03-09-2007, 12:33 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Many modern advaitAcharyas are also uncomfortable with science putting holes into their ideas of sUkShma sharIra and its role in transferring vAsanas between sharIras. Finally, Hindus believe in the concept of punarjanma, ascent in the janma ladder as per karma etc, all of which have been entirely undermined by science. I personally feel Hindu dharma is not damaged seriously by the falsification of punarjanma and associated ideas. However, I have heard many other Hindus being deeply distressed by this possibility.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
There have always been atheist and agnostic Hindus since ancient times.
So I agree with Hinduism has no objection to Atheist view points.
I welcome all debates on issues like punarjana, whether Brahman actually exists or is a figment of our imaginations, whether the devas actually exist and most importantly whether I continue to exist after I die.
I am not scared of science blowing holes in any of my theistic beliefs.
Atheists should also be open minded about debates.
Why is it that no University or Atheist scholar is willing to investigate whether we continue to exist after death?
Isn't this the most important question?
Why are they scared to answer this question.
(Don't get offended by my questions, I am just debating here)
As far as the sUkShma sharIra not actually existing, how do we know that is true?
How do you account for the "out of body" experiences recorded by trustworthy Yogis and Swamis?
What about all the re-incarnation stories that have proven to be true by valid sources?
Is that all a fraud also?
Swami Sivananda has written some good books on this. Can some Atheist scholar go through it and refute his arguments? :-
http://www.dlshq.org/download/god_exists.htm
Arguments On The Existence Of God
1. The existence of Brahman is known on the ground of its being the Self of everyone. For everyone is conscious of the existence of his Self and never thinks "I am not." If, the existence of the Self were not known, everyone would think "I am not." And this Self of whose existence all are conscious is Brahman or God. It is difficult to define Brahman. But we will have to give a provisional definition. That is Sat-Chit-Ananda (Existence, Knowledge, and Bliss Absolute).
2. Close your eyes and imagine for a moment that you are dead. You can never do so. You can never think that you will not exist (after death). You will imagine that your dead body is lying down and that you are witnessing the dead body. This clearly proves that you are always the witnessing subject (Sakshi, Drashta). There is an inherent feeling in everybody 'I exist,' 'Aham Asmi.'
3. Because the Self is the basis of the action of proving, it is evident before the action of proving, and since it is of this character, it is therefore impossible to deny it. In denying Brahman you deny your own existence which is logically absurd. Brahman is the basis of all presuppositions, demonstrations and all notions.
4. Every effect has a cause. This phenomenal world must therefore have a cause. It is an effect of Brahman, the original causeless cause (Parama Karanam). This is the cosmological way of proving.
5. You cannot think of a finite thing without thinking of something beyond. The mind is so framed that it cannot think of a finite object without thinking of Infinity. You cannot think of an effect without thinking of its cause. You cannot think of impurity, duality, disagreement, variety, mortality, etc., without thinking of purity, oneness, agreement, unity, immortality, etc. The possibility of the relative implies the reality of the Absolute. This is the psychological method of proving the existence of Brahman. Infinity belongs to the very essence of His Nature. Sat-Chit-Ananda is His very essence just as heat and light constitute the very essence of fire.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
There have always been atheist and agnostic Hindus since ancient times.
So I agree with Hinduism has no objection to Atheist view points.
I welcome all debates on issues like punarjana, whether Brahman actually exists or is a figment of our imaginations, whether the devas actually exist and most importantly whether I continue to exist after I die.
I am not scared of science blowing holes in any of my theistic beliefs.
Atheists should also be open minded about debates.
Why is it that no University or Atheist scholar is willing to investigate whether we continue to exist after death?
Isn't this the most important question?
Why are they scared to answer this question.
(Don't get offended by my questions, I am just debating here)
As far as the sUkShma sharIra not actually existing, how do we know that is true?
How do you account for the "out of body" experiences recorded by trustworthy Yogis and Swamis?
What about all the re-incarnation stories that have proven to be true by valid sources?
Is that all a fraud also?
Swami Sivananda has written some good books on this. Can some Atheist scholar go through it and refute his arguments? :-
http://www.dlshq.org/download/god_exists.htm
Arguments On The Existence Of God
1. The existence of Brahman is known on the ground of its being the Self of everyone. For everyone is conscious of the existence of his Self and never thinks "I am not." If, the existence of the Self were not known, everyone would think "I am not." And this Self of whose existence all are conscious is Brahman or God. It is difficult to define Brahman. But we will have to give a provisional definition. That is Sat-Chit-Ananda (Existence, Knowledge, and Bliss Absolute).
2. Close your eyes and imagine for a moment that you are dead. You can never do so. You can never think that you will not exist (after death). You will imagine that your dead body is lying down and that you are witnessing the dead body. This clearly proves that you are always the witnessing subject (Sakshi, Drashta). There is an inherent feeling in everybody 'I exist,' 'Aham Asmi.'
3. Because the Self is the basis of the action of proving, it is evident before the action of proving, and since it is of this character, it is therefore impossible to deny it. In denying Brahman you deny your own existence which is logically absurd. Brahman is the basis of all presuppositions, demonstrations and all notions.
4. Every effect has a cause. This phenomenal world must therefore have a cause. It is an effect of Brahman, the original causeless cause (Parama Karanam). This is the cosmological way of proving.
5. You cannot think of a finite thing without thinking of something beyond. The mind is so framed that it cannot think of a finite object without thinking of Infinity. You cannot think of an effect without thinking of its cause. You cannot think of impurity, duality, disagreement, variety, mortality, etc., without thinking of purity, oneness, agreement, unity, immortality, etc. The possibility of the relative implies the reality of the Absolute. This is the psychological method of proving the existence of Brahman. Infinity belongs to the very essence of His Nature. Sat-Chit-Ananda is His very essence just as heat and light constitute the very essence of fire.