Bhakta Don Muntean

[i meant to say vishnu- I corrected that in my posting] Ok here you are out-of-context - this chapter ten of Gita is not stating anymore than the fact that - the best of everything - represents Krishna For example - Krishna isn't the shark etc., you have taken these points out of context - so as it is - Yamaraja is representative of Krishna - not an aspect of Him.

Quote: In the Vedic texts of India, there is an understanding that things are not black and white, good and bad. In fact we are very rarely faced with a clearcut choice between good and bad. Reply: I can apply that to this discussion about other faith groups.

Quote: This discussion has become rather heated and that is not what I was aiming for. You originally spoke about "politics" and "myth" and my view is that the myths of the Semitic religions are doing more bad than good for the world. Reply: It’s not all that heated and yes there are some who are using the texts out of context to further a political and/or other materialistic end – and in some cases as noted - an upset to the order of things is set into action. That is the point of this string – but to be fair - just because there are so many people who do not understand those traditions - but that nonetheless employ them for selfish ends – well that doesn’t mean that we thus trash the whole tradition. Quote: The soul of a person is pure and good. But people get brainwashed by false teachers and they start to believe the false idea that on this earth there is a war going on between good and evil. God and Satan. But this is only a story. Life isn't like this really. Life is an emanation from Param-Brahman, Sri Krishna, who is beautiful and good. Reply: You are correct – but there is a struggle of good and evil [duality] in the material world [what you been reading?] – and without doubt it is reflected in the pages of the Vedic texts – but no - there is no literal Satan [or any being like that fictional character] – but there are demons - both seen and unseen. Yes it is a “story” and if we understood these things in their proper context – then there is great value therein. Quote: All life is sacred and full of wonder. But mankind has concocted all sorts of false ideas and created a hell on earth. Reply: The concocted hell on earth is due to mass ignorance of the modes of material nature and the influence of kuli yuga – and when humanity is playing into the hands of quarrel - in the modes of passion and ignorance – one may see anyone in that maya - concoct ideas? Not everyone - in all traditions is lost. It is that simple. Quote: You said, "during the coming messianic age – during that time - there will be no flesh eaters " The reality is, these Semitic religions tell people it is OK to kill cows and kill whales, and pollute the seas that are the blood stream of mother earth. And the misguided people (and future generations) will suffer karma for what they are doing in the world in the name of their religions. May Yamaraj have mercy on them (Yamaraj is an aspect of Visnu, according to Bhagavad gita) Reply: Yamaraja is not an aspect of Vishnu – he is a demigod who is a servant of Krishna – he has a special agency with paramatma. Do you have exact citations for that? “Semitic religions” do not teach that this destruction is ok - as you claim - some people following those teach that. All humanity is en-masse failing to follow the precepts in the world’s major scriptures [choosing to quarrel instead] – that is a sad fact – and - without careful guarding - we devotees aren’t even immune to this propensity. Quote: In regard to the "messianic age", I think John Lennon got it right when he said, "there ain't no Jesus who's gonna come from the sky". Reply: No Jesus isn’t coming back again – if you read here in this string you would see that I’ve noted that – Torah teaches that the [still expected] messiah is going to be an ordinary man – no supernatural stuff etc., but there IS going to be a messianic age – and one could say that it actually started in 1486! Quote: The story about the messianic age is all just a collosal illusion. And while people are waiting for Jesus to come they are busily creating a new hell on earth. Reply: No it isn’t illusion and - yes – many people are creating hell to “hasten his coming”. BDM

Everyone has seen the paintings of Jesus holding the lamb - we all see look of security in the lamb - so let's then introduce the flesh eating factor. Why is Jesus holding the lamb - is he going to eat it? Just see - these two ideas - placed side by side like this evoke a kind of disgust [especially in christians] - the two ideas are opposing! Is it not so? I of course know that Jesus isn't preparing to eat that lamb - but the picture is to show two contrasted ideas in a lucid interplay.

You at last mention the point in this thread - there are some biblical ideas – [that are not false] - but which have no literal interpretations - yes these literal misinterpretations are now being used by thugs - all about the world - to mess things up. While Satan may be a myth - the effects of those that accept this myth - those 'effects' are not so unreal. But taking your approach - is like putting out the fires with gasoline... BDM

