are in general agreement that withthe fall of the Roman Empire Europe

plunged in to the Dark Ages, whichwere characterised by religiouspassion, destruction of temples andmonuments, burning of books,vandalisation of art, and killing ofnon-believers. This process wasrepeated later in the persecution ofthe indigenous peoples in the NewWorld, and the abuse of the natives

of Europe’s colonies. As religiousdogma ruled, science retreated.

Some see the beginning of theAge of Enlightenment in the 18thcentury with the dawning of thescientific revolution. Sectarian viewswere increasingly replaced byhumanism. Science itself beganlooking for universal principles, not

BEING HINDUCOVER STORY BEING HINDUCOVER STORY

n Subhash Kak

Six Steps to theRenaissance

INDIAN sciences are universal and they havewithin them the power to inspire people to findtheir true potential and find meaning in life, asalso having the potential for the next advances inboth physical and biological sciences

HISTORIANS

Opinion

March 18, 2018 l Organiser l 29

Six Steps to the_Org_Mukta_Organiser 16-Mar-18 3:14 PM Page 3

1

30 l Organiser l March 18, 2018

BEING HINDUCOVER STORY BEING HINDUCOVER STORY

2

just ideas rooted with earth as thecenter of a universe seen through atheological lens. However, the searchfor this universal knowledge hasbeen a slow process that is still notaccepted by all societies, and thereremain nations where free thought isbanned and non-believers areoppressed.

In one sense, the modernrenaissance is the journey to thediscovery of consciousness, which isparadoxical for we experience realityin it and yet are happy to be obliviousof its nature. In the West, theuniverse was seen as a machine,and this goes back to Aristotle andthe Greeks who saw the physicalworld consisting of four kinds ofelements, earth, water, fire, and air.This model continued in Newton’sclockwork model of the solar system.Indian thought, in contrast, has a fifthelement, ākāśa, which is the mediumfor inner light and consciousness.

The modern renaissance has hadto go beyond the machine model ofthe universe and bring in theobserver into the picture. This hashappened in different fields atdifferent times and it is a process thatis still continuing. The new ideas firstarose in the field of philosophy andthen spread to literature and otherdomains of thought. Perhaps the lastscientific field they were accepted inwas Physics where absolute spaceand time were dethroned by relativitytheory and quantum mechanics inthe early decades of the twentiethcentury.

Indian ideas were and are centralto the ongoing renaissance. We arenot talking here of mathematics andthe sign for zero, binary numbers ofPingala, or the idea of immunisationof Ayurveda, but even morefundamental ideas that have shapedthe recent past and continue to exertpowerful influence in all fields. Thebest way to see this is to look at itsmost fundamental foundations andone finds they are precisely thesciences (śāstras) associated with thedarśanas. Here’s a quick summary:

The idea of structure of systems,such as abstract systems likelanguage and social organisation, isbased on Mīmāṁsā and thephilosophy of Sanskrit grammariansgoing back to Pāṇini, and of BharataMuni’s Nāṭya Śhāstra.

Pāṇini’s work showed the way tothe development of modern linguisticsthrough the efforts of scholars suchas Franz Bopp, Ferdinand deSaussure, Leonard Bloomfield, andRoman Jakobson. Bopp was apioneering scholar of the comparative

grammars of Sanskrit and other Indo-European languages. Ferdinand deSaussure wrote his Ph.D. on Del’emploi du génitif absolu en Sanscrit(1880) and lectured on Sanskrit inParis and Geneva. In his mostinfluential work, Course in GeneralLinguistics (Cours de linguistiquegénérale), that was publishedposthumously (1916), he took theidea of the use of formal rules ofSanskrit grammar and applied themto general linguistic phenomena.Bloomfield, having studied Pāṇini,contributed much to structurallinguistics, applying these ideas notonly to Indo-European historicallinguistics but also to Austronesianand native American languages.

The structure of Pāṇini‘s grammarcontains a meta-language, meta-rules, and other technical devicesthat make this system effectivelyequivalent to the most powerfulcomputing machine. Although it didn’tdirectly contribute to the developmentof computer languages, it influencedlinguistics and mathematical logicwhich, in turn, gave birth to computerscience. The works of Pāṇini and

Bharata Muni also presage themodern field of semiotics which is thestudy of signs and symbols as asignificant part of communications.Bharata’s Nāṭyaśāstra has muchmaterial on acting, signs, gestures,and posture each one of whichcommunicates its own specificmeaning to the spectator.

