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 line between the material manifestation and the spiritual manifestation is the Virajā River, and beyond the Virajā, which is a transcendental current flowing from the perspiration of the body of the Lord, there is the three-fourths manifestation of God's creation.

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.

Śrī Caitanya Caritāmṛta Ādi 2.101

 

cic-chakti, svarūpa-śakti, antarańgā nāma

tāhāra vaibhava ananta vaikuṇṭhādi dhāma

 

SYNONYMS

cit-śakti — spiritual energy; svarūpa-śakti — personal energy; antaḥ-ańgā — internal; nāma — named; tāhāra — of that; vaibhava — manifestations; ananta — unlimited; vaikuṇṭha-ādi — Vaikuṇṭha, etc.; dhāma — abodes.

 

 

TRANSLATION

"The cit-śakti, which is also called svarūpa-śakti or antarańga-śakti, displays many varied manifestations. It sustains the kingdom of God and its paraphernalia.

 

Śrī Caitanya Caritāmṛta Ādi 2.102

 

māyā-śakti, bahirańgā, jagat-kāraṇa

tāhāra vaibhava ananta brahmāṇḍera gaṇa

 

SYNONYMS

māyā-śakti — the illusory energy; bahiḥ-ańgā — external; jagat-kāraṇa — the cause of the universe; tāhāra — of that; vaibhava — manifestations; ananta — unlimited; brahma-aṇḍera — of universes; gaṇa — multitudes.

 

 

TRANSLATION

"The external energy, called māyā-śakti, is the cause of innumerable universes with varied material potencies.

 

Śrī Caitanya Caritāmṛta Ādi 2.103

 

jīva-śakti taṭasthākhya, nāhi yāra anta

mukhya tina śakti, tāra vibheda ananta

 

SYNONYMS

jīva-śakti — the energy of the living entity; taṭa-stha-ākhya — known as marginal; nāhi — there is not; yāra — of which; anta — end; mukhya — principal; tina — three; śakti — energies; tāra — of them; vibheda — varieties; ananta — unlimited.

 

 

TRANSLATION

"The marginal potency, which is between these two, consists of the numberless living beings. These are the three principal energies, which have unlimited categories and subdivisions.

 

 

PURPORT

The internal potency of the Lord, which is called cit-śakti or antarańga-śakti, exhibits variegatedness in the transcendental Vaikuṇṭha cosmos. Besides ourselves, there are unlimited numbers of liberated living beings who associate with the Personality of Godhead in His innumerable features. The material cosmos displays the external energy, in which the conditioned living beings are provided all liberty to go back to the Personality of Godhead after leaving the material tabernacle. The Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad (6.8) informs us:

 

 

na tasya kāryaḿ karaṇaḿ ca vidyate

na tat-samaś cābhyadhikaś ca dṛśyate

parāsya śaktir vividhaiva śrūyate

svābhāvikī jñāna-bala-kriyā ca

 

"The Supreme Lord is one without a second. He has nothing to do personally, nor does He have material senses. No one is equal to Him or greater than Him. He has unlimited, variegated potencies of different names, which exist within Him as autonomous attributes and provide Him full knowledge, power and pastimes."

<<< >>>

 

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,

The living entity, being part and parcel of Parabrahman, is actually internal potency, but because of being in contact with the material energy, he is an emanation of material and spiritual energies.

The external potency manifests this material world, the internal potency manifests the spiritual world, and the marginal potency manifests the living entities, who are mixtures of internal and external.

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 overwhelmed by ignorance, it is called marginal energy.

When spiritual energy is no longer overwhelmed by ignorance how can it still be marginal potency?

Prabhupada wrote or said that "Who you hear from, that is your guru."

 

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:

Although all three potencies — namely internal, external and marginal — are essentially one in the ultimate issue, they are different in action, like electric energy, which can produce both cold and heat under different conditions. The external and marginal potencies are so called under various conditions, but in the original, internal potencies there are no such conditions, nor is it possible for the conditions of the external potency to exist in the marginal, or vice versa. One who is able to understand the intricacies of all these energies of the Supreme Lord can no longer remain an empiric impersonalist under the influence of a poor fund of knowledge

 

I still maintain this puzzle cannot be solved philosophically and that we must take Bhaktivinodes advice and realize it rather than bat it about between those with opposing opinions.

