Science and Spirituality: Bridges of Understanding

By Bettina Sharada Bäumer and Shivam Srivastava

A dialogue between science and spirituality is a necessity in our times where both, differences and mutual enrichment of the two great fields of human approach to reality, are taking place. This volume addresses this need from the perspective of different areas of science and spiritual traditions. The starting point is the intention of the founder of the IIAS, Dr S. Radhakrishnan, who saw that “both the practice of science and experience of spirituality are intimately related to being human”. Although much thought has gone into their relationship, the present volume intends to broaden and deepen the possibility of a harmonious integration, necessary to overcome the present-day crisis of humanity.
From the side of science, the contributors come from the fields of physics, plant biology, neuroscience, psychology, ecology and philosophy of science; and from the side of spirituality, following traditions and spiritual masters are represented: PÀtaðjala Yoga, Trika Œaivism of Kashmir, VedÀnta, Buddhism, Christianity, Theosophy, and Rabindranath Tagore, Swami Vivekananda and J. Krishnamurti. The deliberations included topics such as Awareness in plants, Neuroplasticity and Habit, appropriate use of terms such as “Consciousness” and “Energy” in different contexts, clarifying several issues concerning the on-going dialogue. The contributing scholars have built “bridges of understanding”, thus encouraging the reader to proceed further in this quest.

• Language: English
• Publisher: D.K. Printworld
• Release date: Mar 6, 2023
• ISBN: 9788124611906

Book preview

Front.jpg

Science and Spirituality

Science and Spirituality

Bridges of Understanding

Edited by

Bettina Sharada Bäumer

Shivam Srivastava

Cataloging in Publication Data — DK

[Courtesy: D.K. Agencies (P) Ltd. ]

International Seminar on "Science and Spirituality:

Bridges of Understanding" (2016 : Indian Institute of

Advanced Study)

Science and spirituality : bridges of understanding /

edited by Bettina Sharada Bäumer, Shivam Srivastava.

pages cm

Papers presented at an International Seminar on "Science

and Spirituality: Bridges of Understanding" held at the IIAS in

November 2016.

Includes bibliographical references and index.

ISBN 9788124610435

1. Hinduism and science – India – Congresses. 2. Religion and

science – India – Congresses. 3. Spirituality – Hinduism – Congresses.

4. Spirituality – India – Congresses. I. Bäumer, Bettina, 1940- editor.

II. Srivastava, Shivam, editor. III. Indian Institute of Advanced

Study, organizer. IV. Title.

LCC BL1215.S36I56 2016 | DDC 294.51650954 23

ISBN: 978-81-246-1190-6 (E-Book)

ISBN: 978-81-246-1043-5 (Hardbound)

First published in India, 2020

© Indian Institute of Advanced Study, Shimla

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or any information storage or retrieval system, without prior written permission of both the copyright owner, indicated above, and the publisher.

The views expressed in this volume are those of the authors, and are not necessarily those of the editors and publishers.

Published by:

The Secretary

Indian Institute of Advanced Study

Rashtrapati Nivas, Summerhill, Shimla - 171005

Phones: [phone]; Fax: [phone]

e-mail: [e-mail]

Website: www.iias.org

and

D.K. Printworld (P) Ltd.

Regd. Office: Vedaśrī,, F-395, Sudarshan Park

(Metro Station: ESI Hospital), New Delhi - 110015

Phones: [phone]; 2546 6019

e-mail: [e-mail]

