 This lecture is titled Contemporary Indian Writers – The Search for Creativity. In this, we will talk about three interrelated ideas. In part one, we will look at generative approach for creative writing, which we have discussed earlier also. This involves searching for new themes and new concerns. Part two will deal with decolonization and creativity and we will present the views of three very important scholars on this subject, Gyanprakash, Shiv Vishwanathan and Ram Subramanyan. In particular, we will look at Gyanprakash's reference to Siddhanta Shri Romani in his book, which we will of course, discuss soon. The most interesting part of this lecture is the response that Professor Ram Subramanyan has provided and I hope our search will continue. To begin with, let us go over our earlier discussion of generative approach for creative writing, in which we have pointed out to you that really there is nothing ready made available to anyone who is interested in writing and indeed all the joy and also the excitement of this process will be lost if something is ready made and you just fit into a pre-given formula. While talking about the evolving sense of the cell, we had also talked about Ericsson's psychosocial model. However, I think that kind of model offers some help because it talks about the universal patterns that are applicable to young people and how the institutions around them shape them. Of course, the vitality and health of those institutions as well as the sort of creative sense of one's own self, these are very vital ingredients in the process. However, this psychosocial model does offer certain clarity in order to help us accept the kind of complex construction of the self that we undertake in the process of writing. We pointed out to you how Albert Camus and Margaret Atwood also undertook this journey in their own distinctive way and these are great professional writers. However, even if you are a person who wants to write, I think these are models that one should look at, but at the same time one should look at one's own inner world as carefully as possible. It is in this perspective that we really want to offer you the view of some of the scholars in terms of our own starting point for the search. The reason I have placed it within decolonization process is related to the fact that this is a period where the process of creativity was greatly intensified due to the kind of questions that were posed before the nation, before each individual in the nation. It is within this framework that I want to start with the provocative statement by Shiv Vishwanathan first, who is a very important anthropologist of science. That is how many people describe his work. He has looked at scientific institutions in India, not only in terms of the governmental institutions, but a lot of work that the NGOs have been undertaking. So, let us look at what he has to say about this period of decolonization and this is part of our search for creativity, which as I pointed out, it was renewed due to the process of decolonization. What it did is to help us understand that there is this immense diversity of Indian systems of thought and in a way rediscovered it because all these systems were challenged by the British notions and these were notions that were calculated to really make a subservient. So, in that sense, they really do not represent the western tradition in its own diversity also. It is kind of very calculated and therefore, we have to understand what kind of tussles ensued in this process. So, now let me move to the next slide. Let me look at Shiv Vishwanathan's point of view, which he expressed in a celebration of difference, an essay titled or subtitled, Science and Democracy in India, which was published in 1998. Do look, I have a look at this full essay because there is always this difficulty that when you extrapolate a statement, it takes on a slightly different color. But I think what he points out is very important, although he has his own inimitable style, which sometimes provokes a lot of discussion and I think it is intended to do so. He says, India today stands as one of the world's great clearinghouses and composed heaps for ideas. It keeps alive some defeated ideas without consigning them to the museum and reinvents others through translation. This is best seen in the attitude to its three greatest imports, democracy, the English language and modern western science. So, two of these things we are already invested in and the third two I think we are part of the democratic process. So, then he goes on to say, for Indians these were not alien ideas to be handled with suspicion, but celebrations, which they had to internalize and reinvent for themselves. So, that is where the tussle is, that these ideas had to be internalized and reinvented. Indeed the confidence and openness with which India greeted and scrutinized science constitutes one of the most fascinating chapters in the encounter between science and democracy. A very, very thought provoking and important idea and indeed we will actually build on this essay further in the next lecture also. So, I hope you would have time to read this essay carefully and start reflecting on some of the observations through your own experience of these institutions. The next scholar whose work we are looking at is Gyan Prakash, who is a very important historian. What he has done in