sumedh
-
Content Count
456 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by sumedh
-
-
Hare Krishna
Material world is created/destroyed in cycles. Spiritual world is not -- it is Eternal realm where there is no past or future, only the undivided eternal present.Sure the soul will vanish in the spiritual realm, but will come again in the material world to play the part. It's a cycle.
From Srimad Bhagavad-Gita
8.15
mam upetya punar janma
duhkhalayam asasvatam
napnuvanti mahatmanah
samsiddhim paramam gatah
SYNONYMS
mam -- Me; upetya -- achieving; punah -- again; janma -- birth; duhkha-alayam -- place of miseries; asasvatam -- temporary; na -- never; apnuvanti -- attain; maha-atmanah -- the great souls; samsiddhim -- perfection; paramam -- ultimate; gatah -- having achieved.
TRANSLATION
After attaining Me, the great souls, who are yogis in devotion, never return to this temporary world, which is full of miseries, because they have attained the highest perfection.
8.16
a-brahma-bhuvanal lokah
punar avartino 'rjuna
mam upetya tu kaunteya
punar janma na vidyate
SYNONYMS
a-brahma-bhuvanat -- up to the Brahmaloka planet; lokah -- the planetary systems; punah -- again; avartinah -- returning; arjuna -- O Arjuna; mam -- unto Me; upetya -- arriving; tu -- but; kaunteya -- O son of Kunti; punah janma -- rebirth; na -- never; vidyate -- takes place.
TRANSLATION
From the highest planet in the material world down to the lowest, all are places of misery wherein repeated birth and death take place. But one who attains to My abode, O son of Kunti, never takes birth again.
8.20
paras tasmat tu bhavo 'nyo
'vyakto 'vyaktat sanatanah
yah sa sarveshu bhuteshu
nasyatsu na vinasyati
SYNONYMS
parah -- transcendental; tasmat -- to that; tu -- but; bhavah -- nature; anyah -- another; avyaktah -- unmanifest; avyaktat -- to the unmanifest; sanatanah -- eternal; yah sah -- that which; sarveshu -- all; bhuteshu -- manifestation; nasyatsu -- being annihilated; na -- never; vinasyati -- is annihilated.
TRANSLATION
Yet there is another unmanifest nature, which is eternal and is transcendental to this manifested and unmanifested matter. It is supreme and is never annihilated. When all in this world is annihilated, that part remains as it is.
8.21
avyakto 'kshara ity uktas
tam ahuh paramam gatim
yam prapya na nivartante
tad dhama paramam mama
SYNONYMS
avyaktah -- unmanifested; aksharah -- infallible; iti -- thus; uktah -- is said; tam -- that; ahuh -- is known; paramam -- the ultimate; gatim -- destination; yam -- which; prapya -- gaining; na -- never; nivartante -- come back; tat -- that; dhama -- abode; paramam -- supreme; mama -- My.
TRANSLATION
That which the Vedantists describe as unmanifest and infallible, that which is known as the supreme destination, that place from which, having attained it, one never returns -- that is My supreme abode.
you said:
The cycle will not stop, but not because the souls will return. It will not stop because the Lord is infinite and consequently there are infinite vibbhinnamsas viz. the infinitesemal jiva souls.If a soul would vanish to never return the sycle would stop.
-
Seems like the bhrama-kumaras have taken a particular liking to this site. Too much time on their hands ...
Soul will "vanish" from the material world into the spiritual realm.If it was possible to be liberated form the cycle of birth and rebirth something which has been there -the soul will vanish.
-
Hare Krishna
Liberation means Self realization and God realization.I wish to know that if we can attain complete peace, happiness through the remembrance of God and realization of self while living in this world itself then why should we aim for liberation from the cycle of birth and death.
This is only your imagination. Moreover, this reasoning fits better for Lekhraj.Nobody, who is supposed to have been liberated has returned to tell us his/her experience of liberation. Then how do we know if a particular soul has actually attained salvation or has taken rebirth?
-
Dear roohani sevadhari
The scope of your misunderstandings is becoming too large for me to handle.
you said:
You apply foolish examples to only show your poor understanding of the law or of the Truth.In the eyes of law the one who aids and abets a crime is also equally responsible for the crime. So, if you say that God's energy which accomplishes the action i.e. the SuperSoul dwelling in the jivas indirectly helps us fulfil our desires (good or bad) then you are indirectly holding God also responsible for the good and bad deeds performed by various souls.
Let me try to give a better example: There is no law which would punish the owner of petroleum refinery plant because a criminal used petrol coming from the plant for his vehicle in which the crime was committed.
