical Churches or the western scholarship act like the Vatapi and Ilvala brothers. First they appear to respect the native culture. They let themselves get adopted to gain confidence or power over their prey. Western scholars learn the language, philosophy, tradition, etc in this first stage. Once the infiltration is complete, they burst open the native culture and traditions with a U Turn.... ... The need today, is for a savior in the form of Agastya... Senthil: Swamy Vivekananda's speech in Chicago first used the concept "All religions lead to same God".. Can we consider this as an attempt of getting digested?  Or is it that the christians twisted this to digest us? Rajiv comment: Your language above suggests as if Swami Vivekananda might deliberately have intended to get digested. Let us separate intentions from actual effect. One may have good intentions but one's actions might have the opposite effect. The mistake swamiji did is that HE FAILED TO ATTACK THE HISTORY CENTRISM OF CHRISTIANITY. That one item would prevent any digestion of Hinduism into Christianity. In fact, the reverse would have happened. With Jesus' significance devoid of any history centrism, one would also automatically undermine the rest of the Nicene Creed. Reduced to a set of teachings only, there is little left in Christianity that Hinduism does not already have. Try in a debate asking the Christian opponent that you will accept the ethical teachings if he drops the history centrism. His cover of sameness will fall apart. Please watch carefully the video my by discussion with Mark Tully. This is my message - how our representatives in public encounters must get re-educated. Swami V was a brilliant man but he did not spend enough time with westerners debating them and being in their midst to study them ....  after his death his organization has slipped into getting digested. But recently some senior monks have discussed with me with an open mind and are reading BD intensely. Julie: "The Bahu of Bengal": My take is that the RKM has made too much about Sri Ramakrishna's forays into other religions…Sri Ramakrishna's forays into other religions were highly unorthodox and last only a few days: for most of his life, Sri Ramaskrishna was content to be a priest of Maa Kali. I don't necessarily agree that Sri Ramakrishna was seeking a "reverse digestion." Rajiv comment: I agree with this comment.   Arun posts: Americans well understood that Swami Vivekananda was undermining Christianity.  (note: the publisher on www.ramakrishnavivekananda.info says that the spelling is as in the original) Quote: MANNERS AND CUSTOMS IN INDIA (Appeal-Avalanche, January 21, 1894) Swami Vive Kananda, the Hindoo monk, delivered a lecture at La Salette Academy [Memphis] yesterday afternoon. Owing to the pouring rain, a very small audience was present. The subject discussed was "Manners and Customs in India." Vive Kananda is advancing theories of religious thought which find ready lodgment in the minds of some of the most advanced thinkers of this as well as other cities of America. His theory is fatal to the orthodox belief, as taught by the Christian teachers. It has been the supreme effort of Christian America to enlighten the beclouded minds of heathen India, but it seems that the oriental splendor of Kananda's religion has eclipsed the beauty of the old-time Christianity, as taught by our parents, and will find a rich field in which to thrive in the minds of some of the better educated of America.. ..." Rajiv responds to Arun's post: "Arun makes a very important point below: There is an initial period in all UTurns and digestions in which it appears that both sides are equally impacted with a sort of merger of the two. So the orthodoxy complains from each side because of what are seen as compromises. This is what Christian orthodoxy at Swami Vivekananda's time complained about. But one must assess the encounter based on long term impact and not just short term. This applies also to many similar movements today that in the short run seem to be spreading dharma into the west - i.e. the sort of things celebrated in "American Veda" - but that in the long run are part of the digestive tract into Western Universalism. After Swami Vivekananda's era, the RK Mission / Vedanta Society in USA under Swami Parmananda changed into digestible form. This swami became immensely popular among liberal white Americans with his "sameness" message, even though he imagined that he was digesting Christianity into dharma. If X = dharma and Y = Christianity, what happened was: X + Y= Y enhanced. The X got digested into Y and enhanced Y in the process. Let me explain further. It is the history centrism of Christianity that prevents it from getting digested, and that in turn digests the other. Imagine a Hindu and a Christian who agree to accept each other's faiths and combine both - as happens in many marriages when they raise the kids with both religions. Here is the resulting set of ideals and practices in the combined version: From Christianity: Nicene Creed = history centrism of Original Sin + Jesus' virgin birth + Jesus' exclusivity as ONLY redeemer/saviour + Jesus' sacrifice to redeem all sins of those who accept him + ... From dharma (as commonly taught today, lacking any items that resist digestion): Pranayama, vegetarian diet, namasker, symbols, certain holidays, etc. Now imagine the person who fully performs both lists of items above. Who is he in terms of faith? He is a Christian enhanced with certain Hindu practices digested. Some are good for his health, others are nice symbolically making him seem very liberal and open minded in order to impress naive Hindus. Accepting Jesus as the one and only SAVIOUR (from Original Sin) is the game changer in favor of Christianity. You can get all the namaskars you want, all the bindis and dhotis being worn, all the sitting on the floor and eating with hands, all the celebrations of Hindu rituals and holidays. IT MAKES NO DIFFERENCE TO THE SOLIDLY ENTRENCHED CHRISTIAN. Such a hybrid is a Christian. Hinduism is made redundant because it becomes a subset of the Christian, i.e offers nothing else that is not already digested. This is why I request people to re-read chapter 2 until history centrism is very well understood. Whats the remedy for us? This question is what drove me for 20 years because I lived in the crisscrossed world of Hinduism and Western religious ideas. This is how my R & D led to the differences explained in BD. These differences are what resist getting digested. They cannot be tolerated by the Nicene Creed. So long as you hang firm to these differences you cannot be digested into Chritianity. This makes it important for gurus to teach these differences to western and Indian followers. .... So do not accept that person X "has become very Hindu friendly" on the basis that s/he does yoga, has an image of a deity, turned vegetarian, does namasker, dresses like traditional Indians, has a guru, and so forth. Ask the HARD QUESTIONS. Dont settle for attempts to evade these questions. But before you can do this kind of encounter (like the one I had with Mark Tully, and the one I was prepared to have with Clooney but he chose to not take me on), you need to do lots of homework. This includes the purushartha of studying the other (purva paksha) and the anubhava (experience) of dozens of encounters as your way to practice and learn from experience. Every guru ought to go through this tapas." [there are several other responses and discussions in this thread. read in the e-group] January 20 Economic Historian's special lecture of BEING DIFFERENT in Bangalore Dear all, Greetings!!! I am glad to invite you for the special talk by Sri. Shankar Jaganathan, Economic Historian, on "Rajiv Malhotra's book Being Different: ... January 20 Opportunity for sponsoring book gifts at World Sanskrit Conference, In January, 2012, the Indian Govt and various Sanskrit Universities are holding a World Sanskrit Conf, the largest of its kind. They have confirmed 1,000... January 20 Re: Itihasa versus history-centrism: Who is a Brahamana Does our scriptures suggest that Varna is a birth right? Far from it. There has been lot of discussions about caste and varna. Summarizing Kshatriya, Brahmana,... January 21 Short report: The India trip thus far Thus far there have been 5 extremely fruitful events on BD in this trip: 1. Univ. of Delhi: Yesterday, I was given the afternoon slot to address a large... January 22 FW: [RajivMalhotraDiscussion] Itihasa versus history-centrism There are a couple of "Vish(s)" out there in this group, so I am not sure which Vish was addressed. but I found my email to the group, tacked, so I will go...