shiva

Guruvani you wrote That is not quite what I am saying. All jivas are manifest from tatastha sakti or rather are tatastha sakti. Nowhere are we told that a jiva is anything but tatastha sakti at any time, nitya baddha or nitya mukta. We do have many sources where we are told that all jivas are tatastha sakti at all times. As Bhaktivinoda points out: The cit sakti (swarupa sakti, antaranga sakti) or the internal energy produces "complete objects" from the "complete potency". What that means is that the cit sakti produces things which are of the nature of cit sakti. What is that nature? From Bhaktivinoda's The Bhagavat: The cit sakti is non different from Krishna. Whatever is manifest by the cit sakti is non different from Krishna. From the Teachings of Lord Caitanya Srila Jiva Gosvami describes the Supreme Person in these words of Bhagavat Sandarbha: The cit sakti manifests the swarupa or form of Krishna and his tad-rupa-vaibhava, his incarnations or personal expansions, which includes the spiritual world, they are non different from Krishna. What does tad-rupa-vaibhava mean? "Tad" in this case means various, "rupa" means form, and this is how "vaibhava" is described: So tad-rupa-vaibhava means various forms of Krishna. In other words what Jiva Goswami is saying is that Krishna manifests in 4 ways. His form and the vaibhava expansions of his form which are all Krishna in different forms, the jivas, and the material energy. The cit sakti manifests both the form of Krishna and his tad-rupa-vaibhava, which includes all his personal expansions and the entire spritual world, all of which is a vaibhava or non different expansion of Krishna. Krishna is identical to his cit sakti and he is identical to the sprititual world because it is a vaibhava expansion of Krishna. Purport Caitanya Caritamrita Adi 4.62 Caitanya-Caritamrta Madhya lila 8.154-155: Caitanya Caritamrita Adi 4.71, purport And from Baladeva Vidyabhusana's Govinda Bhasya Here Baladeva Vidybhusana explains how Krishna is identical to the spritual world So the point I am trying to make is that when Bhaktivinoda says: "All complete objects have appeared from the complete [cit] potency" What he is saying is that the cit sakti manifests Krishna's form and his tad-rupa-vaibhava, which includes his personal expansions and the spiritual world, which is non different from him. The jivas are not manifested from cit sakti, whether they are nitya mukta or nitya baddha, all jivas are a manifestation of tatastha or jiva sakti. Here Bhaktivinoda is saying that the nitya mukta jivas are manifested from Baladeva who presides over jiva sakti. And here Bhaktivinoda says that all jivas are a manifestation of jiva sakti When he mentions nitya siddha he says the jiva is not nitya siddha, he references the kaya-vyuha manifestations of Sri Radha as examples of nitya siddha. What is kaya-vyuha? From C.C. Adi 1.81 They are personal expansions of God, swamsa expansions. They are not jivas. So what he is saying is that all jivas are tatastha or jiva sakti, jiva sakti is presided over by Balarama. Baladeva manifests the jiva sakti in vraja as the nitya mukta jivas. In another place in Bhaktivinoda's Jaiva Dharma he says He includes the nitya mukta jivas in the jiva or tatastha sakti. In his Paramatma Sandarbha Jiva Goswami goes into alot of detail about the jiva always being tatastha sakti. Whether you are in Goloka or the material world you are always tatastha sakti. So tatastha sakti is not a locative description, it is an ontological description. We are not and cannot become cit sakti because cit sakt is identical to Krishna, we are not maya sakti either, we are tatastha sakti. We can come under the dominion of the cit sakti or the maya sakti and then we partake of their nature, but we do not become them. When we are under the dominion of the maya sakti then we are affected by the qualities of the maya sakti and affected negatively by illusion, ignorance, and suffering in various ways. When we are under the dominion of the cit sakti then we are affected by the qualities of the cit sakti which is association with Krishna and his devotees, knowledge and bliss.

Aw shucks I'd like to thank my manager, my agent, my wonderful writers, love you guys. I want to thank my wonderful cast and crew, they're the best in the business and I love working with you guys! I want to thank my hair stylist who makes me what I am, she's my best friend, really, I love you. Especially I want to thank my mom who has supported me from the start and has always believed in me even when no one else did. I love you mom!. Of yeah I almost forgot, thank you Jesus, couldn't have done it without you I had a speech, but I lost it...no wait a sec...here it is...ahem...

What Prabhupada meant is that the inherent nature of the jiva is that of servant of the Lord. So in that sense when we are in the conditioned state we are not really eternally conditioned even though we are called that because eternal means without end, and there is an end to conditioned life. What nitya baddha means is that time begins for the jiva when he enters the material world, and until he leaves the material world there was never a time that he wasn't conditioned. So therefore he is called eternally conditioned. But since all jivas will become liberated therefore in the more literal sense of the word eternal the jiva is not eternally conditioned because he will become liberated. And likewise since the nature of the jiva as a sakti of the lord is that of servant of the lord (the nature of sakti is that sakti has no ability to do anything independentely of the lord), therefore the real nature of the jiva is eternally liberated because that state will go on forever and it is his inherent nature. Bhaktivinoda explains the relationship between god and sakti Jiva Goswami writes in Paramatma Sandarbha Here we see explained that the jiva as a sakti of the lord is inherently servant of God. Even if we do not want to serve God still we have no independence because our nature is that of dependence on the lord. We cannot do anything unless the lord allows. Purport Bhagavad Gita 11.43

Well you can create any dogma you like. The gauidya vaisnava teaching is very specific. Sastra makes it clear why the jivas exist; to bring pleasure to the Lord. It also makes it very clear why jivas are in the material world; to become free from avidya (ignorance) maya (illusion) and and to develop our consciousness to the point where we can give the Lord pleasure. Guruvani and I agree on the large picture, we are just debating more esoteric aspects of the philosophy. We are not turinng vaisnavism into a "strange weird meander of technical dogmas which no one can comprehend". We are not creating these teachings. Why do these teachings exist if they have no point? You can find al these teachings in the upanishads, the puranas, the bhagavatam, the work of the 6 goswamis, the writings of the gaudiya acaryas, etc. People can understand what we are saying, maybe not everyone, but if we understand it why should you think that "no one can comprehend"? Prabhupada's books are full of these topics, as are Jiva Goswami's Sat Sandarbhas and many other Gaudiya acaryas. Ever read Jaiva Dharma by Bhaktivinoda Thakura? Or the Upanishads? Baladeva Vidyabhusana's commentary on the Vedanta Sutra; Govinda Bhasya? Or have you studied the Bhagavatam or the Caitanya Caritamrta very much iin depth? If you do you will see all these topics covered extensively. Maybe not everyone is philosophically inclined, not everyone has the tempermant of a brahmana, but many people are and do. All the past acaryas have spoken or written extensively on these topics, were they also wasting their time on stuff no one can comprehend?

