Shakti-Fan

so you are fault finding such people

I know that you said this in jest. But I think that gHari was just pointing out the nature of the materialistic mind. His "criticism" was aimed at a ubiquitous mentality not a particular group or person, and certainly not a particular group of Vaisnavas or an individual Vaisnava.

There's a difference in honestly recognizing the faults and shortcomings in others as part of moving through everyday life, and consciously and purposely faultfinding as a separate and elective activity.

 

Good point, but the problem is that quite often the "difference" is very subtle. Combine that with the conditioned souls tendency to be illusioned through self-deception and you can see the dilemna. Better to error on the side of caution when judging others. The colloqial phrase is, "to give others the benefit of the doubt". I'm sure that many of our mothers told us,"if you can't say something nice about someone then don't say anything at all." Any way its very difficult for neophyte devotees to practice trnadapi sunicena... and move through the world just like a materialist. I should know because that is my exact plight.

There are different levels of purity. Maharaja Bharata fell down from the level of bhava. He had renounced his kingdom (the whole World) but later became overly attached to a deer. One situated in prema, fully mature divine love can never fall down into lust and attachment. Sometimes we are told that prema cannot exist fully in this world. So fall down in this world is always a possibility unless one has come from the Spiritual World to preach Krsna Consciousness. (nitya siddha). One may argue that sadhana siddha and krpa siddha are equal to nitya siddha. That is true. But since everything is simultaneously one and different, it may not be true in this context.

demand of others only what you demand of yourself.

Yes, very insightful. The alternative is to drown in an ocean of faultfinding.

In his talks Sridhar Maharaja would often refer to the author as Kaviraja Goswami.

Should read: In his talks Sridhar Maharaja would often refer to the author of Caitanya Caritamrta as Kaviraja Goswami.

You say "Damodara Maharaja" but clearly you have no connection with him because if you did you wouldn't call Sripad Bhaktisvarupa Damodara Maharaja that.

The Maharaja title in and of itself is a respectful address. During the time of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakur the practice of refering to a sanyassi by the last name of his title and "Maharaja" was there in the Gaudiya Matha. In his talks Sridhar Maharaja would often refer to the author as Kaviraja Goswami. Also why should every one who had a relationship with Damodara Maharaja be forced to act like his disciple? He had many godbrothers.

The gayatri or brahminical initiation is important for creating and maintaining a priestly class of devotees to perform the Brahminical work of deity worship and performing marriages and all the other Brahminical work needed for a Daiva Varnashrama society.

 

Srila Sridhar Maharaja explains that the gayatri mantra is there to help us in nama bhajan. The mantra "retires at liberation" but what is the Vaisnava definition of liberation? Muktir hitvanyatha rupam swarupena vyavathiti. To obtain darshan of our own eternal form and that of the Lord. And to be fixed in our eternal service relationship with the Lord. The mahamantra can give everything and the [gayatri] mantra is there to help. Srila Sridhar Maharaja states that, "only after one has reached a devoped stage can the mantra be conferred upon him." Why did Srila Prabhupada encourage his disciples to try to reach this stage and then confer second initiation upon them? I certainly doubt that the inner reason was to create and maintain a priestly class. Why keep giving all these external interpretations. Go back and read or listen to Srila Sridhar Maharaja's explaination of the Ramananda Samvada. Anyway he would often quote Na te viduh svarta gatim hi Visnu/durasyaya ye bahir ... and say "you must dive deep into reality". I hardly believe that our common obsession with the formal initiation issue is an example of diving deep into reality.

He called them "ritviks".

 

I think that the basic problem here is that the devotees don't like the word "rtvik" very much. Maybe Guruvani could get together with the other rtviks and form a GBC. Then perhaps if we could have enough influence they could agree that from this point on the "Rtivk Theory" could be hence forth be known as the "Chopstick Theory". This would go over very big in China where they have over one billion people. Since China is becoming the most influentional nation in the world, the Chop Stick Theory would dominate the devotee scene within one generation, its a sure thing. Wow, this post is making me very hungry for some vegetarian Chinese food. I even know how to use chopsticks! Vegetarian pot stickers anyone?

Well spoken, but I don't want to chant any rounds, at least not attentively. So what to do?