this famous study titled, Another Reason, Science and the Imagination of Modern India is to look at the place of science as a discipline as a metaphor as an idea in modern India. He tries to reveal through historical evidence the British attempt to consolidate its power through the European ideas of modernity. And also he, you know, sort of suggests that this kind was a kind of imposition. So, there was a lot of tussle between what we knew and what we were, we had been told to look at more seriously. So, in the process, the process of translation ensued which got connected to science as a sign of modernity and therefore, there was a kind of cultural authority of science as a legitimating sign of rationality and progress. So, what I have done is to actually extrapolate a particular text from the third chapter, part one of Gyan Prakash's book, so that we can try and understand the implications of some of the ideas. Now, the particular reference that we are making here is to Gholsar, which was actually written in 1841 by Omkar Bhatt. And let me give you a bit of the context for this writer. There was an English gentleman who introduced on an experimental basis this whole idea of starting a secular classroom in which actually the siddhantas were taught in order to teach mathematics and astronomy. And he taught it through this very important ancient text, but he brought it to a point where then the students were introduced to the ideas of Copernicus, Newton and Galileo. Thereby, somehow suggesting that although siddhants are very useful, but at the same time because they also are often clubbed with the Puranas, the Puranas are really not important, they are insignificant because they really contain myths and historical legends that take you away from scientific learning. So, this seems to be the kind of ethos in which a lot of controversies were generated when people began to see what Wilkinson was doing. And the particular person we are referring to Omkar Bhatt, he wrote this pamphlet in Hindi in which the teacher and the student, they discussed some of these ideas and I think the teacher is trying to prove the superiority of the western scientific system. Now, of course, would like you to read the original in detail in order to understand it fully, but at the same time for our purpose we will extrapolate this particular statement from Gyan Prakash. This particular statement is not made by either the teacher or the student, but by Gyan Prakash, who says while presenting these different conceptions of the earth, the text declares its commitment to scientific understanding. So, this is with reference to Bogolsaar. It does not dismiss the sage Vyas, but describes the Puranas which he narrated as great poetry and wonderful sketches of God's play, though not science. And then he goes on to say that Bhaskara Charya's theory on the other hand is scientific, not only because it converges with the British view, but also because as this text proceeds to claim the origin of the Siddhants goes back to Surya, the sun god who narrated the Surya Siddhant to Mayasur, a Puranic artisan demon. So, while reading this text in order to understand the zest of this period, the demands of this period, I was somewhat, you know, captivated by this reference to Mayasur. And I did not really have a way of unpacking this allusion at all, because I am not really well versed with the text or history of science in India in those stages. Therefore, what we did is to request one of our colleagues, Professor Ram Subramanian to actually see if some of our takes in terms of the mythic theme and also its multiple associations including the association of makers, fabricators with demons, indeed what he thought about it. And therefore, we indeed are very, very happy to have him here. He would respond to this allusion and also to the frame of reference in terms of science, scientific ideas and different aspects of how these were conveyed in the ancient period under discussion. So, we have the privilege of having Professor Ram Subramanian who himself is a scholar of Indian science, mathematics and Sanskrit. He will unpack this allusion for us and indeed, I think this will add to our journey in extremely significant ways. We will take up further discussion after his conversation with you. Thank you. So, in the recent past, some efforts have been made by historians to try and understand how the Indian society tried to integrate the modern science along with their own sciences. So, in this connection, some study has been made with regard to the observations made by certain authors around 19th century wherein, so they try to see how we will be able to sort of integrate the ideas that emerge from modern science with the ideas that have been represented in some of the ancient scriptures, particularly scientific scriptures related to astronomy and mathematics. So, in this connection, I would like to say a few observations which have been made by certain modern historians, so where they try to interpret the notion of divine revelation that one finds in many of these Hindu scriptures. For instance, one of the most important texts in Indian astronomy is Surya Siddhanta, so which actually begins with the story of Mayasur receiving the knowledge of the motion of planets from the sun god itself. So, we will try and understand what this divine revelation means and how this divine