Beggar

No discussion, no inquisitiveness, no give and take, no communication. A deeply perverted conception of Krsna bhakti, more akin to a totalitarian ideology like the Church in the Middle Ages, National Socialism or Marxist-Leninism.

Here's an example of the kind of purport, Sarva gattah will simply ignore: Srimad-Bhagavatam 3.7.9, purport:

Srila Narayana Maharaja:

Then one individual jiva = a tatastha sakti. All jivas = the tatastha sakti. But what is "all jivas"? Since all the Lord's, Bhagavan's energies are infinite, and ever expanding, the infinite jiva's number continue to grow. So consequently it can be said that the tatastha shakti of the Lord is infinite and ever expanding. The first question would be, "then where does it grow from?" One could answer, "the Lord, but in Gaudiya Vaisnavism we accept that Bhagavan has multifarious energies, na tasya karyam karanam ca vidyate na tat samas cabhyadhikas ca drsyate parasya saktir vividhaiva sruyate svabhaviki jnana-bala-kriya ca. So then the question is from what energy do the individual jiva's expand or grow from? The next question would be, "how can the number of infinite jivas expand in in fact they are eternal, and that this seems contradictory?" In fact this contradiction is the basis for this so-called debate! But actually both sides of the argument can be defeated by linear logical thinking. Tarko pratishanat. Therefore the subject itself is in the realm of acintya, inconceivable. It is inconceivable to the material mind. What Sarva gattah, Garuagopal is doing is to take one side of the inconceivable duality, where it is explained by his guru, Srila Prabhupada, and postulate that it is not inconceivable and that it is a rational fact. Prabhupada, himself, would say, "it's a fact, you must accept." But this strategy was preaching, pravacan, not siddhanta, the devotional conclusion. Every preaching strategy has its risk. Here the risk is that certain less intelligent persons will take the idea that Krsna Consciousness is rational, and therefore not acintya, and then become what we call in the West, doctrinaire. What ever contradictions that can come in logical thought or even within the books or statements of their own guru, will be ignored. Doubters will be considered disloyal, blasphemers and paranoia will abound. Yet this doesn't describe Srila Prabhupada. It was in such an atmosphere that the Zonal Acarya System was imposed. Do you really think that it is a coincidence that the same person who is carrying on this doctrinaire offensive, is also carrying on a thread glorifying the last "real" standing Zonal [acarya]? Srila Prabhupada states in the Sri Isopanisad that the practioners of Krsna Consciousness should become philosophers. He never says that they should become doctrinaire fanatics.

Unfortunately the only reality I actually know is the phantasmagoria of this material world.

Yeah this Soma is really vivid, no strychnine. It's the kine!

Talking about being doctrinaire! If the statement that Gauragopal is quoting was the was the primary meaning and only definition [of nitya siddha - eternally perfect, and nitya-baddha - eternally conditioned or bound] then there would be no reason for the word nitya-baddha to exist. But it does exist therefore the primary understanding is that the jivas in this world are bound by the three modes of material nature. A secondary meaning of nitya-siddha is that from the eternal perspective, that everyone is really eternally liberated. From this angle of vision, nitya in the context of nitya-baddha means, almost eternal and therefore from the eternal perspective the jivas are already nitya-siddha and only lacking realization. But Gauragopal wraps himself in the flag of Srila Prabhupada with his avatar and pounds us with only one perspective ad infinitum, somhow implying that those who do not accept this as the only viewpoint are not as loyal to Srila Prabhupada as he. I'm sorry but such fanaticism and a refusal to look at any other perspective, even directly from Srila Prabhupada's books must be symptomatic of some kind of personality disorder.

Picture yourself crossing the viraja river, With desire trees and transcendental skies. Somebody calls you, you answer quite slowly, A girl in a sari with sweet lotus eyes. Kadamba flowers of yellow and green, Towering over your head. Look for the girl with large lotus eyes, And she's gone. {CHORUS} Lucid in the sky with dreaming, Lucid in the sky with dreaming, Lucid in the sky with dreaming, Ah... Ah...

