[Jagannath] Fw: Quoting Puranas (Lord Caitanya)

[Guest guest]

Dear Narasimha,

 

Jaya Jagannatha!

 

>We are deviating from astrology. But I see this topic (or similar topics) coming up again and again. So I will >make a few points before I withdraw.

 

Guru Parampara is part of any Vedic process of learning and so it is part of Jyotisha too and we cannot ignore it. The point that I was trying to get across was that we cannot consider anything we want in the terms of our belief or disbelief. That is very dangerous deviation because it can ruin the whole foundation of Guru Parampara system. As I wrote earlier our belief and disbelief doesn't determines the reality that is happening around us regardless of our beliefs.

Another point is that our senses are limited and therefore are prone to making of errors.If we would want to analyze this world with our preceptory senses there are many things that we cannot understand and the most important of them is the Absolute Truth and the knowledge given by the Absolute Truth in the form of Vedas and Vedangas. Absolute Truth (in It's personal form is known as Bhagavan) is beyond of perception of senses, logic or knowledge, therefore He reveals Himself to His devotees or bhaktas who are following certain process in order to come to that stage which is not easily available just to anyone, nor can anyone claim that he has seen the truth unless that truth was revealed to him by Bhagavn Himself (like in the case of Brahma) or by bona fide guru or acarya that comes in the unbroken chain of Guru Parampara started by Bhagavan.

Same thing is Lord Krishna saying to Arjuna on the Kuruksetra (Bhagavad Gita 4.34):

 

tad viddhi pranipatena pariprasnena sevaya upadeksyanti te jnanam jnaninas tattva-darsinah

 

TRANSLATION by A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada

 

Just try to learn the truth by approaching a spiritual master. Inquire from him submissively and render service unto him. The self-realized soul can impart knowledge unto you because he has seen the truth.

 

The main point that Lord Krishna is stressing on in this verse is that everyone should try to approach to bona fide spiritual master who has seen the truth. That truth will be revealed (imparted) to us by service and submissive inquiring.

Srila Prabhupada writes in his purport to this verse:"The Bhagavatam says: dharmam tu saksad bhagavat-pranitam--the path of religion is directly enunciated by the Lord. Therefore, mental speculation or dry arguments cannot help one progress in spiritual life. One has to approach a bona fide spiritual master to receive the knowledge. Such a spiritual master should be accepted in full surrender, and one should serve the spiritual master like a menial servant, without false prestige. Satisfaction of the self-realized spiritual master is the secret of advancement in spiritual life."

Here Srila Prabhupada points out:

1. That path of religion (dharma) is started by God Himself,

2. Mental speculation or dry arguments should be rejected if one wants to advice in spiritual life

3.One has to approach a bona fide spiritual master to receive the knowledge

4. Such a spiritual master should be accepted in FULL surrender, and one should serve the spiritual master like a menial servant, without false prestige

5. Satisfaction of the self-realized spiritual master is the secret of advancement in spiritual life.

 

Once person deviates from these 5 points than everything is put on relative platform including God and Gurus, so people will say that they believe in God or that they don't believe in God, but regardless their believing or not believing God continues to exist which is the only reality in this case and has nothing to do with who believes in God and who doesn't.

So if someone deviates from these 5 principles listed by Srila Prabhupada in practical sense that means that one day one of the SJVC students will say that he doesn't believe that Lord Jagannatha really exists. They will see Him just as a decorative wooden statue and nothing else. Than they will start to disrespect the Gurus of the SJVC.

>Believers in advaita philosophy will consider the teachings of Adi Sankara as the final truth, while believers in >dvaita philosophy will downplay it, as you did above, saying that Adi Sankara served the 'limited' purpose of >bringing people back to Vedas from "Budhism". While people may agree on some parts, they interpret some >other parts differently.

 

First I didn't said that Adi Shankara served 'limited' purpose, I said that he appeared for a purpose or reason which was to bring people from Budism to following Vedas. Krishna also came for a purpose which was to remove burden of Earth in form of demoniac ksatriyas from Earth. When His mission was finished He left this planet just like Adi Shankara. Lord Varaha came to rescue Earth and kill Hiranyaksa, Narasimha appeared to kill Hiranjakasipu...That is one of the things how we identify avatars, by purpose that they came to accomplish. If you want to call or understand appearance of different avataras of Lord Krishna or Shiva because they came for some purpose as 'limited' it is up to you.

 

>There are many interpretations and opinions. Naturally, you will be biased towards the teachings of the school >you were initiated into. There is nothing wrong in that. But I just want you to know that there are many schools >of thought and great philosophers spent their lives without knowing which is correct. So don't think you do.

 

It seems like that you are trying to say that if one person is blind than it must be that everone else is blind. What is the logic behind it?

 

>As for Puranas, they are full of ambiguities which are interpreted by different schools in different ways. >Today's people read English translations and think that they understood everything. But no translation or >commentary (English or Hindi or Sanskrit) is necessarily the final word. Different schools interpret differently. >There are many significant differences in interpretation.

 

If no translation or commentary (English or Hindi or Sanskrit) is necessarily the final word than how will we find out the truth? That means that I should forget Bhagavad Gita and Srimad Bhagavatam and read anything and I'll get same result as reading Bhagavad Gita maybe because I believe that the result will be the same, but if I don't believe that means that result will not be the same? Does that means that we are deciding the results by our own beliefs? If that is so that forget Jyotish, we'll all get what we believe that it will come to us.

 

Second question is why have you chosen Sri Sanjay Rath as one of your astrology gurus, and why not perhaps someone like P.S. Shastri who also translated Jaimini Upadesa Sutras long ago before Sanjayji, Professor Shastri is also Sanskrit scholar while Sanjayji isn't, he is known astrologer while at the time when you met Sanjayji over internet he just authored his first book and he was more-less unknown even in Delhi.

Correct me if I am wrong but I think that the reason that you chosen Sanjayji was because his biased interpretation of Jaimini Upadesa Sutras influenced by the school of Jyotish that he was initiated into brought you much closer to reality of this world than all academic and scholarly titles of P.S. Shastri, and that is what matters and what makes difference. Finally you were able to make predictions that would come true which you couldn't do before you met Sanjayji. The point is that now what you predict becomes reality while before was on the level of mental speculation and you could just speculate and make guesses not predictions. So you could see that regardless what you were predicting before you couldn't connect it with reality while now you can. Now, if someone who doesn't know Sanskrit but study Jyotish from Sanjayji and from his books, do you think that one day he may come on the level of which you are now in Jyotish considering that this person can only read Sanjayji's English translations? Do you think that just because person cannot read devanagari script he cannot learn Vedas or Vedangas even if that person is getting the knowledge from an authoritative source?

 

Similarly Srila Prabhupada is the person who is authoritative representative of Brahma-Madhva-Gaudiya sampradaya and he has brought thousands of people in touch with reality in levels of self realization with the English translations of his books and lectures just like Sanjayi brought you in touch with reality in the realm of Jyotisha.

 

>In short, my advice is: don't think that what you read so unambiguously in an English translation was written >equally clearly in the Sanskrit original! That is not the case always. What you read in a translation or >commentary is only an "interpretation". Remember that.

 

Yes, I already know that and therefore I am reading only clear English translations and commentaries of Srila Prabhupada and Sri Sanjay Rath. My intelligence is very limited so I am not able to make any new philosophy, or to juggle with interpretation of Sanskrit words, so I just take my philosophy only from those authoritative personalities (Srila Prabhupada and Sri Sanjay Rath) who have already done that work in English.

 

Nrsimha I hope that you will not take this personally, but i don't understand how such intelligent, successful and learned person who is also brilliant Jyotisha can write such illogical things.

 

Hare Krishna,

Dina-natha Das.

 

P.S. As Nrsimha pointed out at the beginning and I don't want to get into arguments and debates regarding basic things like this one that everyone should already know, so I am requesting Sanjayji to please remove me from Varahamihira list.