jabdakhata

Science, even though based on law of cause an effect, cannot explain the following questions easily - a) How are people born to different circumstances, some in misery while others in prosperity b) Why are some people deformed by birth, afflicted with disease at a very tender age, probably just a few months after birth, die very young c) Why do some people suffer more than others d) Why are some people stronger and healthier than others e) Why are there much evil tendencies among some people and good among others f) In general if the world is entirely materialistic and if there is no motivation for doing good, why should we be good and selfless? Why should not we all become selfish and maximize our gains at the expense of others? Why do we not live happily by killing others? What is the need for peace and charity? Why should we rather kill the weak and ensure that the resources are enjoyed by the strong? If one gives the excuse of ethics, morality etc. why should there be...

While Science acknowledges nature and natural laws, it classifies nature as devoid of intelligence. However it fails to recognize that one that is devoid of intelligence cannot frame or evolve laws. Laws can only be set by an intelligent entity, in other words, one having consciousness. Science does not accept consciousness as it is not perceptible through senses. One for instance cannot see or hear consciousness. However, the faculty of seeing or hearing is a by product of consciousness and therefore by definition cannot know it. An object of knowledge cannot know the one which is studying it. It is always the other way round, i.e. it is consciousness that knows what is the object of hearing and what is the object of seeing. It is the one which is controlling the senses, not the other way round. Vedanta, very scientifically explains that neither eyes by themselves see, nor ears by themselves hear. They are only instruments. The perception carried by them are interpreted in nerve cen...

Vedanta and science, unlike religion and science in the Western concept, are not miles apart. Rather they stand very near to each other. In ancient India there was no major distinction made between science and metaphysics. In fact one was considered as a subset of the other. Mundaka Upanishad talks about Para Vidya and Apara Vidya, the first one deals with realization and experience of supreme knowledge while the latter one with conventional knowledge. Science belongs to the realm of Apara Vidya. However Vijnan or special knowledge also refers to spiritual science or the knowledge of supreme. Gita's 7th Chapter is named as Jnana Vijnana Yoga, pointing to a close relationship between the two. The thoughts of Indian sages were never at odds with modern scientific thoughts. In fact they were very much scientists themselves. They never conjectured or theorized anything, never relied on dogmas, but rather on practices and direct realization. They were like the modern day scientists wo...