What's so achintya?

[Guest guest]

Dear devotees,

 

I would appreciate if anyone could provide references in Chaitanya

Chairtamrita, either in the verses or in purports, where the concept

of achintya bedha abedha tattva is discussed. Especially of interest

is the concept of the achintya-shakti.

 

thanks,

 

Krishna

[Guest guest]

Recently in another forum, someone put the question to me of the

meaning of "achintya" in "achintya bheda abheda." Basically, by

explaining how bheda and abheda (difference and nondifference) are

both correct in defining the relationship between the Lord and His

dependent entities, it seems that we have made the relationship

conceivable. For example, we explain that as a drop of water is to

the ocean, so also are the jiivas are to God. Perfect. I understand

it now - qualitative oneness but quantitative difference.

 

So, what exactly is so inconceivable about it? Since the relationship

is perfectly explained, why do we invoke "achintya" to describe the

bheda abheda relationship?

 

Are we meant to think that Achintya really refers to something else,

or specifically to the relationship, i.e. that the relationship is

like this but actually it is inconceivable?

 

Any thoughts are most appreciated. Of special interest would be any

quotes by Srila Prabhupada where he specifically comments

on "Achintya."

 

yours,

 

- K

[Guest guest]

achintya, "krishna_susarla"

<krishna_susarla@h...> wrote:

> Recently in another forum, someone put the question to me of the

> meaning of "achintya" in "achintya bheda abheda." Basically, by

> explaining how bheda and abheda (difference and nondifference) are

> both correct in defining the relationship between the Lord and His

> dependent entities, it seems that we have made the relationship

> conceivable. For example, we explain that as a drop of water is to

> the ocean, so also are the jiivas are to God. Perfect. I understand

> it now - qualitative oneness but quantitative difference.

 

Well Prabhuji "qualitative oneness but quantitative difference" is

not achintya bheda-abheda.

 

Even madhvas agree with qualitative oneness and quantitative

difference. For example two things like a water pond and ocean can be

qualitatively one, yet quantitatively different. But any person with

sane mind knows that there is absolute difference between the two

despite qualitative similarity and quantitative difference.

Qualitative similarity is not abedha of srutis.

 

 

 

 

> So, what exactly is so inconceivable about it? Since the

relationship

> is perfectly explained, why do we invoke "achintya" to describe the

> bheda abheda relationship?

>

> Are we meant to think that Achintya really refers to something

else,

> or specifically to the relationship, i.e. that the relationship is

> like this but actually it is inconceivable?

>

> Any thoughts are most appreciated. Of special interest would be any

> quotes by Srila Prabhupada where he specifically comments

> on "Achintya."

>

> yours,

>

> - K

 

Well, I am collecting evidences and preparing a post on achintya

bheda abheda and will present that shortly.

 

Your Servant Always

Sumeet.

[Guest guest]

>So, what exactly is so inconceivable about it? Since the relationship >is

perfectly explained, why do we invoke "achintya" to describe the >bheda abheda

relationship?>Are we meant to think that Achintya really refers to something

else, >or specifically to the relationship, i.e. that the relationship is >like

this but actually it is inconceivable?Srila Jiva Goswami in his Bhagavat

Sandarbha quotes from Vishnu Purana & says that everything in relation to the

Lord & his potencies is 'achintya jnana go chara.'

Hence it is achintya alright, but it is also 'jnana go chara' - can be know by

the senses. Which means that it is inconceivable but at the same time it is not

unknowable. Hence one can just simply explain it. But cannot conceive it. Just

for ex: Arjuna is able to glorify Krishna as" Param Brahma Param Dhama etc,

bcos he has known it with his senses from various authorities. But the moment

Krishna starts showing his universal form, it becomes inconceivable as to how

His simple friend could be such a great personailty.

 

Another example can be Lord Brahma in the Brahma Vimohana Lila: Once he starts

seeing the pastimes of Krishna, he says it is inconceivable.Hence one can know

that Krishna is achintya,speak of him as achintya but has not realised Him to

be achintya. when the Lord reveals himself then they understand that it is

achintya.

 

I'll try & revert with Srila Prabhupada's comments on achintya.

 

Thanks

 

Narasimhan

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

In Srila Prabhupada’s new Vyasa-puja book, H.H. Giriraja Maharaja writes that at

the 1971 Kumbhamela, Madhudvisa and Yamuna had some disagreement about Krsna and

Balarama. Madhusvisa asserted that because color is the only diference between

Krsna and Balarama, they’re actually the same. Yamuna however argued that

because Krsna is the exclusive enjoyer of Radharani, they’re actually different.

Eventually, Tamala Krsna Gosvami took the matter before Srila Prabhupada. When

Tamala Krsna Maharaja gave Madhudvisa’s argument, Srila Prabhupada acknowledged,

“Yes, he’s right.” Tamala Krsna Maharaja then presented Yamuna’s argument, and

Srila Prabhupada again assented, “Yes, she’s right.” “But Srila Prabhupada,”

Tamala Ksna Maharaja pointed out, “these two views aren’t compatible; they’re

different--one of them has to be right and the other one wrong.” Srila

Prabhupada said, “Yes, you’re right.” Hearing this, Tamala Krsna Gosvami asked,

“Then which one is right?” Srila Prabhu!

pada answered, “You decide.”

 

 

MDd

[Guest guest]

Any developments on this?

 

Aravind.

> So, what exactly is so inconceivable about it? Since the relationship > is

perfectly explained, why do we invoke "achintya" to describe the > bheda abheda

relationship?> > Are we meant to think that Achintya really refers to something

else, > or specifically to the relationship, i.e. that the relationship is >

like this but actually it is inconceivable?> > Any thoughts are most

appreciated. Of special interest would be any > quotes by Srila Prabhupada

where he specifically comments > on "Achintya."> > yours,> > - KWell, I am

collecting evidences and preparing a post on achintya bheda abheda and will

present that shortly.Your Servant AlwaysSumeet.

Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Messenger