New booklet about Srila Prabhupada

[gHari]

 

Here it is: Qualified senior gurus have spoken:

 

I believe every person who has contributed to this thread considers one, two, or all three of these divine personalities as qualified gurus. I don't think there could be any more senior authority than these three (unless Bhaktisiddhanta himself said what Srila Prabhupada's sthayi-bhava is)

Certainly all three are my master, but then so is Srila Goura Govinda Swami, Srila Narayana Maharaja, Swami Tripurari, Swami Narasingha, and my fortune seeming without limit I cannot possibly name or perhaps even know all the many others Sri Krsna has sprinkled over my path back to Godhead.

[NitaiS]

 

It was obviously instilled in these devotee's understanding that they are actually feminine, that they are Gopi, or that their ultimate goal of existence is to become Gopi.

Taken as is it may seem like that, but it also seems quite incongruous with Srila Prabhupada's mood throughout his acharya-lila. What I mean is I highly doubt he told that devotee "you must consider yourself as a gopi". Until 9:50 basically two statements are made. "We must consider ourselves as the gopis so we can love Krsna that much more" and "we must consider ourselves as female".

 

The first could easily be mispresentation of Prabhupada merely citing the gopis in a talk where he is emphasizing loving Krsna, "we must become like the gopis, they have given up everything for the service of the lord". Certainly there are numerous statements like this in Krsna book and elsewhere. This explanation would match much more with what we know of Srila Prabhupada's preaching style. For a moment the camera later scans back to the devotee originally speaking and he appears a bit like "oops" after the spirited interruption of the obviously more knowledgable devotee. Kirtananda's discussion of it taking lifetimes to become a gopi etc. still seems fairly nuetral, after all it is the core of Gaudiya Vaishnavism (which I think Babhru mentioned if I remember correctly) and thus in the course of giving the basics, some discussion of it is relevant.

 

The second part, "to consider ourselves as female" could very well be a misunderstood reference to prakrti/purusha, a much more basic and relevant topic which kirtananda touches on moments later. The next person to speak makes it clear moments later that he basically came in for a nap, and this was his first day, yet we should note that he too joined in the discussion of the gopis, with some relative air of authority.

 

Overall, I do not know who that devotee is, if he stayed around, or how he stayed around if so, but it would be much more convincing to me if since that video, he had continued in his sadhana, developed his understanding of KC theory and then testified that he understood from those days Prabhupada was in manjari-bhava. Maybe he has? I have not heard of any such testimonies in terms of devotees referencing those early days (though they may exist). Rather, we have heard devotees who are still practicing today (perhaps there have been ups-and downs for some between then and now) like Govinda Dasi, Malati, Jadurani, who both then and now (with the exception of Jadurani) believe Prabhupada displayed clearly this sentiment, whether they feel bold enough to declare it definitively or not. I am sure there are others as well. Furthermore, it cannot be denied that if any, the common idea back then was that Prabhupada was a cowherd boy.

 

So it seems that current testimony from someone who was around in the original days, is worth more then a testimony then. Gurudas tells how one devotee painted the Panca-tattva with breasts because he thought they were women. These devotees certainly had sraddha and Prabhupada used them in magnificent ways, but the conception was not highly developed for the most part at that time.

 

I am very interested to Babhru and others' thoughts. This seems much more the direction this thread was intended to go.

[NitaiS]

 

Certainly all three are my master, but then so is Srila Goura Govinda Swami, Srila Narayana Maharaja, Swami Tripurari, Swami Narasingha, and my fortune seeming without limit I cannot possibly name or perhaps even know all the many others Sri Krsna has sprinkled over my path back to Godhead.

 

I can certainly appreciate the broad appreciation of these Acharyas, but going by beggar's criteria (which was my point in that post) the three acharyas whom I cited are more senior than these, and most likely overall are more widely excepted as qualified as well. I personally do not think our survey of the evidence need be limited to these three acharyas' statements, but if we did, the result seems somewhat clear to me.

