Prabhupada says Moon is closest Planet

[Guruvani]

Śrīmad Bhāgavatam 3.15.15, purport,

 

 

The modern scientists who are trying to travel in space are having difficulty going even to the nearest planet, the moon, to say nothing of the highest planets within the universe.

[Guruvani]

Here Srila Prabhupada says:

 

Śrī Caitanya Caritāmṛta Ādi 2.25 purport,

 

 

The inhabitants of earth may be able to reach the moon, but the inhabitants of heaven can reach even the fiery sphere called the sun.

[Murali_Mohan_das]

Yep. Srila Prabhupada is/was very fair and balanced. It's the folks that quote him that tend to distort his statements/views for their own ends.

 

There was another quote on the forums where Srila Prabhupada acknowledged that scientists were more expert than even the devotees in their own mundane fields, but that the devotees should never be shy about discussing spirituality with the scientists since Krishna Consciousness concerns transcendental knowledge.

 

 

Here Srila Prabhupada says:

 

Śrī Caitanya Caritāmṛta Ādi 2.25 purport,

[Murali_Mohan_das]

 

There was another quote on the forums where Srila Prabhupada acknowledged that scientists were more expert than even the devotees in their own mundane fields, but that the devotees should never be shy about discussing spirituality with the scientists since Krishna Consciousness concerns transcendental knowledge.

 

Found that quote (posted by theist):

http://www.indiadivine.org/audarya/most-interesting-threads/41586-intelligent-designer.html

 

 

 

Prabhupada: Yes. Why shall I give you? You are a rascal, you are against Krishna, why Krishna will give you facility? If you are against Krishna and you want the credit without Krishna, that's not possible. You must be submissive first of all. Then Krishna will give you all facilities. Just like we dare to face any chemist, any scientist, any philosopher. Why? On the strength of Krishna, we believe that "There is Krishna. When I shall talk with him, Krishna will give give me intelligence." This is the basics. Otherwise, from qualification, standard, they are very much qualified. We are common laymen before them. But how do we challenge them? Because we know. Just like a small child He can challenge a very big man because he knows, "My father is there." He is catching the hand of the father, and he's sure that "Nobody can do anything to me."

[theist]

Yes that is why we speak to them on transcendental matters and not useless topics like how far away is the moon. Rather we or they are correct on the distance of the moon is irrelevant. There is no spiritual benefit in being right about that calculation nor is there any spiritual loss in being wrong about that calculation.

 

We start with the body is not the self. There is an Intelligent Designer behind the cosmic manifestation etc. Why argue on their field which has no lasting value either way? We must bring the discussion to our field of discussion.

[Guruvani]

 

.

 

There was another quote on the forums where Srila Prabhupada acknowledged that scientists were more expert than even the devotees in their own mundane fields,

 

That is not the way I read it.

 

Prabhupada says:

 

 

they are very much qualified. We are common laymen before them

 

I don't hear him saying that they are more qualified than devotees in the devotees field of specialty.

 

He is simply saying that as scientists they are more qualified than are devotees.

 

The real devotees are every bit as qualified as scientists in their own field of God consciousness.

 

Scientists are very poorly qualified in God conciousness, so I guess they are spiritually disqualified.

[Guruvani]

 

Yes that is why we speak to them on transcendental matters and not useless topics like how far away is the moon.

 

If the topic was useless Sukadeva Goswami would not have included it in the Bhagavatam nor would Srila Prabhupada have repeated it.

 

I beg to differ.

 

The topic is not useless at all.

 

We just don't understand the esoteric purpose behind the Bhagavat cosmology which is about remembering Krishna in everything we see.

[Murali_Mohan_das]

 

The real devotees are every bit as qualified as scientists in their own field of God consciousness.

 

Scientists are very poorly qualified in God conciousness, so I guess they are spiritually disqualified.

 

If you read my words a bit more closely, I say "scientists were more expert than even the devotees in their own mundane fields." While English may be a bit ambiguous, it should be obvious from the context that "their own mundane fields" refers to the scientific fields in which the scientists are expert and not spiritual fields.

 

But, then, dear friend, subtlety is often lost on you with your bull-in-the-china-shop mentality.

[Guruvani]

 

But, then, dear friend, subtlety is often lost on you with your bull-in-the-china-shop mentality.

 

 

It's not a china shop to me.

It's a battle on planet Earth.

