Developing Faith in Scriptures in the 21st Century
Bhakti Vijnana Goswami · 2021
Chapters
Opening remarks on format
I'm very happy to hear all these things about the development of your group and about the role of Madhu Mati Pushkarini and how you are bonding with each other, trying to support each other in your journey to Krishna in your spiritual journey.
And I'll try to say something, some few words, but uh please don't hesitate to ask questions uh even by interrupting me if you feel the need or urge. And And uh uh yeah, and uh
I really uh wouldn't like to speak too long uh because I don't have at the moment very good feeling of the group. What is the need, what is the relevant for the group. So I will say something to start with.
But then I really hope that we will discuss this interesting matters in our more free-flowing way. Rather than me giving some formal talk and trying to inspire you.
If it was not for this pandemic, I would love to be with all of you.
And it's much easier because when I see the people, when I see, I I can understand what's going on and whether I'm uh lost and irrelevant or saying something which is awkward or whatever.
So it would be easier for me to correct myself by the way of
speaking, but um you know since we are dealing with this impersonal media uh of Zoom uh like Radhanath Swami recently in my recent conversation with him, he said, I'm consumed. I'm totally swallowed by these internet meetings and internet activities.
So therefore I sincerely suggest to you this rule that I just speak a little bit and then you ask questions and or even sometimes challenge if you feel the need or feel some sort of severe doubt in what I have said, and then we can discuss further.
So the topic of my little speech is how the science and the scriptures are. how the ancient Vedic scriptures are actually scientific.
Because the tendency in the modern world and among the modern people is to say that this is all superstitions, this is all some stories from the past, but we are modern, we are rational people, and because we are rational people, we need something else.
We don't need all these outdated old ancient scriptures, they will not help us in this day and age when we have to deal with all these complicated problems, so on and so forth.
So I definitely, this is purvapaks, how it is called in uh in the scriptures, the opinion of the opponent. And I will try to answer this opinion, which is quite widespread.
Personal transition from science to scriptures
First of all, by sharing my personal experience. As you rightly said, I was doing my PhD degree, my
postgraduate studies in the science, when I encountered, first encountered Bhagavad-gītā and spiritual knowledge described therein. And my immediate impression was very peculiar, and I wanted to share it with you.
My immediate impression was that this is something, this is a very rational system of worldview. It's different than scientific worldview. Scientific worldview is definitely very rational.
It's based on the intelligence and on the rational premises, rationally acceptable premises. And after dealing with this premises, it's more or less rationally evolved.
Here, when I first read Bhagavad-gītā, I could see that Bhagavad-gītā presents a completely radically different point of view, but nevertheless very rational. The premise is, of course, different.
The initial premise of the science is that, well uh we don't know if God is there or not there. And actually we don't care. Most probably He is not there. Something like this.
I'm not formulating the exact premises of the science, but basically they say we cannot know about this, therefore, we only deal with something which we know for sure.
This is the matter, this is the subject matter which we can know.
So let's deal with something which is perceivable, something which we can manipulate with, something which we can know, and whether God exists or not is ultimately irrelevant.
That's more or less the point of view of the science. Some scientists do believe in God, some scientists, most of the scientists don't believe in God.
But the initial premise is that whether God exists or not is irrelevant because we cannot know for sure. We cannot really take God and study Him under the microscope.
Or we cannot take a huge telescope, and you know by looking in this teleskop find out where God exists. So the scientific methods they failed when it comes to the concept of God.
Concept of God by the very definition is against the scientific methodology. So, science doesn't know how to deal with God, so therefore they say, you know, it's irrelevant. Let's develop what we can develop.
And uh they develop a very beautiful and very impressive um you know structure of the modern science is definitely very impressive.
You know, every one of you probably has some smartphones and it's uh it's it's impressive.
You know, you uh you push in the button and, you know the whole universes for you there. And you can spend the whole day just by pushing the buttons and imagining that this is all under your control.
So but coming back to my initial impression, my initial impression after reading Bhagavad-gītā was that it's a very beautiful rational system based on a different premise.
And basically, if you take the premise that there is God and he's not irrelevant, he is relevant.
He is not a remote cause which might have been involved in the creation of this universe, but has nothing to do with the universe as such and the affairs of the universe because there is physical laws and everything is determined by the physical laws.
If we don't take this premise and take another premise that God is there and somehow or other He can influence the situation in the material world. He is not powerless.
Despite the existence of physical laws, And actually, perhaps I can mention this in the course
of my little talk, is that modern physics allows the influence of God despite the very determinant nature of the physical laws.
Yes, physical laws are there, they work, but nevertheless, there is a room for God's involvement in our day-to-day affairs without violating the physical laws.
Mathematical axioms and conceptual frameworks
But let's put it aside, what I am telling now is that I saw the rational system developed from the different premise. And as you know, you perhaps studied geometry and in geometry there are axioms.
