Hinduism and science

[The Sage Nabooru]

Here in the US, I would say it is pretty much a common assumption that you either must believe in science or religion, you cannot believe in both; religion and science must be antagonistic to each other. But I know of many religious Hindu scientists.

 

How do you think this is so? In America scientists regularly assure us we have no use of religion, in fact it's harmful, that they can explain everything we are, believe, and do with science. How is it in India? How do you think Hinduism and science get along so well? I do not like to think I am some material automaton, controlled by my brain chemicals!

[arjun2826]

Einstein was telling that little science take you far of god, and many science brings you closer to him.

 

That means that when you start to understand some physics law, you think everything is understandable with science theory.

But actually, when you go further in science, you can see that you cannot find out other physics law because it is too difficult. And when difficulties arrive, people usually need hope, so then they need God.

[sambya]

well the answer as to why it is so lies in the history of western lands !!

 

christianity was the main religion in the west and consequently the culture and values were all shaped by that religion there . the opposition that the church showed towards any free thinking liberal thoughts and scientific progress is well known . many of their philosophies were strange and insufficient to a prudent individual but one had to accept it without raising any question . to this were added the problems of bruning at stake and other vices . and most importantly not all leaders were very pious men . all this slwoly created a feeling of hatred and isolation from mainstream religion or christianity . and chruch succeeded in projecting itself as a tyrant , anti-science anti-modernisation hypocritic order . natuarally most westerners have lost faith over their old religion .

 

in india things were a bit different . although numerous contradictory thoughts and sects existed in this soil no one tried to destroy the other . there was mutual coexistence in all feilds . and this accomodating universal nature of hindus are well known. thus when modern western science first appeared on the horizon of india there was an attempt to synthesize it with the existing indian philosophical systems instead of condemmning it . recently modern physics have also discovered the strange similarities between the indian spiritual philosophies and this has further strengthened the conviction of hindus both on science and religion .

[Sephiroth]

 

Here in the US, I would say it is pretty much a common assumption that you either must believe in science or religion, you cannot believe in both; religion and science must be antagonistic to each other. But I know of many religious Hindu scientists.

 

How do you think this is so? In America scientists regularly assure us we have no use of religion, in fact it's harmful, that they can explain everything we are, believe, and do with science. How is it in India? How do you think Hinduism and science get along so well? I do not like to think I am some material automaton, controlled by my brain chemicals!

 

Might as well call yourself a bundle of flesh and nerve and nothing more than animal if you believe that crap.

 

God which cannot be explained through Science MUST be thrown away.

[sambya]

 

God which cannot be explained through Science MUST be thrown away.

 

i feel god is not something or someone that can ever be explained by science in scientific terms . about a decade back stephen hawkings claimed that he is about to formulate something which he called the theory of everything(if i remember correctly) which shall be one single mathematical euqation applicable to all aspects of physics and solving all problems !! to discover such a master-equation would be almost discovering god !! infact the exact words that hawkings used were "reading the mind of god" !! but then a few years back he finally concluded that it is not possible for him to formulate any such things nor it is likely that it shall ever be .

 

god can never be reached through science because what we call scientific proof is basically related to observation by any or all of our five material(and imperfect) sense organs . and god is concentrated consciousness . it is not possible to reach to chit(consciousness) through jada(material) .

 

so it is very natural that god cannot be explained by science . if it was possible then i would start doubting that god on whether it was god at all .

 

so are you trying to suggest that god is percievable through our gross imperfect material senses by following the processes of experimentaion , observation and inference ??!!

[rishivatsyan]

Science is making progress only due to divine blessing. So ignore them and be religious scientists.

 

God bless you

Rishi Vatsyayan

[arjun2826]

Science brings sometimes answers

God brings allways hope

[kshama]

Respected members,

 

God is the amalgamation of truth-knowledge and bliss. Any man-discovered truths or "sciences" cannot be equal to the knowledge god has. The dispenser of knowledge for the benefit of mankind is god. Whatever achievements man has now is all from god as the precursor of thoughts in man to analyze, discover and experiment ,that gives birth to "science",was and is being planted by god.

