vdayal@castle.net (Virender Dayal) wrote:
>dturina@geocities.com (Danijel Turina) wrote:
>
>>I must compliment you on the wisest and clearest post that I have read
>>in a long, long time. I agree with you completely and it makes me very
>>glad to see the balance in your logic. Again, you have my most sincere
>>compliments and best wishes.
>
>That was the biggest bag of garbage I have read here on this
>newsgroup.  Blasphemy of all pure devotees of Lord Krsna and their
>sastra.  

Would you please be so kind to elaborate on that? Personally, I saw
none of that in his post, it is very well grounded in reality and has
a healthy balance, unlike all the spitting work that I encounter on
this NG all the time, and I'm very happy that people like him write
here, because they are unlikely to respond with a pack of insults and
flames copied from some book.
As for his arguments, they can be found insulting only if an impartial
observation of the reality threatens your philosophy, and if that is
the case, you would be better off without your philosophy. If you
think that astronomical observations threaten Srimad Bhagavatam, then
it's either that Srimad Bhagavatam is a holy scripture, and you didn't
understand its message so you think it is in conflict with reality, or
Srimad Bhagavatam is not a holy scripture, and it tries to describe
the reality, making serious mistakes in the process, thus discrediting
itself. It's one of those two, you take your pick.

>The fifth Canto was one of the reasons I was attracted to Krsna
>Consciousness.  I have 4.0 in calculus, Physics, mathematics, etc.  I

That means nothing, some of the most ignorant people I know, members
of some "born again Christian" cults, who defended utter nonsense on
hr.fido.religija newsgroup, were college students, training to be
engineers, with very good grades.

>didn't rely on any blind foolish belief system.  It makes complete
>sense what is stated in the Fifth Canto.  People who cannot understand
>it should keep their mouths shut or find someone who does understand
>it.

We had such discussion before on hr.fido.religija; it was not about
Srimad Bhagavatapurana, but about the Bible. Some creationists had a
serious problem with the evolution, they couldn't accept it so they
tried to prove that the science got it wrong - they couldn't; they
also tried the argument about the imperfection of the human senses,
claiming that all the bones of the older versions of man were somehow
a hallucination, or a work of devil, trying to seduce pure men from
firm belief in the word of God (!).

Here's what my friend Ratko Jakopec, who studies Catholic theology
with the Jesuits, said, paraphrased from my memory. He said that the
basic mistake of the protestants is the misunderstanding of the nature
of the Bible. The Bible originates from a Semite culture, where people
expressed their views of the reality in images, whereas the Greek
culture tends to form definitions of the terms.
The Bible is history of human relationship with God, that relationship
evolved to reach its perfection in the appearance and the life of
Jesus Christ; in the New Testament God's will is expressed perfectly,
whereas in the Old Testament it is not, and therefore the Old
Testament should be read in the light of the New, and thus correctly
interpreted. If the Old Testament says "eye for an eye", and Jesus
says "love your enemies", then Jesus has the priority.
Furthermore, it is a common mistake to view the holy scriptures as if
they were some sort of an encyclopedia. They are not. They do not
consist of terms and their definitions which could apply to the
reality; on the contrary, they consist of images that are meant to
bring man closer to God, by forming higher images in his
consciousness. Jesus didn't speak in definitions, he spoke in images,
giving people the images that will clarify his point - giving examples
of situations that conveyed the point he was trying to make. 
People also expect the holy scriptures to be some sort of books of
law, with regulations that must be observed or dire consequences will
arise; that is also not true. If that were so, Jesus could be seen as
just another prophet who repeated God's law, and a quote from John
could be seen as of equal importance as one from Jonas. But it is
exactly the opposite - Jesus came to _free_ people from the concept of
the law, and introduced the concept of mercy and love. He simplified
the concepts and said that the most important things are to love God
with all our being, and love our neighbor equally, and all the law and
the prophets can be derived from that. Love does no evil, love does
not harm. Lovers do not hurt the ones they love. This is the key to
perfection, and conveying that is the purpose of the holy scriptures.

Srimad Bhagavatapurana is in that respect no different from the Bible,
it also consists of the images and stories that are meant to introduce
the love of God into a person's heart; bringing it there, they make it
grow and spread, purifying a human being into a living perfection of
the highest consciousness living in a body. This is the purpose of
this scripture; it is not an encyclopedia, because it is written in an
environment which does not know the encyclopedia as in the Greek
philosophical circles: as a set of precise definitions of terms.
Bhagavatapurana doesn't give the exact information that a book of
maths written by Demidovich gives; it doesn't have the accuracy of any
scientific material, compared to those materials it is grossly
inaccurate and false, and contains nothing of value to an astronomer
or a physicist. It is not meant to be read by the astronomers and the
physicists, it is meant to be read by the devotees, and to them it
brings, in images and stories, the vision of the inner spiritual
realm. And there, it is the best, it is probably the highest spiritual
material that I've ever had the privilege to read; it begins where
most holy scriptures end, and Sri Vyasa's insight and abilities to
express the inexpressible are the honor to the human race (and of
course his son Suka is included in that praise). They are the proof
that even the highest states of consciousness can be brought into a
form that can be written on the paper, without just saying that those
are the matters about which nothing can be said, as most mystics do.
If you do not see his work in the context it was written, you are the
one who blasphemes, because you make him look ridiculous in comparison
with scientific material which describes the precise facts about the
laws of physics and their application. So, please, if you want to know
how God's inner being works, read Srimad Bhagavatam, and if you want
to know if Sun is closer to Earth than the Moon, go study physics on a
college, and leave Srimad Bhagavatam alone, and spare Maharsi Vyasa
the agony of seeing you butcher his honorable work.

-- 
Web (Kundalini-yoga): http://danijel.cjb.net