Reconciling Puranic Cosmology with The Siddhantas and Western Astronomy/Astrology

Hare Krishna,

Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Bhaktivedanta Swami and His translations and purports to Srimad-Bhagavatam! All glories to Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati and His translations and annotations of Surya-Siddhanta and Siddhanta-Siromani (as Bimala Prasad Datta)! All glories to both Prabhupadas! 

First, I wish to make it clear that I am comparing at least two or three systems here - (1) Puranic cosmology, and (2) astronomy, both (i) eastern (Vedic/Jyotisha) and (ii) western, including (iii) astrology, using both the sidereal and tropical zodiacs. So there is a fair amount of subject matter to reconcile. Also I would like to acknowledge that as Bimal Prasad Datta was awarded the title Bhaktisiddhānta for his work on the Siddhantas before he accepted Abhay Charan De as his disciple (later A. C. Bhaktivedānta Swami), we therefore we cannot dismiss the Siddhantas just because they present a different perspective to the Bhagavatam, as both scriptures have commentaries authored by both Prabhubadas. 

Regarding the differences between Puranic cosmology (the Bhagavatam) and astronomy including both zodiacs (sidereal and tropical) of Vedic Jyotish (the Siddhantas) and Western systems (astronomy and astrology) we encounter an apparent paradox. Surya-Siddhanta, Siddhanta-Siromani and astronomy/astrology are by and large the same, apart from any minor difference between nomenclature and the use of geocentric or heliocentric systems – superficially the geometry may differ but the respective calculations result in the same outcomes for both systems. For the purposes of making observations and erecting charts and horoscopes using the motions and positions of the heavenly bodies there is no technical argument therein. It must be made clear that Puranic cosmology does not deal with any of that - for example Ekadasi is calculated using the jyotisha of the Siddhantas, not the cosmology of the Bhagavatam! 

Using scriptual knowledge and impirical information to arrive at an intellectual and philosophical understanding is bona fide and not the same thing as wild mental speculation about mundane affairs. In fact, one is always encouraged to use one's brain to understand instead of just parroting things like a robot! Inquisitiveness coupled with healthy scepticism may open many a door locked to even the most pedantic lover of doctrinal dogma. 

Personally, in comparing cosmology to astronomy I wouldn't have expected that our solar system could be mathematically reckoned to a cosmological universe. But in researching this I happened to stumble across one possible explanation - Demigod Yojanas! We already know that demigod time is different to Earth Time - so why not distance as well? After all, time and space are both 'dimensions'. Read on if you're interested...

In astronomy the approximate figure of 4 billion miles for the Sun/Pluto distance is a radius, whereas the roughly 4 billion miles wide universe quoted in cosmology is a diameter. This makes our Solar System twice larger at 8 billion miles wide. So, aren't we trying to compare chalk and cheese here? Something else must be going on.

Before we get to the concept of demigod yojanas.... this is not the place to argue about Flat Earth, Moon Landing hoax, fake NASA, etcetera etcetera. Do that somewhere else and at another time. Sticking to what is relevant here, first we must acknowledge that the SB 5th Canto Chapter 22 is a minefield of typos! I will no doubt be accused of fault-finding but really I am just trying to get to the bottom of this and the truth. What I want to bring attention to here (rather than to nit-pick) is that the confusion caused by differences in the two models (cosmology vs astronomy both eastern and western) is compounded many times over by the errata and typos in the 5th Canto. 

Although eastern and western astronomy closely align, if we compare the three models they don't match up, and we're used to that. For example, Lord Brahma's planet Satyaloka at the top of the cosmological universe, being some 2 billion miles above the Sun, would work out to be closer than our astronomical Pluto at roughly 4 billion miles out. This doesn't make any sense - two completely different sized models. 

Now... add in the typos and see how even more confusing it becomes! 

Take Śanaiścara (Saturn) for example. Using the texts from SB 5.22.8-16 or Chart Three at the front of the volume we find that Saturn is 1.3 million yojanas (10.4 million miles) above the Sun in the text - yet from Chart Three it is 1.4 million (11.2 million). 

Which one is it? 

