Jagat said:
QUOTE
I don't see why scriptures written 400 or more years ago cannot be reinterpreted in accordance with the broader understanding coming from the sciences.
So I am highly interested in help in understanding how it comes togehter. Perhaps Jagat and other scholars who have a good grasp of gaudiya traditon can help me out...please?
Here are some other issues that came up in confronting the belief that control of sexual urge constitutes civilized culture when discussing Bhagavad Gita 7.11 with Adwaita das. I wanted to start this thread becaue I was not finding answers. Please refer to page 3 of the thread "dharmAviruddho bhUteSu kAmo'smi" for more background.
Adwaita said:
QUOTE
There have been primitive tribes everywhere at all times, also in India. We speak of civilised, responsible behaviour.
Kalki said:
QUOTE
So are you suggesting that man was primitive at one time before modern homosapiens. I don't necessarily disagree but is that your view based on all the shastra you quote. Doesn't vaisnava sampradaya put faith in the idea of 4 yuga cycles where in the beginning man was more god conscious and later digressed as kali youga approached? So if you do believe this, are the skeletal remains that archaeoligists find the remains of the humans in Satya yuga or more primitive sort like they constantly say. And so where do your primitives fit, before Satya Yuga? And then I suppose Krishna felt that man was in sin and flooded everything, but set up an arc where Lord Bramha boarded two of every animal and thus commenced the Satya Yuga when the ark landed on Mt. Ararat? I have always been confused how it all fits, so maybe you can help me since you know about the primitives. Especially the part about them being un-vedic, therefor uncivilized.
After being told on the "dharmAviruddho bhUteSu kAmo'smi" thread, that my input was not sastrically based, I PMed Jagat to ask some advice and he encouraged me to post it in my new thread. Perhaps my reason for making the thread will become more clarified and I hope all the devotees with superhuman intelligence out there can come down to the mundane level of someone just asking how to make things fit with science.
QUOTE
Dear Jagat,
Dandavats. I wanting to clarify with a moderator an understanding of the rules so I am not in breach of forum edicate.
Adwaita quoted this:
QUOTE
1. Philosophical and theological matters shall be ultimately resolved by referring to the foundational writings of the Gaudiya Vaishnava tradition. The Visitor shall not insist in public that the view he presents is appropriate unless he presents reasonable evidence to back it up.
So my posts had been questioning the 7.11 verse and because I am not so sastrically founded as others, I thought it valid to question things with common sense. After all I am a modern day thinker making sense of sastra to take into my life for the goal of purification. I can't see having discussions based only on sastric quote against sastric quote. I can't see it going anywhere and might look only like the eternal battle of Gaudiyas vs. Mayavadis.
Beyond all the finer nectar of the height inner experience. We live in a world that has a chronological timeline. I am hoping that my questioning how Yuga cycles fit with real life history can be sastrically based enough to be making a contribution.
I have the feeling that my new thread on this will not attract any attention becasue it may not be a relishable one that folks can post their vast knowledge of poetry from acharyas writings. So I am hoping you can either comment or direct me on how to gain understanding that I search for since you seem like the more of realistic vaisnava writers that I have encountered. I haven't personally heard any satisfying comments by any archaryas on this matter but rather I think that such questions are considered inferior to the real nectar that needs to be discussed. That is why I think there is some validity to when the conservatives of the world consider us no matter than a cheap cult with alot of pizazz.
Sincerely,
Kalki
I am not sure what the problem you are stating is. I cannot speak for anyone but myself in saying that you have to form an understanding of history through an examination of the evidence as far as is possible. There are limits to what we can do, and we have to know furthermore that faith does not hinge on these things.
Human life is meant for experiencing and serving God. The marvels of human history are a way of experiencing God, but it is indirect.