And if you take a certain set of axioms, you develop one system of geometry, Euclidean geometry, but then there are some other systems of geometry.
You change one premise, just one premise, and you have the completely different system which actually works in certain scientific fields.
You cannot really deal with these fields or solve the problems of these scientific fields by using old Euclidean geometry. You need to use Lobachevsky geometry or some other systems of geometry.
So, what I mean to say is that scientific system requires that you have some premises and premises are not provable by definition.
You know you cannot prove the axiom because axiom is the basis for any other mathematical proofs. But taking these axioms after that, you're very rational.
So, what I saw in Bhagavad-gītā, I saw a completely rational system developed from the different set of axioms, different set of truths. That God exists, that God is powerful, that God can be involved in this life.
But after that, after this premises, everything else was very logical and very scientific. And actually, and for some time in my own life, what happened? I was very steeped in the scientific worldview.
For you know, I was very good at schools, I was good in university, I was postgraduate student, I was going deeply into it. So I had a very comprehensive worldview. And here I encountered a completely different worldview.
The worldview of Vedic scriptures, the worldview of Bhagavad-gītā, the worldview of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, the worldview which Śrīla Prabhupāda presented to us.
And there was an internal conflict, severe internal conflict within my heart. I was asking myself, what is true? This is true or this is true.
And that lasted for a long time, I don't remember exactly, but it lasted for months and months and months when I was kind of looking in the world and asking myself, what is true? What is the understanding?
Which understanding is more correct?
The understanding which I had before, uh, while looking in this in this world, that you know everything is just by the movements of the molecules, and there is actually no intelligence involved. Everything just evolved gradually from from very simple structures and ultimately it was created the human beings were created and everything else.
So I was, you know, I knew this system and arguments very well. And here is completely different worldview where Darwin is not correct.
He is actually, as Prabhupāda said, he is a rascal who spoiled the whole human civilization? Because he proved that we humans are coming from monkeys. We or try to prove. It's actually not Darwin, but anyway, Huxley.
But you know uh these two worldviews mm clashed within my heart.
And I was sincerely trying to answer what has more um Weight, what is more correct, and ultimately, I had to admit that the scientific point of view is not so scientific. There are some serious flaws in scientific presentation which are deeply hidden within the initial premises.
Please tell me, am I explaining something which is relevant or which is understandable? Or should I tell some stories? Or whatever? I just want to interrupt myself. Maybe Madhumati Paskarini can correct me also. Okay.
So uh so I ultimately had to admit honestly that Prabhupada is correct and the scientists are not correct.
Impossibility of life from matter
Why? Because of simple you know, ideas, like you know, scientists say that the life comes from matter. But how such a complicated it's completely against the third law of thermodynamics.
You know, because according to the law of thermodynamics, only chaos can increase, you know, the the uh only entropy can increase. It cannot build up more complicated and more complicated and more complicated structures.
And how you can imagine that such a complicated structures like human beings, or even just one living cell can appear on its own. The comparison which is given, you know the probability of this by just complete chance.
If we take that this is the chance, the probability is unbelievably low. It's just not possible. It's just not possible. It's as if, you know, you have a big garbage pile.
In a garbage pile you have all kinds of metallic parts and everything. And then the wind blows. And the wind blows.
And by the movement of the wind, different metallic parts come together and the ready-made Boeing airplane is made just by this accidental way.
And actually the probability of Boeing plane being constructed by the movements chaotic movements of the wind over the garbage pile is more than probability of a single living cell created from just atoms and molecules, simple atoms and molecules.
There is no chance, there is no chance, there is no chance. It's not scientific, and there is no scientific explanation for this. This is a simple thing. It's a sheer act of faith on the part of scientists.
They have to believe. Actually, if you want to be a scientist you have to have very blind faith in all these premises. You have to have śraddhā. Ado śraddhā. It starts with śraddhā.
So uh so uh that's uh little anecdote from my life how I myself uh found that uh the Vedic point of view is very scientific, rational.
Not scientific from the strictly scientific point of view, science as we know it, but nevertheless, it's very rational.
Comparing modern and ancient sciences
And in Vedic scriptures we have such sciences like astrology or Ayurveda, which are very much alive. You know, Ayurveda works.
And the premises of Ayurveda are from the scientific point of view, are not scientific, but nevertheless it works. So it actually means that there is another science.
The point which I want to make in this presentation is that Vedic philosophy or Vedic culture is very scientific, it's science, but it's a different science.
And actually, if we study it impartially and in a very honest way, we will have to admit that it's a better science.
Because the modern science, what are the results of the modern science? We can see pollution, environmental crisis, all kinds of economic instability, all kinds of problems.
They actually the whole civilization is in um uh in a big crisis uh and it's all due to the scientific uh premises which prove that scientific premises are not correct if we judge according to the results.
