Adwait Vedanta and Quantum mechanics

Consciousness is BrhmAn:-
Bohr model and adwait Vedanta/
Bohr Model of atom pictures a planetary model of atom as seen in Chapter
III. One of the most striking features of Planetary Model is the amount of
empty space present in an atom.
The mass of an electron is 9.8 X 10-27grams13. This is equal to the number
we get by dividing one with 1027. This is obviously a very minute quantity,
almost equal to zero, and hence negligible. The masses of proton and
neutron, that together form the atomic nucleus, are 1.672 X 10-27grams14 and
1.675 X 10-24 grams respectively15
.
Since the electrons are of very negligible mass, the nucleus constitutes 99.99
% of the total mass of the atom. However, the volume of this dense nucleus
is only 0.01% of the total atomic volume.
This follows that 99.99 % of the total atomic volume is empty. Atom is
something very hollow in nature. These atoms are regarded as the building
blocks of the Universe. In other words, Universe is made up of the hollow
bricks called atoms.Here we see Neils Bohr at a very close proximity to Adi Sankaracharya. The
Universe is a hollow. It is, as we perceive, a mere appearance. An illusion as
suggested by Advaita through a number of examples. Of the fundamental
texts of Advaita Vedanta, there are countless citations in this respect. Maitri
Upanishad 16 and Gaudapadakarika17, for instance, agree upon this.
In  own words,
संसारः स्वप्नतुल्यो हि रागद्वेषादिसङ्कुलः ।
स्वकाले सत्यवद्भवति
प्रबोधे सत्यसढ्भवेत् ।।(The world which is full of attachments, aversions, etc., is like a dream. It
appears to be real, as long as it continues but appears to be unreal whenone is awake - when true wisdom dawns)” 1
तवात्सत्यं जगद्भाति
शक्तिकारजतं  यधा
यावन्न ज्ञायते ब्रह्म
सर्वाधिष्टानमद्वयम् ,।।(…the Jagat appears to be true (Satyam) so long as Brahman, the
substratum, the basis of all this creation, is not realized. It is like the illusionsilver in the mother-of pearl, the shell) 19”, and again:आत्मन्येवाखिलं द्र्श्यं
प्रविलाप्य धिया सुधीः।
भावेयेदेकमात्मानं
निर्मलाकाशवत्सदा ।।wise one should intelligently merge the entire world-of-objects in the
Atman alone and constantly think of the Self ever as contaminated by
anything as the sky20).
The Real according to Advaita is immutable, self existent and eternal. Our
understanding about it does not undergo any change. “Whatever lacks this
characteristic mark of the real must not be called real”. 21 Also, “Universe is
therefore, due to ignorance. It is not ultimately real”. 22 These arguments are
totally valid in the case of the idea of the Universe that arises from the Bohr
atom model too. It does not essentially remains what it is. And hence, Jagat is midhya ..
  Adwaitvedanta and de Broglie'

Louis de Broglie’s matter-wave duality, on close examination, has some
similarity with Advaita. In the light of the concept, matter is no longer a ‘solid
thing’ as it appears to us. It is something else too: the wave (something
diametrically opposite). It follows that matter is not matter alone, but wave
also and vice versa.
To expand on the theory further, mass and energy are one and the same.
The duality proposed by de Broglie eventually points out to the non-duality of
matter and energy: A kind of Advaita, in the world of New Science.
Matter, therefore, according to Louis de Broglie, is only a form or an
appearance of something else. And so is the case with energy.Newtonian Science is explanatory, relaying upon observation and experiment
and knowledge of causal connection. On the other hand, the entire Indian
knowledge system always remained experiential (Anubhava) that used to be
trans-Newtonian Scientific methods. Here, de Broglie, the trans-Newtonian
Scientist uses exactly the same experiential method as used by the
Maharshis and Rishis of Bharata Varsha. People of New Science may call it
as lately found method or as intuitive, but to an Indian mind, it is at once and
undoubtedly experiential.
The Newtonian concept of matter used to be one that of solid which has
extension, mass and volume. When it comes to de Broglie, Matter is wave
and wave is matter at the same time. That is the matter-wave dichotomy is
illusory; something like the Brahman-Atman dichotomy which is Maya arising
out of Avidya. Here, we see that de Broglie comes very close to Sankara
Vedanta.
Maya has been identified with jada or matter in Svetaswatara Upanishad23
मायां तु प्रकृतिं विद्यान्मायिनं च महेश्वरम्‌।

