The study of analogies (and differences) between the various forms of knowledge and tradition allows the opening of new and interesting horizons – which however must be carefully preserved from the temptation of easy and superficial parallels. Or even worse, from passing fads and attempts to pass off as obvious something that is only a plausible hypotesis.

From a methodological point of view, rigor undoubtedly appears necessary to address a topic of this type. But what type of rigor should we be dealing with? Before addressing this question, let’s see what the subject is about, in its substance.

In this work, together with philosopher Luca Guzzardi, we have explored a general analogy between Modern Physics and Vedic Tradition. In an implicit philosophical framework that we could call the “Unity of Everything” and which essentially implies a vision of reality consisting of a single ontological level[1].

We certainly do not want to imply that a conception of the Vedic type is completely alien to the path of Western philosophy (see for example Schelling’s thought). However, this “Unity” view plays a central and fundamental role – decidedly dominant – mostly in the spiritual and philosophical thought of the Indian East. Where, however, the two aspects, philosophical and spiritual, never appear distinct from each other. The Unity of Everything is a fundamental cornerstone of Vedic Knowledge. “Tat tvam asi”, teaches the Chandogya Upanishad: you are that. You are united with everything else and you are everything.

The central idea of our work is that the process of separation from the One to the multiple world, a cosmic fracture to be recomposed with the Vedic Sacrifice[2], is analogous to the symmetry breaks of the hypothesized unified field of fundamental physics. This series of symmetry breakings occurred during the cosmological expansion of the universe, when, as the average local energy decreased, the primordial unity of forces was spontaneously broken[3].

In essence, fundamental physics (from the scientific side) and Vedic tradition (from the mystical and mythological side) indicate a vision of everything that can be (in philosophical terms) summarized in a One that generates Multiplicity through subsequent differentiations.

To further substantiate this analogical thesis, we have taken into consideration:

• An analogy between the initial cosmological development of matter/antimatter asymmetry and the concept of residue of the Vedic Sacrifice.
• An analogy between the behavior of the hypothesized Inflatonic field in the Cosmology of the very first moments and the role of the Progenitor Prajapati in Vedic Cosmogony.
• An analogy between the Cosmological Constant and (also in this case) the concept of residue of the Vedic Sacrifice.

[1] As opposed to the two-levels traditional Western ontology (metaphysics and becoming).
[2] This interpretation of the Vedic Sacrifice is probably the one having the most important ontological implications.
[3] As explained by modern Particle Physics.
[4] About 10-32 s of cosmic time.

developing the relevant details for each case.

To conclude, let us now reconsider the question of method, our initial problem: how to reconcile the standard rigorous Physics approach with the criterion of truth of a great streak of human spirituality?

The key concept for us is that of analogy in a functional sense. We assert that there is analogy between two concepts belonging to Vedic tradition and modern science if they perform similar “functions” in their respective fields.

For example, the Inflatonic field plays a generating role (of quarks, leptons and energy) in cosmology similar to that of Prajapati which gives birth to the cosmos, producing everything material. And in the process, both the Inflaton and the Vedic God dissolve and die.

The complete article, written in collaboration with Luca Guzzardi, is published in the journal Philosophy and Cosmology and is available online:

M. Giammarchi and L. Guzzardi
Vedic Residue, Cosmic Inflation and a Unified Vision of Everything
Philosophy and Cosmology 31 (2023) 21.
http://ispcjournal.org/31-3/

Autore: Marco Giammarchi