Join the true religion

[Guest guest]

I have joined the true religion.It is the greatest religion in the world.

 

name of religion: science

founder of religion:Aristotle

god of the religion:Truth

important prophets:Newton,galileo,einstein

holy book:all scientific books and journal

holy language:mathematics

rituals:scientific experiments

salvation:Nobel prize

benefits:all

harms:none.

 

This is the true religion.Join this religion.Dont fight in name of all other religions.science is god.

 

[Sephiroth]

Science can never replace God. I will explain why:

 

name of religion: science

 

Who's Science? Greeks?

Greeks Science's foundation comes from Hindusm. Greeks just eliminated Spiritualism from it and hold on to meaningless data.

 

Using this data - Greeks gave its foundations to Europeans in 16th, 17th and 18th Century, resulting in deaths and persecutions of religious followers and create of Atheism.

 

founder of religion:Aristotle

 

You are going to follow someone who didn't even know the world revolved around the Sun? /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

 

Aristotle himself didn't know everything and anything other than what is in his own nation, so why are you following a foolish man who's name only exists in theories alone.

 

god of the religion:Truth

 

Then why are you following a Devil (Lies)?

 

Truth means exploring all means and derive a relavity truth while knowing that you can NEVER understand the Absolute Truth in this world. YET, you believe that you have found Truth. Such belief is your own illusion and lies.

 

important prophets:Newton,galileo,einstein

 

All of them are dead. What is the use of following dead man's words? Why don't you follow the Gita or Judaism and live your life properly, thus your own words will become a guideline to others?

 

The foolish follow the Dead ... one of the rules of Judaism is NEVER to consult the dead for the dead shall not speak. You are consulting the dead who themselves are confused during their lifetime.

 

holy book:all scientific books and journal

 

Which constantly changes. What they say is Truth today, will be false tomorrow.

 

holy language:mathematics

 

Yet you yourself do not speak your "holy" language and the results will be different if people put different values in them. In the end, you will be fighting over values of Mathematical symbols just as some religious followers fighting over values of their religions. /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

 

rituals:scientific experiments

 

Whose results changes with flow of time and creations of better applications and experiemental tools. In the end, the result of experiments today will be false tomorrow.

 

salvation:Nobel prize

Which you cannot take to your grave. So what is the use?

 

benefits:all

harms:none.

 

False notions - Science today is just as harmful as some religions are to Man.

 

No where in time have we lived in fear of Nuclear bombs, man-made virus, disease, Nuclear reactor meltdowns, terrorists using modern-day tools such as airplanes and such as we are today.

 

WHY? Because people like you reject God and think Science alone is enough. People like you create all sort of garbage like Nuclear bombs just to make money or win prizes (your so-called Salvation earlier).

[Guest guest]

name of religion: science

 

science is one way of explaining the world in purely functional terms, in terms of only what is happening. by taking a supreme being out of the picture, it does not explain why it happens.

 

science in theory is pure satyam. in practice however, im sure we fallable humans are prone to and do sometimes register mistakes and treat them as truth. somtimes this mistaken is pointed out quickly. other times it takes centuries for the real truth to come forth.

 

founder of religion:Aristotle

 

i dont object to aristotle being the founder based on the fact that he didnt know certain things about the universe. but rather on the foundation that he is not the first person on this planet to think in a scientific sense. he is merely the first european to be officially recognized as such. there were many people before him who made advancements of knowledge, through chance or by deliberate effort, through use of logic or mistakes. to name aristotle is just another opportunity to use europe aas the measuring stick, acklowedging the first euro person rather than the first person, backed up by some exuse or the other regarding what the euro person did differently.

 

god of the religion:Truth

 

Brahman is satyam

 

Satyam jnanam anantam Brahma

 

important prophets:Newton,galileo,einstein

 

know that although there are many who have amde important contributions to the true understanding existance, only few get their name remembered.

 

most peopel pay their respects and follow those tht have died. everyone living will die. death is no reason to forget the teachings of peoeple. jesus is dead isnt he? krishna is dead. do you follow krishna's teachings?

 

holy book:all scientific books and journal

 

many of these books are truth. but there are some which speak half truths, and when one is unsure of a certain truth, there are many political influences that go into official recognizition of what seems to be the "truth"

 

as for the books changing, thats not the truth changing. its our perception and understanding of the truth. that changes because we do not yet know the truth. at least not on a global level. few men live the truth.

 

holy language:mathematics

 

what about language itself? the ability to pass ideas on to others? communication? vak devi?