The jiva soul is utterly incapable of doing anything... in fact it depends completely on the Lord for its mere existence. The source of energy of the material body as well as that of the pure soul is the Supreme Lord.
-
Dear roohani sevadhari
you said:
Don't bother searching for the quote for you shall not find it. I save you the trouble; here is the quote which you misrepresented as saying that God causes the miseries.It has been mentioned in this forum (in some other thread) only that God only causes misery. I will try to search and quote it.
In the thread http://www.hare-krishna.org/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=HareKrishnaNews&Number=9167
guest said that:
and despite having directly asked to back off you again put forward the same statement.so who is the creator of the mud, the dirt and the rapist?
how many GOD are there?
how god is supreme if he's not the god of mud, rapist and dirt?
You originally said:
which was in reply to the above quote. You show a complete lack of integrity, and go off into digressions when this is pointed out.Such absurd imaginations about God having made mud, dirt and rapists have been propagated by selfish human beings through their scriptures only to fulfil their self-interests and to cover their follies and wrongs.
Then you say that:
which is besides the point. Moreover the sense of this is not wrong though you may try to twist it. The desire to do right/wrong action is ours but it is God's energy which accomplishes the action i.e. the SuperSoul dwelling in the jivas indirectly helps us fulfil our desires though He is the non-doer.There is a famous song of Jagjit Singh which is played in almost all the Hindu temples. The song in the praise of Shri Ram, says, "Tu hi bigaadey tu hi sanwaarey"
However, in the context of devotion it can be seen to have another meaning. The devotee who has surrendered to the Lord (or wants to) gives up all his desires to be completely in tune with God's desires, so that he has no independent desire.
-
Dear roohani sevadhari
Okay i call your bluff. Produce a quote where someone on this forum (apart from yourself) has said that God causes misery or show it written in some Vedic scripture.When the misery or happiness of any living entity is based on his karma then why do Hindus or other scriptures say that it is God who causes misery or happiness?
If you cannot, then apologize publicly for having spread a lie more than once.
Then your cheating tendency is again apparent here:
Why? Because you tried to use fossil records to refute the account of scriptures. Then when i remind you that the fossil records also refute lekhraj's theories then you start off in another tangent trying to impose your imaginations upon myself. I also showed that the fossil records do not refute the scriptures (just because fossils have not been found of as old age as given in scriptures, does not mean none can be found in future -- moreover fossilization requires precise conditions which are rarely present) but on the other hand refute your imaginations since they clearly show that humans have been living for more than 5000 years.If you accept that humans have been existing since lakhs of years(now trillions as per one of our friends)then you will also have believe that human beings were monkeys once upon a time. God Shiva says that this world cycle is only of 5000 years which repeats itself. Neither human beings were monkeys nor monkeys can become humanbeings (unlike your belief).
Have the decency to admit your mistakes.
-
Dear roohani sevadhari
It is quite refreshing to see you refer to scriptures to substantiate what you say, which is quite some progress. However, the quotes you present in fact support what the learned friends on this forum said. What they said is that engaging in devotional service (by the nine processes mentioned in the quote before, primary being chanting of Holy Names) is the best way. This is what the quotes say:
Here yogi means a person engaged in bhakti-yoga who fixes his mind on the Supreme Lord. We know this because in 8.22 before this quote the Lord refers to bhakti only. Thus we know He is talking about a bhakta who fixes his mind on Him.vedeshu yajneshu tapahsu caiva
daneshu yat punya-phalam pradishtam
atyeti tat sarvam idam viditva
yogi param sthanam upaiti cadyam
SYNONYMS
vedeshu -- in the study of the Vedas; yajneshu -- in the performances of yajna, sacrifice; tapahsu -- in undergoing different types of austerities; ca -- also; eva -- certainly; daneshu -- in giving charities; yat -- that which; punya-phalam -- result of pious work; pradishtam -- indicated; atyeti -- surpasses; tat sarvam -- all those; idam -- this; viditva -- knowing; yogi -- the devotee; param -- supreme; sthanam -- abode; upaiti -- achieves; ca -- also; adyam -- original.
TRANSLATION
A person who accepts the path of devotional service is not bereft of the results derived from studying the Vedas, performing austere sacrifices, giving charity or pursuing philosophical and fruitive activities. Simply by performing devotional service, he attains all these, and at the end he reaches the supreme eternal abode.
