ethos

Yes, they could make a whole movie beginning with the devotional art. I personally would like to see the Mahabharata done with Western technology and expertise. But the animals cannot appreciate this greatest story ever told––only sex and violence.

JNdas, Ditto that. Shiva, Prabhupada said our "disease" is that we always want to change things. Obviously, this means we want to influence our environment to satisfy our false ego. These principles are eternal and cannot be changed by people less than perfect. Lord Caitanya's great benediction was giving the Holy Name and saving people in that way. He gave this opportunity to everyone regardless of qualifications, everyone has the opportunity. But that doesn't mean that He accepts anyone regardless of qualifications. People have to chant, follow regulative principles, and rise to His standards. Adherents to the truth must compromise their false ego. Not that the truth is compromised by our silly standards. We have to be suppliant in His hands, not the other way around. You be lenient with thieves and cheaters and you have chaos. You interpret the scriptures and you have utter darkness.

77 Krsihna, Given your proposals in your post, why would you have a signature advertising Krsna? Whatever. It's superficial anyway. Still… suspect. Krsna consciousness or ancient Vedic culture has superior philosophy and spiritual science. Things are explained far beyond our capacity to understand. What intimate knowledge do you have of Allah? And why must Allah be the foremost name and concept anyway? What is your concept of God, His creation and our relationship with it. To us, there is no competitor to God no matter what you know about Him. It's no like you can exploit information on Him as done by mundane business and governments with individual citizens. So there is alot of information about the personal characteristics of God in the Vedic literature. And no where else to my knowledge. You may be throwing away a very valuable source of knowledge in favor of your own sectarian view. But we enjoy theistic talks here. Please make your case and substantiate your claims concerning the supreme aspect of Allah. What is the origin of the Koran and your teachings? How do you explain the origin of time and how was the universe developed? What is spiritual life and what do you do eternally? How do you view other life forms such as the cow? What does Allah being "unique and one" mean to you?

77 Krsihna, Given your proposals in your post, why would you have a signature advertising Krsna? Whatever. It's superficial anyway. Still… suspect. Krsna consciousness or ancient Vedic culture has superior philosophy and spiritual science. Things are explained far beyond our capacity to understand. What intimate knowledge do you have of Allah? And why must Allah be the foremost name and concept anyway? What is your concept of God, His creation and our relationship with it. To us, there is no competitor to God no matter what you know about Him. It's no like you can exploit information on Him as done by mundane business and governments with individual citizens. So there is alot of information about the personal characteristics of God in the Vedic literature. And no where else to my knowledge. You may be throwing away a very valuable source of knowledge in favor of your own sectarian view. But we enjoy theistic talks here. Please make your case and substantiate your claims concerning the supreme aspect of Allah. What is the origin of the Koran and your teachings? How do you explain the origin of time and how was the universe developed? What is spiritual life and what do you do eternally? How do you view other life forms such as the cow? What does Allah being "unique and one" mean to you?

Avinish, No. It is not blind faith because it has been verified by systematic study and practice. You try practicing it and you can verify it too because Krsna does give experiences to people who treat Him personally.

This is very nice, thought provoking dialogue.

That's a nice concession for sinful people like us bumbling through this world. But Krsna's standards of devotion are a little more direct. He notes our every thought.

"Is my reality the same as yours? Are there multiple realities? Here we are: Is my reality at the at the same time the same but yet different from yours? (Where have you heard a similar phrase like that before?)" Truth is both subjective and objective. For scientific discourse, it is more objective. When accepting the authority of impeccable personalities it is more subjective. We share common realities like the universal or earthly configuration. Yet, even in that, our capacity to experience it or know more about it can vastly differ according to our advancement. Narada Muni certainly has a different "reality" of the universe than we do. Subjectively, there are things that happen between you and God, or say a spiritual master, that are more real to you and "only to you" than anything else. "Then ZING! my reality solified and the universe was made up of millions of galixies of suns. But I did see that there are many things I don't know about." You may know something I don't. How is this corroborated with sastric evidence?

Theist, In your "calling Avinish" thread: "Yeah I can't accept that. This universe is very very big. To think that it is lit by only one sun seems implausible to me. Those stars to me are just other suns. Not planets reflecting back light from the sun close to us." To me that is just a material conception. Is the sun not known to have a trajectory or coarse in Vedic literature… moving very fast? The planets may or may not be reflecting the sun light in my estimation. I just know it's beautiful. "One moon? How can that be? There are already 17 moons known to us just orbiting around Uranus." What you may accept as a moon as stated by the scientists may not be such at all. I seriously doubt the moon is a satellite of earth. So you are talking to a real nut case. I only see two distinctly visible objects in the sky; sun and moon. I see no other comparisons, no matter what you call them. If you can convince me with something other than official government or scientific data, then I will relent. As far as the official version goes, there is incessant cheating. You just may be looking at some fractal program or something when you see these space images. Does Mars look suspiciously like the Moon? Even if we accept these space pictures as true, there's no verifying what we think we see from a distance if we cannot get closer. Whom or what do you accept as authority? The photographer, the pictures, the scientific analysis? Are professional sound-bytes or popular belief the measure of all things? You are demonstrating blind faith. You simply believe what they tell you. You cannot practice it as you can Krsna consciousness.