Website: www.dkprintworld.com

Printed by: D.K. Printworld (P) Ltd., New Delhi

Contents

Inaugural Address

- Chetan Singh

Introduction

- Bettina Sharada Bäumer

1. Science and Spirituality

- Partha Ghose

2. The Perilous Bridge of Vijñāna: A Perspective from Pātañjala Yoga and Psychology

- Stephen A. Parker

3. Perception and Awareness in Plants

- Sudhir Kumar Sopory

4. Trika Śaivism of Kashmir and Its Insights for a Dialogue with Science

-Bettina Sharada Bäumer

5. In Search of Rationality in Our Habit: Spirituality in the Light of Neuroplasticity

- Gopal Chandra Bhar

6. Rabindranath Tagore’s Belief in Holistic Science

- Martin Kämpchen

7. Neuroscience and Freedom

- Günter Rager

8. Sacred Secularity as Synergy of Science and Spirituality

- Varghese Manimala

9. A Non-dualistic Relational Model of Reality: Science and Buddhist Insights

- Michael von Brück

10. Swami Vivekananda’s Concept of the Harmony of Science and Religion

- Swami Atmapriyananda

11. Two Complementary Quests for Truth: J. Krishnamurti’s Approach

- Padmanabhan Krishna

12. Science and Spirituality: Compatible Paradigms?

- Vijaya Shankar Varma

13. Thought: Its Genesis and Growth in the Light of Theosophy and Neuroscience

- Atul Bhatnagar

14. Vedānta and the Possibility of a Heart-centric Education

- Arpita Mitra

15. Ancient Indian and Modern Scientific Perspectives on Ecology

- Kishor Dere

Contributors

Index

तत्रापि च पलाशपर्णमध्यशाखान्यायेन आब्रह्मरन्ध्रात् अधोवक्त्रपर्यन्तं

प्राणश िक्त ब्रह्माश्रयमध्यमनाडीरूपतया प्राधान्येन स्थिता।

There itself (in the body)

the Universal Consciousness remains principally

in the form of the Central Channel

whose substratum is Brahman as Life Energy,

right from the opening at the top of the skull

down to the lowest opening

like the central rib of a leaf.

– Kṣemarāja, Pratyabhijñāhr̥dayam 17

Gaze on them as they grow, see how the plant

Burgeons by stages into flower and fruit,

Bursts from the seed so soon as fertile earth

Sends it to life from her sweet bosom, and

Commends the unfolding of the delicate leaf

To the sacred goad of ever-moving light!

– Johann Wolfgang von Goethe,

The Metamorphosis of Plants

Inaugural Address

Chetan Singh

Dr S. Radhakrishnan, the founder of this Institute, had visualized it as a place for intellectual engagements of exactly the kind that we shall be pursuing for the next two days. He had sought to create an institution that would contemplate upon, and understand, the human condition. He argued that, Both the practice of science and the idea and experience of spirituality are intimately related to being human. At a personal level, I find it gratifying that the last national seminar of my tenure as Director should be on a theme that extends beyond confined disciplines, and treads upon domains that are relatively unmapped. This is something that the founder of this Institute and eminent scholars who preceded us here would have been greatly appreciative of. There is good reason to believe that the intellectual exchange at this seminar will be very enriching. When good thinking minds agree to get together in this manner, the results can be magical!

My expertise to speak on either of the ideas contained in the title of this seminar on Science and Spirituality: Bridges of Understanding is inadequate. So, my comments here are likely to display some amount of ignorance or innocence; depending on which way you wish to look at it. We know that the Enlightenment project had an enormous impact on human thinking and in effect created the modern world. As a result, the dominance of scientific thinking is quite evident everywhere today. A large number of people broadly understand and appreciate what the term science means. There is an element of certainty in their relationship with the idea of science: a realization, as it were, that science fundamentally affects their lives in every respect. About spirituality, however, there seems to be some ambivalence. Unlike science that is collectively experienced and shared, spirituality remains elusive. What is the connection between spirituality and the human? As I leave my house for work every morning, there is a forest that I have to walk through. I walk alone amongst the trees and the experience is exhilarating. It is also deeply personal. One feels an almost tangible intimacy with nature. I often ask myself: Is it simply the walk that I am enjoying or is this a spiritual experience? Is there a difference between experiencing the immense joy of being a part of this world and appreciating it as a spiritual experience? Or are they the same? I don’t know.

The need for a bridge to connect science and spirituality arises because the two are regarded as being based on essentially divergent foundational principles. Yet, paradoxically, both science and spirituality are themselves seen by their practitioners as bridges for understanding reality and truth. The concept of spirituality, on account of its long history, has meant diverse things to various people living in different historical periods. What it shares in common with science and some other methods of acquiring knowledge is a professed search for truth as a means of understanding the universe and humankind. But the nature of truth is itself highly contentious. So is the idea of reality. This poses a problem that participants in this seminar will need to deal with: that is, the relationship between two rather fluid but fundamental concepts.

