8.4 million species and those born of sweat

[theist 1]

Well said Vikram. There is also the danger that by insisting on the literal acceptance of these numbers and other staements we will turn thoughtful prople off from investigating seriously the transcendentalism of the Bhagavat and that would be the ultimaye tragedy.

 

I did not know that Madhvites and Sri's had already gone past this problem. Good for them.

[Guest guest]

One of the biggest problems a rational person faces in Iskcon is that any interpretation of such shastric statements that differ from those offered by Prabhupada is seen as a major deviation and even "aparadha".

 

On one hand we claim to propagate a "spiritual science" approach, but on the other hand we are completely dogmatic when it comes to what the "conclusions" are. No wonder Iskcon is short on rational people and big on fanatics.

[Vikram Ramsundar 0]

 

Well said Vikram. There is also the danger that by insisting on the literal acceptance of these numbers and other staements we will turn thoughtful prople off from investigating seriously the transcendentalism of the Bhagavat and that would be the ultimaye tradgedy.

 

I too totally agree with you, Prabhu. There is an urgent need in some quarters of modern Gaudiya Vaisnavism to eliminate major psychological barriers such as these, and follow a more rational approach to Vedanta and Bhakti-marga. The Srimad Bhagavatam is a scripture which exists for the spiritual edification of us all. Being predicated on historical or quasi-historical events which take place in a Puranic setting, usage is made of the usual mythological and cosmological material which is typical of the entire corpus of similar literatures. As Srila Prabhupada himself says, Canto 10 is the summum bonum of the Bhagavatam. The preceding content builds up to that in a more or less orderly and logical sequence, but with the express aim of later getting drowned in the transcendental whirlpool of Krsna-lila. In other words, the pastimes of Bhagavan Hari are the essence of our favourite, spotless Purana, and that is where most attention ought to be focused. Things such as the numbers of bodyguards or species are, to all intents and purposes, irrelevant to Hari-katha, and can be safely dismissed from the picture.

 

This is my own two-paisa worth on this topic.

 

Radhe Radhe

[Guest guest]

 

I think it is great time that Gaudiya Vaisnavas stop wasting their energy taking these speculative figures seriously. The followers of Ramanujacarya and Madhvacarya, for example, see no conflict between Vaisnavism and modern science because they, rightly, disregard these unrealistic truth claims such 8.4 million yonis etc. The Bhagavatam was written in about the 7th to 8th century CE in South India, and even though much of the basic Puranic material was already present in the subcontinent thousands of years prior to that, almost all of the Puranas available today, or at least the existing recensions of them, date from a few centuries before the composition of the Bhagavata to as late as the 1300s, which is the scholarly accepted time frame for the Brahma-vaivarta. There was no scientific knowledge as we know it in our own time back then. The pre-scientific poet/s who was/were the authors of the Bhagavatam often let their unbridled imagination run wild. For instance, it is mentioned that Ugrasena had four billion bodyguards. Elsewhere, we find absolutely astronomical numbers of horses (90 million) and servants (9 billion) being given by King Nagnajit on the occasion of the wedding of his daughter to Lord Vasudeva. No one in his right mind would even think of defending the veracity of these ludicrous instances of poetic license.

 

Let us instead focus on the essence of vaisnava-dharma and thereby advance in our sadhana. The scriptures available to us, no matter how imperfect, are here principally to guide and throw light on our chosen paths. Let us therefore heed the wise words of Srila Saccidananda Bhaktivinoda Thakura and try to become Saragrahi Vaisnavas. In other words, we should sift through received wisdom and sort the important and necessary bits from the less essential content. Whether one believes that there are 8,400,000 or 9,131,562 species is not germane to the practice of dharma and attainment of moksa in reality. If one is sincerely engaged and puts in the required effort in the right mental frame, the desired results are certain to follow. Sri Sri Radha-Krsna want our humble, loving devotion, not fanatical commitment to negligible elements of sastra.

 

Radhe Radhe

 

Again, before we bash the Vedas we should discuss with an expert scholar who can see past & present.

 

As I stated earlier, there are massive interpolations in the Vedas which are put there to give partial doubts to it's readers. Serious doubts to the skeptic.

40 trillion bodyguards is obvious. No one needs 40 trillion bodyguards.

 

We should be strong minded and understand we have a very limited IQ compared to others who have an very different view of how the universe operates. Those with the high IQs know what the lower IQ people can perceive. Let's be tolerant.

 

We can humilate the composer (a Vaisnava) whoever that is, almost everybody thinks it's Wyasa or authentically receive the truth on this matter and not just speculate speculate speculate.

[Guest guest]

 

Again, before we bash the Vedas we should discuss with an expert scholar who can see past & present.

 

 

Do you have such a person available for consultation in this matter?

