The jiva is the tatastha sakti

[CCC]

 

Lord Siva impregnates Durga with us the little jivas.

We don't fall here. We are impregnated into matter by Lord Siva.

 

Siva is our daddy.

 

CC Madhya 20.273 purport:

The word svāńga-viśeṣābhāsa-rūpe, indicating the form by which the Lord begets living entities in the material world, is explained herein. He is Lord Śiva. In the Brahma-saḿhitā it is stated that Lord Śiva, who is another form of Mahā-Viṣṇu, is like yogurt. Yogurt is nothing but milk, yet it is not milk. Similarly, Lord Śiva is considered the father of this universe, and material nature is considered the mother. The father and mother are known as Lord Śiva and goddess Durgā. Together, Lord Śiva's genitals and the vagina of goddess Durgā are worshiped as the śiva-lińga. This is the origin of the material creation. Thus Lord Śiva's position is between that of the living entity and that of the Supreme Lord. In other words, Lord Śiva is neither the Supreme Personality of Godhead nor a living entity. He is the form through which the Supreme Lord works to beget living entities within this material world. As yogurt is prepared when milk is mixed with a culture, the form of Lord Śiva expands when the Supreme Personality of Godhead is in touch with material nature. The impregnation of material nature by the father, Lord Śiva, is wonderful because at one time innumerable living entities are conceived. Bhāgo jīvaḥ sa vijñeyaḥ sa cānantyāya kalpate (Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad 5.9). These living entities are very, very small:

 

keśāgra-śata-bhāgasya śatāḿśa-sadṛśātmakaḥ

 

jīvaḥ sūkṣma-svarūpo 'yaḿ sańkhyātīto hi cit-kaṇaḥ

 

[Cc. Madya 19.140]

 

"If we divide the tip of a hair into a hundred parts and then take one of these parts and divide it again into a hundred parts, that very fine division is the size of but one of the numberless living entities. They are all cit-kaṇa, particles of spirit, not matter."

so when the Lord wanted to be many he expanded himself in the form of Lord Shiva and created infinite jivas?

 

Is Prabhupada saying that the jivas are created by Lord Shiva or Just Lord Shiva is the door for the jivas comming from the spiritual world for taking birth in the material world?

[Sonic Yogi]

 

so when the Lord wanted to be many he expanded himself in the form of Lord Shiva and created infinite jivas?

 

That's the way I understand it.

 

If somebody says Krishna cannot beget more souls, unlimited souls according to his sweet wish, then they are certainly minimizing Krishna.

 

"having one been"

"the soul never ceases to be"

[bija]

 

It is not a characteristic of the soul, but a "position". by sonic

No sonic. It is both these things.

 

The only difference is the liberated soul knows its function. It is enlightened to its nature. Its character is transcendental.

[Sonic Yogi]

 

 

Is Prabhupada saying that the jivas are created by Lord Shiva or Just Lord Shiva is the door for the jivas comming from the spiritual world for taking birth in the material world?

Siva is another form of Krishna.

He is Vishnu tattva in touch with Prakriti.

[Sonic Yogi]

 

No sonic. It is both these things.

 

The only difference is the liberated soul knows its function. It is enlightened to its nature. Its character has become transcendental.

 

Read this again and think about it.

 

 

"The root of all actions is the desire for acts, the root of which again is avidya. Avidya is the name for the forgetfulness of soul's essential nature that 'I am Krsna's servant.' This avidya did not commence within the course of the mundane time. That root of karma of the jiva arose when he was at the tatastha position. As such, the beginning of karma is not to be traced within mundane time, and, on account karma is beginningless."

(JAIVA DHARMA, p 234, by Srila Bhaktivinode Thakur)

 

A position is a place.

It is not an eternal quality of the jiva.

[bija]

when you are at work, and when you are at home with family, do you exhibit different character traits?

 

the place only exhibits a certain quality when there is an active principle (potency) behind it.

 

the actual quality or characteristic is present in the place due to the soul quality.

