If we could only see what the material univese really looks like?

[Sarva gattah]

On this planet we are unable to prove to others the full picture of the material universe through the medium of our mundane biological bodies. Such bodily vessels can only reveal to others a very small part (our biological world) of the multidimensional subtle realities of the material creation. In other words, our own personal realizations can never prove the existence of the material subtle world to others with gross material instruments.

 

What would this world look like if we could see the subtle world of ethereal bodies, the soul is contained in as well, which takes up more of the mahat-tattva that our secular world of biological bodies.

Even though there is still a lot to learn, the following gives some insight into how the universe really looks. I believe there is still a lot of work to be 'discovered' within the Vedas on this subject and the author, Sadaputa Dasa (Richard L. Thompson) has still not been able to clearly explain to those who just do not naively or blindly accept his explanation of the Univers. For example, many will rightly say, there is no way that the Sun we see in the sky, is closer than the moon, at least on the secular level that our biological senses are on and can only comprehend, perceive and tune into.

 

Now that’s where the problem is, are we seeing the full picture of the universe? Even the material scientists say the majority of the univers is made up of dark matter that they have no idea what it is.

When Srila Prabhupada was discussing the fifth canto in Vrndavana with his disciples the verse spoke about 10,000 mile high mountains. Srila Prabhupada said,

“Yes, I have seen once when we were flying over the mountains of Europe.”

The devotees asked

“You mean the Alps?”

Srila Prabhupada said

“Yes”

The devotees started to repeatedly deny that such a mountain could exist because by now the scientists would certainly have found such a thing.

Finally Srila Prabhupada forcefully laid his hand down upon the table and roared “I HAVE SEEN! AND YOU CANNOT SEE!”

This is an important point, only the perfected realized soul can see the secular and subtle material realities similtaneously, and can also can see the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Sri Sri Radha Krishna, the source of everyone and everything at every moment. Only advanced souls who understand this, can see the multidimensional aspects of the universe like a 10,000 mile high mountain

We perceive with our biological bodies and its extended instrumentation of telescopic, radar and microwave instruments, to view the universe ‘we only can perceive’ that is made out of secular gross matter however, we are unable to see, feel, touch, with our gross biological senses, the rest of the multi dimensional universe that overlaps the same space.

 

Frankly, our material science is primitive because, like the old black and white TVs we could only view in Australia in the 1960s, we only could see part of the picture, we were not able to tune into the picture as it really is in colour, similarly we are only presently seeing the secular or gross material energy of biological spcies of life and are unable to see the material creation as it really is with where the living entity is housed in ethereal bodies within a subtle-space world.

The only way to really have a correct understanding of the material universe, or understand our position in the mahat-tattva, is to see the bigger picture of ALL THE material creation, WHICH is the subtle above-space (heavenly planets) and sub-space (hellish and ghostly realms) THAT ARE ALL AROUND US. To do that, one must become a great devotee of the Lord. Only through devotional piety can such things be realized and not by material gross instruments.

Presently on this planet there is close to a billion mobile phones or cell phones as they call them in the US, with camera facilities. Such gross material devices will never tune into the subtle world of any kind. At John Lennon’s Mansion in England in 1970, Srila Prabhupada began waving his came around, non of the devotee new what was happening because they could not see what Prabhupada was seeing, which was annoying ghosts.

So the conclusion is we are presently not see the planet for what it really is with it multidimensional and subtle realities.

 

The following is an attempt to discribe the material universe by Sadaputa Prabhu as it really looks, if we could see the subtle aspect of the material creation as well.

 

http://www.unitedindia.com/cosmology.htm

[harekrsna20]

Thanks for sharing.

 

hare krsna

[Kulapavana]

like I said on another thread, we need to honestly present what we do know, and what we do not know. Claiming that Bhagavatam says Sun is closer to Earth than Moon is false, that is not what Bhagavatam says. We should be able to admit to our mistakes as well - that is both knowledge and humility.

 

Our senses may not be perfect, but you just can not dismiss obvious contradictions in your presentation using that excuse. We have this intelligence, mind and senses so that we can distinguish between truth and falsehood.