Objective study shows that the essential teachings of the biblical faiths actually support a flesh free life - but Kuli yuga time and circumstances have ordered humankind in general - to be more inclined into flesh eating. In these other traditions - where we see a concession for it – we do not [thus] forget that the original and ultimate objective is to - refrain from it - and that our world will see this day - is to be fully realized [according to biblical texts] - during the coming messianic age – during that time - there will be no flesh eaters – allegedly - not even among the animals. When that shall be - is another matter - but the fact is - the texts of the "meat eaters" admonish them to stop that practice. If we cannot learn the universal truths within these ‘other traditions’ and thus relate them [with a vedic perspective] to the ‘theologically cautious’ within those traditions - [from their own perspective] - then we shall fail to reach the vast majority of people – it is that simple. Say I am some person not inclined to do my homework prior to forming an opinion and let's say that I've read materials online and elsewhere and I have listened to lectures from some Hindus - wherein all these - it is claimed that the 'original' Rig-Veda says that eating meat is OK and that - there is even something in manusamita to this effect - I even saw what looked to be real quotes – so what does one believe then? Just see... Again - in our world of contradictions...one must have sincere faith and good patience to learn… BDM

You are not seeing the point - and yes I get your point and no maybe all roads don't lead to rome - but rome is rome - no matter the road you take to get there...

These quotes are more well known [and more practical too]: The Vedas mainly deal with the subject of the three modes of material nature. Rise above these modes, O Arjuna. Be transcendental to all of them. Be free from all dualities and from all anxieties for gain and safety, and be established in the Self. All purposes that are served by the small pond can at once be served by the great reservoirs of water. Similarly, all the purposes of the Vedas can be served to one who knows the purpose behind them. [bG 2.45-46] When your intelligence has passed out of the dense forest of delusion, you shall become indifferent to all that has been heard and all that is to be heard. [bG 2.53] Of course there is this: Abandon all varieties of religion and just surrender unto Me. I shall deliver you from all sinful reaction. Do not fear. [bG 18.66]

Well I see none of this in Prabhupada's books or Vani - and - whatever the history - you'll just remain a 'counter-point to the point' of the "yavanas"? Why not stop and think where your current approach will lead you...

Quote: I saw 'crooked logic' and read 'arrogant'. Am I wrong? Reply: Nope! Yer servant,

Quote: I will bring about the total devastation of the entire race of Yavanas Reply: Well five hundred years later there are still all sorts of godless people on the earth – and even in bharta varsha! So what went wrong? In the way that you've been quoting - I almost think you’re in favor of killing demons as opposed to - destroying their demoniac tendencies? Am I hearing that you may want to be the instrument for this “total devastation of the entire race of Yavanas” – I sure hope not! Caitanya Mahaprabhu does not liberate any demons by killing them – and neither do his followers – Prabhu - you know this… BDM

Quote: Break open and smash everything. Break it! Break it!" These were the orders of the Supreme Lord. Who could disobey? The congregation was already exuberant and inebriated with the association of Lord Caitanya and the Holy Name, so such a command from the Lord was immediately put into action with great enthusiasm. They ransacked the entire property. They went through the house and indiscriminantly broke anything that came their way. The garden lay limp and ravaged as if after a hurricane. Reply: Well I only want to say this right now - why is the version different in the C.C.?? "Performing kirtana in this way, circumambulating through every nook and corner of the city, they finally reached the door of the Kazi. Murmuring in anger and making a roaring sound, the people, under the protection of Lord Caitanya, became mad through such indulgence. The loud sound of the chanting of the Hare Krishna mantra certainly made the Kazi very much afraid, and he hid himself within his room. Hearing the people thus protesting, murmuring in great anger, the Kazi would not come out of his home. Naturally some of the people who were very much agitated began to retaliate the Kazi’s actions by wrecking his house and flower garden. Srila Vrndavana dasa Thakura has elaborately described this incident. Thereafter, when Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu reached the Kazi’s house, He sat down by the doorway and sent some respectable persons to call for the Kazi." [C.C. Adi. 139-143] Your quote says: "Lord Visvambhar (Sri Chaitanya) stood before Kazi's palace doors, His rising anger visible, with a voice like thunder He said, "Where is that mischief monger, Kazi, bring him right this minute to Me and cut his head off. I will obliterate the entire yavana race from the face of this earth, like I have previously done. Break open and smash everything. Break it! Break it!" These were the orders of the Supreme Lord. Who could disobey?..." Well that is fully different than anything I've seen in Prabhupada's translations/teachings - thus I have to wonder about this quote! Read this: "As he read the thousand names of the Lord, in due course the holy name of Lord Nrsimha appeared. When Caitanya Mahaprabhu heard the holy name of Lord Nrsimha, He became fully absorbed in thought. In the mood of Lord Nrsimhadeva, Lord Caitanya ran through the city streets, club in hand, ready to kill all the atheists. Seeing Him appearing very fierce in the ecstasy of Lord Nrsimha, people ran from the street and fled here and there, afraid of His anger. Seeing the people so afraid, the Lord came to His external senses and thus returned to the house of Srivasa Thakura and threw away the club. The Lord became morose and said to Srivasa Thakura, “When I adopted the mood of Lord Nrsimhadeva, people were greatly afraid. Therefore I stopped, since causing fear among people is an offense.” Srivasa Thakura replied, “Anyone who takes Your holy name vanquishes ten million of his offenses immediately. “There was no offense in Your appearing as Nrsimhadeva. Rather, any man who saw You in that mood was immediately liberated from the bondage of material existence.” After saying this, Srivasa Thakura worshiped the Lord, who was then greatly satisfied and returned to His own home." [C.C. Adi, 17.91-98] So I wonder about the literal nature of your quote - whatever it is. "Break open and smash everything. Break it! Break it!" These were the orders of the Supreme Lord" OR: "Naturally some of the people who were very much agitated began to retaliate the Kazi’s actions by wrecking his house and flower garden. Srila Vrndavana dasa Thakura has elaborately described this incident. Thereafter, when Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu reached the Kazi’s house, He sat down by the doorway and sent some respectable persons to call for the Kazi." Two - contradictory versions - of the same pastime? Yer servant, BDM