 

Religion is metaphysical, and it is beyond the comprehension of laymen. Only the very blessed in this present birth get to know god....the amalgamation of truth-knowledge-bliss. Namaste.

[arjun2826]

 

in india things were a bit different . although numerous contradictory thoughts and sects existed in this soil no one tried to destroy the other . there was mutual coexistence in all feilds . and this accomodating universal nature of hindus are well known.

Hi Sambya,

- don't you think that the accomodation of numerous contradictory as you said is only in reality an unablelity of being consistent ?

 

-In western countries, there is the same inconsistency: on one hand science, on the other hand religion. But people are free to believe in both. And actually, they often do without condemning religion as you said. Otherwise catholicism would disapear, wouldn't it ?

-They believe in both because as I said earlier science brings sometime answers and god brings allways hope. But indian are same :

An example : somebody has cancer. What would you do ? See a doctor and pray. It is same in western countries.

 

 

 

recently modern physics have also discovered the strange similarities between the indian spiritual philosophies and this has further strengthened the conviction of hindus both on science and religion .

Could you please precise with examples please ?

[sambya]

 

Hi Sambya,

- don't you think that the accomodation of numerous contradictory as you said is only in reality an unablelity of being consistent ?

 

-In western countries, there is the same inconsistency: on one hand science, on the other hand religion. But people are free to believe in both. And actually, they often do without condemning religion as you said. Otherwise catholicism would disapear, wouldn't it ?

-They believe in both because as I said earlier science brings sometime answers and god brings allways hope. But indian are same :

An example : somebody has cancer. What would you do ? See a doctor and pray. It is same in western countries.

 

its true that people are free to believe either science or religion . infact anyone is free to beilieve anything he wishes to believe . and most people do not actually condemn religion . but it is a fact that a vast majority of modern western people hardly have any faith or interest in their original religion - christianity that is . christianity has not dissapeared .....thats true . numerically it is the most influential faith . but how many people actually practise christianity in the west ? for many people church serves a few purpose-marraige and funeral service !! this practising christianity is dying in west .

 

but in the east religion is no less than science , if not higher . all eastern religions are alive and most hindus are everyday practising hindus . that was the difference i was trying to show .

 

 

 

Could you please precise with examples please ?

 

this is not something to illustrate with a few sentences . basically science have discovered or hypothised about the similarities between advitist thoughts and concepts of creation and cosmos and modern astrophysics . there are numerous books available on that matter . the one that i can immideately remember is the tao of physics . it was an international bestseller . try reading those books and im sure you will get your answers in a much better way than what i would be capable of explaining to you !!

 

pranaam .

[sant]

How about E= mc square(How Do i type a 2 in upper part?)

Everything is energy.

[sant]

OHter things includiing the above one which baba had said for example-

Jyotish vidya is a complete science ,vastu vidya

Then there are certain things which iv read such as mudras whos benefciial Properties have been known,There was a yagya done by pandits shown on tv to call the rains.And they were succesful.

[Sephiroth]

 

so it is very natural that god cannot be explained by science . if it was possible then i would start doubting that god on whether it was god at all .

 

so are you trying to suggest that god is percievable through our gross imperfect material senses by following the processes of experimentaion , observation and inference ??!!

 

The important aspect here is TRY IT not DONE IT. Don't understand? I will explain.

 

An action of TRYING to explain God (through our imperfect senses) is more valuable than actually doing it. By trying to explain God, one can achieve knowledge which one cannot achieve in any other ways.

 

The Europe were in Dark Ages because everyone accepted "God" is like what the Bible have stated. So, they blind follow it and willing to stone, kill and burnt alive anyone who stated otherwise. In their minds, they have already achieved an understanding of God (and even today, Christians still fools themselves into thinking that God is like what their Bible stated).

 

At the same time in India, Scientists and learned ones tried to understand God and they know that it is impossible to do so. Yet they continue to do - learning new things, examine and reexamine them and try to piece together how the World and the Universe works. Their actions have created a large reservoir of Knowledge which no one else could have possibly achieved at that age.