Results is very very detrimental. It's not actually tragic. The situation in the world which we are dealing with is tragic. Like today I was driving in a car with one devotee who is a scientist. He's also a chemist.
He's in the same Jain University teaching chemistry. And he said, I asked him what is your research area.
And he said, my research area is how to eliminate the pesticides and all this, you know, insecticides which are used.
So, first you know produce all the pesticides and insecticides and you kill all the poor little insects and little rats and everyone and then you have to deal with bigger problem.
It's actually Albert Einstein his uh very beautiful point is that you cannot solve the problem from the same mentality which created the problem.
You know what science is trying to do? Science is a certain mentality, certain worldview. And you know it creates a problem. And then you try to solve this problem created by this mentality, by the same mentality.
So what will be the result? The result will be bigger problem and bigger problem. And you will try to solve it and solve it again and solve it again. And there's no end to it. It's just this circle.
So there is much more harmonious and user-friendly science which is Vedic science. Vedic science is user-friendly. Modern science is actually demonic. It's not user-friendly.
It actually creates or develops the demoniac traits within the users of this science, of the advantages of this science. This is what we are dealing with. So you know, coming back to the whole Vedic science,
we have sciences in the Vedic culture. Ayurveda is a science, proved science that it works. There is uh uh in a in a more how to say in a more harmonious way than the modern medicine.
Of course, the modern medicine uh in uh emergency cases is much more efficient and there is uh you know great achievements in the modern medicine. I have to say this because I see Nirma Krishna sitting in front of me.
So I cannot undermine the achievements of the modern medicine completely. But nevertheless, Ayurveda has its advantages over the modern science and it's scientific.
You have Jyotish which is also scientific in its own way, and many times it's being proved that you know if you know the science, then you can predict accurately.
Like this pandemic was predicted even by a small boy from Mayapur, this Abhia Krishna. He one year before pandemic, he published in his blog his 11 years old, young bright astrologer from Mayapur, a devotee.
And he said there will be a pandemic at the end of 2019 and uh 2020. And he was correct, you know. So uh you know and if we look at this uh
so what I try to prove is that there is a different science, that Vedic science is a science, but it's a different science.
Inverted structures of knowledge domains
So, what is the difference? What is the difference in approach? Why do we have completely different approaches to the reality? The science is trying to study the reality, to understand what reality is in real sense.
And the Vedas also trying to study the reality. So, what is the approach? What is the different approach? If we see the structure of the modern science, we have the foundation.
What is the foundation of the modern science? It's math. Mathematics. So first you have to compute, you have to understand this very abstract science, and that's the foundation of everything else.
After mathematics, you have physics, after physics, you have chemistry, after chemistry, you have biology, after biology, you have molecular biology, or after chemistry, you have molecular biology, biochemistry, and then you have biology, and after biology you have medicine, and after medicine you
have you know sociology and after sociology you have you know politics and after politics you have economics or whatever and then at the very end of it you have philosophy, and at the very end you have religion.
So that's the foundation of the modern culture. You have mathematics as the foundation, math as the foundation.
Therefore, everyone has to know mathematics, no matter who you are, whether you study economics or you study sociology or you study politics, you have to know math in the modern culture.
Without mathematics, you're nobody. You know, you're not scientific basically. So we have mathematics and it's considered to be very rational and strictly scientific, and everything else is developed from this.
And you know on the remote end of this structure you have philosophy and religion.
And if we take the Vedic science or the Vedic structure, the structure of the Vedic culture, what we will see, we will see that the foundation of everything is religion. The spiritual knowledge.
And then from spiritual knowledge you have philosophy. From philosophy you have politics, Arthashastra.
From Arthashastra, you have also economics, Arthashastra, and then you have biology, and you have the same sort of edifice, the same sort of structure, but turned upside down. So it's the same.
As Prabhupāda explains very beautifully in the 15th chapter of Bhagavad-gītā, what is this material world? This material world is the reflection of the spiritual world.
It's like Lord Krishna explains that this material world is like tree with the branches growing down and the roots growing up.
So Prabhupāda explains that we all have seen such strange trees with the branches growing down and the roots coming up. That's the reflection trees.
The trees, when you stand on the bank of a river and you see the reflection of the tree, the roots are up there and the branches are down there. So the science is this reflected tree of reality.
And because it is a reflected tree, it has reality. It definitely gives you some sort of understanding of what reality is, some sort of understanding of the truth of this world. And therefore it works to a certain limit.
Logical proofs for divine existence
But because it's all upside down, it's ultimately It ultimately doesn't work in a bigger sense. The Vedic understanding is very simple: there is God. Otherwise, how can you explain the existence of this world?
This is logical proof of God. Nyaya Shastra explains that everything which we see has a creator. Whatever you will take, it was created by somebody and it means that the whole world also has to have a creator. It's logical.
