Siddha Pranali

[raga]

Dearest Jagat,please forgive my impertinance,I, in my ignorance of your exalted position,did not not realize, your ability to give the true import to Srila Prabhupadas words,when he did not deem it necessary to clutter up his understanding,with your superior "realization".

Dear Shiva, it is only a question of *your* understanding and *his* understanding of the Caitanya Caritamrta. You assume that *your* understanding of the Caitanya Caritamrta and the commentaries of Swami AC Bhaktivedanta is correct, in contrast to *his*. Who has given you the right to assume that whatever you think is the correct understanding of the Swami and the scriptures?

 

For all we can guess, it might be false, given the fact that you apparently have not studied the Caitanya Caritamrta and the other basics of Gaudiya theology cover to cover. Or otherwise, how can you refer to references which do not exist:

"Sri Krsna Caitanya Radha Krsna nahe anya"(C.C),this tranlates as-Radha,Krsna, and Sri Caitanya,are one.

This reference is nowhere to be found in the Caitanya Caritamrta. This is a common wording of "mahaprabhu sri caitanya, radha-krsna nahe anya", found in the song "Guru-parampara" by Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati.

Srila Prabhupada did not say, that when Krsna desires to enjoy,he becomes Sri Caitanya,in order to taste the love of Radha,

If he meant that,then why did he not say that.

What Jagat has said is perfectly in line with Gaudiya theology, as it is found in the Caitanya Caritamrta for instance. You have not presented the exact reference of what Swami AC Bhaktivedanta says, so how is Jagat supposed to know exactly to which sentence of his do you refer?

 

Interestingly enough,regardless of your mindless declaration,"When Krsna desires to enjoy, he becomes Radha",still means what it says.

...

Krsna ENJOYS, as Radha,that is a simple understanding.

 

That is a simple understanding, and quite wrong. Sri Krishna is *visaya-tattva*, the enjoyer, and Sri Radha is *asraya-tattva*, the receptacle of love, or the enjoyed. Of course everyone enjoys in connection with Krishna, but Krishna is the Purusottama, purusa-uttama -- supreme enjoyer. We do not call Radha Purusottami, but we call Krishna Purusottama. What does this mean? To expand HIS enjoyment, Sri Krishna manifests varieties. He remains the principal and prominent enjoyer.

 

In case you only believe in the words of Swami AC Bhaktivedanta, here you have it in his words:

<blockquote>

Eko bahu syama. He alone, He has become so many. And why? What is the purpose of becoming so many? The purpose is anandamayo ?bhyasat. He wants to enjoy Himself with so many.

 

============ REF. Sri Caitanya-caritamrta, Madhya-lila 20.367-84 -- New York, December 31, 1966

 

Alambana may be further divided into asraya and visaya. In the loving affairs of Radha and Krsna, Radharani is the asraya feature and Krsna the visaya.

 

============ REF. Adi 4.135

 

Lord Caitanya is Sri Krsna Himself, the absolute enjoyer of the love of the gopis.

 

============ REF. Adi 4.226

 

The word rasadi-vilasi (?the enjoyer of the rasa dance?) is very important. The rasa dance can be enjoyed only by Sri Krsna because He is the supreme leader and chief of the damsels of Vrndavana. All others are His devotees and associates.

 

============ REF. Adi 7.8

 

 

[Radha speaks:] Now that attachment has become a natural sequence between Ourselves. It is not that it is due to Krsna, the enjoyer, nor is it due to Me, for I am the enjoyed. It is not like that. This attachment was made possible by mutual meeting.

 

============ REF. Madhya 8.194

 

The damsels of Vrndavana, the gopis, are super goddesses of fortune. The enjoyer in Vrndavana is the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Krsna.

 

============ REF. Madhya 14.227

 

The male parrot then said, ?My dear sari [female parrot], Sri Krsna carries a flute and enchants the hearts of all women throughout the universe. He is specifically the enjoyer of the beautiful gopis, and He is the enchanter of Cupid also. Let Him be glorified!?