Many of the core ideas that seem to bridge or connect science and spirituality are themselves rather slippery to negotiate. This is because the processes creating, sustaining and recreating these ideas or bridges are continuous and unending. For instance, even an understanding founded upon supposedly enduring ideas in religion, ethics and morality is subject to change. Large elements of what we understand by religion, ethics and morality grow out of a particular historical context that alters with the passage of time. There was a time when religion and spirituality were seen almost as equivalents. This is no longer the case. With changing attitudes these concepts have come to be differently understood. Clearer lines of demarcation seem to be drawn around them. Nevertheless, both science and spirituality endeavour to search for, and engage with, phenomena that are broadly regarded as sacred. This part of a shared engagement probably creates some space for overlapping ideas and interests.

While spirituality is frequently understood in personal and experiential terms, the idea of religion harbours a greater sense of community, normative practices, prescriptions and an organized pursuit of the legitimate and the sacred. Amidst all this, matters pertaining to the ethical and the moral constitute the core of human thought and social organization. But moral and ethical issues are not merely bridges that might connect science and spirituality. As they were integral to the evolution of human thought, moral and ethical concepts, too, have evolved. They are part of the unceasing processes that have transformed human society. Science, too, has experienced similar trajectories of development. Scientific methods developed historically through their interaction with the material world. As a result, distinct methodologies emerged. We can, therefore, legitimately argue that the concepts of spirituality, too, have continued to change? If a person’s inner experience is influenced by interaction with the external world, why would not the nature and understanding of this experience change as the external world changes? If science, religion, ethics and belief systems change with the passage of time, why not spirituality! Spirituality may conceptually deal with the eternal and the unchanging, but its practice and methods have changed over time.

This brings me to how some social scientists have viewed the question. In 2009, Peter van der Veer¹ wrote an interesting article on spirituality in modern society. One may disagree with some of the ideas presented but they might, nonetheless, be worth taking note of. Though the early origins of spirituality are deeply embedded in mysticism, gnosticism and other related practices known since antiquity, van der Veer suggested that spirituality, as practised today, is very modern. It has evolved into a capacious concept that links and accommodates diverse belief systems and traditions from across the world. This, apparently, makes it somewhat similar to the idea of secularism. The appearance of the spiritual and the secular as alternatives to institutionalized religion occurred simultaneously with the growing dominance of European–American modernity. Van der Veer sees spirituality as being situated at the heart of modernity. In fact, from the mid-nineteenth century onwards, the West began to search for a universal morality or spirituality that it shared with other religious traditions. The Unitarian World Parliament of Religions held in Chicago (1893) exemplified this. Representatives of the world religions met on a common platform. It signified the emergence of spirituality as a concept that tried to include a range of traditions under a universal morality unburdened by the baggage of competing religious institutions. He suggests that a globalized concept of spirituality emerged as an alternative to both secularism and institutionalized religion. This new alternative represented the universal aspect of modern spirituality.

However, van der Veer perceives a peculiar contradiction in the concept of spirituality today. It is projected as being universal in character, but is in practice tinged by the influence of specific civilizations and linked to notions of national identity. The idea of Indian spirituality is one such example. A crucial political role has been played by the idea of spirituality in contemporary Indian history as well as in creating a nationalist conviction that Hindu civilization is especially respected for its spiritual qualities. This would apply equally to Chinese and several other Eastern ideas about spirituality. The Oriental perspective of European Romanticism strongly influenced the nationalist view of Hindu civilization. Van der Veer suggests that Vivekananda presented a modern version of religious ideas and practices for a modernizing middle class. Even Gandhi and Tagore were inclined to posit Indian nationalism against Western materialism. While the latter resulted in warfare and colonial exploitation, the spirituality of the East provided an alternative leading to world peace and prosperity for all. The reality may be quite different because India’s desire for material prosperity is hardly less than that of the West. Moreover, the unprecedented levels of production and consumption occurring in both India and China have been combined with the successful marketing of spirituality and philosophies of well-being. Modern spirituality is profitably aligned with neo-liberalism and capitalism in the marketplace. Spiritual leaders and lifestyle gurus are regular invitees to important business meetings and for lecture tours to leading business schools. Modern spirituality has in many ways replaced both apathetic secularism and institutionalized religious life.