Of course, you know, any logic is not very consistent, you can disprove this logic. But in any case, it's a very logical premise.
If we see the world with all the complications, all the complexities—not complications, complexities of the world. With all the beautiful things, with all the harmonious structure.
Actually, Krishna says this in Bhagavad-gītā when he says, Mattaḥ parataraṁ nānyat kiñcid asti dhanañjaya, there is no truth superior than me, and then he says that everything is like uh the pearls which are placed in the everything is based on me as the pearls or the necklace is based on the thread.
So Lord Krishna says, how you can understand the existence of God. You know, you look at your neck beads. Or any other bead or any other necklace. You don't see the thread. But you can understand that the thread is there.
Why? Because all the little pearls or little beads in this bead, they're together. They're not flowing around. You know, otherwise if there was no thread, what would happen with the beads?
The beads, being separate parts, they would just, you know, go this way or that way. There would not be harmonious interaction or even connection between the threads.
You know, Vedic scriptures they say that there is a force, connecting force, unifying force. Who is this unifying force? This is God. This is Brahman.
Brahman is the unifying force, and if you take away this unifying force, everything else will be just destroyed. You know.
If we take away God from our life, the very destructive forces will start displaying its, you know, its influence.
And ultimately everything will be destroyed and the very fact that it's not yet destroyed because there is this powerful force. Like India, take for example India. How many states are there in India?
Twenty seven or how many? I don't hear you, but you know you you nod your head. So there are 20 plus or maybe around 30 states in India. You know let's imagine for a split second that there is no central government.
What will happen with all these parts of India? Every part of India, every state of India will declare, declare its independence. Because there is force, unifying force, therefore they are together.
Otherwise, they will say, you know, 28. Okay. I was almost right. I said 27, but it's 28.
So, you know, if there is no unifying force, then there will be the forces which are the natural forces in this material world which work. It's, uh, how you call these forces? There is, um, circumh— how you call this.
Is it centrifugal? Yeah, centrifugal, uh, centrifugal, right? Yeah, there is a very uh strong centrifugal force, you know, going away, being separate, being independent.
You know, and therefore, to counteract the centrifugal forces, you need a different force to keep everything together. And that's what we can see at every step. You can see harmony, we can see unification, unifying forces.
And this is God. This is how God's influence manifests. And He Himself says this.
That, you know, sūtre maṇi-gaṇā iva, that how all this, all these little bits are connected together on the sutra, on the thread in this world.
So that's uh that's the point, you know that uh Vedic uh culture or Vedic understanding of the world starts with this uh very simple and very rational and very provable, to a certain extent, provable premise that there is unifying force who created this world, it's intelligent force, it's not just natural force, it's intelligent force capable of doing something with certain plan behind it. Because this whole creation cannot be just by chance. There must be somebody with great intelligence and with desire to create this.
Otherwise why would it exist? So, and then from this premise, which is a religious premise, you work out everything else. You work how to behave in this world. Therefore, you get ethics.
You work out the philosophical implications of this premise philosophy. You work out the politics, economy, and then ultimately you work out biology, chemistry, physics and mathematics. There is Vedic mathematics.
But according to the Vedic science, mathematics is the you know is the remotest part of the culture. You need mathematics for some calculations, it's practical, you need it, but it's not the foundation.
So just have in mind these two worldviews and understand that they all you know they all have some right to exist.
They all have some advantages and disadvantages, but ultimately one is false because it has the false foundation. It's not the numbers which is the foundation of reality.
It would be very strange if the numbers, completely abstract concepts, would be the foundation of very concrete and tangible reality.
It's God who is very concrete and tangible, who is the foundation of reality, and just develop the science from this point on.
So again, I'm very happy that you are studying this beautiful knowledge and science with Madhumati Puscarini, that you are together, that you're doing this.
I was trying to explain how the Vedic cultures developed from this foundation, foundational understanding that God is there and how it you know created a very beautiful scientific worldview, which is very rational.
And we have opposite to this is the modern scientific worldview, which is also very rational, but not very harmonious at the end of the day. Anyway, I finished my talk. I don't know if you could relate to it or not.
Please let me know.
Explaining ancient technological achievements
And I'll try to correct myself if necessary. Thank you. And I think I'm sure actually children have some questions and I request them to start typing.
I if not I have questions here with me which they have sent some of the children. So we can start asking otherwise children can start typing questions on the chat. They can raise their hand we can ask you.
They can also raise their hand, yes. Andcha is going to take care of that. So please take care of this. If anybody has, you can start raising your hand. I would love to see all of you. I don't know how to do this.
We have to do this. Uh will you please uh yeah uh uh Sadhir Pupapuji, please can you put it on uh the grid mode so all children have it? Yes.
Quest all uh children to kindly turn on their videos since Puruvaraj also wants to see you all. I can only see Venyani. Chanak is also on. Ashwina would like to see you. Ritchika Nushka. Latanjruga's camera is not working.
