|
आज शाळेत अथवा कॉलेजमधे जे विज्ञान शिकवले जाते, ते बहुतांशी western oriented/originated आहे. त्यामुळे विज्ञान म्हणजे ज्या ज्या गोष्टींना समीकरणात बसवता येईल तेवढ्याच असा समज असू शकतो. ह्या अशा विज्ञानातून भारतीय concepts चा शोध घेण्याच्या दृष्टीनी तितकी प्रगती झाली नाहिये. हा मार्ग चुकीचा नाही पण विज्ञानाची कक्षा western न ठेवता जर वैदिक अवलंबली तर कदाचित हे अंतर लवकर कापता येईल. वेदांमधे फ़क्त तत्वज्ञान नाही तर विज्ञानही आहे हे सर्वमान्य आहे. अगदीच साधे उदाहरण द्यायचे झाले तर ऋग्वेदामधे प्रकाशाच्या वेगासंबंधीही माहीती सापडते. http://www.tginvents.com/tushar/speedoflight.htm ही लिंक पहावी. जर ध्यानाचा मार्ग न अवलंबता केवळ समीकरणातून देव शोधायचा असेल(किंवा तो तसा शोधणे शक्य नाही ह्याची खात्री करायची असेल) तर वैदिक ज्ञानाचा उपयोग होऊ शकेल.
ध्यानधारणा न करता आणखी कुठले supreme consciousness चा जवळपास जाऊन अभ्यास करणारे माध्यम असेल तर ते माझ्या माहिती प्रमाणे ज्योतिषशास्त्र. जीव, पुनर्जन्म, घराण्याशी संबंधित चांगले वाईट परिणाम वगैरे राहू, नेपच्यून, मोक्ष त्रिकोणातील ग्रहयोग ह्यावरून सांगितले जाऊ शकतात. अर्थात ज्योतिषशास्त्र हे certainty पेक्षा probability वरती जास्त based आहे. फ़लज्योतिषाच्या अभ्यासात ग्रहांचे परिणाम का होतात ह्याबद्दल आजच्या विज्ञानात विद्युतचुंबकीय लहरींतून म्हणजेच electromagnetic waves असे उत्तर दिले जाते. पण मोक्ष म्हणजे नक्की काय ह्याबद्दल ज्योतिषशास्त्रात खूप चांगले दाखले आहेत. ते अभ्यासता येतील. पण हे ही शास्त्र पूर्णपणे तर्कावरती अवलंबून आहे. फ़रक एवढाच की ह्याचे परिणाम जगासाठी दृष्ट आहेत. अर्थात, एखादी गोष्ट केवळ माहिती असणे व त्याचा अनुभव असणे ह्यातला फ़रक रहाणारच.
पाश्चिमात्य उगम असलेल्या विज्ञानातून देव पहाण्या एवढे माझ्याजवळ ज्ञान नाही. तसा कुणी प्रयत्न करू पहात असेल तर ते कौतुकास्पद ठरेल. देव काय आहे हा विचार डोळसपणे मांडणारे नास्तिक खूप कमी असतात. (नास्तिक शब्दाच्या मूळ अर्थाप्रमाणे - जे वेदांना प्रमाण मानत नाहीत असे - भगवान बुद्ध व महावीर ही नास्तिक होते) अशा विचारातून कदाचित एखादी नवी दिशा मिळूही शकेल. अर्थात, ह्या विभुतींनी जगाला भक्तीमार्गच शिकवला. पण देवाचा संबंध अधिभौतिक सुखाशी लावून, ते तसे मिळत नाही असे पाहून, देव हीच खोटी संकल्पना आहे असे बोलणे ह्यात मला तथ्य दिसत नाही. अर्थात तुमचे प्रश्न तसे नव्हते म्हणून चर्चेचा मोह टाळला नाही.
|
अरे वा चर्चा आता वेगळ्या गृहीतकांकडे वळत आहे. जस्ट क्युरीअस कोणी प्लेटो ची Idea concept आणी immortal soul वाचले आहे का? शिवाय त्यावर ऍरीस्टॉटल ने केलीली टिप्पनी वाचली आहे का?
त्या थेअरीस वाचल्यावर एका वेगळ्या दृष्टीकोनातुन देव वा ती शक्ती वा अजुन काही याकडे बघता येउ शकेल.
( त्याची नाव अशासाठी की ते Natural philosophers आहेत)
|
ध्यान हा विज्ञानमार्ग नाही असं तुम्ही का म्हणता? तुमच्या मते विज्ञानमार्ग म्हणजे नक्की काय?
Scientific method is a body of techniques for investigating phenomena, acquiring new knowledge, or correcting and integrating previous knowledge. It is based on gathering observable, empirical and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning.[ scientific method consists of the collection of data through observation and experimentation, and the formulation and testing of hypotheses.[
|
Yog
| |
| | Tuesday, January 15, 2008 - 3:18 am: | 
| 
|
आता चर्चा शाळेतल्या पाठ्यपुस्तकान्कडे वळत आहे..(वरील विज्ञानाची व्याख्या वाचता) 
|
>>>> scientific method consists of the collection of data through observation and experimentation, and the formulation and testing of hypotheses.
मग या observation and experimentation मध्ये ध्यान का बसत नाही? ध्यानधारणा करायच्या पद्धती आहेत, त्यात वेगवेगळ्या टप्प्यांत येणार्‍या अनुभवांची नोंद आहे, कुणीही ही पद्धत follow करून पडताळा घेऊ शकतं.
|
Maanus
| |
| | Tuesday, January 15, 2008 - 10:48 pm: |
|
|
परमेश्वर ही संकल्पना सोडल्याशिवाय माणसाची प्रगती नाही. - डॉ. लागू.
http://www.esakal.com/esakal/01162008/PuneF55D484A61.htm
|
मग या observation and experimentation मध्ये ध्यान का बसत नाही?
कारण अमुक इतके तास ध्यान केले तर अशा प्रकारचे अनुभव येतील असे वस्तुनिष्ठ आणी पडताळा करून पहाता येण्यासारखे निष्कर्श उपलब्ध नाहीत.
आहे ते सारे व्यक्तीसापेक्ष आहे
|
Bhagvad Gita vacha. Tyat sarva kahi ahe.
|
Maanus
| |
| | Thursday, January 17, 2008 - 5:27 am: |
|
|
.. .. .. ..
|
Scorp_119
| |
| | Friday, January 18, 2008 - 6:22 am: |
|
|
Swami Vivekananda gave this brilliant lecture in England on June 7, 1896. It was transcribed by J. J. Goodwin and subsequently included in the book Jnana Yoga and also in the Complete Works (2: 57-69). Swamiji discusses here some of the most vital issues connected with religion: the beginning of religion and the role of religious study.
Religion: The Most Potent Force
Of all the forces that have worked and are still working to mould the destinies of the human race, none certainly is more potent than that, the manifestation of which we call religion. All social organizations have as a background, somewhere, the workings of that peculiar force, and the greatest cohesive impulse ever brought into play amongst human units has been derived from this power. It is obvious to all of us that in very many cases the bonds of religion have proved stronger than the bonds of race or of climate or even of descent. It is a well-known fact that persons worshipping the same God, believing in the same religion, have stood by each other with much greater strength and constancy than people of merely the same descent or even brothers.
Beginning of Religion: Two Theories
Ancestor Worship
Nature Worship
1 Ancestor Worship
Various attempts have been made to trace the beginnings of religion. In all the ancient religions which have come down to us at the present day, we find one claim made--that they are all supernatural, that their genesis is not, as it were, in the human brain, but that they have originated somewhere outside of it.
Two theories have gained some acceptance amongst modern scholars. One is the spirit theory of religion, the other the evolution of the idea of the Infinite. One party maintains that ancestor worship is the beginning of religious ideas; the other, that religion originates in the personification of the power of nature. We want to keep up the memory of our dead relatives and think that they are living even when the body is dissolved, and we want to place food for them and, in a certain sense, to worship them. Out of that came the growth we call religion.
