shiva

that answer is not satisfactory to me.

I want to know if the residents of Goloka worship God or not?

 

Is Goloka really a Godless planet of hedonistic pleasure as you seem to be saying?

 

Or, is Goloka the planet of the highest form of God worship?

 

Please don't try and tell me that the residents Goloka have no conception of God or of the Supreme Personality of Godhead.

 

You answer was ad hoc.

 

What I am seeking is an authoritative response with some shastric version of the religious and spiritual life of the residents of Goloka.

 

If you cannot present shastric explanations, then don't bother.

 

Ad hoc responses without any shastric support will not satisfy the question I have posed.

There is a difference between Goloka and Krishna's pastimes in the material world (Gokula). While the pastimes are practically the same there are some differences i.e no demons in Goloka, no birth and death, etc. Clearly you know that in Goloka there is vedic religion and that they worship Lord Narayana as well as Shiva and Durga etc. So I don't know why you feign ignorance on this point. What is your objection? My point was that the devotees in Goloka do not know Krishna is God. I quoted Srila Prabhupada and the Bhagavatam to that effect. Accept or reject, I simply repeated what is written by guru and sastra. If there is some preaching in the sastra where devotees in Krishna lila preach about the existential position of Krishna as the supreme Lord then that is done for our benefit, it is not going on in Goloka, only in Gokula is the Lord recognized as the Lord i.e revealing his identity in the battlefield of Kuruksetra etc.

Well, we know that the residents of Vrindavan are a very religious and faithful people. Vrindavan is not a Godless realm of unbridled sense gratification.

 

Vrindavan is the realm of the most purely religious (devoted) souls of all.

 

So, if the residents of Vrindavan do not consider Krishna as God, then who is God in Goloka?

Surely, Goloka is not a planet without a God and a religion?

 

Who is the God of Goloka?

 

Do the resident of Goloka not worship God?

 

If they do, then who is that God?

 

Narayana?

I suggest you read Srila Prabhupada's KRSNA book and the works by the 6 goswamis and others for an intro to the culture and religion of Krishna lila. The point I made stands. While the residents of Krishna lila do indeed follow vedic religious practices to some degree, they are not renunciates of sensual enjoyment. The renunciation of sensual enjoyment is only meant for conditioned souls so as to aid them in their purification so that they can enjoy eternal pleasure pastimes. Krishna's nitya lila is not religious in the same sense that we are advised to be. Religion for us is for the purpose of our purification and upliftment towards a higher state of consciousness. Whereas religion in Krishna lila is a cultural and psychological addition for the enhancement of pleasure pastimes.

Shiva,

 

The scriptures says that the jiva souls in Vaikunta are full of bliss and 'full of knowledge'. But your post seems to contradict the nature of the jiva souls in Vaikunta. If they do not know their position, where they are and the nature of the Personality they're enjoying with, how can they be considered 'full of knowledge'? If Jivas in the material world can understand this fact, how is it that residents of Vaikunta cannot understand it?

Srila Prabhupada and the Bhagavatam state quite clearly that the jivas in Goloka do not know Krishna is God. If that is too difficult for you to accept so be it.

Haribolo Shivaji! Still bussy propagading polygamy/sexual freedom in Hawaii?Any results so far?

Please tell us your real name and your source for such a claim, otherwise I ask the admin to ban this person's ip for making false and defamatory accusations.

So what about this quote that someone provided at the start of this thread:

"So my Guru Maharaja will be very, very much pleased with you... it is not that he is dead and gone. That is not spiritual understanding... he is seeing. I never feel that I am alone."

 

(Lecture, 2/3/75)

That quote is taking from various parts of this lecture:

So now, by the grace of Krishna and Caitanya Mahaprabhu and in the presence of my Guru Maharaja, you are so nice boys and girls. So in front of Caitanya Mahaprabhu you are chanting Hare Krishna mantra, and you are taking part in it very seriously. So my Guru Maharaja will be very, very much pleased upon you and bless you with all benefits.

 

So he wanted this, and he is not... It is not that he is dead and gone. That is not spiritual understanding. Even ordinary living being, he does not die. Na hanyate hanyamane sarire. And what to speak of such exalted, authorized personality like Bhaktisiddhanta. He is seeing. I never feel that I am alone. Of course, when I came to your country without any friend, without any means... Practically, just like a vagabond I came. But I had full faith that “My Guru Maharaja is with me.” I never lost this faith, and that is fact. There are two words, vani and vapuh. Vani means words, and vapuh means this physical body. So vani is more important than the vapuh. Vapuh will be finished. This is material body. It will be finished. That is the nature. But if we keep to the vani, to the words of spiritual master, then we remain very fixed up. It doesn’t matter. Just like Bhagavad-gita. It was spoken five thousand years ago. But if you keep to the words of Krishna, then it is always fresh and guiding. Not that because Arjuna personally listened to Krishna about the instruction of Bhagavad-gita, therefore he knew it. That is not the fact. If you accept Bhagavad-gita as it is, then you should know that Krishna is present before you in His words in the Bhagavad-gita. This is called spiritual realization. It is not mundane historical incidences. If we keep...

 

evam parampara-praptam

imam rajarshayo viduh

sa kaleneha (mahata)

yogo nashtah parantapa

 

If you don’t keep in touch with the original link, then it will be lost. And if you keep touch with the original link, then you are directly hearing Krishna. Similarly, Krishna and Krishna’s representative, spiritual master, if you keep always intact, in link with the words and instruction of the superior authorities, then you are always fresh. This is spiritual understanding.

Srila Prabhupada was talking about feeling the presence of his spiritual master through his vani, his words.

Srila Prabhupada also would sometimes say things that were not really literally true but he would say them to inspire certain devotees for different reasons.

1967 June 14 : "Yes it is due to your prayers that this time my life has been saved."

1967 June 14 : "So far my health is concerned, I am improving daily, but due to my weakness sometimes I feel dizziness. Your prayer and all other boys' prayers has saved me and I hope to render some service to you all for some more years."

1967/Dec. 16: "When I left your country on the 22nd of July, I had very little hope to come back again. But Krishna informed me that I'm not going to die immediately; therefore, I have come back again to get inspiration from you all good souls. Although officially I am your Spiritual Master, I consider you all students of my Spiritual Master because your love for Krishna and service for Krishna teach me how to become a sincere Krishna Conscious person."

As far as I am concerned some people sometimes need to be told things that are not really literally true due to their lack of a philosophically inclined mentality, if sentimentalism can inspire those people to engage in sadhana bhakti and to serve the spiritual master's mission then Krishna will arrange sentimentalism to inspire them. But for those who can understand philosophy they will be able to see the true situation and the reasons for it.

From Srila Prabhupada letter to Mahananda dasa, 27th April 1970:

Regarding your questions, 'are the Spiritual Master and the Grand Spiritual Master consciously aware of the prayers of a sincere devotee who prays in love to Them'?-the answer is that no conscious prayers go in vain. They are transmitted positively. But one thing you must know that any prayer you offer to your Spiritual Master and Superior Spiritual Master, all of them are conveyed to Krishna, so no sincere prayers go in vain. We shall always offer such prayers to Spiritual Master, Superior Spiritual Master, Vaisnava Acaryas, Lord Caitanya, and at the end Radha Krishna, that is the system.

We have such loving relationship. Though he is not present here,

he's gone, went back to Godhead ; from that land, Vraja Bhumi, nitya Goloka Vrndavana,

he has eye on his dear disciple, takes care:

'Caksu dan dilo yei, janme janme prabhu sei',

One who has opened my eyes, he's my Master life after life - why not this life?

If a guru leaves this earthly plane of existence and goes to live in Goloka in nitya Krishna lila then it will be impossible for that person to "keep an eye" on his disciples. Why? The jivas in Krishna's nitya lila do not know Krishna is God, they do not know they are in God's highest heaven living with God. They are kept unaware of that fact. They see themselves as residents of Vrindavana or Dwarka or Mathura etc, they do not have knowledge of Krishna consciousness. Since the knowledge of Krishna being God and of gaudiya philosophy which is centered around the knowledge of Krishna's divinity is necessary for a person to act as a gaudiya vaisnava guru, therefore jivas in Goloka would be unable to act as a guru to a gaudiya vaisnava. Even though they are all pure souls they are kept in ignorance because Krishna wants to enjoy life with them without them being in awe and reverence of Him as God.

From Srila Prabhupada 1975 lecture

In the spiritual world there is no such distinction. The officer and the cleaner, they are of the same importance. That is even Krsna, with Krsna. That is spiritual world. In Vrndavana the cowherds boys, they are playing with Krsna on equal terms. They do not know Krsna is God. They simply know how to love Krsna, that's all. There is no need of thinking that "Krsna is greater than the other cowherds boy. They are living entities." There is no such sense. Krsna wants that. That is Goloka Vrndavana worship. Simply the center is Krsna, and all the inhabitants of Vrndavana, they love Krsna, and they do not know anything except Krsna. This is Vrndavana life. Everyone knows that "Krsna is my very intimate friend." Somebody knows, "Krsna is my son," somebody knows that "Krsna is my master," and somebody is thinking, "Krsna is my lover." But center is Krsna. The cows, the calves, the friends, the gops, and the cowherds boy, Krsna's father, Nanda Maharaja, Krsna's mother, Yasomati, and . . . Everyone's center is Krsna, "How Krsna will be happy?" This is Vrndavana life.

 

 

Srimad Bhagavatam 10.7.10

 

na te sraddadhire gopa

bala-bhasitam ity uta

aprameyam balam tasya

balakasya na te viduh

 

The assembled gopis and gopas, unaware that Krsna is always unlimited, could not believe that baby Krsna had such inconceivable power. They could not believe the statements of the children, and therefore they neglected these statements as being childish talk.

 

 

 

Purport Srimad Bhagavatam 7.10.48

 

...the Supreme Personality of Godhead in His original form as Krsna was always living with the Pandavas. Although the Pandavas, because of the influence of Krsna's yogamaya, could not think of their fortunate position [i.e having God as their friend], every saintly person, including the great sage Narada, could understand it, and therefore they constantly visited Maharaja Yudhisthira.

 

 

 

Srimad Bhagavatam 2.7.30

 

grhnita yad yad upabandham amusya mata

sulbam sutasya na tu tat tad amusya mati

yaj jrmbhato 'sya vadane bhuvanani gopi

samviksya sankita-manah pratibodhitasit

 

When the cowherd woman [Krsna's foster mother, Yasoda] was trying to tie the hands of her son with ropes, she found the rope to be always insufficient in length, and when she finally gave up, Lord Krsna, by and by, opened His mouth, wherein the mother found all the universes situated. Seeing this, she was doubtful in her mind, but she was convinced in a different manner of the mystic nature of her son.

 

PURPORT

 

One day Lord Krsna as the naughty child disturbed His mother Yasoda, and she began to tie up the child with ropes just to punish Him. But no matter how much rope she used, she found it always insufficient. Thus she became fatigued, but in the meantime the Lord opened His mouth, and the affectionate mother saw within the mouth of her son all the universes situated together. The mother was astonished, but out of her deep affection for Krsna she thought that the Almighty Godhead Narayana had kindly looked after her son just to protect Him from all the continuous calamities happening to Him. Because of her deep affection for Krsna, she could never think that her very son was Narayana, the Personality of Godhead Himself. That is the action of yogamaya, the internal potency of the Supreme Lord, which acts to perfect all the pastimes of the Lord with His different types of devotees. Who could play such wonders without being God?

 

 

 

Srimad Bhagavatam 1.11.39

 

tam menire 'bala mudhah

strainam canuvratam rahah

apramana-vido bhartur

isvaram matayo yatha

 

The simple and delicate women truly thought that Lord Sri Krsna, their beloved husband, followed them and was dominated by them. They were unaware of the extent of the glories of their husband, as the atheists are unaware of Him as the supreme controller.

 

PURPORT

 

Even the transcendental wives of Lord Sri Krsna did not know completely the unfathomable glories of the Lord. This ignorance is not mundane because there is some action of the internal potency of the Lord in the exchange of feelings between Him and His eternal associates. The Lord exchanges transcendental relations in five ways, as proprietor, master, friend, son and lover, and in each of these pastimes He plays fully by the potency of yogamaya, the internal potency. He plays exactly like an equal friend with the cowherd boys or even with friends like Arjuna. He plays exactly like a son in the presence of Yasodamata, He plays exactly like a lover in the presence of the cowherd damsels, and He plays exactly like a husband in the presence of the queens of Dvaraka. Such devotees of the Lord never think of the Lord as the Supreme, but think of Him exactly as a common friend, a pet son, or a lover or husband very much dear to heart and soul.

Err, no - What you just said, THAT is propoganda. Evolution of species into other species depends on both mutation and genetic diversity (i.e. a diverse gene pool).

Today the evolution community claims that evolution (macro evolution i.e one species into another) is achieved through mutation + natural selection. Some evolutionists (like yourself) like to claim that variation in the gene pool somehow has something to do with evolution, unfortunately for them and you they cannot prove it. That claim is like all evolutionary propaganda...nothing more then speculations built upon other speculations, turned into complex theories, and promoted by people with an agenda that blinds them to the truth presented by actual data.

I don't like to debate evolution with ardent evolutionists because they are not honest. They are deluded and want to delude others in some bizarre unholy quest. Maybe I've pegged you wrong? I suggest you study some of these writings:

http://www.designinference.com/

http://www.iscid.org/boards/ubb-forum-f-10.html

I will not respond to you on this topic because frankly it bores me to communicate with evolutionists, what with alll the faux science they like to pretend is real. It's just a waste of time, like arguing with a child about things they do not understand but the child is too egotistic to see the questionable motive and lack of understanding it possesses. I have better things to do with my time.

That isn't propoganda. It is called micro-evolution because it is exactly what evolution is about. By the way, evolution isn't just mutation of genes - it is also mixing (i.e. breeding) - this, in effect, is the same as mutation because you bring random alleles together to form "better" phenotypes.

What has been termed micro-evolution is diversity within a species. Macroevolution is one species changing into a different species. Calling diversity within a species (variation) any type of "evolution" is an ideological preference (propaganda) because the essence of evolutionary theory i.e. the evolution of species from one into another, has nothing to do with variation within a species.

The essential component of neo-darwinian theory is that mutation can produce new genetic information. That is how an amoeba can turn into a whale or a mango tree. New genetic information is created by mutation to the genome. The mutations that are not harmful to the species survive and the ones that are harmful die off due to natural selection. Over millions of years one non-harmful mutation mutates again and again and again, millions of times, until new functioning body parts are formed such as eyes, legs, fur, lungs, bones, wings, feathers, leaves, flowers, fruits, vegetables, nuts, etc. That is evolution and that is what happens and will happen according to so called experts.

"Micro-evolution" is what they have termed the variation of genetic information with a species. Mutation can be involved here also. Genetic diseases caused by mutated genes passed on to progeny for example. Also recessive genes can make it so that certain traits of species only show up occasionally. But the essential component of neo-darwinism is missing i.e introduction of new genetic information which builds new body parts.

Dogs can be breeded for millions of years and the result will always be a dog of some type. The reason they call variation within a species micro-evolution is because they are propandizing in an effort to make it seem like macro-evolution is possible. It goes like this: "Sure we can't prove evolution is true because evolution takes place over millions of years therefore we can't see it happening, but we can see micro-evolution going on all of the time which proves that evolution is possible." Calling variation within a species "micro-evolution" is an attempt to mislead people into thinking that variation within species supports the basic schema of evolutionary theory i.e neo-darwinism or the building of new body parts and new body plans by mutation. That a microbe can "evolve" through mutation + natural selection and become a tree or a human.

From darwinismrefuted.com

Variation, a term used in genetics, refers to a genetic event that causes the individuals or groups of a certain type or species to possess different characteristics from one another. For example, all the people on earth carry basically the same genetic information, yet some have slanted eyes, some have red hair, some have long noses, and others are short of stature, all depending on the extent of the variation potential of this genetic information.

 

Variation does not constitute evidence for evolution because variations are but the outcomes of different combinations of already existing genetic information, and they do not add any new characteristic to the genetic information. The important thing for the theory of evolution, however, is the question of how brand-new information to make a brand-new species could come about.

 

Variation always takes place within the limits of genetic information. In the science of genetics, this limit is called the "gene pool." All of the characteristics present in the gene pool of a species may come to light in various ways due to variation. For example, as a result of variation, varieties that have relatively longer tails or shorter legs may appear in a certain species of reptile, since information for both long-legged and short-legged forms may exist in the gene pool of that species. However, variations do not transform reptiles into birds by adding wings or feathers to them, or by changing their metabolism. Such a change requires an increase in the genetic information of the living thing, which is certainly not possible through variations.

 

Darwin was not aware of this fact when he formulated his theory. He thought that there was no limit to variations. In an article he wrote in 1844 he stated: "That a limit to variation does exist in nature is assumed by most authors, though I am unable to discover a single fact on which this belief is grounded."28 In The Origin of Species he cited different examples of variations as the most important evidence for his theory.

 

For instance, according to Darwin, animal breeders who mated different varieties of cattle in order to bring about new varieties that produced more milk, were ultimately going to transform them into a different species. Darwin's notion of "unlimited variation" is best seen in the following sentence from The Origin of Species:

 

"I can see no difficulty in a race of bears being rendered, by natural selection, more and more aquatic in their structure and habits, with larger and larger mouths, till a creature was produced as monstrous as a whale."29

 

The reason Darwin cited such a far-fetched example was the primitive understanding of science in his day. Since then, in the 20th century, science has posited the principle of "genetic stability" (genetic homeostasis), based on the results of experiments conducted on living things. This principle holds that, since all mating attempts carried out to transform a species into another have been inconclusive, there are strict barriers among different species of living things. This meant that it was absolutely impossible for animal breeders to convert cattle into a different species by mating different variations of them, as Darwin had postulated.

 

Norman Macbeth, who disproved Darwinism in his book Darwin Retried, states:

 

"The heart of the problem is whether living things do indeed vary to an unlimited extent... The species look stable. We have all heard of disappointed breeders who carried their work to a certain point only to see the animals or plants revert to where they had started. Despite strenuous efforts for two or three centuries, it has never been possible to produce a blue rose or a black tulip."30

 

Luther Burbank, considered the most competent breeder of all time, expressed this fact when he said, "there are limits to the development possible, and these limits follow a law."31 In his article titled "Some Biological Problems With the Natural Selection Theory," Jerry Bergman comments by quoting from biologist Edward Deevey who explains that variations always take place within strict genetic boundaries:

 

Deevey concludes, "Remarkable things have been done by cross-breeding ... but wheat is still wheat, and not, for instance, grapefruit. We can no more grow wings on pigs than hens can make cylindrical eggs." A more contemporary example is the average increase in male height that has occurred the past century. Through better health care (and perhaps also some sexual selection, as some women prefer taller men as mates) males have reached a record adult height during the last century, but the increase is rapidly disappearing, indicating that we have reached our limit.32

 

In short, variations only bring about changes which remain within the boundaries of the genetic information of species; they can never add new genetic data to them. For this reason, no variation can be considered an example of evolution. No matter how often you mate different breeds of dogs or horses, the end result will still be dogs or horses, with no new species emerging. The Danish scientist W. L. Johannsen sums the matter up this way:

 

"The variations upon which Darwin and Wallace placed their emphasis cannot be selectively pushed beyond a certain point, that such variability does not contain the secret of 'indefinite departure'. "

to say that species evolve does not have to negate the creationism principle.

 

Science has shown how certain species have evolved in some ways. That is not to say that some fish crawled out of the Ocean a few billion years ago and has evolved into humans.

It simply means that species sometime evolve to adapt to enironmental factors.

 

the purport says that Brgu was an anthropologist and he explained how there is some evolution of the species.

 

Even the interbreeding of various species can produce an evolutionary effect.

That quote from Prabhupada was not referring to Darwinian nor Neo-Darwinian theory. He uses the word evolution in a different context which has the same meaning as progression.

Here is what Prabhupada wrote about Darwinian evolution:

In this verse we can understand that the various types of living entities were created simultaneously at the very beginning of the creation. The nonsensical Darwinian theory of evolution is not applicable here. It is not that intelligent human beings did not exist millions of years ago. On the contrary, it is understood that the most intelligent creature, Lord Brahmā, was first created. Then Lord Brahmā created other saintly sages like Marīci, Bhṛgu, Ātreya, Vasiṣṭha and Lord Śiva. They in their turn created different types of bodies according to karma. In Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam Lord Kapiladeva told His mother that the living entity gets a particular type of body in accordance with his work and that this body is decided upon by higher authorities. The higher authorities, as appointed by the Supreme Personality of Godhead, are Lord Brahmā and all other Prajāpatis and Manus. Thus from the beginning of creation it can be seen that the first creature is the most intelligent. It is not that so-called modern intelligence has developed by the gradual process of evolution. As stated in Brahma-vaivarta Purāṇa, there is a gradual evolutionary process, but it is not the body that is evolving. All the bodily forms are already there. It is the spiritual entity, or spiritual spark within the body, that is being promoted by the laws of nature under the supervision of superior authority. We can understand from this verse that from the very beginning of creation different varieties of living entities were existing. It is not that some of them have become extinct. Everything is there; it is due to our lack of knowledge that we cannot see things in their proper perspective.

 

In this verse the word dhvasta-tamasaḥ is very important, for without being free of ignorance one cannot control the creation of different types of living entities. As stated in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (3.31.1), daiva-netreṇa — bodies are awarded under the supervision of superior powers. How can these superior powers control the evolutionary process of the living entity if they are not free from all imperfection? The followers of the Vedic instructions cannot accept the Darwinian theory of evolution, for it is marred by imperfect knowledge.

Also the interbreeding of species does not cause evolution. although evolutionists like to call the effect seen as "micro-evolution". In reality micro-evolution is a misnomer and nothing more then a use of language for propaganda. Real evolution according to the modern synthesis (Neo-Darwinism) is caused by mutation + natural selection (survival of the fittest). Interbreeding of species is not evolution, it is variation of already present genetic information of the species, no different then if a native australian human breeds with a nordic blue eyed blond haired person and they produce a body of mixed genetic information. If a person breeds dogs to obtain specific characteristics the result is called micro-evolution, but that's just the use of the word evolution for propaganda purposes. Real evolution (Macro-Evolution) requires new information be introduced to the genome by mutation to the genome, thereby causing NEW bodily parts of some type or another i.e. a pigs grows wings.

While I did write the above response to Gaura Keshava on the dandavats.com website, I did not post it here. To whomever posted it: If you are going to post something I have written make it clear that it is not me posting it. The username for that post says "from shiva", that makes it seem like I posted that here.