"Chant, Chant, Chant; can't, can't, can't". Srila Prabhupada.

chat room, chat room, chat room, can, can, can!

dude, go easy on venomous statements like that!

 

Yadi Guruvani... If Guruvani wasn't making "venomous" statements" many of us wouldn't "tune in" to Audarya Fellowships Spiritual Discusssions , at least so often. If Guruvani had not come to the Audarya Fellowships Spiritual Discusssions how could we go on? If Guruvani did not exist, we would have to invent him.

Suicide isn't as bad as all that. Jains fast unto death, it's their standard practice. Fasting unto death is not like other forms of suicide, which are usually violent and sudden. In this case, it's smooth and easy, and no karma is accumulated. But one must know the right method; for dying is as much an art as living!

Srila Sridhar Maharaja: So Vasudeva Ghosh says, Yadi gaura na ha’te tab ki haita demane dharitam de. If Mahaprabhu had not appeared in this Kali-yuga, then how could we tolerate living? How could we sustain our lives? What He has given - the very gist of life, the very taste, the charm of life - without that, we think it is impossible for anyone to live in this world.

<nobr>Such a thing has been invented, discovered by Gauranga. If He had</nobr>

If He had not come, then how could we live? It is impossible to live devoid of such a holy and gracious thing as divine love. Without Caitanya Mahaprabhu, how could we know that Radharani stands supreme in the world of divine love? We have received all these things from Him, and now we think that life is worth living. Otherwise to live would be suicidal.

Look, ISKCON should either promote the ritvik system or promote a genuine diksha guru parampara instead of an official guru parampara that is nothing but formal ceremony...

 

If we are going to follow a formal, official guru system, then a ritvik system is probably better than the phoney diksha guru club in ISKCON today.

 

Srila Sridhar Maharaja (Conversation 1982)

Krishna consciousness is the cause of Krishna consciousness.

And we have to get help from the sadhu who has got Krishna

Consciousness within them. Just as, from one candle another candle

may be lit. A candle cannot produce light from within, but it is to be

lit from another candle – it is something like that. We are to awaken

our buried Krishna consciousness, which is covered by ‘anyabhilasa-

karmma-jnana’ (fruit-seeking, selfish work, the result of the attempt

to satisfy material desires, both fleeting and ‘organized’; and the

search for philosophical/spiritual knowledge, devoid or independent of

devotional service.); so, that light, that association, will come to help

the sleeping Krishna Consciousness within us, and our consciousness

will arise from it’s sleep and show itself, as it is. So, the method is

that: to take sadhu-sangha – krsna-bhakti janma-mula, haya sadhu-

sangha – association with the sadhu, devotee of Krishna, is the root-

cause of Krishna consciousness.

 

 

Even noumena is perceived by thought in the mind, so Brahman is not noumena either.

 

Brahman is spirit and as such can only be percieved with the spiritul soul proper and not in the eyes or the mind.

These are only words borrowed by the crude English language from other slightly less crude European origins. In a way noumena means the opposite of phenomena. Therefore if percieved it would be perceived with consciousness by some kind of revelation rather than through the senses and mind. These words are only tools to convey thoughts. We are speaking and writing in a rather barbaric tongue. I know; How can one write with the "tongue"? Because I am using the word figuratively rather than literally. Remember Srila Sridhar Maharaja's axiom: "As denotation increases, connotation decreases. And, as connotation increases denotation decreases." This takes place on all levels of thought.

Brahman is not a "phenomena".

Your right its a noumenon.

Suppose consciousness itself is an entity with an existence that is only reflected in brain activity. Wouldn't it be possible that every thought, every perception of every being still exists beyond the shackles of relative time? Some call this the Akashic records. According to Wikipedia, "Akashic records (Akash is a Sanskrit word meaning "sky", "space" or "aether") are said to be a collection of mystical knowledge that is stored in the aether; i.e. on a non-physical plane of existence." Different mystics like Edger Cayce have been allegedly been able to tap into the Akashic record(s). But could the Record(s) know Itself, like some kind of universal super computer? The Vedantists already have a concept in place which would explain this phenomena called brahman. The Theistic Vedantist refer to it as para brahman or param brahman, Supreme Brahman. Could the Supreme Brahman have personal qualities?, but that is whole new issue. One man posed to Srila Sridhar Maharaja: "If the infinite can be known by the finite, he is not infinite." To which Srila Sridhar Maharaj replied,

"If the infinite cannot reveal himself to finite, he is not infinite!"

