The Couch

The Universes Have Always Existed!

Comments on The Universes Have Always Existed!

Thinker13
Senior Member
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 27, 2009

Total Topics: 357
Total Comments: 3379
Posted 08/29/12 - 2:21 PM:
Subject: The Universes Have Always Existed!
Whenever anyone used to put question before Buddha-the-Gautama: "When was universe created?" His standard answer was: "It has always been there."

If you consider matter, which is illusory potency of supreme personality of Godhead Shri Krishna, you realize that it's true.

There have been three( and only three entities) quintessential entities always(because there has never been a 'beginning.')


These entities are: Krishna(God/Brahm), Jeevas(Souls) and Maya(matter/universes/illusory-potency).

Krishna is superconscious, Jeevas have tiny consciousness in comparison whereas Maya is inert.

Billions upon billions of universes come into existence when Mahavishnu(an expansion of supreme personality of Godhead Krishna) exhales. These universes come out from pores of his body and when he inhales they merge back into him.

But the illusory potency Maya which was invested in the universes stays same.

Jeevas which come to play and dance in universes do so until those universes merge back into Mahavisnu and then they all go for sleep unless they have attained love for Krishna, in which case only they reach Goloka(or Vaikuntha if devotee is of Vishnu), otherwise they have to rest inside Mahavishnu till next cycle of creation of universes. Then again molecular Mayic play and liberation, or devotion or sleeping again inside Mahavishnu.

But the universes which subside into Mahavishnu don't die, neither they were created in an actual sense.

They have always existed inside him and will always exist inside him.

Such is Krishna's divine play with one fourth of his potencies.

Three fourth of his potencies are in Paravyoma--spiritual sky--which are not known to anyone.

Even Big-Bang model has been replaced by Big-Boom model which suggests the cosmic cycles of expansion and contraction of universes which hint towards eternal nature of created universes.
SUNLIGHT
Senior Member
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 28, 2012
Location: united kingdom

Total Topics: 64
Total Comments: 931
Posted 08/30/12 - 3:37 AM:

good post thinker thumb up interesting reading ...peace
Thinker13
Senior Member
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 27, 2009

Total Topics: 357
Total Comments: 3379
Posted 08/30/12 - 9:34 AM:

SUNLIGHT wrote:
good post thinker thumb up interesting reading ...peace



Thanks Sunlight. Glad that you liked it. nod
SUNLIGHT
Senior Member
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 28, 2012
Location: united kingdom

Total Topics: 64
Total Comments: 931
Posted 08/30/12 - 2:47 PM:

Thinker13 wrote:



Thanks Sunlight. Glad that you liked it. nod

..................................................................

while i was reading it the memory again came into my mind about reading long long ago , that when god breathes out things are created and come into existence and when he breathes in again everything returns to him , now i clearly remember readind about the time periods involved between the outgoing breath and the ingoing breath but it was so long ago when i read it that i cant remember the figures involved, so my question is , how long was it between the brathing out and the breathing in again ? i know figures were mentioned but i cant rememer them , can you remember them thinker ?smiling face

Edited by SUNLIGHT on 08/30/12 - 2:53 PM
thedoc
Senior Member
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Sep 15, 2011

Total Topics: 41
Total Comments: 982
Avatar thedoc
Posted 08/30/12 - 4:41 PM:

There seem to be several stories that describe how long the universe will endure, not related to scientific estimates. One most relavent to the OP is that Bramah (I think that is correct) is dreaming the universe into existance and occasionally stirs at which point the universe disapears and when he sleeps again he dreams a new universe into existance.

Another speaks of a high stone wall where every 100 years a sparrow flies over carrying a silk scarf in it's beak dragging it over the top of the wall. When the wall is completely worn down, from this, the universe will end.

The other concerns a puzzle called the 'Tower of Brhama'. The legend states that there are 3 posts, and on one of which, there are 64 gold disks of progressivly smaller size. And in a monistary in India there are monks working the puzzle. The object is to move the disks from one post to another, moving one disk at a time and never placing a disk on top of a smaller disk. The estimate, moving one disk per second is that it will take 585 billion years to complete the puzzle. I think we have plenty of time according to that.
Thinker13
Senior Member
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 27, 2009

Total Topics: 357
Total Comments: 3379
Posted 08/31/12 - 12:06 AM:

SUNLIGHT: Those figures are beyond our calculation.