Shiva, under your "Vedic Conception" post on page 1 you wrote this: "We today can observe the cosmos with help from modern technology, in vedic times this was impossible. So the vedic conception on the literal level is for the audience of the vedic age,or the residents of the spiritual world." You immediately contradict yourself. "So the true situation of the galaxy is not neccesary to be known to those people, they see the world through the lens of the pure vedic conception, this is for the purpose of enhacing their lifestyle, which is full of magical events and transcendental ecstacy. At least thats the way I see it." This is true of beginners like us. It is certainly not true for advanced souls. I suspect Prabhupada knew alot more about this than he cared to explain… perhaps for similar reasons that he did not display yogic powers. He only wanted to attract the purely motivated. If you can believe that Prabhupada was traveling on sunshine, it's easy to believe he might know more than he reveals. Christ certainly did this. In any case, Arjuna, Narada and so many others certainly knew all this quantitative knowledge in a practical way.

Theist, "The universe is God's presentation. That's my point. Any clarification of that presentation I accept as a sort of divine revelation." You don't get that divine revelation from material processes. Understanding Jesus Christ as the son of God is not mundane history. The spiritual depth and prowess of Prabhupada is not mundane history. Mundane history or information or processes cannot help us understand these things. Again, for the slow people out there: The beginnings of modern material science began with this intent of theistic understanding and they have yet to succeeded with all their contemplation and influence. In fact, they claim God is not even relevant to their processes now. So they have achieved just the opposite. We become entangled in contemplating the world. Material science simply increases your ignorance as seen from this philosophical and religious reality. Practically, we have historical information in the scriptures of very religious people falling prey to their desires even as they act them out. Even we are ineffective as devotees, and our engrossment isn't even official. Your lower knowledge and purposes may be subsumed within your higher theistic purposes, but that is only evidenced by your theistic knowledge from transcendental sources. You will not see––as a general rule––behind the veil without significant success in the higher realm. And that you cannot get that verification from empirical observation. Nature will befriend and reveal her maya and God's play to a confidential devotee. But for the mundane worker… beware! Theist, I think you are sincere and definitely have established some relationship with the Supreme. But I think you are wrong if you advocate material science to facilitate that understanding. You seem to be dovetailing. But atheistic methodologies and philosophies will certainly not agree with you or even acknowledge that you see what you claim by their self-imposed and limiting standards. Scientifically--as the word is generally understood--you are crazy.

RiFF, Uh, sorry about the reply. I was in a hurry and didn't even notice your content so much as your title… and it wasn't even directed at me. My mistake. My circumstances are very hectic right now. The context of my reply is no longer appropriate for the circumstance. I grossly erred in judgement. Still, Theist and Jagat might learn something from it. Probably not. We have a miserly capacity for influencing each other and agreeing. Therefore we are not making it as Prabhupada's family.

Just a quick reply. I'm about to take this computer down for a day or two. Pursuing quantitative knowledge by observing entities, charting the consistencies and deriving laws does not give us any significant knowledge--especially not about God. Science is the same knowledge acquiring skills any conscious being demonstrates, it's just more methodical. Thus we call it a science. We actually don't even know what science is! Is it scientific to be obsessed with endless adjustments to a temporary situation? Anyway, modern scientific dogma still has all the refelective deficiencies inherent in conditioned beings because they are speculative processes of imperfect beings. You are making the same mistake Western empirical science has made regarding theistic vision through material processes. These redundant arguements appear to be incomprehensible to you. We have done very little good overall with these scientific advancements. If you add up all the benefits like air-conditioners, computers and plastic surgery on the one hand,and then on the other hand all the problems of pollution, empowerment of the unqualified, and general ignorance scientific world views create, we can very easily conclude that we are destroying ourselves with this science. Modern science certainly hasn't been a catalyst for theistic understanding or even facilitating the enrichment of mankind. If you don't know who you are before what you do, then maybe everything you're doing is wrong. Your proposal is a bluff. Practically, our disease is to exploit the world and material science is an indulgent methodology for cultivating that. Even Sadaputa and such "devotee experts" are simply tearing down intrenched material faith by negation of existing dogma. They are not preaching positively with direct descriptions of God. If they were so expert at understanding God through material nature as you suggest, then they could lead us to Krsna as Prabhupada did. All your empirical knowledge is lost with the body. So why endeavor so hard for it? It is a form of worship to devote so much time and energy to an actyivity. Krsna says a person worships Him with their mind just by reading the Bhagavad-gita. It is also a form of worship to give undue attention to movie stars or politicians––or scientists or sports or anything. You cannot worship material nature and Krsna together. And Krsna is not impressed with your quantitative knowledge. It is a simple point.

