सत्ता में सम्पृक्तता वश हर वस्तु चुम्बकीय-बल संपन्न है। चुम्बकीय-बल सम्पन्नता वश वस्तुओं में परस्पर पहचान सिद्ध होती है। चुम्बकीय बल सम्पन्नता - आकर्षण, प्रत्याकर्षण (आकर्षित होना), और शून्याकर्षण के रूप में होती है। वस्तुओं के बीच चुम्बकीय-धारा के आधार पर आकर्षण और प्रत्याकर्षण है। शून्याकर्षण का मतलब है - न किसी को आकर्षित करता हो, न किसी की ओर आकर्षित होता हो। जैसे - यह धरती शून्याकर्षण में है। न हमारी धरती किसी गृह-गोल को अपनी ओर आकर्षित कर रहा है, न यह किसी दूसरे गृह-गोल की तरफ़ आकर्षित हो रहा है। यह अपने कार्य-गति पथ की निरंतरता को बनाए हुए है। दूसरा उदाहरण - जीवन परमाणु शून्याकर्षण में है। धरती शून्याकर्षण में है, जीवन शून्याकर्षण में है। यदि ये दो बात पहचानने में आ जाता है तो समझ आता है - "शून्याकर्षण प्राकृतिक है।" दूसरे शब्दों में - "प्रकृति में शून्याकर्षण प्रमाणित है।"
- बाबा श्री नागराज शर्मा के साथ संवाद पर आधारित (अगस्त २००६)
11 comments:
Hi Rakesh,
As per MD ,Earth is not getting pulled by sun's gravitaional force which as per science is supporting the orbital motion around sun.
But based on these gravitaional principles, scientist have been able to calculate the trajectories of various moon missions and ended up on moon.
In fact people have gone to moon and realized that as gravity is lesser there , it is easier to jump much higher. How do we explain that ?
How about the satellites launched ? Are they also in sunyakarshan as they keep orbiting the earth for long long time.
But that heppens only in a particular distance from earth, how can we explain that ?
Plz. let me have your thoughts on these.
Regards,
Gopal.
Hi Rakesh,
Also It can be undrstood that jeevan is in sunyakarshan as it denies any kind of physical and chemical bonds. So it denies any kind of physical force.
But earth is physical object. There is no concept of structural completeness about earth, so it should accept all kinds of physical forces from rest of the matter. With this logic how can we understand sunyakarshan for earth.
Best Regards,
Gopal.
Hi,
Two objects pull each other based on the mass they have - is what newton's principle says. Earth pulls the apple with the same amount of force as the force with which apple pulls Earth. This and other motion-principles hypothesised try to explain numerous natural-phenomenon. And the evidence of their correctness is shown as accuracy in landing human to moon, the sattellites etc.
I am not saying that man's landing to moon is fictitious. I am only questioning the premise that Earth and Moon (and all other planets, and Sun) pull each other to stay in the orderliness they evidence. I am saying that Earth is in zero-attraction state - and performs certain activity, of its spin, of its rotation, of its revolution, with its tilt, with its climate-cycles, with its diversity - to be in an orderliness it is evidencing with all four natural-orders. I am saying that Earth is energized on its own due to being saturated in Space (Energy) - and it's not the Sun which is spinning it around!
Now let's begin with this seed-thought, and try to explain all natural-phenomenon around. The extent to which I can see, I don't find myself getting stuck!
regards,
Rakesh
So the very first question arises is, why then earth pulls small object towards it ? We know everything falls back to earth untill it is given enough velocity to cross earth 's gravity.
if it does attract these then it should as well attarct other things.
If MD just says that because of the arrangement of the planets and other matter, the earth is ultimately in zero attraction state then that is okay. That is what in a way science says. The net force on earth is zero. Hence it maintains its orbital motion.
Regards,
Gopal.
Hi Gopal,
The principle here is - The material objects on Earth realize coexistence with each other. This is manifested in natural-inclination for solids to be together, liquids to be together, and gases to be together. Gases have mass - but they don't come down to ground the way an apple does. (To circumvent this problem - science hypothesized of negative-weight for gases!) The proposal here is - All material (solid, liquid, and gas) on Earth has natural-inclination to be together - so that four natural-orders could emerge and establish on Earth. There is no struggle happening between branch of apple tree and the Earth below to pull or keep the apple. apple exhibits the action of falling down upon getting released from the branch - that's manifestation of the principle talked about here.
In the same way, Earth and other planets are not pulling-straining themselves to be in a precarious balance! There is stability and definitiveness in existence.
Earth's richness is not at the expense of other planets and Sun.
There is no struggle (push and pull) in existence.