Bhagavad-Gita 8.22
purushah sa parah partha
bhaktya labhyas tv ananyaya
yasyantah-sthani bhutani
yena sarvam idam tatam
SYNONYMS
purushah -- the Supreme Personality; sah -- He; parah -- the Supreme, than whom no one is greater; partha -- O son of Pritha; bhaktya -- by devotional service; labhyah -- can be achieved; tu -- but; ananyaya -- unalloyed, undeviating; yasya -- whom; antah-sthani -- within; bhutani -- all of this material manifestation; yena -- by whom; sarvam -- all; idam -- whatever we can see; tatam -- is pervaded.
TRANSLATION
The Supreme Personality of Godhead, who is greater than all, is attainable by unalloyed devotion. Although He is present in His abode, He is all-pervading, and everything is situated within Him.
Elsewhere the Lord says:
BG 6.46: A yogi is greater than the ascetic, greater than the empiricist and greater than the fruitive worker. Therefore, O Arjuna, in all circumstances, be a yogi.
BG 6.47: And of all yogis, the one with great faith who always abides in Me, thinks of Me within himself, and renders transcendental loving service to Me -- he is the most intimately united with Me in yoga and is the highest of all. That is My opinion.
Similiarly in the other quotes you have provided, the Lord says that only a devotee can see Him and Arjuna is His dear friend. This is stated clearly in just the next quote:
Srimad Bhagavad-Gita 11.54
bhaktya tv ananyaya sakya
aham evam-vidho 'rjuna
jnatum drashtum ca tattvena
praveshtum ca parantapa
SYNONYMS
bhaktya -- by devotional service; tu -- but; ananyaya -- without being mixed with fruitive activities or speculative knowledge; sakyah -- possible; aham -- I; evam-vidhah -- like this; arjuna -- O Arjuna; jnatum -- to know; drashtum -- to see; ca -- and; tattvena -- in fact; praveshtum -- to enter into; ca -- also; parantapa -- O mighty-armed one.
TRANSLATION
My dear Arjuna, only by undivided devotional service can I be understood as I am, standing before you, and can thus be seen directly. Only in this way can you enter into the mysteries of My understanding.
As you say one cannot reach the Lord by reading vedas, only by devotional service which is performed through the nine processes given before, the primary being the chanting of the Holy Names.
you said:
He gives the "third eye", as you call it, to His pure devotees; see the quote before.One can realize self and God only through the third eye of knowledge which God Himself grants us in the present time.
Haribol
-
Dear roohani sevadhari
You again come up with your speculations etc. Whoever said that God commits the sins? You impose your speculations on others and your rumblings are only a source of amusement to others.
For instance you say:
If God did not make dirt, rapists etc. then did they spring out of nowhere. You are a completely confused individual who cannot distinguish between creating someone and commiting some act. No one said that God commits sins, but definitely He gives birth to the sinner.Such absurd imaginations about God having made mud, dirt and rapists have been propagated by selfish human beings through their scriptures only to fulfil their self-interests and to cover their follies and wrongs.
-
Dear roohani sevadhari
I never said that incorporeal Shiva is an imagination: what i said that what you make of Lord Shiva as being incorporeal etc. is your own imagination. Your ideas of incorporeal are your imagination; you try to "kill" Lord Shiva in your thoughts by imagining that he has no transcendental body. Shiva-tattva is very complex and would be a whole new topic in itself, but only if you come up with a better attitude.I wish to say that just as you say that incorporeal Shiva is an imagination we can also say that Shri Krishna possessing only transcendental body (or subtle body) is also an imagination only. Roles in this corporeal world cannot be played just with subtle bodies. All the persons who have played roles on this earth have had corporeal bodies. How can Shri Krishna manage to have played role for so many years without a corporeal body in front of lakhs of people. I have not heard of any famous character of world history without a physical body. It is only a fig of imagination to say that Shri Krishna did not have a physical body.
Transcendental is different from normal subtle -- transcendental is subtlest of subtle. So actually the normal non-devotee humans only saw Lord Krishna as possessing a normal human body due to lack of transcendental eyes, while the pure devotees saw the transcendental form with their transcendental eyes. Actually even though the Lord is present everywhere all the time and the pure devotees can see Him, only when He comes as a lila-avataara can the normal humans see Him though they think He has a material body due to their possessing material eyes. The siddhanta is simple -- material eyes can only see a material projection of the Truth.
