Multibillion-dollar experiment to probe nature's mysteries

[Guest guest]

H.N.Sreenivasa Murthy

Pranams to all.

 

advaitin , vaibhav khire <vskhire wrote:

 

Dear Sri Vaibhav Khare,

 

Thoughts expressed in your posting clearly show that you have

not correctly grasped the fundamentals of the message of the

Upanishadic sages. Has the science ever undertaken an investigation

into the OBSERVER of the whole manifestation. Science deals with only

observed objects whereas the Sages investigated who the observer is.

The investigations lie in different directions. How can the science

reach the same findings as that of the Sages? Is it ever possible?

And also, is it not a waste of energy , time and money to investigate

about a matter for which investigations have already been conducted

and results obtained? Please ponder over.

 

With warm and respectful regards,

Sreenivasa Murthy

[Guest guest]

advaitin , Sri Ram Chandran ji wrote:

> This news item contains some interesting information (see the link

> below)

>

> http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/09/08/lhc.collider/index.html

 

Hari OM

Thank you very much for it. I would have missed it otherwise.

 

A valiant, persistent and dedicated effort from so many scientists

working in co-operative endeavour in pursuit of truth is fascinating.

 

Invariably, huge effort entails huge expense and whenever the

justification for such incurred cost is questioned, I remember the

response of noted Nobel laureate Dr. Subramanyan Chandrasekhar,

made to a similar question, that left a deep impression on me.

 

The following response of Dr. Subramanyan Chandrasekhar from the

publication " Man behind the legend " (ISBN:1-86094-038-2), in which

Agnes M. Herzberg reminisces and I quote:

----------------------------

(during) " his convocation address at the University of Chicago

in 1971, he (Chandrasekhar) tried to answer the question of

a student, " How can you justify spending all your efforts on

abstract astrophysical problems when there are untold millions

in India in dire poverty? " There is no question about the

validity of his answer: Survival is certainly a necessary aim

of society, but without at the same time keeping alight the

flame of the highest intellectual endeavors it (i.e. survival)

is not worth the effort. Chandra did not express it quite as

bluntly as I just did but far more eloquently and almost

poetically. Whichever way you like to formulate this answer it

is our duty in our egalitarian society to emphasize this, to us,

obvious truth. "

----------------------------

 

Also, whenever a question is raised asking if Brahman or

Consciousness is everything, then why do research or any thing,

I remember simple but profound reply of Swami Jyotirmayanandaji.

I don't have the exact words with me right now, but paraphrasing it.

 

Even when scientists say everything, including so called matter,

is nothing but wave of energy, they don't stop to sit, stand, eat or

do things. So too, even though saying it is all only Brahman or

consciousness is the absolute reality, aspirant still does integral

yoga- with body doing Hatha Yoga (or exercises) to keep fit and

perform karma yoga ( " service " ), with mind do bhakti yoga

( " devotion " ), with intellect gnana yoga ( " inquiry and path of

knowledge " ). No aspect of sadhaka or aspirant's personality needs

to be neglected at the expense of another.

 

Needless to say, the original words are better than my attempt to

convey. But it did hit home run, clarifying it for me.

 

Furthermore, if one asks why redo this search all over again,

when it was already done by sages of yore, I remember a beautiful

verse in Telugu of Viswanatha Satyanarayana*, a noted Telugu poet.

 

# marala nidEla rAmAyaNaM bannacO,

nI prapaMcakamella nella vELa

tinucunna annamE tinucunnadinnALLu,

tana ruci bradukulu tanivi gAna

cEsina saMsAramE cEyu cunnadi,

tanadaina anubhUti tanadi gAna

talacina rAmunE talacedanEnunu,

nA bhakti racanalu nAvi gAna#

...

Rough translation is:

 

-----------------

" You ask

Why I write about

The same Ramayana that already many wrote about.

 

Every one eats

The same old food

Since

his taste and life

are his own

 

Every one raises family

The same old family

Since

his experience of it

is his own

 

I write about

the same old Rama

Since my faith and style

are my own. "

-----------------

(* Viswanatha wrote in Telugu " Ramayana Kalpavriksham " his own

interpretation of the epic, which got Jnanpith award- the highest

literary award in India)

 

So too, the pain or gain of austerity or thrill of discovery of every

aspirant upon reaching the hall of Truth seem subjectively as ones

own, no matter how many reached the sacred altar before him or since.

=======================================================

 

Hari OM!

-Srinivas

[Guest guest]

advaitin , kuntimaddi sadananda

<kuntimaddisada wrote:

>

> PraNAms - Interesting.

>

> And What a waste of multi billions of dollars.

>

> That will not be the end since they need be to break even those

particles if they have even higher energy accelerators - Still the end

will be insight.

