Guruvani

The sleepervadi conception proposes that magically and mysteriously we will all wake up someday in Goloka. They don't even understand what Mahaprabhu has instructed about taking birth in a material universe where the pastimes of Krishna are manifesting and taking birth in the womb of a gopi to go through a natural sequence of establishing our relationship/rasa and spiritual form there first and then going to Goloka from Vrajabhumi. They don't see a need for raganuga bhakti either because they think they are already there and already have their spiritual body waiting for them if they can just wake-up from the dream they are having from Goloka. The sleepervadi concept is a cheating process. It makes things very cheap. It is just a matter of snapping out of a dream they are having in Goloka. It also introduces imperfection into the Goloka realm by saying that falling down from eternal life is a common occurance that oocurs on a scale that is unimaginable. I know Kailasa Chandra das has a website where he preaches the same thing. I don't know if Sarva Gattah is Kailasa Chandra, but they sure have the same sleepervadi philosophy and they both have a rotten attitude towards most all Gaudiyas outside of ISKCON. They probably aren't the same person, but Kailasa Chandra is very active on the web with his own similar campaign to preach the fall-from-vaikuntha nonsense.

In many ways, Srila Prabhupada lived a sheltered life of strictly conservative Indian society. He was raised in a very conservative Vaishnava family and then came in contact with the Lion Acharya who elevated his Vaishnava conservatism to an even higher level. Western people grow up in abject materialism and sense gratification. I guess Srila Prabhupada considered that we were incapable of grasping the minute details of Gaudiya siddhanta because of our dull senses that are jaded from a life of wanton lust. Even we can look back at the questions that his "disciples" were putting to him and see that in fact they were not grasping what he was writing in the books. In the early years there were not even that many books. But, even after writing something in his books that his disciples were supposed to be reading and understanding, Srila Prabhupada appears to have gotten the impression that they weren't actually grasping the details and were still coming to him with questions that had already been addressed in his books. It appears that Srila Prabhupada just felt that modern people had to be taught some remedial substitute for the Gaudiya siddhanta on the actual facts of the origins and the fall of the jiva. He didn't explicity teach the fall-from-goloka theory, but he did seem to sort of steer his students toward deriving that conception from his rather elusive statements on the origin and fall of the jiva. It has been shown though that western people's intelligence might surpass their religiousity. As such, the fall-from-goloka fairytale has been undermined by extensive study and research of the Gaudiya texts. I am a good example. I am not very intelligent, but what paltry intelligence I have certainly surpasses my religiousity. In my case, curiosity has killed the cat of the fall-from-goloka fairytale, though my devotional life has much to be desired.

If we accept the Bible as Veda, then we can also accept , , and all sorts of other books and writings as Veda. I think we should just draw the line at the works of Vyasadeva.

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink. But, the horse is not really a horse and water is not really water. Hence:sleep: Birth of sleepervada.

The Vedas were complied by Vyasadeva. Then there are Itihasa and Purana etc. I don't consider the Bible as Veda. I just think that Srila Prabhupada didn't want to start a war with the Christian western world and preached in a way as to try and prevent that war. As western people taking to the Vedic knowledge we have a little more tendency to be critical than an acharya from India trying to avoid a religious war between the Christians and the Hare Krishnas. I definitely do not consider the Bible as Veda. I just think Srila Prabhupada was being diplomatic. I don't take everything Srila Prabhupada says as literal. I see other things at work in his words besides literal meanings.

Srila Prabhupada said not to add or subtract. What we have to avoid is the adding or subtracting to his message. Srila Prabhupada gave enough. We don't need to expand into further addition or subtraction to what Srila Prabhupada taught. Whatever is in the Gaudiya books I relish. Whatever comes after that I can live without. Krishnadas Kaviraja Goswami did not touch or comment on Jesus, the Bible or Christianity. I can do without these modern excursions outside the message of the previous acharyas - the self-realized masters of the Gaudiya sampradaya.

I would be flattered if the divine payed that much attention to me. I think it was just a technical glitch that came with the forum upgrades and possibly some new blocks against linking or the word censors.

something is weird. I removed a quote from post and it went through. I was linked to Vedabase.net. I don't know what is up but something is.