 

The Goal in Science should be TRY to Find God (even so it is impossible to do so). Because in God, all things resides and by trying to find Him, you will find all sort of Knowledge which you did not know existed.

[sambya]

 

By trying to explain God, one can achieve knowledge which one cannot achieve in any other ways.

 

not exactly . by trying to explain god one comes to know his various attributes and features as explained in scriptures and other religions . but one cannot arrive at 'knowledge' of god through that . for knowing god personally one must have a strong desire to know him or love him coupled with sincere sadhana .............there's no other way . infact explantions and endless talks destroy the calmness of mind !

 

 

 

but your last post didnt clarify your stand properly . you said that God which cannot be explained through Science MUST be thrown away . now that means only that much of god must be accepted as is materially 'proven' by science . which in turn means that gods validity is subject to scientific 'proofs' !!!

 

is that what you actually meant ?

[sant]

jyotish means astrology and vidya means knowledge.

vaastu shastra

- Vastu Shastra - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

mudras-http://www.healthandyoga.com/HTML/meditation/mudras.html

[Sephiroth]

sambya :

 

 

by trying to explain god one comes to know his various attributes and features as explained in scriptures and other religions . but one cannot arrive at 'knowledge' of god through that.

 

Wrong ... the Knowledge which one obtains through studies of His Attributes and Features IS KNOWLEDGE.

 

Knowledge itself cannot help one arrive to God, but one MUST change that Knowledge into Wisdom before he or she could understand God.

 

Take Evolution for example. 150 years ago, people in India could not know what Evolution (like West came to know) means. Yet by studying the Attributes as shown in Maha Vishnu's Avatar, one could able to derive this knowledge in theory.

 

Therefore, God which (attributes) cannot be explained by Science should be thrown away.

 

 

now that means only that much of god must be accepted as is materially 'proven' by science . which in turn means that gods validity is subject to scientific 'proofs' !!!

 

Yes, even Gods must be subjected to Examinations and Studies in order to understand them (even so we cannot understand them completely).

 

If you believe that Gods exist, then why not try and proof them? What do you have to fear?

[sar]

 

Take Evolution for example. 150 years ago, people in India could not know what Evolution (like West came to know) means. Yet by studying the Attributes as shown in Maha Vishnu's Avatar, one could able to derive this knowledge in theory.

 

Science in India was much more advanced than the west in the other Yugas. It is only only in Kaeli Yuga, the present metal age, the Vedic Knowledge is degrading and this was predicted in the Vedas long back. I beleive the Avatars of Vishnu are REAL and they are not just for the purpose of learning about evolution. According to Vedic knowledge we are in Kaeli Yuga, which lasts 432,000 years. The avatars of Maha Vishnu has taken place throughout these Yugas. Man did actually exist for millions of years, but the Western ideas forbid it. Refer to this

 

 

ISKCON researchers have compiled evidence supporting the Vedic picture of the age of the human species.

 

Modern science tells us that anatomically modern man has been around for only about 100,000 years. The Vedic writings say he has been here a lot longer. Now a book from the Bhaktivedanta Institute takes a new look at the scientific evidence. That evidence, says the book, has been fudged.

 

The authors are Michael Cremo (Drutakarma Dasa) and Richard L. Thompson (Sadaputa Dasa), both regular contributors to BTG, and Stephen Bernath (Madhavendra Puri Dasa). Their book uncovers a startling picture not only of what the evidence is and what it means but also of how science reached its story.

 

It seems permissible, therefore, to consider a possibility neither Tuttle nor Leakey mentioned - that creatures with modern human bodies to match their modern human feet lived in East Africa some 3.6 million years ago. Perhaps, as suggested in the illustration on the opposite page, they coexisted with more apelike creatures.

 

As intriguing as this possibility may be, current ideas about human evolution forbid it. Knowledgeable persons will warn against suggesting that anatomically modern human beings existed millions of years ago. The evidence of the Laetoli footprints is too slim.

