The Indus Valley Civilization

Yoga Discussion General Yoga
#21

[QUOTE=Surya Deva;32069]I think we need to ask another question before I tell you what button I would press.

Is Christianity worth preserving in its current form? Let us look at Christian history: Crusades, inquisitions, genocides, suppression of science and philosophy. Let us look at some of its core doctrines: condemnation(all are sinners) exclusivism (must accept Jesus, or you will go to hell and tyrannical god(all non-believers will be damned in hell)

Is Islam worth preserving in its current form? Let us look at Islamic history: mass genocide, conversion by the sword, fundamentalism, oppression especially of women. Let us look at some of its core doctrines: Slavery(we are slaves to god), intolerance(kill the infidels) anti-philosophy(nobody can question the will of god) mysogony(women are made to serve men both here and the hereafter; a woman must give sex to a man whenever he demands it)

I would have to answer they are not worth preserving in their current form. So I would have to press button 1. We can have Christian gnosticism and Sufism which are perfectly compatible with Hinduism, but orthodox Christianity and orthodox Islam has obviousy been a curse on this planet.

The worse things you can point out about Hinduism is perhaps the caste system or wife burning. However, these are historical and cultural specific issues in differet periods in India and have nothing to do with Hindu philosophy. As Hinduism never existed as an organized religion, there is no authority in Hinduism to ordain anything. [/QUOTE]

Ok. I just wanted to ask this “button question” because before you said “I have no wish to undermine other religions,…” however I felt otherwise (and what become clear in above text). I think it is good to drop pretense and be who you really are.

[QUOTE=Surya Deva;32069] No, Jesus was not a yogi because of his devotion to god. He was a yogi because he was initiated by Hindu teachers, he taught Hindu teachings(reincarnation, non-dualism, and detachment from the sensory world) He even spent the rest of his life in India. See “Jesus in India” It is very clear looking at Jesus’s teachings the influence of Hinduism and Buddhism.[/QUOTE]

Could you provide the historical sources? Or at least where could I find them. Because I never heard Jesus was initiated by Hindu teachers or taught reincarnation and non-dualism. Detachment yes, in several places he taught of the need to leave old life and follow him. But I don’t agree that this is clear he was influenced by Buddhism. He taught about personal God with whom we should develop close relationship - not exactly the main message of Buddha.

[QUOTE=Surya Deva;32069] I have already seen the video by Zakir Naik. He is renowned only to Muslims, nobody else takes him seriously. He has been thoroughy discredited by academics. He claims Mohammed was predicted in the Vedas, in the bible and many other religious scriptures. He has been proven to fabricate citations. Outside of the Muslim world this man has no reputation.[/QUOTE]

If I would live with him in the same house I would probably commit murder on myself or him! He is so annoying! :eek: However, I put this video hoping you could understand what I feel being confronted with such point of view. Someone who tries to decompose your identity and put it back but in his own way (in his case Islam).

[QUOTE=Surya Deva;32069] 20 million Americans in a Christian majority country practice Yoga. Churches in America are hosting Yoga. There is now even Christian Yoga. More and more Americans now believe in reincarnation, chakras, astral planes, kundalini, karma, higher sef, meditation, spiritual evolution. About 800 Hindu temples have sprung up across America. It is a silent take over. Hinduism dominates in every mind-body-spirit section in every bookshop. It has infuenced several movements in America: The American transcendentalist movement, the counter-cultural movement and the new-age movement. It has influenced the development of psychology and transpersonal psychology(which cite many Hindu texts) In the 21st century Hinduism will become the dominant philosophy of America.[/QUOTE]

I believe that is correct description of the 60’s. Recently I read an article (in Christian magazine to be more funny) about New-Age movement in US. How it changed from the 60s and lost its way. Instead of searching for meaning and having high spiritual ideals, new age now is more and more commercialized “well being” philosophy, sort of spiritual supermarket aiming to make you feel good. “Yoga” as well - for great majority of people its just physical, relaxing exercise, with some meditation component at best…

#22

[QUOTE=Surya Deva;32062]Hinduism is purely based on its philosophy and sciences. All of the core texts of Hinduism are all philosophical discourses. They are no more religious texts than Sartre’s, “Being and nothing” or Kant’s, “Critique of pure reason” are religious texts.

None of the core tenets of Hinduism are based on beliefs. They are all based on rigorous philosophical argument and scientific investigations, such as the scientific investigation of the mind by Patanjali.[/QUOTE]

I was thinking about it and reading on internet. I found this:

So I’m bit lost now. If canons of Hinduism are divine revelation how does it fit with proposed scientific nature?

#23

The ancient Greeks were Hindus.

And Plato and Socrates were yogis.

Fascinating stuff, Surya Deva.

I am most certainly open to all of that.

Indeed, it actually makes a great deal of sense.

#24

To undermine something suggests I want to be rid of it. This is why I said, “not worth preserving in their current form” In other words they need reform and many of their regressive views(exclusivism, tyrannical god, condemnation) need to be reformed. Fortunately, and a Christian member here has told me, there are forms of Christianity which are reforming those views and bringing them more in tune with Hinduism. Such as introducing reincarnation, karma and yoga.

Ultimately, if we go with what is true then the whole world is going to turn to Hinduism. As Hinduism is not based on any beliefs, but eternal principles. All of which can be scientifically validated. For example science has studied Yoga, reincarnation, astral travel and positive evidence has been produced for them. Modern physics now accepts Hinduism’s main tenet that the observer creates the physical universe and accepts other dimensions exist.

I think it would be helpful to you to not consider Hinduism a religion. I know it can sound like saying, “Hinduism is the the one true religion” Rather consider Hinduism more like spiritual research by the Indian people. This research is just as scientific as any physical research. As it is science, it means anybody anywhere in the universe can discover the same. This is why it is called the eternal law.

Indians do not own Hinduism. They merely discovered it. This research belongs to all of humanity.

Could you provide the historical sources? Or at least where could I find them. Because I never heard Jesus was initiated by Hindu teachers or taught reincarnation and non-dualism. Detachment yes, in several places he taught of the need to leave old life and follow him. But I don’t agree that this is clear he was influenced by Buddhism. He taught about personal God with whom we should develop close relationship - not exactly the main message of Buddha.

This is a very large topic and I realised it is off-topic as this is about the Indus valley civilisation. Do you want to start a separate topic to discuss this?

I believe that is correct description of the 60’s. Recently I read an article (in Christian magazine to be more funny) about New-Age movement in US. How it changed from the 60s and lost its way. Instead of searching for meaning and having high spiritual ideals, new age now is more and more commercialized “well being” philosophy, sort of spiritual supermarket aiming to make you feel good. “Yoga” as well - for great majority of people its just physical, relaxing exercise, with some meditation component at best…

The New-age movement is starting to reform now, largely due to Hindu gurus and masters making the original teachings which inform the new-age movement more accessible to the West. The problem with many new-age people is they lack context to the knowledge. In any case it does support my point that Hinduism is starting to take over. We will see this more and more clearly as the 21st century unfolds. It is inevitable as the current trajectory science is taking is going in the direction of Hinduism. Many quantum physicists for instance refer to Hinduism.

It is a silent take over. As you can remain Muslim and remain Christian, whilst at the same time believing in karma, reincarnation, dharma and yoga. It does not make me any less of a Hindu to use a computer, why would it make a Christian or a Muslim any less of a Christian or Muslim if they use Hinduism?

#25

[QUOTE=Pawel;32077]I was thinking about it and reading on internet. I found this:

So I’m bit lost now. If canons of Hinduism are divine revelation how does it fit with proposed scientific nature?[/QUOTE]

Hinduism does not have canons. However it doe have authoritative and less authoritative texts, but there is no injunction in Hinduism that one must read those texts. One can be a Hindu without reading any of the texts, or going to a temple, or worshipping a deity. What makes one Hindu is the knowledge and practice of the core principles of Hinduism:

*Living life as per dharma or eternal laws. You must flow with the laws of the universe and in harmony with nature.

