“In glorification of Srila Gadadhar Pandit and Srila Sachidananda Bhaktivinoda Thakur on their Holy Disappearance Day”
http://www.scsmath.com/docs/articles/Bktnd-GadadharDisap_Dmynt0507/Disap_Gadadhar_BtvndTkr1.html
“Srimad Bhaktivinoda-viraha Dasakam”
http://www.scsmath.com/02c/btvnd_varahadasakam_pj.html

Here is the recording of 11 July 2010 satsanga.

Download (Downloads 34)

Servant of Servants.

Our Affectionate Guardians – Part 1
http://www.gosai.com/chaitanya/saranagati/html/vishnu_mjs/affection_unabridged/index.html

Here is the recording of 30 May 2010 satsanga.

Download (Downloads 80)

Servant of Servants.

Reading and commentary by HH BP Tirtha Maharaja
Encounters with Divinity – The Path of Dedication Vol. II
by Srila B.R. Sridhara Maharaja
(not available via Internet)

Here is the recording of 23 May 2010 satsanga.

Download (Downloads 101)

Servant of Servants.

http://srimadbhagavatam.com/1/3/38/en

Here is the recording of 19 January 2010 satsanga.

Download (Downloads 99)

Servant of Servants.

http://srimadbhagavatam.com/1/3/37/en

Here is the recording of 12 January 2010 satsanga.

Please click link below….

Download (Downloads 54)

Servant of Servants.

http://srimadbhagavatam.com/1/3/33/en
http://srimadbhagavatam.com/1/3/34/en

Here is the recording of 22 December 2009 satsanga.

Please click link below….

Download (Downloads 76)

Servant of Servants.

Recitation and discussion of the Sikshastakam

Here is the recording of 20 December 2009 satsanga.

download (Downloads 80)

Click here for the full text.

Servant of Servants.

http://srimadbhagavatam.com/1/3/29/en
http://srimadbhagavatam.com/1/3/30/en
http://srimadbhagavatam.com/1/3/31/en
http://srimadbhagavatam.com/1/3/32/en
http://srimadbhagavatam.com/1/3/33/en

Here is the recording of 15 December 2009 satsanga.

Please click link below….

Download (Downloads 56)

Servant of Servants.

Q&A with HH Bhakti Madhava Puri Swami

Here is the recording of 13 December 2009 satsanga.

download (Downloads 85)

Servant of Servants.

http://srimadbhagavatam.com/1/3/31/en
http://srimadbhagavatam.com/1/3/32/en

Here is the recording of 08 December 2009 satsanga.

Please click link below….

Download (Downloads 68)

Servant of Servants.

http://srimadbhagavatam.com/1/3/30/en

Here is the recording of 01 December 2009 satsanga.

Please click link below….

Download (Downloads 63)

Servant of Servants.

Q&A with HH Bhakti Madhava Puri Swami

Here is the recording of 29 November 2009 satsanga.

download (Downloads 8)

Servant of Servants.

http://srimadbhagavatam.com/1/3/28/en
http://srimadbhagavatam.com/1/3/29/en

Here is the recording of 24 November 2009 satsanga.

Please click link below….

Download (Downloads 46)

Servant of Servants.

Introduction to HH Bhakti Kusum Swami

Here is the recording of 22 November 2009 satsanga.

download (Downloads 35)

Servant of Servants.

http://srimadbhagavatam.com/1/3/25/en
http://srimadbhagavatam.com/1/3/26/en
http://srimadbhagavatam.com/1/3/27/en

Here is the recording of 17 November 2009 satsanga.

Please click link below….

Download (Downloads 48)

Servant of Servants.

http://srimadbhagavatam.com/1/3/11/en
http://srimadbhagavatam.com/1/3/12/en
http://srimadbhagavatam.com/1/3/13/en
http://srimadbhagavatam.com/1/3/14/en
http://srimadbhagavatam.com/1/3/15/en
http://srimadbhagavatam.com/1/3/16/en
http://srimadbhagavatam.com/1/3/17/en
http://srimadbhagavatam.com/1/3/18/en
http://srimadbhagavatam.com/1/3/19/en
http://srimadbhagavatam.com/1/3/20/en
http://srimadbhagavatam.com/1/3/21/en
http://srimadbhagavatam.com/1/3/22/en
http://srimadbhagavatam.com/1/3/23/en
http://srimadbhagavatam.com/1/3/24/en

Here is the recording of 10 November 2009 satsanga.

Please click link below….

Download (Downloads 77)

Servant of Servants.

http://srimadbhagavatam.com/1/3/17/en
http://srimadbhagavatam.com/1/3/18/en
http://srimadbhagavatam.com/1/3/19/en
http://srimadbhagavatam.com/1/3/20/en
http://srimadbhagavatam.com/1/3/21/en

Here is the recording of 03 November 2009 satsanga.

Please click link below….

Download (Downloads 24)

Servant of Servants.

http://srimadbhagavatam.com/1/3/9/en
http://srimadbhagavatam.com/1/3/10/en

Here is the recording of 27 October 2009 satsanga.

Please click link below….

Download (Downloads 48)

Servant of Servants.

Dandavat Pranams

Please click the link below to download recording.

download (Downloads 62)

Click here for the full text.

Servant of Servants.

http://srimadbhagavatam.com/1/3/6/en
http://srimadbhagavatam.com/1/3/7/en
http://srimadbhagavatam.com/1/3/8/en

Here is the recording of 20 October 2009 satsanga.

Please click link below….

Download (Downloads 37)

Servant of Servants.

Dandavat Pranams

Please click the link below to download recording.

download (Downloads 57)

Click here for the full text.

Servant of Servants.

http://srimadbhagavatam.com/1/3/5/en

Here is the recording of 13 October 2009 satsanga.

Please click link below….

Download (Downloads 37)

Servant of Servants.

Dandavat Pranams

Please click the link below to download recording.

download (Downloads 37)

Click here for the full text.

Servant of Servants.

http://srimadbhagavatam.com/1/3/3/en
http://srimadbhagavatam.com/1/3/4/en

Here is the recording of 6 October 2009 satsanga.

Please click link below….

Download (Downloads 25)

Servant of Servants.

Dandavat Pranams

Please click the link below to download recording.

download (Downloads 43)

Click here for the full text.

Servant of Servants.

http://srimadbhagavatam.com/1/3/2/en

Here is the recording of 29 September 2009 satsanga.

Please click link below….

Download (Downloads 35)

Servant of Servants.

Dandavat Pranams

Please click the link below to download recording.

download (Downloads 43)

Click here for the full text.

Servant of Servants.

Dandvat pranams..

Here is the recording of 15 Feb 2009 satsanga.

Please click below links….

download (Downloads 96)

Servant of Servants.

Today on the appearence day of His Divine Grace Srila Bhakti Sundar Govinda Dev-Goswami Maharaj, Bhakti Madhav puri Maharaj discussed about the past time of Srila Bhakti Sundar Govinda Mahraj. 

Autobiography

http://scsmath.org/trove2/boundbyaffctn.html

Please  click here (Downloads 104) to listen.  

Servant of Servants

Today on Srila Bhaktisvarupa Damodara Gosvami Maharaja’s Vyasa Puja, Bhakti Madhav Puri Maharaj discussed about the past time of Srila Bhaktisvarupa Damodara Gosvami Maharaja. 

Part 1

Part2

Part3

Part4

Part5

Part6

Part7

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 106)

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.

Please accept our humble dandavats.

Hare Krsna.

–Satsanga MP3– Satsanga, August 10, 2008 is now uploaded.

      In the Satsanga a scientific discussion is presented about “Identity and personality” and thus a platform is proposed to help distinguish the human being from that of other form of living beings exist in the universe.  

http://www.animalliberationfront.com/Philosophy/Morality/Speciesism/MirrorMirrorEvidence.htm 

—————————————————————————

     Thinking is an activity. Knowing is an activity. That means consciousness is also an activity. Hegel said that the “I” is pure restlessness, pure activity, or pure negativity. Activity means change. And whatever changes must negate its present situation in order to change or appear in another situation. For a flying arrow its present position in space must be negated in order to move to a further position in space. The tensed bowstring imparts the force to the arrow for its movement or its negation of place to take occur. But in the case of thinking, what is the force that is activating it? According to Aristotle, thinking moves itself. It is self active or spontaneous. For him, thought thinking itself is God. This must not be misconceived as our thought or finite thought, but the Infinite or Pure Thought of the Absolute, from which all other finite movement comes.

When thought reflects upon itself, i.e. when thinking thinks about thinking, this self-reflection is what is called I. So we can understand why Aristotle called this God. The “I” also means identity. When I ask what is my real identity, I am asking, “who am I?” When someone wants to establish your identity, they want to know who you are.

      Identity is generally thought to refer to a numerical unity or one. However, that is not the case, because identity is a comparative term. In other words two things are required. Identical twins refer to two bodies. Even self-identity requires thought as subject, dealing with itself, its own thought, as object. So it apprehends itself by dividing itself. Or it reflects upon itself, i.e. makes itself object to itself as subject. In this way we say “I.”

     Consciousness is subjective and has an object of consciousness. But consciousness can also be conscious of itself. In that case it is called self-consciousness or Ego. Consciousness can also take different forms or shapes, such as knowing, thinking, feeling or willing. In that case it is called Mind. It can also take the form of a sensuous object. In that case it is called sentient. Behind or implicit to all these different forms, however, is thinking, although it may not be explicit to the consciousness when it is in its different forms.

     Depending on the different forms of consciousness an individual may not be able to access all the other forms of consciousness. Some may not be able to access their mathematical intelligence, or others their literary intelligence, or linguistic intelligence, etc. Some may not be able to access their artistic ability, and different forms of life, such as animals, are not able to access their thinking capacity. They are able to feel, and usually have strong feelings, and senses, but thinking is not accessible to them, even though it is there implicitly even in animals. Thus Man is called a rational animal. He is distinguished by his ability to think, and not merely act instinctively.

     For knowing, what is the necessary requirement? Knowing that an object is there is one requirement, but it is also required to know what the object is. These are not the same thing. Knowing that something is there refers to its being, but knowing what is there requires a determination of its being or determinate being. And what does that require? Determination requires thought or the explicit thinking aspect of consciousness, which we have explained is constituent of consciousness. Thinking, or the content of thinking, is what constitutes our personality, or the person. In order to be a person, there must be consciousness, but more significantly, when we say, ‘I,’ we must be thinking, as Descartes claimed.

     When the true knowledge or consciousness of the self or ‘I’ and our relationship with God are unknown or we are unconscious of that, then the individual in ignorance identifies with a limited or vitiated form of consciousness, and that is called the false ego.

     We can understand that there is a restricted (or conditioned) and unrestricted (or liberated) sense of self. In the unrestricted or universal sense, the ‘I’, exists in all the instances, circumstances, or arrangements of my body. I call myself ‘I’, whether I am sitting, standing, eating, running, thinking, whatever. Whatever the body is doing, ‘I’ remains the same. The body may be young, old, or middle-aged. The body keeps on changing – the situations of the body keep on changing, but ‘I’ remains the same. Just like the river Ganges, sometimes it overflows, sometimes it even changes its course, sometimes it has less water, sometimes more water. The water is always moving, changing, but still the flowing river is always identified as the Ganges. This means that the Ganges is something universal, i.e. it is an idea that is not associated merely with some particular sensuous experience. Similarly, the body is particular, the mental state is particular: sometimes we are happy, and sometimes we are unhappy. The mind is changing, the body is changing, but the ‘I’ remains the same.

     So the ‘I’ is of a different categorical nature than the situations that the ‘I’ identifies with. Thus we can categorize ‘I’ as a universal entity that is, moreover, not an entity or thing, but pure activity, as we explained before. However the ‘I’ is also not infinitely universal. Mathematicians know that there are different types of infinity, some larger than others. In other words, I can know from a first person perspective what is going on with my body, but not what is going on with yours. So the universality of my ‘I’ is limited. ‘I’ is a universal, but it is a limited universal. So the proper term would be infinitesimal, as our infinity is limited.

     Human beings are special among all the creators of the universe, because they have developed thinking to a very high degree of abstraction, and due to that they can understand a concept like ‘I’. Non human creators can’t say ‘I’, because their thinking is not so exclusively developed. Thus it is not possible for them to think: “Why am I suffering?” They must simply suffer their fate, unhappily, no doubt.

     What is the influence of the negative activity or the activity of thinking on the positive activity of the body and vise versa? We can’t say “positive” if there is no negative. There is relation; one can’t exist without the other. They are related although they are totally opposite. In electricity we have negative and positive charges, and in a magnet north pole and south pole, but they are complete opposites. Thinking can’t be detected by the senses. But if what we think about is a sensuous object then it has a positive significance to us. We call the experience of the sensuous or empirical field positivity. But we also experience thinking, and since it is not sensuous experience we can call it negativity.

     The negative is always related to the positive, and positive is always related to the negative. For example an object, say, a dog is here and a cow is there. From a sense point of view the dog and cow can be felt, seen, smelled and so on. But thinking or making the judgment that, here is the dog, there is the cow is not a sense activity. The determination that what is in front of me is a cow is not a sense determination, it is a judgment. I see some black, some white, some long, some big, some different qualities. I am seeing, but the judgment of what that I am seeing, that is coming from another place and not from the senses.

     There are so many things in this world that are black, white, small and long. However, this information is not enough to say that, that thing is a cow. Senses can only detect the qualities of the thing like color, the shape, the weight, the hardness and the softness. But to determine what that thing is, requires another principle that is a non sensuous principle. Thus it is above the senses.

     The word cow, the idea cow doesn’t come from the senses. It comes from the mind or the thinking. That is called judgment. To say ‘this is’ and then give it a name means to judge what this is. When we say ‘this’, we utter an ‘indexical’ or referential word – an abstract thing. ‘This’ refers to everything and thus ‘this’ is indeterminate. To determine what ‘this’ is requires a judgment or determination. Determining of ‘this’ means thinking is involved. To think what ‘this’ is, to give some definition to this, is called determination or thought.

     So from where does the thought of cow come? The word or idea is coming from thought. From where the thought of cow is coming we don’t actually know. That may not be the word cow, it may me ‘go’ in Sanskrit. ‘go’ and cow are the same word actually, they sound the same, they come from the same word. The original word was ‘go’ and in English it came down to cow. But from where the original word ‘go’ came from we can’t say.

        From all of this, I hope we can see that identity is a very important idea. Scientists don’t know much about it. They use it, but like “cow” and so many other words, they don’t know much about what they are saying or what they are doing. Still, identity is a very fundamental concept for them. For example, scientists think only in terms of atoms and molecules. For them identity means the atom. The atom, in chemistry, generally retains its identity regardless of whatever situation it is in. For scientists the atom or molecule is the basic principle of identity. They are the things that maintain their identity throughout time and throughout different circumstances or situations.

     The identity of the carbon atom remains throughout all its occurrences in chemistry. Of course in physics, from the nuclear principle it is different. Carbon can be broken down into neutron, proton, electron and all those subatomic particles become the principle identities. But otherwise, the carbon atom is the same in a rose and a caterpillar. How can we distinguish the carbon which is present in both rose and caterpillar? Scientists can’t speak about what distinguishes the carbon in a rose and a caterpillar, because their focus for identity is based upon atoms and molecules only. This is foolishness. They are not realizing that they are invoking the category of identity at a very low level, or one specific level. But the idea of identity exists at the grass level, at the caterpillar level, at the cow level, at the man level, at the level of a planet and earth. We can find identities at all levels, and they cannot all be encompassed at the level of the identity of atoms.

To hear this Transcendental Nectar of Satsanga please click here (Downloads 135)

You can browse year/month wise Streaming Satsanga MP3s at: http://mahaprabhu. net/satsanga/ .

Timing of weekly Satsanga: 6:00 PM India time, Every Sunday.  

You may visit http://mahaprabhu. net/satsanga/ about/ to know the details about joining process for the online “Weekly Satsangas”.

All Glories all Sadhus, Guru and Vaisnavas.

Thanking you.

Your humble servants

Purushottama Jagannatha Das &

Sir Isaac Newton

Newton ’s three laws of motion are well known in scientific literature. The first one is called the law of inertia. According to the first law an object at rest tends to remain at rest and an object in motion tends to remain in motion with the same speed and in the same direction unless acted upon by an external force.

The second law is the one most people are familiar with in the science courses and is know as law of force. According to the second law, the acceleration of an object as produced by a net force is directly proportional to the magnitude of that force, in the same direction as the net force, and inversely proportional to the mass of the object. The same can be expressed as a = F/m.

Constant velocity is called speed but acceleration is the change in speed or change in the velocity of an object. So if the velocity is described with the symbol ‘v’ then acceleration is the change in ‘v’ with respect to time ‘t’. In calculus it is described by ‘d’ differentiation, i.e., differential symbol ‘dv’ over ‘dt’ and we can express the acceleration as a = dv/dt. This indicates that acceleration is the change in velocity per unit change in time. When we drop something from a building — say a penny, the penny is at rest (v= 0) when we are holding it in our hand but when we drop it, it immediately begins to accelerate due to the force of gravity acting upon it. As it continues to move downward (increasing x) it will move at increasingly higher velocity. If that penny should hit someone on the head it may kill him/her depending on what velocity it has reached. Normally, if we drop a penny on someone’s head it won’t cause any damage. But if we drop it from a high distance and it falls on the head that same penny can crack the skull and kill the person. Thus it is to be concluded that it is not the penny which is responsible for killing the person, rather it is the velocity.

The third law states that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. According to Newton ’s third law, whenever two objects interact with each other both of them apply forces upon each other. The interaction can be possible when, the objects are in physical contact with each other or they are physically separated. Thus forces in general are classified as contact forces and action-at-a-distance forces. Frictional/resistance force, tensional force and normal force are the contact forces and on the other hand, gravitational force, electrical force and magnetic force are the action-at-a-distance forces.

A devotee asked a question to His Holiness Bhakti Madhava Puri Swami (BMP), Ph.D. of Bhaktivedanta Institute, in the weekly Satsanga on 3^rd of August, 2008: “What is the purpose of Newton ’s first law? Is it not true that first law is just a natural conclusion of second law? The second law states that F=ma. According to the second law, if the force ‘F’ is zero then the acceleration ‘a’ is zero, and if the acceleration ‘a’ is zero then the force ‘F’ is zero. Thus can we accept that the first law is a special case of second law and there is no need to mention it separately?” BMP explained the various details in answering this question and said that Newton ’s first law is more than just a special case of the second law. The first law describes a negative force and thus is a negative law. According to first law if we don’t apply enough force to a body, it won’t move. The first law is not merely applicable to zero force but it includes forces which are not sufficient to generate change in the speed/rest of a body. The first law tells us what force is needed to change the speed of a body, or what resistance has to be overcome. If the mass is too big as compared to the applied force then the force will be negated and thus can be called a negative law since it explains the negation of force. For example a small meteor can hit the earth with appreciable force but it may have no effect on the speed of the earth.

It is also sometimes explained in the scientific literature that that Newton ’s first law establishes the inertial frame by which we measure acceleration. That becomes important when we talk about, say, movement inside an airplane. If we drop a ball from our hand sitting in an airplane, and if the airplane is accelerating, the ball won’t drop. It will move backwards at first, i.e. it will move horizontally. Hence, apparently it is violating Newton ’s law of gravity. Thus we must know what the inertial frame of reference is, since without that Newton ’s law may not be properly applied.

Hence the first law is essential and can’t be replaced as a special case of second law. First we must know the inertial frame of reference and then we can know about the accelerating frame of reference. We know from Einstein’s general theory of relativity that Newton ’s laws are not valid at very high velocities approaching the speed of light, or for very massive bodies. This is because of the Lorentz transformation SQRT(1 – v²/c²)^-1 that becomes very important when v à c, where c is the speed of light. Thus Newton ’s laws have to be replaced by Einstein’s equations.

The devotee further asked the question, “Does the concept of inertia create the notion of will that a body posses? Materialists argue that the sense of ‘I’ and instinct of survival are nothing but the manifestation of inertia, a simple property of a body of matter.” BMP explained that organic matter is a spontaneously acting dynamic system. Matter is considered inert and doesn’t spontaneously move. What is causing matter to come to a state of spontaneous dynamic equilibrium? In other wards a living body is violating the inertial laws by moving and maintaining its ‘self’ against the environment. It is violating the law of inert matter. That is why we don’t expect that matter would give rise to life. The living body is not only a dynamic system but it is exchanging matter with the environment – taking matter in through a boundary and similarly eliminating matter. Inert matter is not expected to exhibit this type of spontaneous dynamic behavior.

We don’t know how we could interpret the dynamic equilibrium of living organisms with inertia. Inertia refers to the property of matter to remain in an unmoving state, or even if it is moving how it can establish any dynamic equilibrium without assistance. Sometimes it is argued that a living organism wants to continue living, so life has also a conservation principle similar to matter. It is the property of matter to conserve itself, so life has also the property of conservation.

We also agree with that. The conservation principle of life is known as sat in Vedic literature. But that would mean that the living organism will not die. Then, how can scientists explain the conservation of life at the death of a living organism?

Big Bang Model

We know the conservation law of matter – matter can neither be created nor destroyed. Of course applying Einstein’s theory in the case of matter we can transform matter into energy and energy into matter, i.e., E=MC^2. So conservation of matter means it can’t be created or destroyed but it can be transformed. Thus the destruction of both energy and matter can’t happen at the same time. Here is a big problem. Where does this energy and matter come from if it can’t be created? The Big Bang will be in trouble if we show that the matter and energy are somehow created. Thus it seems to violate some very fundamental principle of physics – conservation of matter and energy.

But as we mentioned, for life, if the conservation principle holds there, then how can scientists explain death. And how can they explain the creation of life? How can they explain that from non-life, life comes and again from life, non-life comes? This seems to violate any law of conservation or inertia that materialists may invoke. We accept that life is a separate principle (atma) from matter and thus can be conserved. But modern science has not yet advanced to this point.

You can download this Transcendental Nectar of Satsanga at (Downloads 70)

You can browse year/month wise Streaming Satsanga MP3s at: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga/ .

Peter Higgs

You can hear this Transcendental Nectar of Satsanga at (Downloads 136)

You can browse year/month wise Streaming Satsanga MP3s at: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga/ .

Timing of weekly Satsanga: 6:00 PM India time, Every Sunday.

You may visit http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga/about/ to know the details about joining process for the online “Weekly Satsangas”.

All Glories all Sadhus, Guru and Vaisnavas.

Thanking you.

Your humble servants

Purushottama Jagannatha Das &

Sushen Das

Subscribe to Satsanga Mailing List
Transcendental Nectar of Satsanga

Please accept our humble dandavats.

You can hear this Transcendental Nectar of Satsanga at (Downloads 199)

 

SCIENCE AND SCIENTIST
Inquiring into the Origin of Matter and Life
January-March 2008

  
Bhaktivedanata Institute’s latest quarterly newsletter
is now available online

  
You can download the January-March 2008 issue from:
http://scienceandscientist.org/current.php

______________________________ ______________________________ __
 

What’s it about?

  
Modern science has generally been directed toward investigating
the material world, excluding consideration of the conscious
scientist who is essential to the whole process, since, of
course, the very existence of the scientific endeavor itself
depends upon consciousness. Complete scientific knowledge must
consequently include both objective science and subjective
consciousness.
 
 

In addition to other programs, Bhaktivedanta Institute’s Science
and Scientist Newsletter is humbly offered to inspire scientists
and scholars to contribute their sincere efforts toward
developing this grand synthesis. The result will be valuable not
only for helping to better understand the “hard” problems of
science such as the nature and origin of life and the cosmos, the
mind-brain connection, artificial intelligence, etc. But the
pressing problems of ethics in science, world peace, and
interfaith dialog will also benefit from a more inclusive
scientific worldview.
 
 

In our modern era science and religion are the predominating
influences determining the fate of mankind. Promoting and
developing a culture of harmony between such diverse fields has
the potential to expand our conception of reality and advance
human knowledge in the new millennium, in which it is said the
study of life will be pre-eminent. Let us welcome the dawn of
that new epoch with great hope and determined endeavor.

______________________________ ______________________________ __
 
 

Newsletter Homepage: http://www.scienceandscientist.org
 
 

Newsletter Subscription:
http://www.scienceandscientist.org/subscribe.html
 

Please send comments, questions and submission of articles to:
editors@scienceandscientist.org

Please accept our humble dandavats.

In 2005, Science magazine published in the 125th Anniversary Issue 125 questions for which modern science has no tangible clue. These questions are presented under a special title What Don’t We Know? In the introduction section of “What Don’t We Know?” it is mentioned that “At Science, we tend to get excited about new discoveries that lift the veil a little on how things work, from cells to the universe. That puts our focus firmly on what has been added to our stock of knowledge. For this anniversary issue, we decided to shift our frame of reference, to look instead at what we don’t know: the scientific puzzles that are driving basic scientific research.” In the ‘Online Skype Conference’ on 16 March, 2008 HH Bhakti Madhava Puri Swami  described the participants about one of these 125 questions mentioned by the Science magazine – What Is the Universe Made Of? A short discussion on this topic is also presented in the inaugural issue of quarterly newsletter of Bhaktivedanta Institute: Science and Scientist – Inquiring into the Origin of Matter and Life.   

HH Bhakti Madhava Puri Swami explained the participants about the reasons due to which the scientists are facing the problems in answering the fundamental questions. In the context of the question What Is the Universe Made Of?, HH Bhakti Madhava Puri Swami told that, scientists are running into a problem – in understanding the universe they don’t have enough matter. The theories of the universe they have are not producing the results they are expecting. There are certain theories of Einstein and Newton, which they use to calculate the density of matter and the universe, the frequency of light coming from various parts of the universe and the micro waves that are present in the universe. It is not just a matter of measuring some features and putting down some results, they plug those features into an equation. Where do they get that equation from? – From their theories. Where do they get their theories from? – Some body made a guess: it might be like this and it might be like that. From that guess they wrote the theory and then the equation and they see if that confirms to that. They had a nice theory. They put a nice theory together – the explosion theory or the Big Bang theory. They calculated from that so many different things. Now they find that universe doesn’t have enough matter to let their equations work. Their theory doesn’t work. Rather than change the theory they want to change the universe. They say that, “The universe is not right. Our theory is right but universe is not correct. So let us correct the universe.” This is the philosophy of scientists.

In the conference various fundamental topics (for example, galaxy and why a force called gravity exists between the two masses) related to the question ‘What Is the Universe Made Of?’ are discussed by HH Bhakti Madhava Puri Swami.

The philosophy of G. W. F. Hegel and Immanuel Kant are also discussed in this connection. When one wants to study deeply, what is matter, what is space and what is time, then certain principles arise or the philosophy – one is unity and the other is diversity. From the principles of unity and diversity we can understand that matter exhibits two symptoms – unity and diversity. G. W. F. Hegel described the existence of attractions and repulsive force that exists between two bodies in a universe. However, scientists have no idea about the repulsive force in the universe. Scientists only know about the unitive force so they have made this Big Bang force.

We try to make distinction between our knowledge about the object and the object itself. But our knowledge of the object and the object itself are one and the same. When we talk about an object we talk nothing but our knowledge about that object. Hence we should know this philosophy properly. Scientists think knowledge about the object and the object itself are two different things. Scientists are failing to understand the logic of reasoning properly. The architecture of our own reasoning has to be understood properly before we can understand how our knowledge or consciousness is creating universe or representing universe to us. According to the knowledge of the universe that an individual has the universe is different for different individuals. Therefore we see in different civilization we have different ideas about the universe. They were explaining previously, in the western world they are looking out at the cosmos and they are thinking that it is all static – it is not moving. Now a day we think it is moving. So is that means that universe changed from previous age to this age? The universe doesn’t change over all these years but our knowledge is changing. Previously they understood that God created the universe, now they think that it is an explosion. It is all based upon how we understand things. Hence how to come to a proper understanding? We need veda. If we understand every thing is relative like that based on our knowledge then can we arrive at any truth ever? We can not come to any conclusion based on our mental speculation. To correct this defect of imperfect knowledge we need to accept the absolute authority of veda.

    We have uploaded this Transcendental Nectar of Satsanga – Under the holy association of HH Bhakti Madhava Puri Swami. To listen this absorbing and very details technical discussion please click Satsanga: 16 March 2008 (Downloads 503). To see all our past posting you may visit http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga/ . Keep checking this page, we will be updating this site soon with many more details.

Timing of weekly Satsanga: 6:00 PM India time, Every Sunday.   

You may visit http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga/about/ to know the details about joining process for the online ‘Weekly Satsangas’.

All Glories all Sadhus, Guru and Vaisnavas.

Recently in January 2008, there was request for some comments on the claim of some scientists about “a major step towards creating the first ever artificial life form” on the forum. Thus we would be happy to offer some thoughts on this topic of profound relevance the Krishna Consciousness movement.

Dan Gibson, Ph.D., et al. has published this work online in the Science Journal. According to the paper, this team comprised of 17 researchers at the J. Craig Venter Institute (JCVI) has created the largest man-made DNA structure by synthesizing and assembling the 582,970 base pair genome of a bacterium, Mycoplasma genitalium JCVI-1.0. Further the publication has claimed that in the next step, which is ongoing at the JCVI, the team will attempt to create a living bacterial cell based entirely on the synthetically made genome.

However the fact remains that the question of life is far from being answered by the recent claims of this group even though it has managed to hog the limelight all over the world. Several critics who are publishing articles in newspapers and magazines all over the world have also accepted this fact. The world must have a proper critic of the question of life. Our Gurumaharaja said, we should not believe everything that is being passed off in the name of knowledge. Gurumaharaja dedicated his entire life in carrying out the instruction of Srila Prabhupada to preach “Life comes from Life.”

It is a fact that nowadays there is no unanimous agreement in the scientific world about the question of artificial life. For eg, Carl Zimmer says, “there is a lot we don’t understand about life, of course, but Venter’s project isn’t going to answer all the questions … But what does doing this really signify? What does it teach us about life that we didn’t know before? …The scientists didn’t assemble the fragments of DNA by themselves, nor did they program robots to do so. Instead, they injected the fragments into E. coli, and let the bacteria do the job themselves. Eventually, it turned out that E. coli could only build up a quarter of the genome. The scientists don’t quite know why. So they injected those big chunks of Mycoplasma DNA into yeast. Lo and behold, the yeast were able to finish up the job for the scientists. They don’t quite know how the yeast did their own biochemical magic either. I would assume that God would have this kind of stuff figured out….Out of 382 genes that the scientists have identified as potentially essential, 110 of them are absolute mysteries. Scientists have almost no idea what they’re for. … Scientists have gotten very good at manipulating genes — at copying them or using them to make biotechnology products like insulin — but they still know relatively little about how genes work together in living things. “

The question was discussed in our last BI Satsanga which is organized everyday Sunday 6 PM India time worldwide on Skype. HH Bhakti Madhava Puri Maharaja (Dr. M. A. Marchetti), explained the technical difficulties that are today inherent in modern science towards explaining life, inspite of the extensive research by the scientists all over the world, including the Venter Institute. After discussing basic terminologies that are relevant to the question of artificial life, Maharaja explained, that,

1. It is quite a feat to synthesize the DNA molecule. Of course creating DNA molecule itself is not life. It is only one part of the living organism. But all it is a chemical process. It is not a creation of life in the sense of the term. 
2. How much the DNA molecule contributes to the bacteria or a living entity, it is uncertain. Because they can take out that DNA and replace it with another, completely different in another bacterium. So it is uncertain that how much that DNA effects the life force in the bacterium.
3. It is like replacing the heart with a plastic heart. They can’t put the heart in a machine and expect the machine to become alive. So it is not the heart that is making it alive. Life is already there.

HH Bhakti Madhava Puri Maharaja (Dr. M. A. Marchetti) explained that Srila Prabhupada gave us the Vedantic conception that life comes from life. Maharaja also explained that our HDG Bhaktisvarupa Damodara Swami (Dr. T. D. Singh), carried this message of Srila Prabhupada all over the world and also to the best men of science like leading scientists of the world. HDG Bhaktisvarupa Damodara Swami (Dr. T. D. Singh) explained to all of us that life is completely transcendental to the assembly of molecules and it is never a by product or emergent product of molecular interactions. HH Bhakti Madhava Puri Maharaja (Dr. M. A. Marchetti) also explained that scientists should give credit to God. Just as after the Morse code was invented, the first message sent by Samuel Morse, was, “What had God wrought.” Thus he has given credit to God.

We have uploaded this ‘Satsanga MP3′ and to download please click Satsanga: 02 March 2008 (Downloads 427).
 
You may visit http://my.podcast. com/Satsanga to know the details about joining process for the online ‘Weekly Satsangas’. All past Satsanga MP3s month wise can be found below:
 
 
Satsanga MP3s: March 2008
 
Satsanga MP3s: February 2008
 
Satsanga MP3s: January 2008
 
Satsanga MP3s: December 2007
 
Satsanga MP3s: November 2007
 
Satsanga MP3s: October 2007
 
Satsanga MP3s: September 2007
 
Satsanga MP3s: August 2007
 
Satsanga MP3s: July 2007
 

All Glories to all Sadhus, Guru and Vaisnavas.
Your humble servants
Purushottama Jagannatha Das &
Sushen Das

Please accept our humble dandavats.

Hare Krsna.

We are happy to inform you that four papers (abstract) which are presented in International Conference on Science and Spirituality for World Peace (held at the RIMS Jubilee Hall in Imphal on November 23-24, 2007), appeared online on ”Kangla Online” in the Religion Section. These four articles are as below:

(1) Vedantic Conception of the Origin of Life  —  by: Dr. Michael Marchetti (Bhakti Madhava Puri Swami), Serving Director, Bhaktivedanta Institute.

(2) Modern Science-Religion Symbiosis: Historical Perspectives and Future Prospects  –  by: Prof. John B Lourdusamy, Dept. of Humanities and Social Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai, India.

(3) Vedantic Concept of Life  –  by: Phalguni Banerjee, Research Scholar, Dept. of Chemical Engineering at Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur, Kharagpur, WB, India.

(4) Logic and Religions  –  by: Dirk Laureyssens, Antwerp, Belgium.

If you would like to participate more actively we invite you to attend our regular online meetings (satsanga) using Skype. My contact ID is sushen_das.

Thanking you once again. We look forward to having your association and active participation in the programs of the Institute.

Your humble servant

Sushen Das (P. Suresh Kumar)