Guest guest Report post Posted March 14, 2004 “Everything in word is same” “Only by illusion they appear different” “Everything is made up of same matter” “All is one, one is all” Don’t immediately scream advaithi and shower abuses. It was Einstein who said so. It is the acceptable current version of physics. So whatever be your replies it should go to Einstein and other scientists. Let us see what science said about it. Let us see the law of conservation of energy. “everything is made up of matter and energy. Both can never be created, never be destroyed. One can be converted into another. “ In other words “All is same, all is one thing, everything is the different manifestations of the same thing. That thing was never created, never destroyed” This belief is the foundation of Hinduism. The foundation of vedism. Oneness of all. Science talks about maya also. Illusion. There is a separate branch of science that deals with it. It is called as quantum physics. There is a theory called as Copenhagen theory in quantum physics. I will give what it says (source: http://library.thinkquest.org/3487/qp.html) The atomic world is nothing like our world, no matter how much we try to pretend it is. According to Niels Bohr, who worked in Copenhagen when he presented what is now known as the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum theory, the particle is what you measure it to be. When it looks like a particle, it is a particle. When it looks like a wave, it is a wave. Furthermore, it is meaningless to ascribe any properties or even existence to anything that isn’t measured21. Bohr is basically saying that nothing is real unless it is observed. Furthermore, quantum physics leaves us with a rather large open question: what is reality? The Copenhagen interpretation attempts to solve this problem by saying that reality is what is measured. However, the measuring device itself is then not real until it is measured What does this mean? What we measure appears real, what we don’t measure is unreal. So if you see a man, you actually are seeing a group of atoms. But since your eyes are subconsciously measuring the object, its distance from you, its height, weight etc without even you knowing it, it looks real. If it isn’t measured it isn’t real. It’s just an illusion. Adhi shankara famously quoted “ Is the sky blue when none sees it?’” . When none sees it sky is just a bunch of quanta, the indivisible part of an atom.. Only by somebody seeing it, somebody measuring it, does the sky appear blue or the illusion looks real. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
maadhav 0 Report post Posted March 14, 2004 << ?’” >> could some one tell please what the above, and words like above mean? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted March 15, 2004 I agree, but I'm curious about how 1 or 2 Vaishnavas on this site claim that Advaita has been proven false or defeated by Dvaita. What source do they have, because I've always heard of Advaita being spoken of as the one that compliments science. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted March 15, 2004 Visit www.audarya-fellowship.com there you visit "enclyopedia of "defeat of advaitham . there u will see all details of how advaitham & saivam has been proven false by "all" sampradayas. (pls dont post ur comments on the enclyopedia thread) its not 1 or 2 vaishnavas tell that kevala-advaitham as false but all vaishnavas in the world tell that & it has been proven. /images/graemlins/smile.gif Om Namah Sivaya /images/graemlins/smile.gif Om Namo Narayanaya Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted March 15, 2004 i dont think "Einstein" is any acharya or jagadguru. i think he was just a materialistic scientist. Materialistic persons like einstein cant understand Vaishnava sampradayas. so his views should not considered for authenticity. priyaji, why dont u visit "Enclyopedia of Rudra Sampradaya" in www.audarya-fellowship.com & read it. perhaps it will clear up your confused mind. /images/graemlins/smile.gif Om Namah Sivaya /images/graemlins/smile.gif Om Namo Narayanaya Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
atanu 0 Report post Posted March 15, 2004 Priya-Vaishnava, Yes, Congratulations. That the objective truth, independent of the observer’s limited faculties and still more limited machines, will never be known is already known to science. Observer when measuring introduces Uncertainty in the objective truth. This is known as uncertainty principle in science. Even when mind attempts to grasp truth it uses some energy which interferes with the objective truth. So, we in India know from times immemorial that all knowledge exists in Brahman, that knowledge needs no rational derivation and that intuitive flash during meditation, when mind is non-existent reveals the knowledge. But since expression is again through limited faculties, the objective truth can never be expressed and understood. So, the objective truth can not be understood and expressed. But, it can be realized. Science knows much more of the objective truth than it knew at the time the Vedas were written. But what Vedas told at that time is being unravelled today. But, possibly, the objective truth will never be known from our sense organs. Einstein and others have shown that matter is huge storehouse of energy. Uncontrollable amounts of energy would be released if matter were to be fully converted to energy. Einstein has told us that matter and energy are same. Modern physicists also know that a set of proton-antiproton-pion particles can evolve out of void and again resolve into the void. Such creation, apparently out of nothing, goes on all the time. Physicists now know that what we call void is repository of all forms and unlimited energy. But physicists only have a hint but no definite knowledge that the void is also conscious and intelligent. God is this non-dual void equipped with infinite consciousness. No one will ever know the equations that govern the super intelligent void. A report written by me will not know me but I will