[theist]

What is the spiritual value in promoting the cosmology according to the fifth canto of SB? You can't prove your 10,000 mile mountains to anyone so why even bring it up?

 

If they hear you speaking about such things that you can't prove and then you tell them about God they are more likely to conclude God is as much of a non-proveable belief as the vedic cosmology.

 

Actually Intelligent Design makes sense to any sensable person as reason can be satisfied by a little applied thought. That is more than can be said for the cosmology of the fifth canto which requires blind faith or PERHAPS mystic vision. And even if it perceived there is no spiritual benefit.

 

10,000 mile high mountain or not how does it enlighten me as to the nature of the Self?

[Sarva gattah]

 

We have this intelligence, mind and senses so that we can distinguish between truth and falsehood.

 

But they must be spiritualised so we can see for ourselves what is really going on. If we voice our concerns enough, backed up with shastra, we will get the attention of genuine devotees who can correctly answer these questions for us and hundreds of thousnands of other devotees.

It is a two way street, Krishna is in our hearts and he will guide us if we remain sincere and don't allow the temptations of the material world to drag us down. We are also pioneers in a very young movement of Gaudiya Vaishnavism, at least in the West. What we are trying to understand cannot be understood with jnan, it is only understood with Bhakti

[Sarva gattah]

 

You can't prove your 10,000 mile mountains to anyone so why even bring it up??

 

No one can prove ghosts exist either or prove there is life after death or even prove there is a God but these things have perplexed man for centuries in the present world we know and made so many curious enough to search for the answers. The search for paragons is inherent in human society, instinctly all cultures believe in a God in some way. People naturally want to know what in the hell is going on in the world around them? This is why the Vedic planetarium should be build.

And it will be built to educate the world about the coming of a great Golden Age

I believe strongly that it is up to Lord Caitanya’s movement to answer these questions, so much so, that as you suggest - who cares about the multidimensional material world when you have pure bhakti

[bija]

hi Kulapavana,

 

I recall reading onetime a term used by Srila Bhaktivinoda, 'pure spiritualism'?

Are you familiar with that term? And the Thakura's understandings?

 

When I read this term spiritualism I realized a fragment of Thakura's deep realizations on Bhagavatam, which is very different than dogmatism, and very difficult to explain for me. It was an illumination in the heart I cant formulate in words. It took all my doubts away about vedic literature though. And the explanations and approaches to these things by the likes of Richard L Thompson and other devotees, are not necessary for me any longer. Spiritualism as understood by Thakura is a very different understanding, it is within Vraj, the heart. I think the spiritualism understandings of Thakura really open the depth of Krsna lila and the Bhagavatam, and the heart and pen of Vyasadeva and other writers. Very different approach to scripture and spirituality than western rationale. That is the key point, we often approach these vedic scriptures with a western mindset, and the oral tradition of these ancient stories which were eventually penned by Vyasadeva, in the vedic bhakti tradition, and their purpose is very different than that western mindset and approach. This spiritualism is something very different than traditions we grew up with in the west. A very different faith.

 

I cant find it now in my knowledge base. I thought it was in Bhakti Tattva Viveka, cant find it now.

 

He also says the madhyama devotee wrestles with these doubts, but the kanistha and uttama devotees do not.

 

Could it be that the different acaryas explain sastra like the sun and moon thing in different ways depending on the qualification of the listener?

 

The kanistha mentioned by Thakura is surely different than a westerner with no faith at all.

 

Could you share your realizations on these things please?

 

Thank you.

 

The writing from Sri Krsna Samhita below is not the writing I am refering to, but it explains spiritualism and the way I see Bhagavatam as penned by Vyasa. This is how I dont depend on rationale and see vedic writing differently than the above ways of seeing it as explained by Richard L Thompson and others. Their explanations could not take away my doubts I had, only Thakura's realizations did. Now my faith is steady.

 

As you know Sri Krsna Samhita is Thakura's commentary on Srimad Bhagavatam.