Alas, the figure given by western astronomers is over 70 times that, around 886 million miles, illustrating the vast difference in the sizes of the two models. Adding Pluto to that equation emphasises that even more so. 

Now... SB 5.22.8 re Sun/Moon distance clearly states 'lakṣa-yojanataḥ' and in the translation 100,000 yojanas...

... yet in Chart Three we find the Moon drawn above the Sun by 200,000 yojanas - not 100,000!

Which one is it? 

Nowhere in the slokas or translated verses do we see the Sun referenced as 100,000 yojanas above the Earth. We only see it using the chart (you may also be able to find in English in a purport) but I cannot find that figure anywhere in Sanskrit or the translation - even using online search tools! Why did Śrīla Prabhupāda use NASA's figure of 93,000,000 miles in the purports? And anyway 800,000 miles is nothing like the 93 million miles we are all familiar with. 

Which one is it? 

It is a mystery where the unnamed artist who drew the Chart Three obtained the figure of 100,000 yojanas from for the Earth/Sun distance (perhaps Vishnu Purana?). It's not in the slokas or the translated verses, and can only arrived at by working backwards from the 4 million miles stated in the weird Text 11 purport which comes from the incorrect distances found in Chart Three. Very confusing! 

Further investigation led me to realise just how astronomical the size difference (pun intended) of the two models is, the cosmological universe being a mere fraction of the astronomical universe that uses Light-years to measure vast distances (six trillion, or 6,000,000,000,000 miles approx = 1 light-year). 

I do remember reading elsewhere that a yojana is a relative measurement – which may or may not account for the discrepancy between the two sizes of universe ie Earth vs Demigod yojanas – also it has various values ie 8 miles, 5 miles or 8 kilometres, etc as used by different Jyotish practitioners. 'As far away as a bull can be heard bellowing' and 'as far as one can see clearly' are two examples I have also come across for 1 yojana. Perhaps a yojana means one thing in outer space and another in a paddock? Or a more feasible explanation as one author suggests, is that in the same way that Demigod time is different to Earth time (eg one day of Brahma equals 4.32 billion Earth years) perhaps a Demigod yojana is much, much bigger than an Earth yojana!

https://m.facebook.com/VedicCosmology/posts/our-universe-is-4-billion-miles-in-size-but-is-that-demigod-size-or-earth-size-k/1652037028437556/

This actually makes a lot of sense to me in a way when I take the time to ponder the possibility. For quite some time I have agreed with Richard L. Thompson's view that Vedic Cosmology is described as seen from the Heavenly Planets - perhaps why it seems so perplexing to us. It is no wonder Vedic Cosmology has confused devotees and scholars the whole world over when we try to impose Earth value systems upon it.

We have all heard the expression "Too many cooks spoil the broth". There was more than one editor who worked on Bhagavad-Gītā As It Is, Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam and similar works with the Devanagari, romanised Sanskrit, transliterations, translations, and purports and I think it is safe to say that some have made a few mistakes here and there, as we are all human. This is separate from any confusion caused by any measurement of spatial differences.

Personally I have no objection to the numerous typos in Śrīla Prabhupāda's books - and I am certainly not criticising Him. Not only do I not mind them, I value them - as they provide a valuable function! These typos serve to identify His Divine Grace's original books because they have since been removed from the edited, so-called 'corrected' and changed modern BBTi versions.

Besides, most of the typos are so glaringly obvious as mistakes that they generally don't cloud any meaning. Forr eximple, you moste probbly hav no diffculity unda standing wot this sentence meenz. Similarly with figures, when different numbers describe the same phenomena (such as 10,000 yojanas and 1,000,000 yojanas for the same distance of Siddhaloka below Rahu) we can do the sums in our head and work out with simple arithmetic, which one is correct.

Distances between planets in 5th Canto, Book Two, Chart Three differ not only from the texts - the texts differ from the purports. Even the heavenly bodies change names in some places! It is no wonder Vedic Cosmology has devotees confused the world over. It definitely seems to have confused the editors, proof-readers and typesetters! 