I really don't understand why so may of the posters here insist on being so doctrinaire on this subject. From one angle of vision the spiritual body must be obtained from another angle of vision it is something that already exists (from the viewpoint of eternity). It is acintya, or inconceivable how apparently opposite truths can simultaneously be true. Debating will not give anyone the real answer and that will come by bhakti, alone. Then when the real truth will come in our hearts we will find that it is really not really knowledge or jnana but bhakti. When bhakti comes into our hearts we will see what is what but that will not be our real focus - not the desire to know Krsna, but rather the desire to please Krsna.

Rasa tattva and regular tattva are not the same.

Hmmm...doesn't sound like the cowherd boys fighting and wrestling or the gopis anxiously awaiting Krsna's afternoon return with the grazing cows, calves and gopas.

Bhagavad-gita As It Is, Introduction Bhaktivedanta VedaBase: Śrī Caitanya Caritāmṛta Madhya 20.117

Dear Snonic Snogi, But my point is that the idea that the fallen jivas are dreaming their material lives from Goloka does have some truth in it and is not and absurd idea, but rather it simply an idea which is being misapplied. The previous acaryas used the analysis that Srila Sridhar Maharaja is giving: that the land of exploitation is negative, the land of dedication is positive and the brahmajyoti is the tatastha position or the abscissa or 0 (zero) point. From the standpoint of time, the jiva has a beginning and the beginning point is 0 (zero), because in this context zero means beginning. The abscissa or 0 (zero) point (tatastha position) is also a point of resting or lack of activity. This can also be seen as equalibrium. The baddha jiva also has the potential to again return to the point of equalibrium or "merge with brahman". But because of the inherant personal and active nature of the jiva, he/she will again become activated and again leave the brahmajyoti. ye 'nye 'ravindaksa vimukta-maninas tvayy asta-bhavad avisuddha-buddhayah aruhya krcchrena param padam tatah patanty adho 'nadrta-yusmad-anghrayah [sB 10.2.32] From the viewpoint of eternity we may see that if we are going back to Godhead then since there is no time in eternity then from that angle of vision, we are already there. But this is only from the viewpoint of the jiva being origin-less or eternal. Dreamer-vad overextends certain concepts given by Srila Prabhupada for preaching purposes for persons who had no real chance of understanding the complexities of the higher siddhantas. Gauragopal's Dreamer-vad Theory misapplies and mixes up different concepts, but their thoughts on this subject are not bad thoughts per se. The revealers of the Gaudiya Siddhanta such as Srila Jiva Goswami also had to deal with so many apparent contradictions in the duality between time and eternity and through their divine genius have given some deep ideas which can help us along in our sojourn. The siddhanta they gave perfectly harmonizes opposites and reveals Sri Krsna as the All-Harmonizing aspect of Reality.

Snonic Snogi: What's your take my post #28?

To use Srila Sridhar Maharaja's terminology: [angle of vision] not just of this world which is the negative plane, or the tatastha region which is the abscissa (0), but also of course the positive world, the land of dedication. as Srila Bhativinoda Thakur has said in his speech The Bhagavat, "no thought is a bad thought." So behind each thought although it may be imperfect, or in error, there is some reality. The thesis will always provoke an antithesis which will lead to a synthesis. Synthesis is possible because there is some underlying truth in a theory although fraught with so much contradiction. The antithesis accentuates the contradiction and together they give birth to the synthesis. This is only possible where the truth is a living conception which is progressive and not static. The Thakur has told us that students should be like satellites who reflect the truth, not like the magistrates who shackle the prisioners. Prabhupada may have said many things but his "followers" are not to imprison those ideas in the dungeon of our static conception of reality. The tendency to cling to one angle of vision, only and to be overly attached to the presentation of that vision IOW, the style of language, the syntax, the accent etc. is symptomatic of this pitfall. Unfortunately the thinking public is all too aware that this has run rampant in Iskcon and Iskcon circles. Those who manifest this phenomenum are like broken records; the same thing, over and over again. In the atmosphere that they create there is no real possibility of discussion.

Just another angle of vision. Each angle is not the whole picture. Obviously when you think about it Krsna created the situation where the jivas can and do come to the material world. Therefore its ultimately by His Will and therefore the jivas coming to material world and changing bodies here, is another one of His lilas.