 

Sri Krsna Samhita by Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura

TEXT 9

samanya-vakya-yoge tu rasanam kutra vistritih

ato vai kavibhih krishna- lila-tattvam vitanyate

Fearing to cross the threshold of argument, some madhyama-adhikaris say, “Just try to explain these feelings with simple words. There is no need to use Krishna's pastimes as examples.” But such type of comments are faulty, for the variegatedness of Vaikuntha cannot be explained with simple words. Just by saying, “There is a Lord. Worship Him,” does not properly explain the living entities' supreme constitutional duties. The act of worship is not possible without a relationship. To be situated in Brahman after giving up maya cannot be called worship, because in this process only an indirect mood of negation is accepted; there is nothing positive. But by saying, “See the form of the Lord. Take shelter of the Lord's lotus feet,” the quality of variegatedness is somewhat accepted. At this juncture we must consider that if one is not fully satisfied with spiritual variegatedness, one may still address the Absolute Truth as “Lord” or “Father.” Although these relationships appear mundane, there is nonetheless an indescribable purpose behind them. Since one must accept material ingredients, activities, and all the perverted mundane reflections of the relationships of Vaikuntha as examples, swanlike persons must not fear to extract from these the understanding of spiritual activities and ingredients by the propensity of swans. Out of fear that foreign scholars will not understand this and accuse us as idol worshipers, should we submerge the jewel of spiritualism? Those who will criticize are certainly immature in their conclusions. Being on a higher platform, why should we fear their fallacious conclusions? The science of rasa cannot be fully explained by ordinary words, therefore poets such as Vyasadeva have elaborately described the pastimes of Krishna. Those wonderful pastimes of the Lord are the respected wealth for both kanishtha-adhikaris and uttama-adhikaris.

[bija]

There is definately subtle realms of existence all around us. For example I see subtle bodies/minds visually, and ghosts, spirits, and vimanas and such phenomena since childhood. Some call these things aura or particular siddhis. New agers call it spiritual. Some westerners call us psychics. Some doctors call us crazy in the west. But still these states of consciousness and perception are material! That is important to understand, it may be due to piety but is not suddha bhakti. Many of the spiritual realities and descriptions, for example Vraj are much much more subtle than these upper heavenly realms, as we all know from the acaryas teachings.

 

Some of these upper heavenly states of awareness are attained by some degree of piety or past yoga practice etc...but Vraj is not so cheap.

 

Often I hear devotees say and explain the moon sun thing, or entities on the moon as existing, but not accesible to our mundane eyes. This may be true to some degree, but in my opinion is not a good preaching tool to those who do not see.

 

Sri Krsna Samhita and the realizations of Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura explain the mysteries of the Bhagavata and spiritualism in a much more profound, deep and simple way.

 

No amount of heavenly consciousness, piety, yoga, knowledge or siddhi is going to reveal that to a jiva soul. Only a simple heart full of bhakti will eventually see. That is what we can teach, that process. The Holy Name and surrender to Guru. All will appear in due course that way.

 

I do not mean to discredit Richard L Thompson ofcourse, he is a far greater mind than me, and his preaching is reaching a far greater audience. Please forgive my offences.

[bija]

Sri Krishna Samhita can be read here.

 

Many of Srila Bhaktivinoda's beautiful books can be read here.

[theist]

 

No one can prove ghosts exist either or prove there is life after death or even prove there is a God but these things have perplexed man for centuries in the present world we know and made so many curious enough to search for the answers.

There are enough anecdotal accounts and personal experiences of ghosts to make many accept their existence and life after death can be explained in a way that satifies any reasonable person.

The search for paragons is inherent in human society, instinctly all cultures believe in a God in some way.

Yes and it is the duty of those with the higher and more specific understand of God to offer good reasoning as to why there is God and what His nature is. The atheists are assailing this inherent tendancy daily and weakening it greatly and theists teaching about giant invisble mountains in the universe does nothing to protect the innocent from the atheist onslaught and actually present s the atheists with more ammunition for calling religion superstitious and not verifiable.

People naturally want to know what in the hell is going on in the world around them? This is why the Vedic planetarium should be build.

