Lord Caitanya as God

[Guest guest]

Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura has written in the concluding words of Shri

Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, His Life and Precepts:

 

"We leave it to our readers to decide how to deal with Mahaprabhu. The

Vaishnavas have accepted Him as the great Lord Krishna Himself...Those who are

not prepared to go with them may accept Nimai Pandit as a noble and holy

Teacher. That is all we want our readers to believe.

 

"We make no objection if we do not believe His miracles, as miracles alone never

demonstrate Godhead. Demons like Ravan and other have also worked miracles which

do not prove that they were gods. It is unlimited prem and its overwhelming

influence which would be seen in none but God Himself."

[Guest guest]

Hare Krishna

 

At the beginning of the 8th chapter of the Adi-lila Krsna Dasa

Kaviraja mentions that those who claim to worship Lord Krishna but do

not accept Lord Chaitanya are to be considered demons.

 

The verse says that in past jarasandha and others who performed vedic

rites etc and worshipped Vishnu, because they didn't accept Lord

Krishna were considered demons, so in the same way those who don't

accept Lord Chaitanya[and claim to worship Lord Krishna] are to be

understood as demons also.

 

It is 8th verse of 8th Chapter of Adi Lila CC.

 

Please can anyone check up this verse. And throw some light on, in

the view of above where does this leave the other sampradayas ? Are

they to be considered demons ?

 

 

Your Servant Always

Sumeet.

 

 

 

achintya, "rupavi" <rupavi@n...> wrote:

> Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura has written in the concluding words of

Shri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, His Life and Precepts:

>

> "We leave it to our readers to decide how to deal with Mahaprabhu.

The Vaishnavas have accepted Him as the great Lord Krishna

Himself...Those who are not prepared to go with them may accept Nimai

Pandit as a noble and holy Teacher. That is all we want our readers

to believe.

>

> "We make no objection if we do not believe His miracles, as

miracles alone never demonstrate Godhead. Demons like Ravan and other

have also worked miracles which do not prove that they were gods. It

is unlimited prem and its overwhelming influence which would be seen

in none but God Himself."

[Guest guest]

On Sat, 9 Aug 2003, sumeet1981 wrote:

> At the beginning of the 8th chapter of the Adi-lila Krsna Dasa

> Kaviraja mentions that those who claim to worship Lord Krishna but do

> not accept Lord Chaitanya are to be considered demons.

.. . .

> Please can anyone check up this verse. And throw some light on, in

> the view of above where does this leave the other sampradayas ? Are

> they to be considered demons ?

 

Not really. Acyutananda and Tamala Krsna Gosvami once brought this very

question up before Srila Prabhupada. His Divine grace answered that those in

other sampradayas may get bhakti in santa and dasya bhavas, rather than sakhya,

vatsalya and madhurya. That's a much softer stance than taking other

authoritative Vaisnavas as demons.

 

Another consideration is that there isn't really anything preventing any or all

of the other Vaisnava sampradayas from accepting Lord Caitanya as the Supreme

Lord, once the considerable evidence has simply been presented to them

appropriately; if even some ISKCON devotees haven't actually heard all the

pramanas about this, it wouldn't be beyond imagination that that many acaryas of

other groups simply haven't heard it yet either. Still, it isn't likely that

all will accept Mahaprabhu, since most are pretty well set in their respective

and centuries old paradigms.

 

MDd

[Guest guest]

In achintya, mpt@u... wrote:

 

> Not really. Acyutananda and Tamala Krsna Gosvami once brought

this very question up before Srila Prabhupada. His Divine grace

answered that those in other sampradayas may get bhakti in santa and

dasya bhavas, rather than sakhya, vatsalya and madhurya. That's a

much softer stance than taking other authoritative Vaisnavas as

demons.

 

Well this is his view. But how does he justfiy saying this in light

of the fact that those who reject to accept divinity of Lord

KrishnaChaitanya are considered demons. Krishnadas doesn't says that

they will get lower rasas. He says they are demons. His line of

reasoning is that those people who worshipped vishnu through rites

etc... but didn't accept Lordliness of Sri Krishna are considered

demons same way those who worship Sri Krishna but don't accept Sri

Chaitanya are to be accepted as demons. Can Srila Prabhupadas

comment be backed up by writings of Krishna Das or goswami ?

 

Whenever next time you give SPs reply to a particular question I

post, please give an appropriate scriptural backing for the same. In

the context of this question backing source can be scriptures which

are solely acknowledged within our sampradya.

 

 

>

> Another consideration is that there isn't really anything

preventing any or all of the other Vaisnava sampradayas from

accepting Lord Caitanya as the Supreme Lord, once the considerable

evidence has simply been presented to them appropriately; if even

some ISKCON devotees haven't actually heard all the pramanas about

this, it wouldn't be beyond imagination that that many acaryas of

other groups simply haven't heard it yet either. Still, it isn't

likely that all will accept Mahaprabhu, since most are pretty well

set in their respective and centuries old paradigms.

>

> MDd

 

The point is not whether others will accept it or not, but it is

that can we defend ourselves adequately against scriptural criticism

we face regarding Mahaprabhu. Its for that we need a Chaitanya

Sandarbha.

 

 

Your Servant Always

Sumeet.

[Guest guest]

achintya, "sumeet1981" <sumeet1981> wrote:

> Hare Krishna

>

> At the beginning of the 8th chapter of the Adi-lila Krsna Dasa

> Kaviraja mentions that those who claim to worship Lord Krishna but

do

> not accept Lord Chaitanya are to be considered demons.

>

> The verse says that in past jarasandha and others who performed

vedic

> rites etc and worshipped Vishnu, because they didn't accept Lord

> Krishna were considered demons, so in the same way those who don't

> accept Lord Chaitanya[and claim to worship Lord Krishna] are to be

> understood as demons also.

 

I don't have my CC with me at the moment. Does the verse refer

to "acceptance of Chaitanya" or "acceptance of Chaitanya as being the

same as Krishna?" I think we should be clear on this point.

 

I remember asking this question before in some other forum. Can't

remember where, exactly. The response I got was that one who is a

Vaishnava should accept Chaitanya at least as a devotee. It is the

one who cannot even do this who is considered a demon. Not that one

who does not accept Chaitanya as Krishna-avatara is demon.

 

- K

[Guest guest]

 

"Well this is his view. But how does he justfiy saying this in light of the fact

that those who reject to accept divinity of Lord KrishnaChaitanya are considered

demons. Krishnadas doesn't says that they will get lower rasas. He says they are

demons."

To say that the opinion offered by Srila Prabhupada requires us to question

whether it is so is not an appropriate way to approach siddhanta. We may

question HOW it is so. One who is situated in the parampara and who has

repeatedly established his purity and his commitment to speaking according to

guru, sadhu and sastra--his opinion is of great substance. If Krsna or His pure

representatives utter something we must try to reconcile it with other

statements according to sadhu and sastra and understand in what context it is

so. It is not our business, nor do we have the adhikara to question WHETHER

what Srila Prabhupada said is correct but we may try to understand HOW it is.

[MODERATOR NOTE: This list is open to just about everyone, including

non-Gaudiiyas, and it may be that some of them will question the validity of

what Srila Prabhupada says. They are allowed to do so, provided they remain

polite. However, in this case, I believe the original poster was not

questioning Srila Prabhupada's correctness, but simply looking for a

reconciliation as has been suggested.]

By the way, Krsnadasa Kaviraja does not in the Bengali say that those who do not

accept SCM as God are demons. He says that those who do not accept Him are

demons. In the purport Prabhupada emphasizes that those who want the

"perfection of Krsna consciousness" and to be "successful on the path of Krsna

consciousness" must understand SCM to be the Supreme Lord." This statement

could be reconciled with the statement cited about not achieving the higher

more intimate rasas. I see that he also states: "Similarly, one who does not

accept Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu as Krsna Himself is also a demon."

 

So we will have to examine all of Srila Prabhupada's statements on this topic as

well as the writings of the acaryas and come to a harmonious conclusion which

does not try to dismiss the opinions of such exalted souls.

 

Rupa-vilasa dasa

To from this group, send an email

to:achintyaAchintya Homepage:

achintyaDISCLAIMER: All postings appearing on

Achintya are the property of their authors, and they may not be cross-posted to

other forums without prior approval by said authors. Views expressed in Achintya

postings are those of their authors only, and are not necessarily endorsed by

the moderator or spiritual leaders of the Gaudiiya school. Your use of

Groups is subject to the

[Guest guest]

-achintya, "rupavi" <rupavi@n...> wrote:

> "Well this is his view. But how does he justfiy saying this in

light of the fact that those who reject to accept divinity of Lord

KrishnaChaitanya are considered demons. Krishnadas doesn't says that

they will get lower rasas. He says they are demons."

>

 

Hare Krishna

 

RVD, please read my statements again. I didn't challenge SP. All that

i said was "Well this is his view" which is so true. And then I asked

how does he justifies this in light of the fact that Krishnadas calls

them demons. So the actual question is how is SP correct without

changing Krishnadas statement.The question is not whether or not SP

is correct or incorrect. It is how is SP correct along with

Krishnadas.

 

And also, if a guru says something and i don't understand his point

scripturally or i can't reconcile it with known scripture, then i

have full right to ask for scriptural backing or further elaboration

as the case may be, so that i can understand the saying properly.

Even in Gita, Arjuna questions krishnas statement about him giving

the knowledge of yoga to visvasan, saying that your birth is recent

and suns is prior to you, so how can i understand you giving yoga

knowledge to visvasan. He doesn't says Krishna i don't believe you

and hence prompting Krishna to defend his position. But accetping

Krishna as his guru he says how may i understand you. He doesn't

makes guru defend but he makes guru clairfy or elaborate.

 

Same way Krishna das says this, SP says this. So how may i understand

SP in view of Krishnadas statement. Thus was my question. May be u

got the wrong sense because i used the word "justify" in my original

statement. However, i feel that i have made my point clear.

 

 

>By the way, Krsnadasa Kaviraja does not in the Bengali say that

those who do not accept SCM as God are demons. He says that those who

do not accept Him are demons. In the purport Prabhupada emphasizes

that those who want the "perfection of Krsna consciousness" and to

be "successful on the path of Krsna consciousness" must understand

SCM to be the Supreme Lord." This statement could be reconciled with

the statement cited about not achieving the higher more intimate

rasas. I see that he also states: "Similarly, one who does not accept

Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu as Krsna Himself is also a demon."

 

 

Can you please type the verse and relevant part of the purport over

here. Then we can understand what does SP wants to say and what does

Krishna das means.

 

>So we will have to examine all of Srila Prabhupada's statements on

this topic as well as the writings of the acaryas and come to a

harmonious conclusion which does not try to dismiss the opinions of

such exalted souls.

 

Agreed.

 

 

Your Servant Always

Sumeet.