Nature of Reality

[Shrinivas Gadkari]

Namaste:

<jaldhar at BRAINCELLS.COM> wrote:

>Define "todays world"  From where I'm standing, this sounds like the kind
>of issue my Fathers generation had to deal with.  It seems you are saying
>there is some sort of culture clash going on.  In which case wouldn't such
>disciplines as sociology, anthropology, history and economics provide more
>insight than quantum physics?
>

Consider a program on the Discovery channel on astronomy. Almost surely
it will remind you that you are an insignificant part of the cosmos.
And this is without doubt the mainstream view. What is being said in
Vedanta is quite the contrary. There is difinitely some clash going on
here.

>Would you not stop to admire a sunset just
>because you knew the Sun doesn't really set?
>
>The problem with the scientific explanations, is they miss the point of
>why we study the shastras in the first place.  It is not for the sake of a
>theory but a practical guide to what should be done or not done. This is a
>much higher level of abstraction than science deals with.
>

If one can admire the sunset without being bothered by the
fact that Sun doesn't actually set, these postings were not
meant for that person. Such a person has evolved to a stage
where he/she can 'be' in the higher plane.

But I think there are still many people who have not yet reached
this stage and need to overcome 'samskar's that are an effect
of training in modern science.

For example:
How many of us can admire stars without thinking 'many of these
stars are bigger than the sun' ?

How many of us can appreciate the waves on a sea shore without being
reminded that tides are caused by gravitational effect of moon (and sun) ?

Actually, these 'scientific explanations' try to kill the mystery in
the play of nature. What I was trying to do is to reintroduce the element
of mystery in the natural phenomenon using the same science.

Best regards
Shrinivas