Okay. Ayurija, can you start taking, okay? Uh don't send me questions uh on a private chat. Okay, if you're comfortable with that then because Ayurija is going to ask the questions. Yes, Hajj.
So there's uh questions are coming to me on a private chat which you can't uh see. So till they send it on a common chat, let me start asking the questions myself first, then we can ask Ayurija.
Uh the first question that's come here is there are a lot of scientific advancements which are described in the Vedic texts, but somehow they don't exist now, so how can we believe that they ever existed?
See the very fact that all the scientific discoveries of the present day somehow rather described even before you know before they were discovered, also, you know, proof something.
You know, of course, you can say that this is just imagination, wild imagination.
But you know if if we can ride if we read Mahabharata for example, or Ramayana very carefully, we will see that you know whatever is described there, this modern science more or less is doing now.
So, how can we believe, I would be radical enough to say that you don't have to believe. You know, if you wish to believe, you may believe, if you don't want to believe, you don't have to believe.
But there is enough scientific achievements of the Vedic age which exist even now. You know, like you know so many different things which do exist. Yoga exists.
And people who achieve higher stages of yoga they manifest some mystic power and it's a very scientific system how to develop this power. And there are people who know this.
You know, if we take also Sanskrit, the whole science of phonetics in the West was developed when Western linguists who study languages they discovered Sanskrit.
And they were amazed because there was nowhere else in no any country or any other language there was no this completely scientific understanding of how you pronounce the words.
And moreover, the Vedas they not only say or explain how to pronounce the words properly, they say that the sounds of Sanskrit are very powerful mantras, that they have special power invested in them, and if you perfect this power, then you can manipulate the material energy.
And it works to a certain extent even now, you know, people chant mantras And by chanting mantras, like for example, I live in Vraj in Vṛndāvana. And there are still some people who are snake charmers.
They chant a mantra, and you know, by chanting this mantra, some snake mantra, which they perfected through certain procedures, they can cure you from the snake bites. It's something which exists now.
Of course, it's dwindling very quickly, and very soon you will not have those people who know this art because it's more subtle art.
But what I want to say is that you don't have to believe in something which you cannot see, but there is enough scientific achievements of this science even now, luckily, which we can see.
The yogic powers, the you know, this powers which people acquire by chanting certain mantras, the Ayurvedic achievements, like you know, uh Ayurveda can cure sometimes incurable diseases. Uh and nobody can understand how they do this.
Meditation uh you know this meditation discovers the power of the mind. And this power of the mind, which was known to the people of the ancient India, influences the matter.
Basically, why all these achievements are not visible now because there is no people who can use this because for that you need somebody with a very concentrated and very powerful mind. And people nowadays they have very weak minds. And all these gadgets they basically fragment our minds and make us very restless and inattentive and deprive us of this power of the minds.
You can only manipulate or do all these things which are described there if you have powerful, very concentrated, and very pure mind. So don't believe in this.
Believe in what is still there. And luckily for us it's enough. You know, in a couple of hundred years probably there will be nothing of this restless. And people will doubt even these things.
They will doubt that Ayurveda existed and that Ayurveda cured the diseases and that there were astrologers who could correctly predict certain significant events in a people's life and in the life of humanity.
You know, what can we do? This is the Kali Yuga, the age of degradation. You know, because when the people's mind became weak, manda sumanda matayo manda bhāgyāḥ upadrutāḥ as it is described in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam.
Yeah, I usually take it forward.
Distinguishing true spirituality from sectarianism
Next, I think, who who's asking? Prahlāda, you're asking? So you said that religion is the basis of the base age of all the— But at the present moment, people argue that religion is now the basis of mass discrimination.
You know, for example, in India, there's a lot of discrimination on Hindus and Muslims. So how do we prove to them that religion is the basis of basic science and the week? Okay. Thank you very much.
Yes, religion in Kali Yuga is grossly misused and it's misused by unscrupulous people to manipulate or to exploit other people. That's true. territorial religions— no, sectarian religions of this age.
I don't mean Muslim religion or Christian religion or even Hinduism as such. I don't mean this thing. I mean the scientific understanding which places God at the center.
The scientific rational understanding that God is the source of everything which we see.
So if you put this understanding as the foundation and very rational premise, it's a very rational supposition. You can say, yeah, why not? There is no reason to say no.
And there are a lot of reasons to say yes, it is true.
So by religion, I don't mean the particular religions which developed later, with their rituals, with their superstitions, and there are a lot of superstitions in religion, with all their prejudice, which is also there. I don't mean this.
I mean that there is this spiritual foundation for your worldview. That God exists and that human beings are essentially eternal souls. There are few premises of this sort.
And then after that, the philosophy develops, how everything else is connected with it. After that, the ethics is developed.