Ok. We know believe in giant invisible mountains. Now what? And how do these mountains hewlp me rise beyond birth and death?

 

And it will be built to educate the world about the coming of a great Golden Age

How does that work exactly?

 

I believe strongly that it is up to Lord Caitanya’s movement to answer these questions, so much so, that as you suggest - who cares about the multidimensional material world when you have pure bhakti

 

Not sure I understand this sentence.

[xexon]

It all depends on frequency.

 

All of creation has it's own vibrational rate at which it can manifest. This creates many levels of existance, all co-existing within each other. Its not space that changes because space is pure illusion. It is the mental concept that changes, and creates the reality around you. Including the concept of space and distance, as judged by your physical senses.

 

Your own perception has much in common with a radio. You can tune up and down the dial. At least within your range.

 

A spiritual path is an an attempt increase this tuning range. Beyond what you currently call the world around you. As this range increases, you will see things which cannot be compared with anything you've known in earthly life.

 

When you say there are 10,000 mile high mountains, your mind chokes on the mere concept of it. And this is after the master has given you the simplest explanation he can.

 

You can only imagine what it was that he truly saw.

 

He tempts you to see it for yourself, and be done with "faith".

 

 

 

x

[bija]

It is the mental concept that changes by xexon

Yes xexon so much is in relation to the mind. Do you think all is just mind like the buddhist or is there more?

 

I appreciate your understanding of the nature of mind in this regard, I have found such internally.

 

 

and be done with "faith" by xexon

There are so many interpretations of the word faith. If you are talking about naieve faith I agree....but personally I think faith is dynamic and does not necessarily have to be discarded at any level of awareness. Why do I say this? Because the nature of reality and truth is ever new and ever increasing. We will always be drawn deeper into new realms of awareness. So I feel faith can always be utilized in this regard.

 

If we claim to have seen the whole truth we may be deluded and still naieve.

[xexon]

You must look at the world in the same way a naked soul does.

 

Souls come to this world for the experience of doing so. Its no different than someone going to Disneyland. It is the experience. Your soul is nothing more that a spark of the divine itself. Greatly limited because of it's size, but still pulsing with awareness.

 

When you come to this world, you cannot enter as a naked soul. You must put on a very restrictive body, and agree to be tied to it's senses, until you understand you don't have to be.

 

It's a thrill ride. And a darn good one too, huh?

 

Part of the body package is a brain to process stimuli, and a mind which is your user interface in this world. The ego. Now we get into the problem area.

 

The mind has no ability to look into the spiritual realm. It can understand concepts of it, be does not have a range high enough for direct perception.

 

Since this mind, which contains your identity in this world, can't see it's connection to that which created it, it assumes it is alone. It answers to no one other than itself. The world it creates around it is based on physical reality rather than true reality.

 

But hope is not lost. The heart is your true indentity, but the mind makes it sit in the backseat. It can "feel". Without a body. Without a mind. Without an ego. It has unlimited range. The physical universe cannot compare to what the heart can see. The material universe becomes mundane.

 

As you progress on a spiritual path, reality will constantly move beneath your feet. And the things you know in this world now may not be so attractive later on when you see them in a better light.

 

 

x

[bija]

Thank you xexon. In the Gaudiya tradition the word 'application' is used, and the path is described not to be one of 'negation'. This approach of utilization and application is very appealing and practical....not calling for severe austerity and denial of our experience here on earth. If you read very closely the quote from Sri Krsna Samhita above you will see this type of application and spiritualism being utilized.

 

Do you think the mind has ability to be spiritualized? Or is it always in relation to that which is false?

 

And to keep the discussion in relation to this thread, can the projection from the mind to the outer world also be spiritualized in due course? The Gaudiya tradition says all things can be spiritualized even while in this mind/body.

