Fascinating article. I didn't realise that science too has made so much progress in understanding the spiritual. I agree with you that many more people are talking and discussing and seeking the spiritual, yet we are all also more suspicious and not as willing as people were once upon a time to give up our pleasures and our needs. That is why I found the articles on Tantra also very interesting. I guess there must be many paths that we are just not aware of which give us an option to live in the world, enjoy it and seek the spiritual within it all. Seems like the modern and sensible way of going about things.

Waiting for part 2 of your article.

Very interesting ideas in this article. I like the way you bring up the connections between science and spirituality in many of your writings. Very readable and thought provoking!

seems jasjit, between you and anusheh, you know all! perhaps now you need to go beyond 'knowing' lol.

indian philosophy has always considered the world to be maya, an illusion, a projection of our minds. it is as ramana says, like the film on the screen while our mind is the negative of the film and our soul as the light from behind thrown by the projector.

the negative in david bohm's terms would be the sub-totality enfolded in the hologram, here perhaps called superhologram by you.

in fact it has been going on for ever - spirituality intuiting the next destination and then science actually reaching there step by step. science is now reaching the destination spirituality intuited perhaps at the beginning of the AD cultural spiral. from here perhaps the new spiral/cycle will begin.

at our individual levels, it is like first our dhyana bringing some destination into our focus and then our actually going there (realizing that)step by step with the help of mind and body.

from soul you go to the mind and from mind to the body and bodies; and then from bodies/body you come back to the mind and from mind to the soul again, which our global culture as an entity is doing now. we do the same on individual levels in a day. from just before 'amrit wela' we begin projecting our world outside, then go out to interact with it, finally bring it back to our minds as we prepare to sleep and eventually let it go to remain only with or as our soul.

sorry for the unsystematic thoughts...

jasjit, in continuation of what you have written above regarding david bohm's hologram here are a few lines copied from my book. (Mosc is a term coined by me and means soul, spirit or god or whatever, literally meaning "matter of spiritual category." according to me every moscino - unimaginably small yet constituent particle of Mosc - enfolds in it the whiole universe.)

*******
He has proffered the hypothesis of an undefinable and immeasurable holomovement which includes or rather enfolds in itself the principle of life at some deep unmanifest level. ‘Indeed, the holomovement which is “life implicit” is the ground both of “life explicit” and of inanimate matter,’ write he somewhere further. In fact, I can only hope that our Mosc theory of evolution in some small way contributes to his hypothesis of the life implicit in the holomovement and of its subsequent manifestation.

Holomovement, according to our own proposal, in its most abstract form will be our Mosc through and through, while the virtual realm where Mosc gets entangled into four basic forces as I have explained earlier, would perhaps be what Bohm calls autonomous sub-totality enfolded in it.

Though I cannot understand why he becomes so self-conscious, so apologetic even after having reached such depths as the holomovement - which contains even ‘life force’ in it as well - in speaking about life and inanimate matter in juxtaposition such as when he writes:

The above does not mean, however, that life can be reduced completely to nothing more than that which comes out of the activity of a basis governed by the laws of inanimate matter alone...

or:

Thus we do not fragment life and inanimate matter, nor do we try to reduce the former completely to nothing but an outcome of the later.

I can’t understand what is wrong if life ‘comes out of the activity of a basis governed by the laws of inanimate matter alone’. Or, if life is ‘reduced to an outcome of’ inanimate matter. Have we really understood sufficiently what potentials this so-called basis has and what laws this poor, simple inanimate matter has to preclude life thus coming out of it?

When all is an unbroken wholeness, why differentiate so strongly between its various parts? Why not try to include all and everything including life and inanimate matter into a single life-process, single evolutionary process?
******

Good Morning Harb

Your first comment is wonderful and articulate. Especially the last paragraph which sums it all perfectly and is anything but unsystematic thoughts.

However I am fascinated by the 2nd comment but before I respond I need you to clarify : Have you written about holomovement in your book. Amazing! But then who is He that you refer to in the 2nd paragraph. Are you referring to Bohm as he and 'self-conscious'? So was Bohm mentioned in your book and why have you found him self-conscious? For I would like to commment on "The above does not mean, however, that life can be reduced completely to nothing more than that which comes out of the activity of a basis governed by the laws of inanimate matter alone..." but whose opinion is that, yours, Bohm's. Sorry I'm a bit slow this morning.
:)

yes, jasjit, i have mentioned bohm and his holomoment in my book at page 50-51. in fact, if you will excuse my presumptuousness, i am sure that if and when you will go through the whole book you will find that nothing at the cutting edge and almost in any subject has been left untouched there. of course the book is a difficult read but then so was marx's das capital or darwin's origins of species as my elder son said.

