Why the science is silent about the unimaginable, Only the existence of God is acceptable and explicable Options

[antonyanil]

Why the science is silent about the unimaginable
Only the existence of God is acceptable and explicable

The silence of science about the unimaginable God is mis-understood as the negation. Similarly, the silence of Buddha about the unimaginable God was mistaken as negation of God. By this, both Buddha and science were treated as the sources of atheism. Silence does not mean negation of unimaginable entity. Even the authority of theism, the Veda, says that the best expression of God is silence. Even Shankara clearly stated that the absolute God (Parabrahman) is always expressed by silence. Shankara debated with the followers of Buddha only on this point and proved that silence is not the indication of negation of God. Silence is only the acceptance of existence of unimaginable God.

You must say that the unimaginable God exists. You are authorized only up to this single point. The Veda says that only the existence of God is acceptable and explicable (Astityeva…). Regarding the further information of God, silence is to be adopted. The acceptance of existence of unimaginable God is based on the exhibition of unimaginable events called as miracles. The multiplicity in the unimaginable events is not the multiplicity in the unimaginable item. There is only one unimaginable item called as God. He is establishing the existence of the unimaginable item on several occasions using several imaginable materials. Therefore, the multiplicity is only in the occasions and in the imaginable materials and it is not in the final conclusion, which is the existence of single unimaginable item. Already, we have established that there cannot be multiplicity in the unimaginable item.
www.universal-spirituality.org
Universal Spirituality for World Peace

[Jakare]

Does a bird making a nest use science?

Good point but a bird doesn´t need to study to do so.

Thales of Miletus is thought to be the first scientist because he tried to explain the world without invoking gods. This train of thought has prove itself most useful.

Science just try to escape from superstition which is the source of irrational fear, violence and most evil things happening in the world.

[PANCHO]

Science just try to escape from superstition which is the source of irrational fear, violence and most evil things happening in the world.

I agree that science tries to be objective. Objectivity has its limitations and weaknesses. Can one be objective about the subjective? Are wishes subjective? Are feelings subjective?