 

the place and its character are manifest due to soul potency. the spiritual dimension is glorious.

 

the material manifestation is visible due to the marginal souls activation within matter. the real glory of the jiva is when its inherent potency is directed toward spiritual substance.

 

the soul, its quality, and its field are deeply integrated...

 

and to suggest that these things are dis-connected is incorrect.

[Sonic Yogi]

 

No sonic. It is both these things.

 

The only difference is the liberated soul knows its function. It is enlightened to its nature. Its character is transcendental.

 

No, it is more than that.

The devotees of Krishna have hladini-shakti added to the jiva-shakti.

There is more than just a change of thinking but the ingress of a higher power than the jiva itself.

 

The jiva gets imbued with hladini-shakti and is not just a generic jiva anymore.

 

The jiva becomes a medium for hladini shakti.

The jiva shakti becomes secondary to the hladini shakti that is flowing through the jiva.

 

That is not a marginal position.

That is securely within the internal potency.

 

There is nothing marginal in all of Goloka.

It is all internal energy.

[Sonic Yogi]

 

Quote: "The inconceivably narrow line of demarcation between land and water or the line where land and water meet is called Tata; so also the meeting line of the Cit world or the eternal abode of the Supreme Lord and the Acit world or the region of maya is called Tata. The power of the Supreme Lord displayed at the Tata is known as the Tatastha (lying at the Tata) or marginal power. All the jivas being the display of this power, have the inherent oscillating tendency and capability of going to the Cit or the Acit world. Tata not being a resting place, jivas must go this side or that..."

 

From an English article by Srila Bhaktivinode Thakura and Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati entitled: "Vaishnavism Real and Apparent", 10th paragraph.

 

The tatastha is a marginal plane where the jivas who are in between maya and Vaikuntha become manifested by the glance of Maha-Vishnu.

 

That place is known as the Causal Ocean or Viraja River and that is where all the conditioned jivas fell for maya even though the spirit world was on the other side.

[bija]

you see the soul by its nature cannot stay inactive within the brahmajyoti. therefore it either moves toward spiritual kriya or material kriya. remember kriya is in relation to hladini.

 

 

There is nothing marginal in all of Goloka.

It is all internal energy.

 

yes.

[bija]

the summum bonum is a complete whole made of various energies...according to sri caitanya transformation of energy is possible.

[Sonic Yogi]

 

"The root of all actions is the desire for acts, the root of which again is avidya. Avidya is the name for the forgetfulness of soul's essential nature that 'I am Krsna's servant.' This avidya did not commence within the course of the mundane time. That root of karma of the jiva arose when he was at the tatastha position. As such, the beginning of karma is not to be traced within mundane time, and, on account karma is beginningless."

(JAIVA DHARMA, p 234, by Srila Bhaktivinode Thakur)

 

This statement by the Thakur clearly rejects the "absolute" anadi-karma of the jiva and explains that because karma started in the Viraja it is materially "beginningless", but is so old that it cannot be traced.

 

karma is not absolutely "anadi".

It is anadi in that in many cases it precedes the universal creation.

But, to say that the jiva has been in the material world for billions or trillions of creations is not what "anadi" means.

[Sonic Yogi]

 

the summum bonum is a complete whole made of various energies...according to sri caitanya transformation of energy is possible.

 

Exactly, his doctrine was shakti-parinamavada - the transformation of energy.

The material world is created by a transformation of brahman.

 

The jiva can be transformed by the ingress of hladini-shakti which is love of Krishna.

[shiva]

 

I haven't seen that anywhere.

I think your imagination is just running wild.

 

The personal associates of Radha and Krishna are not marginal energy.

 

You are just imagining that they are.

 

when the jiva gets imbued with hladini shakti he is not "marginal" anymore, but has been taken into the internal energy.

 

There is nothing marginal in the whole of Goloka.

It is all internal energy.

No marginal energy there.