Using both the search engines built into Vanipedia and Gitabase as well as reading and skimming through the actual 5th Canto, I cannot find a single Sanskrit reference to the 100,00 yojana distance between the Earth and the Sun anywhere in the texts (either in the Devanagari script, the Sanskrit, the transliterations, or nor the English translation of the Sanskrit). It appears in Chart Three as 100,000 yojanas; elsewhere in English in the purports varying as either 100,000 yj or 93 million miles; yet not a single mention in the actual Sanskrit slokas - at least not in the 5th canto which deals with our position in the material universe in detail. 

Now, some of you might gloss over my pedantry as being trivial. But as having a western-type triple Virgo symbolism I was born to focus on these sorts of things. If it exists somewhere else in Sanskrit I would be very grateful if someone can show me where - IN SANSKRIT - in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, the Earth/Sun distance is (I am NOT referring to in the English in the purports). As far as I can see there is no reference IN SANSKRIT to either 100,000 yojanas nor 93 million miles which is a NASA figure. I would be very happy to be proven wrong, please do! 

When using the search tools built into Vedabase, Gitabase and Vanipedia, with the words "Sun", "Earth", "distance", "above" in quotation marks - even including the Boolean term AND between them to narrow down the results - I didn't find ANYTHING in the actual Sanskrit-to-English text. There are plenty of references everywhere else but they all use figures based on western astronomy, not Vedic. I guess this is why Śrīla Prabhupāda uses the 93,000,000 figure. As far as I could fathom the actual figure of 100,000 yojanas (or 800,000 miles) comes from the Viṣṇu Purana, not the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam.. but that still doesn't explain how 100,000 yojanas found its way into Chart Three mistakenly as double that figure.

So we have these unusual entries:

#1. SB 5.22.8, the Moon is listed as 100,000 yj above the Sun; whereas in Chart Three it is drawn as 200,000 yj;

#2. SB 5.22.11 is an absolute ripper of an example of errata and typos in 3 ways. The bold text says that the 28 Stars are 1,600,000 miles above the Moon, yet in the purport it reads "above the Sun". The whole purport 5.22.11 says:

"The stars referred to herein are 1,600,000 miles above the sun, and thus they are 4,000,000 miles above the earth (sic)."

 

If we take the Earth/Sun distance as 800,000 miles (and ignore what is written elsewhere in SB about 93 million miles) it can only add up to 3.2 million. The distance of the 28 Stars above the Earth at 4 million miles only adds up using the Chart 3 distance of the Moon being 1,600,000 miles above the Sun instead of 800,000 as it the text. Therefore the 5.22.11 purport is wrong in three ways because it uses: 

a. Double the Moon/Sun distance resulting in the wrong figure;

b. An unexplained figure of 100,000 yojanas for the Earth/Sun distance found nowhere but in the incorrect chart. Nowhere in the body of the text EXCEPT THE PURPORTS is the height of the Sun above the Earth given - and even then in other places it is 93 million miles; and

c. It says the sun and not the moon;

#3. SB 5.24 chapter introduction states re: Siddhaloka, etc are below Rahu "by another 1,000,000 yojanas" whereas 5.24.4 says only 10,000 yojanas;

#4. Chapter 24 goes on to say that the seven Subterranean planets, each the same size as Earth, are 10,000 yj apart. Chart Three shows them situated as starting at 70,000 yj beneath the Earth (which is about 1,000 yojanas diameter according to Surya-Siddhanta). This is also summarised previously in the last verse 5.23.9 which says 30,000 yj below the subterranean planets lies the Garbhodaka ocean some 130,000 yj below Earth. None of this adds up when looking at Chart Three. 

The only way anyone can interpret subterranean as meaning 'inside hollow Earth' is obviously by taking its meaning literally and disregarding the arithmetic. They can't all be the same size as Earth and yet fit inside it! Yes, 'subterranean' means 'below the crust of the Earth'', as in underground - but certainly not below the Earth's plane which is the context in which it appears to be used! Perhaps an overzealous editor substituted or suggested the word not knowing the correct context of 'subterranean'? 

