Should Christians practice Yoga?

No, its blasphemy. Christians shouldn't perform yoga. The American Institute of Vedic studies by David Frawley is quite determined to bring out the misconceptions that many of them have on Hinduism and Yoga.

The original teachings of Yoga: From Patanjali back to Hiranyagarbha

Hiranyagarbha and Vedic Yoga 

Who then was Hiranyagarbha, a human figure or a deity? The name Hiranyagarbha, which means “the gold embryo”, first occurs prominently as a Vedic deity, generally a form of the Sun God. There is a special Sukta or hymn to Hiranyagarbha in the Rig VedaX.121, which is commonly chanted by Hindus today. The Mahabharata speaks of Hiranyagarbha as he who is lauded in the Vedic verses and taught in the Yoga Shastra (Shanti Parva 339.69). As a form of the Sun God, Hiranyagarbha can be related to other such Sun Gods like Savitri, to whom the famous Gayatri mantra is addressed. Therefore, the Hiranyagabha Yoga tradition is a strongly Vedic tradition. We can call it the Hiranyagarbha Vedic Yoga tradition. 

Krishna states in the Bhagavad Gita (IV.1-3) that he taught the original Yoga to Visvasvan, another name of the Sun God, suggesting Hiranyagarbha. Vivasvan taught this Yoga to Manu, the original man or first king, making it into the prime Yoga path for all humanity.

As it clearly states Yoga is owned by the Sun God, it is no ones intellectual property. It was he who gave the knowledge of yoga to the world and yet the world is totally ignorant of this and gives no homage to him. (Hindu Group Stirs a Debate Over Yoga’s Soul - New York Times)

What most westerners don't understand is that it is impossible to separate the Vedic deities from the practice of Yoga. Vedic deities are anthropomorphic gods with whom we can have a dialogue with, they are real beings and they reside in our bodies, this is the traditional view and we will not tolerate if a false interpretation of our scriptures is promoted all over the world.

Vedic deities and Yoga

All those Christians who practice yoga are already worshipping a different image of god. It is wrong as many of the bishops blindly say that Yoga is the work of the devil (Yoga is the work of the devil says Vaticans chief exorcist) without being aware of its origins and the traditions it come from and  it is equally wrong to impose Yoga on young Christian minds and try to bring down Christianity.

Christianity doesn't need any help from Hinduism, it is self sufficient, it has all the goods with in it. It has more hope than Hinduism. I'll be more than happy if Christians worship Christ rather than meddling with eastern religions.  

Forgiveness, Sin, Bitterness and Redemption

Of all the religions which I have studied there is no other religion which teaches so much about forgiveness other than Christianity something which I very much like about Christianity even though I personally hold a different concept of sin and redemption. No other god draws me to his feet other than Christ when the poison of bitterness gets deep rooted in my heart.

However according to us the root cause of all sin in humans is ignorance of the Father. We don't consider a person who has wronged upon us as a sinner but we consider him as lacking acquaintance of the Father. What men need is not forgiveness but pneumatic Baptism. One who has realized that Christ has each within him whether an angel, mystery or a human (Gospel of Philip) or one who has realized that Isha vashyam idham sarvam(Isha Upanishad, verse 1) means that God dwells in the hearts of all human beings is by nature a spiritual person and such persons by their very nature cannot sin.

St.Paul cries out in Romans explaining the case of a sinner or one who is in bitterness like this which is very much true.

" 14 We know that the law is spiritual; but I am unspiritual, sold as a slave to sin. 15 I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do. 16 And if I do what I do not want to do, I agree that the law is good. 17 As it is, it is no longer I myself who do it, but it is sin living in me. 18 For I know that good itself does not dwell in me, that is, in my sinful nature.[c] For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. 19 For I do not do the good I want to do, but the evil I do not want to do—this I keep on doing. 20 Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it."

"According to the Gospel of Philip, ignorance "sinks its roots deep within us, and yields its crops in our hearts; dominates us; we are its slaves; it takes us captive, so that we do the things we do not want and do not do the things we want; and it grows powerful because we have not recognized it. So long as it exists, it is active." ( Gospel of Philip 83:22-29 cf. Romans 7:14)"

Yes sin exists as long as ignorance exists. The truth is that we human beings do not have free will, we are either controlled by Aeons when we do good works or by evil demons when we sin. Let us not question what god has ordained for us for this is his world and this is his body and we are here to do his works and he is preparing all of us to return us back to the fullness of the Pleroma.(For us Pleroma has a local existence, it doesn't just mean fullness).

"If anyone becomes a 'son of the bridechamber' he will receive the Light. If anyone does not receive it while he is in these places, he cannot receive it in the other place.[10] He who receives any Light will not be seen, nor can he be held fast. No one will be able to trouble him in this way, whether he lives in the world or leaves the world. He has already received the Truth in images, and the World has become the Aeon. For the Aeon already exists for him as Pleroma, and he exists in this way. It is revealed to him alone, since it is not hidden in darkness and night but is hidden in a perfect Day and a holy Night."

- Gospel of Philip

What in the world are Gnostics?

Stephan Hoeller has pretty much captured the thoughts which I wanted to express. It will not be wrong to say that this was the attitude that flourished in ancient India. The truth that everything pales before the gnosis of the heart.

This excerpt was taken from the gnosis archive.

What in the World Are Gnostics?

The words Gnostic and Gnosticism are not exactly standard features in the vocabulary of contemporary people. In fact, more people are familiar with the antonym of Gnostic, which is agnostic, literally meaning a non-knower or ignoramus, but figuratively describing a person with no faith in religion who still resents being called an atheist. Yet Gnostics were around long before agnostics and for the most part appear to have been a far more exciting category of persons than the latter group. In contradistinction to non-knowers, they considered themselves knowers—gnostikoi in Greek—denoting those who have Gnosis or knowledge. Gnostics were people who lived, for the most part, during the first three or four centuries of the so-called Christian era. Most of them probably would not have called themselves by the name Gnostic but would have considered themselves Christians, or more rarely Jews, or as belonging to the traditions of the ancient cults of Egypt, Babylon, Greece and Rome. They were not sectarians or the members of a specific new religion, as their detractors claimed, but rather people who shared with each other a certain attitude toward life. This attitude may be said to consist of the conviction that direct, personal and absolute knowledge of the authentic truths of existence is accessible to human beings, and, moreover, that the attainment of such knowledge must always constitute the supreme achievement of human life. This knowledge, or Gnosis, they did not envision as a rational knowledge of a scientific kind, or even as philosophical knowledge of truth, but rather a knowing that arises in the heart in an intuitive and mysterious manner and therefore is called in at least one Gnostic writing (theGospel of Truth) the Gnosis kardias, the knowledge of the heart. This is obviously a religious concept that is at the same time highly psychological, for the meaning and purpose of life thus appears to be neither faith, with its emphasis on blind belief and equally blind repression, nor works with their extraverted do-goodism, but rather an interior insight and transformation, in short, a depth-psychological process. 

