Some Issues

Thatte, Uday (NM IT) Uday.Thatte at NMB.NORWEST.COM
Thu Oct 2 11:54:20 CDT 1997

Of course, I see the substance of Martin's replies and don't intend to go
into any argument. However, I feel that my writing did not clearly convey
what I meant....hence.....

>At 04:34 PM 29/09/97 -0500, Uday wrote:
>>1. Religion is subjective, science is objective and universally accurate.
>'Objective' means you are separate from that which you observe. How could
>you know or prove that you are separate? Science creates conceptual objects
>and then analyses their creations!

What I intend to mean is religion can be different for each individual
whereas science cannot be.

>>2. Religions have a purpose but do not have rules, science is a collection
>>of rules but has no purpose.
>It's purpose is to understand the universe.

In my opinion, the purpose to understand the universe is not of science but
of human being. Science is just one of the media or collection of data
created by man to help pursuit of this discovery. Whereas the 'typical'
religions were established and propogated (either by convincing or by
forcing people) with a purpose to elevate human beings from a raw 'animal'
state based on instincts of survival to a higher level having a superior
logic of survival that would ensure peace and fulfillment for everybody
without struggle. Although one cannot discard the importance of science and
scientific pursuit, one has to bear in mind its limited scope and

>4. Science tells us not to believe without reason, religions tell us to
>believe and then reason (if you want to).

Science tells us to believe in separate objects and then to explore what you
believe. Gurus tell us to break away from all falsely held concepts like our
supposed identity as a separate object.

Frankly speaking, this can become very confusing when we start our
philosophical learning with a scientific approach (which we are used to in
this age). What I mean is, life was very simple and successful for people
like Mira Bai, Tukaram or Narsinh Mehta (the famous saints of 'Bhakti'
path). I doubt if they had any trace of information on Vedaanta but they
obtained the ultimate salvation without even being conciously aware of it.
And on the other hand, we come across many people having a detailed
information and understanding of not only vedantic but many other schools of
thought and still struggling to achieve some kind of peace and fulfillment
in their own life and feelings. For that matter, aren't we all struggling to
find that answer? I some times feel that it may be worth considering the
possibility of 'needing no answers because there are no questions' as some
one has it in his mail footnote. Or may be I am simply either tired or lazy
or too dumb to think so deep.

Please excuse me if I have diverted from the original discussion. I just
didn't know where to stop !!!


More information about the Advaita-l mailing list