The search for universal laws ofgrammar underlying the diversity oflanguages is ultimately anexploration of the very nature of thehuman mind. The other side to thisgrammar is the idea that a formalsystem cannot describe realitycompletely since it leaves out theself. As human society evolves, signsand symbols in use lose their originalmeanings, manners change, andfashions come and go.

Modern logic and machine theorythat led to the development ofcomputers and artificialintelligence goes back to thetradition of Navya Nyāya.

That Indian thought was central tothe development of machine theoryis asserted by Mary Boole—the wifeof George Boole, inventor of modernlogic—who herself was a leadingscience writer in the 19th century.She claimed that George Everest,who lived for a long time in India andwhose name was eventually appliedto the world’s highest peak, was theintermediary of the Indian ideas andthey influenced not only her husbandbut the other two leading scientists inthe attempt to mechanise thought:Augustus de Morgan and CharlesBabbage.She says inher essayon IndianThought andWesternScience inthe 19thCentury(1901):“Think whatmust havebeen the

Six Steps to the_Org_Mukta_Organiser 16-Mar-18 3:14 PM Page 4

43March 18, 2018 l Organiser l 31

effect of the intense Hinduising ofthree such men as Babbage, DeMorgan, and George Boole on themathematical atmosphere of 1830–65.” She further speculates thatthese ideas influenced thedevelopment of vector analysis andmodern Mathematics.

Indian logic texts were translatedinto English by H T Colebrooke in1824. De Morgan himself admitted tothe significance of Indian logic in hisbook (1860): “The two races whichhave founded the mathematics,those of the Sanscrit and Greeklanguages, have been the two whichhave independently formed systemsof logic.”

Some scholars have suggestedthat knowledge of the results of theKerala School of Astronomy andMathematics (14th to 16th centuries),which first developed Calculusessential to modern science, wastransmitted to Europe through thetrade route from Kerala by tradersand Jesuit missionaries.

Much prior to this, Mohsin Fani'sDabistani-i Madhahib (17th Century)claimed that Kallisthenes, who was inAlexander's party, took logic textsfrom India and the beginning of theGreek tradition of logic must be seenin this material. In Indian logic, mindsare not empty slates; the veryconstitution of the mind providessome knowledge of the nature of theworld. The four pramā�as throughwhich correct knowledge is acquiredare direct perception, inference,analogy, and verbal testimony.

Indian Physics that goes back toKaṇāda not only has laws ofmotion but also a place forobservers.

The Indian Physics tradition, withthe laws of motion alreadycharacterised in the Vaiśehika Sutras(500 BCE) and the idea of relativityof motion enunciated by Aryabhata(500 CE) perhaps did not directlyinfluence discovery of physical lawsin Europe. But Indian ideas thatplaced the observer at centre

prefigure the conceptual foundationsof modern Physics, as isacknowledged by the greatestphysicists of the twentieth century.

In my own study of the Vaiśehika(as in my translation titled Matter andMind (2016)), I have becomeconvinced that Kanāda is perhapsthe greatest physicist before Newton.He anticipated much of Newton in hislaws of motion and he spoke ofinvariants. Further, he attemptedsomething that no physicist to datehas dared to do: he created a formalsystem that includes space, time,matter, as well as observers. He alsopostulated four types of atoms, twowith mass (like proton and electron)and two without mass (like neutrinoand photon).

The problem of observers is oneof the major unsolved areas ofPhysics and my own sense is thatIndian ideas will play an importantrole in the progress in this field.

Cosmology both at the personaland the cosmic levels. Sāṅkhya.

The Rigveda speaks of theuniverse being infinite in size. Afamous mantra speaks of how takinginfinity out of infinity leaves itunchanged. This indicates thatparadoxical properties of the notionof infinity were known. The evolutionof the universe is according to cosmiclaw. Since it cannot arise out ofnothing, the universe must beinfinitely old. Since it must evolve,there are cycles of chaos and orderor creation and destruction. Theworld is also taken to be infinitely old.

Beyond the solar system, othersimilar systems were postulated. Aninfinite size of the universe logicallyled to the acceptance of manyworlds.

The Sānkhya system describesevolution at cosmic and individuallevels. It views reality as beingconstituted of puru�a,consciousness that is all-pervasive,motionless, unchangeable, withoutdesire who at the individual level isthe sāksin, the witness, and prak�ti,which is the phenomenal world.Prakriti is composed of three differentstrands (gunas or characteristics) ofsattva, rajas, and tamas, which aretransparency, activity, and inactivity,respectively.