 

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.

just wanted to point out that the falldown rate of male Vaishnavas is of such dimension that they walk on thin ice/ lost all credibilty but then busy making statements like women are shy, unqualified, this is not the tradition, this is not the etiquette, they actually don't want to be spiritual teachers etc...

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.

Seems the Sastric Advisory Council paper doesn't speak of the situation within the Hindu culture but of today what we have here in the West. Even since 1977 things have changed and the next US president will be for the first time a woman.

When asked if Clinton will be “good for business,” Rothschild replies,

 

“First of all, Hillary will be good for America. And so if we care about our country —which all of my fellow capitalists do —we’ll be very pleased that she’s president.”

 

There's no point though to preach that there should be female gurus, but if present male gurus are so much untrustworthy what can be done?

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?

I don't want to sound like some version of a racist, but traditionally guru's have been men, very rarely is there a women guru.

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.

Mathematically then if there is no past, present or future as we are acquainted with it, can we take for granted we are likely already in Goloka, is that your aphorism?

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.

1 -Internal or Superior energy is Krishna and the Vishnu-tattva's in Goloka and Vaikuntha

 

 

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.

Bhagavad-gītā As It Is 7.5

 

apareyam itas tv anyāḿ

prakṛtiḿ viddhi me parām

jīva-bhūtāḿ mahā-bāho

yayedaḿ dhāryate jagat

 

SYNONYMS

aparā — inferior; iyam — this; itaḥ — besides this; tu — but; anyām — another; prakṛtim — energy; viddhi — just try to understand; me — My; parām — superior; jīva-bhūtām — comprising the living entities; mahā-bāho — O mighty-armed one; yayā — by whom; idam — this; dhāryate — is utilized or exploited; jagat — the material world.

 

 

TRANSLATION

Besides these, O mighty-armed Arjuna, there is another, superior energy of Mine, which comprises the living entities who are exploiting the resources of this material, inferior nature.

 

 

PURPORT

Here it is clearly mentioned that living entities belong to the superior nature (or energy) of the Supreme Lord. The inferior energy is matter manifested in different elements, namely earth, water, fire, air, ether, mind, intelligence and false ego. Both forms of material nature, namely gross (earth, etc.) and subtle (mind, etc.), are products of the inferior energy. The living entities, who are exploiting these inferior energies for different purposes, are the superior energy of the Supreme Lord, and it is due to this energy that the entire material world functions. The cosmic manifestation has no power to act unless it is moved by the superior energy, the living entity. Energies are always controlled by the energetic, and therefore the living entities are always controlled by the Lord — they have no independent existence. They are never equally powerful, as unintelligent men think. The distinction between the living entities and the Lord is described in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (10.87.30) as follows:

 

 

aparimitā dhruvās tanu-bhṛto yadi sarva-gatās

tarhi na śāsyateti niyamo dhruva netarathā

ajani ca yan-mayaḿ tad avimucya niyantṛ bhavet

samam anujānatāḿ yad amataḿ mata-duṣṭatayā

 

"O Supreme Eternal! If the embodied living entities were eternal and all-pervading like You, then they would not be under Your control. But if the living entities are accepted as minute energies of Your Lordship, then they are at once subject to Your supreme control. Therefore real liberation entails surrender by the living entities to Your control, and that surrender will make them happy. In that constitutional position only can they be controllers. Therefore, men with limited knowledge who advocate the monistic theory that God and the living entities are equal in all respects are actually guided by a faulty and polluted opinion."

