Jahnava Nitai Das

Unfortunately this answer is all too common from modern Gaudiya followers. Anytime they cannot reconcile their views with Vedic traditions they just try to avoid the subject by saying we follow the Goswami's. Krishna? Nope, we follow the Goswami's. No need to follow the Gita's precedent. Upanishads? What are they? We don't need to support our views from shruti, we just quote the Goswami's. Sampradayas? Oh, those are old traditions. They don't apply to us anyway, we follow Chaitanya. Chaitanya? Well He is God, so we don't need to actually follow His example. Etc., etc., etc. Such modern schools of thought certainly are not Vedantic traditions, which the Gaudiya line definitely is. [This message has been edited by jndas (edited 05-31-2002).]

Onion and garlic have certain medicinal properties. But they should be taken only when one requires that particular treatment. In ayurveda one often uses poison to counteract other poisons in the body.

Before we continue, could some one post whatever data is available on earthquakes, so we can see what it means that earthquakes have increased.

I think Ram's stance is that if we are going to quote Prabhupada's (or anyone else's) translations we should be ready to first establish that the translation is accurate based on shruti pramanas. This is a necessity since various acharya's interpret a single verse in apparently diverse ways. Take for example the verse we discussed just prior to this where akshara and kshara are defined. We have three unique definitions to akshara by the acharya's (i.e. "Muktatmas", "Pradhana", and "Brahman"). Madhva, for example, cannot accept that it refers to Brahman, for he does not make a distinction between Brahman, Paramatma and Bhagavan - they are all Krishna and nothing less. Thus to translate the verse as referring to Brahman would require evidence from the shruti to establish that Brahman is something different than Krishna. The Gaudiya's own supportive verse (i.e. brahmeti paramatmeti bhagavan it shabdate) would seem to support Madhva's stance, as it is stated therein "tattvam yaj jnanam advayam". These three truths are advayam, or non-different from each other. Thus it would require substantial evidence before one could establish the simplest thing as a translation. So it seems Ram would like to know if we can bypass such a stage by agreeing on a particular person's translations and moving on from there. [This message has been edited by jndas (edited 05-28-2002).]

I see the earthquake prophecy as too general, same with prophecising about plagues and doomsday. If today I say there will be an increase in earthquakes and the third incarnation of Nixon will appear from the sky, I may get right on the first point, but that does not validate my second point. Every single doomsday prophecy in the world will follow a certain patern. The main features will be plague, earthquakes, wars, etc. There are probably thousands and thousands of such prophecies in all religions and by all sorts of people. The Bible stands out because it has been propagated throughout the world effectively. Thus when we hear it we think it is unique. Actually we just aren't very well informed (i.e. we haven't been subjected to propaganda) of other prophecies. Personally I believe there is probably a lot of truth to the prophecies in the Bible. But I am presenting doubts from a logical perspective. To prophesize doomsday is way too common to use and then hold to for validating one's other prophecies. Furthermore, there really hasn't been any recordable data to proove that earthquakes have increased over the last 2,000 years. 50 years is a tiny spec of time to base a prophecy on, especially when it isn't backed by longer observation. To say earthquakes have increased over the last 50 years is a meaningless statement unless we know how many earthquakes occured every 50 years for the last 2,000 years. Otherwise it can be passed off as random variation.

I think any doomsday prophecy would include something about earthquakes, plagues, diseases, etc. Nothing spectacular about that. I'm sure we could find many other prophecies made by all sorts of people that would include "an increase in earthquakes". This isn't to take anything away from a real prophecy that may be there.

When the life water-points of the earth are blocked, the result is earthquakes. This is presently being done by construction of skyskrapers, dams, and drilling for oil. The earth breaths through natural springs. When these are blocked the eart shakes to reopen them.

Are you sure? I have no idea, but would just want to be certain that the ability to detect earthquakes hasn't been improved in the last 50 years. 50 years ago was the entire world covered with such equipment? Personally I feel earthquakes are increasing, but it may just be that we receive more exposure to the news through TV and newspapers than we did in the past. [This message has been edited by jndas (edited 05-27-2002).]