Quote: Read what Prabhupada says again Reply: It's All Relative isn't it? I could tell you the same thing. Why have you not stated it - what is the underlying issue here? If you think that the oldest biblical scripture – the Torah supports animal killing you are not seeing the full context – and it in-fact teaches that such a way of life is in-gratuitous to the desire of God. As noted in many passages his preference is for man to not eat flesh – but of course later texts were adjusted – as they have been in all traditions – so do we because of this lose sight of the original objectives of those texts? These texts also support that soul is soul – no matter the bodily form it’s in. I’ll say it again – we’ll not ‘convert’ everyone to our platform – so we have the next best task – to instill deeper love of God within people - using their terminology and - the original imports of the five major faith groups – which incidentally correlate to the vedic version. All people can be encouraged onto a better spiritual position – encouraged by devotees - in one way or another – we have an insight to interest all the groups. Is there a reason some refuse this task? Not any sound theological arguments can defeat this one – so what is it? We must be somewhat afraid to do this – as we may think we may become contaminated or abused and ridiculed – but the fact is - one shall not be checked from one’s steady faith if we are preaching - with sound foundations. If we are loyal to our guru-parampara and - if we want to help everyone then - we must be loyal to the - openness of faith - as the object of faith is shared by one and all. Yer servant, BDM

No - Nephesh is soul and it refers to the animal as well as the human. The usage is most often applied to humans – but the fact that it is applied to animals as well is inescapable – especially considering the places where it is rendered as referring to both. Without doubt in my mind spirit and soul are the same thing. This person may be thinking that both humans and animals have the - “breath of life” which in this case - they are probably rendering into a general - “spirit”. Fact is - it’s the same word – with the same implications - no matter its application. Yer servant, BDM

I simply see no contradiction – I can place faith in the words of God - no matter where I find them - if “guest” has built a case for exclusivity on a few writings of these previous acarya's - then I am sure that it is because - as you say - they have already concluded what all this means - so they look to read to see only the alleged evidence of an exclusive slant rather than an inclusive - the latter which being Prabhupada's mellow is naturally found all throughout his teachings. Yer servant, BDM

All Glories to Srila Prabhupada! Dear gHari: You are so correct - if only their point could be made - why do some have a limited aversion - to what is in-fact true? I guess for a time - some people need to feel somehow special and extraordinary – exclusive. But in time they shall see: He is a perfect yogi who, by comparison to his own self, sees the true equality of all beings, both in their happiness and distress, O Arjuna! [bG 6.32] You are such a yogi – you have broad vision – none of this tunnel awareness for you! Yer servant, BDM

I mentioned that text in my discussion - check this posting right above: He didn't mention all sorts of things... [re: Guest] 08/01/05 01:57 AM

See I knew you were fixated on THAT text! You better read a little more broadly in the Vani - or you'll never rise over the us vs. them mentality - be no more than you are and see that you’ve missed the point. So if these groups do not convert to our path – then you think that they and their particular Faiths are of no value? “ Being single-pointed in devotional service does not mean shutting out reality. Exclusivity can become sectarian if one focuses on relative truths or dedicates oneself to an ordinary person. But when the object of appreciation is the Supreme Personality of Godhead, one attains the broadest vision, the vision of a mahatma. ” [Narada Bhakti Stotra, 6.7, purport]