 

============ REF. Madhya 17.214

</blockquote>

 

Is that enough, or more I should post?

 

Shiva, if you wish to have a clear discussion on a certain point, it will be helpful if you articulate your points clearly and present the references to which you refer.

 

In the words of Swami AC Bhaktivedanta:

<blockquote>

The process of speaking in spiritual circles is to say something upheld by the scriptures. One should at once quote from scriptural authority to back up what he is saying.

 

============ REF. Bg 17.15

 

Sruti-pramana, evidence from the sruti, from the Vedas, that is perfect. Therefore, according to Vedic civilization, if you want to establish something you have to quote the section or the injunction from the Vedas, Then it is perfect. In learned circle you cannot say anything hodge-podge. That will not be accepted.

 

============ REF. Bhagavad-gita 16.9 -- Hawaii, February 5, 1975

 

So this cheating, vipralipsa, is one of the qualification of the conditioned soul. Bhrama pramada vipralipsa karanapatava. So a person, authorized person in the line of disciplic succession, he does not speak by his own authority. Immediately he?ll quote from the Vedic literature to support his proposition.

 

============ REF. Srimad-Bhagavatam 1.2.5 -- Aligarh, October 9, 1976

</blockquote>

 

Let us do our best to avoid hodgepodge and let us quote from the sastra like Swami AC Bhaktivedanta has taught us. "In learned circle you cannot say anything hodge-podge. That will not be accepted." OK?

 

[Rati]

Originally posted by shiva:

 

Humor,yes,hostility no.

Jagat has tried to twist the words of the Guru, and then proclaim that the words of the guru,are best understood with his appendix,which completely changes the actual words and the meaning of them,to suit his limited understanding.

I have pointed that out.

What is YOUR problem?,do you think Srila Prabhupadas words, should have your purport added to them, hotshot?

You must read with an unprejudiced mind,otherwise you cannot see the truth,even if its right before your eyes.

Yes, I am a hotshot! As far as not being able to see the truth, Jagat's qualifications far outweigh your own, no doubt. I am just sitting back and watching the match, wherein you are way out of your league, my friend. Hope you are not a poor loser!

 

[This message has been edited by Rati (edited 05-03-2002).]

[Rati]

Originally posted by jijaji:

Ratiji,

 

You been smokin Salvia Divinorum over there again?

 

 

 

 

Nothing that exotic, I am afraid. Just breathing in too much methane from our huge herd of cows in the pasture out back today.

 

 

 

[This message has been edited by Rati (edited 05-03-2002).]

[Guest guest]

This is about what Ram has just posted:

When you are 5 years old you may not be allowed to see an R-rated movie,you might believe Santa Claus is real,ditto fro the easter bunny.

When your 7 years old,some of those restrictions and beliefs will have changed,yet your still prohibited from crossing the street unattended,you cannot drive a car,and you must go to sleep at an early time.

 

When you are 15 years old,none of the earlier proscriptions apply anymore,still you cannot buy alcohol(in the U.S.),or join the Army,or vote.

When you are 21 years old,there are no longer any activities that are denied you,because of immaturity.

Bhakti is exactly like that.

The neophyte might think one thing about Krsna,after he progresses,he sheds that conception.

This then happens again, and again,until finally, one day he finds himself, in the intimate association of God.

The rules of the neophyte,at that stage, are an impediment to the relationship he has arrived at.

What once seemed to be of utmost importance,is no longer of any value.

What was once concieved of, as being the truth,is then seen as simply a transitory conception,no longer valid,or of worth.

[raga]

Originally posted by ram:

Dear Raga, earlier you said that there are no niyamas in bhakti yoga - only yamas. now you are accepting that there are niyamas. if you actually are progressing by personal realization in bhakti yoga, you would not be ignorant of these basic rules of bhakti in the first place. What is the tangible proof that you have progressed ? I am not asking you to answer me but I humbly fall at your feet and request you to introspect.

I never said that.

 

Did I say there are no niyamas? I said, "Would you define the niyamas of bhakti yoga to be followed according to bhakti-sastra, as you see it?"

