Democracy is a myth
I just realized the thread title is "Debates about the Economy, Politics, Religion, and everything under the sun"
Which has a poll "Who will win 2014 elections"
Which has a poll "Who will win 2014 elections"
Absolutely correct on that. I can take you even deeper on that logic for there is no such thing as direction in this directionless world anyways. Like I reasoned for names etc as a frame of reference, direction is also a frame of reference in a relative term. For that matter can you even prove your existence? For all I can see, from a greater level of reasoning, is a tornado of molecules, a dance of energy behind your "perceived" shape of the body which is changing every nano-second. Does your existence go beyond to the atoms that left your body through excreta, perspiration, exhale etc or the do the atoms that come to your body, through inhale, drinking, energy from sun, light from tubelight etc, for a "moment" even belong to you in the first place?Raaabo said:The sun rises in the East? Yes, a fact in the old world. However, today we know that the sun actually doesn't "rise" it's the
spot on earth you're standing at that turns to face the sun, and sunrise is different for everyone. In the circles it rises
and sets once in 6 months. Science and exploration taught us that. No one "knows" anything about their body, they "believe".
how much weight can you lift right now this very instant? Exact, to the nearest kilo? no one knows these things, which is why
we lift some, if it's too heavy we take off some, if it's liftable we try and lift more. Weightlifters go through years of
extensive training and keep pushing. There is no absolute, there is no knowing, there is only exploring.
You are getting confused I guess in this overdose of reasoning. I never would want people to "follow/believe" Vedas in the first place, but question it!Raaabo said:As you stated, "higher" implies better, and the way you speak of it implies better. Maybe not best, but it sure sounds like
you feel that people who do not follow the vedas, or think of the mind and consciousness differently are illiterate or
However the world was here before you came along, and will be here after you depart it. It was here before all humans came
along, and will be here after they depart it. Their perception of it does not govern it. This is what the problem is with
humanity, this feeling of being special. It's what all religions are based on, you're not ordinary and pointless, you are
special... wow, feels good, so it must be right. Human beings are the most narcissistic of creatures around, and want
desperately to find a higher purpose and meaning. Is it possible that there exists a consciousness that is on a higher plane
or maybe in a different dimension, sure, it’s also possible that God is a green goblin with one testicle and breasts, and is
actually a little monster baby and entire universes are just motes in his / her snow globe that is shaken about now and then.
And, it’s also equally possible that human beings give themselves too much importance and religion and higher purposes are
just tricks the mind plays to prevent people from going nuts and killing themselves. Thus the “faith”. And yes, you have it
I guess you still haven't understood the basic meaning of consciousness or the order that I have explained again and again or the Ritam at large. It is not limited to "life" or happening on the earth. For that matter, even if I narrow myself to your understanding, how can you call that which contains life as lifeless? For that matter the essence of Sun like I explained before, encompasses the entire solar system. Earth is a part of the solar system which is a part of milky way galaxy and hence the universe. How can you call Universe as lifeless which contains you and me? Like I questioned before, are you really apart from the Universe or you are simply a part of it?Raaabo said:I prefer to classify myself as an atheist, and many atheists I meet are similar. I think you have a narrow view of atheism,
and those who only accept what can be proven or measured or seen.
The entire universe isn’t full of consciousness. It may be, it may not be, there is no proof of consciousness other
than on Earth for the moment. Anything said more than that is based on faith, and nothing more. Sure you may “believe” that
it is so, but sorry, it isn’t fact, just your faith. It’s not even an improper-yet-accepted-fact like the “sun rising in the
The concept of infinity has always existed to all thinking beings. To a man standing on a sea shore, the horizon is an
infinite distance. Mathematically you can analyse infinity in a few ways, for example anything divided by infinity = 0. Or
anything divided by zero is infinity. Actually not exactly, but for the sake of simplicity an acceptable compromise.
Also, nothing is infinite, which is the beauty of the world around us. It may take “forever” to reach the edges of the
galaxy travelling at the speed of a rocket-boosted engine today, but that forever is a number. It can be calculated, if we
ever went there. Infinity simply means too long to bother about researching and calculating anymore in everyday life, and
undefined/error in mathematics.
As for time, it’s very real. Many people will complain about the time it takes to read these posts.
Without time there would be stasis, and nothing at all. The very reason anything exists is time, so is time God? There is no
higher plane of consciousness needed to understand time. It is then and now and what we assume/hope will be. Someone broke it
into seconds and hours and days so we could keep track and have a common reference frame, so we can make appointments or say
“two days ago the bad men came and slaughtered our cattle”, or whatever. Today we have refined the art of telling time, where
before it was “many moons ago” or maybe in ancient years their way of saying many moons was to say what now translates to a
century or a thousand years. We don’t know. It’s common for people to exaggerate. Before infinity, it was “thousands of
years”. In fact the yugas people follow themselves are measures of time. And even Bhrama has limited time and dies after a
specified time (only to be born again – resurrection is the hook for people in this particular religion).
The problem I have with most ancient texts is that the translator sees what he wants to see.
For example in the Yugas, what was first 4800 years then became 4800 divine years when things didn’t match up. Extensions of
time in such a manner seem a little convenient to me, even though I am all for updating science and realising that what we
know is only what we know today. However, facts that are provable are just my preferred way of operating.
It’s like the people who call Nostradamus a seer. If anything he was probably inspired by ancient texts to predict events in
this way. The use of tongues to veil apparent meanings is still applied by scamsters when you go for tarot card readings, or
those who read tea leaves. No one will tell you “You will die tomorrow” because that’s clear and concise. Instead it will be
veiled in the form of “Your death will be peaceful and will coincide with the meetings in the heavens of <random name> and
<another random name>, but only when the moon is in the ascent…” you get the idea. This is an age old magician’s trick.
Distract and dazzle. All religions do this. You will find multiple sites online that will tell you how the Bible is always
right, even today, and uses verses to prove even the modern era, and how it’s a problem of our “understanding” of the texts.
You will find the same for the Quran, for example, explaining everything that science has found out today. I have no doubt
that the “Indians” of that era were more scientific in their observations, and thus were obviously more accurate. I have no
problems with many of the sayings, including those which talk about greed, and try and better our lives.
The video I showed and the discovery is based on dating techniques. "A claim or what has been claimed" is a totally different thing! I really don't know how you define civilization. But for me civilization means a society which can learn to co-exist with the nature and the animals, promotes science of consciousness and mind and body control to be taught at a very young age to children, perfection in various spheres of life, ability to retain knowledge. For that matter, I don't see the "modern world" to be much civilized which is busy in external analysis, attachment and making concrete jungles out of fertile lands in the name of "progress and development", where life has been reduced to a little booze, drug-addiction, engrossed in one's own life and job without any concern for the Family, Joint Family, Nation and world at large!Raaabo said:What we “thought” is perhaps the wrong way to put it. What we “knew for sure” until the discovery of this city is better.
There are squabbles over dating of course but certainly 9,500 years, and yes I’ve seen a history channel documentary that
wanted to hype it and said 32000 years, and also claimed Krishna was an alien.
Here’s more proof of civilised life older than we previously discovered.