Dear 'unknown guest" To whom is it offensive and - in what way? If it’s because I’ve stated that Prabhupada himself made [seeming] contradictory statements - well if we accept your reasoning - then that is the case - but as noted - for one with proper vision - there are no such disparities…

The word nephesh - is found in the original Torah scriptures - as you've seen in my reply - this point about the soul of animals and humans being the same - doesn't need the Talmud commentary to be established. Yer servant, BDM

Quote: Did Srila Prabhupada ever mention the Talmud? Did Srila Prabhupada ever say the Talmud is a genuine scripture? Reply: When Prabhupada mentions ‘the scriptures of the biblical faiths’ - I think it is to be assumed that he is referring to the scriptures and - related texts - which those peoples revere – to learn of these texts – we must reference the tradition’s of those peoples. Not that Srila Prabhupada gave a detailed description of all the scriptures of the world - with their commentaries. That is what the Talmud is – a commentary – so I am not sure why you cannot understand that it is scripture - insofar as it is a commentary on scripture. Some outsiders think that the Mahabharata and - as such - the Bhagavad Gita isn’t scripture – they say the same of Srimad Bhagavatam – even in the vedic tradition there are followers - with opposing theological variances - in terms of what is accepted as scripture and - how one each contrasts the others. I wonder where you are going with this argument – are you saying that since Prabhupada didn’t mention it – he would thus reject it? So you can thus conjecture his unspoken opinion and - reject it too? Sounds a little reaching to me… “…There are so many nonsensical literatures, stories and books of speculative philosophy. Materialistic persons are very interested in reading such literature, but when they are presented with genuine books of knowledge like Srimad-Bhagavatam, Bhagavad-Gita, Vishnu Purana or other scriptures of the world, such as the Bible and Koran, they are not interested…” [sB 3.32.19, purport] “…Even scriptures like the Bible or the Koran, declare that the Absolute Truth is the all-powerful, all knowing Supreme Person…” [Renunciation Through Wisdom, chapter 1.8] Of course - I think you are meditating almost exclusively on this one comment from Prabhupada: “…The Shastras [scriptures] of the yavanas, or meat-eaters, are not eternal scriptures. They have been fashioned recently, and sometimes they contradict one another. The scriptures of the yavanas are three: the Old Testament, the New Testament and the Koran. Their compilation has a history; they are not eternal like the Vedic knowledge. Therefore although they have their arguments and reasonings, they are not very sound and transcendental. As such, modern people advanced in science and philosophy deem these scriptures unacceptable…” [C.C., Adi, 17.169] As I said - there are [seeming] contradictory comments from Prabhupada himself – what did he mean in that C.C. quote? He is saying: “…As such, modern people advanced in science and philosophy deem these scriptures unacceptable…” We know his opinion on science and modern speculative philosophy – so he is not saying that he rejects these scriptures – rather he is saying it is being rejected by - "modern people". He is saying that they came into existence recently – well that’s not bad in and of itself – certain Vedic texts like the Caitanya-Caritamrita, - one could say that it was fashioned recently – does that make it bad? He says that they are not eternal – I think he is indicating that amongst those traditions - their influence has waned and thus they are not eternal - and in many cases no trancendental mellow is present in the pages - as we know it's due to the modes of nature which the particular reader may be in. As for the contradictions found therein – well contradictions are also found in our texts – and one who takes a proper vision - will not be perplexed - by seeming contradictory statements as found in various sacred texts - and yes - these types of contradictions appear in all the traditions. It gives the various traditions something for them together to - reconcile and resolve – to the great pleasure of God! The book The Quest for Enlightenment has this reproduction of an exchange of question and answer - with a devotee on the topic of Discussions on Western Philosophy and Science: Hayagriva : As far as contradictions and seeming absurdities in scripture are concerned, Origen considered them to be stumbling blocks permitted to exist by God in order for man to pass beyond the literal meaning. He writes that “everything in scripture has a spiritual meaning, but not all of it has a literal meaning.” Srila Prabhupada: Generally speaking, every word in scripture has a literal meaning, but people cannot understand it properly because they do not hear from the proper person. They interpret instead. There is no need to interpret the words of God. Sometimes the words of God cannot be understood by an ordinary person; therefore we may require the transparent medium of the guru. Since the guru is fully cognizant of the words spoken by God, we are advised to receive the words of the scriptures through the guru. There is no ambiguity in the words of God, but due to our imperfect knowledge, we sometimes cannot understand. Not understanding, we try to interpret, but because we are imperfect, our interpretations are also imperfect. The conclusion is that the words of God, the scriptures, should be understood from a person who has realized God." “…devotees who know the Supreme Personality of Godhead do not see contradictions in Him… The unintelligent see contradictions in Him, but sober devotees find no contradictions.” [sB 6.9.37, purport] “… If somebody says that “We find some contradiction from Vedic literature, from this literature to that literature,” no. There is nothing at all, any contradiction, even, even in the preachings of the great acaryas. I am speaking of India. There were many great acaryas, I mean to say, reformers, came. Lord Buddha also appeared in India. Then, after Lord Buddha, Shankaracarya came. Then, after Shankaracarya, Sri Ramanujacarya came. Then, after Sri Ramanujacarya, Madhvacarya, and then, lately, Sri Caitanya, Lord Caitanya. He came. But you will find a link, a link, although superficially we may see that Lord Buddha is speaking something which is contradictory to Lord Shankaracarya’s teaching, or Ramanujacarya is speaking something which is contradiction to Shankara. No. There is no contradiction. It is the question of studying how they are paving way for ultimate spiritual realization. That requires a very, I mean to say, substantial knowledge, how they are paving the way, just step by step. …” [bhagavad Gita 2.58-59 [Lecture] April 27, 1966] Yer Servant, BDM