  • You must be responsible for your life and your actions. If you want to change your life, you have to put in the action. The results are not in your hand. The law of karma is immutable.
  • You must develop your self and evolve every moment by expanding your consciousness.
  • You must recognise you are a spiritual being and part of a greater source and your purpose in life is to return to the source.

This is what makes a Hindu a Hindu. You cannot be born a Hindu, worshipping an Indian deity will not make you Hindu.

#26

A point on the texts in Hinduism. The most important category of texts are Sruti, this means they have been directly heard in a state of superconsciousness and therefore they are not authored by humans. The first Sruti texts are the Vedas, these are a collection of the writings of hundreds of realised sages in ancient Indian(men and women) who recorded the profound spiritual truths they had discovered in their meditations. They contain all of the knowledge of Hinduism(dharma, karma, yoga, reincarnation) in germinal form. It is based on this edifice Indian civilisation was built. So the Vedas are regarded as very sacred and the source of Hinduism.

Later, another category of texts appear known as the Upanishads, which are also considered Sruti, as they are revealed by divine sages. The Upanishads were used in the ancient Vedic schools called gurukuls where the master would instruct a handful of disciples on atman-vidya/brahma vidya(spiritual science) using philosophical argument, allegories etc (a tradition that is later adoped by Buddha and Jesus) The disciples had to use a 3-fold method to learn: Listening to the master, critical examination of what the master has taught and meditation on the results of the examination. This method is still used in gurukuls in India.

Later another category of text appears known as the Darshanas, which are the foundation of the philosophical and rational schools of Hinduism: Samkhya, Yoga, Vedanta, Mimasa, Nyaya, Vaiseshika. These are different from the Upanishads in that they systematize and codify the Vedic knowledge in a scientific way. They also all use a proper method of scientific anaysis known as the pramana method(valid means of knowing) which are 1) Perception 2) Inferene and 3) testimoy. The most important means were perception and inference. If any knowledge-claim was not empirically and logically sound it would be rejected.

The Darshana schools also known as the 6 systems of Hindu philosophy is what defines all of the core tenets of Hinduism. All practical systems in Hinduism come from the Darshanas. Yoga and proof of reincarnation come primarily from Samkhya; Ayurveda comes from Samkhya and Nyaya-Vaiseshika. The rituals like puja and kirtan come from Vedanta.

I will say a bit on the rituals of idol worship and where all those Hindu gods and goddesses come from. It is based on the Hindu philosophy of Sadguna Brahman and Nirguna Brahman first mentioned in the Brahma Sutras(foundation of Vedanta) Nirguna Brahman is the impersonal, ineffabe, infinite and perfect ONE and the source of all existence and it is beyond comprehension. However, when we refer to this Brahman we cannot but help personify it and give it human attributes through the agency of language. Hinduism therefore recogises the logical necessity for personal gods and gives you the freedom to create any personal god you wish. You can be as simple or as extravagant as you want. Your god could be your own teacher, mother or father. This is why India over thousands of years has evolved 330 million gods. It is understood by learned Hindus though that there is only one ultimate supreme being.

#27

In summary then Hinduism is defined by the Darshanas. The Darshanas developed their knowledge through empirical and logical analysis. This is why none of Hinduism’s tenets are a belief. Everything is based on very rigorous scientiic analysis. Hence, why modern physics and Hinduism are not at odds with one another, but confirm one another.

On the other hand, Christianity, Islam and Judaism are based on beliefs. This is the reason why they have been so messed up historically. Hindus have never had this problem because we worship knowledge, not beliefs. Hence why Hindus have been at the forefront of science. Even today Hindus are renowned for their ability in science. In an age of science we need Hindusim, because current science does not have a scientifically developed ethics or sound metaphysics, which Hinduism does.

How Hinduism can help the Abrahmic religions is by giving them valid spiritual technologies like Yoga and a valid metaphysical system to expain how reality works and the relationship between the soul and god. They must be made to understand that everybody is potentially divine(nobody is a sinner) and that spirituality is a personal journey and nobody can be forced on it. They must also understand that nature is sacred and we must preserve it and protect it to live in harmony with it. They must understand that realised masters are born everywhere in the world, and their prophets were one of many masters. They must be made to understand how dangerous blind beliefs are and how everybody must come to their own conclusions using their experience and intellect.

Hinduism accepts Jesus, Moses and Mohammed, but not as sole prophets of god, but as one of many realised teachers and masters. Hinduism accepts the bible, quran and torah, but not as the sole word of god, but as one of many divine texts. Hinduism accepts the rituals of Christianity, Judaism and Islam, but not as the only methods, but one of many to get to god. It is thus easy to see how Hinduism’s universalism brings together all religions and science. This is why it will be the worlds religion for the 21st century.

#28

[QUOTE=Surya Deva;32123]To undermine something suggests I want to be rid of it. This is why I said, “not worth preserving in their current form” In other words they need reform and many of their regressive views(exclusivism, tyrannical god, condemnation) need to be reformed. Fortunately, and a Christian member here has told me, there are forms of Christianity which are reforming those views and bringing them more in tune with Hinduism. Such as introducing reincarnation, karma and yoga. [/QUOTE]

??? But you said before you DO NOT wish to undermine other religions. What you say now shows otherwise. I noticed in myself that sometimes I want to hide my radical and aggressive intentions and be perceived as very tolerant and wise person. So I’m sensitive to such things in others. I do not perceive you as a tolerant person – you do not tolerate “evil” things in others (and whole cultures) and you want to get rid of them.

[QUOTE=Surya Deva;32123]Ultimately, if we go with what is true then the whole world is going to turn to Hinduism. As Hinduism is not based on any beliefs, but eternal principles. All of which can be scientifically validated. For example science has studied Yoga, reincarnation, astral travel and positive evidence has been produced for them. Modern physics now accepts Hinduism’s main tenet that the observer creates the physical universe and accepts other dimensions exist. [/QUOTE]

It happens that I’m a professional physicist and according to my knowledge, science (and specifically physics) never produced any accepted evidence to support reincarnation or astral travel (I do not understand what does it mean to prove Yoga though). On contrary, I read from time to time about studies disproving such things as acupuncture or astrology. Also, modern physics does not accept tenets such as creation of physical universe by observer (my arms dropped when I read that…) and also existence of other dimensions. String theory needs additional dimensions to make math correct but it is not validated yet (so it is not scientific knowledge yet – just theory waiting for validation) and also those additional dimensions are extremely small and would not be able to hold whole worlds (like “astral” world).

[QUOTE=Surya Deva;32123]I think it would be helpful to you to not consider Hinduism a religion. I know it can sound like saying, “Hinduism is the the one true religion” Rather consider Hinduism more like spiritual research by the Indian people. This research is just as scientific as any physical research. As it is science, it means anybody anywhere in the universe can discover the same. This is why it is called the eternal law. [/QUOTE]

I don’t think it would be so simple to call Hinduism a science - because of the high degree of subjectivity. I heard before this view that Hinduism is sort of “spiritual science” but I’ve never seen such frequency of this expression. I read on internet and found some articles on this subject:

One promoting this point of view:
http://www.sanskrit.org/www/Hindu%20Primer/hinduismandscience.html

And one criticizing it:
http://www.mukto-mona.com/Articles/vedic_science_Mira.htm

So it seems there is some political and social agenda behind this effort to present Hinduism as science…

[QUOTE=Surya Deva;32123] Many quantum physicists for instance refer to Hinduism. [/QUOTE]

They refer to it just as a sort of philosophical inquiry and interpretation of their work. They do not cite Hindu scriptures in their works and do not consider them as a source of knowledge at everyday work. So it is bit misuse of their philosophical interests. And if it will be used as a part of “propaganda”, they soon will stop doing that – only to avoid being perceived by their peers as people with religious agenda (it is very damaging in terms of ability to publish and obtaining funding).

