From the Vedic standpoint, the attempt to explain sense data by mental speculation is a lower method of knowledge. The failure of Western philosophy is that it never rose above this level, which is limited by factors of time, space, the defects of human sense organs and the distortion and unclarity inherent in mundane vocabulary and grammar. The Vedic method of knowledge is darçana, a systematic revelation of deep reality. It does not fish in muddy depths for meaning; rather, it purifies the depths so that the self-evident truth emerges.
The Vedas are spiritual sound, and therefore there is no need of material interpretation for the sound incarnation of the Vedic literature ... In the ultimate issue there is nothing material because everything has its origin in the spiritual world. The material manifestation is therefore sometimes called illusion in the proper sense of the term. For those who are realized souls there is nothing but spirit.
Substance and Shadow -Suhotra Swami
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Fighting in the name of religion
Srila Prabhupada, August 1976, Tehran
Nava-yauvana: Also they say that religions are the causes of war. In Lebanon now the Christians are killing the Muslims and the Muslims are killing the Christians in the name of...
Prabhupäda: And the Communists are killing capitalists and capitalists are killing Communists. What is that? Is that religion? Then? How you can stop war? Because you are animal, you fight, you can give some name, either on religious ground or this philosophical ground. But because you are animal you will fight. You can give a different name. That is different thing. But because you are dogs, you'll fight. The real religion is why they will fight? Religion means to accept God. So if you are Muslim, I am Hindu, if I accept God, if You accept God, then where is fight? If we accept that God is the proprietor, God is the father, then where is the question of fight? Because we are not religious, therefore fight. Otherwise, if you accept God is the supreme father, if I accept God is the supreme, why fight?
Hare Krishna
Nava-yauvana: Also they say that religions are the causes of war. In Lebanon now the Christians are killing the Muslims and the Muslims are killing the Christians in the name of...
Prabhupäda: And the Communists are killing capitalists and capitalists are killing Communists. What is that? Is that religion? Then? How you can stop war? Because you are animal, you fight, you can give some name, either on religious ground or this philosophical ground. But because you are animal you will fight. You can give a different name. That is different thing. But because you are dogs, you'll fight. The real religion is why they will fight? Religion means to accept God. So if you are Muslim, I am Hindu, if I accept God, if You accept God, then where is fight? If we accept that God is the proprietor, God is the father, then where is the question of fight? Because we are not religious, therefore fight. Otherwise, if you accept God is the supreme father, if I accept God is the supreme, why fight?
Hare Krishna
Friday, February 20, 2009
God as the Supreme Enjoyer 2
It is very simple. For example, when I buy an I-Pod, I use it to enjoy the I-Pod by listening to music. Therefore the root of enjoyment is possession of the object.
Similarly if God is the Supreme enjoyer, it simply means our body, mind, senses and all of sense objects (entire material nature) belongs to God. He is therefore the supreme possessor of all objects and the supreme enjoyer. The problem arises when we (jivatmas) who are part and parcel of Him assume (this is Maya) to be Him and treat all objects as objects of our enjoyment. This illusion of mistaken ownership (which by the way arouse from envy) is the cause of misery to the Jivatmas. All we have to do is change this mentality and give back the ownership to the right owner which means use His (God) objects (includes this body, mind and senses) for His enjoyment. This way God, jivatmas and His energy (Maya shakti) will be in perfect harmony!
Hare Krishna
Similarly if God is the Supreme enjoyer, it simply means our body, mind, senses and all of sense objects (entire material nature) belongs to God. He is therefore the supreme possessor of all objects and the supreme enjoyer. The problem arises when we (jivatmas) who are part and parcel of Him assume (this is Maya) to be Him and treat all objects as objects of our enjoyment. This illusion of mistaken ownership (which by the way arouse from envy) is the cause of misery to the Jivatmas. All we have to do is change this mentality and give back the ownership to the right owner which means use His (God) objects (includes this body, mind and senses) for His enjoyment. This way God, jivatmas and His energy (Maya shakti) will be in perfect harmony!
