Fables and Fairytales of the Bhagavatam - The Paroksha Method

[sevabhakta 0]

Truly anyone who cannot accept descending knowledge as it is spoken to them, without "experiencing it themselves" or proving it by "kicking the tires", is in a relatively unfortunate position, his much vaunted high level of experiential ascension truly a mere speck compared to the ocean of descending grace.

[theist 1]

 

Truly anyone who cannot accept descending knowledge as it is spoken to them, without "experiencing it themselves" or proving it by "kicking the tires", is in a relatively unfortunate position, his much vaunted high level of experiential ascension truly a mere speck compared to the ocean of descending grace.

Wow what a mouthful. Of course I am a speck. How big do you think you are?

 

Oh and a side thought. If you really believed 100% in everything Prabhupada and this parampara said and taught you would be a cent per cent pure lover of God now wouldn't you?

 

So what is your secret doubt? Haven't seen it yet within yourself because you have convinced yourself you are a true blue believer? Take the battle inside, wherer it truly is, and face your mortal enemy...your own mind. It will help you drop the pretense also.

 

Introspection my dear sevabhakta, introspection.

[Kulapavana 0]

 

On the other hand you are the one in the dangerous position. Because your faith is linked to the historisicity of the war and if that faith is even shaken then POOF! there goes your faith in Krsna consciousness. It is you that is in a dangerous position.

 

Your only proof of the war is in the tradition of your teachers. There is no external proof for the war like artifacts etc. I have seen you question and disagree with these same teachers over the moon issue for example so where is your consistentcy?

 

 

I am not surprised that you make such silly statements because clearly you do not even understand what my position is and has been. I would request that you first understand my position then agree or disagree.

 

 

The misunderstanding is clearly on your side as well. It is not about yours or mine personal beliefs, but about what constitutes a proper understanding of our sampradaya's theology. Dont take it a personal criticism, please.

 

On the personal side, I have no doubt that both Krsna and Arjuna were historical persons, and that the war actually took place. Is my personal faith dependent on the historicity of these events? Hardly, as this matter is not provable beyond a reasonable doubt.

[Murali_Mohan_das 0]

 

When and if I do then you can use words like Mayavadi. Until then ......!

 

If you're willing to call somebody a Mayavadi for their choice of pronouns ("It") when describing Paramatma...

[Kulapavana 0]

 

If you're willing to call somebody a Mayavadi for their choice of pronouns ("It") when describing Paramatma...

 

good point! Mayavada is always on the other side of the fence...

[theist 1]

 

The misunderstanding is clearly on your side as well. It is not about yours or mine personal beliefs, but about what constitutes a proper understanding of our sampradaya's theology. Dont take it a personal criticism, please.

 

On the personal side, I have no doubt that both Krsna and Arjuna were historical persons, and that the war actually took place. Is my personal faith dependent on the historicity of these events? Hardly, as this matter is not provable beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

Bhaktivinode may have had a different view. Besides you would be hard pressed to find one post of mine where I have referred to myself as representing any sampradaya.

 

Glad to hear you understand it is not provable. So you take it by faith. I have no problem with that. But I have noticed that those that take such things by faith also don't take other things by faith. It would seem to be an all or nothing proposition wouldn't you agree?

 

If you really understand my position you would not claim I am one step from becoming a mayavadi. Yes I take that personally because I am a person. You may not have meant it that way but that is how it is.

 

Anyway let me restate my basic position so as no one misunderstands.

 

I am NOT a disciple of any particular person and therefore I do not consider myself a representative of any particular sampradaya.

 

I do not identify with any camp of devotees which has formed around any one Vaisnava teacher.

 

I am some attraction for the teachings of Gaudiya Vaisnavism because the intimacy that is decribed possible between Krsna and the other souls has a sweetness that is obviously beyond awe and reverence. I have never seen that elsewhere.

 

I have no attraction for trying to follow the Hari Bhakti Vilasa and the pancaratriki system. I do have some attraction for the spontaneous power of the Holy Names especially the name of Krsna as taught by Mahaprabhu.

