Moon Moods

[stonehearted]

 

Originally posted by melvin:

THEY SAY THAT TRUTH IS STRANGER

THAN SCIENCE FICTION. HENCE, IF

YOU BELIEVE IN TELEPROMPTING

 

Stone: I do believe in teleprompting; it has made many presidents (especially GW) look good. And, as someone who grew up reading science fiction, I also find the prospect of teleportation great fun.

[animesh]

Did Sanatan Goswami give any reason why he contradicted Bhagwata? Or did he not contradict at all?

 

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

[melvin]

Sanatana Goswami, my dear Animesh, was

once a Hindu who became a Muslim em-

ployed under a certain Shah but was con-

verted by Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu into

a Krishna conscious yogi. Sanatana was

fed up with the Islamic religion and

wanted to go back to Hinduism but was

refused by the so-called Hindu authori-

ties. Sri Chaitanya took compassion o-

ver him and accepted Sanatana back to

the Vaishnava fold. This view has some-

thing to do with Sanatana Goswami con-

tradicting some of the verses on Bhaga-

vad-gita in one of his writings.

 

[This message has been edited by melvin (edited 10-25-2001).]

 

[This message has been edited by melvin (edited 10-25-2001).]

[Guest guest]

Animeshji: Did Sanatan Goswami give any reason why he contradicted Bhagwata? Or did he not contradict at all?

 

Satyaraj: Yes, he gave the reason. He says that ‘rasa-sastras’ are a secret that only bhavukas and rasikas can understand a little. They are meant for a specific kind of muktas and not for people in general.

 

Besides Pariksit’s death Sanatana makes many other considerations on Krsna’s lilas, by inverting the order of some lilas as given in Bhagavata, by stating that actually the demons weren’t killed, and by changing completely the whole version presented by Sukadeva in many circumstances.

 

Sanatana also stresses that some lilas in Bhagavata are only prakrti and others are aprakriti, while others are mixed. And there are also lilas that never had happened. No ordinary people can fathom these topics.

 

Regarding scientific, astrological, astronomical, historical, and many other events and facts that are narrated on Bhagavatam some other Puranas simply present versions that completely contradicts Bhagavata’s thesis, specially those concerning cosmogony.

 

One should be aware that in sanatana-dharma dissension is allowed, and that there are many schools of thought like Sankhya, Yoga, Vedanta, Sakta, Pasupata, Vaisnava, Saiva, and so on. Therefore one may find as many cosmogonies as schools of thought and we cannot say that Bhagavata’s version represents the “Vedic” viewpoint, as simply there is not a “Vedic” viewpoint or a sruti’s cosmology given in details. Details on sarga and visarga (primary and secondary creations) are given by smrti such as Puranas, and those smrtis are but inferences and never should be considered as absolute evidences, and they are allowed to diverge among themselves.

 

[Guest guest]

 

Sri Chaitanya took compassion over him and accepted Sanatana back to the Vaishnava fold.

 

Satyaraj: Caitanya himself wasn’t a Vaisnava, and actually he has showed in so many occasions how he disdained Vaisnavas and all the other fanatics from Hindu sects. Caitanya was a revolutionary and his precepts are far beyond any sect or religion. In fact Gaudiya-vaisnavism was never founded by Rupa, Sanatana under Caitanya’s precepts as some present days missionaries use to say. Please read carefully the narrative found in Caitanya-caritamrta on the cleaning of Gudinca-mandir and Caitanya’s opinion on Vaisnavas from Bengal. You may also consult Caitanya-bhagavata regarding how Caitanya use to deal with Vaisnavas, specially in adi-lila.

 

[talasiga]

Originally posted by Satyaraja dasa:

Caitanya was a revolutionary and his precepts are far beyond any sect or religion.

Yes.

 

 

.

.

.

 

 

 

 

------------------

talasiga@hotmail.com

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

Regarding scientific, astrological, astronomical, historical, and many other events and facts that are narrated on Bhagavatam some other Puranas simply present versions that completely contradicts Bhagavata’s thesis, specially those concerning cosmogony.