[Guest guest]

rituals:scientific experiments

 

if that is yours, so be it. do what you do with a pleasure and gratitude that you have been given the grace of doing so.

 

my religion teaches me to tolerate other means of genuinly understanding the universe, truth and god. although you do not seek god, hopefully you will see him when you reach your goal.

 

salvation:Nobel prize

 

you get salvation from being recorgnized by a bueracatic organization that gives out annual awards at specific intervals to those that accomplish a ceratin thing? if one doesnt win, does that mean he has failed? he must be doomed, for he has not attained salvation? was he a lesser man because his accomplishemnts were not recognized by the media and the world?

 

benefits:all

harms:none.

 

how does it benefit those that see no use for sciecne? how does it benefit those that resent science in favor of religion? regardless of which viewpoint is the correct approach to take, it cant opossibly benefit ALL people if there is any opposition to it at all.

[Sephiroth]

by Ratheesh

 

science in theory is pure satyam. in practice however, im sure we fallable humans are prone to and do sometimes register mistakes and treat them as truth. somtimes this mistaken is pointed out quickly. other times it takes centuries for the real truth to come forth.

 

If you know some truth takes years to point out their mistakes and also, this "truth" is changeable during the flow of time, the Science cannot be called "pure satyam", does it?

 

i dont object to aristotle being the founder based on the fact that he didnt know certain things about the universe. but rather on the foundation that he is not the first person on this planet to think in a scientific sense. he is merely the first european to be officially recognized as such. there were many people before him who made advancements of knowledge, through chance or by deliberate effort, through use of logic or mistakes. to name aristotle is just another opportunity to use europe aas the measuring stick, acklowedging the first euro person rather than the first person, backed up by some exuse or the other regarding what the euro person did differently.

 

Right ... recognized by WHO? Europeans? Americans? So the qualifications of a founder is based on what race recognize who and not one what the person who recognised had achieved.

 

Hindus had made discoveries far before Aristle. Do you think any Western instutite will openly accept any Hindus (like the Sittars and Brahmins) as founder of Science? If not, then I do not see why we must entertain the same notion with Aristotle.

 

god of the religion:Truth

Brahman is satyam

Satyam jnanam anantam Brahma

 

Don't be an idiot ... this truth the person mention has nothing to do with Brahmnan. They are speaking for relative truth which they themselves found and "worship" as truth.

 

most peopel pay their respects and follow those tht have died. everyone living will die. death is no reason to forget the teachings of peoeple. jesus is dead isnt he? krishna is dead. do you follow krishna's teachings?

 

Jesus NEVER existed ... so how can someone who didn't exist be dead? Krishna's words is accepted NOT because He was a God, or because His words need to be respected. His words are accepted BECAUSE IT MAKES SENSE.

 

many of these books are truth. but there are some which speak half truths, and when one is unsure of a certain truth, there are many political influences that go into official recognizition of what seems to be the "truth"

 

Then why do we must entertain this sort of book as "Holy" as describe by the person?

 

what about language itself? the ability to pass ideas on to others? communication? vak devi?

 

Language is created as communication skills. However, you do not need words to "Communicate" with God. To say such is like saying mute people are atheist for they do not speak. /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

 

[Sephiroth]

Are you referring to me or to the creator of this thread?

[maadhav]

<< harms:none. >>

 

atom bomb, chem bio weapons, missiles, guns, IEDs, bombers, harmed none?

 

did not science/industiralization produce polution?

 

how is it that science does not know how to harmlessly dispose nuclear waste?

 

why can science not avoid death?

 

[Guest guest]

Who's Science? Greeks?

Greeks Science's foundation comes from Hindusm. Greeks just eliminated Spiritualism from it and hold on to meaningless data.Using this data - Greeks gave its foundations to Europeans in 16th, 17th and 18th Century, resulting in deaths and persecutions of religious followers and create of Atheism

 

EINSTEIN:Science doesnt care who gave what to whom in the past.

 

You are going to follow someone who didn't even know the world revolved around the Sun? Aristotle himself didn't know everything and anything other than what is in his own nation, so why are you following a foolish man who's name only exists in theories alone.

 

EINSTEIN:Nobody in the world knows everything.Nobody is foolish.All are wise.

 

Truth means exploring all means and derive a relavity truth while knowing that you can NEVER understand the Absolute Truth in this world. YET, you believe that you have found Truth. Such belief is your own illusion and lies.