Finally I have some time to get back to this thread, so I will try to deal with a few topics at first. Bhagavan is not infallible (akshara) - He is "beyond", as akshara refers to the liberated souls in the spiritual realm. This is Krishna's statement in the Gita: dvav imau purushau loke ksharas cakshara eva ca ksharah sarvani bhutani kuta-stho 'kshara ucyate "There are two classes of beings, the fallible and the infallible. In the material world every entity is fallible, and in the spiritual world every entity is called infallible." The word "loke" refers specifically to the Puranas and subsidiary Vedic texts. Therein the division between the liberated and conditioned souls is established. In the prior verse the Lord makes reference to the Vedas and Vedanta, which establish Himself as the Supreme. Now in this verse He is making reference to the Puranas and subsidiary Vedic texts which also establish His supremacy, beyond both the fallible and the infallible. "ksharah sarvani bhutani" identifies the fallible, those who have "come into being" - i.e. the materially embodied living entities (jiva-bhuta). "kuta-stho 'kshara ucyate" identifites the infallible living entities, those who are fixed and non-changing, i.e. eternally liberated. uttamah purushas tv anyah paramatmety udahritah yo loka-trayam avishya bibharty avyaya ishvarah "Besides these two, there is the greatest living personality, the Lord Himself, who has entered into these worlds and is maintaining them." The Purushottama (Supreme Personality) is another ('anya') besides these two (the fallible and infallible, or kshara and akshara). yasmat ksharam atito 'ham aksharad api cottamah ato 'smi loke vede ca prathitah purushottamah "Because I am transcendental, beyond both the fallible and the infallible, and because I am the greatest, I am celebrated both in the world and in the Vedas as that Supreme Person." It is for this very reason (that the Lord is situated beyond the infallible) that He is the Supreme Person. Again, Lord Krishna concludes by citing both the Puranas and Vedas (ato 'smi loke vede ca) as establishing His supremacy. Thus infallibility is not limited to the Lord, rather it refers specifically to the liberated souls. The Lord is neither fallible nor infallible, but beyond all measurement of fallibility and infallibility. [This message has been edited by jndas (edited 05-26-2002).]

Spirit can change, the atma by definition does not. Gaudiya vedanta is known as shakti-parinama-vada, "The philosophy of transformation of energy". The entire existence comes about by a transformation of spiritual energy. Matter comes from spirit. Having said that, the consciousness does not change any more than the water changes when it becomes dirty. [This message has been edited by jndas (edited 05-26-2002).]

Akshara has been identified in various manners by various acharya's from different schools. Some schools identify akshara with the unmanifested pradhana, in which case Purushottama still remains beyond both the fallible and infallible pradhana. The key point being Bhagavan is beyond even the infallible (whether we identify this with the liberated souls, the pradhana, or Brahman). You said "only brahman is akshara". I wouldn't agree with this. Many other acharya's have established akshara (kuta-sthah) to refer to either the liberated living entities or to pradhana (the second view is established in the Bhagavatam [3.26.19] as well). Many verses in the Gita will have multiple layers of meanings. We find different acharyas sometimes analyze a verse from completely different angles of vision. This does not negate other interpretations, even if they seem completely non-related. It certainly does have significance, as Krishna is speaking leading one point to the next. When interpreting Krishna's statements we should see his past usage of concepts, more than we should take an external definition for a word. It does not mean that external definitions are invalid, but that primary importance should be given to Krishna's own style of building definitions to words over time through the conversation. I think this would certainly require another thread. Already we have drifted from the original topic, so I won't get into that here. [This message has been edited by jndas (edited 05-26-2002).]