Gobekli Tepe: The World
What is civilised life however? There are cave paintings we know of as old as 40,000 years ago. Humanoid remains have been
found all over the globe and carbon date between 7 million years and 2 million years ago. Is it the building of cities that
defines civilisation? Is it grouping together and living together? Life’s existed for millions of years on Earth, and the
fossils we found prove that. We cannot prove exactly when it started, but the estimates will do for now.
This is again an example where you are judging everything through a narrow and limited frameworks of "physical" alone. Like I said, if you dwell in the lowest consciousness i.e physicalRaaabo said:Sorry, but again this is where we diverge. You may call it “knowing” for as long as you want, but there is no physical proof
of this. It is “belief”. Sure, we believe that city to be 12000 years old, but carbon dating of the oldest artifacts found
will date it at around 9500. Small leaps of faith are possible, sure, like believing that the city found was built and
developed for almost 3000 years before it perished – very, very believable. Also believable that there were a bunch of nomads
living there 9500 years ago, and say, 2000 years later that developed into a city. But we’d rather “believe” that the city
was in fact older, and sure, nothing wrong with that. The truth will lie somewhere close to what the facts can prove anyway.
Do you think cavemen cannot be perfect? Or do you think men in this age who cannot remember what happened 2 days back, need a timer to wake up, calculator to do simple maths, who cannot stand in Sun for 1 hour etc are perfect? BTW, there are instances of human beings co-existing with the dinosaurs from the smritis!Raaabo said:However, believing that there were “perfect beings” in a time when all fossils and physical proof shows only cave men, or
dinosaurs, depending on whether you go with the yuga definition of “years” or “divine years”. Something tells me that
there would be some physical evidence of this. There is none. Apparently perfect beings didn’t need shelter from the weather,
or the ice age, or anything. Now of course perhaps the weather was perfect, much like the beings, however even that is proven
wrong when we look at rock formations, permafrost going back hundreds of thousands of years. Much like counting the rings on
the trees and looking at the way in which those rings are formed we can tell what the weather was, the same applies to rock,
Like I stated, brahma is an experience and not an abrahamic God isolated from you or me. I requested you to transcend beyond names. Brahma as I repeat is a lower level of consciousness and Vishnu the supreme as per the context! Similarly, the world of Shakti can rise and merge, from Sati to Parvati to uniting with Shiva, where a man is said to be awakened with the union of Shakti with Shiva! It is simply a transenscion of consciousness, just like I gave the analogy of matter and energy rising from matter and energy and using matter and energy and becoming matter and energy at its end, where matter is alone seen as energy as per Quantums theory!Raaabo said:In order to understand the vedas, don’t I have to believe that Brahma created everything, Vishnu will destroy it all, etc?
Isn’t everything put in context with those beliefs? I honestly don’t know because everything I have read thus far says so
(which is I am SURE a miniscule fraction of what you have read on the subject). I am the first to claim ignorance of this
because it turns me off when the very first words or sentences ask me to make a leap of faith and just “believe” with no
facts being provided. Good writing for me lays out facts first, then if necessary asks you to take a leap of faith, all the
while explaining why that leap of faith may and may not be right. I like to have all my bases covered. Again I’m not merely a
techno junky, so don’t pounce on the example that follows – would you trust a review for the iPhone that said, trust me, it
sucks (or trust me, it rocks). Would you automatically assume that since Digit’s an old brand in technology, we know what
we’re saying? After you got your hands on the iPhone, would you then automatically start assuming we meant that the camera is
bad (or that the battery life is good), etc., as reasons why it sucks (or rocks). Would you automatically trust us
implicitly, saying we must have been scientific about our conclusions, because look, here are 30 other phone reviews we got
right as well? I hope you get the point I am making, but I can always bring more examples into this.
I don't really understand how these points you made are connected to context I'm talking of or perhaps you are again ignoring too much?Raaabo said:Entropy, what’s wrong with it? Matter converts into energy and back again all the time in everyday life. Understanding it is
not hard at all, not even thousands of years ago. You eat, you get strength. You don’t you faint. You get hungry you get
desperate, but also weaker, eventually you die. Small plants don’t grow in shaded areas, thus the sun is needed – it is
needed to create matter, and importantly the fruit I eat. Planting seeds in my cave fails, but in a field with sunlight they
prosper. Same with water, stupid plants…. The sun is strange – burns my face if I stand in it for too long, yet when it goes
away it’s too cold and dark. In my rock the sun gives light, indirectly, and without the heat of direct sunlight. It is far
away, but still burns silently, how strange. The moonlight never burns, no matter how much we bask in it. The fire I build
burns also, but makes smoke and noise as well. The sun doesn’t. Thus it proves the sun is far away, and when I see through
the trees I can see the sun’s “rays” which must be magical carriers of warmth and light. I had this drink once, Energee, it
made me feel active and strong, let’s call it Energy instead (at least their stupid lawyers will not be able to sue me then).
I tend to attempt humour sometimes to break the monotony (and fail?), but I suppose you get the drift. That doesn’t equate to
E=MC^2. Sure the cavemen could have had a concept of “energy” as did the ancients obviously, but there are limits. They
didn’t know about the atomic bomb or matter energy coefficients, they merely stated what they observed and thought of and
then extrapolated one view into another. The world was flat, then it changed and became spherical when combined knowledge
(from China some say) explained the motion of the stars and the day and night. The earth was the centre, then the sun was.
This centre theory was good, it was easily explainable, just tie a rock to string and whirl it and a circle is born. But you
are at the centre. Thus god must be at the centre of everything, because the earth is wondrous, and must be the creation of a
god. I can create string, a hut, a club, and I can grow fruit, but to create life and the stars and the sun, wow, that must
be a supreme being. Thus the stories start, and everyday experiences build and add to the story.
I have read hundreds of links like that. I see really no difference in the fact that “faith” is required. Many will say that
all religions believe that there is only ONE true god, which some people in Hinduism also believe – that all the gods are
merely the powers of the all-powerful. Nomenclature, as far as I am concerned – just personal opinion of course. Many also
believe that the Christ and Krishna story are the same on so many levels that it has to be the same story, just told by
different people, and thus the different religions. The more people try and differentiate, the more similarities are found.
Even science has similarities to religions – blind belief by the masses for one, and lack of understanding. However, the
difference is that popular, everyday, modern science is based on drawn up laws that you and me can experiment and verify. We
have no desire to, of course, but we can. Many of us have done chemistry in school, and seen reactions that would be magic to
the average villager.