 

 

You may want to get some reading glasses:

 

 

From Mahaprabhura Siksa: The Teachings of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu by Bhaktivinoda Thakura:

 

Quote:Sri Jiva says:

 

tad evam ananta eva jivakhyas tatasthah saktayah

tatra tasam varga-dvayam eko vargo’ nadita

 

eva bhagavad-unmukhah anyas tv anadita eva bhagavat-paranmukhah svabhavatas tadiya-jnana-bhavat tadiya-jnanabhavat ca tatra prathamo’ ntaranga- sakti vilasanu

grhito nitya-bhagavat-parikara rupo garudadikah asya

ca tatasthatvam jivatva-prasiddher isvaratva-kotav

apravesat aparam tu tat paranmukhatva-

dosena labdha-chidraya mayaya paribhutah samsari

 

The number of jivas is unlimited. They are divided into two classes. One class is favorable to the Lord without beginning. The other class is averse to the Lord without beginning. The first class is favorable to the Lord because of knowledge of relationship with the Lord. The second class is averse to the Lord because of lack of that knowledge. The favorable jivas are all recipients of the Lords splendid internal energy. They are the eternal associates of the Lord, such as Garuda. They are not in the category of the Lord, as in shown by the scriptures. They are still tatastha or jiva. The second class of jivas is devoid of the help of the internal energy as they are averse to the Lord. Because of this lack, they are overwhelmed by maya and take repeated birth in the material world.

 

Debating you is pointless. That's why I stopped participating here, so many people whose only goal is to "win" arguments instead of being honest, makes this forum a place of endless nonsensical arguments and offensiveness.

[Beggar]

 

Tatastha is a "position".

 

Professor Kapoor refers to it as a "position" as well.

 

It is not a characteristic of the soul, but a "position".

Why are you sucked into the black and white world of the Iskcon Super-Fundamentalists? Or maybe there is a method to the madness and your strategy is to fight fire with fire? It's just how one decides to look at Reality, from which angle of vision. Tatastha has been translated as marginal. That's the best that can be done with a clumsy and crude Germanic based language which is best for analyzing dead matter. And that's the problem with English, that the language itself tends to reinforce the material conception if we use it to discuss spiritual topics. Therefore we always have to be aware of the limitations of our language and how it tends, along with living in the modern world, our material conception of life.

So Professor Kapoor, tells us that the word tatastha "refers to a 'position'' ... But what if the idea that he is attempting to convey?

There actually is no real position of tatastha and it really only a concept used to convey the qualities of the conditioned soul and not the soul proper. There is no tangible place which is neither the beach sand or the water, so tatastha is an abstract concept of a position. From a higher viewpoint there are only two energies of the Lord, internal and external. And from an even higher viewpoint there is only one energy for everthing is a form of Krsna's energy. So both are right and both are wrong. But those who believe that the eternal nitya siddha, servitors of the Lord, fall down or actually come to this world because they misuse their free will are delusional, foolish and commiting maha-Vaisnava aparadha. Srila Prabhupada said that they can, but they don't. That is clearly a way to give pablam to babies. Unfortunately even after almost forty years some of the babies still are reguritating their pablam for an inability to digest even the most basic concepts. Best just chant, hear, humbly serve Sri Guru, and sit down and be quiet.

[Sonic Yogi]

 

You may want to get some reading glasses:

 

 

 

Debating you is pointless. That's why I stopped participating here, so many people whose only goal is to "win" arguments instead of being honest, makes this forum a place of endless nonsensical arguments and offensiveness.

 

Garuda is not a prema-bhakta.

The example you give does not include the gopis or residents of Vrindavan.

Garuda and the others referred to are muktas not prema bhaktas.

 

Garuda also eats snakes.

Do you think Garuda is eating snakes in Vaikuntha?

 

Garuda comes back and forth from Vaikuntha.

 

Please show the example you claim to have that the residents of Vrindavan are marginal entities.