If we come to envision the Gnostics as early depth psychologists, then it immediately becomes apparent why the Gnostic teaching and practice was radically different from the teaching and practice of Jewish and Christian orthodoxy. The knowledge of the heart, for which the Gnostics strove, could not be acquired by striking a bargain with Yahweh, by concluding a treaty or covenant which guaranteed physical and spiritual well being to man in exchange for the slave-like carrying out of a set of rules. Neither could Gnosis be won by merely fervently believing that the sacrificial act of one divine man in history could lift the burden of guilt and frustration from one's shoulders and assure perpetual beatitude beyond the confines of mortal existence The Gnostics did not deny the usefulness of the Torah or the magnificence of the figure of the Christos, the anointed of the most high God. They regarded the Law as necessary for a certain type of personality which requires rules for what today might be called the formation and strengthening of the psychological ego. Neither did they negate the greatness of the mission of the mysterious personage whom in his disguise men knew as the Rabbi Jehoshuah of Nazareth. The Law and the Savior, the two most highly revered concepts of Jew and Christian, became to the Gnostic but means to an end greater than themselves. These became inducements and devices which might, in some fashion, be conducive to personal knowing which, once attained, requires neither law nor faith. To them, as to Carl Jung many centuries later, theology and ethics were but stepping stones on the road to self-knowledge. 

Some seventeen or eighteen centuries separate us from the Gnostics. During these centuries Gnosticism became a faith not only forgotten (as one of its interpreters, G. R. S. Mead, called it) but also a faith and a truth repressed. It seems that almost no group has been so relentlessly and consistently feared and hated for nearly two millennia as were the unhappy Gnostics. Textbooks of theology still refer to them as the first and most pernicious of all heretics, and the age of ecumenism seems to have extended none of the benefits of Christian love to them. Long before Hitler, the Emperor Constantine and his cruel bishops began the practice of religious genocide against the Gnostics, their first holocausts to be followed by many more through history. The last major persecution concluded with the burning of over 200 latter-day Gnostics in 1244 in the castle of Montsegur in France, an event which Laurence Durell described as the Thermopylae of the Gnostic soul. Still some prominent representatives of the victims of the latest holocaust have not regarded the most persecuted religious minority in history as a companion in misfortune, as the attacks of Martin Buber on Jung and on Gnosticism indicate. Jews and Christians, Catholics, Protestants and the Eastern Orthodox (and, in the case of the Manichaean Gnosis, even Zoroastrians, Moslems and Buddhists) have hated and persecuted the Gnostics with a persistent determination. 

Why? Was it only because their antinomianism or disregard for moral law scandalized the rabbis, or because their doubts concerning the physical incarnation of Jesus and their reinterpretation of the resurrection angered the priests? Was it because they rejected marriage and procreation, as some of their detractors claim? Were they abhorred because of licentiousness and orgies, as others allege? Or might it be that perhaps the Gnostics truly had some knowledge, and that this knowledge re them supremely dangerous to establishments both secular ecclesiastical? 

It is not easy to give a reply to this question, but an attempt must be made, nevertheless. We might essay such an answer by saying that the Gnostics differed from the majority of humankind, not only in details of belief and of ethical precept, but in their most essential and fundamental view of existence and its purpose. Their divergence was a radical one in the sense of the word, for it went back to the root (Latin: Radix) of humankind's assumptions and attitudes regarding life. Irrespective of their religious and philosophical beliefs, most people nourish certain unconscious assumptions pertaining human condition which do not spring from the formative, focused agencies of consciousness but which radiate from a deep, unconscious substratum of the mind. This mind is ruled by biology rather than by psychology; it is automatic rather than subject to conscious choices and insights. The most important among these assumptions, which may be said to sum up all others, is the belief that the world is good and that our involvement in it is somehow desirable and ultimately beneficial. This assumption leads to a host of others, all of which are more or less characterized by submissiveness toward external conditions and toward the laws which seem to govern them. In spite countless illogical and malevolent events of our lives, the incredible sequences, by-ways, repetitious insanities of human history, both collective and individual, we will believe it to be incumbent upon us to go along with the world, for it is, after all, God's world, and thus it must have meaning and goodness concealed within its operations, no matter how difficult to discern. Thus we must go on fulfilling our role within the system we can, being obedient children, diligent husbands, dutiful wives, well-behaved butchers, bakers, candlestick-makers, hoping against hope that a revelation of meaning will somehow emerge from this meaningless life of conformity. 

Not so, said the Gnostics. Money, power, governments, the raising of families, paying of taxes, the endless chain of entrapment in circumstances and obligations—none of these were ever rejected as totally and unequivocally in human history as they were by the Gnostics. The Gnostics never hoped that any political or economic revolution could, or even should, do away with all the iniquitous elements within the system wherein the human soul is entrapped. Their rejection was not of one government or form of ownership in favor of another; rather it concerned the entire prevailing systematization of life and experience. Thus the Gnostics were, in fact, knowers of a secret so deadly and terrible that the rulers of this world—i.e., the powers, secular and religious, who always profited from the established systems of society—could not afford to have this secret known and, even less, to have it publicly proclaimed in their domain. Indeed the Gnostics knew something, and it was this: that human life does not fulfill its promise within the structures and establishments of society, for all of these are at best but shadowy projections of another and more fundamental reality. No one comes to his true selfhood by being what society wants him to be nor by doing what it wants him to do. Family, society, church, trade and profession, political and patriotic allegiances, as well as moral and ethical rules and commandments are, in reality, not in the least conducive to the true spiritual welfare of the human soul. On the contrary, they are more often than not the very shackles which keep us from our true spiritual destiny. 

This feature of Gnosticism was regarded as heretical in olden days, and even today is often called "world denying" and "anti-life," but it is, of course, merely good psychology as well as good spiritual theology because it is good sense. The politician and the social philosopher may look upon the world as a problem to be solved, but the Gnostic, with his psychological discernment, recognizes it as a predicament from which we need to extricate ourselves by insight. For Gnostics, like psychologists, do not aim at the transformation of the world but at the transformation of the mind, with its natural consequence—a changed attitude toward the world. Most religions also tend to affirm a familiar attitude of internalism in theory, but, as the result of their presence within the establishments of society, they always deny it in practice. Religions usually begin as movements of radical liberation along spiritual lines but inevitably end up as pillars of the very societies which are the jailers of our souls. 

If we wish to obtain Gnosis, the knowledge of the heart that renders human beings free, we must disentangle ourselves from the false cosmos created by our conditioned minds. The Greek word kosmos, as well as the Hebrew word olam, while frequently mistranslated as world, really denote more the concept of systems. When the Gnostics said that the system around them was evil and that one had to get away from it in order to know truth and discover meaning, they acted, not only as the forerunners of innumerable alienated drop-outs from St. Francis to the beatniks and hippies, but they also stated a psychological fact since rediscovered by modern depth psychology. Jung restated an old Gnostic insight when he said that the extraverted human ego must first become thoroughly aware of its own alienation from the greater Self before it can begin to return to a state of closer union with the unconscious. Until we become thoroughly aware of the inadequacy of our extraverted state and of its insufficiency in regard to our deeper spiritual needs, we shall not achieve even a measure of individuation, through which a wider and more mature personality emerges. The alienated ego is the precursor and an inevitable precondition of the individuated ego. Like Jung, the Gnostics did not necessarily reject the actual earth itself, which they recognized as a screen upon which the Demiurge of the mind projects his deceptive system. To the extent that we find a condemnation of the world in Gnostic writings, the term used is inevitably kosmos, or this aeon, and never the word ge (earth), which they regarded as neutral if not as outright good. 