>

>

> According to advaita there are no fundamental particles - only

fundamental is the consciousness because of which one is even looking

for fundamental particles!

>

>

> Hari Om!

> Sadananda

>

 

Sada Ji,

 

With utmost humility I want to ask you one question in contention of

your observation above

 

According to advaita there is only Nirguna Brahman, but why do we then

worship the saguna brahman?

 

For most of us, we need saguna brahman to get to the nirguna. Don't

you think the same logic works for this scientific experiment - let

alone the potential benefits of future by-product inventions.

 

Of course I am not debating if the cost is worth it.

 

Thank you

 

Sudesh

[Guest guest]

Namaste,

 

This link talks about the Nataraja statue outside CERN, Geneva.

http://www.fritjofcapra.net/shiva.html

 

Ananda K. Coomaraswamy, seeing beyond the unsurpassed rhythm, beauty, power

and grace of the Nataraja, once wrote of it " It is the clearest image of the

activity of God which any art or religion can boast of. "

 

More recently, Fritjof Capra explained that " Modern physics has shown that

the rhythm of creation and destruction is not only manifest in the turn of

the seasons and in the birth and death of all living creatures, but is also

the very essence of inorganic matter, " and that " For the modern physicists,

then, Shiva's dance is the dance of subatomic matter. "

 

It is indeed as Capra concluded: " Hundreds of years ago, Indian artists

created visual images of dancing Shivas in a beautiful series of bronzes. In

our time, physicists have used the most advanced technology to portray the

patterns of the cosmic dance. The metaphor of the cosmic dance thus unifies

ancient mythology, religious art and modern physics. "

 

==

As I am located a couple of hundred kilometers away from

the place. If the local cosmic dance turns out to be the global

cosmic dance (however remote the the chances of it will be,

according to the experts), will be happy to witness it first hand!

 

Shivoham

Ramakrishna

[Guest guest]

Namaste everyone,I think people who are opposing the experiment are missing something important about the goal of science. On a pure level, the goal of science is same as religion, or the same question which the rishis asked ages ago, the scientists also have been asking. The question is "koham", or 'who/what am I'?The question is paraphrased differently at different times based on the outlook, upbringing and background of scientists. But the quest is for the same, the truth.Rishis tried to find out about that, 'knowing which everything becomes known'. The scientists for a while have also been trying to have a "Theory of everything", which will explain all phenomena of nature.Secondly, several people have complained that the method of scientists is wrong, since they are looking "outside", when the answers are "within". But,

isnt the 'inside' and 'outside', only the creation of an ignorant mind? For in truth, even from paramarthika standpoint, there is no 'inside' and 'outside'. As Shri Ramakrishna says "Putting a stick on top of water does not divide the lake, similarly the body and mind do not divide Brahman". So if scientists decide to look in what one feels as "outside", will they not find the same truth as those who looked "inside"? On a fundamental basis, why cannot the knowledge of Brahman not be attainable by goinging smaller and smaller, deeper and deeper into matter, until nothing exxists within? If "like peeling various layers of onion, and ultimately finding nothing inside, one can get rid of various layers of mind and find no seat for ahamkara", why cannot the scientists reach the same truth about the falsehood of the matter/nature?There can be objections about the spending going into the project when millions are dying of

hunger. Or about the possible danger involved in the expt. itself. But I feel it is wrong to say that what the scientissts are doing will not take them closer to truth, or that it will produce no-knwoledge... I do not feel that should be considered official Vedanta opinion atleast. Some Valya koli had to say Lord's name reverse to reach the brahma-jnAna state, same way some people might go all the way "outside" and gain the same knowledge! Who are we to say otherwise!Hari Om!Vaibhav.--- On Wed, 10/9/08, Madathil Rajendran Nair <madathilnair wrote:Madathil Rajendran Nair <madathilnair Re: Multibillion-dollar experiment to probe nature's mysteriesadvaitin Date: Wednesday, 10 September, 2008, 12:01 PM

 

Namaste.

 

This project is aimed at achieving the impossible. It wants to marry

aparAvidyA (mithyA-knowledge or non-knowledge - my unscholarly

translation for those who are not faimiliar with Sanskrit) to

parAvidyA (Absolute Knowledge or Absolute Truth). All scientific

knowledge, however sublime, is non-knowledge. Brahman, the Truth of

Advaita, only is Knowledge.

 

Secondly, Truth (Knowledge or Brahman) cannot be the result of an

experiment, howsoever sophisticated and expensive it is. So, all

experiments of the non-knowledge realm are doomed to fail in reaching

the Truth. They may at best produce more non-knowledge and more

challenging questions in the transactional, to answer which planners,

policy and budget-makers will have to again earmark billions and

billions of dollars. It is a ceaselles game.