तस्यावयवभूतैस्तु व्याप्तं सर्वमिदं जगत्‌॥ Thou shalt know Maya to be Force of Nature and the Master of Maya to be the great Lord; this whole universe is occupied by His becomings that are His members.मायाम् प्रकृतिम् - māyām prakṛtim - Maya to be Force of Nature | विद्यात् - vidyāt - Thou shalt know | मायिनम् - māyinam - the Master of Maya| महेश्वरम् - maheśvaram - (to be) the great Lord |च - ca - and | सर्वम् इदम् जगत् - sarvam idam jagat- this whole universe | तस्य अवयव भुतैः - tasya avayava bhutaiḥ - His becomings that are His members | व्याप्तम् - vyāptam - is occupied by..... And again equates Maya with the Universe (As seen in the usage, Viswa maya .....

क्षरं प्रधानममृताक्षरं हरः क्षरात्मानावीशते देव एकः।

तस्याभिध्यानाद्योजनात्तत्त्वभावात्‌ भूयश्चान्ते विश्वमायानिवृत्तिः(1/10) प्रधानम् - pradhānam - Matter | क्षरम् - kṣaram - is perishable | हरः - haraḥ - God | अमृताक्षरम् - amṛtākṣaram - is imperishable and immortal |एकः देवः - ekaḥ devaḥ - He, the only God |क्षरात्मानौ - kṣarātmānau - the perishable matter and individual souls | ईशते - īśate - rules over |तस्य अभिध्यानात् - tasya abhidhyānāt - By meditating on him | योजनात् - yojanāt - by uniting (with Him) | तत्वभावात् भूयः - tatvabhāvāt bhūyaḥ - by becoming one with Him | अन्ते - ante - in the end | विश्वमायानिवृत्तिः च - viśvamāyānivṛttiḥ ca - cessation of all illusion...In the context, Bhagavad Gita25 identifies Maya with the power of God as:

दैवी ह्येषा गुणमयी मम माया दुरत्यया।

मामेव ये प्रपद्यन्ते मायामेतां तरन्ति ते।।7.14।।7.14 Hi, since; esa, this, aforesaid; daivi, divine; Maya mama, of Mine, of God, of Visnu, which (Maya) is My own; and which is guna-mayi, constituted by the gunas; is duratyaya, difficult to cross over; therefore, this being so, ye, those who; wholeheartedly prapadyante, take refuge; mam eva, in Me alone, in Me who am the Master of Maya and who am their own Self, by giving up all forms of rites and duties; te, they; taranti, cross over; etam, this; mayam, Maya, which deludes all beings. That is to say, they become freed from the bondage of the world. 'If it is that those who resort to You cross over this Maya, why then do not all take refuge in You alone?' This is being answered: 

And so does Gaudapadakarika26 as:

In the third chapter of Māṇḍūkyakārikā, Gauḍapādācārya extracts four important and profound messages 

about the status of the waking world, the world experienced by all of us. The messages are: 

1. The existence of the waking world is to be negated. 

2. The origination of the waking world from Brahman is to be negated. 

3. The appearance and the experience of the waking world are to be accepted. 

4. The cause for the appearance and experience of the waking world is to be understood as self-

ignorance or māyā. 

Self-ignorance in Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad means the Turīya ajñānam. Gauḍapāda is stressing these four 

points by addressing and analyzing them from various angles. He points out that this is a message found 

in not only Māṇḍūkya but the other Upaniṣads also. Māṇḍūkya is not different and unique but there is 

consensus among all the Upaniṣads with regard to the message. Some challenge this four-fold message 

and they quote the sṛṣṭi vakyams of the Upaniṣads. Gauḍapāda analyzes the sṛṣṭi vakyams. 

