If Bhagavatam and Bible come from different frames of reference, does that mean everything is relative?

Answer Podcast

Transcript

This is an AI-generated transcript and may contain some errors.
Thank you. So, now, if we say that there are… Bhagavad-gita comes from one frame of reference, other philosophy comes from different frame of reference. So, does that mean that these frames cannot be matched or… Is everything just relative matter of perception? No, that’s definitely not true.
Bhagavatam does give us the absolute truth. And that’s why I said, everything, the authenticity of everything should be seen in the light of Bhagavatam. I said that clearly.
But at the same time, it is not that the Bhagavatam is going to explain every concept that has come in every philosophy. So, for example, if somebody asks, what does the Bhagavatam cosmology say about black holes? Or what does it say about pulsars or quasars or whatever? Or binary stars or whatever like that. Now, the fact is that the Bhagavatam doesn’t talk about black holes.
Is there a deficiency in the Bhagavatam? Or are we going to say that the whole concept of black holes is just a concoction because it is not there in the Bhagavatam? No. See, when we have a particular frame of reference, accordingly, certain things are highlighted in our vision. And certain things are not highlighted.
So, for example, if we say, if the historians say that there are certain things that existed in the past, maybe 7000 years or 10,000 years ago, and they’re not mentioned in the Bhagavatam. Does that mean that they didn’t exist? No, history is quite vast. And the Bhagavatam doesn’t necessarily talk about history in an exhaustive sense.
Similarly, the Bhagavatam doesn’t talk about cosmology in an exhaustive sense. That king may have been significant in a particular frame of reference, but in Bhagavatam’s frame of reference, it is not important. So here, we’re talking about frame of reference, not in terms of everything being relative.
We’re talking about frame of reference in terms of what will be the focus for some people. Within a particular vision, certain things are focused and certain things are neglected. So, now, some correlations can definitely be made.
That’s why I said that the broad philosophical principle of wanting to enjoy in a way independent of God, that being the cause of our suffering, that is entirely harmonizing with Bhagavatam. But once you get into specific details, then it becomes, at the very least, it becomes speculative. How would that apply here? We can make some inferences and speculation is not necessarily bad, since it can be philosophical speculations or mental speculation.
But everything in every worldview, every specific detail in every worldview may not be talked about in the Bhagavatam. The Bhagavatam focuses on principles. And in the light of those principles, we can analyze things in different worldviews.
That would not necessarily mean that they are true or false. So, Adam and Eve, whether that event actually occurred, it could be an event which has occurred, but that being the cause of all suffering for everyone, that being the cause of everyone’s material entanglement, that definitely is not true. As a historical event, maybe Eden might have been some place, and from there, some souls rebel against you.
But it’s one philosophical principle is true, but the whole philosophy that is built around that event, that definitely is, as I said, little Christianity itself question if you want to speak within our philosophy.