No products in the cart.
A curious schoolboy was once told by his parents that the universe has neither beginning nor end; that it has always existed. That was the commencement of the boy’s fascination with the world around him. As ritualistic Hindus seriously seeking security as immigrants in a multi-ethnic, multi-religious, and thereby multicultural, conglomeration of fellow Asians from various corners of that continent, his parents were not inclined to question what little they had been taught during their formative years among their own people about Man’s place in the universe.
After a lifetime of foraging casually in the wilderness of books about mankind, during which time the boy now turned senior citizen had battled for survival in yet another foreign land, he discovers a Hindu cosmology. This cosmology is somewhat complex. It too offers durability, but without stability.
Pared down to its core, it says that the known universe is renewed every 8.64 billion years. In the first half of this period, 4.32 billion years, there is growth. It then ends in destruction. The second half is a period when the universe becomes uninhabitable; souls to be reincarnated await the next cycle of growth (a long wait).
Then, there is a longer-term cycle. Every 311.04 trillion years, the Cosmos (with its multiple universes) is renewed, except that, as with the shorter cycle, the first half is one of growth and, in the second half, everything is either dissolved or suspended.
This is a very difficult cosmology to accept, especially since our current civilisation is only about 8,000 years old. Were there many other human civilisations before this one?
Putting aside for the moment the obvious questions about the underlying mechanisms, the operational meaning of growth, suspension, and dissolution, and the terrible implications of such a framework for mankind, one has to wonder about those who had conceived this perspective, and how it had been worked out with such mathematical precision. Was it all based purely on maths or had there been a contribution from advanced spacemen?
Modern cosmologists do not seem to refer to this paradigm, except that eminent science writers like Carl Sagan have commented favourably on the depth and breadth of the perspective offered. The prevailing view in the West upholds the Big Bang Theory. Yet, was not the Steady State Theory upheld not so long ago? Did not that theory offer both durability and stability in the heavens? However, The Hubble Telescope changed that explanation.
This instrument shows that all observed galaxies are moving away from one another. Perpetual expansion into infinity? The cause? A big bang. From a so-called (presumably imagined) ‘singularity’ came forth the universe. Sounds very Hinduistic! Yet, the data seemingly supports this rather illogical scenario. What was there before the Big Bang? This is apparently a meaningless question.
There you have it. The universe explained in a way which cannot be tested – ever; or in a way which seems illogical – something from nothing! But then…… what if the Big Bang Theory is internally consistent with the Hindu Cosmology?