 

More on point I feel no need to accept every story in the Bhagavatam as historically literal. I view such stories as vehicles for passing down the essence and not the essence themselves. Accepting the vehicle is not the same as accepting the essence anymore than the car is not the driver.-

 

A would say this to the devotees in general. Since you cannot prove many of the extraordinary happenings in Mahabharata or Bahagvatam is suggest it is not proper for you to insist on others believing in them."Believe this story is historically literal or you are next to being an atheist." This is not only rude but is also not true. Please consider this point.

 

Sorry if I seemed to jump on you Kulapavana. I have had over 35 years of this same thing and mantaining tolerance is often hard for me.

[theist 1]

 

If you're willing to call somebody a Mayavadi for their choice of pronouns ("It") when describing Paramatma...

 

You can refer to Krsna as an IT if you like Murali. "My dear IT please let me meditate upon IT's form within my heart."

 

I have never heard any Vaisnava teacher do so however. I have heard impersonalists refer to Krsna an an IT or "Thou art That" and other such slogans. And that is fitting for them for they appreciate the impersonal energy God and that is the reason they are called impersonalists.

 

So it is my habit to assume that someone that refers to Krsna in any of His expansions as IT appreciates only His impersonal aspect.

[theist 1]

 

good point! Mayavada is always on the other side of the fence...

 

Yes, just like Krsna's Maya is is always on the other side of Krsna like a shadow. One who falls into the shadow may temporarily relieve themselves by crawling out of the shadow and into the sunshine of Brahman for a time.

 

Maya and Mayavadi no-self philosophies are always together on the other side of Krsna.

[Beggar 0]

 

 

I am NOT a disciple of any particular person and therefore I do not consider myself a representative of any particular sampradaya.

 

"Representative" has a formal connotation. But going beyond that connation to another one, in the next statement you appear to be representing the conception of Gaudiya Vaisnavism:

 

 

I am some attraction for the teachings of Gaudiya Vaisnavism because the intimacy that is decribed possible between Krsna and the other souls has a sweetness that is obviously beyond awe and reverence. I have never seen that elsewhere.

 

Represent, Respek, West Side, Peace Out

[Kulapavana 0]

 

Bhaktivinode may have had a different view. Besides you would be hard pressed to find one post of mine where I have referred to myself as representing any sampradaya.

 

Glad to hear you understand it is not provable. So you take it by faith. I have no problem with that. But I have noticed that those that take such things by faith also don't take other things by faith. It would seem to be an all or nothing proposition wouldn't you agree?

 

 

Bhaktivinode had a lot of different views over the years - he was a person who grew in both knowledge and faith and who was humble enough to admit his gradual evolution.

 

No, it is not all or nothing. You know that I have no problem questioning things and thinking for myself. Yet in the matter of our teachings some things should be made very clear. I do consider myself a member of the BMG Sampradaya and I do make every effort to make sure that it's teachings are presented properly.

[Shakti-Fan 0]

WHAT IS THE GAUDIYA SAMPRADAYA?

Murwillumbah, Australia, January 15, 2000 (Excerpt)

 

Satyarupa dasi: You told me in one darsan that the Gaudiya Matha came from Brahma.

 

 

Srila Narayana Maharaja: But now I will tell you more. Those who follow Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, especially those who are from a place called Gauda, these devotees are called Gaudiya. There are five Gaudas, and each is between two rivers. The first is Punjab, located between the Sindhu and Yamuna rivers; another is between Ganges and Yamuna. Another is between Ganges and Gundaka, and the fourth is between two other rivers and the fifth is Bengal. Of the five, the prominent Gauda is Bengal.

 

 

Satyarupa dasi: Why?

 

 

Srila Narayana Maharaja: Because Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu appeared there. He practiced love and affection for Krishna in parakiya mood. Do you know what is meant by parakiya? It is paramour-love (transcendental unwedded love). In India there are so many sampradayas and they do not know about this; but Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu discovered it from Srimad Bhagavatam.

 

 

Satyarupa dasi: What specific verses are evidence of this in Srimad Bhagavatam?