How are we to understand the statements of the Upaniṣads that say that the world originated from 

Brahman? In verse 23, Gauḍapāda makes a general observation. This is a profound and technical topic 

of Vedānta. The Upaniṣads repeatedly say that the world originated from Brahman. Gauḍapāda says that 

the Upaniṣads do not say what type of origination it is, seeming or actual. It only talks about the 

origination but does not say whether the creation is a seeming one or an actual one. Gauḍapāda says that 

in the creation we see that everything has two versions, seeming or actual. The creation can be actual or 

seeming and the Upaniṣads do not say which. The Upaniṣadic statement about creation does not 

support the objectors or Gauḍapāda. Merely by sṛṣṭi vakyam, one cannot come to a conclusion. That 

is what Gauḍapāda said in verse 22 that the creation may be actual or seeming and the Upaniṣads do not 

comment either way. Therefore one cannot go strictly by sṛṣṭi vakyam but has to go and look for some 

more clues. This is called mīmāṃsa, Vedic analysis. Whenever a Vedic idea is vague, you look around 

for some clues from the other areas of the Veda to get clarification about a particular vague idea. If the 

idea is clear, the analysis is not necessary. Gauḍapāda says that mīmāṃsa supports him in that the 

origination is not an actual one but is only apparent. Later Gauḍapāda says that not only mīmāṃsa

supports him but logical analysis also supports him. Both mīmāṃsa and tarka establish the conclusion 

that creation is not an actual creation. When we talk about sunrise, we never refer to it as a seeming 

sunrise. But when enquired into it is known to be an apparent one.The following verses 24, 25, etc., are all clues for an apparent creation. Gauḍapāda takes mantras from 

other Upaniṣads to support his conclusion. 

First he takes a mantra from the Kaṭhopaniṣad (2.1.11). The mantra says that a pluralistic universe is 

not at all there. It does not say it was not there nor it will not be there. It says that even now the 

pluralistic universe is not there. If a world has really originated from Brahman, the Upaniṣad should 

have said that a real universe is there originating from Brahman. It does not say that. Therefore the 

origination is ‘as though’ origination. If the creation is real, Veda will not have negated it. Veda negates 

the pluralistic universe and so the creation must be apparent. Instead of quoting the entire mantra, 

Gauḍapāda is quoting only two words neha nānā. This is clue number 1 for the apparent origination. 

The 2nd clue is from Bṛhadāranyaka Upaniṣad (madhubrāhmaṇam, 2.5.19): 

"So, let it be understood," says the great Ṛṣi, "that the Master magician who can be called great Māyāvi, 

the Supreme Being who is designated here as Indra, the Lord of all beings, appears in such manifold 

forms that it is impossible for the physical eyes to connect the forms with the circumstances in which 

they are really placed."

Brahman multiplies into many through its māyā-śakti or produces this universe through its māyā-śakti. 

Māyā is generally used in the meaning of magic. Whatever magically happens does not really happen. 

In Dakṣiṇāmūrtistotram, we see the line in verse 2, “ To Him, who, like a magician or even like a great 

Yogin, displays, by his own will, this universe…..” This is clue number 2. 

The third clue is taken from Puruṣasūkta. “ajāyamāno bahudhā vijāyate” (verse 21) is the line from 

Puruṣasūkta. This means that Bhagavān produces the world without actually producing. Without 

multiplying into plurality, Bhagavān multiplies. This is possible only by seeming multiplication through 

māyā-śakti like the dream by nidrā-śakti. By using the word māyayā, Gauḍapāda reminds us of a verse 

in the Bhagavad Gita which conveys a similar idea: 

Even though, being one who is unborn, one whose knowledge does not wane, and also being the Lord of 

all living beings, still, wielding My own prakṛti, I, ‘as though,’ come into being by My own māyā. (4:6) 

Kṛṣṇa says, ‘Even though I am unborn, I am born.’ This is not logically possible. The only way of 

explaining is that even though ‘I am not born, I am seemingly born through māyā-śakti.’ This is clue 

number 3.

