raga

<blockquote><font face="Georgia" color=brown><center><big>SRI VRINDAVAN DAS THAKURA </big>

Vrindavan Das Thakura is the author of

the famous Sri Caitanya Bhagavata,

depicting the earlier life of

Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu

(young Nimai in the picture)</center>

Vrndavana dasa Thakura was the son of the brahmana Vaikuntha dasa and his wife Narayani. Sri Narayani devi was the niece of Srivasa Pandita. Srivasa had three brothers who all came from Srihatta to live in Navadvipa. Srivasa’s only son died at a very early age.

Vrndavana dasa lost his father before he was born. When poverty struck Narayani devi she had no other alternative but to accept work in the house of Sri Vasudeva Datta Thakura. Narayani was entrusted with the responsibility for offering service to the Deity installed by Vasudeva Datta at Mamagachi village. There Srila Vrndavana dasa took his birth and started his education. It seems that the childhood of Vrndavana dasa was spent only at Mamagachi.

At the time when Mahaprabhu began to manifest His divine nature in the courtyard of Srivasa, Narayani devi was four years old. Vrndavana dasa describes in the Caitanya-bhagavata that his mother was very dear to Lord Gauranga.

“Narayani-devi received the entire remnants of Mahaprabhu’s meal. Though she was only an insensible child He bestowed His mercy on her in this way.”

Also as a result of this mercy, Srila Vrndavana dasa Thakura, whose life and soul was Gaura-Nityananda, took his birth from her womb. Gaura-gannodesa-dipika (109) describes he is the manifestation of Vyasa and Kusumapida.

narayani--caitanyera ucchista-bhajana

tanra garbhe janmila sri-dasa-vrndavana

“Narayani eternally eats the remnants of the foodstuffs of Lord Caitanya Mahaprabhu. Srila Vrndavana dasa Thakura was born of her womb.” (Cc Adi 8.41)

The Gaura-gannodesa-dipika describes that when Lord Krsna was a child, He was nursed by a woman named Ambika who had a younger sister named Kilimbika. During the time of Lord Caitanya’s incarnation, the same Kilimbika used to eat the remnants of foodstuffs left by Sri Lord Caitanya Mahaprabhu. That Kilimbika was Narayani.

bhagavate krsna-lila varnila vedavyasa

caitanya-lilate vyasa--vrndavana-dasa

“Srila Vyasadeva described the pastimes of Krsna in the Srimad-Bhagavatam. The Vyasa of the pastimes of Lord Caitanya Mahaprabhu was Vrndavana dasa. (CC Adi 11.55)

Sri Gaura-Nityananda were his life. In his writings he never mentions the identity of his father but frequently speaks of his mother. A devotee of Lord Krsna is celebrated in terms of devotional service rendered to the Lord; thus we know Srila Vrndavana dasa Thakura as the son of Narayani. In the introduction of Caitanya-bhagavata, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Prabhupada states that Vrndavana dasa was born in the house of Malini devi.

Just four years before the birth of Sri Vrndavana dasa, Sri Gaurasundara took sannyasa. When Mahaprabhu disappeared, Sri Vrndavana dasa was not more than twenty years old. He received initiation from Sri Nityananda and was His last disciple. Sri Vrndavana dasa visited Kheturi with Jahnava Mata. Sri Krsnadasa Kaviraja specifically sings the glories of Sri Vrndavana dasa.

Vrndavana dasa acquired a profound command of several theological works which is born out by his own work Caitanya-bhagavata. He was the last disciple of Lord Nityananda at whose command he took up writing the divine sports of Lord Gauranga in Caitanya-Bhagavata. Some of the lyrical poems composed by Vrndavana dasa are found in Padakalpataru.

Caitanya-Bhagavata of Vrndavana dasa stands as a unique store of nectar of the divine pastimes of Lord Gauranga and Nityananda. Deeply immersed in the stream of this nectar, Vrndavana dasa seems to have delivered for other devotees what he himself enjoyed. Being thoroughly dedicated to the task of describing the lila of Lord Nityananda, the size of the book grew larger and Vrndavana was unable to describe the last days of Lord Gauranga. Devotees of Vrndavana were so fascinated by reading Caitanya-Bhagavata that they commanded Krsnadasa Kaviraja to complete what had not been finished by Vrndavana dasa.