From Jiva Goswami's Bhagavat Sandarbha You claim that the brahmjyoti is vaikuntha. You also claim that the jiva comes from the brahmajyoti. We are taught that the tatastha sakti is the source or the same as the jiva and that the spiritual world is the same or manifested from cit sakti (swarupa sakti). If the brahmajyoti is the same as vaikuntha then that would contradict the teaching that the jiva is manifest from tatastha sakti and that the spiritual world manifests from swarupa sakti. If the brahmjyoti is the spiritual world then that would mean that the jiva is manifest from swarupa sakti instead of tatastha sakti. But clearly we are told that the tatastha sakti is neither in the spiritual world nor the material world, it is on the border between the two. In "Sri Caitanya's Teachings" Bhaktisiddhanta writes Tattva Viveka 2.4 by Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura Bhaktivinoda writes in Jaiva Dharma From Bhaktisiddhanta's "Vaisnavism Real and Apparent" From Srila Prabhupada C.C. Madhya 20.108-109 If the jiva originates from the brahmajyoti and the brahmajyoti is the spiritual world then the above statements are wrong. Here Srila Prabhupada quotes Bhaktivinoda who states that the jiva comes from neither the spiritual nor material world. Therefore the brahmajyoti cannot be considered to be the same as Vaikuntha. Just like everything is comprised of brahman, which is spiritual, including vaikuntha, but at the same time not everything is considered to be comprised of spiritual energy. Maya sakti is considered to be different then cit sakti, the material world is said to be different from the spiritual world, one is said to be comprised of cit sakti and the other is said to be comprised of maya sakti. But still they are both comprised of brahman and can be said to be the same thing. So even though the brahmajyoti is everywhere, still vaikuntha is considered to be different then the brahmajyoti because they are manifested as different. So that is why brahmajyoti is different then vaikuntha. Even though ultimately they are both simply manifestations of brahman or Krishna, still they are categorized as different for various reasons. The vedic teachings categorize brahman depending on what action Krishna is taking. Bhaktivinoda writes in Jaiva Dharma The conclusion is that no one falls from the spiritual world or Vaikuntha, for it is the eternal abode. (Bhag.3.16.26, purport) This ordinary living being is of two kinds--nitya-baddha or nitya-mukta. One is eternally conditioned and the other is eternally liberated. The eternally liberated living beings are in Vaikuntha jagat, the spiritual world and they never fall into the material world. (Bhag. 5.11.12, purport)

Wow, now you are going to say I said things I never did and then argue againt that fabrication? I didn't say "vaikuntha means lila". I said "Vaikuntha is the realm of lila." And then I backed that up with citations after you said that is a concoction. Vaikuntha is the residence of Lord Narayana and the various Vishnu forms. Above that is Goloka. The brahmajyoti is not in Vaikuntha, and as already described in my pervious post the brahmajyoti is not the source of Vaikuntha, you took Prabhupada's words out there context. He simply meant that everything is comprised of brahman. Krishna is the source of the brahmajyoti and vaikuntha, the effect is not the cause as you would have it. From Srila Sridhara Maharaja From Bhaktivinoda's Jaiva Dharma You can conclude that the brahmajyoti is the same as vaikuntha if you like. I disagree and claim that vaikuntha is the abode of the Lord where he performs pastimes. I disagree with your assertion that the word vaikuntha means something different then the abode of the Lord ,and the subsequent use of brahmajyoti as cognate with vaikuntha. Yes the literal meaning of vaikuntha is without misery or anxiety, but so what what? That doesn't mean that any situation where there is no misery is the abode of the Lord. It's like claiming that because Goloka means cow world or planet that anyplace where there are lots of cows is where Krishna's nitya lila pastimes take place. Vaikuntha is the abode of the Lord. Brahmajyoti is the undifferentiated plane of consciousness. No one falls from Vaikuntha, anyone can fall from the Brahmajyoti.

You are confused. You are using the following from Prabhupada to extrapolate the idea that the brahmajyoti is in vaikuntha and the same as vaikuntha. Yet we have numerous direct statements saying that the brahmajyoti is outside of vaikuntha and not the same as vaikuntha. Why you choose to extrapolate a meaning which contradicts direct unequivocal statements is a mystery. "As stated in the Brahma-samhita (yasya prabha prabhavato jagad-anda-koti- [bs. 5.40]), the Brahman effulgence emanating from the body of the Supreme Lord creates innumerable planets in both the spiritual and material worlds; thus these planets are creations of the Supreme Personality of Godhead." This is simply saying that Brahman is the ingredient of all created things, sarvam khalv idam brahma, everything is brahman because everything is manifested out of God and created by God. But still there are differences. If we take your logic that because the spiritual planets are created out of brahman therefore the brahmajyoti is not different from vaikuntha, then we can say that the material world is also not different from the brahmajyoti or vaikuntha because the material world is also created from brahman. From Srimad Bhagavatam 7.9.31 If we take the statement in bold in the above purport literally and without the proper context, then we can conclude that time is God. In the same way you are taking Prabhupada's words and the concept he is trying to get across out of context when he says that everything is created from brahman. Why do you want to insist that the brahmajyoti is in vaikuntha or the same as vaikuntha when we are told repeatedly that is not the case?

