How to accept some parts of Srimad Bhagavatam Canto Five - As It Is

Nityananda! Gauranga! Hare Krsna!

Dear devotees here is some of my writings and thoughts about some parts of Srimad Bhagavatam Canto Five, regarding the descriptions of cosmology etc. I  have copied this from a discussion on another forum where the Fifth Canto debates often appear. I thought this writing may be of benefit to some of our family here.

aspiring service...Nava.

Bhagavad Gita As It Is Chapter Nine Verse Seventeen

I am the father of this universe, the mother, the support and the grandsire. I am the object of knowledge, the purifier and the syllable oḿ. I am also the Rg, the Sama and the Yajur Vedas.

PURPORT
The entire cosmic manifestations, moving and nonmoving, are manifested by different activities of Krsna's energy. In the material existence we create different relationships with different living entities who are nothing but Krsna's marginal energy; under the creation of prakrti some of them appear as our father, mother, grandfather, creator, etc., but actually they are parts and parcels of Krsna. As such, these living entities who appear to be our father, mother, etc., are nothing but Krsna. In this verse the word dhata means "creator." Not only are our father and mother parts and parcels of Krsna, but the creator, grandmother and grandfather, etc., are also Krsna. Actually any living entity, being part and parcel of Krsna, is Krsna. All the Vedas, therefore, aim only toward Krsna. Whatever we want to know through the Vedas is but a progressive step toward understanding Krsna. That subject matter which helps us purify our constitutional position is especially Krsna. Similarly, the living entity who is inquisitive to understand all Vedic principles is also part and parcel of Krsna and as such is also Krsna. In all the Vedic mantras the word oḿ, called pranava, is a transcendental sound vibration and is also Krsna. And because in all the hymns of the four Vedas � Sama, Yajur, Rg and Arthva � the pranava, or omkara, is very prominent, it is understood to be Krsna.

I cannot extract one part of Bhagavatam as absolute truth, ie Canto Ten Krsna Lila, and reject another part, ie Canto Five, as mundane or imperfect.
So how to reconcile these things? That is not easy to explain for me. Firstly Srila Bhaktivinoda's understandings in the above quotes,  from Sri Krsna Samhita, I have posted in this topic do not minimize the completeness, perfection, and total absolute nature of the whole Bhagavatam. That is very important in my understanding and realization, and faith.
Basically I see the Bhagavatam as Srila Vyasadeva's perfect samadhi, and therefore his expression in written word. I accept this by faith. A very advanced stage of Krsna consciousness would be able to see the Bhagavatam as 'the spotless purana'. Such was the vision of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu. This is why regular reading of the Bhagavatam is recommended by Sri Caitanya and all his direct associates.
Some would justify Sri Caitanya's words by saying, 'oh yes it is spotless because the Bhagavatam extols Bhakti as the highest goal. Pure.' But a closer study of the Bhagavatam reveals that it caters for all transcendentalists. There is Jnana, Yoga, etc.
So why did Sri Caitanya call it spotless? In my humble opinion for the very same reason Srila Prabhupada called it spotless. For it is without defect! How is this so with apparent paradox like the fifth canto and tenth canto?
Simply because it is the expression of the samadhi of Srila Vyasadeva. It is directly from the spiritual realm.
Can we disect Tenth canto apart from other sections of this book. Or is there a deeper Krsna conscious way to see the book in its totality as all perfect, without any mundane taint? Maybe we can attain that developed vision by aspiring the service of the mahatmas.
Quote: BG 9.17
All the Vedas, therefore, aim only toward Krsna. Whatever we want to know through the Vedas is but a progressive step toward understanding Krsna. That subject matter which helps us purify our constitutional position is especially Krsna.
If the vedic literature is also Krsna, there must be no mundane attribute in it. Only by very advanced Krsna consciousness will we understand why Srila Prabhupada and other mahatmas can say authoritively, vedic litertaure is 'all spiritual - non different to Sri Krsna'.
Quote: BG 9.19
By analyzing all these different energies of Krsna, one can ascertain that for Krsna there is no distinction between matter and spirit, or, in other words, He is both matter and spirit. In the advanced stage of Krsna consciousness, one therefore makes no such distinctions. He sees only Krsna in everything.

Therefore Sri Caitanya and Srila Prabhupada take no indirect meanings from Srimad Bhagavatam (commentary of Vedanta Sutra), but accept it directly 'As It Is'.

Quote:
CC Ādi 7.131: "In all the Vedic sūtras and literatures, it is Lord Krsna who is to be understood, but the followers of Sankaracarya have covered the real meaning of the Vedas with indirect explanations.
PURPORT
It is said:
vede rāmāyaṇe caiva purane bharate tatha
ādāv ante ca madhye ca hariḥ sarvatra giyate
"In the Vedic literature, including the ramayana, Purāṇas and Mahābhārata, from the very beginning (adau) to the end (ante ca), as well as within the middle (madhye ca), only Hari, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, is explained."

CC Ādi 7.132: "The self-evident Vedic literatures are the highest evidence of all, but if these literatures are interpreted, their self-evident nature is lost.
PURPORT
We quote Vedic evidence to support our statements, but if we interpret it according to our own judgment, the authority of the Vedic literature is rendered imperfect or useless. In other words, by interpreting the Vedic version one minimizes the value of Vedic evidence. When one quotes from Vedic literature, it is understood that the quotations are authoritative. How can one bring the authority under his own control? That is a case of principiis obsta.

CC Ādi 7.133: "To prove their philosophy, the members of the Mayavada school have given up the real, easily understood meaning of the Vedic literature and introduced indirect meanings based on their imaginative powers."
PURPORT
Unfortunately, the Śańkarite interpretation has covered almost the entire world. Therefore there is a great need to present the original, easily understood natural import of the Vedic literature. We have therefore begun by presenting Bhagavad-gītā As It Is, and we propose to present all the Vedic literature in terms of the direct meaning of its words.

Comment on this Post