Moon Moods

[Namah]

Am a novice on a journey through the written word of His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada. Read the Bhagavad Gita As it Is, Dialectical Spiritualism - A Vedic View of Western Philosophy, and have humbly travelled through the Srimad Bhagavatam into the Tenth Canto - Part Three. This is also the day I found this website and the home of other devotees. Now I have a place to communicate with devotees and work out my issues and questions. I have been programmed by a Western culture with values and concepts which through thoughtful debate can find their way down the mountain of Truth and into Ocean of Understanding. I am aware that my river is polluted with beliefs from my past. I am a Sudra with Karmi training. What can I say. We all have to start somewhere. Now for my Moon Moods question. I need help in understanding the distance of the Sun and the Moon from Earth. I need help in understanding the lunar moon landing. In my mind the Sun is the gateway to returning to Krsna as a spiritual being and the Moon is the gateway to returning to Krsna as a material being. My struggle is with Duality and overcoming my senses which are treated as Demigods in the West by the vast majority.

 

[Audarya lila]

Dear Namah,

 

For help with the distance of the sun and moon from the planet earth I suggest you consult an asstronomy text book. The lunar landing is not a spiritual subject and understanding it won't help your standing in devotion. For a good exposition on a plausible understanding of the cosmography presented in the 5th canto you can read the books published by Sadaputa dasa on the subject. The jest of his very lengthy and scholarly presentation is that the distances referred to in the Srimad Bhagavatam are distances above the plane of Bhu-mandala in which these two heavenly bodies orbit, not their physical distances from the planet earth. The empirical data fits well with this model.

 

As far as the moon goes, you should know that Krsna appears in the dynasty of the moon god and that his amorous pastimes are performed during the harvest moon. From that perspective the moon may certainly take precedence over the sun for devotees of Sri Krishna.

 

Your servant,

Audarya lila dasa

 

 

[animesh]

I am a Sudra with Karmi training.

 

How does it matter what caste you belong to?

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

As far as the moon goes, you should know that Krsna appears in the dynasty of the moon god and that his amorous pastimes are performed during the harvest moon. From that perspective the moon may certainly take precedence over the sun for devotees of Sri Krishna.

Yet, the Sun is Narayana Himself (Surya Narayana); and He is pratyakasha-devata, the most visible form of the Lord.

 

Also Sri Ramachandra took His birth in the Surya vamsha (sun dynasty).

 

When everything is connected to the Lord it becomes difficult to choose which is more important.

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

How does it matter what caste you belong to?

I think it was more poetic than literal. By stating "I am a shudra", it didn't literally mean he was born in a shudra family, but that "I am unqualified..."

 

Sri Chaitanya has stated:

 

kiba vipra, kiba nyasi, sudra kene naya

yei krsna-tattva-vetta, sei 'guru' haya

 

"It does not matter whether one is a brahmana, shudra, grihastha or sannyasi. If one knows the science of Krishna, he is a guru."

 

[melvin]

The presiding deity of the moon

is Chandra. Here the denizens

love to drink the celestial in-

toxicant known as SOMA. Thus,

the inhabitants there always en-

gage themselves in SOMA rasa.

When Lord Krishna departed for

Krishnaloka 5,000 yrs. ago, it was

said that He introduced this

pastime, SOMA rasa, in order that

His devotees would be able to for-

get Him so that they won`t suffer

so much from thinking of the Lord

because of separation.

 

[This message has been edited by melvin (edited 10-24-2001).]

[darwin]

Please visit the Bhaktivinoda Thakur page on my website. Bhaktivinoda Thakur was favorable to modern science.

 

Also visit Sadaputa Dasa's Mysteries of the Sacred Universe website. Make sure to read this overview page on the website.

 

Sadaputa Dasa tells us that it's ok to acknowledge that the earth is not flat. I am not sure what he says about the moon stuff, but these issues are probably related.

 

Sadaputa Dasa tells us that the Vedas don't really mean that the earth is flat, they mean that a map of the earth is flat. I think that his book goes on to say that the map is a complicated projection map so that all the distances come out wrong, just like a wall map makes the US. and Canada look bigger than Africa. I think he also says that it's got 2 or more maps thrown together into the same map, leaving us hopelessly confused. Until Sadaputa Dasa's book, of course.

 

Let us hope that Sadaputa Dasa will now use his brilliant method to analyze the Vedas to show us how they support the theory of evolution and the fact that we evolved from apes.

 

Namah, how come you get to have two?

 

[This message has been edited by darwin (edited 10-24-2001).]

