Narasingh

You misunderstood my question of why. I felt that upon speaking of Saraswati Thakura I was broadening the base of Saraswati's Succession. It certainly wasn't a trap, and I agree with the overall gist of your comment, but wondered why you specified disciples of Swami Prabhupada. I wondered if there was an inherent "exclusivity" in your remark. I was not trying to find a contradiction, simply wondering the reason for the perceived exclusivity. That is all. Cheers

Why only of "Srila Bhaktivedanta Swami"?

And yet, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati chose to "remain distanced respectfully from Radha Kunda, so as not to disturb the residents." Prabhupada also maintained this standard. The mission of Mahaprabhu is a simultaneous one. As Sarasvati Thakura saw it, it has less to do with taking up "residence" at Radha Kunda than it does with saranagati and Brhat Mrdanga Seva.

Srimad Bhagavatam 7.10.4: nānyathā te 'khila-guroghaṭeta karuṇātmanaḥ yas ta āśiṣa āśāste na sa bhṛtyaḥ sa vai vaṇik Otherwise, O my Lord, O supreme instructor of the entire world, You are so kind to Your devotee that You could not induce him to do something unbeneficial for him. On the other hand, one who desires some material benefit in exchange for devotional service cannot be Your pure devotee. Indeed, he is no better than a merchant who wants profit in exchange for service. Prahlada Maharaja is speaking from an elevated perspective. There are certainly different reasons to approach God, and Krsna asserts that He reciprocates in such ways. Sometimes this is the only way we initiate our relationship with Him. Dhruva Maharaja's story is applicable here. If there was anyone who wanted alot it was him. His prayer and determination to receive wealth, power, fame etc... from Vishnu finally brought Vishnu to him. However, upon seeing Vishnu, he lost all taste for his previous desires.

Would you mind reconciling these before and after statements?<would you="" mind="" reconciling="" these="" two?=""> You seem to suggest an immaturity to one who is of any other rasa. Somehow, in the Gaudiya scriptures, wherever you find mention of the objective differences, you find the harmonious statement that, although one rasa may be seen as being better than another, whoever is experiencing rasa of whichever kind feels it is perfect for them, such as kintu yanra yei rasa, sei sarvottama tata-stha hana vicarile, ache tara-tama It is true that whatever relationship a particular devotee has with the Lord is the best for him; still, when we study all the different methods from a neutral position, we can understand that there are higher and lower degrees of love.</would>

So there are instances in which ones sthayi bhava may have multiple moods, and therefore may have multiple spiritual forms? I can understand how Uddhava remains as who he is. As well as how Laxmidevi remains who she is. Although they have some intense appreciation for other bhavas, they are actually fully situated in their sthayi bhava of one mood. But there is room for one to have a sthayi bhava with multiple moods such as Narada Muni. Interesting. I'd love to hear more about it

Okay Sukhada, that explains the definition of svarup siddhi, but it sort of dances around the question. How does it explain the fact that, although Gopa Kumar attained a place in the Eternal Realm (Vaikuntha) served with the Narayan Bhaktas (of which there are surely an unlimited number of eternal Narayan parshads) in the form suitable to do so (an eternal form which never needs to see birth, death, old age, or disease), he still moved on to Goloka to another form? That is assuming his four armed form from Vaikuntha changes to a two armed form of a cowherd boy.

........ src="http://www.google.com/calendar/embed?src=7obrs0vi9ogb2u2tu1r0jtkt4c%40group.calendar.google.com&ctz=America/Los_Angeles" style="border: 0" width="800" height="600" frameborder="0" scrolling="no">.........>

........ src="http://www.google.com/calendar/embed?height=600&wkst=1&bgcolor=%23FFFFFF&src=7obrs0vi9ogb2u2tu1r0jtkt4c%40group.calendar.google.com&color=%23528800&ctz=America%2FLos_Angeles" style=" border-width:0 " width="800" height="600" frameborder="0" scrolling="no">.........>[/HTML]

........ src="http://www.google.com/calendar/embed?src=7obrs0vi9ogb2u2tu1r0jtkt4c%40group.calendar.google.com&ctz=America/Los_Angeles" style="border: 0" width="800" height="600" frameborder="0" scrolling="no">.........>

Happy Birthday!

