[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
No Subject
Subject: Re: Help Please!
Dhruba Chakravarti (dchakrav@netserv.unmc.edu ) wrote:
>Dear Pradipbabu:
>Thank you for your explanations. My understanding of this issue is
>slightly different. First, science is not just logic. It is also
>observations, experience. There are many things that scientists deal
>with that they can not explain right away, but they are under the
>so-called 'purview' of science. Perhaps a great majority of issues in
>science is like that.
>I strongly feel that the experience of God is not beyond science.
>In various statements in the upanishads, are scientific observations, for
>example, the ishopanishad refers to the one law in the universe; that it
>always changes. It also says that God (the one unmoving) moves faster than
>the fastest in the universe; these are scientific observations, that
>relate to the experience of God. Some other scientific observations
>are statements like, the sun and the stars give light because that is
>their Divinely given role, the wind blows for the same reason, etc.
>There is no conflict between science and the experience of God, because,
>all science does is, try to discover the laws that God has put in the
>universe.
>I know that some authors such as our own Dr. Debiprasad Chattopadhyay has
>decided that there was a great conflict between scientists and mysticists
>in ancient India. I have read his book (I also own a copy) that was
>reviewed in the journal Nature. I believe that the idea of such a
>conflict is false, beause the scientists were regarded as rishis too,
>they authored the upanishads (such as the chhAndogya by UddAlaka Aruni).
Dear Dhrubababu:
Thank you for your views on the broad subject of the relation between
God and religion. I was talking about a much narrower subject. Can science
ever test the truth of the various kinds of Samadhi experienced by the
mystics? Can any scientific experiment ever detect God rather than any laws
of nature put in by God. I am very sceptical about it. Science can not even
explain ordinary consciousness.
I think that there is a serious conflict between the mystic and
science. To understand the reason for this difference I will reiterate what I
have already posted before:
(1) The inability of our logic and senses to discover God could mean that there
is no God. This is the position of athiests.
(2) This could also mean that God is beyond logic (alogical) and beyond senses
(supersensuous). This is what devotees believe.
The agnostics believe that it is not possible to choose between the two
possibilities. The scientific establishment believes that all phenomena can be
explained by reason and senses (scientific instruments). The scientific
establishment denies possibility (2). Thus science will naturally conflict
with the mystics. I agree with you when you say science should investigate the
laws put in by God. But since science denies possibility (2) they will not
accept that the laws were put in by God. They will not accept that stars shine
because of their divine role. They will tell you that stars shine because of
fusion of hydrogan atoms.
I personally believe that the only way to reconcile the two is if
science admits the possibility of an alogical and supersensuous realm. However,
the chances of that currently happening seems to be extremely remote.
Best Wishes
PG