revelation has been understood by Indian astronomers themselves. So, the way I would like to present this, we start with the description of the peninsular Mayasur and how the sun god reveals the knowledge of Jyotish Shastra, so to Mayasur. And then we proceed with the interpretation of what one means by divine origin and the grace of god. Then we will see that this knowledge per se is though it is ascribed to divine being, so how do the Indian astronomers as well as the philosophers try to understand what this divine revelation is and then, so we move on to a specific topic, so wherein a question is being raised as earth is being a heavy body. So, all the heavy bodies are falling in space, so does the earth stand on its own or is it supposed to fall, does it require some supporting agency and how the notion of eclipse has been considered by Indian astronomers and then, we see certain allegations which have been made on astronomers and mathematicians and then, we conclude the few remarks. So, coming to the story of Mayasur, so the Surya Siddhanta actually begins with the following words, so after paying his obeisance to the god, so then he starts with the story of Mayasur wherein, he describes the penance done by Mayasur. So, these are the second and third verses of the Surya Siddhanta, so wherein he says that there was Asura called Mayasura, so if we were to trace the mythology, so one finds in Ramayana, so this Mandodari wife of Ravana is supposed to be the daughter of Mayasura, so Mayonama Mahasura, so this Mayasura was though demonic, I mean he was endued with great skills and therefore, people call him an artisan, so artisan them and maya, so at one point of time he was so curious to know, so how the planets are moving in the sky, so how things are to be understood, so he says jinyasu, the poet says jinyasa actually means a craving for knowledge, jinyasu jnana muttamam, he wanted to attain the supreme knowledge and therefore, he did severe austerities, tapas te pe sudushcharam. So, the reason for doing this penance is to obtain the jyotisham gathikaranam, so to understand the gathis basically motion, so jyotisham gathihi, so jyotisham actually means a certain branch of knowledge wherein we study the luminary objects per se, see there is a common misunderstanding that the term jyotisha refers to astrology which is not quite true, so jyotisham the very word jyotisha springs from jyuti, jyutru jiptau, so basically study of luminary objects. So, then so it proceeds, the text proceeds, so the story basically goes like this, so the sun god, so toshitahat apasahiham, so the sun god apparently, so comes and then reveals himself to mayasura and then he says that I am pleased by your penance, so vijitaste mayabhavahad, I also understand the reason for which you have undertaken this austerities, so I am going to reveal you the knowledge. So, it is a very interesting statement which has been made here, the term kala has various connotations, so kala actually refers to the god of death, kala actually refers to time, so on and so forth, so here the word is what is being stated, so the notion of time that we have 11, 13, 12, 13, etc is all based upon the motion of the planets actually, time per se is an extremely intricate concept, so where physicists are grappling and we do not have a very clear understanding till date, so it has various connotations, but here we will limit our notion of time to those which are defined by the motion of the celestial objects, in fact the very notion of year that we have has to do with the rotation of the earth around the sun or as perceived from us the time taken by the sun to move around the earth once and so on, so the very notion of moon, lunar month and so on and so forth is all basically defined by the motion of the celestial objects and therefore, we find this description kalashrayam nyanam, so it is primarily the motion of the celestial objects that actually gives us the notion of time, if the period where to change the rotational period of the earth where to change, so then this 24 hours will no more be 24 hours and so on, so anyway Jyothisham is basically kalashrayam nyanam and the sun god, so as the episode goes, the sun apparently tells mayasura that if you were to approach anywhere near you, then you will be no more existing, you will be burnt and therefore, you will not be able to bear the heat and therefore, I will employ somebody else to reveal this knowledge to you and this person, so reveals the knowledge to mayasura and so on and so forth, this is how the story goes. But this concept of divine revelation is not something which is found in Surya Siddhanta alone, so this will be found in many of these texts in many disciplines as well in the Indian scriptures. How do people understand, so in the Indian tradition itself, what the divine revelation means? So let us take the example of Neelakanta. So Neelakanta was an astronomer, so who lived around 14th, 15th, in fact 15th, 16th century that was his exact period, so he was a brilliant astronomer in the Kerala school wherein he contributed significantly to the improvement of the planetary model. So considering this particular passage from Surya Siddhanta, as well as the passages which have been interpreted differently by different people right from the work of Aryabhatiya by Aryabhata which was in 5th century, Neelakanta discusses at length