Does God exist ? Stephen Hawkin’s ‘hot’ new debate

No, actually He does not. Neither does She. Neither does any religion push the existence of an individual as God. Buddha denied the existence of God except as the idea of ‘nothingness’. Christ was the Son (and therefore born of) God that is Eternal and the Light. The Prophet Mohammad was the Prophet through whom God the Almighty and Omnipresent spoke. The fundamentals of Hinduism are based on the idea’s of an eternity that encompasses all existence as described by Krishna (or at least revealed to) Arjun in the Bhagvad Geeta. Each religion has attempted to expand the concept of God to include ideas of universal eternal love and compassion.

I sometimes feel people keep raising these issues to sell their books or to get on to TV shows.

Of course science will go continue to expand the frontiers of knowledge in the logical understanding of our Universe. And wise philosophers and spiritualists will continue to co opt that part of science that somehow corresponds with concepts of centuries old spiritualists. Such as quantum physics. But while science can give us many theories to describe love, can it give us the experience of love ? And are experience and analysis the same thing ? No they are not.

There in lies the difference. We live in an infinite universe that we must describe and measure in finite terms for it to be ‘scientific’. The ideas of infinity can only come as mathematical possibilities with a ‘constant’ always needed to complete the infinite equation. More often than not that ‘constant’ is the assumption of ‘non linearity of time’ . Which will be proven no doubt, but to a human ego existing and addicted to the idea of linearity of time, ‘eternity’ is essentially incomprehensible other than in moments of expansive emotions of ‘faith’ and ‘love’.

The spiritualists describe the Universe as infinite probabilities. Infinite potential. It exists as you imagine it does. In fact it exists and does not exist at the same moment.

So does God also exist and not exist at the same time ? Is there a ‘being’ that is pulling all the strings of the Universe according to huge design ? Yes, if the design is infinite. And encompasses all possibilities that gives infinite choice. The idea being not someone or somebody that controls the Universe , but a Universe that is consistently creating and destroying itself.

Can there be a scientific equation that ‘explains’ the Universe ? Yes, if you could find an equation that is consistently evolving and destroying itself, refusing to be a static defined representation of our infinite existence.

178 Responses to “Does God exist ? Stephen Hawkin’s ‘hot’ new debate”

  1. kishore says:

    The only thing I would say is a little unfair in your observations in this entry – is the potential accusation that Hawking made his argument so he can get on TV shows. Not everybody is happy with a simple explanations such as God created everything. Just because a few texts written by humans thousands of years back proclaim so doesn’t make that the truth. If man doesn’t pursue scientific questioning we would continue to be in darkness. You know that as well as anyone else – would we rather continue to believe the Earth is flat? Didn’t we get a great understanding of the Universe and in turn God, due to the scientific discoveries that opened us up to the fact that we are not the center of the Universe? Once you just sit back and just say ‘God did it’ then all thinking stops, evolution stops. The Universe may as well not exist in our imagination or in reality (whichever you prefer). In logic theory it is known as ‘asserting false’. Once you assert that, everything is explained in a moment and therefore there is nothing else to do. The theory folds up. That’s great if one is looking for an easy way out. I don’t think we are here to get an easy way out. To understand the Universe it takes enquiry. It could be spiritual or scientific – they will eventually meet – but it has to be done in earnestness. Hawking didn’t really deny the existence of ‘God’ – he’s merely pointing out that the notion of ‘creation’ by God may not be as simple as it sounds. If you sit back and think about it, it actually throws more light into the nature of ‘God’.

  2. Harb says:

    Deepak R, it is even simpler than Einstein’s equation E = mc2.

    In one line it is: In contraction/involution all the forces unite first into four basic forces and then into one unified force and in expansion/evolution the reverse happens – they separate out in the same way. And it is a fact all scientists know that one of the first things which happen at big bang is the process of this separating away of forces. That is all, the rest is superstructure.

    Just imagine, scientists have first united all the numerous forces in the universe to four basic ones and then have been trying to unite them into one called grandunification, but could not just because science is based on duality while grandunification as its very name suggests will be all singularity or oneness. Which is why it can only be self-experienced or is the domain of mystics (because here the seer which is the self will also get merged). There is no supernatural reason for this but just because in constant search of it man’ attention will become so sharp that it will penetrate everything around him of course from the same level. All will just become one. It is the same experience which finally happens when one asks the question “Who am I?”

    Anyway, now even if one has not had this experience one can reason out that if so numerous forces have first been unified into four basic ones and then even three of them have been further unified it stands to reason to agree that eventually all must somehow stand unified and mystics must be right when they say that they have had the experience of thi unification otherwise called experience of oneness of all and everything.

    Now, that having been said, again one can reason out that if all the forces have been unified eventually taking us to the state of grandunification, singularity and big bang the reverse must be true from big bang outwards. This is in fact my insight. Having experienced Oneness once I happened to ask myself certain question and in response was told that just as in involution all the forces unify first into four and then into one similarly from big bang side they will first separate out into four at all cycle levels and then into numerous. And this winding into and getting unwound will comprise the whole design. On which then Darwinian theoris will operate for living species.

    Whatever the science may do it will eventually have to agree to what I have written above. It may take centuries as it often happens with such books but they cannot do without it. I do admit that I may not have written it very clearly but still this basic theme comes out absolutely clearly and the lack is only in details.

    Just now I was reading Erwin Shrodinger’s book What is Life and in one way or other he supports everything I say though he had then not noted the contribution of forces, he only talked about that physical laws can explain all and that quantum jumps explain evolution. He even says that all we (western science)now need is a bit of blood transfusion from eastern mystics lol.

    Just two paragraphs for your interest:

    “We must therefore not be discouraged by the difficulty of interpreting life by the ordinary laws of physics. For that is what is to be expected from the knowledge we have gained of the structure of living matter. We must be prepared to find anew law prevailing in it. Or are we to term it as non-physical not to say a superphysical law?”No, I dont think so…”

    And,

    “Well, so it is because our science – Greek science – is based on objectivation, whereby it has cut itself off from the adequate understanding of the Subject of Cognizance, of the mind. But I do believe that this is precisely the point where our present way of thinking does need to be amended, perhaps by a bit of blood transfusion by Eastern thought….We do not wish to lose the logical precision that our scientific thought has reached…but one thing can be claimed in favour of the mystical teahing and that is, identity of all minds with eah other and with the supreme mind.”

    Now this is just what socalled God provides – that it binds the whole universe or universal scheme of things into one well-knit scheme of things or Grand Design and besides enables one to see the universe from inside-out or mind’s side just as science sees it from outside-in or body’s. In fact in Mind, the universe gets wound up into forces and in Body it gets unwound, that is all.

    Sorry for long explanation, seems in my own life’s cycles within cycles I have somehow again entered the third phase, which is the phase of intellect or words even of ego lol. But I prefer all this exhausts itself on its own rather than myself controlling it in one way or the other like doing meditations etc. It will remain for a few days anyway.