Late last night, I read the abstract of Prof. Sopory’s lecture for this seminar. Apart from the many perceptive observations he makes in it, he also looks closely at some of the other living things on this earth that we almost invariably neglect: plants. It is with touching sensitivity that he understands and explains to us the complex network that not only enables them to thrive but also makes them essential for our own existence. One wonders at the fascinating way in which everything – living and non-living – in our planet is interconnected. I lost my father in January this year. There have been moments thereafter, when I have wondered about the meaning of life; about one’s existence in the world that we are trying to understand and about the cosmos that we know so little about. It is in this context that Prof. Sopory’s words reminded me of a poem by Jalaluddin Mohammad Rumi (also known as Mohammed Balkhi) a Sufi saint-poet of the thirteenth century. Though deeply committed to Islam, it was his great spiritual insight that enabled him to preach and write in a manner that appeared to go against the grain of the sectarian perspectives that must have been quite common during his lifetime. His poem reproduced below is one such example.

I died as a mineral and became a plant,

I died as a plant and rose to animal,

I died as animal and I was Man.

Why should I fear? When was I less by dying?

Yet, once more I shall die as a Man to soar with angels blest;

But even from angelhood I must pass on,

All except God doth perish.

When I have sacrificed my angel-soul,

I shall become what no mind e’er conceived.

Oh, let me not exist! For Non-existence,

Proclaims in organ tones, To Him we shall return.

– tr. A.J. Arberry

---

¹ Peter van der Veer, 2009, Spirituality in Modern Society, Social Research, 76(4): 1097-1120.

Introduction

Bettina Sharada Bäumer

anyadevāhurvidyayā ’nyadāhuravidyayā ।

iti śuśruma dhīrāṇāṁ ye nastadvicacakṣire ।।

vidyāṁ cāvidyāṁ ca yastadvedobhayaṁ sa ha ।

avidyayā mr̥tyuṁ tīrtvā vidyayāmr̥tam aśnute ।।

– Īśa Upaniṣad 10-11

Something is expressed through wisdom,

something else through conventional knowledge,

thus we have heard from the wise who explained it to us.

He who understands both wisdom and conventional knowledge as one,

through conventional knowledge passes over death,

and through wisdom attains immortality.

Dr S. Radhakrishnan, the founder of the Indian Institute of Advanced Study, envisaged as a topic to receive special attention in the deliberations among scholars: Indian and Asian contribution to the synthesis of science and spirituality. The present volume, which is the outcome of an international seminar on Science and Spirituality: Bridges of Understanding, is an attempt to contribute to this important subject. It was the desire of Radhakrishnan that this Institute be a place of meeting and dialogue, not only between disciplines and cultures, but also between the so-called objective disciplines and spirituality, an essential dimension of the Indian traditions.

The first question which will be asked is: which science? and which spirituality? Another question will be, why not science and religion? Should we not narrow the topic down to be more focused? But the purpose of this seminar having been a dialogue at different levels, the topic was purposely left open, to be defined by the scholars of the various disciplines and spiritual traditions and their underlying philosophy in their own context and understanding. However, one question has to be addressed at the outset: We know that ancient and medieval Indian sciences, which are partially still alive today, were spiritually oriented, their ultimate aim being expressly mokṣa. It may be Āyurveda, Vāstuśāstra, Jyotiṣa (both, astronomy and astrology) and the Śāstras of the various arts like Saṅgītaśāstra and others, they were embedded in a spiritual world view. Thus they were not in need of bridging the gap. Even if we witness a rediscovery, these sciences are under the pressure of the all-dominating modern science and its offshoot technology.

This seminar was not addressed to these Śāstras, but to our present predicament of being situated and sometimes caught between modern science and spirituality, whether based on a specific tradition such as Buddhism for example, or independent of it, as in the case of J. Krishnamurti, among other spiritual movements and personalities of recent times. The focus of the seminar was thus not historical – that would require another approach and methodology – but contextual in our present world. And yet, being open to a multilayered dialogue, nothing was excluded, especially whatever is conducive to such a bridge of understanding.

