MY ARTICLE: 'FAITH IS NOT RELIGION' Kindly comment on it!

109 views
Skip to first unread message

Andris Heks

unread,
Jun 22, 2020, 6:40:49 AM6/22/20
to Online Sadhu Sanga
Hi  dear Fellow Truth Seekers,

Would you kindly comment on my attached article?

Many thanks,

Andris Heks
FAITH IS NOT RELIGION.docx

art wagner

unread,
Jun 22, 2020, 9:42:52 AM6/22/20
to online_sa...@googlegroups.com
Religion is the systematic expression of faith.

From: online_sa...@googlegroups.com <online_sa...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Andris Heks <a.h...@hotmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, June 21, 2020 11:16 PM
To: Online Sadhu Sanga <online_sa...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: [Sadhu Sanga] MY ARTICLE: 'FAITH IS NOT RELIGION' Kindly comment on it!
 
--
----------------------------
Idols of the Mind vs. True Reality
https://www.amazon.com/Idols-Mind-vs-True-Reality/dp/1734908955
https://www.amazon.in/Idols-Mind-vs-True-Reality/dp/1734908955
 
Ontological Distinction between Mechanical, Chemical & Biological Systems
http://scienceandscientist.org/conference/systems
 
Send a Donation to Support Our Services: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
 
Report Archives: http://bviscs.org/reports
 
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
 
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
 
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
 
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
 
Princeton Bhakti Vedanta Institute: http://bviscs.org
 
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
 
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
 
Contact Us: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/MN2PR14MB28804C2EC2849858A0CA672695970%40MN2PR14MB2880.namprd14.prod.outlook.com.

Deva Sarran Samaroo

unread,
Jun 22, 2020, 10:58:22 AM6/22/20
to online_sa...@googlegroups.com
Thanks

Let me down load same read then I will comment

Deva

From: online_sa...@googlegroups.com <online_sa...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of art wagner <wagn...@hotmail.com>
Sent: Monday, June 22, 2020 2:13:32 PM
To: online_sa...@googlegroups.com <online_sa...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: [Sadhu Sanga] Re: MY ARTICLE: 'FAITH IS NOT RELIGION' Kindly comment on it!
 

Andris Heks

unread,
Jun 22, 2020, 10:58:22 AM6/22/20
to online_sa...@googlegroups.com
Thank you Art.
What I am saying is that the systemising tends to take place in an exclusivist rather than in an universally inclusive frame.


Sent: Monday, 22 June 2020 11:13 PM
To: online_sa...@googlegroups.com <online_sa...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: [Sadhu Sanga] Re: MY ARTICLE: 'FAITH IS NOT RELIGION' Kindly comment on it!
 

Whit Blauvelt

unread,
Jun 22, 2020, 12:32:30 PM6/22/20
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 01:13:32PM +0000, art wagner wrote:
> Religion is the systematic expression of faith.

Art,

Yet can't we have religion without faith? Seems to me we do best to approach
the holy without adherence to any prejudices, to any doctrines which
pre-judge what we should find there, or return with from our approach. Faith
asks us to be blind; we should approach humbly, with eyes open, rather than
proudly, sure in some claimed doctrine of the truth. True religion requires
us to renounce faith.

Not that I'd make a doctrine of this....

Whit

Alex Kiefer

unread,
Jun 22, 2020, 1:38:49 PM6/22/20
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Thanks for your thoughts, Andris.

Faith, as you have characterized it here, seems to me to be an essentially mystical attitude or practice. This is because, in order not to exclude anyone or anything, one must not put one’s faith in any particular doctrine (as against its negation).

For example, the doctrine that one should love one’s enemies is, in a way, exclusive of the opposite claim.

That said, universal love (and other attitudes or practices) may follow naturally from one who has adopted the attitude of faith (universal acceptance) even though no dogma is accepted (or rejected!).

It’s also interesting to consider the connection between the universality of (the object of) faith as you have described it and the idea that faith does not depend upon evidence. Universal acceptance/love doesn’t wait for evidence because it’s unconditional.

Best
Alex

Rabindra Nath Chatterjee

unread,
Jun 22, 2020, 1:38:50 PM6/22/20
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Dear Sir, 
Like language, origin of any religion is regional. In a society, a large number of people may have lower personality and understanding of relative reality. When intelligence and mental energy are at the service of good will, then a man/ woman make quick progress on the path that leads to God/ absolute reality. Therefore, the evolution of simplicity pathway of teaching of truthfulness, honesty, non-violence etc. known as evolution of God. So every religions have scientific basis. However every religion should be dynamic. Then society prosper.
 Thank you 
(R.N. Chatterjee) 


On Monday, 22 June, 2020, 04:18:49 pm IST, Andris Heks <a.h...@hotmail.com> wrote:


Boxbe This message is eligible for Automatic Cleanup! (a.h...@hotmail.com) Add cleanup rule | More info
FAITH IS NOT RELIGION.docx

Whit Blauvelt

unread,
Jun 22, 2020, 3:52:49 PM6/22/20
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 12:39:03PM -0400, Alex Kiefer wrote:

> It’s also interesting to consider the connection between the universality of
> (the object of) faith as you have described it and the idea that faith does not
> depend upon evidence. Universal acceptance/love doesn’t wait for evidence
> because it’s unconditional.

There is a difference between discovering that you have a love for all
beings, and choosing a faith which recommends we have a love for all beings.
The first is relevatory, and obvious when in evidence. The second is
doctrinaire, generally rings false, and often fails to connect us with our
true wellspring of love.

Faith should welcome evidence, as evidence can transcend and transform
faith. Those who advocate faith independent of evidence may be in serious
error -- loveable in their own way, but wrong in their doctrine. We should
of course hate the sin -- in this case blind faith -- but love the sinner.

Whit

Andris Heks

unread,
Jun 23, 2020, 12:17:34 AM6/23/20
to online_sa...@googlegroups.com
Many thanks dear Alex for your fascinating and wise comments.

I would like to savour and digest them together with hopefully more comments before
responding.

All the best,

Andris


From: online_sa...@googlegroups.com <online_sa...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Alex Kiefer <aki...@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, 23 June 2020 2:39 AM
To: Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] Re: MY ARTICLE: 'FAITH IS NOT RELIGION' Kindly comment on it!
 

Alex Kiefer

unread,
Jun 23, 2020, 12:17:34 AM6/23/20
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Hi Whit,
Really nicely said.

Re: evidence—I think it’s imperative that we consider evidence whenever an empirical proposition is in question. One should not have faith in the cosmological constant’s having a particular value for example. I just don’t think faith in the universal sense under discussion is directed at a particular falsifiable proposition...what I meant to suggest was that love needn’t wait for evidence (of loveableness, for example), and perhaps that’s the greater part of faith if not the entirety of it.

Alex

--
----------------------------
Idols of the Mind vs. True Reality
https://www.amazon.com/Idols-Mind-vs-True-Reality/dp/1734908955
https://www.amazon.in/Idols-Mind-vs-True-Reality/dp/1734908955

Ontological Distinction between Mechanical, Chemical & Biological Systems
http://scienceandscientist.org/conference/systems

Send a Donation to Support Our Services: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate

Report Archives: http://bviscs.org/reports

Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03

Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138

Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer

Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin

Princeton Bhakti Vedanta Institute: http://bviscs.org

Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org

Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga

Contact Us: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.

Andris Heks

unread,
Jun 23, 2020, 12:17:34 AM6/23/20
to online_sa...@googlegroups.com
Wonderful Whit!

You turned my position on its head!

Very creative!

I'll respond to it later.

Many thanks,

Andris

From: online_sa...@googlegroups.com <online_sa...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Whit Blauvelt <wh...@csmind.com>
Sent: Tuesday, 23 June 2020 12:59 AM
To: Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] Re: MY ARTICLE: 'FAITH IS NOT RELIGION' Kindly comment on it!
 
--
----------------------------
Idols of the Mind vs. True Reality
https://www.amazon.com/Idols-Mind-vs-True-Reality/dp/1734908955
https://www.amazon.in/Idols-Mind-vs-True-Reality/dp/1734908955

Ontological Distinction between Mechanical, Chemical & Biological Systems
http://scienceandscientist.org/conference/systems

Send a Donation to Support Our Services: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate

Report Archives: http://bviscs.org/reports

Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03

Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138

Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer

Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin

Princeton Bhakti Vedanta Institute: http://bviscs.org

Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org

Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga

Contact Us: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.

Andris Heks

unread,
Jun 23, 2020, 12:17:36 AM6/23/20
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Many thanks Rabindra.

I like what you say here: 'teaching of truthfulness, honesty, non-violence etc. known as evolution of God.'

My wish is that we evolve a universalist conception of God as the living unconditional lover of all creation.

Andris

From: 'Rabindra Nath Chatterjee' via Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D. <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, 23 June 2020 3:15 AM
To: Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] MY ARTICLE: 'FAITH IS NOT RELIGION' Kindly comment on it!
 

Andris Heks

unread,
Jun 23, 2020, 12:17:54 AM6/23/20
to online_sa...@googlegroups.com
Fascinating again Whit!
I couldn't agree with you more that:' Faith should welcome evidence, as evidence can transcend and transform faith.'
And also strenghten faith!
Thank you,
Andris
From: online_sa...@googlegroups.com <online_sa...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Whit Blauvelt <wh...@csmind.com>
Sent: Tuesday, 23 June 2020 3:51 AM
To: Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] Re: MY ARTICLE: 'FAITH IS NOT RELIGION' Kindly comment on it!
 
--
----------------------------
Idols of the Mind vs. True Reality
https://www.amazon.com/Idols-Mind-vs-True-Reality/dp/1734908955
https://www.amazon.in/Idols-Mind-vs-True-Reality/dp/1734908955

Ontological Distinction between Mechanical, Chemical & Biological Systems
http://scienceandscientist.org/conference/systems

Send a Donation to Support Our Services: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate

Report Archives: http://bviscs.org/reports

Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03

Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138

Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer

Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin

Princeton Bhakti Vedanta Institute: http://bviscs.org

Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org

Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga

Contact Us: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.

Andris Heks

unread,
Jun 23, 2020, 5:03:31 AM6/23/20
to online_sa...@googlegroups.com
Yes Alex.
I love your saying: 'I just don’t think faith in the universal sense under discussion is directed at a particular falsifiable proposition...what I meant to suggest was that love needn’t wait for evidence (of loveableness, for example), and perhaps that’s the greater part of faith if not the entirety of it.'

Absolutely! But I also think that there is plenty of day to day evidence of the extraordinary transformative power of unconditional loving.

I also find linguistic evidence for the primordial causal nature of unconditional loving in the Cosmos.

Hungarian, is arguably the most ancient living language and it still includes the highest number of original etymons, over 60% of words in the current language.

The word for unconditional love in Hugarian is 'szerelem'.

'Szer' is the core first syllable of 'szervez' which means 'organise'. 

'Szervezet' means 'organism'.

'Er' is the core first syllable of 'eredet' which means 'origine'.

And 'elem',of course, means element.
Accordingly, the ancient, perhaps rishi wise Hungarian wordsmiths may have seen 'unconditional loving'
(Cl. with John: God is love)
as 'the original (primordial) organic organising element (of the Universe)

A Sanskrit confirmation of this is the word 'prem' for love, which implies, premium or first, like Premier.

Andris

From: online_sa...@googlegroups.com <online_sa...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Alex Kiefer <aki...@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, 23 June 2020 12:17 PM
To: Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] Re: MY ARTICLE: 'FAITH IS NOT RELIGION' Kindly comment on it!
 

Andris Heks

unread,
Jun 23, 2020, 5:03:31 AM6/23/20
to online_sa...@googlegroups.com
Here it is Deva, above and pasted below:

FAITH IS NOT RELIGION!               Andris Heks      20.6.2020

 

I do not know a single religion or atheism that is not dogmatic in the sense that they are all sectarian, rather than being all-inclusive, universal.

I my mother tongue, Hungarian, the word for church is ‘egyház’. ‘Egy’ means one and ‘ház’ means house.

So, church means one house. Note, not two or many houses but ‘one house’.

A house that is a house for everyone, all-inclusive, irrespective of dogmas.

 

Every religion tends to claim that it is the only true religion and anyone who does not follow it, is misguided.

 

Religion brings together two components: one is its dogma the other is faith.

 

Tragically, faith and religion are conflated not just by the followers of particular religions but also by their atheist, materialist critics.

 

The latter tend to throw out the baby, faith, with the bath water, religious dogma.

The essential difference between dogma and faith is that dogmas are always sectarian, only catering to that section of the population who believe in a certain religion.

 

Whereas true faith is all-inclusive, universal.

 

Paul says: Faith, hope and love! These three abide! But the greatest is love. (1Corinthians 13, the last line.)

Now the love, Paul refers to here is universal or unconditional, because Paul says that such love ‘bears everything and believes everything’.

 

So here is the contrast: religion does not believe everything, only its own dogmas and that is how every religion tends to be sectarian, not universally inclusive.

There are the chosen, the members of a sect, the blessed ones, and there are the ‘infidels’, anyone, who does not belong to the sect.

 

But pure faith; faith without dogmas, by contrast, recognises a God who loves everyone equally, whether fidel or infidel; like the sun that shines on everyone, sinner or saint alike.

And one with true faith, indeed attempts to love his/her neighbour as him/herself and even tries to love ‘his enemies.’

 

A person of true faith loves his/her enemies, in so far as, being an unconditional lover, that person would perceive and label no one as his/her enemy.

 

Rather such person of faith would identify with everyone as his/her other half, whom he would see as loved by God as much as himself, as he would see everyone as a beloved child of God.

 

Would Christ be a Christian? I wonder.

 

In the Gospel Of The Sophia of Christ, Jesus calls God androgynous: The Saviour Father and the Life Giving Mother, dwelling in Oneness.

Yet Christians, Jews, Muslims, and even many Eastern religions, perceive and call God exclusively as Father, airbrushing Mother out of the picture.

And in that Gospel, Jesus calls SHimself unambiguously an Androgen.

So, SHe is not just the Son of God but also SHis daughter, in one.

But most Christians won’t have a bar of this. Their neo-traditional dogma reigns supreme.

 

Even the English language dichotomises God into either a male or a female instead of recognising that SHe might actually be both. English, gender-splits the living third person into either he or she.

 

I had to coin the word, SHe in an attempt to do justice to a God, who as a whole, is made up of a Yin, the female aspect and Yang, the male aspect, to perhaps more accurately describe God as SHe.    

 

Oh, those appalling religious wars fought in Christ’s name against SHis exhortation to love one’s enemies.

 

Christ did not ask SHis followers to love SHim because SHe ‘saved’ them.

 

Rather, SHe appealed to them that if they really wanted to serve SHim then they should love the ‘least of their brothers and sisters’.

 

Do refugees pop into mind here?

 

SHe eloquently argued that those who quenched the thirst of the hungry, who fed the poor, who cared for prisoners and the sick, who let the homeless into their homes, would do all this to SHim.

SHe did not ask for piety towards SHimself.

But SHe asserted that faith without works, was no faith at all, as SHis half-brother, James famously observed.

 

So faith, when based on universal, active love, could be the essence of all religions and atheism, if only, they could override their divisive, sectarian dogmas by all-inclusive, unconditional love.  



From: online_sa...@googlegroups.com <online_sa...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Deva Sarran Samaroo <devas...@hotmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, 23 June 2020 12:18 AM
FAITH IS NOT RELIGION.docx

David Marjanovic

unread,
Jun 24, 2020, 4:29:02 AM6/24/20
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
> Hungarian, is arguably the most ancient living language

Oh, please – what would "most ancient living language" even mean? Do you believe languages pop up out of nothing?

> and it still includes the highest number of original etymons, over 60% of words in the current language.

What do you mean by "original etymon"?

> 'Szervezet' means 'organism'.

And how old exactly do you think this term is? Don't you think it was deliberately, consciously coined as a translation of 'organismus' within the last few hundred years?

Andris Heks

unread,
Jun 24, 2020, 6:28:31 AM6/24/20
to online_sa...@googlegroups.com
Oh what fury David!
I am sorry If I sounded too enthnocentric.

I do not wish to argue about which was the most ancient language especially with those who are convinced that theirs is more ancient.
What is relevant here is ancient wisdom that seems to point to a primal organising cosmic
lover.
If you wish to argue, please argue with Einstein too, who said that our human intelligence can never fathom the enormity of the intelligence of the cosmic spirit.

But he, together with Ghandi, emphasised the necessity of utmost humility in the face of the enormity of the ever unknown.
So let us please, dialogue with respect and humility!