  3. rudrabhairav@yahoo.com says:

    Kavitha ,

    Write to me , if you are eager for an honest dialogue on the eternal Vedic tradition.

    You sound like , you have an issue with my observations. Tell me about you – where do you stand and what is your argument ?

    It is customary in the Vedic tradition , for two debaters to introduce what they are arguing about. I am very clear about where I stand.

    Thanks. I welcome you to probe an aspect of Vedic tradition you want to attack.

  4. Harb says:

    Below is a copy of a writing to show where science is today in relation to uniting the four fundamental forces, which according to me can never be achieved by it because of the reason given above, and which can only be known through self experience.

    “­Physicists are currently pursuing the ideas that the four fundamental forces may be related and that they sprang from one force early in the universe. The idea isn’t unprecedented. We once thought of electricity and magnetism as separate entities, but the work of Oersted, Faraday, Maxwell and others showed that they were related. Theories that relate the fundamental forces and subatomic particles are called fittingly grand unified theories. More on them next.

    Uniting the Fundamental Forces

    ­Science never rests, so the work on fundamental forces is far from finished. The next challenge is to construct one grand unified theory of the four forces, an especially difficult task since scientists have struggled to reconcile theories of gravity with those of quantum mechanics.

    That’s where particle accelerators, which can induce collisions at higher energies, come in handy. In 1963, physicists Sheldon Glashow, Abdul Salam and Steve Weinberg suggested that the weak nuclear force and electromagnetic force might combine at higher energies in what would be called the electroweak force. They predicted that this would occur at an energy of about 100 giga-electron volts (100GeV) or a temperature of 1015 K (10 raised to the power of 15 – Harb), which occurred shortly after the Big Bang. In 1983, physicists reached these temperatures in a particle accelerator and showed that the electromagnetic force and weak nuclear force were related.

    Theories predict that the strong force will unite with the electroweak force at energies above 1015 GeV and that all the forces may unite at energies above 1019 (10 raised to power of 19)GeV. These energies approach the temperature at the earliest portion of the Big Bang. Physicists are striving to build particle accelerators that might reach these temperatures. The largest particle accelerator is the Large Hadron Collider at CERN in Geneva, Switzerland. When it comes online, it will be capable of accelerating protons to 99.99 percent the speed of light and reaching collision energies of 14 tera-electron volts or 14 TeV, which is equal to 14,000 GeV or 1.4 x 104 GeV.

    ­If physicists can show that the four fundamental forces indeed came from one unified force when the universe cooled from the Big Bang, will that change your daily life? Probably not. However, it will advance our understanding of the nature of forces, as well as the origins and fate of the universe. ”

    There is no need of any other God or His intervention to explain the universe except that this grandunification can only be self experienced and from its perspective the whole universe and its scheme of things can be seen bound by one single theme and can be explained by what I call one spirituo-scientific law, that of its going through four basic interactions from all minute to big cycle levels.

    What happens at grandunification and consequent big bang gives us the canvas called consciousness by us on which then the whole play of the universe unfolds. But this is not the same consciousness all usually use here. It is the unexplainable unifying consciounsess which even a grain of sand possesses as against the usual which is really the consciousness of the other.

    As I have explained somewhere else http://harbsmiscellaneousmusings.blogspot.com/ Homo sapiens with all their specific human traits are the product of the third force, the strong force. IN a story in my book, I have tried to explain in a most simple way how we get lost in it and then how we go beyond and finally reach God or Oneness or consciousness of Oneness. I am also copying the story on the above blog.

    (Of course just as science cannot reach grandunification similarly mystics cannot reach the details of science. But those on the cutting edge on both sides and have the interest can understand and they do. All cutting edge scientists like Einstein, Shrodinger, Prigogine, Heisenberg, Bohm to name only a few have sensed that there is truth in mystics experience of Oneness and similarly all mystics who have then looked towards the world or the scientific world have understood that they are generally right, that finally there is no need of any God to explain things except that explanation can be seen and begun from Oneness of all. And in fact it is this Oneness which all mystics have experienced and defined as God.

  5. Harb says:

    By the way, if anybody is interested I have begun to write my whole book in the blog form which will open if one will click on my name here (especially in this post).

  6. Trupti says:

    Shekhar new blog please.

  7. Subodh Deshpande says:

    hi read the twitter comment on your blog..and hence just sharing a thought…
    Quote
    If love is merely a chemical reaction then heartache could be cured like a headache, with asprin?
    UnQuote

    indeed its chemical reaction (true commonly called love do not exists, its imagination) Shekhar, the only difference is like you do not take any pill to fall in love, you do not take any pill to forget also..the body, brain and mind controls it..

    do you think these birds, animals really know what the love is…no..they know only how to respond..its the chemical reaction takes place inside.. beause of that only they perform all their movements mechanically, but we try to find.love in it…and they are only programmed to live and die..they know what is their food, they know how to survive..they know what is threat..we call them as ‘this is their life’ by comparing snapshots of our life with these lives..this happens because only human has got cells in side who can do analysis and reach to some conclusion in a given situtation and that is why we can think of different options where as these birds and animals have limited options..their life span is also small and their affinity towards life is more intense than us..and that is why their fundamental right on this nature is more than us..like our kids have more right on our belongings…

    thanks..subodh

  8. brahmastra says:

    LOL..gotta say Trupti has the best answer of all.

  9. Harb says:

    Love, sex and the universe

    In ordinary love/sex:

    Some start from sex (through arranged marriage) and end up at love (but not all)

    Some start from love (love-at-first-sight) and end up at sex (but not all)

    In case of the universe:

    The first are like scientists who have not reached grandunification (or have at least not reached the almost mystical heights of an Einstein, Shrodinger, Heisenberg, Prigogine…to name only a few).

    And the second are like mystics who have just stopped with their experience of Oneness but could not connect it to the universal scheme of things in whatever way.

    The universal scheme of things comprises both.

    Those who are neither of the two begin extolling the virtues of the one party or the other depending upon their own deficiencies: those who cannot understand science begin to say that the experience of “I am That” is enough. If it were so why would the “I am That” would enter into the “I am This” in the first instance?

    And those who cannot understand mysticism begin to say that there is nothing beyond reason, logic and step by step understanding of what is in front of us. If it were so how would they ever explain sleep, orgasm, love where nothing would remain in front in the final stages and reason would seem to go into infinite depths, more so when they encounter what they call quantum jumps even on the way?

  10. Subodh Deshpande says:

    What I mean is can water ever become thrusty..so is the case of love..tru love..subodh

  11. pappu says:

    harb, in zen there is saying..bfore enlightenment, chop wood carry water..after enlightenment, chop wood carry water. for ur case, it luks like..bfore enlightenment, sardar..after enlightenment, sardar..

  12. Harb says:

    lol, zen also says don’t go after any saying but be true to yourself, and even if it were not from zen following is my saying and I act accordingly:

    “Man is capable of having the last laugh. Beyond good and evil, materialism, spiritualism, divine, undivine, thisism and thatism lies his fulfillment. A master is one who is neither an atheist nor yet a theist but he himself…

    If according to you I am being sardar (though I dont know what do you mean by this and I have never used the word) I must be it.