Consider this: Bramha, who is one of the creators, created this universe.

A four headed Bramha created our universe so it's a very small universe in comparison to the universes created by ten-headed, thousand-headed, billion-headed Bramhas.

These Bramhas are created by an expansion of Krishna called Narayana.

Bramhas are born from navel-lotus of Narayana.

Bramha's age is called Para.

Para is 3110 Kharab, 40 Arab years.

100000= 1 lakh
100 lakh= 1 crore
100 crore= 1 arab
100 arab= 1 kharab


In a day of Bramha 71*14 Mahayugas happen.

1 Mahayuga is Sata+Treta+Dwapara+Kaliyuga

Kaliyua= 10%
Dwapara=20%
Treta=30%
Satayuga=40% of one Mahayuga.

71 Mahayuga= 1 Manvantara.

{ A Manu(Adam) lives for one Manvantara }

14 Manus come in one day of Bramha.

A Bramha lives for 100 days.

Mahavishnu is beyond imagination then because there is no way to conceive number of universes sustained during the time interval of his inhalation and exhalation.

Krishna is beyond Mahavishnu. Mahavishnu is one of his expansions from 1/4th of his potencies.

3/4th of his potencies are in Paravyoma--spiritual sky which is unknown to even greatest of sages.

Sources: Bhagvata Purana, Chaitanya Charitamrita etc.
Thinker13
Senior Member
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 27, 2009

Total Topics: 357
Total Comments: 3379
Posted 08/31/12 - 5:10 AM:

thedoc:

I have heard about impersonalist Bramh view that universe is a dream but I don't endorse it anymore; neither do a lot of devotees and Hindu scriptures.

I have not heard about second story.
thedoc
Senior Member
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Sep 15, 2011

Total Topics: 41
Total Comments: 982
Avatar thedoc
Posted 08/31/12 - 2:06 PM:

All this is interesting Mythology, but we can really know nothing outside of this one existing Universe. Science is discovering that, but all else is Myth and speculation.
SUNLIGHT
Senior Member
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 28, 2012
Location: united kingdom

Total Topics: 64
Total Comments: 931
Posted 09/03/12 - 8:13 AM:

thedoc wrote:
All this is interesting Mythology, but we can really know nothing outside of this one existing Universe. Science is discovering that, but all else is Myth and speculation.
.
.....................................................................

.smiling faceit would be very difficult discovering things on a SPIRITUAL plane by using instruments developed for use on a MATTERIAL plane rolling eyes





Thinker13
Senior Member
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 27, 2009

Total Topics: 357
Total Comments: 3379
#10 - Quote - Permalink
Posted 09/03/12 - 10:22 PM:

SUNLIGHT wrote:
.
.....................................................................

.smiling faceit would be very difficult discovering things on a SPIRITUAL plane by using instruments developed for use on a MATTERIAL plane rolling eyes








Actually that is 'impossible,' in my opinion.

If you churn a bucket full of milk for enough long you will get cream.

If you churn a bucket full of calcium water even for a billion years you cannot get cream.

The world and matter are expressions of Maya--the illusory potency of Godhead and to search for lasting happiness in it is like churning calcium water in hope of getting milk from it.
SUNLIGHT
Senior Member
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 28, 2012
Location: united kingdom

Total Topics: 64
Total Comments: 931
#11 - Quote - Permalink
Posted 09/04/12 - 6:25 AM:

Thinker13 wrote:



Actually that is 'impossible,' in my opinion.

If you churn a bucket full of milk for enough long you will get cream.

If you churn a bucket full of calcium water even for a billion years you cannot get cream.

The world and matter are expressions of Maya--the illusory potency of Godhead and to search for lasting happiness in it is like churning calcium water in hope of getting milk from it.

