The Soul's Fall... The Final Word

[Guest guest]

On 17 Jul 1999, Mahanidhi das wrote:

> Let's not leave the purport in *question*:

 

Now who's willfully casting aside context?

 

> "The original home of the living entity and the Supreme

> Personality of Godhead is the spiritual world. In the spiritual world

> both the Lord and the living entities live together very peacefully.

> Since the living entity remains engaged in the service of the Lord,

> they both share a blissful life in the spiritual world. However, when

> the living entity wants to enjoy himself, he falls down into the

> material world. Even while in that position, the Lord remains with

> him as the Supersoul, his intimate friend. Because of his

> forgetfulness, the living entity does not know that the Supreme Lord

> is accompanying him as the Supersoul. In this way the living entity

> remains conditioned in each and every millennium."

 

> OK. Let's see what informations we have in order that they are

> given from Prabhupada in *this* one purport:

 

> - the living entity is together with the SPG in the Spiritual Sky.

 

Ok

 

> - the living entity lives peacefully there with the SPG

 

Ok

 

> - **however**, the living entity may decide to enjoy himself

> - such living entity falls down

 

Fine. However, this is not explicitly stated to be the same

living entity that is already living together peacefully

with the Supreme Lord. That is only your speculation.

 

> - the Lord **remains** with him *even* in that condition.

 

Ok.

 

> - the living entity is **forgetful** and does not know that

> the Supreme Lord is still with him, accompanying him to the

> material world.

 

Ok.

 

So, where is the prior experience of the spiritual world prior

to the beginningless material activity? It wasn't described in

any of the above.

 

> You insist that it is not the *same* "living entity" that

> Srila Prabhupada is speaking here. But the one that is always

> in the Spiritual world, and the other one that has never been

> with Krsna in the spiritual world but always in the material.

 

> Thus you are indeed making a blunder of jeopardizing

> Srila Prabhupada's intelligence when he speaks about the

> fallen living entity that Krsna *remains* with him "even while

> in that position", and that he is *forgetful* of the Lord.

 

Re: "remain" -- the Lord also remains with the jaDa although

we would never suggest that that has experienced the spiritual world.

The Lord remains with the jIva regardless of her position; there's

certainly nothing in that to suggest that the jIva has had

a prior experience of the spiritual world before her beginningless

material activity.

 

Re: "forgetful" -- I've addressed this in another note.

 

> My last remark regarding understanding of this particular

> purport of Srila Prabhupada:

>

> It is remarkable that you have pointed to us that there is no

> reason for us to "assume" how Prabhupada would mean anything

> else but what exclusively your explanation was. In other words,

> that there is no reason for us to "assume" that Prabhupada

> is consistently speaking in this one purport about the same

> living entity that first was with Krsna and then decided to

> leave.

>

> I will step out here. Makes no sense to bit the empty husk.

> I understand well that different meanings might be derived from

> different purports (und thus may be for discussion), but to insist

> that *only* one meaning is to be applied by hook or crook

> (regardless of what the particular purport/verse/statement is),

> is something that turns me off on the spot.

 

So why do you insist only on the use of your meaning, that the

living entity has misused his independence while in the spiritual

world? Why don't you "turn [yourself] off on the spot" with your

own postings?

 

Yours,

 

Vijay S. Pai