මගේ ලෝකය

මගේ ලෝකය

 

ශ්‍රි ලංකාවේ රාජකීය ආසියාතික සංගමයේ ලේකම්වරයකු වන පුන්සර අමරසිංහ මහතා මෙවර ශ්‍රී ලංකා ගාඩියන් සඟරාවට ලියා ඇති ලිපියක් මා මෙහි පළ කරන්නේ හුදෙක් සකර්බර්ග් සඳහා නොව විවිධ අදහස් දැන ගැනීම සඳහායි.

 

මගේ ලෝකය ලියා දැන් අවුරුදු තිස්හතක් වෙනවා. එහෙත් එය සාකච්ඡාචට සුදුසු පොතක් ලෙස විද්වතුන් සලකන්නේ නැහැ. එයත් මා පසුව ලියා ඇති ලිපිත් සැලකෙන්නේ මිථ්‍යා මත පතුරවන ලේඛන ලෙසයි.  බටහිර දැනුම අතැඹුලක් සේ දත්තවුන්ට මගේ අදහස් යල් පැනපු ගෝත්‍රිකවාදී අදහස්. 

 

බටහිර දැනුම මෙරට හා අනෙක් රටවල දරණ ආධිපත්‍යය නිසා වෙනත් සංස්කෘතියක මතයකට අදහසකට ඉඩක් නැහැ. එය බටහිර තාක්‍ෂණය හා දේශපාලනය සමග සම්බන්ධයි. ඒ ආධිපත්‍යය අපට ඉසිලීමට බල කෙරෙන්නේ ම ඉසිලිය නොහැකි මතවාදයක් විසින්. මගේ ලෝකය සමාජයෙන් ප්‍රතික්‍ෂෙප වීම මට තේරුම් ගන්න පුළුවන්. එමෙන් ම මා හැමදාමත් මහල්ලකු නොවූවත් මිථ්‍යා මතධාරී මැන්ටලයක් ලෙස හැඳින්වීමත් තේරුම් ගන්න පුළුවන්. සමහර විට මගේ ලෝකය ලියන කාලයේ මා වයසින් කෙසේ වෙතත් මනසින් මහල්ලකු ව ඉන්න ඇති.

 

මා මගේ ලෝකයේ පළමු මූද්‍රණවල සඳහන් ඇතැම් අදහස් දැන් දරන්නේ නැහැ. ඉඳිආප්ප ආකෘතිය හා පැටලීම පිළිබඳ අදහස් වෙනස් වෙලා. මගේ ලෝකයේ තුන්වැනි මුද්‍රණයේ ඒ බව සඳහන් වෙනවා. මගේ ලෝකයේ ඇති අදහස් අමුතුවෙන් කියන්න වීම ම අභාග්‍යයක්. මා උත්සාහ කරන්නේ බුදුහාමුදුරුවන් දේශනා කළ දේ තේරුම් ගැනීමටයි. එය පටිච්චසමුප්පාදය කියෙවුවත් තේරුම් ගන්න පුළුවන්. ඉදින් A ඇත්නම් B ඇත යනුවෙන් ගණිතයේ සඳහන් වෙන ආකාරයට එය කියන්න පුළුවන්. එහෙත් එය ගණිතයට වඩා පොහොසත්. ඉදින් B  ඇත්නම්  A  ඇත යනුවෙන් ද එය ප්‍රකාශ කරන්න පුළුවන්. විඤ්ඤාණ පච්චයා නාම රුප, නාම රූප පච්චයා විඤ්ඤණ යනුවෙන් සඳහන් වන්න බොහෝ දෙනකුට විෂය වන්නේ නැහැ. මේ දැනුම සුළියක් වැනි මායාවක් පමණයි. බටහිර ගණිතයේ ඇත්තේ ස්වසිද්ධි ද්විකෝටික න්‍යාය අනුමාන නීති නිගාමි තර්කය හා නිගමන පමණයි.  ඊනියා සාධනයක් ගැන කිවුවත් ඔය එකක්වත් සාධනය කෙරී නැහැ.

