Re: eclipse question

03-03-2007, 02:20 AM

> From: "Jai Simman R. Rangasamy"
> Date: Fri Mar 2, 2007 5:15 pm
> Subject: Re: eclipse rjsimman
> Send IM
> Send Message
> View Yahoo! 360° Page
> Edit Membership
>
> Hare Krishna Prabhu.
>
> Thanks for this information.
>
> During Srila Prabhupada's manifest presence, several
> eclipses would have come and gone. What was Srila
> Prabhupada's instructions regarding deity worship in
> this regard ? I have not seen any in the folio. Would
> that mean that all ISKCON temples were open and fully
> operating as per normal during eclipses back then ?
>
> Some devotees might conjecture that we need to improve
> on things, etc. but if His Divine Grace was fully
> aware of these things, he would have told us to do so.
> If he was around and things were going on, why change
> now without his authority ?
>
>
> das
>
> jai simman,
> singapore.

Well one reason is that we should follow the regulations of the sastras as
enjoined by us by Srila Prabhupada himself. A guru is only a guru if he
follows sastra, a sadhu is only a sadhu if he follows sastra. An Acarya is
only an Acarya if he follows and upholds sastra. In the trinity of Guru,
Sadhu and Sastra -- Sastra is most important. Why? Because "sastra yonit
vat" "Sastra is the source of all knowledge (of Brahman)." Vedanta Sutra
1.1.3

It may be that on a particual point in question the sastric injunction
was/is not known, but after finding out what it is then a person following
Krsna's Vedic culture will follow that injunction. To not follow sastra in
such a situation is the logic of the naked mother "matrika nagnika nyaya"
because my mother was born naked she should stay naked.

So because some sastrik injunction was not known in past does it mean that
after it becomes known we should not follow it? Of course not, it just means
that today we are wiser than we were yesterday.

Hari Sauri told me that in past when some issue was raised and there was
controversy that Srila Prabhupada would say "what do the puranas and other
sastras say?" And after finding out the relevant sastric injunction that is
what Srila Prabhupada would follow.

We are also reminded that once Srila Prabhupada heard BSST order the killing
of a snake. Srila Prabhupada had doubts as to how a sadhu could order the
killing of another living entity. But when much later he read in SB 7th
canto the prayer of Prahlada Maharaja that even the sadhus are happy when a
snake or scorpion is killed that his doubts about BSST were removed. So it
shows that SP was not familiar with that point but after finding out the
opinion of sastra that is what Srila Prabhupada accepted.

The sastras are enormous (in fact infinite in size having eminated from the
breath of the Lord) so it is not surprising that one may not be familiar
with each and every point. And though the sastras are infinite and eternal
they are not always manifest in their totality. There are many examples of
this. Where for instance are the other 99 chapters of the Brahma Samhita?
And the Purva Mimamsa refers to Brahmana sections of the Vedas which give
commentary on Samhita section of Vedas which are no longer extant. There are
many large parts of the Vedas which are not within our vision at this time.
On our planet the Mahabharata contain 100,000 slokas, on Pitri loka
1,400,000; in Gandharva loka 1,500,000 slokas and on Devaloka 3,000,000
slokas.

Returning to my point, once we find out the opinion of authorized sastra
that is what we follow. This is the example of all the acaryas.

03-03-2007, 02:20 AM

> From: "Jai Simman R. Rangasamy"
> Date: Fri Mar 2, 2007 5:15 pm
> Subject: Re: eclipse rjsimman
> Send IM
> Send Message
> View Yahoo! 360° Page
> Edit Membership
>
> Hare Krishna Prabhu.
>
> Thanks for this information.
>
> During Srila Prabhupada's manifest presence, several
> eclipses would have come and gone. What was Srila
> Prabhupada's instructions regarding deity worship in
> this regard ? I have not seen any in the folio. Would
> that mean that all ISKCON temples were open and fully
> operating as per normal during eclipses back then ?
>
> Some devotees might conjecture that we need to improve
> on things, etc. but if His Divine Grace was fully
> aware of these things, he would have told us to do so.
> If he was around and things were going on, why change
> now without his authority ?
>
>
> das
>
> jai simman,
> singapore.

