8,000,400 different species in the universe?

[Guruvani 0]

 

As to archealogical evidence. Why not ask for suchevidence. The lack of fossil records disproves Darwinian evolulution and I see no reason why it is off limits to seek similar to clarify statements in the Vedas Puranas Mahabharta and Ramayana.

 

Where are the ruins of Dwarka? Where are the artifcats from the war at Kurukshetra (18(?) million dead humans, plus elephants and chariots swords spears and battle dress. Should be one of the most dramatic archeaological fields in human history.

 

None of this affects my faith one way or another. I don't care if it is all just a literary vehicle by which Krsna chose to tell His story through some inspired transcendenatlists.

 

The reality of Krsna consciousness is not diminished in the least if the battle of kurukshetra didn't really take place in our 3d reality or not. I personally don't think it did. Krsna is still there in Bhagavad-gita and we as little Arjunas can come to know Him and become His devotees just by hearing Bhagavad-gita.

 

Do you think differently? No problem for me. I feel no need to persuade anyone.

 

One of the reasons we are reluctantant to question these things is that we fear the truth may ruin our faith. My point is if we are thinking like that then we don't have any genuine faith to lose in the first place. What we have is fear masquerading as faith. Better to rip that mask off and come face to face with the reality of the situation. IMO of course.

 

Well, if you want to get archaeological, then why don't you seek some scientific proof that Jesus existed?

 

They can't even find scientific proof that Jesus or King David or any of that Bible mythology ever existed and that was supposed to be 3000 years after Krishna appeared on the Earth.

 

There is not a shred of scientific proof that Jesus ever existed and that was only 2000 years ago.

 

Why should you demand archaeological proof of Dwaraka or Kurukshetra?

 

Do I detect a prejudice here?

 

I think most definitely

[muralidhar_das 0]

 

I don't care if it is all just a literary vehicle by which Krsna chose to tell His story through some inspired transcendenatlists.

 

This is exactly how I feel

[muralidhar_das 0]

Further to this, I know Mahaprabhu existed as a living being and because of the fact that reincarnation is a fact of life I know that Mahaprabhu is still existing somewhere.

 

People saw Mahaprabhu manifest 4 arms, manifest as Balarama, manifest as Radha-Govinda.

 

Bob Marley once sang, "the live god is a living man". My God is a living person, I have no doubt he exists and I'm sure he is not a fairy tale because as Krishna says in the Gita, "For the soul there is neither birth nor death.... souls just change bodies just like changing clothes".

[muralidhar_das 0]

 

It's quite amuzing to see devotees seperating what part of the Gaudiya or Vedic canon they accept as real and what part they accept as fantasy.

 

We have no proof of any of it.

It all sounds quite fantastic and mythological.

 

It's just really funny to see devotees separating what part of the mythology they accept as real and what part they want to label as fiction.

 

Picking and choosing what part of these scriptures we accept and what part we reject is a mind game that ends up in a lot of confusion and quarrel.

 

Maybe we should just try to find the spiritual element in all of it instead of trying to label part of it as history and part of it as mythology.

 

It's all got a spiritual meaning and spiritual purpose.

 

Our problem is that we want to get all mental about it and start picking and choosing to suit our personal preferences.

 

Where will it all end?

Probably in a condition of weakened faith on the mental platfrom.

 

It's all fantastic.

 

Separating one part as acceptable and another as unacceptable is a losing proposition.

 

IMHO

Which devotees are you talking about here?

 

Srila Bhaktivinode Thakura?

 

The people who follow his line of thought?

[Murali_Mohan_das 0]

Guruvani Prabhu. It delights me to find myself in complete agreement with your statements below.

 

Even the scientist, absent proof to the contrary (for the lack of proof is *not* the same as proof to the contrary), must accept that all these things described in the Vedas are at least *possible* in some realm, if highly improbable according to his/her own intuition.

 

It's a dangerous game to pick and choose what to accept as "fact" and what to relegate to "allegory".

 

In fact, finding myself almost always in agreement with Theist-ji, I wondered, when I saw this thread, if he/she had been hitting the bong again (since, as Srila Sridhar Maharaj points out (and I know from first-hand experience), ganja is an enemy of faith).

 

Not that these topics should be avoided, but, as you point out, for the faithful, there is no doubt.

 

 

It's quite amuzing to see devotees seperating what part of the Gaudiya or Vedic canon they accept as real and what part they accept as fantasy.

 

We have no proof of any of it.

It all sounds quite fantastic and mythological.

 

It's just really funny to see devotees separating what part of the mythology they accept as real and what part they want to label as fiction.

 

Picking and choosing what part of these scriptures we accept and what part we reject is a mind game that ends up in a lot of confusion and quarrel.

 

Maybe we should just try to find the spiritual element in all of it instead of trying to label part of it as history and part of it as mythology.