These are just a few typos that I found by double-checking a few chapters of just one book. My point is, the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam is wonderful, but regarding these minor discrepancies, anyone who takes EVERYTHING they read literally, especially the multitude of contradictions in the 5th Canto, is sure to be getting the wrong picture. Perhaps they spent a little too much time experimenting in Haight-Ashbury during the 60s? Maybe that explains how some people can accommodate both a Flat Earth and a Hollow Earth at the same time… 

From what I have read, besides Giriraj who was very qualified and did most of the editing and proofing before anything was sent to the printers, there were others who at various times may have 'helped' eg typed, copied manuscripts, dotted the i's and crossed the t's etcetera to get everything ready for printing. We take it as a given that the Devanagari script, Sanskrit romanisation, word-for-word transliteration, and all the text translations were all done by highly qualified and experienced people. You will be hard-pressed to find any mistakes there.

It is in the purports that we invariably find all the discrepancies, not just typographical errors, for in some places the information is for the wrong sloka, partially scrambled, or completely incorrect, rendering it very confusing to the reader. This is where I suspect some garden-variety editors made very human mistakes.

We all agree that Śrīla Prabhupāda's Bhagavad-Gītā As It Is and Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam are masterpieces. As I have said before, the typos that they do contain help identify them as the originals because subsequent edited and altered editions don't have them. Therefore they serve a valuable purpose rather than detract from the greater body of work.

No-one can deny that human error has crept into the editing of SP's books. These listed typos are proof of that. Yet it does not stop us from marvelling at these most sacred of scriptures. 

In your service, 

Sam 

Hare Kṛṣṇa

हरे कृष्ण

'Country' is now .com

DYK: originally internet sites had a simple suffix like .com cos they were all in the USA. Nowadays it should be .com.us for the septic tanks. 

Now we have separate domain suffixes (ccTLDs) for each country. One day the Official Office for Political Correctness and Cancel Culture (OOPCCC) will adjust this xenophobic anomaly and like the covid-19 variants that have been assigned Greek letters of the alphabet (short for alpha and beta, the first two letters) the OOPCCC will annihilate any reference to country.

This will greatly annoy Australian Aborigines who delight in making constant reference "to country". In future this will be referenced as "to .com" with no suffix. Traditional owners will be replaced by URLs and servers as the soon to be extinct culture is effectively 'dead'.

Poor choice of words I know because of the connotations of genocide. Regardless, Latin and Sanskrit are considered 'Dead Languages' and I see no reason to classify native culture as alive as it is 99.9% only practised ceremoniously. When was the last time you saw a Koori draped in wallaby skins with a spear in hand hunting warrigul? Smoking gum trees aside, there is little that remains.

Of course one could argue that colonisation wiped out their livelihood, decimated the countryside and demolished their lifestyles so they can no longer exist in the traditional way. Which is entirely true. And so is the claim that Aboriginal culture is dead - a remnant that exists only in museums and in the odd fragmented outskirts of Never-Never Land. 

Which brings me to my next point - how geographical isolation has similarly dissolved (like melting ice) in the 20,000 years since the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM). We see globalisation and interbreeding that is unheralded in times past. Cultures and ethnic groups have survived cut off from each other in the past, but recent technological developments have brought everyone together. Indeed it is entirely foreseeable that at some point in the future racial, nay, genetic distinctions may entirely disappear. 

Surely as a human race (I use the term loosely as there is no scientific genetic basis for human races) we can all envisage ourselves as moving towards one great big melting pot of humanity. Barring some monumental catastrophe or world war it is an inevitable, logical progression. It is geographical isolation alone that is responsible for skin colour. There is no gene. Same for hair type, eyelid shape, you name it.

I cannot stress this point enough to any of you anthropologists out there. The biblical (and Vedic) references to a Great Flood bear many similarities to the Big Melt after the LGM. Consider that when (and if) the world froze over, cultures and civilizations were forced to retreat (head for the hills?) and got cut off from each other, leading to a loss of connection, cultural lore and social progress. Effectively this is the origin of the supposed Cave Man concept.

Now consider this. One theory is that the Himalayas are the only major mountain chain that runs east/west and affords protection from advancing glaciation. This left the Indian Subcontinent warm, fertile, and hospitable - and culturally connected. This is the basis of their claims to being the oldest civilization on Earth.

