Guest guest Posted March 9, 2000 Report Share Posted March 9, 2000 Dandavats. Jaya Prabhupada! On Thu, 9 Mar 2000, Krsna Candra (das) SNS (Zurich - CH) wrote: > Sorry, I think you misunderstood this quote: > "Srila Vishvanatha cakravarti Thakur has given us a transcendental literary > work entitled Krishna Bhavanamrta, which is full with Krishna's pastimes. > Exalted devotees can remain absorbed in Krishna-thought by reading such > books. Any book of krishna lila, even this book, Krishna, or our Teachings > of Lord Caitanya, is actually solace for devotees feeling separation from > Krishna." > I did certainly not compare RCM with Vishvanathas works. > I just wanted to point out, that RCM is also "actually solace for devotees > feeling separation" from his isthadeva. > I see. Unfortunately, I not only spoke too harshly to you, but I was also *wrong.* So I apologize and I hope you will forgive me. I remain your humble servant. Hare Krishna. MDd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 10, 2000 Report Share Posted March 10, 2000 dear devotees pamho agtsp, saviour of the fallen! I have a theoretical question here - could you help answer it please? I do not know if it fits well in the context of the discussion below, but just based on the extract below, this theoretical question came to my mind - is it of any relevance to this discussion? But in any case the question cd stand on its own. I am doubtful of some of the terminologies i have used so maybe some kind devotee can comment or improve on the concept. thank you here is the question. If a devotee (is so advanced that he) is able to feel separation, he should be already a rasika devotee (is this statement correct?). Then if he is already a 'rasika' devotee, would he be able to actually relish the mellows of separation by reading a book which is written by another personality who is not also on the rasika platform? Would he actually find solace there? Is this not the very reason why Svarupa Damodara Gosai was screening all so-called 'vaishnava' literature that was being presented to Mahaprabhu? He would only allow certain writings which passed his 'rasika' test to be read by Mahaprabhu who was then absorbed continuously in Mahabhava, hidden from public view. It appears that those literatures written by non-rasika devotees, albeit theorietically correct from the ordinary viewpoint, would have actually disturbed the rasa that mahaprabhu was relishing instead of enhancing Mahaprabhu's divine sentiments that non-rasikas cannot even conceive. is the above understanding in order siddhantically? thank you for your comments yr servant dina M. Tandy [mpt@u.washington.edu] Friday, March 10, 2000 5:10 AM (Krsna) Katha Re: Tulasidas Dandavats. Jaya Prabhupada! On Thu, 9 Mar 2000, Krsna Candra (das) SNS (Zurich - CH) wrote: > Sorry, I think you misunderstood this quote: > "Srila Vishvanatha cakravarti Thakur has given us a transcendental literary > work entitled Krishna Bhavanamrta, which is full with Krishna's pastimes. > Exalted devotees can remain absorbed in Krishna-thought by reading such > books. Any book of krishna lila, even this book, Krishna, or our Teachings > of Lord Caitanya, is actually solace for devotees feeling separation from > Krishna." > I did certainly not compare RCM with Vishvanathas works. > I just wanted to point out, that RCM is also "actually solace for devotees > feeling separation" from his isthadeva. > I see. Unfortunately, I not only spoke too harshly to you, but I was also *wrong.* So I apologize and I hope you will forgive me. I remain your humble servant. Hare Krishna. MDd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 10, 2000 Report Share Posted March 10, 2000 On 10 Mar 2000, Dina-Anukampana Dasa wrote: It appears that those literatures written by non-rasika > devotees, albeit theorietically correct from the ordinary viewpoint, > would have actually disturbed the rasa that mahaprabhu was > relishing instead of enhancing Mahaprabhu's divine sentiments that > non-rasikas cannot even conceive. > is the above understanding in order siddhantically? thank you for your > comments I think you're completely correct, and that this is an important topic; I just don't want to argue about it. I don't have the time. There's no reason why a pure devotee wouldn't relish the works of any vaishnava who belongs to another sampradaya, unless the work in question is shot through with rasabhasa, as is usually the case. Someone else would know better, but as far as I know, only the Gaudiya vaishnavas explicitly recognize the existence of rasabhasa to begin with. My experience has been that Suradasa, Mira, and Tulasidas, etc. are generally contaminated with rasabhasa. But even though it's very important, rasabhasa isn't easy to understand at all, and Srila Prabhupada hasn't given us much theory about it in detail; so we should also be as cautious here as in other areas. Caitanya-caritamrita, Madhya-lila, 10.111-114 as well as 14.157 are good references; they refer to the Bhakti-rasamrita-sindhu too. Antya-lila, 5.91-134 is better: text 97 goes into some detail about rasabhasa, texts 103-105 hint at the standards of adhikara we would do well to consider before publishing our own compositions, and text 120 indicates the gravity of the matter--note it's use of exclamation marks. I hope this helps. Hare Krishna. MDd 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.