Rahu chasing the Moon... literal or allegorical? Irrelevant!

[Guest guest]

I don't think Vedabasevadi has been there but I'll let him answer the question.

 

 

Guruvani,

 

Have you ever been to Vrndavana?

[Guruvani 0]

 

Guruvani,

 

Have you ever been to Vrndavana?

 

Probably long before you did.

[theist 1]

If Guruvani and his guest supporter would step off the soapbox for a minute and actually take the time to consider what was said in the opening post, they would see that it is Srila Prabhupada that said the asura's head chasing after Candraloka is allegorical. Read the first two sentences below.

 

Then he says we should not bother with any differences between the statements in the Bhagavatam and modern science concerning the moon and such things. It's not one or the other the whole controversy is a needless waste of time.

 

Sila Prabhupada instructs that one should take the essence from Srimad Bhagavatam.

 

Now we need to find that essence. Anythging other than th essence is irrelevant.

 

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"> But because you have asked me, I am your spiritual master, I must try to answer to your satisfaction. Yes, sometimes in Vedas such things like the asura's decapitated head chasing after Candraloka, sometimes it is explained allegorically. Just like now we are explaining in 4th Canto of Srimad-Bhagavatam the story of King Puranjana. Just like the living entity is living within this body, and the body is described there as city with nine gates, the intelligence as the Queen. So there are sometimes allegorical explanations. So there are many things which do not corroborate with the so-called modern science, because they are explained in that way. But where is the guarantee that modern science is also correct? So we are concerned with Krishna Consciousness, and even though there is some difference of opinion between modern science and allegorical explanation in the Bhagavat, we have to take the essence of Srimad-Bhagavatam and utilize it for our higher benefit, without bothering about the correctness of the modern science or the allegorical explanation sometimes made in Srimad-Bhagavatam. But this is a fact that in each and every planet there is a predominant deity, as we have got experience in this planet there is a president, so it is not wonderful when the predominating deity fights with another predominating deity of another planet. The modern science takes everything as dead stone. We take it for granted that everything is being manipulated by a person in each and every affair of the cosmology. The modern scientists however could not make any progress in the understanding of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, therefore we do not accept modern science as very perfect. We take Krishna's version:

gam avisya ca bhutani

dharayamy aham ojasa

pusnami causadhih sarvah

somo bhutvah rasatmakah

[bg. 15.13]

"I become the moon,'' and "yac chandramasi yac cagnau,'' (ibid, 12) "I am the splendor of the moon,'' and "jyotisam api taj jyotis,'' [bg. 13.18] "I am the source of light in all luminous objects,'' so no one is able to give us the correct information than Krishna, that you should know. </td> </tr> </tbody></table>

<!-- END TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote -->

[Guest guest]

 

Probably long before you did.

I was at 1st Mayapur Festival you Vedabasevadin !

[Guruvani 0]

 

If Guruvani and his guest supporter would step off the soapbox for a minute and actually take the time to consider what was said in the opening post, they would see that it is Srila Prabhupada that said the asura's head chasing after Candraloka is allegorical. Read the first two sentences below.

 

Then he says we should not bother with any differences between the statements in the Bhagavatam and modern science concerning the moon and such things. It's not one or the other the whole controversy is a needless waste of time.

 

Sila Prabhupada instructs that one should take the essence from Srimad Bhagavatam.

 

Now we need to find that essence. Anythging other than th essence is irrelevant.

 

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"> But because you have asked me, I am your spiritual master, I must try to answer to your satisfaction. Yes, sometimes in Vedas such things like the asura's decapitated head chasing after Candraloka, sometimes it is explained allegorically. Just like now we are explaining in 4th Canto of Srimad-Bhagavatam the story of King Puranjana. Just like the living entity is living within this body, and the body is described there as city with nine gates, the intelligence as the Queen. So there are sometimes allegorical explanations. So there are many things which do not corroborate with the so-called modern science, because they are explained in that way. But where is the guarantee that modern science is also correct? So we are concerned with Krishna Consciousness, and even though there is some difference of opinion between modern science and allegorical explanation in the Bhagavat, we have to take the essence of Srimad-Bhagavatam and utilize it for our higher benefit, without bothering about the correctness of the modern science or the allegorical explanation sometimes made in Srimad-Bhagavatam. But this is a fact that in each and every planet there is a predominant deity, as we have got experience in this planet there is a president, so it is not wonderful when the predominating deity fights with another predominating deity of another planet. The modern science takes everything as dead stone. We take it for granted that everything is being manipulated by a person in each and every affair of the cosmology. The modern scientists however could not make any progress in the understanding of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, therefore we do not accept modern science as very perfect. We take Krishna's version:

gam avisya ca bhutani

dharayamy aham ojasa

pusnami causadhih sarvah

somo bhutvah rasatmakah

[bg. 15.13]

"I become the moon,'' and "yac chandramasi yac cagnau,'' (ibid, 12) "I am the splendor of the moon,'' and "jyotisam api taj jyotis,'' [bg. 13.18] "I am the source of light in all luminous objects,'' so no one is able to give us the correct information than Krishna, that you should know. </td> </tr> </tbody></table>

<!-- END TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote -->

so, some letter to a pinhead neophyte that was having problems understanding the esoteric mysteries of the Bhagavat is supposed to undo the Bhagavatam and everything Srila Prabhupada wrote in the 5th canto?

