Guest guest Posted July 8, 2005 Report Share Posted July 8, 2005 Dear Giri-Nayaka Prabhu Hare Krishna! Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada! >You are opening a whole new point of view here. I see, my problem was, that >I accepted explanations of Sadaputa prabhu for bonfide as by definition. I >never considered, that he may be wrong, since I had faith, that he knows >what he is talking about. This is certainly a problem. We can not blindly accept. Of course if you blindly accept Srila Prabhupada there is no problem. It is proven far beyond any question of doubt that Srila Prabhupada is a pure devotee of Krishna and if we simply accept everything he says as the absolute truth we will not go wrong. However if we transfer the same absolute faith to some other devotee and that devotee turns out not to be on the highest transcendental platform that can be very dangerous for our spiritual advancement. In Hari-Bhakti Vilasa it is recommended that before accepting a spiritual master he should live with him and serve him and enquire from him with the object of testing him to see if he can actually deliver us from the cycle of birth and death. We know Krishna tells us tad viddhi pranipatena pariprasnena sevaya upadeksyanti te jnanam jannainas tattva darsinah. Just try to learn the truth by approaching a spiritual master, render service unto him, enquire from him submissively, such a self realized soul can give you real knowledge because he has seen the truth. The key here is that the spiritual master must be a self realized soul who has seen the truth. Otherwise, if he has not seen the truth himself, how can he teach the truth to us? So knowingly or unknowingly you have accepted Sadaputa Prabhu as your spiritual master. You have accepted his words on the same absolute platform as Srila Prabhupada's words. But you do not really know if Sadaputa is a self-realized soul who has seen the truth. >Although you plainly reduce authority of Sadaputa Prabhu, I hope you can >understand if I take some time before doing the same. I will try to gather >some more opinions, maybe some explanation pops out, which will prove, that >Srila Prabhupada is correct, but also that Sadaputa prabhu is correct. I >believe there may be some explanation lie this, I will try to find it. It is quite well known in ISKCON that Sadaputa Prabhu is siding with the scientists. Danavir Maharaja has even published a big, big book on this subject challenging Sadaputa's most recent cosmology book. It is called Vedic Cosmology and you can get it at http://www.thekrishnastore.com/Detail.bok?no=1807 In this book Maharaja shows very clearly how Sadaputa is deviating from the teachings of Srila Prabhupada in so many ways and siding with the scientists. You have somehow accepted Sadaputa as your guru without going through the system of checks and balances, and you are instructing the people who come to you with the teachings of Sadaputa. The checks to see if a guru is bona fide are 3. Guru-sadhu-sastra. He must preach in line with his guru, he must preach from the sastra and his teachings must be in line with the recognized and approved sadhus. Otherwise he is not a guru. >I can only agree with your observation of hopeless situation, in which >academics are, due to their huge false ego. False ego is of course the symptom of the bodily concept of life. Really that is what it means. Ego means self so false ego means a false understanding of the self, or understanding the self to be the body. So ultimately you are right, the scientists are in a hopeless situation due to their false ego. But the main point is all conditioned souls have 4 defects. We make mistakes, cheat, have imperfect senses and are illusioned. So these 4 imperfections render all knowledge coming from "scientific research" practically useless. That is the real point. There are 2 ways of receiving knowledge. One is the ascending process. That is the "scientific process" of observation and experimentation. But we do not accept that process as being a valid way of receiving knowledge because of the aforementioned 4 defects. The other process is the descending process. That is to receive knowledge from an authority. And that is a perfect process, if you can find a perfect authority. The whole basis of Krishna consciousness is to receive perfect knowledge from a perfect authority. That is getting knowledge from the descending process, not the ascending process. This idea that we can not understand the world around us and the universe and how things are working on our own strength by scientific research but rather if we want real knowledge about these things we have to hear it from someone who knows is not very attractive to scientists who have dedicated their whole lives to and who have become completely captivated by the "scientific process" of observation and experimentation. So the bigger picture here is not really about the moon at all. It is if we should accept knowledge gained by the ascending process or knowledge gained by the descending process. Prabhupada's strong condemnation of scientists is based on the fact that the "scientific process" is fundamentally flawed. One can never get perfect knowledge through the "scientific process" because of the 4 defects in all conditioned souls, the tendency to cheat, imperfect senses, mistakes and illusion. It is our desire to establish in the world an understanding that if one wants real knowledge he has to get it from someone who knows. Through the descending process. We can not even understand material things by the ascending process, what to speak of spiritual subject matters. >1. If Sadaputa Prabhu is wrong, then how to understand properly his work, >and how to see his endeavors to be connected to Srila Prabhupada? Sadaputa Prabhu has done