The only flaw in your argument is that you made the science of the consistent ( where sifferent sages of 108 Upanishads, contributing to Veda, Tantras, Zend Avesta, Greek Literature arrived at the same conclusion ) compared to a case of probability "a broken clock is right twice a day". There is a difference between modern science and the science of the consciousness. Former works on the lowest level of consciousness and hence a "subset" of the latter, perhaps a subset of "Vaiseshika classification", but the latter works on the higher levels of consciousness aimed to achieve the highest. The former changes its theories based on a limited set of analysis, where the believers of science, those attached to it unable to understand it in detail change their tone as research changes with time. Hence the proverb - Dhobi ka kutta na ghar ka na ghaat ka (Its a proverb, not an abuse FYI). The Latter remains static, fixed, where sages can arrived at the same truth through different approaches as they like depending upon their outlook, creativity and experience and hence at a higher level of awareness can comprehend the reality/happenings and have a "direct access to knowledge". Yes, this understanding of "direct access to knowledge" is something alien to "modern science" before you jump to conclusions that everything is compared to "modern science" (like your dark energy comment). Hence different shruties though arriving at the same conclusions and affirmations, have different styles of writing!Raaabo said:Or it could also mean that both the cow and light help us survive, and thus are sacred. There are still many jumps of faith
made in such cases. A greater understanding of something always raises the way in which you look at ancients. You may go to
ancient civilisations and see step farming as them understanding gravity, fluid dynamics and more advanced concepts, but
maybe they just planted everywhere and found that plantations on natural steps didn’t get washed away. We recreate what
works. It happens in villages today as well, where farming techniques that are used in the US are also used here, by
illiterates. However practising is not understanding, not always. Even a non-musician can hit a chord by mistake and discover
it – without knowing what it is called or why it sounds nice. Even a broken clock is right twice a day…
"The Mysterious" dark energy used to explain the "faster expanding universe" which was earlier "supposed" to slow down under the effect of its own gravity? I didn't think that words like "mysterious" are apt to explain a phenomena which contradicts the earlier "supposed" theory. I won't really relate it to Vedas but again an example of a wild goose chase by the modern scientists just like as in the case of Higs-Boson which has so many fundamentals incorrect and already refuted by many other scientists.Raaabo said:If science calls something dark energy, I am sure someone will go back to the vedas and find a verse or two to show how it
fits in perfectly with theory, however, this just doesn’t cut it for me, because as I said earlier, really enlightened and
smart people speak clearly, and take time to explain, and cover all questions. With accumulated knowledge that is tinged with
religious overtones that were prevalent in the day, the meanings are being hidden, morphed, misread and interpreted as per
one’s desire. This is great for abstract art, but for science, a little less desirable.
You have got it all upside down. It is not because of Veda that a person may become knowledgeable, creative or wise! Veda is just a tool a guidance for those who seek genuinely and hence can utilize it, just like in the company of wise, even a foolish can change and improve! Moreover, it is a foundation for the lower sciences and hence a testimonial of the world's famous scientists from Heisenberg, Tesla, Einstein, Capra etc who were influenced and motivated by it.Raaabo said:Also as for the past and time, anything that’s measurable is acceptable. I will have written this in the past when you read
it, yet I am sure you will not agree with it. That logic goes nowhere, because I thought I was the one you were trying to
show up as an unbeliever as time passes. Had I written this 1000 years ago would it make it more believable to you? Thus the
ancient texts do not turn me off because they are ancient alone, but because they are written for a society that is long dead
and gone, and being interpreted by one who knows a lot more now, and is also more creative, and is reading too much
importance into them. If knowledge is the ultimate goal, who cares where it comes from. Do I have to accept Indra and Brahma
before I can acquire knowledge? If so I have a problem with that. Do I have to accept what they say at face value without
questioning? Do I have to read things written vaguely (on purpose or lack of language capability) which some people interpret
one way and others another, and then fight till eventually one wins and drowns the other out? That’s religion in a nutshell
isn’t it? The world has moved to a fact based one. You shirk you get fired, you don’t earn you starve, you don’t pay your
internet bill, you can’t bore forum members with a million word debate, you can’t solve the problem of hypersleep, you can’t
go to alpha centauri, you don’t invent a better propulsion system than rockets, you won’t go to mars. This is the world
today, and it’s increasingly connected and increasingly fact based. Answers need to be to the point, and not vague. Thus
You got my logic all wrong. What would you call the shape of the Sun during solarwinds, Sunpots etc? Even a spheroid has a shape, but something which changes its shape all time due to increasing and decreasing flames cannot be said to have a "definite shape". How can that which is ever changing, according to the lower consciousness of sense, be called as having a definite shape?Raaabo said:I can see what you’re saying, but I prefer to look at it as the radiation of energy in all directions. The light and heat get
weaker the further you go, and the shape of the sun is a spheroid because it is observed so from various angles, and the
physics of gravity thus far prove it to be thus. By your logic any shape can be proven to not be that shape. A line is
a collection of dots and never perfectly straight… this is what I would call overthinking. What purpose does it serve except
to make it akin to a candle, and then take a leap of faith into believing that radiation is an “essence”. Why not just call
it radiation, and leave essence as something I put in my milk to give it a vanilla flavour? Why is it that modern science
tries to distinguish everything by giving it a new word. What people called birds biology broke into hundreds of thousands of
species. Clarity is formed when broken down, perhaps this is why all things faith based want to converge everything into one.
The murkier the better, because then it leaves more things open to interpretation. Why not break them down to an atom, and
study that atom. You use the example of the river flowing into the ocean, and losing it’s identity, why is that important.
It’s taken on faith that this is important, and it then requires another jump of faith to believe that this is the true path
to enlightenment. However abstracts haven’t built this world and new civilisation of ours. It’s specifics, and the separating
of disciplines. If everyone had to learn everything, and try and live only by the old beliefs, we would have no specialised
heart surgeons, and every heart attack would be fatal.
Again you did not read my post properly. Tell me if the Marijuana smokers, drug addicts can control their mind or body under its effect? Do you really think Marijuana, smoking, drug-addiction "increases" life? The very concept of higher consciousness is based on detachment whereas the drug addiction is based on attachment to the sense-object! Moreover, a yogi who shows attachment to material pleasures like "Marijuana,smoking, drugs etc" is not really a Yogi in its basic definition. So I can only request you to not be fooled by the names/tags or what a person calls himself. Transcend to the essence, is the only thing I can request you.Raaabo said:Again it sounds to me more like losing consciousness (as in passing out and letting your mind run wild). Many marijuana
smokers I know report the very same thing. When I went to Nepal last year, and met and spoke to some of the hundreds of
Sadhus there, they also reported that it made it easier to meditate. It cleared the mind. I asked them also what meditation
was to them, and they all said very personal things. “For me…” actually “Mere liye…” since they all spoke Hindi to me… and
that for me starts with an “I”. The very fact that it’s personal, makes it not about anything of global importance, but like
any other self-serving experience. I have a detachment from all things material when I sleep, when I focus on something, when
I day dream, or even sometimes when I sit about looking into the distance. There are always thoughts there though, and it is
my mind at work, so I still do not get this whole idea of wisdom flowing into you. Sure your synaptics firing randomly making
a pattern that gives you an aha moment and snaps you out of a dreamy state, definitely, that’s how I get article ideas and
headlines, or cover stories.
A person who seeks interest in technology will indeed gain knowledge of it and what is available in terms of technology. It is as simple as that! You don't have to "believe" (like you assume) in the science of consciousness here. It is inherent to you! Similarly, one who seeks the highest does not need to read Veda, but simply genuinely seek it and the path shall reveal itself in time!Raaabo said:So if I don’t believe it to be a higher science, and I am not willing to make leaps of faith I can never experience it? Is it
even remotely possible that people will accept the explanation that I offer, which is that perhaps it is just a mind
searching for its own superiority, to feel important, to feel a sense of purpose that gives people these feelings – perhaps
even delusions. Something like everything seeming to be in slow motion just before you’re about to have an accident. It’s a
mind trick, where your brain goes into overdrive, and your focus is heightened in a hurry, which makes you feel like it was
slow motion, because you happened to notice a hell of a lot more than you usually do. Thus the noticing of events is
increased, but the absorption of events is still normal, and thus it’s like slow motion. Very much like shooting in 60 fps
and then watching back in 30.