[QUOTE=Surya Deva;32123]As you can remain Muslim and remain Christian, whilst at the same time believing in karma, reincarnation, dharma and yoga. It does not make me any less of a Hindu to use a computer, why would it make a Christian or a Muslim any less of a Christian or Muslim if they use Hinduism? [/QUOTE]

I’m lost again. You say that Hinduism is not based on belief and here you show how to remain in your own religion adopting BELIEFS in karma etc. And what does it mean to believe in Yoga?

[QUOTE=Surya Deva;32123]A point on the texts in Hinduism. The most important category of texts are Sruti, this means they have been directly heard in a state of superconsciousness and therefore they are not authored by humans. The first Sruti texts are the Vedas, these are a collection of the writings of hundreds of realised sages in ancient Indian(men and women) who recorded the profound spiritual truths they had discovered in their meditations. They contain all of the knowledge of Hinduism(dharma, karma, yoga, reincarnation) in germinal form. It is based on this edifice Indian civilisation was built. So the Vedas are regarded as very sacred and the source of Hinduism. [/QUOTE]

Whether you will say they were heard in a state of superconsciousness or told you by God, they are revelations in nature. External and divine knowledge given to you. I don’t know what can be further from scientific origin of knowledge. Writing down your inspirations and illuminations (or revelations from God himself) is not science. And any tradition based even partly on such knowledge should not pretend to be treated as scientific by definition.

[QUOTE=Surya Deva;32123]On the other hand, Christianity, Islam and Judaism are based on beliefs. This is the reason why they have been so messed up historically. Hindus have never had this problem because we worship knowledge, not beliefs. Hence why Hindus have been at the forefront of science. Even today Hindus are renowned for their ability in science. In an age of science we need Hindusim, because current science does not have a scientifically developed ethics or sound metaphysics, which Hinduism does. [/QUOTE]

Yes, Christianity, Islam and Judaism are based primarily on beliefs. And I don’t see anything wrong in that. Also, I don’t consider religion as something inappropriate that should be transformed into philosophical/scientific system. I want religions to remain religions – with full set of beliefs and rituals. Religion is for me closer to life than philosophy – among other things it gives the way for people without minds able to develop sophisticated philosophical analysis to express and experience spiritual part of their nature. And it has humility to admit that not everything can be explained/experienced and that faith is an important element of our life.

Transforming religion into science will damage religion – because it will promote rational perception of the world. So at the end it will become a limiting factor preventing full expression of the human spirit.

#29

??? But you said before you DO NOT wish to undermine other religions. What you say now shows otherwise.

Reforming is not the same as undermining. If you do not have a problem with a religion that believes that infidels must be exterminated, all non-believers will perish in hell and women must give their men sex whenever they wish, then you have a problem with yourself. Christianity and Islam need reform. Many of their beliefs are at odds with modern civilisation.

It happens that I’m a professional physicist and according to my knowledge, science (and specifically physics) never produced any accepted evidence to support reincarnation or astral travel (I do not understand what does it mean to prove Yoga though). On contrary, I read from time to time about studies disproving such things as acupuncture or astrology. Also, modern physics does not accept tenets such as creation of physical universe by observer (my arms dropped when I read that...) and also existence of other dimensions.

I think as a professional physicist you should be aware of quantum physics and the Copenhagen interpretation which is the prevailing interpretation in modern physics. This demonstrated that the particles does not exist before it is observed, it only exists as a wave of possibility or as Schrodinger models it as a wavefunction and the wavefunction only collapses when it is observed. Later, Eugene Wigner developed the consciousness-based theory of measurment which shows that all quantum systems are entangled prior to the act of observation. Another key quantum physics concept is entanglement which has been empirically demonstrated by the test of the Bell inequalities that the entire universe exists in a superpositioned state at the quantum domain. This notion is mirrored in Hinduism that all of reality is essentially one undifferetiated substance and everything is entangled by the mutual intterelations of the gunas.

I have read several books on quantum physics written by quantum physicists, and my dissertation was on quantum physics and Hinduism. So rest assured, I do know what I am talking about.

As for scietific studies producing positive evidence for astral travel, reincarnation and Yoga. The scientific research into these areas has been ongoing for several decades. See:

Astral travel:

http://cref.tripod.com/tucsonpaper.htm
http://www.victorzammit.com/book/chapter07.html
http://www.parapsych.org/out_of_body_experiences.htm
http://www.towardthelight.org/neardeathstudies/suchapter.html

Reincarnation:

http://hubpages.com/hub/reincarnationevidence
http://www.pureinsight.org/node/1165

Yoga

http://www.noetic.org/research/medbiblio/ch_intro1.htm

I hope you review these studies with an open and objective mind.

I don’t think it would be so simple to call Hinduism a science - because of the high degree of subjectivity. I heard before this view that Hinduism is sort of “spiritual science” but I’ve never seen such frequency of this expression. I read on internet and found some articles on this subject:

Other Hindus claiming Hinduism is a science might me misguided by political and nationalistic enthusiasm, but I am not. I am declaring this on the basis of the extensive research I have done of Hindu philosophy. Like science, Hindu philosophy is based on an epistemology and a methodology. All knowledge in Hindu philosophy must be first proven empirically and then demonstrated to be logically sound. There are no exceptions, nothing within Hinduism is accepted if it cannot be empirically and logically proven. It also must be able to stand up to counter-argument and peer-review.

Now spiritual science comes under the category of phenomenology which is a recent development in scientific philosophy. This is where one one uses ones observation itself to record scientific data. There are many kinds of phenomenology(neuophenomenology, ecophenomenology etc) Yoga is a mental phenomenology whereby through a controlled method one can investigate the mind and consciousness. As it is scientific and objective evidence it is replicable and can be validated by peer review. The studies done by ancient spiritual scientists or yogis produced very consistent phenomenological data on the various stages and levels of the mind, which is consistent with modern studies.

To give you an idea of some of the discoveries the Hindu's made in science

  • The discovery of the atomic theory of matter
  • The discovery that all matter was vibration
  • The discovery of the theory of mechanics
  • The discovery of formal languages and the science of linguistics
  • The discovery of binary numbers, hashing codes and error checking systems
  • The discovery of quantum theory of matter
  • The discovery of scientific medicine and surgery
  • The discovery of psychology
  • The discovery of mathematics
  • The discovery of city planning
  • The discovery of the expansion and contraction cycles of the cosmos
  • The discovery of evolution

Hindus have excelled in science because Hinduism is science. Nothing in Hinduism is a belief its all based on rigorous empirical and logical examination.

They refer to it just as a sort of philosophical inquiry and interpretation of their work. They do not cite Hindu scriptures in their works and do not consider them as a source of knowledge at everyday work.

They cite it because Hinduism is saying exactly the same thing. Schrodinger was so convinced he became Hindu himself. Do you know that the famous Schrodinger cat paradox is a reformulated Hindu paradox. Quantum physics has a lot to owe to Hinduism.

I’m lost again. You say that Hinduism is not based on belief and here you show how to remain in your own religion adopting BELIEFS in karma etc. And what does it mean to believe in Yoga?

Karma is not a belief it is a universal law of cause and effect. It simply means "action" and there is a reaction to every action. Likewise, there is an reaction for every physical and mental action you do. This is what happens according to the Yogasutras, it creates an imprint on the substance of your mind which is stored in your unconscious memory bank as samkaras. These samkaras get triggered by external stimuli and affect your conscious behaviour. Thus most of your behaviour is controlled by unconscious forces which are thought patterns developed from past actions.

In case you do not know this is called psychodynamics and psychoanaysis in the science of psychoogy. It is not a belief, but an actual measurable principle of the mind. Like I said nothing in Hinduism is a belief.

