Rig Veda 1.01.164.4...how the formless One supports the formed?

[sayak83]

That is true.

But, if knowledge of Vedas and Upanishads could be rationally explained then those would not be Sruti. To upanishadic sages, vijnana is science of divided consciousness in contrast to jnana which is wisdom of indivisible consciousness. The latter cannot be known through divided consciousness.

The UR -- the Ultimate reality, the author talks about is just a pointer to Brahman that science cannot measure or explain, since it is Brahman that is seeing, knowing and explaining.

One should not stop at reading Chapter 14 but should proceed further and especially to Chapter 16.

OK, the next chapters do discuss QM. I still don't think the writing is very clear. It would have been better if he used a specific paradigmatic example (like EPR experiment or delayed choice experiment) to clearly articulate how his philosophical thesis goes about interpreting the observations. I am getting the feeling that he is shoehorning Brahman in the book just because he is working at Aurobindo institute.

 

[atanu]

OK, the next chapters do discuss QM. I still don't think the writing is very clear. It would have been better if he used a specific paradigmatic example (like EPR experiment or delayed choice experiment) to clearly articulate how his philosophical thesis goes about interpreting the observations. I am getting the feeling that he is shoehorning Brahman in the book just because he is working at Aurobindo institute.

But I think he has discussed proper QM in Chapters 1 to 13, although I have only sampled them. And it is also true that only because the author has exposure to Vedas and Vedanta that he can add a few extra chapters that are pointing to an alternate top down approach.

Many have pointed out that when one begins from a paradigm of separate objective objects, one will encounter unexplainable paradoxes.

 

[sayak83]

But that I think he has discussed paper QM in Chapters 1 to 13, although I have only sampled them. And it is also true that only because the author has exposure to Vedas and Vedanta that he can add a few extra chapters that are pointing to an alternate top down approach.

Many have pointed out that when one begins from a paradigm of separate objective objects, one will encounter unexplainable paradoxes.

OK. Now I will have to read all of it. I will put it in my long long queue.

 

[atanu]

OK. Now I will have to read all of it. I will put it in my long long queue.

There was an error in the sentence which I have edited now.