Studying the ancient religions of the Egyptians, Babylonians, Chinese, and many other races in America and elsewhere, we find very clear traces of this ancestor worship being the beginning of religion. With the ancient Egyptians, the first idea of the soul was that of a double. Every human body contained in it another being very similar to it; and when a person died, this double went out of the body and yet lived on. But the life of the double lasted only so long as the dead body remained intact, and that is why we find among the Egyptians so much solicitude to keep the body uninjured. And that is why they built those huge pyramids in which they preserved the bodies. For, if any portion of the external body was hurt, the double would be correspondingly injured. This is clearly ancestor worship. With the ancient Babylonians we find the same idea of the double, but with a variation. The double lost all sense of love; it frightened the living to give it food and drink, and to help it in various ways. It even lost all affection for its own children and its own wife. Among the ancient Hindus also, we find traces of this ancestor worship. Among the Chinese, the basis of their religion may also be said to be ancestor worship, and it still permeates the length and breadth of that vast country. In fact, the only religion that can really be said to flourish in China is that of ancestor worship. Thus it seems, on the one hand, a very good position is made out for those who hold the theory of ancestor worship as the beginning of religion.
2. Nature Worship
On the other hand, there are scholars who from the ancient Aryan literature show that religion originated in nature worship. Although in India we find proofs of ancestor worship everywhere, yet in the oldest records there is no trace of it whatsoever. In the Rig-Veda Samhita, the most ancient record of the Aryan race, we do not find any trace of it. Modern scholars think, it is the worship of nature that they find there. The human mind seems to struggle to get a peep behind the scenes. The dawn, the evening, the hurricane, the stupendous and gigantic forces of nature, its beauties, these have exercised the human mind, and it aspires to go beyond, to understand something about them. In the struggle they endow these phenomena with personal attributes, giving them souls and bodies, sometimes beautiful, sometimes transcendent. Every attempt ends by these phenomena becoming abstractions whether personalized or not. So also it is found with the ancient Greeks; their whole mythology is simply this abstracted nature worship. So also with the ancient Germans, the Scandinavians, and all the other Aryan races. Thus, on this side, too, a very strong case has been made out, that religion has its origin in the personification of the forces of nature.
Their Reconciliation: The Struggle to Transcend the Limitations of the Senses
These two views, though they seem to be contradictory, can be reconciled on a third basis which, to my mind, is the real germ of religion, and that I propose to call the struggle to transcend the limitations of the senses. Either, people go to seek for the spirits of their ancestors, the spirits of the dead, that is, they want to get a glimpse of what there is after the body is dissolved, or, they desire to understand the power working behind the stupendous phenomena of nature. Whichever of these is the case, one thing is certain, that they try to transcend the limitations of the senses. They cannot remain satisfied with their senses; they want to go beyond them.
The explanation need not be mysterious. To me it seems very natural that the glimpse of religion should come through dreams. The first idea of immortality we may well get through dreams. Isn’t that a most wonderful state? And we know that children and untutored minds find very little difference between dreaming and their waking state. What can be more natural than that they find, as natural logic, that even during the sleep state, when the body is apparently dead, the mind goes on with all its intricate workings? What wonder that they will at once come to the conclusion that when this body is dissolved forever, the same working will go on? This, to my mind, would be a more natural explanation of the supernatural, and through this dream idea the human mind rises to higher and higher conceptions. Of course, in time, the vast majority of mankind found out that these dreams are not verified by their waking states, and that during the dream state it is not that we have a fresh existence, but simply that we recapitulate the experiences of the waking state.
The Discovery of States Higher Than Waking or Dreaming
But by this time the search had begun and the search was inward. Human beings continued inquiring more deeply into the different stages of the mind and discovered higher states than either the waking or the dreaming. This state of things we find in all the organized religions of the world, called either ecstasy or inspiration. In all organized religions, their founders, prophets, and messengers are declared to have gone into states of mind that were neither waking nor sleeping, in which they came face to face with a new series of facts relating to what is called the spiritual kingdom. They realized things there much more intensely than we realize facts around us in our waking state. Take, for instance, the religions of the Brahmins. The Vedas are said to be written by Rishis. These Rishis were sages who realized certain facts. The exact definition of the Sanskrit word Rishi is a Seer of Mantras--of the thoughts conveyed in the Vedic hymns. These Rishis declared that they had realized--sensed, if that word can be used with regard to the supersensuous--certain facts, and these facts they proceeded to put on record. We find the same truth declared amongst both the Jews and the Christians.
Some exceptions may be taken in the case of the Buddhists as represented by the Southern sect. It may be asked--if the Buddhists do not believe in any God or soul, how can their religion be derived from the supersensuous state of existence? The answer to this is that even the Buddhists find an eternal moral law, and that moral law was not reasoned out in our sense of the word. But Buddha found it, discovered it, in a supersensuous state. Those of you who have studied the life of Buddha, even as briefly given in that beautiful poem The Light of Asia, may remember that Buddha is represented as sitting under the Bo-tree until he reached that supersensuous state of mind. All his teachings came through this, and not through intellectual cogitations.
Thus, a tremendous statement is made by all religions; that the human mind, at certain moments, transcends not only the limitations of the senses but also the power of reasoning. It then comes face to face with facts that it could never have sensed, could never have reasoned out. These facts are the basis of all the religions of the world. Of course, we have the right to challenge these facts, to put them to the test of reason. Nevertheless, all the existing religions of the world claim for the human mind this peculiar power of transcending the limits of the senses and the limits of reason; and this power they put forward as a statement of fact.
Renunciation and Its Relation to Ethics
Apart from the consideration of the question how far these facts claimed by religions are true, we find one characteristic common to them all. They are all abstractions as contrasted with the concrete discoveries of physics, for instance; and in all the highly organized religions they take the purest form of Unit Abstraction, either in the form of an Abstracted Presence, as an Omnipresent Being, as an Abstract Personality called God, as a Moral Law, or in the form of an Abstract Essence underlying every existence.
In modern times, too, the attempts made to preach religions without appealing to the supersensuous state of mind have had to take up the old abstractions of the Ancients and give different names to them as "Moral Law," the "Ideal Unity," and so forth, thus showing that these abstractions are not in the senses. None of us have yet seen an "Ideal Human Being," and yet we are told to believe in it. None of us have yet seen an ideally perfect person, and yet without that ideal we cannot progress. Thus, this one fact stands out from all these different religions, that there is an Ideal Unit Abstraction, which is put before us, either in the form of a Person or an Impersonal Being, or a Law, or a Presence, or an Essence. We are always struggling to raise ourselves up to that ideal.
Every human being, whosoever and wheresoever he or she may be, has an ideal of infinite power. Every human being has an ideal of infinite pleasure. Most of the works that we find around us, the activities displayed everywhere, are due to the struggle for this infinite power or this infinite pleasure. But a few quickly discover that although they are struggling for infinite power, it is not through the senses that it can be reached. They find out very soon that that infinite pleasure is not to be got through the senses. In other words, the senses are too limited and the body is too limited to express the Infinite. To manifest the Infinite through the finite is impossible, and sooner or later we learn to give up the attempt to express the Infinite through the finite. This giving up, this renunciation of the attempt, is the background of ethics. Renunciation is the very basis upon which ethics stands. There never was an ethical code preached which had not renunciation for its basis.
All the current social forms and methods are derived from society as it exists, but what right has the Utilitarian to assume that society is eternal? Society did not exist ages ago, possibly will not exist ages hence. Most probably it is one of the passing stages through which we are going towards a higher evolution, and any law that is derived from society alone cannot be eternal, cannot cover the whole ground of the human nature. At best, therefore, Utilitarian theories can only work under present social conditions. Beyond that they have no value. But a morality, an ethical code, derived from religion and spirituality, has the whole of infinite human being for its scope. It takes up the individual, but its relations are to the Infinite, and it takes up society also--because society is nothing but numbers of these individuals grouped together; and as it applies to the individual and his or her eternal relations, it must necessarily apply to the whole of society, in whatever condition it may be at any given time. Thus we see that there is always the necessity of spiritual religion for human beings. We cannot always think of matter, however pleasurable it may be.
