All the universes are clustered together up and down, and each and every one of them is separately sevenfold-covered. The watery portion is beyond the sevenfold coverings, and each covering is ten times more expansive than the previous covering. The extent of the cosmic phenomenon is calculated to be diametrically (both ways) four billion miles. Then the coverings of the universe begin. The first stratum of the covering (earth) is calculated to extend eighty million miles, a...nd the subsequent coverings of the universe are respectively of fire, effulgence, air and ether, one after another, each extending ten times further than the previous. (SB 2.2.28 p.)
1 yojan = 8 miles = 12,8 km
Dhruvaloka, the polestar, is 3,800,000 yojanas above the sun. Above Dhruvaloka by 10,000,000 yojanas is Maharloka, above Maharloka by 20,000,000 yojanas is Janaloka, above Janaloka by 80,000,000 yojanas is Tapoloka, and above Tapoloka by 120,000,000 yojanas is Satyaloka. Thus the distance from the sun to Satyaloka is 233,800,000 yojanas, or 1,870,400,000 miles. The Vaikuntha planets begin 26,200,000 yojanas (209,600,000 miles) above Satyaloka. Thus the Visnu Purana describes that the covering of the universe is 260,000,000 yojanas (2,080,000,000 miles) away from the sun. (SB 5.23.9 p.)
From decoding 5 th canto of srimadbhagvatam
This phenomenal material world is expanded to a diameter of four billion miles,... (Srimad Bhagavatam 3.11.40 Sri Maitreya to Vidura)
The statement above made by Sri Maitreya Muni is straightforward and exact.
Learned scholars who are free from mistakes, illusions and propensities to cheat have thus described the planetary systems and their particular symptoms, measurements and locations.
With great deliberation, they have established the truth that the distance between Sumeru and the mountain known as Lokaloka is one fourth of the diameter of the universe — or, in other words, 125,000,000 yojanas [1 billion miles].
(Srlmad Bhagavatam 5.20.38; Srila Sukadeva Gosvami to Maharaja
Pariksit)
The diameter of the universe is plainly stated by Srila Sukadeva Goswami to be pahcdsat-koti (500,000,000 yojanas or four billion miles.) Since there is agreement between the acaryas what is the need for speculation on this subject?
"A Radical Position"
To say that everything outside a four-billion-mile diameter shell is imaginary
is indeed a radical position. It is practically indefensible within modern society.
Unlike Darwin's theory, which has numerous scientific flaws (as admitted recently by many serious scientists), the "Universe Within Four Billion Miles Theory" cannot be supported by scientific evidence or arguments. If you doubt this, please consult with some scientists and see.
For certain there was no one more radical than Srila Prabhupada when it came to opposing modern scientific theories.
He tested them in the laboratory of the Bhagavatam and then gave his pronouncement. Of course we are not saying that "everything" outside the four-billion-mile diameter shell is imaginary, there are layers, then trillions of other universes, then paravyoma, etc.
We do not have a narrow vision of cosmology, it is far vaster that the modern scientists can imagine even using their millions of light year calculations.
We do say that the estimates given for the distances of planets within our visible sky by astronomers are inaccurate because they do not tally with the Bhagavatam. Otherwise, if we do not accept fully the Bhagavatam, what does it mean to see through the eyes of the shastra.
We should not be intimidated by the scientists.
For a common man, both modern science and Vedic wisdom are simply to be accepted because none of the statements either of modern science or of Vedic literature can be verified by him.
!['This phenomenal material world is expanded to a diameter of four billion miles,... (Srimad Bhagavatam 3.11.40 Sri Maitreya to Vidura)
The statement above made by Sri Maitreya Muni is straightforward and exact.
Learned scholars who are free from mistakes, illusions and propensities to cheat have thus described the planetary systems and their particular symptoms, measurements and locations.
With great deliberation, they have established the truth that the distance between Sumeru and the mountain known as Lokaloka is one fourth of the diameter of the universe — or, in other words, 125,000,000 yojanas [1 billion miles].