In this context Lord Krishna says:
Srimad Bhagavad-Gita 9.11
All i can say is that you have taken to oppose all these direct scriptural statements without any evidence.avajananti mam mudha
manusim tanum asritam
param bhavam ajananto
mama bhuta-mahesvaram
Fools deride Me when I descend in the human form. They do not know My transcendental nature and My supreme dominion over all that be.
you said:
you imagine anyone to be god, what can be done. Even if the ideas of your god have been shown to be wrong you cling on to them -- as you wish. It may be fashionable to call the accounts given in the vedic scriptures as "outdated", "myths" etc. but does not change the Truth. In their complete understanding none of the Vedic Truths have been shown to be incorrect a wee bit; on the other hand scientists have learned a lot from the vedic knowledge e.g. using sanskrit in AI, vedic mathematics, the latest fad of yogic postures etc.If you wish to cling on to imaginary, outdated stories and scriptures, it is your sweet will. It may be karnapriya (sound sweet to the ears) but is nothing more than mere imagination. god comes and gives knowledge that is practical and useful and does not narrate imaginary stories just to please the crowd.
-
Dear roohani sevadhari
you said:
As i said before, if you need to ask do it in a proper way. First off you expose your ignorance of these topics then challange others arrogantly -- do you know how persons with such a kind of behaviour have been described in the scriptures?But my question regarding the whereabouts of Brahma, Vishnu and Shankar and 33 crore deities is still valid, because you say that deities are imperishable (after drinking the amrit or nectar) and have bodies as mentioned in various scriptures. For a moment I may accept that Shri Krishna had a transcendental body and hence cannot be proved, but where are all the other imperishable 33 crore deities? Have all of them vanished in the thin air? And where are all the demons and their paataal lok, from where they perenially fight with the deities living in heaven? Scientists have sent probe missions upto Mars, but have not found evidence of any life beyond this earth. Then where are all the imperishable 33 crore deities mentioned in the scriptures? Did all the 33 crore deities and demons vanish along with Shri Krishna on the so-called date when he breathed his last? Why have human beings not seen any of the 33 crore deities or an equal army of demons during the few thousand years of recorded human history?
Anyways the scriptures also give precise descriptions of these planets e.g. that these planets have different time scales. Do we or the scientists have any experience where a world has a different time scale? They do not have because using mechanical means only one level (viz. bhu-mandala, and that too not properly and completely) can be probed. The fourteen planetary systems mentioned in the scriptures are in different planes of existence as can be seen from the different time scales mentioned for them. The bhu-mandala is only composed of the five gross elements (the subtle elements being present only in living beings) while the others are in more subtle and other realms of existence. This is a very complex topic; various puranas give the description of how to move from one plane to another using the sushumna passage, e.g. markandeya purana, which is said to have closed at the start of kali-yuga though there are yogic siddhis which enable one to still go there. Even many modern day yogis claim to be able to go into other realms but their claims should be taken with a grain of salt; however acharyas have confirmed all these so there is no question at least to those who believe in vedic scriptures.
See this for an introduction to this:
http://nersp.nerdc.ufl.edu/~ghi/vc.html
with a sample chapter here:
http://nersp.nerdc.ufl.edu/~ghi/vcchap.html
Suffice to say that if one is considering the descriptions of the various planetary systems from the scriptures, then one must consider the complete description not try to refute by taking a part of it. When the scientists are able to find a method to move to other planes of existence then they can try to refute it -- till then only say "we do not know" or "we do not know, and do not believe that there are other planes of existence".
-
Dear roohani sevadhari
you said:
This is not any quote from Rig Veda, a statement by someone at Adhyatmik... has not value. You need to give the precise reference for this, which richa with the complete quote. A vague reference has not value; why? because all the scriptures directly contradict this. For example see Bhagavad-Gita 7.4man buddhi ko hi atma kahajata hai ,rug ved ki richa me ye baat ayi hai " Manrew atma" arthat man ko hi atma kahajata hai
bhumir apo 'nalo vayuh
kham mano buddhir eva ca
ahankara itiyam me
bhinna prakrtir astadha
Earth, water, fire, air, ether, mind, intelligence and false ego--all together these eight comprise My separated material energies.
-
Hare Krishna
To some extent yes. See Sripad Madhava's commentary on Bhagavad-Gita (esp. 2.13) for instance.
you said:
Which has been shown to be wrong according to the scriptures, for Lord Krishna does not possess a corporeal body but a completely transcendental one. As for "incorporeal" Lord Shiva being ajanma, he is born from Lord Brahma and that is the verdict of the scriptures. Your artificial differentiation between shankar and shiva is heard of before, but has not scriptural evidence -- maybe you mean sadashiva.It is written in Gita itself that God is ajanma, avyakta, abhokta etc. which apply only to incorporeal Shiva and not the corporeal Shri Krishna. What more proof do you want?
you said:
which is only your imagination, for it was the year when Lord Krishna ended His manifested lilas.Shri Sumedh has himself given the year of death of Shri Krishna. I think he will also be able to tell the date of his birth.