Struggle is only in human-mind while in illusion.
If we begin observations with these premises - we ourselves become able to see existence to be trust-worthy. This comprehension becomes the root of trust within one's self (jeevan).
regards,
Rakesh
Hi Rakesh,
So here is probably the another way to look at things.
Every entity in existence has a behaviour. The very existence of any entity is for a purpose. The purpose is the inclination/movement towards perfection and ultimately participation in the overall order and that itself is the reason for emergence of that entity into the existence. So not just the particular behaviour we are talking but any behaviour is for that single purpose only. So in nushell that answers all the questions.
This is top-down approach of looking at everything in existence.
Science till now has been a bootom-up approach of looking at various behavior. Every behviour seen prompted a need of a theory to explain it. So that is why there many theories to explain the behavior. Because there is order in the nature ( at least all 3 orders behave the same consistently ) a theory came up in this way , stands true in those circumstances. But if circumstances change , the theory may not hold true ( like newtonian laws dont hold true in certain circumstances ).
Do you think I understood it correct?
Regards,
Gopal.
Hi Gopal,
Few observations:
"Every entity in existence has a behaviour. The very existence of any entity is for a purpose."
Every entity is with its purpose of being in existence. It is called "sva-bhav". This purpose is manifested as that entity's behaviour. This is called "aacharan".
"The purpose is the inclination/movement towards perfection and ultimately participation in the overall order and that itself is the reason for emergence of that entity into the existence."
The purpose of every entity in every state of emergence is to participate in overall order. Participation doesn't happen "ultimately" - it is evidenced in each stage of natural-emergence, a stone, a tree, a deer - every entity (except human-being in illusion) naturally participates in overall-order. Each entity is an orderliness within and participates in larger orderliness. "tva sahit vyavastha - samagr vyavastha mein bhagidaar"
There is no race or competition in existence for becoming "complete". While an entity evidences its participation in larger-order as its behaviour - it has natural-inclination for next higher expression of orderliness. Natural-inclination is evidenced at two levels - at the level of atom (to become constitutionally-complete) and at the level of natural-formation (for emergence of human-body). Each stage and sub-stage in this natural-emergence gets established as its own kind, and it's with a way for its cyclicality.
Except humankind all previous natural-orders have their cyclicality established along side their emergence. For humankind, the cyclicality is established only upon being established in knowledge of existence - since humankind is the knowledge-order.
"This is top-down approach of looking at everything in existence.
Science till now has been a bootom-up approach of looking at various behavior. Every behviour seen prompted a need of a theory to explain it. So that is why there many theories to explain the behavior. Because there is order in the nature ( at least all 3 orders behave the same consistently ) a theory came up in this way , stands true in those circumstances. But if circumstances change , the theory may not hold true ( like newtonian laws dont hold true in certain circumstances ). "
Yes I agree with you. Prevalent-Science's approach is reductionist and limits itself to empirical observation (what could be measured). It tries to move from parts to whole. While Madhyasth-Darshan's approach is Whole to Parts. The Parts to Whole approach doesn't lead to the same explanations - because, it ignores two important things:
1. Jeevan (which is observer)
2. Space (the pervasive inexhaustible energy in which all entities are saturated)
Both Jeevan and Space can't come under empirical-observation criteria of Science - since empirical observation, however subtle, would still be material - which can't capture subtler aspects than material.
This is the reason study of existence, and study of human-being is not possible by scientific-method.
Scientific theories have been one patch on top of other - and there are loop-holes all over the place.
Regards,
Rakesh...
Rakesh,
I have been trying to digest your response. I need your opinion on few comments here.
1. I think there has been one crucial difference between the way I understood the Emergence ( evolutuon ) and what it really is probably. The way I thought
is this. Let us say earth or any entity is in state A at this moment. Now there will be a change x from this state. I thought this change x is random ( it happens randomly in random manner,
nothing but a mutation as Darwin proposed.) but this change will sustain or will become permanenet when situation x really needs it or supports it, otherwise it will vanish.Looks like that is wrong understanding.
The change x is definite and is completely guided by state A. Though it may be difficult for us to see that definitiveness. There is nothing like random mutation.
I will be great if you can explain the whole emergence process in great detail. How various entities emerge...what is that mechanism ?
2. In short I can say that behind every behavior of any entity the reason is always same "mool urja or samya urja" which manifests as "tav sahit vyavastha and samagra vayavstha me bhagidar".