 

But there is further evidence. Over the past few decades, scientists in Africa have uncovered fossil bones - apparently millions of years old - that look remarkably human.

 

At Kanapoi, Kenya, in 1965, Bryan Patterson and W. W. Howells found a surprisingly modern humerus (upper arm bone). Scientists judged it more than 4 million years old. Henry M. McHenry and Robert S. Corruccini of the University of California said the Kanapoi humerus was "barely distinguishable" from that of modern man.

 

Then there is the ER 1481 femur - a thighbone found in 1972 in Lake Turkana, Kenya. Scientists normally assign it an age of about 2 million years and say it belonged to the prehuman Homo habilis. But Richard Leakey said the femur matches those of modern humans. And since the femur was found by itself, one cannot rule out the possibility that the rest or the skeleton was also anatomically modern.

 

Forbidden Archeology by Michael Cremo (Drutakarma Dasa)

 

 

 

 

What my understanding of this is, the theory of evolution of man rising from the water and becoming more and more human, being analogical to the avatars of Vishnu seems to be incorrect.

 

Of course Hinduism itself is based on Vedas, which means absolute knowledge. The original pure Hinduism beleived in Knowledge rather than hard work. According to these sanskrit words,

 

Avidyaaya Mruthyum Theerthwaa

Vidyaaya Amruthamasnuthe

 

Use the scientific knowledge to tackle problems in our life and use the spiritual knowledge to attain immortality through philosophical outlook.

 

For example by using astrology, we can get ourselves detatched from material lives, because our method of astrology is based purely upon the position of the planets and Karmic patterns unlike the fake western astrology. Using astrology we can ascertain our Karma in the material life and choose our reactions to the events in our lives in a favourable way to avoid bad Karma and bad situations in our next life since according to Hinduism the soul is eternal, and that is what "immortality" implies in the above quote.

 

The Hinduism what we see today is truncated due to the influence of Bhuddism, Christianity, Islam etc, where prefence is given to materialistic faiths. Today people only hope to use astrology for material gains and fool themselves. Other religions do not insist on the eternal nature of soul as much as Hinduism does. In fact there was no other religion for millions of years in the past and so Hinduism itself is not a Religion. Astrology is pure knowedge,using the position of the planets and how old is it? While the West was fooling themselves with the fact that the earth was flat and the sun revolves around it.

 

Not to mention zero and modern numbers actually originated from India.

 

There is more knowledge in the Vedas than any other science can teach.

[sambya]

 

sambya :

Wrong ... the Knowledge which one obtains through studies of His Attributes and Features IS KNOWLEDGE.

 

Knowledge itself cannot help one arrive to God, but one MUST change that Knowledge into Wisdom before he or she could understand God.

 

there might have been a communication problem here . i used the word knowledge in the sense of wisdom - and that is the standard meaning of the word in indian spiritual scriptures . you were using knowledge in the sense of book reading .

 

what i was saying is that mere book reading and dry speculation will do nothing to get you the wisdom ....... you need sadhana and devotion for that . do you disagree ?

 

 

Therefore, God which (attributes) cannot be explained by Science should be thrown away.

 

modern science doesnt believe in personal god - one who has a anthropomorphic form , but our scriptures repeatedly speaks of such god . do you deny such gods merely because science does not accept them ?

 

 

Yes, even Gods must be subjected to Examinations and Studies in order to understand them (even so we cannot understand them completely).

 

If you believe that Gods exist, then why not try and proof them? What do you have to fear?

what examination do you suggest ? something involving radar detection , telescope and similar instruments ? please elaborate

 

tell me .....do you really think it is possible to 'prove' god to the entire population using material science ?!!

 

i have nothing to fear........ill be the happiest if you suceed doing that , but sadly our own scriptures indicate that it is not possible !

[Sephiroth]

sambya :

 

 

there might have been a communication problem here . i used the word knowledge in the sense of wisdom - and that is the standard meaning of the word in indian spiritual scriptures . you were using knowledge in the sense of book reading .

