By HG Rasamandal Dasa
Over the past century or so we have seen tremendous information explosion and the scientists in every field have been able to scale newer heights in their pursuits. As more and more research initiatives are underway we see celebrations in the scientific community. The present-day research is getting closer and closer to the smallest unit of creation but at the same time losing what we call the “common-sense” understanding on the subject matter.
Let us take agriculture for instance. Decades ago, the farmer used to be the center of knowledge with regard to his land, soil condition, seeds, weather, growing season, harvesting, pest control, etc. He was all in all and though may not be possessing any qualification according to the present day standards, he was well-equipped for his requirements. He could manage his activity of cultivation based on the knowledge handed over to him from his family environment and confirmed by practical experience. He had the knowledge of weather condition and took advantage of it for sowing seeds and managing irrigation based on moisture condition. He had knowledge when to look for pests and what care to be taken in case of pest incidence. He had full knowledge of the predators in nature and also the available protective mechanism in nature which would not require much external interference. He knew that the yield of crops was dependent on the condition of the soil and he could see a relationship with all the entities in the nature. This means he had a holistic knowledge of what is required in his field of activity. Contrast this with the present day agricultural sciences. Over the decades we have created so many “specialists” and we are adding more and more to the list. We have the breeders, soil scientists, entomologists, pathologists, nematologist, germplasm experts, biochemists, nutritional scientist and of course the sterile laboratories. Each of them are becoming so specialized in their field that they do not understand the relationship that exists between one specialization and the other specialization. It is like the cardiologist, who specializes in his field but does not know what consequences his prescription drugs will have on the lungs, liver or other parts of the body. First it was the anti-biotics and now it is pro-biotics. So the modern education with “specialization” is confining us into narrower and narrower bandwidth of knowledge. Somewhere in the 60’s and 70’s we had the breeders in focus who with some advances in breeding technology established that breeding holds the key to improving crop yields. So they introduced hybrid seeds and with that came the need for use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides. The debate is still on the extent of damage the “green revolution” has caused to the environment in the most exploited northern states of India. With further advances in biotechnology, genetics, molecular biology, the emphasis is on genetically engineered seeds. It is argued that this is the only way that the growing population could be fed in the coming decades. The GM seeds have only thrown open more issues than it seeks to address. As is evident, in the absence of holistic knowledge the implications of introducing such a technology are not known unless its damages manifest at some point of time. A common-sense understanding is enough to establish that chemicals in the direct food chain will cause irreparable damage to health and progeny in the coming decades. From these advances in the knowledge what is imperative is that these are based on the exploitative nature of human nature and become more pronounced due to the influence of “kali”. The move now is towards mechanization or factory farming of food with control vesting with a few corporations or individuals. Meanwhile, the Varnasrama setup is non-exploitative in nature because everything is dovetailed with the design of the Supreme Lord. The farmer tends to understand his relationship with nature and is dependent on it for his needs and he is confident that all his needs will be fulfilled. Because he understands that he is part of the “living nature”, he develops an understanding and respect for it which is lacking now.
Contact: Rasamandal.BRS@pamho.net
Hare Krishna
It was wonderful! how so many things are happening without notice of so called intellectuals and highly educated from esteemed universities,hope Krishna will give some intelligence to these so called scientists and Srila Prabhupada’s famous word RASCALS.
All glories to Srila Prabhupada.
I told this story in another comment but I think it is relevant to share here again.
I once attended a lecture at U.C. Berkeley by the comparative religions professor Houston Smith. He drew a circle on the board and a line through the circle. He asked us, if the circle represents all religious traditions of the world, and the line divides some traditions from others, what is the first line or most basic division we should recognize.
I raised my hand and suggested, “Acceptance or non-acceptance of a personal God.”
He said that was a good response, but he would draw the first line between those traditions which are exclusively oral traditions as opposed to those which have written traditions.
He elaborated, he did not mean in the slightest to suggest that a written tradition is superior.
By having just an oral tradition, the wise elders, shamans or holy men have to become walking embodiments of the tradition. Once we start writing things down, we create a situation where people can specialize, where we can feel comfortable in the knowledge that we can go to the library (or the internet) and find out the answer to some question without having to incorporate all the answers into our own subtle bodies. (Okay, Prof. Smith didn’t say “subtle bodies”. I am giving my interpretation of what I took him to mean.)
I suppose even with an oral tradition, you can specialize to a certain extent. Vyasadeva divided the one Veda into four parts and entrusted it to different sages to be passed along in parampara to their various disciples. But something is lost by such division. No one is a master of everything. [For many centuries this remained an oral tradition learned by rote and handed down through parampara, along with the ability to perform and explain the various rituals and their significance.]
And so we come to the “Questions By The Sages” with which begins the Beautiful Bhagavatam. They wanted Suta Goswami to explain what he had learned from his qualified teachers, what the essence (in one place) of all principles of religion was, and what the highest and best of all Vedic learning, the absolute and ultimate good for all people was, and how the benighted people of kali yuga could make any progress, and about Krishna’s pastimes, and those of His multi-incarnations.
The person Bhagavata can explain the answer to these questions, having thoroughly assimilated that knowledge, being a “goswami” and freed from all vice. See, S.B. 1.1.6.
“The acarya or the goswami must be well acquainted with all these literatures. To hear and explain them is more important than reading them. One can assimilate the knowledge of the revealed scriptures only by hearing and explaining. Hearing is called sravana, and explaining is kalled kirtana. The two processes of sravana and kirtana are of primary importance to progressive spiritual life. Only one who has properly grasped the transcendental knowledge from the right source by submissive hearing can properly explain the subject.” (S.B. 1.1.6, Purport)
There is something like this requirement to master at least one field or branch of knowledge in the modern Ph.D. system. That is, before one can be accepted as a doctoral “colleague” in a particular field, one must defend a dissertation and demonstrate that one has become proficient in the subject and has the ability to make contributions to the advancement of that particular department of knowledge.
But it is a different concept from being a complete embodiment of what one needs to know to be a successful and virtuous person. That whole idea of a person who embodies the qualities of an ideal human is kind of lost in the modern world, among the jumble of various fields of expertise and specialized knowledge.
Scientific knowledge is, for modern civilization, strangely cut off from ethical behavior, as if facts and moral values belong in two entirely separate categories.
Varnasrama civilization means that there is a unified vision of nature and the ideals of various types of human workers (according to the social and economic roles played by different parts of the social body).
This reminds me very much of classical western traditions such as Stoics, who saw ethics as the fruit of their system of logic (the wall) and physics-theology (the cultivated field).
Or even in Plato’s Republic, a very foundational book of European culture, the idea of the social body with head, arms, trunk and legs is there, as is rule by “rajarsis”, translated in English as philosopher-kings.
Not that we necessarily should reject modern knowledge and go back to some kind of medieval civilization where we do away with modern advances in agriculture, medicine, transportation (at lease those innovations which really are useful). That might be phalgu vairagya, and we do not have to adopt a vow like Amish do of not using new technology.
But we definitely need to assimilate Bhagavata culture through hearing and chanting.