A quest for help/perspective... - evolution in understanding

Dandavats. All glories to the Vaisnavas.

Over the last three weeks I have had the pleasure of reading several of Sri Ananta das Babji Maharaja’s books. A very different presentation from Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Maharaja’s disciples. In my humble opinion, unlike the books of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Maharaja’s disciples, Baba’s books and texts require more faith as Baba’s translations and commentaries don’t focus on bridging the gap between western psyche and the mysticism of our siddhanta.

Personally I tend to believe that both Bhaktivinoda Thakura and Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Maharaja invested a tremendous amount in trying to both bridge this gap, between western psyche and the mysticism of our siddhanta, as well as satisfy the morality and intellect of the Western mind. Personally I have experienced most of my intellectual difficulty due to some of these apparent attempts. I have started to feel that Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura really wanted to build that bridge to close the gap between Vaisnavism and the heavy influence that Christianity was having on India due to British rule. Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Prabhupada brought that a step further by really bringing a prominent emphasis and focus on morality, discipline and “worldly” topics.

Personally it is within the discussion on these “worldly” topics that I generally find myself becoming uncomfortable with what I hear. This is compounded by what I perceive to be the absolutism that surrounds the legacy of Srila Bhaktivedanta Prabhupada. When devotees take his statements on topics that are outside of pure siddhantic points and push them as absolute I really get uncomfortable.

I think this emphasis on the absolutism of the Guru is a bit more prevalent in the West due to the religious and cultural upbringing of the devotees as it leads to a deification of the individual. Persoanlly, I had always perceived a certain deification of Srila Prabhupada and personally I prefered to approach him as a person, albeit spiritually perfect. In some respects I struggle the most with what I perceive to be the influence that Christian theology has on Vaisnavism. The most blaring for me is the tendency to deify the Guru. Not that the Guru isn’t perfect but again their perfection is rooted in spiritual desire and practice as opposed to cent per cent perfection, both spiritual and material.

I forgot the name of the book but I read a piece that touched upon the overwhelming view held by the British at the time which viewed the “Hindus” as being sentimentalists captivated by “fantasy” styled theology. The article talked about how during the late 1800’s through the 1900’s there was a very stark evolution in most hindu religious doctrines to emphasis morality and discipline to counteract the British opinion. This seems to be present in both Bhaktivinoda Thakura and Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Maharaja. There is and was an obvious advantage and reasoning behind this transformation as it has opened the door of Vaisnavism to millions who would have never of been attracted to Vaisnavism without this evolution. I just think that some of the results of these evolutions are difficult for me. Does anyone else have this experience?

Overall I really enjoy the Baba’s books although I think it really will require at least 2 or 3 reads of each book before I can say much substantial in regards to different realizations that have come from these books. In most respects I am still trying to gain my footing with this presentation.

I really would be interested in the other devotees’ feelings about my thoughts and experiences in this regard. It is an exciting time but I am feeling a bit off balance so please forgive me if my thoughts are coming out a bit awkward.

Aspiring to be a servant of the Vaisnavas,
Rasaraja dasa

It is rather just the other way around. Look around you in the western Vaishnava community, how many devotees leave or swap their Gurus. Indian devotees rarely do such a thing. Did you have any extensive association with Indian Vaishnavas? I had. They consider the Guru as Bhagavan Himself, much much more so than their western counterparts. And indeed it is so according to shastra -

acaryam mam vijaniyan - "Know the Guru to be Me (Krishna)"

bandhur gurur aham sakhe - "The friend is the Guru and that is Me (Krishna)."

Both from the 11th Canto.

gurusu nara matir --- yasya vai naraki sah

"A person who considers his Gurus to be human beings is a hellish resident."

na martya buddhyasuyeta - "One should not be envious of the Guru or consider Him an ordinary mortal"

martyasaddhi (7th Canto) - "A person who sees the Guru as mortal has a wicked intelligence."

Dandavats. All glories to the Vaisnavas.

I agree that in some sense those from Hindu culture do approach the Guru in a unique angle where as the Guru is looked upon as Bhagavan himself however their approach is still more based on the Guru's perfection being in a mystical sense where as Westerners tend to see it in a very point for point perspective. The spiritual understanding of perfection within the Eastern and Western mindset seem to be very at odds with one another from the perspective of mysticism verse "real world".

To your point if you read the glorification of Sri Guru from an individual whose upbringing is Eastern they refer heavily on mystical or spiritual signs/examples of divinity where as Westerners shy away from this angle and point to accomplishments or historical/"proven" forms of glorification. This is what leads Westerners to really struggle with the concept of Guru as our approach seems to be more all encompassing and overtly practical as opposed to driven by faith and reliance on the mystical attributes of Sri Guru.

Aspiring to be a servant of the Vaisnavas,
Rasaraja dasa

Just a couple of comments here, as time is short:

The guru has various aspects in Vaishnava tradition. In one of those aspects he/she is a priest in the role of connecting the jiva to Bhagavan. In another aspect the guru is like the tribal shaman holding the keys to otherwise unfathomable mysteries. In another aspect the guru is a guide and mentor like a golf instructor in the game of life. In another aspect the guru is the archetype of servant of the servant of the Deity, in essence a role model. In yet another aspect the guru is the protagonist on the stage of lila as maidservant to the heroine in the divine drama.

There is also the question of scope. The guru at one end of the spectrum is spiritual master to the individual disciple. At the other end of the spectrum the guru is world teacher as jagat-guru (this is where the messiah complex muddies the whole concept for most Westerners).

Certainly the Saraswata ideas about the guru are heterodoxical in a number of respects. Still there is considerable overlap with mainstream Chaitanyaism. It is just a matter of sorting it all out, which requires some investigation and study on the part of persons such as yourself, Rasaraj Ji.

Rasaraj ji
Actually prior to Bhaktivinode Thakur there was even more emphasis on "morality, rules, sadachar" .... you can read Hari bhakti vilas for an earful/eyeful.
If you reside in india today you will find most of the so called raganuga/mystic indian vaishnavas to be extremely caught up in rules and superficial ethics to the extent of exhaustion.
but perhaps your observation on western empericism/rationalism would be correct.
as an indian i say indians need more and more of that if they ever hope to progress spiritually or materially. alot of what indian vaishnavas are into is nothing more than superstition which they accumulated from their village samskars and somehow mixed with "bhakti", and external rules of sadachar which have nothing to do with scientific health and hygiene - in fact - it runs opposite to it.... check out washing your plates with soil!

I wonder, though, whether Bhaktivinod was any sort of turning point in the history. There have always been people overly obsessed with various rules and regulations. Referring to a text, such as Hari-bhakti-vilasa, doesn't really portray an accurate view of how the tradition chose to implement the rituals in their daily lives.



Would you like to give examples of superficial ethics people are obsessed with?

I can give so many examples but being that they have to do with things like their bathroom habits and other personal things.... i don't want to offend the sensiblities of people on this forum.

It is only natural that a person who is not very acquainted with the Western culture would not go to great lengths to build a bridge between the siddhanta of the tradition and the Western psyche. Remember, even the books available in English were written in Bengali, and evidently primarily for a Bengali-speaking audience. I find it admirable how Sri Ananta Das Babaji presents plain siddhanta in his works, leaving cultural biases, whether Western or Indian, aside for other occasions. Siddhanta au naturel.



I wonder whether the conclusion on people's being attracted to Vaishnavism due to this reform is accurate, though. Hindu-groups with less emphasis on rules and morality, some even advocating promiscuous sexuality, have had great success in the Western soil. Anyway, that's a bit off topic here.

"It is only natural that a person who is not very acquainted with the Western culture would not go to great lengths to build a bridge between the siddhanta of the tradition and the Western psyche. Remember, even the books available in English were written in Bengali, and evidently primarily for a Bengali-speaking audience. I find it admirable how Sri Ananta Das Babaji presents plain siddhanta in his works, leaving cultural biases, whether Western or Indian, aside for other occasions. Siddhanta au naturel."

Very well put. For some reason this vantage point is attractive to me.

"I wonder whether the conclusion on people's being attracted to Vaishnavism due to this reform is accurate, though. Hindu-groups with less emphasis on rules and morality, some even advocating promiscuous sexuality, have had great success in the Western soil. Anyway, that's a bit off topic here."

Still I think this perception and thought does play into Bhaktisiddhanta's presentation. It would seem to pacify and counteract the thought process of that time period that Hinduism, or Vaisnavism in this context, was based on mystical mumbojumbo and immoral in material respects. Bhaktisiddhanta seemed to take the focus on Madhurya Rasa and hide it behind the aspects of discipline and in the philosophical parallel and engagement of modern thought in order to validate the theology for the Western mind.

Aspiring to be a servant of the Vaisnavas,
Rasaraja dasa

Oh yes, it certainly does feature in the presentation of Bhaktisiddhanta, and was a good point in those days. My point is just that it probably didn't play a major role as the attractive factor when Vaishnavism was introduced on a larger scale in the West to a culture aiming for a free sex revolution and so forth.

Dandavats. All glories to the Vaisnavas.

Well in some sense its direct contrast to the mood of the time (free sex) was a major part of the initial attraction as it was the extreme swing from the present condition. It didn't bode well for long term commitment but it did for the short term.

A few examples to illustrate what I am pointing out as the focus on disciplines that seem to be uniquely focused on by Bhaktisiddhanta/Bhaktivedanta Swami was in regards to the focus on the relationship between husband and wife, regulative principles, sleeping times, etc. I remember meeting a nice gentlemen who grew up in a Vaisnava family that was so surprised by ISKCON’s presentation as he said that he had never heard of a mendicant talking about or regulating the relationship between husband and wife. That even the thought was so foreign. Even the regulative principles he said were a bit foreign in that they weren’t a focus because as one advances they wouldn’t want to do those types of things or that they would want to rise early. However they weren’t seen as a central focus. So he was stating a unique contrast on how Bhaktisiddhanta/Bhaktivedanta focused on aspects of disciplines that may have been applicable to Vaisnavism but not such a central aspect.

Aspiring to be a servant of the Vaisnavas,
Rasaraja dasa

If you care to study other religions, Islam for example, I daresay you'll find that such "superficial ethics" are in fact rooted in a noble desire to fully follow a perfect role model.

I think it is a mistake to think that "fully following" means adopting outmoded standards of cleanliness, etc. The desire may be noble but not well informed. If for example the idea is that cleanliness is next to Godliness, then by all means—or by the highest modern standards—keep clean.

Gaurasundar - I don't know what you are talking about. I'm talking about superstitions of village India that effect the way many Indian vaishnavas conduct their daily routines. Come with me to India - I'll take you to Nabadeep or Braj, we will live in a math, ashram or Indian family's home and you will get your eyeful. Has nothing to do with bhakti or scientific health and hygiene.

Rasaraj, yes back in the 1800s and early 1900s alot of Hinduism and Indian culture was under scrutiny by the British Christians who found much of it to be sexually based - carvings on temples, worship of Shiva lingam and yoni, erotic aphorisms in religious poetry etc. There were various groups in India who sought to "clean up" the religion and culture to conform to the more sterilized, Victorian view of Christians. As far as the rationality of those Britishers, they claimed to be of a scientific mindset yet still clung to the idea that a virgin could give birth -- go figure. By the time Bhakti reached western shores in full force (iskcon) those ideas had become obsolete. In fact, right now here in USA, the more sexually centered a spiritual path, the more popular it seems to be. I guess people are trying to heal their svadishtthan chakra.

The shock of the Indian man over renunciates talking about the relationship between husband and wife I would think would have more to do with his shock of anything of a sexual nature being talked about publicly by anyone. I can tell you that almost all of my Bengali family members feel a little uncomfortable with Swamiji's mention of the word "sex" in almost all of his books. In India, even today, the people are so repressed (perhaps due to Victorian British influence) that no one talks about sex openly and if, by chance, they have to - well the word is skirted around or just alluded to. Knowing Indians, I would consider his surprise to be more of a by-productive of his conservative upbringing rather than a comfortability with sexual relations/topics.

Dandavats. All glories to the Vaisnavas.

The point of my example is that in reading Vaisnava books/texts and hearing from those outside of the Bhaktisiddhanta tree it seems that there is much less emphasis on the different disciplines and “worldly” topics. I haven’t read or heard anything that would lead me to believe that any of these individuals would condone or encourage activities which contradict these very disciplines but that most don’t get overly involved in such aspects of ones life with the vision that if one is sincerely chanting and serving that those desires will naturally wane.

I guess the question in my mind is in regards to why Srila Bhaktisiddhanta put so much emphasis on the disciplines which at times seems to overshadow the more esoteric aspects of Vaisnava siddhanta. In reading and hearing so much about Srila Bhaktisiddhanta I developed the thought that this may have been due to the hope of pacifying and preaching to the British mindset that was so prevalent at that time. So again I don’t question the need for the disciplines just the central focus he placed on them.

Aspiring to be a servant of the Vaisnavas,
Rasaraja dasa

It all boils down to what is a superstition and what is not. I'll be the first to admit that it is difficult to differentiate between the two due to a lack of sastric references, but I can confirm that all or at least most of the hygienic practices that are implemented by Indian people do have some sort of sastric basis. Again we'll have to define sastra in this context; I am talking of the various dharma-sastras out there. I have this book written by a certain Acharya Ganeshdas in which he has briefly outlined summaries of almost all Indian philosophies and sub-cults, and he has also included a section on ethics and hygiene, etc. I was rather surprised that most of the (good!) hygiene habits that were taught to me by my parents apparently had some sastric basis!

I also gave the example of Islam; if one cares to deeply study Islam, one will find that a large part of the Islamic faith is based on the sunnah, which is the example of the Prophet Muhummad. Because the Prophet is an ideal role model (and this has Quranic basis), Muslims since his time have strenuously noted all of his practices and dealings in all sorts of situations and compiled them in a series of books known as Hadiths. Naturally, the Hadiths are full of "sastric precedent," or rather an "Acharya's precedent" since I guess you can say Prophet Muhummad is a Muslim acharya; they contain innumerable examples of the Prophet's own example and commentary on various practices from personal likes and dislikes to personal hygiene. A fascinating collection. I deeply admired this aspect of Islam as it closely paralleled the ideal of 'mahajano yena gatah sa panthah' that is often extolled in Gaudiya Vaishnavism. That's why I'd urge not to prematurely declare that certain practices have "nothing to do with bhakti or scientific hygiene." as one may be surprised by what one may find with research!

As I said before, it's hard to differentiate between the standards and the superstitions. Many people would be disgusted by the thought of spreading cow dung all over the kitchen floor, but this method has been implemented for centuries in order to exterminate any bacteria. For Westerners I guess they can be satisfied with kitchen bleach? Yes I've been to India many times and I've had more than my fair share of silly superstitions; do not drink milk outside of a building, do not cut your fingernails or toenails in the evening/night, do not urinate against a tree lest you may be cursed by the ghost who lives in the tree, etc etc etc.


Since when did "healing" of the svadisthana-chakra take place by extensive use of it?


Perhaps the times are finally a-changing; one should just go and read some women's magazines in India these days, or perhaps catch up with females at the local juice bar.

I think I agree with you broadly on this point. I suspect that upon provision of specific examples of "disciplines," it would be beneficial to conduct an investigation of sorts to see if said disciplines have any sort of sastric basis. Perhaps then we will be able to see if such disciplines should not be implemented or otherwise.

Oh ok, you are saying other Vaishnava acharyas write more about lila? Yes that is true. Don't know why he chose not to.
One thought I had concerning not BSST but his father Srila Bhaktivinode Thakur was that rather than exclusively trying to stradle the western mindset with Indian theology I think he was trying to update Indian tradition and make it relevent for Indians at that time in a changing world. For instance, Indians have a very strong tendency towards superstition and I think Bhaktivinode wanted to divorce Vaishnavism from laukik superstition. For example, as far as research showing that Bhagavatam is not at least five thousand years and Vaishnavas saying it is, BVT says it doesn't matter if it is or isn't because the essence of the Bhagavatam is what a Vaishnava is concerned with, not its chronology. Also, Bhagavatam has within it's pages cosmology, history, socialogy, etc. BVT seemed to believe that these aspects of Bhagavatam could be seen in a relative light so as not to get "stuck" in certain modes of thinking that reflect rigidness or a non-fluid approach to life and modern tools of scientific research. There is a tendency amongst superstitious fundamentalists of any religion to affirm that whatever was written hundreds or thousands of years ago in their divine scriptures must be true for all times and all places right down to the letter. BVT seemed to want to divorce this type of mentality from Gaudiya Vaishnavism. Srila Shridhar Maharaj gave an interesting answer to one person who asked about the Bhagavatam's claim that the sun is closer to the earth than the moon. We know from scientific research that the opposite is true - the moon is actually closer to the Earth. Rather than say that the scientists are mislead demons who don't know anything, Srila Shridhar Maharaj said that the moon may indeed be closer to the Earth in terms of distance, but in terms of usefullness to the planet, the sun is closer. Meaning that the Earth uses the sun's energy more than it uses the moons. So in this way there are different perspectives. Not that one has to be right and the other wrong.

Now, as far as the guru/sisya issue. I recall one lila where Vallabhacharya volunteered to Srila Rupa Goswami to edit one of his books... maybe Bhaktirasamrita Sindhu. SRG was happy to oblige him. Jive Goswami on the other became upset that anyone would dare to edit, correct, his gurudeva's work... seeing that anything written by Rupa Goswami would be flawless. SRG chastised Jiva for being so impudent with another Vaishnava. But the commentary was that SRG was correct from his position as a humble vaishnava and Jiva was correct in his position as a disciple with unflinching guru nistha. So I guess here would be an example of someone taking their gurudeva to be perfect on all levels --- I don't know. Anyone is welcome to correct any mistakes I made in narrating this lila and the conclusion I came to.

Rasaraj, that above lengthy post was in response to your last one.

Finally, what are these "disciplines" that everyone is saying BSST emphasized? Chanting one lakh daily?

Dandavats. All glories to the Vaisnavas.

Sorry if my points are confusing. Like I said I am feeling a bit "off" balance lately and am having a tougher time articulating myself when it comes to these thoughts. I keep hearing that damn inner alarm "they will think you don't want to follow the principles", "they will think you are minimizing _______ (fill in the blank)". This isn't my thought process or intention. I am just a bit relieved to see the philosophy discussed outside of, or without the constant shadow of, discipline, discipline, and more discipline. Just hearing the philosophy and/or pastimes for what they are has been nice.

Aspiring to be a servant of the Vaisnavas,
Rasaraja dasa

Again, both Rasaraj ji and Gaurasundar have mentioned "disciplines" that BSST emphasized. I don't know which disciplines you are talking about -- could you please explain?

By the way Rasaraj, no need to tell me which rules you follow or don't. I don't think these things have any bearing on bhakti... or at least not very much. That's just my opinion.

Gaurasundar.... glad to see someone else here is interested in Islam as well. Which rendering of the Hadith do you recommend? Any other reading suggestions? Have you researched Sufi origins in Islam?

There are different collections of Hadith compiled by different Islamic scholars so it all depends on which collection you would like to read. I think that Bukhari's compilation (named Sahih al-Bukhari) is maybe the most prominent or easily accessible. Other prominent collections are Dawud, Sahih Muslim, etc. I actually have a copy of Sahih-al-Bukhari in my library.


I haven't researched the origins of Sufism but I have read a bit about the philosophy, yes. I also had a Sufi friend who explained a lot about it to me. Based on that and my own readings, I was shocked and surprised at the parallels with Gaudiya Vaishnavism. The one perceivable difference, however, is the goal of the philosophies; Gaudiya Vaishavism is strict about retaining identity whereas Sufism suggest a merging of the soul with God (Allah), but even on this there are conflicting opinions about the retainment of individuality within Sufism.

I find this conclusion disturbing, in fact I find that whole lecture rather disturbing.

What is disturbing?

As far as I know, Bhaktivinod Thakur wrote those ideas (demigods do not exist, etc) for Western indologists, and he even mentions somewhere that these conclusions are not meant for devotees. I cannot quote exactly since I do not have the book, sorry.

I was having trouble with Vedic cosmology once awhile back. An associate of mine was being rather forceful with the idea that the sun was driven across the sky each day, pulled behind a chariot by the Sun-god, Vivashwan, or Surya Narayan. It seemed preposterous to be pushing a theory like that and a sad example of dogmatic fundamentalism.
Anyways, around that time, when this was all fresh in my head, I participated in a Native American sweat-lodge, and a quite authentic version. In the swent lodge prayers are offered up to all diferent aspects of Nature: the four leggeds, the creepy-crawlys, the spirits of the four directions, the sun, the moon, the Grandfathers and all our relations. So here I was in a sweat lodge because that was something progressive people did.
Anyways, it gets pretty hot in those lodges, alot of steam, alot of chanting and praying, and its real hot. It's very mind-altering. People have visions in them on a regular basis. But anyways, it's hard to construct the mindset I was in at the time, but around the fourth gate, towards the end of the ceremony, when the doors were opened, and I was able to breathe again, I was sitting there watching mist floating just off the ground in front of me, slowly moving and swirling slowly, and I just knew then that this mist was alive, it was sentient. And in the Native American view, that was right. All of nature is alive and sentient This mist slowly swirling around in front of me was alive, and was as much a part of the ceremony as I, maybe moreso, being a specially invited guest; Spirit of the Mist. I was very happy for the darshan.
That experience was powerful for me, and I remembered it. It informed my thinking about so-called primitive cosmology after that. If all of nature is actually alive, having only been killed off lately, by modern rationalist thinking, then why can't the sun be drawn around by the Deity of the sun. The description of a chariot may be what is comprehensible for those on the sensual plane, in a certain time and place. We understand these things as best we can. But the actual reality is probably a lot more mind-boggling than we can know.

So, now I don't actually go around trying to convince people that the sun is pulled on a chariot. I follow the stars so I mostly think from the perspective of the planets circling around the sun. But I would like to be able to remember more often that all of nature is alive and swirling around me. I mourn the death of nature, and the destruction that followed, when, as Neil Young said, "the aimless blade of science slashed the Pearly Gates".

Actually, the Bhagavata speaks specifically about distances when discussing the positions of the Sun and the Moon: evaM candramA arkagabhastibhyaH upariSTAl lakSayojanata upalabhyamAno ..., "In the same way, the Moon is perceived to be above the rays (i.e. the disc) of the Sun by 100,000 yojanas" (5.22.8). It seems a little far-fetched to talk about "usefulness" in this context when the text is clear, but if it helps save one's faith, I guess one can think about it in that way.

Sincerely,
Elpis

laksayojanata

indians use the term lakhs in a very "laxidasical" way.
so may lakhs this, so many lakhs that.
if you are indian then you know that.
if you are not then you will come to know that when you go there.

also, you would have to know sanskrit to really know what the sloka says.
often times ACBVS Prabhupada (if that's who's translation you are using) does not translate literally word for word.

what it comes down to is it is still left up to interpretation at this point till we get a sanskritist in here.

PS... lakh means "100,000"

Betel Nut, where exactly did Srila Sridhar Maharaj make this statement about the sun and moon? I have 2,500 hours of audio recording of Srila Sridhar Maharaj, and most of this is also on a database, but I haven't heard of this particular statement before. I will say that it does seem to be representative of Srila Sridhar Maharaj 's appraoch to such matters. He didn't take a "literalist" approach to readings of scripture. So as you say the word lakh signifies "a large number" and not the exact number 100000.

I came across it recently. I believe I read it in a transcribed darshan or maybe I even heard it on a tape.... can't remember.

I believe our friend Elpis is rather accomplished in Sanskrit.

Actually, I do know Sanskrit. I did not use a translation, but the actual Sanskrit text. The translation that I provided is my own (believe me, I would never cite Bhaktivedanta's translation of a verse).

I have also read a number of astronomical and cosmological works in Sanskrit, and I am familiar with how the word lakSa is used in such texts.

The text of the Bhagavata passage that I cited is quite clear: the Moon is 100,000 yojanas above the Sun. The yojana is unit measuring length, so there is no ambuguity regarding which of the Sun and the Moon are further away from us with respect to distance: the Moon is further away than the Sun.

Even if the word lakSa does not mean 100,000 exactly, the statement still implies that the Moon is above the Sun.

Sincerely,
Elpis

I know. This is how I translated it in the Bhagavata passage in question.

Is the Moon really further away from Earth than the Sun?

Is the earth flat, like a lotus flower, as in Bhagavatam 5th canto?

Where is the ocean of liquor? I want another drink, my bottle is empty. I can get in an aeroplane and fly due west, going from Australia to Africa and South America, then back to Austalia. What sort of strange illusion is this? I cannot find the ocean of liquor anywhere? I need a drink, desperately.

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. The religion of the Bhagavata is free from such a poetry. Indeed, in
some of the chapters we meet with descriptions of these hells and heavens, and
accounts of curious tales, but we have been warned somewhere in the book, not
to accept them as real facts, but as inventions to overawe the wicked and to
improve the simple and the ignorant. The Bhagavata , certainly tells us a state of
reward and punishment in future according to deeds in our present situation.
All poetic inventions, besides this spiritual fact, have been described as
statements borrowed from other works in the way of preservation of old
traditions in the book which superseded them and put an end to the necessity of
their storage.
http://www.mandala.com.au/books/bhagavata.pdf

Where?

If the heaven is a poetic device to allure the ignorant, then who's that fellow who sent forth the clouds of devastation when that bluish village boy told the local folks to not worship the god of heaven, but rather the local mountain?

The yogis of India often stood in sirsha-asana while contemplating on the mysteries of the cosmos. Now, if you stand upside down, the universe is also upside down, and it looks as if the Moon were above the Sun.

Just see. There is a way to reconcile everything. It is a matter of perspective.

LOL!

Which leads me to another question..........is this pantheism?

What about the worship of shiv ling?

This is going to sound stupid but someone asked me the other day if drinking cows urine was a practice amongst vaishnavas. i said it wasnt a "practice" yet sometimes urine will be charanamrit in which case vaishnavas would either take that on their heads or drink a little.
the person was flabbergasted and asked "how can those people be taken seriously in this day and age?"

What to say?

Im also doubtful.

the above message in response to local mountain worship .... forgot to qoute

As the saying goes, "Where there is a will, there is a way."

Your posting reminded of the discussion on "the downness of down" found in medieval Indian cosmological texts

The attempt to reconcile the puranic cosmology with a spherical cosmology is not a new thing; it goes back centuries. You will find the most ingenious solutions, but somehow it never really works out to everybody's satisfaction...

Best,
Elpis

Actually, in recent days I have been studying Vedanta Sutra, in regard to Badarayana's (Vyasa's) discussion about whether the Vedic deities such as Indra really do exist. Badarayana discusses opposing views, and concludes by saying that Indra and other gods do exist.

See Brahma Sutra, Chapter 1, SAMANVAYA ADHYAYA, SECTION 3 , Sutras 26-33

My interest in this was in regard to the discussion in Vedanta about how Indra could be present at different yajnas happening simultaneously in different places. I was reading a Srivaishnava commentary on this in which it was stated that the gods can exist as mental-beings or as concrete beings simultaneously.

I personally have no doubt that Indra and the other gods exist. I see the Devas as somewhat like "ideas" within the mind of men or animals: the prototype god of dogs is incarnate in all dogs, the prototype god of mother earth is incarnate in all cows.

Further, Indra can take a human form if he desires. In the Srivaishnava commentary it stated that Indra sometimes materializes so he can enjoy lust with maidens on Earth. Reminds me of Zeus and Europa.

Canto 1:5:10-11

Narada said to Vyasa:
That literature which is full of descriptions of the transcendental glories of the name, fame, forms, pastimes, etc., of the unlimited Supreme Lord is a different creation, full of transcendental words directed toward bringing about a revolution in the impious lives of this world's misdirected civilization. Such transcendental literatures, even though imperfectly composed, are heard, sung and accepted by purified men who are thoroughly honest.

___________
In the brief instruction of Narada to Vyasa he clearly gives the purpose of Bhagavatam: Bhagavatam is directed toward bringing about a revolution in the impious lives of this world's misdirected civilization.

Moreover, even though imperfectly composed, the words of Bhagavatam are accepted by purified men who are thoroughly honest. The sadhus accept Bhagavatam, for it brings us closer to God.

This doesn't prove anything about the how and why of heaven and hell, and how the descriptions of the same are unreal facts.

I noticed during several discussions that some devotees misinterpret the words abaddhavatyapi in SB 1.5.11 not to mean that the wordings of the Bhagavat may be imperfect, but that actually the meaning may be wrong, so therefore some philosophical mistakes may be there in the Bhagavata. This is a namaparadha - sruti shastra nindanam - "to criticise the Shastras". Of the tikakaras, only Siddhanta Pradip (whoever that is) says dosha yukta, and Vira Raghava (also not a main Gaudiya tikakara) says shabdato'rthatash ca doshavati. The others, Visvanatha (bandhano'pi gadhah va shitalo va kvapi shloke yatra nasti kim punar alankaradir ityarthah), Jiva (yat kincit pratita sanketaditvad asamyag artha bodhake), Vallabha (bhasha grantha slokeshu vyakarana dustasya prayogah abaddha snanartham va ardha prayogah abhyupagamena) and Sridhar Swami (apashabdadi yukta) say that abaddhavatyapi refers to mistakes in grammar, embellishments and vocabulary. For those in the Saraswata camp, this was also the translation of the Bag Bazar Gaudiya Math's Bhakti Srirup Bhagavat Maharaja.

Indeed it is an offence to criticize the holy scriptures. However, as I mentioned earlier, there are some anomolies in what we read in shastra which we cannot pretend are not comprehensible to normal, rational thought and discourse.

Is the Moon really further away from Earth than the Sun?

Is the earth flat, like a lotus flower, as in Bhagavatam 5th canto?

It is not an offence to seek proper understanding of Truth when we find the words of the holy books are not in conformity with what we know is real and true. Sri Madhvacharya said that when we find we cannot reconcile the statements of shastra with our experience of reality, then it is our understanding of the scripture that has to be modified. The scriptures have no faults, no errors. However what is to be gained by holding on to some dogmatic assertion based on a misreading of scripture, such as the assertion that this earth is flat? The scriptures teach by way of allegory; the verse I quoted does indeed say that the purpose of Srimad Bhagavatam is to bring about a revolution in the impious lives of this world's misdirected civilization and lead people towards Vraja-seva. The Bhagavata is not a science book dealing with geography.

Who was the final writer of the Bhagavatam, as we have it today. In Bhagavata, it speaks of how Vyasa was dissatisfied by the wisdom embodied in previous compilations of scripture, and that Narada then came to him to advise him to write the Bhagavata. But this story being told about Vyasa is clearly not being told by Vyasa himself. There is another hand writing these words, an unknown writer who writes of Suta, Suka, Vyasa and Narada. A South Indian writer of the 8th century AD, according to Srila Bhaktivinode Thakur and Srila Sridhar Maharaj. See below if you want to see what Bhaktivinode said. Actually I am not interested in fighting with you Advaita. I will leave you in peace in your own region of experience.

From Sri Krishna Samhita, by Srila Bhaktivinode Thakur:


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. Respected Sridhara Svami has confirmed the eternality of the Bhagavatam by using the words tarankurah sajjanih. Srimad Bhagavatam has been accepted as the supreme fruit of the Vedic desire tree

nigama-kalpa-taror galitam phalam
suka-mukhad amrta-drava-samyutam
pibata bhagavatam rasam alayam
muhur aho rasika bhuvi bhavukah

"O expert and thoughtful men, relish Srimad Bhagavatam, the mature fruit of the desire tree of Vedic literatures. It emanated from the lips of Sri Sukadeva Gosvami. Therefore this fruit has become even more tasteful, although its nectarean juice was already relishable for all, including liberated souls." (Bhag. 1.1.3)46. From pranava (om) came Gayatri, from Gayatri came the Vedas, from the Vedas came the Brahma-sutras, and from the Brahma-sutras came Srimad Bhagavatam. This Paramahamsa-samhita consists of inconceivable topics in relation with the Supreme Truth that have brightly risen in the form of a sat-cid-ananda sun after being reflected through the samadhi of the author. Those who have eyes should see, those who have ears should hear, and those who have a mind should meditate on the topics of Srimad Bhagavatam. People who are infected by the blindness of partiality are deprived of the sweet taste of Srimad Bhagavatam. Let the supremely conscious Lord be merciful by destroying their blindness.Srimad Bhagavatam has no birth because it is eternal, without beginning or end. Nevertheless it is extremely desirable to ascertain when, where, and by whom this literature was manifested according to modern opinion. Modern scholars have concluded that Vyasadeva wrote Srimad Bhagavatam on the bank of the Sarasvati River under the instructions of Narada Muni, the knower of the truth. Being dissatisfied after writing the scriptures, Vyasadeva presented the Srimad Bhagavatam after visualizing the Absolute Truth through samadhi. He presented Srimad Bhagavatam for the benefit of third-class people, who are unable to understand the deep meaning of a subject. Those great personalities who wrote the scriptures were all known as Vyasas, and they were all respected by people in general. In this regard, the title Vyasa indicates all Vyasas, beginning from Vedavyasa up to the Vyasa who wrote Srimad Bhagavatam. When he was unable to ascertain the Absolute Truth after studying all the scriptures, then Vyasadeva, who is expert in the spiritual science, withdrew his mind and speech from those literatures, realized the Truth through samadhi, and then wrote the Srimad Bhagavatam. The modern scholars also say that Srimad Bhagavatam appeared in Dravida-desa (South India) about 1,000 years ago. The living entity has a natural inclination for being attached to his native place. Therefore even great personalities have this inclination to some extent. Due to the glorification found in the Srimad Bhagavatam of Dravida-desa, which is not very ancient, it appears that Vyasadeva was a native of that place.

krtadisu praja rajan kalav icchanti sambhavam
kalau khalu bhavisyanti narayana-parayanah
kvacit kvacin maha-raja dravidesu ca bhurisah
tamraparni nadi yatra krtamala payasvini
kaveri ca maha-punya pratici ca maha-nadi
ye pibanti jalam tasam manuja manujesvara
prayo bhakta bhagavati vasudeve 'malasayah

"My dear King, the inhabitants of Satya-yuga and other ages eagerly desire to take birth in this age of Kali, since in this age there will be many devotees of the Supreme Lord, Narayana. These devotees will appear in various places but will be especially numerous in South India. O master of men, in the age of Kali those persons who drink the waters of the holy rivers of Dravida-desa, such as the Tamraparni, Krtamala, Payasvini, the extremely pious Kaveri and the Pratici Mahanadi, will almost all be purehearted devotees of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Vasudeva." (Bhag. 11.5.38-40).

If the glories of Dravida-desa were mentioned in other scriptures, then we would have no right to give this conclusion. Our conclusion is further confirmed by the mention of a very recent holy place in the Srimad Bhagavatam

dravidesu maha-punyam drstvadrim venkatam prabhuh

"In the southern provinces known as Dravida-desa the Supreme Lord saw the sacred Venkata Hill." (Bhag. 10.79.13)48. It is stated in the Venkata-mahatmya, which is popular in the South, that Venkata-tirtha was established when Laksmidevi went to Kolapura from Chola. Kolapura is situated to the south of Satara. The Chalukya kings defeated the Cholas in the eight century and established a large kingdom in that province. Therefore Laksmi went to Kolapura and Venkata was established at that time. For this reason, they do not hesitate to accept that Srimad Bhagavatam was written in the ninth century. Sathakopa, Yamunacarya, and Ramanujacarya vigorously preached Vaisnavism in the tenth century. They were also from Dravida-desa. They all highly respected Srimad Bhagavatam, so we cannot accept that Srimad Bhagavatam was written after the ninth century. Furthermore, when Sridhara Svami wrote his commentary on the Srimad Bhagavatam in the eleventh century, there were already a few commentaries like Hanumad-bhasya available. So there is no need to further consider this matter. I have not found a means of determining the family name of the author of Srimad Bhagavatam. Whoever he may be, we are grateful, and with awe and reverence we accept that great personality, Vyasadeva, as the spiritual master of the swanlike people.

Indeed, the Bhagavata as it currently is evidently the outcome of an oral tradition being passed on and eventually written down. As you note, the narrations of Vyasa from a third person's perspective, along with other narrations of future events, bear testimony to that.

The Bhagavata is not restricted to a particular length. At the dawn of the cosmos, we find that the Bhagavata consisted of four shlokas, as Bhagavan recited the core of all wisdom to Brahmaji. Then we have the Bhagavata spoken by Vyasa to Sukadeva, and later the Bhagavata spoken by Suka to the rishis of Naimisaranya. Prior to that, there is the Bhagavata spoken by Maitreya to Vidura. There are a number of sub-narratives within our Bhagavata, which were the oral Bhagavata of the time.

purA mayA proktam ajAya nAbhye
padme niSaNNAya mamAdi-sarge |
jJAnaM paraM man-mahimAvabhAsaM
yat sUrayo bhAgavataM vadanti || BhP 3.4.13 ||

"In the ancient days, at the dawn of the creation, I spoke to the unborn one who appeared from the lotus of my navel, explaining the great wisdom relating my glories; that, which the gods know as the Bhagavata."

From four to an epic of 18000 verses; now that's interpolation all right.

Narrations on cosmology are not really aspects of theology as such.

Be that as it may, this does not answer the question as to the how and why of hell and heaven's existence. Several thinkers opine that the description of the earth (Jambudvipa) is really a description of the solar system, which is certainly flat in a way. And so the theories go on. However, drawing attention to these examples does not answer the question of the questionable example such as hell and heaven.
In the matter of the flatness (or not) of Earth, the descriptions are vague enough for thinkers to speculate on what is actually being described, the earth or the solar system, etc. Whereas in the subject of hell and heaven, we even have a clear reference for their location:

rAjovAca
narakA nAma bhagavan kiM deza-vizeSA athavA bahis tri-lokyA Ahosvid antarAla iti
King Pariksit inquired from Sukadeva Gosvami: My dear Lord, are the hellish regions outside the universe, within the covering of the universe, or in different places on this planet?