 

There ain't no china shop.

There is just a lot of cheaters trying to exploit and I ain't buying it.

[Murali_Mohan_das]

Dude!! You RAWK!!!

 

Have a fabulous weekend.

 

I'll see you on the dark side of the moon.

 

 

It's not a china shop to me.

It's a battle on planet Earth.

 

There ain't no china shop.

There is just a lot of cheaters trying to exploit and I ain't buying it.

[theist]

 

If the topic was useless Sukadeva Goswami would not have included it in the Bhagavatam nor would Srila Prabhupada have repeated it.

 

I beg to differ.

 

The topic is not useless at all.

 

We just don't understand the esoteric purpose behind the Bhagavat cosmology which is about remembering Krishna in everything we see

Right. And seeing Krsna behind everything is not in the least bit dependent on distance calculation. Krsna is the light of the moon irregardless if the moon is a million miles away or a billion. That is the point. Therefore arguing over the distance calculation is a needless activity.

 

"take the essence..."

[Guruvani]

 

 

"take the essence..."

 

That is what the Bhagavatam is...... the essence.

The whole book is the very essence of the Vedanta sutra in a form suitable for us Kali yugites.

 

I don't see any room for condensing down any further since Srila Prabhupada did see any need to do that.

 

Bhaktivinoda condensed it down in his Bhagavat-arka marici-mala.

 

Maybe you would prefer that version.

[AncientMariner]

 

Therefore arguing over the distance calculation is a needless activity.

 

Well it does give Hare Krishna devotees a fresh new topic to debate over and over once every few weeks or few months.

[Guruvani]

 

Well it does give Hare Krishna devotees a fresh new topic to debate over and over once every few weeks or few months.

 

Yep, and it even gives non-Hare Krishna's like me something to write about.

I hope nobody here confuses me for Hare Krishna.

I ain't no Hare Krishna.

 

I am just a baddha-jiva killing time until time kills me.

[theist]

 

That is what the Bhagavatam is...... the essence.

The whole book is the very essence of the Vedanta sutra in a form suitable for us Kali yugites.

 

I don't see any room for condensing down any further since Srila Prabhupada did see any need to do that.

 

Bhaktivinoda condensed it down in his Bhagavat-arka marici-mala.

 

Maybe you would prefer that version.

 

Wrong again. Below is a statement from Srila Prabhupada directing us in this way of hearing Srimad Bhagavatam, "we have to take the essence of Srimad-Bhagavatam and utilize it for our higher benefit, without bothering about the correctness of the modern science or the allegorical explanation sometimes made in Srimad-Bhagavatam."

One should not claim to speak on behalf of the spiritual master unless he can back it up.

[...]

But because you have asked me, I am your spiritual master, I must try to answer to your satisfaction. Yes, sometimes in Vedas such things like the asura's decapitated head chasing after Candraloka, sometimes it is explained allegorically. Just like now we are explaining in 4th Canto of Srimad-Bhagavatam the story of King Puranjana. Just like the living entity is living within this body, and the body is described there as city with nine gates, the intelligence as the Queen. So there are sometimes allegorical explanations. So there are many things which do not corroborate with the so-called modern science, because they are explained in that way. But where is the guarantee that modern science is also correct? So we are concerned with Krishna Consciousness, and even though there is some difference of opinion between modern science and allegorical explanation in the Bhagavat, we have to take the essence of Srimad-Bhagavatam and utilize it for our higher benefit, without bothering about the correctness of the modern science or the allegorical explanation sometimes made in Srimad-Bhagavatam. [...] Letter to Krsnadas 1972

 

Now here is where you usually chime in saying Prabhupada didn't really mean what he clearly said, he really means what you say but he had to disguise his meaning for some reason.

 

Or he was only saying that to one devotee even though he himself says "WE have to take the essence."

 

I don't expect you to accept this. I post it again for any innocent out there that thinks accepting every allegory, myth or parable in the Puranas has to be taken literally or they are not "real devotees" and speaking outside the parampara.

[suchandra]

What we call the Moon travels around the Earth in 27.3 days and when pulling out your telescope you see the Moon like that, below. Sometimes the Moon is only 12000 miles away from Earth and sometimes 29000 miles because Moon orbits in an eclipse.

 

[AncientMariner]

 

Yep, and it even gives non-Hare Krishna's like me something to write about.

I hope nobody here confuses me for Hare Krishna.