Evolution begins by purusa andprakrti creating mahat (Nature in itsdynamic aspect). From mahat evolvebuddhi (intelligence) and manas(mind). Buddhi and manas in thelarge scale are Nature’s intelligenceand mind. From buddhi comesindividualised ego consciousness(ahankāra)and the fivetanmātras(subtleelements) ofsound,touch, sight,taste, smell.From themanasevolve thefive senses(hearing, touching, seeing, tasting,smelling), the five organs of action(with which to speak, grasp, move,procreate, evacuate), and the fivegross elements (ether, air, fire, water,earth).

The evolution in Sānkhya is anecological process determinedcompletely by Nature. It differs frommodern evolution theory in that itpresupposes a universalconsciousness. In reality, modernevolution also assigns intelligence toNature in its drive to select certainforms over others as well as in theevolution of intelligence itself.

Six Steps to the_Org_Mukta_Organiser 16-Mar-18 3:14 PM Page 5

6

32 l Organiser l March 18, 2018

BEING HINDUCOVER STORY

5Yoga. Mind-body medicine. Self-actualization.

The Yoga revolution is occurringnow all over the world. For many, it isabout health and well-being but thatis only a doorway to the next step ofasking as to who the self is and therelationship between it and the body.

Patañjali’s Yoga-sūtra (see mybook Mind and Self (2016) for a newcommentary) is a systematicexposition on the nature of the mind.

It is logical in its method and itquestions the naïve understanding ofthe world. Patañjali takes it that thereis a single reality and the multiplicitywe see in it is a consequence of theprojections of our different minds.Therefore the challenge is to undo theworkings of the mind to experiencereality in its most directness.

The Consciousness Revolution.Vedānta.

The Vedic texts claim to beātmavidyā, “science of self” or“consciousness science” and theyalso provide a framework to decodeits narrative, establishing its centralconcern with consciousness.

Until recently, the question ofconsciousness was considered to lieoutside of the scope of science and,consequently, the Indian texts on thesubject were not properly examined.Scientific attitudes towardsconsciousness have changed due tothe advances in neuroscience andbecause modern physics andcomputer science must confront thequestion of the observer.

In the Vedic view, reality is unitaryat the deepest level since otherwisethere would be chaos. This reality iscalled Brahman, which engendersand, paradoxically, transcends the

mind/matter split. It is identical toconsciousness at the cosmic scaleand it informs individual minds.Turning focus to the very nature ofthe mind provides insight aboutconsciousness.

Since language is linear, whereasthe unfolding of the universe takesplace in a multitude of dimensions,language is limited in its ability todescribe reality. Because of thislimitation, reality can only beexperienced and never describedfully. All descriptions of the universelead to logical paradox, and Brahmanis the category transcending alloppositions.

Vedic ritual is a symbolic retellingof this worldview. Knowledge isclassified in two ways: the higher orunified and the lower or dual. Thehigher knowledge concerns theperceiving subject (consciousness),whereas the lower knowledgeconcerns objects. The higherknowledge can be arrived at onlythrough intuition and meditation onthe paradoxes of the outer world. The

lower knowledge is analytical and itrepresents standard sciences(śhāstra) with its many branches. Inaddition, darśhana representsphilosophy where the problem of selfis taken together with some aspect ofouter reality. There is acomplementarity between the higherand the lower, each being necessaryto define the other. Thiscomplementarity mirrors the onebetween mind and body.

ProspectsLet’s now briefly look at the prospectsof this knowledge from theperspectives of contemporary societyand technology. There is excitement,and fear, that machines will replacehumans at literally all jobs. Thatwould save humanity from workadaydrudgery, but it would also shakemany societal foundations. A life ofno work and only play may turn outto be a horrible dystopia.

Conscious machines would alsoraise troubling legal and ethicalproblems. Would a consciousmachine be a “person” under lawand be liable if its actions hurtsomeone, or if something goeswrong? To think of a more frighteningscenario, might these machinesrebel against humans and wish toeliminate us altogether?

Researchers are divided onwhether these sorts of hyperawaremachines will ever exist. There’s alsodebate about whether machinescould or should be called “conscious”in the way we think of humans, andeven some animals, as conscious.Some of the questions have to dowith technology; others have to dowith what consciousness actually is.

