Wednesday, June 25, 2008

मन्त्रं

The efficiency of the japa is accentuated according to the degree of concentration। The mind should be fixed on the source or the related YANTRA (please see yantra section for details). Then only you will realize the maximum benefit of a mantra.


Om Bhur Bhuvah Swah, Tat Savitur Varenyam। Bhargo Devasya Dheemahi, Dhiyo Yo Nah Prachodayat।”
Gayatri Mantra is the supreme mantra of the vedas। Gayatri is the mother of universe, the shakti itself. There is nothing she cannot do. Her mantra purifies the mind, destroys pain, sin and ignorance, brings liberation, and bestows health, beauty, strength, vitality, power intelligence and magnetic aura. Modern system of treatment is bereft of religion. Anybody who enchants the gayatri mantra everyday can never be affected by diseases. Mahatma Gandhi believed that It protects both your body as well as soul.



“Om Sri Maha Ganapataye Namah”

The mantra of elephant headed God. A remover of obstacles and bestower of success. It is the mantra adopted by famous astrologer Bejan Daruwala.


“Om Namah Sivaya”

It is the mantra of Lord Shiva. Many people have become multi-millioner from penniless by enchanting this mantra. Lord Shiva is very innocent God and bestows his blessings immediately on the devotee.

“Om Namo Bhagavate Vasudevaya”

The mantra of Lord Vishnu. Any thing in the world is possible by worshipping lord Vishnu, who sustains the life in world. Enchanting this mantra saves you from many types of troubles. It bestows the devotee with prosperity, peace, wealth etc.


“Om Sri Ramaya Namah”

The description of word RAMA is unlimited. Lord Rama is the incarnation of Vishnu. The influence of Rama is spread all over Asia in one or the other way. One can gain a lot in all fields of his life by enchanting this mantra.


“Om Sri Durgaya Namah”

This mantra is of Goddess Durga the combined form of the powers of Lakshmi, Saraswati and kali. By enchanting this mantra all the physical, mental, economic problems are solved.

“Om Sri Maha Lakshmyai Namah”

The mantra of Goddess Lakshmi, the goddess of all the wealth and prosperity in the world.
“Om Aim Saraswatyai Namah”Godess Saraswati bestows the devotee with the memory, Knowledge and the power of speech.

“Om Kleem Krishnaya Namah”

The mantra of lord Krishna, the incarnation of Lord Vishnu. Solves all the problems of devotee and bestows him with wealth and prosperity.

“Om Tryambakam Yajamahe Sugandhim Pushtivardhanam Urvarukamiva Bandhanan Mrityor Mukshiya Mamritat”

This Mahamritunjaya Mantra of Shiva, is to protect and cure the persons from diseases, fear of death.

Abstract Mantras

“Soham” - I am That I am
“Aham Brahma Asmi ” - I am Brahman
“OM ” - It consist of three letters A, U and M. it signifies three periods of time, the three states of consciousness and all existence. A devotee can feel its effect very soon by including it in his daily routine of japa.
Bija Mantra, Mystic seed lettersOut of 11 bija mantra some are given below
“Kreeem” - This is the bija mantra of Kalika and Krishna
“Shreem” - The mantra of Maha Lakshmi, Wealth, satisfaction and dispeller of sorrows
“Aim ” - This is the mantra of Saraswati, the goddess of Knowledge.
“Kleem ” - This mantra relates to the lord of desires, also to lord Krishna.
The science of mantras is very complex. There are many mantras for specific purposes like Shabar Mantras, which give immediate result and don’t need any special techniques for their use.

बीजमंत्र


Om
Shrim
Hrim
Krim
Hum
Aim
Phat
Krom
Svaha
Klim
Hum
Hraum
Drim
Sphem
Plrem
Klrim Svaha
Thah
Prim
Tham Tham Thah Thah
Sphim
Hrum
Hrum
Hskphrem
Gam
Blum

गायत्री मंत्र

We meditate on the glory of the Creator;Who has created the Universe;Who is worthy of Worship;Who is the embodiment of Knowledge and Light;Who is the remover of all Sin and Ignorance;May He enlighten our Intellect.

