Gaurasundara

This was Prabhupada's favourite verse from Kulasekhara Alvar:

 

LYRICS:

kṛṣṇa tvadīya-pada-pańkaja-pañjarāntam

adyaiva me viśatu mānasa-rāja-haḿsaḥ

prāṇa-prayāṇa-samaye kapha-vāta-pittaiḥ

kaṇṭhāvarodhana-vidhau smaraṇaḿ kutas te

TRANSLATION

O Krsna! Please allow my mind to immediately yield to Your lotus flowerlike feet, just as the flamingo enters into the labyrinth of the lotus flowers' stems. When at the moment of my last breath my throat becomes constricted by the action of the bodily humors air, bile, and phlegm, how will I be able to remember You?

So even if you are choking, no matter, just remember Krishna. Smaranam is also a way to the Lord. The Lord is not cruel that He will forget you in your time of need.

 

We should be trying to eliminate all stumbling blocks to the acceptance of transcendental knowledge. I know many consider such statements in the SB to be transcendentla knowledge simply because it is in the SB but I think this is a mistake. I am hoping for a discoupling of all such statements from the Absolute Truth in the SB so that the Absolute Truth can be more readily seen without obstruction.

 

Some will consider this approach as heretical and I ask those that do to please tell me why they think so. It could be a fruitful discussion.

I wouldn't think it is necessarily heretical. If you're referring to the descriptions of the universe in the fifth canto (which is obviously at odds with modern science findings), I think that this can be properly reconciled because one of the SB verses shows how Sukadeva is explaining the universe to Pariksit in a way so that he can comprehend it as the "body of God". So if Pariksit is being urged to see the universe in a divine way that resembles God, it's natural why the Bhagavatam descriptions would be simultaneously true and conflicting with modern science.

 

So, the only place we get information about Jesus is in the Bible.

Srila Prabhupada said we cannot accept the Bible as authoritative, so how then can we accept Jesus if in fact Srila Prabhupada rejected the Bible as being authoritative?

 

Srila Prabhupada rejected the New Testaments of the Bible which are the source of information about the teachings of Jesus.

So, if he rejected the Bible, then by proxy he is covertly rejecting Jesus.

 

If he didn't accept the Bible and rejected it as not being authoritative, then really what grounds are there for all this sentimental whining about Jesus?

Well the first quote in this thread is by Prabhupada. I guess he was just sentimentally whining according to you..

 

I think the Christian Vaisnavas are really loosing the plot with their "your being offensive to Christ" statements. I often find this "you're-being-offensive prabhu" tatic being used by devotees when they are loosing a argument.

 

The other tatic used by devotees is to use the "Srila Prabhupada says..." tatic. The problem with this tatic is that Srila Prabhupada said many things on many topics. Sometimes it appears he contradicts himself. So when you say "Srila Prabhpada says..." please mention the context in which he said what he said. There's a "Srila Prabhupada says..." for nearly everything. I looked at the VNN article mention by Guruvani, and Srila Prabhuopada is less than complamentary towards Christians.

 

One last thought: How many Jesus threads have there being on here since this forum started?

 

Wasn't it only last month when someone said Jesus is Kalki?

I think people are mixing up concepts here, but from my point of view I also disagree with the "Christian Vaishnava" concept because I don't think syncretism is possible. But I have no problem with offering my obeisances to the feet of Jesus, he was a great soul. Prabhupada is also referring to how we should respect Jesus as a preacher of God and I have no problem with that.

 

This "Krishna is better than Christ" stuff is juvenile and pure fanaticism. It's the type of stuff that newbie overenthusiastic idealists say.

 

Ignore function would be good. In practical terms that is called banning one from posting.

Perhaps he can post, but a filter of sorts can be created so that the posts of certain people are no longer visible to the reader who is filtering.

 

 

He was banned here once before as he has been banned from most forums he enters. I am loath to ask for this generally as most disruptive trolls burn out when ignored but this character is an exception. His rantings are creeper killers.

 

But his offence behavior towards Christ is eally just a tactic to turn the disscussion onto himself. The poor little attention starved kid in classroom that disrupts the class preventing others from learning just to get noticed.

Oh, I never noticed him before except in the fall/no-fall discussion recently. So this is regular behaviour? Hmm..

 

I understand and completely emphatise with what you say about creeper-killers though.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"What we're dealin' with here is a complete lack of respect for the law."

 

- Sheriff Buford T. Justice (Smokey and the Bandit)

 

to say that Krishna has no effulgence in Goloka is simply a serious lack of spiritual knowledge.

and within the effulgence of Krishna in Goloka are numberless spiritual sparks in shanta rasa.

