[Advaita-l] ***UNCHECKED*** Re: On evidence for and against Yugas of Indian chronology

[Venkatesh Murthy]

Namaste Sri Vishwanath and Sri Raghav

First of all Science makes us to believe there is something outside the
Mind and can be verified by experiments and everybody will agree with the
results. But this itself is the Illusion. If Waking and Dream states are
not different how can we say in Dream there are no outside objects beyond
Mind but in Waking there are outside objects? This will not be correct.
Therefore we have to agree Waking and Dream objects are imagined in the
Mind only. If you say there are Yugas those Yugas are imagined in the mind.
If you say there are no Yugas also that is imagined only. There is nothing
outside the Mind. Even Time is Illusion.

Now Scientists themselves are saying the Universe is some kind of Illusion.
Kindly read -

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-4171700/Are-living-HOLOGRAM.html

On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 8:43 PM, V Subrahmanian via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 6:21 PM, Praveen R. Bhat via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
> > Namaste Raghavji,
> > ​​
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 4:56 PM, Raghav Kumar Dwivedula via Advaita-l <
> > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
> >
> > > On 13-Nov-2017 4:52 PM, "Raghav Kumar Dwivedula" <
> > raghavkumar00 at gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > ​
> > > I am also not too sure the time scales are merely an arthavAda for
> > > ​ ​
> > > inculcating vairagya. I am trying to take itihAsa (iti ha aasa - thus
> it
> > > ​
> > > happened ) as having atleast some historical basis. Sri Kanchi Periyava
> > for
> > > ​
> > > one took them quite literally and seriously.
> >
> >
> > ​As ​you and others rightly said that many Vedantins have no interest in
> > yuga dates, etc, which may be taken as mere stories or related to anAtma
> > and thereby landing on the moral of the stories instead. However,
> > traditionalists such as Kanchi Paramacharya have no pressure to agree to
> > so-called scientific conclusions and appear modern or rational to
> > scientists. The reason I call it so-called is because, its a work in
> > progress which will always be a work in progress! Even science agrees
> that
> > absence of proof doesn't mean proof of absence. There may be a new
> > scientific means available down the "yugas" which may give earlier dates.
> > Vedas are alaukika upAya for laukika gains also. No science can disprove
> > it, just as we cannot prove it. So it remains as shraddhA in shAstra that
> > is not logical or illogical but alogical (not subject to logic).
>
>
> Very well said.  Shankara cites a Mahabharata/Vishnu purana verse:
> अचिन्त्याः खलु ये भावा न तांस्तर्केण योजयेत् । प्रकृतिभ्यः परं यच्च
> तदचिन्त्यस्य लक्षणम्’ BSB 2.1.27.  While this is about the jagatkāraṇam
> that is beyond prakriti, even about the prakriti kāryam that is the jagat
> Shankara says:  अस्य जगतो नामरूपाभ्यां व्याकृतस्य अनेककर्तृभोक्तृसंयुक्तस्य
> प्रतिनियतदेशकालनिमित्तक्रियाफलाश्रयस्य मनसाप्यचिन्त्यरचनारूपस्य  BSB
> 1.1.1.2.
>
> Thus, whether it is Brahman or the jagat, no brain-work would succeed in
> determining the true nature.
>
> regards
> subbu
>
>
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>



-- 
Regards

-Venkatesh