Guest guest Posted January 24, 2006 Report Share Posted January 24, 2006 I offer my hmble obeisances to all the members of the group, Here I'm expressing my views that seem to me as Mayavada in Gaudia Vaishnava Philosophy. I request U plz to throw light on this subject matter. 1.It accepts all avataas are not of full knowledge and bliss (avataras of Lord Krishna). Lord Buddha not same as Krishna. So krishna is superior in terms of attributes possesed compared to Buddha.This is what I mean from above.Is it not possible that Lord Krishna is inherent in Lord Buddha. 2.Jiva as part and parcel of of Superme personality of Godhead How is this possible, is it not part of ultimate purity is Supreme pure whole. 3.In Gaudia philosophy there exisits a concept of Svaamsha and Vibhinna Amsha. Vibhinna Amsha means part and parcel do you agree this statement of Srila Prabhupaad. Lord's Amsha is not diffrent from Lord in other words its Lord only. His legs his eyes are not different from him. A part of supreme is not different from the whole. So it is the Supreme itself. In other words its equivalent to say that i'm God. Hence mayavada. If Bhagavan's part and parcel(Bhagavan) are to suffer in the material world in the gutters of street it doesn't behold the position of Lord in other words Bhagavan is not jnanamai and anandamai. This is what I mean!!! 4.Here jiva before coming into material World are accepted as to be as pure as Lord himself. I'm not convinced withthis statement of Prabhupaad. 5. Jiva is accepted as a drop in mighty ocean which are susceptible to come under the influence of,Maya.But the Supreme Lord doesn't come under it. . Since both Lord and jiva are from the same ocean(example). Why only jiva(drop) why not Lord(mighty)?. Quality and quantity both are one and the same in terms of Ultimate pure. In otherwords lord's minute divine purity (jiva) is trapped in maya is equivalent to Lord's part getting trapped in maya is equivalent to Lord getting trapped!?. This what my understanding is. 6. Jivas original nature is accepted as Shudda sattva. I've not got how?. 7. It follows Vishistadvaitic Traditions more than that of Madhva Traditions. It mentions many of the Madhva Yatis in the lineage but do follow do have links with Ramanuja's philosophy than Madhva?. Plz throw light on this matter. 8.Jivas are said to be exisiting at thatastha and at this position jivas are said to be as pure as Lord!. Plz throw light on this matter. 9. It is accepted here, as in Ramanuja tradition that jivas are in indolent state before comng to the Material World. Jivas are given the free will (liberty) to select wether Vaikunta or Material world. Plz throw light on this matter. Expecting reply, All glories to Nitai Gauranga. Send instant messages to your online friends http://in.messenger. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 25, 2006 Report Share Posted January 25, 2006 Dear Prabhu, In a message dated 1/25/2006 12:34:15 AM Eastern Standard Time, prad_1982 writes: 1.It accepts all avataas are not of full knowledge and bliss (avataras of Lord Krishna). Actually, according to Gaudiya philosophy, all avataras are intrinsically the same. In his Bhaktirasamrtasindhu, Rupa Gosvami states "Though from the point of view of philosophy (theology), the Lord of Sri and Krishna are nondifferent." Lord Buddha not same as Krishna. So krishna is superior in terms of attributes possesed compared to Buddha.This is what I mean from above.Is it not possible that Lord Krishna is inherent in Lord Buddha. More accurately, because Buddha is sakyavesha-avatara (a jiva empowered by the Lord), Krishna's energy is inherent in Buddha. > 2.Jiva as part and parcel of of Superme personality of Godhead How is this possible, is it not part of ultimate purity is Supreme pure whole. "Part and parcel" is a translation of the word "amsha" which means part. However, Srila Prabhupada states at the beginning of Bhagavad-gita 2.12p, that this does not imply the material conception of a broken piece of a greater object. That would be the type of Mayavada called bheda-abheda. > 3.In Gaudia philosophy there exisits a concept of Svaamsha and Vibhinna Amsha. Vibhinna Amsha means part and parcel do you agree this statement of Srila Prabhupaad. Lord's Amsha is not diffrent from Lord in other words its Lord only. His legs his eyes are not different from him. A part of supreme is not different from the whole. So it is the Supreme itself. In other words its equivalent to say that i'm God. Hence mayavada. No, the vibhinna-amsha is not identical to svamshas of the Lord. >4.Here jiva before coming into material World are accepted as to be as pure as Lord himself. I'm not convinced withthis statement of Prabhupaad. This means that every jiva has an intrinsic svarupa that is as pure as the Lord. The jiva doesn't have to "get" this from some an external source. >5. Jiva is