It appears to me Srila Prabhupada, being the great world acharya he was, also had to be part psychologist, part socialogist and part babysitter. As I quoted before, Srila Prabhupada even wrote in his purport that he was somtetimes perplexed about exactly how to preach Krishna conciousness on a world scale. So, I see in Srila Prabhupada's approach to preaching a sort of mayavada defense mechanism in his parakosha method of analogous examples. He appeared to worry that the actual Gaudiya siddhanta could get misunderstood and butchered by neophyte western devotees if he was too straight forward and open about the actual connection between the jiva and it's brahmajyoti origins. He does explain the situation if some parts of his books but in most of his letters and conversations he seemed to dance around the issue and avoid such direct and open explanations. So, as a spiritual pshycologist, Srila Prabhupada approached preaching about origins and the fall of the jiva with a extreme measure of tact so as to hopefully prevent upstart western devotees from misunderstanding the siddhanta and using it to justify some jnana-misra bhakti and an over-infatuation with the brahman aspect of Krishna. Sometimes I refer to this as fairytale telling. Srila Prabhupada felt that kind of preaching was necessary. I personally prefer the straight on siddhanta. I don't think I needed to be spoonfed some watered-down siddhanta. Maybe Srila Prabhupada felt that most western people did. So, I see a certain measure of psychological programming built into the preaching of Srila Prabhupada. I don't see his message as some raw version of Gaudiya siddhanta. I see some embellishments that Srila Prabhupada added because he felt the need as he admitted to being perplexed sometimes about exactly how to push forward the KC movement on a global scale. However, if we venture into the actual Gaudiya texts and writings of the previous acharyas we will find that there is much less of this psychology added to the siddhanta and the shastra. I certainly don't fault Srila Prabhupada for the way he preached. I am not so sure I agree that western people really needed to hear it that way, but Srila Prabhupada obviously felt they did. He was an Indian guru and I am an American, so our perspectives on that issue are very different. In the end I think the preventative measures might have become an issue. Not that the fall-from-goloka fairytale really hurts anyone, while the Mayavada contamination would. Personally, I don't think that the raw Gaudiya siddhanta at all nurtures any Mayavada tendencies and I personally don't really see that the "fairytale" was necessary. Srila Prabhupada did not exactly tell the fairytale, but it is seen that from his preaching the fairytale was able to be extrapolated. So, it is not really that Srila Prabhupada diverged from the Gaudiya siddhanta. He just approached his world mission with a certain approach to the psychology that he thought was necessary for western people. I am not so sure that Srila Prabhupada really understood the mind of western people. I think western people could have been given the raw siddhanta without making a mess out of it. What has been made a mess of is his "origins" theory and his paroksha method of preaching by analogy. The analogies have been taken too literally and some philosophical confusion has taken root in ISKCON.

there must be some word censor thing preventing a post I have been trying post all day. Otherwise, I don't have a clue why this one copy/paste post I have been trying to post won't go through.

It appears to me Srila Prabhupada, being the great world acharya he was, also had to be part psychologist, part socialogist and part babysitter. As I quoted before, Srila Prabhupada even wrote in his purport that he was somtetimes perplexed about exactly how to preach Krishna conciousness on a world scale. So, I see in Srila Prabhupada's approach to preaching a sort of mayavada defense mechanism in his parakosha method of analogous examples. He appeared to worry that the actual Gaudiya siddhanta could get misunderstood and butchered by neophyte western devotees if he was too straight forward and open about the actual connection between the jiva and it's brahmajyoti origins. He does explain the situation in some parts of his books but in most of his letters and conversations he seemed to dance around the issue and avoid such direct and open explanations. So, as a spiritual pshycologist, Srila Prabhupada approached preaching about origins and the fall of the jiva with an extreme measure of tact so as to hopefully prevent upstart western devotees from misunderstanding the siddhanta and using it to justify some jnana-misra bhakti and an over-infatuation with the brahman aspect of Krishna. Sometimes I refer to this as fairytale telling. Srila Prabhupada felt that kind of preaching was necessary. I personally prefer the straight on siddhanta. I don't think I needed to be spoonfed some watered-down siddhanta. Maybe Srila Prabhupada felt that most modern people did. So, I see a certain measure of psychological programming built into the preaching of Srila Prabhupada. I don't see his message as some raw version of Gaudiya siddhanta. I see some embellishments that Srila Prabhupada added because he felt the need as he admitted to being perplexed sometimes about exactly how to push forward the KC movement on a global scale. However, if we venture into the actual Gaudiya texts and writings of the previous acharyas we will find that there is much less of this psychology added to the siddhanta and the shastra. I certainly don't fault Srila Prabhupada for the way he preached. I am not so sure I agree that western people really needed to hear it that way, but Srila Prabhupada obviously felt they did. He was an Indian guru and I am an American, so our perspectives on that issue are very different. In the end I think the preventative measures might have become an issue. Not that the fall-from-goloka fairytale really hurts anyone, while the Mayavada contamination would. Personally, I don't think that the raw Gaudiya siddhanta at all nurtures any Mayavada tendencies and I personally don't really see that the "fairytale" was necessary. Srila Prabhupada did not exactly tell the fairytale, but it is seen that from his preaching the fairytale was able to be extrapolated. So, it is not really that Srila Prabhupada diverged from the Gaudiya siddhanta. He just approached his world mission with a certain approach to the psychology that he thought was necessary for western people. I am not so sure that Srila Prabhupada really understood the mind of western people. I think western people could have been given the raw siddhanta without making a mess out of it. What has been made a mess of is his "origins" theory and his paroksha method of preaching by analogy. The analogies have been taken too literally and some philosophical confusion has taken root in ISKCON.

