Comments Posted By brhad bala
Displaying 1 To 6 Of 6 Comments
So, if you have more faith in your own mental reasoning and the consensus of modern day scientists, rather than that of the pure devotee who is above the four defects of conditional life, then I wish you luck on this journey.
âA foolish person who manufactures his own ways and means through mental speculation and does not recognize the authority of the sages who lay down unimpeachable directions is simply unsuccessful again and again in his attempts.â (SB 4:18:5)
At the present moment it has become fashionable to disobey the unimpeachable directions given by the acharyas and liberated souls of the past. Presently people are so fallen that they cannot distinguish between a liberated soul and a conditioned soul. A conditioned soul is hampered by four defects: he is sure to commit mistakes, he is sure to become illusioned, he has a tendency to cheat others, and his senses are imperfect. Consequently we have to take direction from liberated persons. This Krishna consciousness movement directly receives instructions from the Supreme Personality of Godhead via persons who are strictly following His instructions. Although a follower may not be a liberated person, if he follows the supreme, liberated Personality of Godhead, his actions are naturally liberated from the contamination of the material nature. Lord Chaitanya therefore says: âBy My order you may become a spiritual master.â One can immediately become a spiritual master by having full faith in the transcendental words of the Supreme Personality of Godhead and by following His instructions. Materialistic men are not interested in taking directions from a liberated person, but they are very much interested in their own concocted ideas, which make them repeatedly fail in their attempts. Because the entire world is now following the imperfect directions of conditioned souls, humanity is completely bewildered.
Comment Posted By brhad bala On 01.08.2009 @ 22:46
If youâd like to debate and argue with conspiracy theorists, then go ahead and waste valuable time speculating with them. However, if you want to discredit the statements made by the Founder Acharya, I suggest you reconsider. A shakti-avesa-avatar has a direct conscious connection with Brahman, Paramatma, and Bhagavan â the source of all knowledge. I would like to personally suggest you evaluate and study the statements Srila Prabhupada has made in this regard, and try to understand the context and meaning of these statements. Just because one doesnât understand them, or make sense of them, doesnât mean they are false or contradictory. If you take to studying them seriously, in time, you will gain realization and understanding of the factual truths His Divine Grace has given. This is the task for all of us. In this regard, so many examples can be given as to how this process works. The example of factually knowing oneâs father is perfect in this case. If the mother is truthful, good, and not in ignorance, she can tell her child who the father is. If sheâs in ignorance of the fact or is a cheater, thatâs a different story. So, knowledge of the father can be acquired through a reputable mother, and that is most efficient and conclusive. The child, if he wishes, can then also personally realize this truth (to satisfy his own doubts) in his own analytical observations/studies through empiricism â a paternity test. However, if you start from the lower platform, with empiricism (the paternity test), then you can search your entire life and not reach the conclusive truth. You risk beginning with the wrong hypothesis and arriving at the wrong conclusion. This is not blind religious faith. It is a logical scientific process as well as a genuine process for transmitting true knowledge. When Srila Prabhupada was unfamiliar with something, he would say that he doesnât know. Srila Prabhupada is not omniscient, but he is free from the four defects. Just like in one of the video recordings where devotees are asking him technical questions on how to record and lay down audio tracks of him singing. He says. âI donât knowâŠyou know better.â So make sure you thoroughly understand the statements made by His Divine Grace before you become quick to criticize. This my friend is a great offense.
Comment Posted By brhad bala On 01.08.2009 @ 22:46
You state, âVery large vacuum chambers are barely within reach of modern science. â in order to omit the possibility of a studio replication.
I am not a film or special effects expert. Thatâs why I stated âifâ it could be replicated. I am not implying the presence or absence of a âvacuum chamberâ or any other unsubstantiated factors. I am simply leaving room for possible outcomes to the truth, unlike your absolute statements in regards to this topic. Therefore, If you are trying to convince or prove to the dedicated followers of His Divine Grace, something based on erroneous prone empirical and hypothetical analyses (such as the moon landing), which contradicts statements made by His Divine Grace, you are simply wasting your time.
When I said âEverything we are considering here is solely based on speculationâ, I am referring to individual opinions of the moon landing based on individual subjective conclusions, rather than through genuine objectivity.
âWhat do I base this assertion on?â
The fact that you, myself, nor anyone else on this forum, has personally been, or known a person to have been, on the moon. Only a small handful of individuals claim to have been to the moon and they have not, and do not welcome/allow open scientific questioning or interview analyses on the event (except the one brief laughable press conference that followed after their claim of victory).
