Theos-Talk Archives (August 2005 Message tt00035)

Dear Jayananda Hiranandani,

Thank you for your message below. It is indeed important to recognize 
that science is, as you quote the late physicist, Richard Feynman,"a 
body of knowledge,some of which is nearly certain,a lot which is quite 
uncertain and NOTHING THAT IS COMPLETELY CERTAIN." One could also say 
that science is a methodology. Science seeks certitude through the 
repeatability of experimental results, and, through the extent that the 
resulting theories are able to explain the observations. Consequently, 
if we are to completely accept Feynman's comment, then we must be open 
to the possibility that the world is really flat after all. However, 
there is a large gap between what is possible and what is probable--what 
could be and what is more certainly to be the case. Even science, while 
remaining open to possibilities, actually works with probabilities. 
Scientific certitude does not require that all possibilities are 
answered--only that all the data is accounted for. 
Regardless of the evidence Dr. Tillett offered (i.e. birth and census 
records) that CWL was *not* born in 1847, there will always be those who 
will continue to believe that he was. Regardless of the photographic 
evidence gathered by the Martian orbiters and landers, there will always 
be those who will continue to believe that CWL's description of Martian 
civilization is accurate. In 1976, when the Viking landers broadcasted 
their pictures of the Martian landscape, I ask a student of CWL's 
writings how he accounts for the new evidence. He answered me with 
perfect confidence that CWL's observations are indeed quite accurate, 
and the Viking landers had proved them to be so. He explained that the 
Martians did not want their presence known. Therefore, they "created a 
mayavi" so that the camera, while looking upon a Martian city, would 
only see a desolate rocky landscape. 
It is possible that our CWL student is correct: that there really are 
Martians who can determine what a camera sees. But, where is the 
evidence? 
I have known people in the TS who are certain that we will eventually 
discover that Black magicians, in order to create doubt, had magically 
altered CWL's birth and census records. I have also known people who 
are confident that the Martians will eventually pay us a visit and erase 
all doubt about CWL's clairvoyant abilities. 
On the other hand, there are also people in this world (scientists among 
them) who discriminate between what is likely and what is possible. 
They formulate their views of the world based upon a certitude created 
from repeated observations and testing. They are not closed to what one 
might imagine to be possible. However, they also do not confuse what is 
possible with what is shown by repeated observations and testing to be 
more likely. 
Best wishes,
Jerry







Jayananda Hiranandani wrote:

> Dear Everyone:
>
> I wish to supplement what Anand Gholap has to say.
>
> A PhD. thesis or research in science is by no means final. Many of the difficulties in religion arise from the fact that people come to a conclusion and stop inquiry. This leads to simplicity, and if accompanied by rigidity, it creates problems. This is far from enlightenment, human regeneration or search for truth. T.S. has the maxim "There is No Religion Higher than Truth".
>
> It is for a good reason the the T.S. - at least the Adyar T.S. - has in its second objective the promotion of the comparative study of philosophy, science and religion. This is of great value.
>
> It is interesting to quote Richard Feynman, a Nobel Prize winner from California Institute of Technology. He says,"Science is a body of knowledge,some of which is nearly certain,a lot which is quite uncertain and NOTHING THAT IS COMPLETELY CERTAIN".
>
> Also Freud says, "It is a mistake to believe that a science consists in nothing but conclusively proved propositions, and it is unjust to demand that it should. It is a demand only made by those who feel a craving for authority in some form and a need to replace the religious catechism by something else, even if it be a scientific one."
>
> Therefore, whatever debate is there in this forum about Leadbeater, Blavatsky or others should be viewed accordingly. Even Krishnamurti has emphasised that the truth has to be perceived for oneself and not according to Freud, Shankara or some such authority. Krishnamurti once said to discard books, including his, in the search for truth.
>
> Jayananda H. Hiranandani
>
> Anand Gholap <AnandGholap@AnandGholap.org> wrote:
> It is well known fact that students for PhD.D. do research and write 
> thesis mostly to get PhD.D. degree and to prove their ability to do 
> scholarly research. Gregory also did some research and wrote thesis. 
> He earned doctorate because he did some research mostly related to 
> rumors in Leadbeater's life. Till this point what Gregory did was 
> logical and sensible from viewpoint of the candidate for PhD.D.
>
> But Gregory made big mistake later. His research on rumors - which 
> formed very small part of the life of Mr. Leadbeater - was published 
> by Gregory as his full biography. In Adyar TS there are large number 
> of members who have PhD.D. or master's degree. Most of these scholars 
> rejected this biography considering it completely misleading as it 
> focused on small part of his life and was published by Gregory as 
> full biography of Mr. Leadbeater. These scholars in Adyar TS and 
> many outside TS also considered this biography as most unscholarly 
> biography. It formed opinion that Gregory does not have capacity to 
> do any objective, scholarly research and his character is not pure 
> enough to place before world accurate facts in balanced manner. 
> So whatever credit Gregory had earned by getting PhD.D. was lost by 
> printing thesis as biography. 
> If he was wise enough, after taking PhD.D. he could have said " thesis 
> is written to get PhD.D, I wrote it and earned doctoral degree. Matter 
> is over, I don't want to discuss that subject" If he had said so, 
> nobody would have ridiculed Gregory or questioned his capacity to do 
> research. But after getting doctoral degree also he published that 
> small part of Leadbeater's life as biography. Result was hundreds of 
> scholars in Theosophical circles and outside ridiculed Gregory, 
> considered his work as unscholarly and came to conclusion that 
> Gregory lacks capacity to do research and he can't present correct 
> picture. So what Gregory earned by getting PhD.D. was lost by 
> publishing thesis as biography. 
> Anand Gholap
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 	
> ---------------------------------
> Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links