Guruvani

Śrī Caitanya Caritāmṛta Ādi 5.45 'jīva'-nāma taṭasthākhya eka śakti haya mahā-sańkarṣaṇa — saba jīvera āśraya SYNONYMS jīva — the living entity; nāma — named; taṭa-sthā-ākhya — known as the marginal potency; eka — one; śakti — energy; haya — is; mahā-sańkarṣaṇa — Mahā-sańkarṣaṇa; saba — all; jīvera — of living entities; āśraya — the shelter. TRANSLATION There is one marginal potency, known as the jīva. Mahā-sańkarṣaṇa is the shelter of all jīvas.

Śrī Caitanya Caritāmṛta Madhya 19.154, purport: <!-- BEGIN TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote --> Quote: <table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="100%"> <tbody><tr> <td style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding-left: 3ex; padding-right: 3ex;" bgcolor="#e0e0e0"> Everything in the Goloka Vṛndāvana planet is a spiritual expansion of sac-cid-ānanda. Everyone there is of the same potency — ānanda-cinmaya-rasa. </td> </tr> </tbody></table> <!-- END TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote -->

The marginal potency is referred to as marginal potency because this potency is manifested in the marginal line between the material and spiritual world. Śrīmad Bhāgavatam 2.9.10 purport, The marginal jivas are called as such because they have their origin in the marginal potency of the Lord. It is called marginal potency because this potency is manifested by Lord Vishnu in the marginal line of the Viraja River or Causal Ocean that forms the bufffer zone between the material and spiritual world. The entire spiritual world is comprised of the internal antaranga-shakti - the svarupa or chit shakti of Krishna. There is no such thing as marginal potency within the internal potency. Marginal potency is called marginal potency because it is manifested in the Viraja - the marginal line between the material and spiritual world. When a jiva is integrated into the svarupa-shakti - the internal potency of Krishna then that jiva is no longer a marginal potency but has entered the domain of internal potency. The jivas of the spiritual world are manifested by the internal potency, not the marginal potency. Srila Prabhupada explains that the jiva soul is actually INTERNAL POTENCY NOT MARGINAL, but because the conditioned jivas are manifested within the material energy they are marginal. Śrīmad Bhāgavatam 7.3.34, purport, So, it is quite clear that marginal jivas are marginal because they are in contact with the material energy. When they are no longer in contact with the material energy but are within the svarupa-shakti they are no longer marginal jivas. Chapter 31: The Supreme Perfection Teachings of Lord Caitanya When spiritual energy is no longer overwhelmed by ignorance how can it still be marginal potency?

Maybe, in the broadest sense we can say that. However, guru, in the context of he who is the authorized agent of the Godhead sent as his ambassador to the fallen souls, we have to understand that guru is the direct agent of the Godhead with full authority and empowerment to lead and deliver fallen souls out of illusion to the service of the Godhead. Guru Krishna can act through even a bird or a dog to show us a lesson. However, most of us think of guru in terms of he who is authorized by the Godhead to represent him and make a contract to deliver fallens souls if they are willing to accept and abide by his guidance and directions.

I think there is a clue in this purport by Srila Prabhupada that explains that such designations as marginal potency and external potency refer to certain conditions. The conditions that dictate such designations as marginal potency and external potency do not exist in the spiritual world, so how can there be such a conception as a marginal jiva within the antaranga-shakti that constitutes the spiritual world? Śrī Caitanya Caritāmṛta Ādi 2.96, purport:

I don't think I agree. These are topics and conclusions that are dealt with in shastra. Anybody can read the books and understand. You don't have to realize these things as much as you just have to internalize them and accept what the shastra and the acharyas have said. If we refer back to pre-ISKCON Gaudiya Vaishnavism then many of the issues and questions can be resolved because no acharya or guru has the right to change or alter the siddhanta and the conclusions of Mahaprabhu's direct disciples and the great Goswamis of Vrindavan. It appears that in bringing Gaudiya Vaishnavism to western people there has been some confusion and indeed Srila Prabhupada himself said he was perplexed about how exactly to push forward the movement in the western world. Maybe he was a little over-protective and reserved about just blasting westerners with the deepest aspects of Gaudiya siddhanta. As such, his words were sometimes a little ambiguous and allowing some western people to misunderstand some things. I for one certainly do not accept literally everything Srila Prabhupada said. Other than literal meanings, I think his teachings were sometimes allegorical as are some of the stories and fables in the Bhagavatam.

Crucify the messenger if you want. Anyway, there are plenty and plenty of women who have fallen down and gone away from ISKCON. They just don't get all the publicity and fanfare that sannyasis and gurus get when they bite the dust. I still question if embracing all modern standards for women is really what Krishna consciousness is all about. Most devotee women are more concerned with serving Krishna than with getting position and authority in the KC movement. The battle against male dominance is going on in ISKCON just like it is going on in the secular world. I am not so sure that this battle against male dominance has anything at all to do with Krishna consciousness. The most advanced devotee women I ever saw in the movement were very shy, reserved and keeping to the background. The ones out on the battlefront challenging male dominance are not the most advanced devotee women as far as I have seen.

But, the question this issue begs is if abandoning the traditional Vedic customs and embracing all modern standards is really what the KC Movement and Krishna consciousness is all about. Is getting completely away from the Vedic customary cultural traditions and embracing a modern standard for women really good for the KC movement. Besides that, most of the devotee women that I saw around ISKCON and the KC movement were very humble, shy and chaste and were not interested in becoming guru. Most devotee women don't want to "rock the boat" and start issues with women gurus in the KC movment. In Gaudiya culture most usually the sannyasis did the work of guru. Is rejecting that norm and encouraging women to become gurus really good for the KC movement or good for the devotee ladies? ISKCON is coming in the Saraswata Gaudiya line. Is having women gurus in ISKCON really in the tradition of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakur?

