What is the evidence that you are a scientist?

First you must be aware of the definition of science. Science is defined as finding out the truth through logical analysis of perceived objects and phenomena relating those objects. Objects and their phenomena are called as systems, which must have defined boundaries taken for the study. There can be no philosophy without science. In philosophy the ultimate goal is to find the truth. In such investigation logical analysis must be adopted. Such analysis should not be mere feats of theoretical assumptions and imaginations of the brain. The analysis must be based on the experience of the objects and their phenomena. No philosopher speaks philosophy leaving this basis. That is the reason why the word philosophy is introduced as a common word in the highest degree Ph.D. of every subject.

God is beyond this creation and cannot be experienced directly. I am not speaking about such original nature of God because it cannot be experienced directly. God gives His experience through an object, which acts as a medium. Once a medium transfers the experience of God, you can call that object as God or we can say that God is in that object or we can say that the power of God has entered the object. In any case the object gives the experience of God and can be treated as God or a representative of God. The electric power comes from a battery. We say that the source of the power is the battery and we write the word power on it. The best medium for human beings to perceive God is the human incarnation because in this form, God directly answers our questions. Even if you treat that human being as a messenger of God, it is only God who answers our questions through the human being. The questions related to God cannot be answered by anybody who is not God. Some people may be able to answer to some extent but God alone can answer to the full extent. All the human incarnations have answered all the questions in all the times about God. God has answered through them. You must give an equal chance to God to argue His own case. He does not need any human being as an advocate.

All the previous spiritual preachers preached about God in a systematic and scientific way. The human incarnations performed miracles to show that this entire universe is only the imagination of God. You can create any object, change one object into another, make an object disappear or do anything as you like only in the case of your imaginary world. A real entity cannot do all this with another equally real entity. You cannot call miracles as some magic. You may achieve the same result through magic but the path of achieving the same result need not be the only path. For example the human incarnation may create some sacred ash from His hand. You may also create the same ash from your hand by hiding the wet powder of sodium chloride in the grooves of your hand. The final product is one and the same. But the paths are different. You should not argue that your path is the only true path. The same sodium chloride can be prepared through several chemical reactions using different materials. Since the final product is the same, you should not argue that all the initial materials and paths are one and the same. You should also not argue that the materials and the reaction path, which you have followed to produce sodium chloride is the only true path and those are the only true materials.

If you see the history of science the indivisible atom has become divisible and now the subatomic particles are also divisible as composites of quarks. The science of yesterday is thrown out by the science of today. You must sincerely find out the path in which that sacred ash was produced. Instead of that you are scolding and condemning that path. If a villager condemns your science, you will laugh at him. Similarly the human incarnation will laugh at you if you blindly condemn miracles. Sincere scientists have approached human incarnation and tried to observe the materialization at will very closely to find out the truth. Since there is no alternative to disprove it, they have agreed that the materialization by will is a true concept. Why are you limiting yourself only to certain concepts and discarding the existence of concepts out of your boundaries? If you accept all the concepts proved by logical analysis and experience, then everything is science. You are limiting yourself by calling your village as the entire earth. The analysis of miracles is experimental science, and is the most important essence of science.

The ancient preachers preached based on the science developed up to that day. For example in ancient Indian logic it is said that space or vacuum has sound as its characteristic (Sabda Gunakamaakasam). But sound does not pass through vacuum. We need not feel shy to discard that old concept. In religion we accept that old is gold and all that is new is wrong. The scientist speaks the reverse of this. Both are extremists. Spirituality or philosophy examines both and takes the truth from both and rejects the false from both. The modern science can discard the old science because both are related to the concepts of the items existing in the creation. We should not feel sorry about it because we are only bothered about the truth, whether it is old or modern. But science, which is the study of creation, cannot discard the Creator, who is beyond this creation.

The Creator is neither any item of the creation nor the sum total of all the items in creation. The Creator, being beyond the four-dimensional space and time, becomes unimaginable and so wishes to give His experience to His believers through the objects, which are within the realm of space and time. This gives the experience of the unimaginable, which is yet not imagined. The existence of unimaginable God is proved and it does not mean that the unimaginable should become imaginable. How do you accept the unimaginable infinity, which has unimaginable boundaries? Since the boundaries of this infinite universe cannot be imagined, can you say that the universe does not exist?

Therefore, throughout My knowledge, science, which is defined as above, exists like the gold in a golden ornament. I have also dealt with the latest theories of science separately to include them in the spiritual knowledge. I have given an equal status to science as every religion. Please go through all those topics patiently and don’t be hasty in your conclusions. Can you give Me any specific statement from My knowledge, which is not scientific? Your remark is very general without any specific example.