    Anyway, thank you. You seem to be some good-natured soul.

  13. Rudra says:

    Hi kavitha :

    I wrote a reply to your post , but it seems to have gotten lost somewhere in SK’s beard ..he’s gat a formidable beard you know – he uses it for filtering posts selectively..i also suspect SK uses hisobeard to strain his teabags…

    anyway , i was saying that in the Vedic tradition , it is customary to know the stated position of two debaters..i am clear about mine , i am not so sure about yours. You can raise any subject on any aspect of the Vedic tradition you like.

    you can also write to me at @ rudrabhairav@yahoo.com . i dont always check SK’s blog.

    Regards
    Rudra.

  14. Harb says:

    In this post I will try to answer Shekhar’s specific observations related to Design.

    Yes, One Unified Force which comes into being at big bang thanks to the interaction of three realms ie, actual (physical), virtual and spiritual, represented and explored by science, philosophy and mysticism respectively pulls all the strings of the universe according to a huge design.

    Design comprises, spiritual realm’s (our souls in our case, nothing more than our portion of the same unified force or force of big bang) entanglement into four basic forces via the virtual realm (anti-matter + virtual matter = our brain + mind in our case) and then disentanglement from them while the virtual realm then keeps account of the disentanglement.

    Design is infinite and comprises both creation and destruction of the universe in cycles because while entangling from forces it is simultaneously getting entangled into them and vice versa (as tree is simultaneously getting entangled into the new seed while getting disentnalged from the previous one.

    Moreover, the universal scheme of things is in the form of wheels-within-wheels-within wheels all having four basic phases with all four basic phases further having four basic phases and so on so that it sort of has almost infinite rungs on those wheels. Each rung of each wheel has the potential to throw up its own universe while trying to outgrow it. And each rung gives apparent choices though actually these only subserve the underlying design. All this gives the Design infinite possibilitis and choices.

    In all fairness we cannot talk about God or on His behalf because for one, we have not been able to adequately define He/She/It and for an other even while we may have had an experience of oneness we can not adequately explain it nor we see the universe from there we are accustomed to. As they say, either you see the universe or you see (or rather be with) God. A paragraph from my book in which I confront this situation and find a way out will explain it fruther. (In the previous chapter Shiva or Natraja on being asked “what makes you dance?” had accused Parvati (representing this world which science has reduced to four basic forces) or four basic forces. In this chapter I ask him why he allowed himself to be entangled into them in the first place:

    ‘But pray, Nataraja, why did you allow yourself to be entangled in Parbati – in those four forces – in the first instance?’

    ‘Ha, ha, ha…’ Nataraja, perhaps, would laugh his heart out on hearing this question.

    ‘Entangled! Entangled he says…hooooh! Who says I’ve been entangled ever? It’s the vested interests of the people like you to first show me entangled and then struggling to get disentangled. With what else will you, you funny scribblers, otherwise fill your books?’

    ‘…But…but…those tears in your eyes… Your accusing finger towards Parbati…’ Now it was my turn to shed tears.

    ‘Oh, that…I see…one of those stormy visions of yours…!’

    ‘…..?’

    ‘You dream all sorts of dreams and then you say I, who am to you as you’re to your dreams, am entangled in them? Are you entangled in your dreams? You are not entangled my child, though you may feel so while dreaming. Wouldn’t you yourself laugh if one of your dream creatures were to ask you questions involving your first instances? First go and exhaust your dream, go and write your dreamy book, go and win your dreamy name, fame, and fortune, only then you will know of my first instances. While dreaming ye may not talk of first instances, lest talking of first instances ye may lose your dreaming mid-way through’

    ========

    As regards the scientific equation some other day…

  15. pappu says:

    kavitha, frm ur posts, luks like u need to take it ez with the spicy idli sambar and filter coffee..it put mind in over drive..be chill like the dude Kavi Deepak Sharma..his poem are so cool.

  16. pappu says:

    Subodh Deshpande , firsht of all want to say to you Jaiiiiiii Maharashtra..but without macchar raj..plz none of that for me thanks you..but ur post r very very cool like amitabh bacchan in coolie..thank you

  17. Harb says:

    The gravitational interactions give us physique and senses.

    The electromagnetic interactions give us love, hate, movement and feelings/emotions.

    The strong interactions give us ego and all communication tools like word, language, phones and so on.

    The weak interactions give us spirituality, compassion, experience of oneness, God.

    Grandunification, Big Bang and four basic interactions acted upon by Darwinian theories of evolution cover everything. No need of any God beyond them to explain anything.

  18. Harb says:

    Just came across the following which I think clearly supports my four basic forces based theory of evolution as also that seeds of everything including human intelligence were sown in the very first spiral.

    *****
    The Big Bang and Augustine’s seven levels of
    creation– a speculation

    Augustine’s theory of creation is not widely known, no doubt because he continued to develop his thoughts on this throughout his life. So, like his concept of developmental seeds or engines imbedded in nature, it’s in pieces scattered throughout his (many) writings. And these vary as his thoughts matured (the seeds grew).

    Still, it is the best I have come across. Here are some of his main ideas as I see them. Others may not agree with my interpretations.

    Augustine correctly associated time with change, perhaps one of the oldest principles of philosophy. If there is no change, there is no time. In addition, Augustine also associates the 7 days of creation, in which 7 changes were made, as 7 cognitive states (levels or categories). So rather than reading the events of Gen.1-2 as occurring on 7 days, I read them as the 7 levels of creation Thus the Big Bang included the seven days of creation as 7 levels of creation which occurred all at once or nearly so.

    But, you say, are you trying to tell me that life was created during the Big Bang ?

    Yes. life, by which I mean intelligence, was created during the Big Bang, but only in the form of what Augustine called “seeds”. These are future developments, some of them continuing developments…

    For a fuller account of these, see the account below.

    – Roger

    http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2009/may/22.39.html

    ” Augustine draws out the following core themes: God brought everything into existence in a single moment of creation. Yet the created order is not static. God endowed it with the capacity to develop. Augustine uses the image of a dormant seed to help his readers grasp this point. God creates seeds, which will grow and develop at the right time. Using more technical language, Augustine asks his readers to think of the created order as containing divinely embedded causalities that emerge or evolve at a later stage. Yet Augustine has no time for any notion of random or arbitrary changes within creation. The development of God’s creation is always subject to God’s sovereign providence. The God who planted the seeds at the moment of creation also governs and directs the time and place of their growth.

    Augustine argues that the first Genesis Creation account (1:1–2:3) cannot be interpreted in isolation, but must be set alongside the second Genesis Creation account (2:4–25), as well as every other statement about the Creation found in Scripture. For example, Augustine suggests that Psalm 33:6–9 speaks of an instantaneous creation of the world through God’s creative Word, while John 5:17 points to a God who is still active within creation.

    Further, he argues that a close reading of Genesis 2:4 has the following meaning: “When day was made, God made heaven and earth and every green thing of the field.” This leads him to conclude that the six days of Creation are not chronological. Rather, they are a way of categorizing God’s work of creation. God created the world in an instant but continues to develop and mold it, even to the present day.”
    *****
    And here is my brief reply, with a few lines from the first chapter of my book:

    Hi.

    Yes indeed, Augustine’s seven levels will comprise the first spiral in terms of four basic interactions and would contain the seeds of clay, minerals, plants, animals, apes, man and supermen (expected) according to my book Self-Designed Universe. Here are relevant lines:

    “Anyway, as scientists describe the forces in terms of interactions, we may also simplify the whole above explanation in terms of the interactions as follows. But before this I may clarify that each interaction in our scheme of things comprises two parts and so gives two apparent ‘species’: one in which Mosc gets disentangled from the previous force and the other in which it gets entangled into the next. For example, in gravitational interaction it disentangles from inertia and entangles into gravity giving us in the process clay to minerals. In the second or electromagnetic interactions it gets disentangled from gravity, which gives us the species of plants, and simultaneously get entangled into electromagnetic forces which gives us the species of animals. So that collectively this electromagnetic interactions gives us the species of plants to animals. Same is the case with apes to man – disentangling from electromagnetic forces and further entangling into strong forces. Anyway, coming again to the main point of simplifying the above in terms of interactions:

    1. Gravitational interactions gave us the ‘species’ of clay to minerals.
    2. Electromagnetic interactions gave us the species of plants to animals.
    3. Strong interactions gave us the species of apes to man.
    4. And finally, weak interactions would some day give us the species to which we may call the species of superman.

    More you can read at my blog http://www.selfdesigneduniverse.blogspot.com as also at http://www.harbsmiscellaneousmusings.blogspot.com

    There you can find much more detail.

    Thanks,

    Harb

  19. kavitha says:

    Hi Rudra,

    Don’t wish to go down the path of judgements on the nature of your [lost] response, or the filtering mechanisms on this blog, but I suppose sipping strained chai, with the dust settled, is always more palatable?…unless one is using self-filtering tea bags, sparing the beard of potential hot spills and dust in the process

    anyway,

    I believe the Vedic tradition is also tolerant of the ‘position’-challenged questioners – the ignorant, stupid, not-knowing, and more. On the other hand, an all-accepting one really does not see a need to take one position or the other. Whether one is the former or latter is in the mind of the beholder, no? Why does our human mind feel compelled to box one into a stated position of this or that, anyway?

    I really had NO issue with your observations or a desire to ‘attack’ — I simply intended to understand, and for you to elaborate on, your earlier references (re: intricate logic, Aryan invasion theories).

    Always open to constructively shared perspectives. Hope you can share yours in this space. That can perhaps be savored with a well-filtered cup of tea 🙂

  20. salu says:

    I think, the option and acceptance of God in its broad sense is based on ones own intelligence and cognizance. Since humans origin multiple thoughts and opinions on the existence of God have been moving parallel through the track and it will continue infinitely. The faith is purely personal and it is directly related to his erudition. So, no problem of being remained as an atheist or theist. Just remain to be accountable to ones own thoughts. Thanks for the enlighting notes on God’s existence.

  21. Subodh Deshpande says:

    Hi Harb,

    I am trying to understand all the things you have written down on this blog and also on yours.
    I am not able to understand what exactly, I mean where exactly you have reached in this..so just finding out..

    I am software professional, so just wanting to relate your idea of universe with our nowadays regular term. The regular terms is VMWare and VMware instances, many readers who do not know this concept for them I will brief what i mean.
    say we have an computer on which you can install a software called VMware, as long as you have some space and memory available you can install anohter operating systems (eg like XP, windows7, vista, linux etc) on same machine and all these different installed VM ware instances can be running and some one use them at a time. You are free to install any applications on these VMware instances as long as space and memory is not constraint, you can selectively start and shutdown any of the instance. But this has a limitation if the primary instance has been shutdown all the other VMware instances will also get shutdown.

    OR Harb, are you going to create altogether different nucleous, electron, proton etc all those stuff..thus you will have different periodic table too and which will finally have different physics laws and hence different other scinces too..which will eventually came into existence..

    OR you are gathering information on which present sciences can be used as reference create the universe of your defination

    OR something else..

    Thanks..subodh

  22. Harb says:

    Dear Subodh, thank you for the interest shown.

    I will try to answer your question by giving a paragraph from the first chapter of my book also given at my blog. It is:

    ****
    But then, every new theory must have some iconoclastic content otherwise it would forfeit the very justification of its existence. Here I recall the words of Einstein by which, after having shaken the very foundations of the Newtonian world of absolute space and time by his theory of relativity, he asked forgiveness of Newton. Wrote he:

    “Forgive me, Newton; you found the only way open in your time to a man of the highest scientific capability and strength of thought. The concepts created by you are still the leading ones in our physical thinking, though we know now that if we aspire to a deeper understanding of the interrelationships in nature, we shall need to replace these concepts with others farther from the sphere of our immediate experience.”

    And mine is an aspiration, as is obvious from the Oneness of the dialogue from where I begin my story, at understanding the interrelationships in Nature at the deepest possible level. Hope my predecessor thinkers/cosmologists/evolutionists would also forgive me likewise.
    ****
    So what I am tryng to do is to aspire to the DEEPEST understanding of the interrelationships in nature, or rather, not really aspire to but have had that understanding thanks to first my having what I call my experience of oneness, which is really the experience of the deepest ground of everything or universe or what you have and THEN SEEING THE THINGS FROM THERE IN RESPONSE TO A QUESTION WHICH i HAPPENED TO ASK HAVING BEARING ON THE EVOLUTION OF THE UNIVERSE.

    Needless to add I too will need to replace all the concepts may be of all the sciences with others farther or farthest from the sphere of our immediate experience. (You may have read about the experience in the blog which opens if you click on my name).

    As for the other “stuff” I am creating nothing new I am only seeing it falling into place in a different way when seen from the point of view of the One or even Grandunification, which I think is really what one experiences in the name of experience of oneness.

    No doubt writing is not easy from “that point” for you will then have endless scope (which is why Augustine too could not complete his work as written in a post above), not to talk that previous to that you are neither a scientist nor a writer and so dont know much vocabulary nor how to write systematically. Though then the same universal scheme of things which enables one to have the experience of oneness in the first place finds a way out through inspired writing which somehow was able to put across the main theme of my insight even in the first chapter in my case. I have often felt that the rest is only to make a book to house that.

    For a simple understanding imagine some atheletes are running a race in a stadium and you go there well after the race has already been half completed. You try to figure out who is where to understand who is the first, second, third and so on, but really you cant. But now imagine you see the race from the very beginning. You will be immediately able to know who is first and who is second.

    Similarly, science has begun to see the universal evolution from the middle backwards, and moreover is unable to go to the very beginning, so it really does not know how the athletes stand as against a person who thanks to the experience of oneness sort of sees the race from the very beginning.

    Often religious people have seen the game from there and that is why most talk of oneness, of design in the language “that everything happenes on its own,” or as per God’s will, or as Bible says, “there is time for everything” and so on. I just happened to see the game from there in terms of four basic interactions and it srt of explains a bit more how the things happen from there. I know many people have many misconceptions about this design thing and think that man has free will or this and that, but all has perfect answers. Only the problem is that it is not easy to write from that point and moreover taking all the possible questions into account. But if one asks by coming in front it is easy because then answers sort of come on their own perhaps according to the capacity of understanding of the questioner.

    Thank you once again for asking.

  23. Subodh Deshpande says:

    Thanks harb,

    Quote
    So what I am tryng to do is to aspire to the DEEPEST understanding of the interrelationships in nature
    or rather, not really aspire to but have had that understanding thanks to first my having what I call my experience of oneness, which is really the experience of the deepest ground of everything or universe or what you have and THEN SEEING THE THINGS FROM THERE IN RESPONSE TO A QUESTION WHICH i HAPPENED TO ASK HAVING BEARING ON THE EVOLUTION OF THE UNIVERSE.
    UnQuote

    just sharing my thoughts..not ncessary everyone agree to it..

    What Swami Vivekanand had said is if some one could know how one smallest piece/particle of ‘sand’,’mud’ or ‘gold’ is formed he would be able to understand entire sand, mud or gold as a whole..so is applicable for universe..and that is why he furhher said if you understand how human is formed you will be able to understand how the universe is formed. (the eaxct vedic science statement is ‘Pind and Brahamand are one and the same, pind means every life) Many people have unnecessary think that sprituality (not relegion..relegion is behavioural pattern) is not science..on the conarary spritual scince is the most complete scince and its only the foundation stone of every sciences.

    In further it is said that this pind is formed of five elements (Prithvi i.e. earth, Agni i.e. fire, vayu i.e. wind, Tej ie. light and Aakash i.e. space or sky) and three attributes (attributes gunas Satva, Raj and Tama). The nature of lives(human, birds, animal, trees etc) changes because of different composition of these five elements and three attributes. Food plays an important role in keeping them in balance that is why I think cooking is a scince its not just art or only meant for hunger, now look at it what important job every houesewife(atleast still in Inida, a housewife cooks the food that is why she is Narayani) is playing in this universe and how we look at her.

    The basic moto/aim of our vedic culture is to maintain every one in balance (I am saying balance not of exact proportion), and to maintain that balance some acts/work/methods are necesary those are provided by relegion the bahavioural pattern, the variation in these pattern are due to atomspheric or environmental condition (again the best example is India, from KanyKumari to Kashmir and from Gujarat to Aasam people are one and the same but their behaviour are different food habits are different but their idea of oneness is one and the same). This is why I think this is also applicable for world and other relegions in this world.

    What Vivekanand has said is today human has fallen from his standards, once he again rasises himself, everything will be again in place..our every saint/sage has focused only on ‘human’..they continiously counselled him..they were belonging to different relegion,cast, cluture and there message was one and the same..human only requires continous monitoring, counselling..

    in short understand human you will understand the construction of universe.

    thanks..
    subodh

  24. Harb says:

    Subodh, Vivekananda ws right, it is the same thing from a proverbial grain of sand to the whole universe itself. All obey the design in terms of four focrces.

    Five elements now can now be better understood in terms of molecules, atoms, nucleons and leptons and similarly the working of the universe can now be better understood in terms of the forces they relate to.

    Yes, we try to keep the balance but it is broken at due time by the force of design in terms of four basic forces topush us to the next level of evolution, otherwise as the time available has no limit there should have been complete balance by now.

    Harb

  25. Raaj says:

    Hi Deepak R, if you are checking this can I request you to please share your contact details. Or please mail me at non.dualpress@gmail.com. Many thanks, Raaj.

  26. Harb says:

    There is nothing, and I repeat nothing, which we can not explain here without the intervention of God and if time and place allowed I will continue step by step. As for God one is free to accept or reject, if one accepts it may be said to have created the whole universe at big bang (by providing it a spark from the background somewhat in the way a knife-sharper wheel creates a spark in the knife)and not only design and so we should continue studying the design or socalled intelligent design in the same way as we have been studying other facets of the working of universe and, if one does not accept God one may take that the universe’s cyclical motion provides the first push from big bang (just as night passes and day gives us a push from behind to get up)

    Anyway, in this post I will explain how spirals at big bang end up being kundlini shakti for the Indian Yogis and coiled up DNAs, genes for scinece.

    Read it after reading my post of 17th Sep (5:51pm) (Excuse my informal style as I am really copying it from my book, Mosc may be taken as unified force now reduced to the level under question or as our souls, our “I”s in our case, and even God in us if you will).
    ****

    So that is that, dear reader! Let us take it straight from the horse’s mouth as they say that Mosc is entangled in the world in the manner we (our basic consciousness) is entangled in our dreams. That is to say, just as we lie there coiled in the heart of every dreamy being, in the heart of the whole of the dreamy world, similarly, Mosc lies here coiled in the heart of every being, in the heart of the whole of the Universe…

    Sure reader, you are very clever! You wouldn’t allow even as innocuous a word as ‘coiled’ slip into my descriptions stealthily. I can see you are viewing it suspiciously. Why did I say ‘Mosc lies here coiled’ and not simply ‘lies here’ in the above sentence?

    Ok. I will answer it, though I must say that you are being overly tough with me. One of our greats in the not-so-distant past got away by placing even ‘nothingness’ duly ‘coiled’ in the heart of our beings. Not only did he get away but was instead offered the Nobel Prize…! Remember? Our very Sartre! The heart-throb of our younger days, when we loved the words anguish, angst, anxiety!! Didn’t he write in his monumental book Being and Nothingness that ‘nothingness lies coiled in the heart of our beings – like a worm?’

    Not only him, I find a fair sprinkling of this word around, in fact.

    That was a philosopher. Now let us see what the Eastern mysticism, our current heart-throb, says on the matter.

    There is a branch, a very important one at that, of Hindu Yogic philosophy called Raja Yoga in general and Kundalini Yoga in particular. According to that, the undefinable Kundalini Shakti (literally – the coiled up power of pure-consciousness) lies coiled near the lower end of our spinal cords at our births, and moves upwards as we grow or evolve, which for this philosophic system are synonymous words.

    Now, this Kundalini Shakti of the Raja Yoga philosophers with minor variations is nothing but our Mosc lying coiled at the heart of our beings, just like the dream metaphor of our god-friend Nataraja. And in fact, in the ‘heart’ of all the entities in the world, giving to the living systems what we call double helix – which is only an other name for coiled – genes or chromosomes at their base and to all the rest their spiral ‘seeds’ or even structures.

    Actually, those original spiral ‘seeds’ of the inanimate Universe slowly metamorphose into double helix chromosomes, genes, DNAs as the things come down evolving to animate and finally to human levels.

    In the Yogic philosophy, this coiled up Kundalini Shakti lies at the base of our spinal cords at the time of our birth and moves up as we grow, crossing on the way various chakras – nerve or psychic centers – which as I understand them are nothing but the well-defined energy thresholds representing various basic interactions already described. Which as per our theory would mean, Mosc moving from one energy threshold or interactions level to the next and so on. Mosc getting disentangled from one force after the other.

    What the scientists say ground state in the quantum theory must in some way be indistinguishable from all Mosc, from ultimately the unalloyed realm of this Kundalini Shakti, which Yogis most probably identify with God. In fact, our famous Yoga is all about making this coiled up Kundalini Shakti rise more expeditiously in our systems so as to re-unite with God, with Mosc – our final evolutionary destiny – as soon as possible.

    Anyway, now finally, let us come to our scientists. What have they to say about the use of our word ‘coiled.’ In fact, their very spirals, eddies and whirlpools, double-helix chromosomes, genes or DNAs represent that coiled up Kundalini Shakti or Mosc lying at the base of whatever there is capable of evolving. And there is hardly anything which is not. Though for those which are yet beyond the pale of DNA, which are yet beyond the pale of ‘molecular biology,’ the scientists would perhaps some day come up with their atomic-biology, down to nuclear-biology or even to some sort of Moscology (accepting our Mosc theory lol). In a way our book in hand may also be said to a be part of this later, that is, Moscology.

    At the Universal level, its spiral structure exhibits this coiling. At the mineral’s level it is perhaps the aperiodic crystalline formation at their base. At the level of the living systems it is the ‘double-helix’ structure of their chromosomes, genes or DNAs.

  27. samir says:

    The problem is nor science nor faith. It is, however, when it becomes religion.

  28. Harb says:

    How Jesus Christ took away our sins

    Imagine an evolutionary caravan (spiral)moving towards its end in such a way that one person is in front followed by two then by three and so on.

    Similarly imagine an evolutionary caravan (spiral) beginning with one person followed by two by three and so on.

    Now Jesus was at the timespace where one decaying cultural spiral (BC) was to come to an end and the next was to be born in its place (AD), through sort of a quantum jump or paradigm shift and that happened through his person.

    So what taking away our sins really means is that with him one cultural spiral died and what saving us really means is that with him a new innocent or fresh cultural spiral was born.

  29. Harb says:

    Samir just as not all can understand a scientific theory similarly not all can understand a prophet’s experience. So followers are a must in both the cases. Moreover, all is in order as per design. The religious oppression provokes some energetic people to quantum jump beyond the religion and have the experience of the prophets themselves. In fact understood as a whole the Perfect One displays a Perfect world.

  30. Rudra says:

    Hi Kavitha ,

    I’ll leave your comments on beards and tea bags aside .. but yes , Filtering is a reality though it is annoying when the filtering becomes ‘ blocking’.

    I see that you have a name – kavitha and by the sound of it you are a female , does it mean you are boxing yourself into a defined box ?

    What is this non-sense about an ‘ all accepting one’ not taking a position ? all you have to do is to read with attention – vedic tradition has a great heritage of debates and discussion – Ideas were spread by a longish debates about amny aspects of this philosophy or that – how do you think Adi Shankara , an avtar of lord Shiva , single handedly re-established the path of the Vedas ?

    I am into structured debate and not a free wheeling , tangential crap that serves no purpose . if there is no basic understanding of this – there is no point in further discussion.

    By thew ay how do you know what an ‘ all accepting one’ is suppoed to be like / how can you tell from what i write , that ‘ i dont accept all’. In anycase , I am not a grbage bin to ‘accept all’.

    As a true inheritor of the Vedic wisdom , I tend to be highly discerning and there is no assumed glory in being the ‘ all accepting one’… i reject non-sense – this is my only identity you ‘ll need to work with for now ;)))

  31. kavitha says:

    Hi Rudra,

    Any theories on *why* the ‘blocking’ may be happening? Could it be part of a grand design? Wonder what AI programming-type-responses might yield! That said, even garbage these days (and spaces where stupidity may be a virtue) doesn’t take all junk you know, and goes through filtering non-bio-degradable/explosive materials that can potentially destruct.

    Anyway, we seem to be digressing from what was originally a simple & sincere call out to elaborate. Are you able (and willing) to point to authentic and reliable resources that surface the “intricate logic” you referred to? (it would serve well to stay away from presumed positions of placing others in ‘attack’ mode or as lacking respect for Vedic wisdom and heritage ). As for the Aryan Invasion theory, I recently was gifted a book called ‘Return of the Aryans’ and the timing of your reference to the same, in the context of the post, triggered a spontaneous curiosity. That’s all there’s to it. Why this urge to make things out to be more complicated than it really is? Is engagement a possibility only from stated positions of ‘attack’?

    If the possibility of working with such an identity is an issue for you, I have totally no issue accepting that 🙂

    In all fairness to the spirit of the original post, you think God exists, anyway?

  32. pappu says:

    kavitha dear..why bother with aryan and dravidan..when i can b ur chulbul pandey..n u can b my rajo..dabanggggggg i say

  33. Rudra says:

    Hi Kavita ,

    The grand design that blocks my postings here is in the form of Shekhar Kapur’s paranoid mind 😉

    AI is as harmless as a gun or a knife 😉 it depends on who is designing it. guns don’t kill people , people do.

    So now you are qualifying a grabage bin . Hmmm – so are you saying that garbage bins and spaces with partial

    stupidity donot fall under the category of ‘ all accepting one’ ? Thats a pity , since I was hoping that , even

    though I am not an ‘All accepting one’ , as the one who likes this term and wants to attach value based on this

    percieved quality , you’ at least be an ‘ all accepting one’ 🙂

    Your question about ‘atuthentic’ and ‘reliable’ resources that ‘surface’ the intricate and advanced logic in

    the vedic tradition is a bit silly. A vast mass of vedic literature is available for those willing to dwell in

    it. What other ‘ authentic’ and ‘reliable’ resources do you need ? Ahhh i get it – maybe you need some Western

    indologist to qualify your own identity for you – some arsinine Mc Aulean ‘Indologist’s analysis of Samskrit

    literature , which , for you is ; authentic’ and ‘reliable’ ? Sorry , but all the authentic and reliable

    resource is the vast mass of Vedic literature .

    Since you show that you probably dont have the aptience or the self-respect to learn your own mother culture’s

    lingua franca ( excuse the pun) , i.e. Samskrit – you will need some good English translations of the same. But

    not all English translations are good – I ‘ll save you the agonising process of reading agonisingly asinine

    English translations of vedic literature.

    As a start , there are three great works , called the ‘Prasthana Triya’ : If you can read and understand the

    three great ‘ authentic’ and ‘ reliable’ vedic resources , Bhagawad Gita ( As it Is ) , as transliterated and

    translated by Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada , Brahma Sutras of Adi Shankara and the 108 upanishads and Adi

    Shankara’s commentaires , it will be a small start.

    God is an English word ( derived from the German Gut = Good) – it is a stupid word too – since it sits squarely

    opposite the Devil. they balance eachother.

    The vedic tradition of the divine is three fold : Paramatma , Brahman , and Bhagavan.

  34. Rudra says:

    Kavita ,

    The grand design that blocks my postings here is in the form of Shekhar Kapur’s paranoid mind 😉

    AI is as harmless as a gun or a knife 😉 it depends on who is designing it. guns don’t kill people , people do.

    So now you are qualifying a grabage bin . Hmmm – so are you saying that garbage bins and spaces with partial stupidity donot fall under the category of ‘ all accepting one’ ? Thats a pity , since I was hoping that , even though I am not an ‘All accepting one’ , as the one who likes this term and wants to attach value based on this percieved quality , you’ at least be an ‘ all accepting one’ 🙂

    Your question about ‘atuthentic’ and ‘reliable’ resources that ‘surface’ the intricate and advanced logic in the vedic tradition is a bit silly. A vast mass of vedic literature is available for those willing to dwell in it. What other ‘ authentic’ and ‘reliable’ resources do you need ? Ahhh i get it – maybe you need some western Indologist to qualify your own identity for you – some arsinine Mc Aulean ‘Indologist’s analysis of Samskrit literature , which , for you is ; authentic’ and ‘reliable’ ? Sorry , but all the authentic and reliable resource is the vast mass of Vedic literature .

    Since you show that you probably dont have the aptience or the self-respect to learn your own mother culture’s lingua franca ( excuse the pun) , i.e. Samskrit – you will need some good English translations of the same. But not all English translations are good – I ‘ll save you the agonising process of reading agonisingly Arsinine English translations of vedic literature.

    As a start , there are three great works , called the ‘Prasthana Triya’ : If you can read and understand the three great ‘ authentic’ and ‘ reliable’ vedic resources , Bhagawad Gita ( As it Is ) , as transliterated and translated by Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada , Brahma Sutras of Adi Shankara and the 108 upanishads and Adi Shankara’s commentaires , it will be a small start.

    God is an English word ( derived from the German Gut = Good) – it is a stupid word too – since it sits squarely opposite the Devil. they balance eachother.

    The vedic tradition of the divine is three fold : Paramatma , Brahman , and Bhagavan.

  35. kavitha says:

    My 3 year-old niece always wants to walk through the door with a flower and a story book in hand. Submitting to infinite intelligence of her kind, my tiny intellect chose to park the presumed observations, guns & bullets at the gates, and walk through the doors with the gems buried under them. Thank you for the pointers, Rudra.

  36. Rudra says:

    Kavitha ,

    ‘ submitting to infinite intelligence of her kind ‘ ?????.. difficult to find sense in what you write …but , the last sentence will do you good , if you go back and pick up on Sanskrit , our living language – not just living but life-giving , soul-quenching language of vedic culture.

    Good Luck !

  37. Deepak R says:

    Ruchi, that is a powerful book. Thanks.

  38. Harb says:

    Some Random Thoughts

    There are many misconceptions regarding evolution through four basic forces or interactions and in this post I will try to address some of them.

    1. Though it is rightly identified with design or even intelligent design* it must be understood that Darwinian mechanisms of natural selections on variations for survival etc are also a part of this design and, moreover, right from big bang and not just from living entities onwards.

    Newtonian action and reaction begins to take place right from big bang, which in fact causes the unified force of the big bang to slowly separate out into four distinct forces spiral by spiral. And it is the reaction part of this which finally finds its explanation in Darwinian terms of natural selection, for survival, on variations etc as the things come down evolving to living entities or species including homo sapiens.

    Action part provides quantum jumps, punctuated equilibriums, sudden variations or phase changes, gaps in apparently continuous evolution, mutations hitherto taken as happening because of mistakes in replications of genes etc – and the above-said reaction part provides slow or gradual change on them in terms of natural selections for survival etc. Thus both aspects provide the complete design.

    2. Some erroneously take design to be against free will. While actually it is the very device which gives us increasing free will with each passing step.

    When Jean Paul Sartre, the Nobel Prize winning French philosoopher said his famous words, “Man is condemned to be free,” he was unknowingly referring to this very design.

    Just imagine a continuity of evolution from clay to minerals to plants to animals to apes to man etc and see how with each step we are gaining free will.

    Or, just allow me to give example from our own individual life. We grow or evolve (on the whole) from childhood to youth to middle age to old age. First we can’t even move not to talk of any other free will. Then as we grow and become a youth we can move but with our gained free will actually begin to fall into the bondages of emotional entanglements. Are we free then? No, but thanks to design through four basic interactions we move forward and outgrowing a bit of our emotional entanglements gain proportionate free will. Are we free then? No, we further fall into reason, into what one may call rational, intellectual or conceptual entanglements. We consider we are free now. But are we?

    Most people die here because they rather feel suffocation.(Only the other day our famous film director Shekhar Kapur was tweeting that he was feeling imprisoned by his thoughts). But then again thanks to design we move forward. Though then we fall into what I all spiritual entanglements, the most deceptive of entanglements. From which only rare persons get freedom.

    If you have gone there enjoy your freedom, your free will though then you will find if you will correctly understand design that the least you use your free will or choose the best it is. This is the state when it will seem to you that what you really want to choose rather seems to get chosen for you as if on its own, things seem to fall in their place on their own and you just “flow with the flow,” as they say.

    3. Some people think design is an invitation to do nothing as everything will happen according to this design on its own anyway. Again this is wrong. As I have explained above, Darwinism too is an essential part of this design and so we are obliged to do our part in terms of natural selections, adaptations for survival etc on the mutations or variations provided by the action part of four basic interactions.

    For a simple example in terms of first or gravitational interactions, the action part of this interaction will force us to get up in early childhood, but reaction part will oblige us to try to avoid the consequent falling down. Both will result in finally our standing up on our own. We can explain all actions and reactions in the same way and in terms of four basic forces or interactions.
    It is an other matter that in the fourth phase, the phase of weak interactions, your reactions (your choices) will be hardly distinguishable from the action part as it is in fact in childhood. And you will again become like little children, as the sages are said to be.

    The most problematic is the third phase, the phase of the strong interactions, the phase of the strongest of four basic forces. It is the most dangerous in this regard. Here you are away from the natural flow of things to the maximum. You have developed ego and strong separation from nature or natural flow. You have developed a whirlpool-like world of your own, with your own limited vision, within the flowing, natural world. To further confound the problem here you are deluded into thinking that you have complete free will, that you can create the world you want, that it all depends upon your intentions, here you will encounter the most reasonably written books to hardly let you live in peace or flow with the flow. You will be lucky if you will be able to go beyond them. With each effort you will actually be strengthening the whirlpool-like prison around you. Though finally the flow of design will again save you.

  39. Rudra says:

    Harb,

    You seem incapable of rejecting anything – Darwinism , Creationism , Intelligent Design , or QUantum Physics as doctored and edited by Einstein and Hawking.

    In your writings you show enormous ability to somehow make everything valid – in the process of trying to justify all theories , you are forced to create a new theory – this is logical , how else can you connect the totally disconncted – big bang , newtonian mechanics and evolution ? and further still spiritual evolution ?

    You have not connected time and space with the observing intelligence. Accorsing to you – is intelligence a random chemical energy ?

    Your attempt to make all theories agree is commendable , but way off .

  40. Harb says:

    Rudra, so ultimately you could not resist yourself!

    There is enough place for all in the house of my Lord lol. Or at the ultimate top.

    Intelligence is at the end of the line of evolution of knowing through four basic forces according to my theory. The first three are senses, feelings and reason/intellect, the last is intuition or intelligence.

    Beyond that we go beyond knowing into a state of rather being.

    Intellignece joins us with all spacetime and in the process takes us beyond duality, beyond the things which we can classify by dichotmous words such as high low, left right, materialism spiritualism, divine undivine and so on. Finally we go beyond even it, beyond even the word Intelligence, beyond all words. It is One, it is God, it is Sunyata, it is this and that and still that and still beyond description. It can only be self-experienced if one is ripe enough. Otherwise total surrender can also give one a feeling of it.

    Thank you for asking. To everybody his own cross!

  41. brahmastra says:

    All these junk theories takes people away from the simplicity of it all. Are you proud of your theories? You will have to unlearn them someday, and it won’t be easy. The mind expands and then has to contract and disappear. The latter process will be your purgatory.
    The intelligence, perfection and peace that emanates from spontaenous being cannot be researched or validated by any theories.

  42. brahmastra says:

    http://sri-ramana-maharshi.blogspot.com/2008/08/ajata.html

    Ajata means ‘not created’ or ‘not caused’. When the word is used as a prefix in vedantic creation theories, it indicates a philosophical or experiential position that the world was never ‘created’. The classic formulation of this position can be found in Gaudapada’s Mandukya Upanishad Karika, chapter two, verse thirty-two. This is Bhagavan’s Tamil rendering of the Sanskrit verse:

    There is no creation, no destruction, no bondage, no longing to be freed from bondage, no striving to be free [from bondage], nor anyone who has attained [freedom from bondage]. Know that this is the ultimate truth.

  43. brahmastra says:

    Though the above exposition is verbose, at its core, it preaches stillness of mind, unity and perfect spontaneity. All theories – that attempt to define God or its design – arise out of a sense of separation.

  44. Harb says:

    Brahamastra, to each one his own cross! Some people are born Brahamgyanis some have to learn it the hard way throughout life. The excessive energy you often display here may very well have taken you in your youth to where even Ramana may have reached after whole life of sitting in self-absorption.

    Don’t worry I am progressing well on my path. There is a great difference in knowing things through books and knowing them through first hand.

  45. Subodh Deshpande says:

    Sorry Rudra, Brahamastra but many times your comments give a feel of a typical ‘Sanatani’, and many enlightened souls have said that this is bound to happen if someone is not capable of knowing them .Mahashri Vyas who wrote mahabharat, 18 puranas also could not describe them..Vedas are inexpressible and inexplicable.Vedas are infinite But Vedas also said we do not know what is ‘God’, to know him start loving him, truely. and that is why Vedas are more powerful, more rich, more enlightened than any other religious, spritual, scientific, philosophical, logical, literature based book and they will remain so..because they also feel proud they tried to describe god..but could not..

    where as every most of the relegious texts feel proud of describing the almighty..so lets not talk about Vedas..vedas are infinite..

    Our Saints told in a different way they said only Gyan or Yoga is of no use unless it is accompained by Bhakti..

    Today we do not have that social system in existence which was present when Vedas were being learnt. One will have to learn sanskrit for that..in nowdays sanskrti how many dhatus (verbs) we use hardly four (pratham, tritiya, chaturth and dashamgan)..in how many ways we use Naam(nouns)..real literature is also form of one braham (Akshar Brahma, I think its orginated from the letter ‘Kha ‘ ‘?’)..

    Vedas can not be discussed/debated with everyone..and the teaching in it can be spread with everyone..so lets Vedas be whether they are..for day-today life Ramayan and Mahabharat are more than enough.

    our culture tells us that if some one is trying to know the god in the way he/she want he/she should be allowed to do so..final destination is one and the same..do not get disturbed with it..

    thanks and take care..subodh

  46. Subodh Deshpande says:

    harb,

    just imagine a sign wave..every jeevdasha is exactly like so..

    and bring infront of you the satuaration graph of any wave..this is exactly is the path after Moksha.

    sunayata is not god..sunayata is state one should attain..this is what I know…to attain the state of sunayata everyone practices all ashramas (brahamachrya, grishta, wanprastha and sanayastha)

    the guru acts as ‘Escape Key’ (he only can break the maya) in all these ashramas.

    This system of Ashrama only can give protection to all sot of lives in this univese..everyone was adopting these system knowingly or unknowingly..if you look carefully the nations which do not have these ashramas are nowhere as nation today..they have become hallow in all respects..including India

    thanks…subodh

  47. brahmastra says:

    Subodh, your mind is still in the process of expansion. When it reaches its peak, it will start contracting, and you will develop the necessary “vairagya” to unlearn all that junk. But yes, that junk is probably useful to get you to that point. And what enlightened souls do you talk of? Any enlightened person will only advice you to cleanse yourself of mental junk. Your lack of grounding in the self grows your mind.

  48. brahmastra says:

    Harb,

    Your self-designed theories are pure junk, and mere bad imitations of ancient wisdom anyway. And your talk of free-will only puts you in the category of these new-age pseudo-spiritualists like Wayne Dyer, makers of The Secret and such clowns. If you were really hooked into the process, you would know that the human body is an automaton. Free-will only reinforces the individual ego. But you will never know the difference just like a robot.

  49. Deepak R says:

    I am more enlightened than you. My wisdom is shinier than all else. My realization is more genuine and closer to the truth. My command over knowledge is deeper than others can fathom. My source and my guru are more genuine that anything else. My interest and pride over it is more justified.

    Rejection and exclusivity, another wondrous way the mind retains its relevance.The tricks the mind has up its sleeve are great fun isn’t it, watching them even more so.

  50. Harb says:

    Subodh, well said on sign wave. Since God is indescribable it is all words including sunyata yet none.
    All Ashrams are within as well. Since I go by my own experiences I have neither read past religious texts much nor enjoy using their vocabulary. Anyway, txs all the same.

    Brahamastra, in your permanently angry state you do not read posts thoroughly, you are only eager to comment and criticise. Remove the anger. Seems you lost security of father one way or the other in your childhood. You immediately feel shaken the minute anybody seems sure of him/herself to you. Find your own spiritual bearings. You perceive only what you are and going by the number of times you have used the word “pseudo” for all and sundry here I have no doubt that you are a complete pseudo from within yourself. Fill this gap.

Leave a Reply