Concoctions in the biographies

[Guest guest]

>> Excuse my deep ignorance. Since you have a different philosophy, why have Madhva's name in the title of your Sampradaya? Aren't you contradicting yourself?

 

Because the upasya-tattva is the same.

 

Some differences in the conception of Brahman, jiva and jagat, as instructed by Madhvacarya and by Sri Mahaprabhu's followers are not enough to cause a formation of a new sampradaya, or a deep deviation. Only the change of the realization of para-tattva or upasya-tattva (istadeva) is the cause for it.

 

You can find in Sriman Mahaprabhu's statements in Sri Caitanaya Caritamrta, that He has accept the worship of Nrtaka-Gopala made by Madhvaitas. He has only rejected misra-bhakti that was included into the sampradaya later on. That's to say, He has accept the same upasya-tattva than Madhvacarya. Therefore He hasn't deviated from Madhva's line at the point of a definition of a new sampradaya.

The scholars argue that Madhva's mission was to establish dvaita-vada, and the concept of our bhakti-acaryas is quite different. Actually Madhvacarya has established the worship of Nartaka-Gopala as the istadeva (upasya-tattva) of his sampradaya and suddha-bhakti as the way to attain His service. That is the essence of our Acaryas' consideration of Madhva as an acarya in our line.

 

dasa dasanudasa

Satyaraja dasa

 

[Guest guest]

 

As Sriman Jñana dasa has kindly explained, iIt is common in sanskrit to use the words "yoga-nidra" (mystic sleep) to refer to a state of trance in complete samadhi. Anyone who is studding sastra will find the mention that Sri Garbhodakasayi Visnu is in yoga-nidra state, lying in His bed who is Sesa-naga. No intelligent student should conclude by this statement that Sri Visnu is dreaming due a sleep condition caused by avidya. This yoga-nitra should be understood as a samadhi state.

 

Some people are imagining that the talks between Sri Madhva and other Acaryas and Sri Caitanya were mere ordinary talks like ordinary people use to have all time.

 

But sastra clearly states these talks are made in samadhi state. Smadhi is to be defined as the same state of conscience - Sama = same + dhy = knowledge, or conscience. These Acaryas, great mahajanas, therefore, had attained the same state of conscience than Sri Caitanya, they had attained KC in the real sense.

 

The Srimad Bhagavatan , in the narrative of King Purañjana, states that samadhi is to be considered as the 4th state of conscience:

 

1st) awaken state

2nd) dream state

3rd) deep sleeping state

4th) ultra-conscience, or samadhi.

 

In this state one realize that the other 3 stages of conscience are only like a dream, or a false reality.

 

Sastra states that if one want to serve Indra he should attain the place where Indra resides, and at Indra's environment he should understand whatever Indra relishes and whatever he may desire. Only then one may serve him according. By inference, if you want to understand the transcendental realm, you should be transferred to that realm by this path, named samadhi state.

 

Vaikuntha may only be naturally observed by samadhi. The only way to attain samadhi is through the association with those who already had attained it. And this association can be found only by Sri Krsna direct mercy.

 

In the sate of samadhi one can see Sri Krsna directly, just like His personal associates can see Him, and many 'secrets' may be revealed by this way.

 

Samadhi is a transcendental realm and may only be attained by a transcendental method. It is only achieved by receiving the seed of samadhi by proper initiation in how to attain it. This can be given exclusively by an expert in samadhi.

 

This donation is technically called diksa. And by the process of diksa, one may gradually attains samadhi. There is no other method. The method is very scientific and is easily reproducible by anyone who by good fortune attains the association with an expert in samadhi, a self-realized soul.

 

Unfortunately ordinary people have too much faith in argument and logic caused by their attachment to their own mind, intelligence and senses, and disdain the natural samadhi as something superstitious and unnatural. They prefer to find some artificial methods to attain the upper state of conscience and put their faith in history, drugs, tantra, argument, logic, bodily exercises and so on.

 

One should be aware that all sastras are written in the state of samadhi.

 

dasa dasanudasa

Satyaraja dasa

 

[shvu]

 

I have my own doubts about your logic of upAsya Tattva about which I will write later.

 

Meanwhile, can you provide a reference, preferably outside the Gaudiya literature, to show that all Shastra was written in a state of Samadhi?

 

Out of curiosity, do you think Prabhupada was also in a state of Samadhi, when he wrote stuff like,

 

People who were not intelligent, followed the Buddha.

