Question: The Indian sages were very evolved people, highly intelligent, so why did they not invent modern technology, such as a car, a computer, a cellphone, or a vaccine to counter various diseases?
Answer: There is a popular saying in Sanskrit, ātmavan manyate jagat – “Everyone sees the world with one’s own perspective”. It is natural. There is no other way that one can see the world. We perceive and interpret things as per our own experience. That is how our mind and intellect function. At present, we live in the age of science and technology. We can compare how science and technology have benefited our lives. It has provided immense comfort. We are in better control of nature. We can communicate faster and over long distances. Life seems impossible without the various amenities and gadgets that science and technology have provided us. We have seen several changes in our own lifetime brought by scientific inventions. There are always newer and newer gadgets appearing in the market. Artificial Intelligence is doing wonders. We cannot even imagine what life will be like after fifty years.
Seeing all this, a natural question arises as to why Indian sages, who could invent Yoga, Ayurveda, Jyotisha, and various fine arts, did not produce anything close to the modern gadgetry or the machinery to make human life more comfortable. The reply lies in the fact that our action or engagement, pravṛtti, depends on our goal or prayojana. But one can argue that the goal of science does not seem to be different from that of the sages. Science works to make our lives comfortable and happy. The sages also aimed to achieve mukti, or freedom from all suffering. So, where is the difference?
The difference lies in the approach. Although both aim to achieve happiness free of all suffering, their approaches are quite different. The major cause of the difference lies in the basic difference between the understandings of life by science and the sages. Modern science believes that there is no life after death. You only live once (YOLO). There is no creator of the universe. There is no such thing as the law of karma. But the sages have a different opinion. They believe that life is eternal. Based on this difference, there are two different approaches. This is succinctly indicated by Śrī Kṛṣṇa in the Gītā (5.21, 22):
bāhya-sparśeṣv asaktātmā vindaty ātmani yat sukham
sa brahma-yoga-yuktātmā sukham akṣayam aśnute
“One whose psyche is detached from the external sense objects attains that bliss which is intrinsic to the self. Such a person, whose self is united with God through devotional absorption, tastes imperishable bliss.”
ye hi saṁsparśa-jā bhogā duḥkha-yonaya eva te
ādy-antavantaḥ kaunteya na teṣu ramate budhaḥ
“The enjoyments born of sense contacts are only a source of misery. O Arjuna, they have a beginning and an end. Therefore, the wise do not indulge in them.”
The first verse hints at the approach of the sages, and the second hints at the approach of science, which is forbidden for intelligent people. The sages, obviously, have avoided the second approach because it ultimately leads to suffering. This, from the point of view of science, is certainly debatable. A person devoted to science would not accept it. But I suggest not being biased either way. I do not say that you accept the first approach blindly. But I request to not reject it also without due deliberation. There is a nice advice to this effect:
purāṇamityeva na sadhu sarvaṁ na cāpi navamitiyavadyam
santaḥ parīkṣyaīnyatarat bhajante mūḍhaḥ para-prtyaya-neya-buddhiḥ
Not everything old is necessarily good, nor is every new thing to be condemned. The wise examine and accept what is proper, while the foolish are led by others’ opinions.” (Mālvikāgni1.2)
In our present context, we can say that neither everything old, i.e., coming from śāstra, is worthless, and not every invention of science is a boon to humanity. Generally, I see that there are three types of people. The first types are those who only believe in śāstra. They trash everything discovered by science. I have met people who believe that the Earth is flat, the Sun rotates around the Earth, the Moon is beyond the Sun, and so on. The second type is those who trash śāstracompletely. They accept only what is described in the books of science. All śāstric knowledge is myth and worthless. Then, there are third types, who accept both. But there are certain points on which science and śāstra have divergent views. So, how is it possible to accept both? In this regard, they have difference of opinions. Some always chose science over śāstra, others the other way round, and then there are others who take a different approach. They accept that certain principles of śāstra are non-negotiable and thus cannot be overridden by science. Indeed, science has nothing to say about these subjects scientifically. For example, the principle of ātmā is distinct from the body. But there are certain other things where the śāstra either is not very clear or does not say anything. The scientific knowledge is acceptable in those areas. In some areas, the śāstric statements may be seen in a scientific light, and in some areas, the other way round.
Keeping all this in my mind, my reply to the original question is that the sages of India did not invent any machinery or gadget, as modern science has done, because their vision of life was different. They had a holistic approach and were very much concerned about the balance in individual life, society, and nature. From their perspective, the modern invention causes disturbance to nature. This can be seen in the current state of earth, water, fire, air, and space. All five mahābhūtas have been polluted by modern technology. So much so that our very existence is in danger. Many species of animals, birds, and aquatic animals have become extinct. The same is the situation with fauna and flora. This ultimately reflects at the social and individual level. It can be observed that life at present may be more comfortable physically, but there is immense disturbance at the psychological level. And psychological disturbance is a big obstacle to the ultimate goal of life as envisioned by the sages. Indeed, Manu, the author of Manu-smṛti, considers inventing any machinery that would replace human beings as a sinful act. Therefore, the Indian sages did not make any machinery or gadgets that could be purchased in the market. They did speak about certain extraordinary powers that an individual could acquire by personal practice. This way, there was no misuse or exploitation of natural resources.
-Originally published at https://jiva.org/sages-and-technology/
Leave a Reply