Whether you will say they were heard in a state of superconsciousness or told you by God, they are revelations in nature. External and divine knowledge given to you. I don’t know what can be further from scientific origin of knowledge. Writing down your inspirations and illuminations (or revelations from God himself) is not science. And any tradition based even partly on such knowledge should not pretend to be treated as scientific by definition.

I already told you Hinduism is not based on the Vedas, but on the Darshanas. The Darshanas accept the authority of the Vedas, but they do not base their conclusions on the testimony of the Vedas, but on scientific investigation. It is a very common Hindu ethic not to believe in anything, even if it was revealed by god himself, if it contradicts our experience and reason. This is why Hinduism is scientific. Nothing it claims is a belief.

Abrahamic religions are based on faith. Hinduism is based on science. There's your difference.

Transforming religion into science will damage religion – because it will promote rational perception of the world. So at the end it will become a limiting factor preventing full expression of the human spirit.

Here is a good test to see if something is good. Look at its effects. The Abrahamic religions are responsible for genocide, oppression, inquisitions, witch burning, fundamentalism, terrorism and many other things. Give me one good reason why we shoud preserve them as they are?

As a Hindu I tell you my reason is tellling me they are inherently destructive and they have no place in their current form in a modern and progressive world. We need a religion that suits our times and our scientific mindset. That is Hinduism.

There is no divide between science and spirituality. Spirituality can be scientifically studied. Many daring scientists today are doing just that. And they are confirming what the Hindus have known for thousands of years.

There is no place for faith in our modern world. Faith cannot be tested. Anybody can say anything and get away with it if we rely on faith. This is why it is dangerous.

#30

Before I read your links and respond, could you please send link to your thesis? It would be very interesting to have a look - I never saw such work before.

#31

[QUOTE=Surya Deva;32161] Reforming is not the same as undermining. If you do not have a problem with a religion that believes that infidels must be exterminated, all non-believers will perish in hell and women must give their men sex whenever they wish, then you have a problem with yourself. Christianity and Islam need reform. Many of their beliefs are at odds with modern civilisation. [/QUOTE]

Sorry, but from what you write it is clear that you do undermine those religions. Or even more than undermine – you claim that they are something evil in our world. As I said I am aware of evils related with religions in past and present but I don’t want to go there – it would expand even more our discussion and basically I agree – those evil elements have to be reformed (but I’m not sure whether Hindu philosophy would automatically increase social justice and people rights). What I want to say is that if you take a sword you have to accept all consequences – e.g. the one that you are no longer follow ahimsa. Through your calls to remove those religions (remove and not only reform because you claim there is no room for faith in this world along with claim that those religions are based on blind beliefs) your karma is binded with forces aiming at their destruction.

[QUOTE=Surya Deva;32161] I think as a professional physicist you should be aware of quantum physics and the Copenhagen interpretation which is the prevailing interpretation in modern physics. This demonstrated that the particles does not exist before it is observed, it only exists as a wave of possibility or as Schrodinger models it as a wavefunction and the wavefunction only collapses when it is observed. [/QUOTE]

Copenhagen interpretation was just interpretation – it didn’t DEMONSTRATE anything. Experiments demonstrate properties of matter. Also it doesn’t claim anything about EXISTENCE of particles before/after measurement. Nature of existence is a domain of meta-physics, not physics. This is very important distinction, even one of the defining properties of physics. Expression “exist as a wave of possibility” is not a physical description. Quantum mechanics says that a system may be DESCRIBED as a wave function of given properties (a solution of Schr?dinger equation, and related with probability of observation of classical properties of the system). Also, wave function does not collapse ONLY when it is observed. From what we know, it collapses when we perform measurement. We do not know what is happening between measurements.

[QUOTE=Surya Deva;32161] Later, Eugene Wigner developed the consciousness-based theory of measurment which shows that all quantum systems are entangled prior to the act of observation. Another key quantum physics concept is entanglement which has been empirically demonstrated by the test of the Bell inequalities that the entire universe exists in a superpositioned state at the quantum domain. This notion is mirrored in Hinduism that all of reality is essentially one undifferetiated substance and everything is entangled by the mutual intterelations of the gunas. [/QUOTE]

Yes, I think it is amazing that physics arrived to similar concept of the interrelations of the world that Hindu philosophy. But comparison of the view of the world presented by quantum mechanics and by gunas (as I understand a composition of existence of sound, feeling, colour, taste and smell or triad of creation, preservation and destruction) is really far-fetched. Maybe some philosophical conclusions of quantum mechanics may meet with Hindu philosophy, but not quantum mechanics itself. That would require some sort of equation with gunas as variables able to predict all physical effects (e.g. diffraction of light).

[QUOTE=Surya Deva;32161] Other Hindus claiming Hindu is a science might me misguided by political and nationalistic enthusiasm, but I am not. I am declaring this on the basis of the extensive research I have done of Hindu philosophy. Like science, Hindu philosophy is based on an epistemology and a methodology. All knowledge in Hindu philosophy must be first proven empirically and then demonstrated to be logically sound. There are no exceptions, nothing within Hinduism is accepted if it cannot be empirically and logically proven. It also must be able to stand up to counter-argument and peer-review. [/QUOTE]

Hm… Maybe I don’t understand what you mean by science. Could you show me for example how this theory that matter is composed of gunas (or other types of elements) was empirically proven? (I assume gunas are accepted part of Hindu philosophy). Could you provide sort of complete system of gunas which could be used to determine composition of each type of matter and how to conduct experiments to verify it? And how it predicts some basic properties of matter? (e.g. phase transitions or transparency). That may be very interesting. Or if not gunas, maybe other theory? I would like to see what exactly means this claim that they are the same (modern physics and Hindu philosophy).

[QUOTE=Surya Deva;32161] Now spiritual science comes under the category of phenomenology which is a recent development in scientific philosophy. This is where one one uses ones observation itself to record scientific data. There are many kinds of phenomenology(neuophenomenology, ecophenomenology etc) Yoga is a mental phenomenology whereby through a controlled method one can investigate the mind and consciousness. As it is scientific and objective evidence it is replicable and can be validated by peer review. The studies done by ancient spiritual scientists or yogis produced very consistent phenomenological data on the various stages and levels of the mind, which is consistent with modern studies. [/QUOTE]

I know what you mean. I hope this phenomenology will develop fast – there is a lot of quantitative research to be done in this area.

[QUOTE=Surya Deva;32161] Hindus have excelled in science because Hinduism is science. Nothing in Hinduism is a belief its all based on rigorous empirical and logical examination. [/QUOTE]

Again I I don’t agree that nothing in Hinduism is a belief. Maybe if you consider rational component of Hinduism it is true. But there are millions of people who practice and develop Hinduism with faith as important aspect of their lives and perception.

[QUOTE=Surya Deva;32161] They cite it because Hinduism is saying exactly the same thing. Schrodinger was so convinced he became Hindu himself. Do you know that the famous Schrodinger cat paradox is a reformulated Hindu paradox. Quantum physics has a lot to owe to Hinduism. [/QUOTE]

Maybe I wasn’t clear – I’m under impression that quantum physicists DO NOT cite Hindu works in their scientific papers. E.g. stating some fact about properties of physical system and citing Bhagavad Gita.

[QUOTE=Surya Deva;32161] Karma is not a belief it is a universal law of cause and effect. It simply means “action” and there is a reaction to every action. Likewise, there is an reaction for every physical and mental action you do. This is what happens according to the Yogasutras, it creates an imprint on the substance of your mind which is stored in your unconscious memory bank as samkaras. These samkaras get triggered by external stimuli and affect your conscious behaviour. Thus most of your behaviour is controlled by unconscious forces which are thought patterns developed from past actions.
In case you do not know this is called psychodynamics and psychoanaysis in the science of psychoogy. It is not a belief, but an actual measurable principle of the mind. Like I said nothing in Hinduism is a belief. [/QUOTE]

Wait, if you define Karma as law of cause/effect then this is something different from stating that my unconscious impulses come from my previous life. And it is not psychoanalysis. Psychoanalysis is my hobby and I’m pretty sure reincarnation is not part of its theoretical framework.