Can you tell me there is a reason supported by some kind of evidence for NOT thinking I'm merely made of matter, and that my consciousness is not merely the product of electrochemical reactions of the brain? If so, I'm all ears. I believed in God not too long ago, that mystical states of awareness were authentic and science as of yet had no way to account for them. But then I became aware of the research dealing with God and the brain, and that pretty much dispelled my reasoning for belief in God. Science has accounted for why we believe in God (as you stated above, it's so we can survive, it's an evolutionary trait); science has also accounted for mystical states of awareness, they've found the part of the brain responsible for this, and it turns out the mind isn't still after all, it still functions during this period (certain regions of it anyway), and it can be stimulated to induce mystical states of awareness; science has furthermore disproved these mystical states of awareness as anything more than flights of fancy (as far as I know there has been no evidence to SUPPORT the possibility of astral projection or any other such notions which would make someone believe in the soul, however if you have heard of such cases again, I'm all ears). In the end what's left? What reason can I hold on to for believing in the soul? Even if God came down and blessed me, I'd have to doubt the validity of that experience simply from what I know. I can't just blindly accept something, no matter how much I want it to be, if I have knowledge of reasons why it probably really isn't.

You say, "science has furthermore disproved these mystical states of awareness as anything more than flights of fancy". If your whole supposition is true then wouldn't any state of consciouness be a "flight of fancy"? Let's borrow from science fiction; suppose you are already disembodied. You brain is floating in a saline solution in some scientist's laboratory and he/she is creating experiences for you, Mr. Brain by using probes and chemicals in an expert way. In this case the experience of Mr. Brain is Experience A. But what about Mr. Scientist, by definition he is merely an electro-chemical brain also, so he is Experience B. Although Experience B is manipulating and creating Experience A perhaps he is just dreaming that he is doing this and that Experience B is being controlled by another mad scientist, who's electro-chemical brain impulses is known as Experience C. This could go on ad-finitum, why not? But is it possible that there is a Super-Brain existing somewhere, controlling the entire scene? Sounds absurd in a way, but I am showing you in a sense the theistic line of thought. Ultimately the soul or Super Soul cannot be revealed by logical argument to anyone. He is for Himself and by Himself (the Super Soul). If he choses to reveal Himself and the nature of our exitense to anyone, it is ultimately up to His/Her sweet will. But if we have no faith in our own experience then why bother? In your case and the case of all who are struggling with atheistic thought, including myself, we have to understand that its all thoughts. Yes, we have to believe that consciousness is the background and basis of thoughts, not electro-chemical impulses. At least we can suspend the atheistic thoughts temporarily and at least believe theorectically in consciouness and have a primitive faith in our own experience. Then at least our minds will be somewhat open and receptive to the possiblity of spiritual realization. So actually the bottom line is that there is no objective proof of this is really possible. The argument can and will go on for eternity. When we hear Guru Maharaja say, "It is possible!", then that vibration resonates within us and creates a kind of joy in our existence. But ultimately is really comes down to a choice. A minute use of free will. The Theistic Vedantists believe that it is do to something called sukriti. Some merit coming from the past, that enables us to percieve this choice either consciously or unconciously. But tarko pratistha srutayo na bhinnam, no real logical argument will suffice. All you can do is try to temporarily suspend your judgements based on experience and submissvely hear about Krsna from a self realized soul. I don't believe that anything more can be said.

What were you doing on the third wednesday of the August month ten years back in the current life? You must answer this from memory and not from some diary.

Chasing cars up and down the street, bark, bark. Then unceremoniously beaten by my master.

Actually, and unfortunately, neuroscientists have delved into this "inner communication" and sense of "inner bliss", and it seems it really is empty of substance as they've traced it to particular regions of the brain which are responsible for that feeling. There are neuroscientists out there who are even trying to INDUCE mystical states through electromagnetic manipulation of the brain. So how can you trust these "feelings" of inner bliss or communication with "God" when it turns out that this is probably nothing more than some change in brain chemistry?

 

I just don't see where there is room for God when there is absolutely no hard proof for the soul, and the basis of the belief in mystical states of God communion is also pretty much undermined.