......................................................................
I completly agree thinker thumb up smiling face
thedoc
Senior Member
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Sep 15, 2011

Total Topics: 41
Total Comments: 982
Avatar thedoc
#12 - Quote - Permalink
Posted 09/04/12 - 9:28 AM:

Likewise it is impossible to determine the nature of the physical world with instruments developed for the spiritual plane. Mythology and Religion do not teach the science of the material Universe.
SUNLIGHT
Senior Member
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 28, 2012
Location: united kingdom

Total Topics: 64
Total Comments: 931
#13 - Quote - Permalink
Posted 09/05/12 - 8:11 AM:

thedoc wrote:
Likewise it is impossible to determine the nature of the physical world with instruments developed for the spiritual plane. Mythology and Religion do not teach the science of the material Universe.

...................................................

In the 1st millenium before CHRIST many nations had FALSE assumtions about the earth , some believed tha earth and heavens were carried on the back of a giant called ATLAS , some believed it was supported on pillars, EASTERN thought was that the earth was carried on the back of a huge fish that swam thought the sea of ETERNITY , but in the darkness of these beliefs there shone a ray of LIGHT , in the book of JOB are written these words.
.........................................

Job 26:7
New International Version
He spreads out the northern [skies] over empty space; he suspends the earth over nothing.

smiling face




thedoc
Senior Member
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Sep 15, 2011

Total Topics: 41
Total Comments: 982
Avatar thedoc
#14 - Quote - Permalink
Posted 09/05/12 - 10:22 AM:

In Job there are also references in ch 38 by God of laying the foundations of the Earth and setting it's cornerstone, clearly suggesting that the Earth was built on something. There are also several other references in other books of the Bible of the 'four corners' of the Earth implying that the Earth is like a square table top which would be supproted by something. Again I will say, Mythology is not science.
thedoc
Senior Member
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Sep 15, 2011

Total Topics: 41
Total Comments: 982
Avatar thedoc
#15 - Quote - Permalink
Posted 09/05/12 - 10:40 AM:

As far as 'Universes - plural' we can observe and learn about only one, the one in which we exist, everything else is speculation. Religion is not science, and tells us little or nothing about the physical universe.
Thinker13
Senior Member
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 27, 2009

Total Topics: 357
Total Comments: 3379
#16 - Quote - Permalink
Posted 09/05/12 - 11:14 PM:

There is a difference between Mythology and History. The word 'Purana' means 'History'. Sage Veda-Vyasa has written 18 Puranas and Mahabharata along with other books and Bhagvata Purana is best of Puranas.

The descriptions I have given about universes come from Bhagvata Purana and Caitanya Caritamrita.

The earth was considered round and milky way galaxy was described along with many constellations in Bhagvata Purana.

Before getting it written down, Bhagvata Purana was in oral circulation for at least a few thousand years.

I am not arguing that religion is Science but it takes a little faith to investigate and an open mind as well.

You can read Bhagvata Purana with an open mind and it's available online and see for yourself.smiling face


Before twentieth century hardly any scientist considered possibility of 'multiverse' seriously. Puranas had it thousands of years ago that there are billions upon billions of universes with same kind of molecular dance as this one.

Arjuna was able to attack with a nuclear bomb and take it back as well whereas tiny atom bomb of Hiroshima-Nagasaki could be only used to attack and can't be taken back once it has started its action.

Indians had a very developed Science indeed--but unlike modern Science they were all investing it to search for eternal-bliss-Krishna.
Thinker13
Senior Member
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 27, 2009

Total Topics: 357
Total Comments: 3379
#17 - Quote - Permalink
Posted 09/05/12 - 11:20 PM:

Link: Veda-Base
Caitanya Mahāprabhu describes Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam as the spotless Purāṇa because it contains transcendental narrations of the pastimes of the Supreme Personality of Godhead Śrī Kṛṣṇa. The history of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is also very glorious. It was compiled by Vyāsadeva, who drew from his mature experience of transcendental knowledge under the instruction of Śrī Nārada Muni, his spiritual master. Vyāsadeva compiled all the Vedic literatures - the four Vedas, the Vedānta-sūtra or Brahma-sūtras, the Purāṇas and the Mahābhārata. Yet he was not satisfied until he wrote Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. His dissatisfaction was observed by his spiritual master, and consequently Nārada advised him to write on the transcendental activities of Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa. Śrī Kṛṣṇa’s transcendental activities are specifically described in the Tenth Canto of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, the canto that is considered to contain the substance of the whole work. One should not approach the Tenth Canto immediately but should approach it gradually by developing knowledge of the subject matters first presented.

