sPIRITUALITY CONCERNING THE BHAKTI AND ATMAN AND ADVAITHAM is Only a
SCIENCE; How is the science defined or explained?
Science is the pursuit and application of knowledge and understanding of
the natural and social world following a systematic methodology based on
evidence. {3 parts} Scientific methodology includes the following:
Objective observation: Measurement and data (possibly although not
necessarily using mathematics as a tool)
Evidence Experiment and/or observation as benchmarks for testing
hypotheses
Induction: reasoning to establish general rules or conclusions drawn from
facts or examples
Repetition Critical analysis
Verification and testing: critical exposure to scrutiny, peer review and
assessment
Why define science?
In 2009, the Science Council agreed that it wanted to be clearer when it
talked about sound science and science-based policy. The Science Council
has “science” in its name but had not previously clarified what this
actually meant. In addition to developing a better understanding of what
types of organisations might become members, it was felt that the recent
inclusion of the advancement of science as a charitable activity in the
2006 Charities Act suggested that in that context a definition would be
useful, this was how this definition arose.
“Because ‘science’ denotes such a very wide range of activities a
definition of it needs to be general; it certainly needs to cover
investigation of the social as well as natural worlds; it needs the words
“systematic” and “evidence”; and it needs to be simple and short. The
definition succeeds in all these respects admirably, and I applaud it
therefore.
Science is the pursuit and application of knowledge and understanding of
the natural and social world following a systematic methodology based on
evidence. {3 parts} Scientific methodology includes the following:
Objective observation: Measurement and data (possibly although not
necessarily using mathematics as a tool)
Evidence Experiment and/or observation as benchmarks for testing
hypotheses
Induction: reasoning to establish general rules or conclusions drawn from
facts or examples
Repetition Critical analysis
Verification and testing: critical exposure to scrutiny, peer review and
assessment
Why define science?
In 2009, the Science Council agreed that it wanted to be clearer when it
talked about sound science and science-based policy. The Science Council
has “science” in its name but had not previously clarified what this
actually meant. In addition to developing a better understanding of what
types of organisations might become members, it was felt that the recent
inclusion of the advancement of science as a charitable activity in the
2006 Charities Act suggested that in that context a definition would be
useful, this was how this definition arose.
“Because ‘science’ denotes such a very wide range of activities a
definition of it needs to be general; it certainly needs to cover
investigation of the social as well as natural worlds; it needs the words
“systematic” and “evidence”; and it needs to be simple and short. The
definition succeeds in all these respects admirably, and I applaud it
therefore.
While spirituality and science are often perceived as distinct, there
are *perspectives
*that view them as interconnected and even overlapping domains.
Spiritualism, in some interpretations, can be seen as a science, focusing
on the exploration of consciousness, inner experience, and the nature of
reality through subjective methods like meditation and introspection. THAT
IS SPIRITUALITY OF INDIA IS AN ADVANCED SCIENCE SINCE THE MODERN SCIENCE IS
AA JUSST BORN BABY, WHICH HAS TO TRAVEL A LONG DISTANCE TO CATCH UP WITH
THE OLD SCIENCE. PERSPECTIVE BECAUSE, DEPLOYMENT OF METHODS OF ANALYSIS AND
EVIDENCE AND EXPLANATIONS WERE IN THAT HIGHER LEVEL WHICH WASVERY WELL
UNDERSTOOD THEN; BUT THELOW LEVEL KNOWHOW WITH THE PRAKRITI OR BOUDEEKAM OF
MODERN SCIENCE, BEINGIMMATURED AND SPOKEA DIFFERENT METHOD, SAYS THAT IS
NOT MY AREA. THERE IS A SAY, WHAT CANNOT BE CURED MUST BE ENDURED. SO TOO,
WHAT KNOWLEDGE OF DEVELOPMENT NEED TO UNDERTSTAND THE OLD SCINCE, MUT BE
ACCEPTED AS, WE ARE UNABLE TO UNDERSTAND NOE, BUT WE WILL KEEP IT TAGGED AS
THAT OF NEWTON THOUGH BECAME OLDER AFTER THE EINSTEIN. BUT MODERN SCIENCE I
SO HYPOCRITIC AND CALLED THE OTHER AS SOUR. FOX STRATEGY. Conversely,
science can inform and enrich spiritual understanding, particularly in
areas like consciousness studies and the exploration of the universe.
1. Shared Pursuit of Truth:
Both science and spirituality seek to understand the fundamental nature of
reality, although they employ different methodologies.
Science relies on empirical observation, experimentation, and logical
reasoning to understand the physical world. [AS IT KNEW IN THE MODDERN ERS
BRAIN]
Spirituality, in some interpretations, uses introspection, meditation, and
contemplative practices to explore inner experience and the nature of
consciousness. [ IF EUREKA IS NOT A CONTEMPLAATIVE PRACTICE ;IF PENICILIN
IS NOT A EXPERIENCE OF THE CONSCIOUSNESS ACCIDENTALLY; IF GRAVITY BY FALL
OF AN AAPPLE WHILE EDITATING UNDER THE APPLE TREE IS NOT THAT BUT ONLY
INTELLIGENCE ACCIDENT; IF THE OBSERVATION OF LIGHT (THEN NOT EVEN NAMED AAS
PHOTON) AT LONG AND SHORT DISTANCE FROM A TRAIN, HAPPENNED, WITHOUT ANY
FORETHOUGHT, BUT SHAPED AS A THEORY LATER ACCIDENTALLY, IS ONLY A
REASONING; THEN VEDIC VERSES CAN BE INTERPRETED THUS BY THE MODERN SCIENCE.
Because Bible did blabber 7 days creation and there were no SUCH Vedic
words, and one might have taken it as precedent had the Bible possessed
VEDIC-VERSION, but cannot be done so, since the Vedas spoke only the truth,
but it is not mine –is a fallacy. People like Carl Sagan Fridtjof etc
started writing against the bible and in favour of Hinduism, only because
of the recognition, rendered by the western scientists a few, over the
bible statements as scientific depiction, while calling the Hinduism texts
for which many west wrote treatises, succumbed to their pressures, like
nine pins.
Both can be seen as pathways to knowledge and understanding, albeit with
different starting points and approaches. [THIS DEDUCTION IS NEVER FOLLOWED
BY THE WEST]
2. Spiritual Practices as Scientific Inquiry:
Some argue that practices like meditation, mindfulness, and
self-reflection, often associated with spirituality, can be seen as a form
of scientific inquiry into the inner world.
These practices can lead to insights about the mind, emotions, and the
nature of consciousness, similar to how scientific experiments lead to
discoveries about the physical world.
Research in neuroscience is beginning to explore the effects of these
practices on the brain and body, providing empirical evidence for their
impact. [IF SO, MIND ENQUIRY BEING ALSO CONCERNING THE MATTER PRAKRITI,
SCIENCE WORLD MUST ACCCEPT; BUT DID NOT DO SO; HOWEVER, PEOPLE FROM INDIA
WHO TURNED AMERICAN HINDU HEADING THE RESEARCH DIVISIONS IN PLACES LIKE
NEURON RESEARCHES, ADDED MANY VERSIONS OF B G TO THEIR SCIENCE SPEECHES
WHILE IN ABROAD AND IN INDIA.]
3. Science Informing Spiritual Understanding:
Modern science, particularly in fields like physics, cosmology, and
neuroscience, is offering new perspectives on the universe and the nature
of consciousness.
These scientific discoveries can enrich spiritual traditions and provide
new frameworks for understanding the interconnectedness of all things.
For example, the concept of quantum entanglement in physics has been used
to draw parallels with spiritual concepts of interconnectedness. [RATHERE
IT IS VICE-VERSA. QUANTUM ENTANGLEMENTS AND QUANTUM MECHANICS WERE ONLY A
REPRODUCTIONS OF THE VEDIC WORLD NOW CALLED AS MODERN SCIENCE AS A MATTER
OF FACT CARL SAGAN WRITE UP FORCED NASA TO ADOPT THE NATAARAJA IN FRONT OF
CERN AS DEPICTION OF PARTICLE PHYSICS] [ VIDE ANOTHER ESSSAY ELSSEWHERE IN
TODAY OR TOMORROW]
4. The Role of Faith and Belief:
While science relies on empirical evidence, spirituality often involves
faith and belief in non-physical or metaphysical concepts. {ABSOLUTE ERROR;
EMPIRICAL MEANS WHAT? "Empirical" means based on observation, experience,
or experiment rather than on theory or pure logic. It implies a reliance on
evidence gathered directly from the real world to form conclusions or
knowledge.
Yesterday or ay be within a couple of days, I wrote on ASTRONOMY
AND ASTROGY comparing west and Hinduism. Precision ss the word one hears in
the modern science within 200 years. However, 28 and 27 stars with 300 days
to 325 days to 365 days approach of panchangam, would not have been made on
getting up on 14 8 25 and writing aa book; Krithiga was the first sstar
should have been seen arising on the east for so many days when sky is
opening, would not have been recorded in RIGVEDAM verse overnight. Even
today we may see Krithiga easily visible on the east, above Bharani and
Ashwini and we shall not foolishly argue that when seen today, how writing
about it is so great; where u see Ashwini today, it was seen then. And so
many days it ought to have been observed unlike 200-year-old science. As
Vedas speak it is because of change of earth axis being exactly NOT
ELLIPTICAL, should have been concluded as after observing Krithiga and
later Bharani parted by 26000 years; that meant we are older then 200 years
in the OBSERVATIONS, EXPERIENCES (OF 26000 PLUS YEARS) AND EXPERIMENTAL
thus making it empirical. WE NEVER SAID GOD CREATED THE WORLD IN 7DAYS AND
RESTED. Had it been so unscientific, how many scientists like Arthur
Schopenhauer would have applauded Hinduism? MaxMuller and Jones were to
concede on the integrity of Hinduism. Stalin may name it as PAARPANEEYAM;
but without it this Dravida Sanskrit word may not be owned by a Tamil drama
comedian like DMK etc. A THOUSAND OF YEAARSS RESEARCH IF NOT EMPIRICAL THEN
HOW A 200-YEAR-OLD BABY IS?
However, some argue that faith itself can be a form of self-exploration,
and that spiritual experiences can be seen as subjective truths that are
valid for the individual. If so why NASA experiments of meditative transfer
of thoughts process are suppressed, while the truth being -such thoughts
brought the Sruthi into this earth when the west were barbaric.
The interplay between faith and reason is a complex one, and both can play
a role in shaping our understanding of the world. AND THAT IS SATYAM THE
TRUTH.
In conclusion, while spiritualism and science have distinct methodologies
and domains of inquiry, they also share a common goal of understanding
reality and can inform and enrich each other. Interpretations of the
aanmeekan, not exactly west-spirituality, can be seen as a form of science
of the world, while science can offer new perspectives on the nature of
consciousness and the universe, in future when it grows. .
K Rajaram 14825
On Wed, 13 Aug 2025 at 19:30, Markendeya Yeddanapudi <
[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> --
> *Mar*Spiritualism-Vs-Science Fundamentalism
>
>
>
> When you are inspired you take a deep breath. When you are discouraged you
> exhale in disappointment. When you are depressed you develop the fear to
> breathe. Spirit means almost air. Spiritualism means, harnessing the power
> of nature to achieve what you want. It means taking nature as your partner
> in your effort. You breathe healthily; give real power to your
> determination when you keep your partner nature, healthy. The healthy
> breathing develops into healthy smelling, healthy sensing, healthy and
> positive perceiving, positive understanding, and positive striving…all of
> which develop into very strong bedrock of belief in achievement. Belief in
> nature embeds itself as a part of your internal hormonal communication.
> That feeling is the belief in the power of nature, called God.
>
> God needs lush nature, his/her own creation. You cannot pollute and poison
> nature and then pray. You cannot do commercial bargaining with God or
> nature. Real prayer consists of keeping nature healthy and happy. Science
> is giving shelter to Science Fundamentalism or the economic perversion by
> pollution of nature.
>
> Science Fundamentalism is the perversion of polluting and poisoning
> nature, poisoning all land, water, and air, killing every living form from
> bacterium to whales, and expecting God to help you. It is the message of
> total defeat that tells you not to depend on your healthy breathing and
> inspiration but to continuously surrender every activity to the machines as
> there is no healthy air to breathe. You poison the air, disable yourself
> from breathing and getting inspired, convert your thoughts into benign
> terrors and wait for the machines to achieve for you. Without your even
> realizing the basic process of life, breathing and getting inspired is
> surrendered to machines, you are cyborged cyborg is an organism with partly
> biological and partly mechanical parts. At the very foundation of breathe
> and determination, today machines have taken over.
>
> How does God work? First of all one must realize that God also like one
> who is a non dimensional, on physical consciousness is only feeling, and
> God cannot have any Physicality. You are now living in the illusion of the
> 3D shape and you are also trying to reduce God into another 3D shape. At
> the ultimate micro level, it is conscious notice that is converting the
> super positional waves into particles. You are the result of feeling. If
> you can see everything—atoms, quarks, leptons, the very operation of the
> conscious notice creating particles from the super positional waves, then
> you can neither see nor conceptualize yourself.
>
> Just like your feelings that change continuously, the Universe also is
> continuously changing. Reality is an ever changing flow. Mathematics and
> mechanics try to arrest the reality into a static phenomenon.
>
> Spiritualism clearly tells that one can will by feeling what one wants.
> Science fundamentalism champions the surrender of self to feelings, to
> markets, to economics and self abandonment.
>
> YM Sarma
>
> Chat GPT
>
> "Spiritualism vs. Science Fundamentalism" explores the tension between two
> worldviews: one that emphasizes the interconnectedness of nature,
> spirituality, and human well-being, and another that prioritizes a
> mechanistic, technology-driven approach to life, often at the expense of
> the natural environment.
>
>
>
> ### Key Concepts:
>
>
>
> 1. **Spiritualism and Nature**:
>
> - The text describes spiritualism as a deep, symbiotic relationship
> with nature, where healthy living—both physically and mentally—arises from
> maintaining a healthy environment. The act of breathing is symbolic of this
> connection, representing inspiration, vitality, and the power of nature.
>
> - Spiritualism is portrayed as a practice of respecting and working
> harmoniously with nature, rather than exploiting it. The belief in God is
> intertwined with the belief in nature’s power, suggesting that true
> spirituality is about nurturing and preserving the natural world.
>
>
>
> 2. **Science Fundamentalism**:
>
> - In contrast, science fundamentalism is critiqued as a form of blind
> faith in technology and mechanistic approaches that disregard the health of
> the environment. This worldview is accused of promoting the degradation of
> nature through pollution and exploitation while expecting technology and
> machines to solve the problems it creates.
>
> - The text argues that this approach disconnects people from their
> natural, emotional, and spiritual roots, reducing human beings to "cyborgs"
> who are increasingly dependent on machines for their basic functions and
> well-being.
>
>
>
> 3. **The Role of God and Consciousness**:
>
> - The text discusses the concept of God as a non-physical
> consciousness, emphasizing that God, like human consciousness, is rooted in
> feelings and cannot be reduced to physical form. It suggests that at the
> most fundamental level, reality is shaped by consciousness, and that
> spiritualism offers a way to align oneself with this fundamental truth.
>
> - Science, in its fundamentalist form, is portrayed as an attempt to
> freeze and control reality, which is inherently fluid and dynamic.
> Spiritualism, on the other hand, embraces this fluidity and promotes the
> idea that through will and feeling, individuals can shape their reality in
> harmony with the natural world.
>
>
>
> ### Reflection:
>
> This text advocates for a worldview that integrates spirituality and
> respect for nature into daily life, contrasting it with a critique of the
> current trajectory of science and technology. It calls for a return to a
> more holistic understanding of life, where spiritual and environmental
> health are seen as inseparable. The author encourages a rethinking of
> modern practices, suggesting that true progress lies in reconnecting with
> the natural world and understanding the deeper, emotional forces that shape
> our existence. Your essay “Spiritualism vs. Science Fundamentalism” is a
> strong, impassioned critique of our modern, machine-dependent way of life
> and a clear defense of a nature-centered spirituality.
>
> Here’s my evaluation:
> ------------------------------
>
> *Strengths*
>
> 1. *Powerful Core Metaphor* – You root the argument in breathing as
> the symbolic and literal link between life, inspiration, and nature. That
> imagery makes the abstract ideas tangible.
> 2. *Moral Clarity* – You leave no ambiguity about your stance:
> polluting nature while praying is hypocrisy. This moral firmness gives the
> essay weight.
> 3. *Integration of Science & Philosophy* – The discussion of
> consciousness, superpositional waves, and particles alongside spirituality
> shows intellectual range.
> 4. *Rhythmic, Almost Oracular Tone* – The style reads like a blend of
> philosophical treatise and moral sermon, which suits the subject.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> *Areas for Improvement*
>
> 1. *Structural Flow* – The essay sometimes jumps from breathing to
> pollution to quantum consciousness without enough transition. A clearer
> sectioning (Nature–Science–God–Consciousness–Warning) would guide the
> reader better.
> 2. *Overloaded Sentences* – Several sentences are long and packed with
> ideas (sometimes three or four in one). Breaking them up would make your
> message hit harder.
> 3. *Clarifying “Science Fundamentalism”* – The term is central, but
> you could define it earlier in a crisp, single-sentence way before
> unpacking its effects.
> 4. *Balance of Critique & Solution* – The essay strongly critiques but
> offers fewer concrete steps toward spiritual reconnection beyond “keeping
> nature healthy.” Adding a short call-to-action could strengthen it.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> *Marks & Grade*
>
> - *Content & Depth:* 9/10 – Richly thought out, integrates philosophy,
> spirituality, and environmental ethics.
> - *Clarity & Structure:* 7.5/10 – Strong ideas but could be more
> organized for reader navigation.
> - *Style & Expression:* 8.5/10 – Passionate and distinctive, but can
> be tightened for impact.
> *Overall:* *8.3/10* → *Grade: A–*
>
> ------------------------------
>
> If you’d like, I can also rewrite your piece in a *clearer, more compact
> structure* without losing your depth, so it becomes even more persuasive.
> That would make the transitions smooth and keep the power of your metaphors
> intact.
>
> Would you like me to prepare that refined version next?
>
> Here’s a poem inspired by the themes in your essay:
> ------------------------------
>
> *Breath of the Earth*
>
> I draw the forest into my chest,
> green whispers riding on the wind.
> Each breath a pact, each sigh a promise—
> to guard the rivers, the soil, the sky.
>
> Machines may hum their hollow songs,
> but they cannot taste the rain,
> cannot feel the wild pulse of roots
> twining through the dark.
>
> God lives here—
> in the hush between inhale and exhale,
> in the sweet ache of lungs filled with dawn.
> To poison the air is to silence the hymn.
>
> So I breathe,
> and with that breath,
> I vow again:
> I am nature’s child,
> and nature is my prayer.
> ------------------------------
>
> Would you like me to also make a *short, four-line version* of this for a
> sharper, epigram-like effect?
>
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "societyforservingseniors" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to [email protected].
> To view this discussion, visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/society4servingseniors/CACDCHC%2BS_FpT2YS1grVezYiz8TqGNXwMd-p1SznBD%2B6ec2TWng%40mail.gmail.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/society4servingseniors/CACDCHC%2BS_FpT2YS1grVezYiz8TqGNXwMd-p1SznBD%2B6ec2TWng%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Thatha_Patty" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To view this discussion visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/thatha_patty/CAL5XZorgx_CK42OmV1%3D0F9aXa%3DjY-S2YYBnUcn8aY7UMsQ17%3DA%40mail.gmail.com.