a great deal of valuable work and research and so much service for Srila Prabhupada. But the reality is that things change. We can be Krishna conscious one day and in maya the next. We all have that independence. We can choose to serve Krishna or we can choose to serve maya. So because we may do some very nice sincere service for Srila Prabhupada does not mean that automatically everything we do forever will also automatically be on the same transcendental platform. You cannot blindly accept, you have to test, and that is what Danavir Maharaja has done in his book and Sadaputa's most recent cosmology book certainly fails that test in so many ways. >2. You condemn the scientists understanding, but how to understand the view >of Surya Siddhanta, which agrees with observations of scientists. Surya >Siddhanta was taken seriously both by Srila Prabhupada, and of course by >Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura, who took his time to translate it to >bengali and for that received title Siddhanta Saraswati. Before becoming "Bhaktsiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura" he was knowen as Bimal Prasada datta. And he was a great scholar and astronomer/astrologer. Prabhupada has described that every type of philosophy is there in India. Even atheism is there, the leader of the atheists is Chavaka Muni who said: Rnam krtva... Somehow get money, buy ghee and enjoy. Similarly all astrological knowledge is there in India, so the Western astronomical model is also present in India. Exactly what the Suriya Siddhanta says we really do not know. When people translate something with a certain object in mind they find what they want to say and present that quote. It is one of the four defects mentioned before, the tendency to cheat. I can not speak authoratively on what is in the Suriya Siddhanta except that it is a translation of a much older Indian astrological/astronomical text. I can let you know one thing however. I have discussed these issues with western astronomers in great detail and any thoughtful western astronomer will agree that they really have no idea how the universe is working. What they have is a "predictive model." That means they have observed what is going on in the sky and made some hypothesis, which really means "educated guess" as to what is going on. Then they make predictions of what will happen in the sky according to their hypothesis and then test to see if that is actually what is happening. In this way they have come up with a predictive model which fairly accurately predicts what we see happening in the sky. And they have speculated things like gravity causes heavenly bodies to rotate around other heaver things in space. They have speculated that the earth and all other planets are rotating around the sun. And they have discovered this does not match the observations if the orbits are circular, so they have made the orbits oblongs. That means the earth is sometimes closer to the sun and sometimes farther away, etc. But if analyzed minutely there are many, many problems with their model. As I was saying if you approach a thoughtful astronomer he will agree that all he has is a predictive model. All he knows is that by relying on the educated guesses the model is based on they can predict and explain to a certain degree of accuracy the position of the heavenly bodies at a particular point in time. And as far as the Suriya siddhanta is concerned, that was mainly used by astrologers, astronomy and astrology were one in India and astronomy was to accurately determine the positions of the planets and constellations for the purpose of making astrological charts. So they need a predictive model. If it predicts the positions of the heavenly bodies that is fine, it serves their purpose. The Suriya siddhanta is not based on the Bhagavata astronomy. It comes from a book from an even earlier Indian astronomer. I am not very knowledgeable on these things. You could do some research and let me know. But the Bhagavatam is different. It is not a predictive model. The Bhagavatam is spoken by Sukadeva Goswami who has heard it from his father Vyasadeva who has heard it from Narada Muni, who has heard it from his father Lord Brahma who created the universe!!! So if you have information directly from the creator of the universe who built everything and who, sitting on his lotus flower seat, can see the whole universe and who knows EXACTLY how it is working, and you have information from one of our "frog in the well" scientists who has no means of seeing more than what he can see out of the top of his 3 foot well, who would you take more seriously? So the point is we have the prefect knowledge of the universe in the Bhagavatam. It does not agree with the ideas of modern science. Prabhupada has declared that the scientists are fools and rascals and that their "scientific process" is fundamentally flawed and useless. So if we are followers of Srila Prabhupada we have to accept this and instead of turning to science and mental speculation and intellectual juggling to try and discover the answers by the ascending process on our own strength, we can simply surrender to Srila Prabhupada, surrender to Krishna, and hear from a perfect authority. The knowledge will be revealed to us by Krishna from within our hearts. That is the only way we will understand it. These things are all avan manasa gochara, beyond the power of our mind to conceive and beyond the ability of our senses to perceive. If we want the real knowledge we have to find a perfect authority and hear from him... Chant Hare Krishna and be happy! Your servant Madhudvisa dasa Giri-nayaka (das) BVS (Ljubljana - SLO) [Giri-nayaka.BVS (AT) pamho (DOT) net] Friday, July 08, 2005 3:26 AM Balarama LOK; Madhudvisa (das) (ITV Los Angeles, CA - US); Understanding Srila Prabhupada's Teachings The Sun Is Closer Than The Moon Dear Madhudvisa prabhu. Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada! Thank you for your reply. > It is a touchy subject. And you have admitted that you did not have a good > answer to it, except Sadaputa Prabhu's answer, which you quoted here. But > his answer is the Moon is closer than the Sun and Prabhupada was therefore > mistaken. Apparently Prabhupada does not understand the Bhagavatam as well > as Sadaputa does. We still come to the same conclusion. You are opening a whole new point of view here. I see, my problem was, that I accepted explanations of Sadaputa prabhu for bonfide as by definition. I never considered, that he may be wrong, since I had faith, that he knows what he is talking about. Although you plainly reduce authority of Sadaputa Prabhu, I hope you can understand if I take some time before doing the same. I will try to gather some more opinions, maybe some explanation pops out, which will prove, that Srila Prabhupada is correct, but also that Sadaputa prabhu is correct. I believe there may be some explanation lie this, I will try to find it. > > And you state that: "I was able to tell him that Prabhupada was probably > not concerned with distances, since his main point was they never went to > the moon." But that is your mental speculation. It is not even what > Sadaputa says, not to speak of what Prabhupada says. Yes, of course it is my mental speculation. It is my humble attempt to put together both statements. I'm aware that my speculations are useless. Thats why I was asking arround if somebody else has a good explanation of that. Of course what Srila Prabhupada says is correct by definition, but I also hope to find solution, which will not render Sadaputa Prabhu's work as totally useless. > > So they are fools and rascals and we should not forget that. I can only agree with your observation of hopeless situation, in which academics are, due to their huge false ego. > > Please forgive me for going off on a tangent here but there is a bigger > picture and I hope you can see that. If you start by saying Prabhupada is > wrong and Sadaputa has a better explanation of the Bhagavatam then you > have short-circuited everything. No one is going to become Krishna > conscious by reading Sadaputa's books. But everyone who reads Prabhupada's > books will ultimately become Krishna conscious, even Sadaputa. But right > now he is on the side of the scientists, not on the side of Prabhupada. > And we have to be careful like that. Maya can be very tricky. Thank you for your understanding. But your answer opens another point. I think you may want to provide answer to the following two points. 1. If Sadaputa Prabhu is wrong, then how to understand properly his work, and how to see his endeavors to be connected to Srila Prabhupada? 2. You condemn the scientists understanding, but how to understand the view of Surya Siddhanta, which agrees with observations of scientists. Surya Siddhanta was taken seriously both by Srila Prabhupada, and of course by Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura, who took his time to translate it to bengali and for that received title Siddhanta Saraswati. I suggest that there are two ways to look at the moon and sun, same as two ways to look at the earth. 1. There is Surya Siddhanta moon and earth, and their position is described similarly to observation of modern scientists, namely that moon is smaller and closer to earth. 2. There is Srimad-bhagavatam version of Moon and Earth, namely that bigger Moon (Candraloka) is further away from the Earth (Bhu-mandala) than the smaller Sun (Suryaloka). This are both shastric statements, and we consider them bonadife, because Srila Prabhupada considered them bonafide. So, we can understand Srila Prabhupada, that although they cannot go to the Moon (Candraloka), they may go to the moon (dust planet), which is useless, because it is full of dust and stones. But they cannot go to Candraloka. And we could say, that just to make impossibility of travel to Candraloka clear to western brain, he proposed that it is too far away to reach there in 4 days. But the real point is not that the moon is exactly 95.000.000 miles away. The point is that Candraloka is OUT OF REACH, and cannot be reached by any mechanical means, because it is heavenly planet. We can say, that Sadaputa prabhu in representing scientists, but we may want to be a bit careful not to jump to conclusions to soon. I will try to gather more opinions on that. > > Hope you are well. Chant Hare Krishna and be happy! > > Your servant > > Madhudvisa dasa > > > > Giri-nayaka (das) BVS (Ljubljana - SLO) > [Giri-nayaka.BVS (AT) pamho (DOT) net] > Thursday, July 07, 2005 2:04 PM > Balarama LOK; Madhudvisa (das) (ITV Los Angeles, CA - US); > Understanding Srila Prabhupada's Teachings > The Sun Is Closer Than The Moon > > > Dear Madhudvisa Prabhu. > Pamho. AgtSP. > > At first it seems as a touchy subject, I know. But, please don't think, > that I'm trying to undermine Srila prabhupadas authority or something like > that. Not at all. Quite the opposite. Like I said, this question was > posted by another devotee (please see it in recent posting by Caitanya > Candrodaya Prabhu), and I had no really good answer to it, besides that of > Sadaputa Prabhu, which I quoted also here. And I was also able to tell > him, that Srila Prabhupada was probably not so concerned about distances, > since his main point was, that they never went to the moon. > > > > > There is no question. Prabhupada has let us know for sure on many > > occasions that the Moon is further away than the Sun. And it is > > described like that in the Bhagavatam also. That the Moon is much bigger > > than the Sun. But the Moon and