RSir uvAca
antarAla eva tri-jagatyAs tu dizi dakSiNasyAm adhastAd bhUmer upariStAcca jalAd yasyAm agniSvAttAdayaH pitR-gaNA dizi svAnAM gotrANAM parameNa samAdhinA satyA evAziSa AzAsAnA nivasanti
Sukadeva Gosvami answered: All the hellish planets are situated in the intermediate space between the three worlds and the Garbhodaka Ocean. They lie on the southern side of the universe, beneath Bhu-mandala, and slightly above the water of the Garbhodaka Ocean. Pitrloka is also located in this region between the Garbhodaka Ocean and the lower planetary systems. All the residents of Pitrloka, headed by Agnisvatta, meditate in great samadhi on the Supreme Personality of Godhead and always wish their families well. - Bhag 5.26.4-5

By the way, the subject of hell and heaven was discussed earlier in this forum.

QUOTE

It is not an offence to seek proper understanding of Truth when we find the words of the holy books are not in conformity with what we know is real and true. Sri Madhvacharya said that when we find we cannot reconcile the statements of shastra with our experience of reality, then it is our understanding of the scripture that has to be modified.

Rather, as Sripada Madhvacharya himself declares:

na ca anubhava virodhe Agamasya prAmANyaM | - Scripture is not valid when opposed to direct experience.

However, who here has had direct experience of hell? Or heaven, for that matter? Therefore I think it is a dangerous thing to speculate about subjects which nobody has had any direct experience of. It is a much better proposal to simply accept the word of the sastra.

QUOTE

The scriptures have no faults, no errors. However what is to be gained by holding on to some dogmatic assertion based on a misreading of scripture, such as the assertion that this earth is flat? The scriptures teach by way of allegory;

Rather, according to the respected opinion of Sripada Madhvacharya, there is no reason to think that the stories in the scriptures are allegorical unless it is specifically stated to be so. For example, Narada Muni tells the story of King Puranjana and finishes off with etad adhyAtmaM pArokSyeNa pradarzitam (SB 4.28.65).

QUOTE

the verse I quoted does indeed say that the purpose of Srimad Bhagavatam is to bring about a revolution in the impious lives of this world's misdirected civilization and lead people towards Vraja-seva. The Bhagavata is not a science book dealing with geography.

Yet there is plenty of "geographical information" in there, the truth of which may perhaps be revealed when we finally decipher all those encrypted verses? In any case I still don't see how saying that heaven and hell don't exist constitutes a "revolution." Rather it would be a good device for attaining Krishna in as much as approaching Bhagavan out of fear is the cause of vaidhi-bhakti.

As a postscript, I think it is a rather dangerous idea to present the views of Bhaktivinoda Thakura as evidence for exactly the same reasons that I outlined in the other thread where this same topic was discussed.

SB 11.3.44 may be what he is referring to.

parokSa-vAdo vedo 'yaM bAlAnAm anuzAsanam |
karma-mokSAya karmANi vidhatte hy agadaM yathA || BhP 11.3.44 ||

"As parokSa-vAda, the Vedas prescribe karma for people who are like children in order to guide them for karma-mokSa, just like medicine is prescribed."

That speaks of the Vedas and parokSa-vAda. traiguNya-viSayA vedA, we know that from the Bhagavad-gita. Should that apply for the Bhagavata as well? dharmaH projjhita kaitavaH, does the Bhagavata not say that in its very first verses?

Visvanatha's tika -

tathahi yadyetad ausadham pibasi tada te khanda laddukam dasyamiti pralobhya pita balan nimba rasam payayati laddukam ca tebhyo dadatyanyatha punas tat panasakteh kintvagada panasya na tallabha eva prayojanam api tvarogyam evam vedo'pi phalaih pralobhayan eva karma moksayaiva karmani vidhatte

Father says to his child: "If you drink this bitter medicine I will give you a laddu." In this way the child gets the bitter Neem ras. The laddu was actually not the medicine but is held before the child to attract him to the medicine. Otherwise the child would never have taken the medicine. Only his cure was the father's aim, not the laddu. Similarly the Vedas make the conditioned souls attracted to karma moksa by promising the 'laddu' of fruitive results.

Bhaktivinoda is also saying that the Bhagavata is an essential spiritual message (catur sloki) placed in a Puranic setting, and thus in its expanded from it includes stories of heaven and hell found elsewhere in Puranic texts that were employed for the purposes of motivating people through material prospect and fear.

I beg to suggest that while it may be hard to find anyone who has had direct experience of heaven, you can certainly find many, many people who have had direct experience of hell. If you want to meet some of these people, go for a holiday in Bosnia.

I don't say that heaven and hell don't exist. Only that they are not necessarily found in a particular, permanent geographical location, as some people interpret the Bhagavata to portray.

However...

I think that hell can exist in a geographical location sometimes. For example in the Empire of the Mexicans they used to offer regular human sacrifice to demons who live in the underworld, and by placating these demons the Mexicans were able to keep power and control of their region for many centuries.

My best friend, when I was young, was the son of a judge who wrote part of the constitution of Papua New Guinea, and who earlier had been a judge in the Highlands and Bougainville. My friend grew up attending boarding school here in Oz, but his dad and mum were in Bougainville, mostly. In the New Guinea highlands where my friend's father was working for the Australian government, he had to suppress the cannibal trade, because highlanders used to traffic in humans who they would take from place to place, cutting off an arm here, and a leg there. They used to then use bitumen to stop the blood flow, so the meat stayed fresh and alive. There are other acts that these people in the highlands used to perform 40 years ago which are even more abomiable than this. Acts involving sexual activity. Hell? - you ain't seen nothing yet, baby!

In regard to heaven, I have been studying Vedanta Sutra where this matter is discussed in detail in the Devatadhikaranam section. Badarayana and all the commentators i have read (Sankara, Ramanuja, Baladeva) all state in their commentaries that Indra and other gods really do exist.