How can the sunshine not be the sun? The sun is situated within sunshine. Therefore the sunshsine is the sun. Therefore the sunshine created the sun. This is your logic. The conception that "vaikuntha is manifested out of the brahmajyoti" and "Vaikuntha is only a manifestation of the brahmajyoti" is ridiculous. Clearly we are told that the brahmajyoti is outside of the vaikuntha planets. Your idea that "vaikuntha is only a manifestation of the brahmajyoti" and "the source of vaikuntha" shows that you are now just floundering in a sea of misconception and concoction.

There is a difference between the "spiritual sky" or paravyoma and Vaikuntha. The "spiritual sky" or paravyoma is where the vaikuntha planets are situated, but that is not illuminating the vaikuntha planets. An analogy is the sun and the sunshine. Sunshine surrounds the sun but the sunshine is not illuminating the sun, the sun is self luminous. Similarly the brahmajyoti is not illuminating vaikuntha, it is illuminated from Vaikuntha. Within the paravyoma are the vaikuntha planets which are self luminous. Purport from Sri Caitanya Caritamrta Madhya 20.192 Sri Caitanya Caritamrta Adi 5.34

Well, what can I say. You could have just admitted your mistake instead of making false claims. I didn't twist your words. I simply said that you were wrong. You may know what you are saying but all we have is what you actually write down. The brahmajyoti according to Srila Prabhupada exists everywhere. The Vaikuntha planets are surrounded by the Brahmajyoti because the brahmjyoti is coming from them. You also claim the brahmajyoti "illuminates" vaikuntha: Purport Srimad Bhagavatam 2.4.14 No need to make claims that people are being egotistic simply because you make mistakes and then they are pointed out.

Guruvani this is what you wrote That is incorrect. By claiming such a thing you are contradicting your other claim that no one falls from vaikuntha. If the brahmajyoti is vaikuntha then jivas can fall from vaikuntha because jivas come from the brahmajyoti and fall into the material world. Also jivas can attain to sayuja-mukti (merging into brahman) but they cannot stay there and eventually fall back into the material world. So there is a difference between vaikuntha and the brahmajyoti. The brahmajyoti is not vaikuntha. Vaikuntha is where Krishna and his swamsa expansions like Narayana presides with nitya mukta devotees. Since your claim is that no one can fall from vaikuntha then the brahmajyoti cannot be vaikuntha. Everything exists within the brahmajyoti, both the material and spiritual world. If your claim were true then we would be in vaikuntha wherever we are. You also claim that I concocted the claim that vaikuntha is where lila takes place.

Srila Prabhupada said that since the start of Kali Yuga that after 15 thousand years the age of Kali will become too "gloomy" for Krishna consciousness. That since now we are 5,000 years into Kali Yuga that there are 10,000 years left for the Krishna consciousness movement. He has stated that it is foretold that for 10,000 years more the Krishna consciousness movement will continue " provided we keep it uncontaminated". Some quotes Srimad Bhagavatam 8.5.23 When Krsna appeared, He gave His orders, and when Krsna Himself appeared as a devotee, as Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, He showed us the path by which to cross the ocean of Kali-yuga. That is the path of the Hare Krsna movement. When Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu appeared, He ushered in the era for the sankirtana movement. It is also said that for ten thousand years this era will continue. This means that simply by accepting the sankirtana movement and chanting the Hare Krsna maha-mantra, the fallen souls of this Kali-yuga will be delivered. After the Battle of Kuruksetra, at which Bhagavad-gita was spoken, Kali-yuga continues for 432,000 years, of which only 5,000 years have passed. Thus there is still a balance of 427,000 years to come. Of these 427,000 years, the 10,000 years of the sankirtana movement inaugurated by Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu 500 years ago provide the opportunity for the fallen souls of Kali-yuga to take to the Krsna consciousness movement, chant the Hare Krsna maha-mantra and thus be delivered from the clutches of material existence and return home, back to Godhead. ---------------------------- Ramesvara: Srila Prabhupada, you said yesterday, or a few days ago, that this movement will go on unimpeded for ten thousand years, so... Prabhupada: Yes, provided we keep it uncontaminated. You should take this opportunity. --------------------- Srila Prabhupada: Rather, this movement, as I have now began with my disciples, European, American boys, they're...They are not very satisfied, the present politicians. They are not very satisfied. They don't want. Everywhere this, more or less the same mentality, but it is our duty on behalf of Krsna to push on this movement. So we are doing, and we are getting response. It is not without response. It will increase.That is also stated, that for ten thousand years Krsna consciousness movement will increase. Yes. Syamasundara: Ten thousand years. Prabhupada: Within ten thousand years, if they become Krsna conscious, then life is successful.After ten thousand years, the gloomy picture of Kali-yuga will come. Still there is time. Ten thousand years is not small period. So we have passed five thousand years. So still ten thousand. We have got to the fifteen thousand years. Kali-yuga's duration of life is four hundred thousand, four hundred and twenty-seven thousand. So Srila Prabhupada was writing in his purport to the Srimad Bhagavatam about how it has been predicted that that the sankirtan movement of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu will go for 10,000 years from the birth of Sri Caitanya. I don't think Iskcon existed back then. So Iskcon may or may not last that long. The prediction wasn't about Iskcon, it's about Sri Caitanya's sankirtan movement. If you claim it is about Iskcon then you have to explain how you exclude all the previous acaryas and vaisnavas from that prediction. Was not Bhaktisiddhanta part of that prediction? Or Bhaktivinoda? Or Narottama Das Thakura or Baladeva Vidyabhusana? Also I hear the claim about saying Srila Prabhupada said his books would be law books for 10,000 years. I think it was Babhru a few years ago who pointed out that the quote is nowhere to be found, so until proven otherwise it carries no weight. Since Srila Prabhupada's books are not law books it seems to me that if someone wanted to claim that Srila Prabhupada actually said that, then they should offer direct proof due to Prabhupada's books being theology, not law.