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

Sadaputa Dasa tells us that it's ok to acknowledge that the earth is not flat.

Actually, the Vedic scriptures never say the earth is flat. For thousands of years the ancient rishis of India knew the earth was a globe. Visit any ancient bhu-varaha temple, and you will see engravings of Varaha holding a round earth on his tusks. The Vedic texts do speak of various planes of existence, with each comprising of many planets. This may be mistaken as a "flat earth" by some.

 

As far as Sadaputa Das's (Dr. Richard Thompson's) work on evolution, he has already written a book on it, titled "Forbidden Archeology: Hidden History of the Human Race". You can read it if you are interested, but it probably won't satisfy you, as the conclusion is the opposite to what you are looking for.

 

 

[This message has been edited by jndas (edited 10-24-2001).]

[Namah]

Originally posted by animesh:

I am a Sudra with Karmi training.

 

How does it matter what caste you belong to?

Dear Animesh: Your right. Thank you

[Namah]

Originally posted by Audarya lila:

Dear Namah,

 

For help with the distance of the sun and moon from the planet earth I suggest you consult an asstronomy text book. The lunar landing is not a spiritual subject and understanding it won't help your standing in devotion. For a good exposition on a plausible understanding of the cosmography presented in the 5th canto you can read the books published by Sadaputa dasa on the subject. The jest of his very lengthy and scholarly presentation is that the distances referred to in the Srimad Bhagavatam are distances above the plane of Bhu-mandala in which these two heavenly bodies orbit, not their physical distances from the planet earth. The empirical data fits well with this model.

 

As far as the moon goes, you should know that Krsna appears in the dynasty of the moon god and that his amorous pastimes are performed during the harvest moon. From that perspective the moon may certainly take precedence over the sun for devotees of Sri Krishna.

 

Your servant,

Audarya lila dasa

 

 

Dear Audarya lila dasa: Thank you for your reply. I have found a place where I can read and converse with understanding, help and guidance.

Your humble servant,

Namah

[Namah]

Originally posted by jndas:

Yet, the Sun is Narayana Himself (Surya Narayana); and He is pratyakasha-devata, the most visible form of the Lord.

 

Also Sri Ramachandra took His birth in the Surya vamsha (sun dynasty).

 

When everything is connected to the Lord it becomes difficult to choose which is more important.

Dear jndas: Thank you. I have found a home and guidance in the hearts of devotees.

Your humble servant

Namah

 

[shvu]

 

I need help in understanding the distance of the Sun and the Moon from Earth.

 

What do you mean by that? The distance is a number in some units, just like the distance between the Pacific and the Atlantic. I am not clear, what you want to understand here.

 

I need help in understanding the lunar moon landing.

With due respect, a spiritual forum is the last place to seek info on moon landing. Even if you did get any answers here like "it was a hoax", "the US govt cheated the world", etc, I would suggest you take them with plenty of salt. None of these allegations hold water.

 

Cheers

 

[darwin]

jndas prabhu,

Why do you think that I am "looking for" a certain conclusion? What would be my motive? Wouldn't I would be thrilled if Sadaputa Das's views on evolution were true? Wouldn't I, just like you, want ISKCON's scientific teachings to be correct?

 

Please visit the science page on my website. I have a couple of links to pages that successfully refute "Forbidden Archeology". "Forbidden Archeology" is about as scientific as a Flintstones cartoon.

 

[This message has been edited by darwin (edited 10-24-2001).]

[shvu]

 

"Forbidden Archeology" is about as scientific as a Flintstones cartoon.

I am not suprised. It is not surprising because, I am familar with the "vedic" astronomy book with those interesting pieces on moon landing, gravitation, etc. What the gentleman meant by vedic turned out to be the Bhagavatam and not any of the 4 vedas. That was when I learnt the unique iskcon meaning of the term vedic.

 

Cheers

 

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

Why do you think that I am "looking for" a certain conclusion?

Because you yourself said so. Reminder:

 

"Let us hope that Sadaputa Dasa will now use his brilliant method to analyze the Vedas to show us how they support the theory of evolution and the fact that we evolved from apes."

[Guest guest]

 

Namah: Am a novice on a journey through the written word of His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada. Read the Bhagavad Gita As it Is, Dialectical Spiritualism - A Vedic View of Western Philosophy, and have humbly travelled through the Srimad Bhagavatam into the Tenth Canto - Part Three...

