Jiva-tattva Within Iskcon

[theist 1]

Yudhasthir being forced to lie "Aswattama is dead" is an example.

[Guest guest]

The general consensus within ISKCON is that the Jiva fell from the Spiritual World as a result of his desire to enjoy separately from Krishna. Also from his desire to be the master.

[Guest guest]

He didn't really lie if you look at the circumstances. He simply followed an instruction of Krishna and since Krishna is Himself the embodiment of Dharma or righteousness, how could anything that Yudhisthir said under Krishna's instruction constitute a lie?

 

And then, of course, there was an elephant named Aswattama, who had died.

 

 

Yudhasthir being forced to lie "Aswattama is dead" is an example.

[theist 1]

 

He didn't really lie if you look at the circumstances. He simply followed an instruction of Krishna and since Krishna is Himself the embodiment of Dharma or righteousness, how could anything that Yudhisthir said under Krishna's instruction constitute a lie?

 

And then, of course, there was an elephant named Aswattama, who had died.

 

Yes, but Kulapavanna said great souls must be forced into this kind of action. This is an example of that. Yudhasthira, I believe had to be convinced by Krsna personally to lie. It was not natural to him.And yes, that is perfect but is also the exception to the rule.

 

Problem is if we are not convinced ourselves then how can we convince others? We can't. Therefore we fall back on slick salesman techiniques to outright lying. People at large felt this and the krsna consciousness movement in the west suffered. Devotees were seen as just another cheating religion group like Rajneesh or Yoyo(is that we he calls himself now?). Oh I mean Osho.

 

Greatly unfortunate.

[sanatan 0]

 

The general consensus within ISKCON is that the Jiva fell from the Spiritual World as a result of his desire to enjoy separately from Krishna. Also from his desire to be the master.

 

That's what I was always taught in ISKCON; the conclusion made sense, especially in light of Christian teaching regarding the fall of mankind, therefore I never questioned it.

 

Too simple-minded, perhaps?

[Guest guest]

I fully agree with you that being in the conditioned state, we're not convinced ourselves, so to convince others we use salesman techniques. But the dvotees out n the streets that are distributing books (though perhaps not fully realized themselves) are a whole lot more elevated than the people that have no interest in Krishna consciousness at all. I'm certain you would agree with that. If we all have to wait to be fully convinced ouselves before trying to distribute Krishna consciousness, we may never get a chance because it could take a lifetime!

 

 

Yes, but Kulapavanna said great souls must be forced into this kind of action. This is an example of that. Yudhasthira, I believe had to be convinced by Krsna personally to lie. It was not natural to him.And yes, that is perfect but is also the exception to the rule.

 

Problem is if we are not convinced ourselves then how can we convince others? We can't. Therefore we fall back on slick salesman techiniques to outright lying. People at large felt this and the krsna consciousness movement in the west suffered. Devotees were seen as just another cheating religion group like Rajneesh or Yoyo(is that we he calls himself now?). Oh I mean Osho.

 

Greatly unfortunate.

[Guest guest]

Well, personally I never had a problem with that theory. Let me explain why- if we did not choose to come to the material world ourselves and therefore did not 'fall', it would mean we got put here by the Supreme Personality Himself. But why would the most merciful personality of all, whose compassion knows no bounds, place us in a world of misery? That we fell because of our own desire to be Lord and master seems like an acceptable theory.

 

In any case, Krishna does promise in the Bhagavad Gita that having returned to Vaikuntha, one will never 'fall' again, so we should just try to work our way back there

 

 

That's what I was always taught in ISKCON; the conclusion made sense, especially in light of Christian teaching regarding the fall of mankind, therefore I never questioned it.

 

Too simple-minded, perhaps?

[sanatan 0]

 

Well, personally I never had a problem with that theory. Let me explain why- if we did not choose to come to the material world ourselves and therefore did not 'fall', it would mean we got put here by the Supreme Personality Himself. But why would the most merciful personality of all, whose compassion knows no bounds, place us in a world of misery? That we fell because of our own desire to be Lord and master seems like an acceptable theory.

 

In any case, Krishna does promise in the Bhagavad Gita that having returned to Vaikuntha, one will never 'fall' again, so we should just try to work our way back there

 

The reason I found this to be so satisfactory an explanation was that it places the responsibility of choice for their material predicament squarely upon each individual, infinitely more common-sensible than:

 

A. Impersonalist/Voidist teaching...in some mystical and nebulous way, the Supreme that is actually each individual decides to "experience itself", gives up the position of omnipotent, omnipresent, and all-knowing Godhood, and voluntarily drifts into an eternity of material suffering and illusion...