Jagat we're just going to have to agree to disagree over these things. Although I find pretty much everything in your last post post to be purely speculative on your part and wrong, one thing you said though I find to be quite unusual.

The jiva is tatastha shakti. He is either under the influence of the external potency or under the influence of the internal. Once within the internal potency, he does not lose his individuality. He ceases, strictly speaking, to be tatastha at that point and becomes a functioning, yet independently conscious element of the internal potency. This is why manjari bhava is deemed desirable, because it is direct recognition of this most fundamental ontological relationship.

The jiva is always a part of the cit sakti as atomic cit but never fully the same as the cit sakti. Like a fire and a spark of that fire, or the sun and the rays of light from the sun. Tatastha sakti means that the jiva is between the Cit Sakti and the Maya Sakti because the jiva can come under the influence of either. This means the jiva can live under the auspices of yogamaya or mahamaya. Although the jiva is said to be a part of the cit sakti it is always different then cit sakti-bhedabheda, as atomic cit. The jiva will never be the same as Radha and Her expansions who are the fire or the sun and not the spark or the ray.

In Krsna Sandarbha Jiva Goswami says there are two types of expansions of The Supreme Lord:

This is confirmed in the Varaha Purana:

 

The two kinds of expansions from the Supreme Personality of Godhead are : 1. svamsa (personal expansions) and 2. vibhinnamsa (jiva). The svamsa expansions are unlimitedly powerful. Their form and personality are the same as the Supreme Personality of Godhead Himself. There is not the slightest difference between the svamsa expansions and the Original Personality of Godhead. The vibhinnamsa expansions are very weak in comparison to Them.

The question is; why do you say:

This is why manjari bhava is deemed desirable, because it is direct recognition of this most fundamental ontological relationship.

All jivas in whatever bhava they relate to Radha Krishna, in vaikuntha or goloka, are under the auspices of the cit sakti. You only desire manjari bhava because you think it is the highest possible level of attainment for you.

We cannot limited God to the post of God. Even an earthly king is allowed to "lose himself" as king while in play with his grandchilren.

That's exactly what I have said many times. Krishna doesn't forget He is God just like the king doesn't forget he is the king. This is what I have written previously on this:

For example; if I was the president of the U.S.A, I would control vast armies and military might, other leaders would tremble before me, hoping I would not be angry with them, My military could devastate any other nation without a sweat if so desired.

 

Yet at home I put that all aside, I let my wife chastise me for leaving my socks on the floor, I allow my 5 year old child to ride on my back and boss me around, I allow myself to leave my factual identity as ruler of the world out of my life at home. At home I come under the spell of the home life. I am not the ruler, rather I am the provider and servant. I enjoy my family bossing me around, out of their love and mine.

 

Does this mean I factually forget everything else in my life? No, my "forgetting" of my role as ruler of the world is not real forgetfulness. Rather it is a self conception that is not important and therefore set aside. But I do not actually forget who I am.

 

Do I leave my job as President when I am home? No, I am still President, still rule the world, there is not a shadow president who takes over when I am with my family. I am president day and night, 24/7.

 

This is exactly what is meant by Krishna taking shelter of Yoga Maya. He can never forget that He is God, He is factually doing the work of maintaining everything and everyone in existence. His Yoga Maya and Maha Maya energy is not a separate conscious entity from Himself.

 

isvarah paramah krsnah

sac-cid-ananda-vigrahah

anadir adir govindah

sarva-karana-karanam

 

What does this verse tell us ?

Well Jagat you can have your interpretations of the sastra. I have shown pramana showing that Cit Sakti and Radha and Her expansions are called identical to Krishna, not one and different. And you will not find anywhere in gaudiya teachings where the jiva is called anything but bhedabheda. You can make your assertion about these concepts being worded so as to contrast with mayavada philosophy, I reject that as pure speculation. As for metaphor and lila and your complaint that too much metaphor makes it meaningless I simply disagree. It is my own experience that the rasa sastra serves 2 purposes. The first is for those who only have entrance into the extoeric meaning and the second is for those who have entrance into the esoteric meaning. For the former the rasa sastra serves as an incentive to want to take part in Krishna lila thereby inspiring them to take to the process which will attain them their goal.

From KRSNA book

Some ask that if Krsna is self-sufficient, why should He at all manifest pastimes with the gopis, which are disturbing to the so-called moralists of the world? The answer is that such activities show special mercy to the fallen, conditioned souls. The gopis are also expansions of His internal energy, but because Krsna wanted to exhibit the rasa-lila, they also appeared as ordinary human beings. In the material world, pleasure is ultimately manifested in the sex attraction between man and woman. The man lives simply to be attracted by women, and the woman lives simply to be attracted by men. That is the basic principle of material life. As soon as these attractions are combined, people become more and more implicated in material existence. In order to show them special favor, Krsna exhibited this rasa-lila dance. It is just to captivate the conditioned soul. Since they are very much attracted by sexology, they can enjoy the same life with Krsna and thus become liberated from the material condition. In the Second Canto of Srimad-Bhagavatam, Maharaja Pariksit also explains that the pastimes and activities of Lord Krsna are medicine for the conditioned souls. If they simply hear about Krsna they become relieved from the material disease. They are addicted to material enjoyment and are accustomed to reading sex literature, but by hearing these transcendental pastimes of Krsna with the gopis, they will be relieved from material contamination.

For the latter the descriptions of the rasa in Vraja contain a message only they can see.

As for the speculations that Krishna can somehow fool Himself into not knowing He is God, we will just have to agree to disagree.

Theist it is a little different then that. Krishna is paramatma, Krishna is yogamaya, Krishna is Balarama, Krishna is Ramachandra, Krishna is Radha, Durga, Maha Vishnu, etc. They are all one person. What you propose is that Krishna is split into different segments which can be unaware of each other's activities. That is not how God exists. Krishna is all pervading, everything is comprised of Krishna, Krishna is conscious of everything, everywhere, always. Krishna in lila is still the same all pervading consciousness aware of everything in existence. While Balarama may take a different side in lila that doesn't mean they are different, it's just lila.

you said

When baby Krsna was hungry and He cried for the breast of Mother Yasoda was He thinking, "well it's time for me to fool Mother Yasoda into thinking I need her milk once again." Or was He also fully immersed in being a dependant child in need of His mother?

From Krsna Book

When Lord Krsna saw that Vasudeva and Devaki were remaining standing in a reverential attitude, He immediately expanded His influence of yogamaya so that they could treat Him and Balarama as children.

From Srimad Bhagavatam

Srimad Bhagavatam 10.45.1

 

sri-suka uvaca

pitarav upalabdharthau

viditva purushottamah

ma bhud iti nijam mayam

tatana jana-mohinim

 

Sukadeva Gosvami said: Understanding that His parents were becoming aware of His transcendental opulences, the Supreme Personality of Godhead thought that this should not be allowed to happen. Thus He expanded His Yogamaya, which bewilders His devotees.

Krishna is never hungry, God doesn't need food, rest, or anything. Of course Krishna has to act like a child who is hungry, Krishna is not a child and He doesn't get hungry. He has to act. He is controlling what everyone does at every second. Sarva karana karanam-the cause of all causes. The point of Krishna lila for Krishna is not to feel like a child, it is to enjoy relationships with His devotees. The whole purpose of Goloka versus Vaikuntha is to fool the devotees into thinking He is a human, one of us, to have a relationship without people being in awe of Him/Her. In Vaikuntha Lord Narayana who is also Krishna is not hiding who He is, there people are in awe and reverence of God, they can't help it. If you know a person you live with is God then you will be in awe, you won't treat Him or Her the same as if you thought He or She was a human. Don't think that Krishna forgets who He is, that cannot happen because God exists everywhere and is fully conscious everywhere of everything, and is controlling everything that happens. Krishna is with you and me, fully conscious of everything we do, guiding us to fulfill our destiny at all times. He is pretending the entire Vraja lila to be human, He is controlling the lila, everything that goes on in the lila is going on according to plan. When he incarnates in Gokula in the material world, then he shows that He is God sometimes, like to Arjuna at Kurukshetra.

He knows full well He is God....in Vaikuntha. But in Vraja it's another play.

No it's not. He displays mystic powers in Vraja causing the devotees to occasionally think he is an avatar, like when He shows the universe in his mouth to Yasoda devi, or when He makes the rope that she tries to bind him with never long enough even though the rope is long enough.

So my question is why can Krsna not place Himself fully under yoga-maya and be totally immersed in that play. And as Radha also.

That's like believing that your arm can independently write a book while you are asleep. Yogamaya is like Krishna's arm, the arm cannot act intelligently independently of the mind of Krishna. Nothing can act independently of Krishna's control. Everything is going on because Krishna is controlling it.

From Brahma Samhita

eko 'py asau racayitum jagad-anda-kotim

yac-chaktir asti jagad-anda-caya yad-antah

andantara-stha-paramanu-cayantara-stham-

govindam adi-purusham tam aham bhajami

 

He is an undifferentiated entity as there is no distinction between potency and the possessor thereof. In His work of creation of millions of worlds, His potency remains inseparable. All the universes exist in Him and He is present in His fullness in every one of the atoms that are scattered throughout the universe, at one and the same time. Such is the primeval Lord whom I adore.

 

PURPORT

 

Krishna is the highest of all entities. In Him is an entity which is termed cit (spiritual) which is distinct from the principle of limitation. By His inconceivable power, He can at will create numberless universes. All the mundane universes owe their origin to the transformation of His external potency. Again His abode is beyond human conception; since all worlds, limited and spiritual (cit) exist in Him and He resides simultaneously in His fullness and entirety in all the atoms in all the worlds. All-pervasiveness is only a localized aspect of the majesty of Krishna, the Lord of all. Though He is all-pervasive yet in His existence everywhere in a medium shape consists His spiritual Lordship beyond human conception. This argument favors the doctrine of simultaneous inconceivable distinction and nondistinction, and knocks down the contaminating Mayavada and other allied doctrines.

Purport from the Bhagavatam

It is described in this connection that the Supreme Brahman, the Personality of Godhead, is the master of both pradhana and purusha. Pradhana means subtle matter, such as ether. purusha means the spiritual spark living entities who are entangled in that subtle material existence. These may also be described as para prakriti and apara prakriti, as stated in Bhagavad-gita. Krishna, being the controller of both the prakritis, is thus the master of pradhana and purusha. In the Vedic hymns also the Supreme Brahman is described as antah-pravishtah sasta. This indicates that the Supreme Personality of Godhead is controlling everything and entering into everything. The Brahma-samhita (5.35) further confirms this. Andantara-stha-paramanu-cayantara-stham: He has entered not only the universes, but even the atom. In Bhagavad-gita (10.42) Krishna also says, vishtabhyaham idam kritsnam. The Supreme Personality of Godhead controls everything by entering into everything.

Here is Bhaktivinoda's Jaiva Dharma where he is explaining how yogamaya and mahamaya work:

The commentary on Vedanta-sutra declares:

 

"The potency and the possessor of the potency are not different."

 

The meaning, then, is that the potency does not exist apart from its substance. The only true substance is the Supreme Personality of Godhead, the master of potencies. The nature of the potency is either to be a quality of the Supreme Lord, or submissive to His will.

 

When it is said that the potency has pure consciousness, that means that because the potency and the master of potencies are not different, therefore, like the master of potencies, the potency also has a form of spiritual consciousness, has desires that are at once fulfilled, and is beyond the touch of the three modes. It is not a mistake to say these things.

 

Will and consciousness are qualities of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. By itself, the potency does not possess will, but rather it carries out the will of the Supreme. For example, you have power, and by Your will, your potencies act. If you say, 'the power acted', then that means that the possessor of the power was actually behind the action. To say that 'the power acted' is only to use a figure of speech.

 

In truth, the Supreme Personality of Godhead has only one potency. When she performs spiritual actions, she is called spiritual potency [yogamaya], and when she performs material actions, she is called the material potency, or maya.

If Radha is not a separate conscious entity from Krishna, then there is no meaning to Chaitanya lila or anything else, for that matter. Why bother glorifying Radha's love if her love is a cardboard cutout?

There is meaning to Gaura Lila. Glorifying Radha's love is part of sadhana bhakti, it will purify you, help you develop love of God.

Śrī Caitanya Caritāmṛta Ādi 1.4

anarpita-carīḿ cirāt karuṇayāvatīrṇaḥ kalau

samarpayitum unnatojjvala-rasāḿ sva-bhakti-śriyam

hariḥ puraṭa-sundara-dyuti-kadamba-sandīpitah

sadā hṛdaya-kandare sphuratu vaḥ śacī-nandanah

May the Supreme Lord who is known as the son of Śrīmatī Śacī-devī be transcendentally situated in the innermost chambers of your heart. Resplendent with the radiance of molten gold, He has appeared in the Age of Kali by His causeless mercy to bestow what no incarnation has ever offered before: the most sublime and radiant mellow of devotional service, the mellow of conjugal love.

Also it is said that Krishna wanted to taste what Radha tastes, so he incarnated as Sri Caitanya in order to do that.

CC Adi 4.133: "I taste the bliss to which the object of love is entitled. But the pleasure of Radha, the abode of that love, is ten million times greater.

 

CC Adi 4.134: "My mind races to taste the pleasure experienced by the abode, but I cannot taste it, even by My best efforts. How may I taste it?

 

CC Adi 4.135: "If sometime I can be the abode of that love, only then may I taste its joy."

 

CC Adi 4.136: Thinking in this way, Lord Krishna was curious to taste that love. His eager desire for that love increasingly blazed in His heart.

 

CC Ādi 4.230: Desiring to understand the glory of Rādhārāṇī's love, the wonderful qualities in Him that She alone relishes through Her love, and the happiness She feels when She realizes the sweetness of His love, the Supreme Lord Hari, richly endowed with Her emotions, appeared from the womb of Śrīmatī Śacī-devī, as the moon appeared from the ocean.

Mahaprabhu is Krishna come to taste that which Krishna cannot taste unless he takes on the mood of Radha. That is a metaphorical message. We are told repeatedly from numerous authoritative sources that Radha and Krishna are one and the same, identical. Krishna knows what Radha experiences because He is Radha.

O Balarama, please listen and I will tell You something. One day, taking My flute, My heart full of bliss and My form bending in three places, I went under a kadamba tree and, seeing My own form reflected in a splendid golden platform studded with jewels, I became enchanted. At that moment My heart became filled with the sweet happiness known as conjugal love, which charms the entire world. My heart now desires to become a woman. I yearn to enjoy Myself as a woman.

 

As the Lord thought in this way, His heart approached itself. From the sweetness of His heart came bliss and from the bliss came Himself, manifested in a second form, a female form of transcendental bliss that could experience the direct perception of Himself.

Even if you cannot understand that Radha and Krishna are identical still you have to accept that the primary reason for Mahaprabhu's descent has to be metaphorical. Why? Because we are told Krishna is curious to taste what Radha tastes, so he incarnated as Mahaprabhu. Yet we are also told that Krishna became Radha because he wanted to taste the same thing.

These are deep metaphorical messages. We are being taught that God enjoys more as a female then as a male. Mahaprabhu is teaching that on the outside God is masculine e.g All powerful Vishnu, Narayana, Purusa, Krishna. But on the inside God is feminine. Mahaprabhu is masculine on the outside and feminine within. God's most intimate identity is female. That is Mahaprabhus metaphoric message. God's inner self is feminine while the outer display is masculine. This is Mahaprabhu's message, this is the inner message of his lila. Radha is Supreme. Radha and Krishna are one and the same but Radha enjoys millions of times more then Krishna. Radha is God's innermost and most confidential identity.

radha-krsna pranaya-vikrtir hladini saktir asmad

ekatmanau api bhuvipura deha-bhedam gatau tau

caitanyakhyam prakatam adhuna tad-dvayam caikyam aptam

radha-bhava-dyuti-suvalitam naumi krsna-svarupam

 

The loving affairs of Radha Krishna are transcendental manifestations of the Lord's internal pleasure-giving potency {They are Radha's doing}. Although Radha and Krishna are one in Their identity, They have separated Themselves eternally. Now these two transcendental identities have again united in the form of Sri Krishna Caitanya. I bow down to Him, who has manifested Himself with the sentiment and complexion of Srimati Radharani although He is Krishna Himself.

Jagat you wrote:

The nature of the jivas is certainly different from the other shaktis, but that does not mean that these shaktis are not functioning as separate individuals. The vibhinnamsas jivas are also non-different from God. The emphasis on their difference is due to the effort to distinguish our doctrines from Mayavada.

The jivas are not non-different from the Lord. They are bhedabheda, one with and different. Radha and Her expansions are Cit Sakti, svamsa expansions of the Lord, they are non-different from the Lord. Why you choose to make some case for calling bhedabheda-tattva something to counter Advaita doctrine with is curious. Jivas are never non-different from the Lord. They are always one and different.

Jagat you wrote:

The emphasis on the oneness of Krishna with his shaktis is to emphasize the opposite--that there is no pluralism in the Supreme, i.e., in order to maintain the unicity of God. Again, this is playing a role in the debate with other Vedantists. This should not be a source of confusion, but that often happens when there is overcompensation.

You can choose to interpret what is written as you like.

You also wrote:

God differentiates himself as shakti and shaktiman, just as he differentiates himself into infinite jivas. The jivas are also minute reflections of himself, and yet they have separate consciousness.

You can claim these things but they contradict the pramana I have given.

You then wrote:

In reference to the I/other dichotomy. In this world I am surrounded by other conscious entities. I still believe that these are real people, not cardboard cutouts. If I did not, my actions and interactions would have no meaning. If there is a nitya-lila peopled by residents of Vrindavan, etc., it will be completely meaningless if they are all cardboard cutouts in a kind of "Truman show" put on exclusively for my purpose, no matter how clever the Maya.

Interesting how you mention "The Truman Show". For those of you who have not seen it; it is a movie about a person who was raised in a gigantic dome. Inside the dome it is meant to look like you are in the real world e.g a painted on sky, huge body of water to fake an ocean or lake, a town, jobs, newspapers, television, radio, people, etc. Truman is raised there and thinks he is living in the real world. In truth everyone but him is an actor and his life is a reality t.v. show. The movie is about Truman finding out that the world he believes is real is in fact a controlled environment centered on him.

In a sense that is what life is like for the jiva, in the mundane world or the spiritual world. Everything we encounter is the arrangement of the Lord. Whether we live in the mundane world or the spiritual realm the Lord will always be arranging everything for us.

In Goloka the jivas do no not know they are living with God. They are not allowed to know. They think Krishna is a human. Sometimes they may think he is some type of avatar, but that thought is quickly removed and forgotten due to yogamaya. There are lot's of jivas in Goloka and there are many expansions of the Lord (male and female) there as well.

There are two aspects to Krishna lila. The internal and the external. The jivas in that lila are only aware of the external. We can glimpse deeper. We are not encumbered by ignorance. Those jivas in that lila do not know that Radha and Krishna, Balarama and the nitya sakhis etc, are all the various personas of the same Supreme Lord. They see the lila externally. To them Radha and Krishna are people in love. They are totally unaware of the existential position they are in and the true inner nature of the pastime they are participating in. They are in ignorance, and in this case ignorance is in fact bliss. Knowledge of Radha and Krishna's true position would lessen the rasa that Radha Krishna desire's in that situation. Instead of a normal lifestyle sharing love amongst equals, it would turn into awe and reverence of the Supreme Lord.

So this is the truth. The Gaudiya commentaries in rasa sastra are giving descriptions of the nature of that lila in Vraja, of what would appear to be going on if you were a mukta jiva living there. But there is an inner dimension to that lila as well that one needs to fully understand in order to fully appreciate the nature of God in the here and now.

Jagat you wrote:

Since we are once again reduced to repeating ourselves, I think that rather than throw a lot more "shakti and shaktiman are one" quotes at me, you had better explain what you think they mean in concrete terms. In particular, explain what all these acharyas meant by manjari bhava, which makes you snicker at their, or at least our, foolishness.

I don't snicker at the acharyas. I find that people who are not yet qualified to appreciate the teachings on Radha Krishna tattva written by those acharyas are amusing when they attempt to pontificate about things beyond their experience.

Manjari bhava is something which unqualified people try to portray as the goal of gaudiya practice as well as the most important aspect of gaudiya siddhanta. In reality it is misunderstood by anyone who is unable to understand basic truths of Radha Krishna tattva, nor are people able to understand the confidential lila of the Lord unless they understand the esoteric intent of those writings. If they rely on the literal then they will not understand. These topics are confidential knowledge, revealed knowledge. If you want to try and be a manjari...go ahead. I did at one time some 25 years ago. I had the same exact ideology on these topics as you do know Jagat. Then I had my views radically altered and my eyes opened to another angle of vision. I was shown that I was wrong about so many things. It all starts with understanding that Radha is Krishna and Krishna is Radha and that Radha is supreme.

Wish this wasn't so far above my head but it is. I was wondering if yogamaya had any influence on Radha/Krsna as They relate to each other similar to the separated expansions mention above? Anyway never mind I don't mean to interuppt.

Good question, you're not interrupting, this is a free for all. Yogamaya cannot delude God because that would mean Yogamaya is a separate conscious entity from God. Yogamaya is the power of God. Yogamaya is the name given to the aspect of God which controls the activities in the spiritual world, the name mahamaya is given to the aspect of God which controls the activities of the mundane world. Although they are the same thing.

Śrīmad Bhāgavatam 10.1.25

viṣṇor māyā bhagavatī

yayā sammohitaḿ jagat

ādiṣṭā prabhuṇāḿśena

kāryārthe sambhaviṣyati

 

The potency of the Lord, known as viṣṇu-māyā, who is as good as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, will also appear with Lord Kṛṣṇa. This potency, acting in different capacities, captivates all the worlds, both material and spiritual. At the request of her master, she will appear with her different potencies in order to execute the work of the Lord.