 

what i was saying is that mere book reading and dry speculation will do nothing to get you the wisdom ....... you need sadhana and devotion for that . do you disagree ?

 

I disagree because what you say in both paragraphs actually conflicting with each other.

 

I could agree that Wisdom could only obtained by devotions (and Spiritualism); however, right now, I'm more toward limiting my use of Knowledge on sense of book reading.

 

You seems to think that Knowledge should only be used for "Spiritualism". If that is the case, I will disagree with you. I believe that Knowledge which derived from Spiritualism MUST be used in Worldly manners as well. One should not separate Knowledge and Wisdom from Worldly and Spiritual World.

 

 

modern science doesnt believe in personal god - one who has a anthropomorphic form , but our scriptures repeatedly speaks of such god . do you deny such gods merely because science does not accept them ?

 

Mind explaining what do you mean by "Modern Science" here? What do you consider as "Modern Science"?

 

 

tell me .....do you really think it is possible to 'prove' god to the entire population using material science ?!!

 

YES, it is possible to derive a working model of God using Material Science. It will not show 100% accurate "descriptions" of God, but it should validate some of His Attributes enough to fit the puzzle called God.

 

 

i have nothing to fear........ill be the happiest if you suceed doing that , but sadly our own scriptures indicate that it is not possible !

 

Then THROW AWAY your Scriptures.

[sambya]

 

sambya :

I could agree that Wisdom could only obtained by devotions (and Spiritualism); however, right now, I'm more toward limiting my use of Knowledge on sense of book reading.

 

okay

 

 

You seems to think that Knowledge should only be used for "Spiritualism". If that is the case, I will disagree with you. I believe that Knowledge which derived from Spiritualism MUST be used in Worldly manners as well. One should not separate Knowledge and Wisdom from Worldly and Spiritual World.

 

 

there is spiritual knowledge which is also the knowledge of god( i mean wisdom) . apart from that there is material knowledge . both the knowledges are beneficial to mankind and i see no reason why knowledge of one field could be applied to the other . but for any individual spiritual knowledge stands at a higher position than material knowledge . a human birth without knowledge of god is considered worthless . so a person having material knowledge and denying spiritual knowledge is not worthwhile . but this of course is from the viewpoint of spiritual scriptures .

 

 

 

Mind explaining what do you mean by "Modern Science" here? What do you consider as "Modern Science"?

 

the normal science that began in middle ages and continues till this day and taught in schools and universities . includes different fields of science and still unproven but popular hypothesis like worm hole or multiverse .

 

why ? what was so difficult in understanding the term 'moden science' ?

 

 

 

 

YES, it is possible to derive a working model of God using Material Science. It will not show 100% accurate "descriptions" of God, but it should validate some of His Attributes enough to fit the puzzle called God.

 

thats good !! i wish it could happen fast ! but supposse that some attributes described in the scriptures cannot be found out by science even after lot of research . now would that mean those attributes are non existent , in your understanding ?!!

[Sephiroth]

sambya :

 

 

... but for any individual spiritual knowledge stands at a higher position than material knowledge . a human birth without knowledge of god is considered worthless . so a person having material knowledge and denying spiritual knowledge is not worthwhile .

 

I disagree here. In my opinion, Spiritual knowledge and Material Knowledge are the same. ONLY DIFFERENCE here is HOW WE USED THEM.

 

I believe that a person can still achieve Spiritual development by using Materialistic Knowledge. For example - a Scientists could develop means of growing food, clean the planet (from pollution), eradicate diseases and such (ALL IN NAME OF GOD) using Materialistic Knowledge.

 

And at the same time, a Swami could fall from grace by denying help to others and seek solely toward Spiritualism alone. He could reject Humanity yet he seeks God. Such person could be useless to God and Man.

 

 

 

the normal science that began in middle ages and continues till this day and taught in schools and universities . includes different fields of science and still unproven but popular hypothesis like worm hole or multiverse .