However, a potential flaw in that theory presents itself as the Urals and Mongolian Ranges which may have afforded Orientals with a similar survival opportunity - even if they were 'cut off' from India. Likewise we have Australia - and Africa - not connected to the Poles in any way, and unlikely to suffer glaciation except in the vicinity of Mt Kilimanjaro perhaps (the highlands of Australia are actually lowlands in comparison, Mt Kosciuszko is but a pimple on the landscape). To a smaller extent we have the Swiss Alps sheltering Italy and Greece. No doubt Scandinavia didn't fare too well… 

... or it is why they are so hardy! Those Vikings! 

Realistically it is only the Americas with the North-South chain of the Andes that have this LGM doomsday feature. Perhaps that explains the push for the theory. Anyfuckenwhatever, we have these indisputable facts:

1. At the time of the LGM, cultures were geographically separated/isolated.

2. Due to lower sea levels (from glaciation) there were land bridges that have now disappeared that facilitated intercontinental migration.

3. With successive generations of localised interbreeding, distinct physical characteristics became identifiable. 

4. Due to tunnel vision of 'scientists' this led to the spurious 'Race Theory', now proven false. 

5. Martians are preoccupied with anal probing. Not true, I just thought this discussion was getting boring and needed a bit of spicing up. 

6. As a historical account, the Bible and its Great Flood may be chronologically incorrect but otherwise may indeed be factual. 

7. Regarding Darwin's evolution theory, the LGM might explain how he got it so wrong. There is no evidence of one species morphing into another. This is parallel to H.G.Wells or Isaac Asimov science fiction. Where is the Missing Link? It has never been answered. There are no fish whose scales turn into feathers and they end up flying.

8. Questionable, but worth considering: if in fact folk had better memories in olden days (pre LGM), that would explain why oral tradition played such a huge part and writing was an unnecessary 'development'.

9. Progress is actually the opposite. We are killing off the very thing that sustains us. Pollution, toxic waste, deforestation, species extinction, loss of habitat, loss of plain fucking sense.

Nice Police

 More stories pour moi.. 

Interesting story, I was asked (86-87) if I had a pilot's licence driving back from a Rye gig once. They saw my gear in the back of the Kingswood. "The Senior Sergeant would like to hear some 12 bar"... so I got the bass out, rested the body against the fender (the panel, not the amp) and rattled off Blue Suede Shoes.

No breathalyser, they were satisfied that I was in control, let me off. "just take it a bit easier driving the rest of the way to Rosebud, Mr Treloar". The Senior Sergeant played saxophone and was apparently suitably impressed.

Next: driving back from the Royal gig Wed or Thurs in M'ton, got pulled over speeding near the Briars. Blew over, the lady copper wanted me to accompany them back to the station for a proper blood test but I protested saying I didn't want to risk leaving my gear in the car on the side of the road in the dead of night.

She took my keys, said "sit right there, I'll be back" and got back into the divvy van and made some calls. A couple of minutes later she opened the driver's door and said "move over" and drove me home to McCrae. On the way I asked what I blew. She said she wasn't supposed to tell me but because I was only 0.06 they figured that by the time they got back to the station and cranked up the machine there was a fair chance I'd be under and it wasn't worth the trouble. They stuck a canary on my car and I paid the speeding fine

When the time came to present my car at Dromana cop shop for inspection after I'd fixed it, Sgt Alvin Aitkens (or something like that) said ok. I said aren't you going to look at it, he said no, you wouldn't be here unless you fixed it. The same guy rocked up one day to serve a summons for a bloke that used to live in the flat I was renting. He looked down at the dope plant growing in a pot on my porch. "What's that?" he asked. "A tomato?" I replied. "Can you get rid of it?"

"Eventually..." I replied. He leant down, pulled it out, and without saying a word, walked away.

Alvin picked me up hitch-hiking years later in Red Hill South in the pissing rain. I said "What is it with you Alvin? You're a good bloke. I've never been given a lift by a policeman before. You're different.. How come?" 

Alvin replied, "I joined the Force because I wanted to serve the community". I got the feeling he wasn't at all on some sort of power trip, didn't want to chase after criminals or shoot them, just wanted to be a well-oiled cog in society.