 

not in my book bub!

 

Prabhupada had to dish out some pablum to the little babies that couldn't escape the shackles of scientific thinking and embrace the mystical.

 

one letter to a neophyte cannot negate what Srila Prabhupada wrote in his books.

 

At least not for anyone with more than a couple of brains cells in his skull.

[Guruvani 0]

 

I was at 1st Mayapur Festival you Vedabasevadin !

 

so what is your base you baseless nobasevadi?

[Guest guest]

 

Prabhupada had to dish out some pablum to the little babies that couldn't escape the shackles of scientific thinking and embrace the mystical.

 

And Mahaprabhu said the Bhagavatam was spotless to make it easy for people who would otherwise harbor doubts and ask a number of questions.

 

After all, it is not like he wrote it down somewhere. You only have his opinion from third party sources. Why then are you holding on to your theory so dearly?

[theist 1]

It is obviously too much to ask that my attempt to bring out a certain point be taken seriously even for just a couple of posts. The advanced "long time and greatly experienced vaisnavas want to argue about who was the first to go to India. Such depth. 35-40 years of knowledge of Krsna consciousness and supposedly it's practice and this is as far as you guys have gotten!?!?

 

Actually I can't talk. I started going out on street sankirtana in 1970 and and 37 years later I am still bound by birth and death. The difference may be that I am embarassed at my position to have made so very little advancement in all this time while watching newcomers zoom past me in their first year of sadhana.

 

God have mercy.

[Guest guest]

Exactly!

 

And the last time I checked, letters are directed to a specific person, else it's called a book.

 

Rather than read the books as source, some people want to take letters as the source of reference. And Theist doesn;t bother to answer the question about Krishna revealing the universe to Mother Yasoda. Is that allegorical?

 

 

so, some letter to a pinhead neophyte that was having problems understanding the esoteric mysteries of the Bhagavat is suppoed to undo the Bhagavatam and everything Srila Prabhupada wrote in the 5th canto?

 

not in my book bub!

 

Prabhupada had to dish out some pablum to the little babies that couldn't escape the shackles of scientific thinking and embrace the mystical.

 

one letter to a neophyte cannot negate what Srila Prabhupada wrote in his books.

 

At least not for anyone with more than a couple of brains cells in his skull.

[theist 1]

 

Exactly!

 

And the last time I checked, letters are directed to a specific person, else it's called a book.

 

Rather than read the books as source, some people want to take letters as the source of reference. And Theist doesn;t bother to answer the question about Krishna revealing the universe to Mother Yasoda. Is that allegorical?

 

And Krsna did not write the Bhagavad-gita rather it was spoken to one person Arjuna. So what is your point?

 

I do not say that Mother Yasoda seeing the universe in Krsna's mouth is an allegory. Srila Prabhupada said that Rahu chasing Candraloka was an allegory. Do you think he was lying or mistaken?

 

And still you ignore the real point of this thread. Perhaps you lack the intelligence to even understand what that was. And I won't bother to address any other questions from you until you do address my opening point and sign in as something other than just guest.

[Guruvani 0]

 

 

I do not say that Mother Yasoda seeing the universe in Krsna's mouth is an allegory. Srila Prabhupada said that Rahu chasing Candraloka was an allegory. Do you think he was lying or mistaken?

 

 

neither.

what you are saying is wrong.

He did not say that Rahu chasing the Moon is an allegory.

 

He said

 

sometimes it is explained allegorically

He said that sometimes it is explained allegorically.

 

That is not the same as saying that it is an allegory.

 

You are jumping to conclusions and making assumptions hastily without proper discimination.

 

Please don't put words in the mouth of Srila Prabhupada and make false claims against his statements to support your own views.

[Guest guest]

Guruvani,

 

Did you ever meet Prabupada?

[Guest guest]

Alright, forget it. I don't care if you don't want to respond.

 

At least be consistent. when someone challenged you to reveal your identity, you responded that these names were temporary designations and we are all spirit souls. And now you object to my using 'guest'. Hypocrisy is what I call it.

 

And <B><I>His Holiness Guruvani</B></I> made a telling point that Prabhupada said "sometimes it's called allegory", he did't say "it is allegory".

