--- In [email protected], Angela Mailander
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Couple points:
> That the material world is an illusion was understood in the popular
>mind to mean the world is a mirage, i.e. not really there.  Shankara
>made the term clear  long before MMY by explaining that "illusion" in
>this context means "not real" in the sense that it is changing, not in
>the sense that it isn't really there.  He uses the example of the son
>of a barren widow, as I recall.  That boy has no existence.  Spencer
>Brown makes much the same point also when he says that "existence" is
>not the source of reality, as  20th century science tends to see it. 
 >This tendency to see existence as the source of reality  is at the
>heart of  the failure of 20th century science to really deal with the
>notion of causality at any depth, and it has other consequences on
>clear thinking.

Interesting thread. However, science is here to stay. Sometime this
year the new Large Hadron Collider (LHC), located
under the French-Swiss border, will be ready for a new round of
subatomic particle investigations at unprecedented energy scales (in
proton collisions). This is going to be big news, and will likely
garner Nobel prizes in coming years. This, and a contemplated
follow-on larger machine (International Linear Accelerator (ILC))
(electron-positron collisions) will be Maya on a grand scale
studying Maya at an almost unimaginable microscopic scale. 

This is going to make for an interesting few years in Physics, coming
at a time when the TM organization will be trying to define itself in
the aftermath of Maharishi's passing. For better or for worse, this is
the way life, and science is at this time, and it is up to the TMO to
find a niche, or otherwise reinvent itself, to keep current and in the
Public's eye. 

I have often felt that identifying a host of new particles does not
ease one's aches and pains, but rather results in a lot of tired
scientists and computer programmers. There is a small hope that it may
indicate to a few the futility of this being the only respected
mainstream approach to studying reality (expense of it, when does it
all end?, what does it mean to me when I lay dying?, and so on).
Perhaps the TMO can use this as an angle, along with good research, to
reach people. 

We should not forget that Maharishi spoke of 200% value of life. I,
for one, will be interested in the progress of the big machines
plumbing the depths of Maya, in parallel with my own subjective
explorations of inner reality.

GA
Lurker (hope you don't mind me butting in)

Reply via email to