Then the only thing that you believe is that you are an electro-chemical brain. That's your choice. Sridhar Maharaja was always fond of the western philosopher Berkeley's concept that the world is in the mind rather than the idea that we are a mind floating in the world. Is it possible that the electro-chemical brain is the gross representation of our subtle experience. In other words one person thinks that the firing of the neurons in the thinking part of the brain is the reality and our subjective experience is illusion. Berkeley would say that the subjective experience is the reality and the firing of neurons is the background. Could the subjective reality become free from its representation in the cold hard physical reality? Berkeley and the Vedantists would say yes. This is really faith or sraddha, a belief that there is something inherently amazing and sublime in the very nature of our consciousness. Actually everyone has it to some degree or another otherwise they would never get out of bed in the morning. The alternative is to drive your car into a wall like Jean Paul Sarte to express the absurdity of existence. The other choice is to become a theistic existentialist. At that point it is possible to make some sense of Krsna Consciouness, otherwise not. Its your choice.

Devotion to Krishna cant take place perfectly in any other place than Bharathavarsha.. .....that says it all doesnt it?

From the superficial view that may appear to be the case. But "na te viduh svarta gatim hi visnu"... Srila Sridhar Maharaja would quote this Bhagavatam verse and say, that, "we must dive deep into reality". The deeper reality here is the power of the Holy Name of Krsna. We receive this name from Sri Guru, the proper channel and if we chant and take the name of Krsna it will have a most purifying effect. The time, place and circumstance become irrelevant in light of the power of the Name of Krsna. It is even said that the Name of Krsna is even more merciful than Krsna. Of course some situations are more favorable for Krsna Consciouness than others. Many practitioners actually do better in India than in the West. But our faith must be in the absolute nature of the Holy Name. If we loose sight of this, it won't matter where we are, we will be in a compromised postion.

All Glories to Sri Sri Guru & Gauranga!

Swami B.V. Narayan

Founder Acharya of Bhaktivedanta Trust International [bHAKTI] and International Gaudiya Vedanta Trust

Sri Kesavji Gaudiya Math - Mathura [uP] 281001 India - Ph.: + 91 565.2502334

President of Sri Gaudiya Vedanta Samiti Trust and Vice President of Sri Gaudiya Vedanta Samiti

<HR>

Delhi, August 19, 2006

Dear Devotees,

My heartly blessings are for you. All glories to Sri Sri Guru and Gauranga, all glories to Sri Sri Radha Vinode Bihariji.

This is very important for all to understand.

“sanga tyagat sato vrtteh”, if we desire pure bhakti, at all cost we must avoid unfavorable association and follow the ideal example of our Gurudeva and the previous acaryas.

If anyone is not obeying his Gurudeva, not following the scriptures, especially not following Srimad Bhagavatam, you should not hear anything from this person. Cut all his arguments, especially never hear from him. This is my strict order, whoever he may be. Also sastra has said, those who are not following Gurudeva, nor the scriptures, one should never hear from them.

If someone has received sannyasa and gives up this ashram, coming in grhasta ashram, he is vantasi. Moreover, although he is vantasi but he does not regret for this, this is extremely dangerous. The example of Vallabhacarya is quite wrong, he was never sannyasi until three days before his departure from this world. Also, I know very well that the disciple of Srila Bhakti Raksak Sridhar Gosvami Maharaja, Srila Bhaktisundar Govinda Maharaja, he was first in grhasta ashram, then he received sannyasa. His outstanding character is that he never disobeyed his Gurudeva. For this quality Param Pujyapada Sridhar Maharaja gave him sannyasa, and up to this day he is still sannyasi.

Whether a disciple is grhasta, sannyasi or brahmachari, he should follow his spiritual master and please him in all respects. If a disciple does not follow the ideal of his Gurudeva and he does not please him, he does not deserve honor from anyone.

I want to inform all of you that from ancient times we are accepting Guruparampara.

In Srimad Bhagavatam it has been said:

tasmad gurum prapadyeta

jijnasuh sreya uttamam

sabde pare ca nisnatam

brahmany upasamasrayam

Therefore any person who seriously desires real happiness must seek a bona fide spiritual master and take shelter of him by initiation. The qualification of the bona fide guru is that he has realized the conclusions of the scriptures by deliberation and is able to convince others of these conclusions. Such great personalities, who have taken shelter of the Supreme Godhead, leaving aside all material considerations, should be understood to be bona fide spiritual masters.

