Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Guest guest

!RE: Vedic Cosmology debate

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

Dear Gauranga Premananda Prabhu


Hare Krishna! Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila



I think you need to read my reply again. This discussion has nothing

whatsoever to do with 18,712,069,200,000,000. And I think you know that very

well. That is just your way of trying to distract us from the real point.


The real question is: "Should we accept the Bhagavatam as a scientific

presentation of fact or should we interpret it using non-literal

interpretations made up out of our imagination as Sadaputa Prabhu has done?"

It is a simple point. Should we take the Bhagavatam "As It Is." Or should we

interpret it so it appears that it lines up completely with the conclusions

of modern science? This is the point I have been requesting you to reply on

this point from the beginning and so far you have not replied on it at all.

All your emails simply contain the number 18,712,069,200,000,000, apart from

that they are completely null and void.


My position is we should accept Srila Prabhupada's directions on this

matter. We are supposed to be Prabhupada's followers. We are supposed to

accept his words and the words of the Bhagavatam as being non-different from

Krishna's words. Srila Prabhuapda is very clear that we should accept the

Bhagavatam "As It Is." Sadaputa's idea of non-literal interpretations is a

very dangerous thing. It means he is greater than Prabhupada and Krishna.

Krishna has given the scriptures and Prabhupada has explained them and

Sadaputa has rejected those direct explanations and came up with his own

indirect explanations that suit his purpose. AND YOU LIKE THIS!! Why stop

with the fifth canto? If we accept that Sadaputa can interpret it in

different imaginary ways then why not interpret the rest of the Bhagavatam

in imaginary ways? Why not interpret the Bhagavad-gita so it suits us

better? So it is less controversial?


I am convinced that the fifth canto of the Srimad-Bhagavatam is giving the

actual description of the universe. We can not understand it at the moment.

That is our limitation, that is our conditioning.


So I need you answer on all the points I have raised in my 3 letters to you.

So far you have not answered a single point. Simply every email you come

back with that same old number. And none of my letters even concern that

number. It is not at all the point of discussion.


So I am hoping that you will write back admitting that yes, we do have to

accept the Srimad-Bhagavatam AS IT IS, and yes, it is a real description of

the universe, and yes, the scientists have made so many mistakes and all

their grand theories are nothing better than castles in the sand. They are

useless. The scientists have absolutely no idea at all how the universe is



Looking forward to your reply. I will remind you that Prabhupada has asked

us to build the Temple of the Vedic Planetarium based in the information in

the Srimad-Bhagavatam. That figure you quote does not appear in the

Srimad-Bhagavatam at all. It comes from a completely different tradition of

astronomy altogether. Srila Prabhupada stated the diameter of the universe

to be four billion miles TWENTY ONE TIMES! So we have to accept that as the

diameter of the universe. Who do you believe? Krishna and Krishna's pure

devotees or the scientists? It is up to you to decide where to put your

faith but I know who I am putting my faith in and I know I will not be



It is really, really a big problem if the spiritual master says "the

diameter of the universe is four billion miles" twenty one times and the

"disciple" refuses to accept this because his real guru is modern science.

He can not see that modern science makes so many mistakes, builds theories

on assumptions that are false, has imperfect senses and of course they cheat

SO MUCH to try to "prove" their pet theories. You believe in the big bang

and the red shift, not in Prabhupada and Krishna.


The whole idea is to expose this. Not to pretend that the Bhagavatam agrees

with the great advanced knowledge of "modern science" as your Sadaputa

Prabhu does in his books. We want to smash them, expose them for what they

are, cheaters who have no knowledge of the universe themselves yet they put

themselves up as teachers. They are cheaters, not teachers...


Chant Hare Krishna and be happy!


Your servant


Madhudvisa dasa



Gauranga Premananda (das) BCS (Amsterdam - NL)

[Gauranga.Premananda.BCS (AT) pamho (DOT) net]

Tuesday, February 01, 2005 12:38 PM

Danavir Goswami (USA); Drutakarma (das) ACBSP (Los Angeles - USA);

Arya Siddhanta (das) DG (Los Angeles, CA - US); Carana Renu (dd) DAS

(Ljubljana - SI); richard thompson; Oxford Studies

RE: Vedic Cosmology debate



Dear Madhudvisa Prabhu


Hare Krishna! Please accept our humble obeisances. All glories to Srila



We read your reply.

What is your explanation on the CC. madhya lila 21.84 and purport.

The statement: " According to some, this is only half the circumference"

This would make 18,712,069,200,000,000 x 8 miles till Lokaloka mountain.

This is in one sense the universe: beyond Lokaloka mountain is no sunlight

and living entities.

This gives respectabe figures.

Srila Prabhupada said that western scientists have partial knowledge.

(see our e-mail exchanges with HH Danavir Maharaja)


"Krishna said:

Your particular universe has a diameter of four billion miles; therefore it

is the smallest of all the universes. Consequently you have only four heads.


Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura, one of the greatest astrologers of

his time, gives information from the Siddhanta-siromani that this universe

measures 18,712,069,200,000,000 x 8 miles. This is the circumference of this

universe. According to some, this is only half the circumference.

(Madhya 21.84)"


ys: Gauranga Premananda das and Madhu Gopal das






You have said: "We are not saying anywhere that one should not take

Srimad-Bhagavatam literally "as it is", nor are we suggesting that one

should accept them as simply allegorical stories that are open to be

interpreted in any non-literal way that one can conjure up in one`s



However you are supporting Sadaputa Prabhu and this is EXACTLY what he has

done. His whole presentation is that we should not take the Bhagavatam

literally, rather we should interpret it to make it fit in with the

"correct" understanding of modern science. And to this end he has conjured

up various non-literal explanations of the Bhagavatam from his imagination.