Hare Krishna
God as the Supreme Enjoyer 1
Preaching Krishna Consciousness means simply to convert people from envy to non-envy towards God-Krishna.
This envy towards God-Krishna takes so many shapes and forms such as
1.completely denying the existence of God (atheism)
2.doubting the power and energy of God (skeptics)
3.accepting other smaller powerful entities (demigods) as the Lord of the heart
4.accepting one’s own (material) abilities/inabilities as the absolute reality (thus creating modern science and scientists)
5.accepting an all powerful God for one’s own pleasure (thus creating variety of religious and sub-religious principles).
6.finally…concluding that “I am God”
This envy that we have takes so many forms depending on one’s consciousness. Therefore, preaching is to provide medicine to this envy. How…by explaining in a nice way our own short comings and presenting a blissful alternative that is associating with God. This is not easy especially if we have really short periods of interaction with people.
Trying to convince people and to be convinced ourselves that we cannot enjoy in this material world but rather God is the Supreme enjoyer is the biggest obstacle, for one who is convinced of this truth, will gradually take to the process of pure unalloyed devotional service. Till then it will be either no devotion or mixed devotion.
Hare Krishna.
This envy towards God-Krishna takes so many shapes and forms such as
1.completely denying the existence of God (atheism)
2.doubting the power and energy of God (skeptics)
3.accepting other smaller powerful entities (demigods) as the Lord of the heart
4.accepting one’s own (material) abilities/inabilities as the absolute reality (thus creating modern science and scientists)
5.accepting an all powerful God for one’s own pleasure (thus creating variety of religious and sub-religious principles).
6.finally…concluding that “I am God”
This envy that we have takes so many forms depending on one’s consciousness. Therefore, preaching is to provide medicine to this envy. How…by explaining in a nice way our own short comings and presenting a blissful alternative that is associating with God. This is not easy especially if we have really short periods of interaction with people.
Trying to convince people and to be convinced ourselves that we cannot enjoy in this material world but rather God is the Supreme enjoyer is the biggest obstacle, for one who is convinced of this truth, will gradually take to the process of pure unalloyed devotional service. Till then it will be either no devotion or mixed devotion.
Hare Krishna.
What is science supposed to mean?
Whenever science calls the possibility of philosophy into question, it also calls the possibility of science into question, since philosophy is a parent of science. In the West, science owes a foundational debt to, among other philosophers, Pythagoras, Plato, Aristotle, Descartes, Leibniz and Kant. Scientists are often heard to dismiss the speculations of these great thinkers as unreliable. But they should not dismiss the original purpose of philosophy, which is to explain informationto probe beneath the surface data that makes up the world of bodily objects. Philosophy grapples with the why of the world. If Professor Wolpert means to say that this is irrelevant to today's scientists, then science only informs. Though by the grace of science today's world is perhaps better informed than it ever has been, there is no certain metaphysical foundation to all this information. The result is information chaos.
To the question What problem does the information solve? the answer is usually How to generate, store, and distribute more information, more conveniently, at greater speeds than ever before. ... For what purpose or with what limitations, it is not for us to ask; and we are not accustomed to asking, since the problem is unprecedented.
Beyond the senses and mind
From the Vedic standpoint, the attempt to explain sense data by mental speculation is a lower method of knowledge. The failure of Western philosophy is that it never rose above this level, which is limited by factors of time, space, the defects of human sense organs and the distortion and unclarity inherent in mundane vocabulary and grammar. The Vedic method of knowledge is darçana, a systematic revelation of deep reality. It does not fish in muddy depths for meaning; rather, it purifies the depths so that the self-evident truth emerges.
The Vedas are spiritual sound, and therefore there is no need of material interpretation for the sound incarnation of the Vedic literature ... In the ultimate issue there is nothing material because everything has its origin in the spiritual world. The material manifestation is therefore sometimes called illusion in the proper sense of the term. For those who are realized souls there is nothing but spirit.