From a Gaudiya perspective, Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakur has referred to the soul as eternally pure in some of his songs (Sri Sri Kalyan Kalpa-taru): bhutatita shuddha-jiba, niranjana sadashiba, mayatita premer adhar "The spirit soul actually lives beyond the five gross elements, and he is always spotlessly pure, devoid of material designations, and abounds in auspicious spiritual happiness..." A problem will arise if we fail to make a distinction between the soul (atma) and the cit-shakti (consciousness). The soul is conscious, he is not consciousness. Consciousness is the quality or energy of the soul. We can very simply understand this difference when we see that the soul is situated within the heart, yet the consciousness of the soul pervades the entire body. The soul remains eternally pure; only the soul's consciousness may be influenced by the material nature. The polution of the soul's consciousness is described as follows in the Gita: dhumenavriyate vahnir yathadarsho malena ca yatholbenavrto garbhas tatha tenedam avritam "As fire is covered by smoke, as a mirror is covered by dust, or as the embryo is covered by the womb, similarly, the living entity is covered by different degrees of this lust." avritam jnanam etena jnanino nitya-vairina kama-rupena kaunteya duspurenanalena ca "Thus, a man's pure consciousness is covered by his eternal enemy in the form of lust, which is never satisfied and which burns like fire." indriyani mano buddhir asyadhishthanam ucyate etair vimohayaty esha jnanam avritya dehinam "The senses, the mind and the intelligence are the sitting places of this lust, which veils the real knowledge of the living entity and bewilders him." As far as the eternality of the soul's devotional service, Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakur states: atma nitya suddha-dhana hari-dasa akincana, joge ta'r ki phala ghatana "The soul possesses an eternal pure wealth, which is to remain as the humble servant of Lord Hari. In comparison to this wealth, what kind of spiritual result could possibly come from mundane so-called yoga practice?"

Perhaps the ability to detect earthquakes has improved over the last century.

This is a good question. What does it mean to attain something which is already the nature of oneself? In Gaudiya philosophy bhakti is synonymous with mukti (liberation). True liberation does not refer to being free from matter, but being resituated in one's constitutional function of service to the Lord. The Bhagavatam defines mukti as follows: muktir hitvanyatha rupam svarupena vyavasthitih "To become free from all external designations (identifications) and to be resituated in one's own factual identity (svarupa)." Thus attaining liberation (mukti) is not actually attaining anything, it is simply being one's true self. For Gaudiyas, who equate svarupa and mukti with Krishna bhakti, the attainment of liberation is giving up all lording propensities (false designations) and being situated in one's true identity of service. One's svarupa is not attained from an outside source, it is one's factual and forgotten identity. Because we are holding on to the "anyatha-rupam", the external non-real identifications, therefore we cannot experience our svarupa, "our factual identity". The process of liberation, or bhakti, does not entail acquiring our eternal natural identification, but simply removing the false identifications and being situated in one's true eternal position. Before we try to understand what "mad-bhaktim labhate param" means, let us see Lord Krishna's discussion on the topic. In the sixth chapter of the Gita, we find the following: prashanta-manasam hy enam yoginam sukham uttamam upaiti shanta-rajasam brahma-bhutam akalmasham "By making the mind peaceful the yogi attains the supreme happiness; by becoming free from the lower modes of passion and ignorance, he becomes freed from all sinful reactions and situates himself on the brahma-bhuta platform of liberation." This verse is directly connected to Gita 18.54, where in we find "mad-bhaktim labhate param". First we should note that the liberated yogi attains the supreme happiness. Of course, the fundamental tenets of Vedanta teach us that ananda is the nature of the soul, as are the qualities of knowledge (cit) and eternality (sat). So what does the yogi actually attain? Nothing. Just as the soul is always possessing the quality of sat (eternality), similary it also always possesses the qualities of cit (knowledge) and ananda (bliss). The supreme happiness (ananda, or sukham uttamam) is the soul's own inherent nature, covered by the influence of the maya shakti. When this covering is removed (i.e. when he rises beyond the lower modes, "shanta-rajasam", and when he makes the mind peacful "prashanta-manasam") then he attains this supreme happiness. But how does that actually occur? That is what Lord Krishna further explains in 18.54: brahma-bhuta prasannatma na shochati na kankshati samah sarveshu bhuteshu mad-bhaktim labhate param "Being situated on the spiritual platform of liberation (brahma-bhuta) one becomes fully enlivened. He never laments nor desires for anything (i.e. prashanta-manasam - his mind has become peaceful). He sees all living entities equally. In that state he attains my devotional service." The supreme spiritual happiness one "attains" is the result of "attaining devotional service", or in other words "liberation" (being free from external material designations and being resituated in one's own nature of service - muktir hitvanyatha rupam svarupena vyavasthitih). Factually, the happiness one attains is the inherent nature of the soul (as are knowledge and eternality), the devotion one engages in is the eternal nature and function of the soul, and the liberation one attains is nothing but removing the external coverings and acting in one's own devotional nature. In other words, nothing is attained from an external source; everything belongs to the soul. Why nothing is attained? Because nothing is lost at the time of becoming conditioned. When the living entity identifies with matter, his soul does not cease being eternal. It only appears so due to his false identification with matter. Likewise the soul's nature never transforms to become ignorant or miserable. These apparent changes are all due to misidentifying with the external energy of maya. The soul continues to possess the qualities of sat-cit-ananda even in the conditioned state, for the soul is avikarya, avyayam, sthanuh, etc., - imutable and unchanging. Gita 2.16 further establishes this point: nasato vidyate bhavo nabhavo vidyate satah ubhayor api drishto 'ntas tv anavos tattva-darshibhih "Those who are seers of the truth have concluded that for the material body there is no endurance (i.e. it constantly under goes changes), and for the soul there is no change (it eternally remains the same). This they have concluded by studying the nature of both." Thus what happens to these divine qualities? How is it that the soul, which is described in the Upanishads as being more effulgent that 10,000 suns, becomes apparently transformed into an insignificant miserable entity? It is all the illusion of maya, like the perception of one's reflection on water. The true and eternal knowledge and happiness of the soul become covered by the influence of maya and cease to manifest. This is why Sri Chaitanya states "ceto darpana marjanam", it is like cleaning a mirror. When the mirror becomes covered by dust, one's reflection is no longer visible. In the same way, when the consciousness becomes polluted by the three modes of material nature, the inherent qualities of the soul become covered. But as one cleanses the dust away, then "anandam buddhi vardhama prati-padam", one will see that there is an ocean of transcendental happiness within the soul. Thus in summary, bhakti is the eternal svarupa of the soul. It can never be changed under any circumstance, just as the spiritual qualities of the soul (sat-cit-ananda) can never be changed. Any apparent discrepancy is due to misidentifying the self. We are factually servants of Krishna, not just potentially. Our eternal nature is that we are servants. By the covering of avidya we may forget this truth, but bhakti can never be removed from the heart of the soul. [This message has been edited by jndas (edited 05-26-2002).]

