Do you know that the universe ressemble an egg?

Question by nitai777: Do you know that the universe ressemble an egg?
This universal egg, or the universe in the shape of an egg, is called the manifestation of material energy. Its layers of water, air, fire, sky, ego and mahat-tattva increase in thickness one after another. Each layer is ten times bigger than the previous one, and the final outside layer is covered by pradhāna. Within this egg is the universal form of Lord Hari, of whose body the fourteen planetary systems are parts.

PURPORT

This universe, or the universal sky which we can visualize with its innumerable planets, is shaped just like an egg. As an egg is covered by a shell, the universe is also covered by various layers. The first layer is water, the next is fire, then air, then sky, and the ultimate holding crust is pradhāna. Within this egglike universe is the universal form of the Lord as the virāṭ-puruṣa. All the different planetary situations are parts of His body. This is already explained in the beginning of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, Second Canto. The planetary systems are considered to form different bodily parts of that universal form of the Lord. Persons who cannot directly engage in the worship of the transcendental form of the Lord are advised to think of and worship this universal form. The lowest planetary system, Pātāla, is considered to be the sole of the Supreme Lord, and the earth is considered to be the belly of the Lord. Brahmaloka, or the highest planetary system, where Brahmā lives, is considered to be the head of the Lord.

This virāṭ-puruṣa is considered an incarnation of the Lord. The original form of the Lord is Kṛṣṇa, as confirmed in Brahma-saḿhitā: ādi-puruṣa. The virāṭ-puruṣa is also puruṣa, but He is not ādi-puruṣa. The ādi-puruṣa is Kṛṣṇa. Īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ/ anādir ādir govindaḥ [Bs. 5.1]. In Bhagavad-gītā Kṛṣṇa is also accepted as the ādi-puruṣa, the original. Kṛṣṇa says, “No one is greater than I.” There are innumerable expansions of the Lord, and all of them are puruṣas, or enjoyers, but neither the virāṭ-puruṣa nor the puruṣa-avatāras — Kāraṇodakaśāyī Viṣṇu, Garbhodakaśāyī Viṣṇu and Kṣīrodakaśāyī Viṣṇu — nor any of the many other expansions, is the original. In each universe there are Garbhodakaśāyī Viṣṇu, the virāṭ-puruṣa and Kṣīrodakaśāyī Viṣṇu. The active manifestation of the virāṭ-puruṣa is described here. persons who are in the lower grade of understanding regarding the Supreme Personality of Godhead may think of the universal form of the Lord, for that is advised in the Bhāgavatam.

The dimensions of the universe are estimated here. The outer covering is made of layers of water, air, fire, sky, ego and mahat-tattva, and each layer is ten times greater than the one previous. The space within the hollow of the universe cannot be measured by any human scientist or anyone else, and beyond the hollow there are seven coverings, each one ten times greater than the one preceding it. The layer of water is ten times greater than the diameter of the universe, and the layer of fire is ten times greater than that of water. Similarly, the layer of air is ten times greater than that of fire. These dimensions are all inconceivable to the tiny brain of a human being.

It is also stated that this description is of only one egglike universe. There are innumerable universes besides this one, and some of them are many, many times greater. It is considered, in fact, that this universe is the smallest; therefore the predominating superintendent, or Brahmā, has only four heads for management. In other universes, which are far greater than this one, Brahmā has more heads. In the Caitanya-caritāmṛta it is stated that all these Brahmās were called one day by Lord Kṛṣṇa on the inquiry of the small Brahmā, who, after seeing all the larger Brahmās, was thunderstruck. That is the inconceivable potency of the Lord. No one can measure the length and breadth of God by speculation or by false identification with God. These attempts are symptoms of lunacy.

<<< >>>

See answers below. Add your own as well

 

10 Comments on "Do you know that the universe ressemble an egg?"

  1. scott b
    says:

    I guess the yolks on us.

  2. Byzantino says:

    those are the shape of things in life or patterns that they repeat
    in a micro and a macro form,in the whole universe,and that is one of the other patterns(there are six)

  3. magime says:

    What is the question? The universe resembles an egg and it is all relativity like Einsteins theory. The egg is a symbol of birth.
    But it also resembles the shape of my head and face oval.

  4. Poohbearsall says:

    What is your response when leading theorist, scientist, physicists believe that the universe is infinite? And what is your belief based on beside religious text?

  5. hutchr5 says:

    Apparently, by what Masha S said, this is the belief of Hindus. I find it quite difficult that the universe is an egg/body of a lord. How big would these layers be? If they are not millions of light years big then astronomists would have seen these layers.
    Also, ego is an idea or a figment of the mind, not a physical thing. If water is at the middle why is the planet and everything surrounding it not liquid. And wouldn’t the layers touch? If so then the fire layer would start to evaporate the water layer. Right? Just to add on, aren’t air and sky the same thing? And finally, what is pradhana?

  6. David J says:

    Yes I knew.

  7. AnnieD says:

    Watch out for when the egg hatches and the shell cracks open!

  8. ♥Tao Barbie♥ says:

    Yes, I knew that.
    Your point is?

    .

  9. David T says:

    Like OMG I so need like a dictionary and like a bottle of advil after like reading that ok….like I need to go shopping.

    Whatever

  10. Masha S says:

    Of course I knew that. I am 13, and was born a Russian Orthodox, but I declare myself as a Hindu. It’s the only religion that makes sense. People who think Hinduism is idiotic, really knows NOTHING about the religion because there is a TON about it. I hate people who are ignorant like that. Thankyou so Much!

Got something to say? Go for it!

Similar Questions


Why is there a stereotype that men are “simple” and women are “complex”?
Question by Tetsu Inoue: Why is there a stereotype that men are “simple” and women are “complex”? This stereotype is insulting to men. It seems to imply that we are “simpler” than women, more primitive. Tell me – if someone were to call you simple or complex, which would you rather be called? Complex, of …

For what situation we are using “having been” in English sentences?
Question by White Bell: For what situation we are using “having been” in English sentences? For what situation we are using “having been” in English sentences? What are the difference between “having been” and “have been” in English. In which context both can be used? Can anyone explain this in details? For example the last …

How often to you see a woman that is “perfect”?
Question by hieishin88: How often to you see a woman that is “perfect”? How often to you see a woman that is “perfect”? Someone that looks like theyd just fit you. not necessarily victoria secret model but someone that you see as perfect to you? for me id say about twice a year What do …