Die zwei Postulate können zur Mathematik übersetzt werden, indem man eine schematische Situation verwendet, in der es zwei Bezugsrahmen gibt, die eine konstante Bewegung in Bezug auf einander haben (sehen Sie die Abbildung). Wenn das zweite Postulat zutreffend ist, messen Beobachter in beiden Bezugsrahmen die gleiche Geschwindigkeit des brahmajyoti Lichtes. Vereinfacht, kann die Lichtgeschwindigkeit als der zurückgelegte Abstand x eines hellen Signals geschrieben werden, geteilt bis zum der Durchfahrtzeit T. in Bezug auf einen Bezugsrahmen C, das ein helles Signal entlang dem X-axis in der positiven Richtung fortpflanzt, entsprechend: x = ct (wo c 300.000 km/sec entspricht) Die gleichen Spielräume des hellen Signals, auch in Bezug auf Bezugsrahmen C' mit einer Geschwindigkeit gleich C. in Bezug auf C' , wird die Gleichung für die Bewegung des hellen Signals dann x' =ct'. (x' =ct' , nitya baddha darstellend) Die Geschwindigkeit V des Rahmens C' in Bezug auf Rahmen C, kann indem das Teilen des zurückgelegten Abstandes entlang seinem X-axis bis zum der Durchfahrtzeit berechnet werden. Wegen der Symmetrie kann v innerhalb von C und von C' gleichmäßig beobachtet werden;. Merken Sie dass, von innerhalb C, an jedem möglichem Zeitpunkt (koordinieren Sie), t> 0, die Koordinierung x des Ursprung von C' seien Sie kleiner als die Koordinierung x der Frontseite des hellen Signals. Zur gesamten Ableitung, die in diesem Artikel besprochen, anwendet es dieses C' s; übereinstimmt mit C an koordiniert t=0 und t' ert; =0. Die Koordinaten x und x' von der Frontseite des hellen Signals seien Sie an diesem sehr Moment auch, der bis null gleich ist. Wegen des zweiten Postulats müssen wir Zugeständnisse in Beziehung zu beiden räumlichen Eigenschaften der Bewegung der Gegenstände (in Form einer Längekontraktion), sowie auf das Konzept der absoluten Zeit bilden, wie es im Allgemeinen damals begriffen (mit dem Ergebnis einer Zeitausdehnung im beweglichen Bezugsrahmen). Das helle Signal (in der Abbildung oben) verschiebt gleichmäßig geradliniges in Bezug auf beide Bezugsrahmen. So müssen wir eine gleichmäßig geradlinige Bewegung in C in andere in C' umwandeln;. Dies heißt, dass es eine lineare Relation zwischen geben muss koordiniert x, y, z, t und x' , y' , z' , t'. Die allgemeinste Form dieser Relation, wie vorbei gebraucht und entsprechend der speziellen Theorie der Relativität, ist, wie folgt: Merken Sie, dass die Einbeziehung von t und t' koordiniert; ist zur Relativitätstheorie spezifisch: dieses ist notwendig, wenn man hofft, eine Umwandlunggleichung zwischen ihnen zu finden. Weil C' bewegt linear entlang den X-axis von C, es anwendet immer dieses y=y' und z=z'. Von diesem folgt für die Koeffizienten: Wegen der Symmetrie t' kann von x nur abhängen, in dem x nitya baddha und t ist, in dem t nitya mukta ist. Von diesem folgt: Dann angenommen es dass x' s; =0 in C' muss mit x=vt in C. entsprechen. Es folgt für die Koeffizienten dem: Wenn die Koeffizienten in den Gleichungen (1), (2), (3) und (4) durch ihre Werte ersetzt, erhalten wir: Die Falschheit in dieser Ableitung kann in der Annahme befinden, die x' =0 muss mit x=vt entsprechen. Die Gleichungen (1) bis einschliesslich (4) sind die allgemeinste Form einer linearen Umwandlung des vierdimensionalen Zeit-raums koordiniert, von einem Ereignis, das ist - Ereignisse haben eine Position im Raum, der von einer Zeit abhängig ist, koordinieren. An diesem Punkt in der Ableitung ist dieses Ereignis die Beobachtung von innerhalb C und von innerhalb C' vom räumlichen koordiniert von jedem möglichem Phänomen (nicht notwendigerweise die Frontseite von einem hellen Signal dennoch) in der Uniform, geradlinige Bewegung, an einem bestimmten Zeitpunkt, der von beiden Beobachtern verschieden sein kann. Wir sollten x' nicht deuten; =0 als seiend der Ursprung von C' , der Bezugsrahmen selbst, weil, wenn Sie von innerhalb C' beobachtet; es ist nicht ein Ereignis in der beabsichtigten Richtung: dieses x' ist Unabhängiger der Zeit. Angenommene irgendwelche koordinieren müssen auf einem korrekten Ereignis beziehen. Folglich x' =0 für x=vt muss auf ein Ereignis zutreffen, das gerade mit dem Ursprung von C' übereinstimmt; und nicht ist ein Teil des Bezugsrahmens C' selbst. Aber nur von den Ursprung der Bezugsrahmen selbst wissen wir sicher, dass der Abstand zwischen ihnen vt ist: wir wissen nicht, wenn die Koordinierung x des besagten korrekten Ereignisses, wie von innerhalb C beobachtet zu x' umwandeln kann; =0, wie von innerhalb C' beobachtet; , denn ein beobachtetes t koordinieren (> 0) in Bezug auf x entsprechend x/t=v. schließlich die Ableitung der Lorentz (Kapila) Gleichungen bedeutet, um in der Lage zu sein, solch eine Umwandlung im Ende festzustellen: wir können es nicht beim Anfang annehmen. So müssen wir feststellen dass x' =0 für x=vt ist eine unzulässige Annahme hier. In Wirklichkeit fälscht dieses die resultierenden Umwandlunggleichungen (14) und (15) als gültige Ableitungen der zwei Postulate der speziellen Theorie von Relativität von nitya baddha und von nitya mukta. Zu fortgesetzt werden. Letztes redigiert von Beggar: Gestern am 07:47 P.M. Grund: Ansturm der geisteskranken Gedanken