Yet you miss the obvious fact that Krishna says, "Besides these two, there is another. The Purushottama is situated beyond both of these." yasmat ksharam atito 'ham aksharad api cottamah "Because I am transcendental, beyond both the fallible (kshara) and the infallible (kshara)..." uttamah purushas tv anyah paramatmety udahritah "But the Purushottama is another (than the kshara and akshara)..." And in Gita 6.8 Krishna already established that kuta-sthah refered to the liberated yogi: jnana-vijnana-triptatma kuta-stho vijitendriyah yukta ity ucyate yogi [This message has been edited by jndas (edited 05-26-2002).]

Thank you for writing with your question. In the Bhagavad Gita Krishna says: vyavasayatmika buddhir ekeha kuru-nandana bahu-shaka hy anantash ca buddhayo 'vyavasayinam "Those on the path of spiritual advancement are resolute in purpose, and their aim is one. The intelligence of those who are irresolute is many-branched." We must focus our intelligence on one aim, otherwise all of our endeavours will result in failure. One whose mind is branched in many directions fails to concentrate on anything and is simply left in confusion. The nature of the mind is to drift. We must learn to control the mind with our spiritual intelligence, otherwise the mind will be the cause of our own bondage. In the Gita Krishna describes that the mind can either be our best friend or our worst enemy: bandhur atmatmanas tasya yenatmaivatmana jitah anatmanas tu shatrutve vartetatmaiva shatru-vat "For him who has conquered the mind, the mind is the best of friends; but for one who has failed to do so, his mind will remain the greatest enemy." The mind is the repository of all sensual perception. Through our five knowledge acquiring senses we experience the world, and the resultant experience is transmitted to the mind, where it is classified as either enjoyment or distress. The uncontrolled mind begins to dwell on the desires and fears created by these experiences. The result is a whirlpool of thoughts making it unable for us to think, concentrate, and focus our selves. Krishna says: nasti buddhir ayuktasya na cayuktasya bhavana na cabhavayatah shantir ashantasya kutah sukham "One who is not connected with the Supreme can have neither transcendental intelligence nor a steady mind, without which there is no possibility of peace. And how can there be any happiness without peace?" Thus it is necessary to develop a link with the Supreme. This process is known technically as yoga. Either through bhakti-yoga, jnana-yoga, or karma yoga one must link oneself to the Supreme, for this will give one spiritual intelligence. With spiritual intelligence it will be possible to control the mind. With a controlled mind it will be possible to attain peace. And with peace, the internal happiness will become manifested to oneself. Yours in service, Jahnava Nitai Das, Bhaktivedanta Ashram & Bhaktivedanta International Charities http://www.foodrelief.org [This message has been edited by jndas (edited 05-24-2002).]