It was on this knowledge, the knowledge one has in one's heart concerning the spiritual barrenness and utter insufficiency of the establishments and established values of the outer world, that the Gnostics relied in order to construct both an image of universal being and a system of coherent inferences to be drawn from that image. (As one might expect, they accomplished this less in terms of philosophy and theology than in myth, ritual, and cultivation of the mythopoetic and imaginative qualities of their souls.) Like so many sensitive and thoughtful persons before and after their time, they felt themselves to be strangers in a strange country, a forlorn seed of the distant worlds of boundless light. Some, like the alienated youth of the 1960's withdrew into communes and hermitages, marginal communities on the edge of civilization. Others, more numerous perhaps, remained in the midst of the great metropolitan culture of the large cities like Alexandria and Rome, outwardly fulfilling their roles in society while inwardly serving a different master—in the world but not of the world. Most of them possessed learning, culture and wealth, yet they were aware of the undeniable fact that all such attainments and treasures pale before the Gnosis of the heart, the knowledge of the things that are. Little wonder that the wizard of Küstnacht who, since his early childhood, sought and found his own Gnosis, felt close to these strange and lonely people, these pilgrims of eternity, homeward bound among the stars.

         -By Stephan Hoeller.

Comparative religion: The role of religious scholars

With the advent of Internet, Information technology and the way of sharing of information it has become possible to accurately compare and contrast different doctrinal interpretations of different world religions hailing from different cultures across different timelines and places in the world. A huge amount of research has been done on comparative religion by religious scholars worldwide.

Let's just see how religious scholars are changing and have changed the way we think about the major religions of the world.

We begin first with Dr. B. Alan Wallace, a Buddhist scholar and he arrives at this conclusion after his life time research on religious studies.

Alan Wallace's Official Website

"While Buddhism is deemed non-theistic, the Vedas are regarded as polytheistic, and the Bible is monotheistic, we have seen that the cosmogonies of Vajrayana Buddhism, Vedanta, and Neoplatonic Christianity have so much in common that they could almost be regarded as varying interpretations of a single theory. Moreover, the commonality does not end there, for in the Near East, the writings of Plotinus (205-270) also influenced Islamic and Jewish theories of creation. This apparent unity could be attributed to mere coincidence, or to the historical propagation of a single, speculative, metaphysical theory throughout south Asia and the Near East.  For  example, the Upanishads may well have influenced the writings of early Mahayana thinkers in India, and they could also have made their way to the Near East, where they might have inspired the writings of Plotinus. On the other hand, Plotinus declared that his theories were based on his own experiential insights, and similar claims have been made by many Buddhist and Vedantin contemplatives. If these cosmogonies are indeed based upon valid introspective knowledge, then there may some plausibility to the claims of many contemplatives throughout the world that introspective inquiry can lead to knowledge, not only of the ultimate ground of being, but of the fundamental laws of nature as well."

- Alan Wallace, Is Buddhism really non-theistic.

How does one decide which doctrinal interpretations are correct and which aren't? Aren't we just cherry picking?

No, no certainly no. This is a common criticism made against comparative religious studies, however we don't just cherry pick interpretations to suit data with the theory that we have under consideration instead we use negative theology and intuitive reasoning.

In negative theology we figure out what God cannot be if he exists based on the recent available empirical evidence. For example, as the leading quantum physicist, Bernard D'Espagnat says,

 “any tentative philosophical approach to a world-view should take information coming from contemporary physics into account quite seriously."

- Bernard D'Espagnat.

Now what does facts established from experiments and recent empirical evidence says. All empirical evidence is in support of a philosophical approach called 'open realism'. A view that something real exists outside of space-time confirming that Platonic realism is scientific. 

“Plato’s ideas do not belong to space-time but they exist independently of the human mind and are the cause of phenomena. This is why, when we talk of Plato, we sometimes talk of the realism of essences. In this sense (a distant independent reality, probably not situated in time and space-time), it is difficult for the philosophical realism of a physicist to avoid being a little bit Platonist. Bohm himself, previously a standard bearer of the “materialist” physicists, even says now that perceived objects are only projections of what exists.”

- Bernard D'Espagnat 

Therefore based on this premise we choose those interpretations of religions which have withstood the test of times and which are more likely to be the correct interpretation of a religion based on the recent empirical evidence.

Next we choose which traditions of religions had figured out this years back before the advent of modern science about the nature of reality as confirmed by facts established from recent experiments. Which are mainly the Smartha tradition of the Vedic Aryans, the Vajrayana tradition of the Tibetan Buddhists, the Valentinian tradition of the pneumatic Christians and the tradition of Neo-Platonism and they all have so much in common between them that they can all be put forward as one single theory. Of course all these traditions are based on the philosophy of Platonic realism.

Next we take care that each one of these traditions is critically examined and analysed so that we don't misrepresent and twist the doctrines of these traditions without understanding them in their own milieu and try to forcefully find similarities between them in order to prove the very hypothesis which we are testing. If we find some major contradictions among the doctrinal interpretations of these traditions then the theory or the hypothesis that these traditions have a identical core set of beliefs is wrong or falsified and not that the interpretation is changed to meet our theory.

In this way we arrive at consistent conclusions based on negative theology and recent empirical evidence and hence successfully refuting the criticism that the conclusions made from comparative religious studies are all cherry picking and non-empirical.

We move on to our next religious scholar Richard H Jones.

The official website of Richard H Jones.

Sometimes I feel that religious scholars need some encouragement and external support since they alone fight in academic circles in order to overthrow misunderstood preconceived notions with in the academic circles and also foolish dogmatic positions held by fundamentalists and other various thinkers. Therefore I contacted and congratulated him for recognizing that Advaita Vedanta and Quantum mechanics have nothing in common with each other and that they are based on a different epistemology which most people don't realize and foolishly defend their dogma.

This is how I congratulated him for his works on Science and Mysticism.

---

Comment

Respected Richard. H Jones,

     This is Harshit from Bangalore, India. I have been interested in the dialogue between Advaita Vedanta and Quantum Physics for quite some time and I just wanted to congratulate you for correctly differentiating the epistemology of Advaita and Quantum Physics.

As you say many eastern and western thinkers do not understand that it is incorrect to equate the concept of field in Quantum Physics with Brahman of Advaita.

Brahman is a platonic concept and it exists outside of space-time itself and to be honest I have been extremely disappointed with people who misinterpret these traditions without giving any justice to their philosophical differences.

"[When making parallels] it could be that Western thought is unconsciously or consciously being taken as the supreme standard, with a corresponding lack of sensitivity to other interests: Asian thought must be shown to be positivistic in a time when positivism was in vogue, or existential for those who value existentialism. . .Or it must share our moral values, if not our beliefs. The various traditions cannot stand on their own terms but must be related to a Western standard. The danger here is in distorting the fundamental nature of these traditions in order to fulfill this demand rather than in understanding them in their own milieu."

- Richard H Jones.

I surely have to give a thumbs up for that statement and I appreciate for the honesty and the intellectual rigour you have shown in your works.

Indian or the eastern thought is not positivistic in fact its the opposite. According to Indian psychology the Mind and Brain are two different things.

Please kindly keep up your good works.

Thanking you!!

Best Regards,

Harshit

---

Richard H Jones replied:

Hi Harshit, 

Thank you for your kind remarks. You will be glad to know that I have an article coming out sometime next year in a book on mysticism that once again argues that Advaita Vedanta (and Buddhism) is very different from quantum physics.

Richard

---

The next scholar which we are discussing requires no introduction as she is quite famous for her works on Gnostic Christianity and the way she changed our picture of early Christianity, she is none other than Dr. Elaine Pagels.

Elaine Pagels, Princeton University.

Her works are highly authoritative on the Valentinian tradition which is one of the neo-platonic Christian traditions which has a lot of similarities with the other two traditions of Vedic Aryans and the Tibetan Buddhists and hence her works on early Christianity are very much important for the theory of B. Alan Wallace to be successful.