 

why ? what was so difficult in understanding the term 'moden science' ?

 

What you call as "Modern" Science, I call it as Ignorant Science.

This Science is created in the West with purpose of proving that (Christian) God is false and wrong.

 

 

thats good !! i wish it could happen fast ! but supposse that some attributes described in the scriptures cannot be found out by science even after lot of research . now would that mean those attributes are non existent , in your understanding ?!!

 

It is scientific fact that it is IMPOSSIBLE to get all the variables correct. Even the most intelligent group of scientists, working with the most powerful computers, could only get 99% correct accuracy and in most cases, it could be that 1% which determines the result. That 1% is God.

 

Science have accepted that it has limitations. Therefore, God is acceptable hypothesis within Science.

[sambya]

 

sambya :

I disagree here. In my opinion, Spiritual knowledge and Material Knowledge are the same. ONLY DIFFERENCE here is HOW WE USED THEM.

 

i respect your freedom of thought .

 

but the scriptures always differentiate and place the transcendental knowledge at a higher place than this material knowledge . although in its perfectional stage there are no two knowledges . their are different aspects of the truth . but material knwoledge is more concerned with creation while spiritual knowledge is concerned with the creator !

 

 

I believe that a person can still achieve Spiritual development by using Materialistic Knowledge. For example - a Scientists could develop means of growing food, clean the planet (from pollution), eradicate diseases and such (ALL IN NAME OF GOD) using Materialistic Knowledge.

 

nishkama karma ...good .

 

 

And at the same time, a Swami could fall from grace by denying help to others and seek solely toward Spiritualism alone. He could reject Humanity yet he seeks God. Such person could be useless to God and Man.

 

correct !

 

 

What you call as "Modern" Science, I call it as Ignorant Science.

This Science is created in the West with purpose of proving that (Christian) God is false and wrong.

 

 

ignorant science it is for sure ! but the second statement is not wholly true . it was not created to deny god but to provide more material comforts . but it actually ended up in denying god ............thats correct .

 

 

 

It is scientific fact that it is IMPOSSIBLE to get all the variables correct. Even the most intelligent group of scientists, working with the most powerful computers, could only get 99% correct accuracy and in most cases, it could be that 1% which determines the result. That 1% is God.

 

Science have accepted that it has limitations. Therefore, God is acceptable hypothesis within Science.

 

 

what about the rest 99% ? should we believe it as true or not ......your answer is not quite definite !

[Sephiroth]

sambya :

 

 

but the scriptures always differentiate and place the transcendental knowledge at a higher place than this material knowledge . although in its perfectional stage there are no two knowledges . their are different aspects of the truth . but material knwoledge is more concerned with creation while spiritual knowledge is concerned with the creator !

 

To me, whether it is Materialistic Knowledge or Spiritual knowledge - only thing I could think about is HOW TO USE THEM for benefit of Mankind. If you cannot use them for the benefit of Mankind, then those knowledge are USELESS.

 

 

ignorant science it is for sure ! but the second statement is not wholly true . it was not created to deny god but to provide more material comforts . but it actually ended up in denying god ............thats correct .

 

Wrong ... Western Science evolved from the needs to debunk Christian god. And that is fact.

 

Unlike in India, the Europeans have lived for 500 years in (what historians called) Dark Ages. In that period of time, Christianity was practiced and Science is according to the Bible. Which means that anyone who said that the Earth is not the Center of the Universe or the Solar System, or that there are other lifeforms somewhere else and such WILL BE CONSIDERED HERETIC AND PUNISHED BY DEATH.

 

So, Science grew later with a goal of ensuring that the Dark Ages do not return. Unfortunately for us (in the East), this foolish people considered Asians to be lowered in status and education and attended to "reeducate" Asians so they could be more civilized. And that is how this ignorant Science found it's way to Asia.

 

 

what about the rest 99% ? should we believe it as true or not ......your answer is not quite definite !

 

I don't know ... what do you think?

 

99% is useless without the 1% to complete it, and 1% is simply too small to be considered as an important fact. So, what do you believe we should do?