It has been said that too much attention to things spiritual disturbs our practical relations in this world. As far back as in the days of the Chinese sage Confucius, it was said, "Let us take care of this world: and then, when we have finished with this world, we will take care of other world." It is very well that we should take care of this world. But if too much attention to the spiritual may affect a little our practical relations, too much attention to the so-called practical hurts us here and hereafter. It makes us materialistic. For we are not to regard nature as our goal but something higher.
Religious Study, the Healthiest Exercise for the Human Mind
Thus, apart from the solid facts and truths that we may learn from religion, apart from the comforts that we may gain from it, religion as a science, as a study, is the greatest and healthiest exercise that the human mind can have. This pursuit of the Infinite, this struggle to grasp the Infinite, this effort to get beyond the limitations of the senses out of matter, as it were-- and to evolve the spiritual person --this striving day and night to make the Infinite one with our being--this struggle itself is the grandest and most glorious that we can make.
Some persons find the greatest pleasure in eating. We have no right to say that they should not. Others find the greatest pleasure in possessing certain things. We have no right to say that they should not. But they also have no right to say no to the person who finds the highest pleasure in spiritual thought. The lower the organization, the greater is the pleasure in the senses. Very few people can eat a meal with the same gusto as a dog or a wolf. But all the pleasures of the dog or the wolf have gone, as it were into the senses. The lower types of humanity in all nations find pleasure in the senses, while the cultured and the educated find it in thought, in philosophy, in arts and sciences. Spirituality is a still higher plane. The subject being infinite, that plane is the highest, and the pleasure there is the highest for those who can appreciate it. So even on the utilitarian ground that we are to seek for pleasure, we should cultivate religious thought, for it is the highest pleasure that exists. Thus religion, as a study, seems to me to be absolutely necessary.
We can see it in its effects. It is the greatest motive power that moves the human mind. No other ideal can put into us the same mass of energy as the spiritual. So far as human history goes, it is obvious to all of us that this has been the case and that its powers are not dead. I do not deny that people can be very good and moral on simply utilitarian grounds. There have been many great men and women in this world perfectly sound, moral and good, simply on utilitarian grounds. But the world-movers, those who bring, as it were, a mass of magnetism into the world, whose spirit works in hundreds and in thousands, whose life ignites others with a spiritual fire--such persons we always find have that spiritual background. Their motive power came from religion. Religion is the greatest motive power for realizing that infinite energy which is the birthright and nature of every one of us. In building up character, in making for everything that is good and great, in bringing peace to others and peace to one’s own self, religion is the highest motive power and, therefore, ought to be studied from that standpoint.
|
Yog
| |
| | Thursday, January 24, 2008 - 8:34 pm: |
|
|
zakki mode on*
देव म्हणजे काय? सचिन! आणि तो साक्षात आहे देखिल. तेव्हा हा bb आता बंद करा..
|
Malavika
| |
| | Thursday, January 24, 2008 - 11:56 pm: |
|
|
ही मायबोली आहे तेव्हा मराठीत लिहीण्याचे कष्ट घ्या.
|
Zakki
| |
| | Friday, January 25, 2008 - 2:47 am: |
|
|
अहो मालविका, असे काय लिहीताय्! एकदा माझ्या रंगीबेरंगी पानावर जाऊन पहा मी या विषयाबद्दल काय लिहीले आहे. अक्षरश: गेली सात वर्षे 'उर्ध्वबाहूविरोम्येषां .... न च कश्चिद् श्रुणोति माम्' असे झाले आहे.
|
शिंचा हा बी बी बंद करा...
