Role of Vedic cosmology in the Bhagavatam, Gaudiya Tradition and ISKCON
Transcript
Disclaimer: This transcript was generated using AI and may contain occasional errors or inaccuracies.
Hare Krishna. So, today morning we are discussing on the 5th canto, 16th chapter, which is the first chapter in a series of 11 chapters from 16 to 26 that describe the cosmology as is understood in the Bhagavad Purana. So, I will be focusing on, rather than going on the details, getting first a broader understanding and in the afternoon class we may discuss more specifics.
We have to, whatever knowledge we study, we have to see the connection of that knowledge with the broad picture. So, we currently are studying a particular book, Srimad Bhagavatam, within a particular tradition, that is Gaudiya Vaishnavism, as a part of a particular institution, that is ISKCON, which is a part, which is actually the Vijnushila Prabhupada. So, we will first focus on trying to understand what this role of Vedic cosmology is within the book Srimad Bhagavatam, within the tradition of Gaudiya Vaishnavism and then within the mission of ISKCON, Vijnushila Prabhupada envisioned.
Then, after that, why we are taking this background? Because understanding this requires a substantial amount of intellectual effort and not many devotees have the inclination or the capacity to put in that kind of effort. But still, we need to understand how to understand this. So, if we are not going to put in the effort to intensively study this, then, Ravindra Sanu Prabhu is the chairman of the committee for the Vedic Planetarium.
He was telling that, if we want to make the Vedic Planetarium, we can keep over a thousand devotees, thousand PhDs engaged for the next hundred years, trying to understand this. And even after that, the Bhagavatam itself will assure that even Brahmaji cannot understand this planetary system properly. So, even if we had Brahmaji in our Vedic Planetarium team, still we would have had problems.
So, what to speak of, we ourselves doing it. So, still, in the broad picture, we will try to understand this. So, the Bhagavatam has, according to traditional perspective, 18,000 verses.
Out of these, 300 verses are dedicated to cosmology. So, verses 16 to 20, that's 300 verses. And this comes in the fifth canto.
Now, if we look at the 12th canto of Srimad Bhagavatam, there are 335 chapters. And among those 335 chapters, the maximum chapters are devoted to the 10th canto, which has 90 chapters. The second largest cantos are the 11th canto and the 3rd canto.
So, if we see, the heart and the essence of the Srimad Bhagavatam is the 10th canto. And everything else is centered around that. In fact, the 11th canto is largely a continuation of the 10th canto itself.
But Krishna is still playing an extremely prominent role by delivering the message to Uddhava Gita. There are 24 chapters in the 11th canto. So, how is this magnificent and huge array of 335 chapters arranged? So, the evolution of the Bhagavatam is a very fascinating subject and it can be studied at various levels.
Essentially, Shukadeva Goswami is preparing Parikshit Maharaj to face the exam of death. While doing this, Shukadeva Goswami indirectly is also guiding the seeker towards progressive spiritual evolution till he comes to realize Krishna. So, the Srimad Bhagavatam, actually Shukadeva Goswami's narration starts in the 2nd canto, 1st chapter.
In the last chapter of the 1st canto, Shukadeva Goswami appears. He starts speaking in the 2nd canto. So, Srila Prabhupada writes on the way to Krishna that all knowledge comes from Krishna, but all knowledge doesn't begin from Krishna.
All knowledge comes from Krishna means all knowledge comes from Krishna. But when I want to learn, it's not that suddenly I start thinking of Krishna. Maybe I look at the world around me, I think where did the trees come from, where did the skies come from, where did the stars come from.
So, all knowledge comes from Krishna, but knowledge doesn't begin from Krishna. When our knowledge begins, our knowledge begins from the visible to the invisible. In fact, all of science is based on observing the visible, that is a picture, and postulating the invisible, that is anumana.
So, Newton saw the fruit falling and he postulated an invisible force called gravity. So, in general, knowledge moves from the visible to the invisible. So, we see visible specific actions and we try to formulate invisible universal principles.
So, now, in the Srimad Bhagavatam also, Krishna in his abode is very far away. So, the Bhagavatam develops the reader, the seeker for realizing Krishna progressively. So, there are two ways to approach Krishna.
One is to completely reject this world and focus on Krishna. In a literal sense, there was Swami and Parashar Maharaj doing that. Parashar Maharaj renounced the world and he is focusing entirely on hearing about Krishna.
But at the same time, we live in the world and we can't stop thinking about the world because we are living here. So, in the Bhakti tradition, and this is the difference between the Bhakti tradition and the Yoga tradition. By Yoga, I mean Ashtami Yoga.
You know, Patanjali says, Yoga is chitta vritti nirodha. That for the practice of Yoga, chitta vritti nirodha. All the movements of consciousness have to be stopped.
So, just stop thinking about the external world. And Krishna talks about in 6.19, 6.20 onwards, Uparamate means to stop thinking. So, stop thinking, stop the mind.
And then the spiritual perception will awaken. The Bhakti tradition doesn't ask us to do that. Bhakti tradition, rather than rejecting the world, Asks us to utilize the world.
So, basically, there are three different approaches to the world. The Karmakanda tradition, it glamorizes the world. Glamorizes means, oh, there is so much pleasure in this world.
You can go out and enjoy. So, modern materialism is a godless version of Karmakanda. There is also so much glamorization of the world.
The Jnana tradition demonizes the world. This world is filled with temptation. This world is so much, all the sense objects are like snakes.
