Sonic Yogi

No, it doesn't. It implies objectivity and intelligence. Mahaprabhu explained the concept of gradation in rasa. If anyone should know about the gradation in rasa it would be Mahaprabhu and it is he who said that the madhurya-rasa is the sweetest. If someone wants less sweetness then they can have less sweetness in love.

Very interesting topic. I am hoping to see you develop this topic more and more. Very nice. Free thinking. Drink from the fountain of truth and share the news.

My theory is that there is complete freedom in bhakti-rasa. If, like Uddhava, one sees a higher kind of devotion than his own and aspires to attain to that higher platform of sacrifice and surrender, then he has that option. I don't believe that one is eternally locked into a lesser level of love of Krsna when higher levels are there. If a cowherd boy realizes that the love of the gopis is superior, or Uddhava realized that the gopis love Krsna more perfectly than him, then why should there be an eternal barrier to them moving up to a higher rasa? There is higher and lower from an objective point of view. That is the version we get in the Gaudiya shastra. If any bhakta objectively sees that the gopis are on a higher platform of surrender than him, then what is to stop him from ascending to the higher level? Is it all one? Is santa rasa really as good as madhurya-rasa? Is dasya-rasa as good as madhurya-rasa? Maybe in the eyes of the santa-bhakta, but not in the eyes of an objective thinker. So, there can be no block to advancing in devotional service. That is my position. Objectively speaking the Gaudiya shastra teaches that the gopis have the highest kind of love and surrender. If you want to surrender on a lower platform Krsna will accept that, but that does not mean that you have reached the highest point of surrender. The jiva souls are prakriti, feminine energy in nature. They all have the capacity to attain to that feminine position in relationship to Krsna. Anything less is not complete surrender. But, some surrender is better than none and can still afford one eternal life with Krsna.

I don't pretend anything. Right or wrong I speak my mind. That is the beauty of being a freelance realist, you don't get blunted by party politics, position seeking, kissing butt or guru wars. You can think for yourself and because you don't want any position in anyone's camp you can speak your mind freely. I am a little ad hoc in my ways, but that is just because I am so fluid and flexible that realization comes to me rather easily and naturally. See, I am not out to get a position in anyone's club. Never have been, Never will be.

What is even more sad is that you guys lumped up in camps, politics, guru bias, guru wars, guru mania and position seeking are so lame on siddhanta and deeper understandings of spiritual reality. This is what politics and party spirit does to a man. It makes him philosophically challenged.

After I posted authoritative reference from Gaudiya shastra, you come back with some lame theory about no choice and divine slavery? Wow, you are really taking a shot in the dark. I hope to God you aren't any leading devotee preaching this kind of stuff to innocent newcomers.

Nice house? It is just a glorified shack. It is a little wooden house up on cement blocks. I payed $30,000.00 cash for it about 9 years ago. It is not so nice. It is very simple. Yet, I like the simplicity and certainly nobody can claim I am living in the lap of luxury. But, I like my little shack in Florida. It's paid for and the taxes are low. For a man who lives on the poverty line that is about as good as it gets. (sorry for the diversion from topic)

I was not insinuating at all in the least that T Swami is moving towards such a thing. That was not my intentions. Besides that, the tantric sahajiyas and the siddha-pranali are two different things. I insinuated that Maharaja is moving towards somewhat of a siddha-pranali conception. That should not be confused with the tantric sahajiyas who have sex with women playing roles of Radha and Krsna. The siddha-pranali of the orthodox school are very rigid in principles and nothing to be lumped in with tantric sahajiyas. Many of the "orthodox" siddha-pranali types are very strict and rigid in their sadhana and regulative principles. The tantric sahajiyas have sexual relations and try to connect that with some sort of raganuga bhakti concept. I heard on another forum that Jagadananda had made the move in the tantric sahajiya direction and the orthodox boys thought he was off his rocker. So, I don't agree with T Swami on everything, but I know he is nowhere near anything like a tantric sahajiya. He is a man of strict principles that I admire greatly. That doesn't mean that I understand the Gaudiya shastra the same way he does. I have my own perspective free of camp, school, politics and position. I am a lone wolf. I have NO camp.