 

Satyaraj: Take a good equipment for that travel. As you may be aware, Bhagavad Gita is part of the Mahabharata. In the Mahabharata it is stated that Pariksit Maharaja after been cursed by a Brahmin boy went to his palace and remained there complete secluded, in a room that not even the air could enter, and he had never left this place for seven days until his death. No one could enter that place. It was a maximum security room. Tastaka, the winged snake, has entered into that room disguised as a small worm within an apple, and he has killed Pariksit as soon as he took the apple at his and.

 

So, how could that Pariksit hear the Bhagavatam from Sukadeva at the Ganga’s shore in an opened assembly? One can not disbelief Mahabharata and at the same time accept the Gita as the utmost Vedic scripture. Mahabharata clearly denies the veracity of Bhagavatam’s version on how Pariksit was enlighten by Sukadeva seven days before his death.

 

Therefore, scientific, astrological, historical, and many other events and facts that are narrated on Bhagavatam should be read and understood with the due caution.

 

Known that the God-knowledge (vidya) within this lore is a mystery and a secret, and it is not a matter of free proselytism.

 

[shvu]

 

So, how could that Pariksit hear the Bhagavatam from Sukadeva at the Ganga’s shore in an opened assembly? One can not disbelief Mahabharata and at the same time accept the Gita as the utmost Vedic scripture. Mahabharata clearly denies the veracity of Bhagavatam’s version on how Pariksit was enlighten by Sukadeva seven days before his death.

 

Therefore, scientific, astrological, historical, and many other events and facts that are narrated on Bhagavatam should be read and understood with the due caution.

Good point. Just for the record, history dates the Mahabharata at around 200 BC, while the Bhagavatam is dated at 700 AD. At least history rules out the possibility of a common author. Assuming these works were authored entirely by indivuduals, which itself is highly unlikely.

 

Cheers

 

 

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

So, how could that Pariksit hear the Bhagavatam from Sukadeva at the Ganga’s shore in an opened assembly?

Sri Madhva states that the two versions of Parikshit's final days (as found in Bhagavatam and Mahabharata) are narrations from two separate divya yugas. Thus there is no discrepancy.

[shvu]

 

Sri Madhva states that the two versions of Parikshit's final days (as found in Bhagavatam and Mahabharata) are narrations from two separate divya yugas. Thus there is no discrepancy.

To which, I had asked,

 

1. What happened to the Bhagavatam written for this yuga?

 

2. Where is this information documented or where did Madhva get this info from?

 

The answer in my opinion is, Madhva starts out with the premise that both works are correct and speculates thus. The question of whether the Bhagavatam is authentic or not is never raised by him and so his speculation is of no help.

 

As an example, one can say the Shaiva Puranas are the only texts to be studied; Shiva is the ultimate and everyone else worships him. If someone counters this saying, the vaishnava puranas state otherwise, one can say the VPs are true, but were written for a different yuga. In fact, this logic can be extended to anything. Wherever there is contradiction, say it was from a different yuga, but don't ask how I know.

 

The most logical reason for contradiction in Shastra is, they were written by different people with different backgrounds. The practise is to attribute writings to some famous personality, so it is taken more seriously. Thus everything ended up with Vyasa's label, just like a number of advaita works attributed to Shankara are not by him or a number of statements in the NT atrributed to Jesus, were not by him, etc. But this does not go well with our Indian tradition of "Vyasa composed it all" and hence, the circus of trying to reconcile everything.

 

Cheers

 

 

[This message has been edited by shvu (edited 10-24-2001).]

[Guest guest]

Jndas: Sri Madhva states that the two versions of Parikshit's final days (as found in Bhagavatam and Mahabharata) are narrations from two separate divya yugas. Thus there is no discrepancy.

 

Satyaraj: That’s a very old way to try to conciliate contradictories points. One should be aware that both works were supposedly made by the same old Krsna Dvapayana Vyasa, the son of Parasara, and are meant for that present specific Kali-yuga, presenting the history from that past Dvapara-yuga. Therefore Mahabharata is an Itihasa, a historical narrative. Not a compendium of kalpas’ different events to mislead people in general.

 

If one is to accept these two versions as narratives from different divya-yugas he may argue: “Why should Krsna Dvapayana Vyasa mix both versions all times?”

 

In Mahabharata Krsna Dvapayana Vyasa has followed the version presented by his father in Visnu Purana, stating that Krsna and Balarama were the most insignificant of Visnu’s portions. They were only an expansion of a white hair and of a black hair from Visnu’s chest who had come to this world to kill an insignificant demon called Kamsa. They weren’t ‘svayam bhagavam sri krsna’ the utmost form of Brahman as stated in Bhagavata Purana.