From: online_sa...@googlegroups.com <online_sa...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of David Marjanovic <david.ma...@gmx.at>
Sent: Wednesday, 24 June 2020 9:55 AM

To: Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] Re: MY ARTICLE: 'FAITH IS NOT RELIGION' Kindly comment on it!
--
----------------------------
Idols of the Mind vs. True Reality
https://www.amazon.com/Idols-Mind-vs-True-Reality/dp/1734908955
https://www.amazon.in/Idols-Mind-vs-True-Reality/dp/1734908955

Ontological Distinction between Mechanical, Chemical & Biological Systems
http://scienceandscientist.org/conference/systems

Send a Donation to Support Our Services: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate

Report Archives: http://bviscs.org/reports

Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03

Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138

Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer

Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin

Princeton Bhakti Vedanta Institute: http://bviscs.org

Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org

Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga

Contact Us: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.

Krishna Keshava Dasa

unread,
Jun 24, 2020, 1:35:31 PM6/24/20
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Dear Andris,

Namaste. You say

"But pure faith; faith without dogmas, by contrast, recognises a God who loves everyone equally, whether fidel or infidel; like the sun that shines on everyone, sinner or saint alike. And one with true faith, indeed attempts to love his/her neighbour as him/herself and even tries to love ‘his enemies.’"

The faith and love that  you mention is based upon self-centered consideration. You only address how God may love us, and in order for us to love others, we must consider them like ourselves.  This type of faith and love is limited, and bound by ego or ahankar, thus it cannot be pure.  Pure faith and love are selfless, and recognize our ultimate dependency upon God, who is the Supreme Controller (Isvara) of the Vedas, and the Supreme Mover (Pantocrator) as discussed by Newton.  Through faith and its rational development, the finite may recognize its relationship with the infinite.

You separate faith from dogmatic religion, but seem to assume that dogma and religion are inseparable.  A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada has pointed out that, 

"Literature or knowledge that seeks the Supreme Being can be accepted as a bonafide religious system, but there are many different types of religious systems according to the place, the disciples, and the people's capacity to understand."  
 
Religion lays out a path for the faithful to follow in order to realize the fulfillment that faith seeks.  

Due to the limited nature of humans, people of various levels of realization of Truth may require different approaches to overcome their relative obstacles to pure faith and its development.  Thus, various religions have emerged with various teachings which may be true, although they do not represent the Complete Truth. 
True and Truth.jpg

This is no reason to dismiss religion entirely, it merely points out the flaw in our own conception of what religion is, and how Truth is revealed.  It is not rational to think that the finite may approach the infinite based upon its limited capacity.  However, it is rational to think that the all-inclusive infinite may approach the finite.  This is the only way for Complete Truth to be revealed.  Religious systems born from such revelation are grounded in Supreme Authority, not relative dogma.  Externally, due to our finite nature, such a system may seem like "one house" out of many. However, its distinguishing characteristic would be its all-inclusiveness; the ability of such a system to harmonize all differences.  Such an ability cannot be artificially inserted through finite mental effort, but must be fundamental as a quality of the Absolute Truth.  

The philosophy of Achintya Bheda Abheda Tattva refers to the harmony of contradictory  concepts such as one and many, sameness and difference.  The harmony of these seemingly opposite ideas is found within the infinite, Absolute, Organic Whole.  Hegel points out that the Absolute must exist by itself and for itself, meaning that it is its own cause and it exists for its own reasons.  Thus, it is Absolute.  The Supreme Autocrat's (Isvara, Pantokrator) Will and Being is where all other being finds order and meaning. In Gödel's Collected Works: Volume 4, in a letter to Marianne Gödel on 10/06/1961, he says,

"What I call the theological world-view is the idea that the world and everything in it has meaning and reason [to it], and in fact a good and indubitable meaning. From that it follows directly that our earthly existence, since it in itself has a very doubtful meaning, can only be a means toward the goal of another existence. The idea that everything in the world has meaning is, after all, precisely analogous to the principle that everything has a cause on which the whole of science rests."

Pure faith seeks meaning, and faith develops through the gradual fulfillment of that meaning.  No doubt, that meaning is founded in love, pure and selfless love.  If we isolate love to only our fellow men and women (even animals, plants, etc), then we lose that purity.  We cut ourselves off from that which is the source of love, the source of all living beings.  Even Jesus says,

"Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength."
The second is this: "Love your neighbor as yourself." There is no commandment greater than these. (Mark 12:30-31)

If we develop love of God, rationally, through an authorized process which goes beyond our finite mental speculation, then we may develop true love, compassion, and respect, for all other beings as well.  If you want to nourish all of the branches, flowers, and fruits of a tree, then you must water the roots. Watering each branch, flower, and fruit individually will not produce the same result.  


Humbly in service,
Krishna Keshava Das
Serving Assistant

Princeton Bhakti Vedanta Institute
of Spiritual Culture and Science




--
----------------------------
Idols of the Mind vs. True Reality
https://www.amazon.com/Idols-Mind-vs-True-Reality/dp/1734908955
https://www.amazon.in/Idols-Mind-vs-True-Reality/dp/1734908955
 
Ontological Distinction between Mechanical, Chemical & Biological Systems
http://scienceandscientist.org/conference/systems
 
Send a Donation to Support Our Services: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
 
Report Archives: http://bviscs.org/reports
 
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
 
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
 
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
 
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
 
Princeton Bhakti Vedanta Institute: http://bviscs.org
 
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
 
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
 
Contact Us: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/MN2PR14MB28804C2EC2849858A0CA672695970%40MN2PR14MB2880.namprd14.prod.outlook.com.

Alex Kiefer

unread,
Jun 24, 2020, 2:29:51 PM6/24/20
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
I was about to react negatively to David’s message, when I realized that he’s just providing us the opportunity to reflect on what it means to practice the universal love we’ve been discussing (not to say that there’s nothing to the challenge he poses). Thank you for the amusing illustration, David!

Best to you
Alex

Whit Blauvelt

unread,
Jun 24, 2020, 2:29:51 PM6/24/20
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 01:26:42PM -0400, Krishna Keshava Dasa wrote:

> The faith and love that  you mention is based upon self-centered consideration.
> You only address how God may love us, and in order for us to love others, we
> must consider them like ourselves.  This type of faith and love is limited, and
> bound by ego or ahankar, thus it cannot be pure.

You assume we should want purity. Yet if God wanted purity, She/He would
have provided a creation which is nothing but pure. God loves the impure.
For God to only love the pure would leave God with none to love but God. Nor
does God want nor need us to strive to become God. God created this world so
that we might be our own sparks within it, in degree separated. In loving
us, God loves our selves. We should too.

Whit

David Marjanovic

unread,
Jun 24, 2020, 4:06:45 PM6/24/20
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
> Oh what fury David!
> I am sorry If I sounded too enthnocentric.
>
> I do not wish to argue about which was the most ancient language

Oh, sorry for the misunderstanding! I most certainly don't want to argue about which is the most ancient language. Instead, I want to argue against the very concept of "the most ancient language": it is meaningless. How much do two dialects have to diverge before we call them separate languages? How much does one dialect have to change till we call it a new language? There are no good answers to these questions; being unable to define "a language", we are unable to define "the age of a language", and it is impossible to argue that any language is "the most ancient living language".

We still call the dialects descended from Ancient Greek "Greek". But the dialects descended from Latin, which was spoken at the same time as Ancient Greek, we don't call "Latin" anymore; the two reasons are that they have diversified more than the Greek ones and that they have ended up as the official languages of different countries, a status only one variety of Greek has. This way, Greek looks older than French at first glance; but that is meaningless.

(As with "species", many have tried to find an objective definition for "language"; as with "species", all have failed to come up with one that can always be applied unambiguously. One criterion many have tried to use is mutual intelligibility: if people speaking two different dialects can understand each other, these dialects belong to the same language, otherwise they don't. But of course this is a matter of degree, not of yes-or-no; it is very often asymmetric; "dialect chains" confuse the issue*; there are all sorts of social confounding factors; and, finally, this would mean Greek is four languages, not one, while Hungarian might be two.)

* That's when everybody understands the people in the villages around them, but not those who live ten villages away. This is a very common situation. Until very recently, there was a branched dialect chain from the southern tip of Italy to the southern tip of Spain and to the northern tip of France; likewise, German and Dutch form a huge dialect chain where people from its ends understand only half of what the other side is saying.

> What is relevant here is ancient wisdom that seems to point to a primal organising cosmic lover.

Perhaps, but that's not the topic I'm trying to discuss here. :-) I don't have an opinion on whether faith is religion.

> If you wish to argue, please argue with Einstein too, who said that our human intelligence can never fathom the enormity of the intelligence of the cosmic spirit.

Indeed, I can't see a reason to think there is such a thing as a "cosmic spirit", or any other spirit for that matter.

> So let us please, dialogue with respect and humility!

...But that's it: calling any language "arguably the most ancient living language" shows little respect for the basics of the science of linguistics, or for your ability to inform yourself about them before you use a misunderstanding to make a point.

Krishna Keshava Dasa

unread,
Jun 24, 2020, 5:24:14 PM6/24/20
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Dear Whit,

Namaste.  Thank you for your reply.

If I made an assumption, it was that some want purity.  They want the real thing, if they dare to have faith that it is even possible.  Of course some don't want purity, as it may require more self-sacrifice then they are comfortable with. No problem.  Hopefully everyone will do their best based on their current understanding.

If God is infinite, which I think most people would agree to, then She and He (potency and potent, beloved and lover, Yin and Yang) must include free will. Such free will would allow those who desire the Absolute Truth to pursue it, resulting in heightened sweetness within that relationship due to the nature of free choice, and would also allow those who reject the Absolute Truth to live in whatever circumstances may come upon them due to that decision.

I never said that God only loves the pure.  There is no question that God's love is unconditional for all living beings. In this present age of Kali, most of us are incredibly degraded and impure, especially myself.  However, God has come in Her and His most merciful manifestation to allow those who desire it to develop love of God in a relatively convenient way.

Those who strive to become God are the most deluded.  It is simply the result of a lack of comprehension of the nature of the infinite, and our role as finite parts of that infinite Whole.

You conclude with


God created this world so that we might be our own sparks within it, in degree separated. In loving us, God loves our selves. We should too.

My humble opinion is that there is no evidence to suggest that God created this world so that we may forget Her and Him and exploit our external environment to satisfy our own self-centered desire to enjoy.  In fact, I believe that there's evidence to suggest that such an approach only perpetuates suffering.  If we are able to humbly and honestly recognize the root of suffering that we experience in this world, then perhaps we can develop the proper mood to cultivate selfless faith and love for the Organic Whole, of which we are a part.  



Humbly in service,
Krishna Keshava Das
Serving Assistant

Princeton Bhakti Vedanta Institute
of Spiritual Culture and Science



--
----------------------------
Idols of the Mind vs. True Reality
https://www.amazon.com/Idols-Mind-vs-True-Reality/dp/1734908955
https://www.amazon.in/Idols-Mind-vs-True-Reality/dp/1734908955

Ontological Distinction between Mechanical, Chemical & Biological Systems
http://scienceandscientist.org/conference/systems

Send a Donation to Support Our Services: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate

Report Archives: http://bviscs.org/reports

Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03

Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138

Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer

Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin

Princeton Bhakti Vedanta Institute: http://bviscs.org

Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org

Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga

Contact Us: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/20200624175821.GA20941%40black.transpect.com.

Andris Heks

unread,
Jun 25, 2020, 4:06:03 AM6/25/20
to online_sa...@googlegroups.com
Thank you Whit, very interesting.
I am glad I am not the only one who puts forward fantasies about the nature of God, which must remain fantasies, as we haven't got a clue about who God really is or even if SHe really exists.
That of course does not stop me from deeply believing, on the basis of my experiences and various indoctrinated literature, that God does exist and that God is an unconditionally loving Cosmo-personal being.
I also agree with the notion that if God did not exist we would need to invent SHim.
Why? Because to me God represents a Being who is simultaneously being able to see the whole of the Cosmos, including all human being, and being able to be in intimate loving relationship with every being. Like a Google map, God has the overview of it all, yet also sooms into every minor detail. But if so how come God does not stop atrocities? Especially, if SHe is supposed to created us in SHis image?
I can only answer this by by deeply felt fantasy that God is the one ultimate cosmic lover, and SHis omniscience and omnipotence is in being such lover; having the love that subsumes conributing to justice and creating a Paradise on Earth.
I also believe Whit with you that:'God loves the impure.
For God to only love the pure would leave God with none to love but God.'

But then you go on to say:
'Nor does God want nor need us to strive to become God. God created this world so

that we might be our own sparks within it, in degree separated. In loving
us, God loves our selves. We should too.'
Very interesting take. However, in my view, while we can never become God there might be something in the claim that God created us (if not in His but) in SHis image.
This implies to me, in particular, because God is an unconditional lover, that God values unconditional love so totally that SHe yearns  to have this unconditional loving realised in SHis creation, particularly through us humans.
That God actually yearns for a loving Paradise on earth where everyone is included and the unnecessary dichotomy between unigue individuality and universality is seemlessly resoved in the synergic state of being, for which I coined the term 'unicentric'.
So that there is maximum UNIqueness in maximum UNIversality; like in the idea of 'all for one and one for all' and the dictum of a society where 'the free development of each is the condition for the free development of all.'
I think that God created the material world because God did not wish to stay just immaterial. We as SHis creations are however both immaterial and material.
It is only through us that God can realise SHis immaterial vision of universal loving on Earth; we are God's materialised body, hands and feet in this sense.
So that God needs us as much as we need SHim to move towards a loving, all-inclusive Paradise on Earth.


From: online_sa...@googlegroups.com <online_sa...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Whit Blauvelt <wh...@csmind.com>
Sent: Thursday, 25 June 2020 3:58 AM
To: Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] MY ARTICLE: 'FAITH IS NOT RELIGION' Kindly comment on it!
 
--
----------------------------
Idols of the Mind vs. True Reality
https://www.amazon.com/Idols-Mind-vs-True-Reality/dp/1734908955
https://www.amazon.in/Idols-Mind-vs-True-Reality/dp/1734908955

Ontological Distinction between Mechanical, Chemical & Biological Systems
http://scienceandscientist.org/conference/systems

Send a Donation to Support Our Services: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate

Report Archives: http://bviscs.org/reports

Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03

Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138

Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer

Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin

Princeton Bhakti Vedanta Institute: http://bviscs.org

Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org

Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga

Contact Us: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.

Rosie Guadarrama

unread,
Jun 25, 2020, 4:06:03 AM6/25/20
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
The oldest languages come from India: Sanskrit and Tamil.

Rosie
"To become happier, wiser, and more loving, sometimes you have to swim against ancient currents within your nervous system."
-Rick Hanson, PH.D.-Buddha's Brain
--
----------------------------
Idols of the Mind vs. True Reality
https://www.amazon.com/Idols-Mind-vs-True-Reality/dp/1734908955
https://www.amazon.in/Idols-Mind-vs-True-Reality/dp/1734908955

Ontological Distinction between Mechanical, Chemical & Biological Systems
http://scienceandscientist.org/conference/systems

Send a Donation to Support Our Services: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate

Report Archives: http://bviscs.org/reports

Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03

Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138

Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer

Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin

Princeton Bhakti Vedanta Institute: http://bviscs.org

Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org

Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga

Contact Us: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/trinity-62f68ebf-ec66-4205-a219-cd0c5c01e1a3-1592956531201%403c-app-gmx-bap23.

Andris Heks

unread,
Jun 25, 2020, 4:06:03 AM6/25/20
to online_sa...@googlegroups.com
Thank you dear Krishna for your wonderful contribution!

'Pure faith and love are selfless, and recognize our ultimate dependency upon God,'
'Through faith and its rational development, the finite may recognize its relationship with the infinite.'

Absolutely!