 

What is so hard to understand about living entities coming out of wombs, seeds, or eggs? Do you need to be a tri-kalajna to figure it out? These are elementary things happening in front of us every day. Same with the last category - svedaja.

[gHari 0]

"elementary things happening in front of us every day"

 

I can only see a very very small portion of this one planet. I have no direct perception of any other planet, nor do the books of science attempt to analyze the creature forms of other planets.

 

So far scientists have categorized millions of species here on earth. Were I guessing: if anything, eight million would seem too low, based on numbers alone (per science: 200 billion galaxies each of 200 billion stars).

 

From the big picture, even from a satelllite, millions and trillions are quite trivial. How many servants does God have?

[Guest guest]

 

"elementary things happening in front of us every day"

 

I can only see a very very small portion of this one planet.

 

I have given very specific examples of a reproductive system which applies here and now to thousands of lower life forms. I asked:

 

"How do fungi reproduce? Do they lay eggs, make seeds, or come from the womb? Or maybe pigs sweat them out on a hot summer day? How about bacteria? How about amebas or the malaria plasmodium? They clearly fall in the fourth category and multiply by division."

 

No need to pull out the standard Iskcon smoke screen defense to the obvious conflicts between observable empirical science and certain statements in our books. The way living entities are born is indeed part of the great show of "elementary things happening in front of us every day".

[Guest guest]

 

Do you have such a person available for consultation in this matter?

 

What is so hard to understand about living entities coming out of wombs, seeds, or eggs? Do you need to be a tri-kalajna to figure it out? These are elementary things happening in front of us every day. Same with the last category - svedaja.

 

I am not liberated (they can see past-present-future about this universe) but I am sure there are a bunch on this earth whom preach about god. Most of them are in holy cities in India. Characteristics of liberated souls you'll have to research into.

[gHari 0]

I see, Lowborn. I had mistakenly got the quick impression that everyone was whining about the 2 million and 8 million numbers being too high.

 

Maybe we have to look for the source of the original fungus or bacteria. Perhaps the 'sweat' is the biosphere itself.

 

When I get hot it appears that a lot of bacteria appear on my armpits; these little guys really have BO. Were they inside?

 

Maybe that's just how Lord Brahma gets the egg rolling - like that primordial oooooooze at the bottom of Darwin's pool.

[Guest guest]

 

When I get hot it appears that a lot of bacteria appear on my armpits; these little guys really have BO. Were they inside?

 

 

No, the bacteria is really on your skin and it feeds off fatty materials in the sweat produced by the apocrine sweat glands (located where the bodily hair grows). The odor also comes from scent glands located in the same area.

 

If you wash yourself thoroughly, your sweat does not stink very much. Only when there is bacteria growing on your skin the sweat and BO really go together

[gHari 0]

Aha! Now I see why I could get away without armpit spray for the last thirty years.

 

So where does that bacteria come from on my skin?

 

So we have seeds, eggs, embryos and oozes. But where do those hundred thousand species of microbes come from in the methane of that purple planet over there?

[muralidhar_das 0]

It is OM that is radiating forth the entire cosmos, from minerals to humankind. As sparks burst from a bonfire or as rays of light are emitted by the sun, the entire cosmos is produced by OM, the Everlasting and radiant Reality.

[Vikram Ramsundar 0]

 

Again, before we bash the Vedas we should discuss with an expert scholar who can see past & present.

 

As I stated earlier, there are massive interpolations in the Vedas which are put there to give partial doubts to it's readers. Serious doubts to the skeptic.

40 trillion bodyguards is obvious. No one needs 40 trillion bodyguards.

 

We should be strong minded and understand we have a very limited IQ compared to others who have an very different view of how the universe operates. Those with the high IQs know what the lower IQ people can perceive. Let's be tolerant.

 

We can humilate the composer (a Vaisnava) whoever that is, almost everybody thinks it's Wyasa or authentically receive the truth on this matter and not just speculate speculate speculate.

 

 

You're the one who has the cheek to disregard the siksa of Bhaktivinoda and Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati. I prefer to stay connected to the main trunk of the parampara, instead of deviate to the point of fitting the description of a fringie quite aptly. Read the Sri Krsna-samhita. Krsna consciousness is not synonymous nor dependent on mythology and hyperbole.

[Guest guest]

 

So where does that bacteria come from on my skin?

 

So we have seeds, eggs, embryos and oozes. But where do those hundred thousand species of microbes come from in the methane of that purple planet over there?

 

Bacteria on your skin comes from the air and everything that you touch. These guys are everywhere. As soon as there is some food they multiply furiously. One bacteria can turn into millions in the matter of hours when the conditions are favourable.

 

Microbes were created by the Prajapatis, just like all the other species. How exactly it was done is not clear, but it was out of general design of the Universe carried out by the Devas.

[Guest guest]

 

Read the Sri Krsna-samhita. Krsna consciousness is not synonymous nor dependent on mythology and hyperbole.

 

Yes, we should not blindly trust Bhagavatam, we should blindly trust Sri Krsna Samhita, a book written by Bhaktivinoda before initiation into Vaishnavism and while eating meat...

 

Blind faith is blind faith.

[Vikram Ramsundar 0]

 

Yes, we should not blindly trust Bhagavatam, we should blindly trust Sri Krsna Samhita, a book written by Bhaktivinoda before initiation into Vaishnavism and while eating meat...

 

Blind faith is blind faith.

 

Well, if you presume to be more knowledgeable than the Seventh Goswami himself, a fallen soul like me has no chance of getting you to use your brain and think rationally. By the way, the Bhagavata is a 1300-year-old book which was gradually developed in South India, and borrows ideas from a number of different sources, some genuinely authentic and old, others less so. The poets who wrote it had no scientific knowledge like we do now, nor did they find it necessary to compose an empirically verifiable work on matters pertaining to natural processes. This explains the multiple cases of hyperbolic use one can see in that work.

 

One more thing - how did those 30 trillion bodyguards live, sleep, pass stool etc? Did their poop evaporate in thin air? How many toilets were required for them? What about their wives and children? Maybe they all lived in another dimension! If you can provide me with satisfactory answers to these questions derived from solid reasoning, I'll rest my case.

 

Radhe Radhe

[Guest guest]

 

Well, if you presume to be more knowledgeable than the Seventh Goswami himself, a fallen soul like me has no chance of getting you to use your brain and think rationally. By the way, the Bhagavata is a 1300-year-old book which was gradually developed in South India, and borrows ideas from a number of different sources, some genuinely authentic and old, others less so. The poets who wrote it had no scientific knowledge like we do now, nor did they find it necessary to compose an empirically verifiable work on matters pertaining to natural processes. This explains the multiple cases of hyperbolic use one can see in that work.

 

The principle of rationality in religion which Bhaktivinoda so nicely advocated certainly applies to him as well. His understanding of spirituality and Vaishnavism gradually developed and evolved, culminating in him becoming a true acharya of the Gaudiya Vaishnava sampradaya. I know his story a lot better than you may think and I have been reading his works for many years.

 

Sri Krsna Samhita does not fully represent the siddhanta of any Vaishnava sampradaya and makes no pretense of doing so - it is merely a collection of Bhaktivinoda's reflections and realisations from that time period. It is his followers who made it into some kind of major expositions of our sampradaya's teachings. At the time of writing the Samhita, Bhaktivinoda was not connected in any way to any of the Vaishnava sampradayas.

 

 

 

One more thing - how did those 30 trillion bodyguards live, sleep, pass stool etc? Did their poop evaporate in thin air? How many toilets were required for them? What about their wives and children? Maybe they all lived in another dimension! If you can provide me with satisfactory answers to these questions derived from solid reasoning, I'll rest my case.

 

 

And where exactly do I advocate a literary interpretation of this passage? Of course it is a case of licentia poetica the Vedic literature (especially smriti) is famous for.

 

Like I said: a blind faith is just a blind faith.

[theist 1]

 

Even the full moon has some spots but only a fool would close his eyes to the beauty of it's radiance because of it.

 

It is not an all or nothing proposition to me. I don't concentrate on the spots but neither do I shut my eyes to their presence.

 

Compared to the radiance they are insignificant.

 

This is how I approach all scriptures.

 

I did not get the impression that Vikram on referring to Krsna Samhita was suggesting we take that work on blind faith. Rather I took it he was pointing to a principle that Bhaktivinode took in making the great work of the Bhagavatam accessable to modern readers.

 

To reject Krsna Samhita because of some habits the Thakur had (and was later to overcome) is like rejecting the vedas because of some insignificant spots found here and there.

[Guest guest]

 

To reject Krsna Samhita because of some habits the Thakur had (and was later to overcome) is like rejecting the vedas because of some insignificant spots found here and there.

 

it is not so much the habits of the writer that is a problem for many Vaishnavas, as the fact that this books does not represent any recognized Vaishnava sampradaya. Most Gaudiyas reject that book outright and you also dont see Prabhupada or Bhaktisiddhanta presenting the approach to shastra Bhaktivinoda advocated in this work.

 

Vedas on the other hand are universally seen as authoritative. Thus your comparison above is seriously flawed.

[muralidhar_das 0]

 

it is not so much the habits of the writer that is a problem for many Vaishnavas, as the fact that this books does not represent any recognized Vaishnava sampradaya. Most Gaudiyas reject that book outright and you also dont see Prabhupada or Bhaktisiddhanta presenting the approach to shastra Bhaktivinoda advocated in this work.

 

Vedas on the other hand are universally seen as authoritative. Thus your comparison above is seriously flawed.