anyway, and yes i am refering to bohm when i am talking of being self-conscious, and i know it is because of his being a western and on top of that a scientist, because he is afraid that westerns in general and his scienstist friends in particular will laugh at him were he to bond living and non-living in one go in his explanations while to me it is almost an accepted thing in eastern philosophy.

and further my book proves that in the sense that the same formula of going through four basic forces or interactions applies to all and is the basic cause of all evolution. we living beings with our socalled conscious efforts or free will cannot and do not change an iota of that scheme of things. our efforts and their results are very superficial on the face of how and where we are being taken thanks to that scheme of things which comprising of of depends upon those four basic interactions i mentioned above. which is in fact why eastern philosophy finally ends up accepting 'rab da bhana' as to what happens despite our best efforts. because it knows that what will happen will happen.

it is the same viewpoint towards which the west is coming through its progressive leanings towards intelligent design.

of course, you can have a different view point.

love, harb

Fascinating stuff Harb JI

Of course your book must be containing all the cutting edge theories. I now have to discipline myself to complete it. Apologies for a mind which finds reading impossible and at best flits through erratic spells of interest. For the most part there is just this silent potato state my mind sinks into where no thought visits for too long and no event external or internal engages me enough. Hmmm I often wonder if this is a blessing or a state of premature senility. Needless to say 'I'm loving it' and so mind potato and I countinue in happy harmony.

Now just to share some thoughts.... I see what you say about Bohm. even though many of his peers found him brilliant and outstanding in his courage and contributions and equally large number(what else can one expect from scientists!!) scoffed his theories and called them untenable. I feel the most important thing he did was to bring out the fundamental paradox in modern physics by saying that Quantum and Relativity theory are basically contradictory and cannot be used together as a premise (which is apprently what modern physics does). Quantum is based on non-physical, non-causal and non-local paradigms and relativity needs a reality to be continuous, local and physical. I guess as a theoretical physicist, harping on this basic contradiction earned him much disfavour.

Personally I feel his concept of 'holomovement; raised the bar for physical reality to be seen as dynaimc, in a flux and infinitely connected. Since he was hugely influenced by J Krishnamurti and engaged in substantive dialogue with him it is obvious he like Fritjof Kapra saw the east and west as coming together and mysticism and science as synergetic rather than exclusive. I guess his caution came from the outrage such a view triggered amongst the classicists in his fields.

O.K have to run for a bit so will come back and write another comment on the other points soon.

Harb

To return to our exchange. "The above does not mean, however, that life can be reduced completely to nothing more than that which comes out of the activity of a basis governed by the laws of inanimate matter alone..." Here I am wondering if we need to make the distinction between activity rising out of inanimate matter and laws governing the SOT. Seems to me they complement and synchronize attract and repel as cycles of movement which is succinctly referred to as 'holomovement' by Bohm.

You see this entire engagement with holograms and holomovement for the last few days has opened up a totally fascinating vista for me especially at the experiential level. A long, long time ago (within my intensely on a spiritual enquiry time-frame!), I was visiting Nepal for a quiet time of meditation/contemplation. Chose a beautiful, excluded hotel and had a fascinating experience of what now I realize was an insider view of the Superhologram. At that point I realized that within the superhologram of essence was another circle which at that time I understood to be Mahamaya and included all- even Buddha's concept of Niravana. Outside the circle was parinirvana which I understand is the raw energy essence of the Self which is totally devoid of any participation in holographics. A fishbowl scenario where the void outside pulsates undisturbed while it looks into what swims within the bowl. I feel it is there where ultimately the larger WILL of the existence or destruction of the fishbowl exists. But I felt within the circle or Mahamaya, we have infinite power and possibilities. The 'rab da bhana' I therefore translate it as slightly different. Our intention/desire/will create the images for the many holograms within the 'super'. That freedom is essentail and the ONLY reson for the essence to take the form of the Self or there would be no joy to the play and no creativity. The myriad connective aspects of past, present future holograms then bear upon the final outcome of our desires/intention and hence they in that sense do not lie purely in 'our control'. However even within this state once the Self rises to a degree where it cannot identify with any distinct 'ego' (a rare state I agree) then its power and speed to fashion holograms within this world becomes awesome. Purely because it then moves to a channel of speed like a superhighway much like the one we assign to the Creator. I feel this is also what is said when they say that Buddha beings have a powerful impact on their environment even when they seem to be in non-action and silent. Like Ramanna Maharishi whose energy field drew (and draws) millions to the column of radiance that he created at Arunanchala without stepping out of there or giving sermons.