in a very interesting text called Jyotir Mimamsa. Mimamsa essentially means inquiry, inquiry into the discipline of the science of celestial objects, so Jyotir Mimamsa is the title of the text, so wherein he asked this question. Which actually helps us in trying to understand the kind of methodology which the Indian astronomers have adopted. This is a very important thing to understand today, so there are two things which emerge from this particular passage. One is, is it necessary for us to attribute something to divine origin for the knowledge to be valid forever? So is it necessary for us to call it scientific only if it is divine revelation or do we describe these Indian scriptures as scientific at all if at all they can be described. So all these things emerge from this, so in this particular context for instance in the recent studies which have gone also, so the kind of struggle which some of these historians seem to have undergone or rather academicians in trying to understand the academicians who were there in the 19th century trying to sort of integrate this modern science into their society, so this passage is extremely useful in trying to understand that. For instance in one of the recent studies which has been made by Jnana Prakash, so he tries to cite a certain text called Bhugol Sar by Omkar Bhat which has been written around the middle of 19th century. So this Bhugol Sar as the title indicates, so Bhugola is basically a earth, the sphere in the form of the earth in the form of sphere. Sar is the essence of it, so the motion which is being described, so in the Indian scriptures one finds that sun moves around the earth, so of course this is what one can do through naked eye observations this is the best thing that can be done. So here, so whereas the modern Copernican modern astronomy, so which starts with rather Copernicus around the time of Copernicus, so it presents a picture wherein the sun is at the center and the earth moves around that. So how do we understand this with the picture which has been depicted in the Indian scriptures and in the Indian scriptures as we find, so it has been revealed by some god himself, so how can this go wrong and so on so forth. So there has been a certain confusion which has been there in trying to integrate this modern picture with the ancient, with the pictures given by the ancient scriptures. So in this context, so this Bhat for instance, so in his Bhugola Sar tries to present a certain picture, so wherein he says that the knowledge as revealed by Bhaskara Charya in his Siddhanta Shoromani is scientific for two reasons, one we find certain themes which are described by Siddhanta Shoromani which are in concordance with what has been revealed in the modern science on the one hand and it is also scientific for the reason that it has been revealed by the sun god himself and so on and so forth. So what does one really mean by revelation of knowledge by divine grace? So this is where it goes. So the question is Tapovihi Prasannobrahma. Tapovihi by austerity is Prasannaha pleased Brahma, so a lot, Arya Bhattaya. So Arya Bhattaya, so got this knowledge from Brahma and so for instance in Surya Siddhanta we find the knowledge is revealed through sun god. So if it has been revealed by divine people, so why is it that we need to revise them at all? So this is the question that the student poses. So Tasse Kutaf Parikshanam means why should that be examined? Why should that be examined? This question arises because Brahma is considered to be omniscient. So anything that is revealed by omniscient has to be valid forever and also for the reason that the description about Brahma is Raghad Vesad Yabhava. So he is being free from likes and dislikes. Of course one can be omniscient and if one wants to deceive others, so one can give a wrong information. So Brahma, so he is also free from likes and dislikes and therefore whatever that has been revealed by Brahma to Arya Bhattaya should be valid forever. So if that is so, why is it that we need to examine this at all? So then Neelakanta tries to reply this query in a very interesting way. So he explains a very important concept which one calls as Devata Prasada. In fact, if one looks into these Indian texts, so this Devata Prasada means, so this has been received by Divine Grace. That is what it really means. What does this Devata Prasada mean? So Neelakanta says, Devata Prasada Mati Vaimalaya Hethureva. So when we say Devata Prasada, it essentially means that this person acquires a certain clarity in thinking. So an understanding emerges only if the person keeps on contemplating on something and in the process of contemplation, obviously there will be various thoughts which will come to us. So and one will be definitely in a confused state and till one gets resolved and this resolution which takes place because of a certain clarity which emerges in thinking is what one calls as Devata Prasada. In fact, he goes on further and then says, Natupunaha Brahma Adityova Svayam Agatya Upadishet. So this is a very, very important statement. So in Aravatiya, for instance, it is said that Brahma revealed the knowledge in Surya Siddhanta as I just stated earlier. So it is stated that this Mayasura got it directly from Sun or the one who was employed by Sun. So what does one understand this? So it does not really mean that this Brahma or the Sun God is