'the all-inclusive infinite may approach the finite. ... 'its distinguishing characteristic would be its all-inclusiveness; the ability of such a system to harmonize all differences....' Pure faith seeks meaning, and faith develops through the gradual fulfillment of that meaning.  No doubt, that meaning is founded in love, pure and selfless love.  If we isolate love to only our fellow men and women (even animals, plants, etc), then we lose that purity.  We cut ourselves off from that which is the source of love, the source of all living beings.  Even Jesus says,

"Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength."
The second is this: "Love your neighbor as yourself." There is no commandment greater than these. (Mark 12:30-31)'

I am in 100% agreement with everything I quoted from you above.
In my essay to which you kindly respond, I only elaborated on Christ's second commandment.
But in fact my basic position indispensably includes the first commandment you quote from Mark about loving God with all my being.
I could not agree with you more that without such love, any attempts to love my neighbour as myself will be shallow.
The above quote I have been meditating on for years as the most succint and fundamental revelationary guiding path towards the impossible dream of living a life of actual unconditional loving, that I have come across.
I say impossible, because I believe only God could do it, as a human, I feel blessed, even if I can keep moving towards its realisation increasingly, if never fully.
The only word I quarel with, in the above gem of truth, is the biblical word of 'Lord', and no doubt you'll disagree with me.
As I pointed out in my essay, to me, and perhaps to Christ too, God  is not just Lord but is the dynamic union of God the Savior (Father or Lord or Krishna or Shiva) and the Life Giver (Mother, or Rathe, or Shakti).
Calling God as Lord only, therefore truncates God and elevates SHis masculine gender to subsume the feminine in God, rather than recognising, what is my 'fantasy' about God: that God is love in the sense of literally and constantly making love through the perpetual intercourse between Father and Mother within God's binary monism.
I find that the great Vedas tend to overstate the importance of consciousness, as the absolute Shiva, and understate the importance of the Life Giver, Shakti.
Now with respect, you assume together with your extraordinary Guru, A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, that revelations are capable in giving us a path to
eventually grasp God's infinite truth.
But are they really?
Are they really 'the Word of God?'
Are they not almost always tainted with our limited human capacity, through our filter of biases?
Aren't many revelations, such as  A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada's doctrine on incarnation, highly disputable in terms of their truthfulness?
Is it not the case that any Guru, no matter how enlightened,
can only gain glimpses of the truth and not the whole truth, because the latter is intrinsically and forever beyond the human grasp, no matter how deeply it is rooted in long traditions of revelation or science?
So therefore, after having practiced Yoga for over 40 years, my difficulty with any doctrine is that once it is declared as 'THE truth', or the most valid path to truth, it immediately fails as truth as the latter is infinite and is intrinsically beyond doctrines.

This, however, does not stop me from being totally biased towards the two commandments of Christ you quoted from Mark above as THE ultimate guide towards the magnificent, if never fully realisable universal, unconditional loving, which I wish to live for, as the central meaning in my existence.
All the best Krishna,

Namaste and Humillimus Servus (Your humblest servant) I wish, I wish!

Andris Heks



From: online_sa...@googlegroups.com <online_sa...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Krishna Keshava Dasa <krishna.ke...@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, 25 June 2020 3:26 AM

To: Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] MY ARTICLE: 'FAITH IS NOT RELIGION' Kindly comment on it!

Andris Heks

unread,
Jun 25, 2020, 4:06:17 AM6/25/20
to online_sa...@googlegroups.com
Well said Alex!

Andris

From: online_sa...@googlegroups.com <online_sa...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Alex Kiefer <aki...@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, 25 June 2020 4:24 AM

Andris Heks

unread,
Jun 25, 2020, 4:06:38 AM6/25/20
to online_sa...@googlegroups.com
I shall never convince you David about Hungarian, nor do I wish too.
However, I thank you for your lecture.

What fascinates me is, how, over the years I used to get certain insightful questions about spiritual matters popping up into my conscious mind unsolicited.
I sought to answer them.
They typically popped up while I was doing Yoga!
But I found no direct answers in English.
Yet every time I asked the same question in Hungarian, there was an amazing answer, even though my English was far better than my Hungarian as I only lived in Hungary for the first 18 years of my 74 year life.
Such inquiries were about God, Spirit, Soul, Breath, and the connection amongst them.

I used to cry first with gratitude for the wisdom of my ancestors.
But as I got used to what some would call 'revelations', I just enjoyed them and began to see the wonderful continuity in the perceptions of Hungarian and Indian Rishis.
Once I discovered a Hungarian connection, then I could find either the same or another and different take in the various German, Latin, Greek, and Angloceltically derived words in English. And I also referred constantly to my dictionary and ecyclopedia of Eastern Religions and Philosophy.
It was great fun to move amongst various dictionaries to gain a deeper meaning of that which I experienced.
It was like a great jig saw puzzle and I felt like a kind of 'truth sleuth'.
The more bits I was able to piece together, the more the infinite whole expanded.
So this is the nature of the infinite search for truth.
As Socrates said, 'I know nothing.
All I know is love.'
And love is indeed no-thing.
How good it would be to really know it!

Sent: Thursday, 25 June 2020 4:57 AM

To: Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] Re: MY ARTICLE: 'FAITH IS NOT RELIGION' Kindly comment on it!
--
----------------------------
Idols of the Mind vs. True Reality
https://www.amazon.com/Idols-Mind-vs-True-Reality/dp/1734908955
https://www.amazon.in/Idols-Mind-vs-True-Reality/dp/1734908955

Ontological Distinction between Mechanical, Chemical & Biological Systems
http://scienceandscientist.org/conference/systems

Send a Donation to Support Our Services: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate

Report Archives: http://bviscs.org/reports

Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03

Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138

Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer

Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin

Princeton Bhakti Vedanta Institute: http://bviscs.org

Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org

Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga

Contact Us: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.

David Marjanovic

unread,
Jun 25, 2020, 9:56:58 AM6/25/20
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 25. Juni 2020 um 03:43 Uhr
Von: "Rosie Guadarrama" <r.guad...@att.net>

> The oldest languages come from India: Sanskrit and Tamil.

No; these are neither the oldest languages, nor the ones that are documented first.

Even the oldest songs in the Rgveda are less than 4000 years old, probably about 3500. Several languages – off the top of my head: at least Sumerian, Ancient Egyptian, Akkadian-Babylonian-Assyrian – were first written down more than 4000 years ago.

The oldest surviving Tamil literature is younger still (less than 2500 years).

It is completely clear that even Sumerian was not the first language ever _spoken_, if that's what you mean by "oldest languages". No linguist doubts that Sanskrit, Tamil, and indeed all languages spoken today (except Esperanto and Klingon) had ancestors that were spoken at the same time as Sumerian or even earlier, and that many more languages spoken then have not left any documented descendants. The origin of language may easily have happened 100,000 years ago, perhaps earlier still.

Gesendet: Donnerstag, 25. Juni 2020 um 09:26 Uhr
Von: "Andris Heks" <a.h...@hotmail.com>

> What fascinates me is, how, over the years I used to get certain insightful questions about spiritual matters popping up into my conscious mind unsolicited.
> I sought to answer them.
> They typically popped up while I was doing Yoga!
> But I found no direct answers in English.
> Yet every time I asked the same question in Hungarian, there was an amazing answer, even though my English was far better than my Hungarian as I only lived in Hungary for the first 18 years of my 74 year life.

This doesn't surprise me at all. :-) Because you learned English as an adult and used Hungarian to think during your entire childhood and youth, Hungarian and English have completely different associations for you; you use them to think about different things.
 
> Once I discovered a Hungarian connection, then I could find either the same or another and different take in the various German, Latin, Greek, and Angloceltically derived words in English. And I also referred constantly to my dictionary and ecyclopedia of Eastern Religions and Philosophy.
> It was great fun to move amongst various dictionaries to gain a deeper meaning of that which I experienced.
> It was like a great jig saw puzzle and I felt like a kind of 'truth sleuth'.
> The more bits I was able to piece together, the more the infinite whole expanded.
> So this is the nature of the infinite search for truth.

That's great! Etymology and comparative linguistics can be a lot of fun. :-)

Whit Blauvelt

unread,
Jun 25, 2020, 9:56:58 AM6/25/20
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Andris,

Thanks. Enjoyed reading that.

Whit
> ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

Whit Blauvelt

unread,
Jun 25, 2020, 9:56:58 AM6/25/20
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 05:19:58PM -0400, Krishna Keshava Dasa wrote:

> Namaste.  Thank you for your reply.

Krishna, namaste!

> If I made an assumption, it was that some want purity.  They want the real
> thing, if they dare to have faith that it is even possible.  Of course some
> don't want purity, as it may require more self-sacrifice then they are
> comfortable with. No problem.  Hopefully everyone will do their best based on
> their current understanding.

Thank you for your gentle reply. We have what looks a fundamental
disagreement. I don't take purity to be the real thing. What is pure is
sterile, and often dangerous. While we can breathe in an atmosphere of pure
oxygen, it also makes catastrophic fires more likely. We like our water
pure, but to live a baby needs milk, which is water with many impurities. In
the middle of a desert we may find pure sand, but in places rich with life
we find the greatest mixture of elements. Where coca leaves are used as a
healthful tea in some cultures, the cocaine purified from them is a
dangerous poison; similarly heroin is far worse than the opium it is
purified from.

When Hitler purified Germany of Gypsies and Jews, that was against God.
Similarly so as Trump attemps to purify America against Mexicans and others,
and as China, India, Myanmar and Israel seek to purify their nations of
Muslims.

Related Finnish live in both Finland and across the border in Russia. In
Finland, they keep their homes far more pure and sterile with cleaning
products. As a result they have a significantly higher rate of many diseases
in children, particularly allergies. Our immune systems have evolved to
require innoculation by exposure and tuning to pathogens so that we might
develop proper defenses, and then react in proper proportion, rather than
over reacting as with allergies.

There are many poisons we should simply avoid. We don't want lead in our
drinking water, or hatred in our souls. But too much purity can itself be a
poison. Flowers need dirt to grow.

Best,
Whit

Andris Heks

unread,
Jun 25, 2020, 11:05:16 AM6/25/20
to online_sa...@googlegroups.com
Rosie you quote :

"To become happier, wiser, and more loving, sometimes you have to swim against ancient currents within your nervous system."
I actually found the opposite 😊
"To become happier, wiser, and more loving, mostly I needed to discover and swim with ancient currents within my nervous system."

The current Kali Yuga is so much more deprived than the ancient Krita Yuga of Golden Age that is still has traces deep down in our 'nervous system' and can be liberated by practices such as Yoga.



From: online_sa...@googlegroups.com <online_sa...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Rosie Guadarrama <r.guad...@att.net>
Sent: Thursday, 25 June 2020 11:43 AM

To: Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] Re: MY ARTICLE: 'FAITH IS NOT RELIGION' Kindly comment on it!

Andris Heks

unread,
Jun 25, 2020, 11:05:16 AM6/25/20
to online_sa...@googlegroups.com
Wonderful David, I agree with just about all the claims you make here!
I actually use Hungarian and English to think about the same things.
That's where the differences become most enriching.
Take for example the word 'spirit'.
There is a connection between SPIRal and SPIRit. The the word 'Wind' as a noun becomes 'to wind', kind of spiral, as a verb. Now in Hungarian the spirit is 'Szellem" where the first syllable means wind, and the second means 'element'. ( Szellem also means ghost as in Holy Ghost in English. And its second meaning is spirit as in Holy Spirit.) But the most interesting thing I find here is how come the noun of wind becomes winding as a verb? Perhaps because the spirit spirals and the Hungarian tells us that there is the wind in the concept of the spirit ; the winding wind.

Sent: Thursday, 25 June 2020 11:14 PM

To: Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] Re: MY ARTICLE: 'FAITH IS NOT RELIGION' Kindly comment on it!
--
----------------------------
Idols of the Mind vs. True Reality
https://www.amazon.com/Idols-Mind-vs-True-Reality/dp/1734908955
https://www.amazon.in/Idols-Mind-vs-True-Reality/dp/1734908955

Ontological Distinction between Mechanical, Chemical & Biological Systems
http://scienceandscientist.org/conference/systems

Send a Donation to Support Our Services: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate

Report Archives: http://bviscs.org/reports

Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03

Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138

Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer

Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin

Princeton Bhakti Vedanta Institute: http://bviscs.org

Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org

Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga

Contact Us: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.

Krishna Keshava Dasa

unread,
Jun 25, 2020, 6:08:10 PM6/25/20
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Dear Andris,

Namaste. You say:
 
Calling God as Lord only, therefore truncates God and elevates SHis masculine gender to subsume the feminine in God, rather than recognising, what is my 'fantasy' about God: that God is love in the sense of literally and constantly making love through the perpetual intercourse between Father and Mother within God's binary monism.

The Absolute must include both masculine and feminine, but God is not a He/She.  God, the Organic Whole, harmonizes all differences, however this does not mean that differences are dissolved.  An exchange of love requires more than one.  Union requires plurality.  The feminine aspect of the Absolute, Radharani, is the potency of the male aspect, Krishna, the potent.  Although the Absolute is one, It is also differentiated.   

In regard to the necessity of a proper authority to learn transcendental knowledge, philosophy recognizes the problem of induction.  You may remove 20 golden balls from a big barrel and claim that all of the balls in the barrel are golden, but you don't actually know if that is true.  This imperfect knowledge comes from our limited experience.  Limited experience cannot know about the Whole. 

However, if you ask the person who filled the barrel with balls, you may easily find out the true number of each color of balls.  Complete knowledge descends from the proper authority.  This deductive process is what validates the disciplic succession of bonafide Gurus, which begins with Krishna Himself revealing Vedic knowledge to Brahma, who in turn teaches Narada Muni, who teaches Vedavyas, and the succession continues.  The revealed scriptures also descend from this succession, such as Srimad Bhagavad Gita (meaning the Song of God), which was spoken directly from Krishna to Arjuna.   

You also say:

...my difficulty with any doctrine is that once it is declared as 'THE truth', or the most valid path to truth, it immediately fails as truth as the latter is infinite and is intrinsically beyond doctrines.  

This is true, since the Absolute is not a static or dead thing. Through this living disciplic succession, we learn what the proper purpose of the scriptures are.   Our Gurus have told śrutibhir vimṛgyām, the revealed scriptures may only point us in the direction of the Absolute Truth.  It may be impossible to say where exactly It can be found, but we are guided in a general direction.  After all, an exchange of love requires more than one.  We may give a sincere effort, but ultimately it's the Supreme Will which decides whether a deeper connection is developed or not.   If we remain more humble than a blade of grass, more tolerant than a tree, and always give respect to others, then perhaps our effort will not be in vain. 

Andris Heks

unread,
Jun 26, 2020, 9:02:56 AM6/26/20
to online_sa...@googlegroups.com
How about 'pure consciousness' Whit.
You know when the mind is clear, undisturbed by chattering thought.
Pure, open minded awareness or mindfulness.
You know the lake analogy, where waves of surface thoughts, prejudices don't muddle the water, so that you can see down through the mirror smooth surface to the bottom of the lake; deep insights in the subcounscious mind.
Consider Patanjali's definition of Yoga: To block the patterns of consciousness is Yoga.

From: online_sa...@googlegroups.com <online_sa...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Whit Blauvelt <wh...@csmind.com>
Sent: Thursday, 25 June 2020 11:43 PM

To: Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] MY ARTICLE: 'FAITH IS NOT RELIGION' Kindly comment on it!
--
----------------------------
Idols of the Mind vs. True Reality
https://www.amazon.com/Idols-Mind-vs-True-Reality/dp/1734908955
https://www.amazon.in/Idols-Mind-vs-True-Reality/dp/1734908955

Ontological Distinction between Mechanical, Chemical & Biological Systems
http://scienceandscientist.org/conference/systems

Send a Donation to Support Our Services: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate

Report Archives: http://bviscs.org/reports

Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03

Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138

Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer

Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin

Princeton Bhakti Vedanta Institute: http://bviscs.org

Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org

Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga

Contact Us: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.

Krishna Keshava Dasa

unread,
Jun 26, 2020, 9:02:57 AM6/26/20
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Dear Whit,

Namaste.  It is necessary to distinguish between material "purity", a relative perspective of what is pure based on personal biases, imperfect senses, and temporary bodily existence, and transcendental purity which genuinely seeks the eternal and fully conscious Absolute Truth.  The latter is concerned with purity of heart, developing selflessness, humility, tolerance, and true respect towards all living beings - cultivating a consciousness of sincere and pure service to the Organic Whole, of which we are an eternal part and parcel.


Humbly in service, 
Krishna Keshava Das
Serving Assistant

Princeton Bhakti Vedanta Institute
of Spiritual Culture and Science



--
----------------------------
Idols of the Mind vs. True Reality
https://www.amazon.com/Idols-Mind-vs-True-Reality/dp/1734908955
https://www.amazon.in/Idols-Mind-vs-True-Reality/dp/1734908955

Ontological Distinction between Mechanical, Chemical & Biological Systems
http://scienceandscientist.org/conference/systems

Send a Donation to Support Our Services: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate

Report Archives: http://bviscs.org/reports

Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03

Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138

Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer

Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin

Princeton Bhakti Vedanta Institute: http://bviscs.org

Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org

Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga

Contact Us: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/20200625134305.GC19208%40black.transpect.com.

Andris Heks

unread,
Jun 26, 2020, 11:14:19 AM6/26/20
to online_sa...@googlegroups.com
I agree Krishna

Andris

Sent: Friday, 26 June 2020 9:00 PM

To: Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] MY ARTICLE: 'FAITH IS NOT RELIGION' Kindly comment on it!

