Summary of Discussions: Mayesvara Das & Vedic Cosmology

Who is Mayesvara Das?

Mayesvara Das is a disciple within the International Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON) who has put forward a radical reinterpretation of the Fifth Canto of the Srimad-Bhagavatam, which describes the Vedic cosmological model.

The Core of the Controversy: Vedic Cosmology

The traditional understanding, as presented by Srila Prabhupada (the founder of ISKCON), describes a geocentric universe with:

• Earth (Bhu-mandala): A vast, circular plane divided into concentric islands and oceans.
• Mount Meru: A gigantic mountain at the center.
• The Sun: Orbiting around Mount Meru, causing day and night.
• The Universe: A spherical shell (brahmanda) with the planetary systems located at different levels.

Prabhupada often presented this as a literal description, while also acknowledging that modern science would not accept it. He encouraged his disciples to do research to reconcile it, a project known as the "Vedic Planetarium" (TOVP) initiative.

Mayesvara's Interpretation

Mayesvara Das argues for a literal but modern re-reading of the Fifth Canto. His key claims are:

1. Bhu-mandala is a Map of the Solar System: He proposes that the concentric rings of Bhu-mandala are not flat islands but represent the orbits of the planets around the sun.
2. Heliocentric Model: He aligns the Vedic cosmology with a heliocentric (sun-centered) model, identifying the Sun's orbit described in the Bhagavatam with the ecliptic plane.
3. Mount Meru is the Sun: He posits that Mount Meru, the central axis, is not a physical mountain but represents the Sun itself.
4. A Rejection of the "Globe" Earth: A significant and highly controversial part of his thesis is that the Vedic texts do not support the idea of a spherical Earth globe orbiting the sun. He argues that the Earth is a vast circular plane (Bhu-mandala), and what we call the "globe" is just a small part of it.

The Main Points of Debate

• Rejection by ISKCON Leadership: The ISKCON Governing Body Commission (GBC) has officially declared that Mayesvara's interpretations are not in line with the teachings of Srila Prabhupada or the previous acharyas (teachers). They have cautioned devotees against his teachings.
• Scriptural Evidence: Critics argue that Mayesvara selectively quotes scriptures and ignores clear descriptions that contradict his model (e.g., the details of Jambudvipa and Mount Meru having specific geographic features).
• Prabhupada's Intent: A major point of contention is what Prabhupada meant by a "literal" interpretation. Traditionalists believe Mayesvara is creating a new model to appease modern science, while Mayesvara claims he is taking the description more literally than anyone else.
• The "Flat Earth" Association: Although Mayesvara's model is complex and not simply a "flat Earth" theory, his rejection of the global Earth model has led to him being associated with flat Earth ideas, which has caused significant embarrassment for ISKCON.

Addressing the Specific Question on Measurements

Mayesvara's Critique of Danavir Goswami

Mayesvara criticizes Danavir for focusing on isolated measurements of Bharata-khanda (India) without placing it in the context of the larger Earth-circle (Bhu-mandala). He asserts that Bharata-varsha is explicitly described as a 72,000-mile-wide region on the southern side of Jambudvipa—not a separate globe. Danavir's model of "nine globe-shaped planets" is dismissed as a "made-up story" with no basis in the Puranas.

How This Coincides with a 4000-Mile Earth Radius?

It doesn't, and that's his entire point. Mayesvara argues that the apparent contradiction proves the modern globe model is the error. His logic is:

1. The Srimad Bhagavatam gives explicit, literal dimensions for Bhu-mandala and its features.
2. These dimensions (e.g., a 72,000-mile-wide Bharata-varsha) are impossible to reconcile with a spherical Earth of a 4000-mile radius.
3. Therefore, the premise of a spherical Earth must be rejected as non-Vedic, and the Bhagavatam's flat, colossal plane must be accepted as the true description of reality.

He isn't trying to make them coincide; he uses the scriptural measurement to invalidate the modern astronomical model entirely.

Summary of Conclusion

This is a deep theological debate within ISKCON centered on how to reconcile ancient scriptures with modern science. The official ISKCON position remains aligned with the traditional, geocentric cosmology as presented by Srila Prabhupada. Mayesvara's views, which take the measurements as literally true and thus reject the globe model, are considered a controversial and unofficial interpretation.

The two models—Danavir's (globe-accepting) and Mayesvara's (globe-rejecting)—are fundamentally irreconcilable because they start from opposite first principles.