Next we move on to the Sanskrit scholar and ritualist, Devudu Narasimha Shastry. He isn't much popular to the outside world and he needs a little introduction.

Devudu Narasimha Shastry, Sanskrit scholar.

"Devudu Narasimha Shastry (1896-1962) was a colourful personality and a polymath. He was a thinker and writer of unusual and extraordinary merit. A forceful speaker, he was equally a persuasive writer, and an indefatigable enthusiast for reformation and revolution within the ambit of tradition. He was chosen for the honour of being ‘worshipped’ in the ceremonial way, as one among the hundred traditional scholars, by the first president of India, Babu Rajendra Prasad, in the sacred Varanasi. He hailed from a family of royal priests in Mysore, but the stature that he had as a traditional scholar was acquired by him as a result of his systematic study of the shastras for 20 years.

Popularly known by his pen name ‘Devudu’, was not merely a great writer but like the seers who had the Vedas in vision, he gave visual shape to the Upanishadic verses in his transcendental work."

- Devudu Prathistana.

Devudu Narasimha Shastry was a multi-faceted personality, researcher - The Hindu News.

His works on the Vedic Aryan religion are highly authoritative and gives immense support to the theory of B. Alan Wallace.

---

The Vedic Aryan religion.

Savitr - Sol Invictus - The Invincible Sun - King Helios

Christianity

In Christ dwells all the Pleroma of deity in bodily form. - Col 2:9

Buddhism

Adi-Buddha, Samanthabhadra.

These three traditions have so much in common between them that they can be put forward as a single theory and such a theory should be taken seriously and they might give insights into the nature of reality which science cannot give.

Why the Polytheistic mythos of the esotericists is inevitable?

                                                                    Abstract

                A growing number of scholars, scientists and philosophers are leading us to an esoteric worldview without themselves being aware of this. While there seems to be much confusion on how to reconcile modern science with eastern and western esotericism most of the confusion seems to have come from choosing incompetent scholars for their study.

The paper not only gives the correct approach for reconciling modern physics with Advaita Vedanta but also puts the hypothesis of the ontological and philosophical similarities between the two ancient monistic systems Valentinian Monism and Advaita Vedanta on a much firmer ground. An ancient method is also proposed to test this worldview and the paper concludes with the profound implications that it might have for religion, science and philosophy.

Introduction

          The east is rich with linguistics and it could be hypothesized that it was their language which enabled them to describe the metaphysical worlds of the numinous with such simple words or short syllables of the late antiquity conveying a wide range of insights just as how the language of mathematics describes the world of Physics with such great beauty. One such eastern esoteric religion which has influenced in all forms of philosophical debates is the religion of Aryans with such giants like Erwin Schrödinger and Arthur Schopenhauer who said that ‘Upanishads have been the solace of my life and will be the solace of my death’.

When the architects of the Modern Physics got to know that science cannot give an objective account of reality some of them resorted to other forms of traditional knowledge existing in eastern religions and started to find parallels between these eastern religions and modern science but such an attempt has not only resulted in confusion among the public but has also resulted in the misrepresentation of the teachings of these traditional doctrines which have considerable differences between one another. The problems existing in the above field as well as with the recent developments in the field of quantum mechanics and its philosophical implications as espoused by Bernard D’Espagnat and in the field of Gnosticism as espoused by such reputed scholars like Elaine Pagels and others were the main reasons that resulted in bringing out this all important paper.

Methodology in the study of Esotericism

       While esotericism has existed since millennia as a form of study of the esoteric essence and wisdom hidden in all ancient mystery religions, recently few have argued to push the field of Esotericism into the academic. One such attempt has been made by a historian of religion, Wouter J. Hanegraaff and argues that esotericism can be studied from an empirical approach where one can measure its influence from a historical perspective. Any student of esotericism who accepts the most authoritative definition of Antoine Faivre knows that esotericism deals more with the reality of the numinous and less with our historical past. Hanegraaff who is well aware of this implicitly admits that to truly know the truth behind these religions only the empirical approach would not suffice. A simultaneous perennialist approach is needed where an intuitive access to the numinous is albeit necessary in order to completely understand these esoteric religions which are inherently metaphysical as this paper shows and hence not falls under the positivism of science or the empirical method.  

        Based on this argument or assumption a competent scholar can be defined as one coming from the tradition and not someone from outside the tradition and one who has the competent skills and intuitive knowledge to interpret the works of our ancient people and give us a picture as these ancient people saw it and not as how one sees it individually which inevitably leads to conflicts based on how each one interprets these ancient works subjectively without any intuitive knowledge which our ancients claimed to have access to.

A few words about the Scholar chosen for this study -

        Devudu Narasimha Shastry (1896-1962) was a colourful personality and a polymath. He was a thinker and writer of unusual and extraordinary merit. A forceful speaker, he was equally a persuasive writer, and an indefatigable enthusiast for reformation and revolution within the ambit of tradition. He was chosen for the honour of being ‘worshipped’ in the ceremonial way, as one among the hundred traditional scholars, by the first president of India, Babu Rajendra Prasad, in the sacred Varanasi. He hailed from a family of royal priests in Mysore, but the stature that he had as a traditional scholar was acquired by him as a result of his systematic study of the shastras for 20 years.

Popularly known by his pen name ‘Devudu’, was not merely a great writer but like the seers who had the Vedas in vision, he gave visual shape to the Upanishadic verses in his transcendental work.

A proposed reconciliation of Modern Physics with Advaita Vedanta

        Jonathon Duquette, philosopher of religion from the University of Montreal is the leading philosopher working for the correct reconstruction of the dialogue between Modern Physics and Advaita Vedanta and in his thesis he clearly outlines the problems and confusion associated with this subject. He addresses the problems of finding parallels between Modern Physics and Advaita Vedanta through such early works like Fritjof Capra’s Tao in Physics and Panda’s Maya in Physics and questions the validity of their approach.

The argument that the vacuum fluctuation of Quantum mechanics has similarities with the Brahman of Advaita is illogical. Scholars who argue that Brahman is the substratum of the universe or the absolute and compare this with the vacuum of Physics don’t realize that our ancients didn’t knew about modern science or quantum mechanics and the Vedas or the Upanishads are not concerned with the empirical reality and it has nothing to do with it. Without understanding the epistemological foundations of these traditions and the vast wisdom hidden in them some scholars and thinkers desperately try to misrepresent these traditions, its sensitive issues and differences between them just to justify their illogical claims. The philosopher and historian of religion, Richard H. Jones points out this fact in his works,

[When making parallels] it could be that Western thought is unconsciously or consciously being taken as the supreme standard, with a corresponding lack of sensitivity to other interests: Asian thought must be shown to be positivistic in a time when positivism was in vogue, or existential for those who value existentialism. . .Or it must share our moral values, if not our beliefs. The various traditions cannot stand on their own terms but must be related to a Western standard. The danger here is in distorting the fundamental nature of these traditions in order to fulfil this demand rather than in understanding them in their own milieu.

-Richard H. Jones

Bernard D’Espagnat, a French theoretical physicist who has worked under the founding fathers of Modern Physics like Bohr and De Broglie, popularly known for his philosophical works in quantum physics argues that the multitudinous view of classical physics is in direct conflict with facts established from quantum mechanics and that we need to give up Einstein separability and Scientific realism to be in coherence with quantum mechanics. This gives support to the phenomenon of Kant which shows that the physical sciences is only dealing with the phenomena (i.e. things as they appears to us) rather than the ultimate noumena (i.e. things in itself). 