Yet another story: driving back from a gig in Portsea, was looking for a bottleshop in Rosebud but it was after hours. Got pulled over outside Woolies, he took one look at my licence, asked what my sister's name was, said he knew her, took my car and said "walk home, come and pick it up at the Boneo station tomorrow when you're sober". When I got there it had a tag on the keys "yellow shit box Ford". But no canary! Good coppers! 

The moral of the story? I think most trained Police can spot a criminal in an instant. If you aren't one, unless you are being really rude or they're not a nice person, they will treat you with respect. Sure, I've had some brush ups with coppers that weren't exactly sterling silver but generally they're a great boon to society. Except the crooked ones.

A Covid Reality - or Devotee Conspiracy Theory?

First of all I must declare that I find it rather awkward for me to state my reasoning from my observations lest it be faulty or offends some.

All religion, mysticism, yoga etc begins with asking you to accept as truth a paradigm that has no obvious present manifestation, be it Jesus, Brahman, or Krishna. The Bible and the teachings of Jesus Christ have been handed down for centuries but no-one really knows for sure how accurate they are or whether in fact the parables can be correctly attributed to Him. The practising mystic focuses on the formless Brahman and the aspiring yogi on the Supreme Lord even where there is no evidence they exist.

And take the Bhagavad Gita, which is supposedly narrated by a blind clairvoyant and clairaudient who relates to the King what is happening on the battlefield of Kurukshetra far away. If you cannot accept or at least entertain this possibility then you are never going to accept the Gita. None of us in our normal human state of consciousness can see Jesus, Brahman or Krishna. Anyone who can is regarded as gifted, visionary, or self-realised. Yet for the neophyte approaching and attempting to embrace spirituality the only tools they have are belief, and later, faith - that is, until (and if) they come face-to-face with and can directly see God.

So it is not surprising to find that those aspiring on varied spiritual and/or religious paths may believe in some rather bizarre ideas.

In 2020, covid-19 brought with it a shipload of conspiracy theories – some quite plausible, but most of them utterly ridiculous. In general, participants of counter-culture such as devotees do not trust governments and western society, usually for good reason. We therefore expect to see sentiments ranging from anti-establishment to those bordering on anarchy. But this global catastrophe has exposed just how gullible sheepish people can be, falling for conspiracies about it being a population control experiment, a fake pandemic (how can you have both!?!) involving Bill Gates, UN & the Great Reset, engineered bioweapons, claims of face mask 'danger', vaccine microchipping and altered DNA, caused by 5G, etc.

    Don't worry, the government isn't going to kill you - but the virus just might! Here's something I prepared earlier:

"Covid has exposed cultish elements in some ex-iskcon devotees. I have witnessed several posting online every conspiracy theory ad nauseum - even tired flim-flam disproven long ago. No-one seems to check authenticity even - they're more concerned with showboating their latest discovery or revelation rather than a truthful exposé. It's so ridiculous it's not even funny. Here's some of the nonsense (followed by sense):

The vaccine will enable authorities to track you via an injected microchip - 

No. The said microchip is on the vessel to track expiry date etc.

The vaccine will alter your DNA - 

No. Messenger RNA (known as mRNA for short) never enters the nucleus of any body cells and only interacts between them via dendrites.

YouTube videos show Bill Gates has planned the whole thing - 

No. The said videos are edited/respliced/arranged and contrived to imply things he never said.

5G causes covid by excitation of the oxygen in your blood - 

No. It is true that 5G uses oxygen molecules to efficiently transmit signals over short distances - how 5G works - but if you had free oxygen molecules in your blood you'd be dead in seconds. Yes, free oxygen molecules in the air (0₂) become excited by the 50-300 Gigahertz radio wave spectrum, but oxygen in the blood is bonded with iron (FeO) in haemoglobin and is unaffected."

Can I stop now? You get the point.

Wuhan bat soup. Population control experiment. Engineered bioweapon. World Bank & IMF global wealth redistribution. Vegan immunity. Quack cures - drink bleach or straight vodka. Fake pandemic. Face masks are suppression muzzles…"

I have known former devotees who, out of uniform, have behaved as bad as, if not worse than, your average Joe Blow. After all, we're only human, and Hare Krishnas are no different when they 'come to rest in their normal state'.