Not quite. Vaikuntha is the realm of lila. The brahmajyoti is the undifferentiated plane of consciousness, there is no lila there. Jiva Goswami writes in his commentary on Brahma Samhita Prabhupada wrote in Srimad Bhagavatam 9.11.19 It can be said that Prabhupada invented the idea that we were originally with Krishna or that we can fall from Vaikuntha. Clearly Prabhupada said these things many times. But if we study what he said in it's entirety and we are well educated in vedic knowledge then we can see that he was always speaking metaphorically. Saying we are originally with Krishna is a metaphor in a literal sense. In the Gita Prabhupada writes The Brahmajyoti or Brahman is Krishna. Brahman, Paramatma, and Bhagavan are nondual, they are all Krishna. Srila Prabhupada clearly said in Srimad Bhagavatam 4.30.5 Saying that we could fall from Vaikuntha was something that Prabhupada was doing to inspire his neophyte disciples not to think they were above falling down. In fact he usually used the example of Jaya and Vijaya to explain that you can fall from Vaikuntha. But in reality they fell because the Lord caused them to fall so he could perform pastimes with them. Srila Prabhupada mentioned this: Therefore it is to be understood that when Jaya and Vijaya descended to this material world, they came because there was something to be done for the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Otherwise it is a fact that no one falls from Vaikuntha. (Bhag.7.1.35, purport). Ordinarily, there is no possibility that the four sages could be so angry with the doorkeepers, nor could the Supreme Lord neglect His two doorkeepers, nor can one come back from Vaikuntha after once taking birth there. (Bhag. 3.16.29, purport) More from Srila Prabhupada Pure devotional service is so spiritually relishable that a devotee becomes automatically uninterested in material enjoyment. That is the sign of perfection in progressive devotional service. A pure devotee continuously remembers the lotus feet of Lord Sri Krishna and does not forget Him even for a moment, not even in exchange for all the opulence of the three worlds. (Bhag. 1.5.19, purport) Therefore, the devotees never fall down, but the materialists, i.e., the fruitive workers and the speculative philosophers, do fall down, being forced by their respective modes of nature. (Bhag. 1.6.31, purport) The expansions of His separated forms are called living entities, and these living entities are classified according to the energies of the Lord. They are divided into two classes--eternally liberated and eternally conditioned. Eternally liberated living entities never come into contact with material nature, and therefore they do not have any experience of material life. They are eternally engaged in Krishna consciousness, or devotional service to the Lord, and they are counted among the associates of Krishna. (TLC. Ch. 10) The last word in knowledge is not self-realization or Brahman realization. There is more to realize--namely, that the jiva is the eternal servant of Lord Krsna. This realization is the awakening of supramental consciousness, and the activities a jiva performs in such consciousness are the beginning of his eternal life. (Renunciation Through Wisdom, pp147) There are living entities, their number is greater. Nitya-mukta, ever liberated. They live in the spiritual world, Vaikuntha planets. Nitya-mukta. Nitya-mukta means eternally liberated. They never come down in this material world. And we are nitya-baddha--ever conditioned, eternally conditioned. (Lec. Bhag. 1973, Mayapura) The mature devotees, who have completely executed Krsna consciousness, are immediately transferred to the universe where Krsna is appearing. In that universe the devotees get their first opportunity to associate with Krsna personally and directly. (Krsna Book Ch. 28) From Vedic scriptures it is understood that sometimes even Brahma and Indra fall down, but a devotee in the transcendental abode of the Lord never falls. (Bhag.3.15.48, purport) The conclusion is that no one falls from the spiritual world or Vaikuntha, for it is the eternal abode.” (Bhag.3.16.26, purport) This ordinary living being is of two kinds--nitya-baddha or nitya-mukta. One is eternally conditioned and the other is eternally liberated. The eternally liberated living beings are in Vaikuntha jagat, the spiritual world and they never fall into the material world. (Bhag. 5.11.12, purport) The devotees of the Lord, however, never fall down. In Bhagavad-gita (9.31), the Supreme Personality of Godhead assures Arjuna, kaunteya pratijanihi na me bhaktah pranasyati: "O son of Kunti, declare it boldly that My devotee never perishes." Again in Bhagavad-gita (2.40) Krishna says: nehabhikrama-naso'sti pratyavayo na vidyate svalpam apy asya dharmasya trayate mahato bhayat "In this endeavor there is no loss or diminution, and a little advancement on this path can protect one from the most dangerous types of fear." (NOI. 3) A pure living entity in his original spiritual existence is fully conscious of his constitutional position as an eternal servitor of the Lord. All souls who are situated in such pure consciousness are liberated, and therefore they eternally live in bliss and knowledge in the various Vaikuntha planets in the spiritual sky. When the material creation is manifested, it is not meant for them. The eternally liberated souls are called nitya-muktas, and they have nothing to do with the material creation. (Bhag. 3.5.29) But once one is engaged in the spiritual activities of bhaktiyoga, one does not fall down. (Bhag.8.3.11) Sometimes it is asked how the living entity falls down from the spiritual world to the material world. Here is the answer. Unless one is elevated to the Vaikuntha planets, directly in touch with the Supreme Personality of Godhead, he is prone to fall down, either from the impersonal Brahman realization or from an ecstatic trance of meditation. (Bhag.3.25.29, purport) Bhaktivinoda Thakura writes in Jaiva Dharma