 

 

Srila Narayana Maharaja:

 

 

pati sutanvaya-bhratr bandhavan

ativilanghya te 'nty acyutagatah

gati-vidas tavodgita-mohitah

kitava yositah kas tyajen nisi

(S.B. 10. 31. 16)

 

 

When Krishna played His flute on the full-moon night, all the gopis left their husbands, children, friends, fathers, mothers, and everything, and they went to Krishna. Their husbands were there at home; and therefore this is parakiya. Although the gopis had husbands, Krishna was their beloved. From the beginning they had no relation with their husbands; Yogamaya arranged it so that their husbands never touched them. She made artificial wives, and the husbands used to be with them. Those who accept this, and who follow the teachings of Caitanya Mahaprabhu, are called Gaudiya.

 

 

Satyarupa dasi: Like the false Sita?

 

 

Srila Narayana Maharaja: Yes, something like that. There are so many slokas in Srimad Bhagavatam:

 

 

na paraye 'ham niravadya-samyujam

sva-sadhu-krtyam vibudhayusapi vah

ya mabhajan durjara-geha-srnkhalah

samvrscya tad vah pratiytu sadhuna

(S.B.10.32.22)

 

 

Krishna is telling the gopis, "I cannot repay you. Your love and affection to Me, and our meetings are so pure and transcendental that I cannot repay you. You have given up your husbands and all other relatives for Me, but I cannot give up anyone. I cannot give up my father and mother. I have so many bhaktas, and I cannot give them up. Therefore I cannot repay you."

The gopis had left their husbands, and therefore this verse is another evidence of parakiya bhava. This understanding was discovered and preached in this world by Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu. Those who follow this idea of Mahaprabhu, under the guidance of Srila Rupa Gosvami and Srila Raghunnatha dasa Gosvami, are Gaudiya. Those who do not follow are not Gaudiya's, even if they live in that area. Those who maintain this idea that the gopis are parakiya, who want to develop the same mood, and are doing bhajan for that end, are Gaudiyas. Srila Rupa Gosvami is Sri Rupa Manjari. He is doing bhajan, externally in the body of Srila Rupa Gosvami, and internally as Sri Rupa Manjari. Externally he is chanting and remembering as Srila Rupa Gosvami, and internally he is serving in his siddha-deha of Sri Rupa Manjari. He is serving Radha and Krishna conjugal.

 

 

This is the idea of Gaudiya, and those who follow this are Gaudiyas. It is coming especially from Sri Madhavendra Puri, then Sri Isvara Puri, Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, Sri Nityananda, Sri Svarupa Damodara-down to my Gurudeva, Srila Bhaktiprajnana Kesava Gosvami Maharaja.

 

[theist 1]

Quote:

<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="100%"> <tbody><tr> <td style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding-left: 3ex; padding-right: 3ex;" bgcolor="#e0e0e0"> Originally Posted by theist

I am NOT a disciple of any particular person and therefore I do not consider myself a representative of any particular sampradaya.

</td> </tr> </tbody></table>

<!-- END TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote -->

"Representative" has a formal connotation. But going beyond that connation to another one, in the next statement you appear to be representing the conception of Gaudiya Vaisnavism:

 

<!-- BEGIN TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote --> Quote:

<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="100%"> <tbody><tr> <td style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding-left: 3ex; padding-right: 3ex;" bgcolor="#e0e0e0"> Originally Posted by theist

I am some attraction for the teachings of Gaudiya Vaisnavism because the intimacy that is decribed possible between Krsna and the other souls has a sweetness that is obviously beyond awe and reverence. I have never seen that elsewhere.

</td> </tr> </tbody></table>

 

 

This is how I believe the Krsna sampradaya works, by attraction, which leads to contemplation and mediatation, which then lead to realization. Any genuine line of descending knowledge is a line of realization and not "belief".

 

Since I have realized nothing and only have some attraction there is no way I could possibly represent such a line of descending realized knowledge.

 

I am also attracted to the breasts of young woman. So what is the value of my so-called attraction?

 

Surface attraction and believing does not a line of descending realizations about God represent.

 

<!-- END TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote -->

[theist 1]

 

WHAT IS THE GAUDIYA SAMPRADAYA?