In the perfection of the being his consciousnes is the holographic lens in complete harmony with the cosmic principle, there is no 'bhana' for such a being for he is the 'bhana' and sets up a series of combinations and permutations for humanity at a whole new level of awareness. I'm not sure if I am rambling here and am confusing you but at an instinct level I know there is a state of free will and a state of connected destiny which is far more complex than 'rab da bhana'. What do you think?

Harb

I was also wondering though you may have told me this earlier, you received the 'wisdom' in this book in one of your transpersonal experiences. Did you then sit and research all the existing cutting edge theories and include them as how the world of existing science converged or diverged with what you were stating? Is that how you brought in Bohm etc? Just curious as to how the book came together.

Harb

Another question I have meant to ask you for some time now. One day I was listening to Maskeen Ji (you must know of him) on T.V and he saiid that the basic diffeence between the eastern philosophical schools and the western spiritual paradigm is that the latter acknowldege only 4 principles and the east has five. Like panch tattva, and hence panj pyarey etc. He the said while the west draws from earth, water, fire and air as the four critical elements, the East (India specifically) includes the fifth-sky which adds vastness, expanse and the element of nothingness/void and therefore infinitude to it all. That triggered some amazing connections and for some reason my mind went straight to your four elements and I wondered why you spoke of only four. So is my question making any sense and can I trouble you to clarify my confusion?

jasjit, first sorry, we were here without light the whole of yestrday night and day. it came at night but by then i was not in any mood.

now i would first give reply to your last question. the fifth element maskeen ji is talking about in fact represents the unification of all the four basic forces or elements. of late west has been trying to arrive at this very stage/element through the unifcation of all the four basic forces in what is called grandunification. they also call it to arrive at the theory of everything. eastern philosohphers intuite this grandunification point directly, while science has to go there step by stp which it cnnot because it is like going to infinity by multiplying 2x2x2....

pl ask for further clarifications if any.

jasit, just to add, the west first reduced all the numerous forces working in the universe to basic four and then was trying to unite the four to one. in other words the west ws coming from many towards one.

i, on the other hand, experienced the one first and then from there looked outwards, and likwise first saw the whole panorama of evolution spreading itself in terms of four basic forces and then further in terms of the numerous. this about sms up my whole experience.

maskeen ji alludes to the one by his fifth element. it is common in indian philosophy to equate one with space/akasha/sky. here is a few lines from bhagvad gita quoted in my book which allude to one as measureless space. these lines are being spoken by krishna, who here represents one...

By Me the whole vast Universe
Is spread abroad; - by Me, the Unmanifest!
In Me are all existences contained;
Not I in them!
See! as the shoreless airs
Move in the measureless space, but are not space
(And space were space without the moving airs);
So all things are in Me, but are not I.

*******
one can here see that the fifth element or space is not exactly the one or krishana but can be spoken of as an example as krishna does. nobody can describe the one, it can only be experienced and that is all.

again jasjit, it is like some people begin from sex (from many, from separation, as in arranged marriages in india)and end up at love, at oneness(as most arranged married couples end up by their old ages), while some begin from love, from oneness (as in love marriages mostly in west), and end up in sex and many.

Yes Harb, I understand now the symmetry of four and the universe of One as you explain it. Also thanks for sharing your personal anecdotes I'm sure they will povide a powerful insight to many here.

jasjit, now to reply to your following message:

I was also wondering though you may have told me this earlier, you received the 'wisdom' in this book in one of your transpersonal experiences. Did you then sit and research all the existing cutting edge theories and include them as how the world of existing science converged or diverged with what you were stating? Is that how you brought in Bohm etc? Just curious as to how the book came together.

*****

No jasjit i dont think i did any such research. first i just happened to lay my hands on fritzof capra's book The Tao of Physics when i was desperately trying to find my raison de etre in coming into this world. it introduced me to the latest developments in physics and to some extent in other related sciences. then i brought a few books which were mentioned in this book. but as i have already told you about scientists efforts at reaching grandunification or oneness, this to me looked as if they were trying to come towards or reach 'me' as i was sitting in or as onenness. and though the grandunification was related to the science of only physics, i found that whatever book - that is, on whatever subject - i happened to lay my hands on as above, its cutting edge thinkers likewise were trying to reach the same oneness from their own angles. so i could in a way see where they were heading, what they were finally looking for, and so could relate to them, or had something to say to all.