David Marjanovic

unread,
Jun 26, 2020, 12:50:33 PM6/26/20
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
> There is a connection between SPIRal and SPIRit.

No, that's a coincidence. The spiral has a historically long i from an Ancient Greek ei, and is apparently derived from some verb meaning "twist" or "turn":
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/spiral#Etymology
while the spirit is a breath in Latin, with no connection to twisting at all:
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/spirit#Etymology

> The the word 'Wind' as a noun becomes 'to wind', kind of spiral, as a verb.

Coincidentally, that's another coincidence. :-) These words actually have a very interesting history. Despite their identical spelling, they sound different nowadays because the verb underwent the regular lengthening of vowels followed by homorganic clusters* in monosyllabic words, while the noun originally did the same, but was then replaced by the current short-vowel variant which was extracted from such words as 'windy' or 'windmill', which had more than one syllable and therefore didn't undergo the lengthening.

* Consonant clusters articulated at the same place in the mouth, e.g. [nd], [ld], [mb].

Halfway down this page https://thehousecarpenter.wordpress.com/2017/04/08/some-of-the-phonological-history-of-english-vowels-illustrated-by-failed-rhymes-in-english-folk-songs/#comment-707 there's an old poem that rhymes "find" with "And every moment blows blusterous winds", followed by linguistic commentary.

So, that explains why the noun and the verb are spelled the same: they used to sound the same, and that goes back all the way to Proto-Germanic.

Beyond that, however, it is clear that they have completely different origins and just happened to end up sounding the same in Germanic due to regular sound changes.

The verb has been almost the same since Proto-Indo-European: from Proto-Germanic wind- and Classical Armenian gind, which means "earring", "necklace", "collar" and such things, we can effortlessly reconstruct a Proto-Indo-European wendʰ- with more or less the modern Germanic meaning and completely regular developments in both directions. (Yes, that's a dʰ just like in Sanskrit and half of the modern languages of northern India.)
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/wind#Etymology_2

The noun, on the other hand, is basically the same all over Indo-European. You may have encountered Vā́ta in the Rgveda; that's the exact same word. How can we tell? Because its sound history, though complex, is again completely regular. It even explains why Vā́ta sometimes scans as three syllables instead of two. (I'll be happy to elaborate on this in detail if anyone is interested; it does take a while to explain, though.) Ultimately, the wind is the blowing one, with no connection to winding or to wending one's way.
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/wind#Etymology_1

Remember:
1) The knowledge of the world is at your fingertips. We're living in the Shiny Digital Future; you can just look things up, including an amazing amount of actual scientific papers (above I only link to Wiktionary for brevity).
2) Historical linguistics is a science just as much as biology. You don't need to reinvent the wheel, and you don't need to risk reinventing the square wheel – that's been done several times over in the last 200 years, and we've been able to learn from all these mistakes.

> Now in Hungarian the spirit is 'Szellem" where the first syllable means wind

It's a direct piece-for-piece translation of spiritus, then. Given the history of religion in Hungary, there's nothing surprising about this. In fact, the Latin use of "breath" for "spirit" in the Christian sense is itself just such a translation of the Hebrew word that likewise combines all these meanings.

Andris Heks

unread,
Jul 9, 2020, 2:34:09 PM7/9/20
to online_sa...@googlegroups.com
Dear Krishna,

I apologise for the delay in responding; duty called with other matters.
I would be delighted if you could kindly answer me again:
I am in complete agreement with your first paragraph.

Then you say:
This imperfect knowledge comes from our limited experience.  Limited experience cannot know about the Whole.

 I agree, but then you claim perfect knowledge of the Whole below:

'However, if you ask the person who filled the barrel with balls, you may easily find out the true number of each color of balls.  Complete knowledge descends from the proper authority.  This deductive process is what validates the disciplic succession of bonafide Gurus, which begins with Krishna Himself revealing Vedic knowledge to Brahma, who in turn teaches Narada Muni, who teaches Vedavyas, and the succession continues.  The revealed scriptures also descend from this succession, such as Srimad Bhagavad Gita (meaning the Song of God), which was spoken directly from Krishna to Arjuna.'

What you say highlights exactly the trouble I have in claims like yours, which elevate scriptural knowledge to truth itself.
Every scripture claims to be 'the word of God'.
That's how it seems to seek legitimacy for itself as unquestionable truth, because it claims to be coming from the Godhead directly.
But is this so?
Were those 'revealed sciptures' spoken directly by Krishna to Brahma, or they 'came' to Brahma in revelatory trans and so on down the line. Did Brahma write it down or orally transmitted it through generations? And did Brahma himself do the transmission recording or his disciples? Because Gurus or God do not seem to leave records. If so could the information become distorted as in a Chinese whisper?
I suspect that it is never a face to face inparting from God to the disciple, but it is always the disciple assuming rightly or wrongly that God made a revelation to him or her.

A classic example of this conflation of directly handed down knowledge vs attributory self generated fantasy, which may or may not have a glimpse of truth is Yogananda's description of his so called encounter with his dead guru , Swami Yuktesware in a   supposed visit to him after Yuktesware's death, in Yogananda's autobiography.
Was it a real visit or a three dimentional halucination, a kind of a spiritual revealatory transmission?
Yogananda begins the description of the encounter as if his Master really appeared to him in flesh in his room. But as the exchange goes on, Yogananada implies that his experience, which was very real to him, did not physically take place, rather it was through some sort of direct telepathic transmission between his Guru's ghost-being and himself.
So here is the conflation of direct transmission vs imagined transmission by the recepient who claims to have received revelation directly, even though it was a halucinatory experience.
It may or may not be accurate as it is articulated by the so called recipient not by the Godhead stating it directly.
And indeed different cultures claim totally contradictory revelations as THE authentic revelations of truth.
They, or most, then go on to claim, that only their revelation is the direct word of God; others' contrary revelations are false.
Even within the Vedas we have advaita and dvaita.
That's why I prefer evolutionary, that is constantly revised scriptures, rather than an 'undisputable tradition' where it is regarded as blasphemous to question the truth of claims, as they are supposed to be the word of God.
Since none of us know directly what is God's ultimate truth, I come back to saying that to assume that God dictated directly to anyone THE wholeness of truth or even a glimpse of it and it was therefore that which was handed down from generation to generation, needs to be taken with a grain of salt and subjected to the scrutiny of fact checks and reason.

You acknowledge that:

Our Gurus have told śrutibhir vimṛgyām, the revealed scriptures may only point us in the direction of the Absolute Truth.  It may be impossible to say where exactly It can be found, but we are guided in a general direction.  After all, an exchange of love requires more than one.  We may give a sincere effort, but ultimately it's the Supreme Will which decides whether a deeper connection is developed or not.   If we remain more humble than a blade of grass, more tolerant than a tree, and always give respect to others, then perhaps our effort will not be in vain.

But just because we experience, in all humility, a 'deeper connection' with the Supreme will, how can we be certain that we actually  got the message, when even Einstein acknowledges that our human faculties just cannot fathom the depth of the Divine?

Would you kindly dear Krishna respond to this?

Namaste,

Andris


Sent: Friday, 26 June 2020 7:35 AM

David Marjanovic

unread,
Jul 10, 2020, 1:33:30 PM7/10/20
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
 
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 09. Juli 2020 um 17:10 Uhr
Von: "Andris Heks" <a.h...@hotmail.com>
 
Our Gurus have told śrutibhir vimṛgyām, the revealed scriptures may only point us in the direction of the Absolute Truth.  It may be impossible to say where exactly It can be found, but we are guided in a general direction.  After all, an exchange of love requires more than one.  We may give a sincere effort, but ultimately it's the Supreme Will which decides whether a deeper connection is developed or not.   If we remain more humble than a blade of grass, more tolerant than a tree, and always give respect to others, then perhaps our effort will not be in vain.
 
But just because we experience, in all humility, a 'deeper connection' with the Supreme will, how can we be certain that we actually  got the message, when even Einstein acknowledges that our human faculties just cannot fathom the depth of the Divine?
 
The answer science theory gives to this is: we don't know, and it doesn't even matter.
 
Suppose we find the truth. How can we test whether what we've found is in fact the truth? By comparing it to the truth, which we don't have?
 
This impossibility to recognize the truth is why science isn't, strictly speaking, a search for truth. Instead, it is the search for all falsehood in the hope of narrowing down the range of possibly true claims further and further.
 

Andris Heks

unread,
Jul 11, 2020, 3:58:19 AM7/11/20
to online_sa...@googlegroups.com
Thank you for this David.
Regards,
Andris

From: online_sa...@googlegroups.com <online_sa...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of David Marjanovic <david.ma...@gmx.at>
Sent: Saturday, 11 July 2020 3:17 AM

To: Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] MY ARTICLE: 'FAITH IS NOT RELIGION' Kindly comment on it!

--
----------------------------
Idols of the Mind vs. True Reality
https://www.amazon.com/Idols-Mind-vs-True-Reality/dp/1734908955
https://www.amazon.in/Idols-Mind-vs-True-Reality/dp/1734908955
 
Ontological Distinction between Mechanical, Chemical & Biological Systems
http://scienceandscientist.org/conference/systems
 
Send a Donation to Support Our Services: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
 
Report Archives: http://bviscs.org/reports
 
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
 
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
 
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
 
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
 
Princeton Bhakti Vedanta Institute: http://bviscs.org
 
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
 
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
 
Contact Us: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.

Venkatakrishna Sastry

unread,
Jul 11, 2020, 3:58:45 AM7/11/20
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com

Namaste  Andris Heks  and David Marjanovic

 

1.  Thanks for invoking a  'Sanskrit -reference' that is used in 'Yoga-Sciences' to  explore 'Consciousness- Cognition' (Sanskrit:  Chit- Darshana)   as Mind-Faculties ( Sanskrit: Chitta -Vrutti).

     

 

2.  The modern science/  scientists answers are clear as posiiton statements: < we don't know, and it doesn't even matter. >  

 

        The first part < we don’t know>  is a honest confession .  Because 'Science' does not recognize the basic issues with which 'religion'  starts and addresses in its exploration.

          Religion premises 'Mind'  and 'consciously explores further', as ' human cognition - experience'.

          Science does not recognize ' Mind'  beyond its physiological base and neural activity ! and yet claims to pronounce verdicts on 'consciousness' ?! 

        

 

        Second part < it does n't even matter> is prejudice and wearing blinkers , and fear to live by the definiiton of 'science' !

         How can a True scientist turn a blind eye to what is 'experienced' , but not distinguishable by the instruments designed by humans ?

         Scientist wants to stay ' chain bound' to ' human form and function'. This is  the model of scuba diving to explore ocean , without ever getting wet by water !

        Understanding of Yoga  by scientists  needs to be  revisited  for the fundamentals.

 

3.  Much of the confusion here comes due to the ' fuzziness and pluri-meaning' of the term religion in different contexts.  Translations have made the issue more muddled and complex.

        (  See:   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religio ; https://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780192800947.001.0001/acref-9780192800947-miscMatter-3   )

    The net outcome: ' Religion does not the mean the same thing across religion teams; much less any concurrence of thought and definition in scence teams.

 

4. Yoga-Science ( a path way and tool to journey towards shruti)  gives clear experiments and validation points for progress.

     These are deisgned to peel and see through the  'Space -Time- Energy' dimensions of 'Matter/ Material existence and processes'.   

     What is explored as ' para-normal, transcendental, miracles…' are in the domain of ' Transformation Dynamics of Consciousness and Conscious-Matter (Chit- Padartha).

     In the first  frame work  of Yoga-Science, the template of ' Nyaya-Vaishshika( NV YSA) is used. In this frame, Mind , Time,  Space  and Individualised Consciousness  are all 'Matter ( Sanskrit:Dravya).

   

5. Dialogue between Modern Science teams and Yoga-Science teams is needed to bridge the understanding of this framework for further exploration.

     What is happening instead, is the demand for ' Show and  Prove it to my satisfaction'  by scientists posing the 'tele-viewing' experiment' as ' prediction';  analyzing some one elses experience of an yoga-practice ( 72 hours of samadhi ?!)  ; debate on statemetns in books of earlier period.  I do not see anything that can be called as ' Scientific'  in these  seeking. The study  needs to be clear in answering the question: What is Science?  What is Religion ?   What and why humans need Science and/or Religion ?

Science Definitions : The intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behaviour of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment.

 

Explore: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science ; http://www.jsu.edu/depart/psychology/sebac/fac-sch/rm/pdfs/Ch2v4.pdf   ( Specifically  section on  assumptions of Science);

     

   Scientists on What is science  is : https://www.brainpickings.org/2012/04/06/what-is-science/   ;

   

 

Regards

BVK Sastry

 

 

 

 

From: online_sa...@googlegroups.com [mailto:online_sa...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of David Marjanovic
Sent: Friday, 10 July, 2020 10:48 PM
To: Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] MY ARTICLE: 'FAITH IS NOT RELIGION' Kindly comment on it!

 

 

Gesendet: Donnerstag, 09. Juli 2020 um 17:10 Uhr
Von: "Andris Heks" <a.h...@hotmail.com>

--

----------------------------
Idols of the Mind vs. True Reality
https://www.amazon.com/Idols-Mind-vs-True-Reality/dp/1734908955
https://www.amazon.in/Idols-Mind-vs-True-Reality/dp/1734908955
 
Ontological Distinction between Mechanical, Chemical & Biological Systems
http://scienceandscientist.org/conference/systems
 
Send a Donation to Support Our Services: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
 
Report Archives: http://bviscs.org/reports
 
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
 
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
 
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
 
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
 
Princeton Bhakti Vedanta Institute: http://bviscs.org
 
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
 
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
 
Contact Us: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.

Dr Sumangala

unread,
Jul 11, 2020, 5:31:01 AM7/11/20
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Sripad Puri Mj July 8, 2020.jpg

Humbly in Service
Sumangala Devi Dasi, Ph.D.



 




Michael Spears

unread,
Jul 11, 2020, 9:29:59 AM7/11/20
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Faith is everything. What we believe becomes true. We are the masters of our own reality, if only we knew.

The more people believed in climate change the more it became true, the more it became true the more people believed it, the more people believed it the more it became true, so it snowballs... then we have the belief that climate change will kill us all, we have the extinction rebellion protests, then the bushfires started in Australia. When Australia was covered with smoke people start saying things like "it's apocalyptic," "It's like the end of the world," the more people believe it the more it becomes true, the more it becomes true the more people believe it, so it snowballs. Then a virus starts in China, now it really starts to feel like the Apocalypse, streets are deserted, people locked down, tourists sent home, planes grounded, ships docked, the more people believe it's the Apocalypse the more it becomes the Apocalypse, the more it becomes the Apocalypse the more people believe it's the Apocalypse. Then we have tragedy after tragedy after tragedy, soon people start to wonder if God is punishing us, and people start to believe in God again, the more people believe in God the stronger God becomes, the stronger God becomes the more people believe in God, the more people believe in God the stronger God becomes.... and that, my friends, is what the Apocalypse is all about. It's a reminder because we forgot. This is how God gets His power back. We put our faith in science. Do you know what science does? Science searches for solutions to problems caused by science, like a cat chasing its tail, and we all know that it was curiosity which killed the cat. There is a secret history of the world that we forgot, a history of Pharoah God-Kings, of Greek Gods, of Hindu Gods, of a God-man who walked on water, but as the world became more connected science was the only thing we could ever agree on, so Science became our God, but Science brings only death. What we believe becomes true. You don't need to breathe, you don't need to eat, you don't need fuel for your car, you can fly! You just have to believe it... but you need others to believe it too. Believing in cancer causes cancer, and the only thing that kills you is believing that you're going to die. It's all fake. Science is the Lie that we all believed. That's what the Apocalypse is, it's a reminder, because we forgot and took the power from God's hands and put it into our own, but we are terrible at playing God. This is why our world is dying... but the death of our world also brings its rebirth.

Your friend,
Michael.


On Sat, 11 Jul. 2020 at 5:57 pm, Andris Heks

Andris Heks

unread,
Jul 11, 2020, 9:30:03 AM7/11/20
to online_sa...@googlegroups.com
Thank you Sumangala.
But the inspiration of scientists is often mystical, coming through the depth of the unconscious and science is rarely just a rational activity.
Our emotionally held biases keep creeping in and the 'participant observer' tend to change outcomes.

From: online_sa...@googlegroups.com <online_sa...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Dr Sumangala <drsuman...@gmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, 11 July 2020 7:06 PM
To: Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: [Sadhu Sanga] "Science is the Product of the Rational activity of Scientists"
 
Sripad Puri Mj July 8, 2020.jpg

Humbly in Service
Sumangala Devi Dasi, Ph.D.