 

Some advaitavadins use to teach that these seemly contradictory points are but strategies made by Vedavyasa to make people in general understand that Hari is a non-dual substance who harmonize all contradictions. No dual position can be held by those who intend to attain vidya (God-knowledge). As Madhva is a dualistic teacher, for certain his explanations on these discrepancies will be based on dualism, such as this suspicion on two separate divya-yugas.

 

[shvu]

 

The Brahmas-sutras talk about the BG and the BG mentions the Brahma-sutras [bG 13.4, 13.5 for some]. This is reconciled by saying Badarayana = Veda vyasa. Since a person can know what he will write in future, or can edit his own work before it reaches it's final form, they must be the same person.

 

The same with explaining Buddhism in the sutras. When a question is raised about how the sutras can talk about shUnyavAda, the answer, is even false doctrines are eternal and exist all the time, etc, etc. it is not convincing at all, but such points are not to be questioned.

 

Cheers

 

[Guest guest]

 

Bhagavata Purana states that Pariksit has died immediately after Taskara’s bite. The poison of that bite was so strong that Pariksit was immediately burned and reduced into ashes before the assembly, and that event was witnessed by countless sages, saint, muktas, and even by Vedavyasa himself by and Parasara.

 

But Sanatana Goswami did not credit Bhagavata’s version on Pariksit’s death. In his Bhrad-bhagavatamrta Sanatana says that Pariksit has narrated Gopakumara’s adventures to his mother Uttara sooner after the winged-snake’s bite. According to Sanatana this narrative has taken some days before Pariksit could die, as ‘bhrad’ also means ‘long,’ or ‘big’ narrative; and so, as long as the Bhagavata’s narrative.

 

So, is Sanatana contradicting Bhagavata? How to conciliate Sanatana’s version and Vedavyasa’s? For certain one cannot employ Madhva’s argument, that these are versions from two different kalpas.

 

[stonehearted]

One hting all must concede about "Forbidden Archeology" is that it has not been ignored, as evidenced by Drutakarma's follow-up book. He has given presentations at scientific conferences around the world, and the book has beenboth reviled and lauded by folks with respectable credentials. Most recently, he has given this report:

 

"I have just received a nice letter from Ana C. Martins, vice president of

the Portuguese Association of Archeologists. I presented a paper on the

"forbidden archeology of the European Paleolithic" in a section organized

by her for the 1999 European Association of Archeologists annual

conference in Bournemouth, England. She tells me that the paper is being

published in a conference proceedings volume by British Archaeological

Reports at the end of November. Also, she has asked me to be co-organizer

with her of a session on history of archaeology for the World

Archaeological Congress to be held in June 2003 in Washington, DC."

 

He andSadaputa have successfully planted what many call a "media virus," which replicates itself in many places and forms.

 

 

[Caitanyachandra]

Bhagavata Purana states that Pariksit has died immediately after Taskara’s bite. The poison of that bite was so strong that Pariksit was immediately burned and reduced into ashes before the assembly, and that event was witnessed by countless sages, saint, muktas, and even by Vedavyasa himself by and Parasara.

But Sanatana Goswami did not credit Bhagavata’s version on Pariksit’s death. In his Bhrad-bhagavatamrta Sanatana says that Pariksit has narrated Gopakumara’s adventures to his mother Uttara sooner after the winged-snake’s bite. According to Sanatana this narrative has taken some days before Pariksit could die, as ‘bhrad’ also means ‘long,’ or ‘big’ narrative; and so, as long as the Bhagavata’s narrative.

 

So, is Sanatana contradicting Bhagavata? How to conciliate Sanatana’s version and Vedavyasa’s? For certain one cannot employ Madhva’s argument, that these are versions from two different kalpas.

Why can't these two stories be from 'two different kalpas'.

 

There is nothing in your post to show why this cannot be true. yi

[melvin]

THEY SAY THAT TRUTH IS STRANGER

THAN SCIENCE FICTION. HENCE, IF

YOU BELIEVE IN TELEPROMPTING

THEN BETTER NOT IMITATE THE FLY

FOR YOU`LL END UP A HALF-MAN

HALF FLY WHICH IS WORSE THAN

BEING A HALF-MAN HALF LION, OR

HALF-MAN HALF BOAR, OR HALF MAN

HALF WOMAN, ETC. IN OTHER WORDS,

PLEASE DON`T BECOME A HALF MAN

HALF MOON( DEMOON)!

 

Note: I`m just punning so that

your discussions won`t get to..

.....oooooooooo SERIOUS. He.he.