The Truth is out there!

[venky]

There is an ultimate truth out there. The fact that so many are searching for it implies that nobody has found it.

 

Most seem to look for it within the written words of scriptures. To me it seems futile - the real truth should be easier to comprehend and follow. ( although this is just my opinion!)

 

Science has found some but not all answers. Because it does not have ALL the answers yet (although they have been searching only for a few hundred years) science is always found fault with.

 

The reason is simple - the truth that science tells us is most unpalatable - it tells us we humans are an insignificant speck in the universe and are of no importance. Every one of us including myself can’t stomach this which in all probability is the truth.

 

The reason why I want to post here is to try and communicate my message, which is that the above conception of science as being barren and without “spiritual” content is simply not true.

 

Science is fully compatible and in fact endorses many of the so called “spiritual truths”. But please note - ONLY SOME AND NOT ALL. Only some of what Bhagavad Gita says is true, only some of what Sankara says is true, only part of Samkhya theory is true and only some of what the Upanishads say is true, if weighed in the scales of science.

 

Much of what is written in the above scriptures and philosophies is blatantly false. But each has some core truth somewhere. If one must believe implicitly in such scriptures, I believe that the things which are blatantly false must be “not discarded but reinterpreted”. That is what I will attempt to do to the best of my ability.

 

The reason being that too many people hold tomes like the Gita sacred. If one is asked to disbelieve the Gita, most would not. That is what Sankara was faced with all those years ago. He “knew” what the truth was, but faced with a neo Brahminic Puranic society he had to mould his philosophy into the scriptures for his words to carry weight. I am sure much of his reinterpretations of the Upanishads and Brahma Sutra etc were not what the original authors intended, but by a new interpretation he lent weight to what he believed in. Same with somebody like Madhava or Ramanuja who’s interpretations of some scriptures may have coincided with the original import but many would be just twisting words to suit one’s philosophy. Similarly, Prabhupada too probably grasped and communicated only one of three different philosophies running through the Gita, though he definitely communicated the intent of the last Gita modification faithfully.

 

Arguing about Madhava or Sankara is meaningless now because the world has moved on. A reinterpretation figuring the “truths” of science with what is written in the scriptures seems in order. It will take me two years to write even the little I have to communicate in this regard, , so bear with me ( I have already broken my promise to Shrao in this regard due to lack of time and being caught up in a history argument elsewhere). Much will come in a disjointed manner, so put it together if you want to know all of what I want to say.

 

There are two kinds of people who are likely to frequent a site such as this.

 

1. Those who seek the truth.

2. Those who deeply believe in Krishna, Bhakti and Gita implicitly and explicitly.

 

If you are type 2, please avoid reading my posts because some of what I will be saying will not be to your liking. However knowing from past experience that you will not avoid what is not meant for you, I have this to say:

 

I specifically want to avoid getting into arguments and debates with people who disagree with me. While I welcome constructive criticism, and would be happy to clarify imperfectly expressed thoughts and discuss points raised, I want to avoid acrimonious and impolite debates. I particularly want to avoid “putting the previous post within lines and then dissecting each statement to prove or disprove a point”. Although I don’t want to sidestep fights, I have realized that it is impossible for me to spend more than 1 hour of internet time and 1 hour of research per week. Also, proving a small grain of a mountain wrong because of faulty communication of an idea does not mean that the whole idea is wrong, whatever the Greek or Tarka logicians and debaters may say. He who gets the last word in does not achieve anything. The truth will still be out there.

 

You can read what I say and take it or leave it. I will probably continue to believe what I believe, irrespective of what others may say, although expressing my ideas definitely results in improvements and embellishments, to say nothing of new insights.

 

Read on seeker!

 

(PS: Greetings shvu and shrao!)

 

 

 

[Love]

If science yields some spiritual truth, then why was it that ancient Indians called wisdom or Truth as "Gyaan" and science as "Vigyaan". I think the reson is that science attempt to gain insights into the temporal truth (or fact as a better word to use) while the seekers of knowledge strive to find the eternal Truth. Any ideas?

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

In the ancient texts we find the words jnana and vijnana to refer to knowledge and applied knowledge respectively. Vijnana not only refers to applied material knowledge, but to applied spiritual knowledge as well. It is probably because of the application aspect that the word was later used to refer to modern science in local languages such as hindi, etc. Modern science tends to focus on applied knowledge, how to utilize information to create results - as opposed to just knowing something.

 

Without application all knowledge is basically useless, including spiritual knowledge. The Gita stresses this point (the need for vijnana in addition to jnana) in several places. Perhaps later I will try to say more on this aspect.

 

Of course the word jnana also has a more general meaning, so we have to see the particular context in order to define the proper meaning. Not ever occurence of the word jnana indicates academic knowledge.

 

[Love]

Hello Venky,

I was much delighted to read your dissection of the two words - jnaana and vijnaana. It is quite rational and correct. There is no doubt that if vijnaana used correctly will eventually lead to truths that may have a different perspective from spiritual point of view but the same conclusion. The reason is I feel any quest for truth, transitory or eternal, have the presence of God within and so will lead to similar conclusions. However, we need to understand that in ancient India vijnaana meant application of knowledge to find the empirical truth. Jnaana was what was required to find the spiritual truth – love. Simply put, there is only one spiritual truth – God, who is only realized when we reconcile our inner selves – somatic, psychological, scientific, intellectual, and spiritual – and produce that inner brook which springs forth love in a continuous flow and produces joy for ever. I believe that it is a wrong approach to mix up different selves within us. For instance mixing up scientific/ rational selves. Indian thought does not condone that for it can only produce confusion. All Indian stories, time and again, remind us of this. Why is it that Brahman, Vishnu, Shiva do not work together? Whenever it is time for Shiva to save dharma, Brahman and Vishnu are bowing down to Shiva. Whenever, Vishnu is requested to take reincarnation to save earth, Shiva and Brahman are bowing down to Vishnu. Whenever, Brahman is in the act of creation, Vishnu and Shiva are not interfering. It is because each of them are complete in themselves, but they know which time is appropriate for whom to work and so the other two powers hibernate at that moment. The same way, there is no gain that may come out of mixing up science and spirituality. When our scientific self is invoked it is time for our other selves to hibernate and let only the scientific light command the quest. Each of our inner selves has complete knowledge encoded within it for it to function correctly and only then it functions properly as well. Any other light is darkness for it and can only create confusion.

Later

Love