Oh no. Now Satyaraja is going to become an authority on Vedic cosmology. Excuse me while I step out for a while.

 

[This message has been edited by jndas (edited 10-25-2001).]

[Guest guest]

Jndas: Oh no. Now Satyaraja is going to become an authority on Vedic cosmology. Excuse me while I step out for a while.

 

Satyaraj: Satyaraj is only a very stupid Brazilian and for certain he cannot be an authority not even on soccer, what to say on any Vedic topic.

 

As any stupid Brazilian, however, Satyaraj is completely convinced that no cosmologies, theologies, philosophies and any kind of proselytism may explain how Hari sports His lilas, because His ‘modus operandi’ is far beyond any Brazilian’s reasoning and not even Indian muktas can fully understand it.

 

As a very stupid Brazilian, Satyaraj is only trying to glorify Hari by discussing some of these cosmologies, theologies, philosophies with his insignificant intelligence as he cannot worship cows over here due some cultural restrictions.

 

Do you really imagine that Bhagavata Purana completely explains the whole lilas of creation, maintenance and destruction of the material world?

 

[shvu]

 

Details on sarga and visarga (primary and secondary creations) are given by smrti such as Puranas, and those smrtis are but inferences and never should be considered as absolute evidences, and they are allowed to diverge among themselves.

And they have diverged a lot. For instance, the story of Rama is mentioned in 9 Puranas, and all the nine version have some differences among themselves. One author's comment was, "what is the fun in repeating things as they are? The fun is in coming up with a new version".

 

For more info read,

 

Retrieval of History from Puranic Myths

Author: P L Bhargava

Publisher: D K Print World Ltd.

ISBN: 8124601003

 

Cheers

 

[Guest guest]

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

 

Satyaraj: Notice that I am stressing differences between Sanatana’s version on Bhagavata and Sukadeva’s. Supposedly both sages belong to the same kalpa, and they are dealing with the last Krsna’s avatara lilas. I had not noticed a pralaya between two different kalpas yet. Did you?

 

Krsna’s lilas from former kalpas were quite different, as those described by Parasara in Visnu Purana.

 

[suryaz]

Originally posted by Satyaraja dasa:

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

 

Satyaraj: Notice that I am stressing differences between Sanatana’s version on Bhagavata and Sukadeva’s. Supposedly both sages belong to the same kalpa, and they are dealing with the last Krsna’s avatara lilas. I had not noticed a pralaya between two different kalpas yet. Did you?

 

Krsna’s lilas from former kalpas were quite different, as those described by Parasara in Visnu Purana.

...and the cow jumped over the moon

[Guest guest]

Shvuji: the story of Rama is mentioned in 9 Puranas, and all the nine version have some differences among themselves. One author's comment was, "what is the fun in repeating things as they are? The fun is in coming up with a new version".

 

Satyaraj: Yes, otherwise lila would be a monotonous activity! Therefore Hari is always enacting a brand new version.

 

Padma Purana describes a Rama’s lila were Ravana was killed before Kumbhakarma’s death, and there were four Rama’s mothers instead of three. Even Rama was quite surprised with the many differences of that new script and had to be helped by Jambavan, who was His oldest lila’s partner and could give a satisfactory development to these sports.

 

[valaya]

Originally posted by suryaz:

...and the cow jumped over the moon

 

Now that must have been a mooving experience...!

 

 

[valaya]

As a very stupid Brazilian, Satyaraj is only trying to glorify Hari by discussing some of these cosmologies, theologies, philosophies with his insignificant intelligence as he cannot worship cows over here due some cultural restrictions.

C'mon, Satyaraja, you've been called many things but certainly never stupid! Jndas referred to you as `that guy in Brazil`, which I don't think can be taken as analogous with `stupid`...can it?

 

BTW, I think you can be quite humorous at times, but what have those poor Brazilian cows got to do with all this, anyway? I'm sure they're no more stupid than cows anywhere else!

 

 

valaya (Persons Against Bovine Bashing)

[valaya]

Shvuji: the story of Rama is mentioned in 9 Puranas, and all the nine version have some differences among themselves. One author's comment was, "what is the fun in repeating things as they are? The fun is in coming up with a new version".