[Sonic Yogi]

 

Why are you sucked into the black and white world of the Iskcon Super-Fundamentalists? Or maybe there is a method to the madness and your strategy is to fight fire with fire? It's just how one decides to look at Reality, from which angle of vision. Tatastha has been translated as marginal. That's the best that can be done with a clumsy and crude Germanic based language which is best for analyzing dead matter. And that's the problem with English, that the language itself tends to reinforce the material conception if we use it to discuss spiritual topics. Therefore we always have to be aware of the limitations of our language and how it tends, along with living in the modern world, our material conception of life.

So Professor Kapoor, tells us that the word tatastha "refers to a 'position'' ... But what if the idea that he is attempting to convey?

There actually is no real position of tatastha and it really only a concept used to convey the qualities of the conditioned soul and not the soul proper. There is no tangible place which is neither the beach sand or the water, so tatastha is an abstract concept of a position. From a higher viewpoint there are only two energies of the Lord, internal and external. And from an even higher viewpoint there is only one energy for everthing is a form of Krsna's energy. So both are right and both are wrong. But those who believe that the eternal nitya siddha, servitors of the Lord, fall down or actually come to this world because they misuse their free will are delusional, foolish and commiting maha-Vaisnava aparadha. Srila Prabhupada said that they can, but they don't. That is clearly a way to give pablam to babies. Unfortunately even after almost forty years some of the babies still are reguritating their pablam for an inability to digest even the most basic concepts. Best just chant, hear, humbly serve Sri Guru, and sit down and be quiet.

 

Unlike yourself, who is s fencewalker trying to be Mr. Wonderful to all people, I am not out to win a popularity contest.

I say what I believe and then good people like yourself like to attach labels to me like "fundamentalist" etc.

Well, if you want to start that, I would have to say that Srila Prabhupada was a fundamentalist.

I think all the acharyas were "fundmentalists" and not very concerned with being popular with all people at all times.

[Sonic Yogi]

Madhya 20. 108-09

 

 

You belong to Kṛṣṇa's marginal potency. There are two worlds — the spiritual world and the material world — and you are situated between the material and spiritual potencies. You have a relationship with both the material and the spiritual world; therefore you are called the marginal potency.

 

So, how is it that the parshadas of Krishna and Radha in Goloka "have a relationship with both the material and spiritual world"?

They have NO relationship with the material world.

 

This purport says that the marginal jiva is between the material and spiritual worlds.

 

How is it that the parshadas of Radha-Krishna are "between the material and spiritual world"?

 

The criteria mentioned in this purport for being "marginal" energy are:

(a) Being situated between the material and spiritual worlds.

(b) Having a relationship with both the material and spiritual worlds.

 

The parshadas of Krishna qualify for neither of these two criteria.

 

Garuda does, as he actually lives in the material world and becomes the carrier of Vishnu when he comes to the material world.

 

Garuda is marginal because he meets both the criteria given by Lord Caitanya in the above verse.

 

These criteria do not fit the parshadas of Krishna.

[Beggar]

 

Unlike yourself, who is s fencewalker trying to be Mr. Wonderful to all people, I am not out to win a popularity contest.

I say what I believe and then good people like yourself like to attach labels to me like "fundamentalist" etc.

Well, if you want to start that, I would have to say that Srila Prabhupada was a fundamentalist.

I think all the acharyas were "fundmentalists" and not very concerned with being popular with all people at all times.

 

Sonic, there is some conceptual connection that Srila Sridhar Maharaja made between acintya bhed[a] tattva, inconceivable simultaneous oneness and difference and the Hegelian dialectic of thesis, antithesis and synthesis.The conceptions of the Fall-Vadis and Dreamer-Vadis are based on half-truths not complete falsity. Half-truths or partial truths are the basis of their logic which means that often there is some truth in what they are saying but that the conclusion or siddhanta in this case comes out very wrong.

The opposite approach is an attack style of confrontation, where the attacker or anti-party becomes the antithesis of the improper thesis.