The fossil record does not support evolution, it contradicts it, anyone who says differently is either ignorant or a liar. There is no disagreemnt on this by experts. See also http://www.evolutionfairytale.com/articles_debates/fossil_illusion.htm As for bacteria or viruses developing resistance. First off they are not turning into new species. If you play guitar a lot then your fingertips will develop calluses because your body is developing resitance against the constant pressure to your fingertips. Secondly mostly the development of resistance in microrganisms to antibiotics is not done through mutations. It has other causes. University of Bristol bacteriologist Alan H. Linton went looking for direct evidence of speciation (change of species) and concluded in 2001: "None exists in the literature claiming that one species has been shown to evolve into another. Bacteria, the simplest form of independent life, are ideal for this kind of study, with generation times of twenty to thirty minutes, and populations achieved after eighteen hours. But throughout 150 years of the science of bacteriology, there is no evidence that one species of bacteria has changed into another ... Since there is no evidence for species changes between the simplest forms of unicellular life, it is not surprising that there is no evidence for evolution from prokaryotic [i.e., bacterial] to eukaryotic [i.e. plant and animal] cells, let alone throughout the whole array of higher multicellular organisms." (Alan Linton, "Scant Search for the Maker," Times Higher Education Supplement, April 20, 2001, Book section, 29.) Also see http://www.idthefuture.com/ http://www.darwinismrefuted.com/

In His Govinda Bhasya; Sri Baladeva Vidyabhusana, the great scholar and acharya has written: Isvara is supremely independent. He is the master of all potencies. He enters the universe and controls it. He awards both material enjoyment and ultimate liberation to the individual spirit souls residing in material bodies. Although He is one, He manifests in many forms. They who understand the transcendental science maintain that He is not different from His own transcendental form and qualities. Although He cannot be perceived by the material senses, He can be perceived by bhakti. He is changeless. He reveals His own spiritual, blissful form to His devotees. "Of all the eternals, one is the supreme eternal. Of all conscious entities, one is the supreme conscious entity." - - Svetasvatara Upanisad 6.13 As a vaidurya jewel manifests many different colors, so the Supreme Lord manifests many different forms. Each of these forms is the same perfect, complete, and pure Supreme Lord. In some forms the Lord displays all His qualities, and other forms the Lord does not display all His qualities. Therefore a wise devotee may meditate on all the Lords qualities, as described in the scriptures, as being present in the particular form of the Lord that is chosen for worship. Both Lord Hari and His associates are the same persons in both previous and subsequent actions. Why is that? The sutra explains: "sarvabhedad" because of complete non-difference. This means that because there is no difference in Their personalities, the same Lord Hari and the same associates present in the previous actions are also present in the subsequent actions. That Lord Hari remains one even though He expands into many forms is confirmed in the Gopala-tapane Upanisad in these words: eko pi san bahudha yo vabhati "Although He is one, the Supreme Lord appears in many forms." Also, in the Smriti-sastra it is said: ekaneka-svarupaya "Although He is one, the Supreme Lord appears in many forms." This is also true of the Lord's liberated associates, who remain one even though they appear in many forms. The forms of the Supreme Lord are undivided. They are all full of eternity, knowledge, infinity, and bliss. In this way it is said that although the Lord's forms present a very wonderful variety, still They are all one in essence. Although this truth was also described in sutra 3.2.14, the merciful teacher of Vedanta repeats the same teaching so this very difficult topic may be clearly understood. The Supreme Lord is identical with each of His forms. They are all Him. That a certain form of the Lord is His original form, or an expansion of that form, or an expansion of the expansion is determined only by how much of His powers the Lord chooses to display when He manifests that form. Only in that way are some forms of the Lord considered higher and others less high. The great devotees of the Lord declare: The Lord's forms are considered greater or lesser on the basis of how much of His transcendental power the Lord chooses to manifest when He reveals them. Because she is not different from the Supreme Lord, Goddess Laksmi is also all pervading. In the Smriti-sastra it is said: Goddess Laksmi is the mother of the worlds. She is the constant companion of Lord Visnu. As Lord Visnu is all pervading, so is she. To think that Goddess Laksmi is different from Lord Visnu, but still all-pervading, is a false, a heretical idea. In this way the idea that Goddess Laksmi is an individual spirit soul, like the many millions of other individual spirit souls is refuted. As Lord Visnu has limitless transcendental qualities, so does Goddess Laksmi. In the scriptures it is said: O Goddess, even if we had tongues like the demigod Brahma, we still could not describe all Your transcendental qualities. O Lotus-eyed Goddess Laksmi, please do not ever abandon your devotees. When Lord Visnu assumes different forms, Goddess Laksmi also assumes different forms and follows Him. In the scriptures it is said: When Lord Visnu assumes the form of a demigod, Goddess Laksmi assumes the form of a demigoddess. When He assumes the form of a human man, she assumes the form of a human woman. In this way she assumes a form to match the form of Lord Visnu. Sri Radha is the origin of all the forms of Goddess Laksmi. Sri Krsna is the origin of all the forms of Lord Visnu. In the Purusa-bodhini Upanisad it is said: In the land of Gokula in Mathura-mandala, Lord Krsna resides. At His two sides are Radha and Candravali. There it is also said: Laksmi, Durga, and the Lord's potencies are expansions of Sri Radha.

I think the problem is semantics. The use of the word dream in sastra is metaphoric, it is used as an analogy trying to show that a conditioned soul and a person experiencing a dream while sleeping are similar because neither one is fully conscious of reality. They both take what is an illusory reality as being real. When you are in a dream (except lucid dreaming which has no relevance to the analogy) you don't know you are dreaming, you don't know that what you are experiencing is an illusion which seems like reality. Similarly conditioned souls are unaware to varying degrees of the actual spritual reality they exist within and as a part of in this world. So they are compared to people living in a dream world. But Guruvani is correct when he states that the material is not a dream in the sense of not being a real place. The first post of his to comment on dreams was in response to this statement: "The material world is like a day dream" He then rejected that as false and said: "No its not. Pradhan is not a daydream. Maya-shakti is not a daydream. The Viraja is not a daydream. The material world is a perverted reflection of the spiritual world. Reflections in water are not daydreams. They are real reflections. The Moon reflected in the ocean is a real reflection. It is not any daydream. The only daydream going on is the fall-from-goloka fairytale." Guruvani was right because the material world isn't like a daydream, the dream is not recognizing reality for what it really is, the material world is real, not recognizing the material world for what it is and how it works creates a dream like reality for conditioned souls. We don't dream that our bodies or rocks and cars are real, they are real, they are not dreams, the dream is not realizing that God manifests all these things and controls them. I know you understand this because you wrote: "Everything you perceive in this field is a dream until you become Krsna conscious then you realize it is all Krsna in the form of one of his innumberable energies. If we have the concept of "material" then we are still dreaming." So, neither of you are wrong, you just don't seem to understand what the other is saying.

Guruvani and theist, you are both right, I don't think you are speaking in defined terms which you guys have agreed upon, therefore there is confusion. Theist is correct in his statements concerning the dream nature of the material world and how matter is manfiest as maya in the vision of conditioned souls. The problem with understanding what he is saying is that he is using the word "dream" when it might be better understood by using the word "illusory". For example when you wrote: "Everything you perceive in this field is a dream until you become Krsna conscious then you realize it is all Krsna in the form of one of is innumberable energies. If we have the concept of "material" then we are still dreaming" That might make more sense to some devotee if it is stated like this: "Everything you perceive in this field is illusory until you become Krsna conscious then you realize it is all Krsna in the form of one of is innumberable energies. If we have the concept of "material" then we are still in illusion" Or when you wrote: "Without the whimsical (dreaming) desires of the wayward living entities there would not be a material manifestation at all...not even one blade of grass. Krsna has no personal need for the material world. So it is based on the dreams of living entities trying to be the prime enjoyer. What is based on subtle dreams is also dream matter. For instance, aman may desire to build a huge skyscraper building. That desire is a dream which represents his need to be seen as a big man. So his desire to be a big man is a dream of the mind and the specific plan to accomplish this is by building a skyscraper is a dream of under the influence of intelligence. When he starts to build the building in gross matter he is just solidifying the same dream into a more external level where it can be perceived by the gross senses. Remember gross matter itself is a product of subtle matter and is therefore dream energy vibtating at a frequency that makes it perceiveable to a denser form of senses." It might be better phrased like this: "Without the illusory desires of the wayward living entities there would not be a material manifestation at all...not even one blade of grass. Krsna has no personal need for the material world. So it is based on the illusory desires of living entities trying to be the prime enjoyer. What is based on illusion is also illusion. For instance, aman may desire to build a huge skyscraper building. That desire is illusory which represents his need to be seen as a big man. So his desire to be a big man is an illusion of the mind and the specific plan to accomplish this is by building a skyscraper is illusory under the influence of intelligence. When he starts to build the building in gross matter he is just solidifying the same illusion into a more external level where it can be perceived by the gross senses. Remember gross matter itself is a product of subtle matter and is therefore subtle energy vibtating at a frequency that makes it perceiveable to a denser form of senses." What guruvani said is also correct. You cannot just jump to the level of being free from all dreaming or illusion, that is the state of liberation, jivan mukta, that comes from following a process, although somepeople may gain that state faster then others due to their level of attainment in a previous life. This is from Srila Prabhupada Srimad Bhagavatam, 4.9.7 My Lord, You are the supreme one, but by Your different energies You appear differently in the spiritual and material worlds. You create the total energy of the material world by Your external potency, and after creation You enter within the material world as the Supersoul. You are the Supreme Person, and through the temporary modes of material nature You create varieties of manifestation, just as fire, entering into wood of different shapes, burns brilliantly in different varieties. Purport Dhruva Maharaja realized that the Supreme Absolute Truth, the Personality of Godhead, acts through His different energies, not that He becomes void or impersonal and thus becomes all-pervading. The Mayavadi philosopher thinks that the Absolute Truth, being spread throughout the cosmic manifestation, has no personal form. But here Dhruva Maharaja, upon realization of the Vedic conclusion, says, “You are spread all over the cosmic manifestation by Your energy.” This energy is basically spiritual, but because it acts in the material world temporarily, it is called maya, or illusory energy. In other words, for everyone but the devotees the Lord’s energy acts as external energy. Dhruva Maharaja could understand this fact very nicely, and he could understand also that the energy and the energetic are one and the same. The energy cannot be separated from the energetic.

Whenever the veda speak about the soul entering into Brahman what is being spoken about is union with God. This is the meaning of the word yoga, to yoke, to unite the soul with God. The word merge can be used only if it is understood in the sense of the merging of one soul with a higher reality, not in the sense of the soul or God losing individuality. If I merge my business with a large corporation I don't lose my individuality, rather I simply work with the leaders of the corporation. As mentioned above there are different types of liberation: Salokya Mukti (or Moksha): Living on the same planet as the Lord's Sarsti Mukti: Gaining opulences similar to the Lord's Samipya Mukti: Becoming a close associate of the Lord Sarupya Mukti: Gaining bodily features similar to the Lord's Sayujya Mukti: Merging into Brahman The final liberation is described thusly in Srimad Bhagavatam 2.10.6: The highest type of liberation is when the soul attains to his sva-rupena vyavasthitih, his permanent form, and lives with the Lord in that permanent form in Vaikuntha. Katha Upanishad 1.3.9-11 "Mahat" in 3-11 refers to the Mahat Tattva, the material universe manifest before us. "Avyakta" refers to the unseen realm beyond the manifest world. Purusha refers to God, Vishnu. So the meaning is that the highest realm is the realm of Vishnu, and it is their where the journey of the soul ends.

Hey if you guys like Kula Shaler (vaisnava rock band) you can listen to their entire new album for free at http://www.virginradio.co.uk/music/artists/kula_shaker/index.html The website misspelled "Narayana" for the track "Song of Love/Narayana"

Don't know them, probably saw them around L.A though.

I'm not offended, I just know that I can barely remember anything of what I did when I was 6 years old. If you don't mind can you tell us what your parents initiated names are? Hey and how is Rukmini doing? When I met her I had no idea of what was going on, I had just flown in from Maui where I had been without any info about ISKCON for 4 years, and even when I got to L.A. I didn't talk with anybody about what was going on with temple leaders and whatnot, there was no internet back then either.