They bite you, stay away from it. So, the Bhakti tradition neither glamorizes nor demonizes the world. It utilizes the world.
It utilizes the world as a tool for meditating on the absent. And in the Srimad Bhagavatam, This utilization of the world is done in three different ways. And these ways are repeated over the cantos.
But, prominently, in the second canto, there is the Virata Rupa. In the third canto, there is Sankhya. And in the fifth canto, there is Cosmology.
All three are means of using the world as a tool to connect with and meditate on the Lord. If you look at the start or the end of the descriptions of the second canto, the Virata Rupa, the third canto, Sankhya, and the fifth canto, Cosmology, you will find, essentially, the speaker, there it is in the second canto, Shubhdeva Swamy speaking, the third canto, the fifth canto, actually, Shubhdeva Swami speaking, but that is the narration which is going on between Maitreya and Vidura. So, essentially, what they will describe is that by contemplating on this description, one can understand the glory of the Supreme Lord.
And one can become more fixed in meditating on Him. So, essentially, we are not interested in studying the world per se. We are interested in studying and learning about the Supreme Lord.
And to the extent the study of the world can help us in meditating on the Lord, we utilize that. So, these three are different approaches. So, before we focus on the fifth canto, let's get a quick introduction of what are these three approaches.
The second canto, Virata Rupa, which the Prabhupada clearly explains, is a conceptual tool. The word that is used is Kalpita. Prabhupada explained that actually there is no particular form of the Lord whose head is the upper planetary system and legs are the lower planetary systems and arms and the belly are the upper planetary systems.
It's a conceptual tool. And what is the conceptual tool used for? For understanding the greatness, the bigness, the largeness of God. You think, okay, some person is so big that the mountains are his bones.
He must be so big. So, as Prabhupada explained, this is a preliminary meditation to get a sense of how big God is. So, as far as the second canto, Virata Rupa, is concerned, there is no Virata Rupa loka anywhere.
So, Virata Rupa, there is no actual form called Virata. Now, of course, if Krishna wants, he can reveal the Virata Rupa. If he wants, he can reveal the Virata Rupa.
But primarily when the seeker is meditating, as described in the second canto, it's a conceptual tool. What about the third canto? The third canto contains Samkhya. So, Samkhya is basically a system of philosophy that has been present for a long time in India.
One of the six systems of philosophy. And Kapila and Ishwara Krishna, these two are the most prominent proponents of Samkhya. So, that Kapila is, of course, different from the Kapila whom Prabhupada refers to.
So, the Samkhya, so, Ishwara Krishna's Samkhya Karika is a very important book within the Samkhya tradition. I know Vishwanath Chaturthi Thakur quotes it in several places in his commentaries in 7th chapter and 13th chapter of the Bhagavad Gita, which deals with Samkhya. So, the point is that Samkhya is a way of analyzing the world.
What do we mean by analyzing the world? That earth, water, fire, air. This is a particular way of looking at the world. Now, this way was prevalent even in the western intellectual tradition when Plato and Socrates looked at the world.
Actually, the Greek civilization has much similarities with the Vedic civilization. In fact, they are expatriate in the Vedic civilizations only. But, in the modern times, there is a different way of looking at the world.
Because, the modern way of looking at the world is dividing it into atoms. And, from the modern perspective, earth, water, fire, air are ultimately made of atoms. All of them are made up of fundamentally electrons, neutrons, protons and for the subatomic particles.
So, in modern times, that particular way of looking at the world has been abandoned by modern science. But, present primarily, it is called the elemental theory of matter and the atomic theory of matter. They are two different approaches to matter.
So, Samkhya is one way of meditating on the Absolute. Analyzing that all that comprises the material world ultimately is an emanation from the Supreme Lord. And, all the diversity that we see ultimately is all coming from the Supreme Person.
So, this will help us to understand again the greatness of God. So, now, the first is a conceptual tool, second canto. Third canto, the third canto, Samkhya, is not a conceptual tool, it is an analytical tool.
What is the difference between conceptual to conceptual is what we conceptualize. Analysis means, okay, this is there, how do I break it apart? It's an analytical tool. Now, in the fifth canto, that we are discussing right now, Cosmology, this is not referring to the world per se.
Specifically, as it is combined with the elements, or it's not a conceptual tool. It's a model of observation. These are technical words.
Now, what is a model? A model, essentially, is a is a exploratory system for making sense of things. So, for example, within science, we have quantum physics, we have relativity physics. Both of them are models.
They are exploratory systems for trying to understand what it is actually. So, now, within this, fifth canto description of the cosmology that is given, the focus, if you look at it, if you look at the main verses repeatedly, out of the 300 verses, there are basically three things that are covered. There is geography, there is cosmology, and there is astronomy.
So, geography refers to the way the land masses are. There are oceans, and there are rivers, and there are mountains, all this refers to geography. Then, cosmology refers to the origin, and the development, and the structure, and the dynamics of the celestial objects.
And astronomy refers to the overall study of the celestial objects. So, these three are the broad subjects covered over here. But, while covering these subjects also, actually, the focus is primarily devotional.
For example, there is a full chapter, The Prayers by the Residents of Jambudweep. That is 60 verses. Similarly, there are other prayers by other individuals, that's 20 verses.
So, out of 300 verses, 220 verses alone remain. And if you go further and further, the factual information about what is given over there, or how these planets and how all this looks like, is not much. Because, the purpose of Shukadeva Goswami describing this, is not to actually describe the planetary systems.
