Two types of uttama adhikaries

[Guest guest]

> There are two

> > descriptions of kanistha-, madhyama- and uttama-adhikaris in Lord

> > Caitanya's teachings to Sanatana Goswami. One is based on sraddha

> > (faith) and another on rati-prema (attachment and love). You are talking

> > of the uttama-adhikari who is categorized as per rati-prema and I am

> > talking of the uttama-adhikari who is categorized based on sraddha.

>

> As a further comment, I wanted to mention that both Type 1 uttama-adhikari

> and Type 2 uttama-adhikari are referred to by Srila Prabhupada as

> "uttama-adhikari". Here are three instances for each:

>

> Type 1 uttama-adhikari: NOI 5 purport, Madhya 15.106 purport, Madhya 16.74

> purport

>

> Type 2 uttama-adhikari: As "uttama-adhikari": Isopanisad 6 purport, NOD Ch

> 17 para 1, TLK Ch 15

 

Prabhu, I have my doubts regarding this. What is the proof that both

categories of description of uttama adhikaries are not describing the same

level from different angles? Why has Prabhupada not informed us explicitly

of such an important point?

 

You have given the proof of vaco vegam verse from NOI in the following

manner:

 

> The presence of

> these urges indicates that the guru may not in bhava or prema. Yet Srila

> Rupa Goswami says prithvim sa sisyat: "he can make disciples all over the

> world."

>

> Had it been that the "uttama-adhikari" guru should only be in bhava or

> prema, where is the question of any of his sensual urges and the

> injunction that he should tolerate them?

>

> Now the type 2 uttama-adhikari is BEYOND these six urges since his love

> for Krsna is already developed (see the purport to SB 11.2.45). So it

> cannot be that Srila Prabhupada is equating him with the person who is

> qualified to be a guru in NOI verse 1. Therefore the person who is

> qualified to be a guru according to NOI verse 1 is referred to here in the

> purport under analysis and is the same as type 1 uttama-adhikari

 

Beyond (or transcending or controlling) the six urges does not imply the

absence of the six urges. Let us not forget that in the purport Prabhupada

speaks on the how to control these urges by using them in the service of

Krsna. I feel that it cannot be concluded from this verse that this verse is

for the type1 ua, as you call it.

 

Like for example, Srila Yamunacharya, guru of Srila Ramanujacharya according

to my understanding falls in your type2 category because he was a very great

devotee and atleast on the bhava platform. But still he wrote this verse,

yadavadhi bata nari sangame smaryamane... That means the thought was there

but he immediately rejected it because he constantly enjoying the everfresh

nectar from the lotus feet of Krsna (which should mean that he was a bhava

or prema bhakta).

 

This is what I feel and I am open to discussion.

 

Your servant,

Nayana-ranjana Dasa