EINSTEIN:Science rejects the existence of absolute truths.It believes that all truths are relative.

 

Which constantly changes. What they say is Truth today, will be false tomorrow.

EINSTEIN:that is because there is nothing called as absolute truth in the world

 

Yet you yourself do not speak your "holy" language and the results will be different if people put different values in them. In the end, you will be fighting over values of Mathematical symbols just as some religious followers fighting over values of their religions

EISNETEIN:We use our holy language only in ritrals:I.e experiments

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

The outcome of most modern research depends on the sponsor of the research...

[Guest guest]

Hi Einstein,

 

Science is truth and try to say only reality that it can prove. It can’t comment on things beyond proof.

 

Vedic Scientists never commented on the Science, because that is real. (But they might comment on the end results).

 

Science is bind, restricted and confined to many things. If you see in Macro level this is confined to Mass ( x,y,z three dimensional) , Energy and Time. And they are lot out of these dims.

 

I say the Spiritual leaders are also great Scientists. They also proved many times to people, the purity of God by realizing it. They can prove but we have drive our self to that state to understand.

God is not confined to any dimensions. The Pure. One Dimensional.

 

You might have heard Black Hole, Science say this cuts one dimension at one stage. And at the end it cuts all the three dimensions and becomes only one unit of Zero diameter. This is also you can treat for some time one way of purity in mass. Black Hole is like once you come into its gravity. Nothing can come out it.

God is also like once you feel the purity - one dimension, you can never turn back to see any thing. Just you want to get into purity.

 

What Here I want to say is...

Science has proved many things which are helping in our material world.

Vedic Science if we understand it proves us the living body, its existence, and it transfer to purity.

 

I feel both are important.

Once you compare, I feel becoming pure is important.

Like, a person needs food but at the same time he needs air and water.

Here air you can take as God, he the one who makes the body to be in the world and feel the world. Science will just recognize the Body and move it through some means.

 

Sometimes I can say,

Science will conclude but sometimes fails in proving.

 

[krishnadasa]

thats a nice one , humorous but still true

[Guest guest]

Mayur said:Science is truth and try to say only reality that it can prove. It can’t comment on things beyond proof.

 

Einstein:What cannot be proved cannot be believed.

 

Mayur:Science is bind, restricted and confined to many things. If you see in Macro level this is confined to Mass ( x,y,z three dimensional) , Energy and Time. And they are lot out of these dims.

 

Einstein:Science is limited to time and mass.But so is every other field in the world.

 

mayur:What Here I want to say is...

Science has proved many things which are helping in our material world.

Vedic Science if we understand it proves us the living body, its existence, and it transfer to purity.

 

Einstein:Science is far better than vedic science.I havent read any vedas but still can say so because scientists gave so much contribution to the world than vedas.

 

mayur:Science will conclude but sometimes fails in proving.

 

Einstein:Is it is not provable,then it isnt true

[Guest guest]

Dear Einstein,

 

your sentence:"I havent read any vedas but still can say so because scientists gave so much contribution to the world than vedas."

 

is the most superstitious and unscientific and blind and meaningless statement. Read it again yourself!

 

Do you think every rishi(vedic scientist) of Land of Bharatha in the past were fools? and believed in something meaningless? and we are all leading a very smart and meaningful life?!! think again and especially with a sober mind look around and talk in reality. not assumptions.

 

How do u conclude one is better than the other without knowing BOTH the things fully? and not experimenting with the principles? Are you really that stupid to just say something is useless by not even reading and trying to understand wat it says by someone who knows about it?

 

Which is far better than which, is a secondary issue. But first atleast let us try to know both with an open and UNBIASED and UNBLINDED mind.

 

Do you know that every core part of science which exist today is deeply explained by vedic rishis in full and with such clarity. Branches like astronomy, astrology, biology, atomic physics, chemistry, mathematics, quantum mechanics and much much more like Naadi Shaastra, astanga yoga etc etc.. which modern science hasnt even thought of and heard of. Please try to read the various works of Vedic teachers and then you can conclude wat is better and wat is not. until then, dont make a blind statement and follow your own blind faith. Awake and arise is wat the upanishads say..(not from sleep.. but from ignorance!)

 

Thanks,

-v

[Guest guest]

the point of science is satyam. sciecne tries to prove the turth of every aspect of the universe through experiments and proof. this is basicallya systematic analysis of satyam of the universe through prescribed procedures. much like our rishis' meditational procuedures, yet different.