The focus is devotional. A simple example is, suppose we want to describe to some person, how ISKCON has centers all over the world. We may say that, you know, in France, there is Paris, and Paris has a very famous tower called Eiffel Tower.
And in that city where Paris is there, we also have a center over there. And in New York, there is, you know, in some other place, there is Statue of Liberty. There also we have stations.
We have our center over there. So now, when we are describing, suppose, what one of us describes, you know, it is recorded somewhere, it is written down. And say, some big pralay happens, everything gets destroyed.
And then, a thousand years later, somebody reads that. And then, based on that description, somebody wants to make a map of the world. Okay, how was New York? How was France? How was Paris? How was Mumbai? How was Calcutta? You know, it is very difficult.
Why? Because when we are describing it, our focus is not a geography, the description. Similarly, when the Bhagavatam is describing it, there are some geographical details. But that is not the focus.
The focus, you know, Parikshit Maharaj is not expected to become a geography or a cosmology expert at the moment of his death. He is expected to become a devotional expert. So, as a, to reassure the hearers, that what you are practicing here, you are not isolated in that.
Everybody, everywhere else in the universe is also practicing it. So, okay, there is Jambudweep over here, there is Lakshadweep over here, there is this over there, there is that over there. And see how there also everybody is practicing Vedic culture.
Everybody is practicing devotion in some particular way. So, the purpose of this description is to give a devotional perspective of geography and cosmology. A devotional perspective of geography and cosmology.
And then, we will see this, even in the response of Parikshit Maharaj at the end of the 26th chapter. What does he ask? How can people be saved from hell? How can people be saved from hell? And then the Bhagavatam moves on, there is Ajaman's pastime which comes, and then it moves on to the 10th canto. So, primarily in the Bhagavatam, matter is used as a tool to contemplate on the Supreme Spirit.
And, that itself, that sort of contemplation is also offered in three different ways. One is through conceptualization, second is through analysis, and third is through modeling. So, there are three different ways of using matter to contemplate on the Absolute Truth, I presume.
And beyond that, the focus of the Bhagavatam is meditating on the Absolute Truth. So, Bhaktivinoda Thakur wrote an essay called the Bhagavatam. And in that, he downplayed the descriptions of the 5th canto of cosmology.
He said, actually the essence of the Bhagavatam is the 10th canto. So, now I am moving to the second point over here now. First, I discussed within the Bhagavatam, what is the position of the 5th canto of cosmology.
Now, let us look at, what is its position in our Gaudiya Vaishnava tradition. So, the Bhagavatam is a book which is accepted as a pramana by many other traditions also. Apart from the Gaudiya Vaishnava tradition, they are also considered important.
So, the Gaudiya Vaishnava tradition considers to where the, as the supreme pramana, as Jiva Goswami says in his Sandarbhas, he says in Sarvasambhavan, he called it the Sarva Pramana Chakravarti Bhutam, which is the emperor of all pramanas. Chakravarti is emperor. Sarva Pramana Chakravarti Bhutam.
So, he describes it is the emperor of all pramanas. Now, in general, in our tradition, there are many Acharyas who have commented in the Srimad Bhagavatam. So, they have commented in the 5th canto also.
But, none of our Acharyas have given any extra emphasis in the 5th canto. It is just like background general knowledge. Just like say, if we are having a preaching discussion and we say, okay, I went to Mumbai, I went there, I went there.
It is just background knowledge. It has not been a focus of any of the Acharyas. So, in the tradition, we have you know, we have almost our, as per the existing books that we have, our Acharyas, Gaudiya Vaishnava Acharyas themselves have written at least 5000 to 7000 books.
And these are what is existing. So, it is just in 500 years of our tradition. So, almost like every generation has written over 100 books.
And that is what is existing. Many more may be existing, but not known to us. Maybe in some Gaudiya Vaishnava devotees' houses somewhere, in some library somewhere.
And many more may have been destroyed also. So, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sridhar asked his disciple, Sambidanand Prabhu, who had gone to London to do a PhD, to do an overview of Gaudiya Vaishnava literature. So, that was his PhD thesis.
And he did an overview of the literature till his times. So, in that overview, if you study the overall tenor of Gaudiya Vaishnava thought, Gaudiya Vaishnava thought is focusing on the Bhaktiya Pradhana and Krishna. And the cosmology is mentioned, but it is not described or emphasized much.
Bhaktivinoda Thakura talked about Adbhut Mandir in Maya. Now, Bhaktivinoda Thakura's idea of Adbhut Mandir did not include any Vedic planetary model. He said there will be extraordinary temple.
Srila Prabhupada, he envisioned that when we build Adbhut Mandir, what it should contain is a body of the planet. So, in our tradition, till now, this has just been taken as a background knowledge, neither to be emphasized nor to be particularly discussed. Bhaktivinoda Thakura, when he wrote the Bhagavata, he recognized that the Bhadraloka, the elite people of his times, would face three obstacles in understanding the Bhagavata.
He anticipated and dealt with those three obstacles. The first obstacle, he said, is the cosmology. It will all see mythological people.
Second obstacle, he said, is that people will feel that this whole thing is so abstruse. Because if you study the philosophy of Srimad Bhagavatam, it's quite abstruse. Srila Prabhupada makes it very simple for us.