 

It is better for intelligent people to avoid lectures on Mayavada.

 

Cheers

[jijaji]

jayasriradhey posts the shortest posting of hers EVER!

 

;^)

[jijaji]

jayasriradhey..

 

All kidding aside, pretty much ALL fanatical religious groups say the same thing.

That theirs is better than all others and that the only way to is through them etc. etc.

 

This is nothing NEW it has occured ALL thoughout religious history!

 

jayasriradhey....don't get so rattled over them!

 

jijaji

[shvu]

 

Among the Gaudiyas themselves, there appears to be different groups who disagree with each other.

 

 

[jijaji]

shvu...

 

More than you know bapu..

 

jajwalbabaji

[Guest guest]

 

>> Meanwhile, can you provide a reference, preferably outside the Gaudiya literature, to show that all Shastra was written in a state of Samadhi?

 

Yes, there are so many references in all Vedic lore, showing that all sastras are compiled in samadhi state. We should mention Srimad Bhagavatam, if you do not consider it a sectarian text. There you can read how Srila Vyasadeva has compiled this sastra as follows;

 

Naradaji has instructed Vyasa (Srimad Bhagavatam 1.5.13):

 

atho maha-bhaga bhavan amogha-drk

suci-sravah satya-rato dhrta-vratah

urukramasyakhila-bandha-muktaye

samadhinanusmara tad-vicestitam

 

"O Vyasadeva, your vision is completely perfect. Your good fame is spotless. You are firm in vow and situated in truthfulness. And thus you can think of the pastimes of Sri Urukramasya (Bhagavan) in trance (samadhina), think repeatedly and describe them (anusmara) for the liberation of the people in general from all material bondage."

 

>> Out of curiosity, do you think Prabhupada was also in a state of Samadhi, when he wrote stuff like,

People who were not intelligent, followed the Buddha... It is better for intelligent people to avoid lectures on Mayavada...

 

For certain Srila A C Bhaktivedanta Swami Goswami was a master in samadhi and he was always longing to conduce all of his followers to this state. In these instructions he is stating that samadhi is not something void or null like some voidists (Buddhists) use to say, and that samadhi is not a kind of a tedious nirvana such as Mayavadis use to state. In theses words he was instructing people in general that samadhi is a very dynamic state, full of emotions and activities, and not a stone-like trance.

 

dasa dasanudasa

Satyaraja dasa

 

 

[Guest guest]

 

>> Meanwhile, can you provide a reference, preferably outside the Gaudiya literature, to show that all Shastra was written in a state of Samadhi?

 

Yes, there are so many references in all Vedic lore, showing that all sastras are compiled in samadhi state. We should mention Srimad Bhagavatam, if you do not consider it a sectarian text. There you can read how Srila Vyasadeva has compiled this sastra as follows;

 

Naradaji has instructed Vyasa (Srimad Bhagavatam 1.5.13):

 

atho maha-bhaga bhavan amogha-drk

suci-sravah satya-rato dhrta-vratah

urukramasyakhila-bandha-muktaye

samadhinanusmara tad-vicestitam

 

"O Vyasadeva, your vision is completely perfect. Your good fame is spotless. You are firm in vow and situated in truthfulness. And thus you can think of the pastimes of Sri Urukramasya (Bhagavan) in trance (samadhina), think repeatedly and describe them (anusmara) for the liberation of the people in general from all material bondage."

 

>> Out of curiosity, do you think Prabhupada was also in a state of Samadhi, when he wrote stuff like,

People who were not intelligent, followed the Buddha... It is better for intelligent people to avoid lectures on Mayavada...

 

For certain Srila A C Bhaktivedanta Swami Goswami was a master in samadhi and he was always longing to conduce all of his followers to this state. In these instructions he is stating that samadhi is not something void or null like some voidists (Buddhists) use to say, and that samadhi is not a kind of a tedious nirvana such as Mayavadis use to state. He was instructing people in general that samadhi is a very dynamic state, full of emotions and activities, and not a stone-like trance.

 

dasa dasanudasa

Satyaraja dasa

 

 

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>I notice that you say vedic and then quote from the SB. Just for the record, Puranas are not vedic...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

 

Is this the Shvu slide again? Why waste peoples time by repeating non-related arguments that have been answered before.

 

Just for the record, your use of the word Vedic is not the only accepted use in the universe. As was mentioned before, Vedic refers to a culture, any text belonging to that culture can be called as Vedic according to english grammar.

