I double checked with Rajshekhar Bose's Chalantika. It says Brahma. I will not be surprised if it has multiple meanings. Hindu mythologies are full of contradictions with respect to characters and events.
Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 7, 2015, at 2:08 AM, Kamal Das kamalctgu@gmail.com [mukto-mona] <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
Sayambhu/Sambhu is Shiva, the Lord of Chandala and Dom communities. Brahma is said to be born in a lotus grown in the navel of Vishnu lying on the serpent named Ananta floating on kshirode ocean. Ananta is the zodiac circle and Vishnu is the sun god, while Kshirode Sagara is cloud laced blue sky. Shiva is Saturn and his ever present ring is sheesh nag. Such stories were told by the seers for common consumption. Such concept doesn't extend beyond solar system.The shortage of free energy caused by rising entropy due to spontaneous irreversible processes may not apply in an ever expanding universe.
Sent from my iPad
On Jan 6, 2015, at 6:55 PM, "Subimal Chakrabarty subimal@yahoo.com [mukto-mona]" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com> wrote:"----- no closed system can survive in the long run." Does the Second Law of Thermodynamics say so? What happens to the closed or isolated system? Does it die? If it does, in what sense?How was the earth a closed system in the beginning? Was it not insignificantly a small part surrounded by a vast open environment?Earth's conducive environment cum Mother Nature cum God: it is nothing but a matter of faith. I don't have any problem with it."Purush" and "Prokriti" are the two important ideas or concepts in one branch of Hindu metaphysics. Is Mother Nature being identified with this "Prokriti"? For now I do not have any comment on Rabindranath having identified Mother Nature as God.Virtually there are many closed societies although they are not closed or isolated in thermodynamic sense. Any way, what happens to these societies (communist and Taliban societies included) if they remain isolated? In thermodynamics, the entropy or disorder tends to reach maximum thereby making the system dynamically equilibrium. How are human closed societies analogous to this?I see a dangerous mixing of science, economics, philosophy, and theology here. We need to be careful about what we are saying.In my opinion the statement that we don't need to invoke any divine authority to prove that God created this universe (now we know there are multiple universes) does not make the persons who make this statement atheists. The universes were created from nothing and each of these universes follows it's own natural laws.The claim that God created these universes leads to one fundamental question: who created God? Let me refer to how Hindu theology answers this question. Brahma is the lord of creation and one name of Brahma is Swoyombhu (self created). Very smart. Right?Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 5, 2015, at 6:50 PM, Jiten Roy jnrsr53@yahoo.com [mukto-mona] <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com> wrote:As per second law of thermodynamics, no closed system can survive in the long run. The way I understand the process is - earth unstable at the beginning, meaning it was closed system. As it started to become stable, various compound formation started to occur. So, when environment on earth became conducive to the origination of lives, lives started to form from various sources across the globe. As a result, we see regional similarity in species.This article clearly explains that lives could be created out of earth's conducive environment (mother-nature) alone, which is also the view of many Hindu religious scriptures - all living beings are creations of the mother-nature.Many Hindus consider mother-nature as their God. Tagore did so also. Dr. Das, how can you deny the existence of this God, can you? So, left and right depends on one's perspective.Now, as you know, second law of thermodynamics applies to all systems, including social systems. As you know, Communist social system was a closed system, and that did not last. Radical Islamic systems, such as Taliban and Caliphate, are closed systems, and they will not last also in the long run.Now, I can predict, with certainty, that an open system, such as Capitalist social system, will last to the end. I am not predicting this based on my political economics, I am doing so based on my faith in the second law of thermodynamics.Thanks.Jiten Roy
From: "Kamal Das kamalctgu@gmail.com [mukto-mona]" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, January 4, 2015 8:04 PM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] God is on the ropes:
God hasn't been a creator in many mythologies. He ain't omniscient even in Abrahamic theology, and not omnipotent in any logic. Vital force theory in creating organic molecules fell apart long ago. Dr. Roy, it is interesting to note, is a wacky right when it comes to political economics. But he belongs to wacky left in denying the existence of god.
Sent from my iPad
On Jan 5, 2015, at 3:22 AM, "Sukhamaya Bain subain1@yahoo.com [mukto-mona]" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com> wrote:Interesting phrase, 'humble servants of God'! I wonder who created this phrase. Shouldn't it be "fearful and ignorant servants of the unknown"?SuBain=====================================On Sunday, January 4, 2015 3:29 PM, "Jiten Roy jnrsr53@yahoo.com [mukto-mona]" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
God is on the ropes: The brilliant new science that has creationists and the Christian right terrifiedA young MIT professor is finishing Darwin's task — and threatening to undo everything the wacky right holds dearEnlargeCharles Darwin (Credit: Wikimedia/WDG Photo via Shutterstock/Salon)The Christian right's obsessive hatred of Darwin is a wonder to behold, but it could someday be rivaled by the hatred of someone you've probably never even heard of. Darwin earned their hatred because he explained the evolution of life in a way that doesn't require the hand of God. Darwin didn't exclude God, of course, though many creationists seem incapable of grasping this point. But he didn't require God, either, and that was enough to drive some people mad.
__._,_.___