Quote: Why do they say that animals have no souls? Why don’t birds and beasts have souls like the human beings. Reply: You might find it interesting that the Hebrew word nephesh - which is translated as “soul” – the same word nephesh - is used in connection to the animals - in twenty-two major texts in the Torah. It is rendered as - "creature" in Genesis 1.21 & 24 – 2.19 – 9.10 & 12. It is also found in Leviticus 11.46. In genesis - where God makes a covenant with - “all creatures” - as seen in 9.15-16 the word nephesh - is rendered as - “creature” – and refers to both man and animal. In numbers 31.28 - the word nephesh refers to “soul” – and it is applied to both man and beast. There is so much more – but that should be enough to evidence that [at least] in the Sacred Texts of the Hebrews - the teaching is that animals are nephesh or “souls” – like humans. Of course the contextual teachings of karma and reincarnation are also there – in Talmud - there are references to the transmigration of 'human' souls into animal bodies. Of course we find this in Bhagavatam: "The Supreme Personality of Godhead is situated as the Supersoul within the cores of the hearts of all living entities, whether moving or nonmoving, including men, birds, animals, trees and, indeed, all living entities. Therefore you should consider every body a residence or temple of the Lord. By such vision you will satisfy the Lord. You should not angrily kill these living entities in the forms of trees." [srimad Bhagavatam 6.4.13] "I am present in every living entity as the Supersoul. If someone neglects or disregards that Supersoul everywhere and engages himself in the worship of the Deity in the temple, that is simply imitation." [srimad Bhagavatam 3.9.21] There is this point in Gita - this text has been quoted before in this string: "One who sees the Supersoul in every living being and equal everywhere does not degrade himself by his mind. Thus he approaches the transcendental destination." [bG 13.29] Yer servant, BDM

Quote: Also, in the Bible it is said that for hundreds of years the Israelites used to worship an idol of a serpent, Nehustan, which was made by Moses. So I really can't understand that "idol worship" is supposed to be against the rulings of yahwey. After all, it was Yahwey and moses who proposed that the Israelites should worship this snake idol Nehustan in the first place Reply: Have a look at chapter’s 17-18 of the book of judges: 1 Now there was a man of the hill-country of Ephraim, whose name was Micah. 2 And he said unto his mother: 'The eleven hundred pieces of silver that were taken from thee, about which thou didst utter a curse, and didst also speak it in mine ears, behold, the silver is with me; I took it.' And his mother said: 'Blessed be my son of the LORD.' 3 And he restored the eleven hundred pieces of silver to his mother, and his mother said: 'I verily dedicate the silver unto the LORD from my hand for my son, to make a graven image and a molten image; now therefore I will restore it unto thee.' 4 And when he restored the money unto his mother, his mother took two hundred pieces of silver, and gave them to the founder, who made thereof a graven image and a molten image; and it was in the house of Micah. 5 And the man Micah had a house of God, and he made an ephod, and teraphim, and consecrated one of his sons, who became his priest. 6 In those days there was no king in Israel; every man did that which was right in his own eyes. {P} 7 And there was a young man out of Beth-lehem in Judah--in the family of Judah--who was a Levite, and he sojourned there. 8 And the man departed out of the city, out of Beth-lehem in Judah, to sojourn where he could find a place; and he came to the hill-country of Ephraim to the house of Micah, as he journeyed. 9 And Micah said unto him: 'Whence comest thou?' And he said unto him: 'I am a Levite of Beth-lehem in Judah, and I go to sojourn where I may find a place.' 10 And Micah said unto him: 'Dwell with me, and be unto me a father and a priest, and I will give thee ten pieces of silver by the year, and a suit of apparel, and thy victuals.' So the Levite went in. 11 And the Levite was content to dwell with the man; and the young man was unto him as one of his sons. 12 And Micah consecrated the Levite, and the young man became his priest, and was in the house of Micah. 13 Then said Micah: 'Now know I that the LORD will do me good, seeing I have a Levite as my priest.' {P} Then we see – God nowhere rebukes them for making this image of Him. 1…And the children of Dan set up for themselves the graven image; and Jonathan, the son of Gershom, the son of Manasseh, he and his sons were priests to the tribe of the Danites until the day of the captivity of the land. 31 So they set them up Micah's graven image which he made, all the time that the house of God was in Shiloh. {P} Then there is this: MISHNA VII. TO IX: "If God is displeased with idol-worship, why does he not destroy the idols, etc.? If the heathens worshipped but things not needful to the world, He would surely annihilate them; but they worship the sun, moon, stars and the planets. How is it that so many cripples are cured by the idols in their temples? If one comes to defile himself, the door is opened to him, while when one comes to cleanse himself, he is supported….”