Third, he said, many of Krishna's actions appear immoral. So, he addressed all these three in his essay and his subsequent writings also. So, Bhaktivinoda Thakura wrote a book called Srimad Bhagavata Arkamarechi Mala.
In that book, he has given a thematic analysis of Srimad Bhagavatam to explain what are the important subjects of Srimad Bhagavatam. And in that, he doesn't emphasize the fifth canto cosmology. So, the fifth canto cosmology, if you look at the Bhagavatam itself, it's a meditational tool.
In the Gaudiya Vaishnava tradition, it has not been utilized much as a meditational tool. It is there, it is accepted. But it has not been utilized primarily within the Gaudiya Vaishnava tradition.
Now, Srila Prabhupada, in his commentary, if we look at the fifth canto commentary, overall, Srila Prabhupada does not, in his purports, go much into the technicalities of what is given over there. So, I have been a part of the Planetarium team also at various times. So, I discussed with several devotees.
So, Duryodhana Maharaj told me that in 1976, when Srila Prabhupada, he was a very learned devotee, so Prabhupada told him that you should study the cosmology. He said, I have given an outline. I have given an outline sketch.
All of you study the cosmology and you build a planetary model. Srila Prabhupada even outlined a methodology. Srila Prabhupada said, you go to some traditional scholar and consult that scholar and based on that scholar's input, you make an intelligible presentation.
So, Srila Prabhupada has given us a broad outline of what is there. So, now, as a part of our movement, if you envision scriptural knowledge as a broad circle, a huge circle. So, we can divide this into three sectors.
One, two and three. So, I have discussed this in the Bhakti Shastri course earlier. Some of you might be familiar with this.
So, the first part of the scriptural wisdom is that which agrees with perfectionism. So, that's one sector. Another sector is that which contradicts perfectionism.
And the third sector is that which transcends perfectionism. That which agrees, that which disagrees and that which transcends. So, now, among these three, which is most important? That which transcends.
We can say that all are important. At the same time, there is a hierarchy of importance. There is a hierarchy of importance.
You know, the Gaudiya Vishnu Acharyas did not descend from the spiritual world to the material world to tell us the height of the Nehru Parampara. You know, isn't it? They descended to take us to the heights of Goloka Vrinda, to the highest devotional ecstasies and the highest spiritual realizations. So, although everything on the Sivad Bhagavatam is important, but still there is a hierarchy of importance.
And that's why, in our sampradaya also, maximum commentaries can be written on them. Sadhana Goswami, Jiva Goswami, they do not comment on the full 10th canto, but they wrote Laksham Dipani and Laksham Tika. So, that is all on the 10th canto itself.
It's the most important part of the Bhagavatam for us. Prabhupada wanted us to be cautious that we don't prematurely jump on it. That's why he wanted to prepare us for that.
But still, that is the important thing. So, among these two, that which is in agreement with the scriptures, with Pratyakshanuman, that which is a rejection of Pratyakshanuman, that which is transcendental Pratyakshanuman, of these three, the transcendental aspect is the most important. The transcendental aspect, because ultimately, Sushil Prabhupada also mentioned in one of the Prakonas, that ultimately, this can neither be proven nor disproven.
It is transcendental. So, that is our focus. So, in the modern society, science has a tremendous hold on people's mind.
So, in such a situation, Sushil Prabhupada considered it important that in order to develop faith in scripture, to develop faith that there is a whole transcendental world which is beyond the reach of Pratyakshanuman, people's faith in Pratyakshanuman needs to be challenged. It needs to be problematized. It needs to be weakened.
Otherwise, people will not be open to alternative bodies of knowledge. So, therefore, Sushil Prabhupada often adopted a confrontationalist approach by dealing with people's pre-existing, almost people have a blind sort of faith in science. Albert Einstein said that if you tell a man that science says there are 500 million stars in the sky, he will believe it.
If you tell a man that the paint on the seat is wet, he will want to touch to see if it is wet or not. So, what does it mean? He said, when there is something which we can't verify or believe and science says it, believe it. It's something which you can see and check it to find out whether it is true or not.
So, actually, he also indicated that we cannot have this kind of blind faith in science. So, of course, we cannot demand in modern society for people to reject their faith in science to begin their faith in scripture. How things will move forward is, for most people who come to the Krishna Consciousness tradition, it is the experience of the potency of Krishna Consciousness.
The higher happiness, the inner transformation, the devotional enrichment that comes from the practice of Krishna Consciousness, that is their primary motive for practicing Krishna Consciousness. So, now, that means, there is a circle of agreement from the people who basically practice Krishna Consciousness, not because it agrees with Pratyaksha Anuman or it disagrees with Pratyaksha Anuman. It is because it is Pratyaksha Vagamam.
It gives them experience. Radhan Goswami says that among all the Pramanas, he says Anubhav is the highest among all the Pramanas, Anubhav, experience, is the highest Pramana. So, what does it mean by experience? Actually, when a devotee chants, an experience is the exorcism.
But then there is nothing that can change that faith. Nothing that can disturb the faith of a person. And that Anubhav has actually nothing to do with Pratyaksha Anuman, nothing against Pratyaksha Anuman.
It is something entirely different. So, Srila Prabhupada gave his disciples, gave all of us, disciples, grand-disciples and grand-grand-disciples, all of us as followers, many mandates to fulfill, many missions to fulfill. So, that is, for example, Srila Prabhupada wanted establishment of Varanashram.