Certain types of people are prone to believing in conspiracy theories - especially those with cognitive biases that filter out any information that doesn't conform to preset conceptions of how they perceive reality to operate. If it doesn't fit, it's rejected. This effectively cuts off all learning as it stops new information from being assimilated and processed. It never even gets a foot in the door.

Cognitive bias is when a set of prejudged concepts form a closed loop and anything and everything outside that loop is rejected as false. Most conspiracy theories are not based on evidence but on belief or faith in the CT. This lack of evidence is used by CTers as 'proof' because it is 'hidden by the conspirators'. This is known as circular thinking and doesn't actually accomplish anything or distinguish fact from fiction. Furthermore, CTers argue that the very term 'conspiracy theory' is manufactured purely as a slur to discredit them, thus deepening their conviction that they alone are privileged to have the secret knowledge of what is going on that the general public is ignorant of. Often in life the simplest explanation will suffice but these kinds of people always look for the most complicated possible cause, because according to their point of view everything is very, very convoluted - and for them, it always is.

Most of us in society innocently use technology with no ulterior motives, and those who believe there is always a conspiracy involved may either suffer from a personality disorder ranging from alienation and depression to delusional paranoia or some form of serious mental illness such as schizophrenia. Yes, Big Tech wants to mine your data because that's how they make money. Yes, there are nasty people who want to screw with us, but they are probably working alone – or, much more likely, in competition with each other – rather than colluding in some sort of massive joint effort against us. Collectively they see us as a pool of resources but generally they are fighting amongst themselves to get the lion's share. There is no need for any covert conspiracy. It is all out in the open. It is all part of the two-faced society we live in - survival of the fittest and goodwill to all mankind. We all need each other to live yet at the same time we compete.

Once upon a time there lived a frog in a well. He started out life as a tadpole in the nearby lake, but later as an adult he went exploring and fell in the well. Unable to get out he survived by drinking from the small pool at the bottom. One day a sparrow landed on the edge of the well and told the frog about how she'd just flown over the Atlantic Ocean. "It was so vast," said the sparrow, "that I barely made it across". "Oh really?" asked the frog. "How big is it? Is it larger than this pool of water?" The sparrow replied, "Oh, much bigger than that". The frog asked if it was larger than the nearby lake. "Much, much bigger" said the sparrow, "you can't possibly imagine". "No I can't. I think you must be telling fibs."

Going around in circles on the same conspiracy websites reinforces the 'frog in the well' philosophy, unaware or unwilling to even look into alternative explanations and refusing to accept that there is another world outside our tiny brain's reasoning. All we need to do is accept that illusion is the work of Māyā and that the actual conspiracy is that God is hidden from us – and that whatever philosophy we invent or whatever thoughts we think, we may then believe to be the truth. It could all be nonsense - including and especially our paranoid conspiracy theories.

For me the strangest part of the whole pandemic is that not only has it highlighted the usual ISKCON devotee anti-establishment sentiment - something that has existed since the movement's beginnings in the 60s - it has exposed a completely distrustful attitude to the extent that it appears to be more like cynicism. In fact some ex-ISKCON devotees so fully embrace the whole raft of Covid-19 conspiracies without any discretion whatsoever that their clique resembles a cult more than a traditional lineage of bhakti devotion.

Some of those who become devotees are distressed - therefore qualifying as one of the four kinds of people who are attracted to Kṛṣṇa consciousness. As wonderful as the process of bhakti-yoga is, many of us struggle to rise above the platform of kanishtha, and only a few truly qualify as madhyama-adhikaris, able to quote the relevant scripture at will and thus defeat any argument put to them.

So it is not surprising that when devotees leave ISKCON, especially after the Zonal Acharya System fiasco, they may resume their former consciousness albeit on a somewhat minimally higher level, yet may be disillusioned, disheartened and very suspicious of others and the world in general.