 

regardless of whether the other person admits to brahman, that is what he speaks of. a person from argentina that calls a cat a gato and stubbornly denies any other word to describe the cat still is referring to a pucha, no matter how much he doenst admit to it. brahman is satyam, so if scientists seek truth, even if it is not the truth that we know to be true, what they seek si brahman. only when they find the truth in brahman, will they understand that it was brahman that they were looking for all along.

 

jesus definately existed. to start denying major infulences of other religions just becuase they are 'other' is wrng. jesus definatley existed, alhtough i do doubt that what the catholic church in the vatican teaches as the sotry of jesus is a little tainted.

 

True you do not need words to communicate. it was my intention to infer communcation as a whole rather than spoken language. comunication is the language of science.

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

 

How is it that all are wise? if that was the case, there would be no such thing as wise, considering all are equal and no one any wiser than the rest.

 

brahman is the only absolute truth. sat-chit-ananda. other than that, everything else is relative truth, relative to those that perceive the truth.

 

since scientology cuts out brahman/god, they donot believe in an absolute truth. but existance is an absolute truth. the fact that things exist at all is an absolute truth.

 

What cannot be proved shouoldnt be dismissed as falsity. maybe it just means the path to prooving it may be blocked and it will take time for thhose obstacles to pass.

 

if you havent read any vedas, then how can you know that science has more to offer? you dont know both ends of the comparison. it is only becuase of your lack of exposure to the vedas that you automatically assume it has nothing to offer you.

[Guest guest]

V.Hebbar..Einstein got you..You cannot escape.

 

You criticized me when I said 'Science is more advanced than vedas".You said I cannot make that claim unless I read vedas.

 

But see what you said in your posting.

 

"..Do you know that every core part of science which exist today is deeply explained by vedic rishis in full and with such clarity. Branches like astronomy, astrology, biology, atomic physics, chemistry, mathematics, quantum mechanics and much much more like Naadi Shaastra, astanga yoga etc etc.. which modern science hasnt even thought of and heard of..."

 

You have not learnt fields like chemistry,atomic physics,quantum mechanics etc.But still you say vedas are explaining it better than science.So now I am asking your question back to you itself.

 

How do u conclude one is better than the other without knowing BOTH the things fully? and not experimenting with the principles? Are you really that stupid to just say something is useless by not even reading and trying to understand wat it says by someone who knows about it?

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

It was Einstein who said, "I bathe my intellect in the Bhagwat Gita every day..." And here you are!

[Guest guest]

Hari OM

 

You are making a basic (wrong) assumption that Science and Vedas are mutually exclusive, but it is not, both are different ways to know the truth.

 

One is through trying to think/experiment/analyse by yourself to reach the truth, other is to hear (or receieve) it from one who knows the truth already.

 

Note: Your method of reading scientific journal and trying to understand the truth , is nothing but religion, it can't be called science in a strict sense.

 

These two paths are explained by a story of Ganesha (spiritual) and Subramanya (scientific) method of trying to achieve the "Fruit of Wisdom".

 

There is science behind every miracle, and there is miracle behind every science (discoveries)

[krishnadasa]

"When I read the Bhagavad-Gita and reflect about how God created this universe everything else seems so superfluous." ~ Albert Einstein

 

 

 

"The Bhagavad-Gita has a profound influence on the spirit of mankind by its devotion to God which is manifested by actions." ~ Dr. Albert Schweizer

 

 

Now do u think you are higher than these souls? if you think so then you shud prove it by bringing theories like what Einstein brought!! lol believ me you are deluded!!!

 

"Of the sciences Spiritual science i,e the science if soul is the greatest " Srimad bhagavadgita confirms it!!!

 

Advice: Its not good to take only the theory of relativity from eistein, shud take his views on the religion as well

 

Hari hari bol

[Guest guest]

Mayur:Science is bind, restricted and confined to many things. If you see in Macro level this is confined to Mass ( x,y,z three dimensional) , Energy and Time. And they are lot out of these dims.

Einstein:Science is limited to time and mass.But so is every other field in the world.

 

Mayur Again: World/Universe is not just made up of Mass/time. They are many other dimensions which people r still finding them. I think, You feel that you are more intellectual, Which is making you not to believe many things.

I think you know E=mc2. You feel that this is proved, but I feel this is concluded. Einstein concluded based on Rutherford theory of atoms. Rutherford in his theory concluded that matter is made up of atoms. In his theory he concluded with alpha rays deflection. Rays should be smaller than atom and then only deflection due to nucleus and electrons is possible. Then my question is with what matter Alpha rays are made of, with which those are deflected and sparked on the coating.