ALBERT EISTEIN (SCIENTIST): "When I read the Bhagavad-Gita and reflect about how God created this universe everything else seems so superfluous."
ROBERT OPPENHEIMER (THEORETICAL PHYSICIST): "Access to the Vedas is the greatest privilege this century may claim over all previous centuries. The general notions about human understanding… which are illustrated by discoveries in atomic physics are not in the nature of things wholly unfamiliar, wholly unheard of or new. In 'Hindu' thought they have a more considerable and central place. What we shall find [in modern physics] is an exemplification, an encouragement, and a refinement of old wisdom."
WERNER HEISENBERG (FATHER OF QUANTUM PHYSICS, Nobel Prize winner): "After the conversations about Indian Philosophy, some of the ideas of Quantum Physics that had seemed so crazy suddenly made much more sense."
ERWIN SCHRODINGER (PHYSICIST), awarded the Nobel prize in Quantum Mechanics, in 1933. He said "The unity and continuity of "Vedanta" are reflected in the unity and continuity of wave mechanics. In 1925, the world view of physics was a model of a great machine composed of separable interacting material particles. During the next few years, Schrodinger and Heisenberg and their followers created a universe based on super imposed inseparable waves of probability amplitudes. This new view would be entirely consistent with the Vedantic (Veda) concept of All in One."
ADVAITA AND SCIENCE IX – SCHRODINGER AND VEDANTA | Adbhutam's Blog
BRIAN DAVID JOSEPHSON (PHYSICIST, Nobel Laureate): "The Vedanta and the Samkhya hold the key to the laws of the mind and thought process which are correlated to the Quantum Field, i.e the operation and distribution of particles at atomic and molecular levels."
Dr. CARL SAGAN (ASTROPHYSICIST):
"The Hindu religion is the only one of the world's great faiths dedicated to the idea that the Cosmos itself undergoes an immense, indeed an infinite, number of deaths and rebirths. It is the only religion in which the time scales correspond, to those of modern scientific cosmology. Its cycles run from our ordinary day and night to a day and night of Brahma, 8.64 billion years long. Longer than the age of the Earth or the Sun and about half the time since the Big Bang. And there are much longer time scales still."
FRITJOF CAPRA (PHYSICIST):
Outlines parallels between Vedantic worldview and Quantum Physics- in his book TAO OF PHYSICS. "Modern physics has thus revealed that every subatomic particle not only performs an energy dance, but also is an energy dance; a pulsating process of creation and destruction. The dance of Shiva is the dancing universe, the ceaseless flow of energy going through an infinite variety of patterns that melt into one another. For the modern physicists, then Shiva’s dance is the dance of subatomic matter. As in Hindu mythology, it is a continual dance of creation and destruction involving the whole cosmos; the basis of all existence and of all natural phenomenon. Hundreds of years ago, Indian artists created visual images of dancing Shivas in a beautiful series of bronzes. In our times, physicists have used the most advanced technology to portray the patterns of the cosmic dance."
Richard Waterstone has written in his book: Einstein and Shiva's cosmic dance : "There is a striking resemblance between the equivalence of mass and energy, symbolized by Shiva's cosmic dance and the Western theory, first expounded by Einstein, which calculates the amount of energy contained in a subatomic particle by multiplying its mass by the square of the speed of light: E = mc2. "
AMIT GOSWAMI (THEORETICAL NUCLEAR PHYSICIST): "Everything starts with consciousness. That is consciousness is the ground of all being". He wrote a book called 'The Self Aware Universe: How Consciousness creates the Material World' which propounds the same Vedic view of Brahman being the ground of all existence, immanent in all things.
NIKOLA TESLA (SCIENTIST) -contributor to the field of electricity and electromagnetism, influenced by Vedic Science and Philosophy.
Nikola Tesla and Swami Vivekananda
Tesla's intrest in Vedic works - YouTube
STEPHEN HAWKING (SCIENTIST) in describing his mathematical model of the universe said that whereas in Western religions a creator god precedes man and the universe, the Hindu gods are preceded by creation; the origin of the world is envisaged not so much as an act of creation but as one of organization, the making of order out of chaos. The universe is often said to be born from the sacred syllable Om, or from an inert void in which " there was neither being nor non-being ... death nor non-death", a single principle from which emerged the diversity of life. From this void desire was born, and from desire came humans, gods and creation."
Hindu Wisdom - Hindu Cosmology
PHILOSOPHERS AND HISTORIANS
General PHILOSOPHY and its concepts of 'mind', 'unity', 'universal consciousness', 'nature of existence', 'ontology', 'metaphysics', 'dualism', 'non-dualism' etc. are sourced from the Vedas and Vedanta.
Sir William Jones (English philologist and scholar) "I can venture to affirm, without meaning to pluck a leaf from the never-fading laurels of our immortal Newton, that the whole of his theology, and part of his philosophy, may be found in the Vedas."
T.S ELLIOT (AMERICAN WRITER): "Indian Philosophers' subtleties make most of the great European philosophers look like schoolboys."
LIN YUTANG (CHINESE SCHOLAR): "India was China's teacher in religion and imaginative literature, and the world's teacher in trignometry, quandratic equations, grammar, phonetics, arabian nights, animal fables, chess, as well as in philosophy, and that she inspired Boccaccio, Goethe, Herder, Schopenhauer, Emerson, and probably also old Aesop." "Not until we see the richness of the Hindu mind and its essential spirituality can we understand India.
Dr. D. T. SUZUKI (JAPANESE/ZEN SCHOLAR):
"The study of Japanese thought is the study of Indian thought."
HENRY DAVID THOREAU (AMERICAN HISTORIAN, CRITIC AND PHILOSOPHER): "In the morning I bathe my intellect in the stupendous and cosmogonal philosophy of the Bhagavad Gita in comparison with which our modern world and its literature seems puny and trivial."
"Most books belong to the house and streets only...But this (Bhagavad Gita) addresses what is deepest and most abiding in man. . . . Its truth speaks freshly to our experience. The sentences are filled with depth and serenity and I am sure they will have a place and significance as long as there is a sky to test them by."
"One sentence of the Bhagavad Gita, is worth the State of Massachusetts many times over."
ALDOUS HUXLEY (ENGLISH PHILOSOPHER, AUTHOR): "The Bhagavad-Gita is the most systematic statement of spiritual evolution of endowing value to mankind. It is one of the most clear and comprehensive summaries of perennial philosophy ever revealed; hence its enduring value is subject not only to India but to all of humanity."
ROMAIN ROLLAND (FRENCH PHILOSOPHER, NOBEL LAUREATE, PROFESSOR OF HISTORY):
"Religious faith in the case of Hinduism has never been allowed to run counter to scientific laws, moreover the former has never made a condition for the knowledge it teaches, but is always scrupulously careful to take into consideration the possibility that by reason both the agnostic and the atheist may attain truth in their own way."
"The vast and tranquil metaphysics of India is unfolded; her conception of the universe, her social organization, perfect in its day and still capable of adaptation to the demands of modern times; the solution which she offers for the feminist problem, for the problems of the family, of love, of marriage; and lastly, the magnificent revelation of her art. The whole vast soul of India proclaims from end to end of its crowded and well ordered edifice the same domination of a sovereign synthesis.
