Srila Prabhupada 100k audio file Sudarsana Button Bar Links FAQ Feedback Text Search Index What's New?
[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: Who is RESPONSIBLE for religion?

chrislee@netcom.com (Christopher A. Lee) wrote:

>In article <3r4d2j$2if@news4.primenet.com> travel1@primenet.com (John Renolds) writes:

>>
>>: And if there is no Apollo, then whose golden chariot pulls the sun accross 
>>: the sky? What's your point?

>>>>>Einstien said, "science is like looking at a face of a watch and trying
>>>>>to figure out how it works inside."  When we have theorys on how nature
>>>>>works, sometimes we will prove it wrong, sometimes we can never prove it
>>>>>wrong, because it is right. Re: The moon and the sun theory/fact!

>>>>  Exactly, it's a great statement. You can take a number of watches which
>>>>  all display the correct time but inside the watches the mechanics could
>>>>  be completely different. Externally they are identical. The same thing
>>>>  holds with the universe. You can develop many different models (like
>>>>  the workings of the different watches) which give the same result as we
>>>>  see in the sky (like all the watches display the same time). Just as
>>>>  you can't determine what the mechanism is inside the watch by looking
>>>>  at it, you can't tell the "mechanism" of the universe by looking
>>>>  through your telescope.

>Maybe you can't and maybe you can.  We certainly can tell alot about the
>watchface
 
  Yes. You've missed the point. It tells you _ABSOLUTELY_NOTHING_ about
  the mechanism inside the case. It could be mechanical, it might be 
  electronic, perhaps it uses a quarts crystal. 
  _YOU_CAN'T_TELL_BY_LOOKING_AT_THE_WATCHFACE.
   
  You can study the watchface in great detail, of course. You can 
  determine if it's covered by glass or plastic, whether there is
  phosperesent dots on it or not and you can speculate as to their
  composition. 

  BUT_YOU_CAN_HAVE_NO_INFORMATION_ABOUT_THE_MECHINISM_WHICH_MOVES_THE_HANDS!

>and use that to our benefit.  We certainly would hope that gives us
>insights to what lies behind (if anything).

  Of course you assume there is nothing behind the watchface, that the
  hands just move "all by themselves".... And that the wach was formed as
  a result of a big bang which came from nowhere, was caused by noone and
  somehow magically formed the watchface. Sounds reasonable?

>>  "Yet there is another nature, which is eternal and is transcendental to
>>  this manifested and unmanifested matter. It is supreme and is never
>>  annihilated. When all in this world is annihilated, that part remains
>>  as it is." (Bhagavad-gita 8.20)

>The important point is the assumption that something lies behind.  Why should
>we assume this if it doesn't manifest itself? 
 
  It's not an assumption, it's the absolute truth. What is beyond this
  universe is _COMPLETLY_ beyond our power to see. We have to find an
  authority for this information. The best authority is the Supreme 
  Personality of Godhead Krishna and He has very nicely given us the 
  above statement of _ABSOLUTE_SCIENTIFIC_FACT_... You can't disprove it 
  can you?

(sorry it's a bit of a diversion but I couldn't help it :-)


Thank you. Hare Krishna!

Madhudvisa dasa       
(madhudvisa@krishna.org)     /sudarsana 
                                
All glories to His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada!
References: