Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

The jiva is the tatastha sakti

Rate this topic


Sarva gattah

Recommended Posts

Back to the original subject:

 

Vrajanatha: What is the tatastha-svabhava (marginal nature)?

 

Babaji: It is the nature that enables one to be situated between both worlds, and to see both sides. Tatastha-svabhava is the eligibility to come under the control of either of the saktis. Sometimes the shore is submerged in the river because of erosion, and then again it becomes one with the land because the river changes its course. If the jiva looks in the direction of Krsna – that is, towards the spiritual world – he is influenced by Krsna sakti. He then enters the spiritual world, and serves Bhagavan in his pure, conscious, spiritual form. However, if he looks towards maya, he becomes opposed to Krsna and is incarcerated by maya. This dual-faceted nature is called the tatastha-svabhava (marginal nature)...

http://www.bvml.org/SBNM/JaivaDharma/15.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 186
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

 

How convenient that you quote no shastra in your spasm of Fallvadi hallucination.

 

I guess we are just supposed to take your word for it?

http://www.gosai.com/chaitanya/saranagati/html/vishnu_mjs/jiva/jiva_4.html

 

Brother, I think you're the one hallucinating. That's why you have to resort to name calling, which is a sign of anger, and we all know what happens to angry people.

 

"From anger, complete delusion arises, and from delusion bewilderment of memory. When memory is bewildered, intelligence is lost, and when intelligence is lost one falls down again into the material pool." (B.G 2.63)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

If it's ok with you I will just stick to the siddhanta the way Prabhupada teaches it in his books and he never taught that there are TWO different Shivas.

 

Show me where Prabhupada teaches there are two different Shivas that are unrelated in Shiva-tattva.

 

There is one Shiva-tattva with various manifestations, some greater some lesser. There aren't two Shiva-tattvas. There aren't two Vishnu-tattvas.

There is one Shiva tattva.

 

So, you are telling me the Lord of oneness has two different types?

You make me laugh.

 

Example:

Vyasadeva is an empowered jiva - shaktyavesha avatar.

Is he still not referred to in shastra as a powerful incarnation of Narayan?

 

When Shiva-tattva becomes manifest in a jiva that jiva ceases to be a jiva and is functionally Shiva.

It is Shiva-tattva being manifest in the jiva.

But, that doesn't mean that there are two different kinds of Shiva-tattva.

Vyasadeva is jiva tattva who became empowered as Vishnu tattva - an incarnation of Narayana.

 

As Sridhar Maharaja explained, shaktyavesha means that Krishna comes down and works through a particular living being.

If Shiva tattva becomes manifest in a jiva that doesn't mean that there are two different Shivas.

If Shiva manifests his powers through a jiva that doesn't make two different Shivas.

 

One Shiva manifesting in different ways and different forms.

 

You now reject Jiva Goswmi and Visvanath Chakravarti Thakura as beneath you because you simply cannot accept that you may be wrong? For some reason you have come back here and started up with your worn out tatastha arguments all over again, and now make the weakest of all copouts with your "If Prabhupada didn't say it, it isn't Gaudiya theology?" Kshama. You've. Officially. Jumped. The. Shark.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Brother, I think you're the one hallucinating. That's why you have to resort to name calling, which is a sign of anger, and we all know what happens to angry people.

 

"From anger, complete delusion arises, and from delusion bewilderment of memory. When memory is bewildered, intelligence is lost, and when intelligence is lost one falls down again into the material pool." (B.G 2.63)

 

Kyros.

 

He never called you a name. He characterized your philisophical stance as concluding (''VADI") that pure fixed up devotional servants can "FALL" and become deluded. Thus "fallvadi".

 

Which is not supported by Sastra. Which means you were speculating. Which is certainly equivalent to hallucinating, spiritually speaking.

 

If you can prove, using Sastra, that Jaya and Vijaya were Deluded due to being present in the material atmosphere, as you wrote, that would be one thing.

 

Otherwise, you were simply caught in a moment of passion, spouting your speculative hallucination as if it was truth, in reaction to the substance of this thread, without a spirit of inquiry or thorough diligence.

 

Which can easily be considered a spasm of attempted sense gratification.

 

Which failed. And you were called on it. At which point you proceeded to project your anger at being exposed upon the one who pointed it out.

 

I hope you will be more careful this time, and not shoot the messenger, I mean you no harm or offense, just defending a Vaisnava who you are offending (however so minor). And your vadi is just plain wrong.

