​How do we explain the concept of achintya to scientific people?

So, when you talk about Achimithya, how do we explain this to students who study science and they tend to dismiss such things as illogical? Yeah, actually, I think it's Blaise Pascal who said that a little science takes people away from God, but immersion in science brings people back to God. So what happens? Because people who know a little bit of science, they say, this is scientific and this is unscientific. So, God, God's pastime, all this is unscientific, all these miracles, I don't believe in it.

I reject it as unscientific. But if people go deep into science, then even in science, scientists acknowledge that there are many things which we can't understand. So for example, today in physics, there are two fundamental theories about how physics works or how matter works.

One is called quantum physics and the other is relativity physics. Now actually, according to relativity physics, it's basically that there are different particles existing and particles come together as molecules and that's how the world around us exists. That's basically relativity physics.

But according to quantum physics, there is no such thing as particles, there is simply waves. So for example, there is no such thing as a mic exist. But when I look at the mic, the waves that comprise the mic, they collapse and they give me the perception of a mic.

Now Einstein was a proponent of relativity and he did not like quantum physics at all. So he, one of the most scathing critics of quantum physics was, he said, I would like to believe that the moon continues to exist even when I am not looking at it. So obviously, the moon continues to exist.

Now the quantum physics, if you look at it purely from the point of logic, it just doesn't make sense. And yet quantum physics works. It works phenomenally well.

Now through quantum physics, you know, scientists can actually measure to within a millimeter the distance of some coral reef somewhere far away in the Indian Ocean from America. Just give you an extreme example. The point is mathematically it works very well.

But in terms of making sense, in terms of the way we observe the world, it doesn't make any sense. There is a famous, I think there was a letterman who was a famous quantum physicist, one of his students asked him, sir, how do you, how do you make sense of this? So he said, his reply has become immortal, he says, stop thinking, start calculating. Stop thinking, start calculating.

What it means is, the equations of quantum physics work phenomenally well. But the picture that quantum physics gives of the world, it doesn't make any sense. So to put it in our epistemology, our way of looking at the world, relativity agrees with Prateksha Pramana to a large extent.

Relativity explains the world as we see it. Quantum physics explains the world in terms of theories, in terms of theories which are expressed in the language of mathematics. So it explains the world, you could say, in terms of Hanuman, the speculation, the world is like this, the world is like that.

But it doesn't gel with Prateksha. So currently, how do scientists work? Actually, these two theories are just not reconcilable. They are violently contradictory.

And Stephen Hawking gave his life to trying to come up with a grand theory of everything, GT as it is called. But he gave up. And of course, he masked his abandonment in a very clever statement.

He said, I am happy to announce that humanity's quest for knowledge will never end. This was his way that now, of course, I think the New York Times wrote an article about it. They said, you know, even he gives up.

Even Hawking gives up. But the point is, currently, scientists, they just, they say, most serious scientists, those who are really understanding what theories are, they say science does not tell us anything about reality. Science gives us models of reality.

Now, how those models actually correlate with reality, no one knows. So by a model of reality, what I mean is that it's like a map. I can have a political map of America, which will show the various states, various districts.

And then I can have a topographical map of America, which will show completely different. Here is a mountain, here is a river, here is a creek. So, if you look at it, there might be some broad features which are similar, but many of the specific details will be very different.

Now, both maps are true. And the reality of America is both of this and more. The reality of America, I can't just understand through any one map.

Just as maps give us some understanding of the territory, of the reality. Similarly, science offers us models, which gives us a working understanding of some aspects of reality. And these two are not reconcilable.

And although they are not reconcilable, although quantum physics doesn't make sense in terms of the way we picturize the world, still scientists don't reject quantum physics. And not because quantum physics works very well, but it doesn't gel with relativity. Scientists don't reject relativity also.

So, scientists also learn to live with contradiction. They don't dismiss one as logical and the other as illogical. They say both are true and they both work in different domains.

So, the operating principle of science at present is, whichever theory works, use it. So, especially with respect to cosmic distances, relativity works. That's what they use.

With respect to microscopic measurements, it is quantum physics which works. Now, all this is a very simplified analysis I am giving. But the principle underlying that I am saying is, even those who go deep into science, they acknowledge that even the material world can't be understood exhaustively.

Even while studying the material world and even by studying it with a methodology like science which is inherently skeptical, even with such a methodology, scientists do accept that certain things we can't understand. And because they work, we use it. Similarly, when we come to some statements in scripture or some aspects of scripture, which we can't understand.

So, what we should focus on is, if we consider your scriptural teaching to be like a broad circle, in which we will see if we can divide it into three sectors. One sector is that which is logical. Second is that which seems illogical.

Or rather, we just break it into two sections. One which makes sense according to logic, something which doesn't make sense according to logic. So, the three sections which make sense according to logic, they work, they benefit us, they transform us.