(if not from his imagination where do you suggest his non-literal

interpretations have come from?)


You go on to say: "Rather we are convinced that many persons do not

understand the figures in Srimad Bhagavatam...."


This discussion is NOT about the figures in the Srimad-Bhagavatam. The

figure you are talking about is not even in the Srimad-Bhagavatam!!! The

point we are discussing is should we accept the Bhagavatam description AS IT

IS or should we interpret it using our imagination to make it appear to

agree with the current ideas of modern science.


That is what Sadaputa has done in his most recent book. The result of all

his non-literal interpretations is to make the Bhagavatam agree with modern

science. His premise is modern science is correct and we will look silly if

we say anything else. That is not Prabhupada's opinion and as followers of

Srila Prabhupada we can not present these ideas in Prabhupada's Temple of

the Vedic Planetarium. That would be blasphemy.


I have discussed this further in my reply to your other letter included



Chant Hare Krishna and be happy!!


Your servant


Madhudvisa dasa



Dear Gauranga Premananda Prabhu


Hare Krishna! Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila



This is not at all a satisfactory reply.


The main point I made is Danavir Maharaja's book is not about the size of

the universe. It is about the principle that we should accept the Bhagavatam

as a literal, actual description of the universe. Not that we should make

many non-literal interpretations out of our imagination to try and make it

appear that the Bhagavatam agrees with the "correct" view of modern science.


So you should reply to this point. Either you should support your argument

that we should make many non-literal interpretations of the Bhagavatam and

present the Bhagavatam "as Sadaputa interprets it to be from his

imagination" rather than the Bhagavatam As It Is [as given to us by Srila

Prabhupada]. Or, admit that it is Srila Prabhupada's desire and therefore we

are obliged to present the Bhagavatam "As It Is" in the Temple of the Vedic



You are supporting Sadaputa Prabhu who accepts modern science as being

correct and sees it as being important that the Vedic descriptions somehow

support the conclusions of modern science.


This is not Srila Prabhupada's opinion. Prabhupada's opinion is that the

modern scientists are no better than frogs in a well. The example is that

one frog has lived in a well for his whole life, while another frog has

traveled outside the well and seen so many things, including the Atlantic

Ocean. So the well-traveled frog is trying to explain the Atlantic Ocean to

his frog friend who has never been out of the well. He is saying, "It is

huge!" But for the "frog in the well" his well is the whole universe. So he

has to compare everything with his experience in the well. So he is

thinking, "perhaps it is twice as big as my well..." in this way he can go

on trying to understand the Atlantic Ocean in terms of the universe as he

knows it (his well) but he can never conceive of the Atlantic Ocean at all.

Similarly modern science, with its frog-in-the-well like knowledge of the

universe can never understand the universe. Because they can not see it.

What can the frog see out of the well of the world? Very little. Sometimes a

bit of blue sky, sometimes a cloud, sometimes he may even see the sun or

some stars. Occasionally the moon may pass over the opening of his well. and

even sometimes he may hear the farmers' tractor plowing the fields.

Sometimes something may fall into the well. Just imagine what he would think

if some children were playing and they dropped a ball in his well. How would

he understand what was going on. How would he explain that ball falling into

his universe??? You can be sure our Dr. Frog Ph.D. would come up with a

perfectly good scientific explanation. But what does he know? How can he



So modern science with their imperfect senses, their cheating propensity,

all the mistakes they make and the problem that they accept so many things

to be facts which are not facts at all makes their conclusions very faulty.

The whole system of modern astronomy is based on so many assumptions which

have no proof. It is like a castle built on sand, it has no foundation. It

is like a very grand mathematical calculation which starts with an error. No

matter how wonderful the calculation, the result will be incorrect. As it is

based on an incorrect assumption...


"That is our basic principle of knowledge, that every one of us is

defective. So you cannot give us complete knowledge. It is not possible. We

must receive knowledge from the perfect without defects." (Srila Prabhupada

Conversation 30 Jan, 1977)


Srila Bhaktsiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura was a great astrologer. And he

translated the Suriya Siddhanta as a great astrologer. But it is not the

authority for the Temple of the Vedic Planetarium. That authority is Srila

Prabhupada's Srimad-Bhagavatam. Srila Bhaktsiddhanta's translation of Surya

Siddhanta is an authorative translation. Prabhupada said if it is available

we should get it. He said that Srila Bhaktisiddhanta was a great authority

on the movements of the sun. But there are many different systems of

astronomy in India contempory to the Surya-siddhanta. They are different

systems, different predictive models which are used for different purposes.

But we are interested in the Bhagavatam which is not just a different

predictive model, but it is a real description of how the mechanics of the

universe work from a perfect person who has perfect knowledge. That is the

main point we have to get across in this Temple of the Vedic Planetarium.

That real knowledge can only come from a perfect person who actually has

that perfect knowledge.


Neither you nor Sadaputa Prabhu seem to accept the authority of Srila

Prabhupada's Bhagavatam. That is a very serious problem.


So it seems that you do not agree with what I have written but you have give

no reason why you disagree nor have you shown how anything I have written is

not correct.


So if you have any objections then please explain them clearly and support

them from the teachings of Srila Prabhupada.


Chant Hare Krishna and be happy!


Your servant


Madhudvisa dasa

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Create New...