Jagat, pull your pants up! I'll get back with you when your descent. (I'm too busy to help you now)

The following are some thoughts I included in a reply attempt. but I'm not happy with it and too tired and uncaring to develop it. I made some points: When Mt. St. Helens errupted, the scientists were surprised to see 2 prominent things: 1) The volcanic magma seperated into layers as it settled much as oil and water might seperate according to weight. Previously it was thought the different layers corresponded to different erruptions over time. 2) Life magically rebounded on the barren landscape with stuptifying urgency simply due to the fact that the wind blew in seeds and insects which supported the higher life forms. Both observations caused "quiet" scientific upheavals in modern theory. "Our scientific processes have revealed this refined reality." Never mind the ignorance their last objective claims caused. And this was evidence by direct perception: What about all the scientific contradiction in Sadaputa's Forbidden Archeology? What about Beale's moleculary chemistry in "Black Box"? The Christians for the most part tried to coincide their creation theories with the scientists. And look where they are! Are we to be intimidated by science? Is our understanding and faith no better? What about Prabhupada's analogy of the three phases of God realization as if seeing a mountain from different perspectives? What you see from a distance may be completely different from a more intimate view. What about the very common sense analogy of the consistency of consciousness as contrasted with the changing body and the lack of scientific comprehension? Scientific substance is ultimately chance which totally contradicts the science of cause and effect. I thought devotees believed in karma and not chance. What about all the empirical crap of proof when you can't even prove ethics or the concepts of government laws? I can go on and on like this for quite a while––I really can––without even revisiting the basic defects of a conditioned soul. You "believe" that the scientists are giving you objective information about the world surrounding us. We like the little technology taste we bite off and accept the whole thing––by varying degrees. We tend to see the world––at least potentially––as meant for our enjoyment. Is that objectively true? In a courtroom, two scientists testify against each other over the same evidence. It happens all the time. And these are professionals with credentials out the ying-yang disputing the same evidence. What you see is not necessarily what you get! But we get what we deserve. Given your reply's finale, I'm quite confused where your science ends and your religion begins. Modern scientific methods and theory are not proof! the senses cannot be trusted.

"I can't show it to you in the Bhagavatam, but if you have access to a deep space telescope..." You are regurgitating the SAME arguments. You sound like the scientists. As for the rest of you... Later, under better circumstances.. In a few days. Remind me if I forget. For now, I'm tired of this material worship.

"Foolish people think that devotional service is flattering the Lord to get special mercy. Factually the pure devotees who are engaged in the transcendental loving service of the Lord are not a mercantile community. A mercantile house renders service to someone in exchange for values. The pure devotee does not render service unto the Lord for such exchange, and therefore the full mercy of the Lord is open for him. Suffering and needy men, inquisitive persons or philosophers make temporary connections with the Lord to serve a particular purpose. When the purpose is served, there is no more relation with the Lord." Prabhupada had many perfections––which seem to substantiate how all good qualities are manifest in the pure devotees. One of his perfections was exposing hypocrites like me (I'm the suffering and needy). Even his admonishments were blissful. Who else in our experience can speak like this?

"Foolish people think that devotional service is flattering the Lord to get special mercy. Factually the pure devotees who are engaged in the transcendental loving service of the Lord are not a mercantile community. A mercantile house renders service to someone in exchange for values. The pure devotee does not render service unto the Lord for such exchange, and therefore the full mercy of the Lord is open for him. Suffering and needy men, inquisitive persons or philosophers make temporary connections with the Lord to serve a particular purpose. When the purpose is served, there is no more relation with the Lord." Prabhupada had many perfections––which seem to substantiate how all good qualities are manifest in the pure devotees. One of his perfections was exposing hypocrites like me (I'm the suffering and needy). Even his admonishments were blissful. Who else in our experience can speak like this?

The Bhagavatam is good. It is authoritative in our system of proof. I did not get "many suns" from reading the Bhagavatam. But then I guess I didn't understand anything about that section. I just felt like giving up when reading it. If you can show there evidence to support your impressions of multiple suns and moons, then you've made your point. And you'll change my world view.

Theist, I'm really distracted with things going on here at the house. We're about to paint walls and lay carpet for starters. So I'm not in this mood of empirical debate. "What do you have against telescopes." These instruments like telescopes and microscopes certainly extend the range of the senses. Granted. And they do open up unseen worlds. Unfortunately, they have not helped prove intelligent design or authoritive scripture. Modern empirical science began it's systematic investigations as an unauthorized process to understand the effect... which would supposedly tell you something more about the cause––or God. Now look at us, we are the controllers, everything must be proved to us and we are the measure of all things. God is no longer relevant in most areas of our life. This is the practical result of such science and technology. The saints and scriptures warn us about contemplating the world too much. But now science is promoting molecule–o–mania of the brain as objective reality. The instruments created by us to extend our senses are also extentions of our defects also; especially our false ego. All this technology bewilders us and advances our destruction. "That to me, as I hear it, is every bit as inspiring as the Bhagavatam's statements on the universe. Nah, more, much more." There is nothing more amazing (conceptually or otherwise) than infinite universes expanding from the breath and pours of Maha-visnu or Lord Brahma being born on a lotus or all this gross matter expanding from the subtle (as if out of nothing). That technology my friend, is yet to be discovered. And because of the limits the scientists impose on themselves within their accepted discipline, it's doubtful they'll even look in the right place for it. You think man's revelations are more inspiring than God's? Surely you don't mean that. Dont forget to answer me with that proof I requested. Just saying the stars are suns proves nothing. Science can't prove that. Find some scriptural references that are accepted as authority to validate what you expound as your universal model. Then I will be convinced. Until then, I think you have too much faith in material science.

It's sounds like ya'll are anxious to interpret what I said. I'm gonna stick by my guns and say that I believe the universe–this smallest universe in the creation I think it is–has only one sun and moon in it's entire circumference. I guess I'm now discredited. So be it. I should look for some references but I don't have my Vedabase running because of a recent hard drive initialization. (I have to call in to authenticate). So it's harder to research. I'm also busy with other things. I plan on answering this later when I can give some Prabhupada or scriptural evidence. And while I do that, why don't you guys substantiate or confirm what you advocate with scriptures too? Empirical science is next to zero in my book when describing things beyond their experience. And don't tell me they've verified it by telescopes and radio waves. Well RIF, looks like the conversation has come full circle. You must be pleased.

Theist and Dna, Yes, my understanding and position is one sun and moon per universe. Do ya'll have another concept?

RIFamily, That was a nice reference you posted. But most of the descriptions about the structure of the universe are not allegorical. Bhu-mandala, the circle of islands and seas, and one sun and moon are all empirical facts.

This may be the hardest one: "Observe silence for a couple of hours each day." I don't think Americans can do it regularly. It's too painful for them.

I thought this should have better air time. Posted by JNdas under "Sanctified Food; the Process of Sadhana" in the Letters to the Editor thread. [What type of general habits should one follow in normal life?] Here are a few principles one should adopt: Try to rise early, around 4 am daily. This time is the brahma muhurta, a period extremely favourable for spiritual practices. During this period from 4 am to 7 am spiritual practices give quick and maximum progress. Sit peacefully in padmasana and recite the Hare Krishna maha-mantra during this early morning time period. Take sattvik food (pure food which does not increase one's passions). Give up chillies, onion, garlic, and excessively sour or spiced foods. Observe moderation in diet. Do not overload the stomach. Systematically study the scriptures such as Bhagavad Gita, Ramayana, Srimad Bhagavatam, the Upanishads, etc., from half an hour to one hour daily. Memorize some powerful prayers and recite them before you begin meditation to elevate your mind. Do charity every month according to one's means. Never fail in this. If necessary forego some personal wants but keep up this charity regularly. Give up bad association, smoking and liquor entirely. Try to associate with like minded spiritual people. Do not develop evil habits. Try always to develop positive virtuous qualities. Fast on certain days of the year by eating only milk and fruit (such as ekadashi day twice a month). Keep a japa mala and wear it around your neck or keep it in your pocket. This will remind you of God. Twirl the beads in your leisure hours and just before going to sleep. Chant your mantra on each bead. Observe silence for a couple of hours each day. Practice to speak truth. Always utter encouraging words. Reduce your wants. If you have four shirts, reduce it to three. Lead a happy contented life. Avoid unnecessary worry. Be mentally detached. Live simply and develop high thinking. Think of those who do not even have one tenth of what you have. Share with others. Practice Love. Never hurt anybody. Be compassionate and forgiving. Have self-analysis. In the evening just before sleeping reflect over the mistakes you made during the course of the day. Keep a daily spiritual diary and self-correction register. Draw up a routine of daily activities and follow it. Never fail to fulfil your duty. Think of God as soon as you wake up and just before you go to sleep, and at all other times. Repeat His name always, it should ring in the mind continuously. Develop the following qualities: Serenity, Regularity, Absence of Vanity, Sincerity, Simplicity, Veracity, Equanimity, Fixity, Non-irritability, Adaptability, Humility, Tenacity, Integrity, Nobility, Magnanimity, Charity, Generosity, Purity.