(SB–11.3.21)

Also it has been told in Svetasvatara Upanisad 6.38:

yasya deve para bhaktir

yatha deve tatha gurau

tasyaite kathita hy arthah

prakasante mahatmanah

"Only unto those great souls who have implicit faith in both the Lord and the spiritual master are all the imports of Vedic knowledge automatically revealed."

Again in Bhagavatam:

bhayam dvitiyabhinivesatah syad

isad apetasya viparyayo 'smrtih

tan-mayayato budha abhajet tam

bhaktyaikayesam guru-devatatma

Fear arises when a living entity misidentifies himself as the material body because of absorption in the external, illusory energy of the Lord. When the living entity thus turns away from the Supreme Lord, he also forgets his own constitutional position as a servant of the Lord. This bewildering, fearful condition is affected by the potency for illusion, called maya. Therefore, an intelligent person should engage unflinchingly in the unalloyed devotional service of the Lord, under the guidance of a bona fide spiritual master, whom he should accept as his worshipable deity and as his very life and soul.

In Sri Caitanya Caritamrta:

vande ’ham sri-guroú sri-yuta-pada-kamalam sri-gurun vaisnavams ca

sri-rupam sagrajatam saha-gana-raghunathanvitam tam sa-jivam

sadvaitam savadhutam parijana-sahitam krsna-caitanya-devam

sri-radha-krsna-padan saha-gana-lalita-sri-visakhanvitams ca

I offer pranama unto the lotus feet of Sri Gurudeva—which includes the diksa-guru, the bhajana-siksa-guru, the superlative succession of gurus, meaning the succession predominated by Sri Madhvacarya and Sri Madhavendra Puri, and the Vaisnavas of all four yugas—to Sri Rupa Goswami, his elder brother Sri Sanatana Goswami, Raghunatha dasa Goswami, Jiva Goswami and their associates, to Sri Advaita Acarya, Sri Nityananda Prabhu, Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu and all of His associates, and to Sri Radha and Krsna accompanied by all of Their sakhis and manjaris headed by Sri Lalita and Visakha.

Without Guru anyone cannot attain Krsna prema. Krsna has told by His own lotus mouth:

prathamamtu gurum pujyam tatasheiba mamarchanam

kurvan siddhimavapnoti hyanyatha nisphalam bhavet

First you have to go to your Gurudeva and worship him and please him in all respects, after this you can worship Me and perform My bhajan. If anyone adopts this process, easily he or she will attain perfection in bhajan. Those who will not adopt this process, everything done by them will go in vain.One may be properly initiated by Swami Bhaktivedanta Narayana, Srila Bhaktivedanta Swami Maharaja, Srila Bhakti Raksak Sridhar Gosvami Maharaja, Srila Bhaktisidhanta Sarasvati Gosvami Thakur Prabhupada and others in their line, no harm. So, without the mercy of Guru and Siksa Guru, anyone cannot achieve Krsna prema.

Someone may say that there is no need of exactly following scriptures, but it is clearly stated in Sri Bhakti-rasamrta-sindhu 1.2.101 :

sruti-smrti-puranadi-

pancaratra-vidhim vina

aikantiki harer bhaktir

utpatayaiva kalpate

Devotional service to the Lord that ignore the authorized Vedic literatures like the Upanisads, Puranas, Narada Pancaratra, etc., is simply an unnecessary disturbance in society.

Pseudo-devotional activities without reference to the standard scriptures as above mentioned are simply acts of disturbances in the name of spirituality, and Krsna has said Himself in Bhagavad Gita:

yah sastra-vidhim utsrjya

vartate kama-karatah

na sa siddhim avapnoti

na sukham na param gatim

He who discards scriptural injunctions and acts according to his own whims, attains neither perfection, nor happiness, nor the supreme destination.