Age of consent laws have risen since the 1980's, in many states 15 could have been legal back then. Either way they may not have had sex, it may have just been a flirtation and dating.

I know the harinam was in Westwood but for people unfamiliar with L.A mentioning Westwood would mean nothing. You are right that in 1978 there wasn't prasad being sold in front of the temple, I didn't really mean to suggest that in 1978 that was going on, I was referring to mangal arati, but I do remember that I was living as a brahmacari in the L.A. temple when there were big pandal tents next to the temple and prasad being sold in front by devotee vendors, the last time I ever lived as a brahmacari in L.A was 1980, so it had to be going on full force by then. So the claim that the big sunday feast outside stuff started since 1992 is totally wrong. I haven't been to the L.A temple since 1986 and I was staying nearby and visiting and even then they didn't have the big pandal tents and food vendors outside any longer. Maybe they started up again after that but it was definitely going on when I was living there as a brahmacari. I think a memory of a 20 year old is more accurate then a 6 year old.

Hah, I was pretty much back in the day, haven't changed on that front, keep my head shaved, But Ramesvara has started to bald. There's a video on youtube from the Ratha yatra You can see Ramesvara as the devotee follows him, he's walking by himself and then with another devotee, at one point you can see him gesticulating with his hands as he talks, just like he used to