 

[shvu]

 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Yes, there are so many references in all Vedic lore, showing that all sastras are compiled in samadhi state.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

 

I notice that you say vedic and then quote from the SB. Just for the record, Puranas are not vedic, neither from a traditional nor critical viewpoint. This reference talks only about the position of the SB. However a work claiming glory for itself is quite common. It does not say that all Shastra, especially the Navadwipa-Dham [the work under the spotlight] was written under a state of Samadhi. And unless I am wrong, there is no such reference anywhere. Neither did any of the principle Acharyas claim that their works were written in a state of Samadhi. So I guess we can safely rule out this statement.

 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>For certain Srila A C Bhaktivedanta Swami Goswami was a master in samadhi and he was always longing to conduce all of his followers to this state. In these instructions he is stating that samadhi is not something void or null like some voidists (Buddhists) use to say, and that samadhi is not a kind of a tedious nirvana such as Mayavadis used to state. He was instructing people in general that samadhi is a very dynamic state, full of emotions and activities, and not a stone-like trance.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

 

How can a void state be tedious? You are contradicting yourself here. Besides, to say 'Mayavadis used to state', is incorrect. Mayavadis are very much existent in large numbers and they haven't changed their definition of Samadhi which of course, never meant tedious. If Samadhi is full of emotions, how is it different from the material state? This is another contradiction. Also by the same logic, one can say Vivekananda was in Samadhi when he wrote all his neo-vedanta stuff. But somehow I have a feeling you will not accept this, for obvious reasons.

 

Anyway as we all know, there is no way of knowing if anyone is in Samadhi or not. There is no decisive test that can be performed to identify that state. When Ramana was sitting in a cave with his eyes wide open and unblinking for days at a stretch, such a state may be given some consideration. Whne you say you are certain that Prabhupada was in Samadhi when he was condemning the Buddhists and Shankara, it is only your faith that makes you say so. Given the fact that his articles on Shankara and Buddha contain erroenous information, I can certainly say that he was in no state of Samadhi.

 

Let us also see what Samadhi means,

 

Savikalpa Samadhi Holding on to the state of reality with effort. A fleeting, temporal state that comes and goes. (Static)

 

Nirivikalpa Samadhi Lost in reality, unconscious of the outside world. (Static)

 

Sahaja Nirvikalpa Samadhi Holding on to reality while functional in the world, although totally unaffected by it. The highest attainable state. (May or may not be dynamic)

 

Clearly, there is no question of having emotions here. Thus a state of Samadhi full of emotions is impossible. A person in such a state, is very unlikely to take potshots at other Acharyas.

 

Cheers

 

[Guest guest]

 

>> Just for the record, Puranas are not vedic, neither from a traditional nor critical viewpoint.

 

Actually this a very interesting remark. To accept only sruti texts ant to reject Vedangas is just like to accept someone head and reject his limbs. As the senses are very disastrous to discriminate paramarthik subjects, viewpoints are quite depreciate for the real seekers of the Truth.

 

The sastras are one. Srimad Bhagavatam is the conclusion of all sastras. If you don't accept the Bhagavatam, you will be troubled by other sastras. So, we don't see the need to quote many different scriptures.

 

>> Anyway as we all know, there is no way of knowing if anyone is in Samadhi or not. There is no decisive test that can be performed to identify that state.

 

This is a common jalpa of those who are ignorant in some subject matter. They say; "As I and the people who I met don't know, by inference no one knows."

 

Samadhi can be recognize even by ordinary doctors employing some electronic devices such as electric encephalagraph that analyze the electric waves of the brain. Even common books on clinic may instruct one to recognize a trance and to notice its difference from a psychotic crises, for example.

 

Bhagavad-gita is to be considered as the mimamsa-sastra of all sastras. This means that it resolves the differences of all sastras by analysis of the conclusions found therein. Gita is a scripture accepted by the adherents of all philosophical systems.

 

In Gita, Arjuna has made a question on samadhi, just like you had done:

 

arjuna uvaca

sthita-prajñasya ka bhasa / samadhi-sthasya kesava

sthita-dhih kim prabhaseta / kim asita vrajeta kim

(Bhagavad-gita 2.54)

 

Arjuna said: O Kesava! What are the symptoms of a person whose intelligence is fixed in samadhi? How does he speak? How does he situate himself? And how does he move about?