Generally a philosophical mind is inquisitive to learn of the origin of all creations. When one who is philosophical sees the night sky, he naturally raises questions about the stars, how they are situated, who lives there, etc. All these inquiries are quite natural for a human being, for the human being has a greater developed consciousness than the animals. In answer to such an inquiry, the author of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam says that the Lord is the origin of all creations. He is not only the creator but the maintainer and annihilator as well. The manifested cosmic creation is created at a certain period by the will of the Lord, is maintained for some time and is finally annihilated by His will. Thus He is the supreme will behind all activities.

Of course there are atheists of various categories who do not believe in the creator, but that is due simply to their poor fund of knowledge. The modern scientist creates rockets, and by some arrangement or other they are thrown into outer space to fly for some time under the control of a scientist far away. All the universes and the innumerable planets within them are similar to such rockets, and they are all controlled by the Personality of Godhead.

In the Vedic literature it is said that the Absolute Truth, the Personality of Godhead, is the foremost amongst all living personalities. All living beings, from the first created being, Brahmā, down to the smallest ant, are individual living entities. Even above Brahmā there are many other living beings with individual capacities. The Personality of Godhead Himself is also a living being and is as much an individual as the other living beings. However, the Supreme Lord is the supreme living being, and He has the greatest mind and possesses the supermost inconceivable energies in great variety. If a man’s mind can produce rockets and spaceships, it is conceivable that a mind higher than man’s can produce superior things. A reasonable person will accept this argument but stubborn, obstinate people will not.
SUNLIGHT
Senior Member
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 28, 2012
Location: united kingdom

Total Topics: 64
Total Comments: 931
#18 - Quote - Permalink
Posted 09/06/12 - 6:53 AM:

QUOTE THINKER13 : it is conceivable that a mind higher than man’s can produce superior things. A reasonable person will accept this argument but stubborn, obstinate people will not.
...........................................
Well said clap
thedoc
Senior Member
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Sep 15, 2011

Total Topics: 41
Total Comments: 982
Avatar thedoc
#19 - Quote - Permalink
Posted 09/09/12 - 11:55 AM:

Calling Mythology History does not change what it is.

I guess all religions have their share of literalists.
Thinker13
Senior Member
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 27, 2009

Total Topics: 357
Total Comments: 3379
#20 - Quote - Permalink
Posted 09/09/12 - 11:15 PM:

thedoc wrote:
Calling Mythology History does not change what it is.

I guess all religions have their share of literalists.



It's not you or I who decide what Mythology or History is, but they're distinct. smiling face

If you have a written record of your ancestors' lives(your father, uncle, grandfather etc), that might contain some errors(even a lot of them unless there has been enough careful effort to maintain them) but that would not be called Mythology; no, that would be family history.

Indian Puranas are carefully recorded history by greatest of sages. Since it's a matter of thousands upon thousands of years of history, it's not easy to validate each and everything with our modern equipments and intelligence, especially without being a devotee or a spiritual person(since all of it was religious) but to run into dismissing it as Mythology with an eye of skeptic is naive and disappointing; in the same way if you reject that Alexander or Napoleon or Socrates ever existed or did anything useful!

Edited by Thinker13 on 09/09/12 - 11:28 PM
SUNLIGHT
Senior Member
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 28, 2012
Location: united kingdom

Total Topics: 64
Total Comments: 931
#21 - Quote - Permalink
Posted 09/10/12 - 10:05 AM:

QUOTE THINKER 13 :but to run into dismissing it as Mythology with an eye of skeptic is naive and disappointing; in the same way if you reject that Alexander or Napoleon or Socrates ever existed or did anything useful!
.....................................

smiling faceWell said thinker thumb up
thedoc
Senior Member
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Sep 15, 2011

Total Topics: 41
Total Comments: 982
Avatar thedoc
#22 - Quote - Permalink
Posted 09/10/12 - 10:06 AM:

Thinker, from your answers, I don't think you understand what Myth really is. Since you claim that this was religious and spiritual it is Mythilogy.
Thinker13
Senior Member
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 27, 2009

Total Topics: 357
Total Comments: 3379
#23 - Quote - Permalink
Posted 09/10/12 - 11:15 AM:

thedoc wrote:
Thinker, from your answers, I don't think you understand what Myth really is. Since you claim that this was religious and spiritual it is Mythilogy.