Srila Prabhupada wanted Gurukul system. Srila Prabhupada wanted temples in every town and village. He wanted Harinam Sankirtan happening.
So, much of it Srila Prabhupada did and much of it remains to be done. So, like that, in the realm of the cosmology, even if we build the planetarium, that is just one step. Actually, understanding the model, presenting the model will take much, much more efforts.
And of course, the faith of people in science, especially in the western world, is slowly weakening. Because science, it's clearly seen that it doesn't just do good. No, it is actually, to some extent, tragically ironic that the greatest scientific insight of the greatest scientific brain of the last century led to the greatest disaster of the last century.
Because Einstein's idea that E is equal to mc squared, that led to the development of the atomic bomb. And that led to the greatest man-made disaster in the last century. So, because of the harmful effects of technology, because of the environmental pollution, because of the various similar factors, people don't have such an unquestioning faith in science.
At least, thoughtful people. So, still in India, in the west, now, the school of thought is not modern thought. They say modern is outdated.
Actually, the school of thought prevailing in the west is called post-modernism. And post-modernism, people don't have much faith in scripture, nor do they have much faith in science. The only faith that they have is in their own experience.
You know, so, their own experience, they will, okay, this feels good, I will do it later. Anyway, the point which we are emphasizing over here is that because of the intellectual trend of current society, the grip that science had on the world is slowly decreasing. So, people are becoming more open to alternative models of reality.
And this is an alternative model of reality. So, what do we mean by an alternative model of reality? See, how can we, for example, we are talking about roots that are as big as mountains. So, how can we justify this to people? How can we actually explain this, understand this? So, again, the principle we have to understand.
The principle is that cosmology, matter, is a tool to meditate on the absolute truth. So, matter being a tool to meditate on the absolute truth. If we study, for example, study Newton or Copernicus or many of these thinkers who study, who actually came up with the modern model of cosmology, they actually saw cosmology as a means of meditating on God.
They saw that actually it is a great and intelligent designer who has made these majestic circular orbits. Newton said that, you know, God, I think thy thoughts have to be. So, the point is, even the existing model can be used to contemplate on the absolute truth.
In fact, the way science is going now is becoming more and more clear. The universe as it exists cannot be understood, cannot be explained adequately without bringing God into the picture. So, even if you accept the Big Bang cosmology, that is one particular model which is popular within modern science.
So, even with the Big Bang cosmology, still it is not a self-sufficient model. Now, three questions. Where did the whole singularity come from? What caused it to explode? And from that explosion, how did the order that we see right now come about? These three questions are valid scientific questions, but they have no adequate scientific answers.
That's why many thinkers, even within the scientific mainstream, are seeing that there has to be a need for an intelligent designer. So, for those people, which includes most of us, who were educated in the modern scientific model of the cosmos, if this is the model that we have been educated in, this model also, if we see it from a theistic perspective, then we can use it as a tool for meditation on the absolute truth. And, ultimately, we want to transcend this and we want to focus directly on Krishna.
And, of course, some devotees, who have an interest and who have the capacity, they can go deeper into the study. And, after going deeper into the study, they can bring about a dialogue between these two models. So, now, in general, as devotees, when we talk about Prakriksha Hanuman and Shabda, we often have a little dismissive attitude towards Prakriksha Hanuman.
Actually, Shabda is the authority. Prakriksha Hanuman is not. But, it's not so simple.
Shabda is the highest authority, but Prakriksha Hanuman, observation and influence are also valid authorities. If we look at Prakriksha Hanuman, if we look at our own day-to-day functioning, you know, we view hardly into Prakriksha Hanuman. Say, morning, we go for breakfast and there is Patal and there is no Prasad over.
Prabhu, we ask the kitchen in-charge, where is Prasad? Prasad is already there in the plate. Don't believe in Prakriksha. I am telling you, Shabda, it is there.
It won't work like that, will it? No. So, if somebody comes late for Mangala Aarti, and he says, why did you come late? I was there. Why are you relying on Prakriksha and saying that I was not there? It will not work like that.
From a functional point of view, Prakriksha and Hanuman are important. So, Prakriksha and Hanuman are subordinate to Shabda. Observation and inference have to be subordinate to Shabda.
But there are many functional areas where we may not have any direct guidance from Shabda. So, at that time, I will have to rely on Prakriksha and Hanuman. Now, suppose there is some Chappal thief who has stolen Chappal.
So, if I want to find out, how will I find out? There is no Shabda to tell me who stole the thief. Then I will have to observe who went there, who all had the key to that particular area. So, it is basically Prakriksha and Hanuman.
So, Prakriksha and Hanuman are valid and valuable ways of acquiring knowledge. But, they are not, so, within the Vedic epistemology, there is first point is, Prakriksha and Hanuman are not valid for the transcendental realm. Prakriksha and Hanuman are not valid for the transcendental realm.
So, that's why we cannot observe or speculate about the transcendental realm. But, what about the observable realm? What about the observable realm? So, normally speaking, in the observable realm, Shabda does not focus so much on that. Where Shabda focuses, you realize it.
Now, if Prakriksha and Hanuman, there are areas where Shabda and Prakriksha and Hanuman contradict, then we understand that there is a different way of looking over here. So, when Srila Prabhupada wrote that famous letter to Bhaktasarva Damodara Maharaj, in which he said that we have to make this model, we have to build a planetarium, Srila Prabhupada said that we should be able to explain four things essentially. We should be able to, using this model, explain four things.