-
Hare Krishna
you said:
which is also incorrect. The start of Vedic period is untracable; all we have is speculations from modern historians. The Vedic texts have been dated at around 3100BC which is consistent with tradition since before that all the Vedic texts were transmitted by hearing and learning. Srila Vyasadeva seeing the future degradation of memory compiled and wrote them. When you quoted the date of manuscript mahabharata, you did not apply basic facts that manuscripts do not survive for 5000 years; Shankaracharya who lived much before that quotes them (and puranas) frequently in his works.You have still not answered my questions as to the ages of various ages like Satyug, Tretayug and Dwaparyug. If Krishna expired in 3102 BC according to you, then Shri Rama must have existed many lakhs/thousands of years earlier. If Kaliyuga's age is more than 4 lakh years then Dwapar must have been certainly much more older. If that is the case then Ramayana must have taken place lakhs of years ago. But there is no historical proof for such events having taken place at that time. When the Vedic period itself is a few thousands years old according to history then how can Ramayan would have been enacted lakhs of years ago?
Moreover, there is no proof that your imagined god exists except in your forced imaginations.
And you avoided the basic question that humans have been existing for lakhs of years without breaks as is accepted by even archeologists. What you make of that? Actually just forget it; it is pretty clear to me by now that you have just decided to repeat and repeat the same things even if they have been shown to be wrong.
-
Hare Krishna
you said:
One is that simply because astronomical evidence is scientifically provable compared to the archeological evidence which keeps changing every year. Second, if you want to live in your fantasies there is little i can do because i have already given links to places which are older than 4000BC according to history. So when you say that the only links i gave are giving astronomical evidence is nothing but a lie.Omshanti. In the articles that you have quoted, the authors have quoted dates prior to 5000 years ago only on the basis of astronomical dates, which are not the basis of history. I have not seen any book on history where astronomy is the proof/basis for deciding the dates of any historical event or place. Most of the dates in history are based on excavations or scientific methods like C-14 Dating techniques.
you said:
Which only proves that the persons who were being quoted are technically atheists because they do not know abcs of transcendental knowledge and so you should consider them "neutral". Get off your bandawagon, rewind a little and go back to the quotes i gave earlier about Krishna ascending to His abode in His trancendental form as in the scriptures. Don't jump around claiming your victory like a little kid by putting words in my mouth, okay ...Finally, by quoting the date of death of Shri Krishna you seem to have accepted that Shri Krishna is not a God but a human being who enters into the cycle of birth and death.
-
Dear roohani sevadhari
You have quite a capacity to write things unrelated to questions again and again. Okay for one last time -- i am asking why does your god send the souls to this drama. I am not asking what happens in this drama and what we should do etc. My simple question is why does your god send the souls here. Is there anything lacking in the soul world? or are the souls not happy there. Another question is that what eventually happens to the souls who did not make "spiritual efforts" after your 5000 years -- do they go back to soul world you say...
-
Dear roohani sevadhari
You again jumped the gun too early instead of trying to understand when you said:
Ever heard of subtle matter. It would be a real waste to quote Bhagavad-Gita in this context. Suffice to say that you are confused what is spiritual and what is material. The vedic definition of material is different, viz. that which is not spiritual or subject to change. Spiritual reality is not subject to change while mind/intellect are. btw mind/intellect comes in the scientific definition of matter also though they are unable to define it as such due to the limited scope of current science.It is a well known fact that mind is something different from matter. Even scientists and psychologists have been trying to do research about mind and its effects. It is surprising to hear from you that mind and intellect is something physical.
-
Hare Krishna
Vishnu and Krishna are one and the same person, get it...
Now if you want to chant Lord Vishnu's name then "Om namo Narayana" or many others are prescribed but manufacturing mantras is not proper and a sign of jumping the scriptures. By the way Krishna and Rama are also Vishnu's Names -- ever heard of Vishnu sahasranama.
As for Lord Krishna being the Original Personality or Original Form (one may say the Original Vishnu), this conclusion is presented in Srimad-Bhagavatam.
-
Dear roohani sevadhari
It is tiring to say same things again. Whatever you quoted is British era history now proved to be wrong. So do your readings again. I can help you for a start.