directly going to come in front of you and then present the knowledge to you. So it is not what is meant by Devata Prasada. So Devata Prasada is Mati Vaimalaya Hethureva. So it is essentially a certain clarity in thinking which emerges because of a certain contemplation which this person does or meditation this person does, whatever it is. So the point that I am trying to drive in here is, so one need not call a work scientific because it is revealed by divine beings. One need not call it scientific because it has to be eternal. In fact, the very notion of science is it is something which is going to change continuously. So if at all you call something as scientific, so it is questionable. So it is not that it is taken for granted forever and therefore it is scientific. But this kind of a confusion is has been there. So which is what is brought out by some of these authors and there are different reasons for that. So which we will see if as we progress further. And one more point that I wanted to drive in here is the episodes which are found. So in some of these works are purely allegorical in nature. So this has been very clearly stated not necessarily in the works on astronomy but in some of the most profound works which have been created in philosophy as well. For instance Adi Shankara himself, so while trying to comment upon some of these Upanishads, so in one or two instances, in a few instances he actually says. So for instance in Kino Upanishad, so while describing a certain story which has been revealed in the Upanishad, so he says, Brahmānādurvijñayatvokthi. So wherein it is stated that this knowledge is something which is so profound and it has not even been understood by some of these divine people. So what does one understand by the statement that it is not understood by divine beings? It only means that the effort that is involved in trying to understand is enormous, yathnādhikya artha. So artha-vada is a certain term which is used in Sanskrit to mean something which is allegorical in nature one should not take it upon at face value. That is what one means by artha-vada. So then we have also a statement in Kathopanishad that right at the beginning Shankara makes Vidyāstutirtha. Akhyāika means Akhyāika Vidyāstutirtha. See Akhyāika is a certain episode which is presented Vidyāstutirtha in order to so price the importance of knowledge. So this particular episode has been integrated with this Upanishad, so it should not be just taken on its face value. So the message that one gets from all this is, so though belief in God's grace is almost all pervasive feature in Indian society, at no point of time there was any confusion among them that this knowledge is directly gained by some divine being and therefore you need not work towards it. So grace is no substitute for hard work in gaining knowledge, so this has been extremely quite clear. And in the very long astronomical tradition, so as we find at no point of time people say that something went wrong, so I am not responsible, so something else is responsible. They just take upon the burden upon themselves and in fact if people were to completely believe in divine grace then there was no need for these astronomers or any of these people in the medicine field or whatever field to work hard to gain this knowledge. In fact in one of his works Neelakanta describing about his grand teacher Prameshwara, he says pancha-pancha sattvarsakalam nirikshya grahanag grahayogadishu parikshya samadrga-nitham cakara. So he makes this statement, so pancha-pancha sattvarsakalam means he worked continuously for 55 years. So nirikshya having made crucial observation then grahanag grahayogadishu parikshya, so having examined so all the results that he has obtained over these years, so then he composed a certain work. So the message is, so this devata prasada has nothing to do with the divine being coming in front of the person and revealing the knowledge. So in fact Aryabhata himself towards the end of the work he says sattva-sajnana-samudrata-samudhritam devata-prasadena sajnanottam arathram mayanimagnanam swamathinava, this is the most important statement. So this is a very poetical description of what Aryabhata did. So towards the end of the work he says, so there has been this ocean of knowledge in front of me, when I say the ocean of knowledge there are right things as well as wrong things, so what he did was to plunge into this ocean. So I plunge into this ocean, so by means of a boat and the boat is none other than my own intellect, so but plunging into this ocean through my own intellect, how do I get this right knowledge, so you can choose anything. So therefore he says devata-prasadena, so through the gaze of God, so that actually means through the clarity which I got through meditation etc. I was able to pull out the right knowledge, so matinava. So this is what one understands by divine revelation. So coming to certain other issues which are discussed in some of these texts in presenting the history, so one often finds several statements which are somewhat infelicitous, so with reference to the contribution made by the Indians. So in this context I just wanted to for instance even Jan Prakash, so he quotes in certain passages from Siddhanta Shri Romani which has been cited by Vonkar Bhatini's own work and this is something which one finds in many other works also in historians. So