 




--
----------------------------
Idols of the Mind vs. True Reality
https://www.amazon.com/Idols-Mind-vs-True-Reality/dp/1734908955
https://www.amazon.in/Idols-Mind-vs-True-Reality/dp/1734908955
 
Ontological Distinction between Mechanical, Chemical & Biological Systems
http://scienceandscientist.org/conference/systems
 
Send a Donation to Support Our Services: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
 
Report Archives: http://bviscs.org/reports
 
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
 
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
 
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
 
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
 
Princeton Bhakti Vedanta Institute: http://bviscs.org
 
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
 
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
 
Contact Us: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.

Andris Heks

unread,
Jul 11, 2020, 9:30:22 AM7/11/20
to online_sa...@googlegroups.com
Thank you BVK Sastri.
You say: 'Science does not recognize ' Mind'  beyond its physiological base and neural activity ! and yet claims to pronounce verdicts on 'consciousness' ?! 

I think that only truncated, mechanical, materialist science does this.
But integrated science that recognises a spiritual basis from which materialisation occurs can and does recognise mind which is living consciousness.
What needs to be further developed is introspectional scientific tests which could study the realm of the spiritual with the same verifiable vigour as exist in external, material experiments.
This is where the dialogue between Yogic and Material scientist could help. But the Yogies need to have mastered the materialists-used scientific method and the material scientists must be able to experience Yoga adequately before they could test introspection based experiments. 

How can a True scientist turn a blind eye to what is 'experienced' , but not distinguishable by the instruments designed by humans ?
Good question. Only ignorant science does this.

What is Science?  What is Religion ?   What and why humans need Science and/or Religion ?

Integrated science, no matter how much in its infancy, tanscends this dichotomy and recognises the need for integrating non-dogmatic religion or spirituality into science to make it wholesome and science into religion to overcome dogmatism.
Einstein made a good start in saying: "science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."
From: online_sa...@googlegroups.com <online_sa...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Venkatakrishna Sastry <sastr...@gmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, 11 July 2020 2:21 PM
To: Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: RE: [Sadhu Sanga] MY ARTICLE: 'FAITH IS NOT RELIGION' Kindly comment on it!
 

Krishna Keshava Dasa

unread,
Jul 12, 2020, 7:26:33 AM7/12/20
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Dear Andris,

Namaste. Your response is appreciated.

The analogy regarding learning the true number of balls in the barrel demonstrates the rational methodology for approaching knowledge of the Whole, which is very different from actually claiming "perfect knowledge of the Whole," as you say.   Relying on our limited ability and egoic consciousness, which attempts to oppose the Whole, is not a proper approach.  Continually relying on our imperfect senses and mental speculation is not an effective way to determine what is truly real.  Recognizing our inherent dependence on the Whole (we need food, water, air, etc to sustain ourselves, all of which exist beyond human manufacturing), as parts of it, we may humbly inquire about the Absolute Truth from a qualified source. Rationally, we should refer as closely as possible to the source of the "balls in the barrel".

You mention


What you say highlights exactly the trouble I have in claims like yours, which elevate scriptural knowledge to truth itself. Every scripture claims to be 'the word of God'.

As mentioned in my last response, when instructed by a genuinely qualified teacher, we learn that revelation and scriptural knowledge point in the proper direction of the Absolute Truth, not that it can confine the Absolute within a finite boundary.  Additionally, as quoted in another previous message, A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada has pointed out that,


Literature or knowledge that seeks the Supreme Being can be accepted as a bonafide religious system, but there are many different types of religious systems according to the place, the disciples, and the people's capacity to understand.

Taking this rational assessment into account, we may understand why there is no issue with various scriptures, which seem to say contradictory things at times (even within one system such as Vedic thought), are all bonafide revelations of the infinitely dynamic Supreme Being.  Seekers may be led to the Truth, gradually, based upon their current circumstances and their sincerity to make spiritual progress, in addition to the independent will of the Supreme.

You continue

Were those 'revealed scriptures' spoken directly by Krishna to Brahma, or they 'came' to Brahma in revelatory trans and so on down the line. Did Brahma write it down or orally transmitted it through generations? And did Brahma himself do the transmission recording or his disciples? Because Gurus or God do not seem to leave records. If so could the information become distorted as in a Chinese whisper?

The Bhagavad-gita was spoken directly from Krishna, the chariot driver, to Arjuna, the devoted warrior, during the historical battle of Kurukshetra, recorded in the Mahabharata.  Vishnu (an expansion of Krishna) initially revealed Vedic knowledge to Brahma (the universal creator) while he was meditating before the manifestation of the content of the universe. Eventually, Brahma taught his disciple Narada Muni, who taught Vedavyas, who then dictated Vedic knowledge to Ganesh while he transcribed.  Vedavyas, an incarnation of the Supreme Being, is the compiler of the written Vedas.  He also continued the disciplic succession by teaching directly to others.  This is what the scriptures tell us, as well as what has been passed down through the living parampara (guru to disciple) system.

Your concern of the chinese whisper seems to assume either that God reveals Truth in a manner dependent upon time, such that it becomes distorted the longer it is passed on from the initial revelation, or that Truth itself is susceptible to distortion, rather than the perception of Truth becoming distorted. Imposing such, or any, limitation, on the Absolute Truth, is the product of the egoic consciousness which suffers from the illusion of independence from the Whole.  The Absolute Truth never becomes degraded and is fully present at all times, during a moment of revelation and throughout the successional passing of knowledge. It is our individual consciousness that does not have the capacity to comprehend the totality of Truth.  However, even this limitation of finite beings is harmonized within the infinite Whole.  

Vedic knowledge identifies the following aspects of the Supreme:
  • Brahman the impersonal effulgence 
  • Paramatman the all-pervasive
  • Bhagavan the Supreme Personality
God, the Absolute, is widely accepted to be omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent (all-pervasive).  Paramatma is present within every single life form.  Our individual self is the soul, atman, and our higher self is the supersoul, paramatman.  The Supreme Controller, Isvara or Pantokrator, is always present within us, whether or not we are aware.  Depending on our sincere desire - essentially, to exploit the external environment in favor of sense gratification, to renounce the world, or to dedicate everything in service to the Whole - Paramatma is there to guide us accordingly.  

Regarding our lack of capacity to comprehend the totality of the Absolute Truth, depending on our level of sincerity and humility, Paramatma  (the Supreme Being) is there to gently guide us through the many mistakes that we are bound to make along our journey towards knowing the Truth.  It is not a process that can be undergone alone.  Our constitutional position is as part-and-parcel of the Supreme, thus we are never isolated or alone.  However, due to our egoic consciousness constantly insisting on the validity of our isolated perspective of reality, and continually relying on our own limited abilities, the illusion of isolation and separate existence begins to dominate our experience.  This is the result of using free will in an exploitative manner. 

You explain how

Yogananada implies that his experience, which was very real to him, did not physically take place, rather it was through some sort of direct telepathic transmission between his Guru's ghost-being and himself.
So here is the conflation of direct transmission vs imagined transmission by the recepient who claims to have received revelation directly, even though it was a halucinatory experience.

Following the train of thought that revelation points us in the proper direction for further spiritual advancement - which means developing greater humility, tolerance, respect for others, lack of self-concern yet simultaneously experiencing greater transcendental bliss and knowledge, and ultimately developing genuine love of and devotion towards God - perhaps the extent that this specific experience guided Yogananda's life further into the aforementioned sphere of transcendental experience would be an adequate method to determine if he received true revelation.  However, I am in no position to make this sort of judgement.

You conclude with

That's why I prefer evolutionary, that is constantly revised scriptures, rather than an 'undisputable tradition' where it is regarded as blasphemous to question the truth of claims, as they are supposed to be the word of God.  
and 
But just because we experience, in all humility, a 'deeper connection' with the Supreme will, how can we be certain that we actually  got the message, when even Einstein acknowledges that our human faculties just cannot fathom the depth of the Divine?

The fact of the matter is that the Absolute Truth is indisputable.  If we deny this, then we don't understand the concept of the Absolute.  Although It is indisputable, it is not static; the Absolute Truth is ever-fresh and infinitely dynamic.  It contains thesis, antithesis, and synthesis.  All contradictions exist and are harmonized within the Absolute.  A system which truly represents the unfolding of this dynamic activity may be accepted as a proper path which leads in the general direction of the Supreme Being.  You are correct to doubt our personal certainty regarding Divine messages.  That is because certainty is part of the illusion of independent existence from the Whole.  As the infinite approaches the finite, the finite may lose all sense of certainty, due to the infinite nature.  Yet, through Divine mercy, our heart may come to understand that we are moving in the right direction.  The lack of illusory certainty allows room for genuine faith to develop, which is the start of true spiritual progress.


Sincere and humble regards,
Krishna Keshava Das
Serving Assistant

Princeton Bhakti Vedanta Institute
of Spiritual Culture and Science



To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/MN2PR14MB28801936E5404DA7619CCE5795640%40MN2PR14MB2880.namprd14.prod.outlook.com.

Diego Lucio Rapoport

unread,
Jul 12, 2020, 7:26:33 AM7/12/20
to Online Sadhu Sanga
To claim that scientific activity stems from "evidence" as stated by the flyer below by Sripad Bahkta Mahdavah Puri Maharaja  is in ignorance and neglect of both the imaginal activity and the semiotic processes as primordial, be that scientist, artist or explorer or still of  a human of anywhere and any cognitive background of any  kind, which go to discover the evidence that would meet this activity. 
Its further claim for the "rationality" of science stands as the natural reductionism of dualism. It is more of a dialectic process, in which creativity is supported by a supradual ontoepistemology, even when the said humans are unaware of it. When this is not unconscious we operate through abduction, as described as a non-inferential process identified by Charles Peirce as the only way to creativity in his work on the logic of science
This claim ignores the unconscious activity which supports the eureka events, such as the realization by Hamilton of the quaternions which manifested as a whole in an instant. Two realizations were involved: fourness and non-commutatitivity, the latter the fundamental basis for Quantum Mechanics as today further realizedb as Quantum Cognition, and the very basis of the torsion geometry of space and of cognition (Rapoport)
Would rationality be the means and support of science, then Organic Chemistry would not exist. We recall Kekule's report of his revelation of the circular structure of benzene while in an hypnagogic state sitting at his desk after luch, falling asleep to "awake" to see two serpents mutually  one the other. Kekule was not a rationalist in the sense of this flyer, but actually a belated alchemist being informed on the archetypal Ouroboros, then turned to benzene. Newton, the alchemist scientist was far more unintegrated than Kekule. 
The only difference in that claim is a recourse to mention that is undefined but by negation of its "mechanical inception", and left unellaborated at that.
Also to claim that "Science is the product of the Rational activity of Scientists" is on the one hand to reduce this rich process of creativity in which semiotic processes such as  metaphorization are crucial (think of the Bohr picture of the atom as a planetary system, for one), and still to ignore that prior to "Rationality" emotics plays a crucial role to spur the cognitive process, and as biological psychology has elicited (Panksepp, Solms, Damasio in the neurosciences. 
Neglect of the aesthetics of the activity as a driving axis is also manifest.
Seems more of an extract of a 19th century positivism manual.

Sincerely, humbly adamantly

Diego Lucio Rapoport

BMP

unread,
Jul 12, 2020, 10:02:03 AM7/12/20
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Dear Diego

Namaste.  The idea of modern science that my quote was referencing is indeed the received view of 19th and 20th century science. Unfortunately it also represents the view of many in the 21st century. This is the view that is somehow being reversed in the materialist conception of science.

You have progressed beyond that stage to a more post-modern conception in which some scientists are tending. Peircean semantics points to the proper direction that science might further progress. My view is that it doesn't go far enough. It still leaves undetermined the essential role of the concept or consciousness in its oblique reference to semantics or meaning.  I try to address that point in the book "Idols of the Mind vs True Reality." It is not about cancelling rationality but rising to its true nature.

Humbly and gently,
B Madhava Puri 



NYIKOS, PETER

unread,
Jul 12, 2020, 3:23:49 PM7/12/20
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
BMP, Diego, Andris,

In my mathematical research, rationality is incorporated into the creative process along with other elements, partly conscious and partly subconscious. An essential part of the process for me is certain fictitous pictures I create and periodically refer back to.  

Rationality comes in when I verbalize my insights which these fictitous pictures inspire, but the verbalization stalls from time to time, and the fictitious pictures help me to get back on track. 
 
Andris, my mathematical proofs are not influenced by any kind of bias, except one towards classical logic which operates under such rules as the law of the excluded middle. There are other logics which deny this law, including an anthropocentric form of Constructivism which has it that a mathematical statement is neither true nor false until a proof or disproof is found; and Constructivism has rigid rules as to what constitutes a proof or disproof, much more demanding than those of classical mathematics.

In his book, In the Name of Science, Martin Gardner pointed out that there is one rule of meta-logic that all logicians worthy of the name must obey. It is that whatever logic a logician follows, it must be possible to tell whether a given proof is valid within that particular kind logic.


Peter Nyikos
Professor, Dept. of Mathematics     
University of South Carolina
http://people.math.sc.edu/nyikos



From: 'BMP' via Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D. <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, July 12, 2020 9:58 AM
To: Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] "Science is the Product of the Rational activity of Scientists"
 

David Marjanovic

unread,
Jul 13, 2020, 4:03:30 AM7/13/20
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
(I have seen BVK Sastry's post, but will need to take longer to reply to it.)

Here are my comments on the text of Dr Sumangala's picture:
 
From: online_sa...@googlegroups.com <online_sa...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Dr Sumangala <drsuman...@gmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, 11 July 2020 7:06 PM

> Science is the body of Man's knowledge

No.

No, science is not a body of knowledge. I know that the Classical Latin word scientia meant "knowledge", but that's not what is meant by "science" today.

Science is a _method_ for testing ideas. It consists of empirical falsification and parsimony (and really the former contains a lot of the latter).

> physics and chemistry are subsets of Scientific knowledge

No, physics and chemistry are science as applied to certain subsets of natural phenomena.

> Science is the product of the rational activity of Scientists.

Sure, parsimony is rational, at least to the extent that it can't be outsourced to a computer, and falsification is rational as well in that it requires coming up with rigorous ways of testing a particular idea, often using statistics. But, as others have pointed out, the ideas that science tests need not have any rational origin. They can come from dreams, like Kekulé's idea on benzene that turned out to be pretty much correct; they can come from meditation, LSD trips, religious experiences, it doesn't matter. What matters is whether they're testable.

Ideas that are not testable are not scientific. Subjective experiences are testable if enough people have them that they can be compared. If that is not the case, so that everyone else can only take them on faith, they're useless to science.

The rest of the picture falls with these three statements.

Venkatakrishna Sastry

unread,
Jul 13, 2020, 4:03:42 AM7/13/20
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com

Namaste Alex,

 

1. Which box  do we put the ongoing debate demanding ' investigation of paranormal' ?  and 'escape routes using ' Guru based explanation of revealed scriptures' ?

 

The boxes are made up by team combinations of  :

            -Main stream scientists (  As Kashyap says), 

            -Scientists exploring the discipline with specific views ( EDAM/ IDAM models),  

            -Scientists studying the phenomenon with preferred tools with predefined understanding of basics ( Experimentalists on Consciousness and yoga using fMRI studies and the like),

            -Integrated Science proponents using expanded base of ' spiritual/ yoga concepts' to explain-explore- Model  the experiments

            - Yoga science teams providing multiple perspectives using multiple references from vedic to religion resoruces

            - and  teams with undefined mix of concepts from above teams.

 

 I believe that the proposed interaction on Nyaya-Vaisheshika Yoga-Science platform benefits all the teams.  Nyaya-Vaisheshika is a comprehensive term to cover every flavor of rational thinkers.

 

Regards

BVK Sastry

Andris Heks

unread,
Jul 13, 2020, 7:55:10 AM7/13/20
to online_sa...@googlegroups.com
Namaste BVK Sastry,

 

 'I believe that the proposed interaction on Nyaya-Vaisheshika Yoga-Science platform benefits all the teams.  Nyaya-Vaisheshika is a comprehensive term to cover every flavor of rational thinkers.'


How wondeful!

Andris

Sent: Monday, 13 July 2020 2:35 PM

Dr Sumangala

unread,
Jul 13, 2020, 7:55:13 AM7/13/20
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Dear Andris Heks,

Namaste. Thank you for your response which elaborates your stand. Sripad Bhakti Madhava Puri Maharaja, Ph.D. has already given a substantial response on this and this is my humble response.

We hope that you must have seen on this group for last many years the annual conference series that our Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute and Princeton Bhakti Vedanta Institute are organizing since 2013 based on the central question that Sripad Bhakti Madhava Puri Maharaja, Ph.D., has raised: “The Scientist is able to explain science but….Is Science able to explain the Scientists?”