 

One more contradictory, you might know Kinetic Energy = 1/2*m*v*v. But the same matter when speed reaches v=c (Light Speed), the KE is doubled suddenly. How come you say this that it jumped to double.

I feel E=mc2 is a conclusion based on the principles proved/concluded by previous scientists. Here I am not saying E=mc2 is wrong, this is a conclusion. I hope the energy doubled because of another dimension or some other reason. But still people are in research to understand the reason.

There are many places where Science is unable to reach.

 

Once again I am telling, Vedic Science has understood the importance of one-dimensional. People experienced and conveyed us. It is our time to understand. We have to go that state to get the purity.

 

 

mayur:Science will conclude but sometimes fails in proving.

Einstein:Is it is not provable,then it isnt true

 

Mayur Again: As per my previous lines, Science has proved many things based on conclusions. Does it mean we believe sceince or we shouldnot.

Belief comes when you & I feel comfortable/acceptable to those things. Intellectual always does not accept unless proved. Belief is something out of intellect. Its not arthemetic algorithm to put in mind and conclude to believe.

 

When Intellect Seizes, Purity starts appearing before you.

 

[krishnadasa]

I appreciate your views and comparison with the one proposed by Einstein. But it was other day I was explaining the difference in fermions and bosenons to someone(in the perspective of Statistical mechanics), I saw the theories and creiterions proposed by these people looked to me as if althought they have done alot of work but only in vain, afterall the reserahc brought only destruction thru atom bombs. what was lacking here was knowledge of soul, which cant be captured by any so called dimensions nor can be treated as a tensor quanitiy to transfer to any coordinate systems :-))

 

All the theories whatsoever without the knowledge of soul and super soul dwelling in and their influence is just a work towards the darkness, not towards light!!!!

 

If you see any of the research in olden days in any of the puranas by the rishis even when it was purely material, the element consciousness and God is present everywhere. More than all these present was the renunnciation from all the results , as they knew perfectly that whatsoever they do in the field of material science can NEVER be even compared to Spiritual science , which is just a toolto become happy forever!!!

 

I too do research in the Uni,but I know my research is just one of those ways for serving my stomoch and nothing more , but I am still happay as my end results I will dedicate to the Spiritual master and his beloved Krishna, and for this there is no doubt!!!

 

Hari hari bol

 

[Sephiroth]

EINSTEIN:Science doesnt care who gave what to whom in the past.

 

That statement alone show your flaw in your "religion".

 

IF your "religion" doesn't care who gave what in the past, then you shouldn't put Aristotle as the founder, do you?

 

Matter a fact, it will be more logical IF you say the "founder" is Mankind - from the time he discovered Fire to today, rather than some "sage" you yourself have never met.

 

The fact that you put Aristotle as a founder shows that YOU do care who gave what. You care on Atheists values of "Science" (if ignoring some values while deitifying some other values you like can be considered as "Science"). That is not Science, that is self-delusion. /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

 

EINSTEIN:Nobody in the world knows everything.Nobody is foolish.All are wise.

 

Wrong ... nobody is foolish and nobody is wise. No one (including you and your precious Aristotle) knows everything.

 

Which is what TRUE Religion is - combinations of acceptable beliefs, understandings and logics by a society which produce religions - a Relative Truth.

 

You do not know, I don't know, Maadhav couldn't know, Krishnadasa couldn't know either. But each has some understanding on something. We gathered together and and put our minds together, thus create a relative truth based on what we understand.

 

What you are doing is taking "Relative Truth" brought by someone like Aristotle and say it is the Absolute Truth. You want to believe such foolishness, that is your choice. /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

 

EINSTEIN:that is because there is nothing called as absolute truth in the world

 

ONLY foolish people will say such foolish things. Do you know why? Because foolish people believe they know everything.

[Guest guest]

It's good to know the material world and try and size it with the help of science.

 

Science is based on a series of 'Why' questions answered rationally. It may not lead to a truth, but it would lead to a belief, that this is how things work or become predictable.

 

Science is an effort made by man to understand the magnanimous 'Maya' & how to leverage it for mankind.

 

'Maya' is just one side of things. Science can keep you in material life and lead you to a belief that one day man will fully control maya. It's no religion.

 

BTW man's body is not seperate from the maya outside. So it's still Maya controlling Maya with the help of science. Are you merely your body, or does the you includes the soul as well?