Quote: “Also, in the Bible it is said that for hundreds of years the Israelites used to worship an idol of a serpent, Nehustan, which was made by Moses. So I really can't understand that "idol worship" is supposed to be against the rulings of yahwey. After all, it was Yahwey and moses who proposed that the Israelites should worship this snake idol Nehustan in the first place.” Reply: “Semitic serpent god whose idol was made by Moses (2Kings 18:4), Hebrew Nehushtan or Nahash, "serpent" descended from the Vedic serpent-king Nahusha, that once ruled all the gods, but cast down to the underworld by India. The Gnostic Jews worshipped Nehustan for the first few centuries AD. (see Gnosticism) They were known as Naassians, "snake-worshippers," and counterparts of the Ophites. A.G.H. 1. SOURCE Walker, Barbara G. The Woman's Encyclopedia of Myths and Secrets. New York, HarperCollins, 1983 [iSBN 0-06-250925-X]” That misinformation was from: http://www.themystica.com/mystica/articles/n/nehushtan.html Now whether the part about the Vedic connection is true - is really quite doubtful – as the creation of this brazen serpent had a purpose - one that is well explained in the source texts. Its purpose was to remind some backsliders of their offence in wanting to eat flesh and the offence of making flesh sacrifices to idols. Numbers 21.8-9: "And the LORD said unto Moses, Make thee a fiery serpent, and set it upon a pole: and it shall come to pass, that every one that is bitten, when he looketh upon it, shall live. And Moses made a serpent of brass, and put it upon a pole, and it came to pass, that if a serpent had bitten any man, when he beheld the serpent of brass, he lived." Why did he do this – what do we find in the traditional Talmud commentary? We find this point:: “…"And Moses made a serpent of brass and put it upon a pole; and it came to pass that if a serpent had bitten any man, when he beheld the serpent of brass he lived." Had the brazen serpent the power of killing or of giving life? No; but while Israel looks upward to the Great Father in Heaven, He will grant life. "Has God pleasure in the meat and blood of sacrifices?" ask the prophets. No. He has not so much ordained as permitted them. "It is for yourselves," He says; "not for me, that ye offer."…” [RABBINICAL ANA] We see that last point reflected here: "To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices unto me? saith the LORD: I am full of the burnt offerings of rams, and the fat of fed beasts; and I delight not in the blood of bullocks, or of lambs, or of he goats." [isaiah 1.1] "Thus saith the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel; Put your burnt offerings unto your sacrifices, and eat [the] flesh. For I spake not unto your fathers, nor commanded them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt offerings or sacrifices: But this thing commanded I them, saying, Obey my voice, and I will be your God, and ye shall be my people: and walk ye in all the ways that I have commanded you, that it may be well unto you. But they hearkened not, nor inclined their ear, but walked in the counsels and in the imagination of their evil heart, and went backward, and not forward. Since the day that your fathers came forth out of the land of Egypt unto this day I have even sent unto you all my servants the prophets, daily rising up early and sending them: Yet they hearkened not unto me, nor inclined their ear, but hardened their neck: they did worse than their fathers." [Jeremiah 7.21-26] So what really happened in this brazen serpent incident? Of course there is more information to consider. Actual context for the creation of this ‘idol’ is found in text 5-6 of Numbers chapter 21: “And the people spoke against God, and against Moses: 'Wherefore have ye brought us up out of Egypt to die in the wilderness? for there is no bread [flesh], and there is no water; and our soul loatheth this light bread [manna].'” So we see it is further explained: 6 And the LORD sent fiery serpents among the people, and they bit the people; and much people of Israel died. 7 And the people came to Moses, and said: 'We have sinned, because we have spoken against the LORD, and against thee; pray unto the LORD, that He take away the serpents from us.' And Moses prayed for the people. 8 And the LORD said unto Moses: 'Make thee a fiery serpent, and set it upon a pole; and it shall come to pass, that every one that is bitten, when he seeth it, shall live.' 9 And Moses made a serpent of brass, and set it upon the pole; and it came to pass, that if a serpent had bitten any man, when he looked unto the serpent of brass, he lived This entire matter itself is described in Numbers chapter 11: 1 And the people were as murmurers, speaking evil in the ears of the LORD; and when the LORD heard it, His anger was kindled; and the fire of the LORD burnt among them, and devoured in the uttermost part of the camp. 2 And the people cried unto Moses; and Moses prayed unto the LORD, and the fire abated. 