Well one reason is that we should follow the regulations of the sastras as
enjoined by us by Srila Prabhupada himself. A guru is only a guru if he
follows sastra, a sadhu is only a sadhu if he follows sastra. An Acarya is
only an Acarya if he follows and upholds sastra. In the trinity of Guru,
Sadhu and Sastra -- Sastra is most important. Why? Because "sastra yonit
vat" "Sastra is the source of all knowledge (of Brahman)." Vedanta Sutra
1.1.3

It may be that on a particual point in question the sastric injunction
was/is not known, but after finding out what it is then a person following
Krsna's Vedic culture will follow that injunction. To not follow sastra in
such a situation is the logic of the naked mother "matrika nagnika nyaya"
because my mother was born naked she should stay naked.

So because some sastrik injunction was not known in past does it mean that
after it becomes known we should not follow it? Of course not, it just means
that today we are wiser than we were yesterday.

Hari Sauri told me that in past when some issue was raised and there was
controversy that Srila Prabhupada would say "what do the puranas and other
sastras say?" And after finding out the relevant sastric injunction that is
what Srila Prabhupada would follow.

We are also reminded that once Srila Prabhupada heard BSST order the killing
of a snake. Srila Prabhupada had doubts as to how a sadhu could order the
killing of another living entity. But when much later he read in SB 7th
canto the prayer of Prahlada Maharaja that even the sadhus are happy when a
snake or scorpion is killed that his doubts about BSST were removed. So it
shows that SP was not familiar with that point but after finding out the
opinion of sastra that is what Srila Prabhupada accepted.

The sastras are enormous (in fact infinite in size having eminated from the
breath of the Lord) so it is not surprising that one may not be familiar
with each and every point. And though the sastras are infinite and eternal
they are not always manifest in their totality. There are many examples of
this. Where for instance are the other 99 chapters of the Brahma Samhita?
And the Purva Mimamsa refers to Brahmana sections of the Vedas which give
commentary on Samhita section of Vedas which are no longer extant. There are
many large parts of the Vedas which are not within our vision at this time.
On our planet the Mahabharata contain 100,000 slokas, on Pitri loka
1,400,000; in Gandharva loka 1,500,000 slokas and on Devaloka 3,000,000
slokas.

Returning to my point, once we find out the opinion of authorized sastra
that is what we follow. This is the example of all the acaryas.

03-05-2007, 02:50 AM

> From: "Jai Simman R. Rangasamy"
> Date: Fri Mar 2, 2007 5:15 pm
> Subject: Re: eclipse rjsimman
> Send IM
> Send Message
> View Yahoo! 360° Page
> Edit Membership
>
> Hare Krishna Prabhu.
>
> Thanks for this information.
>
> During Srila Prabhupada's manifest presence, several
> eclipses would have come and gone. What was Srila
> Prabhupada's instructions regarding deity worship in
> this regard ? I have not seen any in the folio. Would
> that mean that all ISKCON temples were open and fully
> operating as per normal during eclipses back then ?
>
> Some devotees might conjecture that we need to improve
> on things, etc. but if His Divine Grace was fully
> aware of these things, he would have told us to do so.
> If he was around and things were going on, why change
> now without his authority ?
>
>
> das
>
> jai simman,
> singapore.

Well one reason is that we should follow the regulations of the sastras as
enjoined by us by Srila Prabhupada himself. A guru is only a guru if he
follows sastra, a sadhu is only a sadhu if he follows sastra. An Acarya is
only an Acarya if he follows and upholds sastra. In the trinity of Guru,
Sadhu and Sastra -- Sastra is most important. Why? Because "sastra yonit
vat" "Sastra is the source of all knowledge (of Brahman)." Vedanta Sutra
1.1.3

It may be that on a particual point in question the sastric injunction
was/is not known, but after finding out what it is then a person following
Krsna's Vedic culture will follow that injunction. To not follow sastra in
such a situation is the logic of the naked mother "matrika nagnika nyaya"
because my mother was born naked she should stay naked.

So because some sastrik injunction was not known in past does it mean that
after it becomes known we should not follow it? Of course not, it just means
that today we are wiser than we were yesterday.

Hari Sauri told me that in past when some issue was raised and there was
controversy that Srila Prabhupada would say "what do the puranas and other
sastras say?" And after finding out the relevant sastric injunction that is
what Srila Prabhupada would follow.