"The doctrine that the world is made up of objects whose existence is independent of human consciousness turns out to be in conflict with quantum mechanics and with facts established by experiment."

"What quantum mechanics tells us, I believe, is surprising to say the least. It tells us that the basic components of objects – the particles, electrons, quarks etc. – cannot be thought of as "self-existent". He further writes that his research in quantum physics has lead him to conclude that an "ultimate reality" exists, which is not embedded in space or time.

-Bernard D’Espagnat

Bernard argues that nonseparability and non-locality are the basic nature of our physical world which quantum mechanics has revealed to us. Bernard who was not afraid to tackle the philosophical implications of quantum mechanics which others did not went on to say that ‘What we call as empirical reality is only a state of mind’ and thereby gave up his belief on local realism.

Some cognitive scientists with in cognitive science argue that the problem of qualia should be taken seriously and also the problem of universals exist from the time of Plato while there is nothing in the empirical reality to compare with the categories of Kant, we must conclude that such categories exist outside of the empirical reality, we shall not go into the technical details of these problems in this paper.

So far what we have discussed is something which is well known in western thought but how is this related to eastern religions and what the eastern traditions have to say about these problems and that’s what we will discuss in further sections.

If what we call empirical reality is only a state of mind then what is mind?

This was the question asked by someone in Guardian and no one had an answer to it and not even modern science has an answer to it because cognitive scientists are reductionists and they see perception and cognition as neuronal activity in the brain but as Bernard D’Espagnat says even neurons fall under empirical reality which is only a state of mind. So what is mind then?

Here’s the answer:

The word esoteric means “intelligible only to those with special knowledge” – esoterically. The scholar uses the traditional way of storytelling or dialectic to convey his ideas which is common in most forms of wisdom literatures which give us knowledge about the divine and the nature of reality.

Koushika said, “Blessed Vamadeva, for these three days I have been longing to ask a question. The distance between our house and Sage Vashita’s is of two days journey. How did you manage to reach that place right on time on that fateful day? If you hadn’t turned up at that moment what would have been my fate? May I request you kindly to explain all this?”

        Vamadeva beamed a significant smile and said, “you yourself can understand all this, Koushika. But I wonder why haven’t you attempted to explore the secret … All right … The desire to talk for long has seized me today.. Tell me, what you wish to know. I’ll tell you what you desire. It’s your responsibility to ask and mine to answer”.

“Then”, said Koushika, “Please tell me how you were able to reach the spot precisely at the time of my distress. How did you get to know that I was in danger?

       The sagacious and highly evolved Vamadeva replied, “know, Koushika, that the mind is a pillar of light. When we are engaged in worldly affairs we see only one end of that pillar. Owing to its close link with the sensory organs the light gets broken into five beams. That means that the one concentrated stream of light gets scattered. There is a method of which the scattered beams can be united into one stream. That method is called Samyama (full control over the sensory organs). He who practices and becomes proficient in Samyama can go beyond time and space. He will be enabled to perceive everything everywhere. He can understand whatever has happened in the past and whatever is going to happen in the future. When the mind operates through the senses (and therefore subjected to the likes and dislikes of latter), it “acts” like a “stage-king”. That is, it plays the role of the king and cannot be the real living king. Hence, it will be powerless and impotent. If the mind learns to work without being entangled by the senses, then it becomes all powerful and very potent. He who practices this technique of Samyama will be able to know what happens where, why and how”.

-Devudu

When Devudu uses words like sense organs and mind he is not referring it to biological organs and the brain instead he is talking of sense organs and the mind existing in the noumenal world which is responsible for the retrospective creation of our empirical reality which not only includes biological organs and the brain but everything which we see through our eyes. This is what Bernard D’Espagnat means that our empirical reality is a kind of Veiled reality and that there is an ultimate reality which is not embedded in space and time.

Bernard is one of them who believes that the noumenon of Kant can be accessed by other means, he argues that nonseperability is a slight clue which gives us some glimpses of the nature of this ultimate reality and his argument that the structure of consciousness should be outside of empirical reality seems to be accurate when one considers his claims from the perspective of the eastern mode of thought of the Upanishads. What this means is that for the doctrine of Advaita Vedanta to be true scientific realism must be false and it’s a conclusion which it arrives independently without any influence from other schools of thought, an all important fact which many scholars often miss in their approach to find parallels between Modern Physics and Advaita Vedanta. If this is true then neither science nor atheistic religions can give an objective account of reality only God, only He can give an objective account of reality. If there is ever, a Law of Religion and Science then this should be it,

           ‘What we call empirical reality is only a state of mind’

"It is probably true quite generally that in the history of human thinking the most fruitful developments frequently take place at those points where two different lines of thought meet. These lines may have their roots in quite different parts of human culture, in different times or different cultural environments or different religious traditions; hence if they actually meet, that is, if they are at least so much related to each other that a real interaction can take place, then one may hope that new and interesting developments will follow."

-Werner Heisenberg

We are passing along a period of time where not just two but at least three different modes of thought are meeting at a single place making similar conclusions about the nature of reality and if this is true then the next few discoveries in our quest to understand the cosmos will be interesting and exciting to watch out for.

It should be noted that we arrived at this conclusion by assuming that science cannot give an objective account of reality, assuming that scientific realism is false but if science comes up with an objective account of reality independent of mind showing that scientific realism is true then Advaita Vedanta is directly in conflict with Modern Physics. Both Advaita Vedanta and Modern Physics will be in conflict with each other in such a case.

Is teleportation possible? What is the world made up of?

“That’s all right”, said Koushika. “But please tell me whether you had previously planned to arrive at the site?”   “No”, asserted Vamadeva. “I” will tell you all about that. This human body drowns if it is thrown into water while alive. But if it is the body of a good swimmer, it can remain afloat. Likewise, there is another principle in respect of the body. The human body is composed of five elements. Now, as we regard this elements combine as separate, they appear to be obstacles in our onward progress. When once we realize that everything around us is composed of the same elements and that they and we are of one and the same flavour, It would be like giving a loan here and retrieving it there; that means you offer that quantity of the elements which compose your body to those around you (nature) here and claim that portion elsewhere you want it. To put it simpler, just as you learn to swim in water, you should learn to swim in the air too”. 

-Devudu

Our ancients neither knew about modern science nor did they knew about quantum teleportation and hence this should not be confused with such processes. According to major religions of the world, the world is made up of just five elements i.e. earth, fire, water, air and space.

According to Advaita Vedanta these five elements don’t exist in the empirical reality instead they exist in the numinous world and it recognizes this as the external physical world and hence it doesn’t teach solipsism where only one’s own mind is real instead it teaches us that Brahman is real, the empirical world is an illusion, the noumenal world is real and everything in that noumenal world is Brahman, it does recognize a world independent of mind but it is not the empirical world instead it is the numinous world of God or the pleroma of Gods.

Some scholars don’t recognize that Upanishads is the end of Vedas and therefore the worldview of the Upanishads should be in accordance with the worldview of the Vedas as the following quote of the Rig Veda (1.164.46) says,

Indraṃ mitraṃ varuṇamaghnimāhuratho divyaḥ sa suparṇo gharutmān,

ekaṃ sad viprā bahudhā vadantyaghniṃ yamaṃ mātariśvānamāhuḥ

"They call him Indra, Mitra, Varuṇa, Agni, and he is heavenly nobly-winged Garutmān.

To what is One, sages give many a title they call it Agni, Yama, Mātariśvan." (trans. Griffith)

The mind and the five elements are also recognized as anthropomorphic gods. This is the kind of world-view which Advaita Vedanta and Valentinian Monism embrace. We have been tantalizingly pushed into a world-view which inevitably leads to the following conclusion about the nature of our physical world,

“Gods are real.