Also, how can you measure Karma? (since you state this is measurable principle of the mind)

[QUOTE=Surya Deva;32161] I already told you Hinduism is not based on the Vedas, but on the Darshanas. The Darshanas accept the authority of the Vedas, but they do not base their conclusions on the testimony of the Vedas, but on scientific investigation. It is a very common Hindu ethic not to believe in anything, even if it was revealed by god himself, if it contradicts our experience and reason. This is why Hinduism is scientific. Nothing it claims is a belief. [/QUOTE]

So I’m looking forward to example with gunas theory…

[QUOTE=Surya Deva;32161] There is no place for faith in our modern world. Faith cannot be tested. Anybody can say anything and get away with it if we rely on faith. This is why it is dangerous. [/QUOTE]

Oh, I may also have different understanding of faith. I see it like that: science is part of the rational perception of the world. Rational – in meaning of ability to represent it as a logical structure using language (including mathematics). Everything outside that is not-rational. Not everything rational is science (e.g. I can rationally explain why I don’t like this book but it doesn’t make it science yet). However, we have other faculties of perception and experience of the world which in nature extends beyond rationality. E.g. feelings or mystical experiences. They provide experiences which can’t be expressed in rational fashion. Forcing only scientific/rational approach to life would damage development of those trans-rational experiences and faculties of perception.

In general, thank you for discussion! I enjoy it and learn a lot on the side.

I’m sorry I will not respond to links on evidences. Too much reading and too little content. I usually want to skip to results section and it is too difficult to find.

#32

At this point I haven’t read a lot of this thread, but I need to make a few comments on what was the original topic.

[QUOTE=Surya Deva;31955]
Regarding the linguistic evidence showing there are two distinct cutures. No, what it shows is there are two different languages families in India. [/QUOTE]

Hellooo? why do Frenchmen speak French and Italians speak Italian? because the language is part of the national identity, part of the culture. You choose to ignore the evidence because it doesn’t support your point of view.

[QUOTE=Surya Deva;31955]
The traditional methods used in linguistics to determine origins of language are not infallible. They are based on finding the linguistic centre of gravity by looking at where most of the members of a language family are found, however it is not necessary that the origin will be where most members are found. A language can also proliferate and be exported from one country to another, such as English has been.
[/QUOTE]

Actually, according to the Wikipedia article, they look for where the most variants of the language occur. English is a good choice of example. How was English spread around the world?

  1. by colonization, and later
  2. by international trade
    So its completely within reason that the Indo-European language was spread by some similar means.

[QUOTE=Surya Deva;31955]
I have a very good Greek friend who is an intellectual. He admits to me himself that ancient Greek culture was based on Hinduism. He tells me has done a lot of research on this and he was amazed to find out how similar they were, how eary Greek history is full of praise for Hindus, and how they share similar gods and legends, and how the Greeks had Indian gurus living in Greece teaching the Greeks. In fact some early Greek philosophers were clearly Hindu themselves, such as Pythagoras. There is a very good book on this subject written by a French intellectual, “Pythagoras in India” It is also very clear Socrates and Plato were yogis. Many Greek historians talk about how much they learned from the Hindus.[/QUOTE]

There may be some truth to this (just maybe), but if there was some contact between Hindus and Greeks, it might help to explain the spread of the Indo-European language. It may also be possible that both cultures were Aryan.

[QUOTE=Surya Deva;31955]
I will say a bit on the rituals of idol worship and where all those Hindu gods and goddesses come from. It is based on the Hindu philosophy of Sadguna Brahman and Nirguna Brahman first mentioned in the Brahma Sutras(foundation of Vedanta) [/QUOTE]

What a bunch of hogwash. The Brahma Sutra was written long after the Rig Veda, and the Rig Veda contains lots of examples of naturalistic gods and actually consists of a collection of hymns used in the worship of the gods.

#33

Suryaji, in my opinion idol worship has its roots in Agama shastras.

Both Vedas & Upanishads don’t talk about idol worship, but yes the bhakti yogis later generalised the practise of idol worship (worship of Sadguna brahman or Ishwar).

Vedic “God” (Indra) is very different in nature than the Upanishadic “God” (Brahman).

#34

What I want to say is that if you take a sword you have to accept all consequences ? e.g. the one that you are no longer follow ahimsa. Through your calls to remove those religions (remove and not only reform because you claim there is no room for faith in this world along with claim that those religions are based on blind beliefs) your karma is binded with forces aiming at their destruction.

Ahimsa in the Hindu context does not mean absolute non violence. It means that violent measures must only be taken as the last resort(Gita is a perfect demonstration of this) At other time you can take proactive measures, such as debate, diplomacy, protest etc.

Hinduism has never felt the need to force itself on anybody. The history of Hinduism expansion shows no history of violent conversion. It simpy becomes accepted peacefully. Even today, Hindus have not gone out of their way to force the churtch into holding Yoga classes, the Churches are doing it by their own will. Likewise the peaceful reformation of the Abrahamic religions along Hindu lines will happen peacefully as well. The rise of Sufism and Christinan gnosticism recently in the world is evidence that Hinduism is affecting the reform. In the future, we will be living in a globalized world with a globlal government, global language and a global religion. The new global religion will be the new world spirituality that is taking over. It will not be called Hinduism, because it will comprise of Christian Gnosticism, Sufism, Kabbalh, Shamanism, Neo-Paganism, but it will in fact be Hinduism because all of its core principles will be adopted(dharma, karma, yoga and reincarnation)

Also, wave function does not collapse ONLY when it is observed. From what we know, it collapses when we perform measurement. We do not know what is happening between measurements.

Hidden variable theory has now been experimentally disproven. The Copenhagen interpretation is a bit of misnomer, it is not an interpretation per se, but an admittance of what we can clearly see. We can see very clearly that the particle turns into a wave when it is fired through the double slits, and back into a particle as soon as we attempt to observe it. In other words the observer is demonstrably playing a role. As one author said in my research, “It is impossible not to talk about consciousness when talking about quantum physics” Several alternative theories have been suggested to get rid of the observer such as the multiple world hypothesis which leads to even more bizaree conclusions that cannot be tested. Other attemtps are mathematical and speculative. The Copenhagen interpretation is the most honest of them, for it is saying exactly what we can see.

Eugene Wigner shows through compelling argument that the measurement chain only ends at the observer, prior to which the whole quantum system is entangled, there is therefore nothing there to collapse it. So consciousness is something independent of the quantum system and has the power to collapse it.

Have you seen “What the Bleep do we know” by the way?

But comparison of the view of the world presented by quantum mechanics and by gunas (as I understand a composition of existence of sound, feeling, colour, taste and smell or triad of creation, preservation and destruction) is really far-fetched. Maybe some philosophical conclusions of quantum mechanics may meet with Hindu philosophy, but not quantum mechanics itself. That would require some sort of equation with gunas as variables able to predict all physical effects (e.g. diffraction of light).

Nope, the gunas are not sound, seeing, colour , taste and smell, that is the tanmatras which make up empirical reality. The gunas are the three fundamental forces expansion, contraction and stillness. They are, quoting from my Samkhya research texts, infra-atomic and supersensible forces at the very substratum of matter which account for all matter that exists in the universe. The guna theory is that prior to the beginning of any manifestation the universe exists in a potential state where the expansive and contractive force are in equilbrium. This state is called “Moolaprakriti” which means, believe it or not, quantum or root matter. This equilbrium is disturbed when consciousness simply observes the quantum matter and this state collapses out of its superpositioned state and manifests into existence. It then begins to aggregate and eventually to form the micro physical elements, which go onto the form the macro-elements.