 

It's all got a spiritual meaning and spiritual purpose.

 

Our problem is that we want to get all mental about it and start picking and choosing to suit our personal preferences.

 

Where will it all end?

Probably in a condition of weakened faith on the mental platfrom.

 

It's all fantastic.

 

Separating one part as acceptable and another as unacceptable is a losing proposition.

 

IMHO

[shiva 0]

 

Quote:

<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="100%"> <tbody><tr> <td style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding-left: 3ex; padding-right: 3ex;" bgcolor="#e0e0e0"> Originally Posted by Thakura Bhaktivinoda

"One who lives in Kuruksetra, which is south of the Sarasvati River and north of the Drsadvati River, lives in heaven." By discussing the meaning of the name "Brahmavarta" it is assumed that the Aryans came from another country to reside therein. We cannot ascertain exactly where they came from, but it is believed that they came from some northwest country. In the description of Devi's tirtha near Kashmir in the Mahabharata (Vana-parva 82.102) it is stated:

</td> </tr> </tbody></table>

 

What I feel is that it doesn't matter one way or the other whether there was an Aryan invasion.

 

Bhaktivinode Thakura has given his opinion that maybe something like that happened.

 

Devotees who want to fight against science are "wild goose chasing" in my opinion.

 

Frankly I don't care if Hanuman etc were men or monkeys. And in Sri Krishna Samhita we find Bhaktivinode Thakura saying the "descent of the Ganges" story of King Bhagirathi represents not the bringing of the Ganges to the sea but the bringing of the Aryan culture from "Aryavarta" (uttara pradhesh) to the sea in Bengal. This, and many other things Bhaktivinode Thakura says in Sri Krishna Samhita, are not "articles of faith" for me. What these things do for me is make me realize that I don't need to worry one way or the other whether scientific or "fundamentalist" ideas are the right ideas.

 

Bhaktivinode Thakur has presented a way of thinking about history and science which makes those topics separate from spirituality. He goes on to talk about spirituality in great depth in Sri Krishna Samhita.

 

<!-- END TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote -->

 

You still don't seem to understand what Bhaktivinoda is saying. "Another country" means outside of Brahmavarta (the land between the sarasvati and drsadvati), not outside of "India". He is basing this on what is written in the Mahabharata where it says that the brahmanas originally came from a place near Devi's tirtha near Kashmir. He gives no support to any type of aryan invasion theory. As for your support of "science" in these areas or in the so called science of evolution, well, your opinion is interesting but maybe you should try to read a bit closer before making your claim of scientific objectivity. Besides the lack of any scientific proof for an aryan invasion (which was dreamed up by colonialist christians for the purpose of propaganda) there is also a lack of any scientific proof for evolution regardless of the claims made by propagandists. So if someone was to really rely on science and want his opinion to have any merit he or she should first become educated in the relevant science rather then parroting discredited propaganda masquerading as science.

 

As for the various histories written by Bhaktivinoda in the Krsna Samhita you should note that he writes that he is giving the "modern scholars" version of Puranic history, he does not state that he agrees with it. For example he says things like:

 

 

Now we will consider the modern scholars view on the date of the appearance of Srimad Bhagavatam, the jewel of all scriptures. Not understanding our statements, third-grade people may lose all faith and consider this scripture a recent work. Therefore they should not read this section. Actually Srimad Bhagavatam is not a recent book. It is eternal and ancient like the Vedas.

 

Clearly the purpose of the book is to show that even if the itihasas are not literally true, that they still offer a real plausible history, that they can be shown to be not simply an invented mythology with no basis in any real historical events. Early on in the book he writes that it is common for people to reject the religion propounded by the itihasas because they find some part which seems unbelievable to them and then end up losing faith in the entire religion. So his purpose in the book is to aid those people who cannot accept literally the stories and histories of the itihasas (puranas, mahabharata, ramayana etc) by giving a "modern scientific" account of the itihasas to show that they are not simply invented mythology even by modern standards of historical and anthropological methodologies. He then many times adds that he accepts the version of history written in the itihasas as they are written in them.

[Murali_Mohan_das 0]

 

As to archealogical evidence. Why not ask for suchevidence. The lack of fossil records disproves Darwinian evolulution and I see no reason why it is off limits to seek similar to clarify statements in the Vedas Puranas Mahabharta and Ramayana.

 

Where are the ruins of Dwarka? Where are the artifcats from the war at Kurukshetra (18(?) million dead humans, plus elephants and chariots swords spears and battle dress. Should be one of the most dramatic archeaological fields in human history.

 

As I mentioned above, Theist-ji, the lack of evidence cannot prove anything. Only proof to the contrary would.

 

Consider for a moment, the surface area of the world. Then consider just how many archeological digs have taken place. There is no way to claim that even the smallest portion of the archeological record has been revealed.

 

Even then, as far as Kurukshetra goes, there is the description of weapons of similar intensity to conventional nuclear weapons. If such weapons were in play, one would expect to find little remaining except some melted glass.

[Murali_Mohan_das 0]

Thank you, Siva Prabhu for providing some all-important context to these words of our Master!

 

 

Clearly the purpose of the book is to show that even if the itihasas are not literally true, that they still offer a real plausible history, that they can be shown to be not simply an invented mythology with no basis in any real historical events. Early on in the book he writes that it is common for people to reject the religion propounded by the itihasas because they find some part which seems unbelievable to them and then end up losing faith in the entire religion. So his purpose in the book is to aid those people who cannot accept literally the stories and histories of the itihasas (puranas, mahabharata, ramayana etc) by giving a "modern scientific" account of the itihasas to show that they are not simply invented mythology even by modern standards of historical and anthropological methodologies. He then many times adds that he accepts the version of history written in the itihasas as they are written in them.

[muralidhar_das 0]

 

You still don't seem to understand what Bhaktivinoda is saying.

 

...

 

As for your support of "science" in these areas or in the so called science of evolution, well, your opinion is interesting but maybe you should try to read a bit closer before making your claim of scientific objectivity. Besides the lack of any scientific proof for an aryan invasion (which was dreamed up by colonialist christians for the purpose of propaganda) there is also a lack of any scientific proof for evolution regardless of the claims made by propagandists. So if someone was to really rely on science and want his opinion to have any merit he or she should first become educated in the relevant science rather then parroting discredited propaganda masquerading as science.

I guess I'm different from most people on this forum. I have a background in science. Years ago I went to university and learned the science of Psychology. I studied the usual stuff: statistics, metrics, theories of the self, physiology, biology, etc..

 

After that I was lecturing at the university for a while - psych, media and technology.

 

You talk about how evolution has been debunked. Believe that if you like....

 

Looking at the picture I've attached, I feel quite certain that some men are closely related to apes. Notice the way Her Royal Highness is looking at the big monkey. Does she love animals? Maybe not this one.

[Murali_Mohan_das 0]

To clarify my point...

 

The fact that the "missing link" or intermediary species between ape and human has not been found doesn't mean that fossils of same do not exist.

 

Now, finding a skeleton of Homo Sapiens that can be reliably dated to several million years prior to the accepted "birth" of the species, *would* tend to put a dent in the theory of evolution.

 

Of course, this brings up the human element of science--often, data which do not fit the accepted paradigm are discarded as being erroneous.

 

I've not read the book, but I understand much of this is covered in "Forbidden Archeology".

 

 

As I mentioned above, Theist-ji, the lack of evidence cannot prove anything. Only proof to the contrary would.

 

Consider for a moment, the surface area of the world. Then consider just how many archeological digs have taken place. There is no way to claim that even the smallest portion of the archeological record has been revealed.

 

Even then, as far as Kurukshetra goes, there is the description of weapons of similar intensity to conventional nuclear weapons. If such weapons were in play, one would expect to find little remaining except some melted glass.

[Murali_Mohan_das 0]

 

I guess I'm different from most people on this forum. I have a background in science. Years ago I went to university and learned the science of Psyschology. I studied the usual stuff: statistics, metrics, theories of the self, biology, etc..

 

Muralidhar Prabhu. You are so right. I find it is those who are ignorant of science that tend to either deify or demonize it. For those familiar with science, it is just another tool--like a hammer--who would quarrel with a hammer (a poor craftsman, perhaps)?

 

Srila Prabhupada, in his mood as acharya (acharya abhiman) would frequently point out the limitations of science. He can do that since he is (aside from being a pure devotee of the Lord) an educated man and a scientist (chemist). Srila Prabhupada could insult a scientist to his face and the scientist would laugh and accept the correction. If we insult the scientists, they will simply go away with a bitter taste in their mouths.

[Guruvani 0]

 

I guess I'm different from most people on this forum. I have a background in science. Years ago I went to university and learned the science of Psychology. .........................

Naaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.....

You aint' different.

You're just one of us conditioned souls that is prone to make mistakes, cheat etc. etc.

 

Heck, I was a jet engine mechanic just before I joined the movement, but I am not trying to figure out what sort of propulsion system that Hanuman used to jump from South India to Lanka.

 

Excuses are a dime a dozen.

 

Let's just face the fact that we have imperfect senses and the mind of one of them.

 

I think Siva has shed some light on the subject with his explanation.

 

It all sounds very plausible.

 

It's a lot better than making Srila Bhaktivinode out to be some sort of Gaudiya nut-job that is off his rocker.

[muralidhar_das 0]

Quote:

<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="100%"> <tbody><tr> <td style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding-left: 3ex; padding-right: 3ex;" bgcolor="#e0e0e0"> Originally Posted by muralidhar_das

I guess I'm different from most people on this forum. I have a background in science. Years ago I went to university and learned the science of Psychology. .........................