From http://www.geocities.com/~ramayanam/india_history.htm
From the calculation of the vernal equinox cycle, the Taiteriya Samhita provides dates that reach as far as 22000 B.C (Ref: Vartak, Tilak).
In his book "Are the Gathas pre-vedic" H.S.Spencer quotes another scholar stating that "Dhanista was the first of the naskshatras in the Rgvedic times and this takes us back to 21788 B.C., at least, to the origin of the Rgved." According to Dr. B.M. Sidhartha, director of the Birla Science Center, "Rgved .. was a product of a well-settled civilization going back to 8000 B.C. and beyond on the basis of astronomical dating .. and supported by archaeological excavations in south eastern Turkey... the more antique date of 10,000 B.C. proposed for RgVed or Vedic culture seemed more plausible in view of the epi-paleolithic agricultural and proto-agricultural civilizations going back to the same period ..." (TOI, August 2, 1993). These datelines were already proposed by Tilak when he says, " The Vedic hymns were sung in post-glacial times (8000 B.C.) by poets who had inherited their knowledge or contents thereof from their antediluvian forefathers". B.G. Tilak has done some extraordinary work of deciphering the concealed astronomical allusions in the ancient Vedic texts.
The geological discovery of the mighty Vedic river Sarasvati, which originally flowed somewhat parallel to Indus, dried up around 2000 B.C. Now the Rgved speaks of a mighty Sarasvati and it is in much later literature that we hear of the disappearance of the river. It is definitely known that the Veda are much older than the Mahabharat period (3100 B.C.) This establishes that the Rgved itself could not be later than the 4th millennium B.C. A paper presenting technical evidence concerning a newly discovered bronze idol states, " The life sized head has a hair style which the Vedas describe as being unique to Vasishtha, one of the Rishis who composed parts of Rig Veda ... Carbon 14 tests indicate that it was cast around 3700 B.C., with an error in either direction of upto 800 years .. an age also confirmed by independent metallurgical tests" (J. of Indo-European Studies, v.18, 1990, p.425-46). More and more archaeological findings are coming forth that place the Vedic age to remote antiquity.
An assessment of the Vedic literature thus provides a chronology of events in steps of 2000 years, starting from the early period of the RgVed (23,000 B.C.) upto the occurance of the Mahabharat War, a period when Vedvyas compiled the scattered Vedic knowledge into four parts. It is also worthy to note that the Indian history can be traced continuously from 29,000 B.C., when the great law-giver Swayambhuva Manu, flourished.
The astronomical evidence of Vedic texts is irrefutable unless one believes that the writers knew how to solve differential equations. The discovery of the dried up basin of Sarasvati by satellite imagery corroborates it further.
From http://koenraadelst.bharatvani.org/articles/aid/astronomy.html
That Hindu astronomical lore about ancient tuimes cannot be based on later back-calculation, was also argued by Playfair's contemporary, the French astronomer Jean-Sylvain Bailly: "the motions of the stars calculated by the Hindus before some 4500 years vary not even a single minute from the [modern] tables of Cassini and Meyer. The Indian tables give the same annual variation of the moon as that discovered by Tycho Brahe -- a variation unknown to the school of Alexandria and also the the Arabs".6
Prof. N.S. Rajaram, a mathematician who has worked for NASA, comments: "fabricating astronomical data going back thousands of years calls for knowledge of Newton's Law of Gravitation and the ability to solve differential equations."7 Failing this advanced knowledge, the data in the Brahminical tables must be based on actual observation. Ergo, the Sanskrit-speaking Vedic seers were present in person to record astronomical observations and preserve them for a full 6,000 years: "The observations on which the astronomy of India is founded, were made more than three thousand years before the Christian era. (...) Two other elements of this astronomy, the equation of the sun's centre and the obliquity of the ecliptic (...) seem to point to a period still more remote, and to fix the origin of this astronomy 1000 or 1200 years earlier, that is, 4300 years before the Christian era".8
All this at least on the assumption that Playfair's, Bailly's and Rajaram's claims about the Hindu astronomical tables are correct. Disputants may start by proving them factually wrong, but should not enter the dispute arena without a refutation of the astronomers' assertions. It is something of a scandal that Playfair's and Bailly's findings have been lying around for two hundred years while linguists and indologists were publishing speculations on Vedic chronology in stark disregard for the contribution of astronomy.
