srirudra at md3.vsnl.net.in
Fri Feb 3 05:46:13 CST 2006
IMHO the feeling of love if you mean that as between an adult members of the
opposite sex is only due to harmones and not vice verse.In children this
passionate feeling does not arise as the harmones have not been released in
their blood vessels.Puberty is only due to harmonal releases and it is a
mystery what triggers these releases.One`s the harmonal activity is started
what we call love comes into play and perhaps in most of the human beings
intellect takes care and guides the individual from not falling a prey to
The love you have spoken of is in spiritual level and this is not as a
result of harmones but as a result of seeking Brahman in all living things.
----- Original Message -----
From: Mahesh Ursekar <mahesh.ursekar at gmail.com>
To: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta
<advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2006 2:09 AM
Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Self-knowledge
A common misconception - chemicals react to give rise to love. How do you
not know that it is love that is causing the chemicals to behave in the
manner you suggest?
To illustrate this point some more:
There is a story of a saintly lady (I forget her name now) who radiated love
to such an extent that she could sit among wild tigers and they would treat
her as her own! This cannot be due to a tiger's hormones gone wild, can it?
If it were local to her mind, there was no way the tiger would have sensed
Humble pranams, Mahesh
On 2/1/06, Aditya Varun Chadha <adichad at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2/1/06, Mahesh Ursekar <mahesh.ursekar at gmail.com > wrote:
> > 1. Can the intellect comprehend love? However subtle it may be, the term
> > understand love' is a invalid. Infact, all feelings belong to this
> > category. The intellect can only register feelings and act or them but
> > cannot understand them. I am hungry makes the intellect search for food
> > it cannot express the feeling intelligebly in any way. So, is love as
> > prosaic as hunger? I don't think so because most other feelings are
> > localized (I am hungry, I am angry, etc). Sure, one can say 'I am in
> > but interestingly, it is the only feeling that has a higher dimension -
> > statement "Love is" is a valid and correct statement. Infact, if you
> > Rumi, you will know that it is the ONLY valid statement.
> all emotions are functions of the brain, including love, hunger,
> anger, etc. and are limited to this body. When different chemicals act
> on the nervous system, it reacts in corresponding ways, and these
> reactions we give a name, example love. This is pratyaksha pramANa.
> Please do not confuse jurisdictions of science and scriptures, it has
> been done too many times on this community.
> > 2. Lets take now, the case of two lovers who fall in love 'at first
> > How is that possible? How can two individuals who know nothing about
> > other be connected in such a bond "like they were looking for each other
> > their lives"? It behoves the mind (intellect, I guess) to think that
> > individual separately had such overpowering feelings in their manas that
> > attracted them to each other! There has to be some common factor that
> > the two of them - that IMHO is the universal love that is all around but
> > reflected in the two intellects in such a way that they "found each
> > That is the only plausible explanation.
> or the simple scientific explanation: the sense of sight triggered
> specific hormones to act on the nervous system, and there occured a
> configuration change in the structure of the brain. based on various
> attributes and the extent of a match, this reaction can occur almost
> instantaneously, or over a length of time. this new configuration is
> called "being in love".
> > In short, IMHO, when it comes to spirituality, the intellect is a feeble
> > instrument (however subtle) since it can barely rise to the high levels
> > required of true love a.k.a. realization!
> there are simple scientific explanations for all these things (EXCEPT
> the phenomenon of retention of memory across reincarnations).
> Remember, Vedanta does not compete with science. Don't be offended if
> science explains some of the phenomena that we THINK pertain to
> spirituality, because Vedanta welcomes these explanations. Vedanta has
> jurisdiction elsewhere, and that "elsewhere" (brahmanhood) may
> provably be beyond science. but these simpler things (personal love,
> emotions, and even enlightenment, ANY human experience for that
> matter) are much more easily explained by science (these explanations
> don't go against what Vedanta has to say).
> Rumi is poetry. However much mysticism you may advocate, this only
> gives pleasure to your Mind, maybe even changes your mind
> configuration for extended periods of time. but it is all still
> pertaining to the Mind.
> about self realization, let me read more and THEN talk.
> Aditya Varun Chadha
> adichad AT gmail.com
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
To unsubscribe or change your options:
For assistance, contact:
listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list