Transcendental Nectar of Sadhu-Sanga

An article by Melanie Phillips appeared in the online Spectator (UK), on 23 Oct 2008. She wrote about the debate between Richard Dawkins and John Lennox at the Oxford Natural History Museum. Dawkins has published his book, The God Delusion, in what has become his militant atheist style, and John Lennox, who is also a professor at Oxford, critqued that book in his own publication entitled God’s Undertaker:Has Science Buried God?  Lennox is an atheist turned theist, as is his famous counterpart, Anthony Flew, who also criticized Dawkins’ erstwhile encursion into theology. Flew is also mentioned in the article.

It seems that recently Dawkins has, to some degree, backpeddled in his thinking about the existence of God and purpose in the universe, admitting to the possibility of deism or an extra terrestrial origin of life. Dawkins was incredulous when he learned that the Natural History Museum in which the debate was held, was built for the glorification of God through science, by those who saw the study of Zoology, Geology, etc. as a means to further Man’s appreciation of the wonderful creation of its Creator.

We read and discuss the article found on the internet at http://www.spectator.co.uk/melaniephillips/2543431/is-richard-dawkins-still-evolving.thtml

The MP3 for the Satsanga can be accessed here (Downloads 112)

Today we disucessed the influence of Sripad Bhaktisvarupa Damodara Maharaja on Dr. Roger Penrose’s new conception of the cyclical nature of the universal creation. The article that we are reading during the satsanga may be found at http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=859062

Bhaktivinoda Thakur writes in his Tattva Viveka:

Commentary by Srilla Bhaktivinoda Thäkura

  Logic that comes from the soul’s own natural knowledge is pure and faultless. The philosophy that comes from such logic is the actual truth. Separated from that natural knowledge, true logic has no power to stand. However, logic that comes from material knowledge, the logic that is seen everywhere in this world, is always mixed and impure. Philosophies that come from such mixed logic are always faulty and lacking. Such philosophies are never good at describing God. Mixed logic is not the proper tool to describe the Supreme Truth. Pure logic which takes shelter of the soul’s natural knowledge is the proper tool to describe the Supreme Truth. Here someone may ask, “What is this natural knowledge of which you speak?” The answer is: The soul is spiritual, and therefore naturally full of spiritual knowledge. That original knowledge possessed by the soul is called here “natural knowledge”. That natural knowledge is eternally present in the soul. It is not created by perceiving the contents of he material world. The activities of that natural knowledge are called pure logic. That natural knowledge was known by the soul before the soul ever had any knowledge of the material world.

  That knowledge is: (1) I am. (2) I continue to be. (3) I am happy. (4) My happiness comes from a certain place. a shelter, a reservoir of happiness. (5) It is natural for me to take shelter of that reservoir of happiness. (6) I am eternally a follower of that reservoir of happiness. (7) That reservoir of happiness is very beautiful. (8) I have no power to abandon that reservoir of happiness. (9) My present condition is lamentable. (10) Abandoning that lamentable condition I should take shelter of that reservoir of happiness. (11) This material world is not my eternal home. (12) By becoming elevated in this mateerial world I do not become elevated eternally.

 If logic does not takle shelter of this natural knowledge, logic remains mixed with matter. Then logic is only a babbler of nonsense. Even in ordinary material science, first some axioms must be accepted. In mathematics, astronomy, or other sciences, one cannot make progress if one does not first accept the axioms. In the science of understanding the Supreme Truth one must also first accept some axioms, the axioms given by natural knowledge. Those axioms are the root from which the tree of spiritual knowledge grows.

Gauranga Premananda das says: Could you please elaborate or explain this perfect logic? these 12 steps. Are there other pure logics proving God?

Ko addha veda ka ih pra vocatkut ajata kut iyam vishrishtih
Arvagdeva asya visarjanenatha ko veda yat ababhuva [6]

Who verily knows and who can here declare it, whence it was born and whence comes this creation?

The Gods are later than this world’s production. Who knows, then, whence it first came into being.