At the outset I only want to point to some issues which are important to keep in mind while approaching the other discipline and getting into a dialogue.

The first problem which comes to mind is the question of language itself. Scientific disciplines and spiritual traditions cannot help but use many of the same words and concepts in describing their respective contents, insights and discoveries, but they may have a very different meaning and connotation. I may only mention some concepts which are central to both:

• Energy

• Consciousness

• Void

• Light, etc.

Energy to a physicist means something else than to a follower of Tantra. Consciousness in neuroscience, psychology and cognitive sciences has a different connotation than cit/caitanya or saṁvit translated equally as consciousness in Advaita Vedānta or in non-dualist Kashmir Śaivism for example. The void in physics cannot be identified with the Buddhist śūnyatā and so on. And yet, being human experiences expressed in language, these concepts are also not so totally different as not to allow for any attempt at mutual understanding. The problem here is one of the level at which a concept is understood – physical or spiritual. But precisely in the context of the latest developments in sciences such as neuroscience and quantum physics, attempts have already been made to bridge this gap.

The limitations of language in expressing an insight have to be overcome on both sides: in science by taking recourse to mathematical formulas, and in spiritual traditions of Indian origin in the form of condensed Sūtras. Both, the formulas and the Sūtras can be understood and interpreted only by those experienced in their respective disciplines.

A question which emerged in this seminar is, on the one hand: are we aiming at spiritualizing science? or at making spirituality more scientific? Some great scientists have already attempted the first, and present-day gurus want to prove the effectiveness of their spirituality by undergoing scientific experiments, through neuroscience, etc. The New Age wave, especially in America, provides many examples of such syntheses. In India I may just mention one example, Prof. A.K. Mukhopadhyaya of All India Institute of Medical Sciences, who, being a neuroscientist, has written extensively on Yoga and on the spiritual paradigm which he calls the Akhaṇḍa Paradigm. The Austrian-born American physicist Fritjof Capra is deeply engaged in a dialogue with spirituality, as evidenced in his books and in his teaching (see The Tao of Physics, The Turning Point). The examples could be multiplied. His Holiness the Dalai Lama has been engaging in a dialogue with scientists in an on-going way at his ‘Mind and Life Institute’, with a series of meetings between mainly Buddhists and eminent scientists (neuroscience, etc.). All this work was in the background of our present seminar, and yet we can contribute our own insights and exchanges to this process.

Another important topic for such a dialogue is the question of insight, inspiration or intuition – in Sanskrit pratibhā. How does a scientist make a path-breaking new discovery? Is it only the result of a long and costly experimentation? Many scientists have admitted that their important discoveries were not the result of experimentation or rational deduction but of intuitive insights, also sometimes received in dreams. A famous example is the genial mathematician Srinivasa Ramanujan who asserted that he received his extraordinary mathematical equations from his Goddess. The accounts by Werner Heisenberg and Hans-Peter Dürr about how they arrived at the insights leading to Quantum Physics are astounding. Radhakrishnan writes in his introduction to the lecture on Intellect and Intuition:

If all knowledge were of the scientific type, the contemporary challenge to religion would seem to be conclusive. The problem thus narrows itself to the reality of intuitive knowledge and the conditions of its validity. Is there or is there not knowledge which by its nature cannot be expressed in propositions and is yet trustworthy?

Most of the schools of Indian philosophy take such trustworthy knowledge from perfected beings, siddhas and yogīs, as expressed in the concepts of yogīpratyakṣa or āptavacana.

A bridge has to be built from both sides, and this is the challenge.

The German Quantum Physicist Hans-Peter Dürr, close collaborator of Werner Heisenberg and long-time Director of the Max Planck Institute of Physics, has stated in a published dialogue with the philosopher of religion Raimon Panikkar:

The dialogue between science and religion is for me not only significant to find out whether we ultimately mean the same, or at least intend the same, but also whether from our common insights we can derive indications of what is to be done practically in order to meet the present-day challenges we encounter in the world we live in, in a constructive way. How is it possible to make this world dominated by materialism move in another direction, guided by spirituality? ...