in fact, there you find yourself in a position where you begin to be afraid of your knowledge, because you know that you could speak endlessly on all subjects. while on the other hand, sitting as you are at the goal, you dont really want to speak. it is just like you have had a sexual orgasm or love experience and then find many people studying/approaching it from many angles (various subjects) in their efforts to understand what it is or like and you knowing that you could speak endlessly to all but at the same time dont want to speak much lost in your reverie as you are, more so as you know that no amount of such words/speeches will convey the exact experience to the seekers.

the few books i browsed through i have mentioned at the end at bibliography. I have hardly read any whole book because i could understand each's salient points by just cursorily going through it here and there. it was also because i was 'seeing' the things from a special high point. i was sort of seeing the universe from the outside...from even its startng point to the present. while writing i would often say to my wife "today the universe is not coming into my focus properly...aaj universe mere kaabu wich nahin aa rahi..." i could hardly contain my laughter when professor virk (whom i have mentioned in acknowledgements) said i have read vast resource material lol. i think sitting at a very peculiar 'high' point as you yourself are you can easily understand what i have said above...

Hmm Harb

All quite amazing and synchronous. Reading your comment I just remembered how I came across 'The Tao of Physics' in my early twenties totally by accident and despite the fact that I was not a science student and never displayed any deep interest in it the book fascinated me no end. I remember then thinking how wonderful it would be if one day I could actually make such a connection between the mystical and scientific as essentially the same. Little did I know then that I was creating a hologram which would in effect manifest at some later point as my universe.

interesting...and to think that i came upon it at the beginning of my forties...when till then physics was a hard/boring science of the school/college days for me. what intrigued me in the title was the juxtaposition of science with tao, which i remotely knew to be connected with spirituality. i was at the time fully hooked to ramana and had in fact gone to his ashram at trivunnamalai for a visit, as also to ask him to guide me as to my work in this world or my next vocation now that i had left the job of SDO PWD B&R. from his ashram i came back to madras to pass the night. it was there in one of the nondescript khokhas in one of the not so important bylanes that i happened to lay my hands on the book. i stopped there perhaps to buy somthing else. ramana in a way answered my prayer lol.

Harb just to say that I've really enjoyed reading all your comments on this series of posts. Thanks

welcome anusheh, we have indeed progressed from soor to superconsciousness lol.

and jasjit, you know actually we have been progressing on the jounrney towards the unification of science and spirituality side by side.

when you had the first hint of it outside in your early twenties i was having first intimations of it inside which eventually materialised in my first actual experience of oneness (unification) near my end twenties. perhaps around that time you also had some more concrete hint of that union outside.

then having firmly/cosciously established myself in oneness by the end of my thrities i had the vision of that union now outside in the form of the insight for my book. and perhaps around this time you had even more concrete vision of that union but now inside. perhaps from then on you went deeper and deeper inside, into spirtuality while i went outside, or having been trying to with the writing of my book for the world. perhaps at the end you will end up in one, i in many...or perhaps we both will end up in some middle ground...neither in nor out...exactly as i in fact already told above when i said that just as a child does not consider himself or reality to be inside or outside...similarly at the end the seeker would go beyond such dichotomies.

jaisi mein aave khasam ki bani...lol. now strike a finger on your potato mind and decipher...

Dear Harb

Once again thrown by the holomovement of this blog and it participants, especially you and me. Firstly to share the most bizarre- the last line of Gurbaani you wrote was the one I was going to end my yesterday's comment to you. And just stopped short of writing it wondering if you will wonder why I placed it there. And today you write it in the same context! Perhaps we are part of the same hologram.

Yes the events in my thirties were critical in pushing me deep within and then even deeper onto the road that became the great homecoming. And what never fails to fascinate me is how every month, day and now even moment brings yet another wonder of self-discovery and knowing. Slowly it has all became a giant wonderland where finally the Self is bouncing with lightness and joy. Beyond that I know not what the road ahead holds and finally it is a matter which I rarely contemplate. All is as it should be! As for the road we may take ...again Jaisee vey avey khasam ki baani taisa karee bayan vey lalo.

So well-met fellow traveller.

Much love

Dear Harb how right you are ,lol. If there was no soor how would we know or enjoy the superconsciousness:-)
love

Excellent post! Congrats to the writer for taking Bohm's revolutionary ideas abd placing them in the weave of man's pivotal enquiries. Few have known Bohm outside his discipline as being the precursor of some of the major shifts that physicists and others will see in this century.

Very readable and well placed article.

I am really impressed wid whole conversation going on b/w jasjit and Harb...i don't knw abt these findings of science related to sprituality before visiting this blog....

i realy thankful to Harb nd jasjit for puting ur ideas here in such a good manner.....