In2-MeC

Wroclaw, Poland
8 November 2004

A letter about the 5th Canto description
of the universe

For many devotees the description of the universe in the 5th Canto of Srimad-Bhagavatam is very difficult to understand. I have a strong desire to understand the universal functions. I did a research about that. The result you can read in short words below.

My intention is to help people and the devotees to understand our philosophy, specially this point since it is very complicated.

If it is possible, please write to me what you think about the description and point out the mistakes I made.

According to the vedic writings, our universe is only one of many. These universes originate at the pores of Mahavishnu, which is a partial extension of God. When He breathes out, they come into existance, and when He inhales, they are again destroyed.

The energy that constitutes the universe is eternal. When it is withdrawn into the pores of the Lord, that energy resumes its pradhana state, which is of an unperceived nature, devoid of qualities. When the Lord breathes out, this energy expands with His breath, assuming the three material qualities. It is then known as guna-prakrti.

Each universe is egg-shaped, filled half-way with water and surrounded by eight layers: earth, water, fire, air, ether and three subtle elements. Each layer is 10 times as thick as the previous layer.

In Srila Prabhupada's translation of Bhag. 3. 26. 52, only 6 layers are indicated. In other places, 7 are counted. Where do you find reference to 8 layers?

The center of each universe is a golden mountain called Sumeru (Meru) which appears as a giant, upside-down golden pyramid standing on its tip. Meru, a Sanskrit term, translates "pyramid". It stands in the center of squarely arranged mountain ranges on a central circular island, which is surrounded by a circular ocean. This ocean is enclosed again by a circular island, etc. .

Are you sure about this translation you've given for meru? I find no such meaning as "pyramid" for meru in the Monier-Williams Sanskrit Dictionary.

Altogether seven islands and seven oceans surround the central island, and each ocean is just as broad as the island, which it surrounds. Each island is twice as broad as the previous, and on each of the islands seven golden mountains stand.

I believe you are mistaken that the 7 mountains on each dvipa are golden. To my knowledge, only Mount Sumeru is golden.

According to the vedic writings, only one galaxy and one sun exist in our universe.

Sumeru and the golden mountains on the seven islands work like an enormous mirror cabinet and are not directly visible to the human eye. We see this galaxy from many different angles and it also appears in many different sizes on account of the multiple reflecitons caused by the golden mountains. We conclude that there are, then, innumerable galaxies. In reality, however, these are only deceptive images. The whole thing with the circularly arranged mountains and Sumeru in the center resembles a golden lotus flower, whose seven islands are like the surrounding soil. In it, innumerable planets circle around, which are maintained in their courses by a cosmic wind.

As in a tornado water and dust particles whirl up, so the planets whirl by cosmic winds carried around mount Meru, and form our galaxy. Scientists designate this as the milky way.

Contrary to other planets, the sun moves around Sumeru on an axle with one wheel, like a one-wheeled chariot.

On one extreme, the seventh island is a high, closed mountain range, on whose burr as in a rail the enormous wheel of the axle runs. The other end the axle rests on top of Sumeru. The sun resides at the center of the axle.

I believe the mountain range upon which the wheel runs is called Manasottara; it is located on Puskaradvipa, the sixth circular island surrounding Mount Sumeru.

The golden mountains on the seven different islands focus the sunlight on Sumeru. The golden Sumeru reflects the focused light on the mountain ranges which are arranged in a square at its base. These ranges absorb the extreme heat and deliver it to the surrounding environment. Because of this, an upwind develops, causing an area of low pressure at Sumeru's base. This negative pressure seeks to right itself and causes a strong descending wind, which manifests itself in form of an enormous whilrwind. This whirlwind maintains the rotation of our galaxy and also of Sumeru , which is connected with the sun by the one wheel axle.

Briefly stated, the sun causes the whirlwind, which likewise carries all the planets, and so the drive for the movement is the sun itself.

This is a mechanistic description of phenomena. The famous 19th-century British scientist Lord Kelvin (William Thomson, 1824-1907), said in his Baltimore Lectures:

I never satisfy myself until I can make a mechanical model of a thing. If I can make a mechanical model I can understand it. As long as I cannot make a mechanical model all the way through, I cannot understand.

The picture you offer of sunshine-absorbing mountains that cause a whirlwind that moves the planets around is not what the 5th Canto Bhagavatam actually states in plain words. Your picture is a mechanistic model that you've imagined to help yourself understand the 5th Canto. But Vedic science is not, at the end of the day, mechanistic. It is personal.

In the Vedic scriptures physical forces are understood to be indicators of personality. The sunshine is an indicator of the demigod Surya. The wind is an indicator of the demigod Vayu. Such demigods are empowered representatives of the Supreme Person, Sri Krsna. On the contrary, mechanistic explanations are impersonal. Lord Kelvin's admission that he could not understand phenomena unless it be explained by a mechanical model reveals a bias in his thinking, a bias in favor of impersonalism.

In Gita Krsna declares the impersonalists to be less intelligent. Of course, impersonalists argue that personalism is less intelligent because it is too easy. But in fact an explanation that is at once the easiest and the most correct is always accepted by intelligent people as the best. The mechanistic approach can never be the easiest nor most correct. In its building of a conceptual machine to explain nature, it is complicated. At the same time, as it tries to answer questions of detail with the machine-model, a question of origin is raised overall: "How did it happen that nature works like a machine?" That question cannot be anwered by the mechanistic approach.

The rapid rotation of the pyramid-shaped Sumeru causes it to appear round. At times, then, it is described as a cone and at others as a pyramid.

This notion you have that Sumeru is shaped like a pyramid is not supported in Srila Prabhupada's books.

Sumeru, illuminated by the sun in the center of the galaxy, appears also to be a sun. Because of the different distances between Sumeru and the surrounding golden mountains, it is subject our view at different times and angles. This is why galaxies seem to appear in different forms and colors.

Another mechanistic explanation. Thing is, when we are considering what the upper regions of the cosmos are like, we would do well to acknowledge that the predominant element here where we live, on the Bhu-mandala, is bhumi, the earthly element--but on the next level up, Bhuvar-loka, bhumi does not predominate. Hence things there do not adhere to the rules of solid matter that condition our lives. Things there are subtle.

The higher you go, the more subtle things get. According to the Vedanta philosophy of Acarya Madhva, Bhuvar, Svarga and Maharlokas are manifest within the linga-sarira (astral plane) of the cosmos, while Jana, Tapa and Satyalokas are manifest within the karana-sarira (causal plane). As we read the Bhagavatam description of these upper regions of the universe, we are introduced to a realm of higher dimensions. Higher dimensions means higher consciousness--an expanded awareness of space, time, energy, spirit, personality, and relationship.

You have imposed a lower-consciousness, solid-matter model of a light-reflecting mechanism upon the upper region of the universe in order to explain why we see what we see at night through a telescope. I think Plato's analogy in Timaeus is much better. He compares human beings to fish underwater. When at night a fish look at the starry heavens above, all it sees is limited and distorted by the medium in which it lives: the water of the ocean. Similarly, we human beings live in a realm of perception that is limited and distorted by solid matter. The fish thinks the water in which he lives extends up to the stars. Similarly, your mechanistic explanation of why we see many galaxies and suns is constructed upon the assumption that solid matter extends up to the stars.

<< Back