“If Indians were so great in science, why didn’t they invent great weapons, cars, planes and all modern gadgets?”
Being a student of science, it is not necessary that I invent application of physical principles. True scholar, groomed under Dharmic Guru, in dharmic environment, would never trade into destructive paths.
Why no Dhamic person would prefer to be named as inventor of so and so technology?
Modern Science framework only considers first two द्रश्य,द्रष्टा in their realization. That is objectivity. The object or the observed + the observer. That’s it. There is no room for दृष्टि. How you perceive matters. And that is ignored by modern science!
ऋषि दृष्टि is long term. Actually infinite. Cyclic. That which hampers individual to perform his/her dharma, deserves to remain in mind of the idea possessor.
Technology is not our enemy, our surrender to them is! And no ऋषि would prefer slavery of living beings. And so, even if some technological solutions were prevailing in ancient Bharat, I am sure, usage was never commercialized.
Take simple example: Clock revolution. Beginning in the fourteenth century, the clock made us into time-keepers, and then time-savers, and now time-servers. In the process, we have learned irreverence toward the sun and the seasons, for in a world made up of seconds and minutes, the authority of nature is superseded. Eternity ceased to serve as the measure and focus of human events.
There is no issue with clock. There is no issue using it for life simplifications and artificial order when we are not able to handle natural chaotic order. Why force biological clocks in forcible slavery of machines? Insensitivity is not a worthy virtue to learn from machines.
But yes, if there is a system developed (पंचांग), to help humans (as they only need to restore order. Other animals are blessed to remain in order 🙂 ) , without making them slaves, it is more than welcomed!
This was about bygone days. Situation in present is such that, we at least should be capable enough to produce weapons to protect self. Sadly, we are not.