This is not just a similarity in philosophical conclusions, this is an equivalent description of quantum physics and the Copenhagen interpretation. It is in fact, ironically, a more advanced description. As Hinduism explains all the prior stages as well before physical matter takes form or 4D space-time. In the Hindu scheme 4D space-time ends at the Akasha or the event-horizon of space. Then follows 5D, 6D, 7D which are non-physical dimensions or mental dimensions. Hinduism say there are 7*7 vibrational levels of the gunas and each level is made up of 7 transistory levels where matter does not exist in a distinct and stable state. Hence why the matter that we observe is in a distinct and stable state, but if we observe it at a subatomic level it is transistory and in constant movement. At 5D matter once again becomes distinct and stable and hence why Hinduism identifies it as the next plane of reality(astral)

If you are familiar with string theorist Kaku he says exactly the same that matter becomes stable and distinct at higher dimensions and it is possible this kind of higher dimensional matter could form exotic life forms.

Does this sound like a religious beliefs to you? This is science through and through. Modern physics is simply rediscovering what the Hindus have known in detail for thousands of years. Still today a Hindu master can explain physics to you better than a modern physicist can.

Hm… Maybe I don?t understand what you mean by science. Could you show me for example how this theory that matter is composed of gunas (or other types of elements) was empirically proven? (I assume gunas are accepted part of Hindu philosophy). Could you provide sort of complete system of gunas which could be used to determine composition of each type of matter and how to conduct experiments to verify it? And how it predicts some basic properties of matter? (e.g. phase transitions or transparency). That may be very interesting. Or if not gunas, maybe other theory? I would like to see what exactly means this claim that they are the same (modern physics and Hindu philosophy).

You cannot have empirical proof of something which cannot be empirically tested because it precedes the empirical. Again, as per the Copenhagen interpretation there cannot be a physical description of the quantum world, because it precedes the physical. The Hindus recognised this as well and they saw that when empirical examination fails that another valid method could be used and that was inference/logic to go learn about what is beyond the empirical. They used this logical system to develop a metaphysics that describe reality prior to the empirical. The logical argument they gave for the gunas was that the gunas could be known through their manifest effects. They noted that all phenomenon took place as a triad: contractive, still and expansive; attractive, neutral and repulsive. In modelling the universe as a flat-plane like a lake they showed that in order for any manifestation to take place there must be an initial displacement within the plane which causes the plane to oscillate and this oscillation(up, down, still) is what produces all the activity in the universe.

In other other words Hindus understand that everything in existence is a particular vibrational frequency of quantum matter(this is what it meant when it is said the gunas govern everything) and the vibrational frequency of the quantum state of matter is OM. Each plane or dimension is a different vibrational frequency.

Now is it not ironic the most cutting edge theory in modern physics superstring theory is saying exactly the same thing. Again this is not religion, this is science. The Hindus were ahead of the modern age in science. I mean science, not technology. They are two different things. How did they know this? They have developed rational systems of logic from which they could reveal the unseen(I demonstrated in my dissertation that Western science lacks such methods) The second way they knew was Yoga phenomenology which is a special kind of empiricism, whereby one can directly witness subtle realities like atoms etc.

I know what you mean. I hope this phenomenology will develop fast ? there is a lot of quantitative research to be done in this area.

No, phenomenology is qualitative research, as it is based on observational data. It is impossible to get quantitative research of the mind, because it is not an empirical object. This is why it requires phenomenological research methods, which Yoga has already developed. The science of meditation is called the highest science in Hinduism because the entire nature of reality can be known through the observers consciousness itself. In order to control this study various Yogic techniques are developed(asana, pranayama, pratyhara, dharana)

In terms of spiritual science there is no question about it Hinduism is ahead. The West has nothing like Yoga.

#35

Maybe I wasn’t clear – I’m under impression that quantum physicists DO NOT cite Hindu works in their scientific papers. E.g. stating some fact about properties of physical system and citing Bhagavad Gita.

No, of course they do not. However, if you read Schrodingers biography by Walter Moore he writes how much Schrodinger was inspired by Hinduism and how his wave mechanics was a direct result of his involvement within it. Schrodinger said himself he was merely articulating Hinduism in modern physical language. Prior to Schrodinger Tesla wrote a paper trying to prove energy and matter were equivalent using the Hindu terminology of Prana and Akasha.

Isn’t it interesting that these pioneer physicists are looking towards Hinduism for physics? Why are they not looking at Islam or Christianity? It backs up my claim that Hinduism is science. There are no beliefs in Hinduism.

Wait, if you define Karma as law of cause/effect then this is something different from stating that my unconscious impulses come from my previous life. And it is not psychoanalysis. Psychoanalysis is my hobby and I’m pretty sure reincarnation is not part of its theoretical framework.

Also, how can you measure Karma? (since you state this is measurable principle of the mind)

No, reincarnation is not a part of psychoanalysis. As Hindu psychoanalysis like every other Hindu science is more advanced. Karma as in the actual memory bank called the samskas is not physically measurable, because it is mental(mind is not an empirical object) However, the principle of karma can be measured by its effects. So for example it can be measured for example that if a certain stimulus is introduced it will recall certain memories. The proof of unconscious forces determining our behaviour can also be show through various experiments(various experiments exist in psychology which show that unconscious forces affect our behaviour)

Now lets take it to the next level. The Hindus knew through both logical analysis and phenomenological analysis that the mind and body were not the same thing, but that the mind existed in another dimension. Hence why we cannot find it anywhere in the physical(recently this thesis has been proven by showing the non-local origins of memory) Then were then able to show that the mind survived the death of the physical body(the studies I cited earlier also show this) However, because of the latent samkaras which require physical expression, a new body is required to express them. This is why reincarnation would happen. As long as you have a storehouse of karmas you will continue to be incarnated.

Now lets take it to an even higher level. The Hindus were also able to show that the physical reality was influenced by the mental reality. They demonstrated that the samkaras could either manifest in ones mind and body or that they could incline you towards certain paths in the word where they would manifest. This is made possible due to entanglement by the gunas. So for exampe, you think of a friend you have not met in 10 years and a week later you bump into that friend. In this case both you and your friend were bought into union due to karma.

Karma and reincarnation explains many things. Why some people are lucky and some are not; why some people are born with natural abilities and some are not; why some people are born healthy and some are not. It also resolves philosophical problems with an all-fair god.

So to sum up: Karma is a scientific principle

Again I I don’t agree that nothing in Hinduism is a belief. Maybe if you consider rational component of Hinduism it is true. But there are millions of people who practice and develop Hinduism with faith as important aspect of their lives and perception.

Like I said before you cannot be born a Hindu and nor will worshipping an Indian deity make you Hindu. You are Hindu if you accept and practice its principles. These are defined by its 6 philosophical schools.

Most of the Hindus living in India today lack education. So they resort to the exoteric part of Hinduism without any knowledge of the context or meaning of what they are practicing. I know this fully well because learned Hindus often complain to me how most Hindus they talk to know nothing about its philosophy.

However, we have other faculties of perception and experience of the world which in nature extends beyond rationality. E.g. feelings or mystical experiences. They provide experiences which can’t be expressed in rational fashion. Forcing only scientific/rational approach to life would damage development of those trans-rational experiences and faculties of perception.

Mysticism is perfectly rational. Anything which science cannot explain is called irrational, such as the paranormal, and then when science can explain it, it is called rational. Now Western science is very limited because it is based purely on empiricism and it rejects rationalism. It rejects basically the mind, consciousness and limits itself only to the sensory world. This is not in fact rational, because you are artificially splitting up the world and deciding only to look at one part of it. This is what is called the “natural assumption” in phenomenology. The Western scientist is assuming that there is a real, external and separate world out there that will yield to their study. Wrong.