I might as well thow my 2 paisa into this discussion since I had some personal relationships with Ramesvara and Jayatirtha. I actually was initiated by Ramesvara in 1978 and used to serve him personally from time to time in his apartments serving food, not often though. We had a relationship which was not what could be considered a traditional guru disciple relationship. I had become a serious devotee around the time Srila Prabhupada left the planet. I spent a lot of time at the temple but didn't move in until 3-4 months after he had left when I finally became convinced that I needed to move into the temple and give all my time and energy to ISKCON. By that time Ramesvara had become the guru for the zone and for me it was an exciting time. This was probably the high point of ISKCON history because ISKCON had not yet experienced the mass leaving of Prabhupada disciples and I was in the place with the largest devotee population. Mangal arati in Los Angeles in 1978 was an amazing experience. The entire temple was packed shoulder to shoulder and the kirtan leaders were usually people with good singing ability (Jayasacinandana, Agnideva etc). It was ecstatic to have kirtan with some three hundred of devotees singing and dancing enthusiastically in such a nice temple. A few years later Mangal arati would dwindle in size and potency as many people left. But in 1978 it was awesome in size and enthusiam. We used to go out on harinams I think on friday nights to some popular place with close to one hundred people, maybe more at times. We used school buses to transport everyone. We would chant in one place and it was quite a scene. ISKCON seemed invincible at that time. Especially from where I was. Sunday feasts were huge operations. There were pandal tents set up, all kinds of wonderfully opulent prasad being sold in front of the temple by maybe 20 different devotee vendors. They would set up and cook outside all kinds of wonderful things including hot jalebis and samosas and many other tasty treats. There was also the free feast but this was extra prasadam. There were often times Indian performers doing some dance and play recital or gurukulis or others. The sunday feast was a real festival with huge crowds every week. Ramesvara was the man. I was told that he was my guru when I moved in the asrama. I had no chance to really size him up and see if he was qualified it was simply expected of me that I would accept him as my guru. Which I did. He actually never has had a conversation with me of any type. During the "christmans marathons" he would be waiting for us in the money counting room when we got back late at night from collecting in order to see how we had done. I was not a good collecter, I could have been if I had tried harder, but I was not enthusiastic for that service, I found it to be boring. I remember coming back without a lot of money and Ramesvara sitting there asking me how I did as I counted the money, when I told him he was not happy. Occasionally I would do personal service in his apartments i.e serve him his prasadam. He was fed like a deity, except more opulently, although he was not a big eater, most of the food would be given to the server to distribute to others or eat on his own. I also was the food server at the famous GBC meetings in L.A. back in I think it was 1979 or maybe 1980 when all the gurus and GBC came to discuss what to do about Jayatirtha, Hansadutta, Tamal Krishna, and maybe Bhavananda, and also Sridhar Maharaja. All the gurus and sannyasis and GBC would eat and meet in Ramesvaras apartment. I would bring the prasadam into the kitchen and set it up for them and I got to see some them show their personalities away from the show they put on for the adoring masses. Ramesvara was always pretty much the same wherever he was, although he seemed to be very chummy with the other leaders. He was a very intense person with a sense of entitlement about him. I think Jahnava Nitai said Ramesvara was acarya for only 3-4 years, that's not quite accurate. he had total control from the time Srila Prabhupada left until 1986, that's 8 years. Ramesvara was an elitist devotee. I think we have all seen those types of devotees in ISKCON who take themselves very seriously and who wouldn't or don't relate to devotees they consider beneath them if they didn't absolutely have to. They don't make friends with devotees unless the devotee is seen as being on the same level (Since this article is also about Caru, he was also one of these types of elites with an attitude problem. Once when I worked for him on the traveling India festival he threatened all of us that if we ever walked out on him he would ruin our devotee careers. A month later I walked out on him because of his abusive treatment). For example, I was friends with all the common devotees, the elitist devotees tended to look down on us in a kind of boss-worker relationship mode. We all knew it and in turn this created clear class distinctions which created a camaraderie amongst the hoi polloi who then related to the elites similar to how people in regular jobs relate to each other and the elites. What I mean is that often in regular jobs where many people work together you have the boss and his lieutenants with one mindset and you have everyone else in another. The common people usually are friends and socialize together while the boss and his lieutenants or sycophants do not socialize or treat the common workers as friends. There develops an antagonistic social system which pits the leaders against the common folk. The common folk usually speak ill of and laugh at their boss and his sycophants behind their backs because the leaders develop an antipathy to the common workers as being beneath them and treat them as such instead of as friends. This is exactly what went on where I was at. Ramesvara was part of the elitist clique who took their position of authority too seriously when it came to dealing with others. They didn't see any need to relate with common devotees in any other relationship other then boss-worker because they saw themselves as people with a DESTINY! They took/take themselves very seriously as divinely inspired and with some idea of themselves as special people with a special destiny and want others to take them very seriously as well while treating those not in leadership positions as beneath them refusing to treat them as friends. Some people were saying that we shouldn't have expected such inexperienced devotees to make intelligent decisions at such a young age when it came to the zonal acarya situation. What actually happened during that time was not due to youthful inexperience, it was the result of the egotistic elitist mindset which can stay with people their whole lives. Ramesvara was a bright guy, but he was an elitist and he saw his position as being rightfully the boss of the "ordinary devotees". Even though some say he was against the zonal acarya concept, he did embrace it wholeheartedly. Some say he was involved with the Sulochana situation. From my experience of him and the way he ran things I could easily believe he was a willing part of it. But that's not enough to convict him. I'm just saying he kept around a bevy of thugs to rough people up if need be and so I can't discount that type of person from even dirtier deeds. Although he may be totally innocent. Of course being one of the main leaders of ISKCON during his reign he had to be aware of the child abuse going on. He liked to know everything about everyone, so there is no way he didn't know. Because he didn't put a stop to it then he is culpable along with the rest of the acaryas at that time for negligence or even direct culpability. He could also be quite cruel and also careless with disciples lives. I heard him once say that he was going to make sure a certain disciple of his was not going to find a wife if he could help it because the disciple wasn't living up to his expectations. I visited L.A. from Maui in 1986, this was right around the time Ramesvara was leaving or had just left. I didn't know anything about it because I had been out of the ISKCON loop for 4 years. But I did happen to make friends with the gurukuli girl he had been seeing. I didn't know about the situation nor her part in it at that time, I just happened to eat and hang out at the Govindas juice bar for a month or so, and she was their regularly and we started talking and became friendly. She was a very bright and beautiful girl, a dancer, she was mature and modern, not actually going to gurukula, and I could see her as instigating a relationship with older men. I was 26-27 and she was flirtatious with me, so I could easily see her getting Ramesvara riled up enough to chance it all. She was very attractive and cool and smart. I can't blame him for going for it, I doubt if anyone could have resisted her charms if she set her sights on them. Mahak I don't think you have a clear understanding of an uttama adhikari's vision. You wrote "An Uttama Adhikari cannot do this because there is no difference between Mother Theresa and Twisted Sister to the uttama. All that is seen is a pure spirit soul." That is not accurate. An uttama adhikari is not an idiot, he sees the difference between people. An uttama *also* sees that everyone is being directed by paramatma to act the way they do. An uttama sees everyone serving Krishna at all times because he knows and *sees* everyone following the dictates of paramatma to fulfil their destiny in their lives. So when it is said that an uttama comes down to the level of a madhyama in order to preach what that means is that the uttama ordinarily sees *everyone* serving Krishna, but in order to preach he has to neglect that reality in order to tell people that they should take up Krishna bhakti. It's not that they have some hindrance in their ability to discern between a devotee and others. The whole thing is a philosophical point, a teaching meant to elevate people to be able to see how an uttama adhikari sees reality so that they try and see like that. So when it comes to prominent gurus embracing Kirtanananda, it's not because they are uttama adhikaris and are just seeing everyone as spirit souls, in reality what they are doing is hoping to get his followers to come to their camps. It's all about exploiting the situation. People also have written about Jayatirtha. I saw him a few times when I was in ISKCON, but actually got to know him a little bit after he left ISKCON. My friends and myself visited Jayatirtha and his crew a few times when he first moved to Marin County, and in turn they came and visited us. This was at the beginning of his trip and before he evidently turned into believing he was some kind of avatar. His scene was new agey and what would be considered very hip and spiritual by many, and his 2 main men were also new agey hip musicians. They were involved with dealing with prominent leaders of the new age community whom were apparently attracted by Jayatirtha and his scene, which was very much like their own except with a new agey type of Krishna consciousness thrown in as well (sex ands drugs permitted). Jayatirtha's 2 main men both moved to Maui after Jayatirtha died and are prominent and influtential members of the large wealthy new age community there. When I knew Jayatirtha he seemed very likable and hip and cool and I could see why he and his crew were attracting the new age crowd. But I only saw him at the beginning of his trip. I had been visiting california and got to know him and his crew a little bit, they were all very nice and welcoming. I remember when I was visiting them in Marin that they were planning on going to L.A. for Janmastami after they had just held a big Janmastami celebration at an upscale community center in Marin. It was a fairly good turnout, mostly new age people from Marin, there was even a heated pool there for swimming, it was a very entertaining celebration. They had a sufi dancer from Maui lead the celebration in a sufi dance where there would be circles of people within circles of people with each circle dancing in different directions, good music and chanting, a good feast, a slide show from someone's trip to India, all in all a very good time for all. Then we went down to L.A for Janmastami. So I went with them and at that time there were 2 Janmastami celebrations in L.A. One was the one in the ISKCON temple and the other was at some rented hall where maybe a hundred or more of Prabhupada's disciples were having a Janmastami festival. We went to the non ISKCON one. When We walked in everybody stopped and stared at us and Jayatirtha. Here was the ex zonal acarya doing his new age thing and everyone was interested to see what he was up to. We spent the night at Bharadwaja's house and then went on to San Diego where the "fringy" devotees were happy to see the Jayatirtha crew again and had kirtans and prasadama etc. They left and I stayed, then a few months later I went back to Maui with some friends who first had to go upstate, so we ended up visiting Jayatirtha for a couple days in their new secluded large home in the mountains (used to be the italian consulate) before going on to Maui. They were as nice as ever and had started a muffin business, they were baking and selling big muffins with a side of almond butter and honey. They were quite tasty. I never saw Jayatirtha again after this, that was 1983 I think. I heard from his ex-wife years later, who was his wife when I visited, that gradually Jayatirtha went kinda off the deep end and did some things which were very uncool and he thought himself to be some kind of avatar of Jesus or Krishna. I think she is writing a book. When I knew him he hadn't totally gone off the deep end yet.