Guest guest Posted June 29, 2005 Report Share Posted June 29, 2005 > > I'm not so sure what to say. Some have a funny idea on what means > > "to know". No offence at all. If someone is illiterate does it > > means he is covered by maya (whatever kind)? > > good point. If there is paramahamsa, but illiterate, does that mean, > that he is covered? And if devoteed doesn't know, how exactly > computer is working, that means, that he is covered in some way too? > I don't think so. A story I remember told about early day. Prabhupada knew classical English very well. However when devotees / especially in the first few months/ were coming forward to ask questions in the exactly the same way they would talk to anyone else there were some misunderstandings. So they would add at the end "you know?". As usual... "I was wondering why Krsna is blue, you know?" Or anything and then "you know". ]Its still common way of putting any question or even a statement. especially among the native speakers of the Eastcoast US and from Ireland.] So when someone would say: Swamiji, Im gonna come to d'lecture 'day, you know. So Prabhupada used to raise his voice and say "I know!". --- On the other note. I really need to know other people views on the Rahu/Moon (a preaching project). Can anyone help? The question is below: > Consider the 3 quotes from Prabhupada: > > 1 Prabhupada wrote: > "asura's decapitated head chasing after Candraloka is explained > allegorically" > (Letter 72-11-07) > > 2 He also said to Swarupa damodara: > "For example, when the Rahu planet passes before the sun and moon, there > is an eclipse. But the scientists describe an eclipse differently. > Actually, the Rahu planet causes an eclipse. " > > > 3 Srimad Bhagavatam 4.29.69: > Krsna consciousness means constantly associating with the Supreme > Personality of Godhead ****in such a mental state that the devotee can > observe the cosmic manifestation exactly as the Supreme Personality of > Godhead does****. Such observation is not always possible, but it > becomes manifest exactly like the dark planet known as Rahu, which is > observed in the presence of the full moon. > > Could you please share your thoughts on some statements *below* using > say different perspectives or models (surya > siddhanta/puranic/bhagavatam/modern phisics): > > Rahu is a planet (loka) > > Rahu is a graha not a planet but is called planet sometimes > > Rahu is both graha planet and living entity > > Rahu demon/Chandra pastime to be taken allegorically or both > allegorically, factually, astrologically and should be confirmed by > modern science (ie senses and extended senses). > > > === > 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.