 

මගේ ලෝකයේ ඇත්තේ බුදුහාමුදුරුවන් වච්ඡගොත්ත බමුණාට දුන් පිළිතුරයි. ලෝකය පවතින්නේ ද නැත නොපවතින්නේ ද නැත. අවිද්‍යාව ඇති විට සංස්කාර ඇති වෙයි. ලෝකය ඇති වෙයි. එහි ඇත්තේ ද්විඅගයක් සහිත එහෙත් චතුස්කෝටික (Two valued four fold) න්‍යායක්. එය බූලිය වීජයට (Boolean Algebra) එහා යන ගණිතයකට වීජයකට මග පාදනවා. එක් තරුණයෙක් ඒ ගැන අධ්‍යයනයක් කරනවා. එසේ ම වෙනත් විද්‍යාවකට මග පාදනවා.

 

පුන්සර අමරසිංහ මහතා සඳහන් කළත් මා මහාචාර්යවරයකු නො වෙයි. මහාචාර්ය පදවියක් ලැබුණෙත් හැට පැන්නට පස්සෙ. මා රැකියාවෙන් ඉවත් වී දැන් වසර දහයකට වැඩියි. කිසිම විශ්වවිද්‍යාලයක් මට සේවාර්ජිත මහාචාර්ය ධුරයක් කිසි දා පිරිනමන්නේ නැති බව මා දන්නවා. ඒ මට අවශ්‍යත් නැහැ.  ඒ කුමක් වුවත් ලිපිය ලිවීම පිළිබඳ ව මා පුන්සර අමරසිංහ මහතාට පින් දෙනවා.

 

  

 

 

Is the world of Nalin de Silva different from your world? Reading “Mage Lokaya”

Despite his extraordinary contribution in unfolding the construction of Western Sciences, Prof. Nalin De Silva has been given less significant attention in the South Asian Academia.

BY PUNSARA AMARASINGHE

 

JULY 20, 2023

 

 

 

The common conception that has been viewed as the grand narrative is that Western Science reflects the triumph of mankind over the past five hundred years. The ideas from the heliocentric model to gravity and the most advanced quantum model emerged after the relativism of Einstein arose from the scientific endeavours of the West. From the Copernican revolution to Stephan Hawkins’s theories on black holes were generated in the minds of the Western scientists whose contributions have been revered by the scientific community, wherein the non-Western scientists seem to have embraced those discoveries beyond dispute.Given such an unequal hegemonic monopoly held by Western science, very few from the East, mainly from South Asia have come forward to question the objectivity and the rationality of Western science. One of the biggest obstacles undermining such an effort stemming from a non-Western perspective is that the entire scientific nexus in the non-Western states have gained their training from Western universities. Secondly, any possible inquiry emanating from non-Western space is likely to get refuted by Western scholarship and its acolytes as pseudo-science under the guise of a Popperian theory of falsification.

 

The above-mentioned reasons provide legitimacy to South Asians admiring and re-read the works of Prof. Nalin de Silva a Sri Lankan polymath whose ideas have questioned certain aspects of Western science. Notwithstanding his initial training as a theoretical physicist at Sussex, Prof Silva began to question the hegemony of Western science as a discourse built under the light of certain civilizational influences from the West. The name adopted by Nalin de Silva to describe the Western epistemology is called “Greco-Jewish Christian sciences” and it may appear to be a paradox as Western science stands as anathema to deistic concepts of those Abrahamic faiths. Nonetheless, Silva’s aphorism denotes how the ideological apparatus of the West was constructed by the Greco -Jewish Christian tradition. Silva comes with a strong contention proposing that knowledge is constructed by society, in the sense that people living in society construct knowledge. In that context, knowledge gets heavily influenced by the thinking of society. For instance, it is rather conspicuous that the Atomic bomb would not have been created by the ancient Chinese even if they had constructed the basic knowledge essential for the creation of the gun powder and did not proceed from there to construct guns and other weapons. Eventually it was left to the Europeans to construct weapons based on knowledge of gunpowder that they had received from the Chinese. In Nalin de Silva’s seminal work “ Mage Lokaya ” (My World) Silva argues the knowledge is an illusion created by individuals relative to the sense organs, mind and culture.