 

PURPORT

 

Parāsya śaktir vividhaiva śrūyate (Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad 6.8). In the Vedas it is said that the potencies of the Supreme Personality of Godhead are called by different names, such as yogamāyā and mahāmāyā. Ultimately, however, the Lord's potency is one, exactly as electric potency is one although it can act both to cool and to heat. The Lord's potency acts in both the spiritual and material worlds. In the spiritual world the Lord's potency works as yogamāyā, and in the material world the same potency works as mahāmāyā, exactly as electricity works in both a heater and a cooler. In the material world, this potency, working as mahāmāyā, acts upon the conditioned souls to deprive them more and more of devotional service. It is said, yayā sammohito jīva ātmānaḿ tri-guṇātmakam. In the material world the conditioned soul thinks of himself as a product of tri-guṇa, the three modes of material nature. This is the bodily conception of life. Because of associating with the three guṇas of the material potency, everyone identifies himself with his body. Someone is thinking he is a brāhmaṇa, someone a kṣatriya, and someone a vaiśya or śūdra. Actually, however, one is neither a brāhmaṇa, a kṣatriya, a vaiśya nor a śūdra; one is part and parcel of the Supreme Lord (mamaivāḿśaḥ), but because of being covered by the material energy, mahāmāyā, one identifies himself in these different ways. When the conditioned soul becomes liberated, however, he thinks himself an eternal servant of Kṛṣṇa. Jīvera 'svarūpa' haya — kṛṣṇera 'nitya-dāsa.' [Cc. Madhya 20.108]. When he comes to that position, the same potency, acting as yogamāyā, increasingly helps him become purified and devote his energy to the service of the Lord.

 

In either case, whether the soul is conditioned or liberated, the Lord is supreme. As stated in Bhagavad-gītā (9.10), mayādhyakṣeṇa prakṛtiḥ sūyate sa-carācaram: it is by the order of the Supreme Personality of Godhead that the material energy, mahāmāyā, works upon the conditioned soul.

 

prakṛteḥ kriyamāṇāni

guṇaiḥ karmāṇi sarvaśah

ahańkāra-vimūḍhātmā

kartāham iti manyate

 

"The bewildered spirit soul, under the influence of the three modes of material nature, thinks himself to be the doer of activities which are in actuality carried out by nature." (Bg. 3.27) Within conditioned life, no one has freedom, but because one is bewildered, being subject to the rule of mahāmāyā, one foolishly thinks himself independent (ahańkāra-vimūḍhātmā kartāham iti manyate [bg. 3.27]). But when the conditioned soul becomes liberated by executing devotional service, he is given a greater and greater chance to relish a relationship with the Supreme Personality of Godhead in different transcendental statuses, such as dāsya-rasa, sakhya-rasa, vātsalya-rasa and mādhurya-rasa.

 

Thus the Lord's potency, viṣṇu-māyā, has two features — āvaraṇikā and unmukha. When the Lord appeared, His potency came with Him and acted in different ways. She acted as yogamāyā with Yaśodā, Devakī and other intimate relations of the Lord, and she acted in a different way with Kaḿsa, Śālva and other asuras. By the order of Lord Kṛṣṇa, His potency yogamāyā came with Him and exhibited different activities according to the time and circumstances. Kāryārthe sambhaviṣyati. Yogamāyā acted differently to execute different purposes desired by the Lord. As confirmed in Bhagavad-gītā (9.13), mahātmānas tu māḿ pārtha daivīḿ prakṛtim āśritāḥ. The mahātmās, who fully surrender to the lotus feet of the Lord, are directed by yogamāyā, whereas the durātmās, those who are devoid of devotional service, are directed by mahāmāyā.

So yogamaya cannot actually cause Radha Krishna to do anything, it is not a separate conscious entity.

Jagat you wrote:

To think this shakti and by extension Krishna's other shaktis do not have separate consciousness and identity from him flies in the face of a carefully developed ontology.

I do not make the "by extension" that you make, so let's keep this debate to what I actually am saying. There is a major difference between antaranga sakti and jiva sakti.

From Bhaktivinoda's The Bhagavat:

Antaranga-shakti:

 

Antaranga is that which pertains to the proper Entity of the Absolute Person. It is also called Swarupa-shakti for this reason. The literal meaning of the word antaranga is "that which belongs to the inner body." Shakti is rendered as "power."

From Jaiva Dharma:

The cit-potency [antaranga sakti] is Krishna's plenary potency; Whatever she produces is eternally accomplished; the jiva is not so eternally accomplished; when he becomes accomplished by practices (sadhana-siddha), he enjoys bliss like those eternally accomplished entities.

 

The four kinds of confidantes of Sri Radha (to be described hereafter) are eternally accomplished; their bodies are about the same, with slight variations, with that of Sri Radhika who is essentially the cit-shakti. The jivas have grown out of the jiva-shakti of Sri Krishna. Cit-shakti is Sri Krishna's full (plenary) shakti, whereas the jiva-shakti is the incomplete shakti. From the Cit-shakti are produced complete entities, but from the incomplete potency have grown the jivas as atomic Cit. Krishna manifests entities of different types in accordance with the kind of the shakti He applies.

 

When established in His essential cit-shakti He reveals His essential Nature as Sri Krishna Himself on the one hand and on the other as Sri Narayana, the Lord of Vaikuntha.

"Complete entities" means that they are God, independent. Only God is a complete entity, everyone else is incomplete i.e. dependent on God for everything. All Cit sakti entities are complete in the sense that they are all the same Supreme Lord in various forms and personas, therefore the Cit-sakti is called the plenary potency.

Bhaktivinoda explains Antaranga or Cit Sakti in Jaiva Dharma:

Krsna is self-effulgent, like a blazing fire or the sun. Krsna is like a blazing fire. In the centre of the fire is the cit-sakti, it is present in fullness. In addition to the centre there is also a great expanse illuminated by the fire. The same way the Krsna-sun illumines a great area with sunlight. The rays of sunlight are particles of His internal potency. Those atomic particles that constitute those rays of sunlight are the individual spirit souls. The internal potency (cit sakti) manifests the Krsna-sun planet itself. The sunlight emanating from that planet is manifested by the cit-sakti and the individual particles of light are manifested by the jiva-sakti. Therefore the individual spirit souls are manifested by the jiva-sakti.

What is being described is that the Cit or Antaranga Sakti is like the core of a fire, the jiva's are atoms within the rays of light emanating from that fire. Radha, Krishna, Laksmi, Visnu, these are all complete Cit entities, they are all the core of the fire, they are all one and the same, or Svamsa expansions of the same Supreme Lord. They are all various forms produced by Cit Sakti.

From A.C Bhaktivedanta Swami CC Adi lila purport:

Radha and Sri Krsna are identical. The sandhini portion of Sri Krsna's internal potency [Cit Sakti] has manifested the all-attractive form of Sri Krsna, and the same internal potency, in the hladini feature, has presented Srimati Radharani

So my point is that the term sakti does not have the same meaning in all circumstances. So there is no need to make an "extension" beyond what I am saying.

Jiva sakti is acintya-bhedabheda with the Lord whereas Antaranga [Cit] sakti is identical to the Lord.

From Baladeva Vidyabhusana's Prameya Ratnavali:

vishnoh syuh saktayastisristasu ya kirtita para |

saiva sristadabhinneti praha sishyan prabhurmahan || 12 ||

 

12. Visnu has three energies (Cit, Jiva, Bahiranga). The one among them who is proclaimed as the highest is Sri (Laksmi, Radha, Sita etc), who is not different from him. So taught the great master to his disciples.

 

paraiva vishnvabhinna srirityuktam tatraiva (vi. pu., 1.9.44-45):

kalakashthanimeshadikalasutrasya gocare |

yasya saktirna suddhasya prasidatu sa no harih ||

procyate parameso yah yah suddhoâ pyupacaratah |

prasidatu sa no vishnuratma yah sarvadehinam || (gha) ||

 

That the higher [power] is Sri who is non-different from Visnu is stated there [in the Visnu Purana (1.9.44-45)] as well:

 

May Hari be pleased with us, the pure one whose power is not under the control of time which is made up of units like kala, kastha, nimesa, and so forth. He, though pure, is said metaphorically to be the Lord of Sri (parama); may that Visnu, who is the Self of all embodied beings, be pleased with us.

Jagat you wrote:

God"s first division is thus as Shakti and Shaktiman. Male and female supreme truth.

Srī Caitanya Caritamṛta Adi 4.96

rādhā — pūrṇa-śakti, kṛṣṇa — pūrṇa-śaktimān

dui vastu bheda nāi, śāstra-paramāṇa

 

Śrī Rādhā is the full power, and Lord Kṛṣṇa is the possessor of full power. The two are not different, as evidenced by the revealed scriptures.

From a lecture by Ac. Bhaktivedanta:

There is no difference between the energy and the energetic, sakti-saktiman abhina. Therefore there is no difference between Radha and Krsna.

Sri Krsna-bhakti-ratna-prakasa of Srila Raghava Goswami:

Because Sri Sri Radha Krsna are not different and because Sri Krsna is the master of all potencies, therefore Sri Radha is also the master and source of all potencies (She is Shakti and Shaktiman, as is Krishna since they are identical). He is by nature full of sweetness and bliss, free from the three modes, and eternally manifest beyond the material nature. Because Radha is not different from Him, so is She also. It is said that within the Lord are all potencies, the modes and the material nature.

Jagat you believe that Krishna's shakti's are different from Krishna, but that is not supported anywhere. Krishna is identical with the Cit Sakti and Krishna is one and different from the Jiva Sakti. The jiva sakti are different conscious entities from Krishna but the Cit Sakti are all Krishna himself.

In Krsna Sandarbha Jiva Goswami says there are two types of expansions of The Supreme Lord:

This is confirmed in the Varaha Purana:

 

The two kinds of expansions from the Supreme Personality of Godhead are : 1. svamsa (personal expansions) and 2. vibhinnamsa (separate persons). The svamsa expansions are unlimitedly powerful. Their form and personality are the same as the Supreme Personality of Godhead Himself.

 

There is not the slightest difference between the svamsa expansions and the Original Personality of Godhead. The vibhinnamsa expansions are very weak in comparison to Them.

So unless Radha is a jiva She is Krishna Himself.

From A.C Bhaktivedanta's Caitanya Caritamrta Adi lila:

tara madhye vraie nana bhava-rasa-bhede

krsnake karaya rasadika-lilasvade

 

 

Among them are various groups of consorts in Vraja who have varieties of sentiments and mellows. They help Lord Krsna taste all the sweetness of the rasa dance and other pastimes.

 

PURPORT

 

As already explained, Krsna and Radha are one in two. They are identical. Krsna expands Himself in multi-incarnations and plenary portions like the purusas. Similarly, Srimati Radharani expands Herself in multi-forms as the goddesses of fortune, the queens and the damsels of Vraja. Such expansions from Srimati Radharani are all Her plenary (completely identical) portions. All these womanly forms of Krsna are expansions corresponding to His plenary expansions of Visnu forms. These expansions have been compared to reflected forms of the original form. There is no difference between the original and reflected forms. The female refelctions of Krsna's pleasure potency are as good as Krsna Himself.

 

 

The plenary expansions of Krsna's personality are called vaibhava-vilasa and vaibhava-prakasa, and Radha's expansions are similarly described. The goddesses of fortune are vaibhava-vilasa, and the queens are vaibhava-prakasa of Radharani. The personal associates of Radharani, the damsels of Vraja, are direct expansions of Her body. As expansions of Her personai form and transcendental disposition, they are agents of different reciprocations of love in the pastimes of Lord Krsna, under the supreme direction of Srimati Radharani.

Sri Baladeva Vidyabhusana explains this point in Govinda Bhasya:

Is it not true that amorous love is possible only when there are two: the lover and the beloved ? If there is no difference between the lover and the beloved, then love is not possible between them.

 

Although the Lord and His para sakti [Radha] are not different, still, for enjoying different pastimes, They are manifested as different. In this way the Lord's desires are perfectly and completely fulfilled.