 

Satyaraj: Yes, otherwise lila would be a monotonous activity! Therefore Hari is always enacting a brand new version.

 

No matter how many different stories we hear of some wonderful place, we really have to go there ourselves in order to appreciate it's diverse wonders in all their splendor...

 

valaya RR

[Guest guest]

Valaya:... but what have those poor Brazilian cows got to do with all this, anyway?

 

Satyaraj: Perhaps monotony... Up here cows only graze. They won’t be at streets asking you for samosas, cakes, bread, chapatis, or yogurt like Indian cows. So, people in general could not get used to worship cows, and actually they have the bad habit to live on cows death bodies mixed with rice and beans! This is terrible!!!

 

Fearing a re-incarnation in a cow’s body up here or in Argentina due my past sinful activities as a cow’s predator, I had decided to purify myself by studding cow’s scriptures, or those that glorify cows as worshipable beings. That is the link between Brazilian cows and Indian scriptures.

 

 

[valaya]

Originally posted by Satyaraja dasa:

 

Sri Chaitanya took compassion over him and accepted Sanatana back to the Vaishnava fold.

 

Satyaraj: Caitanya himself wasn’t a Vaisnava, and actually he has showed in so many occasions how he disdained Vaisnavas and all the other fanatics from Hindu sects. Caitanya was a revolutionary and his precepts are far beyond any sect or religion. In fact Gaudiya-vaisnavism was never founded by Rupa, Sanatana under Caitanya’s precepts as some present days missionaries use to say.

 

Agreed! Lord Caitanya is considered a `secret avatar` due to His appearance in the mood of Sri Radha as Krsna's topmost devotee. Although so many attempts are made to cram Him into some sampradaya and prove His divinity or define His teachings as just more `religious principles`, they will never be successful.

 

He simply wants everyone everywhere to embrace the Holy Names, preferably in congregational chanting, but always in the spirit of one who is the humble servant of all, not only the `vaisnavas`. Actually Srila Bhaktivinode Thakhur saw everyone as a vaisnava and devotee of Krsna.

 

Efforts to authenticate Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu as God and His teachings as the Absolute Truth are merely to promote this chanting amongst those who insist on following some `bonafide` religion. Same goes for so many of the `religious` rituals, etc. The point is to instill enough faith into the faithless that they wholeheartedly take up this chanting process until they can directly experience it's fruits themselves personally.

 

For one who is blessed with simple sincere devotion and a humble service attitude, everything unfolds quite naturally. Unfortunately most of us, especially we `sophisticated intellectuals`, create so many difficulties for ourselves which must then be dealt with one-by-one, thereby putting further stumbling blocks in our way.

 

Still, in the end, the Holy Names MUST succeed as they remain absolutely unimpeded, for that is the nature of Srimati Radharani Herself. JAI RADHE!

 

valaya RR

[Audarya lila]

Originally posted by Satyaraja dasa:

Sri Chaitanya took compassion over him and accepted Sanatana back to the Vaishnava fold.

 

Satyaraj: Caitanya himself wasn’t a Vaisnava, and actually he has showed in so many occasions how he disdained Vaisnavas and all the other fanatics from Hindu sects. Caitanya was a revolutionary and his precepts are far beyond any sect or religion. In fact Gaudiya-vaisnavism was never founded by Rupa, Sanatana under Caitanya’s precepts as some present days missionaries use to say. Please read carefully the narrative found in Caitanya-caritamrta on the cleaning of Gudinca-mandir and Caitanya’s opinion on Vaisnavas from Bengal. You may also consult Caitanya-bhagavata regarding how Caitanya use to deal with Vaisnavas, specially in adi-lila.

Satyaraja,

 

It appears that you are eating too many nuts over there in Brazil as it is apparent they are going to your head.

 

I will choose to take the opinion of the Goswamis, Svarupa Damodara, Krsna dasa Kaviraja, and all the other vaishnava acharyas coming in their line over your imaginative/offensive interpretations.