Nalin de Silva has aptly described the knowledge-seeking process as a mechanism akin to “string hoppers”, connected by each element. The notion of “I” is just one factor in this long entanglement and we tend to generate knowledge relative to the “I” by creating various concepts.The knowledge that resembles a string hopper has derived from the senses where the culture plays an important role in caring the sensory perception.  In his criticism of the Western conception of the Cartesian wall, which affirms the independence of the observer from the observation, Silva points out that the whole gamut of the observation depends on the observer. The position propounded by Prof.Nalin de Silva has been a moot point for Western scientists over decades. In Copenhagen’s interpretation, Neil Bohr explained there is a static relationship between the observer and the observation.  Contrary to this position classical physicists were adamant in relying on aged long Cartesian position that affirms the distinction between the observer and the observation as two different independent entities.

 

In developing his theory on how mind affects the knowledge creation, Prof. Nalin de Silva applies his stance on the intrinsic relationship between the observer and the observation to the whole sensory world. In explaining this anomaly, Prof. Silva gives prominence to the cultural tradition that generates the knowledge. The Indic and Buddhist traditions that prevailed in South Asia provided no ground for the construction of knowledge devoid of mind. According to Prof. Nalin De Silva, South Asian Tradition has positioned man along with nature as a fellow being. It certainly lacks man’s agency as an independent observer freed from the observation.

 

Thus, there is no scope in the south Asian tradition to form natural sciences in the West under Greco-Jewish Christian influence. Nevertheless, Silva’s analysis on cultured as a key factor in the key structure of knowledge does not either propose or indicate that all those sciences that emerged in the West acknowledged the Abrahamic faith in Judaism the contrary, Prof.Silva brings Greco-Jewish culture as the paramount factor that influenced the thinking system of the western scientist.

 

In his categorisation of sciences Prof. Silva divides natural sciences into three categories as Primary Sciences, Secondary Sciences, and Territory Sciences. under Secondary Sciences he highlights the entire scientific developments that took place in the West from Galileo to Einstein, where classical physics continued to be triumphant. Undoubtedly, those scientists were nourished by the Greco-Jewish two-fold logic and they further relied on the independent existence of the observer from the observation. However, Prof. Nalin De Silva explains how territory sciences that arose to eminence in the mid-twentieth century through Quantum Physics, and Environmental Science were influenced by Eastern mystic traditions stemming from Buddhism from Vedanta.When classical physics excluded the unity of observer and observation, later generation Quantum Physics like Neil Bohr, Hessen Berg tried to comprehend the Quantum concepts by bringing Eastern or South Asian mystical traditions into it. It should be noted that they were compelled to embrace Eastern mysticism as Greco-Jewish tradition provided no concrete foundation to ascertain the Quantum reality and this paradigm shift finally led to disrupt the Cartesian wall.

 

Despite his extra ordinary contribution in unfolding the construction of Western Sciences, Prof. Nalin De Silva has been given less significant attention in the South Asian Academia. In his own country Sri Lanka, he has been often lampooned by his critics as Sinhalese Buddhist Nationalist or someone similar to Putin’s eccentric genius Alexander Dugin. Nalin de Silva’s “Mage Lokaya” did not receive the due credit it deserves in Sri Lanka except the caustic criticism arose from the Left in which Nalin de Silva had been a member before he committed his ideological apostasy. When “Mage Lokaya” was published in 1986, the only review published was carried out by the independent student’s society at the University of Colombo and it was a harsher one scorning the book as a personal narrative, where the reviewer named the book as “ Silvage Lokaya”.  His intellectual contribution in search of Sri Lankan identity has been viewed by his critics as a rhetorical quibble, but ironically the recent Nobel prize winner for Physics Anton Zelinger shares the same view as Prof. Nalin de Silva regarding the unity of the particles in his further explanation on the quantum entanglement. Perhaps, those who are interested in seeking the South Asian identity challenging the Western hegemonic position in science should reread Nalin de Silva by reaching beyond his mere depiction as a nationalist.