know the report. This is advaita philosophy, known to India since Upanishads -- greatest contribution of India’s numerous sages. Modern physics is a sub set of this knowledge of Vedas. Great scientists agree. Physics as of today has no way to incorporate the parameters related to the consciousness of the omniscient soul of the universe. And since, the mind is a tool of this soul and not the other way around, mind may not grasp the truth – the desire and the ways of the soul, in analytical fashion ever. This physics knows as uncertainty principle, which states: At any moment either the position or momentum of a body can be known accurately and it is never possible to know both position and momentum of a body at a particular moment. Heisenberg and Bohr held to this position. But Einstein maintained that “God does not play dice and there is only one truth and that truth is knowable eventually”. Both the above positions are true and false. From the perspective of Avidya, uncertainty will reign supreme forever. But from the perspective of Vidya, the truth is eternally one. There are two states of truth: non-eternal Avidya and eternal Vidya. Jiva, when absorbed in the Self, has no other than the Self. There is no avidya; everything is known, since there is nothing to know. Congrtulations to you. Atanu Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gokulkr 1 Report post Posted March 15, 2004 Dvaita was propounded by Sri Madhvacharya & Sri Raghavendraswamy. Sri Raghavendraswamy knows all . He preached Dwaitam only. So we foolish mortals have no right to criticize it by telling it as defective. if you people dont like "Dvaitham", then keep away from it rather than committing blasphemy of criticizing it. Do you think u know better than Guru Raghavendra. of course comparing to Raghavendra swamy your so called "adi-shankara" is nothing. TILL NOW I HAVENT HEARD ANY ADI-SHANKARAS RUSHING TO CALL OF THEIR DEVOTEES, ONLY RAGHAVENDRASWAMY IS DOING IT. So Raghavendraswamy has proved himself as God (even he had not declared himself due to his humbleness) by blessing his devotees till now (he is even giving darshans to his true devotees). Hello Mr.Atanu Sri Guru Raghavendraswamy has proved ur so called "Advaitham" as false. do u think urself greater than rayaru. humbly agree what rayaru tells. otherwise be silent. Ure not a acharya to give ur views. we (vaishnavas) agree wat our acharyas said instead of giving our own views. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gokulkr 1 Report post Posted March 15, 2004 hey priya, change ur name "priya_vaishnav" to "priya_mayavadi" so that it will be better for confused people like you. hereafter dont call uself as a vaishnava. since ur supporting advaitham ure a mayavadi. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted March 15, 2004 Even within Vaishnavism, Isn't Ramanuja's Visistadvaita better than Madhva's Dvaita? Even though Ramanuja and Madhva were Vaishnavas they still disagreed with the others' school, the thing is what school was correct in the true sense? Gokul you're tying to make out as if all Vaishnavas agreed with each other, whereas even their acharyas couldn't agree. Some Dvaitist sampradaya don't even accept Hare Krishna's or Prabhupada as being true to the original tradition! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted March 15, 2004 yes, variety and some disagreements but the basic tattvas of existence are common we and god are complete and individual personalities we are united with god by an eternal loving relationship love means two all vaishnavas agree, and in their variety they can be called with a common name, vaishnavas... mayavadis have opposite beliefs, there's agreement only on relatively marginal subjects so there's big differences and little differences.. very different Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted March 15, 2004 dont try to divert me. i dont think "vishistadvaita" superior than "dvaitam". hey wait im telling that both are equal. both are two eyes of "hari". my point is both ramanuja and raghavendra proved "advaitham" false. so u people accept their views rather than commenting on their philosophies. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
atanu 0 Report post Posted March 15, 2004 I have listened Atanu Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted March 17, 2004 "Even within Vaishnavism, Isn't Ramanuja's Visistadvaita better than Madhva's Dvaita? Even though Ramanuja and Madhva were Vaishnavas they still disagreed with the others' school, the thing is what school was correct in the true sense? " What are u smoking? Did they say the other's school was false like kevala advaitam? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted March 18, 2004 Nope, Ramanuja taught Vishistadvaita and Madhva taught Dvaita...these are DIFFERENT schools of philosophy. So If they established that kevala-advaitam is wrong, I'm asking out of these other two who was right and who was wrong? It's very simple, who is telling the truth...who knows the truth? And what is the authority? and how do you know they are telling the truth? Only one school can be'the truth', not both or else they're contradictory. Duh! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted March 18, 2004 so we need a concise explanation of visistadvaita and dvaita so we will decide if they are harmonically compatible to be both the truth or not do you agree? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted March 18, 2004 "Only one school can be'the truth', not both or else they're contradictory. Duh!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted December 11, 2004 To me all the three are essentially same. Advaita is like the glacier and snow. Vishistadwaita is the water and Dwaita is the steam or vapor. Essentially all the three are same but looks and feels very different for the perceiver. But if you look at sheer brialliance and genius, it is undoubtedly Adi Shankara. His genius is simply unmatched in the world of philosophy. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
