Nature of Reality

[Anand Hudli]

On Fri, 5 Oct 2001 13:17:57 -0700, Raghavendra Hebbalalu
<hs_raghavendra at YAHOO.COM> wrote:

>sarvebhyo namaH,
>      My earlier mail was to clarify that the mind is
>subtler than the brain and hence includes the brain.
>But I would agree with Jaldhar,Aniruddhan and Vaidya
>that reconciling Science and the Veda will not help us
>attain that which is to be attained. It may help a few
>people, depending on their background, to put their
>thoughts in the right perspective.
>      It would be an interesting exercise to explore
>the link between the Veda and science, though, as a
>purely academic exercise.
>

If the Veda contains information that can be gained from other means
independently, then it (Veda) becomes redundant. Also, as Shankara
says, each source of information will have its own sphere of dominance.
Therefore, any information found in the Veda that can also be gained
independently from other means cannot be in the sphere of dominance
of the Veda. It is reasonable to conclude that such information is
only of secondary importance. Again, Shankara holds that any apparent
contradiction between the Veda and other means of knowledge in a sphere
where the latter is dominant (but not the Veda) has to be resolved by
interpreting the Veda not in a literal way but in a secondary or symbolic
way.

Based on these observations, we can say this about Veda and science.

1. If there is any information that is not yet discovered by science,
but is formulated in the Veda, then such information can serve as a
guide for science to potentially progress to the stage of actually
discovering that information. Remember that such "discovery" by science
may not be possible in all cases!

2. If there is any information that has been discovered by science
independently of the Veda but also found in the Veda, according to
some interpretation, then such information cannot be in the sphere of
dominance of the Veda.

3. If there is any information that has been discovered by science
independently of the Veda but is found to be contradicted in the Veda,
then such contradictions will have to be reconciled according to what
Shankara says.

I agree that the sphere of dominance of the Veda consists of discussion
of those matters that are beyond the grasp of the senses. And science
is traditionally concerned with matters that can ultimately be observed,
verified by the senses either directly, or indirectly through some
measuring instruments. (Such instruments can be considered to be
extensions of the sense organs.) Now, one can try to redefine science
to move beyond the senses but that would not be acceptable to all
scientists. They would object that science would then lose all
objectivity and hence verifiability.

Anand