 

Hare Krsna

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

You now reject Jiva Goswmi and Visvanath Chakravarti Thakura as beneath you because you simply cannot accept that you may be wrong? For some reason you have come back here and started up with your worn out tatastha arguments all over again, and now make the weakest of all copouts with your "If Prabhupada didn't say it, it isn't Gaudiya theology?" Kshama. You've. Officially. Jumped. The. Shark.

That's not it bro.

I just reject your psychedelic version of what you think in all your confusion that they are saying.

 

They don't say there are two Shivas.

 

You are the only person that ever said that.

 

Put down the joint and read a little deeper.

 

Read all the stuff I posted already and you might get over your delusions of their being two different Shiva-tattvas.

 

Do you have any idea of how ridiculous you sound?

The Hare Krishna movement has been going on since 1965 in the USA and then in 2009 Gaurahari das, disciple of Ramesvar Swami, pops up on a forum and says "guess what peeps? - there are two different kinds of Lord Sivas".

 

For almost 45 years in the Hare Krishna movement there has only been one Shiva-tattva until 2009 Gaurahari das decides to shock all the devotees with his latest LSD induced realization that there are two different kinds of Lord Shivas.

 

Really bro, you need to chill and quit trying to be some psychedelic messiah who knows things others don't because they didn't take anough LSD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

That's not it bro.

I just reject your psychedelic version of what you think in all your confusion that they are saying.

 

They don't say there are two Shivas.

 

You are the only person that ever said that.

 

Put down the joint and read a little deeper.

 

Read all the stuff I posted already and you might get over your delusions of their being two different Shiva-tattvas.

 

You are going to fight to the bitter end? One Shiva is usually a jiva who fills a role, like the jivas who fill the role as Brahma, the other Shiva is Vishnu Tattva, i.e. Sadashiva, i.e. God. That is what they say, that is what is taught. That is the difference between the two Shivas. If there is no qualified jiva to fill the role of Shiva or Brahma or Indra, then Vishnu fills that role. That is what is taught. If you think there is no difference between a jiva in a role as Shiva and God, well...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Man From Viraja River, by Bijo Paterson ]

There was movement at the temple, for the word had passed around

That the soul from tatashta shakti had got away,

And had joined the siddha souls - he was worth a thousand pound,

So all the peeps had gathered to the fray.

All the tried and noted seekers from the places near and far

Had congregated at the Audarya overnight,

For the pioneers of devotion love the land where the nitya-siddhas are,

And the simple servant snuffs the commotion with delight.

There was Harrison, who made his claim when Caitanya's philosophy won the cup,

The balladeer with songs of touchstone;

But few could ride beside him when his blood was fairly up -

He would go wherever jiva souls could go.

And A.C. of the Bhaktivedanta came down to lend a hand,

No better devotee ever held the reins;

For discordance could not throw him while the Inconceivable Truth would stand -

He learnt to dance while loving in the middle plains.

And one was there, a neophyte, with truths not yet complete;

He was something like a dark horse undersized,

With a touch of Guru and disciple - three parts thoroughbred at least -

And such as are by those who hold the truth mighty prized.

He was hard and tough and wiry - just the sort that won't say die -

There was courage in his quick impatient tread;

And he bore the badge of gameness in his quick and fiery eye,

And the proud and lofty carriage of his Head!

But still so slight and weedy, one would doubt his power to stay,

And the wise man said, "That way will never do

For a long and tiring journey - lad, you'd better stop away,

These hills are far too rough for such as you."

So he waited, sad and wistful - only A.C. stood his friend -

"I think we ought to let him come," he said;

"I warrant he'll be with us when he's wanted at the end,

For both his way and he are Vaikuntha bred!

"He hails from Goloka, up by faiths good side,

Where the trees are so precious and Sri Krsna's play twice as rough;

Where cows hooves strike and dreams come true from touchstones every stride,

The man that holds his own is good enough!!!!

And the holy truth seekers on the heights make their home,

Where the river runs those giant hills between;

I have seen full many sincere souls since I first commenced to roam,

But nowhere yet such courage have I seen!!!"

So he went: they found the cowboys by the big Govardhana clump,

They raced away towards the hill's brow,

And the wise man gave his orders, "Boys, go at straight way from the jump,

No use to try for fancy riding now!

And, A.C, you must wheel them, try and wheel them to the right!

Ride boldly young neophytes, and never fear the spills,

For never yet was a seeker that could keep his truths in check,

If once they gain the shelter of those sacred hills!!!"

So A.C. rode to wheel them – his mission was racing on the wing!

Where the best and boldest hippies took their place,

And he lived a pure devotion and he made the karatals ring!

With the rod of chastisement, as he met them face to face!

