It was interesting to note during the course that many of us have a certain ideology, certain way of thinking. We acknowledge that there is something more but our ideology, our logic and intellect does not allow us to go beyond it. We want a concrete objective proof. What is interesting is that we do not care if we ourselves have personally experienced or not but if a great scientist (who is logical and intellectual) attests to it, we gladly accept it. Many of us have no clue about Einstein's relativity theory; we have never and will never experience it but we accept it because a scientific logical and intellectual scientist named Einstein has said so. Similarly, we take great pride in understanding and accepting some complex scientific theories like Heisensberg's uncertainty principle, Quantum physics etc. etc.
Now to these intellectuals if someone says these truths and many more which scientists are still pondering over were written by thousands of enlightened beings in purely scientific books like Upanishads, the one thing that immediately comes up is suspicion. We reject immediately because our intellectual mind cannot take in the fact that something like that could have been proven thousands of years ago by some guy sitting under a Banyan tree or a Peepal tree.
But mind you, the latest in science is - what is all this Universe? When did it start? What was it before Big Bang? Who are we? I was watching this video where physicists, top scientists, are all asking these questions. They are coming up with theories like String Theory to explain the Universe. They say that everything that we see is energy. They claim that everything that we see can be described by 11 dimensions. Truly speaking they have no clue about the basic question - what is life and what is death?
Now if an enlightened master or being says that the Upanishads and other ancient scriptures written thousands of years ago actually talk about these eleven dimensions, about what we see as matter is nothing but energy, about the probability of occurrence etc., we cannot take it; our intellect just cannot accept it. Simply because we want a concrete proof.
An enlightened being has seen that space where everything unifies, where everything becomes one and this is what String theorists are trying to prove, which some physicists say will take long time. An enlightened master gives a straight solution for us to experience and we do not want to accept it; we do not even want to try it and see for ourselves. If we think for a moment, isn't it foolish to think that science can explain everything when science itself is a result of human mind? When science can't explain the phenomena of life and death, when science cannot explain what the Universe is, when science cannot explain where it all started, when science cannot explain the how we think, when science cannot explain lot of things, why cannot we accept that there is something beyond science as it exists today?
I have nothing against science, I am a researcher myself. But we must understand that there are limitations to science as we know today and in such a case we should explore what lies beyond it. If the entire science that we know today is a product of the human mind and intellect, then what about the space when the mind/intellect is dropped? A valid question, isn't it?
Its a pity that human intelligence itself has become a impediment to the evolution of the human being.
Isn't it intriguing that the evolution of life has stopped with humans? Life forms were continuously evolving from one life form to the other until the human being happened. Why should it suddenly stop? Why should the human not become a super human?The intelligence in a human has become an obstacle for him to move forward. The very intelligence, which can show him his other dimensions, has become a road block.
Swami Nithyananda says, 'only when we drop the intellect, only when we drop our ego that we are supreme, we can see what really is the truth.'