And these gods are everywhere, in all aspects of existence,

all aspects of human life.”

- James Hillman

What is Intelligence? Does Intelligence exist in platonic realms? Are strong Platonists like Roger Penrose correct in saying that strong AI is impossible?

We all are aware of the metaphor of the Sun and the allegory of the cave of Plato in his dialectic work ‘The Republic’ where he espouses his theory of forms that the highest form of eternal knowledge exists in a different realm and that we can grasp these abstract forms which are eternal and unchanging to describe a world which is always changing.

“Either mathematics is too big for the human mind or the human mind is more than a machine.”

– Kurt Gödel

“Gödel’s Theorem shows that human thought is more complex and less mechanical than anyone had ever believed”

- Rudy Rucker

Gödel through his Incompleteness theorems showed that there were Gödel statements for which we could know the truth value of these statements even though they were un-provable using the same axiomatic systems which those statements were derived from. This showed that mathematics can never be both complete as well as consistent.

This basic fact which showed that human beings can solve problems or answer questions for which no algorithm exists to prove the truth value of such statements led to the conclusion that human thought was in no way identical to the mechanical computations carried on such computational machines like the Turing machines.

Roger Penrose developed Gödel’s ideas and put forward a more substantial argument to show that strong AI is impossible and asserted that there is an element of non-computability in human thought which the current physics cannot in any way explain. So what does the eastern traditional school of thought have to say about this? This is what is discussed in the next section.

“See Yajnavalkya, first we take up Panchathma Sankramana and Avastatraya techniques. Before going to Avastatraya there is much to know about it. Liberated men can go from one state to another using divine knowledge. The knower of this knowledge should be an eye-witness to this process, for him different states like dream, sleep should be like entering and leaving different rooms. This is impossible without knowing that divine knowledge and as long as this cannot happen one cannot be a knower.”

Acharya continued, “During the ending of the state of awareness and in the beginning of the dream state this new state should be experienced. When the mind disentangles itself with the sense organs and when it is not yet entangled with the organs of the dream this should be seen. When the mind is entangled with the sense organs and with the casket of intelligence it will look like a stretched tied rope. If not, if the mind is disentangled with the sense organs and is only in entanglement with the casket of intelligence then it will be like a hanging untied rope and becomes non-functional even though it exists. In this new state which is not the dream, sleep or the aware state one will have revelation. When it happens it is not awareness; it is not dream; it is not deep sleep either. The one who has mastered the art of intuitive access to the numinous in this state will be a true philosopher knowing the thing in itself and not how it appears to us. Like this when both the awake and the sleep state does not seem to exist even though it exist then one can have the great revelations, did you understood Yajnavalkya.

Yajnvalkya who was born for a divine purpose, influenced by the words of Acharya went into such a state of experience immediately, then Acharya said, “See, Yajnavalkya, see when you are in that state see who is holding you from falling down? See who is pulling you up?”

Yajnvalkya saw, “The thing which is pulling me up is Sun’s rays. I am not on earth or the sky, I am in outer space. A goddess is holding me from falling down with her arms stretched. If I ask she says “I am from the pantheon of Sun, know this much for now” and diverts my awareness and as my awareness is diverted the Sun’s rays begin to disappear but the feeling of someone pulling me up and holding me from falling down has not gone”.

“What all you saw Yajnavalkya?

What shall I say Acharya? I have no words to describe what I saw therefore if I say something wrong please forgive me. First some lucky object rolled over and fell from the Broomadhya(one of the places where Jiva resides) then the head was about to fall forward but someone becalmed it as it was dropping down and held it there.  Someone took the object which was dropping inside and held it there. I felt like the place where I stood was not the earth, not the sky but soon I realized that it was outside space. There your speech was not like the way we speak with each other instead it was like actions stimulated by someone. On one side Aditya’s rays on the other side a goddess belonging to the pantheon of Aditya. Both of them were holding a luminous system. I felt like I myself am that lustrous system. On beside me as you said a rope-like object was hanging down and that lustrous system was equipped with a casket. As though I am light itself there was light everywhere.

“That casket is called Intelligence (Buddhi), yajnavalkya and that hanging rope-like object is the mind (Manas) and the goddess who held you from falling down is Ushadevi. Here she came, give your sacrifices to her with the Ushasukta of the Rig Veda.”

Both Acharya and his wife were standing there praying until Yajnavalkya’s experience was completely over.

After everything finished Acharya said, “Yajnavalkya, today you experienced the truth, from here you have earned the authority to study the philosophical scriptures, what happened now was a true revelation. If you clearly understand the philosophy behind it then it will become a Great Revelation.”

-Devudu (Mahadarshana)

Since the positivism of science has spread across all fields of our investigation there is not only confusion as to what is real and what is not but other eastern traditions having a different epistemology are rarely taught or taken seriously by anyone in the academic.

The eastern traditions have non-positivist methods based on a different epistemology which give us the actual nature of the physical world and positively assert that these things do exist in a Platonic realm and the fundamental principle of the Aryans says that it is God who stimulates and direct our thoughts (Buddhi).

Similarities between Valentinian Monism and Advaita Vedanta

When Gnostic scholars began to see monistic expressions in the gnostic tradition of Valentinianism and the frequent assertions of this school of thought that the multiplicity of the world vanishes once one knows the fullness of the father through gnosis just as the Advaita Vedanta says that the multiplicity of the world vanishes once one knows the Brahman they started to hypothesize that there might be a connection between these two ancient monistic systems but they never took such a hypothesis too seriously. The following section shows why such a hypothesis is undeniable without giving reasonable explanations for the astonishing similarities seen between these two ancient monistic systems.

          It is the Aryans (or Aryas – Venerable and highly civilized and cultured people known for their learning, wisdom and large heartedness) who discovered this esoteric secret. All those who are now let into this secret can be called Aryas. The obligatory duty of every such Arya is to discover the secrets of Nature and impart those secrets to worthy and deserving people.  This is otherwise called the recital of Vedic texts which ought to be pursued through study of the Vedas and teaching of the Vedas. The Aryas were those who eschewed Paratantra (subject to or dependent on another) and won Swantantra (freedom or independence). Such Aryas can Aryanise the whole Universe.

 Every living being in this world is verily a Sun worshipper. Some know it, but a large number of beings are unaware of it. Being aware of what one is doing, systematizing it and doing it fully and consciously through Sankalpa is called yoga. Progress is nothing but turning the mind from ayoga to yoga. Vedas declare Surya atma jagataha tasthushascha. It means that the sun is very soul of both the immobile and mobile beings. Since the universe came into existence through the Sun, he is called Aditya. Since all the luster in this universe is his he is called Bhaskara. He is the leading light of the planetary system and fruits such as health, well-being, heartiness and wholeness are due to him are well-known. He is the giver of life and light. The evolution of all created things in the world of human beings is entirely due to the sun. Aryas worshipped him as Savithru because every being needs his permission to issue out of the mother’s womb. Once upon a time the worship of Savithru deva was in vogue in every nook and corner of the world. As divine law declined this Savithru worship decreased. Now it is being performed here and there. In another sense, this Savithru-worship has not been given up at all, and cannot be given up either! For, the support for the breathing process which, takes place every moment is Prana. It is this Agnishoma mandala’s (pleroma of gods) grace and flavour that every living being is kept alive. This is a matter, which can be tested by means of yoga. Agnishoma mandala (pleroma of Gods) is the place of origin or principal place of Purusha (The soul of the Universe, the masculine principle) and Prakrithi (The passive power of creating namely, Nature, the feminine principle).