What you are supposed to do, what you are not supposed to do, that you should not kill anyone, you should not create, inflict harm to anyone or pain to anyone.
And then from that onwards, it goes on and on and on, and ultimately you get mathematics as the remotest part of this understanding. So if you are to speak with people, please correct them from the very beginning.
We don't mean this misjudged sectarian religion which are basically used in Kali-yuga to prove one's superiority. I belong to the superior religion, therefore everyone else... No.
I mean the foundational scientific spiritual outlook of the world. That's what I mean by religion. Which is there in the Vedas.
Vedas say that there is only one God and you know, different people speak about him differently, but it's it's not to say that somebody is wrong somebody is right.
No, there's only one spirit soul and he's Brahman, and He is the source of everything. Athāto brahma-jijñāsa. God or Brahman is something which creates everything, which maintains everything and destroys everything.
That's the science.
Meditative methods of ancient investigation
By science I mean Vedānta-sūtra basically, logical understanding of the Upaniṣads, philosophy of the Upaniṣads, spiritual understanding.
So, Guruji, I have a question that you or you said that the one who in uh the olden times in ancient India there were, the science and engineering were way above today's level. So is it possible that the one who has perfected everything about the ancient science will be able to explain the theory about black holes and other stuff which science can't, modern science?
Yes, thank you very much for this. I I can't answer this question very definitely, but uh I can what I can say is that there is a different method altogether different method of studying reality.
What science does, it takes a telescope or microscope. En vad is teleskop eller mikroskop. To study black hole. You can telescope or new electronics. Teleskop. And you can use similar mathematical sort of equations to try to understand what's going on.
So, what is telescope? Telescope is the extension of one's eye. My eye has certain power of uh seeing so I I I I in the background is a part of the paper. Soon the answer to what's going on? Uh shall I continue or what?
Yes, yes ma'am. Okay, so uh the telescope is the extension of the eye. Uh it uh does not give you much more advantages than the eye.
You know, it gives you advantages of seeing something which you cannot see with the eye, but basically, it's the same power. You don't see something which is completely different.
So, the Vedic scientists, how they studied the matter. They started meditating on the matter very deeply by concentrating the mind.
And when you concentrate the mind on something, your mind takes the shape of the object which you meditate upon. And then you study this object within your mind. Because you have the real object within your mind and you study it there.
So the scientists they look at the black hole from the telescope and you know it's it's very bewildering, it's far away, they cannot really see exactly, they can only speculate what's going on.
The yogi, if he wants to study or understand what is going on in a black hole, he will start meditating on a black hole. And this whole black hole will appear within his mind.
This method of understanding, scientific method of studying the matter is called yogaja. The yogic way of studying. And in this way, the Ayurvedic doctors they discovered the property of different herbs.
They would come to a herb and started meditating on the herb, and the understanding of what this herb is all about and what is the property would appear within their mind through this meditation without chemical study of the herb.
They didn't, you know, take the herb in the laboratory and try to analyze it very thoroughly and make the chemical analysis and say, yeah, this is this is what it is, alkaloids or sugars or whatever.
No, within the mind they would study the same thing and uh through the intuitive uh through samadhi basically, through the concentration of the mind, they would understand the nature.
So, answering your questions, yes, the yogis who know this science would give the answer. What are these black holes? No, black holes is not so difficult. What is this dark matter?
Because the science says that the 90%, whatever, 96% of the matter around us is dark matter which we don't even know what it is.
So but they would do it differently. The method would be, the methodology would be completely different. So I have one last question. Yes.
So what you just said, some people in the, some scientists or do we in general, no, modern science doesn't, doesn't agree?
Judging scientific models by results
So who's to say how do we know that is modern science right or the Vedans? Yeah, ultimately, there is a principle you should judge according to the results. What is the result of modern science?
You have very impressive achievements of the science, no doubt about it, but at the same time, as a side effect of this, you have the destruction. Krishna says about this in Bhagavad-gītā. He predicted it 5,000 years ago.
He said, those people who say that there is no foundation of this world, that there is no God behind this world, they ultimately develop very destructive outlook of the world.
The world starts being destroyed. And that's what we can see. You know, there is ozone hole in our atmosphere, there is a pollution, the whole ocean is polluted so much, I mean it's the environment is destroyed.
The greatest scientist of the last century of 20th century, you know, this Dawkins of whatever his name was, he said the earth is already finished.
We have to find some other planet and make the expedition and go and occupy this other planet because we already destroyed the earth.
So Vedas existed for thousands of years. People lived harmoniously and happily with the nature, very scientifically advanced, very rich. India was the richest country in the world. Everyone was trying to plunder India. Why?
Because there was the science of the Vedas. The spiritual science created material science. And that's scientifically proved, historically proved.
So the science, the modern science, which develops you know for last maybe hundred years, already destroyed the earth.