Murwillumbah, Australia, January 15, 2000 (Excerpt)

 

Satyarupa dasi: You told me in one darsan that the Gaudiya Matha came from Brahma.

 

 

Srila Narayana Maharaja: But now I will tell you more. Those who follow Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, especially those who are from a place called Gauda, these devotees are called Gaudiya. There are five Gaudas, and each is between two rivers. The first is Punjab, located between the Sindhu and Yamuna rivers; another is between Ganges and Yamuna. Another is between Ganges and Gundaka, and the fourth is between two other rivers and the fifth is Bengal. Of the five, the prominent Gauda is Bengal.

 

 

Satyarupa dasi: Why?

 

 

Srila Narayana Maharaja: Because Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu appeared there. He practiced love and affection for Krishna in parakiya mood. Do you know what is meant by parakiya? It is paramour-love (transcendental unwedded love). In India there are so many sampradayas and they do not know about this; but Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu discovered it from Srimad Bhagavatam.

 

 

Satyarupa dasi: What specific verses are evidence of this in Srimad Bhagavatam?

 

 

Srila Narayana Maharaja:

 

 

pati sutanvaya-bhratr bandhavan

ativilanghya te 'nty acyutagatah

gati-vidas tavodgita-mohitah

kitava yositah kas tyajen nisi

(S.B. 10. 31. 16)

 

 

When Krishna played His flute on the full-moon night, all the gopis left their husbands, children, friends, fathers, mothers, and everything, and they went to Krishna. Their husbands were there at home; and therefore this is parakiya. Although the gopis had husbands, Krishna was their beloved. From the beginning they had no relation with their husbands; Yogamaya arranged it so that their husbands never touched them. She made artificial wives, and the husbands used to be with them. Those who accept this, and who follow the teachings of Caitanya Mahaprabhu, are called Gaudiya.

 

 

Satyarupa dasi: Like the false Sita?

 

 

Srila Narayana Maharaja: Yes, something like that. There are so many slokas in Srimad Bhagavatam:

 

 

na paraye 'ham niravadya-samyujam

sva-sadhu-krtyam vibudhayusapi vah

ya mabhajan durjara-geha-srnkhalah

samvrscya tad vah pratiytu sadhuna

(S.B.10.32.22)

 

 

Krishna is telling the gopis, "I cannot repay you. Your love and affection to Me, and our meetings are so pure and transcendental that I cannot repay you. You have given up your husbands and all other relatives for Me, but I cannot give up anyone. I cannot give up my father and mother. I have so many bhaktas, and I cannot give them up. Therefore I cannot repay you."

The gopis had left their husbands, and therefore this verse is another evidence of parakiya bhava. This understanding was discovered and preached in this world by Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu. Those who follow this idea of Mahaprabhu, under the guidance of Srila Rupa Gosvami and Srila Raghunnatha dasa Gosvami, are Gaudiya. Those who do not follow are not Gaudiya's, even if they live in that area. Those who maintain this idea that the gopis are parakiya, who want to develop the same mood, and are doing bhajan for that end, are Gaudiyas. Srila Rupa Gosvami is Sri Rupa Manjari. He is doing bhajan, externally in the body of Srila Rupa Gosvami, and internally as Sri Rupa Manjari. Externally he is chanting and remembering as Srila Rupa Gosvami, and internally he is serving in his siddha-deha of Sri Rupa Manjari. He is serving Radha and Krishna conjugal.

 

 

This is the idea of Gaudiya, and those who follow this are Gaudiyas. It is coming especially from Sri Madhavendra Puri, then Sri Isvara Puri, Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, Sri Nityananda, Sri Svarupa Damodara-down to my Gurudeva, Srila Bhaktiprajnana Kesava Gosvami Maharaja.

 

 

 

Very nice explanation on what separates the Gaudiyas from others.

[Beggar 0]

 

I am also attracted to the breasts of young woman. So what is the value of my so-called attraction?

 

At least you isn't attracted to the breasts of octogenarian women, know what I'm say'in?

Represent, Respek, West Side, Peace Out

[theist 1]

LOL!

 

No No No dear Gawd NO! The problem is every spring another group blooms anew.