2.3. The start of Kali-Yuga
Hindu tradition makes mention of the conjunction of the "seven planets" (Saturn, Jupiter, Mars, Venus, Mercury, sun and moon) and Ketu (southern lunar node, the northern node/Rahu being by definition in the opposite location) near the fixed star Revati (Zeta Piscium) on 18 February 3102 BC. This date, at which Krishna is supposed to have breathed his last, is conventionally the start of the so-called Kali-Yuga, the "age of strife", the low point in a declining sequence of four ages. However, modern scholars have claimed that the Kali-Yuga system of time-reckoning was a much younger invention, not attested before the 6th century AD.
Against this modernist opinion, Bailly and Playfair had already shown that the position of the moon (the fastest-moving "planet", hence the hardest to back-calculate with precision) at the beginning of Kali-Yuga, 18 February 3102, as given by Hindu tradition, was accurate to 37'.9 Either the Brahmins had made an incredibly lucky guess, or they had recorded an actual observation on Kali Yuga day itself.
Richard L. Thompson claims that in Indian literature and inscriptions, there are a number of datelines expressed in Kali-Yuga which are older than the Christian era (and a fortiori older than the 6th century AD).10 More importantly, Thompson argues that the Jyotisha-shâstras (treatises on astronomy and, increasingly, astrology, starting in the 14th century BC with the Vedanga Jyotisha as per its own astronomical data, but mostly from the first millennium AD) are correct in mentioning this remarkable conjunction on that exact day, for there was indeed a conjunction of sun, moon, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Ketu and Revati.
True, the conjunction was not spectacularly exact, having an orb of 37�between the two most extreme planetary positions. But that exactly supports the hypothesis of an actual observation as opposed to a back-calculation. Indeed, if the Hindu astronomers were able to calculate this position after a lapse of many centuries (when the Jyotisha-Shâstra was written), it is unclear what reason they would have had for picking out that particular conjunction. Surely, such conjunctions are spectacular to those who witness one, and hence worth recording if observed. But they are not that exceptional when considered over millennia: even closer conjunctions of all visible planets do occur (most recently on 5 February 1962).11 If the Hindu astronomers had simply been going over their astronomical tables looking for an exceptional conjunction, they could have found more spectacular ones than the one on 18 February 3102 BC.
Further many sites dating to 7000 years and earlier have been excavated. For example: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/cms.dll/html/uncomp/articleshow?xml=0&xml=0&art_ID=129602326
What you quoted was only an obsolete version of history held by people who believe in baseless theories like aryan theory decades ago. Then you said:
which is incorrect. The traditional date for Mahabharata is 3102BC which has been confirmed from the astronomical evidence given in the Mahabharata (as quoted above). Further poeple of those ages used tools like you mention just like there are tribals even now i.e. they coexisted. The discovery of the submerged city of Dwarka further corroborates the descriptions given in Mahabharata (and all the layers have not yet been exposed). I do not have to go to "forbidden archeology" to dispute your claims which have already been debunked by almost all modern historians. In any case the humans have been around for lakhs of years using the fossil record, so your 5000 year thing is your fantasy to keep supporting your current belief system.When Vedas themselves have been written only after 3500 BC then how can Bhagwad Gita which a much later scripture be written in the Dwaparyuga, which according to you must have been lakhs of years ago? Please do not quote dates according to your (or scriptures’) imagination but also support it with historical documents/proofs. Saying that each yuga is lakhs of years old is nothing but shooting arrows in the empty air. If the age of each yuga is actually lakhs of years old then how come the people of Chalcolithic Age or the Stone-Copper Age from 1800 BC to 1000 or 800 BC were aware of only stones and copper? Did Shri Krishna only wear stone ornaments if your version of each yuga being lakhs of years is taken to be correct?
-
Hare Krishna
Mantras cannot be manufactured. They come from the Lord Himself.
-
Dear Roohani Sevadhari
If you need to know these things then you should ask in a humble manner. Unfortunately, you have mistaken conceptions of humility. You mistake duplicity to be humility. How do we know that? Because you say many times "Kindly enlighten me" when you actually mean "i have given such and such an objection to your thinking. do you have any answer". You actually do not come to learn anything from here; you do not come to ask but to find non-existent faults in our understanding.
I have asked you again and again to first do some reading. You say that you have read Bhagavatam etc., but it is clear that you have not or even if you have, you have not understood whatever you read. The reason was that you read to do fault-finding and not to learn. If you would have read then you would not have wrote junk dealing with dalits etc. to an organization which comes from acharyas who for the first time made so called dalits as acharyas, as also untouchables.