[gHari]

I would not draw too much from the movie of the rag-tag group whose good fortune it was to encounter Srila Prabhupada and Kreeeshna. It seems that Kirtanananda at least understood Purusa being masculine and another explained lover and beloved. My impression was that 'gopis' were discussed in relation to selfless love.

 

It was humorous though ... yet absolutely amazing.

[Sonic Yogi]

 

It was obviously instilled in these devotee's understanding that they are actually feminine, that they are Gopi, or that their ultimate goal of existence is to become Gopi.

True. And who is it that is going to come forward and accuse Srila Prabhupada of not practicing what he preached.

 

So, he was teaching all his early disciples that they should realize themselves as feminine in relation to Krsna and that the love of the gopis was the highest and the best but he himself was more partial to a lesser level of love of Krsna?

 

It just doesn't seem plausible that all the early disciples were imbibing madhurya-rasa conceptions from Srila Prabhupada who was himself in sakhya-rasa.

 

So, Mahaprabhu sent a cowherd boy in sakhya-rasa to teach the world that the love of the gopis is the best?

 

[Sonic Yogi]

 

I would not draw too much from the movie of the rag-tag group

 

Rag-tag?

Srila Prabhuapada said "they are intelligent boys, they are not fools".

 

Those early days were magic.

I love watching these old videos.

 

Some of these early disciples were very educated and intelligent.

I didn't see anything "rag-tag" about them.

[Sonic Yogi]

 

Śrī Caitanya Caritāmṛta Madhya 23.53

 

pañca-vidha rasa — śānta, dāsya, sakhya, vātsalya

 

madhura-nāma śṛńgāra-rasa — sabāte prābalya

 

SYNONYMS

 

pañca-vidha rasa — five kinds of mellows; śānta — neutrality; dāsya — servitorship; sakhya — friendship; vātsalya — parental affection; madhura — sweet; nāma — named; śṛńgāra-rasa — the conjugal mellow; sabāte — among all of them; prābalya — predominant.

 

TRANSLATION

 

"There are five transcendental mellows — neutrality, servitorship, friendship, parental affection and conjugal love, which is also known as the mellow of sweetness. Conjugal love excels all the others.

So we are taught this in the Gaudiya siddhanta.

So, that is why most disciples look up to their guru acharya as possessing the MOST EXCELLENT kind of love of Krsna.

It's only natural that a disciple will see his guru this way.

 

To say that Prabhupada does not possess the most excellent love of Krsna will not set well with most disciples of Srila Prabhupada.

[Sonic Yogi]

 

Śrī Caitanya Caritāmṛta Ādi 4.43

 

nija nija bhāva sabe śreṣṭha kari' māne

 

nija-bhāve kare kṛṣṇa-sukha āsvādane

 

SYNONYMS

 

nija nija — each his own; bhāva — mood; sabe — all; śreṣṭha kari' — making the best; māne — accepts; nija-bhāve — in his own mood; kare — does; kṛṣṇa-sukha — happiness with Lord Kṛṣṇa; āsvādane — tasting.

 

TRANSLATION

 

Each kind of devotee feels that his sentiment is the most excellent, and thus in that mood he tastes great happiness with Lord Kṛṣṇa.

 

 

 

 

 

Śrī Caitanya Caritāmṛta Ādi 4.44

 

taṭastha ha-iyā mane vicāra yadi kari

 

saba rasa haite śṛńgāre adhika mādhurī

 

SYNONYMS

 

taṭa-stha ha-iyā — becoming impartial; mane — in the mind; vicāra — consideration; yadi — if; kari — doing; saba rasa — all the mellows; haite — than; śṛńgāre — in conjugal love; adhika — greater; mādhurī — sweetness.

 

TRANSLATION

 

But if we compare the sentiments in an impartial mood, we find that the conjugal sentiment is superior to all others in sweetness.