3 And the name of that place was called Taberah, because the fire of the LORD burnt among them. 4 And the mixed multitude [i.e.: the foreigners - like the Egyptians] that was among them fell a lusting [a greed for flesh]; and the children of Israel [thus] also wept on their part, and said: 'Would that we were given flesh to eat! 5 We remember the fish, which we were wont to eat in Egypt for nought; the cucumbers, and the melons, and the leeks, and the onions, and the garlic; 6 but now our soul is dried away; there is nothing at all; we have nought save this manna to look to.'-- 7 Now the manna was like coriander seed, and the appearance thereof as the appearance of bdellium. 8 The people went about, and gathered it, and ground it in mills, or beat it in mortars, and seethed it in pots, and made cakes of it; and the taste of it was as the taste of a cake baked with oil. 9 And when the dew fell upon the camp in the night, the manna fell upon it. - 10 And Moses heard the people weeping, family by family, every man at the door of his tent; and the anger of the LORD was kindled greatly; and Moses was displeased. 11 And Moses said unto the LORD: 'Wherefore hast Thou dealt ill with Thy servant? and wherefore have I not found favour in Thy sight, that Thou layest the burden of all this people upon me? 12 Have I conceived all this people? have I brought them forth, that Thou shouldest say unto me: Carry them in thy bosom, as a nursing-father carrieth the sucking child, unto the land which Thou didst swear unto their fathers? 13 Whence should I have flesh to give unto all this people? for they trouble me with their weeping, saying: Give us flesh, that we may eat. 14 I am not able to bear all this people myself alone, because it is too heavy for me. 15 And if Thou deal thus with me, kill me, I pray Thee, out of hand, if I have found favour in Thy sight; and let me not look upon my wretchedness.' {P} 16 And the LORD said unto Moses: 'Gather unto Me seventy men of the elders of Israel, whom thou knowest to be the elders of the people, and officers over them; and bring them unto the tent of meeting, that they may stand there with thee. 17 And I will come down and speak with thee there; and I will take of the spirit which is upon thee, and will put it upon them; and they shall bear the burden of the people with thee, that thou bear it not thyself alone. 18 And say thou unto the people: Sanctify yourselves against to-morrow, and ye shall eat flesh; for ye have wept in the ears of the LORD, saying: Would that we were given flesh to eat! for it was well with us in Egypt; therefore the LORD will give you flesh, and ye shall eat. 19 Ye shall not eat one day, nor two days, nor five days, neither ten days, nor twenty days; 20 but a whole month, until it come out at your nostrils, and it be loathsome unto you; because that ye have rejected the LORD who is among you, and have troubled Him with weeping, saying: Why, now, came we forth out of Egypt?' 21 And Moses said: 'The people, among whom I am, are six hundred thousand men on foot; and yet Thou hast said: I will give them flesh, that they may eat a whole month! 22 If flocks and herds be slain for them, will they suffice them? or if all the fish of the sea be gathered together for them, will they suffice them?' {P} 23 And the LORD said unto Moses: 'Is the LORD'S hand waxed short? now shalt thou see whether My word shall come to pass unto thee or not.' 24 And Moses went out, and told the people the words of the LORD; and he gathered seventy men of the elders of the people, and set them round about the Tent. 25 And the LORD came down in the cloud, and spoke unto him, and took of the spirit that was upon him, and put it upon the seventy elders; and it came to pass, that, when the spirit rested upon them, they prophesied, but they did so no more. 26 But there remained two men in the camp, the name of the one was Eldad, and the name of the other Medad; and the spirit rested upon them; and they were of them that were recorded, but had not gone out unto the Tent; and they prophesied in the camp. 27 And there ran a young man, and told Moses, and said: 'Eldad and Medad are prophesying in the camp.' 28 And Joshua the son of Nun, the minister of Moses from his youth up, answered and said: 'My lord Moses, shut them in.' 29 And Moses said unto him: 'Art thou jealous for my sake? would that all the LORD'S people were prophets, that the LORD would put His spirit upon them!' 30 And Moses withdrew into the camp, he and the elders of Israel. 31 And there went forth a wind from the LORD, and brought across quails from the sea, and let them fall by the camp, about a day's journey on this side, and a day's journey on the other side, round about the camp, and about two cubits above the face of the earth. 