moon

[Guest guest]

> > Dear Madhu Gopal Prabhuji,

> > Please accept my humble obeisances, all Glories to Srila

> > Prabhupada.

> > >

> > > Thank you for your intteligently written letter. I must admit,

> > --

> > > For now I refrain from commenting on your wonderfull qoutes

> > > concerning Rahu, since I prefer, for sake of simpicity (let`s

> > > keep it simple), to focus on the moon subject. If you insist

> > > though, I will be glad to comment anyway.

> >

> > Yes. For the sake of THIS discussion please comment on ****

> > selected below. Please.

> >

> > > 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.****

 

> He does not adress the fact that Mother Yasoda is

> seeing the universe. He goes on the help us to explain how we can get

> out of this hell hole. To me it seems abvious that although Mother

> Yasoda sees the whole cosmic manifestation, she might not know how

> far away the moon is from the earth.

 

 

Dear Madhu Gopal Prabhuji

 

Here is my take on it.

 

As the saying goes, 'having started on the dance it is no use to draw

close the veil.'

 

An English king introduced the unit of measurement, yard. William of

Malmsebury wrote -- yard was the "measure of his (the king's) own arm,"

So (our example) Henry wanted to have everything in this world to be

measured by his own measurements. "Imperial" units.

 

We are also used to the idea of measuring "universally" the Universe

using our own limited "selves" as a unit. (That will remain your

perspective and I don't expect you to change it just by reading this

text.)

 

This world is relative and that also means there is birth and death. The

death is nothing but our payback time for the fact that we belong to

this world and measure it by our "own arms". If only we were to measure

it with Gods measurements we would not have to be subjected to birth and

death as well as see the Universe as His own, the virat-rupa form.

 

Keeping in mind that ultimate approximation which is considerable if you

ask me I will try to explain the issue of Rahu and its relationship with

Moon and Sun.

 

Of course there is also a perspective of modern science (Decarts model)

or a universally measurable space that is but an abstraction of

"self-centered" model, that was interestingly resulting from more modern

theological concepts after Reformation.

 

As I have said there are different models and principles of methodology

which not specific to the area of cosmology, but also to spirituality.

Not only they are different, but even if applied to cosmology produce

different perspectives and even measurements.

 

To someone who is trained or otherwise fixed in "self-centered" paradigm

and is not ready to paradigm shift an allegorical explanation of the

scriptures dealing with Vedic cosmogony is often recommended. Some

aspects of Bhagavatam can be explained as allegory thus "self-centered"

intellect is not offended by acceptance of unconceivable, achintya.

 

On the other hand it is not the purpose of Bhagavatam. Purpose of

Bhagavatam is to actually achieve Kingdom of God. So obviously humility

will be required and that will include acceptance of the authority of

the knowledge coming from Bhagavatam itself over the authority of the

senses or ones self-centered concepts.

 

The Bhagavatam refers to the sun, the moon, and the planet Rahu, as

persons. 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." Everything - the

Earth, the moon, the stars, the planets - has a personal conception. In

the background of what we can perceive with our dull senses, everything

that is said to be matter, there must be a personal conception. There

are so many statements on the cosmology of the universe in the

scriptures. The spiritually developed men of former times, used to see

everything as consciousness. They saw that the shadow is also conscious.

The shadow, abhasa, is also considered to be a stage of consciousness.

Only through that shadowy stage of consciousness can we come to the

material conception of a thing. Before we reach the conception of a

shadow, we must pass through some mental stage, and personification may

be attached to that mental stage. The personification of the shadow may

be referred to as "Rahu."

"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."

 

Did Srila Prabhupada think the so-called "story" of the origin of planet

Rahu, as told in the Srimad-Bhagavatam, was merely allegorical? Not

merely, but can be taken as allegorical to the degree that one needs it.

"I must try to answer to your satisfaction. Yes, sometimes in Vedas such

things like the asura's decapitated head chasing after Candraloka is

explained allegorically. .... There are many things which do not

corroborate with the so-called modern science." (Letter to Krsnadasa,

Vrindaban, Nov. 7, 1972. You should always pay attention to details: "I

must try to answer to your satisfaction." If one is not on the level of

being able to "observe the cosmic manifestation exactly as the Supreme

Personality of Godhead does" one must be answered according to ones

realization.

 

I'm sure Prabhupada knew...