- Substance and Shadow -Suhotra Swami
To the question What problem does the information solve? the answer is usually How to generate, store, and distribute more information, more conveniently, at greater speeds than ever before. ... For what purpose or with what limitations, it is not for us to ask; and we are not accustomed to asking, since the problem is unprecedented.
Beyond the senses and mind
From the Vedic standpoint, the attempt to explain sense data by mental speculation is a lower method of knowledge. The failure of Western philosophy is that it never rose above this level, which is limited by factors of time, space, the defects of human sense organs and the distortion and unclarity inherent in mundane vocabulary and grammar. The Vedic method of knowledge is darçana, a systematic revelation of deep reality. It does not fish in muddy depths for meaning; rather, it purifies the depths so that the self-evident truth emerges.
The Vedas are spiritual sound, and therefore there is no need of material interpretation for the sound incarnation of the Vedic literature ... In the ultimate issue there is nothing material because everything has its origin in the spiritual world. The material manifestation is therefore sometimes called illusion in the proper sense of the term. For those who are realized souls there is nothing but spirit.
- Substance and Shadow -Suhotra Swami
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Science as popular mythology
The third point is that Substance and Shadow addresses particular scientific theories in terms of how they are presented to the nonscientific public by authors and journalists who may or may not be professional scientists themselves. No, in researching this book I did not plod through the original writings of Darwin, Einstein, Eddington and Bohr. Wolpert says nobody does this anyway: ...no one is interested that [calculus] was discovered independently by Leibniz and by Newton ... and no one would now read their almost impenetrable papers. As ideas become incorporated into the body of knowledge, the discoverers, the creators (of whom there may be many), simply disappear. Likewise, no one reads Watson and Crick's original paper if they want to know about DNA, or Darwin if they wish to understand evolution.
From statements like this I contend that science is a modern myth. Dramatic storytelling is essential to mythology, and through popular science books and magazines, myth is reborn today as Wolpert's body of knowledge. It is the science writer's myth, not the science researcher/theorist's grind, that captures the public's imagination, seizing for science popular credibility. Even if the myth insults common sense, that only adds to the mystique scientists enjoy in society. Swedish physicist Hannes Alfvn explained this in his 1978 paper entitled How Should We Approach Cosmology?
The people were told that the true nature of the physical world could not be understood except by Einstein and a few other geniuses who were able to think in four dimensions. Science was something to believe in, not something which should be understood. Soon the best-sellers among the popular science books became those that presented scientific results as insults to common sense. One of the consequences was that the limit between science and pseudo-science began to be erased. To most people it was increasingly difficult to find any difference between science and science fiction.
- Substance and Shadow - Suhotra Swami
From statements like this I contend that science is a modern myth. Dramatic storytelling is essential to mythology, and through popular science books and magazines, myth is reborn today as Wolpert's body of knowledge. It is the science writer's myth, not the science researcher/theorist's grind, that captures the public's imagination, seizing for science popular credibility. Even if the myth insults common sense, that only adds to the mystique scientists enjoy in society. Swedish physicist Hannes Alfvn explained this in his 1978 paper entitled How Should We Approach Cosmology?
The people were told that the true nature of the physical world could not be understood except by Einstein and a few other geniuses who were able to think in four dimensions. Science was something to believe in, not something which should be understood. Soon the best-sellers among the popular science books became those that presented scientific results as insults to common sense. One of the consequences was that the limit between science and pseudo-science began to be erased. To most people it was increasingly difficult to find any difference between science and science fiction.
- Substance and Shadow - Suhotra Swami
Srila Prabhupada's Compassion
Someone challenged.'' I say we have evolved from monkeys.'' to which Srila Prabhupada countered.'' Where is the the question of evolution?I say you are still monkeys.'' (Monkey mentality)
A man said .'' Sooner are later i will surrender to Krsna.'' Srila Prabhupada advised.'' Better sooner.Do you know you have a later?''