To follow Bhagavad Gita, Vedas, and especially Srimad Bhagavatam, this is essential. Gurudeva always follows the scriptures. Those who deny that one must follow scriptures, they are not disciples. A disciple should follow the example and ideal of his Gurudeva. This has been instructed by Srila Rupa Gosvami very clearly in Sri Upadesamrta, text 3:

utsahan niscayad dhairyat

tat-tat-karma-pravartanat

sanga-tyagat sato vrtteh

sadbhir bhaktih prasidhyati

Progress in bhakti may be obtained by the following six practices: (1) enthusiasm to carry out the rules which enhance bhakti, (2) firm faith in the statements of the sastra and the guru whose words are fully in line with the sastra, (3) fortitude in the practice of bhakti, even in the midst of obstacles, or patience during the practice stage of bhakti, even when there is delay in attaining one's desired goal, (4) following the limbs of bhakti such as hearing ( sravana) and chanting ( kirtana) and giving up one's material sense enjoyment for the pleasure of Sri Krsna, (5) giving up illicit connection with women, the association of those who are overly attached to women and the association of mayavadis, atheists and pseudo-religionists, and (6) adopting the good behaviour and character of pure devotees.

Your ever well-wisher,

Swami B.V. Narayan

<!-- end of cut paste -->

<!-- Start tempfoot2.shtml -->

Am I meant to be eternally 'in separation' but with the desire for union??

 

No, seperation implies logically that one is desiring and trying for union, but falling short. Srila Sridhar Maharaja would explain that this is the nature of the "adhoksaja plane" and give the example of the flying saucer. If one wants to see a flying saucer then it never appears. Flying saucers seem to appear to those who are not focusing on them at all. Another example he gave is that if there is a man and a lady kissing in a house, if you walk up to the front door and look in they will stop immediately. But if you seem to be disinterested and looking away but looking out of the side of your eyes, then you may see something. So Srila Sridhar Maharaja explained that this is the indirect approach. So "don't try to see Krsna, but rather act in such a way as Krsna will want to see you", is Srila Saraswati Thakur's explanation of this indirect approach. Do your service to guru, vaisnavas and Krsna and focus on that, don't try to drag Krsna down to this plane by the force of your will. Of course this implies that deep inside you do have the desire to get Krsna's darshan because that is the very nature of jiva soul who has some touch of Krsna Consciousness. This is why Srila Narayana Maharaja is stressing the same point but in different language. We shouldn't be so foolish that we think that union is something sahajiya or bad. And of course Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakur has said "nikunja yuno rati keli...that the real Vaisnava, Rupanuga guru is trying to serve in the camp of those who are trying to arrange for the meeting of the Divine Couple in the kunjas of Vrndavana. He is not trying to arrange for their separation! That is a hellish thought.

Prabhupada: That is not the… Then you do not understand. Acarya is not God, omniscient. He is servant of God. His business is to preach bhakti cult. That is acarya.

Many of Srila Prabhupada's disciples who had personal association will tell stories illustrating how he knew things that he could not possibly have known from a physical, material viewpoint. Of course there are psychics and mystics who can also do these things, so our faith should not be based on these experiences although such experiences can enhance our faith. Perhaps to stress this general point Srila Prabhupada would say, "acarya is not God, omniscient. He is servant of God. His business is to preach bhakti cult. That is acarya". Anyway the way I understand it is that the acarya's "qualified omniscience" is that he knows whatever Krsna wants him to know. So it is based on Krsna's Divine Will and carried out by Krsna's yoga maya potency.

What kind of a thread title is this? Strange, to say the least.

Yes H.H. Bhakti Tirtha Swami was a staunch devotee but the use of the word "martyr" is a bit inappropriate.

Sometimes we hear about what one acharya says piecemeal, out of context.

So a few months ago it seemed that the Narayana Maharaja followers were saying that the guru is omniscient just like Lord Krsna, but here we see the qualifier. I think that there were some big debates over the issue but now we can see that it is a mute point.

Exactly that's why I posted this thread. The same thing is true of Srila Prabhupada's books; If we take certain statements out of context it will not only sound like he is contradicting previous acharyas but that he is contradicting himself. Here is where so many devotees become confused.

Then others will take a statement from acharya A to show how he differs from acharya B not knowing that in another place acharya A is saying the same thing that acharya B is saying, and visa versa. Then we are quoting "our" acharya to blaspheme another acharya but in turn we are also blaspheming "our" acharya, and some even have web sites set up just for such a purpose.