I ain't no Hare Krishna.

 

I am just a baddha-jiva killing time until time kills me.

 

 

Me too, I am hoping to get lucky and accidently chant Hare Krishna at that moment.

[Guruvani]

 

Wrong again. Below is a statement from Srila Prabhupada directing us in this way of hearing Srimad Bhagavatam, "we have to take the essence of Srimad-Bhagavatam and utilize it for our higher benefit, without bothering about the correctness of the modern science or the allegorical explanation sometimes made in Srimad-Bhagavatam."

One should not claim to speak on behalf of the spiritual master unless he can back it up.

 

Now here is where you usually chime in saying Prabhupada didn't really mean what he clearly said, he really means what you say but he had to disguise his meaning for some reason.

 

Or he was only saying that to one devotee even though he himself says "WE have to take the essence."

 

I don't expect you to accept this. I post it again for any innocent out there that thinks accepting every allegory, myth or parable in the Puranas has to be taken literally or they are not "real devotees" and speaking outside the parampara.

Just like the fall-from-goloka theorists you desperately search from some old letters to some neophytes that wrote to Prabhupada and expressed some doubts or weakness thereby obliging Srila Prabhupada to get out the baby bottle and feed the infants with something they were willing to accept.

I don't believe that Srila Prabhupada would ever have approved of his letters that were time and circumstance and in response to particular individuals showing weakness or doubt to be put into a book or a central collection and used as the basis for Gaudiya siddhanta.

 

In short, I think many of the letters are just outdated and irrelevant.

 

In Srimad Bhagavatam PROPER Srila Prabhupada doesn't encourage the pablum approach to the Bhagavatam. He only made compromises in letters because some doofus was showing some inability to appreciate some parts of the Bhagavatam.

 

Here in this verse Srila Prabhupada explains the way one must accept the Bhagavatam including the descriptions of the virat rupa.

 

Śrīmad Bhāgavatam 5.26.38 purport

 

In the beginning [the Second and Third Cantos of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam] I have already described how one can progress on the path of liberation. In the Purāṇas the vast universal existence, which is like an egg divided into fourteen parts, is described. This vast form is considered the external body of the Lord, created by His energy and qualities. It is generally called the virāṭ-rūpa. If one reads the description of this external form of the Lord with great faith, or if one hears about it or explains it to others to propagate bhāgavata-dharma, or Kṛṣṇa consciousness, his faith and devotion in spiritual consciousness, Kṛṣṇa consciousness, will gradually increase. Although developing this consciousness is very difficult, by this process one can purify himself and gradually come to an awareness of the Supreme Absolute Truth.

Obviously, in the Bhagavatam proper Srila Prabhupada doesn't encourage picking and choosing and and deriding of parts of the Bhagavatam to do not fit into our conditioned perception.

 

For thousands of years the great souls have attained perfection by understanding and accepting Srimad Bhagavatam with great faith.

When that GREAT FAITH becomes picking and choosing and dissecting and faultfinding then somehow we have failed the test of faith.

[mahak]

 

Well it does give Hare Krishna devotees a fresh new topic to debate over and over once every few weeks or few months.

 

 

 

:eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:

 

What we should do, AM, is start a topic of "Did Jivas fall From the:eek:

:eek:Moon, or did Jesus Begin the Rtvik Movement", then all these rerun:eek:

issues can become a collection. Now we have scattered:eek:

:eek:comic books, soon to be placed in plastic bags:eek:

:eek:and resold as treasures.

:eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:

 

haribol, c'mon, mon, laugh. mahak

 

[shvu]

 

Just like the fall-from-goloka theorists you desperately search from some old letters to some neophytes that wrote to Prabhupada and expressed some doubts or weakness thereby olbiging Srila Prabhupada to get out the baby bottle and feed the infants with something they were willing to accept.

I don't believe that Srila Prabhupada would ever have approved of his letters that were time and circumstance and in response to particular individuals showing weakness or doubt to be put into a book or a central collection and used as the basis for Gaudiya siddhanta.

 

In short, I think many of the letters are just outdated and irrelevant.

 

Outdated and irrelevant in less than 40 years unlike the Bhagavatam where every word is still relevant today?