</td> </tr> </tbody></table>

<!-- END TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote -->

 

Naaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.....

You aint' different.

You're just one of us conditioned souls that is prone to make mistakes, cheat etc. etc.

 

You are right there.

[shiva 0]

 

As I mentioned above, Theist-ji, the lack of evidence cannot prove anything. Only proof to the contrary would.

 

Consider for a moment, the surface area of the world. Then consider just how many archeological digs have taken place. There is no way to claim that even the smallest portion of the archeological record has been revealed.

 

Even then, as far as Kurukshetra goes, there is the description of weapons of similar intensity to conventional nuclear weapons. If such weapons were in play, one would expect to find little remaining except some melted glass.

 

Whether the numbers of people involved in the battle is accurate or not is irrelevant. Sometimes atisayokti or hyberbolic poetic license is used in sastra in order to make a point of one type or another. Mahaprabhu has said:

 

krsna-tulya bhagavata -- vibhu, sarvasraya

prati-sloke prati-aksare nana artha kaya

 

Srimad-Bhagavatam is as great as Krsna, the Supreme Lord and shelter of everything. In each and every verse of Srimad-Bhagavatam and in each and every syllable, there are various meanings.

 

Besides these facts another point to remember is that the vedic custom is cremation for the dead. If there was 10,000 or 10,000,000 dead at Kuruksetra they would have been cremated and the weapons etc would have been carted off. A big problem for finding ancient historical evidence in India is the fact that most archeological digs conducted throughout the world are done in areas which have been abandoned. How can you know the true archeological history of a place if that place was never abandoned? For example if Delhi has been a city for 10,000 years how will you dig up the city to find out what was going on 10,000 years ago? Even if you could dig up the city what are the chances that you could find much? When places are not abandoned they leave little in the way of archeological evidence because items are used until they are broken and then they are used for something else e.g wood objects are used for fuel, metal objects will be melted down and recast, etc. Almost all modern archeology is based upon discovering the ruins of abandoned places. In a place like India where civilization has gone on without interruption it makes archeology very difficult. The saraswata-harrapan ruins showcase this point. They are abandoned cities. Yet they leave very little besides ruins of buildings because anything of value was carted off when the people left or when people came to loot after the abandonment. There is a theory that since hardly any weapons were found that they were a non violent people. But that shows the level of intelligence of those archeologists. The people adbandoning those cities would not leave their valuables behind, you wouldn't expect to find anything of value because why would they leave anything of value? Therefore hardly any weapons were found. So modern archeology is oftentimes led by very foolish people with a view to propagandize a certain view of world history and cultures, their opinions should be taken with a grain of salt.

[muralidhar_das 0]

More from Sri Krishna Samhita:

 

 

Although the Ramayana is counted as poetry, it can also be called a history. It was written by Valmiki Rsi, who was a contemporary of Ramacandra. We don't feel that the current Ramayana was written by Valmiki alone. By considering the conversation between Narada and Valmiki and the recitation of the Ramayana in Ramacandra's assembly by Luva and Kusa, it is understood that Valmiki composed many of the verses glorifying the characteristics of Ramacandra in the Ramayana, but after some time one scholar elaborated on Valmiki's work. I think that the present day Ramayana was propagated after the composition of the Mahabharata, because while chastising Jabali, Ramacandra accused him of being polluted by the Sakya philosophy. Please refer to the Sanskrit Ramayana printed under the direction of the King of Burdwan. It is felt that the present day Ramayana was written around 500 B.C. It is said that the Mahabharata was composed by Vyasadeva, and there is no objection to this. But it cannot be accepted that the Vyasa who divided the Vedas and received the title Vedavyasa at the time of Yudhisthira was the same Vyasa. The reason for this is that in the Mahabharata there are descriptions of kings such as Janmejaya, who ruled after Yudhisthira. There are specific references about the Manu scriptures in the Mahabharata, therefore the present day Mahabharata must have been written some time after 1000 B.C.

 

... it appears that Vedavyasa first made a draft of the Mahabharata, and later on another Vyasa elaborated on it and presented that under the name of Mahabharata.

 

 

[Murali_Mohan_das 0]

 

Naaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.....

You aint' different.

You're just one of us conditioned souls that is prone to make mistakes, cheat etc. etc.

 

I wouldn't be too certain of that Guruvani-ji. Just the other day, Muralidhar Prabhu revealed to me his four-armed form

[Guruvani 0]

 

I wouldn't be too certain of that Guruvani-ji. Just the other day, Muralidhar Prabhu revealed to me his four-armed form

 

Well, I guess I will have to show my Sadbhuja vigraha to top that?