Nobody is denying that effulgence does not originate in Krishna, but that it is not perceptible to the residents of Goloka Vrindavan. If it is, I'd like to see scriptural examples of how His mother, father, friends, gopis, gopas etc. are (constantly) blinded by the bright effulgence that emanates from His body. The example from Sri Rupa Gosvami's Padyavali is an example of Krishna's "soft effulgence" that is a part of His beauty, and which is also called His bodily luster: "A perfect devotee of Krsna is overwhelmed by seeing the beauty of Krsna's bodily luster, His face and smile, and he bathes in the ocean of transcendental convulsions." (Teachings of Lord Caitanya, Chapter: The Beauty of Krsna)

 

Mind you, I assume we are talking about aprakata-lila here, not prakata-lila. You won't find any scriptural examples to support this effulgence idea except for the philosophical verses from Brahma-samhita etc, which nobody is denying. The tattva is that Krishna emanates effulgence, but not in lila. Lila would be pretty hard otherwise; everyone would be constantly bumping into each other being blinded by Krishna's glaring effulgence and leading to some comedic situations. Life in Vrindavan is meant to be a barrel of laughs, but not that much.

 

This is all besides the point though, because I still think the explanation of SB 4.28.54 to refer only to the souls who are supposedly in santa-rasa is a pretty huge extrapolation by any standards. It is also impossible since santa-rasa is not present in Goloka Vrindavan (but is there in Vaikuntha). But even if it were true, I'd like to see evidence that the spiritual sparks within Krishna's effulgence are in santa-rasa. Does anybody else have an opinion or understanding of this? Sorry for offending anyone, I see we're getting off-track from the "fall/no-fall" discussion lol.

 

Anyway I gotta go.

Actually, Theist prabhu, an issue like this may be slightly comedic in places. You can't help wondering how a person may feel in their hearts when reading discussions like this, who may then go on to think:

 

"I know I'm fallen, you don't have to rub it in."

Or is He the father of Lord Vishnu, the father of Brahma?

According to Srimad Bhagavatam, Shiva is the son of Brahma. Please see SB 3.12.4-20 for further information ().

 

Thank You. I lean somewhat in the other direction than the orthodox vedantic position but still remain unrealized in the matter. I also will wait for Krsna to show me the full truth of the matter and not wrack my little brain over this Crow and Tal fruit debate.

You got a friend. I think it's a perfectly natural thing to feel a kinship with Krishna. After all, we are His eternal fragmental parts (BG 15.7), He is our eternal Father (BG 14.4) and of course He is present in our hearts (BG 18.61). "We are always with Krishna".

 

 

At the same time I am happy to see souls debate such topics as this vs. all the other topics that could occupy the mind. Souls will ome to see the fultility of it in their own way and time.

Yes I agree. There is definitely some benefit to discussing spiritual topics. Talks about Krishna are the life and soul of the Vaishnavas. The day that goes by without a thought or word about Krishna is a very bad day.

 

I think the operative word in that statement by Srila Prabhupada is "PEACEFULLY". Shanti means peace and is related to shanta and shanta-rasa.

 

So, what Srila Prabhupada is saying about living "PEACEFULLY" with Krishna in the spiritual word means the living entities existed in the spiritual world in shanta-rasa, which is a neutral stage and has sometimes not been included in the range of having an actual relationship with Krishna in devotional service.

Except that there is no santa-rasa in Goloka Vrindavan. There is santa-rasa in Vaikuntha and dasya-rasa too, so it all depends which area of "the spiritual world" you are discussing. Apart from that, intereting Srila Prabhupada's quote to apply only to those jivas who are supposedly in santa-rasa is a pretty big extraction of an interpretation, probably wouldn't hold any water as far as logic is concerned. The quote clearly refers to "living entities" and doesn't make any statement of any particular types of living entities. The whole quote is a summation of the "fall" doctrine that can be found in Prabhupada's books, and which circulates everywhere including in this discussion. It's a tough quote, I agree, which is why I said I was interested in hearing responses to that quote in Prabhupada's books.

 

 

Some living entities in shanta-rasa are neither averse or attracted to Krishna. They exist in a state of limbo where they maintain some equilibrium, yet they are not protected by actually engaging in positive devotional service.

There is no santa-rasa in Vrindavan, so this does not apply.

 

 

Krishna has an effulgence even in Goloka.

I'm not sure. If Krishna had a bright blaring effulgence in His "hometown" that nobody would be able to see Him, least of all His parents, cowherd friends, gopis, etc.

 

 

That effuglence of Krishna contains unlimited spiritual sparks.

The spiritual sparks in the effuglence of Krishna are situated in Shanta-rasa.

I'm not sure about this either, I'd love to hear scriptural quotes to back this up.

 

 

When Krishna expands himself as Vishnu and impregnates these living entities into the mahat-tattva they become subject to the influence of maya and then many of them fall down.