Is awareness enough?Most computer scientists think that

Philosophers ofscience believe

that these modernquantum physicsviews ofconsciousness haveparallels in ancientphilosophy. Big-C islike the theory ofmind in Vedanta onpar with thephysicaluniverse

Six Steps to the_Org_Mukta_Organiser 16-Mar-18 3:14 PM Page 6

March 18, 2018 l Organiser l 33

consciousness is a characteristic thatwill emerge as technology develops.Some believe that consciousnessinvolves accepting new information,storing and retrieving old informationand cognitive processing of it all intoperceptions and actions. If that’s right,then one day machines will indeedbe the ultimate consciousness. Onthe other hand, there are physicistsand philosophers who say there’ssomething more about humanbehavior that cannot be computed bya machine. Creativity, for example,and the sense of freedom peoplepossess don’t appear to come fromlogic or calculations. Yet these arenot the only views of whatconsciousness is, or whethermachines could ever achieve it.

Quantum viewsAnother viewpoint on consciousnesscomes from quantum theory, which isthe deepest theory of Physics.According to the orthodoxCopenhagen Interpretation,consciousness and the physical worldare complementary aspects of thesame reality. When a person observes,or experiments on, some aspect of thephysical world, that person’s consciousinteraction causes discernible change.

Since it takes consciousness as agiven and no attempt is made to deriveit from Physics, the CopenhagenInterpretation may be called the “big-C”view of consciousness, where it is athing that exists by itself—although itrequires brains to become real. Thisview was popular with the pioneers ofquantum theory such as Niels Bohr,Werner Heisenberg and ErwinSchrödinger.

The interaction betweenconsciousness and matter leads toparadoxes that remain unresolvedafter 80 years of debate. A well-known example of this is the paradoxof Schrödinger’s cat, in which a cat isplaced in a situation that results in itbeing equally likely to survive ordie—and the act of observation itselfis what makes the outcome certain.

The opposing view is that

consciousness emerges frombiology, just as biology itselfemerges from chemistry which, inturn, emerges from physics. We callthis less expansive concept ofconsciousness “little-C.” It agreeswith the neuroscientists’ view thatthe processes of the mind areidentical to states and processes ofthe brain. It also agrees with a morerecent interpretation of quantumtheory motivated by an attempt to ridit of paradoxes, the Many WorldsInterpretation, in which observersare a part of the mathematics ofphysics.

Philosophers of science believethat these modern quantum physicsviews of consciousness haveparallels in ancient philosophy. Big-Cis like the theory of mind inVedanta—in which consciousness isthe fundamental basis of reality, onpar with the physical universe. Thepioneers of quantum theory wereaware of this linkage with Vedanta.

Little-C, in contrast, is quite similarto Buddhism. Although the Buddha

chose not to address the question ofthe nature of consciousness, hisfollowers declared that mind andconsciousness arise out ofemptiness or nothingness.

Big-C and scientific discoveryA dramatic piece of evidence in

favor of big-C consciousness existingall on its own is the life of self-taughtIndian mathematician SrinivasaRamanujan, who died in 1920 at theage of 32. His notebook, which waslost and forgotten for about 50 yearsand published only in 1988, containsseveral thousand formulas, withoutproof in different areas ofmathematics, that were well ahead oftheir time. Furthermore, the methodsby which he found the formulasremain elusive. He himself claimedthat they were revealed to him by agoddess while he was asleep.

The concept of big-Cconsciousness raises the questionsof how it is related to matter, and howmatter and mind mutually influenceeach other. Consciousness alonecannot make physical changes to theworld, but perhaps it can change theprobabilities in the evolution ofquantum processes. The act ofobservation can freeze and eveninfluence atoms’ movements, asphysicists proved in 2015. This mayvery well be an explanation of howmatter and mind interact.

I conclude with a plea to theeducationists. Indian sciences areuniversal and they have within themthe power to inspire people to findtheir true potential and find meaningin life, as also having the potential forthe next advances in both physicaland biological sciences. They oughtto be a part of the school and collegecurricula but are not included there.They are a marvelous gift tohumanity and it is a pity that thosewho are not lucky to learn of them athome have to struggle just to knowwhat they are.

(The writer is an eminent scientist and aprevious Head of Computer Science

Department at Oklahoma State University)

Withcognitive

machinesreplacing humans

at most tasks, thequestion of whatselfhood means willbecome morecentral to our lives.It appears to methat the only wayto find fulfilment inlife will bethroughwisdom ofAtmavidya

Six Steps to the_Org_Mukta_Organiser 16-Mar-18 3:14 PM Page 7