The phases of the moon, the moment of the change of the seasons, the alteration of the days and nights, and the occurrence of eclipses. These four are observable phenomena. And, we should be able to explain how these occur with the model of the universe that we have in the Bhagavad Gita.
All that we are going to depict. So, now as far as describing these four things are concerned, so, within the Vedic tradition, if you see Srila Prabhupada quotes a verse here from the Ananda Purana and he quotes from the Vishnu Vayu Purana over here. So, in the Vayu Purana, there is a vision, Maitreya Rishi, he actually goes into meditation and he goes to a trance.
And, in that trance, he suddenly sees the universe from a different perspective. So, that trance is the key, that description that is given. It's actually, in Vayu Purana and other Puranas also, there is a hint of this description.
So, that is the key for unravelling, that mystic trance, is the key for unravelling the structure of the universe. Jiva Goswami talks about in the Sarasamvadini, he says, we don't accept Pattaksha as valid, but he says there is something called as Vaidusha Pattaksha. Vidhu, Vidhu means knowledge.
Nate Vidhur Swartha, Vidhu means to know. So, Vaidusha Pattaksha means that those who are learned sages, when they observe, their observation is valid. So, Madhavacharya also talks about this as Divya Pattaksha.
So, Jiva Goswami is Vaidusha Pattaksha. So, he says that Maitreya Rishi, what he observed, that is from that Divine Pattaksha. It is from a higher perspective.
So, in the Vedic tradition, if we look at the Bhagavatam cosmology, or in general, the Puranic cosmology, the Bhagavata Puranas, within the Indian tradition also, this cosmology was never used for Jyotish Shastra. In India, there has been an accurate tradition of astrology. And astrology is inextricably connected with astronomy.
Astrology is based on this Murtha is right, this Murtha is wrong, this Murtha is auspicious, this Murtha is inauspicious. How do we determine that? That is by the movement of the celestial bodies. And for hundreds and hundreds and thousands of years, astrology itself could accurately predict the eclipses, the Amavasya, the Purnima, the Ekadashi.
So, we have a working model of the astronomy within the Indian tradition itself. And this model is as accurate in terms of its precision and effectiveness as the modern model. But its explanatory framework is different.
So, okay, how do we predict it? That explanatory framework is different. But as far as the working is concerned, it works equally well. But this model of astrology and the astronomy that you used, it was not the Puranic cosmology.
In the Indian wisdom tradition itself there were two bodies of cosmological knowledge. One body is the Puranic cosmology and the other is what is called the Siddhantic cosmology. The Siddhanta Shastras and the Jyotish Shastras.
So, these describe cosmology in a way that is quite similar to modern cosmology. So, now Maitreya Rishi, when he had mystic vision, he was able to see the cosmos from two different perspectives. So, one perspective is the Siddhantic perspective, which is similar to the modern perspective.
And the other is the Puranic perspective. So, now what exactly is it that he saw and how we can see it? That is not very exhaustively described in the Puranas. Bhaktisiddhanta Prabhupada wrote a Siddhanta book in which he gave some hints for reconciling the two.
He gave some hints, some directions for reconciling them. But still, he has not completed that also. And as of now, the devotees are working in the planetarium model.
They are working in three different directions. One is understanding what is said in the Bhagavatam. Second is linking what is being said in the Bhagavatam with what is said in the Siddhanta Shastras.
And third is linking this body of knowledge with the scientific body of knowledge. And then presenting it to the world. So, each of these is a huge body of work.
And different devotees, different devotees, scientists, devotees, scholars, have worked in different directions to take this forward. But to give a background of this, so now I will conclude with a with a important broad point about faith. See, faith in Krishna and faith in scriptures is not something which can be demanded or legislated.
It is something that has to be individually reposed. Now, if somebody comes to us and says, Prabhu, I just can't believe that there can be mangoes that are so big. You doubter.
You will go to hell if you doubt scripture. No, we can't respond like that to people. Because a person doesn't have faith.
He doesn't have faith. What can that person do at that particular time? So, we have to recognize that faith cannot be demanded or legislated. It has to be reposed and developed.
So, demanded or legislated means you cannot say, have faith. Or we cannot say, everybody, the mangrove has gone, everybody should have faith in the cosmos. We can't legislate like that.
It has to be developed and reposed. Reposed means, okay, I choose to put faith in this. And developed means, naturally faith is developed.
So, how will that happen? So, okay, I will talk about two things now. What happens when that devotee does not have that faith? Does not able to develop or repose that faith? What should be done in this situation? The first point is a broad principle that as Krishna talks about this twice in the Bhagavad Gita. In 3.26 he talks about Don't disturb the minds of people.
And in 17.15 he says Don't speak in ways that are agitating to others. And the ninth offence to the holy name is what? To instruct a faithless person about the glories of the holy name. So, a broader understanding of this is to instruct people about subjects in which they don't have faith.
We don't have to talk about these things. It would be to people who have not yet developed it. So, in general, I gave the whole background to emphasize this point that this is a tool for meditation.
But, if for some people the tool for meditation becomes a tool for agitation. Isn't it? Whenever I think about it, how is it possible? How can I believe such things? I can't find it. Well, the underlying principle of our bhakti is Anukulyasya Sankalpa Pratikulyasya Varjani.
So, whatever is favourable, accept it. Whatever is unfavourable, put it aside. So, now here we are not rejecting it.