Then they halted for a moment, while he swung the dreaded lash,

But they saw their well-loved Holy Land now full in view,

And they charged beneath his counsel with a sharp and sudden dash,

And off into the Govardhana scrub they flew!!!

Then one by one other jiva's followed, where the forests deep and black,

The land resounded to the thunder of their tread,

And the enthusiastic woke the echoes, and they fiercely answered back

From cliffs and crags that beetled overhead.

And upward, ever upward, the young truth seekers held their way,

Where tulsi tree and kalpa-vriksha grew wide;

And the wise man muttered fiercely, "We may bid the mob good day,

NO man can hold them down the other side or to tatashta way!!!"

When they reached the Govardhana's summit, even A.C. took a pull -

It well might make the boldest hold their breath!!!

The wild basil grew thickly, and the hidden ground was full

Of potholes, and any slip was death!!!

But the man from Tatashta Shakti let young courage have his head,

And he swung his rod of truth round and gave a cheer,

And he raced down the holy mountain like a torrent down its bed,

While the others stood and watched in very fear!

He sent the touch-stones flying, but his courage kept his feet,

He cleared the fallen timber in his stride,

And the man from Tatashta Shakti never shifted in his seat -

It was grand to see that truth seeker ride!

Through the coiling vines and creepers, on the rough and broken ground,

Down the hillside at a racing pace he went;

And he never drew that young courage till he landed safe and sound

At the bottom of that terrible descent!!!

He was right among the other souls as they climbed the farther hill,

And the perfected on the holy mountain, standing mute,

Saw him ply the rod of truth fiercely; he was right among them still,

As he raced across the clearing in pursuit!!!

Then they lost him for a moment, where two realities met!!!

In the middle plain - but a final glimpse reveals!

On a dim and distant hillside the wild and courageous racing yet,

With the Jiva from Tatashta at their heels.

And he ran them single-handed till their sides were white with foam;

He followed like a bloodhound on their track,

Till they halted, cowed and beaten; then he turned their heads for home,

And alone and unassisted brought them back!!!.

But his hardy young spirit could scarcely raise a trot,

He was blood from hip to shoulder from the fray;

But his pluck was still undaunted, and his courage fiery hot,

For never yet was another mountain far away!!!

And down by Mother Ganga, where the river rushes raise

Their torn and rugged spines on high,

Where the air is clear as crystal, and the white stars fairly blaze

At midnight in the cold and frosty sky,

And where around the Joining of the Rivers the reed-beds sweep and sway

To the breezes, and the rolling plains are wide,

The Jiva from Tatashta is a household word today,

And the wise men tell the story of his ride!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

You are going to fight to the bitter end? One Shiva is usually a jiva who fills a role, like the jivas who fill the role as Brahma, the other Shiva is Vishnu Tattva, i.e. Sadashiva, i.e. God. That is what they say, that is what is taught. That is the difference between the two Shivas. If there is no qualified jiva to fill the role of Shiva or Brahma or Indra, then Vishnu fills that role. That is what is taught. If you think there is no difference between a jiva in a role as Shiva and God, well...

 

I do understand what you are trying to say.

But, my point is that the Lord Siva of the material world is an amsha or a fractional portion of the Sadasiva.

He is not a different Siva.

He is a partial manifestation of Sadasiva.

Lord Siva is not a second Godhead from Sadasiva.

He is a fractional portion of Sadasiva.

 

Its just like the many avatars of Krishna.

There are some avatars with absolute Vishnu-tattva potency and some manifesting only partial power of Vishnu.

 

Still, these partial manifestation of Vishnu are also referred to as avatars of Vishnu, even though they might only represent a partial portion of the complete powers of Vishnu.

 

Sure, I concede that Sadasiva in Vaikuntha is the complete and total form and power of Shiva, but I don't agree that the Lord Sivas in the material world derive their "Shivahood" from any other source than Sadasiva.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is the most comprehensive explanation of Siva tattva that I have found.

It is for the most part the most definitive exposition on Siva tattva.

 

http://www.purebhakti.com/teachers/bhakti-discourses-mainmenu-61/19-discourses-2000/166-the-glories-of-lord-siva-and-siva-ratri.html

 

 

(argument over?)

 

Special thanks to Narayana Maharaja for his excellent exposition of Siva-tattva.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

<table cellspacing="3"><tbody><tr><td align="right" valign="top">1</td> <td valign="top"> taTastha</td> <td valign="top">mfn. standing on a declivity or bank Naish. iii , 55 ; = %{-sthita}</td></tr></tbody></table>

 

The bank of the ocean is actually most commonly referred to as the beach.

