My Journey into Sanatana Dharma

In the view of evolution being a fact, and that we humans are as much animals as animals are, the reasons we give to eat meat by killing animals, technically our fellow beings, even though we have other options available to consume, to survive, is akin to a cannibal eating other humans even though he had other options to consume to survive. Hence I say, legalizing cannibalism should logically make sense, until killing animals for consumption even though there are other options available, is made illegal and a crime. Even Jesus said, "Thou shalt not Kill" he didn't Say, "thou shalt not kill a human". There is a big difference. what do you think? Think!

LMAO! Just heard this speech by Sam Harris, a neuro-scientist, a prominent anti-theist, may be even an atheist here is talking about how "free will" is an illusion. He obviously is a very accomplished neuro-scientist, so he knows the science he is talking about. The rest of it is actually something all of us can understand just based on pure personal experience. After Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins, I think Sam Harris completes triad/trinity of atheist god fathers for atheists world over. Now he has written a book on free will which I need to read (I will soon) but purely based on this speech right here: I actually will argue he is advocating the need for religion in society without he realizing that. He makes a very basic fundamental mistake in assuming something that makes his whole argument wrong about free will. In fact this speech also ties in to the philosophy of Ancient Indian Astrology, if you understand what he is saying about the nature of &q

I grew up in America since my late teens. And an attempt to “Party” (regretfully) has been a constant endeavor on a regular basis. And what does partying mean? Most people I know its about getting high and finding a girl to hang out with. Luckily, drinking never caught my imagination although I’ve tried quite a few different list of things. I was in general out for the second part, as I said, I regret my immaturity. You see I understand young immature kids seeking the second pleasure, coz its so ingrained to the deepest levels of our DNA and consciousness. No one needs to initiate us into it, no one needs to teach us anything about it. It just a is a natural process. And talking in terms of Sanatana Dharma Philosophy, this is one “Vasana”/ “Samskara” that is potentially the deepest and the most difficult to get rid of, that following the sookshma sharira ( the subtle body) across reincarnations for eternity (until of course you fall off the cycle through “liberation”/Niravana…wat ev

Recently I came across an article on facebook which read: "The West, not even three centuries after the industrial revolution, is now running out of breath. It has no direction, no healthy foundations, no value left except selfishness and greed, nothing to fill one's heart with. India alone has preserved something of the deeper values that can make a man human and the world will surely be turning to them in search of a remedy to it's advanced malady."  - Michel Danino. I've been thinking on similar line for a while now. Yes, I came to America seeing the glitter created by the silicon valley boom. I was 16. But the more I understand the nuances of life in the west, of course by west, I can only talk about life in America, I see how hollow and how thoughtless this society really is in general. Our over dependence on all things modern has gotten us where? We sit on the most comfortable furniture in the history of mankind, yet the chiropractor business

Found an extraordinary piece today on scientific American. Its an interview with Dr. Basil Hailey. The entire script can be found here . The following are the excerpts of the entire interview. Read it, and make your own call: GM :Tell me some of those ideas that you played with. BH: We were interested in undivided whole. How do you describe wholeness without breaking it up into pieces? Bohr said you can’t analyze any further: don’t make the division between the subject and the observing apparatus, because everything is a whole, and as soon as you break it into pieces, you’ve lost it; you’ve changed the phenomenon. I took a lot of insight from Bohr. If you read our book, we never say Bohr was wrong, whereas most other people say Copenhagen is nonsense. What we disagreed with Bohr about is that he couldn’t analyze it further. What we’ve been trying to do is analyze it further. Our idea was to say, yes, you can do it. You can talk about the individual, but it’s the qua

Here is all the proof needed, some people i know very well keep claiming that NOTHING was found in relation to the Dwaraka of the Puranas/Mahabharata in the submerged city found off the coast of present day Dwaraka. Please check below for a few other incriminating links. Here is a nice article I found: @ http://satyameva-jayate.org/2005/08/14/a-search-for-the-historical-krishna/ A Search for the Historical Krishna Dr. N. S. Rajaram The following is a section from a long article called “A Search for the Historical Krishna” by Dr N. S. Rajaram, which precedes his upcoming book which will be of the same title. Dr N. S. Rajaram was a former engineer at NASA, a field which he subsequently left to study ancient civilisations. He has authored a number of scholarly and polemic works. He is widely respected in his field – although his conclusions are by no means universally accepted. Dr Rajaram has also invited hostility from some academics – although they tend to engage in persona

Just a note for people following my thought here: Although at certain levels science is telling us there is no free will and that free will is an illusion and the same being said by schools of thoughts on India. I think further research is necessary from me on both fronts to understand exactly what is being said. I am unclear on this topic at this point.

Considering all the recent findings I've pasted regarding what Physics is saying about the nature of reality, I recall a video I watched here in America that a missionary made mocking the followers of Sanatana Dharma, he was trying to show how pathetic their lives were who lived in Poverty and who prayed to the "false gods". In that show one particular scene where they were interviewing a guy on his way to Kasi (varanasi): Missionary to the poor guy: So why have you left everything at a young age and living in poverty are you going to varanasi? why not live a good life. The poor guy: I am going in search of God. I've left everything because this life is an illusion. Everything we yearn for is an illusion. The scene gets cut, implying how foolish, funny and disheveled these poor Indians praying to false gods are. Considering two things: From the Documentary "Happy :)" on netflix. ( http://www.thehappymovie.com/):  It is evident that happiness

This work is an article I copied from the following location:  The Cosmic dance “I am God.  I do not recognize the hell.  I do not recognize the three worlds of heaven, hell and earth.  I am the Lord, the Controller.  I am still the witness after everything else is dissolved.  Nobody else is God for me; nobody else controls me.  I am I-less, I am my-less. ” Sankara INTRODUCTION In this article I hope to demonstrate some parallels between modern Physics, Eastern Mysticism, and Barbour’s ideas based on Process Philosophy.  I will examine the three perspectives within the context of the dynamic interplay of energies, the emergent and convergent universe, and finally the transcendence of God. MODERN PHYSICS According to Classical Physics, Newton’s mechanical model views the world as deterministic.  All that transpires in the universe has a definite cause, giving rise to a categorical effect.  The philosophical basis of Classical Physics is a fundamental division between

Here is the simplest proof that the world is perceived by humans as real due to maya, as proposed by Advaita Vedanta. Double slit experiment: so an electron is a particle when you see it, but is a probability wave(exactly... An infinite spectrum of possibilities) when you don't see it. Electrons and protons and other subatomic particles with the same behavior make molecules, molecules make objects we can see with the naked eye. Well the naked eye is seeing these particles which are visible only when a conscious entity see it.... Otherwise they are a probability wave...spectrum of infinite possibilities. Simple put: what our eyes and brain perceive is an illusion. Unreal. Here is a small video about the experiment: There is a reason why Adi Sankara is called JagadGuru.

Lately I've been ruminating over the concept of quantum entanglement. As some of you might be aware: The fact of quantum entanglement has been scientifically established and proven beyond the scope of any doubt. What is Quantum Entanglement? Well, please do your research before continuing on. I suggest reading the Fabric of the Cosmos by Dr. Brian Greene. But watching a youtube video on the same might suffice for now. As you watch the video, you will realize that without Quantum entanglement, quantum mechanics is not possible. Without quantum mechanics, our modern life is not possible. Now, how on earth does this entanglement happen? No one knows why and how this very real event functions, but it does. Now, to me, this is the single most clear evidence for Advaita, the non-dual nature of the nature of reality/God, Brahman. Tell me, what has the same reaction at any point in space to the same stimuli without needing to traverse the distance unless it is a  single "

What is the story of creation in Sanatana Dharma? Although there are many stories in the many books belonging to this realm, there is an underlying philosophy that is really well explained at the following location: http://www.pathsofdevotion.com/hinduism/hinduism_science.html A small excerpt from the above location I think should summarize the bottom line: There is no one Hindu creation story.  Numerous cosmogonies can be found in almost all of the important Hindu scriptures.  A Hindu maxim states that “Truth is One; the sages call it by different names” (Rig Veda 1:164:46).  This axiom helps to explain how it is possible for Hindus to simultaneously embrace so many different versions of creation.  Hindus tend to see metaphors in these creation myths for philosophical and spiritual truths.  The  Encyclopedia of Religion  article on Cosmogony classifies cosmogonic myths into six categories. 2   Within the Hindu tradition, there are creation stories that fall under each of tho

Brahma satyam jagat mithya, jivo brahmaiva naparah—"Brahman is the only truth, the world is unreal, and there is ultimately no difference between Brahman and individual self"[13] --- Adi Sancaracarya Now watch this debate/discussion at the world science festival. A Thin Sheet of Reality: The Universe as a Hologram (Full) Science slowly but steadily converging with Vedanta. if the video doesn' t load: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HnETCBOlzJs

Instead of writing books, Lets take this note from wiki and leave the rest to the reader to explore further on how realists lost a long long time ago and they don't even know it yet. O course in reality (no pun intended) they are the classical case of critics, that's all they know to do, to criticize. Read on.... And let the sound of the slap reverberate to the ends of the universe. According to Marin, the opposition to mystical interpretations of Quantum Mechanics that Einstein and others had stemmed from their adherence to the philosophical school of  realism . Yet in the 2007 Nature paper  An experimental test of non-local realism ,  Anton Zeilinger and his colleagues wrote that, "Most working scientists hold fast to the concept of ‘realism’—a viewpoint according to which an external reality exists independent of observation. But quantum physics has shattered some of our cornerstone beliefs. According to Bell’s theorem, any theory that is based on the joint as

Some time back (a few years ago), I met a friend of my, then to be wife, at a restaurant,  and some conversation that I can't exactly recall came about regarding, faith and belief, and he was quick to quip with with a proud gait, " I believe in One God". I was taken aback, offended. It felt pretty condescending, in the way he put it to me. And that got me thinking to which I am responding now. Its been a few years since that incident, but I can't come to terms with the lack of understanding and the condescension thrown at us that belong to the Sanatana Dharma.  Why was I offended? Of course if no harm, no condescension was meant he didnt have to mention his faith in the One God. Its not like he came up to me and told me he saw the sun rise in the East every morning. I grew up in a pretty liberal household, while my grandmother was pretty orthodox in her life style, did not really force us in to an orthodox life style (honestly, I regret she didn't do it). B

A Hindu was flying from JFK New York Airport to SFO San Francisco Airport CA to attend a meeting at Monterey, CA. An American girl was sitting on the right sid e, near window seat. It indeed was a long journey - it would take nearly seven hours. He was surprised to see the young girl reading a Bible unusual of young Americans. After some time she smiled and we had few acquaintances talk.He told her that I am from India Then suddenly the girl asked: 'What's your faith?' 'What?' He didn't understand the question. 'I mean, what's your religion? Are you a Christian? Or a Muslim?' 'No!' He replied, 'He am neither Christian nor Muslim'. Apparently she appeared shocked to listen to that. 'Then who are you?' “I am a Hindu”, He said. She looked at him as if she was seeing a caged animal. She could not understand what He was talking about. A common man in Europe or US knows about Christianity and Islam, as they are t

Two reasons: Self Interest (to the point of selfishness) and Philanthropy That's an oxymoron , isn't it? Let me explain: I am not sure if any of your wondered, why does this guy write and then debate endlessly on such a controversial topic, i am sure most of you have at least rolled your eyes when I start debating on Facebook or seen me post my blog postings. I know; Its ok. Its part of what I do and I started doing this, not knowing its pitfalls. But I am here to stay. Why? You might ask. Why would I risk friendships, why would I risk my reputation ( I am not sure of what ) by getting public about these "controversial" topics? Well “controversial” is in double quotes for a reason. Let me explain. First of all why did I start blogging about my findings on Sanatana Dharma? There have been two major influences on my life growing up: Influence 1: Grandmother and her pious life style Growing up, thanks to my grand mother, I have always, "bel