 

Here the example is that one party says that marginal is a characteristic and never a place an then the other side argues that since marginal is a temporary characteristic of the jiva it therefore is not a characteristic at all but rather only a place. Marginal may be an aquired characteristic of the jiva which Jaiva Dharma actually explains as "tatastha laksana". Here tatastha or marginal is a characteristic albeit temporary. This illustrates how the Fall-Vadis and Dreamer-Vadis make their grievous error: They are too attached to the semantics of what they read in Srila Prabhupada's speech and writings. And because they never triangulate the position of the truth by reading from another source that may use another semantical style, they are never self-challenged to reassess their original ideas that they first established in their minds as new bhaktas.

 

This is why siksa guru becomes an imperitive otherwise there is too much of a tendency to become attached to the form or formal aspects of the vani rather than its substance. On the other hand in their neophyte over-zealousness some take the concepts of the siksa guru and then negate the ideas that they originally heard, sometimes effectively, "throwing out the baby with the bath water." An example is the dichotomy between the conception that we were never with Krsna on the rasik level versus the idea that we have forgotten our relationship with Krsna. On forums like these one side argues black and the other white. But since there is "gradation everywhere" there is actually gradations of conception of siddhantic truths. "Forget" is just a word, and the English word "forget" is just the best we can do to convey the idea. Therefore it is something like "forget". But will have to take into consideration that although we have "forgotten" Krsna we still did not leave the position of an established sthayi bhava, rasa. It sounds contradictory but it does not mean that although we have never had an established sthayi bhava that there is no truth in the idea that we have "forgotten" our relationship with Krsna.

 

It is true, but that truth must be viewed in the light of other conceptions given by the acaryas. The most classic example of not doing this is Gaura Gopal, Sarva gattah refusing to look at quotes directly from Srila Prabhupada's books where he may say the exact opposite thing that Sarva is trying to establish by quoting a letter from 1968. In this case he is refusing to harmonize apparently opposite conceptions given in the writings of his own spiritual master. This is what I mean by "Super-Fudamentalist".

Many current writers use the term "literalism" to define extreme fundamentalist.

[Sonic Yogi]

This is the last paragraph of Bhagavad-gita As It Is.

 

 

The living entity in his original position is pure spirit. He is just like an atomic particle of the Supreme Spirit. Thus Lord Krsna may be compared to the sun, and the living entities to sunshine. Because the living entities are the marginal energy of Krsna, they have a tendency to be in contact either with the material energy or with the spiritual energy. In other words, the living entity is situated between the two energies of the Lord, and because he belongs to the superior energy of the Lord, he has a particle of independence. By proper use of that independence he comes under the direct order of Krsna. Thus he attains his normal condition in the pleasure-giving potency (hladini-shakti).

 

So, the normal condition for the living entity is in the hladini-shakti.

How can a jiva be in the hladini-shakti and still be "marginal" energy?

[Sonic Yogi]

 

Sonic, there is some conceptual connection that Srila Sridhar Maharaja made between acintya bhed[a] tattva, inconceivable simultaneous oneness and difference and the Hegelian dialectic of thesis, antithesis and synthesis.The conceptions of the Fall-Vadis and Dreamer-Vadis are based on half-truths not complete falsity. Half-truths or partial truths are the basis of their logic which means that often there is some truth in what they are saying but that the conclusion or siddhanta in this case comes out very wrong.

The opposite approach is an attack style of confrontation, where the attacker or anti-party becomes the antithesis of the improper thesis.

 

Here the example is that one party says that marginal is a characteristic and never a place an then the other side argues that since marginal is a temporary characteristic of the jiva it therefore is not a characteristic at all but rather only a place. Marginal may be an aquired characteristic of the jiva which Jaiva Dharma actually explains as "tatastha laksana". Here tatastha or marginal is a characteristic albeit temporary. This illustrates how the Fall-Vadis and Dreamer-Vadis make their grievous error: They are too attached to the semantics of what they read in Srila Prabhupada's speech and writings. And because they never triangulate the position of the truth by reading from another source that may use another semantical style, they are never self-challenged to reassess their original ideas that they first established in their minds as new bhaktas.