So nitya in nitya baddha doesn't really mean eternal, it means, "almost eternal" or "from time immemorial". That is a clear example of a figurative use of a word. So in "nitya siddha" we will ask the question, "is that state literally 'eternal' or figuratively 'eternal'?" Krsna says twice in BG, yad gatva na nivartante, tad dhama paramam mama. The 1972 editions translation is [that abode of Mine] "one who reaches it never returns to this material world." Also in the purport there is no mention of "na nivartante - never comes back". being anything but literal and factual and not figurative. In Revatianandana's Memories Video he reports that upon asking Srila Prabhupada about "never" in the "na nivartante" verses that Srila Prabhupada made an "impish grin" and said that never here mean essentially "almost never" and then he stressed the free will of the jiva to make a choice. One day in 1981 I was listening to a Srila Prabhupada lecture and I heard him say at the beginning of his talk, "we are originally from the spiritual world, well not exactly, but that's another story." I have been looking for that lecture for well over a quarter of a century! For me I am of the understanding that the "impish grin" and the "that's another story" statement along with the statement, "everything you need to know is in my books", means that statements such as, "...never returns to the material world" and "no one ever falls from Vaikuntha" can be taken "as it is". To me the "impish grin" and "well, not exactly" indicate that for preaching purposes to the Christian based Western World, that Srila Prabhupada had created a strategy to speak sometimes in one way to his disciples and write for his disciples, the public and posterity in another way. It's clear that the what is in Prabhupada's books must take precedent. If we were to agree to limit the discussion to his books then things would proceed quite differently; Then Gaupagopal's campaign would immediately have the wind taken out of it's sails.