Adwait Vedanta and Heisenberg:- 

It is not possible to determine precisely both the position and the momentum( or velocity) of a small moving particle(eg ,electron ,proton etc) 

∆x.∆p>=h/ 4π

∆x.m.∆v>=h/ 4π ( h= plank"s constant h = h/ 2π) 

∆x.∆v>=h/ 4πm ........Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle, as the name indicates, postulates the 

uncertainty concerning the micro world. The impossibility of accuracy in 

measurement as put forward by the principle has certain definite 

philosophical implications, in addition to its devastating effects on the 

Classical Mechanics. 

The Principle, at the first instance, presents the helplessness of the 

deterministic view. It challenges the notion of causation in Nature, that every 

determinant cause in the nature is inevitably followed by the resulting effect. 

In terms of the Classical Physics, this means that the future motion of a 

particle could exactly be predicted or determined from the knowledge of its 

present position and momentum and all of the forces acting upon it. 

Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle rejects this; because, one cannot know 

the precise position and momentum of a particle at a given instant and hence 

its future cannot be determined. The only option the principle permits is to 

predict a range of possibilities for the future motion of the particle. 

Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle says that in the sharp formulation of thelaw of causality-- "if we know the present exactly, we can calculate the 

future"-it is not the conclusion that is wrong but the premise. 32

 With this, we 

see that the much celebrated law of causation and the concept of causual connection to be nullified .....Brahman & Absolute Existence (Truth) : sat, Atman

(One meaning of Vedanta is : the end, or consummation, of knowledge).

That alone is Truth that exists absolutely, unchangeably, eternally :

Brahman is the ultimate and only Truth : sat. All else are untruths :

Brahman is sat (absolute existence) + chit (absolute consciousness / knowledge) + ananda (absolute bliss) = It is not ‘existent’, ‘conscious’, ‘blissful’ : Adjectives do not apply to Brahman because it is absolute, not relative.

Brahman is One-and-Only =

Brahman is absolute, consciousness, infinitude, im-material, indestructible, undifferentiated, unqualifiable, indescribable.

Atman (individual sentient creature’s essence, soul) is Brahman – ayam atma brahma. (Roughly like a wave of a boundless sea being the same as the sea).

All so-called knowledge or understanding is and of the relative : involving mediateness, comparison, classification, etc. At least two are necessary ― duality.

(Therefore, absolute, non-relative, one-and-only,) Brahman ― advaita ― is beyond access of speech and mind = (Who will know, and know what, and who speak?)

Normal ‘knowing’ and ‘understanding’ is nothing but familiarity, acquaintance.

The Atman (= Brahman) cannot be attained by explanations, nor by intelligence, nor through much hearing – na yam atma pravacanena labhyo na medhaya na bahuna shrutena. It can be attained by im-mediate, aparoksha, experience ― yoga.

Such experience cannot be described by common language which is born of mediate, empirical experience.

How will the knower be known? (Can the eye see itself?).

Everything originates in, subsists in, and merges in, Brahman.

All this (the perceived, conceived, performed) is Brahman only = sarvam khalu idam brahma. Advaita Vedanta is not monotheism ― it is monism, more correctly, non-pluralism.

 

(B) Maya & ‘Appearance’ of Brahman

There is Brahman per se, and there is Brahman’s appearance. ‘Appearance’ or ‘manifestation’ of Brahman is comprehensively different from Brahman per se.

Yet ― all that appears is Brahman : sarvam khalu idam brahma.

Appearance happens per Maya : Maya deludes.

Maya is neither real nor unreal; like darkness – absence of light – is neither real nor unreal. Maya is indescribable, (super-)mysterious.

Maya covers Reality (sat) ― Brahman ― and projects phantasms, unreality (asat).

‘Appearance’ – perception – involves (a) (so-called) subject and (so-called) object, a spurious division, and (b) the mechanism of the senses + mind + intellect (+ scientific instruments) ― making for mediate, paroksha, experience, which distorts. (‘The senses cheat you day and night.’ ― Vivekananda).