 

This is why siksa guru becomes an imperitive otherwise there is too much of a tendency to become attached to the form or formal aspects of the vani rather than its substance. On the other hand in their neophyte over-zealousness some take the concepts of the siksa guru and then negate the ideas that they originally heard, sometimes effectively, "throwing out the baby with the bath water." An example is the dichotomy between the conception that we were never with Krsna on the rasik level versus the idea that we have forgotten our relationship with Krsna. On forums like these one side argues black and the other white. But since there is "gradation everywhere" there is actually gradations of conception of siddhantic truths. "Forget" is just a word, and the English word "forget" is just the best we can do to convey the idea. Therefore it is something like "forget". But will have to take into consideration that although we have "forgotten" Krsna we still did not leave the position of an established sthayi bhava, rasa. It sounds contradictory but it does not mean that although we have never had an established sthayi bhava that there is no truth in the idea that we have "forgotten" our relationship with Krsna.

 

It is true, but that truth must be viewed in the light of other conceptions given by the acaryas. The most classic example of not doing this is Gaura Gopal, Sarva gattah refusing to look at quotes directly from Srila Prabhupada's books where he may say the exact opposite thing that Sarva is trying to establish by quoting a letter from 1968. In this case he is refusing to harmonize apparently opposite conceptions given in the writings of his own spiritual master. This is what I mean by "Super-Fudamentalist".

Many current writers use the term "literalism" to define extreme fundamentalist.

I don't argue that "tatastha" is not a condition of the living entity, yet at the same time a "place".

 

Tatastha as a condition of the living entity is due to the "place" where the jiva was manifested - the Causal Ocean also known as the Viraja River.

 

It is in this "marginal" realm of the Viraja that Maha-Vishnu lies down and manifests the jivas through his agent Lord Shambhu.

 

So, my thinking is that the jivas are called "marginal" jivas because they were manifest in the Viraja where they were in the marginal realm between the material and spiritual worlds.

 

It is from there that they either become attracted to the light of the Brahmajyoti on one side of the glitters of Maya on the other.

 

But, as Bhaktivinode explains in Jaiva Dharma, these jivas are very weak due to a lack of hladini-shakti which is also known as love of Krishna.

 

When these incomplete jivas become blessed with hladini-shakti they are then integreated into the internal energy of Krishna and lose their marginal status and in fact become internal devotees.

 

I just don't buy the claim that the gopas and gopis are "marginal" entities that are "in between the material and spiritual world" as described by Mahaprabhu to Sanatan Goswami.

 

They are not in between anything.

They are in the svarupa-shakti via the hladini-shakti, bhakti-shakti etc.

 

They are also immune to maya and not succetible to the material energy as all the tatastha-jivas are described.

 

The whole "tatastha in Goloka" argument is what supports the Fallvadis.

 

As long as the jiva is tatastha he can fall down.

Why is it that the "jivas" in Goloka are said to never fall down?

 

The tatastha in Goloka argument is the basis of the dreamer-vadi and Fallvadi theory.

 

So, I don't buy it.

[Sonic Yogi]

 

Many current writers use the term "literalism" to define extreme fundamentalist.

 

There is nothing wrong with literalism.

The problem is in misunderstanding the words due to a partial study of the subject.

 

If we depart literalism we then begin the process of speculation, addition and subtraction and end up with nothing.

[Sonic Yogi]

CC Adi, 4.65 purport:

 

 

In the kingdom of God, the Lord's servants and maidservants, His consorts, His father and mother and everything else are all transformations of the spiritual existence of sandhinī-śakti. The existential sandhinī-śakti in the external potency similarly expands all the variegatedness of the material cosmos, from which we can have a glimpse of the spiritual field.

 

All the devotees there are transformations of sandhini-shakti element of the svarupa-shakti.

They aren't tatastha jivas.

They have been transformed by sandhini-shakti.