*KALARIPAYYATTU*

http://www.kalaripayattu.org/

[Events at the Temple] The Clockwork Universe in Chaos

by Sadaputa Dasa
On a Caribbean island, a butterfly flutters briefly to the left instead of to the right. As a result, swirls of air produced by its wings move in a slightly different way than they would have. A few days later, a hurricane gradually building force in the Caribbean veers into the Florida coast instead of heading out to sea.
Could the hurricane’s change in course have been caused by the altered flight of the butterfly? According to Edward N. Lorenz of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the answer is yes.1 Computer simulations Lorenz has carried out suggest that the flow of air in the atmosphere may display the property of “exponential instability.”
Because of this property, extremely small changes in the flow of air can quickly be amplified until they have a major impact on weather. This, says Lorenz, makes short-range weather hard to forecast, because small changes, difficult to monitor, could result in large-scale effects.
This unpredictability has been called “deterministic chaos” because it arises in systems that, from a mathematical point of view, should be strictly deterministic and predictable. The idea of deterministic chaos gives new ways of looking at the question of God’s ability to act within the framework of physical laws.
Newtonian Precision
During the seventeenth century, at the time of Isaac Newton, many European naturalists and philosophers held that the material world was not only created but directly controlled by God. But the publication of Newton’s Principia heralded the soon to be established view that everything in nature happens in a rigidly deterministic fashion, in accordance with fixed mathematical laws.
Newton’s work confirmed an image of reality that had been growing prominent in Europe since the late Middle Ages—the picture of the universe as a machine like a vast clock. According to this picture, there are only three ways in which an agency transcendental to the material world could influence the behavior of matter. These are (1) by directly interfering with mechanical cause and effect in the world-machine at various times, (2) by programming the world- machine in the beginning of time to unfold future history automatically, and (3) by simply allowing events to happen according to the mechanical laws of cause and effect.
In case (3) the elements of interference and preprogramming are both absent, and the only role of the transcendental agency is to keep things going by the laws. The viewpoint summed up by option (3) is often called deism. It contrasts with atheism, which holds that events unfold according to physical laws that require no God to sustain them.
Newton himself felt that divine intervention of type (2) was necessary for the creation of the solar system. The solar system, he thought, would not have arisen on its own. Newton also believed that intervention of type (1) was necessary to keep the solar system operating smoothly.
Many scientists and philosophers rejected Newton’s theistic arguments. Newton’s rival Leibniz, for example, thought of God as a perfect clockmaker who created the universal machine, set it in motion, and then had no need to intervene further in its operation.
In due course, the research of Pierre de Laplace and J. L. Lagrange buttressed the views of Leibniz. Newton had argued that the gravitational influence of the planets on one another would eventually perturb their orbits to a degree demanding divine correction. Otherwise, the solar system would fly apart. But Laplace and Lagrange showed mathematically that in an idealized Newtonian model of the planetary system the orbits would oscillate within fixed limits. So the stability of the solar system would be preserved.
As time went on, divine interventions of type (2) also began to seem more and more implausible. Newton had argued that the regular arrangement of the nearly circular planetary orbits required the “divine arm.”22 But Laplace suggested that this regular pattern may have formed naturally as the planets condensed by physical processes from a primordial nebula. Even though Laplace did not fully work out the mathematics of his hypothesis, it carried the day and further limited the scope allowed for God’s activity within the universe.
God in the World of Modern Science
At present, as in the past, people hold a wide range of opinions on the relation between God and the material world. But many theologians in mainline denominations of Christianity tend to embrace some version of deism, which holds that God’s role in the universe is limited to creating and maintaining the laws of physics.
We will explore this view by examining the teachings of John Polkinghorne, formerly a professor of theoretical physics at Cambridge University. Polkinghorne, now president of Cambridge and an Anglican priest, is an articulate spokesman for deism.
For Polkinghorne, the world is “the expression of the will of a Creator, subtle, patient, and content to achieve his purposes by the slow unfolding of process inherent in those laws of nature which, in their regularity, are but pale reflections of his abiding faithfulness.”3
Everything works by the laws of physics, but God sustains these laws, and indeed the universe would cease to exist if He were to stop doing so.
Yet Polkinghorne also takes religious experiences seriously and accepts God as a “persuading, sustaining, transforming presence in the depths of our being.”4 Here one encounters a serious inconsistency in Polkinghorne’s views.
What is the meaning of Polkinghorne’s statement that God acts as a “transforming presence” in the depths of our being? One might say the transformations are simply internal. But if the transformations brought about by God’s presence do not affect our words and actions in any measurable way, then in what sense are they real or significant. Admitting that God’s transforming presence does affect our behavior, Polkinghorne would say that these behavioral changes are governed by the laws of physics. But if they are governed by the laws of physics, in what sense are they caused by a divine presence?
If God can play a meaningful role in people’s lives, it seems we must also allow God to direct the flow of material processes on a regular day-to-day basis. And this would violate the laws of physics.
