Vaishnava_das108

Gour Govinda Swami used to say that the next Acharya will appear after 1996. Don't know about any current one, but there will be some around but the problem is that they are very hard to recognise, and even if they are right in front of our faces we may not be able to recognise them due to our material conditioning.

Do yourself a favour and read this URL: http://www.indiadivine.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=UBB1&Number=33104&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1

Do yourself a favour and read this URL: http://www.indiadivine.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=UBB1&Number=33104&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1

Chant 'Hare Krishna.' /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Thank you Jahnava-Nitai prabhu, for this answer. I was hoping you would join this discussion with your extensive knowledge. This example of Sri Narada Muni is a good one and has pacified my mind somewhat. But I need to ask you some questions: - If you say that Narada Muni is an eternally liberated soul, how did he get cursed? Isn't it true that Srila Prabhupada said that maya does not enter Goloka Vrindavan? - If he became a sense enjoyer, that is obvious from the Bhagavatam description that it involved wine, women, and possibly meat? - How was it possible for him to be ignorant of Krishna-bhakti? One may say that this may be part of the effects of the curse, but then that is a circular argument as to how a nitya-siddha can get cursed in the first place? Fair enough. That is a clear example of an associate falling into avidya by Krishna's will for the purpose of giving the Bhagavad-gita. But if Arjuna is in this "avidya," does this mean he would indulge in material vices? If Arjuna indulged in material vices while yet being an eternal associate, are his offenses forgiven on the strength of BG 9.30?

Yes, I have quoted that verse somewhere above I think. Please do not misunderstand me. I am not even attempting to view Srila Bhaktivinoda in a material way. My problem is very simple: I was under the impression that the Gaudiya guru-varga were nitya-siddha, and now it seems that some elements may be sadhana-siddha. Ultimately you are right, because as long as they are "siddha," then it's all right isn't it? They can show us the path to reach Krishna, having reached Him themselves. I do not have a guru. My nickname "Vaishnava das" is exactly that, a nickname. It implies what I would like to be, a servant of the Vaishnavas. I am not yet fortunate enough to receive the mercy of a guru. I am very attracted to the books of Srila Prabhupada and Srila Gour Govinda Swami. I am trying to qualify myself to receive the mercy of Sri Guru. Let's hope that I will be successful.

I was expecting (or rather, hoping) that someone would bring up the topic of Sadasiva. Perhaps you can explain to me who is Sadasiva, his role in Goloka and his manifestation in the material creation as Rudra/Siva?

What a nice thing! Do you, or anyone else, have a sastric quotation to verify this?

This means that according to your logic, Srila Bhaktivinoda was a sadhana-siddha who realised his eternal identity as Kamala-majari. Oh how I wish there was a Vaishnava acharya to clarify this situation!

Is there a significant difference between eating meat in your material body and eating meat in a manjari body? Under that logic, any acharya (ancient or present-day) could eat meat and indulge in all sorts of material behaviour under the plea that this is "normal" on account of being born in a low family, environment, etc? I think it is obvious that our beloved Srila Prabhupada never indulged in such things.

Hare Krishna. Thanks for those quotes re: Shiva. I am aware that Shiva smoked ganja and did other things. He is a spiritual authority, the head of his own sampradays, and the greatest Vaishnava. But does he have any place in Krsna-lila in Goloka? If so, then how does he smoke ganja etc?