 

Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura DID advocate the ideas taught in Sri Krishna Samhita.

 

I've said this before to you, Lowborn (and Kula). Should I repeat post the quotes?

 

Laulyam posted Saraswati Thakur's article about Kaliya on the other thread, where Saraswati Thakur said that Kaliya and the forest fire represent "CUNNING AND MALICE". This way of seeing the Bhagavatam is straight from Sri Krishna Samhita.

 

I can also post articles by Saraswati Thakur describing how there is evolution of souls through stages of growth, and that Narasimha worship is suitable for half-civilized men. This also is straight from Sri Krishna Samhita.

 

In Sri Krishna Chaitanya, by professor Sanyal, which has a foreward by Saraswati Thakur, we read numerous chapters based on ideas in Sri Krishna Samhita.

 

Srila Prabhupada, on the other hand, preferred to promote a "literalist" view of the stories in the Veda and Puranas. But again and again in the writing of Bhaktivinode Thakur he states that the Veda is the words of the ancient sages and that anyone who attains transcendental knowledge can find the essence of the Veda.

[Guest guest]

 

Laulyam posted Saraswati Thakur's article about Kaliya on the other thread, where Saraswati Thakur said that Kaliya and the forest fire represent "CUNNING AND MALICE". This way of seeing the Bhagavatam is straight from Sri Krishna Samhita.

 

 

Actually, this analogy pre-dates Sri Krsna Samhita by at least several centuries and in our tradition does not AT ALL negate the understanding that this leela actually took place as described. It is simply an additional dimension to seeing the leela.

[muralidhar_das 0]

What particular things in Sri Krishna Samhita do you think are unacceptable or not promoted by Saraswati Thakura?

[Guest guest]

 

What particular things in Sri Krishna Samhita do you think are unacceptable or not promoted by Saraswati Thakura?

 

Look, BST's main objective was to re-establish Gaudiya Vaishnavism as a respectable, deeply rooted mainstay Vaishnava tradition. Things like introducing sannyasa, constructing a sampradaya line going back to Lord Brahma, open and bold preaching based on sruti and smriti Vedic writings were part of that effort. SKS was essentially rejected by all other sampradayas precisely because of the liberties Bhaktivinoda took with the shastra. There were even accusations of ghost writing supposedly newly discovered "Vedic" texts Bhaktivinoda presented. Even his own son, Lalita Prasad, made a big deal out of it, as such things happened before among the Gaudiyas and it also did not go down very well with other Vaishnavas. Gaudiyas were sometimes making up verses about Krsna that supposedly belonged in Rig Veda - some Iskcon sites list them even today - thus even if BST liked some concepts from SKS he would not push them in his presentations.

[muralidhar_das 0]

Lowborn you need to look more carefully at the real history of what happened. Lalita Prashad was proven to be "cunning and malicious". He knew that Bipin Bihari Goswami cut his connection with Bhaktivinode Thakura but nevertheless Lalita Prashad deceived people like Jagat and made them believe that he (LP) was linked through Bhaktivinode and Bipin Bihari to the parampara of Jahnava Mata. It was a trick. The man is like Kaliya.

 

As far as Saraswati Thakur's teachings go, what makes you think he didn't push the ideas in Sri Krishna Samhita? I've many books and articles of Saraswati Thakur and in those books I've seen him repeating the things said by Thakur Bhaktivinode in Sri Krishna Samhita. Practically every thing. And besides that, Saraswati Thakur printed Sri Krishna Samhita in two editions and promoted it to be studied amongst his disciples. Srila Sridhar Maharaj was THERE and he read Sri Krishna Samhita and told me to read it too.

[Guest guest]

 

Lowborn you need to look more carefully at the real history of what happened. Lalita Prashad was proven to be "cunning and malicious". He knew that Bipin Bihari Goswami cut his connection with Bhaktivinode Thakura but nevertheless Lalita Prashad deceived people like Jagat and made them believe that he (LP) was linked through Bhaktivinode and Bipin Bihari to the parampara of Jahnava Mata. It was a trick. The man is like Kaliya.

 

 

These quarrels of long ago dont interst me very much. Who did what to whom and why - so many angles, so many different opinions. There is for example no single evidence from Bhaktivinoda that he ever rejected Bipin B. Goswami as his guru as he wrote a very elevated verse in his praise shortly before his departure from this world.

 

 

 

As far as Saraswati Thakur's teachings go, what makes you think he didn't push the ideas in Sri Krishna Samhita?

 

one of the central ideas stemming from Bhaktivinoda's SKS is that leela is essentially imaginary on the physical plane, therefore you can imagine more leela and that becomes "shastra" if you are a "realized soul". Very few devotees currently in the Saraswata parivar would put it so bluntly but that is the gist of it.