Actually, the axis of the
earth is inclined at around 66.5 degrees to the orbital plane. So the lengths
of day and night depend on the latitude of the place and the time of the year.
The ‘midnight sun’ is, therefore, possible at high latitude, north of the polar
circle; indeed the closer we go to the North Pole, the longer are the days in
summer and nights in winter. And likewise for the South Pole. As in the case of
the abnormal behavior of the dog in Holmes'' story, abnormalities in nature
conceal new information. Scientists should,
therefore, value
evidence of
abnormalities rather than ignore them if the data do not fit the accepted
paradigm. They may be missing vital information that lies buried.
The NCERT''s class XI text
book on ancient India, first published in 2002, throws more light on contemporary India''s prejudices than on ancient India''s history. Up to class X history is seen as an
unavoidable nuisance. But students who take it in class XI do so by choice. If
some of them plan to pursue an academic career in history, this book ii
unlikely to equip them for the task. Normally, a
textbook provides a thorough
grounding in established scholarship on the subject and then moves on to draw
attention to problems that remain to be solved. This book goes the opposite
way. It gives short shrift
to well-known facts and makes
no clear distinction between what is known and what is presumed. It creates a
pseudo scholarly atmosphere in which debatable and discredited hypotheses are
given; veneer of academic respectability. The book is guilty of intellectual
abuse of children. The book wrongly states that the four Vedas "are
entirely in a different language which can be called the
Vedic languages"
This is true of only the Rugveda, whose language is closer to that of
the-Zoroastrian sacred text Avesta than the other Vedas. Before the time of Yaska
(c. 500 BC) parts of Rugveda had already become obscure. Throughout the book,
the author uses the term Rugvedic India when he essentially means (post-Rugvedic) Vedic India.
Significantly, no notice is taken of the existence of an Indo-European family
of languages. Îgvedic geography is treated equally carelessly. According to the
book, the Rugveda mentions the "Mujavant Mountain in the north". This is wrong.
The Rugveda refers to Soma as
Mujavata, "coming from the Mujavant". It is presumed that Mujavant is
a mountain. Where it stood is anybody''s guess. It is noteworthy that both
Atharvaveda and Yajurveda refer to Mujavant
people living far away. When was
the Rugveda composed? Ma: Mueller''s low date of 12001000 BC is quoted At the
same time it is pointed out "ii passing" but twice that Max Mueller
as is true Christian believed in the genesis stories of the Bible and that the
world was created in 4004 BC. (Why blame poor Ma; Mueller when even the
greatest of all scientists, Isaac Newton, also shared this belief. The book
makes a half-hearted attempt to quote hardcore evidence in support of an older Rugvedic
chronology. Mention of the Vedic gods Indra, Varuna, Mitra and the two Nasatyas
in Boghaz-Koi (Asia Minor inscriptions of 1400 BC is taken to "prove that Rugveda
must have come into existence much before that date". (How much before ''
100, 1,000 or 5,000 years?) The line of reasoning is unsound. The Rugveda could
as well have been under composition when some people moved westwards to enter
the inscriptions.
More strictly, Rugvedic
mythology could be older than the Rugveda. Boghaz-Koi could have involved Indic
dialect-speaking tribes who shared mythology but otherwise did not participate
in composition of hymns. An eminent quoted name in support of older chronology
is Bal Gangadhar Tilak who dated the Rugveda to 6000 BC "on astronomical
grounds". True, but on these very grounds he also made north Pole the
original
home of the Aryans. The book
convenientlthis. The book states blandly "there is no
archaeological or biological evidence which could establish the arrival of any
new people from outside between 500 BC and 800 BC". If this assertion be
true, then it must rank as the most significant conclusion ever drawn about
ancient India. Such an important conclusion should have been
discussed at length in a full chapter, rather than curtly summed up in a
sentence. Also, due credit should have been given to its authors. How is the
arrival of new people expected to manifest itself in archaeological or
biological evidence? Does the
biological evidence pertain to skulls and bones or to DNA? It is now known that
agriculture began in Baluchistan at about the same time as in Iraq, eastern Turkey and Palestine.
The book states rather tamely
that "habitation here (in Mehrgarh) began in about 7000 BC but in the
early period no use of ceramic in seen". It is as if late introduction of
ceramic is more significant than introduction of farming in Mehrgarh. The
author seems to be afraid of recognizing the full significance of Mehrgarh. Who
were these people? How are they related to the composers of the Vedas?
Significantly, no horse bones have been found at Mehrgarh at any chronological
level. This is significant because the
Vedic people are inseparable
from the cult of horse. A textbook should be factually correct, be
intellectually rigorous, encourage free thought and, of course, be
student-friendly. Each sentence of the book even if taken out of context should
be capable of withstanding closest scrutiny. A textbook should be prepared at
two levels. The master manuscript should be heavily annotated. Each substantial
statement in it should be referenced so that expert pre-reviewers can
cross-check it and ensure that loose
unsubstantiated or plainly
illiterate statements do not vitiate the book. Once the manuscript is approved,
all or most of the annotation can be deleted for ease of reading. Annotated
text may be put on the Internet for the benefit of more serious students. The
NCERT and textbook writers will do well to keen in mind an old proverb: “When
you feed somebody almonds, they remember only the bitter ones.”
The Bible says: "The
fool has said in his heart, there is no God". Having first convinced
himself, he then proceeds to broadcast it to the world. Nietzsche the
philosopher announced that God is dead. Later, mortal that he was, Nietzsche
died. Had God the Creator sent an obituary notice to the newspapers, it would
have read thus:'' "Nietzsche is dead! Signed: GOD". A little knowledge
is indeed a dangerous thing. Yet the ignorant unhesitatingly pontificate on
matters they know little about. Rushing in where angels fear
to tread, the
pseudo-philosopher weighs the God of the Old Testament in his own balance,
finds Him wanting and condemns Him to oblivion.
The New Testament is
dismissed with contempt, in a show of intellectual and spiritual bankruptcy.
Long before the Rabbi-author launched into his explanation of why bad things
happen to good people. Job in the Old Testament had flung a challenge defiantly
at God. But wisely, in all humility, he ended up confessing: "Surely, I
spoke of things did not understand: things too wonderful for me to know!"
God Himself spells out this truth in the clearest terms in the Bible:
"For, My thoughts are not your thoughts; neither are your ways My ways...
As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are My ways higher than your ways,
and My thoughts higher than your thoughts". Even seemingly simple words
demand definitions: Who are the good people the Rabbi has in mind? We turn to a
vivid, dramatic scene in the Bible. A woman accused of adultery is dragged into
the presence of Jesus by the "good" religious men, the moral brigade.
Barely looking up, Jesus makes a simple suggestion: "Let him who is
without sin, cast the first stone".
More reviews about the World Religions