 

This spiritualism is a very wholesome way to read scripture such as Bhagavatam. Saying that it is a cultivation and spiritual practice in itself, and I would say I am neophyte in such cultivation. But with such cultivation, the stage of argumentation and doubts is not so necessary, or even conducive to spiritual awareness. That is why I dont spend time reading some of these Gaudiya scholars writing so much. I find it more nurturing and beneficial to cultivate study of Srila Bhaktivinoda's books for example. Comtemplation and absorption of the mind in these writings seems to open the region of the heart much more effectively than some of these later scientific Iskcon scholars. Ofcourse they are targeting a different audience.

 

I actually think Sri Krsna Samhita is a masterpiece of writing, a style of writing targeted at modern people, like myself, to convince us of the validity of the Bhagavatam and the treasure it holds.

[xexon]

The mind is a tool. Thats all it ever was. It helps you navigate this amusement park. Once it has been convinced of it's true nature, permission is granted to seek outside of it's "self".

 

The mind also has the ability to create the material word you see around you.

 

It projects upon the wall of maya, that which you believe in.

 

 

 

x

[bija]

For sure it is a tool.

 

If we could only see what the material univese really looks like? quote by sarva

I feel this material universe is also a tool, and by great skill (swanlikeness) we can extract the truth and see. Absorbing oneself in contemplation upon God. Sravanam...Kirtanam...Smaranam (hearing chanting remembering).

[Amlesh]

The vision of this material world depends on the eye of beholder,i.e, according to the level of consciousness that the particular individual possess. For e.g., a materialist will find it a place for enjoyment; for a Tapasvi, it will be a place for sacrifice and for a devotee a place for Hari's seva etc

 

We cannot generalise it, because it was created for all these different purposes...

 

I'll let the different people of different consciousness decide for themselves how they'll like Dharti Mata to be. However the ideal would have been, a place for Devotion.

[LoveroftheBhagavata]

The Bhagavatam as it exists in the current recension that we know most certainly is not the urtext of the work of Vyasa. As Sadaputa and other scholars irrefutably argue, there have been many evident revisions and modifications of this and other Puranas in the past couple of millenia. For this reason, it is next to impossible to determine which particular verses that appertain to the topic of astronomy are genuine and which are later interpolations. That many are still willing to abandon any semblance of rationality and lose themselves in the mythic symbolism of the fifth canto is a matter of startling mystery to me. And I can only agree with what Theist said, namely that one does not require Bhagavata cosmology in order to extract the spiritual content of the book.

[LoveroftheBhagavata]

 

I actually think Sri Krsna Samhita is a masterpiece of writing, a style of writing targeted at modern people, like myself, to convince us of the validity of the Bhagavatam and the treasure it holds.

 

 

Absolutely. And I would add that the Krsna-samhita also cautions its readers against a literal acceptance of the more mythological and speculative content of the Bhagavata Purana. For instance, Bhaktivinode Thakur writes about the dashavataras in a Darwinian evolutionary context, and he also states that the hells mentioned in the shastra are only meant for meditational purposes, but do not factually relate to actual realms of existence. And the Thakur also separates the Puranic contents into material that cannot be altered by human experimentation (he is clearly thinking of the metaphysical parts here), and relativises the authority and importance of knowledge claims that can vary according to time, place and circumstance, or as our understanding of such things increases and develops. The layout of the material universe definitely falls in the second category.

[Kulapavana]

 

I recall reading onetime a term used by Srila Bhaktivinoda, 'pure spiritualism'?

Are you familiar with that term? And the Thakura's understandings?

 

When I read this term spiritualism I realized a fragment of Thakura's deep realizations on Bhagavatam, which is very different than dogmatism, and very difficult to explain for me. It was an illumination in the heart I cant formulate in words. It took all my doubts away about vedic literature though. And the explanations and approaches to these things by the likes of Richard L Thompson and other devotees, are not necessary for me any longer.

 

 

Yes, I am quite familiar with the works of SBT and the approach he takes on these issues. But it is a very broad subject. Forgive me for saying that, but some of his early works, like Sri Krsna Samhita, do not represent the GV sampradaya in which we place him. They are simply his vision and his attempt to understand things in both rational and devotional fashion. Some of his explanations (like the vanaras from Ramayana being just regular South Indians) are both quite naive and departing from all Vaishnava sampradayas.