We are also reminded that once Srila Prabhupada heard BSST order the killing
of a snake. Srila Prabhupada had doubts as to how a sadhu could order the
killing of another living entity. But when much later he read in SB 7th
canto the prayer of Prahlada Maharaja that even the sadhus are happy when a
snake or scorpion is killed that his doubts about BSST were removed. So it
shows that SP was not familiar with that point but after finding out the
opinion of sastra that is what Srila Prabhupada accepted.

The sastras are enormous (in fact infinite in size having eminated from the
breath of the Lord) so it is not surprising that one may not be familiar
with each and every point. And though the sastras are infinite and eternal
they are not always manifest in their totality. There are many examples of
this. Where for instance are the other 99 chapters of the Brahma Samhita?
And the Purva Mimamsa refers to Brahmana sections of the Vedas which give
commentary on Samhita section of Vedas which are no longer extant. There are
many large parts of the Vedas which are not within our vision at this time.
On our planet the Mahabharata contain 100,000 slokas, on Pitri loka
1,400,000; in Gandharva loka 1,500,000 slokas and on Devaloka 3,000,000
slokas.

Returning to my point, once we find out the opinion of authorized sastra
that is what we follow. This is the example of all the acaryas.

03-05-2007, 02:50 AM

> From: "Jai Simman R. Rangasamy"
> Date: Fri Mar 2, 2007 5:15 pm
> Subject: Re: eclipse rjsimman
> Send IM
> Send Message
> View Yahoo! 360° Page
> Edit Membership
>
> Hare Krishna Prabhu.
>
> Thanks for this information.
>
> During Srila Prabhupada's manifest presence, several
> eclipses would have come and gone. What was Srila
> Prabhupada's instructions regarding deity worship in
> this regard ? I have not seen any in the folio. Would
> that mean that all ISKCON temples were open and fully
> operating as per normal during eclipses back then ?
>
> Some devotees might conjecture that we need to improve
> on things, etc. but if His Divine Grace was fully
> aware of these things, he would have told us to do so.
> If he was around and things were going on, why change
> now without his authority ?
>
>
> das
>
> jai simman,
> singapore.

Well one reason is that we should follow the regulations of the sastras as
enjoined by us by Srila Prabhupada himself. A guru is only a guru if he
follows sastra, a sadhu is only a sadhu if he follows sastra. An Acarya is
only an Acarya if he follows and upholds sastra. In the trinity of Guru,
Sadhu and Sastra -- Sastra is most important. Why? Because "sastra yonit
vat" "Sastra is the source of all knowledge (of Brahman)." Vedanta Sutra
1.1.3

It may be that on a particual point in question the sastric injunction
was/is not known, but after finding out what it is then a person following
Krsna's Vedic culture will follow that injunction. To not follow sastra in
such a situation is the logic of the naked mother "matrika nagnika nyaya"
because my mother was born naked she should stay naked.

So because some sastrik injunction was not known in past does it mean that
after it becomes known we should not follow it? Of course not, it just means
that today we are wiser than we were yesterday.

Hari Sauri told me that in past when some issue was raised and there was
controversy that Srila Prabhupada would say "what do the puranas and other
sastras say?" And after finding out the relevant sastric injunction that is
what Srila Prabhupada would follow.

We are also reminded that once Srila Prabhupada heard BSST order the killing
of a snake. Srila Prabhupada had doubts as to how a sadhu could order the
killing of another living entity. But when much later he read in SB 7th
canto the prayer of Prahlada Maharaja that even the sadhus are happy when a
snake or scorpion is killed that his doubts about BSST were removed. So it
shows that SP was not familiar with that point but after finding out the
opinion of sastra that is what Srila Prabhupada accepted.

The sastras are enormous (in fact infinite in size having eminated from the
breath of the Lord) so it is not surprising that one may not be familiar
with each and every point. And though the sastras are infinite and eternal
they are not always manifest in their totality. There are many examples of
this. Where for instance are the other 99 chapters of the Brahma Samhita?
And the Purva Mimamsa refers to Brahmana sections of the Vedas which give
commentary on Samhita section of Vedas which are no longer extant. There are
many large parts of the Vedas which are not within our vision at this time.
On our planet the Mahabharata contain 100,000 slokas, on Pitri loka
1,400,000; in Gandharva loka 1,500,000 slokas and on Devaloka 3,000,000
slokas.

Returning to my point, once we find out the opinion of authorized sastra
that is what we follow. This is the example of all the acaryas.