Stephen Hawking - How would he react to Hinduism?
He has spoken again from the other side claiming there is no afterlife and no God. He is complaining against the Christian viewpoint that is fixated on a divine personality that rules every aspect of life. And also creationism. I wonder what he would have said if he was exposed to the Hindu philosophy.
The Hindus knew about the universe, infinite such universes, the round earth, planets and their movement, the concept of time and its vastness, mathematics and allied sciences, chemical processes, medicine and surgery; that were all based on firm natural laws. Hinduism talks of the universe (Brahmanda) and also the atom (Pinda) and concludes, the macrocosm (universe) is reflected in the microcosm (atom).
It also says that universal forces that operate outside are reflected in the internal working of all beings; the perfect reflection being in the human being. The Hindu concept of creation centers around the Samkhya philosophy that says life emanated from two energy fields; one static (Shiva) and one dynamic (Prakruti). The dynamic in itself emerged from the static. Each is dependent on the other for maintaining homeostasis. Shiva if left alone would descend into nothingness. Prakruti if left alone would degenerate into chaos.
Everywhere in the Hindu panatheon we notice a circular form of energy whirling around a vortex that creates, energizes, maintains and again destroys. The processes are named Gods. Brahma, Vishnu, Shiva and Kali. They can remain at the invisible energy level and can also take on bodies.
In the scriptures we notice what can be termed teleportation as beings from several worlds manifest on earth mostly to deliver knowledge and to maintain balance in times of extreme chaos. In all the scriptures we notice logic and science in systems and procedures. They are experiments inviting the eligible. You can participate in the play to emerge as an all powerful force (and embrace instability in the process) or develop dispassion and rest in the blissful essence.
All realized souls say the same thing; there is a substratum that is always existing (Sat) all knowing (Chid) and blissfull (Ananda). It is the screen on which the phenomenal universe is played out even as it remains entirely unaffected by it. In essence that substratum is our real nature. An illusionary force called Maya evokes the ego (a false separate identification) and the dependent mind to conjure this world. We emerge from that essence with a physical and a seemingly separate spiritual identity to participate in the world in cycles of birth and death till the essence rises within us to destroy the illusion and be relieved of the cyclical existence.
Why this rigmarole? There is no explanation. It is again called a play that the substratum indulges in when it feels the need. From where does that need come to one who has no need? There is no explanation.