There is no negation. All is harmonized. All the forces of life are grouped like a forest, whose thousand waving arms are led by Nataraja, the master of the Dance. Everything has its place, every being has its function, and all take part in the divine concert, their different voices, and their very dissonances, creating, in the phrase of Heraclitus, a most beautiful harmony. Whereas in the West, cold, hard logic isolates the unusual, shutting it off from the rest of life into a definite and distinct compartment of the spirit. India, ever mindful of the natural differences in souls and in philosophies, endeavors to blend them into each other, so as to recreate in its fullest perfection the complete unity. The matching of opposites produces the true rhythm of life."
ARTHUR SCHOPENHAUER (GERMAN PHILOSOPHER): "In the whole world there is no study so beneficial and so elevating as that of the Upanishads. The Upanishads have been the solace of my life, they will be the solace of my death."
PAUL DEUSSEN (1845-1919) a direct disciple of Arthur Schopenhauer: "Whatever may be the discoveries of the scientific mind, none can dispute the eternal truths propounded by the Upanishads. Though they may appear as riddles, the key to solving them lies in our heart and if one were to approach them with an open mind one could secure the treasure as did the Rishis of ancient times"
GEORGE BERNARD SHAW (NOBEL PRIZE IN LITERATURE, CO-FOUNDER OF LONDON SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS): "The apparent multiplication of gods is bewildering at the first glance, but you soon discover that they are the same GOD. There is always one uttermost God who defies personification. This makes Hinduism the most tolerant religion in the world, because its one transcendent God includes all possible gods. In fact Hinduism is so elastic and so subtle that the most profound Methodist, and crudest idolater, are equally at home with it."
RALPH WALDO EMERSON (AMERICAN PHILOSOPHER, AUTHOR, UNITARIAN MINISTER): "The Vedas haunt me. In them I have found eternal compensation, unfathomable power, unbroken peace."
DICK TERESI (AMERICAN WRITER): "Indian cosmologists were the first to estimate the age of the earth at more than 4 billion years. They came closest to modern ideas of atomism, quantum physics, and other current theories. India developed very early, enduring atomist theories of matter. Possibly Greek atomistic thought was influenced by India, via the Persian civilization."
Frederich von Scheigel (GERMAN SCHOLAR) "The Indians possessed a knowledge of the true God, conceived and expressed in noble, clear and grand language…Even the loftiest philosophy of the Europeans, the idealization of reason, as set forth by the Greeks, appears in comparison with the abundant light and vigor of oriental idealism, like a feeble spark in the full flood of the noonday sun."
John Major Jenkins (RESEARCHER OF ANCIENT COSMOLOGY)
"The Vedic civilization is perhaps the oldest continuous living tradition in the world. Its extremely ancient doctrines and insights into human spirituality are unsurpassed. We might expect that its cosmology and science of time has been as misunderstood as its true antiquity. In looking closely at Vedic doctrines of time, spiritual growth, cosmology, calendars, and astronomy, we will see that a central core idea is that of our periodic alignment to the Galactic Center. And, according to these ancient Vedic beliefs, the galactic alignment we are currently experiencing heralds our shift from a millennia-long descent of deepening spiritual darkness (kalyug) to a new era of light and ascending consciousness (satyug). "
Dr. A.P.J ABDUL KALAM (FORMER PRESIDENT OF INDIA): "Vedas are the most precious treasures of India. The soul of Bharatiya sanskriti dwells in the Vedas. The entire world admits the importance of the Vedas."
VENCENTE AVELINO who was the CONSUL GENERAL for Brazil in India in 1930, said- "India is the only country which has known God and if anyone wants to know God he must know India."
QUEEN FREDRICKA OF GREECE (1931- 1981) The wife of King Paul of Greece: "It was my advanced research in physics that had started me on a spiritual quest. It culminated in me accepting the non-dualism or absolute monism of Shankara as my philosophy of life and science. You are fortunate to inherit such knowledge.... I envy you. While Greece is the country of my birth, India is the country of my soul."
FRANCOIS GAUTIER (French Journalist, founder of FACT-INDIA): "The greatness of India is spiritual. The world has lost the truth. We have lost the Great Sense, the meaning of our evolution, the meaning of why so much suffering, why dying, why getting born, why this earth, who we are, what is the soul, what is reincarnation, where is the ultimate truth about the world, the universe... But India has kept this truth. India has preserved it through seven millennia of pitfalls, genocides, and mistakes. And this was meant to be India's gift to this planet in this century: to restore to the world its true sense, to recharge humanity with the real meaning and spirit of life. India can become the spiritual leader of the world, if only its own people will allow it.
W.J GRANT (BOOK-Spirit Of India): "India indeed has a preciousness which a materialistic age is in danger of missing. Some day the fragrance of her thought will win the hearts of men. This grim chase after our own tails which marks the present age cannot continue for ever. The future contains a new human urge towards the real beauty and holiness of life. When it comes, Hinduism will be searched by loving eyes and defended by knightly hands."
David Frawley (American Hindu and Vedic Scholar/Mystic) "The Hindu mind represents humanity’s oldest and most continuous stream of conscious intelligence on the planet. Hindu sages, seers, saints, yogis and jnanis have maintained an unbroken current of awareness linking humanity with the Divine since the dawn of history, and as carried over from earlier cycles of civilization in previous humanities unknown to our present spiritually limited culture."
Sanskrit literature is a great literature. We have the great songs of the Vedas, the splendor of the Upanishads, the glory of the Upanishads, the glory of the Bhagavad-Gita, the vastness (100,000 verses) of the Mahabharata, the tenderness and the heroism found in the Ramayana, the wisdom of the fables and stories of India, the scientific philosophy of Sankhya, the psychological philosophy of yoga, the poetical philosophy of Vedanta, the Laws of Manu, the grammar of Panini and other scientific writings, the lyrical poetry, and dramas of Kalidasa. Sanskrit literature, on the whole, is a romantic literature interwoven with idealism and practical wisdom, and with a passionate longing for spiritual vision. – Juan Mascaro
I can venture to affirm, without meaning to pluck a leaf from the never-fading laurels of our immortal Newton, that the whole of his theology, and part of his philosophy, may be found in the Vedas. – Sir William Jones (english philologist and scholar)
In India I found a race of mortals living upon the Earth. but not adhering to it. Inhabiting cities, but not being fixed to them, possessing everything but possessed by nothing. – Apollonius Tyanaeus (Greek Neopythagorean Philosopher)
The Indian way of life provides the vision of the natural, real way of life. We veil ourselves with unnatural masks. On the face of India are the tender expressions which carry the mark of the Creators hand. – George Bernanrd Shaw
For me the most important thing is to spread the Hindu knowledge about the soul. This is more important than any other knowledge and is my main priority. – Alfred Ford
When doubts haunt me, when disappointments stare me in the face, and I see not one ray of hope on the horizon, I turn to Bhagavad-Gita and find a verse to comfort me; and I immediately begin to smile in the midst of overwhelming sorrow. Those who meditate on the Gita will derive fresh joy and new meanings from it every day. ( Mahatma Gandhi)
Its basically common-sense. The difference implies shape, size, neareness to other continents etc.ico said:and Mahabharata happened around the time of transition from Dvapar Yuga to Kaliyuga.
So you mean to imply that continents were different 5000 years ago.