If we chant Hare Krishna, we experience happiness. Our cravings, our addictions, they fall away. We get benefited.

If I have excessive anger, there is no medicine available which I can just drink, take a pill or take a medicine and my anger will go away. But if I chant Hare Krishna, I do get purified of anger. So, we are benefited.

It's a practical benefit that comes for us. So, in general, what we should do is, we focus on the working benefits of practicing Krishna consciousness. And initially, at least, we focus on the operational potency.

At least this aspect of scripture makes sense and this aspect works. And try it out. When people try it out, they get benefited.

Then, their faith increases. They become more open. This is not just a mythology.

Maybe there is some deeper wisdom over here which I don't understand. So, we shouldn't initially present ourselves, present those things which people will find it very difficult to understand. A very nice conversation of Srila Prabhupada.

Once, one devotee asked him, Prabhupada, when we go to the scholars and we tell them that Maharaj Ugrasen had some trillions of servants, they laugh at us. And they say, how could so many people live in Dwarka? Where were their rooms? Where were their toilets? How could they live over there? Now, Prabhupada could have answered in many different ways. Prabhupada could have said, Krishna is achintya and Krishna can maintain an unlimited number of people in Dwarka.

But Prabhupada gave a very pragmatic answer. He said, among all the thousands of verses in the Bhagavatam, was that the only thing that you found to speak to the scholars? Was that the only thing you found to speak to the scholars? Now, it is not that we deny this, but there is a time and place for explaining these things. So, we focus on those things which make sense to people and which can help people to benefit themselves, which help them become better.

And when they see that it works, and it works in a way, it helps them in a way that science cannot help them actually, then they understand that this is also a valuable body of knowledge. This is also a good body of knowledge. Then their initial dismissive skepticism, that decreases.

And then when the difficult sections, the sections of scripture which seem illogical that come up to them, at that time, we can, they will be able to accept that there is something inconceivable also over here. So generally, in our presentations, we should focus on the aspect which makes sense and which practically works to people. And if people ask questions about how to make sense of this thing which seems illogical, then we can tell that this is a deep body of knowledge.

And you can understand this gradually as you keep practicing. And in any body of knowledge, even in science, there are scientists who accept that some things are not understandable to us. So, the problem comes when we present scripture as right and science as wrong.

We do not have to do that. Scripture and science are talking about the same universe but in different ways. So, it is not that quantum physics is right and relativity is wrong.

Just as within science itself, there can be two models of the universe, two models of nature. And both have their own validity. So like that, if scripture tells something which seems difficult for people to understand, this is a different way of looking at the world.

We may not understand it right now, but the scripture helps us to make a better sense of the world as we see it. And it helps us to become better in our life. So, I say that science can make things better.

But spirituality can make people better. Science may provide better gadgets. Now, whether those gadgets are better in the long run, whether they have more ecological harmful consequences, that's a different issue.

But we have to choose our battles when we go to new people. So, if you start telling science itself is bad, then they will get alienated. So, then you can say, okay, science can make things better.

To some extent, it can. Many diseases have been cured. There is no need to fight a war on all fronts at the same time.

Science can make things better. But spirituality can make people better. Our own negativity, our own anger, our own unwarranted or addictive cravings, they all can be cured by spiritual practice.

And that way, by not highlighting difficult to accept sanctions, and by focusing on sections which help people, then they can develop faith and by that they can move onwards towards Krishna. Bhaktivinoda Thakur uses this approach while talking about Chaitanya Mahaprabhu's divinity. He has written a book about the life and teachings of Lord Chaitanya.

And he says in the beginning, as far as the Vaishnavas are concerned, they accept that Chaitanya Mahaprabhu is God. He is Vishnu himself. And for them, the many miracles that Chaitanya Mahaprabhu performed, they are the proof of his divinity.

But we acknowledge that miracles alone are not the proof of divinity. Because even demons like Ravana perform miracles like changing his form. So, the essence is that Chaitanya Mahaprabhu has given a path of love.

And by practicing this path, by applying this message of spiritual love, of divine love, of bhakti, our heart can become flooded with love. And irrespective of the question of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu's divinity, we urge our readers to study this message of love and flood their hearts with the love that Chaitanya Mahaprabhu has come to offer. It's a very broad approach.

He is not denying Chaitanya Mahaprabhu's divinity. He is accepting it, but he is not imposing it. He is saying this is what works.

If you chant Hare Krishna and practice bhakti yoga, you will experience love of Krishna. And then when that happens, the many other questions, they get automatically answered or they become irrelevant. So like that, what people have difficulty in accepting, we downplay that.

We don't emphasize that in their face initially. We focus on that which helps them benefit and that builds their faith. And then eventually, they will be able to address the other questions also.

Does that answer your question? Thank you very much.