It is essential that we bring the spiritual component back in this world, otherwise we are moving towards an endless suffering. I feel myself responsible.

– Dürr and Panikkar 2008: 153

This seminar was intended to be more than just an academic exercise. It is also an expression of our responsibility towards this situation.

~~~~~

The present volume contains contributions by international scholars to an interdisciplinary seminar held at the IIAS in November 2016, with some additional articles by scholars who could not be present. Prof. Chetan Singh, the Director of the Institute, inaugurated the event with his Inaugural Address in his inimitable style. Prof. Partha Ghose, an eminent Physicist and Philosopher of Science opened the deliberations with his exhaustive Keynote Address in which he raised many issues to be addressed by the scholars present from their respective disciplines.

Since the Pātañjala Yogasūtra provides the basis for almost all Indian spirituality or yoga, Dr Stephen Parker presented what the title of the seminar was all about: a bridge in the sense of vijñāna, which implies both spiritual and scientific knowledge. Prof. S.K. Sopory, an internationally acclaimed scientist and plant biologist, has thrown new light on the question of consciousness in plants, on the basis of his own research and discoveries. This article presents a convincing bridge between the scientific method and its results which enlarge our perception of the plant world.

Bettina Sharada Bäumer provides an introduction to a lesser-known Indian philosophical and spiritual tradition, commonly called Kashmir Śaivism, which is based on the early non-dualist Tantras and their commentators like Abhinavagupta. This tradition offers a number of bridges for a dialogue with modern sciences like Neuroscience and Quantum Physics, especially with the theory of interconnectedness of all things, and insights into the nature of reality as pervaded by Consciousness.

A few papers address the subject of Neuroscience from different perspectives and are complementary to each other. Prof. G.C. Bhar focuses his presentation on the aspect of neuroplasticity which he also relates with traditional insights from Indian scriptures. Prof. Günter Rager of the University of Fribourg (Switzerland) probes deeply into the question of human freedom in the light of Neuroscience and disproves the reductionist approach of a certain kind of neuroscience.

Dr Martin Kämpchen presents Rabindranath Tagore’s approach to a holistic science and his criticism and warning of what he called the machine, i.e. the technological outcome of science. We are reminded of Tagore’s conviction that it is the transformation of mankind alone that can make it capable of sagaciously using scientific applications. Being a poet he could bridge the two in a poetic style of spirituality.

Dr Varghese Manimala approaches the subject from the point of view of secularity and sacredness, a synthesis proposed by Raimon Panikkar, also in the light of an open Christianity. The vision embraces the cosmic, the human and the divine aspects of reality (cosmotheandric). Prof. Michael von Brück of the University of Munich (Germany) presents an argument which relates a basically dualist scientific view to a non-dualist Buddhist response, building up to an interdependent explication of the implicate order. Swami Atmapriyananda, monk of the Ramakrishna order who was also a Physicist, presents the views of Swami Vivekananda who stood at the threshold between India and the West, and also espoused a position of harmony between Science and Religion.

Among the great spiritual geniuses of twentieth century, J. Krishnamurti stands out in that he questioned traditional religion but taught an all-encompassing dialogue with all fields of human knowledge. His dialogues with the noted Physicist David Bohm are an outstanding example of his approach to science. His words, The religious mind is really a scientific mind – scientific in the sense that it is able to observe facts without distortion, to see itself as it is,¹ express a profound insight into the relationship. Prof. Padmanabhan Krishna, in-charge of the Krishnamurti Study Centre (Varanasi) and former Professor of Physics, has presented Krishnamurti’s insights on the subject in his own inimitable way. Prof. Vijay Shankar Varma, also an eminent Physicist and National Fellow at IIAS, has expressed a sceptical view of the possible compatibility between science and religion, and provokes a discussion.

Dr Atul Bhatnagar, Professor of Dentistry at the Banaras Hindu University, has elaborated on the processes of thought and memory in the light of theosophy and contemporary experimental findings from cognitive and neuroscience. Dr Arpita Mitra, Fellow at IIAS, has presented Upaniṣadic–Vedāntic spirituality as directed towards a holistic and heart-centric education. Ultimately the whole dialogue should find