(Srlmad Bhagavatam 5.20.38; Srila Sukadeva Gosvami to Maharaja
Pariksit)
The diameter of the universe is plainly stated by Srila Sukadeva Goswami to be pahcdsat-koti (500,000,000 yojanas or four billion miles.) Since there is agreement between the acaryas what is the need for speculation on this subject?
"A Radical Position"
To say that everything outside a four-billion-mile diameter shell is imaginary
is indeed a radical position. It is practically indefensible within modern society.
Unlike Darwin's theory, which has numerous scientific flaws (as admitted recently by many serious scientists), the "Universe Within Four Billion Miles Theory" cannot be supported by scientific evidence or arguments. If you doubt this, please consult with some scientists and see.
For certain there was no one more radical than Srila Prabhupada when it came to opposing modern scientific theories.
He tested them in the laboratory of the Bhagavatam and then gave his pronouncement. Of course we are not saying that "everything" outside the four-billion-mile diameter shell is imaginary, there are layers, then trillions of other universes, then paravyoma, etc.
We do not have a narrow vision of cosmology, it is far vaster that the modern scientists can imagine even using their millions of light year calculations.
We do say that the estimates given for the distances of planets within our visible sky by astronomers are inaccurate because they do not tally with the Bhagavatam. Otherwise, if we do not accept fully the Bhagavatam, what does it mean to see through the eyes of the shastra.
We should not be intimidated by the scientists.
For a common man, both modern science and Vedic wisdom are simply to be accepted because none of the statements either of modern science or of Vedic literature can be verified by him.
The alternative for a common man is to believe either of them or both of them. The Vedic way of understanding, however, is more authentic because it has been accepted by the acaryas, who are not only faithful and learned men, but are also
liberated souls without any of the flaws of conditioned souls.
The modern scientists, however, are conditioned souls liable to so many errors and mistakes; therefore the safe side is to accept the authentic version of Vedic
literatures, like Srimad- Bhagavatam, which is accepted unanimously by the great acaryas. (Srimad Bhagavatam 2.2.26 Purport)
It is not scientific for astronomers to theorize about a universe to which they have such little access. Neither is it wise to assign unverifiable distances to objects seen in the sky through telescopes and insist this is the only feasible explanation.
There are so many flaws in that empirical approach where observation and experiment are lacking, what to speak of the total absence of proof.
1) deficient material telescopes
2) our proneness to making mistakes
3) using one's imperfect eyes
4) being subject to illusion
5) using limited brains
6) using restricted intelligence
7) tendency to cheat
This vivid description of how the rays of the sun are distributed throughout
the different planetary systems of the universe is very scientific . Sukadeva
Gosvami described these universal affairs to Maharaja Pariksit as he had heard about them from his predecessor. He explained these facts five thousand years ago, but the knowledge existed long, long before.
Sukadeva Gosvami received it through disciplic succession. Because this
knowledge is accepted through the disciplic succession, it is perfect.
The history of modern scientific knowledge, on the contrary, does not go back more than a few hundred years.
Therefore, even if modern scientists do
not accept the other factual presentations of Srimad-Bhagavatam, how can they deny the perfect astronomical calculations that existed long before they could imagine such things?
There is so much information to gather from Srimad-Bhagavatam. Modem scientists, however, have no information of Other planetary systems and, indeed, are hardly conversant with the planet on which we are now living. (Srimad Bhagavatam 5.20.37
Purport)
Attempting to discover universal truths by telescope, mathematics and imaginativeness is defective from the outset.
Vaisnavas are not supposed to be concerned with the current theories about the size of the universe presented by the cavalcade of dying so-called scientists.
As far as we are concerned, we follow the authority of Vydsadeva and Sukadeva Gosvami, who have described the universal situation according to the Vedic literature.