Only im-mediate, aparoksha, experience – per yoga (= ‘yoke’, ‘join’) ― is correct. Im-mediate experience is indescribable, anirvachaniya, because it is transcendental, having nothing to do with the senses or mind or anything relative or empirical that form the basis of ‘normal’, and even ‘scientific’, perception-cognition and understanding.

Brahman is ‘noumenon’ (‘thing-in-itself’) ― that which ‘appears’ or seems ― and Maya is phenomena ― the ‘appearance’ or ‘seeming-ness’ of noumenon. The whole world is Maya.

Noumenon ― Brahman ― is the one reality, existence, sat; phenomena ― the world ― are falsities, asat : brahma satya, jagat mithya, jiva brhamaiva, na aparah – Brahman is true, the world is false, sentient creatures are Brahman only, not different.

However, as long as you are in and of the world (phenomena), the above statement uttered by you is rendered false thereby – Ramakrishna Paramahamsa.

The highest, most comprehensive, appearance, manifestation, of Brahman is Ishwar (God) : the universe.

Perception-cognition involves that which is perceived-cognized plus the mind. If the noumenon (thing-in-itself) of the external world is x, then the perception-cognition of such external world is x + mind. Similarly, if the noumenon of the internal world is y, its perception-cognition is y + mind. What we observe, perceive, know, understand is never x or y but x + mind or y + mind. x and y per se are ever unknowable… ― Vivekananda (paraphrased).

All perception-cognition is via interactions (that distort). ― Vivekananda (paraphrased).

‘External nature is only internal nature writ large’. ― Vivekananda

 

(C) Change, Involution & Evolution

Empirical entities ― everything of the perceived world ― go through six stages : birth, growth, stability, change, decay, death; thus for atoms, galaxies, stars, universe, bacteria, humans ― everything.

‘Change’ involves (a) material cause (like clay), and (b) efficient cause (like the potter).

As per Advaita, Brahman may be seen as the material and the efficient cause, both.

The properties of the cause inhere in the effect.

Therefore, essentially, all things, creatures, events are Brahman-like : one unity (or inseparably interconnected), infinite, shot through with consciousness ― in varying degrees; nothing is really ‘local’, it is all ‘global’, ‘universal’, infinite, eternal, one.

‘Mayik’ appearance or manifestation of the One-and-Only Brahman seems many per the specious and beguiling mechanism of name-cum-form ― namarupa : the sticking of name-tags on spuriously isolated parts ― really ‘forms’ ― of the real one integral whole, the One-and-Only.

Thus, a multiplicity of things, events, entities are created by the ‘observer’ by speciously defining forms via namarupa. (‘You limit a thing by defining it.’ ― Vivekananda.)

Thus, every thing, creature, event of Maya is a mix of Brahman-like-ness and namarupa : asti (being existent, from sat,) + bhati (being cognizable (through senses and mind), from chit,) + priya (being attractive (to someone), from ananda,) + nama (name) + rupa (form) = asti-bhati-priya-nama-rupa.

All perception / knowledge, common or scientific, is of bhati, appearance, ― via mediative, distorting, interaction ― and never of asti, that which really exists.

That which changes is not sat. (Roughly speaking : a cloud can successively take on forms of an elephant, a horse, a cow, and then vanish : the elephant, horse, cow are asat. A clay ‘dog’ can be made short to tall and then slapped out of existence; such dog is asat but the clay is sat).

Namarupa is Maya : delusion

Space, time, causality ― desh-kala-nimitta ― is Maya : delusion

Since the absolute, the independent, cannot have a cause, therefore, Maya is Brahman’s sport only ―

Change can be (a) real change, as in a potter changing a lump of clay into a pot, or (b) as per Advaita, only apparent change, per fake superposition ― adhyas / adhyaropa ― as a non-existent, fake, snake seen in a rope.

Thus, evolution could be (a) real evolution ― parinam(vada), or (b) pseudo evolution ― vivarta(vada) ― of Advaita.

That which does not exist cannot come into existence (a kind of conservation law). So, there can never be any real increase, but there can be apparent decrease ―through covering or non- or fractional manifestation.

Therefore, there can be no evolution unless there is involution first.