There is no way of knowing for certain exactly when Vrndavana dasa wrote Caitanya-Bhagavata. One can at best make an attempt to guess the probable date based on the following information: In 1431 Sakabda Lord Caitanya accepted sannyasa at the age of 24 years. For a year preceding that date the Lord performed kirtana at the house of Srivasa and manifested his divine nature. Somewhere within this period of one year the Lord showered His mercy upon Narayani, possibly early in 1431 Sakabda or late 1430 Sakabda. Narayani was then only four years old. It seems that Vrndavana dasa was born when Narayani was about 14 or 15 years old which leads us to conclude that around 1440 Saka Vrndavana dasa was born.

In Gaura-gannodesa-dipika 109 Vrndavana dasa is referred to as Vedavyasa. Gaura-gannodesa-dipika was written in 1498 Sakabda which is clearly stated by Kavikarnapura himself. Hence one can conclude that Vrndavana dasa’s Caitanya-Bhagavata became fai rly well known before 14 98 Saka. Some think that Caitanya-Bhagavata was written in 1495 Sakabda and some say 1497 Sakabda. But it seems improbable that the book gained wide fame within the span of only one or two years, so much so that in 1498 Saka Vrndavana dasa was recognized as Vyasa himself.

According to Ramagati Nyayaratna Caitanya-Bhagavata was written in 1548 A.D. (1470 Sakabda). This seems acceptable. At that time Vrndavana dasa was about thirty years old and when Kavikarnapura described Vrndavana dasa as Vedavyasa, Vrndavana dasa was about 58 years old.

The lyrical poems composed by Vrndavana dasa show that he was an authority on music also. There are some poems circulated with the name and bhanita of Vrndavana dasa which are not found in any authentic compilations nor do they stand in harmony with the well known views of Vaisnava Acaryas and Gosvamis. These were perhaps compositions of some other Vrndavana dasa and to add literary weight to the work the bhanita of Vrndavana dasa was inserted.

Vrndavana dasa was a worshiper of Sakhyabhava. Vrndavana dasa Thakura’s Sripat, where his worshipable Deities of Sri Sri Gaura-Nitai are still residing, is at Denur.

Krishnadas Kaviraja glorifies the Caitanya Bhagavat of Vrndavana dasa Thakura in his Caitanya Caritamrta, Adi-lila, 8.33-40:

“O fools, just read Caitanya-mangala! By reading this book you can understand all the glories of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu. As Vyasadeva has compiled the pastimes of Lord Krsna in the Srimad-Bhagavatam, Thakura Vrndavana has depicted the pastimes of Lord Caitanya. Thakura Vrndavana has composed Caitanya-mangala. Hearing this book will annihilate all misfortune. By reading Caitanya-mangala one can understand the glories or truths of Lord Caitanya and Nityananda and come to the ultimate conclusion of devotional service to Lord Krsna.

In the Caitanya-mangala [also known as Caitanya-bhagavata] Srila Vrndavana dasa Thakura has given the conclusion and essence of devotional service by quoting from the authoritative statements of Srimad-Bhagavatam. If even a great atheist hears Caitanya-mangala, he immediately becomes a great devotee. The subject matter of this book is so sublime that it appears that Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu has personally spoken through the writings of Sri Vrndavana dasa Thakura. I offer millions of obeisances unto the lotus feet of Vrndavana dasa Thakura. No one else could write such a wonderful book for the deliverance of the fallen souls.”

<center>Adapted from the archives of veda.harekrsna.cz</center>

Originally posted by gHari:

And if they met Krsna face-to-face they would ask Him for shastric proof that He is God.

May I remind, the shruti has only a few references to Krishna, which are subject to interpretation. That Gopal Tapani is a recent Upanishad. If he appears, he'd better have a bunch of clear statements from the Rig Veda. We'll not accept his interpretations.

Originally posted by gHari:

And if they met Krsna face-to-face they would ask Him for shastric proof that He is God.