 

B. Christian teaching....humanity at large is the totally involuntary and rather out-of-luck inheritor of the consequences of the God-displeasing actions of a pair of distant progenitors.

 

Contrary to Christian contention, Grace isn't excluded from the spiritual equation in our tradition....just receiving the Holy Names and having the inclination to chant them can be seen as tangible evidence that one has been the recipient of Causeless Mercy, Grace, or has been "Saved".

 

And yes, we do have to work at it, and so do the Christians...getting "Saved" is the beginning of spiritual life for them.

[Guest guest]

Prabhu,

 

Great post! Couldn't agree more

 

 

The reason I found this to be so satisfactory an explanation was that it places the responsibility of choice for their material predicament squarely upon each individual, infinitely more common-sensible than:

 

A. Impersonalist/Voidist teaching...in some mystical and nebulous way, the Supreme that is actually each individual decides to "experience itself", gives up the position of omnipotent, omnipresent, and all-knowing Godhood, and voluntarily drifts into an eternity of material suffering and illusion...

 

B. Christian teaching....humanity at large is the totally involuntary and rather out-of-luck inheritor of the consequences of the God-displeasing actions of a pair of distant progenitors.

 

Contrary to Christian contention, Grace isn't excluded from the spiritual equation in our tradition....just receiving the Holy Names and having the inclination to chant them can be seen as tangible evidence that one has been the recipient of Causeless Mercy, Grace, or has been "Saved".

 

And yes, we do have to work at it, and so do the Christians...getting "Saved" is the beginning of spiritual life for them.

[Guest guest]

 

Prabhu,

 

Great post! Couldn't agree more

 

Hare Krishna...glad to have someone see the point clearly, for a change!

 

On other spiritual forums I've had some knockdown arguments with Impersonalists and Christians regarding A. and B.

[Guest guest]

 

Do we know what it means to "fall"?

 

Is it like falling over a cliff where gravity pulls you downward?

 

Or is it like falling asleep and dreaming of being somewhere else while really remaining in the same room all the time?

 

Say I am on the beach at Goa but I start daydreaming of my life in New york City. I get so wrapped up in the daydream that I can hear the car horns honking, feel immersed in hustle and bustle of the crowd on the sidewalk passing by, and feel the sting of the cold winter air. So immersed in fact that I totally forget the beach I am sitting on, the ocean around me and the warm blue sky above.

 

In such a scenario where am I really? Have I fallen from Goa to Manhatten? Or am I still in Goa having never left?

 

If you can tell me where Srila Prabhupada says this very clearly in His books, I believe it, otherwise its just a dangerous speculation.

[Guest guest]

What is so dangerous about that post? It is merely an example to illustrate the different meanings to the word 'fall', in the spiritual sense. As someone said the other day (I think it was Theist), if everyone should just speak exactly what is written in Srila Prabhupada's books adn speak no other word, we wouldn't be very different from a parrot.

 

 

If you can tell me where Srila Prabhupada says this very clearly in His books, I believe it, otherwise its just a dangerous speculation.

[gHari 0]

Letter from ACBSP excerpt

Crow And Tal-Fruit Logic

 

We never had any occasion when we were separated from Krsna. Just like one man is dreaming and he forgets himself. In dream he creates himself in different forms: now I am the King discussing like that. This creation of himself is as seer and subject matter or seen, two things. But as soon as the dream is over, the "seen" disappears. But the seer remains. Now he is in his original position.

 

Our separation from Krsna is like that. We dream this body and so many relationships with other things. First the attachment comes to enjoy sense gratification. Even with Krsna desire for sense gratification is there. There is a dormant attitude for forgetting Krsna and creating an atmosphere for enjoying independently. Just like at the edge of the beach, sometimes the water covers, sometimes there is dry sand, coming and going. Our position is like that, sometimes covered, sometimes free, just like at the edge of the tide. As soon as we forget, immediately the illusion is there. Just like as soon as we sleep, dream is there.

 

We cannot say therefore that we are not with Krsna. As soon as we try to become Lord, immediately we are covered by Maya. Formerly we were with Krsna in His lila or sport. But this covering of Maya may be of very, very, very, very long duration, therefore many creations are coming and going. Due to this long period of time it is sometimes said that we are ever-conditioned. But his long duration of time becomes very insignificant when one actually comes to Krsna consciousness. Just like in a dream we are thinking very long time, but as soon as we awaken we look at our watch and see it has been a moment only. Just like with Krsna's friends, they were kept asleep for one year by Brahma, but when they woke up and Krsna returned before them, they considered that only a moment had passed.