for instance this is an important question which could come up to anybody's mind, so after all if one finds a heavy body, so the heavy body so falls towards the earth. So one may, so in common man's parlance one can say it is falling down. So when you say falling down, so down, so with reference to something which you have defined as up in space that is a geometrical up and there is a geometrical down and a heavy body cannot be suspended on its own in the space and therefore it falls towards the earth. So if this were the case then obviously earth also being a very very heavy body, so where does it stand in space? So this is the kind of question that arises. So there one finds certain descriptions in some of these Puranas that it is sort of supported by some hood of the serpent and so on and so forth. So these kinds of descriptions in Puranas, so this is where the kind of, so when we talk of, so this creative writing and various things which one speaks of, so there are various ways of describing things. For instance even today in common parlance, so we say that this computer has been affected by virus. When you make this statement, what has this term virus got to do with myself being affected by viral infection? So these are all terms which are used in various contexts in various connotations. So that apart, so here, so this question that arises, so how we said that the earth is supported? So this could have been explained to some people at some stage that it is supported by elephant, it is supported by serpent and so on and so forth, it is supported by tortoise. So these are all certain poetic descriptions of certain things which one finds in Puranas. So in a text on astronomy, so how we said that the astronomers have perceived? So this is a very interesting question, so which has been posed and Bhaskara, so he tries to answer, this is not only answered by Bhaskara Charya, even earlier astronomers have responded to this question. So since Bhaskara Charya Siddhanta Sri Romani is considered to be one of the most profound works and this has been cited often by various historians, so we will just read this verse which is given in Bhaskara Charya Siddhanta Sri Romani and the kind of argument that he presents. So to explain, see after all when one says, so that there is something called proof, so what is really a proof? So proof is an argument which is presented by somebody in order to convince someone else. So the very notion of proof varies from discipline to discipline, it varies from time to time, this is something between one needs to understand. So what acts as a proof at one point of time will no more, we accept it as a proof at a different point of time if more evidences have been procured or we have certain devices which have been invented to prove much more in deeper into the aspects and so on. So this being the case, so during his time, so which is around 12th century, so this is a very interesting passage which one finds in Bhaskara Charya, so he says, So this occurs in Gola Dhyaya of Bhaskara Charya Siddhanta Sri Romani. The question that he asks is, if you say that there should be some tangible object which is supporting the earth in space, then the next question that arises is, whatever be the tangible object, so that has to be supported by something else, so that has to be supported by something else and so on and so forth, so where will you end up, so we will end up in infinite regress. So at some point of time you may have to say that there is something which is self supported, if you say that the entity which is self supported, so what is so special about the entity, why not you assign to the first entity itself, so that is what he is saying, So it does not depend on anything else, so this if you can ascribe to some entity at some point of time, then why not you ascribe it to the earth itself, so this is a kind of argument which he gives, so but this is not quite convincing, but the point is that you will not be able to find a solution by saying that it is supported by serpent, it is supported by, so these are all stories, so which have been constructed to explain to some people at some point of time, but this is not something which stands scrutiny, so that is what Bhaskara says, he further goes on and then says, So this is a very, very interesting passage and sometimes this is also grossly misinterpreted by some people, so this is something which one needs to be understood. See there are some people, so who try to study some of these ancient scriptures and they get excited as they keep reading them, so and then the moment they find something which is similar to what has been expressed in modern science they say, so whatever has been state in modern science is something which is there, sometimes they go to the extent of saying that they find some term which is similar to what is there in modern science, so and then they say, so that this is there, the whole theory is there in ancient science, ancient Indian science. So the point I say, I will just cite one example, in fact a few years back when I was in IIT Madras listening to a certain seminar presented by a mathematics professor, so he went to the extent of saying that there is something called string theory, so in modern physics, so he went to the extent of saying that in Bhagavad Gita we find string theory described, I was taken back by the statement, so but