May I remind, the shruti has only a few references to Krishna, which are subject to interpretation. That Gopal Tapani is a recent Upanishad. If he appears, he'd better have a bunch of clear statements from the Rig Veda. We'll not accept his interpretations.

Ofcourse, I can show why this translation is incorrect but let us take a step at a time. Please tell me how something that is ajam is ever born and bound by gunAs.

dehino ’smin yathA dehe

kaumAraM yauvanaM jarA

tathA dehAntara-prAptir

dhIras tatra na muhyati

"As the embodied soul continuously passes, in this body, from boyhood to youth to old age, the soul similarly passes into another body at death. A sober person is not bewildered by such a change."

Due to having its citta-vRtti focused on matter, the Atma imagines it is bound.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

At any rate, will you please answer the root question at hand?

What is the difference between the soul not aware of his nature and the soul aware of his nature? If all souls are vipascin, why some are not aware of it?

Please?

Yes, there are souls who are conscious of a certain body. Sri Bhagavan says (Gita 2.17):

avinAzi tu tad viddhi

yena sarvam idaM tatam

vinAzam avyayasyAsya

na kazcit kartum arhati

"That which pervades the entire body you should know to be indestructible. No one is able to destroy that imperishable soul."

Such a soul is called an embodied soul. In other words, a soul in bondage. This bondage is caused by attachment. Whose attachments? No, don't blame the elements, matter does not animate matter. Who is focused on matter? No, don't blame the elements -- they are matter.

Originally posted by ram:

Question : Are we not souls ?

Answer : Hand is not the soul, nor the leg, nor eyes nor the ear. Nor the mind. Not the intelligence either. But due to ahankara, the mind thinks "I" am the composite of all these. This "I", the material personality is not the soul.

 

Question : Why are "we", "you" and "I", not fully conscious of our blissful spiritual nature?

Answer : The material personality "You" are not brahman and so you are not blissful in this state. But this state itself is like a mirage on the desert or a dream - illusory.

 

Question : How do "I", the material personality produced by ahankara, "realize" the true I ?

Answer : "Just like a lover yearns for the association of her man, yearn for Him." When mind, intelligence and senses are engaged in His service, by truly knowing Him, the ahankara is also dissolved. Everything becomes brahman because of acquiring His nature.

But how is the Atma connected with all this? What does it have to do with all this body, mind and ahankara business? How is it connected with the whole show?

Just answer the question I asked, no need to answer other questions. What is the difference between the soul not aware of his nature and the soul aware of his nature?

<small>

[This message has been edited by raga (edited 06-06-2002).]

Could you answer the question on WHY some souls only experience this mundane realm instead of their eternal blissful nature?

I mean, like you and I, why are we not fully conscious of our blissful spiritual nature? The soul is eternally pure, and there is no question of bondage for the soul. So, are we not souls?

<font color=#cccccc>

[This message has been edited by raga (edited 06-06-2002).]

Originally posted by ram:

Did you understand my answer - ajam ?

It did not answer the question.

I asked what is the difference between the two. If soul & its conscious faculty is eternally pure, then how come some are in bondage?

Think about one soul who is in bondage, and another one who as attained liberation. What is the difference between the two? WHY is another one in bondage, and what is the factor holding it in bondage?

Originally posted by ram:

From your silence, I reckon you got the answer. Let us chant and be happy.

What? For my silence of total seven hours? I am not watching the board 24/7 my friend.

The question is:

1. There are souls who are liberated.

2. There are souls who are in bondage.

3. There is a difference between the two.

4. What is the difference?

5. In other words, what is the factor on account of which others experience bondage and others experience liberation? (Is it perhaps the citta-vRtti of the soul, which is focused on either matter or spirit?)

I hope you followed this.

To clarify the intent of the question:

WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE between one soul who is in bondage and another one who is liberated? Thus WHY. Not since WHEN.

Originally posted by paul108:

What about Jaya and Vijaya? They went from being gatekeepers of Vaikuntha to being Lord Caitanya and Nityananda's devotees. Did Lord Caitanya send them back to the gates when He finished His pastimes on Earth? It seems unlikely, but I haven't heard anything about it.....

It has been explained by the acaryas that one forms of Jaya and Vijaya were left on the gates of Vaikuntha, and other forms went through the cycle Hiranyakasipu-Hiranyaksa -> Ravana-Kumbhakarna -> Sisupala-Dantavakra. They also chose to appear as Jagai-Madhai. Hence this was an expansion of rasa. Unfortunately I don't have the exact commentary at hand. I'll post it in when I get it.

I'm out for today. Tomorrow I hope I will open the thread and read a brief explanation of why one jIvAtma is conscious of matter, and another jIvAtma is not.

"One has the right to answer in the order in which questions are asked. If the previous answers are not clear and well established, this cannot be answered."

According to this logic, we would have to answer the original question presented before proceeding to discuss matters which help us clarify the answer for the original question.

The question I am presenting is integral in discussing any of the earlier posts in this thread. Therefore, please proceed to briefly explain why one jIvAtma is conscious of matter, and another jIvAtma is not.

Please proceed to explain why one jIvAtma is conscious of matter, and another jIvAtma is not. Please.

Originally posted by ram:

There is no need to give excuse for making a mistake, if I did, because it is very beneficial to learn, if wrong. Your question shall be answered.

 

Before that, let me clear the lack of clarity in my previous points. If it has not been clear to you, I submit that it is due to my miscommunication. Please specify what exactly is unclear in what I said so far before asking me to speak further.

We have now arrived at the root of all questions, which is likely to resolve everything. Let us return to any subsidiary concerns later.

Why some jIvAtmas are nitya-mukta, while others are in a state of bondage, focused on matter?

Originally posted by ram:

If you think I have not dealt with anything in the previous page, then even if I proceed it may be just be futile.

 

 

Whenever it gets to the point that you should present a clear answer, you get around it.

Now, without any excuse -- please proceed to explain why one jIvAtma is conscious of matter, and another jIvAtma is not.

Originally posted by ram:

Audarya, let me humbly submit that mere assertion does not prove anything. I have countered Raga's presentation and am yet to answer just one more question that he has which I shall if every one wants.

What exactly is it that you have countered, Ram?

However, please proceed and answer to the question of why.

I think this sheds some light on the questions being posed by Raga and lends some support to the interpretation of the word vimudhatma which he gave as well.

Thanks Audarya-lilaji for sending it in. I am supposed to get a copy of the same in a few weeks, along with the Tattva Sandarbha.

I already began to ponder how far off the track I may be, but to my solace I discovered similar patterns of thought from both Baladeva and Jiva just yesterday. However, I'll not post them in this context, since here it is only shruti that counts, never mind the acaryas' commentaries on or derivations of the same.

I was a little surprised, Ram, by your comments that you feel that 'we all' (whoever that is - I assume you and Raga as I know that Janava Nitai certainly doesn't hold that same sentiment) have given up the 'so-called' shelter of Srila Prabhupada and have gone on to higher authorities and that therefore his interpretations are not germane to the discussion at hand. I know what authorities Raga has gone on to, but I am certainly most curious as to who the authorities are that you consider to be 'higher'.

I do not know to which authorities Ram has gone, but personally I respect the views of Swami Prabhupada, being a scholar and a teacher of the Vaishnava tradition. I may not take every word he says with the same absolute authority as his dedicated followers do, but this is certainly not tantamount to my disregarding his views.

I dont know, why JNDas should chip in ?

Perhaps because he is a person who has a wealth of knowledge in Vedanta, and he might contribute something worthwile to the discussion.

That's what we're doing here, discussiong -- is that right?

Lets see if some of you wealthy Vaisnavas can spare a little of your chapati money for the Dhama, otherwise just shut up,and dont expect ISKCON or the corrupt government officials to do anything,this is your chance to show what you are made of.

Raise your thumbs, all the rich people!

You did not answer the question.

Why are some atmas conscious of matter, embodied in this world, while others are not? What is the reason for this?

Let me give another try in addressing atmaji's questions.

1. If we feel atraction to a certain rasa while we are doing our sadhana is it because we experimented that particular rasa before?

Strong attraction towards a certain rasa is called "lobha", or "greed". Visvanatha explains in his Raga Vartma Candrika the causes for the appearance of lobha as follows:

<blockquote><font color=blue>There are two causes for the appearance of the aforementioned sacred greed: The mercy of God or the mercy of another anuragi devotee. There are again two kinds of mercy bestowed by a devotee: praktana and adhunika. Praktana means mercy bestowed by a raganuga bhakta in a previous life, and adhunika is mercy bestowed in the present birth. The praktana devotee takes shelter of the lotus feet of a raganuga guru after the sacred greed has arisen in him, and the adhunika will get that sacred greed only after having surrendered to the feet of such a guru. It is said (in the Bhakti Rasamrta Sindhu): "The only causes for the appearance of sacred greed are the mercy of Krishna and His devotee. Therefore some call the path of raganuga bhakti also the path of grace."</font></blockquote>

In other words, there are people in whom this greed awakens very suddenly and spontaneously on account of their having been attracted to the same in their previous lives. On the other hand, some persons come in contact with rasika devotees and bhakti scriptures in this life for the first time. If we have not been in touch with devotees who have a strong inclination towards a certain rasa, having not heard from them descriptions saturated with their cherished mood, and nevertheless attraction arises in our heart, then it is likely that we have been in touch with activities related with that rasa before.

However, let us recognize a difference between lobha and attraction born out of our mundane conditioning. Back in the days when I used to distribute books on the streets, it is not one or two Harley Davidson guys who liked the picture of Narasimha Deva on the cover of the Bhagavata 7th Canto. And as said by Swami Bhaktivedanta in his preface to the Krishna Book, many people are also attracted to the pastimes of Radha and Krishna because they resemble the activites of boys and girls in this world. There would be numerous examples one could give to illustrate attraction towards a certain feature or pastime of Krishna arisen out of our mundane nature. Of course this is also great, but it need not be a symptom of having undergone raganuga bhakti sadhana in our previous lives.

2. Why one soul will be in dasya rasa and other in madhurya, who determine that?

Essentially the Lord does. The individual souls, being bhedAbheda part and parcel of the Lord, begin to reflect His desires when they come in contact with their constitutional nature of bhakti service.

3. Where is our free will? Our desires? Or we just want to serve the Lord in any capacity and He give us our service and we happily do it? Is that what we call unconditional love?

Unconditional love means to do that which gives happiness to the beloved, and to do it devoid of selfish considerations. Parama purusa sukha matra sva-sukhatvam -- The happiness of the Supreme Enjoyer is your happiness.

Originally posted by ram:

-----------------------

Originally posted by raga:

If the atma has absolutely no relationship with matter, then why is it aware of matter, and not of its eternally liberated position? And if the atma does have a relationship with matter, then what is that relationship, and what is its cause?

--------------------

 

Ram: I have answered all these questions in the earlier posts. Let me restate that differently : The connection is like the connection of a desert (atma) with a mirage (matter). A mirage does not muddy make a desert.

 

One who knows one svarUpA is aware of matter (ignorance) but is actually in knowledge.

No, in fact you have not answered the question.

The question is WHY, not HOW. WHY is the atma conscious of matter?

<small>

[This message has been edited by raga (edited 06-05-2002).]

Originally posted by ram:

----------

Originally posted by raga:

All well, mind and ahankara are confused, thinking they are the doer. But they are the doer, is it not? After all, that's what it says in the verse, the elements of material nature are declared to be the doer. Why should the mind then be called foolish for thinking it is the doer?

-------------

Ram: I answered that already. The fault that the Lord is pointing out here is that the part thinks it is doer where as the whole is the doer.

Hmmm... This is not a sound proposal in my view. The verse says that prakRti is the doer. The actions are carried out by tri-guna, and the Atma bewildered by ahankara thinks of himself as the doer.

For all I can see, Bhagavan is not concerned with pointing out how Arjuna should understand that it is not only the mind who is the doer, but both mind and body. After all, He points out how it is foolish to think of oneself as the doer. And who is the non-doer? The Atma.

Out of curiosity I checked Swami Bhaktivedanta's translation of 3.27. As follows: "The spirit soul bewildered by the influence of false ego thinks himself the doer of activities that are in actuality carried out by the three modes of material nature."

Any comments, JNDasJi?