So, perhaps there is room, now, for a little revelation of the cowherd Gopas who are dedicated to Srimati Radharani

Yes, this isn't about winning. Its about bhakti which is ahaituki apratihata. And... I've heard it can all be harmonized by taking part in Mahaprabhu's sankirtana.

The thousands of Laxmis are likened to the innumerable Vishnus which Brahma saw by the Darshana of Krsna. They are qualitatively as Laxmi, but Laxmidevi is Narayanas eternal consort. As Krsna says B.G.4.11 He reciprocates with those as they approach Him. The Gopis are those who posess that bhava of losing all control of themselves by the sound of Krsna's flute even at the cost of societal condemnation. Laxmi posesses a different bhava. That is all. This is similar to the subjective differences of sakhya bhava and sakhi bhava in the other thread. One may be seen as less than the other from a neutral standpoint, but when bhava is gifted, there is no question of it not being right for you.

sravanam, kirtanam, vishnu smaranam, pada sevanam, archanam, vandanam, dasyam, sakhyam, atma-nivedanam. These are the 9 processes of Bhakti. Krsna accepts the use of intelligence for His service. The service is see Babhru Prabhu doing is to question the idea that it is unthinkable to have a Gaudiya Vaishnava acharya in sakhya bhava. Babhru shows in his book that Srila Prabhupada welcomed his disciples seeing him in that manner, and since it has become (en-vogue?) to thrash this idea of Prabhupada being in sakhya bhava, I think he felt obligated to counter with the assertion of the possibility. I think this question is meritous, and whether or not I, personally, believe Srila Prabhupada is sakha, still doesn't invalidate his assertion. Let me know, Babhru Prabhu, if I have misinterpreted you. I think it would be valuable for the devotees to be able to see everything which Srila Sridhara Maharaj had to say on this issue in a chronological order along with the questions of the devotees asked of him. Seeing as how it seems even Sridhara Maharaj's views are arguable.

Laxmidevi views Narayan as Her husband, not God. She is attached to that relationship and Narayan is as well. This is what hampers Her entrance into rasa-lila. Even though She knows full well that Krsna is non-different from Narayana, still something inside Her doesn't like the idea of "cheating" and She can't bring herself to follow through with Her desires. It is Her glorification of Srimati Radharani. As for the "curses due to accidental offenses". I've considered that these are Lila as well as the adventing on Earth.

Gaura Hari Bol!!! It is sad! May his example of selfless Bhakti and affection for Guru, Sadhu, and Sashtra remain foremost in everyones mind!

What kind of Bhakti do we strive for? It is: sa vai pumsam paro dharmo yato bhaktir adhoksaje ahaituky apratihata yenatma samprasidati [sB 1.2.6] This ahaituky is the most important function. I don't remember where I've seen it but "want what They want" stands true. When Prabhupada Bhaktisiddhanta said "If you get money, print books" many personalities who were there thought it was a general statement, however A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada considered it directly to him. The satisfaction from bhakti is bhakti. Bhakti begets more bhakti. Not position, wealth etc. If we look at the attaining of svarup to be something to acquire we are sure to be lost. It is a subtle nuance which stands to be reckoned with. We must look for the bestowing of bhakti from the higher realm and we will find ourselves fulfilled. This is what I've learned.

And the final question... If Srimati Radharani wants you to be a cowherd boy, would it be aparadha to want to be a gopi instead?

Are rupanugas also raganugas? I understand that raganugas are not necessarily rupanugas.

I think we need to define rasa... I caught myself using rasa as being mutable when I meant to say svarup in the above statement of mine. I would define the inherent rasa of the Vrajavasis as being this: Krsna is my life and soul! Srimati Radarani is His Ultimate Worshipable Gopi! All Hail Radha-Govinda! The svarup will correspond with the rasa in that whatever makes Radha-Govinda pleased is the thing to do. The rest is details.... We've all heard the cliche of what is in the details.

What about the story of Gopa-Kumar.I find it fascinating that contemporary Gaudiya Vaishnavism almost never counts Vaikuntha, Narayan's abode as having much bearing. However, the fact that there are eternal parshads in Vaikuntha coupled with the fact that Gopa-Kumar passed through Vaikuntha on his way to sakhya bhava lila with Krsna, should indicate that svarupa is potentially mutable. Also that there are kundas in Vrndavan dham capabaple of bestowing gopi svarup... It would be better to say that while a svarup may be right for one, another may be changed if it supports Lila.