We are not rejecting it as God. I can't understand this right now. So, then we can just relegate it to the background and continue on our practice of bhakti.
So, we understand that different people will develop faith differently. And we need to focus on helping people develop faith primarily in the process of Krishna Consciousness. Now, if a person develops faith in Krishna Supremacy, if a person develops faith in the power of the Holy Name, then irrespective of whether the person understands the dimensions of Jammu and Veru Parvat or not, that person can still go back to God.
That is the core thing. In fact, one interesting point which is mentioned in the commentaries by the Acharyas on this section. The Acharyas don't do too much commentaries, but they make a very interesting point.
That the Siddhantic Cosmology is there and the Purani Cosmology is there. So, in the Siddhantic Cosmology, not much is talked about Lakshadweep and Jammudweep. It's talked about, but not much.
And they describe that, why is this not talked about so much? So, they say that, actually, for us who are Earth, Marthiloka, the primary purpose of life is purification. It is actually for the entire material existence, but especially for Earth. And within Earth, for the purpose of purification, we are given a vision of those aspects of the Universe that are important for us, that are relevant for us.
So, we may not be able to see the Meru Parvat, which is very close to us, and we may be able to see the Sun and the Moon, which are very far away from us. And we may not be able to see certain motions of certain kind, although they are actually in the same Boomer Tiller. And certain other things, which are very far away, we might be able to see.
Why is that? Because seeing the Sun, seeing the Moon, they themselves, they are important for astrological calculations, which are important for purification. So, it is by the arrangement of the Lord that we Earthlings, we Earthly residents, have given vision of certain things, and are not given vision of certain things. So, we are given vision of that, which is relevant for us.
Now, somebody may say, what do you mean, if somebody is given vision, somebody is not given vision? This is just your way of saying that, actually something mythological, you are just saying that we are not given vision of that. See, we have to understand that the Universe is like a well managed universal system. Just like, if you have in a company, a big mainframe computer.
In the mainframe computer, there may be different levels of access given to different people. The CEO of the company can access all the data. You know, an ordinary clerk, he can only key in some data and edit some files.
And, for him, even if he opens the D drive or the E drive, he will not even see the other files over there. You know, in computer we have the system capacity of making certain files invisible. So, if in an ordinary computer, we can give different levels of access to different people.
So, why can't Krishna do that within the Universe? So, according to our Adhikar, according to Adhikar, according to our level of authorization, we are given access to different levels of the Universe. So, we, with our material eyes, not just our material eyes, our earthly eyes, we are given vision to the Universe in a particular way. And, that is the way which is talked about in the Jyotish Shastras, in the Siddhant Shastras.
And, based on that observation, we have come up with a particular model, that is what is being talked about in modern science. So, you know, Krishna has, through Universal Dominance, given us a certain level of access. So, as devotees, if somebody else doesn't have faith, then we can't demand that faith.
We tell them to practice Krishna Consciousness. But, if we ourselves find it difficult to have faith on this, we can at least understand this broad principle that there are different levels of access. Universe, because it is Universal Government, different people are given different levels of access.
So, we on Earth are given access, given vision of those things that are relevant for our purification. And, apart from that, there is much more in the Universe, which we cannot see. So, Siddhartha Purno, the best scientist in our moment, and he dedicated practically almost 20-25 years of his life to studying Cosmology.
So, he has written two books, Cosmography and The Streets of the Sacred Universe. So, maybe today in the afternoon, I'll discuss a little bit from those books. All the books are quite technical.
But, there are devotees who have dedicated their life, and they have actually gone a long way in bringing about a dialogue between these. So, if somebody has, somebody is interested in studying these things, so, I'll talk about through perspective and conclusion. First is, if somebody asks a lot of questions to us, the important thing is, rather than just demanding people our faith, or minimizing their interest, what we can do is, we can direct them to these books.
So, these are books written by faithful devotee, Desai Prabhupada. And, they can read these books and, at the very least, by reading Vedic Cosmography, one can understand very clearly, that this cannot be dismissed as pre-scientific superstition or nonsense. There is a profound amount of wisdom about it.
And, if we ourselves have interest, that in general, studying specific sections of the Bhagavatam has to be done, if you want to go deep into that study, it should be done with the guidance of senior devotees. Some special devotees were actually dedicated themselves to the study of this. And then, we can bring it in dialogue.
In the Madhava tradition, their whole mission is to refute Mayavad. The whole mission is to refute Mayavad. In fact, in the Madhava tradition, when a person takes sanyas, the purpose of sanyas is also to establish Vishnu Paraksha, the transcendence of knowledge.
And, they dedicate their whole life. But, how do they study? Actually, they don't study Mayavad directly. They study their own Acharyas commentaries, that refute Mayavad.
Similarly, if you want to study this, if we ask them to start studying modern Cosmography and start studying Vedas, we may get a little bit better. So, if you want to go deep into this, there are devotees who are already doing these things. There is a planetary empty.
And, we can become a part of it. But, for most of us, Vishwa Prabhupada has given like an umbrella of missions. There are many mandates which have to be fulfilled.
And, everybody cannot fulfill every one of the mandates of Shri Prabhupada. Vishwa Prabhupada wanted cow protection. Shri Prabhupada wanted so many things.