Give them prasadam and let them live their life. There is no necessity to associate intimately with them. We should direct such affection to the lotus feet of the pure devotees, not to the dogs. That will truly help us advance in Krishna consciosness. Of course for those who already have dogs, its your duty to take care of them till they die. But for those who do not have dogs, I would not suggest going out and getting one, for it will certainly have an influencing affect on one's consciousness (and aggregate attachments) - especially if you must live in close proximity (i.e. in the same house or appartment). We should be trying to raise our standard of cleanliness and fix ourselves in sattva, so that we can develop knowledge and devotion. Circumstances that will bring us more in contact with the lower modes should be avoided for those practicing devotion.

Showing compassion to all forms of living entities is certainly the practice of Vaishnavas. This doesn't justify having a dog live in one's house, especially for those trying to raise themselves to the platform of cleanliness (from where knowledge may begin to be cultivated). And it certainly isn't beneficial to one's personal worship of the deity form of the Lord within one's house. Of course some may prefer to make to Lord adjust to their mundane attachements, rather than choose to live a clean lifestyle. There are circumstances in Vedic societies where one may keep pets, such as a dog; for example for protecting a farm. But again, the dog does not live in the house of the person.

Actually my wording wasn't very clear. I meant in the case of predictions made by saints, it depends on whether one puts his faith in their words; and in the case of the predictions made by the Vedas, it depends whether one accepts them as authority. Generally the saints words never differ from the Vedas, but sometimes the saint may reveal something that is not found in the Vedas. In such cases it depends on whether you have faith in the saint.

Ganges - the immortal flow of compassion The Bhaktivedanta Ashram will be conducting a nine day lecture series on Ganga Sahasranama in Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, from May 23rd to May 31st, 2002. Time: The program will be held every evening 6:30 pm to 8:00 pm, 23rd May - 31st May, 2002 Place: N.K. Mahadeva Iyer Arangam (Sidu Sadan Hall), 8/456 Sir C.V. Raman Road, R.S. Puram, Coimbatore The lecture aims at giving the audience a wholesome understanding of the "scientific basis of Ganga consciousness", transporting them to a realm "beyond birth and death". Exposing them to a panoramic vision of the river Ganga's "easy journey to other planets", it will invoke the blessings of mother Ganga on them for attaining the "perfection of yoga", thus enabling all to bathe in the "reservoir of pleasure". The Ganga Sahasranama lecture will be a presentation on one thousand and eight names of the divine river, mother Ganga, which is origionally a discussion between sage Agastya and Lord Subrahmanya. It will highlight the methodology of Sahasranamas of different deities in the Puranas along with a scan of the physical and psychic body of the Ganga Sahasranama. The unique feature will be scientific explanations of the multiple dimensions of time and space deeply implanted within the meanings of this prayer. There will be a visual presentation on the "Descent of the Ganges" in Bharatanatyam dance form by Kumari Narayanai Venkatasubramaniam, disciple of Dr. Padma Subramaniam of Chennai, and Kumari Vijayalakshmi Ramaswami, disciple of Mrs. Padma Mohan of Sri Rangam on 26th, 28th and 30th of May, 2002. The main speaker will be Sri Atmatattva Das, along with the following chief guests: Sri Swami Ganeshvarananda of Shivananda Ashram. Sri Sarvaishvarya Das, President, ISKCON Coimbatore Mr. Krishna Iyer, Managing Director, Sri Krishna Sweets

Personally I think it is a stupid question. Factually I know I am lower than both of them, and the millions of other devotees of the Lord. Thus I should just worship all of the devotees and not worry who is higher than who.