Syamarani dasi: One of your disciples asked me to ask you something. He is hoping you will kindly reconcile something regarding the omniscience of Guru. He says that Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura wrote this in his scripture called Divine Governance:

"But it is not for us or anyone to fully know the ways of God. We are only aware of that much of the divine activity as is helpful to us for His service. The least particle of such knowledge is more than sufficient for all the purposes of our pure souls. The person who knows God does not understand His ways in the sense in which Godhead understands them. He understands them in the measure that is necessary for having his conscious share in those activities as a subservient of His subservients"

"On this mundane plane, in the conditioned state, we are anxious to know all things in the fullest measure, even as God Himself knows them. This bad ambition, properly enough, is impossible of realization. If it were possible for us to know everything, the distinction between God and ourselves would cease. Such ambition is the outcome of our attitude of disloyalty towards God. It proves that we are not willing to tolerate the domination of God. We are anxious to become God. This unnatural delusion is kept up by our experiences of this world." (Divine Governance, Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura)

It seems from this that the pure devotee is not omniscient, though you often say he is omniscient.

[srila Narayana Maharaja:] I have told this so many times.

[syamarani dasi:] The devotee is asking why Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura wrote this. "But it is not for us or anyone to fully know the ways of God. We are only aware of that much of the divine activity as is helpful to us for His service." We can only understand him in a measure...

[srila Narayana Maharaja:] What is there to reconcile. What Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura is telling is okay.

[syamarani dasi:] This seems to say that the soul cannot be omniscient, even in its pure state.

[srila Narayana Maharaja:] Then why did Srila Suta Gosvami say that his Guru, Srila Sukadeva Gosvami can enter everyone's hearts?

suta uvaca

yam pravrajantam anupetam apeta-krtyam

dvaipayano viraha-katara ajuhava

putreti tan-mayataya taravo 'bhinedus

tam sarva-bhuta-hrdayam munim anato ’smi

[srila Suta Gosvami said: Let me offer my respectful obeisances unto that great sage who can enter the hearts of all. When he went away to take up the renounced order of life , leaving home without undergoing reformation by the sacred thread or the ceremonies observed by the higher castes, his father, Vyasadeva, fearing separation from him, cried out, "O my son!" Indeed, only the trees, which were absorbed in the same feelings of separation, echoed in response to the begrieved father.

What Srila Prabhupada Bhaktisiddhanta Saravati Thakura has told is right, and in the same time it is okay to say that the Guru is omniscient. (Srimad-Bhagavatam 1.2.2)]

[syamarani dasi:] How do we reconcile the two statements?

[sripad Madhava Maharaja:] Srila Sarasvati Thakura said that Krsna is omniscient and the jiva in his perfect stage is omniscient, but not like Krsna.

[srila Narayana Maharaja:] Yes, only like that. He is not like Krsna.

[sripad Madhava Maharaja:] There must be some distinction between God and the jiva.

na tasya karyam karanam ca vidyate

na tat-samas cabhyadhikas ca drsyate

parasya saktir vividhaiva sruyate

svabhaviki jnana-bala-kriya ca

[“The Supreme Lord has nothing to do, and no one is found to be equal to or greater than Him, for everything is done naturally and systematically by His multifarious energies." (Svetasvatara Upanisad 6.8)]

[Krsna-priya dasi:] I am helping with the preparation of your Gopi-gita lectures for publication. In the commentaries of Srila Jiva Gosvami and Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura and also in your lectures, it states: "If Krsna says" or "Krsna may say" or "Krsna says." In these instances, are the gopis seeing Krsna directly? Or are they seeing a sphurti (vision)? Or are they just thinking of Him and imagining what He is saying or might say? After all, they are searching for Him in that chapter.

[srila Narayana Maharaja:] It is very difficult to understand the gopis' mood without their mercy. When they are absorbed in meditation on Krsna, they see Him and converse with Him.

Through meditation, the gopis hear and realize all these things. The gopis meditate and think, "if Krsna would hear what we say, He may reply like this or like that." They know: "He will say that."

[sripad Madhava Maharaja:] Srila Jiva Gosvami and Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura have said that Krsna manifested in their hearts.

[srila Narayana Maharaja:] Srila Sanatana Gosvami has told us in his commentary that we must pray to the gopis, "Please manifest the meanings of your words."