then he tries to defend himself by saying, by citing a shloka, so wherein he says, so we find a statement in Bhagavad Gita, mahi sarva midam protham sutre manigana ayiva, the term sutra means a string and therefore we find the term string, so and therefore we have string theory in Bhagavad Gita, so people think that they are doing some justice to ancient science, it is going to be counterproductive, so when one looks into the ancient text one has to be all the more cautious and here why I am mentioning this is because, so there is a term Aakrishta Shakti, so Shakti is a certain force, Aakrishta Shakti means a certain force which is attractive in nature, so one should not immediately jump to the conclusion that Bhaskara Charya no gravitational theory, so this is absolutely wrong, so which is what some people try to do and it is injustice to both modern science as well as the ancient scripture, this is what I would say, so here so Aakrishta Shakti is a very interesting argument which is presented by Bhaskara Charya, so which is why I thought I will just explain this verse, suppose you think of the earth, so it is well known to Indian astronomers and it can be easily understood through various means as to why the earth has to be spherical in nature, so this has been understood quite from the period of even Aryabhata, so Aryabhata himself described it to be spherical and there are reasons, so which have been given by these astronomers which will be as valid today as it was valid in those days and so on, so here so that the earth is spherical in nature is some which is very clearly understood, so given that so now one poses the question, so if the earth were to fall, so where will it fall, so why should, why at all you feel that earth has to fall, so this is because it is a heavy object, so now any heavy object falls from above to below, so it falls down, so imagine another observer sitting in California which is directly opposite to some part in India, so there also this fellow will see something for him towards him, so what is up and what is down, so for him this is up, so for the fellow in California that will be down, so that is the kind of argument which is Aryabhata Bhaskara gives here, see, so from the fact that one observes that all objects are attracted towards earth, one concludes that there is a certain force of attraction towards earth, mahi means prithivi, so custom, the word come means space, custom means an object which is in space, so an object which is heavy, towards it swashaktya because of the force of attraction, so which it has, it attracts any heavy object towards it, akrishyate, so it is being attracted, so since it is being attracted, we feel that it falls, so tat patati vabhati, so then he says that this phenomenon is true all around the earth, so not necessarily here, so therefore, so whether you are in India or you are sitting somewhere in California which is directly opposite to some location in India, so diametrically opposite point also experienced that they are pulled towards it and therefore, there is nothing like, so up and down, so wherein earth can go down, so this argument ko patat vm k, so this object where will it fall, so this is the kind of present argument that he presents, so the message is they presented certain arguments with their own limited understanding of what is called gravitation today, one should not simply jump to the conclusion that because he uses the word akrishyate, vaskaracharya new gravitation as Newton understood, so there are other instances in Indian astronomy also wherein there are descriptions of eclipses, so wherein one may find that ahead Rahu, Ketu and so on and so forth, but these are again very similar to Mayasura receiving the knowledge of the motion of planets directly from the sun, so these stories are not accepted by astronomers, so in fact they argue strongly and logically as to why these stories cannot be taken as explanation for a certain physical phenomenon which is happening around, so the simple question that one can raise to a person who believes that some Asura comes and swallows the sun, so if an Asura is a certain human being, so with certain bad qualities or you can call a devata swallows whichever it is, so the problem is, so we have a free will to do, so what we want to do and therefore, nothing can prevent us from swallowing any time we want to swallow, so and therefore, this eclipse which is a certain phenomenon which happens only with certain physical conditions satisfied, so cannot be the act of a certain human being who would like to perform things as and when he likes, so since it is periodic and it can be predicted, so any human activity of course cannot be predicted, so our own mind how it behaves we cannot predict, so therefore, so these are all things which will not be accepted, so and will not hold water the kind of explanations that demon comes and swallows and so on. So finally, I would like to point out a few quotations and this is very important to understand when one tries to study the Indian science, so particularly history, a very important historian who writes about the development of mathematics from ancient times to modern times, so his name is C. B. Boyer, so when he tries to write a text on history of calculus and its conceptual development, so the remark that he makes is the Hindus delighted more on tricks than in the