Srila Prabhupada was perfect in his compassion.When one of his sannyasi disciple saw a poor women picking though the trash.he turned to Srila Prabhupada and said.'' Sometimes i feel so sorry for these people.'' Srila Prabhupada looked at him with a gazeladen with mercy and questioned ."Why just sometimes?''
A man shouted at Srila Prabhupada during a darsana and had to be hustled out of the room.The devotees were quite unnerved and began to speculate as to the offender's future.Would he be sent to some hellish planet?Would he be born in a decrepit condition here on earth?How would he become free of his offence-Vaishnava aparadha?After the discussion went back and forth among the devotee's for some time.Srila Prabhupada looked up and offered,''We could forgive him,'' an option no one else had thought of.
Friday, February 6, 2009
Without Lord Krishna...
Without LORD SRI KRISHNA, our week would be:
Sinday,
Mournday,
Tearsday,
Wasteday,
Thirstday,
Fightday &
Shatterday
Hare Krishna
Sinday,
Mournday,
Tearsday,
Wasteday,
Thirstday,
Fightday &
Shatterday
Hare Krishna
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
Science is not philosophy
Today's scientists are not shy about tackling philosophical questions yet they are not trained in philosophy and, as Wolpert admits, they follow a rule that all scientific ideas are contrary to common sense. Here's an example. Wolpert puts forward the oft-heard argument that a scientific theory ultimately counts for nothing if it does not measure up to what can be observed in nature. Yet he approvingly quotes Albert Einstein as saying that a theory is significant not to the degree it is confirmed by facts observed in nature, but to the degree it is simple and logical; and he quotes Arthur Eddington as saying that observations are not to be given much confidence unless they are confirmed by theory.
Common sense tells us there's a contradiction here. Wolpert admits it: Scientists have to face at least two problems that drive them in opposite directions. The first problem is that science postulates causal mechanisms to explain why the world appears as it does to us. The second is that since a fundamental cause is always before its visible effect in the form of the bodily objects of this world, the cause cannot be perceived as a bodily object can be. In other words, the objectivity of a scientist is restricted by his material body. Thus from his embodied standpoint, he has a difficult task proving that his postulated fundamental cause is real. But prove it he will try, starting with what Einstein termed free fantasy.
Thus fundamental causes (or to be precise, postulations about fundamental causes) such as mechanical forces, electromagnetic and other fields, wave functions, and ultimate particles like the Higgs boson, acquire by free fantasy the same real status as bodily objects. And by the same free fantasy, the everyday bodily objects around us like people, animals, plants, houses, tables and chairs become unstable, hazy theoretical concepts. In the meantime, where did common sense go? I would contend, writes Wolpert, that if something fits in with common sense it almost certainly isn't science. LSD prophet Timothy Leary may have best put his finger on it when he wrote that in science, realities are determined by whoever determines them.
Substance and Shadow -Suhotra Swami
Common sense tells us there's a contradiction here. Wolpert admits it: Scientists have to face at least two problems that drive them in opposite directions. The first problem is that science postulates causal mechanisms to explain why the world appears as it does to us. The second is that since a fundamental cause is always before its visible effect in the form of the bodily objects of this world, the cause cannot be perceived as a bodily object can be. In other words, the objectivity of a scientist is restricted by his material body. Thus from his embodied standpoint, he has a difficult task proving that his postulated fundamental cause is real. But prove it he will try, starting with what Einstein termed free fantasy.
Thus fundamental causes (or to be precise, postulations about fundamental causes) such as mechanical forces, electromagnetic and other fields, wave functions, and ultimate particles like the Higgs boson, acquire by free fantasy the same real status as bodily objects. And by the same free fantasy, the everyday bodily objects around us like people, animals, plants, houses, tables and chairs become unstable, hazy theoretical concepts. In the meantime, where did common sense go? I would contend, writes Wolpert, that if something fits in with common sense it almost certainly isn't science. LSD prophet Timothy Leary may have best put his finger on it when he wrote that in science, realities are determined by whoever determines them.
Substance and Shadow -Suhotra Swami
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)