झक्की... तुम्ही पिकले पान आहात असे आपल्या पोस्ट्स वरुन वाटत राहते. तेव्हा हे रंगीबेरंगी पान म्हणजे काय आणि ते कुठे पहायला मिळेल याची खातरजमा करावी ही विनंती.
|
Slarti
| |
| | Friday, January 25, 2008 - 10:03 am: |
|
|
पंत अहो, ते बागांच्या राज्यांमधले आहेत. तिथे पाने पिकली की एकदम रंगीबेरंगी होतात आणि झक्की 'रोममध्ये असता...' वाले. कसें ? * बरं, तो सोहळा सुंदर असतो असे म्हणतात... म्हणजे बागांची पाने रंगीबेरंगी होण्याचा. *
|
Zakki
| |
| | Friday, January 25, 2008 - 11:56 am: |
|
|
नमस्कार धोंडोपंत.
'पिकल्या पानाचा रंग की हो हिरवा'!
अहो काय सांगू, या नव्या जुन्या मायबोलीच्या गोंधळात ते माझे मलाच सापडत नाही. याबाबतीत थेट मायबोलीच्या संचालकांकडेच विचारणा करणे योग्य.
|
Runi
| |
| | Friday, January 25, 2008 - 7:43 pm: |
|
|
झक्की खरच सापडत नाहीये तुम्हाला तुमचं रंगीबेरंगीच पान? नवीन मायबोलीवर आहे की,
ही घ्या लिंक
|
Zakki
| |
| | Friday, January 25, 2008 - 9:07 pm: |
|
|
धन्यवाद रुनी. मराठी न लिहीण्याची अनेऽक कारणे, जी मी गेल्या सात वर्षात इथे वाचली, ती एकत्र संकलित करून ठेवली होती, तेच नेमके सापडत नाहीये. कदाचित् इतरत्र कुठेतरी लिहीले असेन! पुन: लिहीन, जर कुणी पुन: मराठी लिहा म्हणू लागले तर.
|
Slarti
| |
| | Friday, January 25, 2008 - 11:19 pm: |
|
|
झक्की, तुमच्या 'अहम् ब्रह्माऽस्मि' या रंगीबेरंगी लेखाला तुम्ही स्वतःच प्रतिसाद दिलाय त्यात उपरोल्लेखित 'मराठी न लिहीण्याची कारणे' सापडतील. मी नुकतेच वाचले होते आणि पटले त्यामुळे आठवले.
अहम् ब्रह्माऽस्मि
कृपया माझा एक गोंधळ दूर कराल का ? 'ब्रम्ह' आणि 'ब्रह्म' यातील बरोबर काय ?
|
Zakki
| |
| | Saturday, January 26, 2008 - 1:31 pm: |
|
|
धन्यवाद. मला वाटले नव्हते त्या कारणांमधे कुणाला एव्हढे गम्य असेल.
ब्रह्म हे मला बरोबर वाटते. आता जुने संस्कृतचे ग्रंथ कुठे वाचनालयात दिसले तर तिथे जाऊन बघा. मी तिथेच वाचले.
पूर्वी उच्चारांना फार महत्व होते. असे म्हणतात की मंत्रांची शक्ति केवळ शब्दात नसून उच्चारातहि असते. पूर्वीचे काही उच्चार आमच्या संस्कृतच्या गुरुजींनी करून दाखवले होते.
आता काय विचारता? स्वत: चे नाव सुद्धा विक्रम म्हणता येत नाही म्हणून 'व्हिकी' झाले आहे.
|
|
| मायबोली |
|
| चोखंदळ ग्राहक |
|
| महाराष्ट्र धर्म वाढवावा |
|
| व्यक्तिपासून वल्लीपर्यंत |
|
| पांढर्‍यावरचे काळे |
|
| गावातल्या गावात |
|
| तंत्रलेल्या मंत्रबनात |
|
| आरोह अवरोह |
|
| शुभंकरोती कल्याणम् |
|
| विखुरलेले मोती |
|
|
|
|