[sambya]

 

sambya :

To me, whether it is Materialistic Knowledge or Spiritual knowledge - only thing I could think about is HOW TO USE THEM for benefit of Mankind. If you cannot use them for the benefit of Mankind, then those knowledge are USELESS.

 

 

i agree .

 

 

 

 

Wrong ... Western Science evolved from the needs to debunk Christian god. And that is fact.

 

Unlike in India, the Europeans have lived for 500 years in (what historians called) Dark Ages. In that period of time, Christianity was practiced and Science is according to the Bible. Which means that anyone who said that the Earth is not the Center of the Universe or the Solar System, or that there are other lifeforms somewhere else and such WILL BE CONSIDERED HERETIC AND PUNISHED BY DEATH.

 

So, Science grew later with a goal of ensuring that the Dark Ages do not return. Unfortunately for us (in the East), this foolish people considered Asians to be lowered in status and education and attended to "reeducate" Asians so they could be more civilized. And that is how this ignorant Science found it's way to Asia.

 

 

christianity and its persecutions played a nice role in starting this dark ages but it was not the only factor . dark ages was also a period of social stagnancy and unproductivity and there were numerous other factors involved in its creation .

 

science was created not to deny god but to provide an alternative explantion to the world around ..it was a product of rebellious emotions of some people long oppresed under catholic yoke .

 

and finally when this new science movement gained momentum and found more members it naturally chose to throw away everyting related with the oppressive christianity . it was more of an attack on christianity , a liberation movement from papal power .

 

later when eastern religions with their broad mind setup reached the west , the contemporary scientists were curious and eager to know more of the subtle indian philosophies !!

 

hence it would ne incorrect to say that they created science exclusively for denying god . if you disagree prove your point .

 

 

 

I don't know ... what do you think?

 

99% is useless without the 1% to complete it, and 1% is simply too small to be considered as an important fact. So, what do you believe we should do?

 

 

 

i take the word of scriptures ! they are from the mouths of realized souls .. so what they say about god is far more trustworthy and relevent than anything else !!

[Sephiroth]

sambya :

 

 

christianity and its persecutions played a nice role in starting this dark ages but it was not the only factor . dark ages was also a period of social stagnancy and unproductivity and there were numerous other factors involved in its creation .

 

No, Christianity alone was the reason for the Dark Ages to commence and last for 500 YEARS, choking the European communities from advancing. Even today, it is a fear of such "choking effect" still could be found in Europe and America where people there are still very much ignorant toward Science.

 

 

science was created not to deny god but to provide an alternative explantion to the world around ..it was a product of rebellious emotions of some people long oppresed under catholic yoke .

 

Same thing except you use some nice words to say it. Ignorant Science was created in the West in order to rebel against the (Christian) god. That is fact no matter how you say it.

 

 

later when eastern religions with their broad mind setup reached the west , the contemporary scientists were curious and eager to know more of the subtle indian philosophies !!

 

Quit your daydreams. The Westerners are not that open-minded. They are very egoistic and selfish and they will always look down on Indians, Chinese and everything Asian.

 

Take History for example. Hindu scholars have already discovered that the Sun was the centre of the Solar System and even went to calculate the distant from Earth to the Sun over 1,000 years before Copernicus and what does West teaches to its people there? That Copernicus was the "father" of astronomy.

 

Chinese people have invented paper and used it for various purposes (including as toilet paper) by the time Marco Polo reached China in 13th Century and who gets the credits for inventing the publications? Gutenberg.

 

The Westerners are still very much a Christian even so they do not accept Christianity (as they did during the Dark Ages). They still want their religion to be in the center of everything, and their Jesus to be the most important one and that they are the center of the Universe and all others must bow to them. That attitude did not change from the day they sat foot on the sands of Goa, India to the present day.

 

 

i take the word of scriptures ! they are from the mouths of realized souls .. so what they say about god is far more trustworthy and relevent than anything else !!

 

And THAT is the difference between you and me. I take the 1% to be more important to the 99%.