Hinduism does not make this mistake. It includes both the physical, mental and spiritual world as part of its scientific method. It uses empiricism for the physical, rationalism for the mental and phenomenology for the spiritual. It is a holistic science. Hinduism has no problem explaining paranormal things and mystical things, because it can study these things just as methodically and rationally as it can study physical things. This really only goes to show how much modern science is lagging behind Hinduism. Not only in terms of adducing a correct universal theory, but its methods are not developed properly and it lacks valid rational and phenomenological methods. The current empirical methods produce faulty knowledge even of the empirical world. Arguing this was a major part of my dissertation by the way.

#36

Yes, it does. As the Agama shastras give very detailed instructions on bhakti rituals, temple constructions and idol worship and mention them as the best ways to do sadhana in the kaliyuga. The bhakti tradition is a rather recent movement within Hinduism and this is also why most of the temple constructions are relatively recent. in the Vedic age the main form of sadhana was Yoga and Jnana.

Vedic “God” (Indra) is very different in nature than the Upanishadic “God” (Brahman).

Well, Indra is not actually the god of the Rig Veda. Indra is merely the chief deity. This is why Indra is called deva. The notion of Brahman is contained in the Rig Veda as well, and is most evident in the Nasadiya suktam and Purusha suktam. There are also many other hymns in the Rig Veda where the concept of Brahman is evident.

The devas are basically sadguna brahman and purusha and the ONE are nirguna brahman in the Vedas.

The Upanishads merely expand on the concepts in the Vedas. This is why they are known as jnana khanda of the Vedas. Nothing which is contained in Hindu philosophy cannot be found in germinal form in the Vedas. The Vedas are the root and the darshanas the definition.

#37

[QUOTE=Surya Deva;32215] Hidden variable theory has now been experimentally disproven. The Copenhagen interpretation is a bit of misnomer, it is not an interpretation per se, but an admittance of what we can clearly see. We can see very clearly that the particle turns into a wave when it is fired through the double slits, and back into a particle as soon as we attempt to observe it. In other words the observer is demonstrably playing a role. As one author said in my research, “It is impossible not to talk about consciousness when talking about quantum physics” Several alternative theories have been suggested to get rid of the observer such as the multiple world hypothesis which leads to even more bizaree conclusions that cannot be tested. Other attemtps are mathematical and speculative. The Copenhagen interpretation is the most honest of them, for it is saying exactly what we can see. [/QUOTE]

Hm… I?m thinking about language you are using. From my perspective you are still over-interpreting phenomena and using not precise language. E.g. you say ?we can see very clearly that particle turns into a wave? ? in fact we don?t see it. All we see that at some point e.g. electron shows properties of particle and at some point properties of the wave. You must know this particle-wave dualism. It is inherent to matter and demonstrated by those slits experiments. We can?t see how electron changes from wave to particle. Maybe these are little differences in wording (also from prev post using word existence) but they make huge difference in understanding quantum mechanics.

[QUOTE=Surya Deva;32215] Eugene Wigner shows through compelling argument that the measurement chain only ends at the observer, prior to which the whole quantum system is entangled, there is therefore nothing there to collapse it. So consciousness is something independent of the quantum system and has the power to collapse it. [/QUOTE]

Could you provide source? This sounds really interesting.

[QUOTE=Surya Deva;32215] Have you seen “What the Bleep do we know” by the way? [/QUOTE]

I started to watch it but stopped in the middle. It was raving with scientific inaccuracy. It was like ?The Da Vinci Code? on Christianity (but at least this book was entertaining). I like sci-fi but when someone is using scientific language to promote crazy ideas I get annoyed.

[QUOTE=Surya Deva;32215] This is not just a similarity in philosophical conclusions, this is an equivalent description of quantum physics and the Copenhagen interpretation. It is in fact, ironically, a more advanced description.(…) Does this sound like a religious beliefs to you? This is science through and through. Modern physics is simply rediscovering what the Hindus have known in detail for thousands of years. Still today a Hindu master can explain physics to you better than a modern physicist can. [/QUOTE]

That sounds very grandiose and arrogant. As tempting it is, I will refrain from answering to this and rest of post. I don?t want to lose my request which may solve all difference in opinions between us. I will leave some space so my question won?t be missed easily:
*
*
*
*
*
*
Could you provide some examples how ?science in Hinduism? (using concepts developed in course of millennia of research) can explain such common physical around us:

How come sky is blue?

Why water turns into ice when temperature drops below zero?

Why we hear echo?

How come some solids are transparent?

Why metal feels colder than wood?

These are simple phenomena. There are lots of more advanced ones but it?s good to start with basics. If I will see how these phenomena are explained in language and concepts found in ?Hindu science? I will be totally surprised and claim from now on that Hindu science is indeed superior and mother of all sciences.

#38

[QUOTE=Surya Deva;32221]Well, Indra is not actually the god of the Rig Veda. Indra is merely the chief deity. This is why Indra is called deva. The notion of Brahman is contained in the Rig Veda as well, and is most evident in the Nasadiya suktam and Purusha suktam. [/QUOTE]

The point I was trying to make here is the though Vedas talk about a formless absolute but the Purva paksh(followers of Mimansa or Karma Kaand) have always rejected the Upanishadic concept of “Aham Brahm asmi”

The Upanishads merely expand on the concepts in the Vedas.

I have to disagree with you on this. You might be aware of the fact that the Mimansakas & Vedantins have been debating on this issue since the time of Jaiminya & Maharishi Badaryan. Moreover, the Vedantins ONLY take the Prasthana Traya (Maha-Upanishads, Bhagavad Gita & Brahma Sutras) as their authoritative texts, they never refer to Samhitas (Karma Kaand).

Even the Mimansakas (like Arya Samajis) don’t consider Upanishads, Bhagavad Geeta as parallel to the Vedas.

There are also many other hymns in the Rig Veda where the concept of Brahman is evident.

Even verses from Bible & Koran can suggest the same Upanishadic concept of Brahman, that doesn’t mean they “merely expand the concepts in Upanishads”. :slight_smile:

#39

We can’t see how electron changes from wave to particle. Maybe these are little differences in wording (also from prev post using word existence) but they make huge difference in understanding quantum mechanics.

I did not mean literally we could see the wave turn into a particle. However, we can certainly detect that the particle has turned into a wave and this only takes place when an attempt at observertion is made. The Copenhagen interpretation simply says what we have observed. It is still the prevailing interpretation in modern physics.

However, the Copenhagen interpretation also works as a get-out clause for scientists who want to deal with the practical side of physics and not worry about the quantum because how physical reality ceases to exist at that level making their efforts seem superfluous.The Copenhagen interpretation thus states that there are two kinds of reality: quantum objects and physical objects and they obey different laws. However, the obvious logical error in this how can it be physical objects would obey differet laws, if fundamentally they are quantum objects. Surely then physical objects would also obey quantum laws. Indeed this is exactly what has been demonstrated now that even maco-objects demonstrate quantum behaviour. Quantum teleportation and quantum levitation which currently are capable of only working with micro objects, can theoretically be used for maco-objects as well. It is more a question of technology than science.

Similarly in Hinduism although it is true that the observer collapses quantum reality where the gunas exist, nonetheless all collapsed objects are still fundamentally the activity of the gunas. This is where the concept of Maya comes from to describe the physical and empirical word. It isn’t actually real, because it is fundamentally the activity of guna activity. Quantum physics has reached exactly the same conclusion.

Could you provide source? This sounds really interesting.

Rai Alatair(1986) Quantum physics: Illusion of reality? Camrbridge: Cambridge University press

I am sure if you do a search online for Eugene Wigners work you will find what you are looking for. He is the founder of the Winger’s friend paradox, a development on Schrodinger’s cat paradox.

I started to watch it but stopped in the middle. It was raving with scientific inaccuracy. It was like “The Da Vinci Code” on Christianity (but at least this book was entertaining). I like sci-fi but when someone is using scientific language to promote crazy ideas I get annoyed.