Politicians added fuel to the fire here as always.
A lot of people died in Muzzafarnagar, Uttar Pradesh. Rumour is that media is not reporting killing of Hindus
"Classical Sanskrit" should be the right word. The reason it is good for AI is because it is a high inflection language whose grammar was fixed (standardised) for the good by Panini, not because it is a "divine" language. I wrote this before as well.
Absolutely correct on that. I can take you even deeper on that logic for there is no such thing as direction in this directionless world anyways. Like I reasoned for names etc as a frame of reference, direction is also a frame of reference in a relative term. For that matter can you even prove your existence? For all I can see, from a greater level of reasoning, is a tornado of molecules, a dance of energy behind your "perceived" shape of the body which is changing every nano-second. Does your existence go beyond to the atoms that left your body through excreta, perspiration, exhale etc or the do the atoms that come to your body, through inhale, drinking, energy from sun, light from tubelight etc, for a "moment" even belong to you in the first place?
What exactly are we trying to prove then? What is yours, Can you identify the atoms that are yours? Is your mind even registered to work at micro and the macro, subtler than the subtlest and larger than the largest of what is known?
Knowing here, exists at a different levels of consciousness. I just gave the example at the lowest level of consciousness i.e material play!
You are getting confused I guess in this overdose of reasoning. I never would want people to "follow/believe" Vedas in the first place, but question it!
Questioning takes place the best when you have a genuine interest in the subject or the science and when you have read it, the complete teaching or the message devotedly without dissecting it in between. e.g Pythogoras theoram. Many would mug the theoram. But geuine seekers of mathematics would go to the root, as to how and why it happened. The same goes for the Vedas and hence the description of the term "astik" which I detailed to you in my earlier reply. In this context, one who analyzes the pythagoras theoram, deduces it correctly and sees no flaw in it transcends to a position where he can affirm with confidence about the correctness of the theoram. In that sense, he has become an astik, for he read, understood, questioned and authorized!
Higher doesn't mean the best. Veda propound the science of consciousness from lowest (arthashastras,Ayurveda,Vaisheshika) to highest (shruties). Veda here is an umbrella term which is further branched and connected to itihaas, brahmanas and the science of shruties, the categorizations from different levels of descriptions Nyaya, Yoga, dvaita, advaita, Vaisheshika etc. Its a science of the holistic understanding holding cause and effect, time and space and that which is beyond cause and effect, time and space.
I guess you still haven't understood the basic meaning of consciousness or the order that I have explained again and again or the Ritam at large. It is not limited to "life" or happening on the earth. For that matter, even if I narrow myself to your understanding, how can you call that which contains life as lifeless? For that matter the essence of Sun like I explained before, encompasses the entire solar system. Earth is a part of the solar system which is a part of milky way galaxy and hence the universe. How can you call Universe as lifeless which contains you and me? Like I questioned before, are you really apart from the Universe or you are simply a part of it?
What is "that" which is holding the entire template of your body together which is just a chaotic tornado of atoms at a nano-seconds measure? Who exactly are you? The atoms that left you or the atoms that come to you? Do you think that is measurable, verifiable and proven?
1. Anything divided by infinite is not exactly an analysis of infinity, which you think can be "analyzed".
2. research again, infinite or any number divided by 0 is not exactly infinite i.e a/0 is not equal to infinity, which if taken into consideration can lead to paradoxes!
Are you sure you have your basic mathematics concepts in place? The first is verifiable. You may use a calculator, whereas the second would give an error. Do you know if second situation is encountered in programming, an exception is usually thrown or it may cause the program to terminate? Moreover, who told you that the Universe is finite? Have you got it "measured, verified or proven". Even the modern science works under what is called as "observable universe"!
Actually not exactly, but for the sake of simplicity an acceptable compromise.
If you really think, this Universe is finite, then what is beyond this Universe? What is the shape of this finite. Is this finite rotating and revolving around something higher (lets call it X1)? What is the shape of that X1? Is that finite also rotating and revolving around something higher (lets call it X2)? Do you really think this recursive question/series is finite alone? If you have no answer to it and are waiting for "modern science" to give an answer, then I guess you are undermining your own consciousness and limiting because of an attachment to a thought that "modern science" one day will give you an answer which is again a blind-belief in modern science!
Regarding time, it is relative indeed where time becomes a function of movement. The faster the movement, the lesser the time and so on. But like I have discussed before, who exactly analyzes the frameworks of time? Who causes a distinction between night and day, good and bad, small and large? Do you think the frameworks of time are the same for one who cannot see, hear, speak or touch i.e all five senses not working?
Close your eyes and walk, can you really see where you are walking? When that which is causing a reference has been removed, how can you even categorize then? Like I asked you, if time is a reality, then why do we lose a sense of time and space when we dream? Time exists only at lower frame of consciousness and ceases to exist as we go higher in the place of consciousness.
A simple example :
Raaabo is sitting at the top of eucalyptus tree and Mediator down. Earth being round, your best friend comes from far where you can see but I cannot. For you, your friend is more like present-tense, but for me he is future-tense as I cannot see him. When he comes near me, where I can see him, he becomes present. For you he still remains present. When he leaves and goes at a distance where I cannot see him, he becomes past. But for you he is still more like present tense. You could see the flow, but I could not!
This eucalyptus tree here is a reflection of the scale of consciousness here, where that which is beyond the realms of time and space, cause and effect can see the cause and effect, for whom past, present and future all become one! Hence Mahakaal is called as trikaaldarshi whereas human level of consciousness can only dwell in or percieve a limited framework of cause and effect and hence there exists a science to raise one's consciousness to the Shiva/Mahakaal/Mahadev/trikaaldarshi/supreme consciousness!
Perhaps you have been never introduced to this science, the science of inner which you may call it, as since your childhood you have been conditioned to the analysis of the external? So yes, there is a higher consciousness needed to understand time. I guess it is your "belief" that such a plane is not needed? Obviously, Brahma has a limited time frame and again, exists at a lower level of consciousness only. It is not the same as Brahman! Brahma is the body of the universe which contains the manifest and the unmanifest, but there is that which lies beyond and hence a metaphor of "Vishnu dreaming of infinite Brahmas" where Vishnu dreaming on the AnantNag refers to that which lies dormant and holding this entire body of brahma together which is metaphorically called as "sleeping" where Anant-Nag by its very meaning (Anant = Endless/Infinite) refers to eternal, infinite existence. This somehow resembles the "parallel" universe theory or perhaps the theory has been taken from this Indian metaphor? But according to an atheist like you, it is already void, for you have already rejected its basis which cannot be "proven or measured or seen". For that matter, do you think the evolution theory or the Big Bang that you "believe" in is "proven or measured or seen"? They have been debunked already where I can pour my own questions to further the discussion. Should I call it your blind belief then in these debunked theories?
Further, if its a blind-belief or a belief alone, how different are you, an atheist from the so called theist?
The video I showed and the discovery is based on dating techniques. "A claim or what has been claimed" is a totally different thing! I really don't know how you define civilization. But for me civilization means a society which can learn to co-exist with the nature and the animals, promotes science of consciousness and mind and body control to be taught at a very young age to children, perfection in various spheres of life, ability to retain knowledge. For that matter, I don't see the "modern world" to be much civilized which is busy in external analysis, attachment and making concrete jungles out of fertile lands in the name of "progress and development", where life has been reduced to a little booze, drug-addiction, engrossed in one's own life and job without any concern for the Family, Joint Family, Nation and world at large!