 

So this dreaming condition is called non-liberated life, and this is just like a dream. Although in this material calculation it is a long, long period, as soon as we come to Krsna consciousness then this period is considered as a second. For example, Jaya and Vijaya. They had their lila with Krsna, but they had to come down for their little mistake. They were given mukti, emerging into the Brahmasayujya after being killed three times as demons. This Brahmasayujya mukti is non-permanent. Every living entity wants pleasure, but Brahmasayujya is minus pleasure. There is eternal existence only. So when they do not find transcendental bliss, they fall down to make a compromise with material bliss. Just like Vivekananda founded so many schools and hospitals. So even Lord Brahma, he is still material and wants to lord it over. He may come down to become a germ, but then he may rise up to Krsna consciousness and go back to home, back to Godhead. This is the position.

[theist 1]

 

If you can tell me where Srila Prabhupada says this very clearly in His books, I believe it, otherwise its just a dangerous speculation.

 

Guest, it makes no difference to me what you believe in this regard. Reread my previous posts if interested and you will clearly see I am talking on the platform of philosophical speculation and make no pretense as to final realization on the subject.

 

The heading on your post read, "there and here in the same time?"

 

I would ask you to consider the word time in your sentence. There is no illusory conception of time in the spiritual world. In the material world everything is sequential. Yesterday this was done and so now today must be done and tommorrow this other thing must be done. Therre is no past or future in the spiritual sky. Can you not conceive of that!? Well neither can I. Neither can any other time conditioned soul. That is the whole point. therefore this debate with some people challenging ISKCON's view and making a big stink over disagreeing with it as well as ISKCON's need to depend what they believe in this regard is a foolish disturbance and nothing more.

 

One who does understand it will tell enquirers that "they have to go there" to understand.

 

That should end the debate right there. The most we can do from our position is to try and go there as instructed and we may or may not want to philosophically speculate with others on the way, as we are doing here.

 

Thanks again to gHari who always posts The Crow and Tal-fruit Logic letter. gHari wasn't there another paragraph or two in the letter?

[Guest guest]

 

therefore this debate with some people challenging ISKCON's view and making a big stink over disagreeing with it as well as ISKCON's need to depend what they believe in this regard is a foolish disturbance and nothing more.

 

A lot of us view this differently and see the opposite to be true. Iskcon has made a huge issue over this, beginning in the early 80's, using it to discredit Srila Sridhara Maharaja, even going so far as to call him a mayavadi. They used it against one of "their own" in Srila Gour Govinda Maharaja, and they have also used it more recently in their position papers against Srila Narayana Maharaja, despite the fact that he rarely preaches on the topic. Devotees in Iskcon since the early 80's have been banned and/or made to feel most unwelcome, simply for not accepting the official GBC's version of jiva tattva. On the bright side, if these forums are any indicator, it seems that devotees within Iskcon, over the past year or so, have eased up just a bit and are at least willing to accept the possibility that the whole controversy is inconceivable, and not something to justify "spreading the hate" and causing sharp divides within the greater Vaishnava community.

[Guest guest]

I find it difficult to believe someone would call Srila Sridhara Maharaja a 'mayavadi' over a topic such as this. Sridhar Maharaja was one of the topmost devotees of Sri Krishna.

 

In any case, why would someone be banned from coming to a temple for having an opposite view? if that were the case, most people should be allowed into the temple because so many mayavadis and impersonalists come to the temple. A lot of them become devotees but to start with, they shouldn't be allowed into the temples because they have a different view!

 

In my opinion, the only ones that should be banned are the ones that cause a disturbance (ritviks, for example). Everyone else (regardless of their beliefs and even people from other religions) should be allowed.

 

 

A lot of us view this differently and see the opposite to be true. Iskcon has made a huge issue over this, beginning in the early 80's, using it to discredit Srila Sridhara Maharaja, even going so far as to call him a mayavadi. They used it against one of "their own" in Srila Gour Govinda Maharaja, and they have also used it more recently in their position papers against Srila Narayana Maharaja, despite the fact that he rarely preaches on the topic. Devotees in Iskcon since the early 80's have been banned and/or made to feel most unwelcome, simply for not accepting the official GBC's version of jiva tattva. On the bright side, if these forums are any indicator, it seems that devotees within Iskcon, over the past year or so, have eased up just a bit and are at least willing to accept the possibility that the whole controversy is inconceivable, and not something to justify "spreading the hate" and causing sharp divides within the greater Vaishnava community.

[Kulapavana 0]

 

A lot of us view this differently and see the opposite to be true. Iskcon has made a huge issue over this, beginning in the early 80's, using it to discredit Srila Sridhara Maharaja, even going so far as to call him a mayavadi. .

 

They were of course ignoring what Srila BHAKTISIDDHANTA SARASVATI THAKURA has written on the nature of jiva:

 

 

"Before acquiring material designations, the living entity is supremely pure. Even though he is not engaged in serving the Supreme Lord, he remains situated in the neutral position of santa-rasa due to his marginal nature. Though the living entity born from the marginal potency does not at that time exhibit a taste for serving the Lord due to a lack of knowledge of self-realization, his direct propensity of serving the Supreme Lord nevertheless remains within him in a dormant state. Though the indirect propensity of material enjoyment, which is contrary to the service of the Lord, is not found in him at that time, indifference to the service of Hari and the seed of material enjoyment, which follows that state of indifference, are nevertheless present within him. The living entity, who belongs to the marginal potency, cannot remain indifferent forever by subduing both devotional and non-devotional propensities. He therefore contemplates unconstitutional activities from his marginal position. As a sleeping person dreams that he is active in the physical world without actually being involved in activities, when the dormant indifferent living entity of the marginal potency exhibits even a little apathy to the service of the Supreme Lord and situates himself in a neutral, unchanging condition for even a little time, he is infected by impersonalism. That is why the conditioned soul desires to merge in the impersonal Brahman, thus exhibiting his mind's fickle nature. But due to neglecting the eternal service of the Lord and thereby developing the quality of aversion to the Lord, he cannot remain fixed in that position. In this way aversion to the Lord breaks his concentration of mind and establishes him as the master of this world of enjoyment. (From 'Brahmana & Vaisnava')

I find no better or more direct and unambiguous explanation of that issue than the above referenced quote. Perhaps the GBC thought that some of Srila Prabhupada's statements on this issue contradict those of his guru (but they do not, you just have to understand their context and intent) and refused to acknowledge it.

[stonehearted 0]

 

I find it difficult to believe someone would call Srila Sridhara Maharaja a 'mayavadi' over a topic such as this. Sridhar Maharaja was one of the topmost devotees of Sri Krishna.

I don't find it difficult to believe at all. I've heard it. I heard it back then, and more recently (about a year and a half ago) I heard a leading sannyasi/GBC/guru from ISKCON assert that Srila Prabhupada is the only disciple of Srila Sarasvati Thakura who was unhappy about Gaudiya Math's dissolution, and that all of his godbrothers became mayavadis and sahajiyas. I've been unable to get audio or a transcript of that talk, which was given in an ISKCON center on the occasion of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura's tirobhava anniversary.

[gHari 0]

Letter from ACBSP excerpt conclusion

Crow And Tal-Fruit Logic

 

So when I say Yes, there is eternal lila with Krsna, that means on the evidence of Jaya-Vijaya. Unless one develops full devotional service to Krsna, he goes up only up to Brahmasayujya but falls down. But after millions and millions of years of keeping oneself away from the lila of the Lord, when one comes to Krsna consciousness this period becomes insignificant, just like dreaming.

 

Because he falls down from Brahmasayujya, he thinks that may be his origin, but he does not remember that before that even he was with Krsna. So the conclusion is that whatever may be our past, let us come to Krsna consciousness and immediately join Krsna. Just like with a diseased man, it is a waste of time to try to find out how he has become diseased, better to spend time curing the disease.

 

On the top of the tree there is a nice tal-fruit. A crow went there and the fruit fell down, Some panditas, big big learned scholars saw this and discussed: the fruit fell due to the crow agitating the limb. No, the fruit fell simultaneously with the crow landing and frightened the crow so he flew away. No, the fruit was ripe and the weight of the crow landing broke it from the branch, and so on and so on. What is the use of such discussions? So whether you were in the Brahmasayujya or with Krsna in His lila, at the moment you are in neither, so the best policy is to develop your Krsna consciousness and go there, never mind what is your origin.

 

Brahmasayujya and Krsna lila--both may be possible, but when you are coming down from Brahmasayujya or when you are coming down from Krsna lila, that remains a mystery. But at the present moment we are in Maya's clutches, so at present our only hope is to become Krsna conscious and go back to Home, back to Godhead. The real position is servant of Krsna, and servant of Krsna means in Krsna lila. Directly or indirectly, always we are serving Krsna's lila. Even in dream. Just like we cannot go out of the sun when it is daytime, so where is the chance of going out of Krsna lila? The cloud may be there, it may become very gray and dim, but still the sunlight is there, everywhere, during the daytime. Because I am part and parcel of Krsna, I am always connected. My finger, even though it may be diseased, remains part and parcel of my body. Therefore, we try to treat it, cure it, because it is part and parcel. So Krsna comes Himself when we forget Him, or He sends His representative.

 

Awakening or dreaming, I am the same man. As soon as I awaken and see myself, I see Krsna. Cause and effect are both Krsna. Just like cotton becomes thread and thread becomes cloth, still, the original cause is cotton. Therefore, everything is Krsna in the ultimate sense. When we cannot contact Krsna personally, we contact His energies. So there is no chance to be outside Krsna's lila. But differences we see under different conditions. Just like in the pool of water and in the mirror the same me is reflecting, but in different reflections. One is shimmering, unsteady, one is clear and fixed. Except for being in Krsna consciousness, we cannot see our actual position rightly, therefore the learned man sees all living entities as the same parts and parcels of Krsna. Material existence is impersonal because my real personality is covered. But we should think that because I am now covered by this clay, I am diseased, and we should think that I must get to business to get myself uncovered, not wonder how I got this way. Now the fruit is there, take it and enjoy, that is your first business. God is not bound by cause. He can change, He is the Cause of all Causes. Now don't waste your time with this "Kaka taliya nyaya," crows and tal-fruit logic.

[gHari 0]

It seems we can possibly conclude from the quote from Srila Bhaktisiddhanta above, that a blade of grass in Goloka can fall into the material whirlpool.

[Guest guest]

 

It seems we can possibly conclude from the quote from Srila Bhaktisiddhanta above, that a blade of grass in Goloka can fall into the material whirlpool.

 

then Goloka is not a perfect abode and devotees are falling down by the billions and going to Hell.

If devotees are falling down by the billions from Goloka, then there is no perfection of Goloka and living entities there are fallible and not protected by Krishna.

There is death in Goloka as well, because if a devotee falls down from Goloka for millions and billions of years to suffer in the material world then he has in essence died and gone to Hell directly from Goloka.

 

Is this what the Gaudiya siddhanta teaches?

[gHari 0]

I don't see the 'death' bit, but we do have us another paradox about santa-rasa. We must remain calm about paradoxes for losing our intelligence will certainly not help. Maybe the grass and trees in Goloka are not in santa-rasa or maybe it is a different quality of santa-rasa, one that is actually chosen by the jiva.

[gHari 0]

 

"Before acquiring material designations, the living entity is supremely pure. Even though he is not engaged in serving the Supreme Lord, he remains situated in the neutral position of santa-rasa due to his marginal nature. [...] (From 'Brahmana & Vaisnava')

 

Kulapavana, do we know whether 'Brahmana & Vaisnava' was written directly in English or is it a translation?

[Guest guest]

 

I don't see the 'death' bit, but we do have us another paradox about santa-rasa. We must remain calm about paradoxes for losing our intelligence will certainly not help. Maybe the grass and trees in Goloka are not in santa-rasa or maybe it is a different quality of santa-rasa, one that is actually chosen by the jiva.

 

then you must be saying that one can be in Goloka yet forgetful of that.

I have heard this strange idea before.

Some say that we are actually in Goloka now but we just don't realize it.

they say that we can come to the material and reincarnate millions of times bouncing back and forth from heaven to Hell for billions of years and that is only the blink of an eye in Goloka.

 

Either way you cut it, even going to hell for the blink of an eye is still GOING TO HELL from Goloka and I do not buy that concept.

 

Even if it only takes the blink of an eye in Goloka to go to hell for millions of years in the material world, that is still NOT THE PERFECTION that all the shastra proclaims about Vaikuntha and Goloka.

 

It doen't matter if it is only the blink of an eye in Goloka.

In this world it seems like eternal damnation.

 

did you ever hear of "nitya-baddha" jivas?

Eternally conditoned?

 

If they were in Goloka before they fell, then how could they be called "nitya-baddha"?

[gHari 0]

Indeed, why are they ever called nitya-baddha? Is there no hope at all?

 

Why not use a name for yourself - the arrogance would appear less repugnant that way.