In Vedic culture, India culture, the women are raised and trained to be very shy, chaste and humble. So, in Hindu society there were very few incidents of women gurus because the women were always humble enough to consider that there is a male devotee somewhere who could do the job without her having to sacrifice her respect as a shy and chaste woman. If there are male gurus available, then in the Vedic Hindu culture there were not many women willing to accept the position of guru.

If that is so, then why did Mahaprabhu teach Sanatan Goswami that before a devotee can attain Goloka he must first take birth in a material universe where the pastimes of Krishna are being manifested in his Vraja lila where the devotee is born from the womb of a gopi and grows through a natural sequence just like in the material world? Actually, there is no such thing as just popping-up in Goloka and transcending time altogether. First, in the realm of time, the devotee takes birth in a material universe where the pastimes of Krishna are manifesting. Then, after the pastimes of Krishna are concluded the devotee is elevated to Goloka at the end of his life. So, it is not just as simple as popping-up in Goloka and realizing that you were never gone. First, one must take birth in Krishna's earthly pastimes and then from there he can go back to Goloka and transcend the conception of material time. First, one connects with Krishna within the realm of TIME. Then, from there he eventually attains to the realm beyond time. In Goloka one resumes the service that he perfected in the Gokula Vraja earthly pastimes of Krishna. You just don't pop-up in Goloka without a prior sequence of developing the relationship with Krishna in the material realm of time.

I think that in the way Srila Prabhupada said "transparent via media" it means more than just transparent but also "via media" which is like the go-between, intermediary between Krishna and the jivas. Transparent via media......? A via media that is transparent. But, the guru is not just a window to the spiritual world. He is also the intermediary between Krishna and the conditioned souls.

You are mixing up two different concepts. Internal energy and superior energy are two different terms for two different levels of energy. The "superior" energy is the living entity. He is superior to matter. The internal energy? Internal energy means antaranga-shakti. Internal energy is the chit-shakti which is also called svarupa-shakti. Krishna is not internal energy as Vigraha has said. Krishna is the master of the internal energy. Krishna is not energy. Krishna is the energetic powerhouse.

Your number 1 is certainly a mistaken idea. Krishna or Vishnu are not "energy". They are energetic - shaktiman. Energy is the shakti. The source and master of the energy is the shaktiman. Krishna is not energy. Krishna is the source and basis of energy. As far as classifying any form of bhakta-tattva in Goloka as a marginal jiva, I don't think shastra supports that idea. We might hear some indirect statements about that in the preaching work of Srila Prabhupada, but, as far as shastra actually classifying the bhakta-tattva jivas of Goloka as "marginal", I don't think that can be established on the basis of shastra. To refer to Krishna as "energy" shows a very defective understanding of Vaishnava siddhanta. That is like refering to a nuclear power plant as electricity.

What about love of Krishna? Isn't that love? Sounds like you are asking if there is sexual relationship in Goloka. Are you wondering if there is sexual relationships in Goloka? There is NO sex in Goloka. Sex is the gratification of the senses. There is no such thing in Goloka.

Please elaborate with shastric support. We are eager to hear more about this from shastra.

I didn't say anything about newcomer, oldtimer, nitya-siddha, sadhana-siddha etc. etc. I just want to know if in Goloka there is this classification of devotees into classes of souls as marginal or internal devotees. It seems to me if there is a class distinction between souls then that would be a form of prejudice and discrimination in Goloka.

I am not talking about going back, falling down or understanding the time factor. I want to know if in Goloka there is class discrimination between different gradations of souls and if some are labeled as "marginal" and others are considered higher internal devotees. What does Srila Prabhupada seem to be saying in the purport I referenced? Doesn't he say that everyone is the SAME POTENCY? If so, then where do we come up with this idea that there are marginal jivas in Goloka if in fact everyone in Goloka is of the SAME POTENCY?

p.s This is not a orgins debate or fall-from-goloka topic, so Vigraha or any of his other types are not welcome to turn this topic into a dreamervadi rant. Keep it out of here!

In Goloka, is there really this differentiation in shaktis that we find in the material world? Do the principal gopis of Krishna differentiate between conceptions of shakti-tattva and jiva tattva? Is there any such thing as labeling one class of devotees in Goloka as "marginal" and another class as internal? Does this form of discrimination and gradation of class of souls really exist in Goloka? Would such thinking in Goloka really fit in with the atmosphere of Vrindavan? Here in this purport of Srimad Bhagavatam, Srila Prabhupada explains the parampara conclusion that everyone in Goloka Vrindavan are of the same potency. Do some nitya-siddhas in Goloka get labeled as "marginal jivas" while others are ananda-cinmaya-rasa ? Śrī Caitanya Caritāmṛta Madhya 19.154, purport:

It doesn't take mystic powers to see that Vigraha - Sarva Gattah wants to turn every discussion on the forum into a fall-from-goloka rant. I don't understand why he is allowed to come on to the forum and disrupt every topic that comes up with his dreamervadi rant. I am sick of hearing about his dreamervadi theory. Maybe admin can give him his own section of the forum for his dreamervadi rant and anybody that wants to engage in discussion with him can go there. He should not be allowed in other topics as he tries to turn every topic into a dreamervadi rant.

So, if Srila Saraswati Thakur felt this way then why did he recommend to his disciples to form a GBC and conduct the mission that way? This all seems very contradictory.

All I know is that Srila Prabhupada used the terminology "transparent via media". I don't remember ever hearing or reading him say "transparent medium". He most always said "transparent via media". I don't know if he is the origin of that usage or if his Gurudeva used it before him.

What if one pretends to want to satisfy the senses of Krishna but in his own heart he really wants to gratify his own senses too? Can Krishna be fooled?