So what even if there are cave paintings? How can you really say that they were not civilized or again, the conception of civilization that you are hinting at has been borrowed and the limited framework of your own mind being used to judge the people of the past? Is eating with hands less civilized than eating with forks and spoon?
Research yourself on Shaolin temples, where living is simple with an aim to perfect the control over the body. There they use a concept of Qi/Chi which is not really registered in the frameworks of modern science. Again "knowing" comes into the picture and not some "belief"!
This is again an example where you are judging everything through a narrow and limited frameworks of "physical" alone. Like I said, if you dwell in the lowest consciousness i.e physical
1. Can you prove your own existence then?
2. Can you explain why you lose a touch of time and space often during your dreams?
3. Can you tell who exactly are you?
4. Can you prove that you are isolated from earth and Sun alone?
I have stated the characteristics of Satyuga and not the "physical proof" of it. But you should start from here I guess : Agamas and Science and Art of Temple Construction
Do you think cavemen cannot be perfect? Or do you think men in this age who cannot remember what happened 2 days back, need a timer to wake up, calculator to do simple maths, who cannot stand in Sun for 1 hour etc are perfect? BTW, there are instances of human beings co-existing with the dinosaurs from the smritis!
You can google for the debunks from the modern day scientists yourself, but since there is an overwhelming conditioning of yours to Evolution, let me ask. What really happened to the dinosaurs or the explanation is again a plausible theory? Since the survival of the fittest, adaptation and mutation enables the species to grow to a more suitable environment, is it necessary that the eating habits would change too? How were the senses developed? Did they happen in one day or incrementally? Most importantly when did the life come? Do you understand the history of E.Coli experiment and its advancements so far? The questions are many. Let see how far can you talk on these alone from the framework of "proven or measured or seen".
Like I stated, brahma is an experience and not an abrahamic God isolated from you or me. I requested you to transcend beyond names. Brahma as I repeat is a lower level of consciousness and Vishnu the supreme as per the context! Similarly, the world of Shakti can rise and merge, from Sati to Parvati to uniting with Shiva, where a man is said to be awakened with the union of Shakti with Shiva! It is simply a transenscion of consciousness, just like I gave the analogy of matter and energy rising from matter and energy and using matter and energy and becoming matter and energy at its end, where matter is alone seen as energy as per Quantums theory!
I don't really understand how these points you made are connected to context I'm talking of or perhaps you are again ignoring too much?
The scientists still do not know when Veda originate and FYI they clearly talk of earth's revolution, roundedness etc. You clearly ignored my question - Did the Indians also thought that the earth was round? Here Indians (the students of consciousness studies) refer to the people of the time and before, when "flat earth theory" was coined.
Clearly, this understanding of yours is again based on you abrahamic conditioning and limited perspective of modern science, where you are treating the the different levels of consciousness in isolation to each other, where the tide called Raaabo with the sense of "I" is perceiving itself and all the other tides from the metaphorical infinite ocean as separate from each other.
The only flaw in your argument is that you made the science of the consistent ( where sifferent sages of 108 Upanishads, contributing to Veda, Tantras, Zend Avesta, Greek Literature arrived at the same conclusion ) compared to a case of probability "a broken clock is right twice a day". There is a difference between modern science and the science of the consciousness. Former works on the lowest level of consciousness and hence a "subset" of the latter, perhaps a subset of "Vaiseshika classification", but the latter works on the higher levels of consciousness aimed to achieve the highest. The former changes its theories based on a limited set of analysis, where the believers of science, those attached to it unable to understand it in detail change their tone as research changes with time. Hence the proverb - Dhobi ka kutta na ghar ka na ghaat ka (Its a proverb, not an abuse FYI). The Latter remains static, fixed, where sages can arrived at the same truth through different approaches as they like depending upon their outlook, creativity and experience and hence at a higher level of awareness can comprehend the reality/happenings and have a "direct access to knowledge". Yes, this understanding of "direct access to knowledge" is something alien to "modern science" before you jump to conclusions that everything is compared to "modern science" (like your dark energy comment). Hence different shruties though arriving at the same conclusions and affirmations, have different styles of writing!
"The Mysterious" dark energy used to explain the "faster expanding universe" which was earlier "supposed" to slow down under the effect of its own gravity? I didn't think that words like "mysterious" are apt to explain a phenomena which contradicts the earlier "supposed" theory. I won't really relate it to Vedas but again an example of a wild goose chase by the modern scientists just like as in the case of Higs-Boson which has so many fundamentals incorrect and already refuted by many other scientists.
But anyways, do you know what all has been taken from Shruties (Veda, Upanishads, Gita etc) by the "modern science"? I guess you are trying to make it a debate of Veda Vs Modern science, which is surely not my intention but would love to debate!
You have got it all upside down. It is not because of Veda that a person may become knowledgeable, creative or wise! Veda is just a tool a guidance for those who seek genuinely and hence can utilize it, just like in the company of wise, even a foolish can change and improve! Moreover, it is a foundation for the lower sciences and hence a testimonial of the world's famous scientists from Heisenberg, Tesla, Einstein, Capra etc who were influenced and motivated by it.
Better is one's own law of works, swadharma, though in itself faulty than an alien law well wrought out; death in one's own law of being is better, perilous is it to follow an alien law ( BG 3.35)
This Self is not won by exegesis, nor by brain-power, nor by much learning of Scripture. Only by him whom It chooses can It be won; to him this Self unveils its own body. (manduka Upanishad 3.2.3, Page 145)
When thy intelligence shall cross beyond the whirl of delusion, then shalt thou become indifferent to Scripture heard or that which thou hast yet to hear. When thy intelligence which is bewildered by the Sruti, shall stand unmoving and stable in Samadhi, then shalt thou attain to Yoga. (BG 2.52-53)
Veda exist only because of science of consciousness and not vice versa, which in turn enables a foundation for lower material sciences. This science is embedded in everyone's heart or higher consciousness, the treasure hidden due to the play and conditioning and non-control at the lower levels of consciousness. Do you really think that the knowledge of whole world, number of species, the infinite play of shakti and her dynamism etc can be recorded in 4 books? It is a flow (Ganga) which automatically passes when one reaches the highest stages of meditation or consciousness (Shiva) and hence he becomes a hearer of the heard (shruti), transcending beyond time and space. Hence, it is said that only Shiva is powerful enough to accomodate the flow of Ganga to let it flow in a way which would not destroy but rejuvenate the earth (where man is freed from the essence of karta/doer or karma/actions). Yes, high level of intuition is a siddhi achieved at such a stage which enables a person to have access to direct knowledge. Just like you cannot lift a 100 kg on chest at first visit to gym, similarly a man cannot achieve this science by default. If you lift heavy weight by jerks, it can destroy you. Similarly, many people are indeed intuitive where their mind is not strongly developed to accomodate that intuition and often gets distorted by chaos of the conditioned and uncontrolled mind and hence attachment to such intuition can make them look like mad! Thus Veda is indeed written by humans but not a human level rather at a non-human or super-human level of awareness. This nullifies the lowly argument whether it is written by human or a "God". Therefore, it is not necessary for one to know sanskrit or Veda. The path of karma-Yoga (perfection in actions), bhakti-yog (perfection in devotion and surrender of ego) and gyaan-yog (perfection of knowledge) seem different but lead to the same destiny!