This would work well for one who believes that jivas do fall from the spiritual world. From the content of your previous posts I guess you are not a fan of this idea, so I am surprised with this example. The "impregnation" of the living entitites into the mahat-tattva is the "recycling" of those jivas who did not attain liberation in the previous kalpa. If the kalpa ends and a sizeable number of jivas have not attained liberation, they are merged into the body of Maha-Vishnu in a sleeping and dormant condition, waiting for the next cycle of creation to begin. When it does, these jivas are "impregnated" back into the new creation and act according to their inclinations. They were fallen to begin with and they will remain "fallen" until they get out of the vicious circle.

 

I suppose it's possible to describe this "sleeping within Maha-Vishnu" as "being with Krishna". Maybe that's where the whole controversy lies. The Vedanta also states that karma is beginningless, which is a very important assertion and is they key to this whole issue. Sorry to all for going off-track with the santa-rasa stuff but I am still interested to hear responses/explanations to SB 4.28.54, it does seem an unending controversy with both sides of the discussion being present in Srila Prabhupada's books. But as I say it is ultimately unimportant to me (subjective) as I would much rather concentrate on my own sadhana to reach Krishna, but siddhanta (objective) is important too for it's own reasons. Sorry if I offended anybody.

 

 

 

 

What about this?

 

 

The original home of the living entity and the Supreme Personality of Godhead is the spiritual world. In the spiritual world both the Lord and the living entities live together very peacefully. Since the living entity remains engaged in the service of the Lord, they both share a blissful life in the spiritual world. However, when the living entity wants to enjoy himself, he falls down into the material world. Even while he is in that position, the Lord remains with him as the Supersoul, his intimate friend. Because of his forgetfulness, the living entity does not know that the Supreme Lord is accompanying him as the Supersoul. In this way the living entity remains conditioned in each and every millennium. Although the Lord follows him as a friend, the living entity, because of forgetful material existence, does not recognize Him.

(SB 4.28.54)

 

How does this jive with the explanations that "books are higher than letters/conversations"? I've heard a lot of back-and-forth but I'm always interested in reactions and explanations to Prabhupada's purport to SB as quoted above. This is in his books.

 

I personally don't care anyway. I accept the orthodox Vedantic position that jivas never fall but it is Crow-and-tal-fruit logic: Whether I fell or not, the fact is I'm nowhere so I'm working to get to Krishna.

 

(Quoting Srila Prabhupada) Friendship should be cemented between persons with mutual interests and understanding. Such persons are said to be sva jati, “of the same caste.”

I liked this part.

I love this little extract from Caitanya-bhagavata that I spotted the other day. The scene is set like so:

 

A sannyasi arrived at the house of Advaita Prabhu and, after the normal niceties, desired to ask Advaita Acharya a question. "How is Keshava Bharati related to Chaitanya?" Advaita was in a quandary, for how could he answer? The Lord has no superior, but Chaitanya had accepted Sri Keshava Bharati as master. Contemplating on both the worldly and spiritual aspects of the question, Advaita replied, "Keshava Bharati is Chaitanya's guru. But you already knew this so why did you ask?"

 

At that moment, Advaita's young son Achyutananda came running into the house after play and had heard the words of his esteemed father. In mock anger he chastised Advaita for describing Chaitanya as an ordinary mortal having a guru, and corrected his "misconception". What follows are the beautiful words of Sri Achyutananda as he describes Mahaprabhu as the Supreme Lord and identifies Him as Maha-Vishnu, the Creator:

 

 

 

 

 

Achyutananda went on to say a few more things in chastisement. After hearing thus, Advaita Acharya was so impressed that he embraced his son and shed tears of joy, as did the sannyasi who heard the boy's glorification of Mahaprabhu and similarly wept joyfully.

 

May we all be blessed with the boon of joyful tears after hearing such beautiful narrations.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

http: // groups. google. com.au /group /pradumyaswami

Whoever he is, this doesn't give any information about him but is just his own discussion group with only 4 members. Unfortunately I didn't feel like reading any of the posts because I found the headlines extremely offensive: "Even the cowherd boys fall down", "even the leaves fall down", etc. What I briefly read in other threads from him have even more offensive titles such as "Narada Muni fell down" and so on. I find it ludicrous that anyone can give a "final proof" about an event that supposedly occurred so far back in beginningless time (see the irony?) that anyone can even speak about it. I think this is an extremely bad trend to make such haughty statements about super-eminent personalities like Devarsi Narada Muni and Krishna's cowherd friends, that too from a sannyasi apparently. So while I respectfully disagree with him, I make my obeisances from a distance.