 

PURPORT

 

No one is higher or lower than anyone else in transcendental relationships with the Lord, for in the absolute realm everything is equal. But although these relationships are absolute, there are also transcendental differences between them. Thus the transcendental relationship of conjugal love is considered the highest perfection

 

So, many disciples of Srila Prabhupada, right or wrong, will consider that Srila Prabhupada is of the highest perfection.

 

The Gaudiya siddhanta as it is so fully developed and presented by the Goswamis cannot but lead one to that conclusion.

 

Those devotees not in the line of the six Goswamis might not be so aware of all these things, but in the Rupanuga sampradaya such is the conclusion.

[Sonic Yogi]

 

Srila Sridhar Maharaj:

At least temporarily he has showed like that. What he has expressed there in that journey there, it is almost clear that he liked that sort of lila best, but it may be, it might have been suppressed purposely; it also cannot be denied, maybe. That is one thing. There may be such a possibility, and he has given, he has said that Radharani was his gurudeva. His gurudeva was Radharani, but he himself was thinking that perhaps madhurya rasa should not be distributed in the first installment. That might have been his view.

This is the bottom line for me.

I pretty much take this as the safest position as opposed to going willy-nilly into a sakhya-rasa conclusion.

 

At the is point, I guess I will stop being a disturbance to this topic.

 

Good luck with the book and the topic Babhru.

 

Adios......

[madhuvac]

 

Guess what Prabhus, It all comes down to who is qualified to give the definitive answer. And not only that, but who is even qualified to hear the definitive answer. This is not a court case based on the preponderance of evidence as the author seems to assert. Yes, it comes down to who is qualified to be guru. Or at least amongst gurus who is senior and who is junior. Is there anyone more senior than the "living" authorities that you are approaching? Yep, the guru thing, the rtvik thing comes full circle. You don't think that anyone has more realization? Are you ready for this? Ready or not, hear it comes!

 

If I understand it correctly, what you are saying here is that Narayana Maharaja is the senior most guru today and that his realized opinion should take precedence over that of others. Indeed if others disregard his opinion this is tantamount to buying into the ritvik philosophy because those who disregard his opinion are disregarding the living guru and merely accepting the opinions of previous gurus who are no longer present.

 

This is not a good argument. First of all there is no definitive way to prove that Narayana Maharaja is the most advanced gurus on earth. This is merely your subjective opinion. And there is nothing ritvik about accepting one’s own guru’s opinion on the topic when it differs from NM’s opinion, especially when NM’s opinion differs from the opinion of the gurus of one’s own guru who also happen to be the the gurus of Narayana Maharaja. In other words NM says that Sridhara Maharaja. Puri Maharaja, and Bon Maharaja, all disciples of Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati, are his siksa gurus. They have told us that Prabhupada is in sakhya rasa and so has Prabhupada himself as the book demonstrates. So the real question is why does NM not follow the senior gurus?

 

As a side note, remember also that there are living gurus outside of the lineage of Bhaktisiddhanta who also say that Prabhupada is in sakhya rasa.

 

The evidence presented is objective and the conclusion that Prabhupda is in sakhya is reached by accepting the evidence as it is, the direct meaning. If you insist upon interpreting it subjectively to get a different, indirect meaning out of it, you can of course try to do so. But all you are saying is that a guru whom you consider to be perfectly realized and who is among us today has a different opinion from what the evidence directly indicates. But as far as I am aware, neither he nor you nor any of his followers have demonstrated how an indirect interpretation of the evidence is more feasible and furthermore why your choice of guru on this matter contradicts the opinions of his own siksa gurus, one of whom is Prabhupada himself.

 

If you want to take the alternate suggestion of Sridhara Maharaja’s “maybe” as definitive, you must demonstrate its plausibility in relation to the wealth of evidence in the book that supports Sridhara Maharaja’s personal opinion. Without doing this it will be hard to convince objective readers, and much less so if you merely accuse them of having an agenda, being ritviks, lacking realization, etc.

[andy108]

 

This is the bottom line for me.

I pretty much take this as the safest position as opposed to going willy-nilly into a sakhya-rasa conclusion.

 

At the is point, I guess I will stop being a disturbance to this topic.

 

Good luck with the book and the topic Babhru.

 

Adios......

As another independent thinker, and still a happy camper, I am out the door of this topic as well, but as a parting gift, here are a couple more conclusions from Srila Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada for those frozen in motion on this issue to chew on. Be sure to chew thoroughly before swallowing so you digest it properly.

 

Key Concept = Madhurya Rasa INCLUDES Sakhya.

 

 

CC Antya 1.152 : PURPORT : Śrīmatī Rādhārāṇī is speaking this verse (Vidagdha-mādhava 2.41) to Her intimate friend Viśākhādevī.

 

 

CC Adi 10.134 : PURPORT : The Gaura-gaṇoddeśa-dīpikā (120-24) states that Rāmānanda Rāya was formerly Arjuna. He is also considered to have been an incarnation of the gopī Lalitā, although in the opinion of others he was an incarnation of Viśākhādevī.

 

CC Madhya 2.78 : PURPORT

Paramānanda Purī is said to have been Uddhava in Vṛndāvana. His affections with Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu were on the platform of paternal love. This was because Paramānanda Purī happened to be the Godbrother of the spiritual master of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu. Similarly, Rāmānanda Rāya, who is considered an incarnation of Arjuna and by some an incarnation of Viśākhādevī, enjoyed unalloyed fraternal love with the Lord. Unalloyed personal service was enjoyed by Govinda and others. In the presence of His most confidential devotees like Gadādhara Paṇḍita, Jagadānanda and Svarūpa Dāmodara, Caitanya Mahāprabhu enjoyed the ecstatic conditions of Śrīmatī Rādhārāṇī in Her conjugal relationship with Kṛṣṇa. Absorbed in these four transcendental mellows, Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu resided in Jagannātha Purī, feeling very much obliged to His devotees.

Hare Krsna

[gHari]

When there are many gurus with seemingly differing points of view, then we must adjust for a balance. We have four sampradayas, yet each is only a different sentiment towards the same exact Truth **. It is not a question of who is senior or who is right. All are right; all are absolute.

 

We see conflicting statements in the Vedas and Upanishads, but they are harmonized under Sri Krsna Caitanya. Our hearts should be able to accommodate these infinitely complex equations, for it is the truth, and it may well be the only way such complexities can be expressed with any hope of accuracy in our world of words.

 

We would prefer to pick a number from one to four, but in Reality the numbers have many decimal points of precision - most likely an infinite number of decimals. And that one very special number, that is the special love of His Divine Grace AC Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada.

 

 

** Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura writes in Sri Krsna-Samhita:

 

When such sectarian Vaisnava principles become transcendental, that is, when they are free of impersonalism, then they become Satvata-dharma, or religious principles related to the Supreme Truth. The different sampradayas, namely:

dvaita (dualism),

 

dvaitAdvaita (simultaneous oneness and difference),

 

suddhAdvaita (purified oneness),

 

and visistadvaita (specific monism)

 

that are found in satvata-dharma are nothing but wonderful varieties of sentiments within the Vaisnava science. Actually the various sampradayas are not the result of differences in the basic truth.

[Beggar]

 

If I understand it correctly, what you are saying here is that Narayana Maharaja is the senior most guru today and that his realized opinion should take precedence over that of others.