 

Now that you have left Gaudiya Vaishnavism you are suddenly an expert on Chaitanya Mahaprabhu? So much so that we should listen to your opinions over those of his intimate associates?

 

Have another nut.

 

Your servant,

Audarya lila dasa

 

 

[Guest guest]

Audarya lila: I will choose to take the opinion of the Goswamis, Svarupa Damodara, Krsna dasa Kaviraja, and all the other vaishnava acharyas coming in their line over your imaginative/offensive interpretations

 

Satyaraj: Yes, you are right! You should follow Svarupa’s and Krsnadas’ opinion regarding Caitanya’s filiation with Vaisnavism, and specially with Gaudiya-vaisnavism. Please quote a sloka or a stanza from Svarupa’s diary where he states that “Caitanya was a Vaisnava” or that “Caitanya was teaching Vaisnavas’ doctrine.” You may do the same by scrutinizing Krsnadas’ books such as Caitanya-caritamrta and give us such evidences.

 

Perhaps you are mistaken Svarupa’s and Krsnadas’ opinion with Bhaktivinoda’s and some missionaries in his line.

 

The only filiations you may find is with an uncertain Madhva’s follower, who is not mentioned in Madhva’s sampradaya records and a filiation with a well knew Mayavadi. What a eclectic filiation!

 

[Guest guest]

Lord Caitanya is considered a `secret avatar` due to His appearance in the mood of Sri Radha as Krsna's topmost devotee. Although so many attempts are made to cram Him into some sampradaya and prove His divinity or define His teachings as just more `religious principles`, they will never be successful.

 

Yes, you are right! Caitanya’s precepts are not a sect’s monopoly. Just like Jesus’ aren’t Catholic Church monopoly. These exalted muktas belong only to Hari and cannot be taken as missionaries’s property.

 

Muktas like them exist in a state of non-separation from the Lord (Vedanta-sutra 4.4.4) and they are under the control of no one but the Lord, therefore they are the master of all and have no other master than Hari Himself. (Vedanta-sutra 4.4.9).

 

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

I had decided to purify myself by studding cow’s scriptures, or those that glorify cows as worshipable beings.

Service to cows is a great sadhana that we should all practice. There is a nice book published by the publishers of Kalpataru magazine (are they Gita press?). The book is called "Go Purana" and is a compilation of all the scriptural references to cows as found in the Puranas. It is a full sized book around 1 or 2 inches thick.

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

Padma Purana describes a Rama’s lila were Ravana was killed before Kumbhakarma’s death, and there were four Rama’s mothers instead of three.

Tulasidas says "There are tens of millions of incarnations of Rama's occuring in different Kalpas, thus there is no wonder why various descriptions of His lilas differ." I'm on my way out to Melkote (Sri Narasimha temple) right now, so no time to get the exact reference. If anyone wants it, I will post it when I get back.

[shvu]

 

Tulasidas says "There are tens of millions of incarnations of Rama's occuring in different Kalpas, thus there is no wonder why various descriptions of His lilas differ."

Yeah, I have heard about it. He also mentions there are many crores of Ramayanas. Interestingly, Madhva is of the opinion, the authentic ramayana is moola ramayana, which is not extant today. The valmiki ramayana, is not authority to them.

 

Cheers

 

[Guest guest]

According to Talasidas and to Adiatmika Ramayana this Mula Ramayana was sung by Narayana to Brahmaji in one hundred billion crores of slokas and Narada has heard it from Brahma and delivered it to Sivaji.

 

Sivaji has done the Manasa Ramayana and Tulasidas has made a popular version on this Siva’s Ramayana.

 

As Narada’s disciple, Valmiki is also aware of this Mula Ramayana. According to Bhagavata and other smrtis he will be the Vayasa of the 27th kalpa and no one can match his erudition.

 

As Rama is also an yuga-avatara of Hari, and His pastimes are manifested in this brahmanda at the end of every Tetra-yuga. As in a day of Brahma there are 1,000 of Tetra-yugas, during the 12 hours of the Brahma’s day Rama and His pastimes are coming and going at every 2:30 minutes!