"Narrated Imran bin Husain: The Prophet said, 'There was nothing but Allah, and His Throne was over the water, and He wrote everything in the Book (in the Heaven) and created the heavens and the earth.' "Then a man shouted, 'O Ibn Husain! Your she-camel has gone away!' So I went away and could not see the she-camel because of the mirage. By Allah, I wished I had left that she-camel (but not that gathering)." [sahih al-Bukhari 4.414] EXPLANATION: One may ask why such stories are "narrated". Well, within Islam there are two major sources of shastra, which are the Qur'an and the Hadiths. The Hadiths are the collection of the sayings and doings of the Prophet Muhummad, and each incident is related by an eyewitness. The rationale behind the collection of the Hadiths is to preserve for posterity the example set by the Prophet and is also the Muslim basis for it's Gaudiya parallel, 'mahajano yena gatah sa panthah.' Next, we can easily see by virtue of clear description that Allah was sitting on His "Throne" over the "water". I believe that this corresponds to Ananta-Sesa and the Garbhodaka Ocean respectively. Finally, readers may be confused by the strange anecdote about the she-camel. The idea is that while Imran bin Husain was listening to the Prophet's lecture, he was alerted that his camel had escaped and he went off in search of it. He then laments that he should have ignored his camel and sat down to hear more about Allah from the Prophet. We can also lament, because had Imran bin Husain testified to more of the Prophet's commentary, we may have acquired more evidence to suggest the possibility of a "formful" God within Islam. Conversely, we can study the arguments of Lord Chaitanya with the Pathans, in which He conclusively proved (by quoting the Qur'an) that Allah was of a dark colour and that there are descriptions of karma, jnana and bhakthi within the Qur'an. So we can easily see that a devout Muslim who follows the rules and regulations of Islam and manages to chant the Shahadha declaration at the time of death may very well get a spiritual body to serve Garbhodakasayi Vishnu or serve Vishnu in one of the Vaikuntha planets. Speaking of which, Srila Prabhupada once related to Hari Sauri das that he had a dream about a planet where pious Muslims go after death.

I have no idea. All I know is that Shiva is counted among the demigods, and thus will not survive the Final dissolution. Regarding Shiva's connection with Visnu-tattva, here is the quote: "The living entities are affected by maya, but although Lord Siva apparently associates with maya, he is not affected. In other words, all living entities within this material world except for Lord Siva are swayed by maya. Lord Siva is therefore neither visnu-tattva nor jiva-tattva. He is between the two." - purport to Bhag 8.12.39

With all due respect to Jesus Christ, he is not in the line of Madhva-Gaudiya, but is an acarya for the mlecchas. As such, he taught according to time, place and circumstance. Besides that, there is no objective evidence to suggest that he ate fish. As for Shiva, I simply do not know these things.

I do not know. You tell me? I was taught (or under the impression) that the Acharyas in the Madhva-Gaudiya line were nitya-siddhas. Even if they were somehow sadhana-siddha, they may not have eaten meat or indulged in other vices by virtue of their Indian birth? I don't get it. Eating meat is a sin. Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura revealed in his Siddhi-lalasa that he was an eternally twelve-year-old manjari, Kamala Manjari by name. How can a manjari eat meat? Or is it that Srila Bhaktivinoda ate meat in his "material life," then performed his sadhana, realised his siddha-deha and thus becoming sadhana-siddha, and realised his eternal identity as Kamal Majari? How do I think these thoughts without committing offense?? I am such a sinner, and there is no one who is knowledgeable to clarify the situation with. The above conclusion only works if the Svalikhita-jivani is a authentic text. If it is a forgery and fabrication, then we do not have to accept it.

I myself have read somewhere that the "hunter" that "killed" Krishna was in fact an incarnation of Bhrighu Rishi, and not Vali. I cannot recall where I read this, but I have trying to find it. If anyone knows this quote, please help!

That site is as yet incomplete, as it hasn't yet finished translating the later skandhas. I also do not think that it is a very good translation, because according to that translation, Sri Rama ate meat while living in the forest! I discussed the offending verses with members of the Dvaita mailing-list, and got my doubts cleared. It was clear that the site had mistranslated certain words that gave the impression that Sri Rama ate meat when in fact He did not. It is these misconceptions that give fuel to anti-Hindu debates that appear on pro-Islamic websites, etc etc etc...

May I ask what version you have read?

The devatas are not eternal. At the time of the final devastation, everyone is dead. Including devatas like Shiva, Ganesh, etc. Only Krishna and His eternal associates exist in their uninterrupted pastimes in Goloka Vrindavan. As for their becoming human to get an opportunity to reach Krishna, I once read a quote or a purport from Srila Prabhupada. I do not have it offhand, so please forgive me for paraphrasing. It was something to the likes of: "Demigod is a higher position from human, and you can either progress further to Krishna or you can fall back down." So as I understand it, the position of being a demigod is higher than that of a human, and they are even given some responsibility to perform as per natural affairs. They can either get intoxicated with the power (as has Indra on a number of occasions) or they can use the higher opportunities to progress to full service of Krishna in Goloka. Vaishnava das