 

Perhaps it is just the antiquity factor. The older the material, the harder it is to place it in the right context. 1000 years from now, if Prabhupada's letters are still around, devotees from that time will find it harder to dismiss some of them as "outdated and irrelevant". If Sukadeva Goswami had left similar letters behind, you would have a more difficult time dismissing some of them as outdated, just like you are having a hard time with the moon problem. A little paradox how the older it is, the less outdated it is.

 

Just like the Vedas - very soon the Brahmanas lost their context and sginifcance that they did not understand most of mantras. However, their failure to understand the signifance of the mantras resulted in turning the vedic canon into a sacrosanct entity that was not to be tampered with. Though many of the mantras are clearly for a bygone period, they decided there was some inner signifiicance which was relevant for all times.

 

Cheers

[Guruvani]

 

Outdated and irrelevant in less than 40 years unlike the Bhagavatam where every word is still relevant today?

 

Perhaps it is just the antiquity factor. The older the material, the harder it is to place it in the right context. 1000 years from now, if Prabhupada's letters are still around, devotees from that time will find it harder to dismiss some of them as "outdated and irrelevant". If Sukadeva Goswami had left similar letters behind, you would have a more difficult time dismissing some of them as outdated, just like you are having a hard time with the moon problem. A little paradox how the older it is, the less outdated it is.

 

Just like the Vedas - very soon the Brahmanas lost their context and sginifcance that they did not understand most of mantras. However, their failure to understand the signifance of the mantras resulted in turning the vedic canon into a sacrosanct entity that was not to be tampered with. Though many of the mantras are clearly for a bygone period, they decided there was some inner signifiicance which was relevant for all times.

 

Cheers

All of Srila Prabhupada's letters were personal letters to individual disciples.

Every letter started with Dear So-and-so Das.

The letters were in response to individuals with personal issues and personal shortcomings. They weren't a re-writing of the Gaudiya siddhanta.

 

If any letter doesn't match what is in shastra then we can understand that Srila Prabhupada was compromising in some way to encourage such a neophyte to move on to highers levels where maybe someday his faith wouldn't be hampered by his mind and all the influences of mundane science and materialistic perceptions.

 

Building a new siddhanta off of letters to neophyte western devotees was never what Srila Prabhupada intended in his personal letters to individual disciples that he was trying to nurse along with pablum.

[mahak]

With you, guruvani. This is what I have always demanded from those who have built a religion based on personal letters, as follows:

 

"Okay, brother, I accept Srila Prabhupadas words to be my life and soul. So, what I want from you when you ask me to consider this letter from prabhupada to such and such dasa is to include the letter originally written to Prabhupada by such and such dasa. This is not a horrid request, and it is fully appropriate for me to demand this letter first, then Srila Prabhupadas RESPONSE. This is demanding context."

 

"Now my bonafide basis for this request is that the Srimad Bhagavatam is a series of QUESTIONS followed up by ANSWERS. The answers are the LORD'S VERSION, the version of the mahabhagavatas. But the questions are fully presented in the Srimad Bhagavatam. If we eliminate the questions, we ruin the veda, period. Bhagavatam is uselessw without the inquiry of Vidura, Pariksit, the Sages of Namasaranya. Bhagavatam is not the pulpit sayings of Sukadeva, Maitreya, and Suta Goswami. There is an interaction between disciple and guru that is the REAL teaching, the intimacy of what is meant by "Srimad Bhagavatam". The answers alone give us nothing, just as a law has no meaning without the decision of the Judge."

 

"So, before one can say that prabhupada is chastizing my godbrother Tusta Krsna on the basis of the letter he sent him, I cannot agree that chastizement of any kind took place without being able tyo analyze the letter originally sent to Prabhupada to tusta, the letter that is being nicely and mercifully answered."

 

This is what I have always demanded prior to accepting anything Srila Prabhupada did not personally PUBLISH, in his books or his PUBLIC lectures.

 

Thanks for making this point, guruvani.

 

The Phillipeans sure look like trinidad from the room in which you sit.

 

hare krsna, ys, mahaksadasa

[Guruvani]

 

With you, guruvani. This is what I have always demanded from those who have built a religion based on personal letters, as follows:

 

"Okay, brother, I accept Srila Prabhupadas words to be my life and soul. So, what I want from you when you ask me to consider this letter from prabhupada to such and such dasa is to include the letter originally written to Prabhupada by such and such dasa. This is not a horrid request, and it is fully appropriate for me to demand this letter first, then Srila Prabhupadas RESPONSE. This is demanding context."