thoughts the mind could produce, so that neither Euclidean geometry nor Aristotelian logic made strong impression upon them, so he sort of dismissive this is what it looks like, so Hindus delighted more on tricks. So I am making this statement just to convey an important point that in the Indian tradition things have been authored in the form of sutras, if you look at the ancient texts, so 2000 years back the style of writing was called sutra and it used to be very terse in nature. There is also another reason as to why people had to write in such terse form, so the knowledge was transmitted orally and therefore if you have to keep things in memory, so we do not have, we did not have devices, so in those days to write it and then so whenever we want we can pick up that and then read it. So this came much later, so being a oral tradition, so things were sort of memorized and therefore so you keep them in as terse form as possible, but this does not mean that the teacher did not explain the phenomenon to the thought. So when they say they delighted more on tricks, so this kind of a statement is primarily based upon looking at some of these primary texts which have been very terse in nature, but not looking into the commentaries which actually explain the kind of rationale which they had in trying to arrive at a certain result. So when the result is sort of presented, you do not know how they worked at that. So and therefore some of these historians have been misled, it looks like and therefore they make this kind of statements and this has been repeated by so many people and I just wanted to cite a few more examples. So in the context of astronomy for instance, they say Chinese were careful sky watchers, Mesopotamians, Babylonians did regular observations, Egyptians were remarkable people capable of carrying out very accurate measurements, Greeks were the first to change the astronomy from mystical cult into true science. So when he comes to describe about the Indian contribution, he says the Vedic priests in India believed the world to be supported upon 12 massive pillars, serpent floating on limitless ocean, one cannot help feeling rather sorry for the serpent. So I am just saying this, this is a book which has been authored by Patrick Moore who has written a dozen dozens of works on astronomy. So this person, so when he is trying to describe the contribution of various civilizations, so coming to India he just dismisses it by simply quoting some statement which is found in Korana and not so that is why I just cited the sloka of Bhaskara Charya, so wherein these people themselves have dismissed the idea that it is supported by something else. So he stops as if that is the be all and end all of Indian astronomy. So in trying to study the contribution of a certain civilization, it is extremely important that one tries to get into not only some of the source works which are written in test form, but also the commentaries which have been authored much later and finally I would like to conclude with certain statement which has been made by Claude Alvarez, so which I found very interesting. So he says history is all efforts in myth making. So it is true in a sense that see we will not be able to find out what was happening 1500 years back, we get some tits and bits of information and we try to integrate them and present the whole picture. So this is the effort which is made by historians. And in making such efforts, so some myths will also be there, so which have to be accepted and therefore he says so if we must continue to live with myths, however it is far better we choose to live with those of our own making rather than those invented by others for their own purposes. So that much at least we go as independent society and nation. So I am making this statement because so there has been a certain purpose for which certain studies have been made particularly in the Indian context. So the books which are authored, so to try to see how the modern science was accepted in the Indian society, so this is a very important thing that one needs to understand. So for one to have a certain success in trying to force a certain different system of education, so into a certain continent, so there are various tics which have been adopted, so which I will not be getting into, but the point is that is what Claude Alvarez means invented by others for their own purposes. So this is how certain things have been written and whatever has been written has been simply accepted for various reasons and therefore it is important for one to present the history of one's own nation by their own people instead of some alien, so who has not understood how the fabric here is beaved. So with these few remarks, so I would end my session. Thank you. Thank you so much Professor Ram Subramanian for this exegesis. As I said earlier it will indeed add to our journey and our debates and discussions and I think finally to more creative writing. I do want to finally say that our attempt in this session has been linked to a new writer's search for form, genre and fresh themes. We are greatly interested in locating the connections between creativity and knowledge building, science and technology within our cultural context offer rich possibilities not only for these disciplines, but also for creative writing. So this is the journey that we will undertake from now on. Thank you.