 

 

And Krsna did not write the Bhagavad-gita rather it was spoken to one person Arjuna. So what is your point?

 

I do not say that Mother Yasoda seeing the universe in Krsna's mouth is an allegory. Srila Prabhupada said that Rahu chasing Candraloka was an allegory. Do you think he was lying or mistaken?

 

And still you ignore the real point of this thread. Perhaps you lack the intelligence to even understand what that was. And I won't bother to address any other questions from you until you do address my opening point and sign in as something other than just guest.

[Guruvani 0]

 

Guruvani,

 

Did you ever meet Prabupada?

oh, god.....here he is again.... the old-timer that acts like a baby.

 

Hey, old-timer, tell us who you are and you might get a little respect.

 

If you want to hide in the weeds talking crap then you will get no respect from me.

 

If you actually told me who you were I could probably respect you.

I respect all the old devotees, but not if they act like wierdos posting on the forum anonymously like creeps.

[Guest guest]

Just because you gave yourself a name Guruvani and register here dosn't mean we know who YOU are now does it? Who you think your foolin ?

[Guruvani 0]

 

Just because you gave yourself a name Guruvani and register here dosn't mean we know who YOU are now does it? Who you think your foolin ?

you must be a newbie around here.

I have been on this forum for 4 years and everybody that is anybody here knows that my devotee name is Kshamabuddhi das, initiated in ISKCON in 1975 in L.A. and was trained up directly by Danavir Maharaja.

 

I have even added my pic to my avatar and now I am my own avatar...

see how special I am?

[Guruvani 0]

the reason I don't use my devotee name is because I got banned about 4 years ago and could not use my devotee name account anymore.

 

so, I came up with guruvani and have just stuck with that.

unlike some creeps around here I never sign out and post anonymously.

 

whenever I post, everybody knows who it is.

[Guest guest]

Why were you banned Guruvani?

 

After all the moderators are Hare Krishnas too, as are you. As Hare Krishnas, they surely did not ban you for your condescending attitude towards other beliefs such as Shaivism. They would have banned you for something else.

 

What was that?

[Guruvani 0]

 

Why were you banned Guruvani?

 

After all the moderators are Hare Krishnas too, as are you. As Hare Krishnas, they surely did not ban you for your condescending attitude towards other beliefs such as Shaivism. They would have banned you for something else.

 

What was that?

 

I don't remember what happened 4 years ago.

They were less tolerant back then and it was easy to get banned unless you acted like a jellyfish in a bucket of jello.

 

They have banned many Hare Krishna devotees.

 

Hare Krishna devotees can be very opinionated and strong-minded.

 

The moderators wanted it to be an orgy of love and brotherhood.

 

After 5 years I guess they have finally realized it will never be that.

 

If they banned all us troublemakers the forum would go silent and nobody would have anybody to pick on anymore.

 

They should pay me for being the whipping boy on this forum...

[Guest guest]

I'm actually an old friend Kshamabuddhi,

 

And I must say I am embarrassed for you that you act in this manner,

 

I won't bother you again and hope things get better for you.

 

take care

[Guruvani 0]

 

I'm actually an old friend Kshamabuddhi,

 

And I must say I am embarrassed for you that you act in this manner,

 

I won't bother you again and hope things get better for you.

 

take care

 

well, if condescending like an arrogant fool makes you feel better go ahead.

I don't need your pity.

 

Maybe you need deprogrammed?

Maybe the cult got to you and ate away at your mind and ability to think for yourself?

[Guruvani 0]

 

I'm actually an old friend Kshamabuddhi,

 

And I must say I am embarrassed for you that you act in this manner,

 

 

I am embarrassed for you that you are embarrassed for me for not selling out to NASA and the scientific demons.

[Guest guest]

Are you a Harikrishna Sadhu ? Or just a ISKON devotee? Whatever the case why do you talk so harshly? Where is the love that ISKON shows? I see somthing missing. Unless you are acting. Are you acting? If so why?

[Guruvani 0]

 

Are you a Harikrishna Sadhu ? Or just a ISKON devotee? Whatever the case why do you talk so harshly? Where is the love that ISKON shows? I see somthing missing. Unless you are acting. Are you acting? If so why?

no, I am not a Hare Krishna sadhu.

ISKCON love?

wow...... you must be innocent.

just keep away and stay like that.

 

ISKCON is a house of horrors since 1977.

 

stay clear.......

[Guest guest]

^^ That was by me to the people who state that the Bhagwat Puran is full of nonesense. Not directed to guruvani. As i feel he has His views sorted out just right.

 

Stick up for Dharm. DOnt sit there and take it like fools. Veda Vyas didnt create the Bhagwat out of the blue so it could be a fairytale. These inicdents and the leelas of Bhagwan actually happened and they are no metaphores or aything, Its eternal truth.