Is Study of Spirituality Stupid?
It is often disputed that spirituality is just a lot of wooly stuff; that all this nonsense about spirit, soul,chakras etc etc is nothing but utter nonsense. But can we really say so? Can it be said that the conventional, physical sciences, as we understand them to be, are really rational?Is the ideology of spiritual sciences illogical and irratonal? Or is there a mistake in the method in which we tend to understand all of it, in the dissociated manner that we tend to do, assuming that there is no connection at all between all of the "knowledge" that we "know" today? Let us all try to discuss that now.
First of all, let me start clearly with one fact-that we should learn to neither believe nor disbelieve into anything that is proclaimed, spoken or asserted to be the truth in any discipline of life. It is interesting to see how a lot of scientists today are either absolute atheists or staunch theists-they are never in between. Why then, should we all other people really be in the middle path, with the sense of fanaticism that can drive us to the point of killing each other? The scientists are not fanatical about anything-at least, the true ones are. Neither do we see them scoff at any other's beliefs to the point of denunciation. The reason, as I believe it to be so, is that they also realise at some stage of their pursuit of knowledge that everything is running on the basis of nothing else but a set of hypothesis. All scientific laws are actually running on the chariots of assumptions, which can be broken down by some thorough and precise questioning over their validity. We believe it to be true, however, blindly, without ever questioning the basis or rationale behind it. And yet, when it comes to spiritual sciences, we tend to denounce it openly. Why so?
Let us take an example to question how science can be potentially wrong, though it is my advice to believe what I say at your own discretion. Water is said to be just a chemical compound with the formula abbreviated as DHMO(Di-Hydrogen Monoxide) as a scientific joke. It is just an ordinary chemical, so the scientists say, which is necessary to promote a large number of life-forms on earth. However, a set of scientists from Japan had shown conclusively that water shows a lot of similar responses as life forms when subjected o various 'stimuli'. For instance, when subjected to classical music, the ice-crystals formed by the water were highly structured and orderly in nature, but when subjected to heavy metal rock, the crystals were not even formed in several cases. So would it be fair to say that water is not a life-form? Hydro-therapy is a treatment form, which hen closely inspected, yields a hidden admission, that water is a living thing. And it really works-I can vouch for it personally. So, if I claimed that water was a living thing, would you believe it?Or would you simply disbelieve it?Or would you just shrug your shoulders and say-man, I don't know what to say?
First of all, let me start clearly with one fact-that we should learn to neither believe nor disbelieve into anything that is proclaimed, spoken or asserted to be the truth in any discipline of life. It is interesting to see how a lot of scientists today are either absolute atheists or staunch theists-they are never in between. Why then, should we all other people really be in the middle path, with the sense of fanaticism that can drive us to the point of killing each other? The scientists are not fanatical about anything-at least, the true ones are. Neither do we see them scoff at any other's beliefs to the point of denunciation. The reason, as I believe it to be so, is that they also realise at some stage of their pursuit of knowledge that everything is running on the basis of nothing else but a set of hypothesis. All scientific laws are actually running on the chariots of assumptions, which can be broken down by some thorough and precise questioning over their validity. We believe it to be true, however, blindly, without ever questioning the basis or rationale behind it. And yet, when it comes to spiritual sciences, we tend to denounce it openly. Why so?
Let us take an example to question how science can be potentially wrong, though it is my advice to believe what I say at your own discretion. Water is said to be just a chemical compound with the formula abbreviated as DHMO(Di-Hydrogen Monoxide) as a scientific joke. It is just an ordinary chemical, so the scientists say, which is necessary to promote a large number of life-forms on earth. However, a set of scientists from Japan had shown conclusively that water shows a lot of similar responses as life forms when subjected o various 'stimuli'. For instance, when subjected to classical music, the ice-crystals formed by the water were highly structured and orderly in nature, but when subjected to heavy metal rock, the crystals were not even formed in several cases. So would it be fair to say that water is not a life-form? Hydro-therapy is a treatment form, which hen closely inspected, yields a hidden admission, that water is a living thing. And it really works-I can vouch for it personally. So, if I claimed that water was a living thing, would you believe it?Or would you simply disbelieve it?Or would you just shrug your shoulders and say-man, I don't know what to say?
Comments