It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Everything is in the mind, and not so very constructed in a physical reality. When you can place your hand on something, and know you're not touching it, it makes you wonder if it's really there. One dream in another dream in another. My point being what if you woke up from this existence tomorrow.
Aside from that, of course the rest is personal belief. Nothing so scientific about it. Most of the reason I believe this philosophy is because of the parallels Hinduism has with modern science. Further than that, the concept is fairly solid (as leaps of faith go). I don't necessarily ascribe to Hinduism as my religion, but the texts are fascinating, and makes sense to me.
Originally posted by Sun Matrix
It's extremely hard for me to understand how anyone could believe in evolution.
Your looking at an ancient view with modern eye's. Step into their shoe's and take another look at what the text's say.
Because those six (kinds of) minute particles, which form the (creator's) frame, enter (a-sri) these (creatures), therefore the wise call his frame sarira, (the body.)
But from minute body (-framing) particles of these seven very powerful Purushas springs this (world), the perishable from the imperishable.
When talking about minute particles that hold qualities similar to the preceeding qualities in sequence, and the structure of these minute particles, and the way in which these particles are the basic structure of the world.
Among them each succeeding (element) acquires the quality of the preceding one, and whatever place (in the sequence) each of them occupies, even so many qualities it is declared to possess.
Originally posted by Rasobasi420
Let me ask you. What iff we sealed a science book in a big ziplock bag so it could survive 6000 years. Then we blew the crap out of ourselves so that none but a few survived. In 6000 years, when that textbook was unearthed, would your predecessor make the same arguement? Would he be correct? All I ask is that you admit the possability, not that you personally believe it, but that it could have happened.
Structure & Content
The first chapter deals with the creation of the world by the deities, the divine origin of the book itself, and the objective of studying it. Chapters two to six recounts the proper conduct of the members of the upper castes, their initiation into the Brahmin religion by sacred thread or sin-removing ceremony, the period of disciplined studentship devoted to the study of the Vedas under a Brahmin teacher, the chief duties of the householder - choice of a wife, marriage, protection of the sacred hearth-fire, hospitality, sacrifices to the gods, feasts to his departed relatives, along with the numerous restrictions — and finally, the duties of old age. The seventh chapter talks of manifold duties and responsibilities of kings. The eighth chapter deals with the modus operandi in civil and criminal proceedings and of the proper punishments to be meted out to different caste. The ninth and the tenth chapters relate the customs and laws regarding inheritance and property, divorce and the lawful occupations for each caste. Chapter eleven expresses the various kinds of penance for the misdeeds. The final chapter expounds the doctrine of karma, rebirths and salvation
Thing is, the laws of manu isn't an advanced theoretical physics text book. I don't see how you can draw parallels from the given text with advanced theoretical physics and not have your interpretations be biased by modern knowledge. If the laws of manu were indeed an advanced theoretical physics text book, and written as such, we wouldn't be having this discussion over the improper way to interpret a given text and it's meaning's.
It's no more advanced then anything else thought of durring that time period. Not even close to quantum physic's, let alone string theory. Nor does the creation myth discuss the 6 quark's and it's anti-quark's. Which is where I'm assuming your getting the 6 particles from? But, what about gluon's as well? Where can we interpret gluon's in this text? Or the electron etc etc etc. The atomic theory for that time, while a great accomplishment and step up for our primitive descendant's, there's still nothing modern that can be seen in the ancient text's.