 

What I do appreciate is his honesty and sincerity. He is not claiming he knows these things for a fact based on some inner knowledge or divine revelation. He simply shares his thoughts with his readers. And he tells us it is OK to use our rationality, common sense, and intelligence in trying to understand shastra. That is very refreshing compared to the dogmatism and simple orthodoxy of Iskcon.

 

You ask:

 

"Could it be that the different acaryas explain sastra like the sun and moon thing in different ways depending on the qualification of the listener?"

 

Yes, but they also explain things depending on their own qualifications and understanding. Devotees often think of acaryas in magical terms. That is simply a misunderstanding. Their personality is there, along with their devotional and material upbringing and all it entails. Their greatness and value is not of a comic book superhero kind. It lies in their full surrender to Krsna, in their purity of heart, and in being completely faithful to the parampara.

 

Anyway, this is how I see these things.

[bija]

thx for your response kula...your words are always thoughtfully appreciated here with respect

[LoveroftheBhagavata]

 

Anyway, this is how I see these things.

 

This is also in large part how I view it, and my point is simple: acharyas and panditas are people who have authority and ability for imparting religious knowledge, not for proposing models of the material world than can pretend to rival the well-thought-out, well-researched and extremely sound predominant scientific theories. Of course, scientists are not infallible, but their method is the very best that what we have, at present at least, for comprehending the cosmos and the phenomenon that we call 'life'.

[Dark Warrior]

 

The Bhagavatam as it exists in the current recension that we know most certainly is not the urtext of the work of Vyasa. As Sadaputa and other scholars irrefutably argue, there have been many evident revisions and modifications of this and other Puranas in the past couple of millenia. For this reason, it is next to impossible to determine which particular verses that appertain to the topic of astronomy are genuine and which are later interpolations. That many are still willing to abandon any semblance of rationality and lose themselves in the mythic symbolism of the fifth canto is a matter of startling mystery to me. And I can only agree with what Theist said, namely that one does not require Bhagavata cosmology in order to extract the spiritual content of the book.

 

This argument is refuted. If one cannot depend on scripture to detail intricate aspects of the material nature, how are we supposed to believe its authenticity when it comes to matters of the Self?

 

It is stupid to assume that the texts talk about Souls and Karma accurately, but cannot describe material phenomena.

 

The idea that Srimad Bhagavatam is a modification or is a later work is again, a comment without authenticity. I have already given reasons for it. At best, it can be said that the cosmology of the Bhagavatam is not understandable by mundane minds. I am willing to accept Sadaputa Dasa's take on it, though.

 

Evolution has not been proven by scientists conclusively. But what is conclusive is the fact that most people can get to know of the Self, and how it is distinct from the body and the fact that our scripture talks clearly about the Kalyana Gunas of the Lord.

[Kulapavana]

 

The idea that Srimad Bhagavatam is a modification or is a later work is again, a comment without authenticity.

 

The effects of Time are inescapable. As there are variations of SB manuscripts today, it is conceivable that some verses in the version we use today were added in the last 1000 years or earlier. The language of SB is fairly "modern" (as compared to Vishnu Puranam for example) and smritis in general were re-edited periodically - that is quite obvious. I see no reason to believe that what we have today is 100% Vyasadeva's writing. Does it diminish the value of Bhagavatam? Absolutely not. Over the centuries many parrots ("shukas") have bitten this fruit of the Vedas, leaving it sweeter.

[Kulapavana]

 

..acharyas and panditas are people who have authority and ability for imparting religious knowledge, not for proposing models of the material world than can pretend to rival the well-thought-out, well-researched and extremely sound predominant scientific theories.

 

I suspect that Vedas present the Universe as it seen by the yogis, with various layers of reality (worlds or "dimensions") overlapping one another. In some places it is even mentioned that in the past yogis were able to walk to the moon in their current bodies, on the mystical trail known as Sushumna. In other places it is said that all we can see in the sky is just our own earthly realm - we do not see the higher or lower worlds at all, just their shadows cast into our reality. Like a reflection of the moon in a lake, only 3 dimensional.