Actually this not what I am saying, I am saying that one should approach a siksa guru that they have faith in, and inquire from them. For those who want to line up with Srila Sridhar Maharaja, what about Srila Bhakti Sundar Govinda Maharaja? Why don't they ask him? Well they don't because they think, "I have my math and he has his." But this does not mean that they are even close to being his league, even if they think they are. Srila Sridhar Maharaja said that Govinda Maharaja is a "transcendental personality", that sounds like a very high recommendation. So, why do research? If you don't have faith in Srila Narayana Maharaja then for God sakes ask someone like Srila Govinda Maharaja? You don't think that he understands Srila Sridhar Maharaja after forty years of intimate service and hearing? Another interesting thing about Govinda Maharaja is that he actually lived with Srila Bhaktivedanta Prabhupada for a couple of years in the late forties. Why not ask him about this:

 

Srila Sridhar Maharaj:

At least temporarily he has showed like that. What he has expressed there in that journey there, it is almost clear that he liked that sort of lila best, but it may be, it might have been suppressed purposely; it also cannot be denied, maybe. That is one thing. There may be such a possibility, and he has given, he has said that Radharani was his gurudeva. His gurudeva was Radharani, but he himself was thinking that perhaps madhurya rasa should not be distributed in the first installment. That might have been his view.

 

And BTW, this statement was not made as a reaction to Prabhupada disciples in Iskcon's criticisms; That happened later.

Also Srila Narayana Maharaja has been asked, "what is Srila Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada's spiritual identity, who is he in Krsna lila?" The only answer that I have ever heard is, "I know and when you are qualified, I shall tell you." And this is the exact same answer that Srimati Jadurani (Symarani) received, which she told me, personally. And she is practically the most senior Western devotee in that sanga! So Srila Narayana Maharaja's opinion is that as a class, we (including Indian neophytes, also) are not qualified to receive a definitive answer on the subject and Srila Sridhar Maharaja also gave qualified statements, not a definitive answer.

Yet, so many right here on this forum are taking his statements that the evidence is definitive even though he gives the maybes as shown above.

[madhuvac]

Yes, we have our own gurus. And you have but faith in yours as we have in ours. As for Govinda Maharaja, he acknowledges that Prabhupada is in sakhya rasa. And your attempt to say that Narayana Maharaja has given no clear opinion of Prabhupada's rasa is does not match up with many statements he has made that Prabhupada is in manjari bahva that are all over the internet, some of which have already been posted on this thread. You are fudging the facts on this. Just leave it at this, the opinion in the book differs from that of Narayana Maharaja and that is not offensive but rather merits some consideration. To many it is heartening.

[gHari]

 

[..]

If you want to take the alternate suggestion of Sridhara Maharaja’s “maybe” as definitive, you must demonstrate its plausibility in relation to the wealth of evidence [..]

I don't have to do anything. I 'must demonstrate' nothing. Who the hell are you? Some mundane crass debater?

 

The booklet forces nothing on anyone; that is class.

 

I'm starting to smell an unhealthy over-investment in this topic - the market is surely to crash soon or maybe it just did.

 

I say, "When you get there, ask him (or her)". Until then, play nice.

[Narasingh]

 

I would not draw too much from the movie of the rag-tag group whose good fortune it was to encounter Srila Prabhupada and Kreeeshna. It seems that Kirtananda at least understood Purusa being masculine and another explained lover and beloved. My impression was that 'gopis' were discussed in relation to selfless love.

 

It was humorous though ... yet absolutely amazing.

I'm sorry, it was clear that they were talking specifically about the female gopis of Vrindavana, not any non-directional vague concept. Kirtanananda clearly said that to become a gopi is a most exalted existence and that it may take many lifetimes to get there. He had the understanding (as well as the others in the room) that that is the Ultimate Goal of Life. And "rag-tag"? These persons had great fortune. Look at them! They participated in some of the first Harinam Sankirtans in the western world! This is a relisheable activity by the likes of Shiva, Suka, Narada, and Brahma and here they are taking part in it, being born as mlecchas and yavanas, cow-eater, with no hint of any past sukrti. We must acknowledge the sanctity of their position then!