I have recently read the post of a certain devotee who claims to be in possession of a letter from Lalitaprasada Thakur. The letter itself is dated 30-5-76, typed on "Sri Bhaktivinoda Gosthi" letterhead and is addressed to a "Richard," and this devotee has given implicit permission for it to be published, since he himself has publicly published it. I shall repost it here, this letter by Lalitaprasada Thakura. Make up your own minds regarding LPT's conception of himself: Dear Mr. Richard, "I am glad to receive your letter of 29-4-76. I am a perfect devotee and follow the dictations of Shri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu as incalcated [sic] by Thakur Vaktivinode and as depicted in Srimad Bhagavat, Shri Chatanya [sic] Sikshamrita and the Bhajan dictations by other unalloyed pure devotees. People of Vrindaban always love me heart and soul. I am not in agreement with Gaudiya Math principles, that is not Gaudiya Vaisnaba Math and they are not approved by many Gaudiya Vaishnabas. I always stick to the Gaudiya Vaisnab Samaj and Shri Vaktivinode Gosthi in toto. So there is no enemy of mine and no difference of opinion with the principles which are accepted and followed in Vrindavan. When I went to Vrindaban last time I received warm reception from all there. The different principles which have been lately introduced by the indifferent [?] movement of my brother are not acceptable at all in toto. So also I am not in a position to agree with that [sic] principles followed by "ISKCON" at present and my attempt is to bring the other parties to follow the dictations of Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu as incalcated [sic] by my Guru Thakur Vaktivinode. So I live alone at the birth place of Thakur Vaktivinode who has been declared as the seventh Goswami by well renewed [sic] late Sri Radhikanatha Goswami and other unalloyed pure devotees. So I stick to the Ragamarga and Bhajanmarga as expounded by Sri-Rup-Sonatan-Bhatta Raghunath-Sri Jib-Gopal Bhatta-Das Raghunath. So I remain confined to the Bhajan teachings of Srila Raghunath Das Goswami. If you have any differences of behaviour by any party I remain dumb and silent by seeing their fairy dance. The questions you have raised are to be cleared when we meet. Charandas before his demise corrected his mistake by taking instructions and initiation from Thakur Vaktivinode for a year and half every day while the latter lived at "Bhaktikuteer" on the sea beach of Puri. Knowing the mistake which could not be easily corrected Charandas became mad and passed away at Jhanjpeta Math at Puri. His last remains is kept buried by the side of Haridas Thakur's Samadhi at sea-side in Puri and is adored by all because he corrected his mistake. You will find the account of Charandas in "Vaktivinode Charit" by Krishnadas-Junior. As regards my brother's affairs it is not good for me to meddle with and I am unable to explain at this moment. So kindly excuse me and if you are still anxious to know I can explain to you privately. I want to live secluded. Sincerely yours, L P Thakur 30.5-76 [this signature and date are in his own hand]

Haribol, Jagat. arcye visnau sila-dhir gurusu nara-matir vaisnave jati-buddhir visnau sarvesvarese tad-itara-sama-dhir yasya va naraki sah "One who considers the arca-nuti (the worshippable Deity of Lord Visnu) to be stone; the spiritual master to be an ordinary human being, a Vaisnava to belong to a particular creed, or Lord Visnu, who is the supreme controller, as equal to the demigods is posessed of hellish intelligence." [Padma Purana] How do you reconcile your views with the above sastric sloka? Vaishnava das.

Not to mention the fact that we are getting off-topic here.

That's from a Sai Baba book story, isn't it?

How did Srila Prabhupada popularise Sankara in his writings? In almost every mention the philsophy of Advaita Vedanta (Mayavada) is criticised and thje correct conception is given. So on the basis of one translated verse which you do not agree with, you therefore conclude that Gaudiya Acaryas preach Advaita, while conveniently ignoring everything else that they have said against Advaita? I assume you have left out the word "of," so this means to say that you think that "no one has documented the exact arguments OF caitanya Himself," right? Well, that is an untrue statement. There is plenty of evidence from Chaitanya Mahaprabhu in the Caitanya Caritamrita, Caitanya Bhagavata, Caitanya Mangala, etc etc etc.

So you are an Advaitin?This would surely explain your bias towards Advaita, and your repeated insistence on the equality of Siva with Visnu in the face of sastric opposition. My point was, we do not know what the Acaryas know. We can at best have a grammatical knowledge of Sanskrit, and interpret the Sastras as gramatically correct but they would have no meaning in a theological light. Allow me to quote from the Dvaita website: "Deeper understanding of such texts is possible with training, intuition and commentaries of those great minds like Sri Madhva, who have experienced the truth and expressed it in more elaborate terms. The use of symbols and metaphors, extreme brevity of statement, contextual assignment of meaning to expressions, complexity of the Supreme Divine person and His relationships with the rest of the world, and the apparent inconsistency in different passages make the task of understanding the Vedas a formidable one. The Vedas cannot be just read like a book on the basis of an acquaintance with the language and grammar. An expression like "mR^ida bravIt.h" -- the mud spoke, "yajamAnaH prastaaraH" -- the person performing the sacrifice in a bundle of darbha grass, etc., would be totally meaningless for such a person." In this context, "mR^ida bravIt.h" may be gramatically correct, but what does it mean when translated into English with no meaning? Nothing at all. We have no choice but to accept the translation/commentary of an Acarya, such as Srila Sarasvati Thakura or Srila Jiva Goswami. Nobody is denying that Siva is a part of Govinda. We are all parts of Govinda, graded in quality. There is a difference between everything, though, and those differences should be known. Siva is also a guna-avatar of Krishna. This does NOT mean that Siva IS Krishna. By that same logic, if everyone is a part of Govinda, that means I am a guna-avatar of Krishna too. Which I'm not, beg pardon for my offence in saying so. Also, if Siva was really equal to Krishna, then why does verse 43 say that Mahesa-dhama is below Hari-dhama and Goloka? "Lowest of all is located Devi-dhama [mundane world], next above it is Mahesa-dhama [abode of Mahesa]; above Mahesa-dhama is placed Hari-dhama [abode of Hari] and above them all is located Krsna's own realm named Goloka. I adore the primeval Lord Govinda, who has allotted their respective authorities to the rulers of those graded realms." [brahma-samhita 43] Also, have you read Bhakti-rasamrita sindhu by Srila Rupa Goswami? Have a look at this: "Krishna means all-attractive. Bhagavan Sri Krishna. Krsnas tu bhagavan svayam. There are other great personalities. Lord Siva is also sometimes described as Bhagavan. Similarly, Lord Brahma, Narada, others are also sometimes described as Bhagavan. But real Bhagavan means Krishna. They are..., they are Bhagavan partially. All these things have been very much carefully analyzed by Srila Rupa Gosvami. He has analyzed in the Bhakti-rasamrta-sindhu, which we have translated into English: Nectar of Devotion. He has analyzed that Krishna is cent percent Bhagavan. And Narayana is ninety-four percent Bhagavan. And Lord Siva is eighty-four percent Bhagavan. And all other living entities, all living entities, we are, we are minutely seventy-eight percent Bhagavan. That means when you come to the perfection of life, when you are actually in the spiritual stage, then you are..., you have got the qualities of Bhagavan in minute quantity, but not all the qualities--eighty, seventy-eight percent. These have been very nicely analyzed in Bhakti-rasamrta-sindhu. And the sastra says also: krsnas tu bhagavan svayam . In the Srimad-Bhagavatam there is a list of all the incarnations, that "Such and such incarnation appears for such and such particular activities." In that incarnation list there is name of Lord Ramacandra also, Lord Buddha also. Buddha's name is also there. But in the conclusive portion it is declared there: ete camsa-kalah pumsah krsnas tu bhagavan svayam. In that list, the name of Lord Krishna, Lord Balarama is there also. But the conclusion is given by Vyasadeva that "Except Krishna, all others, they are plenary expansion of Krishna, or part of plenary expansion of Krishna." Amsa-kalah. Amsa means direct expansion. And kalah means expansion of the..., secondary expansions. So it is concluded there that ete camsa-kalah pumsah. All these incarnations, they are either amsa or kalah. But Krishna, the name Krishna, krsnas tu bhagavan svayam: He's the original Personality of Godhead, Krishna." ACBSPN No idea. It might be something to do with Sanskrit grammar. You might like to ask someone in the "Sanskrit" forum. You will have to prove it, with backup quotes from sastras including Bhagavad-gita, SrimadBhagavatam and Caitanya Caritamrita. I think that even a preliminary investigation will show that the Gaudiya sampradaya has always smashed Advaita with no compromise.