[Advaita-l] Quantum Physics came from Vedas: Schrödinger and Einstein read Veda's
rbalpal at yahoo.co.in
Wed Mar 8 04:23:49 EST 2017
The basic difference between a scientist and a spiritual seeker is on the assumptions - for scientists matter is eternal, fundamental. Consciousness, chaitanyam came later. It happened, occurred,.. etc. They are trying to figure out whether it is 'accidental' or 'planned' etc. Whereas a spiritual seeker begins with the premise that 'consciousness / chaitanyam' is fundamental and matter, the Universe came later. And a serious 'mumukshu' finally closes the chapter in Mantra 7 of the MAnDUkya Upanishad.
As long as the objects are scrutinised ignoring the subject, scientists' attempts are at best will keep on adding to the never ending list of comforts and conveniences (concurrent pain, sorrow, delusions, ..) in 'samsAra'. In fact it adds to the list of things the mumukshu has to negate - neti, neti,...
ShankarachArya had to fight with tooth and nail the onslaughts of the 'karma vaadins' and the 'jnAna karma samuchaya vadiis' listing the 5 differences - phala, sAmagri, adhikAri, shAstra and swarUpa bheda.
Similarly one will have to come out with a list of 'bhedas' between a scientist and a vedAntin.
Well, both being human, and dons 'bahukrita vesham' for 'udaranimittam', one can't strictly ask a person to not be a scientist if he has to be a seeker of 'Atma jnAnam'. But it would be better to remember which takes where.
On Wednesday, 8 March 2017 10:55 AM, Bhaskar YR via Advaita-l <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
praNAms Sri Sriram prabhuji
>From philosophical perspective, yes, bhArata has reached it's pinnacle but let us also give credit to western scientists who have toiled day and night to invent.
> I agree with you. First of all shAstra is not meant for vishaya jnana it is there for us to realize our svarUpa jnana. The karma vidhi and other details about other vishaya-s would ultimately lead us to know the vishayAteeta svarUpa jnana. Hence when it comes to the description of bAhya vishaya-s (external objective knowledge) veda-s do have a restricted boundaries which cannot be denied. But it is hard to accept for those who fanatically want to see anything and everything in veda and desperately want to find the roots in veda-s for all the past and recent scientific discoveries . They would not spare even the following examples which you have mentioned :-)
Without Thomas Edison, there wouldn't have been electric bulbs;
> I have read somewhere that in some part of the Rigveda there is a method of doing 'vidyut utpAdana'
without Wright Brothers, there wouldn't have been aeroplanes;
> aeroplanes are nothing but a technology which our pUrvaja-s used to build pushpaka vimAna in rAmAyaNa era i.e. in treata yuga :-)
without Graham Bell, there wouldn't have been telephone;
> telepathy ( some sort of mind to mind communication through dhyAna Taranga-s) was existed during the ancient times...tele-communication (wireless mobile as well) technology developed on this vidhAna.
and without Alexander Fleming, there wouldn't have been Penicillin and so on...who have improved our life standards.
> when it comes to medicines how can we forget the contributions of charaka saMhita and our vishNu rUpi dhanvantari?? :-) Tomorrow if someone comes forward and claims that Penicillin was there in some form in the lost portion of some atharva saMhita, we the vedAbhimAni-s donot suspect that claim :-) do we ??
Having acknowledged the westerners' contribution to the society whose journey is external; the Indian philosophers' journey is internal and the path of the both are mutually exclusive.
> Yes, prabhuji. Recently I saw an article claiming that the most suitable language for computer programming is 'Sanskrit' I donot know how far it is authentic and reliable. But these types of theories floating freely nowadays.
However, it is not that Vedas are only concerned with mantras, karma-kanda, pashu-yagas and attainment of other world and thereafter.
It needs a special mention that a technique of excavation of earth for tracing of gems and certain metallurgical rocks have been mentioned in mantra-bhAga. The gems and mettalurgical rocks were identified with the help of "garuDa". These aspects should have been studied deeply by our our traditional scholars rather than engaging discussions whether Jagat is mithya or satya.
> And those who passionately talk a lot about jagan mithyatva donot want to talk much about jeeva mithyatva despite the fact that both jeeva & jagat have been treated as mithyA only in shAstra and bhAshya when they have been existed on their own..
Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
To unsubscribe or change your options:
For assistance, contact:
listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list