[Beggar]

 

So, my thinking is that the jivas are called "marginal" jivas because they were manifest in the Viraja where they were in the marginal realm between the material and spiritual worlds.

Dear Sonic Veggie Burger, I generally agree with everything you wrote in your last post. Just to add a point that I brought up in my last post, the baddha jivas in this world also have the temporary characteristic or tatastha laksana of being marginal. So there are at least two meanings of tatastha or marginal in this context.

 

 

 

When these incomplete jivas become blessed with hladini-shakti they are then integreated into the internal energy of Krishna and lose their marginal status and in fact become internal devotees.

 

Absolute agreement. This is an application of the Vaisnava conception of sakti parinam, that Sri Krsna has multifareous energies or saktis that are originally one energy or sakti. Thus by His sweet will, Krsna can transform His energies. Therefore the tatastha jivas can become transformed into manifestations of the svaupa sakti or internal energy. When some of his godbrothers heard that Srila B.V. Swami Prabhupada was preaching that the baddha jivas were actually part and parcel of Krsna and therefore tiny manifestations of sat-cid-ananda-vigrah they criticised that he was making some apa-siddhanta. Srila Sridhar Maharaja harmonized the situation by telling them that he was correct in a sense because, "everthing is known by its potential."

[Sonic Yogi]

Yet, even Srivasa Pandit of the pancha-tattva is described as representing the tatastha-shakti.

My thinking about that is it is because he is Narada Muni who does have some dealing with the material energy and goes back and forth between the material world and Vaikuntha.

 

As long as the jiva has some dealings with the material world he is classified as tatastha-shakti, even though we know that Narada Muni is invincible and beyond any of the charms of Maya.

 

So, going back and forth = tatastha-shakti.

[andy108]

 

Yet, even Srivasa Pandit of the pancha-tattva is described as representing the tatastha-shakti.

My thinking about that is it is because he is Narada Muni who does have some dealing with the material energy and goes back and forth between the material world and Vaikuntha.

 

As long as the jiva has some dealings with the material world he is classified as tatastha-shakti, even though we know that Narada Muni is invincible and beyond any of the charms of Maya.

 

So, going back and forth = tatastha-shakti.

 

Sonic Prabhu,

 

How does the above speculation reconcile with this quote pasted back on page 3?

 

 

Vrajanatha: Will you please explain who are the nitya-siddha gopis and who are the sadhana-siddha gopis?

 

Babaji: Srimati Radharani is Sri Krsna’s svarupa-sakti, and the eight principal sakhis are Her first kaya-vyuha (bodily expansions). The other sakhis follow behind as Her further kaya-vyuha. All these sakhis are nitya-siddha; they are svarupa-sakti-tattva, not jiva-tattva. The general sakhis of Vraja – who attained perfection by performing sadhana – follow Srimati Radharani’s eternal associates (parikara), and they are known as sadhana-siddha jivas. Having been imbued with the potency of hladini-sakti, they attained salokya (residence in vraja-aprakrta-lila) with the nityasiddha sakhis of Vraja. Jivas who attain perfection by the path of raganuga-sadhana in srngara-rasa are included amongst the sadhana-siddha sakhis.

 

It seems to me that these perfect living entities who engage in the highest rasa available are still considered jiva or tatastha or marginal because they always retain the option/potential to fall or lord it over material nature.

 

But there is no recorded instance of one EVER doing so, which is testimony to the transformation that occurs when one has reached the level of mature personal exchanges with Krsna due to Prema. They NEVER fall, but always retain the potential, ala Free will.

 

As far as I can tell, this is the only instance of something we can conceive of happening, that does not. Sadhana Siddha Jivas are eternally transformed in their ORIENTATION due to being enveloped by Hladini Sakti.

 

They may even come to the material world, and even appear to play a role as demon or adversary (ie. the cowherd boy Sankachuda) but they are always remembering Krsna under YOGA MAYA'S spell, not Maha Maya's.

 

Hare Krsna