 

This is not a personal opinion. This is what vedanta shAstra (whole

body of teaching on vedanta philosophy) suggests.

 

Best regards.

 

Madathil Nair

 

 

 

Unlimited freedom, unlimited storage. Get it now

[Guest guest]

Dear Vaibhav-ji,

 

You say that: “Secondly, several people have complained that the

method of scientists is wrong, since they are looking " outside " , when

the answers are " within " . But, isnt the 'inside' and 'outside', only

the creation of an ignorant mind? For in truth, even from paramarthika

standpoint, there is no 'inside' and 'outside'. As Shri Ramakrishna says

" Putting a stick on top of water does not divide the lake, similarly the

body and mind do not divide Brahman " . So if scientists decide to look in

what one feels as " outside " , will they not find the same truth as

those who looked " inside " ?â€

 

It is not a question of ‘inside’ and ‘outside’; it is a question

of ‘subject’ and ‘object’. Even when the scientist is studying the innermost

workings of the  brain or probing (as he thinks) the ‘mechanism’ of

consciousness, he is still a subject looking at things, processes, ideas or

whatever – all objects. By definition, he can never find out anything about the

subject because he is the one looking and trying to find out.

 

Best wishes,

Dennis

[Guest guest]

Dear Shri Khire,

 

Your quoting my message in its entirety under yours suggests that you

are replying me.

 

I am not against spending money and conducting experiments. Let

science continue to do what it is doing.

 

I was only looking at the whole issue from the point of view of

advaita and highlighting the fact that experiments belong to the

realm of the non-real(mithyA) and can produce only non-real results,

leaving us in an endless state of 'tending to reach the Truth and

never reaching It'. No doubt, in this 'tending to' game, we have

travelled far from gravitation to relativity to uncertainty. But, the

Truth that advaita advocates will never be reached through

experiments. We will be peeling the onion endlessly.

 

You are right there is no 'outside' or 'inside' when it comes to

knowledge. In final analysis, our internalizations and

externalizations are one and the same. To think of a division

between the two is tacit identification with the BMI, which is

inadvaitic.

 

I am no expert to comment about the dangers of the experiment.

However, having seen the misuse of nuclear energy and the

environmental havoc our scientific progress has wrought in the last

several decades, I am afraid, my feeble voice is compelled to join

the roar of protests.

 

Best regards.

 

Madathil Nair

________________

 

advaitin , vaibhav khire <vskhire wrote:

>

> Rishis tried to find out about that, 'knowing which everything

becomes known'. The scientists for a while have also been trying to

have  a " Theory of everything " , which will explain all phenomena of

nature.

>

> Secondly, several people have complained that the method of

scientists is wrong, since they are looking " outside " , when the

answers are " within " . But, isnt the 'inside' and 'outside', only the

creation of an ignorant mind? For in truth, even from paramarthika

standpoint, there is no 'inside' and 'outside'. As Shri Ramakrishna

says " Putting a stick on top of water does not divide the lake,

similarly the body and mind do not divide Brahman " . So if scientists

decide to look in what one feels as " outside " , will they not find the

same truth as those who looked " inside " ?

>

>  On a fundamental basis, why cannot the knowledge of Brahman not

be attainable by goinging smaller and smaller, deeper and deeper into

matter, until nothing exxists within? If   " like peeling various

layers of onion, and ultimately finding nothing inside, one can get

rid of various layers of mind and find no seat for ahamkara " , why

cannot the scientists reach the same truth about the falsehood of the

matter/nature?

>

> There can be objections about the spending going into the project

when millions are dying of hunger. Or about the possible danger

involved in the expt. itself. But I feel it is wrong to say that what

the scientissts are doing will not take them closer to truth, or that

it will produce no-knwoledge... I do not feel that should be

considered official Vedanta opinion atleast. Some Valya koli had to

say Lord's name reverse to reach the brahma-jnAna state, same way

some people might go all the way " outside " and gain the same

knowledge! Who are we to say otherwise!

[Guest guest]

PraNAms to all

 

To bring the subject back to Vedanta that this list serve is interested in:

Dennis made that fundamental remark - about the investigator and investigated

examining both from fundamental level.

 

One has independent existence and the other has dependent existence. Therefore

one is real and other is mithyaa by definition of real and mithyaa.

 

Any investigation of mithyaa will remain as mithyaa without the understanding of

the real one, the conscious entity, that is doing the investigation – since

the very investigation separates them as two. Hence any investigation even of

consciousness itself as some scientists are trying to do is futile since

objectification of consciousness makes ‘it’ as ‘inert’.