So, different devotees may take up different mandates. So, as most of us may not go into this field, so, we study this as service to Shri Prabhupada, and for our own purification, and for, if we are involved in preaching, for our basic understanding, by which we can answer the introductory questions that people may have. And, beyond that, if people have any further questions, we can guide them, depending on their level of interest and their kind of questions, to more senior devotees, who can answer those questions.
And, overall, this section should not be made into a faith issue to judge people. This should not be made into a faith issue for judging people. Do you have faith in this or not? No.
Because faith is something which is organically developed by the practice of devotion. So, it will automatically be developed. And, we can't legislate faith of people.
So, sometimes, again, this is an important point, regarding the moon landing, you know, sometimes devotees unnecessarily emphasize this. Shri Prabhupada did not take one position on the moon landing. He did not say that man did not go to the moon.
That was one of the things that he said. Other time, in this, in an earlier part, he says, they may have gone to Rahu, he says. Another place, he says, okay, they may have gone to moon also.
Prabhupada gives the example that, just like a person comes from another planet, he comes to Sahara desert. And he says, everybody says nothing there and he says, there is no life on planet earth. He may say that and go back.
So, Prabhupada says that they may go there and not access to the moon. So, now, what it happened, we don't know. We don't know actually what happened.
But, you know, there is no need to absolutize a position that Shri Prabhupada himself did not absolutize. There is no need to absolutize a position that Shri Prabhupada did not absolutize. So, suppose, somebody is working in his room.
And he feels that, you know, I know one devotee. He was from Baba Naya, he is working in his room. And he says, you know, I have studied this so much and I find this whole thing a little difficult to believe.
Which is fine, you know, you don't have to take the condition that Shri Prabhupada said this, Shri Prabhupada didn't say. Specifically, that man did not go. Shri Prabhupada several times he qualified, you know.
I don't think they went there. Or even if they, Shri Prabhupada's basic point was, you know, Shri Prabhupada's basic point was that in that time, 1968-69, people were so infatuated by the idea of man going to the moon. Shri Prabhupada's whole point was, okay, what's so great about it? Okay, you go to the moon, but what is, what next after that? Okay, you went to the moon, but after going to the moon, what are we going to do? Eat, sleep, mate and defend? Isn't it? So, from that point of view, that is not, from the point of view of spiritual advancement, from the point of view of actually doing something higher in life, there's nothing very special about going to the moon.
Shri Prabhupada's emphasis in minimizing the moon landings glamorization was that it shouldn't distract people from life's essential purpose. That is, to make spiritual advancement. So, Shri Prabhupada wanted to downplay the glamor that was associated with the moon landing.
So, if we absolutize that one position, then what happens is, there are many people who start agonizing. Okay, did man go to the moon? Did man not go to the moon? Whether man went to go to the moon or not, we all want to go back to Godhead. That is the important thing.
So, we shouldn't unnecessarily disturb people's minds by making this a faith issue. Faith will develop organically by the practice of bhakti. And it is the practice of bhakti that is important.
And even the study of this is a practice of bhakti. So, now if you see, the 10th canto has been the central focus of the Acharyas coming to it. Somebody may say, this is the 5th canto.
How can you say that it is not important? But, it is not that they are saying it is not important. It may not be un-cool to us, right? See, our Acharyas have commented so much on the 10th canto. But Srila Prabhupada emphasized so much, they don't go into the 10th canto too early.
Why? Because, it is not un-cool for the seekers. They may misunderstand Krishna's past tense prematurely. So, depending on a particular seeker's level, certain things will be favorable, certain things will be unfavorable.
So, depending on what is unfavorable, that has to be put in the back burner for the time. And whatever is favorable, has to be moved on. So, I will summarize what I discussed.
I started by talking how within the Bhagavatam, there are 3 different tools for meditating in the afternoon. One as a conceptualization, Virat Rupa. One as an analytical tool, Sankhya.
And one as a model, that is Cosmology. But the focus is meditation on Krishna. Within the Gaudiya tradition, the general focus has been meditation on Krishna through Shuddha Bhakti.
Without any special emphasis on the Bhagavatam cosmology section. Then, within Krishna, within this context, Sri Prabhupada wanted to challenge, weaken, problematize people's blind faith in science and open their minds to alternative ways of knowing. And that was why he took this up and he presented it challengingly.
Then we discussed how there are different that how Pratyaksha Anuvana Shabda reconcile and how our focus is more on the transcendental aspect, Shabda as it talks about transcendental matter. We neither agree nor disagree with Pratyaksha Anuvana Shabda. And I discussed about 2 different things.
One is how to understand this. So, must say there is, within the Vedic tradition itself, there is Siddhantic and the Puranic Cosmology. And these 2, if they are reconciled, then we have a defensible model, an intelligible model, an acceptable working model of cosmology within the Vedic tradition itself.
And I discussed about why the Puranic Cosmology seems to be so different from the way we experience the world because there are different levels of access. So, the Siddhantic Cosmology is related to Jyotish Shastra, which are required for our own purification. But Puranic Cosmology is not directly related to Jyotish Shastra.
It is not directly required for us to calibrate Murta. That's why we are not given the vision to access that. For that, I gave the example of the computer with multi-level access.
And lastly, I concluded with that we shouldn't make this a faith issue. It is the practice of Krishna Consciousness that will enable people to advance in Krishna Consciousness. And we shouldn't absolutize positions that Srila Prabhupada did not absolutize.
Thank you very much. Sorry for going a little over time. We'll have question answers in the afternoon.
Thank you very much. Thank you.