I have been having trouble posting to this topic. I have been trying all day but it never goes through. I don't know what the problem is.

"Brahmana and Vaisnava" entitled Harijana-khanda , Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura: <!-- 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"> "Before acquiring material designations, the living entity is supremely pure. EVEN THOUGH HE IS NOT ENGAGED IN SERVING THE SUPREME LORD, he remains situated in the neutral position of santa-rasa due to his marginal nature. Though the living entity born from the marginal potency does not at that time exhibit a taste for serving the Lord due to a LACK OF KNOWLEDGE OF SELF REALIZATION, his direct propensity of serving the Supreme Lord nevertheless remains within him in a dormant state. </td> </tr> </tbody></table> <!-- END TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote -->

Sarva Gattah: Don't forget, you are sleeping and dreaming. So, because of your sleepervadi philosophy it means you are dreaming that you have a body in Goloka waiting for you like a loyal dog waiting for his master to come home. So, since you are now dreaming, it is impossible for you to understand Gaudiya siddhanta and what the shastra and the acharyas have said. You are dreaming. You are sleeping. Wake-up and realize that you don't have a spiritual body laying around Goloka waiting for you to come back.

Sarva Gattah: Read the books. Your misconceptions would be resolved if you ever got around to reading the books of Gaudiya siddhanta. You think you know better than BBT scholars, ISKCON gurus, Gaudiya Matha gurus and all the previous acharyas because you found some letter from Srila Prabhupada that you find easy to expoit with your bogus sleepervadi nonsense. The Admin here should just censor your nonsense and put a stop to your foolish rant to confuse people with bogus concepts.

I have spent several months in close association with Sivarama Swami (many years ago) and in my opinion he is 1st class. I always guessed that he was not the type of person to spout off bogus fairytale siddhanta. He is very serious and very grounded in the books. I am glad to hear that he is not a party to the ISKCON fairytale gang.

So, it all boils down to our resident sleepervadi accusing ISKCON gurus, the entire Gaudiya Matha, BBT scholars and a whole host of learned devotees of not understanding the siddhanta while SArva Gattah has it all figured out. He is just a small voice talking out from the depths of misconception as so many learned devotees and scholars rejects his fall-from goloka thesis that he has plastered all over the internet.

An official BBT website also rejects the fall theory. http://www.veda.harekrsna.cz/encyclopedia/philosophy2.htm#4

A BBT website also does not support the fall theory; http://www.veda.harekrsna.cz/encyclopedia/philosophy2.htm#4

"Brahmana and Vaisnava" entitled Harijana-khanda , Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura: <!-- 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"> "Before acquiring material designations, the living entity is supremely pure. EVEN THOUGH HE IS NOT ENGAGED IN SERVING THE SUPREME LORD, he remains situated in the neutral position of santa-rasa due to his marginal nature. Though the living entity born from the marginal potency does not at that time exhibit a taste for serving the Lord due to a LACK OF KNOWLEDGE OF SELF REALIZATION, his direct propensity of serving the Supreme Lord nevertheless remains within him in a dormant state. </td> </tr> </tbody></table> <!-- END TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote -->

"Brahmana and Vaisnava" entitled Harijana-khanda , Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura: Anybody that reads this can understand a proper conception of things as they are.

ISKCON guru Sivarama Swami does not accept the fall theory.

Srila Prabhupada: So, according to Srila Prabhupada the only time we ever saw Krishna was when we were in susupti or deep sleep. So, that cannot refer to the liberated devotees of Goloka. They are not in susupti. They are fully, spiritually awake. So, Srila Prabhupada confirms that we have never really seen Krishna in the awake state of liberation.