accepted as a drop in mighty ocean which are susceptible to come under the influence of,Maya.But the Supreme Lord doesn't come under it. . Since both Lord and jiva are from the same ocean(example). Why only jiva(drop) why not Lord(mighty)?. Because the Lord is the controller of Maya, the jiva is not. >6. Jivas original nature is accepted as Shudda sattva. I've not got how?. >7. It follows Vishistadvaitic Traditions more than that of Madhva Traditions. It mentions many of the Madhva Yatis in the lineage but do follow do have links with Ramanuja's philosophy than Madhva?. Actually, Gaudiya philosophy incorporates elements fropm all sampradayas. However, the similarity of Madhva and Gaudiya traditions in terms of the concept of visesa is so philosophically fundamental, that I would argue that this overrides similarities with all other traditions. >8.Jivas are said to be exisiting at thatastha and at this position jivas are said to be as pure as Lord!. Plz throw light on this matter. Even after the jivas achieve liberation, they are still tatastha sakti. That never changes. >9. It is accepted here, as in Ramanuja tradition that jivas are in indolent state before comng to the Material World. Jivas are given the free will (liberty) to select wether Vaikunta or Material world. Plz throw light on this matter. I don't understand this question exactly. regards Gerald surya Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 25, 2006 Report Share Posted January 25, 2006 3.In Gaudia philosophy there exisits a concept of Svaamsha and Vibhinna Amsha. Vibhinna Amsha means part and parcel do you agree this statement of Srila Prabhupaad. Lord's Amsha is not diffrent from Lord in other words its Lord only. His legs his eyes are not different from him. A part of supreme is not different from the whole. So it is the Supreme itself. In other words its equivalent to say that i'm God. Hence mayavada. If Bhagavan's part and parcel(Bhagavan) are to suffer in the material world in the gutters of street it doesn't behold the position of Lord in other words Bhagavan is not jnanamai and anandamai. This is what I mean!!! ================================ I believe svamsha / vibhinnamsha are from varaha purana. A vibhinna part of the supreme is and isn't different from him so it is not equivalent to mayavada. His vibhinna parts are transcendental to maya. Our suffering and all other things of maya are as real as a dream. Bhagavan's inconceivable ways do not increase or decrease his supreme status. Kutha stha? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 25, 2006 Report Share Posted January 25, 2006 9. It is accepted here, as in Ramanuja tradition that jivas are in indolent state before comng to the Material World. Jivas are given the free will (liberty) to select wether Vaikunta or Material world. Plz throw light on this matter. ====================== As far as I know. We never knew of Bhagavan to choose him. Our nondevotion is because we are naturally ignorant of him. Not because we chose maya over him. Can't choose something you don't know about. ============== Jiva Gosvami, ParamAtma-sandarbha (47): tadevamananta eva jIvAkhyAs taTasthAH zaktayaH. Tatra tAsAM vargadvayam. Eko vargo'nAditaH eva bhagavadunmukhaH, anyas tvanAditaH eva bhagavat-parAGmukhaH-svabhAvatastadIya jJAna-bhAvAt tadIya- jJAnAbhAvAcca. "In this way the marginal energies called jIvas are unlimited. They have two classes. One class is devoted to the Lord beginninglessly (anAdi) and the other is not devoted to the Lord beginninglessly (anAdi). This is because the former class of jIvas naturally have knowledge of the Lord and the second class of jIvas naturally do not have knowledge of the Lord." Priti-sandarbha (1): atha jIvazca tadIyo'pi tajjJAna-saMsargAbhAva-yuktatvena tan-mAyA- parAbhUtaH sannAtma-svarUpa-jJAna-lopAn-mAyA-kalpitopAdhyAvezAc- canAdi-saMsAra-duHkhena sambadhyate iti paramAtma-sandarbhAdAveva nirUpitam asti. "Although the jIva is part of the Lord, he is devoid of knowledge about Him and this deficiency has no beginning. Because of this he is covered by mAyA. This being so, he is united with the beginningless material miseries because the knowledge of his svarUpa is covered and he is absorbed in the upAdhis, designations, created by mAyA. This was explained in the ParamAtma-sandarbha." Sri Visvanatha Cakravarti's commentary on Srimad Bhagavata 3.7.10 — tatra bhagavataH pRSTha sthitayA anAdyavidyayA tamaH svarUpayA anAdi vaimukhya rUpa bhagavat pRSTha-sthAnAM jIvAnAM jJAnam yal lupyate tasya na vastutvam kAraNam nApi prayojanaM kim apy asti "Ignorance, which is beginningless, is situated on the Lord's back. She covers the knowledge of the jivas who are situated on the Lord's back and are non devotees. Their non devotion is anadi. There is no real reason or purpose for their knowledge being covered." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.