the Sun appear to be the same size to us. > > So if we accept the Bhagavatam's description of the relative sizes of > > the Moon and Sun the Moon has to be further away. > > As explained by Sadaputa Prabhu, Bhagavatam says that moon is closer to > Bharata Varsa than the sun. That is also supported by other sastra. Now, > Sadaputa Prabhu may be wrong, but his points seem clear and > understandable. > > It is true, that acording to SB the Sun is closer to Bhu-mandala (larger > earth). But at the same time, it is further away from Jambudvipa and > Bharata Varsa (which is our earth). So, both is true. There is just one > slight disagreement in numbers, and it is a bit hard to grasp. It took me > some time to figure out what the other devotee is actually speaking about. > I needed to use some calculator and paper. And, of course, while not > understanding his point, I blasted him away several times for his "wrong" > opinion. > > BTW. > ============ > Prabhupada: It does not look bigger than the sun. May be bigger. Hare > Krsna. [break] > > >>> Ref. VedaBase => Morning Walk -- November 29, 1975, Delhi > ============ > > > > In this text you are saying, more or less, "What Prabhupada says in the > > Bhagavatam seems to be wrong, here is my explanation, it is better." > > No, not really. Why would I say anything like that. I'm just saying that > it is not clear to me, why would Srila Prabhupada present the point > numerically different than in sastra. It is not a challenging point, > please don't jump to conclusions too soon. I reacted similarly to this > question, as it was raised in "Understanding Srila Prabhupada's Teachings" > conference. I said exactly the same points, as you did. Prabhupada is > talking truth. > > It is just what is the truth? Is the truth in numbers or are numbers used > to support higher truth? I picked up calculator and added numbers in > Srimad Bhagavatam, to see where discrepancy is. You can do the same, if > you want. > > Sadaputa prabhu also recognized this apparent contradiction in Srila > Prabhupadas words. He comments, that SP is simply making the point that if > you put together the Bhagavatam and modern astronomy you get a > contradictory picture. > > Again, acording to SB, it can be viewed both ways. Both that the sun is > closer, or that the moon is closer, depending of what you consider as > earth. One earth is Bhu-mandala, and another earth is Bharata Varsa, part > od Jambudvipa, central island of Bhu Mandala. > > > > > There is something very seriously wrong with this. The words of the pure > > devotee of Krishna are correct. We may not realize how they are correct. > > But we have to accept that we are conditioned. We have imperfect senses, > > we make mistakes, we are illusioned and we cheat. These faults all > > conditioned souls, including the scientists, have. > > It is wrong, of course, the way you present it. But that is not what I'm > aiming at, I assure you. I thought I was clear im my letter about my > intention. Let me repeat my intention again, just to be clear. I noted > this apparent discrepancy, and found explanation of Sadaputa Prabhu for > it. From my experience I know, that usually there is more than one of such > explanations. Different devotees give us more ways how to understand Srila > Prabhupada in a better way. My question was like this: "Is this how we > answer to people when they ask us, or maybe there are some other ways to > look at this subject matter." So, I just wanted to know if explanation of > Sadaputa Prabhu is "bonafide" and the only accepted in ISKCON, or maybe > there is another explanation to it. > > > > > The great benefit of receiving knowledge from Srila Prabhupada is it is > > perfect and not flawed because of these four defects found in all > > conditioned souls. > > Thank you for pointing this out. I was not going in this direction in any > way, not even by far. Srila Prabhupada is right by definition, we all know > that. But sometimes we don't understand some points well enough. And > usually there are several ways how to understand some "contradictory" > points. In this subject (moon) I was able to find only one explanation of > Sadaputa Prabhu. I was just wondering if this is the only way to see it, > or is there another way. Usually there is more than one way to see > so-called "contradictory" points. > > > > > So we may not understand exactly how what Srila Prabhupada is saying is > > correct. But we understand it is correct. And if we surrender and serve > > Srila Prabhupada then the knowledge and realization of the knowledge > > will come to us. > > Yes, Srila Prabhupada is correct. There is of course no doubt about it. My > letter is just a humble attempt to know, if there is another explanation > on this subject besides that of Sadaputa Prabhu. > > > > > But if we start off with the presumption that we have a greater ability > > to understand the Srimad-Bhagavatam than Srila Prabhupada we are in real > > trouble. > > Please, why would I do that? Interestingly, I reacted very similarly at > first to the same questions put forward by another devotee. If you would > like to see my replies, you can read them in "Understanding Srila > Prabhupada's Teachings" conference. Now I know that I just didn't read > another devotees letter carefully enough, and just unfairly attacked him > for his "lack of faith". It was wrong from my side and now I'm just > getting back what I deserve. I was jumping to conclusions abouth his faith > in Srila Prabhupada too quickly, and now the same thing is happening to > me. It is the mercy of devotees, and my great fortune, to be able to be > guided in my attempts to serve Srila Prabhupada in his mission. > > Thank you > > your servant Giri-nayaka das Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.