I don't think so. You are comparing apples and oranges. Prabhupada is referring to Lord Brahma's sentiments as the creator of the universe who meets with Krsna in this world during one of Krsna's incarnations and shakes his hand. Lord Brahma in his service position in this world also relishes a rasa with Krsna in his external position serving Krsna as the creator God of the universe. Srila Bhaktisiddhanta is referring to Lord Brahma's internal nature in his siddha rupa in Goloka. When Lord Brahma perfected the kama-gayatri mantra he entered samadhi and realized that he was a maidservant of Krsna. In the case where he meets Lord Krsna in this world in his service position as Brahma, he relates to Krsna in sakhya-rasa, because it would be otherwise impossible for Lord Brahma in his male form to have conjugal love of Krsna. Rasa with Krsna is not just internally in svarupa-siddhi. Serving Krsna in this world also has it's own rasa and it is not the same rasa as one has in his internal aspect in svarupa-siddhi. That is the my point that seems to be lost on this crowd. Prabhupada experienced rasa with Krsna by preaching his mission all over the world. That is one thing. He also has a rasa with Krsna in his parshada deha in Goloka and that doesn't necessarily have to be the same rasa as the rasa one feels by serving from the relative plane of material existence. As a jagat-guru, Prabhupada was in sakhya-rasa and there would be few that would contest that conclusion. In Goloka? Well, nobody knows for sure except that he desired initiation into the Gaudiya sampradaya and the kama-gayatri mantra of madhurya-rasa. His guru planted the seed of madhurya-rasa in his heart by giving him the kama-gayatri. That seed produces a particular kind of fruit - conjugal love of Krsna. It is called bhakti-lata-bija. It is a seed that is planted in the heart by the guru. It is not innate or intrinsic to the soul. We choose a guru from a rasa we aspire for and take the seed from him out of choice. It is choice. It is NOT something that we have no say about and that we have no freedom to choose.

What point? You guys think you have it all down, all the quotes, all the histories, all the documents etc. etc. What the heck is there to talk about? You wrote everything that can be found about the subject in your book. You didn't come here to have a discussion because you already presume to have everything there is to know about Prabhupada being a cowboy in your book. What is to discuss? You came here to advertise your book. This verse is not about choosing a parshada. it's about choosing a rasa..... If you can get your head out of the ground then read it.

So, if I have a different opinion that someone else I am then a sadhu ninda? You are a fanatic. Fanatics always start yelling "offender, offender" every time somebody disagrees with a sannyasi. Titles and positions don't grant anyone immunity from misconceptions.

According to this statement in NOD ch.4, even liberated souls in Vaikuntha can develop affection for Krsna and get promoted to Krsnaloka. So, considering this, I don't know if I can agree with Narayana Maharaja on his version as Begger posted above. Here we have a liberated soul in Vaikuntha with a body like Lord Narayana or Laksmi Devi, some of whom attained that position from material existence by the mercy of a guru in the sampradaya that worships Lord Narayana, then after attaining liberation and service to Narayana laters can attain to love of Krsna and be PROMOTED to Krsnaloka. So, nitya-siddhas can also improve their position in love of God if they are so inclined. Our rasa with Krsna is chosen by us. It is not appointed by some inborn nature. It is not inborn but it is chosen. That is the shastric version. It wouldn't be LOVE if we didn't have a say in which way we want to love Krsna. If it was inborn, then we would have no real choice in which way to love Krsna and that would then NOT be love. It would be appointed and not chosen. No my friends, we choose our rasa with Krishna. It is not appointed or innate. The only thing that is innate is that we are constitutionally made as to be servants of Krsna in what ever capacity we CHOOSE.

From what I can see, Tripurari Maharaja has clearly departed orthodox ISKCON (Prabhupada) and started to mix and blend with concepts from the "orthodox" school which actually uses the siddha-pranali system. It is not for me to say that it is all wrong. I can say that I don't see his teachings and his position today as being reflective of orthodox ISKCON or Srila Sridhar Maharaja's representation of the Saraswata Gaudiya position. Maybe he wants to carve out himself a niche that is unique and different. That is his buisness. But, I don't see his position nowadays as being orthodox Prabhupada teachings.

I already figured that out. That is how pasted that quote from the booklet. I do the same thing in Vedabase because pasting in Wordpad immediatly removes the coded words and renders them standard. But, I am not going to go through that much work every time I want to post a portion to bring under discussion. As far as being useful for internet discussion, the format of the book was just wrong. At least in the Vedabase they make it easy. All you have to do is copy and paste to Wordpad, then copy that and paste it on the forum reply. Your book makes it all way too much work.

Maharaja writes: Can that be shown with shastric support? Or, is this just an opinion?

As well, the booklet for viewing is in GIF format (pictures not text) and so we can't copy and paste parts we want to discuss and the booklet for download is in some Balarama font or something that is not standard with Windows or browsers. I am not amused.