 

I've seen in numerous missions how magnanimous the Acharya is and gradually the magnanimity decends down to a more selective group. I think we all agree that those who received association with Srila Prabhupada in the early years were very fortunate. They were given insight rarely to be had. Much the same way as Sonic Yogi doesn't recall it ever being discussed that Prabhupada was a cowherd boy in the height of ISKCON yet some early devotees made their offerings in such a direct way.

 

Watch at 9:30+ minutes in

<embed src="http://krishnatube.com/nvplayer.swf?config=http://krishnatube.com/nuevo/econfig.php?key=adc7d7281af83d139641" wmode="transparent" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" height="380" width="470">

[Sukhada]

In the previous quotes Andy gave from Caitanya-caritamrta, this section of Caitanya-caritamrta is giving an overview of Brs. It is analyzing the development of rasa, not the development of a particular jiva. He quoted:

 

"In that part there is a description of devotional service in neutrality, further development in love and affection (called servitude), further development in fraternity, further development in parenthood, or parental love, and finally conjugal love between Kṛṣṇa and His devotees."

 

The fact that this is not the development that a particular jiva goes through is apparent from this quote (as well the previous quote, which Andy decided was simply elementary teachings):

 

"The next development from santa-rasa is dasya-rasa, which means voluntary offering of some service. Next development is Sakhya rasa, or service in spirit of friendship and well-wisher. The next development is Vatsalya rasa, service as well wisher and affection. The next development is Madhura rasa, service, friendship, affection and conjugal love. So in the Madhura rasa, everything is complete; there is Santa rasa, Dasya rasa, Sakhya rasa, Vatsalya rasa, and Madhura rasa. But each and every one of the rasas is complete in itself. A person in Santa rasa or Sakhya rasa is as good as one in Madhura rasa because in the spiritual world everything is absolute."

 

Simple logic also makes it obvious that this isn't a development that everyone goes through. Given that Yasoda-mayi has eternally been in Goloka Vrindavana, why is she not a manjari by now? Do all jivas develop to manjari-bhava given an unlimited amount of time? If not, why?

 

Beggar's quote of Srila Narayana Maharaja also indicates that rasa doesn't change: "The soul’s relation with Krsna, its name, qualities and all specialities, are already present within.... No type of association can change what is already in the soul."

 

As for the quotes from Gaura-ganoddesa-dipika, having a svarupa in Gaura-lila and Krsna-lila is not a change of rasas. Differing opinions of the svarupas in Krsna-lila of devotees in Gaura-lila also does not indicate that these devotees are changing rasas.

[madhuvac]

 

I don't have to do anything. I 'must demonstrate' nothing. Who the hell are you? Some mundane crass debater?

 

 

I am simply stating the standard of spiritual debate. If there are differing opinions and one wants to establish one over the other there is a method of doing so that will be convincing to objective readers. Otherwise, yes you ae free to think whatever you like.

[Narasingh]

 

Beggar's quote of Srila Narayana Maharaja also indicates that rasa doesn't change: "The soul’s relation with Krsna, its name, qualities and all specialities, are already present within.... No type of association can change what is already in the soul."

What about the story of Gopa-Kumar.

I find it fascinating that contemporary Gaudiya Vaishnavism almost never counts Vaikuntha, Narayan's abode as having much bearing. However, the fact that there are eternal parshads in Vaikuntha coupled with the fact that Gopa-Kumar passed through Vaikuntha on his way to sakhya bhava lila with Krsna, should indicate that svarupa is potentially mutable. Also that there are kundas in Vrndavan dham capabaple of bestowing gopi svarup...

 

It would be better to say that while a svarup may be right for one, another may be changed if it supports Lila.

[Beggar]

 

Sri Narayana Maharaja, Mathura Los Angeles, June 27, 1975:

 

There is a difference between rupanuga and raganuga . Those who are in this world and serve Sri Sri Radha-Krsna on the path of raga (loving attachment), following in the footsteps of the ragatmika-bhaktas who are described by Srila Rupa Gosvami in Sri Bhakti-rasamrta-sindhu and Sri Ujjvala-nilamani, all are raganuga.