Personally, I donât care if man ever set foot on the moon. Nor do I think it matters to most devotees, or even the public. I am not debating whether or not man landed on the moon. What I am in disagreement with are your statements concerning the science of guru viddhi. âJust try to learn the truth by approaching a spiritual master. Inquire from him submissively and render service unto him. The self-realized souls can impart knowledge unto you because they have seen the truth.â (BG 3:34)
Comment Posted By brhad bala On 01.08.2009 @ 22:45
Iâm sorry to have not been concise enough in my examples and statements for you to follow. Please allow me to try again.
You state, âThere is a consensus among researchers worldwide that the behavior of the dust and movements of the astronauts in the lunar footage is nearly impossible to duplicate even with nowadaysâ CGI technology, let alone in the late 60.â
You must be referring to the same consensus that accepts and proposes the Big Bang as the origin of all that exists with no possibility of a personality to initialize it, evolutionary theory, the consensus that there is no such existence of a God or soul. Are you proposing that a consensus of modern scientists is transcendental to the four defects? Please tell me you are not betting the whole house on the consensus of modern scientists and your own imperfect reasoning. If so, thatâs fine. However, I would not suggest propagating it amongst transcendentalists. Empiricism vs. spiritualism is not a debate thatâs going to end up with any agreed conclusion, except disagreement. Now, I am not saying that empiricism is completely ineffective or a bad thing, but it definitely has its limitations in arriving at truth. I experience this in my own scientific field on a daily basis. Just one historical gross example is that the consensus of modern nutritional science has understood that protein is a most necessary component of healthy eating. In fact, throughout the 1950s it was a consensus amongst nutritional researchers that the more red meat one consumes, the better oneâs health will be. So we can all see (unless blinded by modern scientific dogma) a consensus of modern scientists is hardly exempt from defects. So you trying to validate your point by citing âconsensus among researchersâ is pretty weak and certainly prone to error.
(SB 5:14:26 Purport)
In this material world, so-called scientists, philosophers and economists are nothing but cheaters in one way or another. The scientists are cheaters because they present so many bogus things in the name of science. They propose going to the moon, but actually they end up cheating the entire public of large sums of money for their experiments. They cannot do anything useful. Unless one can find a person transcendental to the four basic defects, one should not accept advice and become a victim of the material condition. The best process is to take the advice and instructions of Sri Krishna or His bona fide representative.
Comment Posted By brhad bala On 01.08.2009 @ 22:43
So, the moon landing is no different. Srila Prabhupada stated his position very clearly, consistently and publicly. I propose that for those devotees who doubt the opinions and positions of our acharyas, especially those of His Divine Grace, should check their false ego with truthfulness and humility. They should evaluate their faith in the other statements made by our acharyas in regards to all other topics. I have not directly realized that the Supreme form of God is a blackish cowherd boy that plays a flute, and everything is emanating from Him alone. However, I have directly realized several things in my life, that at one time I had difficulty in understanding and accepting. But, I have never realized anything that Srila Prabhupada stated, to be untrue or false. Therefore, I will be sticking with the acharyas on this one, and all others.
The moon issue is not really an issue, unless you want it to be. Besides, it is only a very small percentage of people who actually care. Letâs leave it up to the Vaisnava cosmologists, like Bhaktisiddanta Thakur, and the others of our modern time for introspection on this matter.
Comment Posted By brhad bala On 28.07.2009 @ 07:00
When speaking of planetary orbits (sun around earth, or earth around sun) it is all a matter of relative perspective/location when referring to the cosmos. Since we are viewing things from the earthly platform, it would make sense to say the sun orbits the earth since that is our point of perspective. Either way, it doesn’t matter because all orbits are anchored on polaris (the polestar), according to the Vedic version.
When discussing something as the “supposed” moon landing, a couple of things come to mind. First, if the moon landing can be replicated in a filming studio, that would leave open the possibility of a “hoax” or cheating. Second, everything we are considering here is solely based on speculation. The exception to this is the process of accepting knowledge/information from an authority. The question is, âWho do I accept as an authority for authentic/factual information?â My teachers from school? The news media? NASA? Text books that have a tendency to change and outdate themselves every year or so? Conspiracy theorists? My parents? The consensus of the general public? EtcâŠ Or, the Supersoul/jagat-guru/the acharyas/the exalted vaisnavas? All motives aside, we must accept an authority for receiving any kind of knowledge. Either way, it is faith alone. Faith in ones own mind and senses, or faith in a superior authority?
For instance, there are many things described in Srimad Bhagavatam that 99.9% of us have no direct realization/experience of. The Supreme Personality of Godhead in His innumerable forms such as Lord Nrsimha. Therefore, our faith is built by our surrender to the acharyas. We can see how with every bit of advancement we make that their statements and words become more and more realized as truth. We directly experience that. This way our faith becomes realized and directly perceived. It is NOT blind faith, it is good logic.
Comment Posted By brhad bala On 28.07.2009 @ 06:59