[shiva 0]

 

More from Sri Krishna Samhita:

 

Originally Posted by Srila Bhaktivinode Thakura

 

Although the Ramayana is counted as poetry, it can also be called a history. It was written by Valmiki Rsi, who was a contemporary of Ramacandra. We don't feel that the current Ramayana was written by Valmiki alone. By considering the conversation between Narada and Valmiki and the recitation of the Ramayana in Ramacandra's assembly by Luva and Kusa, it is understood that Valmiki composed many of the verses glorifying the characteristics of Ramacandra in the Ramayana, but after some time one scholar elaborated on Valmiki's work. I think that the present day Ramayana was propagated after the composition of the Mahabharata, because while chastising Jabali, Ramacandra accused him of being polluted by the Sakya philosophy. Please refer to the Sanskrit Ramayana printed under the direction of the King of Burdwan. It is felt that the present day Ramayana was written around 500 B.C. It is said that the Mahabharata was composed by Vyasadeva, and there is no objection to this. But it cannot be accepted that the Vyasa who divided the Vedas and received the title Vedavyasa at the time of Yudhisthira was the same Vyasa. The reason for this is that in the Mahabharata there are descriptions of kings such as Janmejaya, who ruled after Yudhisthira. There are specific references about the Manu scriptures in the Mahabharata, therefore the present day Mahabharata must have been written some time after 1000 B.C.

 

... it appears that Vedavyasa first made a draft of the Mahabharata, and later on another Vyasa elaborated on it and presented that under the name of Mahabharata.

 

 

He begins that section with this:

 

"Now I will establish the dating of the smrti sastras according to the opinion of modern scholars"

 

He makes this point over and over. He writes that Krsna Samhita is not for neophytes because they may not understand his purpose and may lose faith. Also he writes that it is not written for uttama adhikaris, although he says that uttama adhikaris can use the Krsna Samhita as an aid. He writes that his intent in Krsna Samhita is in giving aid to the faith of madhyama adhikaris who lose faith in sastra due to the influence of modern scholarship and modern thinking. Modern establishment "science" strives under the delusion of methodological and metaphysical naturalism and therefore a priori denies the possiblity of any and all metaphysical events as plausible. Therefore any historical literature which incorporates metaphysical events is treated as made up mythology. What Bhaktivinoda is doing is showing that the "mythology" of the vedic histories can be shown to be plausible history. Rejecting them wholesale on the basis of the prejudices of the modern scientific establishment (which is commited to a certain mundane worldview) is not the only alternative to accepting them literally.

[muralidhar_das 0]

 

Quote:

<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="100%"> <tbody><tr> <td style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding-left: 3ex; padding-right: 3ex;" bgcolor="#e0e0e0"> Originally Posted by Murali_Mohan_das

I wouldn't be too certain of that Guruvani-ji. Just the other day, Muralidhar Prabhu revealed to me his four-armed form

</td> </tr> </tbody></table>

<!-- END TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote -->

Well, I guess I will have to show my Sadbhuja vigraha to top that?

 

 

 

It's a fact that I have displayed a six arm form in the past. In a dream I once saw myself as a spider - I was wandering around my web and looking for someone to bite. When I awoke I realized I must have been a spider in some recent past lifetime.

 

=================================

 

Changing the subject...

 

 

 

Srimad-Bhagavatam is as great as Krsna, the Supreme Lord and shelter of everything. In each and every verse of Srimad-Bhagavatam and in each and every syllable, there are various meanings.

 

 

Śrīmad Bhāgavatam[/url'> 11.21.36]

 

śabda-brahma su-durbodhaḿ

prāṇendriya-mano-mayam

ananta-pāraḿ gambhīraḿ

durvigāhyaḿ samudra-vat

The transcendental sound of the Vedas is very difficult to comprehend and manifests on different levels within the prāṇa, senses and mind. This Vedic sound is unlimited, very deep and unfathomable, just like the ocean.

If you take the view that the Bhagavatam is describing "material" events in the material world, you are as much a heretic as someone who says the Bhagavatam is "mythology".

The people living in India 5,000 years ago had a very different world-view from the view of "reality" of modern day people. Dreams, myth, magic, hypnotism, superstition, group-think and other psyhic elements that effected the people would have caused them to see the world around them in an entirely different way from the way we see "the world".

I personally believe that the vision of reality Sukadev had is closer to reality than the view of things that people like me who are conditioned by the modern-day environment are seeing. Sukadev knew that if you say a mantra with proper pronunciation you can invoke psychic "forces" such as Indra, Surya or Visnu, and thus Sukadev's words are pregnant with mystical content. But at the same time if we try to reduce Sukadev's words to "stories" about material history we will never get the true message he was presenting.

I don't have time to type out the things that are written in Sri Krishna Chaitanya, Volume 2, by proessor Sanyal, discussing this point. But Professor Sanyal goes to great lengths to explain that Saraswati Thakur strongly preached that the Bhagavatam is not a book about "history".