Merriam Webster wrote:

Definition of HISTORY

1
: tale, story
2
a : a chronological record of significant events (as affecting a nation or institution) often including an explanation of their causes
b : a treatise presenting systematically related natural phenomena
c : an account of a patient's medical background
d : an established record <a prisoner with a history of violence>
3
: a branch of knowledge that records and explains past events <medieval history>
4
a : events that form the subject matter of a history
b : events of the past
c : one that is finished or done for <the winning streak was history> <you're history>
d : previous treatment, handling, or experience (as of a metal)
See history defined for English-language learners »
See history defined for kids »
Examples of HISTORY

I studied history in college.
a professor of medieval history
They were one of the greatest teams in history.
It was one of the most destructive storms in modern history.
It was a period in American history when most people lived and worked on farms.
The history of space exploration is a fascinating topic.
He wrote a well-known history of the British empire.
The book begins with a brief history of the Internet.



Merriam Webster wrote:

Myth
a : a usually traditional story of ostensibly historical events that serves to unfold part of the world view of a people or explain a practice, belief, or natural phenomenon
b : parable, allegory
2
a : a popular belief or tradition that has grown up around something or someone; especially : one embodying the ideals and institutions of a society or segment of society <seduced by the American myth of individualism — Orde Coombs>
b : an unfounded or false notion
3
: a person or thing having only an imaginary or unverifiable existence
4
: the whole body of myths
See myth defined for English-language learners »
See myth defined for kids »
Examples of MYTH

It's an enduring myth that money brings happiness.
I don't believe the myths and legends about this forest.
Contrary to popular myth, no monster lives in this lake.


If I say that all Puranas and characters therein are mythical figures, I would mean that neither they existed nor their powers, nor the universes and realms described in them---that they are works of imagination, whereas if I suggest that they're history, that means they all did exist and were not fabricated out of author's imagination!
thedoc
Senior Member
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Sep 15, 2011

Total Topics: 41
Total Comments: 982
Avatar thedoc
#24 - Quote - Permalink
Posted 09/10/12 - 1:36 PM:

Unfortunately Merriam Webster's definition, while popular, is not quite correct. Sectiion 2-b, and section 3, are incorrect, and are only based on a false popular usage. I reject these sections and refer to a Myth as relating a truth about our relationship to the Universe. In the examples 'Myth' should be replaced with the word 'Fantasy' or 'Fiction' to be accurate.

To be more correct Mythology is a particular form of History.
Thinker13
Senior Member
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 27, 2009

Total Topics: 357
Total Comments: 3379
#25 - Quote - Permalink
Posted 09/10/12 - 11:45 PM:

thedoc wrote:
Unfortunately Merriam Webster's definition, while popular, is not quite correct. Sectiion 2-b, and section 3, are incorrect, and are only based on a false popular usage. I reject these sections and refer to a Myth as relating a truth about our relationship to the Universe. In the examples 'Myth' should be replaced with the word 'Fantasy' or 'Fiction' to be accurate.

To be more correct Mythology is a particular form of History.


In which case, we don't have any difference of opinion about Mythology/History.

Cheers.
Search thread for
Download thread as
  • 0/5
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5



Sorry, you don't have permission . Log in, or register if you haven't yet.



Acknowledgements:

Couch logo design by Midnight_Monk. The photo hanging above the couch was taken by Paul.

Powered by WSN Forum. Free smileys here.
Special thanks to Maria Cristina, Jesse , Echolist Directory, The Star Online,
Hosting Free Webs, and dmoz.org for referring visitors to this site!

Copyright notice:

Except where noted otherwise, copyright belongs to respective authors
for artwork, photography and text posted in this forum.