: |

:
|| 29||

hcharya-vat pahyati kahchid enan

hcharya-vad vadati tathaiva chnya
hcharya-vach chainam anya hioti
hrutvpyena veda na chaiva kahchit

TRANSLATION

carya-vatas amazing
payatisee
kachitsomeone
enamthis soul;
carya-vatas amazing
vadatispeak of
taththus
evaindeed
caand
anyaother
carya-vatsimilarly amazing
caalso
enamthis soul
anyaothers
iotihear
rutvhaving heard;
apieven;
enamthis soul
vedaunderstand
nanot
caand
evaeven
kachitsome

MEANING
Some looks upon the self (atma) as a wonder,
Some speaks of it as a wonder,
and some hear of it as a wonder,
while others, even on hearing, about this (self), does not understand it at all.

EXPLANATION

A Classic argument for this verse, I think is the science.

Before we go into that argument. Lets look at the means of knowing the self.

In Indian Philosophy, sruti or upanishad is a means of knowledge or pramana to know

oneself. Upanisad is an independent means of knowledge. Why? It is capable of
revealing a given topic without being dependent upon any other or means of
knowledge. The sruti means that which was heard - knowledge which was heard by
revelation. They were believed to have been originally heard by the Vedic seers who
then transmitted it to their successors and pioneered a tradition that continued for
several generations. Upanishads are used as verbal testimony (sabda pramana) to
establish truths that cannot be easily ascertained with the help of the senses, the mind
or human intelligence.

The Upanishads can never be scientific. If knowledge of something is scientific, it

should be available for your demonstration, perception, inference and presumption.
Upanishad is not available for any other means of knowledge. It is exclusive in its
subject matter.

That being the case, I dont understand why some has the pressure in equating the
upanisad with science. Emphasising it by saying Upanishad is very scientific. When
you say Upanishad is very scientific, you are actually saying science has proved and
explained the self. And now Upanishads are actually saying the same thing or just re-
iterate the fact. Which is totally not true.

The subject matter of the Upanishad is truth of oneself. This has been explained some
1500 BCE. But science is still analysing this topic till todate. So how could anyone say
veda is very scientific?

The carya or wonder is even though the truth of oneself has been said in the
Upanishads many many years back, still it is not understood or agreed by many. Be
it western philosophers or science.
Recently, I came across an article which reads as Scientists Found That The Soul
Doesnt Die It Goes Back To The Universe. This is a very interesting and happy
news to me at least.

It shows - it is not a wonder anymore if science really have accept that the soul atma,
doesnt die. Accepting the Upanishads revelation. Therefore, if anyone has the
presume in bringing science into Veda. Now, he should say Science is very vedic
with reference to knowledge of oneself.

The Theory was recently outlined on The Science Channels ongoing documentary show
Through the Wormhole, the which Dr Hameroffs word apparently suggest that human
souls are much more than mere interactions of neurons in the brain. In fact, this
theory indicates that these souls could have been existed since the very beginning
of time itself.

With all these discoveries and explanation, if one still does not understand the
existence of the soul atma, it is wonder, carya.