You do not realize that sometimes even fools can sometimes speak the truth; even a broken clock is right twice a day. My suggestion is that you should first try the path as shown by Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, and then judge for one must judge by the results. The Bhagavatam says (11.8.10):
So maybe you should also try to find the beautiful things in the gaudiya conception. I suggest you try chanting the maha-mantra for say three months, for about half an hour daily (one can do this at any time or circumstances). There is nothing more that i can do for you.anubhyas ca mahadbhyas ca
sastrebhyah kusalo narah
sarvatah saram adadyat
pushpebhya iva shatpadah
Just as the honeybee takes nectar from all flowers, big and small, an intelligent human being should take the essence from all religious scriptures.
-
Dear Roohani Sevadhari
All the incarnations were already mentioned in the scriptures before their appearance, just like now we have the knowledge that Lord Kalki will appear after 427000 years. For example, Mula Ramayana was narrated by Srila Narada Muni to Sage Valmiki before the actual Ramayana.
Your logic is astounding! On one hand you claim that god spoke through lekhraj, and then you say that no proof is required. Then for that matter why dont believe me instead of lekhraj?
-
Dear roohani sevadhari
you said:
Seems that your god has made some progress albeit slow. But you can come to the true understanding of God slowly but surely if you remain sincere.I never said that God is bound by anyone. I only said that God is also bound to enter this world to purify all the souls as per the 5000 years world drama.
Anyway, as usual you dodged the question? Why does God not free all of us?. Your answer that i understand is that he is incapable of doing so ...
-
Dear roohani sevadhari
The purport to the earlier sloka was provided to help you understand simple things and the next sloka. Unfortunately it is only a waste of time to write to you. Why? Because you passed a lot of hot gas for the purport that was provided to help you understand. And then when the purport was not provided your lack of understanding of my understanding was obvious. Go back to what i wrote: cutting the tongue means cutting the arguments with arguments from scripture.
-
Dear Roohani sevadhari
You again fail to understand simple things.
you said:
Even charvakas gave unique knowledge -- so you must observe your own foundations of your faith. Attributing hallucinations of lekhraj to god when he also does not claim it (according to what you say) and arguing with others ...Dada Lekhraj or the present corporeal medium of incorporeal Shiva never claimed themselves that Shiva enters into them. It is we souls, on the basis of the unique knowledge received through them, believe that the incorporeal God father is giving knowledge through the present corporeal medium.
then you said:
which was heights of your inapplication of simple intelligence, because it was an illustration that anyone can claim that Lord Shiva has entered him and give "unique" knowledge. Don't believe me -- i can also act that way.As regards your claim about Shiva entering into you,
Proofs for incorporeal God
in The Hare Krishna Forum
Posted · Report reply
Dear roohani sevadhari
Good you tried to find the proof in the scriptures. Let us see the verses presented.
Srimad Bhagavad-Gita 9.4
The words used here are "avyakta murtina" which means unmanifested Form. The word "murtina" is significant here for it means Form and unmanifested ("avyakta") means that people cannot normally see it. So we do not find "niraakaar" anywhere here which you have put in the translation; on the contrary God clearly says that He has a Form which normally people cannot see, i.e. even in His lila-avataars the normal people cannot see His true Form only a material projection. This is explained clearly by the Lord just a few verses afterwards here:Srimad-Bhagavad Gita 9.11
you said:
The first part has been shown to be incorrect. The second part is also incorrect because the Lord says in the sloka that the entire world is pervaded by Him which incidently is also there is your translation ("sab jagat paripoorna hai"). So He is Omnipresent in His Brahmn feature which is the brahmajyoti emanating from Him (brahmano hi pratishthaham -- BG 14.27). But then He also says "na caham teshv avasthitah" in which Krishna actually affirms that although He pervades the universe, He is distinct from it refuting the theory that God is impersonally distributed -- rather "He is not in them". This is elaborated in just the next verse:Srimad Bhagavad-Gita 9.5
Let us see the second verse that you presented.
Srimad Bhagavad-Gita 10.3
Here the Lord affirms that He is unborn. This is confirmed in all the Vedic scriptures. The Srimad-Bhagavatam describes the birth of Krishna:From Srimad-Bhagavatam
So the Supreme Lord was not born rather appeared in His own Form. But then Mother Devaki requested:
So the Lord then appeared as a new born child.Then the last one:
The word "nirguna" means without "guna" or meaning without material qualities. Thus the Lord says that He is the SuperSoul (BG 10.20 -- I am the SuperSoul ...) without the material senses, and so is "nirguna". This is clear from the previous verse which gives the context of this quote and provides the complete explanation:
So reading both verses makes it plain the meaning.Elsewhere the Lord says:
Srimad Bhagavad-Gita 7.24