The existance of ufo's is part of the history of the planet, There is no denial on the contrary Historic proof. Read the following information about A great King who ruled Earth and the interplanetary communication, Yes. and all was because of the protection to the Brahmanas. Read on, a perfect king. Success leaves clues. This can be acomplished simply by modeling the way this king ruled.
In the history of Vedic civilization one can trace the rulling of a great King. Once upon a time King Pṛthu initiated the performance of a very great sacrifice in which great saintly sages, brāhmaṇas, demigods from higher planetary systems and great saintly kings known as rājarṣis all assembled together.
ekadāsīn mahā-satra-
dīkṣā tatra divaukasām
samājo brahmarṣīṇāḿ ca
rājarṣīṇāḿ ca sattama
In this verse the most significant point is that although King Pṛthu's residential quarters were in India, between the rivers Ganges and Yamunā, the demigods also participated in the great sacrifice he performed. This indicates that formerly the demigods used to come to this planet. Similarly, great personalities like Arjuna, Yudhiṣṭhira and many others used to visit higher planetary systems. Thus there was interplanetary communication via suitable airplanes and space vehicles.
Mahārāja Pṛthu was an unrivaled king and possessed the scepter for ruling all the seven islands on the surface of the globe. No one could disobey his irrevocable orders but the saintly persons, the brāhmaṇas and the descendants of the Supreme Personality of Godhead [the Vaiṣṇavas].
Sapta-dvīpa refers to the seven great islands or continents on the surface of the globe: (1) Asia, (2) Europe, (3) Africa, (4) North America, (5) South America, (6) Australia and (7) Oceania. In the modern age people are under the impression that during the Vedic period or the prehistoric ages America and many other parts of the world had not been discovered, but that is not a fact. Pṛthu Mahārāja ruled over the world many thousands of years before the so-called prehistoric age, and it is clearly mentioned here that in those days not only were all the different parts of the world known, but they were ruled by one king, Mahārāja Pṛthu. The country where Pṛthu Mahārāja resided must have been India because it is stated in the eleventh verse of this chapter that he lived in the tract of land between the rivers Ganges and Yamunā. This tract of land, which is called Brahmāvarta, consists of what is known in the modern age as portions of Punjab and northern India. It is clear that the kings of India once ruled all the world and that their culture was Vedic.
The word askhalita indicates that orders by the king could not be disobeyed by anyone in the entire world. Such orders, however, were never issued to control saintly persons or the descendants of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Viṣṇu. The Supreme Lord is known as Acyuta, and Lord Kṛṣṇa is addressed as such by Arjuna in Bhagavad-gītā (senayor ubhayor madhye rathaḿ sthāpaya me 'cyuta). Acyuta refers to one who does not fall because He is never influenced by the modes of material nature. When a living entity falls down to the material world from his original position, he becomes cyuta, which means that he forgets his relationship with Acyuta. Actually every living entity is a part and parcel, or a son, of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. When influenced by the modes of material nature, a living entity forgets this relationship and thinks in terms of different species of life; but when he again comes to his original consciousness, he does not observe such bodily designations. This is indicated in Bhagavad-gītā (5.18) by the words paṇḍitāḥ sama-darśinaḥ.
Material designations create differentiation in terms of caste, color, creed, nationality, etc. Different gotras, or family designations, are distinctions in terms of the material body, but when one comes to Kṛṣṇa consciousness he immediately becomes one of the Acyuta-gotra, or descendants of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and thus becomes transcendental to all considerations of caste, creed, color and nationality.
Pṛthu Mahārāja had no control over the brāhmaṇa-kula, which refers to the learned scholars in Vedic knowledge, nor over the Vaiṣṇavas, who are above the considerations of Vedic knowledge. It is therefore said:
arcye viṣṇau śilā-dhīr guruṣu nara-matir vaiṣṇave jāti-buddhir
viṣṇor vā vaiṣṇavānāḿ kali-mala-mathane pāda-tīrthe 'mbu-buddhiḥ
śrī-viṣṇor nāmni mantre sakala-kaluṣa-he śabda-sāmānya-buddhir
viṣṇau sarveśvareśe tad-itara-sama-dhīr yasya vā nārakī saḥ
"One who thinks the Deity in the temple to be made of wood or stone, who thinks of the spiritual master in the disciplic succession as an ordinary man, who thinks the Vaiṣṇava in the Acyuta-gotra to belong to a certain caste or creed or who thinks of caraṇāmṛta or Ganges water as ordinary water is taken to be a resident of hell." (Padma Purāṇa)
From the facts presented in this verse, it appears that people in general should be controlled by a king until they come to the platform of Vaiṣṇavas and brāhmaṇas, who are not under the control of anyone. Brāhmaṇa refers to one who knows Brahman, or the impersonal feature of the Absolute Truth, and a Vaiṣṇava is one who serves the Supreme Personality of Godhead.
|
Adam Westcott
panorama,ca usa
5/30/2005 6:31:06 PM
|
Efforts towards breaking conspiracy of this issue, efforts in trying to convince people of the existence of this event and different idealogies if they are good or bad keeps us separate and disorganized. That is exactly where they want us. At some point, someone will have to have the courage to make the statement of the obvious, so that we may develope an alliance. We do not need the approval, validation nor the scientific community to claim the existence of an event that is occuring. Nor is it necessary to have any government authority to make the statement that this is an actual event. The fact remains the same regardless of the misdirection of so many, there here and their agenda doesn't look good.
Efforts are needed for our own agenda. It is foolish to await permission from any authority to address a plan for an alliance and to research their weaknesses, because they do have several of them. What I don't see in any of the research community is a proactive stance of action in regards to this event. How much evidence do you really need? Someone pull a boot strap up and make a stance.
|
Dill
5/29/2005 6:57:36 AM
|