This knowledge helps in putting purpose to what we do but this knowledge is not enough for designing an aeroplane. For that one need to study what science has already done. One has to study
the gravity and many other physical forces. So as a fact or observation what science says is correct but what really is missing is fitting these pieces together.A single unifying theory which completely explains
the behavior, is missing. MD provides that unifying theory but at the same time we do need observations and techniques which came out of science. The technique to build some machines is needed. The scientific explanations may be incorrect but techniques and facts/observations are correct.
Please let me have your comments.
Regards,
Gopal.
Hi Gopal,
On the first point - I agree with what you have written. It's not the random-mutation (or mistake, or a chance) due to survival-conditons that causes emergence in existence - as Darwin and many other evolution-theorists seem to be proclaiming.
There is emergence in Nature for ever higher expressions of coexistence - is the proclamation of MD. Let's understand its working for Plant-order. The unit of any Plant-order formation (trees, bodies of animals, etc) is the praan-kosha. Each praan-kosha is alike every other. Each praan-kosha has the essence of whole formation, and it carries out its role based on its position in the formation. For example, cells in neem-leaves work in accordance to leaf - while still having the essence (rachna-vidhi) of whole neem-tree in their praan-sutra. There is emergence in existence - and therefore when one formation's cyclicality is established, there's an "exhiliration" or "progressive-thurst" within the praan-sutras to express the next higher rachna-vidhi. This is not a random process. It is a purposeful activity, which isn't a competition or struggle. It is a movement from one state of harmony to next state of harmony. This is natural-inclination.
We can observe natural-inclination working in ourselves also. When we make one design (for example for a mobile phone) - and are able to successfully make it work - the next and better design automatically emerges from within us. It's not out of struggle. It is out of exhiliration and a progressive-thurst. If we study the humankind's journey thus far in history - we can see it evidenced all through. The scope for this progress has been limited to "manaakaar ko sakaar karna" only. The aspect of manah svasthta couldn't get a break-through through natural-inclination. Though the efforts have been there all through human-history to get a break-through for that also. Success is quite another matter.
Emergence of water on Earth is another illustration of natural-inclination. hydrogen and oxygen naturally came together for realizing water - which is a higher expression, which paved way for expression of plant-order, animal-order, and humans.
On the second point - I agree with you. There is a need to distinguish Science and Technology. Science tries to explain the natural phenomenon through method of empirical observation - which are bound in reference of time and space. Technology is essentially innovation for making objects of human utility. If we study the technological-breakthroughs in human-history (like aeroplane, telephone,computer, etc) we find that most of them were layman-productions. Most innovations were not by scientists - who gave mathematical formulae to explain how/why things work (or the gyaan aspect of it). MD accepts Technology - but rejects the premises of Science, and provides alternatives for those. MD accepts Technology - and gives it purpose. The purpose of Technology is to assist in realizing humane-orderliness. Imagine the results if the engineering of the world starts working with this vision!
Regards,
Rakesh...
Rakesh,
Thanks for the explanation. This article made one point clear to me about emergence. So it seems your effort did its job.
One thing I have realized is , there is strange similarity in the way an entity evolves, the force behind the evolutaion is same, the purpose is same. In the matter order, it is inclination towards gathan pooranta. In plant order it is inclination in pran kosha towards more and more perfect body formation. Pran kosha acts as unit of evoluation in this order. Animal order is breaking point. Here the evoluation in pran kosha continues but qualitative evolution in constitutionally complete atom start in terms of 4 vishay and 5 senses only. In human the pran kosha evoluation should ieally be complete or nearly complete but qualitative evolution in jeevan continues , essentially humans are continuation of animal order until we really establish knowledge order. But the basic nature of evolution in constitutionally incomplete atom, pran kosha and constitutionally complete atom is same. It moves in certain direction. Using this analogy we can understand many aspect of qualitative evolution of jeevan from constitutioanlly incomplete atoms and pran kosha both and vice versa too. The great asset we have is ourselves...we are jeevan and we can observe ourselves and then understand the rest too. Ideally it should be relatively easier to understand self than anything else. Because nothing is hidden from ourselves. But the reality is,that is what most of us dont understand completely. This is natural but strange phenomena.
Regards,
Gopal.
Thanks Gopal, These are excellent observations. If you see closely - all that's shared in this blog, and in madhyasth-darshan literature is explanation and elaboration of this essence - that you described.
There is complteness in existence.
There is natural-inclination for completeness in existence.
There are statuses in existence, and a way established for their cyclicality.
I would like to suggest "astitva, astitva mein parmanu ka vikas" written by Baba in samadhanatmak bhautikvaad. I will attempt to translate and share that as well in the coming weeks.
Another suggested-reading is - "sah-astitva vaadi vigyaan", part of karm-darshan.
regards, Rakesh.
Post a Comment