science and spirituality

[Guest guest]

Science is a study of the objective world. Spirituality is a study of the

subjective. One cannot know the object without knowing the subject. Even in

science , if we need to measure a quantity with an instrument , then we need to

calbrate the instrument to know that we get a correct reading. Similarly we need

to calibrate our minds so that we know that we are witnessing reality and not

absurdity.

 

In this context I think the first great western scientist was Heisenberg as he

postulated the uncertainity principle. He recognized that to measure the

position or momemtum of a sub atomic particle, you have to consider the act of

measurment itself .

Thus you turn attention from the object to the process. Spirituality goes one

step more. You have to know who it is who is involved in the process. In this

regard C.G. Jung was the first psychologist who propagated that to understand

some one else's state of mind, you need to first understand your mind.

 

So yes, quantum mechanics and analytical psychology are two areas wherein

science approaches spirituality. After dealing in these two fields the ego

learns that the intellect can never measure its source and it leads to surrender

to the higher power within.

 

Regards,

Anand.

 

 

A FREE web-based e-mail service brought to you by the PC World Technology

Network.

Get your FREE account today at http://www.myworldmail.com

[Guest guest]

Greetings Sunder,

 

I wonder if you or anybody else would

comment on this passage from the essay

by Dobson on Vivekananda which you

referred us to

 

http://www.crisny.org/not-for-profit/srv/3version/Dobsvivekeinst.html

> It is important to remember also that what we now refer to as modern science

was not the science of Swamiji's

> day. Modern science came out of relativity and quantum mechanics, which imply

that the first cause under our

> physics is uncertainty (Vivarta). What Swamiji referred to as modern science

was the older physics, Newtonian

> physics, which is based entirely on transformational causation (Parinama).

> Having failed to square his Advaita Vedanta (which holds to Vivarta) with

Newtonian physics (which holds to

> Parinrlma), Swamiji then tried to square it with Sankhya (which holds to

Parinama), because he knew how to get

> from Sankhya to Vedanta.

 

It may be helpful to delineate some of

the scientific ideas that are implicitly

referred to here:

 

(i) Classical determinism: if the state

of universe is completely known at any

instant (the 'initial conditions') then

the entire history of the universe (past

and future) can in principle be worked

out.

 

(ii) Quantum indeterminacy: the initial

conditions cannot in principle be known

with precision owing to

intrinsic limitations on physical

measurements (the Heisenberg principle).

Consequently physical processes can only

be

described in probabilistic terms. This

may or may not mean that there is an

irreducible randomness in nature. (Most

physicists think that there is but many

such as David Bohm still side with

Einstein: `God does not play at dice'.)

 

(iii) Strong determinism (Penrose):

there is only one history of the

universe which is logically possible.

 

I'm inclined to think that (iii) might

be correct but I have no idea what

support there is for this hypothesis in

any tradition, Eastern or Western.

 

Regards,

 

Patrick

[Guest guest]

Greetings Patrick,

 

For a rapprochement of Vedanta and Modern Science, I can refer

you to an on-line book by Dobson, at URL:

 

http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Cafe/9535/Vedanta/front.htm

 

My knowledge of Vedanta, Physics and Mathematics is less than

amateurish, and I don't stand a chance of articulating in any convincing way

answers to your questions.

 

Dr. Dobson, now 85, is an astromer/physicist of great repute,

and has followed both Eastern & Western traditions of thought

very successfully. I have written to him about the questions you have

raised, an I hope he will favor us with his views.

 

 

Regards,

 

s.

 

 

 

 

>Patrick Kenny <pkenny

>advaitin

>advaitin

> science and spirituality

>Thu, 10 Feb 2000 10:46:56 -0500

>

>It may be helpful to delineate some of

>the scientific ideas that are implicitly

>referred to here:

>

>(i) Classical determinism: if the state

>of universe is completely known at any

>instant (the 'initial conditions') then

>the entire history of the universe (past

>and future) can in principle be worked

>out.

>

>(ii) Quantum indeterminacy: the initial

>conditions cannot in principle be known

>with precision owing to

>intrinsic limitations on physical

>measurements (the Heisenberg principle).

>Consequently physical processes can only

>be

>described in probabilistic terms. This

>may or may not mean that there is an

>irreducible randomness in nature. (Most

>physicists think that there is but many

>such as David Bohm still side with

>Einstein: `God does not play at dice'.)

>

>(iii) Strong determinism (Penrose):

>there is only one history of the

>universe which is logically possible.

>

>I'm inclined to think that (iii) might

>be correct but I have no idea what

>support there is for this hypothesis in

>any tradition, Eastern or Western.

>

>Regards,

>

>Patrick

 

____

Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

[Guest guest]

Hi!

Science is study of the universe and objects around us with our mind,

through observations, models, and theories, all pleasing avocations for

the mind.

Spirituality is experience of the universe with no-mind.

It is extremely difficult for science to study the no-mind state since

it uses the imperfect mind to perfect no-mind state!

-- Vis

[Guest guest]

>Science is study of the universe and objects around us with our mind,

>through observations, models, and theories, all pleasing avocations for

>the mind.

>Spirituality is experience of the universe with no-mind.

>It is extremely difficult for science to study the no-mind state since

>it uses the imperfect mind to perfect no-mind state!

 

ALL is the study of ALL...the beginning is made in the objective the final

fulfillment comes in the subjective....we start with the limited end up in

the unlimited----we feel we are limited and finally we realize we are

unlimited---rather only WE ARE.

 

"DO I CONTRADICT MYSELF?YES I CONTRADICT MYSELF;I AM VAST, I CONTAIN

MULTITUDES"--W.WHITMAN

>

>

>--------------------------- ONElist Sponsor ----------------------------

>

>Get what you deserve with NextCard Visa. ZERO. Rates as low as 0.0

>percent Intro APR, online balance transfers, Rewards Points, no hidden

>fees, and much more. Get NextCard today and get the credit you deserve.

>Apply now! Get your NextCard Visa at

><a href=" http://clickme./ad/NextcardCreative6 ">Click Here</a>

>

>------

>

>Discussion of the True Meaning of Sankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy

>focusing on non-duality between mind and matter. Searchable List Archives

>are available at: http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/ Contact Email

>Address: advaitins

>

>

 

____

Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

[Guest guest]

R. Viswanathan wrote:

> Hi!

> Science is study of the universe and objects around us with our mind,

> through observations, models, and theories, all pleasing avocations for

> the mind.

> Spirituality is experience of the universe with no-mind.

> It is extremely difficult for science to study the no-mind state since

> it uses the imperfect mind to perfect no-mind state!

 

I see many interesting things. Some people trying to find the

convergence and melting zone between physics, metaphysics and

psychology, some people (including a friend of mine) wanting to learn

rituals and esotoric mantras or powers and many more. Many increase

their knowledge in rare mind-boogling neuron-tantalising subjects.

 

There is only one point of convergence between science, spirituality

and psychology --- the individual and his/her reality. If one does not

realise through wisdom or Self-knowledge this microcosmic

convergence then how could one realise the macrocosmic

convergence?

 

When YOU are the AtmA and in reality the original principle, wielding

the power of making the entire universe vanish and reappear, why

settle to learn a few supernatural tricks to scare others?

 

If the Reality of the Self is spread equally, then how come only some

must have access to it through difficult knowledge and scholarship? If

this is so, then the earned knowledge and brainwork has no relevance

to Truth!

 

Sri Ramakrishna never read scriptures. Sri Ramana inquired into his

Self by himself only. The illiterate by pure-hearted devoted gopis of

Krishna had only devotion and Love.

 

Why not seek the greatest power in the grasp of a human being -

LOVE! Love All, Serve All! Love is devotion and compassion.

 

The Lord Krishna, Who could make the entire universe obliterated with

a snap of His fingers, manifested into 10,000 identical Krishnas! Could

any being match Him? Yes - One did - Sahadeva tied up 10,000

Krishnas with ropes of his devotion.

 

Krishna said that He supports the entire universe with only a tiny

fraction of His energy. Could any one bear the weight of One who bears

the weight of the universe? Yes! One person did - Rukmini did with her

a tulasi leaf charged with her devotion managed to equal His weight.

 

The Lord is infinite and omnipresent. Could anyone ever try to imprison

Him? Yes! The pure hearted devotee could trap and imprison Him in

their hearts.

 

If this kind of devotion to the Lord, that manifests as compassion to His

Creation is not the greatest and mightiest power on Earth and the rest

of the universe, what is? If this knowledge is with you, is there a need

to wallow in any other deep thoughts?

 

Must we seek the Truth in knowledge, thoughts, rituals and mantras?

Do any of us have the Truth? What is the Truth?

 

Let is ponder these words from the Kena Upanishad:

 

If you think you know it (the Truth) well,

only slightly do you know the form of God.

What refers to you and what refers to the gods

then is to be investigated by you.

 

I think it is known.

I do not think that I know it well,

nor do I think that I do not know it.

Those of us who know this know it,

and not those of us who think they do not know it.

 

The one who has not thought it out has the thought of it.

The one who has thought it out does not know it.

It is not understood by those who understand it;

it is understood by those who do not understand it.

 

When it is known by an awakening, it is correctly known,

for then one finds immortality.

By the soul one finds ability;

by knowledge one finds immortality.

 

If here one knows it, then there is truth;

if here one does not know it, then there is great loss.

Seeing it in all beings,

the wise on leaving this world become immortal.

 

 

 

--

Warmest regards,

Ruben

rubenn

_____________