For thousands of years Vedic civilization was there with very impressive achievements and there was no destruction on the same scale as we have now.
But then again we're talking about the results which are I guess not good. Yeah. Yeah, we're looking at the results which are not good. Thank you. Okay. Matridi need a shiva. Yeah, go ahead. Yes, ma'am.
I just wanted to say back that in Hanuman Chalisa like I like it's typically proven also like in Hanuman Chalisa the first line is Yuka Sastra Yoga So one yoga so that says the distance between the sun and earth.
So it's like one yuga is uh yeah one yuga yuga is twelve thousand years and one sahastra is one thousand years and one yojan is eight miles. So if you uh so if you multiply all of them you get the result 96 million miles.
So one mile is 1.6 kilometer. So if you so if you like multiply multiply 96 million into 1.6 it's equal. I I don't remember the design. He said the question.
He just wants to glorify Hanuman Chalisa that in Hanuman Chalisa there is a very scientific uh distance between the earth and the sun already written there. He just wants to prove my point. He he doesn't have question.
Right? Okay, Ayonita, please take over. Who is the next one? Mahradi.
Applying core principles in modern life
Samrutta can ask next. Samrutta, okay. Yes. Name Samrita. I like the la uh speech a lot. My question is that is it possible to follow the Vedic thing as the base even in Kariyuka? Even now can we follow like that?
Your name is Sangita, right? Am I correct? Samruda. Ah, Samruda. Okay. Thank you very much, Samruda. You know, we can follow the essence of the Vedas. We cannot reproduce all the details.
Details will be difficult to reproduce because we are living in a different environment, different cultural, you know everything is different now.
It would be very difficult to reproduce everything to the smallest possible detail, not possible. But the essential message of the Vedas and the essential implications of this message are simple.
You know, you have to chant the name of God, you have to respect the life, respect other living entities, respect their right to live, you shouldn't kill anyone, you should not exploit other people, you shouldn't try to get artificial happiness from all these intoxicants.
It's a simple thing, and that's the essence, that's the foundation. So we can follow the foundation and that in itself will be very good for us and for everyone else. But details probably not possible.
You know we are too far gone. We are living in Bangalore in 21st century using smartphones and internet and Zoom. So it's very difficult to cook in Bangalore on a wood as Vedas would probably recommend to you.
So you have to use gas and electricity and everything else. Yes, yes, ma, yes, my question.
My question is that in Srimad Bhagavatam it is written the geocentric theory is proposed that the earth is the center of the universe.
But uh nowadays scientists have they have taken photos and they they have have proven that the heliocentric theory, the sun is in the center, that is the correct theory. So then uh how do we solve this contradiction?
Because, you know, mostly Vedic science tells the most of the truth of the universe but in this place Vedic science gets defeated. Not really because there is Siddhanta the astrological
books like Surya Siddhanta and some other Siddhantas written in a very ancient time way before the heliocentric system of the modern science was developed in the West.
And the heliocentric system is proposed in the Siddantas. What we see in Srimad Bhagavatam, we see a different view altogether on the universe.
You know, from the scientific point of view or from the Siddhānta point of view, the view of this ancient astronomy Vedic astronomy the universe is heliocentric, or at least our solar system is heliocentric.
But Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is not contradicted to this. You know, it's easy to see contradiction, it's more difficult to understand how to reconcile the contradictions.
And in the minds of ancient people, there was no contradiction between the Purāṇic worldview, which is reflected in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam and Siddhānta point of view. They knew how to reconcile this.
Like for example, when Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam says Bhu-maṇḍala, usually people translate it as earth, Bhu. But Bhu-maṇḍala is not Earth.
Bhu-maṇḍala is the plane of ecliptics, you know, which is there in the middle of the universe. And then the sun, the movement of the sun.
So, you know there are there are some good astronomers who are now trying to reconcile this so to see from which point of view the description of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam will also match with the modern description.
It's you know to say as you said that it's just contradictory and that Vedic understanding of universe failed. It's simplistic. It's not really correct.
It's just a different view of the universe which you know gives some certain proof and I know for example one devotee who dwells delves very deeply into the whole thing and he would be much more in the position to answer this question than myself. I'm not an expert in this.
Identifying qualities of a devotee
But there is a way to reconcile these two points of view and to prove that this other point of view is not just a failure. It's a different angle of vision, so to speak. Completely different angle of vision.
Hare Krishna Maharaj, uh Anya has put her question on the chat box, so I'll skip that down. Um, she's asking that how do we know if we are devotees? That's a very scientific question.
Well, in this beginning of the sixteenth chapter, Lord Krishna speaks about two natures of living entities. He says that in this material world there are living entities of two natures.
One is demonic, āsura-sampad, and another one is godly, divine, daivī-sampad. And he says that Arjuna, you are lucky because you have this daivī divine nature.
And he describes certain qualities which are inherent to divine uh people or people with divine inclinations and ultimately to the devotees.