 

Even though the Lord's potency and the Lord Himself, the shelter of that potency, are one, still, because the Lord is the best of males and His potency is the jewel of young girls, when They are together there is naturally the perfection of blissful amorous pastimes.

"when They are together there is naturally the perfection of blissful amorous pastimes."

Blissful amorous pastimes are perfected by their relationship in Vraja. In other words their relationship is manifested for the purpose of perfecting lila. They are the same person in two different bodies.

From A. C Bhaktivedanta

Therefore there is no difference between Radha and Krsna. Radha is purna-sakti and Krsna is purna-saktiman, so there is no difference, but, lila-rasa asvadite dhare dui-rupa, to relish the mellow of pastimes two bodies are there, Radha and Krsna, otherwise they are one.

They are one person having a relationship in two forms in order to create perfect pastimes.

The real rasa in the spiritual world is not between Krishna and His personal expansions who are all identical to Himself, they appear to have real relationships with each other in the lila, but that is done to create a perfect pastime for the jivas there. The real rasa is between God and the jivas. There is nobody else but God and the jivas.

Jiva Goswami has written in Priti-sandarbha (10)12:

In the spiritual world, the Supreme Lord has unlimited spiritual forms, all are expansions of Himself illuminating that world. With each one of those forms, the Lord enjoys pastimes with a single individual liberated soul.

The reason you balk at this is because you are using rasa shastra as your literal ontological template. That is not the purpose of those writings, they have an esoteric purpose which is revealed when you are ready.

From Bhaktivinoda's Jaiva Dharma:

Srila Jiva Gosvami describes the Supreme Person in these words:

 

"The Absolute Truth is one. Still, by His inconceivable potency He is manifested in four ways: 1. svarupa (His original form), 2. tad-rupa-vaibhava (His incarnations), 3. jiva (the individual spirit souls), and 4. pradhana (the material energy). These four features are like: 1. the interior of the sun planet, 2. the sun's surface, 3. the sunlight, and 4. the reflection of the sun."

 

This example of course, explains only a small part of the Lord's nature. His svarupa (original form) is His form of eternity, knowledge and bliss. His svarupa-vaibhava (manifestations of His form) are His spiritual abode, name, associates and paraphernalia. The jiva-sakti is the abode of the numberless eternally liberated and conditioned individual souls, who are tiny particles of spirit.

Jiva Goswami explains the personal incarnations of the Lord to be like the sun's surface and the Lord to be like the sun's interior. What this means is that when you look at the sun you only see the surface, but underneath is the sun. So when you look at a personal expansion of the Lord they may display a great variety of forms, personas, pastimes, etc. But underneath they are the same Surpeme Lord.

Jiva Goswami does not mention a third category of living entity. There is only Svamsa and Vibhinnamsa, God and Jivas. Krishna and his personal expansions, and the Jiva.

In Krsna Sandarbha Jiva Goswami:

This is confirmed in the Varaha Purana:

 

The two kinds of expansions from the Supreme Personality of Godhead are : 1. svamsa (personal expansions) and 2. vibhinnamsa (separate persons). The svamsa expansions are unlimitedly powerful. Their form and personality are the same as the Supreme Personality of Godhead Himself.

 

There is not the slightest difference between the svamsa expansions and the Original Personality of Godhead. The vibhinnamsa expansions are very weak in comparison to Them.

Though, I should say, Shivaji, that there are mystical traditions where the sadhaka assumes a male persona in relation to God as the female beloved. There is a strain of Sufism that has produced a number of songs and poems in this mood. I would have to look more closely at these traditions to find out the extent to which their mood was metaphorical or substantial. As with Christianity, there is bridal mysticism, but how carnal did these brides get? No doubt the lines got blurred, but I don't believe that Christian or Muslim theology ever developed the kind of concrete conception of lila that is present in the Vaishnava tradition. I will make inquiries.

 

So, to you I would say: You are an intelligent person who no doubt could develop a mystical path along these lines using Vaishnava symbolism. You have charisma and could no doubt attract a following. Books and a following = a sampradaya. A tradition = legitimacy. You will always be a heretic to Gaudiyas of all stripes, of course, even if you borrow heavily from their tradition, as you seem to do.

My views could only be considered heretical if they could not be backed up by pramana, which I have done. To me the basic flaw in many people's understanding of Radha Krishna tattva is in misunderstanding the identity of Radha and the meaning or function of hladini. Another flaw is in thinking that the descriptions of Radha Krishna rasa lila are all literal and therefore mean what they appear to mean to the casual reader. My contention is that rasa lila is not so easily accessible to the casual reader but is in reality written about esoterically.

The major hurdle for many devotees to overcome if they want to understand rasa lila is in understanding the difference between Radha and Krishna. You state correctly that Srila Saraswati Thakura called Radha and Krishna the female moiety and male moiety. But we shouldn't let that confuse us into thinking that God is a dual entity. God is one entity with dual personas. In fact teaching that God is two and not one is antithetical to all the teachings of Vedanta.

This is from Raghava Goswami's Sri Krsna-bhakti-ratna-prakasa:

In the Narada-pancaratra, Second Night, Third Chapter, Lord Siva explains:

 

"The Supreme Lord is one. Still, He is manifested in two forms."

He doesn't say that the Supreme Lord is two, manifested in two forms. He says the Lord is one, and manifested in two forms.

More from the Sri Krsna-bhakti-ratna-prakasa of Srila Raghava Goswami:

Because Sri Sri Radha Krsna are not different and because Sri Krsna is the master of all potencies, therefore Sri Radha is also the master and source of all potencies (She is Shakti and Shaktiman, as is Krishna since they are the same person). He is by nature full of sweetness and bliss, free from the three modes, and eternally manifest beyond the material nature. Because Radha is not different from Him, so is She also. It is said that within the Lord are all potencies, the modes and the material nature.

If Radha and Krishna were different entities then why are we being told that there is no difference between them?

From CC Adi Lila

radha krsna-pranaya-vikrtir hladini saktir asmad

ekatmanav api bhuvi pura deha-bhedam gatau tau

caitanyakhyam prakatam adhuna tad-dvayam caikyam aptam

radha-bhava-dyuti-suvalitam naumi krsna-svarupam

 

The loving affairs of Radha Krishna are transcendental manifestations of the Lord's internal pleasure-giving potency. Although Radha and Krishna are one in Their identity, They have separated Themselves eternally

If Radha and Krishna are two different entities then that verse should say "Radha and Krishna are two identities".

From Visvanath Cakravarti Thakura's Prema Samput (translation unknown but read by Srila Narayana Maharaja)

Krsna disguised as a demigoddess replied, "You say that You completely understand the heart of Krsna. This must be true, but still I have a doubt. Does Krsna really understand your mind at all?"

 

Srimati Radhika replied, "This is a very confidential subject matter. In the same way that I am restless in the association of Krsna, for some reason I am attracted to You. Therefore, although I can't speak about this subject to anyone because it is so confidential, I feel inclined to speak to You."

 

Krsna said, "Oh Radha, please do not cheat Me. Do not hide anything from Me. I came here just to receive these answers from You."

 

Srimati Radhika said, "The common conception is that I am always in the heart of Krsna and He is always in My heart, and that We have a complete meeting of minds – we completely understand each other. Don't believe this; this is not true – this is a mistake.

 

"Here is the real fact: in a lake there is a lotus plant, and from the root of that plant two flowers are growing – one blue and one yellow. Those two flowers are not different from each other, because they have one root. In the same way, My blue cloth signifies the colour of Krsna's body and His yellow cloth signifies the colour of My body. There is no difference between us at all. We are one soul, and for the sake of tasting our astonishing pastimes we take two forms."

Also A.C Bhaktivedanta spoke this:

There is no difference between the energy and the energetic, sakti-saktiman abhina. Therefore there is no difference between Radha and Krsna. Radha is purna-sakti and Krsna is purna-saktiman, so there is no difference, but, lila-rasa asvadite dhare dui-rupa, to relish the mellow of pastimes two bodies are there, Radha and Krsna, otherwise they are one.

"Two bodies are there, otherwise they are one." The only difference is in the forms, the bodies. If that wasn't the case then Srila Prabhupada would have no reason to make that statement.

From Baladeva Vidhyabhusana's Govinda Bhasya

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."

 

[...]

 

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.

 

Even Durga is identical to Krishna, as told by Jiva Goswami:

Durga is also described in Narada-pancaratra, in the following conversation of Sruti and Vidya:

 

Durga is the supreme goddess. She is an incarnation of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. She is the transcendental potency of the Lord. She is manifested from the form of Lord Maha-Vishnu.

 

Simply by understanding her one immediately attains the Supreme Personality of Godhead. It is not otherwise.

 

Durga is the personal potency of Lord Krishna, and therefore she is Lord Krishna Himself. For this reason Durga should not be considered manifested from a portion of the Lord's illusory potency Maya. This fact is confirmed by the following statement of the Nirukti:

 

Even is one continually worships her, Durga is still difficult to understand.

 

In the Sammohana Tantra, Durga herself declares:

 

"I am Durga. I possess all virtues. I am not different from Sri Radha, the eternal, supreme goddess of fortune."

 

She is identical with Gokula's queen Sri Radha, who possesses a great treasure of love for Krishna. By her grace the Supreme Personality of Godhead, the master of all living entities, is easily understood.

 

Sometimes Goddess Durga is also described as the supreme controller. This is also correct because there is no difference between the potencies and Lord Krishna, the master of all potencies. This is confirmed by the following words of the Gautamiya Tantra:

 

"Krishna is Durga. Durga is Krishna. One who sees that they are different will not become liberated from the cycle of repeated birth and death."

In Krsna Sandarbha Jiva Goswami says there are two types of expansions of The Supreme Lord:

This is confirmed in the Varaha Purana:

 

The two kinds of expansions from the Supreme Personality of Godhead are : 1. svamsa (personal expansions) and 2. vibhinnamsa (separate persons). The svamsa expansions are unlimitedly powerful. Their form and personality are the same as the Supreme Personality of Godhead Himself. There is not the slightest difference between the svamsa expansions and the Original Personality of Godhead. The vibhinnamsa expansions are very weak in comparison to Them.

There is only svamsa and vibhinnamsa, God and Jiva. Svamsa is described being identical in all respects with Krishna, i.e. the same personality.

From A.C Bhaktivedanta's Caitanya Caritamrta Adi lila:

tara madhye vraie nana bhava-rasa-bhede

krsnake karaya rasadika-lilasvade

 

TRANSLATION

Among them are various groups of consorts in Vraja who have varieties of sentiments and mellows. They help Lord Krsna taste all the sweetness of the rasa dance and other pastimes.

 

PURPORT

As already explained, Krsna and Radha are one in two. They are identical. Krsna expands Himself in multi-incarnations and plenary portions like the purusas. Similarly, Srimati Radharani expands Herself in multi-forms as the goddesses of fortune, the queens and the damsels of Vraja. Such expansions from Srimati Radharani are all Her plenary (completely identical) portions. All these womanly forms of Krsna are expansions corresponding to His plenary expansions of Visnu forms. These expansions have been compared to reflected forms of the original form. There is no difference between the original and reflected forms. The female refelctions of Krsna's pleasure potency are as good as Krsna Himself.

 

The plenary expansions of Krsna's personality are called vaibhava-vilasa and vaibhava-prakasa, and Radha's expansions are similarly described. The goddesses of fortune are vaibhava-vilasa, and the queens are vaibhava-prakasa of Radharani. The personal associates of Radharani, the damsels of Vraja, are direct expansions of Her body. As expansions of Her personai form and transcendental disposition, they are agents of different reciprocations of love in the pastimes of Lord Krsna, under the supreme direction of Srimati Radharani.

Hladini sakti is misunderstood by many people to mean that Krishna enjoys the hladini sakti similar to how we would enjoy a girlfriend or boyfriend. That is a misconception.

From the intro to Teachings of Lord Caitanya by A.C Bhaktivedanta Swami:

 

Radha and Krsna are one, and when Krsna desires to enjoy pleasure, He manifests Himself as Radharani.

The truth is that the hladini sakti is what Krishna enjoys through. He enjoys by becoming Radha.

From Raghava Goswami

O Balarama, please listen and I will tell You something. One day, taking My flute, My heart full of bliss and My form bending in three places, I went under a kadamba tree and, seeing My own form reflected in a splendid golden platform studded with jewels, I became enchanted. At that moment My heart became filled with the sweet happiness known as conjugal love, which charms the entire world. My heart now desires to become a woman. I yearn to enjoy Myself as a woman.

 

As the Lord thought in this way, His heart approached itself. From the sweetness of His heart came bliss and from the bliss came Himself, manifested in a second form, a female form of transcendental bliss that could experience the direct perception of Himself.

Note that it is conjugal love which is the impetus for Krishna wanting to become a woman.

From Sri Radha Sahasra Nama from the Narada Pancaratra. This is where Mahadeva Shiva explains the glories of Sri Radha:

yan maya kathitam naiva

tantresv api kadapi na

tava snehat pravaksyami

bhaktya dharyam mumuksubhih

What I have never spoken in the Tantras and what they who yearn for liberation cherish, out of love for you (Parvati), I will now speak.

mama prana-sama vidya

bhavyate me tv ahar-nisam

srnusva girije nityam

pathasva ca yatha-mati

Day and night this knowledge is as dear to me as life. O daughter of the mountain king, please hear and regularly chant (these thousand names) as far as you are able.

yasyah prasadat krsnas tu

golokesah parah prabhuh

asya nama-sahasrasya

rsir narada eva ca

By Her kindness Krsna, the master of Goloka, is the Supreme Master. Narada is the sage of Her thousand holy names.

sakalepsita-datri ca

saci sadhvi arundhati

pati-vrata pati-prana

pati-vakya-vinodini

asesa-sadhani kalpa-

vasini kalpa-rupini

She fulfills all desires (sakalepsita-datri). She is Saci (Wife of Indra). She is saintly (sadhvi). She is Arundhati (Wife of Vasistha) She is faithful to Her husband (pati-vrata). Her husband is Her very life (pati-prana). She delights in Her husband's words (pati-vakya-vinodini). She has the power to do anything (asesa-sadhani). All Her desires are automatically fulfilled (kalpa-vasini and kalpa-rupini).

vatsala kausala kala

karunarnava-rupini

svarga-laksmir bhumi-

laksmir draupadi pandava-priya

She is affectionate (vatsala), expert (kausala), beautiful (kala), and an ocean of mercy (karunarnava-rupini). She is heavenly opulence (svarga-laksmi) and earthly opulence (bhumi-laksmi). She is Draupadi, who is dear to the Pandavas (pandava-priya).

isvari sarva-vandya ca

gopaniya subhankari

palini sarva-bhutanam

tatha kamanga-harini

She is the supreme controller (isvari), worshiped by all (sarva-vandya), reclusive (gopaniya), the giver of auspiciousness (subhankari), the protectress of all living entities (palini sarva-bhutanam), and the wife of Lord Siva who destroyed Kamadeva's body (kamanga-harini).

nilambara-vidhatri ca

nilakantha-priya tatha

bhagini bhagini bhogya

krsna-bhogya bhagesvari

She is dressed in blue garments (nilambara-vidhatri). She is Lord Siva's beloved (nilakantha-priya). She is beautiful (bhagini, bhagini, and bhogya), She is Lord Krsna's happiness (krsna-bhogya)

anviksiki sastra-rupa

sastra-siddhanta-karini

nagendra naga-mata ca

krida-kautuka-rupini

She is the science of logic (anviksiki), the Vedas personified (sastra-rupa), the teacher of the Vedas' final conclusion (sastra-siddhanta-karini), the beloved of Lord Sesa (nagendra), the mother of the snakes (naga-mata) and playful and happy (krida-kautuka-rupini).

sesa sesavati sesa-

rupini jagad-ambika

gopala-palika maya

jayanandaprada tatha

She reclines on Lord Sesa (sesa, sesavati, and sesa-rupini). She is the mother of the universe (jagad-ambika), the protectress of the cowherd people (gopala-palika), the Lord's illusory potency (maya), and she who gives the bliss of victory (jayanandaprada).

gokulantara-geha ca

yogananda-kari tatha

venu-vadya venu-ratih

venu-vadya-parayana

Her home is in Gokula (gokulantara-geha). She delights Lord Krsna when She meets Him (yogananda-kari). She plays the flute (venu-vadya), enjoys playing the flute (venu-rati), and is fond of playing the flute (venu-vadya-parayana).

bilva-vrksa-priya krsnam-

bara bilvopama-stani

bilvatmika bilva-vapur

bilva-vrksa-nivasini

She is fond of the bilva tree (bilva-vrksa-priya). She is Lord Krsna's garment (krsnambara). Her breasts are like bilva fruits (bilvopama-stani). Her form is like a bilva tree (bilvatmika and bilva-vapuh). She stays under a bilva tree (bilva-vrksa-nivasini).

vedatita niralamba

niralamba-gana-priya

niralamba-janaih pujya

niraloka nirasraya

She is beyond the Vedas (vedatita), liberated (niralamba), dear to the liberated (niralamba-gana-priya), worshiped by the liberated (niralamba-janaih pujya), unseen by conditioned souls (niraloka), and independent (nirasraya).

sulaksmana mitravinda

kalindi jahnu-kanyka

paripurna purnatara

tatha haimavati gatih

She is Sulaksmana (sulaksmana), Mitravinda (mitravinda), Kalindi (kalindi), Jahnavi (jahnu-kanyka), most perfect (paripurna and purnatara), Goddess Parvati (haimavati), and the supreme goal of life (gati).

daksa-kanya deva-mata

manda-lajja hares tanuh

vrndaranya-priya vrnda

vrndavana-vilasini

She is Daksa's daughter (daksa-kanya), the demigods' mother (deva-mata), bold (manda-lajja), Lord Hari's own transcendental form (hares tanuh), fond of Vrndavana (vrndaranya-priya), goddess Vrnda (vrnda), and the girl who enjoys pastimes in Vrndavana (vrndavana-vilasini).

For more details go to: The hidden face of God

Kshamabuddhi here expresses something that troubled me as well for a long time. I understood this a little better after studying the books of Rupa Goswami in depth. Before saying anything, though, I would like to point out to Kshamabuddhi and those who sympathize with his ideas in general, that the Gaudiya Math is in a fundamental quandary when it comes to subjects like this, because, as we have already established, the ultimate goals of the Gaudiya Math are NOT different from those of the Babajis. At least, not if they claim to be followers of Rupa and Raghunath. What we have here is a debate over what it means to follow Rupa and Raghunath, that is all. So there may be quibbles between Babajis and GM about sambandha and prayojana, but their real problem is in relation to abhidheya. What Kshamabuddhi has expressed here is a problem with the prayojana.

 

I hope I am keeping within the reasonable bounds of Sanskrit terminology use.

 

As to the prayojana and manjari bhava, anyone who has read _Manjari-svarupa-nirupana_ will know that it is frequently stated that the manjaris have entry into the most intimate pastimes of Srimati Radha and Krishna. They are always peeking into Radha and Krishna's most intimate pastimes through the vines and the windows of the kunja kutira.

 

<center><i>vidyud ghanAcikramiSAM yadopari

smArAd dadhAnA vavale'valepataH |

tadA tu jAlAni sakhI dRzAM balAj

jAlAvalIM harSa-jalaiH plutAM vyadhuH ||</i></center>

<b><blockquote>Ah what a wonder! The Divine Couple, caught up in their erotic amusements have now been so overcome with their ecstatic lovemaking that they have reversed their positions. Like a bolt of lightning desiring to attack the cloud, the beloved, possessed by the hubris of the god of love, shows her lover her power. Seeing this, the manjaris, spectators peeking through the windows of the forest cottage drenched the sills with their tears. (Krishna-bhavanamrita 20.45)</b></blockquote>In this verse by Raghunath Das from the Vraja-vilasa-stava (38), such a privilege is the reward the manjaris receive for their intimate service and is their defining characteristic and distinction from the sakhis:

 

<center><i>tAmbUlArpaNa-pAda-mardana-payo-dAnAdibhisArAdibhir

vRndAraNya-mahezvarIM priyatayA yAs toSayanti priyAH |

prANa-preSTha-sakhI-kulAd api kilAsaGkocitA bhUmikAH

kelI-bhUmiSu rUpa-maJjarI-mukhAs tA dAsikAH saMzraye ||</i></center>

<b><blockquote>I take shelter of the handmaidens of the Queen of Vrindavan,

led by Sri Rupa Manjari,

who by lovingly satisfying her,

by offering betelnut and other condiments,

massaging her feet, bringing fragrant water,

and arranging for trysts with her gallant,

have thus become most dear to her.

 

They are thus allowed permission to enter the scene

of the Divine Couple’s most intimate affairs

without the slightest discomfiture,

a reward not given even to her dearest friends.</b></blockquote>So the prayojana as expressed in these verses, the reward that the manjaris get for their intimate service to Srimati Radharani, is the permission to watch—to be peeping Toms.

 

It's funny to me to read stuff like this, no offense intended, I'm just amused by these conceptions. Don't you find it just a bit strange that the supposed highest position a jiva can attain to is being a spectator of other people's love affairs? But there ya go. In fact it seems to be quite common amongst various gaudiya vaisnavas that they think that the ultimate heaven God has in store for them is being little girls watching and serving God's love affair. It's really quite hilarious if you think about it. Especially so if you understand that the person God is having an affair with is himself, as a women. Even though there are those who are loath to confront the truth of Radha's identity as Krishna i.e they are the same exact person, nevertheless there is still the ontological quandry of: why would God see the highest attainable goal of life for ourselves as transforming us into pre-pubescent girls who spend our lives serving his/her love affair, and also"being peeping toms"? And why would we even desire such a life devoid of our own love affairs?

Why do we think God has that in store for us if we attain to the highest possible position for ourselves? Because we are venturing into theological realms which we are not prepared to fully appreciate. Why would we even want such a life devoid of a passionate love affair of our own? Because we think that we are supposed to want that. Wouldn't it be more fulfilling to have your own passionate love affair with God, like say the sakhis or the queens in Dwaraka? Surely life would have much more to offer and be more fulfilling if we could be in a direct passionate love affair with God rather then simply being a pre-pubescent girl onlooker? I think that should be obvious.

