headers
Sunil Bhattacharjya | 1 Feb 2009 01:20
Picon
Favicon

Re: Science and the Veda

Dear Michaelji,

While Sriniwasji will reply to you I will draw your attention to the fact that all the creation is of Adi
Shakti or Prakriti. The ancient seers visualised Adi Shakti (Durga) with the ten hands representing the
ten dimensions. Compare this with the proposed string thory with the ten dimensions.

Regards,

Sunil K. Bhattacharjya

--- On Sat, 1/31/09, Michael Shepherd
<michael@...> wrote:
From: Michael Shepherd <michael@...>
Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Science and the Veda
To: "A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta" <advaita-l@...ta.org>
Date: Saturday, January 31, 2009, 3:20 AM

Namaste Shrinivas,

In the light of your replies, am I too bold or too precipitous or too
superficial, in suggesting that Stephen Hawking's Grand Unification Theory
of the 'four forces of the universe' (strong force, weak force,
electro-magneticism, gravity) may indeed be prefigured in the language of
the Veda as read through Advaita ?

Michael

-----Original Message-----
From: advaita-l-bounces@...
[mailto:advaita-l-bounces@...]On
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Bhadraiah Mallampalli | 1 Feb 2009 05:00
Picon
Favicon

Science and the Veda‏


Dear Michael, 

1. During the good old Newtonian days material sciences were perfect cause-effect chains.

2. The modern sciences Quantum physics, genetics, relativity, computer sciences, neuro-sciences 
accept some intelligent agents in nature. 

3. With the Grand Unification Theories scientists are trying put back reason into science. 
(There may be some customization for this universe, like universal constants). 

1 & 3 have been rejected to be the highest truth by Gaudapada & Sankara who say that 
causality has to necessarily cease because the highest truth is absense of causality. 
The first two bench marks are at two points of time - going into deep sleep & waking up from deep sleep. 
Sankara says that an ignorant person might enjoy eternal bliss during deep sleep,
but while waking up from sleep, wakes up into the same old waking state based on the karmas which 
have been deposited earlier and are in latent state. The implication is that, the first few micro-seconds 
during the process of waking up hold the key to the nature of this universe. In other words, 
the adjustments the Jiva makes while waking up are so complex, they match the mathematics 
needed for all subjects put together in 2. above.    

Technologically, logically and mathematically speaking 2 is a big deal, but if you sit back and relax 
it is not, because the existence of life itself is a miracle - a fact even a common villager knows. Resolving
either end effectively resolves 2. 
In sciences, intelligent agents give leverage, and they are useful in making gadgets. 

Devas also give leverage, and they were used in making astras like brahmastram etc. 

Intelligent agents in science would one day merge into a unifield field theory. 
The subject of intelligent agents is an isomorphism of the subject of devas.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 7 comments |
headers
Michael Shepherd | 2 Feb 2009 01:30
Picon

Science and Advaita

Thank you for all your helpful replies. I don't wish to waste anyone's time;
so perhaps I can attempt to sum up the typical state of Western science and
scientists as I understand it (there are of course many exceptions):

There is a tradition of non-duality in the West -- though its needs loooking
for !

It was establlished in discussion between 1200--1500 C.E. that there is one
Creator or Cause beyond the chain of cause and effect; and that there is one
intelligence -- and man can but imitate that in part. However, it is
difficult to convince materialists and atheists of this -- especially those
who assume that their own 'mind' is identical to universal mind !

Also, it has been generally accepted for the sake of argument, that the
cosmos could be seen as three 'worlds' -- the physical or material, the
mental or 'subtle', and the 'causal' or spiritual. These 'worlds' are
understood to be 'monist' within their own laws; these laws being seen as
partial 'imitations' of those of the world above.

So the material world, observed by the minds of scientists, is entirely
valid for research within its own laws.

The sticking--point is, as has been mentioned, the distinction between
observer and observed. But that once acknowledged, the really interesting
questions emerge : of the relation between these worlds which may reveal
themselves to observation -- observation which is ultimately divine and
single..