Certainly a small number (a minority) of ISKCON devotees are genuine seekers only interested in the Supreme Absolute Truth, but generally that isn't the case. Perhaps over ninety percent are motivated by the "what's in it for me" principle. But we've only got to look at the monsters that have been exposed in ISKCON – the weirdo splinter groups, the drug fiends, the smugglers and gunrunners, paedophiles, misogynists, homosexual gurus (an oxymoron if there ever was one, as bona fide gurus are always celibate), child abusers, etc., not to forget the secretive cultish subset – to realise that some people who join the movement are really messed-up... not to mention the messed-up fringies like me that never even joined up in the first place!

It is not as simple as reciting some Holy Names over and over or repeatedly uttering transcendental sound vibrations that one's heart is totally purified at once - or even marginally cleansed over time. Certainly there is an automatic effect regardless of the chanter's proficiency due to the power of the Holy Name. But when offences are committed - like thinking about sense gratification or thinking the chanting is weak or ineffective or taking too long - then the process is nowhere near as potent and productive as it could be.

I know from personal experience that my imperfect recitation of the Lord's Holy Name millions of times has not transformed me into any kind of enlightened being or made me a powerful guru. After all, we have trillions and trillions of sins from billions of lifetimes and therefore we cannot expect immediate results from absent-mindedly mumbling a few phrases over and over. Obviously my chanting is on a very basic level as a neophyte and I ought not expect astonishing results.

Those of us who are driven by guilt may frantically chant in desperation. On the other hand some of us are merely trying to raise our consciousness up from the proverbial gutter. For those wanting instant results from performing a mystic process this is bound to be disappointing. If we are patient and sincere we will humbly accept whatever progress we make with gratitude, knowing we are one step closer to our destination. For me, to make an analogy with a journey from Australia to India, so far I may have left Point Leo on the Mornington Peninsula but I'm still to reach the outer Melbourne suburbs - let alone be airborne on a flight to Mumbai!

We all know it is very difficult to escape the clutches of Māyā and overcome illusion. But we should not avoid personal responsibility for our failures and blame conspiracy theories for thwarting our efforts at spiritual progress. There are plenty of obstacles already in place by Māyādevi's power. To dwell constantly on the faults of this world is unproductive and a waste of time. Certainly it is wise to be wary for there is always evil lurking but it should not take up any more of our brain space other than to make a note of it, be vigilant, and move on.

हरे कृष्ण हरे कृष्ण कृष्ण कृष्ण हरे हरे हरे राम हरे राम राम राम हरे हरे

Hare Kṛṣṇa, Hare Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa Kṛṣṇa, Hare Hare,

Hare Rāma, Hare Rāma, Rāma Rāma, Hare Hare.

We choose our mindset and therefore our karma/future/destiny

Research reveals that if a reader doesn't agree with what an author writes they will quickly move onto something else. You only have a few chances to grab their attention somehow. By the third sentence you've either lost them or won them over.

They call this selective '_ _ _ _ _ _ _' (insert noun here). It may be selective cognition, selective attention, selective perception, selective reasoning based on selective recall, or how about this one - selective memory, often used by politicians when sitting in the witness box.

We know what we like and don't like. These preferences dictate pretty much the whole of our lives. It is only when we face a dilemma - when the feedback from reality says it isn't working - that we take the time to look deeper or explore outside of ourselves for other possibilities. 

Sense gratification involves our sense organs, the object of our senses, and the network of nerves that connects it all to our brain via electrochemical stimuli. Different stimuli produces different hormones and complex molecular compounds which then affect our mood. Like rats up the proverbial labratory corridor we are treated by commercial interests as mere money-making lifeforms that predictably repeat the same things over and over. For those moguls it is simple - give the consumer what they want and the public will hand over their money without so much as a blink of the eye.

Now.. if you have read this far it means you are most likely open to suggestions about how you can change your life. I'm not going to sell you anything. I'm not going to waste my time trying to get you to agree with my way of thinking. All I am going to do is respect you because you are aware that you have choices in life and know you don't have to react knee-jerk fashion to social elbowing, including the latest fashion, popular buzz words, facebook memes and trending wokeisms.

Congratulations. Keep up the good work. Most don't even realise they have choices!