Jiva-tattva Within Iskcon

[gHari 0]

 

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"?

I'm not saying any of that stuff. I'm saying we have a paradox. PARADOX. p a r a d o x. A paradox. Slow down. Get rational. Forget the adrenalin.

[Guest guest]

 

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

 

The English translation is by Bhumipati.

[Kulapavana 0]

 

Letter from ACBSP: "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."

 

a few thoughts:

 

1. Jaya and Vijaya's case is without doubt unique and part of the leela. There are no other examples of such fall-downs in the Bhagavatam or other shastras, at least as far as I know. To conclude that everybody here in material world fell down from Vaikuntha like Jaya and Vijaya is quite radical, to say the least.

 

2. Prabhupada is saying that first we fell down from Vaikuntha, then - and only then - we fell down from Brahman. That resolves the first part of apparent inconsistency with the pretty much universal view of the previous acharyas as presented in the quote from Srila Bhaktisiddhanta (we all fell from Brahman).

 

3. The second apparent inconsistency (Bhaktisiddhanta clearly says that our original position is shanta or indifference, Prabhupada says it is dasya, or service) can be solved using the construct of subsequent falls (as in the second point) or argued that SP said so to make a point in his preaching efforts. Surely it is easier to induce people to take up devotional service if that is supposed to be our original position. But the devotional service is our intended position - a relatively minor and subtle difference. After all, what is the use of us returning to Brahman? Only to fall down again?

 

 

Prabhupada did not shy away from telling people things that were not "the whole truth, and only the truth" in order to keep them inspired in devotional life. Perhaps this "controversy" is one of them. It seems that way to me, anyway. Perhaps SP used the Jaya and Vijaya story to construct an inspirational rather than a purely scriptural explanation to the fall of jiva question.

 

For me, it is a mute point to a large degree. I'm not more inspired by one version or another, but the Brahman version seems a lot more plausible to me.

 

And btw. Jaya and Vijaya did NOT fall down - they were cursed to fall down, and they were most certainly not envious or jealous of Lord Vishnu...

[gHari 0]

Kulapavana, the santa-rasa jivas referred to by Srila Bhaktisiddhanta, the ones who can fall into material life, would you think they include all santa-rasa jivas - like the trees in Goloka?

[Kulapavana 0]

 

..the santa-rasa jivas referred to by Srila Bhaktisiddhanta, the ones who can fall into material life, would you think they include all santa-rasa jivas - like the trees in Goloka?

 

I dont think so. Many Gaudiyas say that there is no santa rasa in Goloka. There seems to be a lot of differentiation in each rasa, and santa is no exception. It is all a flowing spectrum, with no distinct boundaries. The most basic santa rasa is in Brahman, where the essence of the relationship is awe (appreciation of Brahman effulgence) and neutrality (we are all one).

 

The rasa of trees in Goloka is infinitely deeper - they see and hear Krsna, they touch Him with their branches... how can that be neutrality in terms of emotion? There may be no active service on their part, but they do serve in a passive and willing way. So their position is actually a lot closer to dasya rasa.

[theist 1]

 

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.

 

My apologies to Guest. I did not intend on disturbing your mind. I have never been an Iskcon insider and after 1978 have never discussed these matters with anyone in Iskcon, occasionally going for Deity darshan and nothing more. I became aware of the controversie on the advent of the internet and from there it seemed that one group in particular was aggressively challenging Iskcon's position.

 

For anyone to call BR Sridhar Maharaja a "mayavadi" is a horrendous offense IMO.

 

After your post above and Babhru's confirmation of the facts I realize my mistake in even referring to this point of contention between parties. My bad. I certainly don't want to start this up again here.

 

Gossip is a form poison even materially. Malicious gossip pointed to a Spiritually realized devotee of Krsna is certain suicide for the speaker of it and willfully drinking of poison to those who try to enjoy it as some form of nectar. We wish to be in neither position.

[theist 1]

 

2. Prabhupada is saying that first we fell down from Vaikuntha, then - and only then - we fell down from Brahman. That resolves the first part of apparent inconsistency with the pretty much universal view of the previous acharyas as presented in the quote from Srila Bhaktisiddhanta (we all fell from Brahman).

 

In a sense falling through the brahmajyoti. Afterall as I understand it the spiritual form is based on one's desire to relate to Krsna in a certain mood. Cowherd boys are boys and not gopis. All based solely on Krsna's pleasure. If one desires to be the enjoyer instead of the enjoyed how could he maintain a form based totally on a particular rasa with Krsna? I believe at this point he falls into the brahmajyoti.

 

But it is not that someone suddenly disappears from Goloka and then in some great distant furure reappears. There is no such time consideration in the Spiritual Sky.

 

Souls from the material side can rise up into brahmasujya and then fall again to earth many times. In a similar way I believe that souls who fell into the Brahman from the Spiritual Sky side can reenter the Spiritual Sky from the Brahman without ever coming to the material side.

 

Falling into the Brahman from Vaikuntha is the real fall. Much more so than the fall from the Brahman into the material side.

 

Again PHILOSOPHICAL SPECULATION ONLY for conversation sake.

[Guest guest]

Well, it's very disappointing to hear that comments like that were made as recently as 1 1/2 years back. In the early years of the movement, little was known about the Godbrothers of Prabhupada. But with the advent of the internet, much more information has been made available about Prabhupada's Godbrothers and their disciples. It's quite plain to see that a lot of them are actually very pure and advanced devotees. So to continue saying that they're all fallen is just absurd. Whichever GBC/Guru said that ... I wonder if he was speaking about someone in particular but issued a general statement.

 

 

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.

[Guest guest]

 

... So to continue saying that they're all fallen is just absurd. Whichever GBC/Guru said that ... I wonder if he was speaking about someone in particular but issued a general statement.

 

 

 

the "guru" in question is well known for his propaganda speeches. he used to be one of main Kirtanananda's cheerleaders at one time, pushing the party line with all his intelectual genius...

[stonehearted 0]

 

Well, it's very disappointing to hear that comments like that were made as recently as 1 1/2 years back. . . . I wonder if he was speaking about someone in particular but issued a general statement.

He mentioned no names; rather, he generalized, or perhaps it's more accurate to say overgeneralized. And the way he put it was "all.Only Srila Prabhupada" was sincere; "all" others became mayavadis and sahajiyas. He was that direct. It was disgusting. Moreover, most of the devotees present applauded his aparadha as a great way to "glorify" Srila Prabhupada and Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura. I was, I found as I tried to get out of the temple as fast as I could, not the only person present who was disturbed by this man's speech.

[stonehearted 0]

the "guru" in question is well known for his propaganda speeches. he used to be one of main Kirtanananda's cheerleaders at one time, pushing the party line with all his intelectual genius...

It's not genius; it's flim-flam. He's very bright, very clever, but I don't see that he's a genius. Watching him speak is among the most bizarre experiences I've ever had. He speaks with his eyes closed, and when he does open them, he looks up at the ceiling. There's no real contact with the audience. And he laughs first and hardest at his "jokes." I guess he has a reputation not only for being clever but for being somewhat progressive among ISKCON leaders. They can have him. I prefer other company. As you say, he's a propagandist; he is not a teacher.

[Guest guest]

 

Kulapavana, the santa-rasa jivas referred to by Srila Bhaktisiddhanta, the ones who can fall into material life, would you think they include all santa-rasa jivas - like the trees in Goloka?

 

These souls can never fall down.

[Guest guest]

 

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"?

 

what does this mean? that these jivas have no hope of escaping reincarnation cycle, or have been in reincarnation cycle in the past (eternally) but can reach Goloka by surrendering to Krsna? PLEASE explain.

[Guest guest]

 

what does this mean? that these jivas have no hope of escaping reincarnation cycle, or have been in reincarnation cycle in the past (eternally) but can reach Goloka by surrendering to Krsna? PLEASE explain.

 

A.=2., (eternaly=since time imemmorial)

[Guest guest]

The souls in the material world are called nitya-baddha or eternally conditioned.

 

Souls in Vaikuntha are called nitya mukta.

 

What meaning is there in the term, "nitya" in the phrase "nitya mukta" if those souls can fall down into samsara.

 

Further, why would there be a distinction in scripture, where the Acharyas tell us there are two types of souls, nitya mukta and nitya baddha, if souls who are right now "nitya mukta" may, in the future, fall down into samsara?

 

It is absurd to call them nitya mukta if they are capable of falling from Vaikuntha and becoming cockroaches who eat stool. If there is a prospect that they can fall, the word "nitya" is meaningless.

 

Nitya baddha souls have never been to Vaikuntha - so they are perpetually in illusion. Nitya baddha.

 

The absurdity of this whole issue is laughable.

[gHari 0]

Then is not 'nitya'-baddha also absurd?

[theist 1]

 

The souls in the material world are called nitya-baddha or eternally conditioned.

 

Souls in Vaikuntha are called nitya mukta.

 

What meaning is there in the term, "nitya" in the phrase "nitya mukta" if those souls can fall down into samsara.

 

Further, why would there be a distinction in scripture, where the Acharyas tell us there are two types of souls, nitya mukta and nitya baddha, if souls who are right now "nitya mukta" may, in the future, fall down into samsara?

 

It is absurd to call them nitya mukta if they are capable of falling from Vaikuntha and becoming cockroaches who eat stool. If there is a prospect that they can fall, the word "nitya" is meaningless.

 

Nitya baddha souls have never been to Vaikuntha - so they are perpetually in illusion. Nitya baddha.

 

The absurdity of this whole issue is laughable.

 

But the joke is on you.

 

When the soul is in the material dream it is totally cut off from it's realization of it's own spiritual existence. It remembers only small portions of it's material existence. So in that sense it is as good as eternally conditioned. Just like in a night dream one has no knowledge of the awakened state. Nitya-baddha.

 

When absorbed in Krsna consciousness that same soul has no sense of the material world in a similar way. Nitya-mukta.

 

Then when you understand that the time conception is illusory you can understand it further.

[Guest guest]

What is the name of this 'guru'?

 

 

the "guru" in question is well known for his propaganda speeches. he used to be one of main Kirtanananda's cheerleaders at one time, pushing the party line with all his intelectual genius...

[stonehearted 0]

 

What is the name of this 'guru'?

If you email me privately and are willing to identify yourself, I may tell you. I'm not interested in starting anything here. Those who know who he is don't have any doubts. There's no reason to disturb others' faith unnecessarily.

[Guest guest]

Dear Babhru prabhu,

 

I understand that there is no reason to disturb others faith. I was just curious who it might be. I think we should just let it go. If my curiosity rears its head again, I'll send you a private email

 

 

If you email me privately and are willing to identify yourself, I may tell you. I'm not interested in starting anything here. Those who know who he is don't have any doubts. There's no reason to disturb others' faith unnecessarily.

[Guest guest]

 

But the joke is on you.

 

...It remembers only small portions of it's material existence. So in that sense it is as good as eternally conditioned. Just like in a night dream one has no knowledge of the awakened state. Nitya-baddha.

 

When absorbed in Krsna consciousness that same soul has no sense of the material world in a similar way. Nitya-mukta.

 

Then when you understand that the time conception is illusory you can understand it further.

The joke seems to be on everyone, Theist. I don't see any contradiction between, " Nitya baddha souls have never been to Vaikuntha - so they are perpetually in illusion. Nitya baddha" and "when you understand that the time conception is illusory you can understand it further". Both concepts seem simultaneouly one and different. But the statement that "no one ever falls from Vaikuntha" is quite straight forward.

[theist 1]

 

The joke seems to be on everyone, Theist. I don't see any contradiction between, " Nitya baddha souls have never been to Vaikuntha - so they are perpetually in illusion. Nitya baddha" and "when you understand that the time conception is illusory you can understand it further". Both concepts seem simultaneouly one and different. But the statement that "no one ever falls from Vaikuntha" is quite straight forward.

 

I see a big difference. The point is there is no past or future in the spiritual world. This subject cannot be understood by thinking sequentially. Because of the fact that there is no time conditioning there we can say no one ever falls.

 

If you dream that you are falling into a fiery volcano does that mean you are? When you wake up you see that you never left your bedroom and are thankful that it "was only a scarey dream."

 

I am convinced that we have to catch this by inspired intuition and not by mental speculation.

[theist 1]

I personally am not trying convince anyone of the rightness of my thoughts on the matter. What I do want to do is show that those who mock the Iskcon position really have no argument that holds up to prove their position is absolute. Therefore as a subject for debate this one is a non- starter and should be dropped. All we can do is engage in some philosophical speculation on it until Krsna gives us the realization.

[gHari 0]

My gut feel remains: if it feels like HOME, then it is.

[Guest guest]

 

I personally am not trying convince anyone of the rightness of my thoughts on the matter. What I do want to do is show that those who mock the Iskcon position really have no argument that holds up to prove their position is absolute. Therefore as a subject for debate this one is a non- starter and should be dropped. All we can do is engage in some philosophical speculation on it until Krsna gives us the realization.

 

The ISKCON position is the position that is stated in the books of Srila Prabhupada, the same position that all the Vaishnava acharyas and great sages have understood since the beginning of Vedic knowledge.

 

That position is well explained in the books of Srila Prabhupada.

 

The predominant ISKCON position that eternal associates of Krishna are falling down by the trillions of billions to become microbes or worms in stool is NOT based upon shastric reference.

 

It is a misconception.

If such a misconception is the ISKCON position, then so be it, but if the ISKCON position cannot be supported with shastra then really the ISKCON position is no position at all.