-Devudu

This is in so much similarity with the Gnostic view of the world which says that everything comes in dyads i.e. with male and female forms.

Valentinians believed that God is androgynous and frequently depicted him as a male-female dyad. This is related to the notion that God provides the universe with both form and substance. The feminine aspect of the deity is called Silence, Grace and Thought. Silence is God's primordial state of tranquillity and self-awareness She is also the active creative Thought that makes all subsequent states of being (or "Aeons") substantial. The masculine aspect of God is Depth, also called Ineffable and First Father. Depth is the profoundly incomprehensible, all-encompassing aspect of the deity. He is essentially passive, yet when moved to action by his feminine Thought, he gives the universe form.

-The Gnostic society Library

 Savithru deva is lord and master of Agnishoma mandala (pleroma of gods) and He is in the macrocosm as well in the microcosm. Human beings who are not aware of this imagine that it is they and their own mind and intellect that get things to be done through their ten sense organs. How can subordinates (the mind, intellect and sense organs) be independent? Imagining that he is independent, the individual attributes his achievement to his own mind and intellect. This amounts to the state of being enamoured and conceit. But those few who are capable of deep reflection realize that there should be one who inspires or activates the mind and intellect further reflection and contemplation leads such individuals to realize that the Inspirer or Activator is Savithrudeva. It is He and He alone who instil power into the intellect. It is the intellect, which is the centre and source of all activity, physical and mental, etc.

-Devudu

"For just as the Demiurge, secretly moved by Sophia (Wisdom), believes that he acts alone, so also with human beings"

(Excerpts of Theodotus 53:4).

This shows that human beings don’t have free-will which is similar to the stoic view of providence and the Gnostic view of pre-destination and shows beyond any doubt the Hellenistic and eastern esoteric influences over Gnosticism.

 He that is Savithru, has to accord permission for anything born, or anything to be born and issue out of the mother’s womb. This is the law of Nature. All those who are aware of this law should worship Savithru; or rather, have been worshipping Savithru. This worship is ceaselessly going on in the form of breathing. When this “Worship” is going on in the right way the physical body will be in good health. But if anything goes wrong in that worship, disease attacks the physical body. Ayurveda which recognizes this principle calls him who prevents disease or restores good health, Pranacharya(one who is learned in the science of prana). By this Ayurveda has cognised the original form of this worship. This Savithru deva is none other than Aditya. He protects the World in his various forms or manifestations. He is a mass of brilliant luster. Veda looks at Him in two ways. They are Visthrutha (Diffused or spread out form) and Samasthi (total or whole form). This luster of Savithrudeva, which Veda calls Samasthi swaroopa (total or whole form), is there in every living being and provokes the activity of the mind and intellect.

-Devudu

This is the ontological view or the ontological reality of Advaita Vedanta i.e. the pleroma of (Aeons) gods (fullness) exist in every living being which is amazingly similar to the Gnostic view.

"Christ has each within him, whether human being or angel or mystery" (Gospel of Philip 56:14-15).

“In Christ dwells all the pleroma of deity in bodily form”

- Colossians 2:9

For the Valentinians the pleroma has a local platonic existence and forms the body of Christ and for the Vedic Aryans the Agnisoma Mandala has a local platonic existence and forms the body of Savithru, the solar deity. As you can see only names change in the way they describe the ultimate reality.

The word Pleroma means the totality of divine powers, all the Aeons and all these Aeons reside in Christ and form his mystical body.

“It was a great wonder that they were in the Father without knowing him and that they were able to leave on their own, since they were not able to contain him and know him in whom they were, for indeed his will had not come forth from him. For he revealed it as a knowledge with which all its emanations agree, namely, the knowledge of the living book which he revealed to the Aeons at last as his letters, displaying to them that these are not merely vowels nor consonants, so that one may read them and think of something void of meaning; on the contrary, they are letters which convey the truth. They are pronounced only when they are known. Each letter is a perfect truth like a perfect book, for they are letters written by the hand of the unity, since the Father wrote them for the Aeons, so that they by means of his letters might come to know the Father.

 All the emanations from the Father, therefore, are Pleromas, and all his emanations have their roots in the one who caused them all to grow from himself.”

- Gospel of Truth

The individual Aeons 33 in number as espoused in both Valentinianism and also in the Vedas like the human beings does not know that they are in the Father.

"Brahma generated the gods, Brahma (generated) this entire world. Within him are all these worlds. Within him is this entire universe. It is Brahma who is the greatest of beings. Who can vie with him? In Brahma, the thirty-three gods; in Brahma, Indra and Prajapati; in Brahma all things are contained as in a ship."

-Taittiriya Brāhmana

Beyond this is non-dualism and if we cannot even meaningfully speak about the Pleroma then one can imagine how fruitless it is to speak about the Unity, the all pervading Brahman.

None the less these Aeons are real and they exist in both the microcosm as well as in the macrocosm i.e. in human body as well as in the elements of the outer cosmos.

Brihadaranyaka Upanishad

III-ix-1: Then Vidagdha, the son of Sakala, asked him. ‘How many gods are there, Yajnavalkya ?’ Yajnavalkya decided it through this (group of Mantras known as) Nivid (saying), ‘As many as are indicated in the Nivid of the Visvadevas – three hundred and three, and three thousand and three’. ‘Very well’, said Sakalya, ‘how many gods exactly are there, Yajnavalkya ?’ ‘Thirty-three’. ‘Very well’, said the other, ‘how many gods exactly are there, Yajnavalkya ?’ ‘six’. ‘Very well’, said Sakalya, ‘how many gods exactly are there, Yajnavalkya ?’ ‘Three’. ‘Very well’, said the other, ‘how many gods exactly are there, Yajnavalkya ?’ ‘Two’. ‘Very well’, said Sakalya, ‘how many gods exactly are there, Yajnavalkya ?’ ‘One and a half’. ‘Very well’, said Sakalya, ‘how many gods exactly are there, Yajnavalkya ?’ ‘One’. ‘Very well’, said Sakalya, ‘which are those three hundred and three and three thousand and three ?’

III-ix-2: Yajnavalkya said, ‘these are but the manifestation of them, but there are only thirty-three gods.’ ‘Which are those thirty-three ?’ ‘The eight Vasus, the eleven Rudras and the twelve Adityas – these are thirty-one and Indra and Prajapati make up the thirty-three’.

III-ix-3: ‘Which are the Vasus /’ ‘Fire, the earth, air, the sky, the sun, heaven, the moon and the stars – these are the Vasus, for in these all this is placed; therefore they are called Vasus.’

III-ix-4: ‘Which are the Rudras ?’ ‘The ten organs in the human body, with the mind as the eleventh. When they depart from this mortal body, they make (one’s relatives) weep. Because they then make them weep, therefore they are called Rudras.’

III-ix-5: ‘Which are the Adityas ?’ ‘The twelve months (are parts) of a year; these are the Adityas, for they go taking all this with them. Because they go taking all this with them, therefore they are called Adityas.’

III-ix-6: ‘Which is Indra, and which is Prajapati ?’ ‘The cloud itself is Indra, and the sacrifice is Prajapati’. ‘Which is the cloud ?’ ‘Thunder (strength).’ ‘Which is the sacrifice ?’ ‘Animals’.

III-ix-7: ‘Which are the six (gods) ?’ ‘Fire, the earth, air, the sky, the sun, and heaven – these are the six. Because all those (gods) are (comprised in) these six.’