Polkinghorne says of the laws of atomic physics, “I could literally write them down on the back of an envelope. Yet the fact that they have such remarkable consequences as you and me speaks of the amazing potentiality contained in their structure.”5 Polkinghorne holds that God created the laws of physics with this potentiality.
Granting this, one might suppose that God also endowed these laws with the potential to generate human brains programmed to produce religious experience.
One might then say that the “transforming presence” in the depths of our being is a neural process ordained by God when He first selected the terms in the differential equations of physics.
But is it meaningful to attribute such physically generated “religious experiences” to the presence of God? If the interactions of charged particles and electromagnetic fields are enough to bring forth all these manifestations, why bother to bring God into the picture at all? It seems simpler and more plausible to adopt the atheistic view: religious experience is just another natural outcome of the underlying laws of nature; and ideas about God, though generated by nature, are false.
A Positive Solution
Polkinghorne is grappling with an impossible problem. He is committed to two contradictory ideas: (1) that material events unfold according to deterministic physical laws and (2) that a transcendental supreme being is at work within the world. It is simply not possible for both of these ideas to be correct.
The root of this predicament is the belief that the laws of physics are deterministic. This belief began in Newton’s era, and it persists today. Of course, the quantum theory is famous for introducing an element of indeterminism into physics. But as Polkinghorne points out, this indeterminism does not allow for nonphysical agencies to interact with living organ-isms. So the problem still lies with the determinism that seems inherent in classical physics.
Classical determinism, however, is an essentially illusory idea. It is not an inherent feature of the mathematics and empirical predictions of classical physics. Rather, it is an error arrived at by generalizing from a limited class of machines (such as clocks). So Polkinghorne’s predicament, and more generally the predicament of Western spirituality during the last three centuries, need never have arisen.
This is where deterministic chaos comes in. In classical physics, this phenomenon is sufficiently widespread to render the behavior of many important systems completely unpredictable. And this inherent unpredictability, as we will show, simultaneously allows such systems to (1) obey the classical equations of motion within the limits of observational accuracy and (2) exhibit patterns of behavior freely selected from a wide range of options.
As a result, it is possible to re-formulate classical physics so that (1) the fundamental laws of dynamics stay essentially the same, (2) the predictions of the theory stay the same within the limits of observational accuracy, and (3) the theory has an element of indeterminism that allows extensive control over the course of events. In this form, the theory does not conflict with the idea that the phenomenal world is directly controlled by a transcendental being.
How Deterministic Chaos Works
To lay the groundwork for our model, we must first explain how deterministic chaos works. The key to understanding this is a phenomenon called exponential instability, and this can be most readily explained by an example.
Imagine firing a bullet at a solid metal sphere a few inches in diameter, and imagine that the bullet will bounce off the sphere. If you’re firing from a distance of several yards, slightly changing your aim can greatly affect the direction in which the bullet bounces. If you aim directly at the center of the sphere, the bullet will bounce back towards you. But if you aim slightly off center it will bounce off to one side. The curvature of the sphere amplifies the slight change in your aim, and this greatly changes the direction in which the bullet bounces.
If there are several spheres and the bullet bounces from one to another, the change grows greater from bounce to bounce and will quickly become enormous. This is called exponential amplification.
Figures 1 and 2 show how such amplification can generate preplanned patterns in ordinary matter. In these figures we consider a simple two-dimensional model of a gas. The gas molecules are represented by disks of equal mass, which elastically collide with one another and with the rigid walls of the square chamber that encloses them.
It is easy to see intuitively why this system should exhibit exponential instability. If two disks are about to collide, the curvature of one will magnify even a slight change in direction by the other, just as we saw with the bullet bouncing from the sphere. After N collisions this magnification will rise to the Nth power. In this way, small changes in direction can quickly have large effects.
To see what can happen, consider Figure 1. The four frames show the system of bouncing disks at four successive times. In each frame the arrangement of the disks seems random, as we would expect for the molecules of a gas.
In Figure 2 we start with an initial arrangement that looks the same as in Figure 1. But it’s slightly different: the directions in which the disks are moving have been systematically rotated by angles less than a millionth of a degree (too small to measure by observation).
As a result, by frame c the arrangement of disks is significantly different from that in Figure 1, and in frame d the disks have lined up in an orderly pattern we would not expect to find in a system of randomly colliding objects.
Now, let’s assume that the disks in the model are about the size of air molecules (some 2 angstrom units in diameter). And let’s say the disks are moving at the same average speed as air molecules at room temperature. Then the time that would elapse for the four frames in Figures 1 and 2 would be 2.75 X 10-11 seconds. From this we can see that when suitable, extremely small changes are made in the motion of the disks, planned patterns of organization can develop quickly in this system. There is every reason to think that similar effects could come about in real systems of molecules.
The key to the exponential amplification in our example is the nonlinearity in motion caused by the curvature of the disks. It turns out that in real physical systems such nonlinearity is the rule rather than the exception. We can therefore expect exponential instability and unpredictable behavior to show up in a wide variety of physical systems. Examples reported thus far include:6 the flow of air and fluids in a wide variety of situations; oscillating chemical reactions; the beating of heart cells; a large number of electrical and mechanical oscillators; the dripping of faucets; the Newtonian three-body problem; models of nerve cells and glial cells in the brain; and models of epidemics, animal populations, and economics.
The Unmanifest And the Immeasurably Small
Deterministic chaos renders the laws of classical physics flexible instead of rigid and deterministic. So without producing measurable deviations from these laws, an unlimited intelligence with direct control over matter on a submicroscopic level could guide the course of events freely.
We can speak of this submicroscopic level as the “unmanifest,” since it involves phenomena we cannot directly perceive or measure. In the classical models we are considering here, the unmanifest is the domain of immeasurably small changes in the position and velocity of particles. In other physical models (including quantum mechanical systems) one can also speak of an unmanifest level involving extremely small changes in the state of a system.
Our proposed change in the laws of physics is simply this: on the manifest, or measurable, level, leave the laws as they are, but at the unmanifest, or unmeasurable, level, allow for intelligently directed changes.
The All-Pervading Supersoul
To effectively control material phenomena through action on the unmanifest level, a controlling agency would have to make minute but precisely coordinated adjustments in the course of events at many points in space and time. Traditional conceptions of God found in cultures all over the world seem to allow for such coordinated control. One of the great perennial ideas of mankind is that God, or some aspect of God, is present everywhere in space and able to perceive and act at all locations simultaneously.
Polkinghorne retains a modified form of this idea. According to Polkinghorne, physical interactions occur in the same way everywhere because of the “abiding faithfulness” of God, who acts everywhere to sustain the laws of physics. Of course, one might argue, if all God does is sustain the laws of physics, why not simply accept the regularity of physical behavior as axiomatic? Then there would be no need to bring in the greater mystery of God to explain it. Nonetheless, Polkinghorne reflects traditional ideas by proposing that not a single electron interacts without the will of God.
Newton, at the beginning of the modern mechanistic era, held a somewhat stronger view of God’s all-pervading nature. He regarded absolute space and time as the sensorium of God, through which God could perceive all phenomena, sustain the laws of physics, and also modify the course of events according to His will.7 Such modifications, he thought, were gross violations of natural law but would be needed from time to time to keep things running smoothly.
The Christian thinker Augustine, writing in the fourth century, described God this way: “God so fills all things as to be not a quality of the world, but the very creative being of the world, governing the world without work, sustaining it without effort. … Unconfined to any place, He is in Himself everywhere wholly.”8
Here the phrases “without work” and “without effort” could be taken to mean that God simply sustains a completely autonomous world system. But Augustine was writing in a pre-mechanistic era, and this suggests that he used these phrases to refer to God’s power to control events personally, from moment to moment.
The Vedic literature of India provides further insight into this point. The Bhagavad-gita explains that all material phenomena are created, maintained, and annihilated by a single part of Krishna, the supreme transcendental person. This part, or amsha,is known as the Supersoul, or Paramatma, and is described in the Thirteenth Chapter of the Gita.There it is stated that the Supersoul:9 (1) lies beyond material cause and effect; (2) has transcendental senses of perception and action at all locations in space and time but has no material senses; (3) is the master of material nature yet is beyond it; (4) is present inside and outside of all living beings; (5) is situated as one, even though appearing to be divided.
This description more elaborately presents some of the ideas mentioned by Augustine. First of all, it indicates that the Supersoul can perceive and act in a unified way at all points in space and time. This is precisely what our model requires. A being fully present at all locations would be uniquely suited to gather the needed data and make the needed calculations to guide the nondeterminate flux of events in any desired direction.
Of course, we do not wish to suggest that God operates by computation, as humans might imagine doing. Augustine and the Gita agree that God is able to guide material events effortlessly, like a practiced pianist improvising on musical themes without worrying about the detailed movements of his fingers. Our main point is that matter acting in accord with classical physical laws is indeed freely controllable, but the exertion of such control requires both omniscience and omnipotence. Long before the advent of modern physical theories, ancient traditions attributed such unlimited powers to God.
We can conclude, therefore, that the laws of classical physics are compatible with the idea that God directly controls the behavior of matter. The same compatibility can also be demonstrated for the laws of quantum mechanics, although the complexity of quantum mechanical theory prevents us from going into this topic here.
Of course, it has not been shown that all events in nature do conform to the known laws of physics, although many scientists assume that this must be so (or that it will be so once some final minor additions to the laws are made). If material phenomena wander from the laws of physics, that does, of course, leave room for action by God. But even if we suppose that all measurable phenomena do follow the known laws, it is still possible for the course of events to be under divine control from moment to moment.

[Events at the Temple] Our Place in Lord Brahma’s Lifetime

by Vishakha-devi dasi
In Ancient India’s Vedic literatures we find a cosmic calendar that shows the cycle of ages—and how to break out of it.
How long we live greatly depends on what kind of body we have. For example, an insect might stay around for only a month, while a human being sometimes lasts for 100 years. And as the time-honored Bhagavad-gita informs us, the inhabitants of planetary systems higher than ours have bodies of a still higher quality and so live much longer than we do here. In fact Lord Brahma, the administrative demigod who resides on the highest planet in the universe, lives not a moment less than 311 trillion 40 billion years.
Of course, modern scientistshave some inkling that a single 24-hour span on some higher planets may equal an earth year or maybe more, but they have no idea just how much more. Bhagavad-gita (8.17) tells us this about the length of Lord Brahma?s day and night:
sahasra-yuga-paryantamahar yad brahmano viduhratrim yuga-sahasrantamte ?ho-ratra-vido janah
?By human calculation, 1,000 great ages taken together is the duration of Brahma?s day. And such also is the duration of his night.?
Here?s the calculation in detail. First, we add up the 4 yugas (ages) shown in the chart. This is 1 divya-yuga (great age), or 4.32 million years. Now, when we multiply by 1,000, what we come up with?and this is a mere 12 ?hours? (1 daytime) in Lord Brahma?s life?is 4.32 billion earth years. His daytime plus his nighttime comes to 8.64 billion years. What?s more, 360 of these days and nights make 1 of Brahma?s ?years,? and he lives for a full 100 of these ?years.?
All of this may seem fantastic to us, but as Einstein learned some years ago, time is relative. Take, for example, an amoeba, whose life span is less than an hour. If we could explain our life span to the amoeba, just think how flabbergasted he would be. In the same way, although we may be astounded by Brahma?s life span, to him it seems quite normal and, if anything, rather short.
Understanding the Overseer
On a grand, cosmic scale, Lord Brahma is an overseer?he manages the process of creation within this universe. At the beginning of each of his days, all varieties of life-forms appear, and when his night comes there is a partial annihilation until the next day, when he sets everything in motion all over again. Although Brahma lives for such a vast span of time and has such awesome responsibilities, we can get a rough idea what his life is like.
Brahma starts his day by meditating on the Supreme Lord. He prays that he may ?engage in the Lord?s service in the creation of the material world,? and that ?I may not be materially affected by my works, for thus I may be able to give up the false prestige of being the creator.? (Srimad-Bhagavatam 3.9.23)
Although he holds such an exalted place in our universe, Brahma acknowledges God?s supremacy and does not want to become illusioned into thinking that he is independently powerful. He wants to remember always that the original cause of everything is Lord Krishna, the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Just as a gardener doesn?t create seeds but simply sows and waters them to make a garden grow, so Lord Brahma does not create life (the soul), but receives power from the Supreme Lord to place certain souls into certain types of bodies.
So at the beginning of his day, Brahma places each one of us?each individual spiritual soul?into a particular body. As Brahma?s day wears on, we transmigrate from one body to another, sometimes to the upper planetary systems and sometimes to the lower ones; sometimes to the body of a pigeon and sometimes to that of a prince?until, after 4.32 billion earth years have passed, Lord Brahma?s day ends. Then we go into a dormant state, until his next day begins and the whole cycle starts again.
We may take exception to all this information, since we can?t recall any of it. But after all, what can we recall of even our present lifetime? For instance, we know for sure that we were once in our mother?s womb, but can we remember that experience? And what to speak of past lifetimes in other bodies? Brahma, however, sees our futile wanderings and feels compassion. He sees us suffering from various types of miseries?anxiety, anger, disease, insomnia, natural disturbances?because of our forgetfulness. ?The material miseries are without factual existence for the soul,? he assures us. Still, many of us refuse to hear about our actual identity and our relationship with the Supreme Lord, and as a result, we keep on suffering in this material world.
A Look Inside 1 Divya-yuga (Great Age) in Lord Brahma?s Day
Beyond Brahma
In Bhagavad-gita (8.16) Lord Krishna tells us exactly what our situation is and what we can do about it: “From the highest planet in the material world-Lord Brahma’s residence—down to the lowest, all are places of misery wherein repeated creation and annihilation take place. But one who attains to My abode never comes to this material world again.”
As long as we live here in the material world, we can know that we face three times of bodily annihilation: (1) the moment of our death, (2) the end of each of Brahma’s days (when there is a partial annihilation), and (3) the end of Brahma’s lifetime (when the entire universe becomes unmanifest for thousands of aeons, until the Lord again manifests Brahma and the rest of the universe).
This has been going on in the past, and it is still going on. “Again and again this multitude of living entities become active; and again and again they are helplessly dissolved.” (Bg. 8.19) No one can calculate how long we have been revolving in the cycle of creation and dissolution. But by using our intelligence properly, we can get out of this insane cycle and save ourselves from a bleak future.
“Yet,” Lord Krishna promises, “there is another nature, which is eternal and is transcendental to the manifested and unmanifested matter. It is supreme and is never annihilated. When all in this world is annihilated, that part remains as it is. That supreme abode is the supreme destination. When one goes there, he never comes back. That is My supreme abode.” (Bg. 8.20-21)
As we’ve seen, the soul’s sojourn from body to body throughout Brahma’s lifetime is pitiable and pointless. Now that we have the human form of life, we have a rare chance to understand our real situation—a chance to see that with each rising and setting of the sun, our inevitable demise is coming closer, and that all the wealth in the world can’t stop it. Lower life forms don’t have enough brain substance to understand this process, but human beings can read Vedic literature and take its advice: “Do not spend your time uselessly in mundane affairs; all these things will be finished at the time of annihilation. Instead, look toward the eternal world. Learn how to go back home, back to Godhead.”
As we can see on the chart, the age that we’re living in (the Kali-yuga) is an ocean of faults. But we have one exceptional opportunity: simply by chanting the names of God, we can become freed from Lord Brahma’s cycle of creations and then return home, back to Godhead. Five centuries ago the Supreme Personality of Godhead appeared as Lord Caitanya Mahaprabhu and personally taught this sublime process of God realization. At that time even Lord Brahma came to this planet to take part in the Lord’s mission. And Brahma—along with Lord Caitanya’s other followers to the present day—always chants the names of God recommended in the Vedic literature: Hare Krishna, Hare Krishna, Krishna Krishna, Hare Hare/ Hare Rama, Hare Rama, Rama Rama, Hare Hare.

[Events at the Temple] Reality, Life, and Quantum Mechanics

by Sadaputa Dasa
In recent years the idea that life can be reduced to chemistry and physics has become very prominent in the life sciences. According to this idea, all living organisms, including human beings, are simply aggregates of molecules interacting in accordance with chemical and physical laws. This conception of life has found particular emphasis in the fields of biochemistry and molecular biology, where the study of DNA, RNA, and the processes of protein synthesis have lent credence to the picture of the living cell as a molecular machine.
What are the molecules that combine together to make this machine, and what is really known of the laws governing their interaction? For the answers to these questions we must turn to physics, and in particular to the quantum theory, which provides the basis for the present understanding of atoms and molecules. However, we find ironically that modern physics presents a description of molecules that seriously undermines the mechanical picture developed by the molecular biologists. While the biologists have attempted to reduce life to the interaction of inanimate entities, the physicists have developed a conception of inanimate entities that necessitates the presence of life—the life of a conscious observer. We will briefly describe this development and indicate some of its implications for our understanding of the nature of reality, and in particular the nature of life.
To begin, let us consider how modern physics uses quantum mechanics to describe atoms and molecules. In popular books these are often depicted as three-dimensional shapes; but this is misleading. In fact, quantum mechanics provides no natural description of three-dimensional objects in space. In quantum mechanics all natural phenomena are described by means of a mathematical construct called the wave function. The wave function can be represented as a three-dimensional arrangement only for a very simple system. For example, we can represent the hydrogen atom three-dimensionally if we regard the nucleus as a fixed point and only the electron as an active entity. However, the wave function for the helium atom (with two electrons) requires six dimensions, and that for the carbon atom (with six electrons) requires eighteen dimensions. In general, the wave function for an entity composed of n particles requires 3n dimensions. So, if we tried to quantum- mechanically represent the complex molecules found in living organisms, we would require wave functions involving many thousands of geometric dimensions.
Actually, it is a mistake to think of the wave function as a model of objective reality. Rather, we should understand it to be only a store of information about the results of observations that could be made by a particular observer. In quantum mechanics there is a system of computational procedures called “observables,” which one can apply to the wave function to predict the expected results of corresponding observations. The wave functions and observables can be reformulated mathematically in many different ways, the only requirement being that for each observation all the reformulations yield the same predicted value. Thus modern physics deals only with observations, whereas nineteenth century physics dealt with arrangements of matter in space.
In this connection Werner Heisenberg pointed out, “The conception of the objective reality of the elementary particles has thus evaporated … into the transparent clarity of a mathematics that represents no longer the behavior of the elementary particles but rather our knowledge of this behavior.” (Italics added.) It has not been possible to regard this “knowledge” as a representation of actual entities, in which symbolic expressions correspond in a one-to- one relationship to what actually exists.
One feature of this “knowledge” is that it inevitably possesses some ambiguity. The famous Heisenberg uncertainty principle states that the degree of uncertainty in either the position or the momentum of an electron must be at least as great as a specific small quantity. Thus we cannot conceive of the electron as a definite object with a definite position and momentum; we are limited to speaking simply of observations of “position of an electron” or “momentum of an electron,” and we cannot think of the electron separately from the observer and his measuring apparatus.
Ambiguities and Paradoxes
According to the quantum theory, natural processes can amplify atomic ambiguity without limit. To illustrate such amplification, Erwin Schrodinger conceived his famous “cat paradox,” which we will describe here in a slightly modified form. Suppose someone attaches a bomb to a railroad track and then connects the bomb to a Geiger counter so that the decay of a radioactive atom will cause it to explode. We then have a scenario in which, say, the 5 P.M. express train will derail if the atom decays within a certain period, and it will not derail if it doesn’t. Suppose we can describe the entire scene, including the train and its passengers, by quantum mechanics (this is a big assumption). The quantum theory would then predict that at 5:01 the wave function describes a train that is both derailed and not derailed! (See Fig. 1.) The quantum mechanical ambiguity in the state of the atom has become enormously amplified, and the “knowledge” represented by the wave function has become ambiguous on a large scale.
The situation of the 5 P.M. express is a source of difficulty if we try to interpret the quantum theory as a description of objective reality. The wave function at 5:01 describes the passengers on the train as simultaneously experiencing the derailment of the train and its normal functioning. Since no one ever actually has such an experience, there must be some deficiency in the theory.
In practice physicists try to remedy this deficiency by redefining the wave function whenever it develops a degree of ambiguity that entails impossible experiences for an observer. It has not been possible to justify this redefinition in terms of either physical forces or any other natural principle of causation. Rather, the wave function is said to be redefined by absolute chance. In our train example, we would have to choose a new wave function that either unambiguously represents a derailed train, or unambiguously represents a normal train. We would have to make this choice before any observer might perceive an impossible ambiguity, but we could attribute the choice to no natural cause other than pure chance.
Much controversy has arisen over this process of redefinition, and we will not attempt to do justice to this issue here. We can conclude, however, that the only sensible way to interpret the quantum theory is as a system of knowledge about observations. It has not been possible to interpret the theory as a description of actual entities existing in space. Furthermore, we can conclude that the knowledge conveyed by the theory is inherently uncertain and sometimes in need of revisions that cannot be determined by any known principles.
Strictly speaking, then, we cannot describe the world on the basis of quantum theory without positing a region that contains the observer and that cannot be described by the theory. Some physicists have proposed that the boundary of this region should be drawn at the point where atomic ambiguities first become amplified to the macroscopic level. Others, such as John von Neumann, have tried to reduce this region to zero, and thus they have been forced to posit a nonphysical observer whom von Neumann called the “abstract ego.” In either case, difficulties and paradoxes arise, and the theory does not give an adequate account of the observer.
In addition, we cannot expect the quantum theory to give an adequate description of the gross behavior of living beings, even if we disregard their role as possible observers of events. The problem of ambiguity in the quantum theory suggests that it may be seriously incomplete, even as a description of the behavior of inanimate matter. What, then, to speak of the quantum theory’s description of the measurable behavior of living organisms? Even without undertaking the formidable calculations required to generate such a description, we can anticipate that it, too, will be inadequate.
Needed: a New Theory of Physics
From the above discussion, we can see the need for a new theory of physics—one resolving both the problem of ambiguity and that of the observer’s role. One prominent physicist, Eugene Wigner, has suggested that such a theory should directly take life into account. He has proposed that many of the principles, entities, and laws involved with life are presently unknown because they do not play a highly significant role in the nonliving phenomena on which the present theory is based.
In making this proposal, Wigner has also pointed out another deficiency of the quantum theory, one that must be shared by all purely mathematical descriptions of natural phenomena. This deficiency is the failure of the theory to give any account of consciousness. As Wigner points out, our knowledge of our consciousness is primary, and our knowledge of all other things is the content of our consciousness. Thus consciousness exists, even though the arrays of numbers appearing in mathematical theories say nothing about it. A theory that truly accounts for life must deal with consciousness, and this means that the theory cannot be exclusively quantitative in nature.
Let us briefly describe how the Bhagavad-gita gives an outline for such a theory. Although the conceptions presented in the Bhagavad-gita are not at all compatible with the mechanistic worldview presently favored in the life sciences, they take on new relevance when we consider the dilemmas faced by modern physics.
Insights into the Enigmas
The Bhagavad-gita (18.61)describes the living organism as follows:
ishvarah sarva-bhutanamhrid-deshe ’rjuna tishthatibhramayan sarva-bhutaniyantrarudhani mayaya
This verse describes the organism as a machine (yantra) made of material energy, and to this degree the verse agrees with the mechanistic views of the biologists. However, it further says that the conscious self rides in this machine as a passenger, and that the machine is being directed by the Supreme Lord in His aspect as material controller (ishvarah), also known as paramatma. Elsewhere the Bhagavad-gita describes the paramatma as all-pervading and as the source of all material senses and qualities (Bg. 13.14-15). The paramatma directs the material apparatus through laws (summarily described as the modes of material nature) that are ultimately psychological in character.
In a very general way, the paramatma corresponds to the natural laws of the physicists, which are regarded as invariant in time and space and as the ultimate causal principles underlying all material phenomena. However, the paramatma possesses all-pervading consciousness, as well as unlimited qualities, and is thus not susceptible to complete description in mathematical terms.
The psychological modes by which the paramatma directs nature may be susceptible to quantitative description to some extent. These modes of nature correspond to the higher laws and entities Wigner felt would be necessary in any adequate theory of life. In the limiting case involving only inanimate matter, these higher laws should approximate the natural laws physicists have deduced from their observations of matter. However, in cases involving living beings, we may expect to find many phenomena that obey higher psychological laws but that defy explanation within the existing theories of physics.
By adjusting the actions of the material energy in accordance with both the modes of nature and the desires of the individual conscious living entities, the paramatma acts as the intermediary between these beings and the observable phenomena of nature. Thus the Bhagavad-gita provides a framework for understanding the nature of the observer and the nature of the observer’s interaction with matter. We can see that this is quite relevant to modern physics if we recall that the quantum theory is essentially a description of observations, and that the theory’s account of the observer and the process of observation is beset with serious difficulties.
At present we may find it extremely difficult to bridge the gap between the Bhagavad-gita’s description of the
paramatma and the known laws of physics. Yet it is important to realize that modern scientific knowledge by no means rules out the possibility that both nature and the living beings have attributes lying far beyond the scope of our present theories. By remaining open to conceptions of life much broader than the limited mechanistic view, scientists will lose nothing. Rather, they may gain a deeper insight into both the perplexing enigmas of modern physics and the profound view of life presented in the Bhagavad-gita.

[Events at the Temple] Can plants feel?

THE DEBATE over whether plants have feelings is about to be reopened with the publication of research by scientists in Italy and Germany.
Their findings suggest that plants under threat can marshal a positively devilish measure of cunning.
They communicate the danger to plants nearby; and also call in help from other creatures.
Biologists at the University of Turin and the Max Planck Institute in Jena were yesterday reported to have found evidence that plants sensed — and reacted to — the presence of hungry, leaf-chomping grubs.
Their response was to emit an odour similar to lavender.
This alerted other plants to the presence of a predator.
But it also served to call in what modern military planners would term air support.
Wasps, the natural enemies of grubs, were drawn by the odour to the plant where they either devoured the grub or injected it with eggs that later killed it.
The bulk of the 3-year project was devoted to studying Lima bean (Phaseolus lunatus), native of central and south America.
But according to a report by the Italian daily La Republica researchers elicited similar reactions from maize, from the plant that yields cranberry or borlotti beans (Phaseolus vulgaris) and from other species.
The findings of their joint project are to be published in Plant Physiology, a review of the American Society of Plant Biologists.
Not the least intriguing question raised by the study is whether, at the start of the process they describe, there is something that can be termed fear.
The debate began in 1966 when a lie detector expert, Cleve Backster, connected a plant to a polygraph. He said the machine registered changes as soon as he began to contemplate burning the plant’s leaves.

Guardian Newspapers Limited 2004

[Events at the Temple] Origin of Sound

In the beginning there was darkness of pradhāna, the unmanifested material energy .
When agitated by Lord Vishnu’s powerful glance his kāla-śakti was awakened to the stage called mahat (‘the great matter).
Gradually the following elements were generated: ahankāra (false ego), manah (mind) and buddhi (intelligence), tan matras (sense objects) and pañcha bhutas (the five gross material elements).
Together they form kārana-sāgara or Causal ocean.
The Lord then expanded himself and entered into the causal ocean.
From his body came forth the seeds of millions of universe.
The Lord then expanded and lay down within each and every universes.
In his navel lake a small transcendental seed was generated, which grew into a lotus flower that contained all the planetary systems.
Within that lotus the first created being, Lord Brahmā appeared. He was perplexed about his origin and destiny, but suddenly from nearby he heard two syllables ta – pa.
“Practice austerities!” thus initiated by the Supreme Lord , Brahma underwent severe austerities and was rewarded with Vedic wisdom for his great task of secondary creation.
The first living entity that appeared from Lord Brahma was pranava, the transcendental sound omkāra. From om came all the sounds of the alphabet.
Human sound creation
According to traditional phonetics sikśa, the self ātma formulates intentions by means of intelligence buddhi and inspires the mind mana to speak.
The mind impulses the bidy fire kāyāgni it in turn sets in motion breadth māruta that moving in the chest, generates a humming sound (mandra) that again rising to the palate and crown of the head, and rebounding thence, passes to the mouth and produces articulate sounds like vowels and consonants.