These authorities differ from modern scientists who conclude from their imperfect sensual experience that only this planet is inhabited by living beings whereas the other planets are all vacant or full of dust. (Srimad Bhagavatam 7.4.17 Purport'](https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xpa1/v/t1.0-9/1619349_363677110493275_7402633967166270812_n.jpg?oh=a912582878055f34a4e0963720b418f1&oe=55B6B878&__gda__=1433826629_07f4ad2c73144146e4b43689cb085f98)
The alternative for a common man is to believe either of them or both of them. The Vedic way of understanding, however, is more authentic because it has been accepted by the acaryas, who are not only faithful and learned men, but are also
liberated souls without any of the flaws of conditioned souls.
The modern scientists, however, are conditioned souls liable to so many errors and mistakes; therefore the safe side is to accept the authentic version of Vedic
literatures, like Srimad- Bhagavatam, which is accepted unanimously by the great acaryas. (Srimad Bhagavatam 2.2.26 Purport)
It is not scientific for astronomers to theorize about a universe to which they have such little access. Neither is it wise to assign unverifiable distances to objects seen in the sky through telescopes and insist this is the only feasible explanation.
There are so many flaws in that empirical approach where observation and experiment are lacking, what to speak of the total absence of proof.
1) deficient material telescopes
2) our proneness to making mistakes
3) using one's imperfect eyes
4) being subject to illusion
5) using limited brains
6) using restricted intelligence
7) tendency to cheat
This vivid description of how the rays of the sun are distributed throughout
the different planetary systems of the universe is very scientific . Sukadeva
Gosvami described these universal affairs to Maharaja Pariksit as he had heard about them from his predecessor. He explained these facts five thousand years ago, but the knowledge existed long, long before.
Sukadeva Gosvami received it through disciplic succession. Because this
knowledge is accepted through the disciplic succession, it is perfect.
The history of modern scientific knowledge, on the contrary, does not go back more than a few hundred years.
Therefore, even if modern scientists do
not accept the other factual presentations of Srimad-Bhagavatam, how can they deny the perfect astronomical calculations that existed long before they could imagine such things?
There is so much information to gather from Srimad-Bhagavatam. Modem scientists, however, have no information of Other planetary systems and, indeed, are hardly conversant with the planet on which we are now living. (Srimad Bhagavatam 5.20.37
Purport)
Attempting to discover universal truths by telescope, mathematics and imaginativeness is defective from the outset.
Vaisnavas are not supposed to be concerned with the current theories about the size of the universe presented by the cavalcade of dying so-called scientists.
As far as we are concerned, we follow the authority of Vydsadeva and Sukadeva Gosvami, who have described the universal situation according to the Vedic literature.
These authorities differ from modern scientists who conclude from their imperfect sensual experience that only this planet is inhabited by living beings whereas the other planets are all vacant or full of dust. (Srimad Bhagavatam 7.4.17 Purport
Dhruvaloka, the polestar, is 3,800,000 yojanas above the sun. Above Dhruvaloka by 10,000,000 yojanas is Maharloka, above Maharloka by 20,000,000 yojanas is Janaloka, above Janaloka by 80,000,000 yojanas is Tapoloka, and above Tapoloka by 120,000,000 yojanas is Satyaloka. Thus the distance from the sun to Satyaloka is 233,800,000 yojanas, or 1,870,400,000 miles. The Vaikuntha planets begin 26,200,000 yojanas (209,600,000 miles) above Satyaloka. Thus the Visnu Purana describes that the covering of the universe is 260,000,000 yojanas (2,080,000,000 miles) away from the sun. (SB 5.23.9 p.)
From decoding 5 th canto of srimadbhagvatam
This phenomenal material world is expanded to a diameter of four billion miles,... (Srimad Bhagavatam 3.11.40 Sri Maitreya to Vidura)
The statement above made by Sri Maitreya Muni is straightforward and exact.
Learned scholars who are free from mistakes, illusions and propensities to cheat have thus described the planetary systems and their particular symptoms, measurements and locations.
With great deliberation, they have established the truth that the distance between Sumeru and the mountain known as Lokaloka is one fourth of the diameter of the universe — or, in other words, 125,000,000 yojanas [1 billion miles].