III-ix-8: ‘Which are the three gods ?’ ‘These three worlds alone, because in these all those gods are comprised.’ ‘Which are the two gods ?’ ‘Matter and the vital force.’ ‘Which are the one and a half ?’ ‘This (air) that blows.’

III-ix-9: ‘Regarding this some say, ‘Since the air blows as one substance, how can it be one and a half ?’ ‘ It is one and a half because through its presence all this attains surpassing glory’. ‘Which is the one god ?’ ‘The vital force (Hiranyagarbha); it is Brahman, which is called Tyat (that).’

Advaita Vedanta is an ancient doctrine which existed prior to Gnostic Christians and is still the orthodox religion of India and is the very soul of India, therefore either there was a cultural diffusion at some point of time between these two traditions or they arrived about the nature of reality independently without any transfusion of ideas between each other. Whatever may be the answer, this hypothesis should be taken seriously and by testing such a hypothesis can reveal many things and have a wide range of implications.

"It is reasonable to agree that when there is a core agreement in the religious experiences of people in different times, places, and traditions, and when they have the same rational interpretations of the experiences; it makes sense to conclude that they are all in contact with some objective aspect of reality, unless there is positive evidence otherwise."

-Broad

An ancient method to test this worldview

          The Aryans extensively relied on the yoga school of philosophical thought in order to access the numinous world. It can be argued that this practical knowledge is an inherent part of their tradition along with other schools of thought and not separate from it.

It’s the foundational basis for all forms of their knowledge, even though Patanjali is well known as the founder of the yoga school of philosophy different forms of yoga existed prior to him and all such knowledge including the yoga school of Patanjali can be traced back to Hiranyagarbha himself who was the god of the Aryans, whom the founders of Rig Veda worshiped him as the first-born.

As said earlier there are two ways to look at the Veda where one can study the individual lustrous rays of the Hiranyagarbha as separate gods of his pantheon i.e. Agni, Soma, Prana etc. or else one can study the whole pantheon of Hiranyabarbha as himself in his Samasthi swaroopa (total or whole form).

It was Vishwamithra who discovered a way to worship this mass of lustre of Savithru or Hiranyagarbha but that method is not addressed here as no one outside the tradition should perform it without first going through a series of rituals in the traditional way. However there are other ways to study his rays as a whole and one such method is given below which is called as Sun Salutations.

The scholar Devudu who hails from this tradition revealed us the secrets of the Isopanishad which were passed in a traditional way through his works. According to tradition Savithru, the supreme god of the Vedas, He himself had said to Yajnavalkya, the author of the Isopanishad that, “Those who read the Isopanishad as well as the Yajnavalkya Upanishad which deals with the life story of Yajnavalkya and clearly understand the deep meaning behind it, I will reveal myself to them without fail.” 

Therefore the following verse of the Isopanishad is uttered before performing the method for those who only want to live the righteous path, as this was the sole purpose of their doctrine, different people perform this method for different reasons,

 Hiranmayena patrena satyasyapihitam mukham

tat tvam pushannya apavrino satya-dharmaya drishtaye

(Isopanishad, Verse 15)

It means that the truth is hidden inside a golden egg from which the first-born Hiranygarbha originated and his light rays are preventing us from seeing the ultimate truth clearly therefore we should plead him to decrease the intensity of his impeding light rays so that we can clearly see him and attain the path of righteousness by understanding the truth behind it.

"People cannot see anything in the real realm unless they become it...if you have seen the spirit, you have become the spirit; if you have seen Christ, you have become Christ; if you have seen the Father, you will become the Father" (Gospel of Philip 61:20-32 cf. 67:26-27)

Though the ancient Aryans used to perform rituals in a holistic way for the good of the whole world irrespective of the nation, creed, race or the culture they belonged to, the rituals were also performed in a multitudinous way to fulfill personal desires. However they highly recommend us to perform in a holistic way which was the sole doctrine of the Aryans that the light of God exists in everyone irrespective of their race or their background. It is advisable to practice it to test the efficacy of this method under the guidance of a master and the verses after the asterisk (*) should be silently uttered in the mind when performing each step.

Conclusion

According to these esoteric religions it is very unlikely that God had used the Big Bang or the DNA to create the universe or the Humans in it and these religions enforce upon us to abandon such form of thinking at least when one is arguing based on these esoteric religions. It should be emphasized that there can be only one reality in the external physical world and if the objects of modern science like quarks, protons, electrons exist independent of the mind i.e. if scientific realism turns out to be true then the metaphysical world of the esotericists will be falsified. As one of the necessary postulates required for the existence of the metaphysical worlds of the above mentioned esoteric religions is that scientific realism must be false and such a test will guide us whether to abandon this form of esoteric thinking and move an alternative way forward or to move in the direction of our ancients.

Bibliography

Devudu Narasimha Shastry. The Glory of Gayathri (Maha Bramhana in Kannada). Translated into English by Prof .N. Nanjunda Sastry. Bangalore: Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, 2004. (Original work in Kannada – 1950, Bangalore).

Devudu Narasimha Shastry. Mahadarshana in Kannada (English version not available). Bangalore: Devudu Press.

Jonathan Duquette. Towards a Philosophical Reconstruction of the Dialogue between Modern Physics and Advaita Vedanta: An Inquiry into the Concepts of akasa, Vacuum and Reality. University of Montreal, 2010.

Bernard D’Espagnat. On physics and Philosophy. Chapter1. Princeton University Press, 2006. http://press.princeton.edu/chapters/s8329.html

Richard H. Jones. Science and Mysticism: A Comparative Study of Western Natural Science, Theravada Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta. Introductory Essay by Job Kozhamthadam. http://www.issrlibrary.org/introductory-essays/

David Brons. Valentinus and the Valentinian Tradition. The Gnostic Society Library, 2003. http://www.gnosis.org/library/valentinus/index.html

Jonathon Duquette. “Quantum Physics and Vedanta”: A Perspective from Bernard D’Espagnat’s  Scientific Realism. Wiley, 2011.

Wouter J. Hanegraaff. Empirical method in the study of esotericism. Foundation for Theology and Religious Studies in the Netherlands (STEGON), 1995.

Faivre, Antoine (1992a). L'esoterisme. (Series "Que sais-je?".) Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.

N.C. Panda. Maya in Physics. Delhi: Motilal Banarasidass, 2005.

Bernard D’Espagnat. Veiled Reality- An Analysis of Present- Day Quantum Mechanical Concepts. Westview Press, 2003.

Bernard D’Espagnat. The quantum Theory and Reality. Scientific American. 1979.  ( http://www.scientificamerican.com/media/pdf/197911_0158.pdf)

Marcus Aurelius Antoninus. The Meditations. Project Gutenberg.

Bernard D’Espagnat. Quantum weirdness: What we call 'reality' is just a state of mind. The Guardian, UK, 2009. http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/blog/2009/mar/17/templeton-quantum-entanglement

Elaine Pagels. The Gnostic Paul: Gnostic Exegesis of the Pauline Letters. Fortress Press, 1975.

James Hillman (1926-2011), psychologist (archetypal psychology), U.S http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hillman

Roger Penrose. Shadows of the Mind. University of Oxford. Oxford University Press, 1994.

Roger Penrose. The Emperor’s New Mind Concerning Computers, Minds and the Laws of Physics. Oxford University Press, 1999.

C.D Broad. The Argument From Religious Experience, 1930.

Surya Namaskara, http://rnarayanaswami.net/yogapdf/SURYANAMASKAR.pdf