I think you probably just did not like the conclusions that the film was portraying. There is nothing wrong with the physics. It is quantum physics and the scientists interviewed in the film are quantum physicists. What the film does is show quantum physical behaviour on a macro scale. Indeed, it also contain much paranormal things and mystical things. The quantum part of it is valid though.

This research cannot be denied now, because there now exist a remarkable amount of studies by professional scientists showing these conclusions that mind and matter affect one another. I really think materialist scientists need to move on and accept materialism is no longer supported by modern science. The faster they can do this the faster we can move on.

Could you provide some examples how “science in Hinduism” (using concepts developed in course of millennia of research) can explain such common physical around us:

How come sky is blue?

Why water turns into ice when temperature drops below zero?

Why we hear echo?

How come some solids are transparent?

Why metal feels colder than wood?

Hinduism can answer some of these questions, but the questions are inappropriate. First of all “how” and “why” are relatives. If you say to me “heat is the cause of the movement of atoms” You are giving me a positivist explanation which can later be falsified with new theories. Just as we do not use Newtonian mechanics anymore to explain physics and use more fundamental physics. At the moment General relativity is the best theory we have for explaining macroscopic phenomeon and quantum mechanics the best for microscopic phenomeon. Although theoretically even macro objects can be explained in terms of quantum physics. If and when string theory becomes usable everything will be explained in terms of quantum strings.

So Hinduism because it has an advanced universal theory explains things in terms of the fundamentals of matter which is guna theory. This is adoped by Ayurveda in order to create its theory of disease and develop treatments.
Now that said there is Hindu school of empirical physics known as Vaiseshika which have an atomic theory of matter(not guna theory as this is more fundamental) Their atomic theory can be used to answer some of your questions.

I will first give an overview of Hindu atomic theory:

All matter can be categorised in 5 perceptual categories: waves(ears-sound) forces(skin-touch) light(eyes-vision) fluidic particles(tongue-taste) solid particles(nose-smell) The Vaiseshika state these are all particular and do not follow from one another, and indeed modern physics agrees for example that particle and waves are distinct for example.

The Vaiseshikas state that except for waves every other element is comprised of fundamental units. So there are force atoms, light atoms, fludic atoms(most likely electrons or quarks) and solid atoms.

Now atoms combine with one another to form aggregates under the cause of heat/energy. The initially exist as points in space-time and then combine in pairs, then pairs combine to form triplets. These combinations of atoms combine until the first visible atom can be observed. This is defined as the motes one can see in a beam of light. These atoms then go onto form the larger macro-world with differet properties than their parent atoms. These combinations only take place when parent particles are compatible with one another(sounds a lot like electron valencies). In order to make or break bonds Vaiseshika states that heat energy is required. This is also based on empirical observations of chemical changes in things, such as heating up clay and seeing the changes in properties.

#40

I will quote directly from the Vaiseshika shastra I own which contains both sutras and commentaries by Vaiseshika philosophers to answer some of your questions:

Ice and water:

Now this is how Vaiseshika explain why water becomes ice etc. It explains that the atoms in the water have a certain amount of fluidity (kinetic energy basically) and when heat engery is reduced the atoms take on the form of ice. It also understand also that through the rays of heat the liquid becomes a gas and rises into the air. This is how it explains the hydrological cycle. In fact this knowledge is as old as the Vedas itself where it is mentioned very explicitly.

Sutra 2.1.2: Water is possessed of colour, taste, touch and is fluid and viscid
The hot touch which appears in water through conjunction with the sun’s rays belongs to the sun’s rays etc. Though it might be asked inasmuch as fluidity is not perceived in ice, hail etc, how is it possible that it should be contained in water, and yet when ice and hail etc are melted with heat it proven to be sensibly water. The answer to this is that the solidity of the water is not produced by the heat, but the solidity is an illusion. The atoms of the water arrange in a certain way to produce the solid ice

Sutra 5.2.5: The sun’s ray cause the ascent of water through conjunction with air

  • It maybe asked how the sun rays have such the powers as to draw up water from the earth. The answer is through the conjunction of the suns rays with the water the aqueas atoms combine with the air and rise upwards.

Sutra 8: The freezing and thawing of water results from the conjunction of light and heat

  • Aqueas atoms originating binary atomic aggregates, in absence of the conjunction of light and heat, produce solid ice atoms which lack fluidity(i.e., kinetic energy) When there is a conjunction of heat and light, activity is produed in the solid atoms which causes disjunction destroying the previous conjunction(arrangement of atoms) resulting in the same atoms of the binary atomic aggregate originating fluidity, thus causing the snow, ice to melt into water.

Sky and blueness

There is a short section addressing this question exactly. It is to prove that space has no qualities(colour being a quality)

Sutra 3.15: The preceding qualities(colour, taste, smell, touch) do not exist in space

  • The perception of whiteness of the sky is an illusion caused by the whiteness in the rays of the sun. Likewise the blue colour of the sky is due to the sun rays and the air.

Sound

The Vaiseshiks shastra does not explictly mention echos but it does give a wave theory of sound and mentions how sound is produced. Most of its discussion on sound is dedicated to refuting the theory that sound is eternal(held by the rival philosophical school mimasa). According to Vaiseshika theory sound is propogated through space and reaches us through the ears. It is not an eternal substance, because it is produced either through conjunction(a drum stick hitting a drum) disjunction(splitting something) and through other sound. It explains that sound propogates from a distant loctation to us through reproduction.

Sutra 31: Sound is produced by conjunction, disjunction and other sound

  • When sound is produced on a lute from a distance it propogates through continual reproduction of the original wave till it reaches the outer ear and is perceived.

This is known as Huyghen’s Principle today, which says that each point on a wave front are independent sources, which produce more wave fronts, called wavelets at the same velocity as the propogation wave.

As the Hindus understood acoustics very well and many temples were built according to acoustic principles I think it can be inferred they knew that echoes were basically sound waves bouncing of the walls. The study of sound was take very seriously by other Hindu schools and it was analysed very clearly. The Mimasa’s said that sound is produced because the of the sound waves travelling through the air causing the air atoms to vibrate. The timbre and volume is directly proportional the vibration of the air atoms
Sound was understood to have its own reflection - pratidhvani (echo). Musical pitches (sruti) were seen as caused by the magnitude and frequency of vibrations. A svara (tone) was believed to consist of a sruti (fundamental tone) and some anuranana (partial tones or harmonics). Musical theory was elaborated on the basis of concepts such as jativyaktyoriva tadatamyam (genus and species of svara), parinama (change of fundamental frequency), vyanjana (manifestation of overtones), vivartana (reflection of sound), and karyakaranabhava (cause and effect of the sound).

Pingala in the Chandashastras analyses musical tones using binary numbers and hashing algoritihms.

Transparent materials and opaqe:

The Hindu scientist and surgeon Charaka knew that we were able to see objects because of light entering into the retina. He was a specialist in eye surgery and diagnosed 71 kind of conditions that affected the eye, and treated 51 of them using surgery and surgical tools. He describes 125 fine surgical instruments that he used to do perform the operations(like cataract removal)

It was understood by Hindus that light consists of high velocity light atoms and that an object could be seen if the light particles reflected of an object. This phenomenon is referred to as rasmiparavartana and is used to explain shadows and opacity of materials.

So once again I have demonstrated that nothing in Hinduism is a belief. It’s science through and through. It has not got even its empirical physics wrong. simply because of the valid rational methods it uses. It will be said, however, that Hinduism did not push the empirical sciences to know everything about the empirical and modern science has a lot more knowledge in this area because of its heavy emphasis on the empirical. Hinduism only looked into the empirical for practical reasons like chemistry, medicine, meterology and metallurgy, beyond that it looked into metaphysics. This is why Hindus did not develop modern technology.(unless of course you accept the Vimana shastra!)

So there is both an atomic theory and a quantum theory of matter in Hinduism. Do you of know of any other religion that has atomic and quantum theories?