[muralidhar_das 0]

 

He begins that section with this:

 

"Now I will establish the dating of the smrti sastras according to the opinion of modern scholars"

.

This is the point of view ISKCON people give when they are confronted with this. If you want to see things in that way, go right ahead.

 

But how about this statement from The Bhagavata Lecture which is not prefaced by any disclaimer:

 

 

In the common-place books of the Hindu religion in which the rajo and tamo-guna have been described as the ways of religion, we have descriptions of a local heaven and a local hell; the Heaven as beautiful as anything on earth and the Hell as ghastly as any picture of evil. Besides this Heaven we have many more places, where good souls are sent up in the way of promotion! There are 84 divisions of the hell itself, some more dreadful than the one which Milton has described in his "Paradise Lost" . These are certainly poetical and were originally created by the rulers of the country in order to check evil deeds of the ignorant people, who are not able to understand the conclusions of philosophy.

.

This is Thakura Bhaktivinode's personal point of view.

[Guruvani 0]

 

More from Sri Krishna Samhita:

 

Still, all that could easily be explained away under the same conditions and the same pretext that has been shown by Shiva in a previous post.

 

Bhaktivinode stated plainly that the work consisted of conjecture and his "feelings".

 

Well, "feelings" that are not consistent with shastra and that challenge or contradict shastra are very much up for question.

 

Bhaktivinode might have had a purpose behind his book that was something more or something different than pure and transparent presentation of the shastra.

 

Being a preacher in British India could have had some impact in his works, above and beyond literal following of authorized shastra.

 

Better not to take a couple of sentences he wrote in some relatively obscure book and try to rewrite the Vaishnava history and tradition.

 

We have to be reasonable at some point.

 

Broadcasting these things in the context of the 21st century Krishna consciousnes movement is probably not a very prudent effort however true they might be in the absolute sense.

[muralidhar_das 0]

Srila Bhaktivinode Thakura writes in Sri Chaitanya Siksamrtam 6.5:

 

 

 

Putana represents the fake guru who teaches bhukti and mukti, material enjoyment and liberation. Devotees attached to bhukti and mukti are like Putana. Being merciful to the pure devotees, Krishna as a baby, killed Putana to protect the devotees' newly appearing affection for him.

The cart represents the load produced by old and recently acquired bad habits, by laxity and by pride. The mood created by thinking of baby Krishna breaks the cart, or removes this evil.

The whirlwind demon represents pride in being learned, and the consequent use of faulty arguments and dry logic, the quest for liberation, and association with such people. This includes all types atheists believing in material causality. Being merciful on seeing the affection for the devotee to Him baby Krishna kills that whirlwind and removes the obstacles to worship.

Pride stemming from intoxication with wealth, which breeds violence, illicit sex and addiction to wine, and finally loose speaking and shameless brutality to other living beings, is represented by the Yamala Arjuna trees. Krishna, being merciful, removes this sin in breaking the Yamala Arjuna trees.

Being controlled by greed and the sinful activities caused by it are represented by Vatsasura. By Krishna's mercy this fault is vanquished.

False dealing due to deceit and cheating are represented by Bakasura. Without eliminating this, pure bhakti does not appear.

The sinful mentality to do violence to others is represented by Aghasura. This tendency must be removed. It is one of the offenses.

Skepticism due to practicing jnana and karma and disregard for the sweetness of Krishna from attachment to the Lord's majestic aspect are presented by Brahma when he was put into illusion by Krishna.

Complete ignorance of spiritual truth, originating from material intelligence, lack of spiritual intuition and foolishness, which is contrary to spiritual knowledge, is represented by Dhenuka.

Pride, deceit, harming others, cruelty, represented by Kaliya must be given up by the devotee.

Any type of conflict such as argument, disagreement with other sampradayas, malice to devatas, fighting are represented by the forest fire.

Pralambasura represents lust for women, greed, desire for worship and position. These must also be given up.

The forest fire which Krishna swallowed represents the obstacles that atheists create against dharma and preachers of dharma.

The brahmanas performing yajna represent indifference to Krishna caused by identity with varnasrama or absorption in karma khanda.

Worship of Indra signifies worship of many gods, or worship of self as God.

Varuna symbolizes intoxicants. Some people mistakenly think that liquor will increase spiritual bliss. Such thinking must be given up.

The snake which attempted to swallow Nanda Maharaja represents Mayavada and similar philosophies which try to swallow up the real nature of bhakti. Mayavada association must be avoided.

Sankhacuda symbolizes desire for fame and desire for women.

Aristasura the bull demon symbolizes disregard for bhakti and attraction for cheating religion.

The illusion of being a great devotee or acarya, is represented by Kesi. Lording it over others and material pride must be given up.

Vyomasura represents thieves and fake devotees.

 

 

 

<!-- BEGIN TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote --> Quote:

<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="100%"> <tbody><tr> <td style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding-left: 3ex; padding-right: 3ex;" bgcolor="#e0e0e0"> Originally Posted by theist

I don't care if it is all just a literary vehicle by which Krsna chose to tell His story through some inspired transcendenatlists.

</td> </tr> </tbody></table>

<!-- END TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote --> And earlier, I said:

 

This is exactly how I feel

 

[Guruvani 0]

Muralidhara, you aren't even reading what he said:

 

 

Quote:

<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="100%"><tbody><tr><td style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding-left: 3ex; padding-right: 3ex;" bgcolor="#e0e0e0"> Originally Posted by Thakura Bhaktivinode

In the common-place books of the Hindu religion in which the rajo and tamo-guna have been described as the ways of religion, we have descriptions of a local heaven and a local hell; the Heaven as beautiful as anything on earth and the Hell as ghastly as any picture of evil. Besides this Heaven we have many more places, where good souls are sent up in the way of promotion! There are 84 divisions of the hell itself, some more dreadful than the one which Milton has described in his "Paradise Lost" . These are certainly poetical and were originally created by the rulers of the country in order to check evil deeds of the ignorant people, who are not able to understand the conclusions of philosophy.

.

</td></tr></tbody></table>

 

Is Srimad Bhagavatam "common-place books of the Hindu religion"?

 

No, no, no!!

Srimad Bhagavatam is not a "common-place book of HIndu religion".

 

If you think so, then woe unto you.

 

As well Srimad Bhagavatam is not about "in which the rajo and tamo-guna have been described as the ways of religion,".

 

Show me where in Srimad Bhagavatam that rajo and tamo-guna have been described as "the ways of religion".

 

Man, you are really off the mark on this one.

 

Bhaktivinode was playing semantics there, because he certainly could not have been disparaging the spotless Purana Srimad Bhagavatam with those kinds of remarks.

 

If he was, then all I can say is...........................woe!!!!!!!!!!!

[muralidhar_das 0]

 

Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakur presents another point taught by Thakura Bhaktivinode.

The avataras of Visnu appear in the world to attract different souls with different stages of "evolutionary growth". (not Darwin's evolution, of course, but a stage of evolution of consciousness).

<!-- BEGIN TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote --> Quote:

<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="100%"> <tbody><tr> <td style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding-left: 3ex; padding-right: 3ex;" bgcolor="#e0e0e0"> Originally Posted by Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura

Professor Albert Suthers: -- In the scriptures of India, adorable Deities have been represented as creatures of the lower creation like fish, tortoise, boar, etc. Is this approved by the sense of decency of civilised humanity? Some again are in favour of supporting such representations as allegorical symbols.

Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura: -- Imagination does not find a place in Vaishnava Philosophy. In it or in the Shrimad Bhagavatam which is the highest scripture for all men in the universe has been described the topmost ontology about God, million times better than what the most civilised races of humanity five thousands years old, nay, as old as several millions of eras, can conceive of even in imagination.

The eternal transcendental forms of God that descend or are manifested according to the gradual evolution of the aptitude for offering service by the totally purified soul quite aloof from the regions of the body and mind, when man becomes the worshipper of the ultimate Reality at the loftiest stage of civilisation, are never the idols of imagination or allegories like unreal things manufactured in the mental factory of man or like the imaginary animal deities of the barbarians such as the tiger-god, serpent-god, horse-god, etc. The worship of the Vishnu Incarnations, like Fish, Turtle, etc., is not fabrication of imagination like that of one of the five deities of the Henotheists formed out of imagination, based on the coinage of set speeches like the imaginary conception of the forms of Brahman (as in the Panchadasi of the monistic school). The Henotheists do not admit the Transcendental Personality of Godhead. The sects of figurative allegorists like the Theosophists are not real theists, cherishing, as they do, doubt against the Personality of God and for that reason they want to curtail god's Omni-potentiality and his Transcendental Names, Appearances, Attributes, Sports by means of allegorical description.

The Vaishnava philosophy or that of the ever-existent religion of India has never supported the atheistic doctrines of such professors of imaginary forms of Brahman, or figurative allegorists. It is about the doctrine of pure and real Avatara-vada (cult of Incarnation) that the philosophy of the ever-existing Indian religion has said. As the pure and real doctrine of Avataras of Fish, Turtle, etc. of the Vaishnavas is not a kind of imagination of the barbarian taste, nor the idolatry of the Mayavadins on the basis of their aphorism of forms of Brahman, imagined for the convenience of practicants, nor the allegorical description of the psychists, so it is not the Anthropomorphism (i.e. representation of the deity as having human forms), as devised by the so-called civilised section of the people, nor Therianthropism (i.e. representation of one's tutelary deity in a combined man-and-beast form), nor even Apotheosis (i.e. elevating man to the dignity of deities). These are respective types of the idolatry of the menatal speculationists of the inductive school.