Words are themselves a limitation and so is the mind. But, IMO, Sanskrit is the perfect language which can incorporate this science in closest way as possible.
Here is the text of Zend Avesta => PersianDNA™* [KHORDEH AVESTA] Niyayesh: Atash (Litany to Fire)
Hymns to Agni which draws close parallels to that in Veda. If you have even a little bit knowledge of sanskrit, you'd find same sanskrit words in the Avestan language as well where putra is modified to puthra, pancha (five) is used as it is, mitra -> mithra and words from sanskrit grammar. The only difference remains that deva and asura have been reversed here.
The above science is not registered or approved by "modern material science", obviously how can that which resides in time and space know that which is beyond time and space?
You got my logic all wrong. What would you call the shape of the Sun during solarwinds, Sunpots etc? Even a spheroid has a shape, but something which changes its shape all time due to increasing and decreasing flames cannot be said to have a "definite shape". How can that which is ever changing, according to the lower consciousness of sense, be called as having a definite shape?
Again, I'm talking about dynamism for nothing in the material world is "static".
Again you did not read my post properly. Tell me if the Marijuana smokers, drug addicts can control their mind or body under its effect? Do you really think Marijuana, smoking, drug-addiction "increases" life? The very concept of higher consciousness is based on detachment whereas the drug addiction is based on attachment to the sense-object! Moreover, a yogi who shows attachment to material pleasures like "Marijuana,smoking, drugs etc" is not really a Yogi in its basic definition. So I can only request you to not be fooled by the names/tags or what a person calls himself. Transcend to the essence, is the only thing I can request you.
A person who seeks interest in technology will indeed gain knowledge of it and what is available in terms of technology. It is as simple as that! You don't have to "believe" (like you assume) in the science of consciousness here. It is inherent to you! Similarly, one who seeks the highest does not need to read Veda, but simply genuinely seek it and the path shall reveal itself in time!
Either you can tune guitar in different ways and fail just to find the 1000th time about the best tuning or instead have a prior guidance about it. Either you can have a permutation and combination of different frets to fail and find the 1000th time about the correct chords or instead a have prior guidance about it. Similarly either you can seek and fail 1000 times to find the perfect procedure or have a prior guidance about it. So yes, your own inner consciousness can reveal different paths and optimize after sometime, or you can have a guidance from RigVeda, Upanishads, Gita and Tantras.
It seems you still did not read the "The Colloquy of Indra and Agastya" from "Secret of Veda by Aurobindo" (Refer page 265) that I requested you to read. I request you again to read it => http://www.sriaurobindoashram.org/ashram/sriauro/downloadpdf.php?id=30
Read the above quote again!
If you still think that the science of consciousness, the essence of the Indian teaching, the shruties is a belief system or has anything to do with supersition etc, then I guess you have reduced all the stars of the modern science to theism.
But like I always requested, I would like you to move beyond from "who said what" and understand the shruties, not just read them, from your primary frameworks, with detachment after emptying yourself of all that of what you call as knowledge, only and only if you have a genuine interest in seeking the higher!
Anyways, much of your understanding is based on how you have seen the society in action, how those tagged as "Hindus" behave, analysis and statements from those who call themselves as 'Sadhus' (and still who use drugs) and so the drug-addicts and what the "modern science" has to tell you. I still don't see any iota of understanding so far in your posts about the basics of consciousness and how the science works for true science does not work on using terms like "mysterious" to explain a phenomena that contradicts the earlier "assumption" on which a theory was based (refer dark energy)! Moreover bringing a debunked theory like Evolution as a source of argument is not really wise. I've told this before also and repeating again, we can't really move forward in this discussion if you don't develop the understanding of the basics of consciousness studies. If the shruties seem archaic to you, or its style incompatible with your "modern conditioning", then you can study the Ken wilber's "levels of consciousness" which is based on Aurobindo's explanation which is further based on Vedic teaching. Moreover, it seems to me that you are using and implementing the "modern frameworks" as a standard to view the science of consciousness. Trust me, until and unless you detach and empty your mind of what you know or decondition from modern "assumptions and conclusions" which revolve around material existence, you will never be able to understand the science of consciousness.
Anyways, Like I asked, can you prove that you exist? You can use the modern science as much as possible!
1st quote -> Irrelevant where conclusion, analysis is done on a science which is totally alien to the quote owner in the context and further apples have been used to compare to oranges i.e different framework used as a standard which doesn't match!
2nd quote -> Knowledge of the language is equally essential instead of generalizing which is done here. The only problem with sanskrit translations to English is finding the right words which can retain the original meaning in its completeness, as most Sanskrit words are an experience in themselves like Bhrama, deva, mahakaal, dharma etc which when translated to a language like English strips it of its underlying experience and hence the disconnect with the broader frameworks that Sanskrit presents! Here bhrama has been reduced to a level of Abrahamic God, further seen as isolated without knowing what the word itself means and further based on underlying ignorance of science of consciousness.
“O Indra, destroy all those lustful people behaving like birds.... angry ones; behaving like wolves.... greedy ones; behaving like vultures.... enticed ones; behaving like owls..... arrogant ones; behaving like eagles… and the jealous ones behaving like dogs.”
- The Atharva Veda
a very apt reply to those pseudo-intellectuals who see quantum mechanics differential equations in vedas.Probability is built up based on evidence, and mathematics. If I told you that I would pay you Rs 1 lakh salary per month, and then gave you 200 x 10 rupee notes, you would fight with me. You wouldn’t let me get away with any “theory” of mine that explained to you that the amount of meaningless atoms in the 2,000 I gave you were identical to the other bundle of Rs 100 x 1000 that I have with me as well.
What exactly are we trying to prove then? What is yours, Can you identify the atoms that are yours? Is your mind even registered to work at micro and the macro, subtler than the subtlest and larger than the largest of what is known?
Knowing here, exists at a different levels of consciousness. I just gave the example at the lowest level of consciousness i.e material play!
Every breath you take contains atoms forged in the blistering furnaces deep inside stars. Every flower you pick contains atoms blasted into space by stellar explosions that blazed brighter than a billion suns. Every book you read contains atoms blown across unimaginable gulfs of space and time by the wind between the stars.
If the atoms that make up the world around us could tell their stories, each and every one of them would sing a tale to dwarf the greatest epics of literature. From carbon, baked in bloated red giants - stars so enormous they could swallow a million suns - to uranium, cooked in supernova explosions - just about the most violent cataclysms in all creation. From boron, generated in atom-crunching collisions in the deep-freeze of interstellar space, to helium, forged in the hellish first few minutes of the big bang itself.
The iron in your blood, the calcium in your bones, the oxygen that fills your lungs each time you take a breath - all were baked in fiery ovens deep within stars and blown into space when those stars grew old, and perished. Every one of us is a memorial to long-dead stars. Every one of us was quite literally made in heaven.
well then, the other examples are immaterial
science actually enables us to go micro and macro. you suspect a very earthly cycle of atoms. when science can show that it is an interstellar cycle.
Thumbs Up for the long Post ...
and I wish there are some (no.. a lot) ppl who didnt read that post