That's really my area of interest: the possibility that Advaita can enrich
with its tradition and terminology, the Western sense of non-duality which
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
kuntimaddi sadananda | 2 Feb 2009 03:00
Picon
Favicon

Knowledge and The Means of Knowledge - 30


We are re-examining some of the VedantaparibhASha statements,
as was suggested by Shree Sastriji, in the light of Navya Nyaaya. Some
background of Navya-Nyaaya is being provided in the last and this post, based
on my understanding of D.H.H. Ingalls,’ Materials for the study of Navya-Nyaaya
Logic’, published by Motilal Banarsidass, Delhi.We are back to the series after a gap of several weeks.

 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Knowledge and the
Means of Knowledge – 30

 

We are discussing some of the concepts of Navya Nyaaya in
relation to Inferential knowledge.  In
the last post several Navya Nyaaya concepts are introduced starting from their
seven fundamental categories (padaartha-s). Of these, descriptions of substances
(dravya), generic character (jaati), ultimate difference (visheSha), and
absence (abhaava) were provided. Jaati is generic abstract qualifier that
inheres with the qualificand to make the qualificand to belong to a genus. For
example, pot-ness in a pot is abstract qualifier qualifying the pot so that the
pot belongs to a family of pots or pot-genus. Similarly, other examples are man-ness
in man, horse-ness in a horse or cow-ness in a cow.  In contrast to generic quality, there are
particular abstract qualities qualifying a particular specimen (vyakti) of a
genus. Thus in a statement ‘this is Devadatta’ – Devadatta has two qualifiers,
one a generic qualifier that is man-ness since Devadatta is a man, and the
other qualifier is Devadatta-ness. Man-ness will distinguish him to be
different from say animals or inert objects, and Devadatta-ness distinguishes
him from other men, who also have man-ness. The later is called relational qualifier.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
KAMESWARARAO MULA | 2 Feb 2009 04:40
Picon
Favicon

Lakshmi Ashttotram


           Lakshmi
Ashotram                                                                
108 names of Sri Mahalakshmi (Sri Mahalakshmi)                                                                      
 (While performing Archana, please add "Om" at the beginning and "Namaha:" at the end of each name.)

S.No.

Name 

Meaning 

01

Prakruti

Nature

02

Vikruti

Multi Faced Nature

03

Vidya

Wisdom
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Michael Shepherd | 2 Feb 2009 13:12
Picon

Re: Science and Advaita

Subsequent to this posting. Naresh Cuntoor has very kindly pointed me to
earlier discussions here on this subject in 2005 and earlier again in 1999.
I have found these very helpful -- it will either shut me up or improve my
postings !

Perhaps the simplest point is that science (generally) investigates How ?
and Vedanta investigates Why ? Though of course, one set of anwers leads to
the other..

At the moment, Darwin's centenary is being celebrated with excellent TV
programmes on 'How Evolution?', but none ask 'Why Evolution' !

Reading the 2005 discussions, it occurs to me that a good question to
distinguish 'scientiific' and 'spiritual' thought is that of Day and
Night -- there's a 'How?' answer and a 'Why ?' answer.. But ultimately, both
answers must be One !

Michael

-----Original Message-----
From: advaita-l-bounces@...
[mailto:advaita-l-bounces@...]On
Behalf Of Michael
Shepherd
Sent: 02 February 2009 00:31
To: advaita vedanta
Subject: [Advaita-l] Science and Advaita

Thank you for all your helpful replies. I don't wish to waste anyone's time;
so perhaps I can attempt to sum up the typical state of Western science and
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
kuntimaddi sadananda | 2 Feb 2009 13:43
Picon
Favicon

Re: Science and Advaita


--- On Mon, 2/2/09, Michael Shepherd <michael@...> wrote:

Perhaps the simplest point is that science (generally) investigates How ?
and Vedanta investigates Why ? Though of course, one set of anwers leads to
the other..
.....