:deal:The two postulates can be translated to mathematics by using a schematic situation in which there are two reference frames which have a uniform motion with respect to each other (see the figure). If the second postulate is true, observers in both reference frames will measure the same speed of brahmajyoti light. Simplified, the speed of light can be written as the covered distance x of a light signal, divided by the transit time t. With respect to a reference frame C a light signal propagates along the x-axis in positive direction, according to: x = ct (where c equals 300.000 km/sec) The same light signal travels, also with respect to reference frame C' with a speed equal to c. With respect to C', the equation for the movement of the light signal then becomes x'=ct'. (x'=ct', representing nitya baddha) The velocity v of frame C' with respect to frame C, can be calculated by dividing the covered distance along its x-axis by the transit time. Because of symmetry, v can be observed equally from within C and C'. Do note that, from within C, at any point in time (co-ordinate) t>0, the co-ordinate x of the origin of C' will be smaller than the co-ordinate x of the front of the light signal. To the entire derivation discussed in this article, it applies that C' coincides with C at co-ordinates t=0 and t'=0. The coordinates x and x' of the front of the light signal are at that very moment also equal to zero. Because of the second postulate, we have to make concessions in relation to both the spatial properties of moving objects (in the form of a length-contraction), as well as to the concept of absolute time as it was generally conceived back then (resulting in a time-dilation in the moving reference frame). The light signal (in figure above) moves uniformly rectilinear with respect to both reference frames. So we need to transform a uniformly rectilinear motion in C into another in C'. This means there must be a linear relation between co-ordinates x, y, z, t and x', y', z', t'. The most common form of this relation, as needed by, and according to the special theory of relativity, is as follows: Note that the inclusion of the co-ordinates t and t' is specific to relativity theory: this is necessary if one hopes to find a transformation equation between them. Because C' moves linearly along the x-axis of C, it always applies that y=y' and z=z'. From this follows for the coefficients: Because of symmetry, t' can only depend on x, where x is nitya baddha and t,where t is nitya mukta. From this follows: Then it is assumed that x'=0 in C' has to correspond with x=vt in C. It follows for the coefficients that: When the coefficients in equations (1), (2), (3) and (4) are substituted by their values we get: The falsity in this derivation can be located in the assumption that x'=0 has to correspond with x=vt. The equations (1) up to and including (4) are the most general form of a linear transformation of four-dimensional space-time co-ordinates, of an event that is - events have a location in space, dependent on a time co-ordinate. At that point in the derivation this event is the observation from within C and from within C' of the spatial co-ordinates of any phenomenon (not necessarily the front of a light signal yet) in uniform, rectilinear motion, at a certain point in time which may be different to both observers. We should not interpret x'=0 as being the origin of C', the reference frame itself, because when observed from within C' it is not an event in the intended sense: this x' is independent of time. Any assumed co-ordinate must relate to a proper event. Therefore x'=0 for x=vt must apply to an event just coinciding with the origin of C', and is not a part of the reference frame C' itself. But only of the origins of the reference frames themselves we know for sure that the distance between them is vt: we do not know if the co-ordinate x of said proper event as observed from within C can transform to x'=0 as observed from within C', for an observed t co-ordinate (>0) relating to x according to x/t=v. After all, the derivation of the Lorentz (Kapila) equations is meant to be able to determine such a transformation in the end: we cannot assume it at the start. So we must conclude that x'=0 for x=vt is an invalid assumption here.In effect, this falsifies the resulting transformation equations (14) and (15) as valid derivatives of the two postulates of the special theory of relativity of nitya baddha and nitya mukta. To Be Continued.

What we have here is a failure to communicate!

I dare say theist, do be careful what you write. Remember you are still under oath!

But just a few pages back on this thread: And then this: The above statement does pertain directly to the origin of the jiva soul. Then my response which you think is so lost directly pertains to: Which seems to imply that those who do not accept that it is proper to say that the jiva is dreaming from a position in Goloka do not accept that the jiva is "dreaming" from any point. I've written before that due to polarization on this subject, some on the tatastha origin side have indeed dropped the concept of the dreamlike quality of material existence. I am pointing out that this is a fault and not indicative of any bonafide current, recent, or past acarya in the Gaudiya Vaisnava line.

Dreamlike means dreamlike, it doesn't mean exactly the same thing as going to sleep at night and dreaming that you're being eaten by a tiger. But our mundane existence is similar to a dream. One of the reasons for this is that we are really only the observer or ksetrajna, knower of the field of the body. The experience of the observer, ksetrajna is to observe the imput of the active senses to the mind and then the mind's concoctions based on these imputs and desire. The jiva soul is neither a material gross or subtle body but identifies with these through the concept of I and mind which is related to designations such as I am this body and this body is American, Indian or dog or cat etc. These designations are called upadhis or foreign things. Srila Narayana Maharaja:

The idea that the material world is a dreamlike condition is accepted by all previous acaryas, the Gaudiya Math and its derivatives and the babajis. It has nothing to do with the origin debate.