The Supreme Lord, Kṛṣṇa, is the only controller, and all living entities are controlled by Him. These living entities are His superior energy because the quality of their existence is one and the same with the Supreme, but they are never equal to the Lord in quantity of power. While exploiting the gross and subtle inferior energy (matter), the superior energy (the living entity) forgets his real spiritual mind and intelligence. This forgetfulness is due to the influence of matter upon the living entity. But when the living entity becomes free from the influence of the illusory material energy, he attains the stage called mukti, or liberation. The false ego, under the influence of material illusion, thinks, "I am matter, and material acquisitions are mine." His actual position is realized when he is liberated from all material ideas, including the conception of his becoming one in all respects with God. Therefore one may conclude that the Gītā confirms the living entity to be only one of the multi-energies of Kṛṣṇa; and when this energy is freed from material contamination, it becomes fully Kṛṣṇa conscious, or liberated.

 

The internal energy?

Śrī Caitanya Caritāmṛta Ādi 2.101

 

cic-chakti, svarūpa-śakti, antarańgā nāma

tāhāra vaibhava ananta vaikuṇṭhādi dhāma

 

SYNONYMS

cit-śakti — spiritual energy; svarūpa-śakti — personal energy; antaḥ-ańgā — internal; nāma — named; tāhāra — of that; vaibhava — manifestations; ananta — unlimited; vaikuṇṭha-ādi — Vaikuṇṭha, etc.; dhāma — abodes.

 

 

TRANSLATION

"The cit-śakti, which is also called svarūpa-śakti or antarańga-śakti, displays many varied manifestations. It sustains the kingdom of God and its paraphernalia.

 

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.

1 -Internal or Superior energy is Krishna and the Vishnu-tattva's in Goloka and Vaikuntha

 

2 -Marginal is the jiva-tattva's

 

3 -External or inferior energy is the material creation or the mahat-tattva

 

What do you mean by internal devotees? Are they marginal (jiva-tattva's)?

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.

Namaste.

Will there be love in Goloka? Will there be marriage? To get to the core, will there be gender differences in Goloka?

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.

yes, yes, yes.

 

mahak

Please elaborate with shastric support.

We are eager to hear more about this from shastra.

Sorry but if you think the other residents of Goloka are going to be looking at someone as a newcomer and an outsider then your question is infected with the concept of past.

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.

When one gets all the plenary indulgences and attains heaven in the form of the groves of Talavana, everyone is gonna look at you and say "Who are you? Who let this nittya baddha in." It goes downhill from there.

 

Actually, the time ya spent here was not even a blink of the eye. The quiet part of a mrdanga riff.

 

 

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?

Everyone there is of the same potency — ānanda-cinmaya-rasa.

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:

Everything in the Goloka Vṛndāvana planet is a spiritual expansion of sac-cid-ānanda. Everyone there is of the same potency — ānanda-cinmaya-rasa.

tabe yāya tad-upari 'goloka-vṛndāvana'

'kṛṣṇa-caraṇa'-kalpa-vṛkṣe kare ārohaṇa

 

SYNONYMS

tabe — thereafter; yāya — goes; tat-upari — to the top of that (the spiritual sky); goloka-vṛndāvana — to the planet known as Goloka Vṛndāvana where Kṛṣṇa lives; kṛṣṇa-caraṇa — of the lotus feet of Lord Kṛṣṇa; kalpa-vṛkṣe — on the desire tree; kare ārohaṇa — climbs.

 

 

TRANSLATION

"Being situated in one's heart and being watered by śravaṇa-kīrtana, the bhakti creeper grows more and more. In this way it attains the shelter of the desire tree of the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa, who is eternally situated in the planet known as Goloka Vṛndāvana, in the topmost region of the spiritual sky.