In imitation of Mayavada, the evil fruit of the Indian civilisation, Anthropomorphsim was invented in Greece and Rome and Therianthropism in Egypt, etc. When the new doctrines got access in those countries along with the commodities produced by the Indian civilization which were based on the imagination of the anthrophysites like the Indian Mayavadins who exalted man or beasts to the status of God with the attribution of divinity to them calling jivas and the poor as 'Narayana' with gratification of the senses in the back ground, then the mental speculations of those respective countries adopted the cheap vitiated Indian dogmas and, labeling new names on them, passed these doctrinal commodities into the forum of religious tenets. But the true Vaishnava philosophy of India never indulged in any such doctrine based on imagination. Shri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu has refuted all such imaginative doctrines or idolatries and rejected both Anthropomorphism and Therianthropism. He vouchsafed the Shastric teaching, viz., that he must be a heretic and sinner who looks upon God Narayana as equal to deities like Brahma, etc.

Anthropomorphism i.e., representation of the Deity with human form and attributes, resembles the tenet of the Bauls of Bengal attributing divinity to the head of their sect, professing, as they do, though wrongly, to have perceptorially descended from Shri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu. Such tenets are the mental imaginations of atheists like the Bouddhas and of the Bauls as above, running contrary to the teachings of Shri Buddha-Vishnu and Shri Chaitanya-Vishnu respectively. The Mayavadi sect too has adopted similar principles. The really scientific philosophy of the Shrimad Bhagavatam and the preachings of Shri Chaitanya Deva have, of course, accepted the human bodyas the Divine Manifestation; but that human body is not the creation of anthropomorphism, nor of the Baul doctrine, but it is the eternal, transcendental Sachidananda Body, the Cause of all causes, the highest Sportive Entity. When the human soul can acquire the wealth of all the sciences in perfection, then only is opened the door of the foremost mystery of true science. According to the Vaishnava Philosophy, the Sportive Manifestation of God is of two kinds. One kind is the creation of the material and spiritual universe and its systematization with inviolable rules. The school of intelligent empiricists can to a certain extent experience this type of God's Sportive Manifestation. The second kind is the Descent of God's Transcendental Sport in this created universe. It is the jivas who are the attendants in His Sports. They become attached to matter having deviated from their own essential nature as the result of their desire for enjoyment.

But when again the soul of a jiva, gains true wisdom of the transcendental region of God at the feet of a representative of His, i.e., a true devotee His, he begins to get back his pure essential nature gradually unfolded, and God's Transcendental Eternal Forms appear as the objects of his worship according to the comprehension of His service in the graded evolution of acceptance of His protection, self-surrender or theism. So in such a case there remains no room, even in the slightest degree, for any form of imaginative doctrines of the so-called civilised or uncivilised human minds, whether apotheosistic, anthropomorphic, henotheistic, theosophic, theriomorphic or therianthropic. The real, eternal and transcendental Divine Forms reveal themselves to the pure souls according to the nature of their serving mood in the evolutionary growth there. The only cause of these Divine Descents is the intense Mercy of God towards jivas. In Europe the theories of physical evolution of Darwin and Lamarck have been considered. But it is in the Vaishnava Philosophy alone that we see the fully scientific and real conception of each eternal and transcendental Divine Form for worship by the freed souls according to their evolutionary growth of serving mood.

We can notice the different stages of animal life from the invertebrates to the fully grown human beings. These stages have been classified by the Indian sages of a scientific outlook in ten orders, viz, (1) the invertebrate, (2) testaceous or shelly, (3) vertebrate, (4) erectly vertebrate (as in the combined form of man and beast), (5) mannikin, (6) barbaric, (7) civilised, (8) wise, (9) ultra-wise and (10) destructive. These are the historical stages of jivas. According to the gradation of these stages as indications of evolution of the serving mood of the jiva soul, there are manifested the ten Incarnations of God, viz., Matsya (fish), Kurma (Turtle), Varaha (Boar), Nrishmha (Man-Lion), Vamana (Dwarf), Parasu-rama, Rama, Krishna, Buddha and Kalki, as worshippable Deities with eternal transcendental Names, Forms, Attributes and Sports. Those who have acquired a true knowledge about Incarnations with a thorough culture thereof, will be able, with the grace of the philosophers trained in the school of Shri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, to appreciate the ontology of Shri Krishna, specially the intense sweetness of His Sports at Braja (i.e. Vrindavana and the neighbourhood.)

</td> </tr> </tbody></table>

<!-- END TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote -->

[muralidhar_das 0]

KB, you can download the entire Bhagavat Lecture here:

 

www.mandala.com.au/books/bhagavata.pdf

 

Thakura Bhaktivinode said that the hells described in the scriptures are

 

QUOTE ::

 

certainly poetical and were originally created by the rulers of the country in order to check evil deeds of the ignorant people

 

:: UNQUOTE