Jump to content

Times Of India: Know God through the prism of science

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

<table width="100%" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td valign="top" width="100%"><arttitle>Know God through the prism of science</arttitle>

7 Feb 2009, 0000 hrs IST, G S TRIPATHI

</td> </tr> <tr> <td height="10">

</td> </tr> <tr> <td width="470"> <table class="fs11" id="printtool" width="100%" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"> <tbody><tr> <td class="prnt">

</td> <td class="mail">

</td> <td class="disc">

</td> <td class="bkmark">

</td> <td class="save">

</td> <td class="wte">

</td> <td style="padding: 5px 1px 0px 2px; background-image: none;">

</td> </tr> </tbody></table> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Speaking_Tree/Know_god_through_the_prism_of_science/articleshow/4088345.cms

</td> </tr> <tr> <td height="7">

</td> </tr> <tr> <td valign="top" align="left"> <!-- google_ad_section_start --> Some people raise doubts as to whether Newton's third law of motion - that every action has an equal and opposite reaction - is violated by M K <table style="margin-top: 3px; margin-right: 6px;" width="205" align="left" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td id="bellyad" style="padding-left: 3px;">thumb.cms?msid=4088365&width=200&resizemode=4photo.cms?msid=3000949

There is no fallacy in the definition of man. But the definition of God is not mathematically correct. (Getty Images)

</td></tr></tbody></table> Gandhi's principle that if you were slapped on the right cheek show the other to facilitate another similar action.


This is an example of misinterpreted science. The validity of Newton's law is restricted only to physical bodies.


Sometimes God is compared with a circle. An anonymous quote in the Oxford Dictionary of Quotations and Proverbs says: "The nature of God is a circle of which the centre is everywhere and the circumference is nowhere." French philosopher Voltaire and Swami Vivekananda also said some thing like this. Swamiji took one step further and defined the nature of man in the following variant: "Man is an infinite circle whose circumference is nowhere, but the centre is at one place."


There is no fallacy in the definition of man. But the definition of God is not mathematically correct. There could not be a circle with its centre everywhere. A given circle, whether finite or infinite, cannot have more than one centre. However, there may be infinite number of circles with a given centre when the the circles are concentric.


God is beyond human imagination. God is the ultimate. Maybe, we can visualise God in our own ways. Since God is assumed to be Omnipresent, Omnipotent and Omniscient, and manifest in all forms, shapes and representations the believer is free to worship, revere or adore one or more manifestations from among the infinite choices available. This is real freedom.


With reference to the likening of God to a circle, the following modification might be necessary: God may be an infinite circle with the probability of finding its centre, in a super space spanned by infinite space and time, is unity anywhere. The inclusion of time emphasises the dynamic nature of God. Therefore, the centre changes with time. In other words, God may be an infinite circle with a centre, and since the centre is a function of time, has infinite configurations.


The circle is a wonderful shape. It is the most symmetric of all shapes in two dimensions. Perhaps this symmetry is what makes it appealing to all. Any break in the symmetry introduces tilting in the nature of God, which is unacceptable since God is the manifestation of perfect symmetry in all aspects.


In the Bhagavad Gita, Arjuna could not comprehend the beginning and end of God. A circle, likewise, has neither a beginning nor an end. Any point on it can be a beginning or an end. Thus it has infinite beginnings and endings; the circle is a manifestation of the endless form of God.


Another interesting thing about the circle is that if we would start from any point on the circle and make infinite rotations about its centre, we would once again reach the starting point. This is equivalent to saying that an infinite action can be comprehended within the finiteness of a given point.


The Bhagavad Gita says: "Cherish gods with this (Yagna) and may these the gods reciprocate; thus cherishing one another, you will reap the supreme good". Do you not see an imprint of the law of action and reaction here?




Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Create New...