Tuesday, June 12, 2007

pioneer: Save Ram Setu

jun 11th, 2007

yes, in general, the public accept the beliefs of:

a. christists that jesus rose from the dead and that he actually existed
b. mohammedans that mohammed went to heaven on his horse
c. communists that the state will wither away and that the proletariat revolution will bring prosperity

although there is no historical evidence whatsoever for any of them. yet, we accept these as somebody's faith, and since faith is irrational, we don't ask too many embarrassing questions. but then hindu beliefs, which should have the same protection as faith, have to be proven with scientific evidence -- this is a clear double-standard.

in fact, though, traditional hindu practices turn out to have a scientific basic much of the time. my favorite example is the hindu fondness for hourglass-shaped female bodies, with big breasts, tiny waists and substantial bottoms. this has been laughed at by lots of people, including white guys who prefer women with boyish bottoms (and i am not suggesting preferring skinny butts is wrong: women of all sorts of shapes can be stunning unless they are gross outliers).

it turns out, though, that the preferred hindu body shape correlates closely with woman having high levels of female hormones such as estrogen and being fertile! since sexual attraction is based fundamentally on the need for producing children and propagating the species, the hindus of old through observation had figured out what the best female physique was.

similarly, i think a lot of old hindu practices are likely to be scientifically valid. hindus were keen observers, with a penchant for classification and analysis. thus, over the centuries, they figured out a lot of things simply through observing and recording things. this is one of the reasons hindu culture are so well adapted to the indian environment, landscape, and climate: we have evolved alongside the flora and fauna here, unlike semites who emerged from the desert which has neither flora nor fauna.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Moksha

Save Ram Setu

 

The Pioneer Edit Desk – June 12 2007

 

History, ecology are at stake

 

When the Taliban destroyed the Bamiyan statues, the world reacted with shocked horror at this act of barbarism. What the UPA Government proposes to do to Ram Setu, also known as Adam's Bridge, is no less horrifying. As may be recalled, the Setusamudram Ship Channel Project aims to create a navigable sea route, between the Gulf of Mannar and Palk Bay, by slicing the Ram Setu in order to reduce the sailing distance between India's coasts. Consequently, the Ram Setu, of known spiritual significance to Hindus, will be destroyed through extensive dredging. In fact, there are sound reasons for rejecting the project, as conceived at present, other than the important one of protecting the site for its cultural and religious worth. Among them, what are weighty are the objections that pertain to its wide-ranging environmental impact. For instance, experts have claimed shifts in the flows of currents would adversely affect sensitive ecosystems, as would the increasing possibility of damaging oil spills. It is estimated that fragile marine life, such as delicate corals, would be destroyed through the various processes unleashed. Life on the mainland would not remain unaffected as changes in seawater flows and temperature would impact climate and affect rainfall in coastal areas even as erosion could increase. Most importantly, experts inform us, the Ram Setu forms a barrier that blocks tsunamis, in the absence of which the entire coasts of Kerala and Tamil Nadu could be endangered. Were this not reason enough, Thorium deposits in Kerala and Tamil Nadu may be affected, upsetting India's indigenous nuclear programme. It is significant that the Sir Mudaliar Committee Report of 1956 had recommended the abandonment of the idea of such a project, finding the channel alignment unsuitable.

 

The argument about the spiritual significance of the site is no less compelling. It is neither here nor there to argue that there is little scientific evidence to prove that Adam's Bridge is manmade. For, within each spiritual tradition are matters purely of belief for which no rational explanations or scientific proofs are available. Thus Christians believe in the immaculate conception, the Jews that the Red Sea parted for Moses, and Muslims that Islam was revealed to the Prophet through the divine agency of Angel Gabriel. The Hindu belief that Hanuman's vanar sena built a bridge to Lanka that allowed Ram to cross over, fell Ravana and rescue Sita is in a similar vein and should hardly be scoffed at. The historicity of the event has little relevance to the debate, though it is possible that, as Indians were prone to oral narratives rather than written records, facts are likely to be the basis of the Ramayan. As the sentiments of hundreds of millions of people are involved, these cannot be trumped by the views of an individual Minister in a democracy. Nothing explains the unholy hurry in going ahead with the project except the need to pander to the crassest financial interests.

 

No comments: