what do you think?

[Kumar_Das]

I came up with this.

Scientists are men who render service to God by engaging with devotion in attempting to know what God has permitted of the manifest through observation and analysis.

[satay]

namaste,

A little too deep for the common man such as myself. But then again I suspect it is not written for the common man. ?

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté

Every where you look in science , the harder it becomes to understand the universe without God
Robert Herman,United States scientist (August 29, 1914 - February 13, 1997)

praṇām

[Ramakrishna]

Namaste,

Unfortunately the majority of scientists are atheists or agnostics. That is because most of them start out as Christians and then they see how science completely disproves so many things in the Bible. Instead of looking into other religions, they just become atheist or agnostic. More of them should look into Hinduism and see how science actually proves many of the things mentioned in the Vedas and other Hindu scriptures.

Jai Sri Krishna

[sanjaya]

Originally Posted by Kumar_Das

I came up with this.

Scientists are men who render service to God by engaging with devotion in attempting to know what God has permitted of the manifest through observation and analysis.

Well, I never thought that I'm rendering service to God just by going to work every day. In a way I almost think of science as a bit selfish. As an astrophysicist, I know that the things I study will not result in technological applications until at least five or ten (or perhaps fifty) years down the road. At some level I do what I do because it's of interest to me. I don't know that I'm serving God in any way. But hey, I'll take what I can get.

However, I would note that ths looks like a quote of some sort. And it's littered with Christian words like "render" and "manifest" (sorry, this just sounds like highly King James-ish language). In the Hindu ethos, I don't know that we have a concept of people glorifying God. Certainly I believe we can serve God by serving the poor and caring for the environment, since God is within all parts of the universe. Maybe in some sense we can worship God by studying science, but I'm not really sure.

Originally Posted by Ramakrishna

Namaste,

Unfortunately the majority of scientists are atheists or agnostics. That is because most of them start out as Christians and then they see how science completely disproves so many things in the Bible. Instead of looking into other religions, they just become atheist or agnostic. More of them should look into Hinduism and see how science actually proves many of the things mentioned in the Vedas and other Hindu scriptures.

Jai Sri Krishna

This is true, but it's not limited to former Christians. Besides myself, there are a few other Indians in my collaboration. As far as I know, none of them are terribly religious or filled with faith in God. Heck, even I would describe myself as "religious but not spiritual" (not that this is a good thing, I'm working on it).

In the West, there's this idea that religion is meant to explain physical phenomena that don't admit to a natural explanation. I'm not entirely sure where it comes from; perhaps it came from missionaries who tried to explain away indiginous religions as being the result of a need to explain away lightning, solar eclipses, etc. Maybe this view has seeped into India via colonization. The fact of the matter is that if you believe religion exists to explain nature, then studying science will make you lose your faith in God. While there are many things that we can't explain, it is truly remarkable what humans have accomplished with our scientific and technological achievements. While I believe in God, I can fully understand why someone might look at all we've discovered, and start to wonder how God can possibly exist. I think the answer is to recognize that the purpose of religion is not to explain nature. Therefore, naturalistic explanations about the universe need not conflict with religion. Christians in the West will of course continue to abandon their faith, since they are required to believe in the scientifically indefensible idea that the Bible is literally true. Fortunately that's a burden we Hindus don't bear.

On that note, I would caution all my fellow Hindus to avoid pseudoscience. Christians like to claim that the Bible or Quran contains scientific truths. A lot of people are starting to do that with the Vedas too. Now I've never looked into the specifics of these claims. But the Christians and Muslims will take vague and obscure texts from their Scriptures and derive scientific facts from them. In one example I read, a Muslim quoted a passage about the Sun moving, and said that this refers to the Sun's motion around the galaxy. In the original context, it likely referred to the false belief that the Sun revolves around the earth. You can't take Vedic texts and back-interpret them either. Ask yourselves: if the Vedas contain some scientific fact, then why was that fact never recognized until scientists elucidated it. Any potential science in the Vedas has to be clearly stated, and derived from a natural interpretation of the text. Otherwise, we Hindus will start making foolish claims which will be refuted by scientists, and Hindus will also abandon their faith in God.

Ramakrishna, I don't mean to direct this at you specifically. I know that there are scientific principles that are compatible with Hinduism, such as the medical benefits of yogic exercises (which is probaby what you were referring to). But I just wanted to comment on the so-called "Vedic Science" movement that I've read about in various places on the Internet.

[Kumar_Das]

Originally Posted by sanjaya

Well, I never thought that I'm rendering service to God just by going to work every day. In a way I almost think of science as a bit selfish. As an astrophysicist, I know that the things I study will not result in technological applications until at least five or ten (or perhaps fifty) years down the road. At some level I do what I do because it's of interest to me. I don't know that I'm serving God in any way. But hey, I'll take what I can get.

However, I would note that ths looks like a quote of some sort. And it's littered with Christian words like "render" and "manifest" (sorry, this just sounds like highly King James-ish language). In the Hindu ethos, I don't know that we have a concept of people glorifying God. Certainly I believe we can serve God by serving the poor and caring for the environment, since God is within all parts of the universe. Maybe in some sense we can worship God by studying science, but I'm not really sure.

Prakriti is the product of Purusha. Because Prakriti is produced by Purusha. Without Purusha, Prakriti cannot exist.

Whatever Prakriti is, is because of Purusha. From the microcosmic level to the macrocosmic level.

We are existing in this universe which is of a scale that we humans as a species are just only beginning to understand. Its complexities, perplex us.

Much of the information that we have gathered as of yet itself is really quite overwhelming.

And we have yet not figured everything about it. It seems that no matter how much we know, there will always be limitations to our capabilities.

The more we know, we realize that there is more that is yet to be known and what we dont seem to know.

Since all of material existence/Prakriti is under the influence of Purusha when try and study it(science) we are merely learning/gathering information about what is permitted to exist by Purusha.

[Ramakrishna]

Namaste sanjaya,

I recommend you to watch the video "Scientific Verification of Vedic Knowledge" http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...q=vedic&hl=en#
It is a half hour long, and it is quite fascinating. I would like to know what you, as a scientist, think about the video.

Originally Posted by sanjaya

In the West, there's this idea that religion is meant to explain physical phenomena that don't admit to a natural explanation. I'm not entirely sure where it comes from; perhaps it came from missionaries who tried to explain away indiginous religions as being the result of a need to explain away lightning, solar eclipses, etc. Maybe this view has seeped into India via colonization. The fact of the matter is that if you believe religion exists to explain nature, then studying science will make you lose your faith in God. While there are many things that we can't explain, it is truly remarkable what humans have accomplished with our scientific and technological achievements. While I believe in God, I can fully understand why someone might look at all we've discovered, and start to wonder how God can possibly exist. I think the answer is to recognize that the purpose of religion is not to explain nature. Therefore, naturalistic explanations about the universe need not conflict with religion. Christians in the West will of course continue to abandon their faith, since they are required to believe in the scientifically indefensible idea that the Bible is literally true. Fortunately that's a burden we Hindus don't bear.

It is true that humans have accomplished great things and have made extraordinary scientific advances over the past several centuries. But how many of those advances or new discoveries have disproved any aspects of Hinduism? They have done great harm to the validity of the Abrahamic faiths, but they have hardly done any harm to Hinduism, if at all. Just think about calculating the age of the earth, evolution, and heliocentrism. All of those scientific advances have disproved certain aspects of the Abrahamic religions, but what have they done to Hinduism? I agree with you that the purpose of religion is not to explain nature. But with Hinduism, naturalistic explanations do not contradict or oppose the religion.

Originally Posted by sanjaya

You can't take Vedic texts and back-interpret them either. Ask yourselves: if the Vedas contain some scientific fact, then why was that fact never recognized until scientists elucidated it.