 

Any investigation of mithyaa by a conscious entity ultimately involves uniting

the existent mithyaa (or to be correct existence 'as mithyaa') is united with

the consciousness of the subject for the subject to be conscious of the mithyaa

- that is the fundamental tenant of the perception that we are discussing in the

VP. Without that we will never know what the fundamental aspect of mithyaa or

matter is. Implication is the fundamental aspect remains as -

existence-consciousness - this is as within and without, since both

subject-object are united in the perception of object by the subject. Without

the observer there cannot be observed- however finer that particles are since

the observed depends on the observer - as stated above that observer is

independent and observed is dependent as one is real and the other is mithyaa.

 

Yes, we are interested in the fundamental truth but what is that truth is

understood. Paramaanuvu theory has been there proposed by Jainism and has been

refuted in B. sutra saying the only fundamental truth is -

existence-consciousness-infiniteness which is part-less. Any parting, by however

fast the accelerator-blasting may be, will remain only as mithyaa. We will

never know the mystery of the universe by blasting it. That much we have learned

already. Hence the last statement of Dennis that is said beautifully-

 

 

--- On Thu, 9/11/08, Dennis Waite <dwaite wrote:

 

 

It is not a question of ‘inside’ and ‘outside’; it is a question of

‘subject’ and ‘object’. Even when the scientist is studying the

innermost workings of the brain or probing (as he thinks) the ‘mechanism’

of consciousness, he is still a subject looking at things, processes, ideas or

whatever – all objects. By definition, he can never find out anything about

the subject because he is the one looking and trying to find out.

------

Beautiful - Hence the scriptural statements:

 

That which one cannot be seen but because of which one has the capacity to see

know that alone is the fundamental truth not this that you are blasting or

blasted;

 

That which one cannot hear but because of which one has the capacity to hear,

know alone that is the fundamental truth not his that you are hearing about the

mysterious fundamental strings and quarks;

 

That which one cannot be spoken of, but because of which one has the capacity to

speak - know that alone is the fundamental truth not this you are speaking about

as fundamental particles;

 

That which you cannot think, but because of which one has the capacity to think

- know that alone is the fundamental truth not this that you are thinking that

will be discovered in the lab as fundamental truth of the universe

 

says in essence by Kena.

 

But of course one can have fun - as long as we understand and put that in proper

perspective.

 

Hari Om!

Sadananda

[Guest guest]

The Truth is " Infinite " , " Indivisible " .A limited, finite equipment in a lab cannot hold / contain this Infinite and present it to all living beings.Regards

Sang

[Guest guest]

advaitin , " Sang Kona " <sang.kona wrote:

>

> The Truth is " Infinite " , " Indivisible " .A limited, finite equipment

> in a lab cannot hold / contain this Infinite and present it to all

> living beings.

 

This aptly summarises what many said quoting scriptures and verses.

 

But, do we really know what " infinite " , " indivisible " actually

mean, other than just as notions, concepts or notations?! It is

hard enough to figure out tax returns, what to talk of infinite!

 

Is it not a limited, finite equipment again that is labeling and

using those words? Admittedly using most sophisticated equipment

ever created. Mind itself! So, a limited finite equipment, mind,

says another limited, finite equipment cannot hold/contain this or

that! What fairness!

 

Before I even begin to put down any thing as " non-knowledge " ,

my own thoughts and words laugh at me! Why? Because any words

used, no, even the art of writing attempted, belong to " mithya "

(not absolute reality), or even so called " non-knowledge " , that I

tried to write against in the first place!

 

I cringe at the thought of even beginning to say anything about

Truth. What can be said other than it is beyond words and mind,

#avaangmaanasa gOcaraM#, and how else can it be described other

than it is indescribable, unthinkable, ungraspable (#alakshyaM,

acintyaM, agraahyaM#), like Upanishads cry! To define it, is to

defile it!

 

Nietzche's words ring so true.

" That for which we can find words for, is something already dead

in our hearts. There is always a kind of contempt in the act

of speaking. "

 

Shankara without being harsh, beautifully and serenely sings

saying Truth is truly expressed in the " silent " commentary

#mouna vhyaakhyaa prakaTitaM#. He check-mated, leaving nothing

more to add.

----------------------

Hari OM!

-Srinivas

[Guest guest]

advaitin , vaibhav khire <vskhire wrote:

>

>

> Unfortunately, it is beyond my capacity to answer all the points

raised. But I sincerely feel science can also lead one day to the same

truth, if only by a different route.

 

Namaste,

 

It is tragic that such misplaced optimism continues its sway!

When the very word Dharma has become a taboo in this pursuit,

the 'different route' can NEVER reach the same truth. (Please see also

Gita v. 11:48, 53-54).

 

 

Regards,

 

Sunder