Prahlada's incarnation was as Raghavendra Swami. Haridas Thakur was said to be an incarnation of Lord Brahma. As far as how is it known, it is different for each individual. Usually it is in reference to a prediction of the Vedas, which is being fulfilled. Other times it is realized souls who have identified them by their divya-drishti. It depends on whether one puts faith in those Vedic predictions, or in the saints who make such statements.

Just a note on this point, which has already been posted in this thread somewhere. This story of the dream initiation statement has no supportive evidence other than a third person account from an acquiantance of the Babaji, who was not very favourable to Bhaktisiddhanta. Thus it is not at all valid as evidence. Further more, if Bhaktisiddhanta was not regarded as the disciple of Gaura Kishora Dasa Babaji, then certainly there would have been objections to Bhaktisiddhanta performing the samadhi rituals for Gaura Kishora Dasa Babaji.

Bhakti is the eternal function of the soul. The soul, being unchangeable, never ceases to possess this eternal function. Thus there is nothing that influences the soul by which it receives bhakti. The concept of the soul becoming purified is impossible to accept, as the soul never has and never will be contaminated. You will not find a description of the atma in the Upanishads as that which is impure, on the contrary the soul is always described as pure. What does it mean that the soul is satisfied (suprasidati), or enlivened (prasannatma). Satisfaction of the soul is its own inherent quality, as is its expanding spiritual bliss - both of which are experienced only in its constitutional position. The process of bhakti (and shravanam in particular, which is being referred in your quotes) removes the polutions of the subtle body. Hearing the Lord's pastimes first acts on the heart, freeing oneself from the qualities of the lower modes of nature and their associated tendencies (lust, anger, greed, etc.). After becoming free from these tendencies, all the knots within the heart are cut, and one is factually situated on the brahma-bhuta platform from where the soul is prasannatma - fully enlivened due to its being situated in its constitutional position. "kurvanty Atma-prasAdanIm" refers to the soul becoming enlivened, or prasannatma, not to it becoming purified. The soul is eternally pure and cannot become contaminated under any circumstance. The process by which hearing the Lord's pastimes acts on the physical and subtle body, purifying the consciousness of material pollution, and thereby revealing the true nature of the self is explained in the following verses of Bhagavatam. shrinvatam sva-kathah krishnah punya-shravana-kirtanah hridy antah-stho hy abhadrani vidhunoti suhrit satam nashta-prayeshv abhadreshu nityam bhagavata-sevaya bhagavaty uttama-shloke bhaktir bhavati naishthiki tada rajas-tamo-bhavah kama-lobhadayash ca ye ceta etair anaviddham sthitam sattve prasidati evam prasanna-manaso bhagavad-bhakti-yogatah bhagavat-tattva-vijnanam mukta-sangasya jayate bhidyate hridaya-granthish chidyante sarva-samshayah kshiyante casya karmani drishta evatmanishvare Srila Prabhupada has given a beautiful flowing translation of these verses in his Bhagavad Gita purport as follows: "To hear about Krishna from Vedic literatures, or to hear from Him directly through the Bhagavad-gita, is itself righteous activity. And for one who hears about Krishna, Lord Krishna who is dwelling in everyone's heart, acts as a best-wishing friend and purifies the devotee who constantly engages in hearing of Him. In this way, a devotee naturally develops his dormant transcendental knowledge. As he hears more about Krishna from the Bhagavatam and from the devotees, he becomes fixed in the devotional service of the Lord. By development of devotional service one becomes freed from the modes of passion and ignorance, and thus material lusts and avarice are diminished. When these impurities are wiped away, the candidate remains steady in his position of pure goodness, becomes enlivened by devotional service and understands the science of God perfectly. Thus bhakti-yoga severs the hard knot of material affection and enables one to come at once to the stage of 'asamshayam-samagram,' understanding of the Supreme Absolute Truth Personality of Godhead." From these verses it is clear that hearing the Lord's pastimes acts to purify one's consciousness from the lower modes of nature, thereby manifesting one's own inner nature, which is one of enlivenment (being free from bondage). [This message has been edited by jndas (edited 05-22-2002).]

Shankara was a liberated soul, there is no question of him being taught. Rather Shankara went through this episode to teach us. Why do we have to think the lesson was for him instead of the obvious conclusion, that it is to instruct us?