Modern Science has limited itself to the study of only unconscious stuff like molecules, atoms and quarks as fundamental reality, thus it only attempts to understand everything including conscious being like Scientist also with those unconscious stuff. Therefore, with our annual conference series we want to awaken the scientists who have taken up such irrational approaches to understand even their own self.

You have said that  “……..the inspiration of scientists is often mystical, coming through the depth of the unconscious and science is rarely just a rational activity. Our emotionally held biases keep creeping in and the 'participant observer' tend to change outcomes.”

If we consider this simple definition of Science as “any system of knowledge that is concerned with the physical world and its phenomena and that entails unbiased observations and systematic experimentation,” (https://www.britannica.com/science/science) then it certainly demands a rational subject to execute this task and it cannot be done by a dull mechanical machine or a heap of randomly accumulated chemicals. The inspiration of scientists can be mystical but certainly not unconscious act and it may at times be emotionally biased by ignoring rational activity of inquiry. The emotionally biased practice of science is very prominent in modern science because the majority of scientists have already prefixed their materialistic position by dogmatically asserting that life originated from insentient material stuff and all life forms are an outcome of accidental mutations of a molecule say DNA. If the vision of modern science is limited to such narrow-minded naive materialism then to maintain that limited vision scientists are forced to adopt an emotionally driven pattern of research and thus they rarely have any real rational inquiry. Scientific laws can never be discovered or changed by any unconscious observer or by only following emotional biases because they are based on evidence and systematic studies. Thus the emotionally driven scientists don't have a law on abiogenesis but the rational observation of honest scientists have established the law of biogenesis with experimental evidence.
Thus modern science needs an evolution from emotionally driven research to rationally driven research: “In Nicomachean Ethics 1.7, Aristotle claims that to discover the human good we must identify the function of a human being. He argues that human function is rational activity. He also explained that “function” does not mean purpose but rather a way of functioning — how a thing does what it does. The way human beings do things is by making rational choices because a rational action or activity is one whose principle expresses the agent's conception of what is worth doing for the sake of what,"(Korsgaard C. M., 2008. The Constitution of Agency: Essays on Practical Reason and Moral Psychology.  ISBN-13: 9780199552733, Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: January 2009).

Andris Heks

unread,
Jul 13, 2020, 7:59:12 AM7/13/20
to online_sa...@googlegroups.com
'What matters is whether they're testable.'

But something that is not testable now may or may not  be scientific if the problem is not in what is to be tested but that the scientific method for testing has not yet developed to properly test it and possibly find it valid and reliable.
See many meditational claims of rishies which moved out of the realm of  traditional scientists' having assumed them as 'mere claims'  until today when they are recognised as scientific facts, once the scientific methods became sophisticated enough to be able to test them.

Regards,

Andris Heks

From: online_sa...@googlegroups.com <online_sa...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of David Marjanovic <david.ma...@gmx.at>
Sent: Monday, 13 July 2020 9:38 AM
To: Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] "Science is the Product of the Rational activity of Scientists"
 
--
----------------------------
Idols of the Mind vs. True Reality
https://www.amazon.com/Idols-Mind-vs-True-Reality/dp/1734908955
https://www.amazon.in/Idols-Mind-vs-True-Reality/dp/1734908955

Ontological Distinction between Mechanical, Chemical & Biological Systems
http://scienceandscientist.org/conference/systems

Send a Donation to Support Our Services: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate

Report Archives: http://bviscs.org/reports

Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03

Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138

Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer

Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin

Princeton Bhakti Vedanta Institute: http://bviscs.org

Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org

Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga

Contact Us: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.

BMP

unread,
Jul 13, 2020, 7:59:13 AM7/13/20
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Namaste David,

You seem to love sitting in the scoffer's chair, but genuine and intelligent critique is more valuable in discussions at the crossroads that modern science and society face today. 

Your idea that science is just a method is entirely misleading. One does not take a course in science simply to learn a method. The heavy science textbooks that every student of science is familiar with contain numerous presumptions, axioms, natural laws, theories, and ideas that are assumed to be factual as well as methods that make up the body of knowledge we call science today. Is this really arguable?

Science assumes there is an external world to Mind. Is it testable? Whatever is presumed as axiomatic or self-evident truth before any further pronouncements is not testable. Is life but a dream? Are we merely participants in a virtual reality game of some higher beings? Are we a brain in a vat? Are there other universes? Are there other minds besides my own? Does God exist? 

An endless list of such questions can be posed that are beyond testing, yet the choice of any initial presumption will determine the outcome of any consequent testing. If that is the case then testing becomes merely the fallacy of begging the question. If this is what you think science is, then it seems to amount to tautological thinking. 

Humbly,
B Madhava Puri
 




 



--
----------------------------
Idols of the Mind vs. True Reality
https://www.amazon.com/Idols-Mind-vs-True-Reality/dp/1734908955
https://www.amazon.in/Idols-Mind-vs-True-Reality/dp/1734908955

Ontological Distinction between Mechanical, Chemical & Biological Systems
http://scienceandscientist.org/conference/systems

Send a Donation to Support Our Services: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate

Report Archives: http://bviscs.org/reports

Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03

Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138

Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer

Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin

Princeton Bhakti Vedanta Institute: http://bviscs.org

Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org

Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga

Contact Us: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsub...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/trinity-dd839bd7-5756-41f3-b8ae-69b28333119e-1594597119801%403c-app-gmx-bap12.

BMP

unread,
Jul 13, 2020, 7:59:36 AM7/13/20
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Namaste Peter,

You bring up a couple of centrally important points regarding the structure of modern scientific thought in your message.

The idea of 'fictitious pictures' held in the mind is really at the heart of the modern method of model-thinking that is ubiquitously found in scientific theories. In philosophy this type of thinking may be called reflective-thought because the external object/world is conceived as an image reflected into the interior subject/mind - sometimes referred to as the mirror of the mind. Narrative reasoning concerned with the internal image proceeds from there.

There are numerous problems with starting from the idea of 'reflection' as a proper conception of the way the subjective mind and objective world are related. When we 'reflect' upon something we do more than just produce an internal copy of it, viz. we think about it. Thinking activity is thus an essential part of determining what an object is. The study of exactly what thinking-activity is involved in perceiving an object is called philosophy. This is what Kant, Hegel and other philosophers have been writing about for the past 200 hundred years and more, but which modern science has sorely neglected and ignored.   

But that is a long story . More immediately, the problem with picture reflections is their fixed, static nature. Reality is anything but fixed. It is in constant motion. Life implies total restlessness. Nature is essentially alive. The modern scientific explanation involves the idea that fixed elements or reified  things move. But a post-modern thinker conceives every 'thing' as fluid, pure movement or change. Pictures simply do not convey such fluidity. Rather they bring any such ideas to a halt. In other words, they become an obstacle to the type of thinking that seeks to go beyond reified conceptions of a wholly dynamic living reality.

This brings us to the other important point you brought up concerning the logic of excluded middle, which is otherwise known as the law of contradiction. According to this logic anything contradictory is to be automatically discarded as non existent or impossible. However, if we are to understand a fluid or living reality that is in constant flux or movement, the very principle of such an idea involves contradiction - because movement implies that something is and is not simultaneously at one point. Contradiction is at the very heart of movement. Zeno made emphasis of this phenomenon in the Greek world, as did Heraclitus. 

I think Godel made short shrift  of the argument you mentioned:
>whatever logic a logician follows, it must be possible to tell whether a given proof is valid within >that particular kind logic.

Humbly,
B Madhava Puri

Andris Heks

unread,
Jul 13, 2020, 8:06:46 AM7/13/20
to online_sa...@googlegroups.com
Bravo Diago, amazingly articulated!

Andris Heks

From: online_sa...@googlegroups.com <online_sa...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Diego Lucio Rapoport <diego.r...@gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, 12 July 2020 5:12 AM
To: Online Sadhu Sanga <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] "Science is the Product of the Rational activity of Scientists"
 

Andris Heks

unread,
Jul 13, 2020, 8:07:34 AM7/13/20
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
'It is not about cancelling rationality but rising to its true nature.'
Yes, B. Madhava!

Thanking you,

Andris Heks

From: 'BMP' via Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D. <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, 12 July 2020 11:58 PM
To: Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] "Science is the Product of the Rational activity of Scientists"
 

David Marjanovic

unread,
Jul 13, 2020, 1:16:45 PM7/13/20
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Namaste, B Madhava Puri! Your third paragraph brings up something very important that I decided to omit yesterday in the interest of brevity, but shouldn't have.

> Science assumes there is an external world to Mind. Is it testable? Whatever is presumed as axiomatic or self-evident truth before any further pronouncements is not testable. Is life but a dream? Are we merely participants in a virtual reality game of some higher beings? Are we a brain in a vat? Are there other universes? Are there other minds besides my own? Does God exist?

Yay, metametaphysics!

I like to make a philosophical distinction between "truth" and "reality". Reality would basically be the observable, physical universe: that in which the argumentum ad lapidem is not a logical fallacy. Truth – the simplest option for what truth could be is that truth is reality; that is the atheistic physicalist view. But all the other options you brought up, and more (e.g. God as the solipsist, with all of reality existing only in His mind) cannot be falsified (...although let's not quite forget that they are less parsimonious).

Science, in this scheme, isn't about truth. It's only about reality.

This way, science doesn't need to make _any_ assumptions about truth. It does not need to presume _anything_ as axiomatic or self-evident; it can be _truly_ intellectually humble. All it needs so it can work is for reality to be reasonably consistent*, whatever the cause of this consistency might be. Funnily enough, the hypothesis that reality is reasonably consistent is itself testable.

I'm really serious about this: because it doesn't make assumptions about truth, science does not even need to assume mathematics or logic. Rather, mathematics is a generalization over how physical objects observably behave, and logic is a generalization over how mathematical objects observably behave.

* Like... if you let go of stuff, it generally falls down. If it fell in random directions at probabilities which changed at random intervals, and the rest of reality behaved likewise, science would be impossible. Note this consistency does not need to be either simple or absolute. On the "not simple" side, we could look for regular exceptions: as a real example, stuff that is lighter than air doesn't fall down in air, but it does in a vacuum. On the "not absolute" side, it would not make science altogether impossible if we had to add "and 5% of the time a miracle happens" to our understanding of every law of physics, it would only make it 5% less useful. (And I'd love to read a work of science-fiction in which reality worked like that.)

> Your idea that science is just a method is entirely misleading. One does not take a course in science simply to learn a method.

As part of my biology studies I did actually have to take a course in science – the branch of philosophy called "science theory" – and the history of science. Science is the application of science theory, not the results of that application.

I know that in the US and no doubt some other countries there's a single middle-school subject called "science" which, unfortunately, doesn't generally teach science, just knowledge produced by science. In yet other countries biology, chemistry and physics are separate school subjects (...and in the 2nd-to-last year of school I had an optional course that actually taught science).

> The heavy science textbooks that every student of science is familiar with contain numerous presumptions, axioms, natural laws, theories, and ideas that are assumed to be factual as well as methods that make up the body of knowledge we call science today. Is this really arguable?
 
Yes.

I mean, at first and sometimes second glance, it often looks the way you describe because of the purpose (and history) of the textbooks, which are meant to impart a lot of knowledge in very little time and therefore take shortcuts. But if you look closer, at least if the book is good enough, there are really no presumptions that are not transparently derived, no axioms; and the laws and theories are explained as such, i.e. as testable generalizations and testable explanations of the generalizations. Just keep in mind that the subject matter of science is reality as I call it above, not (necessarily) truth.

Andris Heks

unread,
Jul 13, 2020, 1:16:45 PM7/13/20
to online_sa...@googlegroups.com
Many thanks Sumangala Devi.

'the majority of scientists have already prefixed their materialistic position by dogmatically asserting that life originated from insentient material stuff and all life forms are an outcome of accidental mutations of a molecule say DNA.'

Yes, you pinpoint the limitation of the reductionist materialist perspective.
However, I wonder if you then overstate the adequacy of rationality for an improved approach of science.
Would it not be more important to emphasise the importance of wisdom, which subsumes rationality but goes way beyond it?
Computer intelligence may be rational, but hardly wise.
Rational, linear thinking can be quite mechanical, utterly unoriginal.
Whereas, wisdom draws on both the right and left hemispheres of the brain, on intuition too, which is then subjected to rational analysis.
Please see Diego Lucio Rapaport's  magnificent exposition on this in previous comments on this topic nearby.

Humbly,

Andris Heks
Sent: Monday, 13 July 2020 8:10 PM
To: Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] "Science is the Product of the Rational activity of Scientists"
 

Andris Heks

unread,
Jul 13, 2020, 1:16:45 PM7/13/20
to online_sa...@googlegroups.com

Nyaya-Vaisheshika is a comprehensive term to cover every flavor of rational thinkers.'


Should it not be 'rational AND creative or mystical thinkers?'

Andris Heks

Venkatakrishna Sastry

unread,
Jul 14, 2020, 3:13:21 PM7/14/20
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com

Namaste

 

1. The original Sanskrit term for < rational AND creative or mystical thinkers>  is < Yoga- Jijnyaasi> : One who uses 'yoga' as a tool and framework for rational investigation (Sanskrit: Brahma-Tarka).

 

2. I did not get to this level of detail in the first post.

 

3. Yes, you are right in your pointing. Thanks.

 

The revised  amplified statement would read : < Nyaya-Vaisheshika is a comprehensive term to cover every flavor of rational ' AND creative or mystical  thinkers.' >  

 

Modern (Main stream) science keeps creative and mystical part of rational thinking out of its domain.

 

Nyaya-Vaisheshikas are  special kind of Yogi's and Yoga-Science Researchers.

Andris Heks

unread,
Jul 14, 2020, 9:08:11 PM7/14/20
to online_sa...@googlegroups.com
Many thanks Ventakakrishna.
Your extended statement sounds great!
Go holistic Yoga science!

Namaste,

Andris Heks

From: online_sa...@googlegroups.com <online_sa...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Venkatakrishna Sastry <sastr...@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, 14 July 2020 2:59 PM

Krishna Keshava Dasa

unread,
Jul 16, 2020, 11:43:20 AM7/16/20
to Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D.
Dear David,

Namaste.  Your response to Sripad Bhakti Madhava Puri Maharaja reminded me of a discussion that you and I had a while back.  

You say,

I like to make a philosophical distinction between "truth" and "reality". Reality would basically be the observable, physical universe: that in which the argumentum ad lapidem is not a logical fallacy. Truth – the simplest option for what truth could be is that truth is reality; that is the atheistic physicalist view. But all the other options you brought up, and more (e.g. God as the solipsist, with all of reality existing only in His mind) cannot be falsified (...although let's not quite forget that they are less parsimonious).
Science, in this scheme, isn't about truth. It's only about reality.

During our previous discussion you made a similar point,

So, when I say "wrong", I mean wrong within the confines of reality. Whether the truth is different is a separate question, and a question that does not need to be answered for science to work.

To which I responded,

The reality which you seem to refer to is the relative reality of phenomenal appearances. Our senses deceive us quite often. We undeniably perceive the sun as moving from East to West, yet the capacity to reason beyond mere acceptance of sense perception has given the heliocentric model. You suggest that truth and reality do not have to have to be aligned with each other in order for science to work, but what is the nature of a reality which is not founded in truth (let alone the study of such reality)?  This sort of reality can only have an illusory nature. Materialistic science is the study of that illusory reality. Our Princeton Bhakti Vedanta Institute advocates the acceptance of the principal that Life comes from Life. This principal is rational and empirical.  We observe that a mother must be alive in order to generate new life.  Her corpse is unable to do the job. Similarly, only living cells can divide. This would help modern science to overcome the shortcomings of a strictly material perspective, and assist in advancing modern science towards a more honest and complete study of reality. 

Separating reality and truth isolates reality from its context, creating an false/illusory perspective of reality. Thus all observations, analysis, and conclusions drawn from such a reality are equally illusory.  This is not to say that such illusory conclusions have no effect on our experience.  They certainly do, however the direction that these conclusions guide us in is farther and farther away from truth. Plato's allegory of the cave illustrates this nicely.  

In Plato's cave, some unfortunate souls live their entire life chained and facing a wall.  Their only perspective of the world is the shadows cast on that wall, due to a fire being maintained behind them.  The chained individuals have no idea what reality is beyond these shadows. These shadows are obviously real. But, when they're isolated from their context i.e. the forms which cast the shadows, the shadows become the basis of an illusory reality.  

Similarly, when seen as a system which strictly deals with empirical observations of space/time isolated from truth i.e. the greater context of empiricism and space/time, science becomes subjected to illusory conclusions.  These conclusions have application, but the result of this application further perpetuates an illusory perspective and experience of reality, only to the extent that they are continually isolated from truth. Full-fledged science is the rational and systematic approach for realizing the truth of nature/reality.