This applies to those devotees who have some greed for vraja-bhakti and are actually following the process to attain it. Still, it may be that they are not rupanuga, but raganuga. Sri Jayadeva Gosvami was not rupanuga, but raganuga. Sri Bilvamangala Thakura was truly raganuga, but not rupanuga. Sri Svarupa Damodara and Sri Raya Ramananda were not rupanuga, although they were in the intimate association of Srila Rupa Gosvami. They are Lalita devi and Visakha devi themselves, so they are in a different category of eternal associates of Sri Sri Radha and Krsna. They are not rupanuga.

Those who follow Srila Rupa Gosvami’s Bhakti-rasamrta-sindhu and are under the guidance of Krsna’s cowherd friends (sakhas), like Subala, Sridama and all others, and who want to serve Lord Krsna like the sakhas – will not be called rupanuga. They will be called raganuga.

 

Srila Prabhupāda, Los Angeles, June 27, 1975:

 

We are called rūpānuga, "strictly following the footstep of Rūpa Gosvāmī." Rūpānuga-varāya te. And our Guru Mahārāja was..., rūpānuga-viruddhāpasiddhānta-dhvānta-hāriṇe: "Anything against the plan of Rūpa Gosvāmī, not accepted." Rūpa-raghunātha-pade yāra āśa, caitanya-caritāmṛta kahe kṛṣṇadāsa.

[NitaiS]

 

Sri Narayana Maharaja, Mathura Los Angeles, June 27, 1975:

 

 

Srila Prabhupāda, Los Angeles, June 27, 1975:

Did you read the book? Bhaktisiddhanta's pranam mantra is mentioned therein. As is this entire subject. I think if you wish to discuss you should read those sections (preferably in the context of reading the whole thing) and raise specific doubts in relation to what was said.

 

Prabhupada in your quote translated siddhanta as plan, but we are all familiar with the term siddhanta. Is sakhya-rasa outside of Rupa goswami's siddhanta? BRS and Ujjvala Nilamani seem to give a resounding "NO". As well as all other sastras.

[Narasingh]

I think we need to define rasa...

I caught myself using rasa as being mutable when I meant to say svarup in the above statement of mine.

 

I would define the inherent rasa of the Vrajavasis as being this:

Krsna is my life and soul! Srimati Radarani is His Ultimate Worshipable Gopi! All Hail Radha-Govinda!

 

The svarup will correspond with the rasa in that whatever makes Radha-Govinda pleased is the thing to do.

 

The rest is details.... We've all heard the cliche of what is in the details.

[Narasingh]

 

Sri Narayana Maharaja, Mathura Los Angeles, June 27, 1975:

 

 

Srila Prabhupāda, Los Angeles, June 27, 1975:

 

Are rupanugas also raganugas?

 

I understand that raganugas are not necessarily rupanugas.

[Narasingh]

And the final question...

If Srimati Radharani wants you to be a cowherd boy, would it be aparadha to want to be a gopi instead?

[Beggar]

Do you have faith that somebody knows? Do you have faith that somebody can Know Srila Prabhupada's siddha swarupa? But not knowing by research work and then weighing the evidence like a civil court or a university study, but knowing by revelation, by realization through the descending process. There are those that know, that have been given the eyes to see, like Duryodhana, was given spiritual eyes by Krsna to get a brief glimpse of Him.

This is the process, not to take apart recorded statements and compare them with anecdotal evidence from questionable sources.

Go ask someone who has been given the eyes to see for themselves and they may just tell you that you should engage in the process so that you may be give the eyes to see for yourself. And this is really what Srila Narayana Maharaja is saying, what Srila Sridhar Maharaja and Srila Prabhuapada are saying, what all bonafide gurus are saying. But unless we are deeply engaged in this process we will take what is really Hari katha as knowledge that we can grasp in our fist. Yet when we take this approach, we will get the opposite, we will find our fist is quite empty.