We have come from Radha Krsna lila!

[Guest guest]

[Text 84119 from SOCHI]

 

> So if some elevated jiva thinks in the heart of his heart that

> Radha-Krsna lila is not his home, why would Krsna disagree with His

> dear part and parcel? And if some upstart soul dare to think that he

> came from Goloka and should return there, why should Krsna refuse this

> opportunity to him?

 

Radha Krsna lila is certainly our final destination which we are trying hard

to achieve. Our home is there in Goloka. My doubt is, however, if we have

ever been there.

 

> So why shouldn't we conclude that it is very much possible that the

> jivas go from this world to where they really think they belong to?

 

Where one will go depends on his particular sadhana which should be

consistent with one's sadhya (yanti mad yajino 'pi mam). But is it stated

anywhere that if one wants to go to Krishnaloka one must believe that he has

come to this world from Krishnaloka?

 

> As for Srila Prabhupada's words, once a sagacious devotee, my big

> friend, answering to my question about how we should take this

> jiva-fall issue, said that since Prabhupada chose to speak about it in

> a particular way, since he was preaching that we came from Radha-Krsna

> lila, and it was satisfying to thousands of people in the past, why

> shouldn't I be satisfied with this version?

 

I'm very curious to see any quote from Srila Prabhupada, which clearly and

directly states that WE HAVE COME FROM RADHA KRSNA LILA IN GOLOKA. Unless I

see it I cannot be satisfied with any kind of interpretation which

contradicts the clear sastric statements. And I know that this

interpretation of Srila Prabhupada's words wasn't at all satisfying to many

people in the past. So far I have seen so many places where Srila Prabhupada

does not allow the possibility of falling down from the Lord's eternal lila.

 

". . . and in the spiritual world *every* living entity is called

infallible." (Bg. 15.16 purp.)

 

If the residents of the spiritual world fall down one after another what is

the use of calling them infallible? Sounds like a mockery. No?

 

> After all, he added, if it

> is not stated in absolutely clear, unequivocal terms in the sastra,

> maybe it's not the most important thing for us to understand, for if

> it would be so, if we couldn't get out of this world without getting

> this point, it would be definitely stated in the sastras.

 

May be the question where we have come from is not so vitally important for

us at the moment. But what is very important, at least for myself, is clear

understanding of the nature of the pure bhakti. Otherwise, if we do not

understand it, how can we develop it properly? The idea that we have fallen

down from Radha Krsna lila implies that the pure bhakti or krsna-prema is

imperfect, that one who has is may still become inimical to the Lord and

deviate from the service of the Lord. If krsna-prema does not give one the

highest perfection then what is the use of trying to develop it? If you have

lost it once why can't you lose it again? You may say "because of the fear

to go to the material world again". But is it real love?? No. Our philosophy

is that the pure bhakti is all-perfect. Once you have it you can never lose

it. Param drstva nivartate.

 

I would hate to think that such supremely pure souls like Srila Prabhupada

may have ever been fallen or fall down at any time in future.

 

> That was just his opinion, so anyone may disagree with it, but I don't

> think it's useful for us to argue with the opinion of a person who

> unfortunately can't be reached at the moment.

 

It's highly unlikely that this was *the* opinion of Srila Prabhupada because

it's completely opposite to his own words, to sastras and acaryas. He did

also express a different opinion:

 

Letter to Jagadisa in 1970:

 

"Regarding your second question, have the conditioned souls ever seen Krsna?

 

Were they with the Lord before being conditioned by the desire to lord it

over material nature?

 

Yes, the conditioned souls are parts and parcels of the Lord and thus they

were with Krsna before being conditioned. Just as the child must have seen

his father because the father places the child in the womb of the mother,

similarly each soul has seen Krsna or the Supreme Father. But at that time

the conditioned souls are resting in the condition called susupti which is

exactly like deep sleep without dream, or anesthetized state, therefore they

do not remember being with Krsna when they wake up in the material world and

become engaged in material affairs."

 

So why not believe this? Why take to the interpretations which bring about

so many

serious philosophical contradictions that cannot be explained? Why dismiss

the clear sastric statements that the pure devotee cannot forget Krsna even

for a moment? Why deny that the pure krsna-prema is the highest perfection

of the living entity?

 

ys