He says Abayam Sattva Samsam Suddih and you know he lists many many qualities of this sort. So you can look at the list of these qualities and see if it fits your description.
The second quality, Sattva Samsuddhi, his desire to purify one's existence. You know, as devotees, we are trying to lead very pure life and we don't like dirty things.
So that in itself is a good sign that we are in on a safe side, so to speak. That we are, we have some devotional inclination. We may not be devotees 100%, 10%, but we are aspiring devotees, no doubt about it.
We chant the holy name. We try to associate with devotees. And actually, Lord Chaitanya he gave a very beautiful definition. If you want to hear his definition, he said, Asat-saṅga-tyāga—ei vaiṣṇava-ācāra,
who is a vaiṣṇava? Who is the devotee?
The one who doesn't like to associate with asad, with not very good people, with evil people, evil-minded people, with all these people who are engrossed in sense gratification and trying to inflict pains to others.
So if we avoid this in our life, in our internet travels, try to avoid this, you know, asat influence of bad things upon us. It means you are a devotee according to Lord Chaitanya. So that's his definition.
Thank you so much, Maharaj. Um and I'm sure that Anya has got her answer. Um I would next like to request Om to unmute himself and ask his question. They have already asked.
Oh, oh, okay, he has raised his hand but No Om. Yes. Um actually my question is uh what is the difference between uh Vedic science and normal science? Vedic science and normal science, she's asked. So I
Limits of virtue without spiritual roots
think, uh, Gandhana, you should you listen to the class once again. Mahārāja has just described all of that.
Yes, so we go for one last question which says that we see sometimes so-called karnis, even athis, they're very kind and well behaved in the society, they're very friendly and helpful. So, how do we understand them from the spiritual point of view? The people who are not spiritual but they're they have good qualities. How do I understand this?
Well see uh the depths of uh these qualities uh you know have to be proven. Uh In the fifth canto of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, it is said Harava Bhaktasya kutoma had guṇan manorat hena sati devatobahia.
The logic of this statement by Prahlāda Mahārāja is that people who are not devotees, who don't have spiritual inclination,
it's very difficult for them to develop really deeply good qualities because their mind is always running after the external things. They are attached to external things.
You know, they see something and they, you know, if if they get something which they really want or they're too much attached, they may forget about their good qualities.
Superficially, they may be well trained, they may be born in good families, they may get good training, but you know ultimately, you have to judge you know we we don't have to judge other people.
You know, if people behave nicely, if they're kind, we have to respect them, no matter you know what they think or whatever it is.
But at the same time, you know, we should not be too quick to make the final judgment because ultimately the test will come, which will say who is who.
You know, and if you are too much attached to the external words, it's very difficult to be consistently good. That's the point of this Bhagavatam verse.
If you attach to external things, if you want some external achievements, it is very difficult to maintain consistently good qualities.
Sooner or later, you know somebody will you know say something to you which you will not like and then you will it will blow your mind and you will say something.
Anyway, that's the point which I'm trying to make is that we should respect, we should not be bewildered. Yes, there are good people in this world.
Not all of them are devotees, but ultimately you can only be consistently good if you have spiritual foundation of all your qualities.
If you don't have spiritual foundation of the qualities, your qualities, they may be there, your virtues may be there, but they are on a shaky ground. There is no foundation of them.
So it means that there will be sensory pleasure even if you can you repeat please?
The sensory pleasure will still remain even visible. Ah yeah, you're right. Thank you very much. The attachment for sense gratification will still remain if even if you're
good, and then you may somehow or other you know compromise in your good qualities because for the sake of sense pleasure. Thank you. Ashwit. Hariksha Maj. Hariksha Maharaj.
I uh I would like to thank you for giving a wonderful lecture on how to develop faith in scriptures in the twenty-first century. It has been very informative and I'm sure many of us started having faith in scriptures already.
Some of the most interesting points that I felt with like how Vedic philosophy is very scientific but it's not the mundane science we understand. And like maths is the basis of everything in modern world.
Religion is basis of everything in the mid in the spiritual world. It is like the inverted reflection of the spiritual world.
And how there is more of a chance of a Boeing plan created from a trash can than a living cell being create formed by entropy. In fact there is no chance of that happening.
Uh finally I would like to thank the gathering here for giving a very patient listen and an interactive response. Thank you very much, Ashwin.
And uh I actually wanted Madhumati Puskarini told me that I should engage you somehow rather in sam aktivites, but I feel to do this. I am sorry. But I'm happy that you appreciated some of the points I made.
Thank you very much for the marajaria. You have very beautiful platform. Uh you have engaged us so wonderfully. Thank you very much.
We do hope to get a chance where all the children can come and sit in front of you and listen to you. Oh that would be wonderful. That would be wonderful. I would be happy. Thank you very much. Hare Krishna.