 

"Now my bonafide basis for this request is that the Srimad Bhagavatam is a series of QUESTIONS followed up by ANSWERS. The answers are the LORD'S VERSION, the version of the mahabhagavatas. But the questions are fully presented in the Srimad Bhagavatam. If we eliminate the questions, we ruin the veda, period. Bhagavatam is uselessw without the inquiry of Vidura, Pariksit, the Sages of Namasaranya. Bhagavatam is not the pulpit sayings of Sukadeva, Maitreya, and Suta Goswami. There is an interaction between disciple and guru that is the REAL teaching, the intimacy of what is meant by "Srimad Bhagavatam". The answers alone give us nothing, just as a law has no meaning without the decision of the Judge."

 

"So, before one can say that prabhupada is chastizing my godbrother Tusta Krsna on the basis of the letter he sent him, I cannot agree that chastizement of any kind took place without being able tyo analyze the letter originally sent to Prabhupada to tusta, the letter that is being nicely and mercifully answered."

 

This is what I have always demanded prior to accepting anything Srila Prabhupada did not personally PUBLISH, in his books or his PUBLIC lectures.

 

Thanks for making this point, guruvani.

 

The Phillipeans sure look like trinidad from the room in which you sit.

 

hare krsna, ys, mahaksadasa

 

Srila Prabhupada made it clear that "books are the basis".

 

There are some out there who would like to make letters as the basis but such an idea is faulty.

 

Some people have built a whole new siddhanta off of personal letters to struggling neophytes.

I have no doubt that Srila Prabhupada would have shut down the letter centralizing program and the attempt to document them in a central registry for all devotees of all time to use as Gaudiya siddhanta.

 

Many improper and unauthorized programs have been created in ISKCON since the passing of Srila Prabhupada.

 

That is why so many disciples of Srila Prabhupada have abandoned the cult for sequester away from the frenzy.

[mahak]

It is ironic that srila prabhupada many times cited personal letters from Srila Bhaktisiddhanta to his disciples were the basis of the demise of their whole authority, the reason that guru tattwa was forsaken and placed before mundane judges. Srila Prabhupada kindly warned us, often, but history just got repeated.

 

mahak

[theist]

 

<!-- BEGIN TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote --> Quote:

<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="100%"> <tbody><tr> <td style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding-left: 3ex; padding-right: 3ex;" bgcolor="#e0e0e0"> Originally Posted by theist

Wrong again. Below is a statement from Srila Prabhupada directing us in this way of hearing Srimad Bhagavatam, "we have to take the essence of Srimad-Bhagavatam and utilize it for our higher benefit, without bothering about the correctness of the modern science or the allegorical explanation sometimes made in Srimad-Bhagavatam."

One should not claim to speak on behalf of the spiritual master unless he can back it up.

Now here is where you usually chime in saying Prabhupada didn't really mean what he clearly said, he really means what you say but he had to disguise his meaning for some reason.

Or he was only saying that to one devotee even though he himself says "WE have to take the essence."

I don't expect you to accept this. I post it again for any innocent out there that thinks accepting every allegory, myth or parable in the Puranas has to be taken literally or they are not "real devotees" and speaking outside the parampara.

</td> </tr> </tbody></table>

<!-- END TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote -->

Just like the fall-from-goloka theorists you desperately search from some old letters to some neophytes that wrote to Prabhupada and expressed some doubts or weakness thereby obliging Srila Prabhupada to get out the baby bottle and feed the infants with something they were willing to accept.

I don't believe that Srila Prabhupada would ever have approved of his letters that were time and circumstance and in response to particular individuals showing weakness or doubt to be put into a book or a central collection and used as the basis for Gaudiya siddhanta.

 

In short, I think many of the letters are just outdated and irrelevant.

 

In Srimad Bhagavatam PROPER Srila Prabhupada doesn't encourage the pablum approach to the Bhagavatam. He only made compromises in letters because some doofus was showing some inability to appreciate some parts of the Bhagavatam.

 

Here in this verse Srila Prabhupada explains the way one must accept the Bhagavatam including the descriptions of the virat rupa.

Good job Guruvani. Right on cue.

 

Hey take a look at that picture suchandra posted of the moon and explain to us why there are no little fires accounting for the moons supposed self illumination as Prabhupada thought and wrote in the Bhagavatam. According to what you just wrote you must believe in that also.