(Srlmad Bhagavatam 5.20.38; Srila Sukadeva Gosvami to Maharaja
Pariksit)
The diameter of the universe is plainly stated by Srila Sukadeva Goswami to be pahcdsat-koti (500,000,000 yojanas or four billion miles.) Since there is agreement between the acaryas what is the need for speculation on this subject?
"A Radical Position"
To say that everything outside a four-billion-mile diameter shell is imaginary
is indeed a radical position. It is practically indefensible within modern society.
Unlike Darwin's theory, which has numerous scientific flaws (as admitted recently by many serious scientists), the "Universe Within Four Billion Miles Theory" cannot be supported by scientific evidence or arguments. If you doubt this, please consult with some scientists and see.
For certain there was no one more radical than Srila Prabhupada when it came to opposing modern scientific theories.
He tested them in the laboratory of the Bhagavatam and then gave his pronouncement. Of course we are not saying that "everything" outside the four-billion-mile diameter shell is imaginary, there are layers, then trillions of other universes, then paravyoma, etc.
We do not have a narrow vision of cosmology, it is far vaster that the modern scientists can imagine even using their millions of light year calculations.
We do say that the estimates given for the distances of planets within our visible sky by astronomers are inaccurate because they do not tally with the Bhagavatam. Otherwise, if we do not accept fully the Bhagavatam, what does it mean to see through the eyes of the shastra.
We should not be intimidated by the scientists.
For a common man, both modern science and Vedic wisdom are simply to be accepted because none of the statements either of modern science or of Vedic literature can be verified by him.
The alternative for a common man is to believe either of them or both of them. The Vedic way of understanding, however, is more authentic because it has been accepted by the acaryas, who are not only faithful and learned men, but are also liberated souls without any of the flaws of conditioned souls.
The modern scientists, however, are conditioned souls liable to so many errors and mistakes; therefore the safe side is to accept the authentic version of Vedic
literatures, like Srimad- Bhagavatam, which is accepted unanimously by the great acaryas. (Srimad Bhagavatam 2.2.26 Purport)
It is not scientific for astronomers to theorize about a universe to which they have such little access. Neither is it wise to assign unverifiable distances to objects seen in the sky through telescopes and insist this is the only feasible explanation.
There are so many flaws in that empirical approach where observation and experiment are lacking, what to speak of the total absence of proof.
1) deficient material telescopes
2) our proneness to making mistakes
3) using one's imperfect eyes
4) being subject to illusion
5) using limited brains
6) using restricted intelligence
7) tendency to cheat
This vivid description of how the rays of the sun are distributed throughout
the different planetary systems of the universe is very scientific . Sukadeva
Gosvami described these universal affairs to Maharaja Pariksit as he had heard about them from his predecessor. He explained these facts five thousand years ago, but the knowledge existed long, long before.
Sukadeva Gosvami received it through disciplic succession. Because this
knowledge is accepted through the disciplic succession, it is perfect.
The history of modern scientific knowledge, on the contrary, does not go back more than a few hundred years.
Therefore, even if modern scientists do
not accept the other factual presentations of Srimad-Bhagavatam, how can they deny the perfect astronomical calculations that existed long before they could imagine such things?
There is so much information to gather from Srimad-Bhagavatam. Modem scientists, however, have no information of Other planetary systems and, indeed, are hardly conversant with the planet on which we are now living. (Srimad Bhagavatam 5.20.37
Purport)
Attempting to discover universal truths by telescope, mathematics and imaginativeness is defective from the outset.
Vaisnavas are not supposed to be concerned with the current theories about the size of the universe presented by the cavalcade of dying so-called scientists.
As far as we are concerned, we follow the authority of Vydsadeva and Sukadeva Gosvami, who have described the universal situation according to the Vedic literature.
These authorities differ from modern scientists who conclude from their imperfect sensual experience that only this planet is inhabited by living beings whereas the other planets are all vacant or full of dust. (Srimad Bhagavatam 7.4.17 Purport
No comments:
Post a Comment