 

 

PURPORT

In the Brahma-saḿhitā (5.37) it is said:

 

 

ānanda-cinmaya-rasa-pratibhāvitābhis

tābhir ya eva nija-rūpatayā kalābhiḥ

goloka eva nivasaty akhilātma-bhūto

govindam ādi-puruṣaḿ tam ahaḿ bhajāmi

 

"I worship Govinda, the primeval Lord. He resides in His own realm, Goloka, with Rādhā, who resembles His own spiritual figure and who embodies the ecstatic potency [hlādinī]. Their companions are Her confidantes, who embody extensions of Her bodily form and who are imbued and permeated with ever-blissful spiritual rasa." In the spiritual world, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Kṛṣṇa, has expanded Himself by His spiritual potency. He has His eternal form of bliss and knowledge (sac-cid-ānanda-vigraha [Bs. 5.1]). Everything in the Goloka Vṛndāvana planet is a spiritual expansion of sac-cid-ānanda. Everyone there is of the same potency — ānanda-cinmaya-rasa. The relationship between the Supreme Personality of Godhead and His servitor is cinmaya-rasa. Kṛṣṇa and His entourage and paraphernalia are of the same cinmaya potency. In this way the Supreme Personality of Godhead is expanded throughout the spiritual world, and when that cinmaya-rasa potency expands through the material potency, it becomes all-pervading. The idea is that although the Supreme Personality of Godhead exists on His own planet, Goloka Vṛndāvana, He is also present everywhere. Aṇḍāntara-stha-paramāṇu-cayāntara-stham. He is present within all the universes, although they are innumerable, and He is also present within the atom. Īśvaraḥ sarva-bhūtānāḿ hṛd-deśe 'rjuna tiṣṭhati: [Bg. 18.61] He is also present within the heart of all living entities. This is His all-pervasive potency.

Goloka Vṛndāvana is the highest planet in the spiritual world. In order to go to the spiritual world after penetrating the covering of the material universe, one must penetrate Brahma-loka, the spiritual effulgence. Then one can come to the Goloka Vṛndāvana planet. There are also other planets in the spiritual world, called Vaikuṇṭha planets, and on these planets Lord Nārāyaṇa is worshiped with awe and veneration. On these planets śānta-rasa is prevalent, and some of the devotees are also connected with the Supreme Personality of Godhead in dāsya-rasa, the mellow of servitorship. As far as the mellow of fraternity is concerned, in Vaikuṇṭha this rasa is represented by gaurava-sakhya, friendship in awe and veneration. The other fraternity rasa, exhibited as viśrambha (friendship in equality), is found in the Goloka Vṛndāvana planet. Above that is service to the Lord in vātsalya-rasa (parental love), and above all is the relationship with the Lord in the mādhurya-rasa (conjugal love). These five rasas are fully exhibited in the spiritual world in one's relationship with the Lord. Therefore in the spiritual world the bhakti creeper finds its resting place at the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa.

 

 

I came here to glorify creation, hoping for Answers by citing the Lords version, and like the twilight zone, Im stuck in anothger origin of jiva morass with the same folks saying the same stuff, with the same out of context clip and pastes of prabhupada.

 

 

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.

"The idea of an organized church in an intelligible form, indeed, marks the close of the living spiritual movement. The great ecclesiastical establishments are the dikes and the dams to retain the current that cannot be held by any such contrivances. They, indeed, indicate a desire on the part of the masses to exploit a spiritual movement for their own purpose. They also unmistakably indicate the end of the absolute and unconventional guidance of the bona-fide spiritual teacher."

Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakur

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.

Does that definition make sense in this context?

 

It seems like definition number 3 of "medium" is what applies here.

 

 

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/medium.

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.

3 results for: via media

vi·a me·di·a /ˈvaɪə ˈmidiə, ˈmeɪ-, ˈviə; Lat. ˈwiɑ ˈmɛdiɑ/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[vahy-uh mee-dee-uh, mey-, vee-uh; Lat. wee-ah me-dee-ah] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation –noun <table class="luna-Ent"><tbody><tr><td valign="top">a middle way; a mean between two extremes. </td></tr></tbody></table>

<hr class="ety">[Origin: 1835–45; < L]

 

 

<!-- google_ad_section_end(name=def) --> <table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td><cite>Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)

Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2006.</cite></td></tr></tbody></table> <!-- end luna --> <!-- begin ahd4 --> <cite>American Heritage Dictionary</cite> - Cite This Source - <cite>Share This</cite> <!-- google_ad_section_start(name=def) --> <table><tbody><tr><td>via me·di·a (mē'dē-ə, měd'ē-ə, mā'dē-ə) Pronunciation Key

<!--BOF_HEAD--> n. <!--EOF_HEAD--> <!--BOF_DEF--> The middle course or way.