 

Arjuna heard about intelligence fixed in trance (samadhau acala). Therefore, Arjuna inquires about the symptoms of a true yogi. "How do those who are sthita-prajña (of undisturbed, fixed intelligence) speak? What is the symptom of their bhasa (language)? How do those in samadhi remain situated in trance? The designations sthita-prajña and samadhi-stha (situated in trance) apply to liberated persons. How do they speak when they face a situation of pleasure or misery, honour or dishonour, glorification or criticism, affection or envy and so on? Do they speak clearly or do they just contemplate within themselves? How do they sit? How do they engage their senses in external objects? How do they walk? In other words, how do their senses behave in relationship to external sense objects?"

 

And in this chapter and in other chapters, Sri Krsna answers Arjuna's question, by describing samadhi and its symptoms. Take a look by yourself!!!

 

dasa dasanudasa

Satyaraja dasa

 

[shvu]

 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Actually this a very interesting remark. To accept only sruti texts ant to reject Vedangas is just like to accept someone head and reject his limbs. As the senses are very disastrous to discriminate paramarthik subjects, viewpoints are quite depreciate for the real seekers of the Truth. The sastras are one. If you don't accept the Bhagavatam, you will be troubled by other sastras. So, we don't see the need to quote many different scriptures <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

 

The Puranas are Smriti and so is the BG. By adding them to vedic lore, you are elevating them to the level of the Vedas, which they are not. Smriti is considered authority only because it is based on Sruti. It also follows that, it is authority only when it does not contradict Sruti. This is the position of any genuine vedantic tradition.

 

But I am guessing that is not so with the Gaudiyas. For them the BG and the Puranas are the only non-Gaudiya literature. They hardly pay any importance to the Vedanta. I have also read that Baladeva was prompted by other Sampradayas to write a Bhasya on the Upanishads that is lost now. That shows how much of value the Gaudiyas give to the Vedanta. Of course, it is their own choice, but it is such things that really makes people of other traditions wonder by what standards, can the GV tradition be considered a vedantic one.

 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Srimad Bhagavatam is the conclusion of all sastras. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

 

Well then, why did Vyasa bother with 17 more Puranas and also take the trouble of composing the Brahma-sutras? This appears to be your own opinion or of your tradition. But make no mistakes, no other tradition of Vedanta holds such an opinion.

 

I will address your other points and the upAsya-tattva later today.

 

Cheers

 

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Well then, why did Vyasa bother with 17 more Puranas and also take the trouble of composing the Brahma-sutras?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

 

As you are aware, Srimad Bhagavatam was written after Vyasa completed the other 17 Puranas and the Brahma-sutras.

 

Srimad Bhagavatam was written as a natural commentary on the Brahma-sutras, and for this reason Vyasa started both with the same verse, janmady asya yathah.

 

[jijaji]

satya says;

 

"Samadhi can be recognize even by ordinary doctors employing some electronic devices such as electric encephalagraph that analyze the electric waves of the brain. Even common books on clinic may instruct one to recognize a trance and to notice its difference from a psychotic crises, for example."

 

Satya....

 

Please show us the clinical findings in regards to traking samadhi. And please name and quote from....

ONE COMMON (mainstream medical book) on clinic not a NEW-AGE or ALTERNATIVE Medicine BOOK that instucts one to recognize a trance from a psychotic crises.

I have family in the medical field and I do not accept your statement at all.

 

;^)

jijaji

[amanpeter]

Don't know if this is relevant to the discussion on scriptural evidence of Lord Caitanya, but my understanding is that He does not appear in every Kali-yuga.

[Guest guest]

 

>> I have family in the medical field and I do not accept your statement at all.

 

Dear Jijaji, I'm a Doctor and sometimes I have to face some cases like that, where one should make a distinction between both situations, and also I still read some articles on this subject matter, and discuss it with some colleges. It's said that delta waves are suggestive of deep absorption in trance and this is a current analysis nowadays. For certain practical medicine is very different in my country (Brazil) than in yours, and I don't known if quotes from Brazilian books of medicine would satisfy your curiosity. If so, I can post many evidences in Portuguese for you. Even in TV newspapers up here trance is considered as a quotidian information.

 

[premananda]

Shvu ji

 

Are you a member of any particular Sampradaya? Just curious.

 

P D

[shvu]

 

No Pemananda Das, I am not.

 

btw this page is too long to read and I am starting a new thread.

 

Cheers