Michael - PraNAms

Not sure if the above statement is correct either. Vedanta points to us- from  vyavahaarika to
paramaarthika - from relative to absolute- the process of how and why have to be transcended along with
cause-effect relations in 'going' from one to the other, since it is not a process that can be definable in
terms of why or how, since descriptions falls short - yatho vaacho nivartante apraapya manasaa saha - the
words and the mind cannot reach there. 
The transition is discontinuous; hence Shankara aptly calls that anirvacaniiyam, inexplicable - yet
absolutely real.

Hari Om!
Sadananda
Permalink | Reply | 8 comments |
headers
Michael Shepherd | 2 Feb 2009 14:02
Picon

Re: Science and Advaita

Dear Sadananda --

Point taken ! But questions take us on usefully to that point where words
'turn back',  can go no further !

Michael

-----Original Message-----
From: advaita-l-bounces@...
[mailto:advaita-l-bounces@...]On
Behalf Of
kuntimaddi sadananda
Sent: 02 February 2009 12:44
To: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta
Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Science and Advaita

--- On Mon, 2/2/09, Michael Shepherd <michael@...> wrote:

Perhaps the simplest point is that science (generally) investigates How ?
and Vedanta investigates Why ? Though of course, one set of anwers leads to
the other..
.....

Michael - PraNAms

Not sure if the above statement is correct either. Vedanta points to us-
from  vyavahaarika to paramaarthika - from relative to absolute- the process
of how and why have to be transcended along with cause-effect relations in
'going' from one to the other, since it is not a process that can be
definable in terms of why or how, since descriptions falls short - yatho
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 7 comments |
headers
ramani veeraraghavan | 2 Feb 2009 14:28
Picon
Favicon

Re: Science and Advaita


Pranam,
 
I am quoting the verses from 'Viveka Choodamani' of Shri Adi Shankara. According to Shri Adi Shankara the
Universe is nothing but Brahman and all the activities, knowledge et all. In otherwords Science is
nothing but a subset of Brahman. Every pursuit, activity and deliberations forms part of Brahman.  
 
Thanks
 
V Ramani

 
225. Brahman is Existence, Knowledge, Infinity, pure, supreme, self-existent, eternal and indivisible
Bliss, not different (in reality) 
from the individual soul, and devoid of interior or exterior. It is (ever) triumphant.

226. It is this Supreme Oneness which alone is real, since there is nothing else but the Self. Verily, there
remains no other 
independent entity in the state of realisation of the highest Truth.

227. All this universe which through ignorance appears as of diverse forms, is nothing else but Brahman
which is absolutely free 
from all the limitations of human thought.

228. A jar, though a modification of clay, is not different from it; everywhere the jar is essentially the
same as the clay. Why then 
call it a jar ? It is fictitious, a fancied name merely.

229. None can demonstrate that the essence of a jar is something other than the clay (of which it is made).
Hence the jar is merely 
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Michael Shepherd | 2 Feb 2009 14:53
Picon

Re: Science and Advaita

Dear Ramani,

Thank you for that reminder. I wish that I had been reminded of that while
working on those 'diverse forms' in the school and college laboratories !

And since in English from Latin, 'science' means 'knowing' -- that must
include self-knowledge, since there is no other true knowledge ?!

Michael

-----Original Message-----
From: advaita-l-bounces@...
[mailto:advaita-l-bounces@...]On
Behalf Of ramani
veeraraghavan
Sent: 02 February 2009 13:29
To: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta
Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Science and Advaita

Pranam,
 
I am quoting the verses from 'Viveka Choodamani' of Shri Adi Shankara.
According to Shri Adi Shankara the Universe is nothing but Brahman and all
the activities, knowledge et all. In otherwords Science is nothing but a
subset of Brahman. Every pursuit, activity and deliberations forms part of
Brahman. 
 
Thanks
 
V Ramani
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |

Gmane