Finally, in your reply to Sripad Bhakti Madhava Puri Maharaja, you say

Science is the application of science theory, not the results of that application.
I know that in the US and no doubt some other countries there's a single middle-school subject called "science" which, unfortunately, doesn't generally teach science, just knowledge produced by science.

Science does indeed include the knowledge which results from the scientific method. Please note the definition of science found on Wikipedia: a systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the universe.


Humbly in service,
Krishna Keshava Das



Diego Lucio Rapoport

unread,
Jul 19, 2020, 8:47:59 AM7/19/20
to Online Sadhu Sanga
Dear B M Puri Maharaja, Namaste

Thanks for your reply, with which i beg to disagree, and to agree, too.
Your comment on the postmodernism you attribute to the Klein Bottle ontoepistemology and its logophysics is only "postmodern" in that it came to manifest in time later than modernism
and transcending particularly the notion that symbolic thinking as in mathematical-physics has and is to keep a privileged dominance in contemporary thinking and what will come thereafter.
Indeed, my formal training was in the latter direction, to which i contested without contesting, since i found that even there supraduality and its conceptualization was the very basis (almost did not get my Ph.D for that, my top world class advisers abhorred of any mention or intuition of supraduality).
So we  do coincide in the importance of conceptualization.
Already Heidegger in philosophy (Jeff Malpas), and Piaget in psychology, came to identify Being and its development in terms of topology.  
But then, please allow me to state that, first of all, there is a feeling, an energy and intuition to supraduality and its conceptualization. And as Kekule came to his eureka moment encounter with the Ouroboros and the figuring out of benzene, it ultimately has to do with arising to recognition, and perhaps some familiarity, though not wholly in awareness, of archetypes.
Humbly, in service

Diego Lucio


To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/MN2PR14MB2880C933BFB10F7F36E17D6C95600%40MN2PR14MB2880.namprd14.prod.outlook.com.

David Marjanovic

unread,
Jul 30, 2020, 5:05:16 PM7/30/20
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Sorry for the delay!
 
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 16. Juli 2020 um 16:22 Uhr
Von: "Krishna Keshava Dasa" <krishna.ke...@gmail.com>
 
Your response to Sripad Bhakti Madhava Puri Maharaja reminded me of a discussion that you and I had a while back.  
 
You say,
 
I like to make a philosophical distinction between "truth" and "reality". Reality would basically be the observable, physical universe: that in which the argumentum ad lapidem is not a logical fallacy. Truth – the simplest option for what truth could be is that truth is reality; that is the atheistic physicalist view. But all the other options you brought up, and more (e.g. God as the solipsist, with all of reality existing only in His mind) cannot be falsified (...although let's not quite forget that they are less parsimonious).
Science, in this scheme, isn't about truth. It's only about reality.
 
During our previous discussion you made a similar point,
 
So, when I say "wrong", I mean wrong within the confines of reality. Whether the truth is different is a separate question, and a question that does not need to be answered for science to work.
 
To which I responded,
 
The reality which you seem to refer to is the relative reality of phenomenal appearances. Our senses deceive us quite often. We undeniably perceive the sun as moving from East to West, yet the capacity to reason beyond mere acceptance of sense perception has given the heliocentric model. You suggest that truth and reality do not have to have to be aligned with each other in order for science to work, but what is the nature of a reality which is not founded in truth (let alone the study of such reality)?  This sort of reality can only have an illusory nature. Materialistic science is the study of that illusory reality.
1) This sort of reality does not necessarily have to have an illusory nature. But we don't have a repeatable way of finding out whether it is illusory, do we?
2) Yes, science is the study of that particular kind of reality.
3) I never said anything about our senses... science does not consist of just looking at things.
 
Our Princeton Bhakti Vedanta Institute advocates the acceptance of the principal that Life comes from Life. This principal is rational and empirical.  We observe that a mother must be alive in order to generate new life.  Her corpse is unable to do the job. Similarly, only living cells can divide. This would help modern science to overcome the shortcomings of a strictly material perspective, and assist in advancing modern science towards a more honest and complete study of reality. 
 
Well, only cells can divide the way cells divide, using a pretty complex apparatus that involves several different proteins and of course the regulated production of these proteins. But self-replication in a more general sense is much more widespread. You can divide soap bubbles simply by stirring them, and so can a storm or a hot spring at the bottom of the sea. Such molecules as DNA fall apart when it's hot, can accrete nucleotides from the surrouding solution when they cool down, and if these nucleotides then condense to a new strand, that's replication. And so on and so forth.

The difference between such phenomena and cell division is a matter of degree, not of kind.
 
Separating reality and truth isolates reality from its context, creating an false/illusory perspective of reality. Thus all observations, analysis, and conclusions drawn from such a reality are equally illusory.  This is not to say that such illusory conclusions have no effect on our experience.  They certainly do, however the direction that these conclusions guide us in is farther and farther away from truth. Plato's allegory of the cave illustrates this nicely.  
 
Well, yes. If I'm the solipsist, reality is illusory, and science is my imagined "study" of my own illusions. :-| Within these confines, it still works, though, because reality is consistent enough, however illusory it may be. It would be useless, of course, but so would literally anything else.
 
Similarly, when seen as a system which strictly deals with empirical observations of space/time isolated from truth i.e. the greater context of empiricism and space/time, science becomes subjected to illusory conclusions.  These conclusions have application, but the result of this application further perpetuates an illusory perspective and experience of reality, only to the extent that they are continually isolated from truth. Full-fledged science is the rational and systematic approach for realizing the truth of nature/reality.
 
How do you propose to study truth beyond reality, why do you think your approach works, and how can we test if it works?
 
Finally, in your reply to Sripad Bhakti Madhava Puri Maharaja, you say
 
Science is the application of science theory, not the results of that application.
I know that in the US and no doubt some other countries there's a single middle-school subject called "science" which, unfortunately, doesn't generally teach science, just knowledge produced by science.
 
Science does indeed include the knowledge which results from the scientific method. Please note the definition of science found on Wikipedia: a systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the universe.
 
Exactly: "a systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge", not the knowledge itself. This is beautifully expressed in the German distinction between Wissen, meaning "knowledge", and Wissenschaft, meaning "science", literally "knowledgeship" (like "craftsmanship" or "lordship" for example).
 
Architecture is not a building; engineering is not a pump; science is not knowledge.

Dilip Das

unread,
Jul 30, 2020, 5:15:48 PM7/30/20
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
All expressed truths have a frame of reference and a domain of validity.
Absolute truth cannot be expressed, but can be realized. 

--
----------------------------
Idols of the Mind vs. True Reality
https://www.amazon.com/Idols-Mind-vs-True-Reality/dp/1734908955
https://www.amazon.in/Idols-Mind-vs-True-Reality/dp/1734908955
 
Ontological Distinction between Mechanical, Chemical & Biological Systems
http://scienceandscientist.org/conference/systems
 
Send a Donation to Support Our Services: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
 
Report Archives: http://bviscs.org/reports
 
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
 
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
 
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
 
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
 
Princeton Bhakti Vedanta Institute: http://bviscs.org
 
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
 
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
 
Contact Us: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/trinity-acb670bb-6f83-464f-8e3e-3bdfd7238ac7-1596140718549%403c-app-gmx-bs24.
--
Mit Freundlichen Grüßen,
Dilip K. Das, P.E., FAIChE
Design And Safety, LLC
www.designandsafety.com
Kansas City, MO 64119, USA

Mit Freundlichen Grüßen,

Dilip K. Das, B.Sc(Honors), B.ChE(Honors), MSChE, P.E., FAIChE

Principal Consultant, ioMosaic Corporation, Houston, TX


das....@iomosaic.com, 603-893-7009 x 8005, M 816-400-3238

Krishna Keshava Dasa

unread,
Aug 2, 2020, 4:36:12 PM8/2/20
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Dear David,

Namaste. Your response is appreciated.

You say


1) This sort of reality does not necessarily have to have an illusory nature. But we don't have a repeatable way of finding out whether it is illusory, do we?
2) Yes, science is the study of that particular kind of reality.
3) I never said anything about our senses... science does not consist of just looking at things.

Please note the definition of truth on Wikipedia and Merriam-Webster dictionary:  "Truth is the property of being in accord with fact or reality."

To consider truth and reality as separate from each other, is only to consider mental abstractions.  Reality is what is real, and what is real is true.  Reality which is not truth, i.e. not true reality, is false reality i.e. illusory or unreal. This is a rational progression of thought which is supported by direct experience. An example is Louis Pasteur's Swan-Neck flask experiment which provided strong evidence against the illusory belief that life spontaneously generates from matter.    

You may consider the repeatable corrections/replacements of scientific theories that were once accepted as the truth to be a means of validating the illusory nature of the false reality of which mainstream modern science is concerned with.  This false reality is characterized by its severe limitation of only accounting for empirically observable phenomena.  Modern science considers this phenomenal part of reality to be the whole - this is the illusion.  In order to consider the true reality, modern science must account for the fundamental role that the subjective consciousness plays in perceiving objective phenomena.  Through properly considering the Whole of reality, the context of objective phenomena may be conceived, perceived, and studied fully in the light of truth.  

Then you say

Well, only cells can divide the way cells divide, using a pretty complex apparatus that involves several different proteins and of course the regulated production of these proteins. But self-replication in a more general sense is much more widespread. You can divide soap bubbles simply by stirring them...

The difference between such phenomena and cell division is a matter of degree, not of kind.

You seem to have the impression that cells and soap bubbles have a lot in common.  This is a product of the materialistic/reductionist perception of reality. There is a vast ocean of difference between biological, chemical, and mechanical systems; Sripad Bhakti Madhava Puri Maharaja clarifies those differences in his article The Logic of Life.  It is of utmost importance that we not lose sight of what characteristics make organisms, i.e. living beings, distinct from inanimate matter.  In his paper On Intelligence in Cells:The Case for Whole Cell Biology, Brian J. Ford makes this point very nicely:

[...] Yet there is an alternative aspect: in studying the minutiae, we have lost sight of the whole cell as organism.  Living cells within the body are modelled in this paper as coordinated but essentially autonomous entities. We shall see how independent cells in nature have remarkable abilities to make decisions and take constructive action, which correlate with the definitions of intelligence.

Next you say


If I'm the solipsist, reality is illusory, and science is my imagined "study" of my own illusions. :-| Within these confines, it still works, though, because reality is consistent enough, however illusory it may be. It would be useless, of course, but so would literally anything else.

However sarcastic your first sentence may have been intended, it actually reflects the inherent rationality behind this entire discussion.  Solipsist (self-centered) consciousness results in illusory perception of reality, because our ontological position is as a part of reality, not as the center or the Whole.  Cultivating consciousness centered on the Whole of reality gradually results in perception of the true reality.  The consistency that scientists perceive in reality is misinterpreted due to the context of objective phenomena not being properly considered.  We are not saying that all of science is useless; we are suggesting that the frame of reference for which science operates within needs to include a more honest and wholesome appraisal of reality.  

You ask


How do you propose to study truth beyond reality, why do you think your approach works, and how can we test if it works?

Truth is as much immanent within reality as it is beyond it.  The method prescribed by Vedic knowledge for studying the true reality is to begin with cultivating the subjective awareness. Nurturing our subjective nature to rationally consider the Whole reality will allow for proper perception of objective phenomena and conception of the role that this phenomena plays in the greater context of reality. The rational and philosophical foundation of such a method is supported by the line of thought in Plato, Aristotle, and Hegel's teachings.  As revealed through writings of Vedavyas such as Vedanta sutra, and more specifically Srimad Bhagavatam (the natural commentary of Vedanta Sutra), the practical approach for cultivating awareness in this way is called Bhakti yoga.  This approach is described in a more systematic way within the writings of Rupa Goswami. 

Confidence in this approach is derived from its ability to harmonize all contradictory elements. Instead of just dismissing contradiction - writing it off as a mistake - contradiction is accepted as a fundamental aspect of reality.  This is seen at the fundamental level of ontological thinking.  Being and nonbeing seem to contradict each other.  However, the synthesis of these opposites is what gives rise to all of the dynamic activity within nature.  The constant flow between being and nonbeing, called becoming, is the cause of all dynamic activity throughout reality.   We may test this approach by seriously applying the practices to our life, and experiencing the result first hand. This is how Sripad Bhakti Madhava Puri began his journey to the realization that he has now.   

Finally, you say


Exactly: "a systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge", not the knowledge itself. This is beautifully expressed in the German distinction between Wissen, meaning "knowledge", and Wissenschaft, meaning "science", literally "knowledgeship" (like "craftsmanship" or "lordship" for example).
 
Architecture is not a building; engineering is not a pump; science is not knowledge.

If you carefully consider the second half of the definition of science, "a systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the universe", you may notice that "explanations [...] about the universe" do in fact entail knowledge itself.  Furthermore, the definition of architecture also includes the building itself: "Architecture is both the process and the product of planning, designing, and constructing buildings or other structures" (Wikipedia).


Sincere and humble regards,
Krishna Keshava Das
Serving Assistant

Princeton Bhakti Vedanta Institute
of Spiritual Culture and Science



--
----------------------------
Idols of the Mind vs. True Reality
https://www.amazon.com/Idols-Mind-vs-True-Reality/dp/1734908955
https://www.amazon.in/Idols-Mind-vs-True-Reality/dp/1734908955
 
Ontological Distinction between Mechanical, Chemical & Biological Systems
http://scienceandscientist.org/conference/systems
 
Send a Donation to Support Our Services: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
 
Report Archives: http://bviscs.org/reports
 
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
 
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
 
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
 
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
 
Princeton Bhakti Vedanta Institute: http://bviscs.org
 
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
 
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
 
Contact Us: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/trinity-acb670bb-6f83-464f-8e3e-3bdfd7238ac7-1596140718549%403c-app-gmx-bs24.

nadeem haque

unread,
Aug 9, 2020, 4:30:13 AM8/9/20
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
I have been receiving emails for years from your group but have remained silent. I joined the precursor to this group when my concepts were published in a book on consciousness with my friend Vimal - that was many years ago. But, not too long ago (in 2018), I presented a paper at the European Society for the Study of Science and Theology (ESSSAT)  in Lyon, France. The theme was whether God is Transcendent or Immanent. There were about 100 speakers and I was the only one presenting an answer to this question from the Islamic perspective! I presented it based on research in the Quran on this and related areas since 1996. The paper or article in my view is my most important one (I have about 40 papers/articles and several books).
 
It would be interesting to see how Vedanta philosophy squares with the Quran, based on this deeper research on the Quran that I was able to be engaged in. 
 
Here's the link:
 
It is the paper entitled: "God - Beyond Transcendence and Immanence: Imagination, eternity, evolution, and the Quranic-God concept."
 
This is a pre-print; but it has been published in their latest journal in 2020.
 
Best Regards, 
 
Nadeem Haque
Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2020 at 5:07 PM
From: "Dilip Das" <dili...@gmail.com>
To: Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] "Science is the Product of the Rational activity of Scientists"

NYIKOS, PETER

unread,
Aug 10, 2020, 3:48:56 AM8/10/20
to online_sa...@googlegroups.com
Thank you for joining us tangibly, Nadeem! A quick look at your essay that seeks to go beyond immancence and transcenderce makes me curious to see what you can contribute here. I'm especially intrigued by the concept of absolute space, as contrasted with the ordinary space of which we are aware. 

It reminded me of similar contrasts in Karl Heim's book, Christian Faith and Natural Science.  In it, he uses the term "suprapolar space" to express what may be the same as your concept of absolute space. On page 165 of my 1957 Harper Torchbooks edition, he lets the reader know that he wants to  get beyond the concepts of immanence and transcendence. The next ten pages go into various details about how he wants to do this; in the process he also talks about how the suprapolar space contrasts with the ordinary "polar" space of physics.

His main thesis throughout the book is how we must take consciousness as the starting point for a philosophy that can stand in contrast to materialism. He uses the word "Ego" for what Hinduism calls  Atman, the individual Self, and it is our separate selves that he never loses sight of, and how we are separated frorm each other in a way that only God, whose space is suprapolar, can overcome. 

At the end of this book he says he means to overcome the disharmony between secularism and faith, in a way that is firmly grounded in the physical and biological sciences, "in the remaining parts of this work." I never found out  what these "remaining parts" were, but the Wikipedia entry on Karl Heim leads me to think that it might be The Transformation of the Scientific World-View. 