Thus, so-called evolution of science is involution + evolution = srishti (creation) + sthiti (subsistence) + pralaya (dissolution) = kalpa. Kalpas

Maya is the very first stage of srishti ― also described as agyan (ignorance, nescience); everything after that is Maya-shrouded, delusive.

Srishti is pran progressively acting on akash. Pran may be considered to be akin to primordial energy ― motive power, changing power. Akash may be considered to be akin to the primordial substance that is moved or changed.

Roughly : pran = efficient cause; akash = material cause.

(So-called) scientific evolution is absolute Brahman, first, in srishti, ‘appearing’ as progressively relative, less conscious, more finite, more material / physical, more differentiated, less permanent, more numerous… and then, reversing the process, in pralaya, to become progressively less relative, more conscious, less finite, less material / physical, less differentiated, more permanent, more one.

In the beginning of creation, ‘That One’ began to vibrate without motion’ ― anidabatam.

In the non-physical is born the physical, in the insubstantial, the substantial, in the abstract, the concrete.

Universal srishti-sthiti-pralaya happens ― mahapralaya ― but there can also be local srishti-sthiti-pralaya also – Vivekananda (paraphrased).

In the course of creation, srishti, there ‘appear’ (or ‘manifest’) (a) finest to finer to fine to gross to grosser to grossest particles / matter, (b) tanmatras ― rudimentary, ‘virtual’, particles ― that do not participate in processes, (c) the senses and mind and intelllect, (d) sentient creatures in subtle forms, and (e) sentient creatures in gross forms.

In the ultimate analysis, there is no such thing as cause and effect; cause-and-effect, causality, is a myth. ― Vivekananda (paraphrased).

Maya, Nature, is aghatana-ghatana-patiyasi – skilful in making the impossible happen : thus, non-causality.One of the well known hypotheses of quantum mechanics is that particles exist as particles as long as these are under conscious observation / watch. When not under observation, particles behave like wave and have no separate identity as particles. Above hypothesis is based on scientific experiments and cannot be brushed aside as unreliable or flawed. If we apply above find of quantum scientists to the concept of Maya, we may come to the same conclusion that what is apparent in the phenomenal world is not necessarily real. Perhaps in reality there is no phenomenon. From above quantum perspective, whatever we see or sense may not be real even in material sense. Thus we find a striking similarity between quantum uncertainty and the concept of Maya. Assuming that Maya is a statement of fact, can it be eliminated / remove?

Our last poser is: assuming that Maya is a statement of fact, can it be eliminated / removed?

The above poser has a spiritual angle, as it involves consciousness and, therefore, falls outside the ambit of quantum science. From spiritual perspective, the poser is re-framed as follows: ‘how the veil of the Maya can be lifted’? We find that in Bhagavat Gita a categorical answer to the above poser has been provided by Sri Krishna, which is as follows.

In Chapter VII, verse 14, of the Gita, Sri Krishna tells Arjuna:

“Daivi hi esa gunamayee mama maya duratyaya I

Mameba ye prapadyante mayametam taranti te II – 14”

[Since my divine Maya constituted by the Gunas or qualities (Sattva, Rajas and Tama) is hard to cross over, there is no other way but to take refuge in Me to cross over this Maya.]

In verses 5 onward, chapter 14, Krishna explains that the three Gunas (qualities) born of nature (Prakriti) bind the immutable soul to the body through numerous attachments. As to the question how this Maya can be transcended, Krishna answers in verses 24 to 26 of chapter 14 that the one to whom happiness and sorrow, censure and praise, honour and dishonour, friend and foe are alike, the one who is established in his own Self, the one to whom a lump of earth, iron and gold are the same, can transcend the three Gunas or the Maya. In other words, a man of complete equanimity alone can transcend Maya. It was believed that Suka, the son of Veda Vyasa, was one such person who was not subdued by Maya....

          Om namo Narayana

                   Om namo shivaya

                     Jai Shree Krishna

                   Jai siya rama👏👏👏🕉️🕉️🕉️

Stay tuned and stay blessed next blog will be based on tretabad khandan exposure 👏