View Full Version : Science and God

06-01-2012, 10:39 PM
Science has developed tremendously and faculty of logic improved a lot. People used to reject the existence of an unimaginable item. They refused God, who is unimaginable. But today in Science, Heisenberg proves the existence of uncertainty or unimaginability owing to the limits of human capability. Today is the right time to introduce the unimaginable concept of God. Buddha kept silent about God because, He did not like to introduce God through some unreal concepts. But, this lead to the misunderstanding of Buddha as an atheist. Shankara introduced God as almost unimaginable by representing God as awareness. Awareness is almost unimaginable to an ordinary person. Mohammed introduced God as power or energy. Awareness is energy only. Thus there is no fundamental difference between these two incarnations. But a common man cannot imagine God through that concept. God is represented by the energetic form as Narayana by Ramanuja or divine Father in heaven by Jesus.

The awareness or the energetic form is charged by God and thus there is no lie even if it is considered as God just like the electrified wire considered as current. But the entire awareness or energy or all the energetic forms are not charged by God. All the wires are not electrified. Angels, who are servants of God, are not God. Indra, an energetic form was not God as proved by Krishna in Bhagavatam. The energetic form is imaginable but not perceivable. It appears only to the mind. It appears to the eyes also, but very rare. Even, if it appears to eyes, the time of appearance is very short and so it is not congenial for preaching the knowledge. Therefore, the materialized form is necessary. The human body is the best suitable form for such purpose.

A statue or photo can be also perceivable and God can charge it also. But such photo or statue cannot preach. It can preach also by the super power of God. But it becomes quite unnatural. The unnatural means create tension and fear, which are not good background or conducive for receiving the knowledge. Such form cannot mix with humanity freely to preach the knowledge. Therefore, the concept of Krishna of human incarnation (Manusheem… the Gita) was more stressed by Madhva through Rama and Hanuman. Krishna, a human form declared that He is God based on the electrified wire. The same concept of “God in flesh” was introduced by Jesus, who stated that He and His Father are one and the same.

Suppose you have started a school with first standard and you are not admitting anyone into the next second standard from outside. Then you are teaching only to the first standard, though you are a postgraduate and can teach up to the 10th standard. To start the second standard in that year, majority was not available. You will teach the same students next year in second standard in another full section. Meanwhile if one or two students worthy of second standard approach, you will guide them personally. Same was the situation. Whenever the human incarnation came, it was dealing with the majority as a section and the lesson pertaining to that standard was only taught. He taught a few devotees of high standard personally but that was not carried on. Therefore, today you think that the preaching of God in the human form on that day was only the first standard. Today, majority is available due to the development of logical faculty and so the high standard is opened as a section.

06-02-2012, 05:04 PM
Science and spirituality were linked until the late medieval period- when there was a concerted push to separate the two. Now we see quantum mechanics is bringing the two back together.....

06-02-2012, 08:07 PM
Science and spirituality were linked until the late medieval period- when there was a concerted push to separate the two. Now we see quantum mechanics is bringing the two back together.....
Science is the logical analysis of the items existing in this creation based on only one authority that is perception (Pratyaksha Pramanam). Even in the ancient logic, all the authorities (Pramanas) are based on perception only. You see the fire giving smoke. This is deduction or perception. When you see the smoke coming from a distance and do not see the fire, you say that fire exists there and this is induction or inference (Anumana Pramanam). But this induction is based on your previous deduction only. Somebody says to you that fire gives smoke. If that person is your dearest, you believe it and infer the fire from the smoke. This is authority of word ‘Shabdha Pramanam’.

Though you have not seen the fire, your dearest person has seen the smoke coming from fire. Like this all the authorities are based on perception only. I do not find any scripture of any Religion, which contradicts the experience of perception. There are four ways of authority. 1) Sruthi, which is the original scripture. 2) Smrithi, which is the commentaries of Scholars on the original scripture. 3) Yukthi, the logical analysis based on deduction, induction etc., 4) Anubhava, the experience based on the perception of the items in this world, which may be direct or indirect. Out of these four ways, the fourth way is the most powerful. If anything contradicts the fourth way, that is not valid or it may be a misinterpretation based on misunderstanding of the Sruthi or Smrithi or Yukthi. Thus Science and Philosophy are not separate. The very frame of the spiritual knowledge is Science only. Thus Science is the basic foundation and over all underlying structure of all the Scriptures.

A true Scientist should always stand on the perception and should not deny the experience derived by perception. If he denies, he is not a scientist. All top most scientists were philosophers and spiritual people only. Those scientists have travelled along the river of Science and reached its end, which is the ocean of spiritual knowledge called as philosophy. Philosophy is pervading all the branches of Science. Every branch of Science gives Ph.D as the final degree. Ph.D means Doctor in Philosophy. If Science and Philosophy are different, why this word Philosophy is regarded so much by all the branches of Science? Philosophy means the essence of the knowledge of every branch that is experienced when one reaches the end of that branch.

Therefore, the spiritual knowledge, which is the ocean is the Philosophy in which all branches of Science and all the Religions merge and loose their identity. A scientist who has not reached the end of Science and who is still travelling in the river only denies the existence of the ocean, since he is still perceiving the limiting boundaries of his knowledge – river. Such river-travellers are called as atheists. They neither see the ocean nor see the other rivers. Even the follower of any particular Religion is in the state of this atheist only. He is no better than these atheists because he believes that God is a particular form only, which is a small part of this creation. Some other followers believe God as formless, who is the all-pervading cosmic energy. Since cosmic energy is also a part of the creation, their form of God is very big. These atheist-scientist believe that this creation is God. Thus all these are atheists only. All these atheists, who may be scientific atheists or religious atheists, will realize the true nature of God only when they reach the end of the Science or Religion.

A scientific atheist is contradicting his own authority, which is the perception. When the human incarnation performs the inexplicable miracles, how can they deny the perception of such miracles? You may do that miracle in an alternative way, but that does not contradict the different path of the original miracle. One may get first class by copying. Such false first class cannot contradict the genuine first class. The result is same, but the process is different. You may produce ash by putting a fine powder of wet salt in the grews of your hand like a magician. The same ash may be produced by a divine miracle also. Since the result is same, can you argue that the process also should be same? Since the first class result is same in the case of the original student and a fraud student, do you mean that the hard work of the original student is fraud?

Do you mean that the original and fraud students are one and the same? Therefore, the same result can have two different processes. Since the result is same, processes need not be same. Do you mean that a result has only one process? Is it not contradicting the very fundamentals of Science? A Chemical compound can be produced in several ways (Hess Law). Since the compound is same, do you mean that the alternative reactions are also one and the same? Same Chennai city can be reached by several ways. Since the end City is same, do you mean that all the paths are not different? Do you mean that all the paths are merged as one path only and thus there is only one path to reach the Chennai city? Therefore, conservative scientists and conservative religious followers can be categorized as immature analysts. The immaturity indicates their position in the river and maturity indicates their position in the end of the river, which is the ocean. Einstein, Newton, Heisenberg etc., are the top most scientists who have travelled and travelled along the Science River and reached the final spiritual ocean.