The difference

[yasodanandana 0]

I)guru (living and present... diksa and siksa.. better if the direct dialogue is possible)

II)shastra(vedas, itihasas, puranas etc. and books of the acharyas)

III)sadhus (the tradition, the masters of the parampara', autoritative devotees and gurus)

 

this is, imho, the source of knowledge and what gives, if one is a serious follower, legitimation to speak

 

of course there's freedom to speak for everyone, because more or less, maya is the companion of everyone, and the above following has to be not only formal... but this is the standard

[anadi 0]

OBJECTION 9: Srila Prabhupada and Srila NarayaNa MahArAja have

different teachings about the original position of the jiva (the

individual soul).

REFUTATION 9 part 4 :

 

“From authoritative sources it can be discerned that associates of

Lord ViSNu who descend from Vaikuntha do not actually fall. They

come with the purpose of fulfilling the desire of the Lord, and their

descent to this material world is comparable to that of the Lord. The

Lord comes to this material world through the agency of His internal

potency, and similarly, when a devotee or associate of the Lord

descends to this material world, he does so through the action of

the spiritual energy. Any pastime conducted by the Supreme

Personality of Godhead is an arrangement by yogamayA, not

mahAmayA. Therefore it is to be understood that when Jaya and

Vijaya descended to this material world, they came because there

was something to be done for the Supreme Personality of Godhead.

Otherwise it is a fact that NO ONE FALLS FROM VAIKUNTHA .”

<font color="red"> (Srimad BhAgavatam 7.1.35) </font color>

[Guest guest]

gaurasundara first quotes me then replies

thus,

--

 

the funny thing about all of this is your intensity,

you reeeaaalllly think this is what bhakti is all about.

 

"it would be so horrible to not be a gopi,just a queen ?

yuck, not me,i'm to good for that,i'm special,the most special,i reject those lesser mortals who will "ONLY"

be with Krsna in dwarka,in palace life,wealth,etc,

while I'll be in Vraja,REALLY enjoying."

 

 

--your inspired reply;

 

I never said anything of the sort. Look, do us all a favour and read the books of Srila Prabhupada. He himself is the one who informs us that the rasas are progressively higher than the previous due to intimacy with Krishna that is free from awe and reverence. Also, consider the conversation between Mahaprabhu and Ramananda Raya:

 

"The Lord said, 'Your statements are certainly getting better and better one after the other, but surpassing all of them is another transcendental mellow, and you can speak of that as the most sublime." Ramananda Raya then replied, 'Conjugal attachment for Krsna is the topmost position in love of Godhead.'" - CC Madhya 8.79

 

The point here is that pure love of God is fully relished when there is pure intimacy, and the qualities of awe and reverence are conspicuous by their absence. The relationships of the Queens of Dvaraka certainly have awe and reverence present in them, and even though their mellow is conjugal it is still svakiya. Only the gopis are on the level of parakiya-rasa. And parakiya-rasa, by definition, is far more exciting than svakiya-rasa.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

 

 

as usual you miss the point,or rather you ignore it,

 

your insistence all along has been concerning the qualifications for the 'highest' sadhana,

the greed or desire to be a manjari,to associate

with Krsna as a manjari,this has been your contention,

with some side issues.

 

your attitude is that of trying to exploit bhakti

for the purpose of attaining the "highest possible

position", claiming that attitude as being the

only qualification that you need to gain

entrance into the path of the perfected,raganuga.

 

you dismissed the people of Dwarka or other places

as being some kind of lesser "attainment",insisting

that Mahaprabhu came to give out the path of raganuga

in the form of mentally conditioning oneself and

meditating on the idea of oneself being a manjari

in a fantasy form of "sadhana" that requires

you to consider yourself as a manjari in vraja

while somehow or another imagining some kind of mental

Vrndavana with a fantasy meditation....

 

this is how you have presented your case.

 

I simply pointed that fact out.

 

you then quote a verse mentioning the highest rasa

is that which is shown by the inhabitants of Vraja,

the casual rasa,without the "awe and reverance"

the queens of dwarka felt for Krsna,(if the queens

are in fact womanly forms of Krsna,why would they

feel awe or reverence ?)

 

then you tell us that "parakiya is far MORE exiciting

then swakiya"

 

and also say "the point is that pure love of God is

fully relished when there is an absence of awe

and reverence"

 

of course in your vision the queens have awe and reverence,

but even though they are in the conjugal rasa they

are still "relishing" less then Yasoda or Nanda,after

all they have no awe or reverence,doest that mean the

least intimate rasa in Vraja is "more relishable"

then the most intimate rasa elsewhere ?

 

But i digress,after all your "point" was that

those in Vraja due to being more casual are

better placed for "relishing".

 

And after all that was the whole point of Mahaprabhus

lila, to inspire you to reject all other ideals for the single minded

attempt to enjoy rasa in Vraja.

 

am i missing something here sawamiji ?

 

 

maybe i am crazy,after all I see the gopis and the queens

as being exactly the same in their rasa with Krsna,

since they are all Krsna himself,in female forms,

really when you come down to it,

we're talking about one person,many forms,

parakiya..svakiya, gopis...queens..Krsna....

one person....many forms....where is the real rasa..

what is real...and what is an illusion....

that is the question...isn't it ?

 

 

[anadi 0]

OBJECTION 9: Srila Prabhupada and Srila NarayaNa MahArAja have

different teachings about the original position of the jiva (the

individual soul).

REFUTATION 9 part 4 :

There is no mayA at all in Goloka VRndävana dhAma. Srila

PrabhupAda often quotes Srila ViSvanAtha CakravartipAda ThAkura’s

relevant verse

 

arAdhyo bhagavAn vrajeSa-tanayas tad-dhAma vRndävanam .

 

There Srila CakravartipAda says that KRSNa’s abode is

as worshipable as KRSNa Himself. As there is no mayA in the

transcendental body of Vrajendra-nandana Sri KRSNa, this is also true

for His abode. Srila CakravartipAda says there that this is the opinion

of Sri Caitanya MahAprabhu and that he is not interested in anyone

else’s opinion. Srimad BhAgavatam (1.1.1) states:

 

“dhAmnA svena sadA nirasta-kuhakaA satyaA paraA dhima hi –

 

KRSNa’s abode is

forever free from maya, so no one there can be deviated from their

constitutional position of loving servitude.”

 

<font color="red"> “The CONCLUSION is that no one falls from the spiritual world, or

Vaikuntha planet, for it is the eternal abode.</font color> ” <font color="blue"> (Srimad-BhAgavatam

3.16.26) </font color>

 

This article is a reply to the paper entitled “ISKCON’s position on Srila NArAyaNa MahArAja” by His Grace Badri-nArAyaNa Prabhu.

 

The following article will examine, one by one, the points made in that paper, in the light of scriptural evidence and the statementsof Srila Prabhupada himself. Statements of the ISKCON position paper will be refered to as OBJECTION, and ours as REFUTATION.

[anadi 0]

Dear Gaurasundara,

 

you have no chance to explain anything in one to one argument, because of the(ir) ahankara.

They can twist your words as Duryodhana twisted the meaning of his deeds proving the Pandavas to be the wrong ones.

Virtue is sinn, and sinn is virtuous.

 

Although The master of twisting remains the Whirlwind twister Trinavarta.

[Gaurasundara 0]

 

Dear Gaurasundara,

 

you have no chance to explain anything in one to one argument, because of the(ir) ahankara.

They can twist your words as Duryodhana twisted the meaning of his deeds proving the Pandavas to be the wrong ones.

Virtue is sinn, and sinn is virtuous.

 

 

Agreed. There is no talking to such ignorant people. It is a shame that such people pretend to hav knowledge of rasika-topics when they clearly have not stuided the tikas of Visvantha, etc. The latest jibes about my "non-qualification" to speak on Gaudiya siddhanta is based on pure envy and foolishness. What else remains to be done?

[Guest guest]

We are closing this thread.