At the Global Science Innovation Forum’s Thrive-2026 summit in Silicon Valley on April 17, Dattatreya Hosabale, Sarkaryavah of Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, articulated a compelling vision for scientific progress. He argued for the revival of Bharatiya knowledge systems, emphasising that true technological innovation must be anchored in economy, ecology, and ethics
Q: How would you describe the roots of scientific and technological inquiry in your tradition?
A: In our tradition, the roots of knowledge have been both sensory and supersensory. That which is based on perception and reasoning, and also that which goes beyond the limits of human knowledge. There has never been a segregation between the spiritual and the secular. What is called spiritual knowledge in our traditions also includes what today would be understood as scientific knowledge.
There are many examples. There are sutras (texts), which explain human anatomy, mind sciences, the functioning of the human body, action and inaction, why the body acts and why it doesn’t. These explanations are detailed and analytical, yet they are considered as spiritual texts. But in essence, they are scientific.
Over a long period of history, particularly due to continuous invasions and foreign rule, many of these traditions were disrupted or destroyed. During those troubled times, we were made to forget much of our scientific heritage. Now, we are in a phase where there is a conscious effort to revive that knowledge. The new government has adopted a policy of education where the Indic knowledge systems are being reintroduced.
For nearly a thousand years of struggle and foreign domination, much of this knowledge was sidelined. One important task before us today is to rediscover and reestablish that scientific tradition which existed in our civilisational history.
Our tradition is rich with cosmic inquiry. The cosmos has always been a source of fascination. Dialogues and debates are present throughout our texts. There is continuous discussion about the relationship between the microcosm and the macrocosm in the scientific and technological texts of our civilisation in terms of physical world manifestations.
When we look at these expressions, we find remarkable achievements. There were highly developed agrarian systems thousands of years ago. Town planning existed at an advanced level. Universities were established. There was significant development in civil engineering. All this reflects a deep understanding of material sciences.
This understanding was not exploitative. The approach was to understand nature, analyse it, make the best use of it, and at the same time protect it. That balance was central to the scientific approach and innovations and experimentation in our traditions.
Q: Where can moral authority gain traction in a world where technology is driven by competition and capital?
A: There are two important dimensions to this question. First, there is the role of education. In our society, priority has been given to scientific education, but it is important to ensure that there is no separation between scientific outlook and spirituality. These are not two different things.
In many parts of the world, religion and science have often been seen at odds. But in our tradition, both have been integrated. The same individuals and groups have engaged in scientific inquiry as well as in deep spiritual practices. This tradition has integrated into civilisational wisdom. This combined approach provided a foundation that addressed not only ethical questions but also practical aspects of life like security, livelihood, and day-to-day issues. Scientific inquiry was not abstract; it was connected to the needs of society. In order to bring greater power for humankind, these things have to flow.
Second, if education does not progress at the same pace as technology, society tends to become more unequal. When scientific and technological advancement moves ahead while the social or educational systems lag behind, inequality increases. Economic growth, education, and quality of life are all interconnected. Therefore, governance today must seriously consider this balance. On one side, we must address inequalities and prejudices. On the other, we must ensure scientific advancement continues. Both are necessary.
However, there is also a challenge before education systems. If they do not properly convey the scientific aspects of our traditional knowledge, then these traditions may be dismissed as superstition. It becomes necessary to distinguish clearly between what is scientific and what is not. This is an important responsibility. In our society, this has been a challenge, but there have also been many efforts to demonstrate how scientific inquiry existed in traditional systems and how it was transmitted through education over centuries. Today, there is a renewed effort to bring this Indic knowledge system into the forefront of education.
Q: How should individuals and society approach technology and its ethical use?
A: As far as the broader question of humanity and its approach is concerned, one fundamental idea in our tradition is that we are all part of the same original source of energy. Unless this understanding is deeply embedded in the minds of people, you get one-upmanship or hegemonisation of thoughts; the sense of oneness does not develop.
If nature is presented as something that exists only to serve human needs and desires, then exploitation begins. When we treat nature as a slave, meant only for fulfilling our requirements, we start disturbing the natural balance. But if we understand that the same source of energy exists in all of us—in every human being, in animals, in plants, in all of nature—then a different attitude emerges.
In the Hindu tradition, this idea is central. Every other creature must be respected because the same energy that is present in me is present in you and is present in all living beings. This concept of universal oneness shapes how we treat others. It promotes respect, humility, and harmony—not just among humans but across the entire ecosystem. We are not separate from nature; we are part of it. This understanding should guide our actions, including how we develop and use technology.
Q: Is technology inherently good or harmful? How should it be evaluated?
A: Technology, like any tool, must be evaluated carefully. In our understanding, it must pass three important tests. The first is economy. Does the technology contribute to balanced economic growth, or does it create inequality in society? The second is ecology. Does the technology respect nature, or does it lead to exploitation and imbalance? The third is ethics. Is the technology morally sound? Does it align with values that support human well-being?
If a technology disturbs the economy by creating inequality, if it harms the ecological balance by exploiting nature, or if it lacks ethical grounding, then it becomes problematic. Therefore, any technology must be tested against these three touchstones—economy, ecology, and ethics. The purpose of technology should always be human welfare. It should enhance life without causing harm to society or nature.
Q: What is the difference between knowledge and wisdom in your tradition?
A: In our tradition, there is a clear distinction between knowledge and wisdom. Knowledge, or what we call jnana, is the understanding or awareness of things. It is the accumulation of information and learning. But wisdom, or what we call vijnana, is the ability to use that knowledge properly. It is the discernment of how much knowledge to apply, where to apply it, and for what purpose.
Knowledge alone is not sufficient. If it is not guided by wisdom, it can lead to ego and arrogance. It can be misused. Our tradition has a vast body of literature that emphasises this distinction. Knowledge must always be accompanied by wisdom. Only then does it become purposeful and beneficial. When knowledge is guided by wisdom, it becomes useful not only for the individual but also for society and humanity as a whole.
Q: How important is the democratisation of knowledge?
A: The democratisation of knowledge is extremely important. Today, knowledge creation is happening, but it does not always flow freely. It is necessary to create conditions where knowledge can flow freely across communities, societies, nations, and civilisations. It should be accessible to all so that there is an equal footing for everyone.
At the same time, we must be careful about the monopolisation of knowledge, where access is restricted. There are some traditions that are full of superstition, this must be distinguished from genuine knowledge. Rationality should not be the monopoly of any one group. It must be available to all.
When knowledge is democratised, individuals become empowered. Communities become stronger. Society progresses in a more balanced and equitable way. This equal access to knowledge ensures that scientific inquiry and technological benefits reach everyone, not just a few.
Closing Remark
Arrogance is not only about one community, nation, or society placing itself above others. When humans consider themselves superior to nature and the Creator, and act without humility, that is also a form of arrogance.