You raise a good point, and the video explains this perfectly. For thousands of years, the Vedas were hardly even known outside of India. When Westerners actually encountered the Vedas, they were too busy coming up with BS like the Aryan Invasion Theory and trying to prove that the Vedas didn't originate in India so they could weaken the faith of Hindus and convert them to Christianity. They were too busy doing that instead of actually reading the Vedas and recognizing the brilliance that they contained. Eventually, they did, and that is how we are seeing these scientific facts continued being proven. Perhaps the most famous Indologist, Max Muller, is a perfect example of this. When he first started studying India and encountered the Vedas, he said that the "Vedas were worse than savage" and "India must be conquered again by education...it's religion is doomed." However, Muller would eventually actually read the Vedas and recognize the brilliance that they contained, and he would go on to become one of the greatest proponents of the Vedas, saying that the Vedas "have their own unique place and stand by themselves in the literature of the world." Since then, there has been tremendous amounts of research on the Vedas, and there's even the American Institute of Vedic Studies http://vedanet.com/

Originally Posted by sanjaya

Ramakrishna, I don't mean to direct this at you specifically. I know that there are scientific principles that are compatible with Hinduism, such as the medical benefits of yogic exercises (which is probaby what you were referring to). But I just wanted to comment on the so-called "Vedic Science" movement that I've read about in various places on the Internet.

Yes, but it's not just the medical benefits of yogic exercises. There's also things such as Vedic cosmology and Vedic mathematics, as well as things that prove the historicity of the Vedas and other Hindu scriptures, such as the dried up Sarasvati River basin, evidence for the kingdom of Dvaraka, other archaeological sites in India, the Iron Pillar of Delhi, and evidence for the Kurukshetra war. All of these are explained in the video, and I would really like to see what you (and others) think.

Jai Sri Krishna

[kallol]

Dear Ramakrishna,

The path to revealing the truth has majorly two ways - one based on external perception i.e. uses the external senses and the other is based on the internal senses which predominatly is mental.

First one is outward and the next one is inward.

Remember in Ramayana - Rishi Vishwamitra, while taking Rama and Lakshmana, asked a question. "There are two paths to the destination. One is 14 days path other one is 14 months path. 14 days one is fraught with challenges and danger while the 14 months one is relatively easy. Which path you want to take ?" The significance of this statement is not so straight forward. The 14 months path is the path which most of us are taking because it is easy, comprehensible, scientifically provable, etc. But it is long.

The other one is 14 days path - the spiritual path - very difficult, abstract, fuzzy & illogical in first comprehension and unscientific (as it is mostly unprovable).

But one thing for sure - both path will lead to the same goal. One will take millions of years and the other one can be only one lifetime.

That is why more and more scientific knowledge is revealed / discovered, it only helps the Hinduism knowledge as the theory, which has remained in the scriptures only can now be recognised and appreciated.

So both science and the true knowledge of Hinduism go hand in hand to prove the ultimate truth.

Whereas Hinduism knowledge is from Macro point of view, Science is the micro details of it.

Love and best wishes

[kallol]

Originally Posted by Kumar_Das

Prakriti is the product of Purusha. Because Prakriti is produced by Purusha. Without Purusha, Prakriti cannot exist.

Whatever Prakriti is, is because of Purusha. From the microcosmic level to the macrocosmic level.

We are existing in this universe which is of a scale that we humans as a species are just only beginning to understand. Its complexities, perplex us.

Much of the information that we have gathered as of yet itself is really quite overwhelming.

And we have yet not figured everything about it. It seems that no matter how much we know, there will always be limitations to our capabilities.

The more we know, we realize that there is more that is yet to be known and what we dont seem to know.

Since all of material existence/Prakriti is under the influence of Purusha when try and study it(science) we are merely learning/gathering information about what is permitted to exist by Purusha.

The understanding is bit different from the above. Yes it is right that without Purusha, there is no existence of Prakriti but prakriti is not a product of Purusha in strict sense.

The basic understanding is that Purusha being the consciousness is required for the mind to work with the prakriti. Just like electricity is required by the filament to work within a bulb. Without electricity the filament cannot work and bulb is useless and remains undiscovered.

That we feel our body, our action, etc through our mind is because of our consciuosness. Body being part of prakriti is inert and by itself does not have provision to feel, enliven, etc. So without consciousness or purusha, prakriti is useless, dead, unfeelable, non existent.

Prakriti might be there but without consciousness, who will say that it is there. That is why existence of prakriti is because of purusha.

Though subtle but this is the explaination.

Love and best wishes