Like I said, you probably really don't want me to read the booklet. I have a knack for finding fault. T Swami writes: Actually, it's not something that is required for self-realization, but something that would come after self-realization.

In the booklet it starts out with a somewhat questionable premise: Tripurari Maharaja: I am not so sure that this conclusion is actually anything Srila Prabhupada ever taught. I would be glad to see some evidence from any previous acharya to support the notion that a person cannot become self-realized if he doesn't know the rasa svarupa of his spiritual master. Again, this seems to be flirting with the siddha-pranali concept. I do know that Maharaja has some appreciation of Jagadananda das and has had him do some translation work. Jagadananda has already become a full out tantric sahajiya. I hope he didn't have any influence on Maharaja.

Since madhurya-rasa is the mukhya rasa or complete and total rasa that includes all other rasa, a madhurya-rasa bhakta can chant gopal mantra since sakhya-rasa is included in madhurya-rasa. The gopis are also friends of Krishna too. Before they were lovers, when they were just little kids they were friends. The gopis parakiya-rasa doesn't appear till they are budding teen-agers. But, since madhurya-rasa is NOT contained in sakhya-rasa you will not find a sakhya-rasa bhakta chanting kama-gayatri. These are just basic laws of rasa. The gopis are also friends of Krishna, not just lovers.

It's just basic math. 1 + 1 = 2 You don't have to be a rocket scientist to figure it out. If Prabhupada says Lord Brahma is in sakhya-rasa and Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati says he is in madhurya-rasa, there is only one rational theory that harmonizes these conflicting conclusions. I guess none of us are allowed to realize new conclusions that haven't been said before? That would make KC a stagnant process. Sure, it's my own conclusion and I am not ashamed of it.

Kama-gayatri always produces this result. I cannot produce any other result. Srila Prabhupada was also initiated into kama-gayatri. In the perfection of the mantra Srila Prabhupada realized the same results that Lord Brahma did "that I am an eternal maidservant of Krsna". None other than maidservants of Krsna chant kama-gayatri mantra. It's an internal thing. It's not something that is always expressed openly in front of millions of gawking spectators watching the jagat-guru evangelize the world. Prabhupada's male body was fully spiritualized. In that spiritual male body Srila Prabhupada was of course prone to feel and express some sakhya-rasa.

This statement needs to be clarified. What is meant in this statement by Srila Prabhupada is that Lord Brahma in his relative position as Lord Brahma is in sakhya-rasa with Krsna. Internally, in his self-realized position he is in madhurya-rasa as evidenced by this quote from Brahma Samhita and commentary. So, the Gaudiya parampara is about the internal, eternal rasa of the spiritual master, not about his rasa involving his external functions in relation with the material energy. This is a good example of the situation of Srila Prabhupada as well. Externally, to do his preaching work he was in the sakhya-rasa much like Lord Brahma is. Internally, much like Lord Brahma he realizes himself to be an eternal maidservant of Krsna. In his preaching work in the material world Srila Prabhupada had a male form, so externally his showed some sakhya-rasa of male friendship to Krsna. He did not manifest his internal heart of hearts but showed the mood in which he carried out his preaching work in the material world in a male body.

What Begger was really saying was that, in his opinion, all these high talks about this rasa and that rasa of the acharya are well beyond the range of forum debate.

I can say that what we think we know about bhakta-tattva is just the tip of the iceberg. There is so much more to spiritual knowledge than the drop we have been given that we cannot even imagine higher truths and higher realities of Goloka. We don't know everything. We have only been given a drop, a glimpse, a peep into higher knowledge of bhakta-tattva and how devotional service evolves in the spiritual realm. I do remember Sridhar Maharaja saying that the manjari position was the entry level of madhurya-rasa. Manjaris grow up to be sakhis. Manjaris make spiritual advancement till they reach the zenith of madhurya-rasa as a full-fledged sakhi of Radha. When you can break out of your hard shell of preconceived ideas you will understand that. Even Radharani is eternally advancing in Krsna consciousness and love of Krishna.

Krsna doesn't need them. The souls according to the level of their realization need Krsna. Your question is silly. If the inhabitants of Vaikuntha can advance beyond worship of Narayana to worship of Krsna, then it is not impossible that a cowherd boy from Goloka can advance to madhurya-rasa. There is not a point at which even the residents of Goloka stop advancing in Krsna consciousness. The cowherd boys aren't stagnant. They are dynamically advancing in Krsna consciousness. Anyone that thinks that advancement in Krsna consciousness stops upon attaining svarupa-siddhi does not understand the dynamic nature of Krsna consciousness. Progress in Krsna consciousness is eternal.