<!--EOF_DEF-->

<!--BOF_DEF-->

[Latin : <tt>via</tt>, way + <tt>media</tt>, feminine of <tt>medius</tt>, middle.]

<!--EOF_DEF-->

</td></tr></tbody></table> (Download Now or Buy the Book)<!-- google_ad_section_end(name=def) --> <table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td><cite>The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition

2006 by Houghton Mifflin Company.

Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.</cite></td></tr></tbody></table> <!-- end ahd4 --> <!-- begin wn --> <cite>WordNet</cite> - Cite This Source - <cite>Share This</cite> <!-- google_ad_section_start(name=def) --> <table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td colspan="2">via media</td></tr><tr><td colspan="2">

noun</td></tr><tr><td colspan="2">a middle way between two extremes [syn: compromise] </td></tr></tbody></table>

<!-- google_ad_section_end(name=def) --> <table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td><cite>WordNet® 3.0, © 2006 by Princeton University.</cite></td></tr></tbody></table> <!-- end wn --> View results from: Dictionary | Thesaurus | Encyclopedia | All Reference | the Web

 

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?

Śrī Caitanya Caritāmṛta Ādi 4.165

 

ātmendriya-prīti-vāñchā — tāre bali 'kāma'

kṛṣṇendriya-prīti-icchā dhare 'prema' nāma

 

SYNONYMS

ātma-indriya-prīti — for the pleasure of one's own senses; vāñchā — desires; tāre — to that; bali — I say; kāma — lust; kṛṣṇa-indriya-prīti — for the pleasure of Lord Kṛṣṇa's senses; icchā — desire; dhare — holds; prema — love; nāma — the name.

 

 

TRANSLATION

The desire to gratify one's own senses is kāma [lust], but the desire to please the senses of Lord Kṛṣṇa is prema [love].

 

 

PURPORT

The revealed scriptures describe pure love as follows:

 

 

sarvathā dhvaḿsa-rahitaḿ saty api dhvaḿsa-kāraṇe

yad bhāva-bandhanaḿ yūnoḥ sa premā parikīrtitaḥ

 

"If there is ample reason for the dissolution of a conjugal relationship and yet such a dissolution does not take place, such a relationship of intimate love is called pure."

 

 

The predominated gopīs were bound to Kṛṣṇa in such pure love. For them there was no question of sexual love based on sense gratification. Their only engagement in life was to see Kṛṣṇa happy in all respects, regardless of their own personal interests. They dedicated their souls only for the satisfaction of the Personality of Godhead, Śrī Kṛṣṇa. There was not the slightest tinge of sexual love between the gopīs and Kṛṣṇa.

The author of Śrī Caitanya-caritāmṛta asserts with authority that sexual love is a matter of personal sense enjoyment. All the regulative principles in the Vedas pertaining to desires for popularity, fatherhood, wealth and so on are different phases of sense gratification. Acts of sense gratification may be performed under the cover of public welfare, nationalism, religion, altruism, ethical codes, Biblical codes, health directives, fruitive action, bashfulness, tolerance, personal comfort, liberation from material bondage, progress, family affection or fear of social ostracism or legal punishment, but all these categories are different subdivisions of one substance — sense gratification. All such good acts are performed basically for one's own sense gratification, for no one can sacrifice his personal interest while discharging these much-advertised moral and religious principles. But above all this is a transcendental stage in which one feels himself to be only an eternal servitor of Kṛṣṇa, the absolute Personality of Godhead. All acts performed in this sense of servitude are called pure love of God because they are performed for the absolute sense gratification of Śrī Kṛṣṇa. However, any act performed for the purpose of enjoying its fruits or results is an act of sense gratification. Such actions are visible sometimes in gross and sometimes in subtle forms.