Ma Janani,

Many people read Vedas, but no one understands it. Not a single commentary of the Vedas exists; which gives true interpretation according to Vedaangas taught in the traditional method. Similarly, all commentaries on Vedaanta are faulty. We had written a brief commentary pointing out the mistakes and giving scientific interpretation, with a different classification of forces (you...

view entire post

Ma Janani,

Many people read Vedas, but no one understands it. Not a single commentary of the Vedas exists; which gives true interpretation according to Vedaangas taught in the traditional method. Similarly, all commentaries on Vedaanta are faulty. We had written a brief commentary pointing out the mistakes and giving scientific interpretation, with a different classification of forces (you can write to mbasudeba@gmail.com for a copy). Thus, most people interpret these wrongly. Maya is not illusion, but mother of all forces. Uncertainty is not a law of Nature, but arises because of the process of measurement. Our capacity to measure something is limited. We measure the state at a given instant and freeze it for future reference, though the object of measurement continues to evolve in time. Thus, the result of measurement describes something different from the state of the observer at the moment of consideration bringing in uncertainty because we cannot precisely determine the factors influencing time evolution (karmanyevaadhikaaraste…). This forced Ozawa to revise Heisenberg’s formulation.

The Upanishads have intrinsic meaning and should not be interpreted literally, because that can be misleading. For example, in your interpretation of the Mundaka (2-2-11), you have interpreted Brahma as Krishna also, which is misleading in the present context, because both have different characteristics, though some common characteristics also. Each term in the Vedas has been written with a purpose and use of synonyms changes the meaning totally. It is easy to say “As is the human body, so is the cosmic body”, but to equate the macro with the macro is the biggest challenge before scientists.

Rig Veda (10-129) gives 10 different interpretations of cosmic horizon from different perspectives like “Ambhah Vaada, ahoraatra vaada, sadasat vaada..etc”. Your description of Lokas are correct, but interpretation of their mechanism is wrong. It depicts three separate three layered structures. The interpretation of grahas are also different (based on their nature of origin). Vaak is not ‘birthing’. Only Ambhrhni Vaak leads to structure formation. Yuga, Manwantara and Kalpa have scientific meanings which do not come out of your paper. It looks like a religious belief. However, carry on with your quest. You can read our essay. Blessings.

basudeba

view post as summary

show all replies (1 not shown)

hide replies