Therefore we have to re-evaluate what we think we "know" about Gaudiya theology. People will argue and say that Sri Rupa and others say this or that which disagrees with what I am saying. They will claim that even though to our vision the life of a manjari seems less then the life of a queen in Dwaraka or the life of a person like Arjuna; that it appears that way to us because we don't understand the ecstacy of the manjaris. I would tell them it is they who don't understand the esoteric intent of Sri Rupa and the other empowered authors of the rasa sastra. I would tell them that there is much more to the rasa sastra then what meets the eye. I would tell them that people who are not yet qualified to catch the true esoteric intent and meaning of the rasa sastra will simply be captivated by the pretty words yet not see the true message contained therein. These books are not ordinary books that you can study and then understand in full. The true meaning and intent is hidden from all but those who have been given entrance into their inner meaning as their destiny dictates. For everyone else those books should not be overly scrutinized and taken as a source of an absolute ontological/theological paradigm. If people do so they will simply come to all kinds of philosophical problems and devotional missteps.

Jiva Goswami has written in Priti-sandarbha (10)12:

In the spiritual world, the Supreme Lord has unlimited spiritual forms, all are expansions of Himself illuminating that world. With each one of those forms, the Lord enjoys pastimes with a single individual liberated soul.

That verse stands in stark contrast to the conception of "manjari bhava" as the highest possible relationship the jiva can experience. That verse is telling us that the goal of life is to enjoy a one on one relationship with the Lord, not as a spectator of God's relationship with him/her self. We should be wary of any theology which tells us that all God has in store for the most initmate relationship attainable for us is as a spectator and servant of other people's love affairs. It makes no sound sense whatsoever and is only promulgated by people with no actual direct experience with what they promote. Promoters of such conceptions need to take a close look at their actual relationship with God and see if it qualifies them to speak authoritatively before they claim to be experts on God's most intimate affairs.

Shivaji, I will get back to your earlier post as soon as I can. I am preparing a response. The question, "How can this be?" was rhetorical, of course. But your answers are welcome.

 

In fact, I believe I owe you some debt of gratitude that I wanted to come clean about before going on. Although I still continue to have deep disagreements with you in connection to our unfinished debate on GD, there was one point that I ultimately do concede. Perhaps I will paraphrase you incorrectly, but certainly after our discussion, I came to change somewhat my entire ontology.

 

To whit: We as conscious individuals are only aware of ourselves and the "other." No matter how complex we perceive the Other being, it is ultimately One. Krishna, his Dhama, his internal potency, Radha, the gopis, etc., all that represents one thing. If we want to make a division in that, it is the internal and external energies, between which we lie.

 

I suppose that may sound pretty standard, but there was a "click" that took place and made me see things slightly differently.

 

Anyway, I said I would answer you eventually, but as keeps happening to me, the Other has its/his say. Pursuing these things is a luxury that I don't seem to get permission for. It seems that many more births will be necessary for me.

 

Jai Radhe.

It's a deep realization to come to. Even though most vedantists all teach that essential point, as well as other religious philosophers, coming to actually understanding it is a major step for people. Once understanding that and realizing that point as well as understanding that everything we encounter is one thing, then the next stage is to see everything as being completely controlled by one being at all times. In a sense our environment can then become a vehicle for that control to be shown directly to us, relating to us through that control.

Although a deeper stage still is seeing that our thought process, our minds, are also part of that oneness and under the same exact control. Knowing that the controller of the mind can reveal that control as well.

Jagat you wrote:

When Raghunath prays to be a dasi, it is because he wants to be an observer (of Radha and Krishna's union) and not a participant. But how can this possibly be? It does not make any sense.

It makes perfect sense if you are able to appreciate the esoteric nature of these types of writings. For people who are unable to understand what these topics are really about, all they will see is the words and the sentences they form and they will take the direct meaning of those sentences as all in all. That may be alright if you are reading the Gita or other philosophical tracts, but that approach will not work for the rasa shastra. And it is because you don't understand the esoteric meaning hidden from you that you are advised not to waste your time trying to make it your goal in life to study these works as if they are your ticket to Godhead. It's no different then licking the outside of a jar of honey hoping to get some sweetness.

If you understood who Raghunath is and what he is all about, and if you understood what the rasa shastra is really alll about, then there would be no question of it making no sense. It is esoteric knowledge. You cannot understand what it is truly about if you think that the outer meaning is the real meaning. Why is this hidden knowledge? Why can't it just be upfront and made obvious? The path of Radha dasyam is a path of love. Love cannot be coerced. It is the mature ripened stage of bhakti. Until the bhakta is able to love, the truth is kept hidden otherwise it will be a form of coercion, which deforms the true emotional stage desired.

Jiva Goswami has written in Priti-sandarbha (10)12:

In the spiritual world, the Supreme Lord has unlimited spiritual forms, all are expansions of Himself illuminating that world. With each one of those forms, the Lord enjoys pastimes with a single individual liberated soul.

Narayana Maharaja also teaches that siddha pranali is part of the Gaudiya Math. If people accept it as authentic, fine with me, good luck with that. Nevertheless it's not necessary for someone to receive siddha pranali in order to obtain a relationship with Sri Radha Govinda.

Anyone who teaches that siddha pranali is necessary is simply ignorant and inexperienced. From my perspective siddha pranali is just another motivation to increase sravanam and kirtanam for certain people who may need that. It's not some magical rite which need be undertaken by everyone. It's just another ritual to aid in the development of one's spiritual awareness.

But there are those who think it is something much more then that. They think it is some kind of magical ritual which elevates people to the highest level and that those who receive it are on a higher level then those who do not.

No ritual nor any initiation can elevate someone to the position of an intimate associate of the Lord. That is only given by the Lord to the devotee, no one else can make you a self realized soul with the ability to relate directly with the Lord on an intimate level. You either experience that or you don't. I cannot see for you, I cannot think for you, in the same way no one can be self realized for you, nor can they give you your relationship with the Lord. Others may be able to give instructions on how to relate with the Lord, but no one can give you that relationship but the Lord. Someone may tell me about my father whom I have never met and who lives in china, but unless I contact my father directly, my relationship with him is only in the conceptual realm.

Raga do you have the transcripts of that book by Bhakta Vikas Swami? If so are there sources for his claims about siddha pranali given by Bhaktisiddhanta? If so can you cite those sources?

Regardless of what was meant the point that I see which is worthy is that the *true* raga marga is not something which you should or even can whimsically decide to follow. Raga marga is something which is organic to the bhakta, it is not an artificial imposition, not that one decides "Oh I think I will be a raganuga bhakta now" and then presto he becomes a true follower of the raga marga. That's not how the raga marga is introduced to the bhakta. People who don't understand the raga marga and who seek to advance themselves by their own willpower simply are deluded when they think their smaranam on asta kaliya lila is anything remotely similar to the real raga marga.

The real raga marga is not something which you can enter, it is given directly to you by the Lord when you are ready, when you can see the Lord within. Anyone who considers that reading about the descriptions of rasa in books like Ujjvala-nilamani to be some kind of rite of passage or essential component of the raga marga, they are exposing themselves as being clueless when it comes to the real raga marga. There is nothing essentially bad or wrong about those types of books, nor are they particularly vastly more intimate then numerous other gaudiya writings. The reason that book and some others were pointed out as something to avoid by recent past acaryas is because they are trying to make a point. Those people who champion the faux raga marga cite those works as all important and as some kind of rite of passage or secret initiation necessary for the raga marga when in truth those writings are no such thing. What they do seem to inspire in some people is faux emotional states, false bhava, narcissism masquerading as enlightenment. So the point the acaryas made was in stating that those writings can only be misunderstood by those unqualified to read them who have a propensity for seeing themselves on a higher level of bhakti then they are really on. And as we have seen this has been playing out all over the gaudiya world.

Of course, this objection is to be expected. Just see how you use the term "monkey" to describe these babajis. I am sure the "monkey babajis" are all going to hell.

 

I have no idea about any group of people. I cannot speak of a class of people. Everyone will have to answer for their spiritual life before God. Sexuality is an aspect of human life. A philosophy that says sexuality is fundamentally against spiritual life is making a statement that denies humanity. The assumption that any Vaishnava who has taken a female companion is automatically a monkey is prejudicial in the extreme and shows that you are a victim of propaganda.

 

A society that has prejudices against all forms of human sexuality except for its procreative function tends to create an unnatural state of affairs in the most important areas of individual affective and physical need. Sexuality is obviously a complex area of human psychology, prone to corruption and misuse, but to make its denial the summum bonum of human spiritual achievement is simply wrong. To make hearing and chanting about Radha and Krishna somehow dependent on attaining this obscure and rarified state is, as I said, a bit of elitism that leads to sexism and all kinds of other nonsense. In fact, it may well be this attitude that creates the "monkey babajis."

Then why was Sri Caitanya so strict about celibacy? Look Jagat what you are saying is nothing new, people lile Rajneesh make the same arguments as do other yogis including vaisnavas who claim to follow the path of Mahapabhu. So the question is; if you and they are right then why is celibacy promoted not only in the gaudiya tradition but in many other vaisnava traditions as well? Are they all deviating from the true message of Vedanta?

The teaching on celibacy isn't that one's spiritual status is equal to one's level of celibacy (even if some people consider that to be true), it's that sexuality has the power to take one's time and energy away from the higher pursuit. Just like the person who is obese is told to stay away from sweets in order to get healthy. It's not that sweets are bad and that anyone who eats sweets is going to die of diabetes. The prohibition against sex is there to make spiritual advancement swift, just like the reouncing of sweets will make weight loss swifter. For a person who is serious about quickly attaining the higher level of God consciousness it is advised to give up other pursuits. If you don't give up sex you can still advance in spiritual understanding, but that path slows down the attaining of the highest realizations. Sex is like an addictive drug in that it leaves you wanting more and more and more. So the prohibition is there for those who have yet to attain to the highest level that they should be strict in their sense control. Those on the highest level have no rules nor regulations, they don't need them. Why? Once gaining entrance into the highest realm, once attaining the goal of bhakti, then nothing can bring you down and there is nowhere higher to attain. If someone who is on a lower level thinks that celibacy or any other sacrifice of sense enjoyment is unecessary, they still may advance on the spiritual path. Sravanam and Kirtanam will still aid that person in his or her development of spiritual realization, but the fact is that sense enjoyment is addicting. The more you have the more you want. Those who give up unecessary sense enjoyment will have more time and energy to devote to spiritual pursuits. It's that simple.

From the purport to Caitanya Caritamrta Madhya 8.221

In all, there are sixty-four items listed for the rendering of service unto Krsna, and these are the regulative principles enjoined in the sastras and given by the spiritual master. One has to serve Krsna according to these regulative principles, but if one develops spontaneous love for Krsna as exhibited in the activities of those who live in Vrajabhumi, one attains the platform of raganuga-bhakti. One who has developed this spontaneous love is eligible for elevation to the platform enjoyed by the inhabitants of Vrajabhumi. In Vrajabhumi, there are no regulative principles set forth for Krsna’s service. Rather, everything is carried out in spontaneous, natural love for Krsna. There is no question of following the principles of the Vedic system. Such principles are followed within this material world, and as long as one is on the material platform, he has to execute them. However, spontaneous love of Krsna is transcendental. It may seem that the regulative principles are being violated, but the devotee is on the transcendental platform. Such service is called gunatita, or nirguna, for it is not contaminated by the three modes of material nature.

Then again if you believe in a philosophy which uses sex as sadhana then these words will mean nothing to you. Jagat you follow the tantric sahajiya path, or so you have claimed? Fine. There may be some people who will be attracted to that and I guess that is why you are here preaching. The mainstream gaudiya tradition rejects that path, you know this. They're not going to change because someone tells them that sex is healthy and that celibacy is unhealthy.