32 And the people rose up all that day, and all the night, and all the next day, and gathered the quails; he that gathered least gathered ten heaps; and they spread them all abroad for themselves round about the camp. 33 While the flesh was yet between their teeth, ere it was chewed, the anger of the LORD was kindled against the people, and the LORD smote the people with a very great plague. 34 And the name of that place was called Kibroth-hattaavah [a name which literally means - "graves of greed"], because there they buried the people that lusted [for flesh]. 35 From Kibroth-hattaavah the people journeyed unto Hazeroth; and they abode at Hazeroth. {P} We also learn of this incident in Psalm 78: These texts [2 Kings 18.4 and Numbers chapter 11 and chapter 21] that is the subject matter here - must be understood - there are a couple of points that are brought out in this Chapter of Psalms. Firstly the context is later set - but in text 4 the discussion is about backsliding people and the: 4"the praiseworthy deeds of the LORDso the next generation would know them". The point in texts 12-16 retells the exodus from egypt and then in texts 17 and 18 we see the contextually important point: "But they continued to sin against him, rebelling in the desert against the Most High. They willfully put God to the test by demanding the food they craved." Of course we know that some of the people wanted flesh and God - was giving manna – looks like He was trying to wean them from flesh and false worship in that 40 years of desert wandering! The people mused to themselves: 20"When he struck the rock, water gushed out, and streams flowed abundantly. But can he also give us food? Can he supply meat for his people?" 21 When the LORD heard them, he was very angry;". 27: "He rained meat down on them like dust, flying birds like sand on the seashore. 28 He made them come down inside their camp, all around their tents. 29 They ate till they had more than enough, for he had given them what they craved." Thus we see how is anger was provoked -- they wanted to eat flesh and he wanted them not to - what was the price? 30: "But before they turned from the food they craved, even while it was still in their mouths, 31 God's anger rose against them; he put to death the sturdiest among them, cutting down the young men of Israel." The story goes on: "Time after time he restrained his anger and did not stir up his full wrath. 41 Again and again they put God to the test;" Thus we see a description of plagues that followed and - the rebuking of the people. So this serpent ‘idol’ had its purpose – it was to remind [some of] the people who were inclined to offer flesh to idols - that they aught not sin against God in that regard – He was providing food – good food flesh free food. But in Egypt there were impure ways – and it seems that flesh eating and sacrificing were co-dependant practices - more often than not – and some of the people - not all - (on the goading of the Egyptians among them) - longed for those ways. So in time this brazen serpent on a pole - became an idol with a name – and it was thus destroyed as noted in 2 Kings 18.4 – that it had be disposed of was apparent – but its original purpose must been understood when reading 2 Kings chapter 18.1-4: “Now it came to pass in the third year of Hoshea son of Elah king of Israel, that Hezekiah the son of Ahaz king of Judah began to reign. Twenty and five years old was he when he began to reign; and he reigned twenty and nine years in Jerusalem; and his mother's name was Abi the daughter of Zechariah. And he did that which was right in the eyes of the LORD, according to all that David his father had done. He removed the high places, and broke the pillars, and cut down the Asherah; and he broke in pieces the brazen serpent that Moses had made; for unto those days the children of Israel did offer to it; and it was called Nehushtan.” So this particular passage isn’t supporting image worship – but it reflects the use of images – something that is noted in numerous places in the Torah and subsequent books. I think the striking point here is the displeasure that God showed for the flesh eating – and it seems that a lot of subsequent strict rules and narrow concessions were put in place to try to curb this practice. BDM

Thank you for your prayers - I TOOK HIM TO THE VET [due to Krishna's mercy today] he is ok now - I am so happy to hear you rescued a stray from the street - God bless you! The Lord surely was listening when you prayed to him - I can see that his quick come back is due to this concern others have for him - enough so to pray for him. Thank you! I am looking forward to hearing how Spelca the kitty found herself in the house of such a grand devotee! Take care and may Krishna bless you and yours... yer servant, BDM