Peter Nyikos
Professor, Dept. of Mathematics        
University of South Carolina



From: online_sa...@googlegroups.com <online_sa...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of nadeem haque <nha...@mail.com>
Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2020 7:16 PM
To: Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: [Sadhu Sanga] "Science is the Product of the Rational activity of Scientists"
 

nadeem haque

unread,
Aug 11, 2020, 11:49:53 AM8/11/20
to nti...@math.sc.edu, Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Hi Peter,
 
Thank you so much for your enlightening email. I'll look further into Heim's book. I'll also send the group a pdf of my book that was the basis of the paper I wrote. There is indeed a commonality at the core among the major belief systems (the origins of Hinduism, what Buddha was really talking about, the basis of Taoism etc..) and I do address that from a 'structural' perspective.  There is an urgent need to take 'space' and consciousness seriously, from which 'time' then can be properly understood and the so-called dichotomy between 'science' and 'religion' effaced (as it is a reactionary situation to certain events over history that were irrational) as there's only one reality..
 
We should therefore all keep digging: The truth is the authoriry; the authority is not the truth.
 
More later.
 
Nadeem
 
 
Sent: Sunday, August 09, 2020 at 4:27 PM
From: "NYIKOS, PETER" <nyi...@math.sc.edu>
To: "online_sa...@googlegroups.com" <online_sa...@googlegroups.com>

BMP

unread,
Aug 11, 2020, 2:16:22 PM8/11/20
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Dear Nadeem,

Namaste. Thank you for sharing your thoughts with us. It is hoped this brief reply can serve to present some of what Vedanta philosophy has to offer for comparison with your interesting work on the Quran. 

Space is in essence 'externality' or 'exteriority' in Hegel's conception. It is simultaneously identical to itself in its difference from itself. In other words, one region of space is the same as any  other region of space in  quality, but differs by the fact that they are different regions. 

Descartes defined matter as res extensus, i.e. as extended bodies. Bodies are therefore constituted by space for him rather than simply existing in an abstract mathematical space as modern science presumes.  

Vedanta accepts the Samkhya view that space or akash [ether] is one of the  material constituents of the world, along with earth, water, fire, and air. These sensuous constituents are also complimented by three subtle elements such as manas [mind], buddhi [intelligence], and ahamkar [ego]. 

The subtle elements represent interiority opposed to the exteriority of space and the other objects of the senses [tanmatras] - earth, water, fire, and air.

Transcending and comprehending the exterior and interior gross and subtle material elements [prakriti] is the Purusha, or transcendental person - God. This is the dualistic view of Samkhya - Purusha and Prakriti. somewhat like Descartes' philosophy which separated the subjective cognitive functions, res cogitans, from the objective bodily or sensuous objects,res extensus. 

However, the Bhagavad-gita, which is also part of Vedanta, corrects this dualist view with the idea of God's immanence as well as transcendence. Krishna, the Personality of Godhead, says, "I am within everyone's heart," and "Everything rests in Me, like pearls strung on a thread."

Krishna also says, "Everything is in Me, but I am not in everything, though I am the source of all." This emphasizes the identity and difference that characterizes the Absolute Godhead Whose energies emanate from Godhead and are thus of the same Divine nature as God, but are different from the source Who produces it [shakti and shaktiman].   

This means that Vedanta accepts the simultaneous oneness and difference of Godhead, not merely the Oneness without difference. God would be incomplete if the Godhead did not contain all differences resolved within the Divine nature. Thus we see the Deity represented as Radha-Krishna, Sita-Ram, Lakshmi-Narayan, and so on,indicating a female-male relationship of Love as the highest expression of the Completeness of the Absolute Godhead. 

Krishna calls this simultaneous inclusion of oneness and difference that is unified within His Own Divine nature "mystical" or "inconceivable." This is because the ordinary understanding tends to distinguish things that are contradictory and even dismiss them as impossible to exist together. Thus something can't be both cold and hot at the same time, or short and tall at the same time. 

But if we consider things from a relative point of view, a glass that is cold to us, may be hot compared to an ice cube and cause it to melt. A plant may be short to us but tall to an ant. A tree may appear short to us in perspective at a distance, but when we approach it will be tall. 

From a general philosophical consideration, universal, particular, and individual are different aspects of any concept. A tree, for instance, may be an individual thing, but the idea of "tree" is a universal. All individual trees are "trees." The universal idea is present in all individual trees, yet is different from them at the same time. Each individual tree is not the universal idea "tree." In the same way God is the universal Personality of the whole, all exist within Godhead, but any particular, individual, and finite thing on its own cannot be said to be God.

Although true to a certain extent, modern science makes a big mistake when it takes things only in their finite existence as separated atoms that exist on their own without considering the nature of such finite particles in relation to the whole of which they are part. Especially when considering a living organism, the parts/organs of the organism are not to be considered on their own as separate things. They exist for the sake of the organism as a whole, and if that relation is not understood then the organ is not properly or completely understood either.

In a similar way, we each have a relation to the whole as well as our own existence. Without understanding that relation we fail to understand ourselves properly. In the Bhagavad-gita that relation is understood to be one of loving service [bhakti] between Man and God. This is the conclusion of Vedanta philosophy.

Humble regards,
B Madhava Puri


nadeem haque

unread,
Aug 12, 2020, 3:23:07 AM8/12/20
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
 
 
Dear Brother Madhava Puri,
 
Namaste. Thanks for the very informative concise summary of the position from Vendanta scriptures; it is very close to the Quranic view, actually (and most Muslims don't know of this). The main point that is emphasized in the Quran (and in my view all Prophets over time in all parts of the world must have done this) is the concept of Oneness but this Oneness (Tawhid) - that God is ahad - One -  is an unbreakable/unsplittable one and also that there is nothing or no thing like God (I mentioned the Surah from the Quran on this. You are probably familiar with this idea). However, what I proved from the Quran itself is that we are in God, there being no outside. You cannot be outside of God because He is the absolute and infinite and since we are in His Mind as it were we cannot be outside. There are verses from the Quran which I cited in that paper I sent.
 
So what you are saying appears to be very close in concept, though different terminology has been used. I showed in my book (which I'll send the pdf of) that when you study Taoism, Bhagavat Gita, Dhamapada (and other sayings of the Buddha) they were essentiallly saying the same thing about One God and our relation to him and therefore our purpose, goal and service to humanity, nature, animals and to ourselves (self development). 
 
Another thing I was able to prove from the Quran is that Chapter Al-Teen is speaking about the Buddha (so I ended up writing Buddha: A Prophet in Islam.
 
It is not the name which is important but the attitude and the doing, of being in service to this type of nonanthropomorphic God.
 
I hope this helps in the dialogue to further an understanding between Hinduism and Islam at the deeper level, where the actual truth lies!
 
Peace!
 
Nadeem
Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2020 at 2:11 PM
From: "'BMP' via Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>

Krishna Keshava Dasa

unread,
Aug 12, 2020, 4:01:56 AM8/12/20
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Dear Nadeem,

Namaste.  Thanks for the opportunity to read a little bit about Islamic teachings.  I hope that this post provides a scriptural background for the concise reply that Sripad Bhakti Madhava Puri Maharaja has already given.  

Bhagavat Vedanta also maintains a monotheistic perspective, as can be seen in the following verses from the Bhagavad Gita (BG):
  • BG 9.4 This entire universe is pervaded by Me in My unmanifest form, and all beings are situated in Me; yet I am not in them.    
  • BG 9.5 Again, they are not in Me. Behold My supreme mystical power of inconceivable oneness and difference (achintya-bhedabheda). I, Myself, am the mainstay and origin of all beings, but I am not in them.    
  • BG 15.15 I am situated (as the Supersoul) within the heart of all souls, and from Me arises the soul's remembrance, knowledge, and forgetfulness (according to his actions). I alone am the Sweet Absolute to be known through all the Vedas. I am the revealer of the Vedanta—Vedavyasa, and I am the knower of the Vedas. 
  • Sri Isopanisad invocation The Personality of Godhead is perfect and complete, and because He is completely perfect, all emanations from Him, such as this phenomenal world, are perfectly equipped as complete wholes. Whatever is produced of the Complete Whole is also complete in itself. Because He is the Complete Whole, even though so many complete units emanate from Him, He remains the complete balance.
He is known to be the cause of all causes as explicitly expressed in the first verse of the Brahma Samhita (BS):
  • BS 5.1 Kṛṣṇa who is known as Govinda is the Supreme Godhead. He has an eternal blissful spiritual body. He is the origin of all. He has no other origin and He is the prime cause of all causes.  
This material creation, or cosmic manifestation, is revealed to be dreamed by an expansion of the Supreme Person in a sleep-like state: 
  • BS 5.12 The same Mahā-Viṣṇu is spoken of by the name of "Nārāyaṇa" in this mundane world. From that eternal person has sprung the vast expanse of water of the spiritual Causal Ocean. The subjective portion of Saṅkarṣaṇa who abides in paravyoma, the above supreme puruṣa with thousands of subjective portions, reposes in the state of divine sleep [yoga-nidrā] in the waters of the spiritual Causal Ocean.
  • BS 5.47 I adore the primeval Lord Govinda who assuming His own great subjective form, who bears the name of Śeṣa, replete with the all-accommodating potency, and reposing in the Causal Ocean with the infinity of the world in the pores of His hair, enjoys creative sleep [yoga-nidrā].
Another expansion of the Supreme Person enters into that dreamed reality in order to animate it, as mentioned in the Srimad Bhagavatam (SB):
  • SB 2.5.34 Thus all the universes remained thousands of aeons within the water [the Causal Ocean], and the Lord of living beings, entering in each of them, caused them to be fully animated.
The Supreme Person is absolutely independent, being by Himself and for Himself.  A part of His natural constitution is His external energy, which includes the multitude of infinitesimal living beings (jivas).  These beings are endowed with free will for the ultimate purpose of freely choosing to cultivate love for God.  Freedom of choice dedicated to this highest ideal increases the sweetness of the exchange between God (Whole) and man (part).      
  • BS 5.21 The same jīva is eternal and is for eternity and without a beginning joined to the Supreme Lord by the tie of an eternal kinship. He is transcendental spiritual potency.
In order to remind those beings who have not invested their free will in this highest pursuit, the singular God may descend in various incarnations according to time, circumstances, and the specific nature of those who He will be addressing. 
  • BG 9.11 Not knowing the transcendental nature of My form of human features, ignorant persons blaspheme Me, the Supreme Lord of all beings, considering Me a mere mortal. 
Such is the mercy of the supremely sweet maintainer of the cosmic manifestation.
  • BG 15.17 But completely distinct from both these types of beings is the Supreme Person, who is known as Paramatman, the Supersoul. He is the Supreme Lord. Entering the three worlds in His eternal form, He maintains all beings in the universe.
  • BS 5.17 Thereupon the same great personal Godhead, assuming the threefold forms of Viṣṇu, Prajāpati and Śambhu, entering into the mundane universe, plays the pastimes of preservation, creation and destruction of this world. This pastime is contained in the mundane world. Hence, it being perverted, the Supreme Lord, identical with Mahā-Viṣṇu, prefers to consort with the goddess Yoganidrā, the constituent of His own spiritual [cit] potency full of the ecstatic trance of eternal bliss appertaining to His own divine personality. 
In reference to the relationship between space (sky/ether) and the Supreme Person, space is seen as the most subtle of the five gross material elements (ether, air, fire, water, earth).  Before the manifestation of these five gross material elements, there are 3 subtle material elements, intelligence, ego, mind, with mind being the grossest. 
  • SB 2.5.21 The Lord, who is the controller of all energies, thus creates, by His own potency, eternal time, the fate of all living entities, and their particular nature, for which they were created, and He again merges them independently.
  • SB 2.5.22 After the incarnation of the first puruṣa [Kāraṇārṇavaśāyī Viṣṇu], the mahat-tattva, or the principles of material creation, take place, and then time is manifested, and in course of time the three qualities appear. Nature means the three qualitative appearances. They transform into activities.
  • SB 2.5.23 Material activities are caused by the mahat-tattva’s being agitated. At first there is transformation of the modes of goodness and passion, and later — due to the mode of ignorance — matter, its knowledge, and different activities of material knowledge come into play.
  • SB 2.5.24 The self-centered materialistic ego, thus being transformed into three features, becomes known as the modes of goodness, passion and ignorance in three divisions, namely the powers that evolve matter, knowledge of material creations, and the intelligence that guides such materialistic activities. Nārada, you are quite competent to understand this.
  • SB 2.5.25 From the darkness of false ego, the first of the five elements, namely the sky, is generated. Its subtle form is the quality of sound, exactly as the seer is in relationship with the seen.
  • SB 2.5.26-29 Because the sky is transformed, the air is generated with the quality of touch, and by previous succession the air is also full of sound and the basic principles of duration of life: sense perception, mental power and bodily strength. When the air is transformed in course of time and nature’s course, fire is generated, taking shape with the sense of touch and sound. Since fire is also transformed, there is a manifestation of water, full of juice and taste. As previously, it also has form and touch and is also full of sound. And water, being transformed from all variegatedness on earth, appears odorous and, as previously, becomes qualitatively full of juice, touch, sound and form respectively.
Finally, it is recommended that the material cosmic manifestation (inclusive of space), even when properly perceived as a part of the Supreme Whole, should perhaps only be considered as the external features of the Supreme.  
  • SB 5.23.8 My dear King, the body of the śiśumāra, as thus described ("This great machine, consisting of the stars and planets" - SB 5.23.4), should be considered the external form of Lord Viṣṇu, the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Morning, noon and evening, one should silently observe the form of the Lord as the Śiśumāra-cakra and worship Him with this mantra: “O Lord who have assumed the form of time! O resting place of all the planets moving in different orbits! O master of all demigods, O Supreme Person, I offer my respectful obeisances unto You and meditate upon You.”

Sincere and kind regards,

Krishna Keshava Das
Serving Assistant

Princeton Bhakti Vedanta Institute
of Spiritual Culture and Science



To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/trinity-53d19668-3539-4e03-bf63-f32fc135f2a0-1596928607007%403c-app-mailcom-lxa02.

nadeem haque

unread,
Aug 13, 2020, 2:49:42 AM8/13/20
to krishna.ke...@gmail.com, Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Dear Krishna,
 
May the peace - that comes from following the truth - be upon you. The greater part of what you are saying is in fact exactly what the Quran speaks about, yet most Muslims and Hindus know not. In the attached book that I co-authored with M. Muslim, my colleague -- now at large somewhere in Africa -- proved this from a logical point of view in terms of the relation between space and consciousness and then we embarked on showing that the logic and emprical evidence had exact correlates in the Quran (we had to do this to convince the Muslims and also re-assure ourselves as well). In fact, in the attached book, M.  Muslim and I speak of this universe as being the 'inverse-dream' of God - so it is interesting you mention 'dreaming'; we used this concept to explain causation and moment to moment sustenance as a unified concept. The universe is an inverse dream because it comes from God's imagination which is also then a form of creation and not part of His essence (hence leaving the Oneness iof God intact); it is like a dream but because God is never asleep but always awake it is like an inverse dream - sharing properties of a dream but not exactly a dream. I mention the Gita in my book too, by the way.
 
My view, if I may expound on this, is that Jesus (Isa), Muhammad, Buddha, Moses (Musa) and other Prophets from ancient India came with this same message - I am convinced by looking at the evidence from a universal point of view. As such they are also His creations and of course access the consciousness of God, whose consciousness they are in because there is no 'outside'. The only proviso or caveat is that no human can be a God etc. (I'm sure you are familiar with the standard Islamic concept on this particular point) .
 
Three decades ago, my late father's (Zeya Haque's) friend in Canada who was a Hindu (Suraj Lal) and a scholar in Toronto spoke to me about the connection between Hinduism and Islam even concerning Prophet Muhammad in ancient Hindu scriptures in relation to prophecies and I went through some of these books with him verifying the translations from Sanskrit. I needed to verify this from a scholarly Hindu researcher because the information I got was froma Muslim researcher. Suraj Lal said that there was a lot more and he would go to India and get more books. His Master/Guru used to live somewhere near the Himalayas and he would visit him every now and then. But my father passed away and I lost all connection with Mr. Lal. I know this is a controversial area but I'm just stating what happened!
 
It is too bad that there is so much conflict and the unity is not seen; things are not analysed from a rational perspective - this has led to much unnecessary hatred among various groups and it appears to be getting worse with time (at least in this period).
 
So I am glad to have been able to exchange ideas with your group.
 
May - God - or whatever one wishes to call this transimmenent being guide us towards a true and just vision for ourselves, humanity and nature itself.
 
Nadeem
 
 
Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2020 at 4:48 PM
From: "Krishna Keshava Dasa" <krishna.ke...@gmail.com>
From Microbits to Everything Vol2._final sent to printer.pdf
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages