146 CHAPTER 4 ADVAITA AND NEW SCIENCE CONTRASTED The quest for reality, the quest to transcend appearance and to approach reality had always been with the enquiring minds. The knowledge seeking minds were intimately concerned with the immediate and mundane phenomenal world, nature and the inter relationship between appearance and reality. The postulate that what is apparent may neither be the truth, nor be the reality had long been established. The reality behind the nature, a deep level beneath the surface level had always troubled knowledge seeking minds. In the ancient world, in Bharata Varsha, it had been the Maha Rishis and Rishis who went for knowledge both empirical and transcendental. For the West, which has its base in the Greek Tradition, it was the Philosophers who searched for knowledge. Thus we have two types of seekers such as seekers of the Empirical knowledge as well as the seekers of the Transcendental knowledge; both using similar categories and tools in their efforts. These two sets are not mutually exclusive. Both sets of people used to overlap one another and also to supplement one another.
Transcript
146
CHAPTER 4
ADVAITA AND NEW SCIENCE CONTRASTED
The quest for reality, the quest to transcend appearance and to approach
reality had always been with the enquiring minds. The knowledge seeking
minds were intimately concerned with the immediate and mundane
phenomenal world, nature and the inter relationship between appearance
and reality. The postulate that what is apparent may neither be the truth, nor
be the reality had long been established. The reality behind the nature, a
deep level beneath the surface level had always troubled knowledge seeking
minds.
In the ancient world, in Bharata Varsha, it had been the Maha Rishis and
Rishis who went for knowledge both empirical and transcendental. For the
West, which has its base in the Greek Tradition, it was the Philosophers who
searched for knowledge. Thus we have two types of seekers such as
seekers of the Empirical knowledge as well as the seekers of the
Transcendental knowledge; both using similar categories and tools in their
efforts. These two sets are not mutually exclusive. Both sets of people used
to overlap one another and also to supplement one another.
147
From this let us look at the Maha Rishis and Rishis of India and the
Philosophers and Scientists of the West.
Advaita Vedanta or the unqualified monism of Sankaracharya tries to
understand reality, both mundane and transcendental. Philosophers of the
West involved in metaphysics looking for the ontological existence and
empirical scientists were also searching reality at the empirical level.
Ultimately all the searches converged simply at one point and therefore, let
us offer our respect to all various knowledge seekers of Man’s great
Knowledge Tradition.
4.1. The Knowers, Knowing and Knowledge according to Advaita
The shanti mantra of Katha Upanishad tells us how the knowledge giver
and knowledge seeker are ought to be:
148
(May both of us be protected, be nourished. May both of us work together
with energy and vigor. May our study be enlightening, not giving rise to
hostility. Aum Peace, Peace, Peace.)
Nyaya Sutra by Maharshi Akshapada Gautama is a work that discuses the
epistemology in detail. He insists that knowledge worth the name must have
the property of affecting the knower through the process of refining the
knower to make him a Sanskrita, the refined one.
However, the process of acquiring real knowledge is not an easy task as
explained by Katha Upanishad as:
(Arise, awake and follow the Wise. Like the sharp edge of a razor is
that path, so the Wise say- hard to tread and difficult to cross) 1.
Such path can only be taken by very select few, the real seekers of
knowledge as Bhagavath Gita rightly says:
(Out of many thousands among men, one may endeavor for perfection, and
of those who have achieved perfection, hardly one knows truth.) 2
149
There is an anecdote of Siva and Parvati. It is Siva who gave the Battle Axe
(Parasu) to Bhargava Rama and it is with that same battle axe that Rama
attacks Vinayaka, the son of Siva. In that context, Parvati tells Siva that gift
should be given only to the deserving hands. Knowledge also is similar. It
must be given to the deserving. Deserving one, here, implies a student with a
yearning mind and an impeccable quest for knowing. Describing the quality
of a student, Bhagavath Gita says:
(One who is self-controlled and unattached and who disregards all material
enjoyments can obtain, by practice of renunciation, the highest perfect stage
of freedom from reaction)3.
Katha Upanishad agrees on the point as:
(When the aspirant is devoid of all desires which stain his mind, then and
then alone he enjoys the bliss of realization) 4 along with Chandogya
Upanishad:
150
(One should think with a concentrated mind about Reality so that one may
realize it) 5 and Setaswatara Upanishad: “The image becomes clear when
the mirror over which it reflects is clean. Similarly, when the aspirant’s mind
is pure, he realizes all” 6
In Sankaracharya’s own words:
(The man who discriminates between the Real and the Unreal, whose mind
is turned away from the unreal, who possesses calmness and the allied
virtues, and who is longing for Liberation, is alone considered qualified to
enquire after the truth.)7
Viveka Chudamani further suggests four fold path for attaining knowledge:
“First is enumerated discrimination between the Real and the Unreal; next
comes aversion to the enjoyment of fruits (of one’s actions) here and
hereafter; (next is) the group of six attributes, viz. calmness and the rest;
(last) is clearly the yearning for Liberation” 8
151
In all the process of knowing, presence of mind is inevitable. Knowledge-
seeking mind must be gifted with very high concentration. Speaking about
the property of concentration, Katha Upanishad says that:
(It is perceived or realized only through a concentrated mind) 9
For Advaita, a knower is a Rishi, a seer, who has seen the truth. They are
the ancient sages, through their meditation, experienced the divine truths.
The ancient Rishis led a very pious life which was further sanctified by the
austerity of penance. They could ‘hear’ the silence of the Divinity and could
‘see’ the formlessness of the Infinite.
The Vedic Rishi is referred to as a drashta or a Seer. The Vedic Rishis could
‘see’ even the transcendental truth as they were great ‘seers’. The ‘divine
truths’ were revealed to them while they were in meditation on higher spiritual
planes.
152
4.1.1. Rishis of New Science
The New Science has its own Rishis called Scientists named Rutherford,
Bohr, Heisenberg, de Broglie, Einstein etc. It is not out of context to examine
how far the New Scientists resemble the Rishis since they are the leading
birds of their own flocks.
New Scientists are not very much pleased with the traditional pattern of
discovery or invention by following the path of experiment, observation and
inference. Like Rishis, they too follow the methods of concentration and
meditation. New Scientists own a childlike ability to see the world as it is and
not as it ought to appear in accordance with the old Science. This childlike
ability is the first qualification to know, as suggested by Katha Upanishad10.
They never hesitate to drop their expert’s minds and to take up the
beginner’s mind that is blessed with numerous possibilities.
New Scientists possess almost all the qualities required by the seekers as
given in the fundamental texts of Vedanta. They always dare to struggle
hard: as hard as “walking on the edge of a razor11”
and they are “ones out of thousands12”
( ). They have discrimination between real and unreal,
aversion to enjoyment of worldly pleasures, six prescribed qualities and
finally, the incessant yearning to know the Reality.
Like Yogis, they concentrate upon their object of inquiry. They, like the
Sages, never waited for experimental verification to assert the truth they
153
have seen. They, very often, follow pure Mathematics, a normative enquiry, a
process very close to meditation in its nature.
It is not very surprising that their results often sound like certain conclusions
of Advaita Vedanta since they fulfill the requirements of Advaitic Rishis.
4.1.1.1. Advaita and Bohr
Bohr Model of atom pictures a planetary model of atom as seen in Chapter
III. One of the most striking features of Planetary Model is the amount of
empty space present in an atom.
The mass of an electron is 9.8 X 10-27grams13. This is equal to the number
we get by dividing one with 1027. This is obviously a very minute quantity,
almost equal to zero, and hence negligible. The masses of proton and
neutron, that together form the atomic nucleus, are 1.672 X 10-27grams14 and
1.675 X 10-24 grams respectively15.
Since the electrons are of very negligible mass, the nucleus constitutes 99.99
% of the total mass of the atom. However, the volume of this dense nucleus
is only 0.01% of the total atomic volume.
This follows that 99.99 % of the total atomic volume is empty. Atom is
something very hollow in nature. These atoms are regarded as the building
blocks of the Universe. In other words, Universe is made up of the hollow
bricks called atoms.
154
Here we see Neils Bohr at a very close proximity to Adi Sankaracharya. The
Universe is a hollow. It is, as we perceive, a mere appearance. An illusion as
suggested by Advaita through a number of examples. Of the fundamental
texts of Advaita Vedanta, there are countless citations in this respect. Maitri
Upanishad 16 and Gaudapadakarika17, for instance, agree upon this.
In Sankaracharya’s own words:
(The world which is full of attachments, aversions, etc., is like a dream. It
appears to be real, as long as it continues but appears to be unreal when
one is awake - when true wisdom dawns)” 18,
(…the Jagat appears to be true (Satyam) so long as Brahman, the
substratum, the basis of all this creation, is not realized. It is like the illusion
of silver in the mother-of pearl, the shell) 19”, and again:
155
(The wise one should intelligently merge the entire world-of-objects in the
Atman alone and constantly think of the Self ever as contaminated by
anything as the sky20).
The Real according to Advaita is immutable, self existent and eternal. Our
understanding about it does not undergo any change. “Whatever lacks this
characteristic mark of the real must not be called real”. 21 Also, “Universe is
therefore, due to ignorance. It is not ultimately real”. 22 These arguments are
totally valid in the case of the idea of the Universe that arises from the Bohr
atom model too. It does not essentially remains what it is. And hence, Jagat
is Midhya.
4.1.1.2. Advaita and de Broglie
Louis de Broglie’s matter-wave duality, on close examination, has some
similarity with Advaita. In the light of the concept, matter is no longer a ‘solid
thing’ as it appears to us. It is something else too: the wave (something
diametrically opposite). It follows that matter is not matter alone, but wave
also and vice versa.
To expand on the theory further, mass and energy are one and the same.
The duality proposed by de Broglie eventually points out to the non-duality of
matter and energy: A kind of Advaita, in the world of New Science.
Matter, therefore, according to Louis de Broglie, is only a form or an
appearance of something else. And so is the case with energy.
156
Newtonian Science is explanatory, relaying upon observation and experiment
and knowledge of causal connection. On the other hand, the entire Indian
knowledge system always remained experiential (Anubhava) that used to be
trans-Newtonian Scientific methods. Here, de Broglie, the trans-Newtonian
Scientist uses exactly the same experiential method as used by the
Maharshis and Rishis of Bharata Varsha. People of New Science may call it
as lately found method or as intuitive, but to an Indian mind, it is at once and
undoubtedly experiential.
The Newtonian concept of matter used to be one that of solid which has
extension, mass and volume. When it comes to de Broglie, Matter is wave
and wave is matter at the same time. That is the matter-wave dichotomy is
illusory; something like the Brahman-Atman dichotomy which is Maya arising
out of Avidya. Here, we see that de Broglie comes very close to Sankara
Vedanta.
Maya has been identified with jada or matter in Svetaswatara Upanishad23,
a point of agreement with de Broglie.
(Know, then, that Prakriti is Maya and that Great God is the Lord of Maya.
The whole Universe is filled with objects which are parts of His being.)
157
And again equates Maya with the Universe (As seen in the usage, Viswa
Maya.) 24
In the context, Bhagavad Gita25 identifies Maya with the power of God as:
And so does Gaudapadakarika26 as:
4.1.1.3. Advaita and Schrödinger
de Broglie knew nothing about Advaita Vedanta. He became Vedantin
without being aware of the tradition of Vedanta, Indian Epistemology or
Methodology. His becoming of Vedantin was spontaneous and he believed
that his knowledge was intuitive. Schrödinger, on the other hand, studied
Vedanta and understood it to a considerable extend. Inspired by the de
Broglie Hypothesis, Schrödinger suggests that the electrons are not spherical
objects but patterns of standing waves. (It must be noted that, contrary to
158
Bohr who bases his Atom Model on experimental verifications, Schrödinger
gets into know his equation from an abstraction, or I would say,
experientially).
The standing waves as pictured by Schrödinger are that kind of waves
produced when a string of a guitar is plucked. One, here, observes a
movement and a stillness at the same time- movement of the string and the
stillness of the wave pattern produced.
Likewise, fundamental particle is a standing wave pattern produced by the
movement of something else. In other words, the atomic particle is an
appearance of something else. When we perceive an atomic particle, we
perceive a mere appearance- a something that is actually not present there.
This is again in resonance with the Advaitic conception that views the
Universe as Maya.
Inevitably, Schrödinger has to assume that some thing is waving or moving
so that the fundamental particles appear and behave as we now observe
them (because, to produce a wave, there must be something that is waving
or moving).
Interestingly enough, he names that ‘something’ that, waves as the Greek
letter, ψ, (Psi, read as “Sigh”). Psi is the root of the word ‘psychology’ and the
symbol ψ is always seen as something pertaining to psyche, or
consciousness, universally. Ψ is seen at the Universities and Hospitals as a
159
symbol at the front doors of the departments of Psychology and
Psychotherapy and used in the logo of various world famous psychological
associations through out the globe. Schrödinger, being an ardent lover of
Vedanta, may be suspected of choosing the symbol purposefully to indirectly
imply chit, consciousness behind the appearance of the Universe, purely in
the Vedic tradition.
Eventually, ψ becomes the very heart of his famous equation. As per the
equation, as seen earlier, determine the presence of the subatomic particle.
Schrödinger may be hinting at picturing the symbol as the decisive factor in
the subatomic realm (and also in the Universal realm).
Later, commenting on the increasing importance of the role of consciousness
in Quantum Mechanics, he states as:” In the world there is no kind of frame
work within which we find consciousness in the plural form. This is simply
something we construct because of the temporal plurality of the individuals.
But it is a false construction… The only solution to this conflict, in so far as
any is available to us at all, lies in the ancient wisdom of the Upanishad.” 27
Advaita attempts to picture Brahman or the Ultimate reality as pure
consciousness that is the Cause of the Universe. Sankaracharya in his
Commentary on Bhagavad Gita proposes that Brahman is the locus of the
Universe. Universe is due to ignorance. And hence it is not ultimately real28.
160
He repeats the same idea in Viveka Chudamani also; “no Universe, but
Consciousness alone…”29
In Katha Upanishad also we have the passage: “Brahman is the eternal
brilliance which illumines every luminous object” 30.
Once we read all these together with Max Born’s comment that the
subatomic particles are not real things, the picture becomes clearer.
Interestingly, even today, the Physicists use these two diametrically opposite
theories (Bohr’s Particles and Schrödinger’s Probability Waves) in order to
interpret many a subatomic phenomena. When they take up Bohr, they
simply forget Schrödinger and do the calculations in Bohr’s way and vice
versa. In both the cases, they get the result they need- the result in
accordance with the particle nature or the probability nature as it is in the
case may be. Unknowingly, these Scientists are following the Bhagavad Gita
that proclaims:
161
(In whatever way you desire to perceive me, I appear to you in accordance
with your wish). 31
4.1.1.4. Advaita and Heisenberg
Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle, as the name indicates, postulates the
uncertainty concerning the micro world. The impossibility of accuracy in
measurement as put forward by the principle has certain definite
philosophical implications, in addition to its devastating effects on the
Classical Mechanics.
The Principle, at the first instance, presents the helplessness of the
deterministic view. It challenges the notion of causation in Nature, that every
determinant cause in the nature is inevitably followed by the resulting effect.
In terms of the Classical Physics, this means that the future motion of a
particle could exactly be predicted or determined from the knowledge of its
present position and momentum and all of the forces acting upon it.
Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle rejects this; because, one cannot know
the precise position and momentum of a particle at a given instant and hence
its future cannot be determined. The only option the principle permits is to
predict a range of possibilities for the future motion of the particle.
Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle says that in the sharp formulation of the
162
law of causality-- "if we know the present exactly, we can calculate the
future"-it is not the conclusion that is wrong but the premise. 32 With this, we
see that the much celebrated law of causation and the concept of causal
connection get nullified.
4.1.1.5. Advaita and Einstein
Einstein’s Special Theory of Relativity, on one hand, rejects the concepts of
Absolute Space and Absolute Time, and suggests the non duality of Matter
and Energy on the other.
4.1.1.5.1. Advaita and Relative Nature of Space and Time
To the dismay of Newton’s Physics, the clocks at different frames of
reference no longer tick away at the same pace and nowhere exists a
paradise that acts as the Absolute frame of reference for the entire Universe.
This is the very anti thesis of Newton’s Classical concepts of Absolute Space
and Absolute Time. Both Space and Time are destined to lose their Classical
glory for ever and are to be Relative.
Advaitin’s point of view regarding Space and Time is very much similar to
that of Einstein’s Special Theory of Relativity. Advaitin holds that whatsoever
is relative is not real at all and so is the case with Space and Time. There are
a number of instances in this matter from the fundamental texts of Advaita
and the works of Adi Sankaracharya.
163
Mandukya Upanishad, at the beginning itself, mentions something that which
is beyond Time. All that is past, present and future is, indeed, AUM. And
whatever else there is, beyond the threefold division of time—that also is
truly AUM33
Definitely, Mandukya Upanishad is sure about a state other than past,
present and future: The Timeless Reality.
Svetaswatara Upanishad clearly mentions the beginning34 of Time as
and end35 of Time as
Translated as: “He by whom the whole universe is constantly pervaded is the
Knower, the Author of time. He is sinless and omniscient, it is at His
command that the work which is called earth, water, fire, air and akasa
appears as the universe. All this should be reflected upon by the wise”. The
usage of the term “author of time” presupposes a beginning for the time
164
which is true according to the modern cosmology that developed with the
help and support of the theory of Relativity.
Adi Sankaracharya’s Bhagavad Gita Bhashya has many citations of the
unreal nature of Space and Time. It follows from Bhagavad Gita’s concept
that the Supreme consciousness is beyond Space and Time. At one place it
is seen as: “Not knowing my supreme nature, which is subtler and more
pervasive than space, ignorant people get ruined” 36 and at another, mentions
the Absolute as the source of the concepts of Space and Time. Here, Space
and Time appear as a construct of Consciousness 37. This is again appears
to be on the same mind with both Einstein and Schrödinger because, for the
former, Space and time are relative and for the other, Consciousness
determines everything.
Among Adi Sankaracharya’s independent works, Viveka Chudamani, Atma
Bodha, Vakya Sudha etc are noted for their philosophical contents that go
along with Einstein’s Special Theory of Relativity and its relative nature of
Space and Time.
Atma Bodha, while describing the One who has seen the reality hails him as
one who is renouncing all activities, who is free of all the limitations of Space
and Time38.
165
Here, Space and Time are treated as limitations due to the handy work of
Maya and are to be discarded to realize the Absolute Truth. This also
subscribes to Einstein’s thought of the Relative nature of Space and Time.
Even the very birth of Special Theory of Relativity is a result of Einstein’s
brave attempt to go beyond the hypothesis of regarding Space and Time as
absolute.
In Vakya Sudha also, Sankaracharya does not treat Time as Absolute. It is
evident from the verse 37 that comments that the Individual Self was present
before Time began. Through this, Adi Sankaracharya hints that Time is not
absolute and it has a beginning. Consciousness, again, appears as more
dignified.
Adi Sankaracharya’s Sri Dakshinamurthy Stotram also admits this as: “The
many places and Time which are before us are drawn by illusion in the board
of life in a peculiar manner.” 39
166
Both Space and Time are, therefore, from Adi Sankaracharya’s and
Einstein’s points of view, doubtlessly, relative and unreal.
Viveka Chudamani has a number of instances to present in this regard when
it says: “Dream Time, Space etc are all unreal in the waking state and
likewise, those Time, Space etc appearing in the waking state are also
unreal” 40.
This, beyond all doubts proves the Advaitin’s knowledge of the relative
nature of Space and Time.
In addition to this, Viveka Chudamani, time and again, expresses the need of
going beyond Space and Time as: “That which is beyond caste, creed,
family, devoid of name and form, merit and demerit transcending Space,
Time and sense object” 41.
167
According to Adi Sankaracharya, the one who has realized the Absolute is
the one who has gone beyond the barriers of Space and Time as expressed
in Viveka Chudamani: “The noble soul who has perfectly realized the truth
and whose mind-functions meet with no obstruction, no more depends upon
conditions of Space, Time, posture, direction etc.” 42
and as: “ So this Atman, that is eternal, manifests itself as soon as the right
means of knowledge is present and does not depend upon either place or
time”. 43
Viveka Chudamani also treats Time as a construct of the Consciousness, like
Bhagavad Gita and the Theory of Relativity. One of the verses runs: “ Such
ideas as gross or subtle are imagined by people through the manifestations
168
of things superimposed- just as Cycles, Years, Half Years, Seasons etc (in
short, Time in general) are imagined” 44.
4.1.1.5.2. Advaita and Mass-Energy Equation
Non duality of Matter and Energy is an essential feature of the Special
Theory that has made tremendous impact in the History of the world.
Einstein postulated through his equation, E = mc2, that Matter and Energy
are one and the same. This assumption, at the first instance, would have
destroyed the law of conservation of Matter (and Energy) and threatened the
very base of Physics, but for the timely acceptance of Energy as a form of
Matter and vice versa.
Advaita Vedanta uses the Sanskrit words, Jada and Sakti to denote both
Matter and Energy respectively. Both of them are denoted by the term
Maya, all through the Texts of Advaita Vedanta. In the view of the Advaitin
also, Matter and Energy are one and the same Maya. Therefore, one can
safely infer that Jada and Sakti are the same because both of them are
Maya.
There are a number of instances where the term Maya is used in the
Vedantic Texts to denote both Matter and Energy (Jada and Sakti).
Svetaswatara Upanishad describes the Matter as Maya when it knows Maya
as the primal cause of the Universe and Maheswara as possessing Maya. 45
169
Again, Svetaswatara Upanishad uses the term twice to get the meaning
Universe, which is nothing but Matter. 46, 47
Bhagavad Gita also describes Matter and Energy as Maya. It is described as
supernatural power48:
and power that lets the things in the Universe move49.
These are the examples of treating Energy (Sakti) as Maya. On the other
hand, when Gita points out that men are deluded by Maya50 it can be
regarded as treating matter as Maya. These two instances together appears
as a kin to that of the Mass-Energy equivalence of the Special Theory of
Relativity.
4.1.1.5.3. Advaita and Space-Time Continuum
Adi Sankaracharya states that Space and Time are relative. They together
form the background of all the illusions. It is obvious that they are inseparably
closer or a continuum together. This follows from the General Theory of
relativity also. Since the advent of the general Theory, no longer there is any
separate Space or separate Time. They are, now, to be viewed together so
170
that the Time forms the fourth axis to the till then three-dimensional Cartesian
Space. They are made to merge into one continuum called the Space-Time
Continuum; a continuum that does not exist apart from the objects.
Swami Vivekananda hints the same idea when he interprets the Advaitic
concept of Maya: “The one particular attribute we find in time, space and
causation is that they cannot exist separate from things. Try to think of space
without color or limits or any connection with the things around- just abstract
space. You cannot. You have to think of it as the space between two limits,
or three objects. It has to be connected with some object to have any
existence. So with time; you cannot have any idea of abstract time but you
have to take two events by the idea of succession. Time depends on two
events, just as space has to be related to outside objects. And the idea of
causation is inseparable from time and space” 51.
4.1.1.5 Role of Consciousness in Advaita and New Science
Advaita, as seen earlier, accepts consciousness as the Ultimate Reality. It is
evident from the Upanishadic verses or the Maha vakyas like:
