A dialog on the path

[Guest guest]

Dr.Jaya Sri Radhey wrote:

 

> Being a Bhaavuka Rasika devotee of Vraja Madhurya rasa, I am NOT worried about the DIVINITY of Sri

Caitanya. Actually I am trying hard to FORGET the Divinity of Lord Krishna as well as Caitanya.

My Gurudev kindly teaches his desciples that Lord is NOT God to His Lovers. Exalted Vrajavasis NEVER

remember the Divinity of Lord Krishna.

 

Satyaraj>Yes, indeed that is a beautiful individual expression of love, you can call it raganuga, or pushti, no matter. Many mahajanas had felt their union with Hari in that way. Sri Ramakrsna Paramahamsa has felt Hari as his mother, some ignorant people believe that he is only a sakta because of that expression.

 

JSR> The RULING Power of Vrindavana is Radhaji, Lord's Svaroopa Sakti i.e.Ahladini Shakti- ONLY PREMA Bhakti reigns! No element of Santa rasa (Lord's Divinity) is RELISHED there. So even if Sri Caitanya is a Tantric God it NEVER hurts my Devotion, but only increases multifold! >

 

Satyaraj>. Exalted mahajanas had always described Hari according to sruti - "There is not a second Hari." We do not feel confortable with the expression of Hari's soul being different than Hari. Its sounds like something against sruti. We also cannot understand a feeling like prema as being the same of Hari's realization, since it should start from sraddha (faith) that is another feeling itself. We only understand the example given by Himalayas picks. When one is placed in one of those picks all the other picks are very elevated and sublime. Hari's realization is an individual and an unique experience, there is no 'photocopy' of this position. His realization is given by Him alone, not by any other means.

 

The notion of a Tantric God is the same of a religion God, that is to say, a temporary god meant to be discarded in the way. This dual and temporary god is not Hari, Who is non-dual and eternal. One should observe a religious path (vaidhi-marga, maryada-marga, etc) only until he is not fully surrendered. After that all dharma should be discarded included all sort of religion's gods (Gita 18.66). We understand surrender to be fully aware that we are not the kartta (doer) of any action in this world or hereafter. Hari's free will is always supreme and He may do whatever He wants. This is Siksastakam also. We do not ask for anything, not even for His Grace.

 

JSR> But ISKCON and other Gaudiyas INVESTED too much in the DIVINITY of the Lord than in the

RAGANUGA Bhakti of Vrajavasis. By propagating the Vaidhi bhakti, their teachers have done INJUSTICE to Lord Caitanya Hari. You are better off abandoning the sinking ship.

 

Satyaraj >.Yes, they had mutilated their Tantric god, that should be the combined aspect of a male and a female gods. What they have now is the old Christian or Muslim God. A severe religion's God, full of asvarya, with no gender, sex, and other attributes. Mayavada?

 

 

JSR> Pushti Margiya devotees are nice and sweetly surrendered but I still feel that their devotion is also MIXED with Jnana and Aiswarya of Lord, to some extent. Pure unalloyed Vraja Madhurya Rasa is very rare treasure to attain. You know all this. >

 

 

Satyaraj>. Yes, you are correct in some extent. Even Sri Caitanya has postulated in Ramananda-samvada that

jñana-misra-bhakti follows saranagati. That's a mandatory way to suddha-bhakti. No one can jump it according to Sri Caitanya, Sri Vallabhacarya, Sri Ramakrsna Paramahamsa, and many others prominent preceptors of bhakti-marg. As pushti-marg begins after saranagati, most of us should be jñani-misra-bhaktis at the first step.

 

 

But in push-marg there is no conception of asvarya in the same way as it happens in Gaudiyas' theology. Regarding asvarya, madhurya, and so on, suddha-advaita-vada is more closely to Sri Sankara's precepts than to Sri Rupa's. That's to say, the unique and individual realization cannot be defined in that way. These conceptions may help in the beginning, but they are not paramarthika, and should be abandoned too.

 

JSR> I like your postings when you grasp the ESSENCE of Pure Bhakti.

 

Satyaraj>. This essence may be fond in all Vaisnavas' sects and all in mahajanas' life stories. It's a general rule, and you may consult Sri Ramakrsna Paramahamsa, Kabir, Mirabai, and others asampradayka-bhaktas to verify their opinion. This essence is always there, but theology makes it sounds different.

 

JSR> My forum is for all the lovers of God, including the so aclled Impersonalists. Please feel free to post as you wish to inspire other seekers of Beloved God.

 

I had visited it. Nice place, but it is still growing. Known that I am an impersonalist too, as Hari may be impersonal or personal. One may choice to be sugar or to taste it. Sri Vallabhacarya has taught that one should not ask for anything. Hari will provide us everything, including our kind of realization. If that realization is to be His Brahaman aspect, that is the pick of Himalayas that you are placed and observing the view. If that realization is to be His Personal aspect, you are placed in another pick where the view is also beautiful. Hari knowns our heart and He will personally provide us everything, always much more than we can imagine by now.

 

Any comment on this dialog?

 

[shvu 1]

 

Hey, welcome back !

Keep your cool at all times, though.

 

Cheers

[Guest guest]

 

JSR>. Quote No.252

 

Indian Paganism Daily Quotes

 

Prayers and chants,

images, temples, gods, sages, definitions, and cosmologies

are but ferries to a shore of experience beyond the

categories of

thought,

to be abandoned on arrival;

for, as the Indian Kena Upanishad states:

"To know is not to know,

not to know is to know",

and the Chinese Tao Te Ching:

"Those who know are still."

 

The Masks of God: Occidental Mythology, p.3, by Joseph Campbell, published by Souvenir Press (1974).

 

Satyaraj> I confess that J. Campbell and F. Capra were two of my most relevant gurus. Campbell was the first one to clear show me the difference between a personal God and an impersonal God, and has paved my way to the experience with Gaudiya-vaisnavism. At that time Prabhupada seemed to me to personify Campbell's instructions. He was teaching the real religion (myth) of a personal God.

 

Nowadays I use to remember this same mantra from Kena Upanisad (2.2); "The Pupil says: 'I do not think I know it well, nor do I know that I do not know it. He among us who knows this, he knows it, nor does he know that he does not know it."

 

Now it is clear that the myth of a religion's God is far below the seek after the Hari that the Upanisads are talking about. Actually the seeker starts from that point! From that Kena's mantra.

 

[Guest guest]

Satyaraj: Did Sri Vallabhacarya has ever accepted Sri Caitanya's divinity, ie, Caitanya being a combined avatara of Sri Krsna Himself and Sri Radha?

 

Bhw:As you probably know, Shri Vallabh was suppose to be the incarnation of the Lord's mouth - hence "spreading His word" - I tend to take all such eulogies of the disciples (of their own Guru) with a

pinch of salt. It is obviously ideal for a disciple / son to think of their guru / father as the Divine incarnate. But, its not ideal for them to force this on the rest of the population. Its almost as ridiculous as trying to say "my mum is better than your mum !"

 

[Jahnava Nitai Das 2]

Satyaraj posted a reply to your question, but I accidently erased it while trying to do some maintenance. Thats the second message this week I did that to.

 

Maybe he can repost what he said (about Vallabha sampradaya).

 

[talasiga 0]

Originally posted by Satyaraja dasa:

Dr.Jaya Sri Radhey wrote:

 

> Being a Bhaavuka Rasika devotee of Vraja Madhurya rasa, I am NOT worried about the DIVINITY of Sri

Caitanya. Actually I am trying hard to FORGET the Divinity of Lord Krishna as well as Caitanya.

My Gurudev kindly teaches his desciples that Lord is NOT God to His Lovers. Exalted Vrajavasis NEVER

remember the Divinity of Lord Krishna.

 

Satyaraj>Yes, indeed that is a beautiful individual expression of love, .............

 

Any comment on this dialog?

This is not a dialectic

It is a reality

that cannot be learned

All that can be taught

Is how little we understand

and putting labels on the windscreen

will bring us to crash

[Jahnava Nitai Das 2]

If its not too much trouble, maybe try making the speakers name bold, so we can easily see who is speaking. Something like this:

 

Satyaraj:

 

 

[jijaji 0]

Satya...

 

Please continue....

 

Again are you now a neo-vedantin..?

 

 

jijaji

 

------------------

PEACE NOW