 

Like I have been telling you peeps, we are all originally beach dwellers, surfers of the waves of illusion, soaking in the Sun of the brahmajyoti rays.

Then, JAWS came and snatched us and took a big bite out of our consciousness.

 

So, the lifeguard of the spiritual master has jumper in the ocean to come and rescue us from the JAWS of illusion.

 

For the jiva, live is a beach!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Here is the most comprehensive explanation of Siva tattva that I have found.

It is for the most part the most definitive exposition on Siva tattva.

 

(argument over?)

 

Special thanks to Narayana Maharaja for his excellent exposition of Siva-tattva.

 

What argument? I thought this was a discussion. LOL.

 

That kind of lecture is what NM Prabhu is good at. I wish he would stick with such, and not try to speculate about Srila Prabhupada's purports and preaching misssion.

 

Anyhow, In the mood of simultaneous oneness and difference, which I would hope you old timers would swear by, by now, I searched Srila Prabhupada's writings on Sadasiva and found 2 very simple explanations of why

 

1. Sadasiva has his own Tattva (Simultaneously Visnu tattva and Jiva tattva, yet as a whole belonging to a unique inbetween tattva dubbed Siva tattva by Srila Prabhupada himself in the purport to SB 4.1.15)

 

2. There is SIMULTANEOUSLY One Shiva, who has Two distinct manifestations, namely,

 

a) Sadasiva who is a kala-svamsa of Visnu and consorts with Ramadevi/Laksmi who is "material nature in the neutral and unmanifested state".

 

b) Sadasiva's espansion Lord Siva/Rudra, who consorts with Mahamaha (material nature in manifestation) from a distance in such a pure way that even a liberated Jiva can be blessed with such a role.

 

Sources:

 

1. Lectures : Philosophy Discussions : Discussions with Hayagriva dasa : Origen : ORIGEN.HAY

 

"Or there are two kinds of expansion: His personal expansions and His expansion as part and parcel. His personal expansion is called Viṣṇu-tattva, and the part and parcel expansion is called jīva-tattva—in Sanskrit technical words, svāṁśa and vibhinnāṁśa. The personal expansion there are also many varieties—puruṣa-avatāra, saktyāveśa-avatāra, manvantara-avatāra, many varieties. So generally, His personal expansion for creation of this material world are three also, accepted as Brahmā, Viṣṇu, Maheśvara. Viṣṇu is personal expansion, and Brahmā is expansion of the living entity, or the vibhinnāṁśa. And another expansion, via-media between the personal expansion and expansion of jīva, the via-media expansion is called Siva.

 

2. CC Adi Lila 7.69, Purport (Bolded areas most relevant)

 

 

 

TRANSLATION

 

Rudra, who is an expansion of Sadāśiva and who appears in unlimited universes, is also a guṇāvatāra [qualitative incarnation] and is the ornament of all the demigods in the endless universes.

 

 

 

PURPORT

 

There are eleven expansions of Rudra, or Lord Śiva. They are as follows: Ajaikapāt, Ahibradhna, Virūpākṣa, Raivata, Hara, Bahurūpa, Devaśreṣṭha Tryambaka, Sāvitra, Jayanta, Pināki and Aparājita. Besides these expansions there are eight forms of Rudra called earth, water, fire, air, sky, the sun, the moon and soma-yājī. Generally all these Rudras have five faces, three eyes and ten arms. Sometimes it is found that Rudra is compared to Brahmā and considered a living entity. But when Rudra is explained to be a partial expansion of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, he is compared to Śeṣa. Lord Śiva is therefore simultaneously an expansion of Lord Viṣṇu and, in his capacity for annihilating the creation, one of the living entities. As an expansion of Lord Viṣṇu he is called Hara, and he is transcendental to the material qualities, but when he is in touch with tamo-guṇa he appears contaminated by the material modes of nature. This is explained in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam and the Brahma-saṁhitā. In Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, Tenth Canto, it is stated that Lord Rudra is always associated with the material nature when she is in the neutral, unmanifested stage, but when the modes of material nature are agitated he associates with material nature from a distance. In the Brahma-saṁhitā the relationship between Viṣṇu and Lord Śiva is compared to that of milk and yogurt. Milk is converted into yogurt by certain additives, but although milk and yogurt have the same ingredients, they have different functions. Similarly, Lord Śiva is an expansion of Lord Viṣṇu, yet because of his taking part in the annihilation of the cosmic manifestation, he is considered to be changed, like milk converted into yogurt. In the Purāṇas it is found that Durgā appears sometimes from the heads of Brahmā and sometimes from the heads of Viṣṇu. The annihilator, Rudra, is born from Saṅkarṣaṇa and the ultimate fire to burn the whole creation. In the Vāyu Purāṇa there is a description of Sadāśiva in one of the Vaikuṇṭha planets. That Sadāśiva is a direct expansion of Lord Kṛṣṇa's form for pastimes. It is said that Sadāśiva (Lord Śambhu) is an expansion from the Sadāśiva in the Vaikuṇṭha planets (Lord Viṣṇu) and that his consort, Mahāmāyā, is an expansion of Ramādevī, or Lakṣmī. Mahāmāyā is the origin or birthplace of material nature.

 

Class Dismissed!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

PURPORT

 

There are eleven expansions of Rudra, or Lord Śiva. They are as follows: Ajaikapāt, Ahibradhna, Virūpākṣa, Raivata, Hara, Bahurūpa, Devaśreṣṭha Tryambaka, Sāvitra, Jayanta, Pināki and Aparājita. Besides these expansions there are eight forms of Rudra called earth, water, fire, air, sky, the sun, the moon and soma-yājī. Generally all these Rudras have five faces, three eyes and ten arms. Sometimes it is found that Rudra is compared to Brahmā and considered a living entity. But when Rudra is explained to be a partial expansion of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, he is compared to Śeṣa. Lord Śiva is therefore simultaneously an expansion of Lord Viṣṇu and, in his capacity for annihilating the creation, one of the living entities. As an expansion of Lord Viṣṇu he is called Hara, and he is transcendental to the material qualities, but when he is in touch with tamo-guṇa he appears contaminated by the material modes of nature. This is explained in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam and the Brahma-saṁhitā. In Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, Tenth Canto, it is stated that Lord Rudra is always associated with the material nature when she is in the neutral, unmanifested stage, but when the modes of material nature are agitated he associates with material nature from a distance. In the Brahma-saṁhitā the relationship between Viṣṇu and Lord Śiva is compared to that of milk and yogurt. Milk is converted into yogurt by certain additives, but although milk and yogurt have the same ingredients, they have different functions. Similarly, Lord Śiva is an expansion of Lord Viṣṇu, yet because of his taking part in the annihilation of the cosmic manifestation, he is considered to be changed, like milk converted into yogurt. In the Purāṇas it is found that Durgā appears sometimes from the heads of Brahmā and sometimes from the heads of Viṣṇu. The annihilator, Rudra, is born from Saṅkarṣaṇa and the ultimate fire to burn the whole creation. In the Vāyu Purāṇa there is a description of Sadāśiva in one of the Vaikuṇṭha planets. That Sadāśiva is a direct expansion of Lord Kṛṣṇa's form for pastimes. It is said that Sadāśiva (Lord Śambhu) is an expansion from the Sadāśiva in the Vaikuṇṭha planets (Lord Viṣṇu) and that his consort, Mahāmāyā, is an expansion of Ramādevī, or Lakṣmī. Mahāmāyā is the origin or birthplace of material nature.

 

Class Dismissed!

Nice, but that is the purport I first quoted when this whole discussion started. post #129

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I do understand what you are trying to say.

But, my point is that the Lord Siva of the material world is an amsha or a fractional portion of the Sadasiva.

He is not a different Siva.

He is a partial manifestation of Sadasiva.

Lord Siva is not a second Godhead from Sadasiva.

He is a fractional portion of Sadasiva.

 

Its just like the many avatars of Krishna.

There are some avatars with absolute Vishnu-tattva potency and some manifesting only partial power of Vishnu.

 

Still, these partial manifestation of Vishnu are also referred to as avatars of Vishnu, even though they might only represent a partial portion of the complete powers of Vishnu.

 

Sure, I concede that Sadasiva in Vaikuntha is the complete and total form and power of Shiva, but I don't agree that the Lord Sivas in the material world derive their "Shivahood" from any other source than Sadasiva.

 

You obviously don't know what you are talking about, you're just using terms and concepts that you can read and repeat but don't understand, just like your bogus tatastha theories. In both cases you reject and ignore what past acharyas have said in favor of your own useless speculations. Now all of a sudden Narayana Maharaja's opinion is first class to you after rejecting Jiva Goswami and Visvanath because "they aren't Prabhupada?". How pathetic, you will say anything to win an argument, since that is your only purpose in arguing.

 

One Shiva is a jiva, the other isn't. The End. If you don't see any diference between them, what can be done for that craziness? You use terms and concepts you don't understand and come up with a philosophy where a jiva as Shiva is the same as Vishnu as Shiva -- total madness. It's the same as when you claimed that jivas can lose their tatastha-sakti nature and become cit-sakti personal expansions of Radha. Insanity. You should stick to what you know from experience instead of speculating about things you have no clue about as if you are THE acharya.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

One Shiva is a jiva, the other isn't. The End.

See bro that is your problem.

You want Siva-tattva to fit nicely into the corner of the box of your mind all nice and simple like a bag of weed in your pocket.

Siva-tattva is beyond your mind, your joint and your LSD.

 

Here is Srila Prabhupada's version..

 

CC Adi 7.69 purport,

 

Lord Śiva is therefore simultaneously an expansion of Lord Viṣṇu and, in his capacity for annihilating the creation, one of the living entities.

So, Gaurahari my old pal, Srila Prabhupada says that Siva-tattva is simultaneously Vishnu and jiva.

 

But, that is not acceptable to you because you insist to reduce Siva down to a jiva like yourself rolling up joints and smoking them.

 

In fact, you even call yourself Shiva because you smoke weed and imitate Lord Siva in drinking poison.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Here is the most comprehensive explanation of Siva tattva that I have found.

It is for the most part the most definitive exposition on Siva tattva.

 

http://www.purebhakti.com/teachers/bhakti-discourses-mainmenu-61/19-discourses-2000/166-the-glories-of-lord-siva-and-siva-ratri.html

 

 

(argument over?)

 

Special thanks to Narayana Maharaja for his excellent exposition of Siva-tattva.

 

Narayana Maharaja says some wacky things in that lecture, as he usually does, e.g. he and Prabhupada are omniscient. Or when he said this:

 

 

Who is Maha-Visnu? Sri Advaita Acarya. He is the amsa (part) of the amsa of the amsa of the amsa of the kala of Krsna Himself. He is a part of the part of the part of the part of Krsna. Being so far away, He can preach with kirtana, but He cannot give Vraja-bhakti. He is not qualified for this. Only Krsna can do this. When He came, therefore, He preached through sankirtana that highest love and affection, as well as the process to achieve it.

 

That is his own invention, this is what is seen in Caitanya Caritamrta:

 

 

Caitanya-Caritamrta Adi 6.33

 

advaita-acarya -- isvarera amsa-varya

tanra tattva-nama-guna, sakali ascarya

 

Sri Advaita Acarya is the principal limb of the Supreme Lord. His truths, names and attributes are all wonderful.

 

Caitanya-Caritamrta Adi 6.6

 

advaita-acarya gosani saksat Isvara

yanhara mahima nahe jivera gocara

 

Sri Advaita Acarya is indeed directly the Supreme Personality of Godhead Himself. His glory is beyond the conception of ordinary living beings.

 

Caitanya-Caritamrta Adi 6.28

 

jiva nistarila krsna-bhakti kari' dana

gita-bhagavate kaila bhaktira vyakhyana

 

He delivered all living beings by offering the gift of krsna-bhakti. He explained the Bhagavad-gita and Srimad-Bhagavatam in the light of devotional service.

 

In the lecture you link to he claims that Baladeva can be bewildered by Krishna. Baladeva is Krishna, he's not a different person than Krishna, so how can he be bewildered by Krishna? It's just nonsense. In Lila Baladeva may act bewildered because he is playing the role of a jiva, but it is foolish to consider that he is actually bewildered by Krishna since they are one and the same person:

 

Caitanya Caritamrta Adi 5.4

 

 

eka-i svarūpa dońhe, bhinna-mātra kāya

ādya kāya-vyūha, kṛṣṇa-līlāra sahāya

 

These two are one and the same identity. They differ only in form. Lord Balarāma is the first bodily expansion of Kṛṣṇa, and He assists in Lord Kṛṣṇa’s transcendental pastimes.

 

What he spoke about Shiva though is really no different than what I said, except he uses concepts like "fractional parts", which make no sense to an average person or even 99.999% of devotees because they don't really understand what that terminology means when it comes to Shiva because they usually don't understand the purpose and ontology of Shiva-tattva. He does state that one type of Shiva is jiva-tattva:

 

 

Prajapati Brahma and Sambhu are Maha-Visnu's separated parts (vibhinamsa), and thus they are gods of delegated offices.

 

And he rightly states that the other Shiva is Vishnu-tattva:

 

 

This means that Sri Krishna's amsa, plenary portion, is Sadasiva, and Lord Siva is His fractional part.

 

 

"Separated part" and "fractional part" or vibhinamsa - means jiva, whereas "plenary portion" means God.

 

Kshama on the other hand doesn't seem to think or appears to want to argue that there is no difference between those two types of Shiva. He doesn't understand that all jivas are amsas or fractional parts or separated expansions of Vishnu, but that doesn't mean that we are Vishnu anymore than when it is said that Shiva is a separated fractional part of Sadashiva (who is Vishnu) that they are of the same nature. In both cases there is jiva-tattva and Vishnu-tattva. Two distinct beings.

 

So, Kshama, maybe you should read carefully what you think backs up your speculations before citing them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

See bro that is your problem.

You want Siva-tattva to fit nicely into the corner of the box of your mind all nice and simple like a bag of weed in your pocket.

Siva-tattva is beyond your mind, your joint and your LSD.

 

Here is Srila Prabhupada's version..

 

CC Adi 7.69 purport,

 

So, Gaurahari my old pal, Srila Prabhupada says that Siva-tattva is simultaneously Vishnu and jiva.

 

But, that is not acceptable to you because you insist to reduce Siva down to a jiva like yourself rolling up joints and smoking them.

 

In fact, you even call yourself Shiva because you smoke weed and imitate Lord Siva in drinking poison.

 

No one can be both Vishnu and a jiva, that purport is obviously miswritten by editors, and obviously misunderstood by you. Vishnu means all pervading Godhead, a person cannot be the all pervading Godhead and not all pervading at the same time. You are either everywhere or you're not. This is what is written (however wrongly):

 

"Lord Śiva is therefore simultaneously an expansion of Lord Viṣṇu and, in his capacity for annihilating the creation, one of the living entities."

 

A jiva as Shiva, or Vishnu as Shiva, or me and you, all living entities, we are all expansions of Vishnu. That doesn't mean we are all the same type of being, that doesn't mean that I am Vishnu and a jiva, anymore than Shiva is Vishnu and a jiva.

 

I don't smoke ganja, but your pathetic poseur attitude has know degenerated into ad hominem lies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyways, Kshama, you are a hopeless case. You only want to get worshiped at any cost, no matter who or what gets in your way. I'm done with you. Debating you is like arguing with a 4 year old boy who will just start screaming if he doesn't get his way. What is the point? I've said all I care to say on these topics. I know you are incapable of understanding any of it because you think whatever you believe must be the 'truth' because you believe you are inherently superior to everyone. Therefore no new information is capable of being understood by you if it conflicts with what you believe to be 'truth'. How sad to live like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

No one can be both Vishnu and a jiva, that purport is obviously miswritten.

So, now you have to resort to claiming that purports have been miswritten by the BBT editors in order to defend your claim that Siva is just a common jiva?

 

Ok, Gaurahari, I understand why you want to leave the discussion and claim a false victory on the basis that the books of Srila Prabhupada are seriously flawed.

 

If you think Vishnu cannot become a jiva, then you surely have a very limted concept of the abilities of Lord Vishnu who is the smallest of the small.

 

He can become even smaller than the jiva if he so chooses.

 

Vishnu can even manifest Vishnu-tattva through a jiva if he so chooses.

 

In short, Vishnu can do anything he wants.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

So, now you have to resort to claiming that purports have been miswritten by the BBT editors in order to defend your claim that Siva is just a common jiva?

 

Ok, Gaurahari, I understand why you want to leave the discussion and claim a false victory on the basis that the books of Srila Prabhupada are seriously flawed.

 

If you think Vishnu cannot become a jiva, then you surely have a very limted concept of the abilities of Lord Vishnu who is the smallest of the small.

 

He can become even smaller than the jiva if he so chooses.

 

Vishnu can even manifest Vishnu-tattva through a jiva if he so chooses.

 

In short, Vishnu can do anything he wants.

 

Visnu may manifest guru tattva through a jiva. But there is no thing as Visnu tattva manifested through a Jiva. Sorry.

 

Visnu tattva means plenary expansion or expansion of expansion. Svamsa or Kala-svamsa. Full potency always.

 

Jiva is fragmental part and parcel. Even when liberated and manifesting guru tattva, never has full potencies of Visnu tattva. See below.

 

SadaSiva is Isvara tattva, even considered Visnu tattva. Rudra is not. Sri Advaita Acarya is Isvara tattva. Lord Shiva/Rudra is Guru tattva, or Sakti tattva, but not Isvara tattva or Visnu tattva.

 

Conditioned Jiva is not yet Sakti Tattva, but Liberated Jiva is Sakti Tattva.

 

 

Lectures : Sri Caitanya-caritamrta Lectures : Adi-lila: Lectures : Adi 1: Lectures : Sri Caitanya-caritamrta, Adi-lila 1.12 -- Mayapur, April 5, 1975 : 750405CC.MAY :

So we have to go through like that. As Caitanya-caritāmṛta Kar is explaining, we have to follow this principle. Then if you are really inquisitive to learn the Absolute Truth, they will explain, as here it is explained that here Advaita Ācārya is īśvara, He's incarnation of Mahā-Viṣṇu. Sometimes Advaita Ācārya is called Sadāśiva avatāra. The Sadāśiva is also expansion of Mahā-Viṣṇu. So either way you say, incarnation of Sadāśiva or Mahā-Viṣṇu, it doesn't matter. But Advaita Ācārya is īśvara-tattva. He's not śakti-tattva. He's īśvara-tattva. And we are all śakti-tattva; therefore there is difference. Śakti-śaktimān. Although there is no difference abhinna, but still, śakti-tattva is superior, er, śaktimān tattva is superior than śakti-tattva.

 

 

 

Lectures : Sri Caitanya-caritamrta Lectures : Adi-lila: Lectures : Adi 1: Lectures : Sri Caitanya-caritamrta, Adi-lila 1.12 -- Mayapur, April 5, 1975 : 750405CC.MAY

Caitanya Mahāprabhu is directly Kṛṣṇa, or Kṛṣṇa's incarnation. Nityānanda Prabhu is directly incarnation of Baladeva, and similarly, Śrī Advaita Prabhu is incarnation of Mahā-Viṣṇu. So all of Them are on the equal footing. Śrī-kṛṣṇa-caitanya prabhu-nityānanda, śrī-advaita. They are on the same equal level. And then śakti-tattva, Śrī-Gadādhara and Śrīvāsādi-gaura-bhakta-vṛnda. Gadādhara is the internal energy, and Śrīvāsādi-gaura-bhakta-vṛnda, they are marginal energy. So Īśvara-tattva and śakti-tattva. So within this group, there is no this material energy because in the spiritual world there is no action of material energy, only spiritual energy

As for the bit about becoming Smaller than the Jiva, that is a poor analogy because Jiva is not just about size, it is about being a part and parcel fragment, where as no matter how small a Visnu tattva incarnation/avatara decides to become, He is still a plenary expansion with full potency.

 

 

The analogy of Visnu becoming smaller than Jiva is not properly symbolic for your argument because Jiva is not just about size, Jiva is about being a fragmental part and parcel, thus not able to display all potencies. As small as Visnu may become, even smaller than Jiva, he still retains full potency.

 

Adi 3.71 : PURPORT : om purnam adah purnam idam purnat purnam udacyate purnasya purnam adaya purnam evavasisyate : In the category of viṣṇu-tattva there is no loss of power from one expansion to the next

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Visnu may manifest guru tattva through a jiva. But there is no thing as Visnu tattva manifested through a Jiva. Sorry.

 

Sorry, but you are wrong about that.

That is what a shaktyavesha avatar is - Vishnu manifesting through a jiva.

 

Do some more homework before you jump to conclusions so hastily.

 

Vyasadeva started out as a jiva and then he became an incarnation of Narayan.

So, as far as I am concerned that is Vishnu manifesting through a jiva.

 

SB 4.19.37 purport,

 

Sometimes Lord Viṣṇu appears in His person as Lord Kṛṣṇa or Lord Rāma. All of these appearances are mentioned in the śāstras. Sometimes He appears as a śaktyāveśa-avatāra like Lord Buddha. As explained before, these śaktyāveśa-avatāras are incarnations of Viṣṇu's power invested in a living entity. Living entities are also part and parcel of Lord Viṣṇu, but they are not as powerful; therefore when a living entity descends as an incarnation of Viṣṇu, he is especially empowered by the Lord.

.....................When King Pṛthu is described as an incarnation of Lord Viṣṇu, it should be understood that he is a śaktyāveśa-avatāra, part and parcel of Lord Viṣṇu, and is specifically empowered by Him. Any living being acting as the incarnation of Lord Viṣṇu is thus empowered by Lord Viṣṇu to preach the bhakti cult. Such a person can act like Lord Viṣṇu and defeat demons by arguments and preach the bhakti cult exactly according to the principles of śāstra.

So, the only way to become God is by being his devotee.

 

It's amazing what you can learn if you read the books of Srila Prabhupada.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

Support the Ashram

Join Groups

IndiaDivine Telegram Group IndiaDivine WhatsApp Group


×
×
  • Create New...