 

But just by coincidence, I was reading Bhagavad-Gita last night and I came across this interesting quote from BG 13.20:

 

 

Both material nature and the living entity are eternal. That is to say that they existed before the creation. The material manifestation is from the energy of the Supreme Lord, and so also are the living entities, but the living entities are of the superior energy. Both the living entities and material nature existed before this cosmos was manifested. Material nature was absorbed in the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Maha-Visnu, and when it was required, it was manifested by the agency of mahat-tattva. Similarly, the living entities are also in Him, and because they are conditioned, they are averse to serving the Supreme Lord. Thus they are not allowed to enter into the spiritual sky. But with the coming forth of material nature these living entities are again given a chance to act in the material world and prepare themselves to enter into the spiritual world. That is the mystery of this material creation. Actually the living entity is originally the spiritual part and parcel of the Supreme Lord, but due to his rebellious nature, he is conditioned within material nature. It really does not matter how these living entities or superior entities of the Supreme Lord have come in contact with material nature. The Supreme Personality of Godhead knows, however, how and why this actually took place.

The general point is that whether we fell from Vaikuntha or not, we can never know for sure. It is a waste of time to consider these things when our time could be better spent engaging our tongues in glorious Hari-kirtan and associating with Vaishnavas.

For years I have been telling anyone who'll listen about the glories of Mahaprabhu's beautiful Golden Lotus Feet. "Mahaprabhu's lotus feet are the most beautiful golden colous, softer than a rose. His toenails are so shiny, you can see your face in them," that sort of thing.

 

And guess what! I just found out it's confirmed by scripture!

 

 

 

 

Gaura-lila is the most beautiful thing in the world. The life of the Vaishnavas is Krishna-katha, and all sectarian differences are dissolved by the unifying principle of sravanam-kirtanam. Please feel free to elaborate on this pastime, I have opened this thread so everyone can post little jewels from Gaura-lila and "Gaura-centric" scriptures.

Wow, this is so shocking, saddening and surprising all at once. It was only yesterday that I was reading some of his recent posts here. This is very unfortunate and he will be missed.

 

I also have that BTG issue.

I am now even more firmly convinced then ever that those that take to lower mode arguments against the other have no solid standing in either.

Bravo!

I was going through CB Madhya-khanda today, the chapter describing Sri Gaurahari's return to Navadvipa from Gaya after receiving diksha from Sri Ishvara Puripada. As Mahaprabhu recounts the basic details of His trip to Mother Sachi and the other Vaishnavas, his joyful memories cause him to faint and revive in a constant cycle, body horripilating and tears streaming from His holy eyes at the very mention of Gaya as "pada-padma-tirtha", and ecstatically crying "Where is Krishna?" to the astonishment and amazement of the residents of Navadvipa.

 

 

ArambhilA mahAprabhu Apana-prakAza

ananta brahmANda-maya haila ullAsa

 

As Mahaprabhu began to manifest Himself, unlimited universes rejoiced!

 

'prema-vRSTi karite prabhura zubhArambha'

dhvani zuni' yAya yathA bhAgavata-vRnda

 

'The auspicious beginning of Prabhu's distribution of prema is about to begin.' Hearing thus, all the devotees immediately ventured to that spot. (CB 2. 1. 47-48)

Finding Himself unable to speak, Prabhu directed only a few of His associates (Sriman Pandit, Sadashiva Brahmachari and Murari Pandit) to meet the next morning at Shuklambhara Brahmachari's house where He promised to give fuller details. As that most auspicious day dawned, Sriman Pandita joyfully came to Srivasa Thakura's beauteous garden to pick flowers for offering to Mahaprabhu, and revealed the news of his impending meeting with the Lord to Srivasa, Gadadhara, Gopinath and Ramai, who were also picking flowers for their morning worship. After relating the happenings of the previous day to them in detail, Sriman Pandit urged them that there was every reason to believe him and his description was greeted with the triumphant and joyful chanting of Harinam from his listeners.

 

 

prathamei balilena zrIvAsa udAra

"gotra bADAuna kRSNa AmA' sabAkAra"

 

The magnanimous Srivasa was the first to speak: "May Krishna increase our family."

 

gotraM nu vardhatAm iti

 

May our family increase. (CB 2.1.73-74)

This is the magic mantra!!!!! "GotraM nu vardhatAm iti" - the most holy words spoken by Bhakta-avatara Srivasa Pandit in the Sri Caitanya-bhagavata, the magic words in seed form that will bestow great blessings upon the world!! How wonderful!!! The most wonderful and benevolent mission of Mahaprabhu is about to start, and billions of jivas will be drawn to His fold!! Indeed so:

 

 

'tathAstu' 'tathAstu' bale bhAgavata-gaNa

'sabei bhAjuka kRSNacandrera caraNa'

 

'So shall it be!' 'So shall it be!' exclaimed the devotees. 'Let everyone worship the feet of Krishnacandra!' (CB 2.1.76)