 

Did I say I was ignorant of the basic rules and regulations of bhakti? I said, "Upadesamrta we all know."

 

OK?

 

[Guest guest]

Dear Raga,you are incorrect.

How can you say the verse Sri Krsna Caitanya Radha Krsna nahe anya,is not in the C.C.,It is, many places,maybe you should look up the verse, it is there,in one place Srila Prabhupada gives us Jiva Goswamis explanation.

As for who is interpreting,that is not my point,Jagat,simply ignored what was written by the Mahabhagavat,and then gave his own limited purport,that Srila Prabhupada did not deem appropriate,maybe you and Jagat,should rewrite his books,adding your own thoughts,wherever you think is necessary,due to your advanced state of realization,after all you have read a few books,wow,your right up there with anybody who reads them,you must therefore be self realized to the fullest extent,there is no room for growth by you guys,hmm,by the way, have you talked to Radha or Krsna lately? No,oh well,maybe when you give up your ego driven thought process,...

 

 

As for the other things I attributed to Srila Prabhupada,like I said,(are you Blind),they are in the intro to the C.C.

 

As to every thing else you say,and to the other naysayer,read the previous post,I just posted.

 

[This message has been edited by shiva (edited 05-03-2002).]

[jijaji]

Originally posted by Rati:

As far as not being able to see the truth, Jagat's qualifications far outweight your own, no doubt. B]

I think you need to re-word this shamanji....

 

btw..you ever sneak up close to those cows for a direct hit..?

 

 

 

 

[This message has been edited by jijaji (edited 05-03-2002).]

[Guest guest]

 

Another thing ,to try to equate the perception of reality in Vrndavana,by the residents of Vrndavana,with actual truth is a mistake.

The residents of Vraja,are covered by Yoga-Maya,to them Radha is the enjoyed,Krsna is the enjoyer.

Why? This is the natural rasa between men and women.

To them,Radha and Krsna are two different people.

That is the influence of Yoga-maya.

When you read descriptions of what is going on in Vraja,you must remember, that Yoga-Maya,is causing the perception of Vraja-lila, (to be different then ours should be)for the residents.

Their vision is impaired,Radha and Krsna are really not different people,or human,or devas.

This is the proper way to understand books written by authorized acaryas,concerning the rasa of Vraja.

Otherwise,your vision is also distorted,but you do not get the benefit,it is Maha-maya covering you,whereas the distortion of the Vrijabasis is beneficial,and is Yoga-Maya.

The identity of Radha and Krsna,and the reality of Vraja as being the topmost Dhama,is hidden from the Vrijabasi,therefore any true description of the rasa of Vraja,has to eliminate knowledge of the absolute truth,because that knowledge is absent in Vraja.

We,on the other hand,are not in Vraja,we are in a position to be observers,of Vraja,from a more knowledgable point of view, then the residents themselves.

The mistaken belief that,what the Vrijabasis are thinking is absolute truth,is due to Maha-maya,not Yoga-maya.

Therefore it is necessary to try, not to give your own limited understanding,preference over the words of the Guru.

 

[raga]

Originally posted by shiva:

Dear Raga,you are incorrect.

How can you say the verse Sri Krsna Caitanya Radha Krsna nahe anya,is not in the C.C.,It is, many places,maybe you should look up the verse, it is there,in one place Srila Prabhupada gives us Jiva Goswamis explanation.

Dear Shiva, I just scanned over the entire Vedabase. It is not in the Caitanya Caritamrta. It is in the commentary of Swami AC Bhaktivedanta, but not in the Caitanya Caritamrta.

 

Given that it is a stanza composed by Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati, it is certain that there is no commentary of Jiva Gosvamin on it. Even if it was written by Krishnadasa Kaviraja, there would be no commentary of Jiva on the verse, for he never wrote a commentary on the Caitanya Caritamrta.

 

As for who is interpreting,that is not my point,Jagat,simply ignored what was written by the Mahabhagavat,and then gave his own limited purport,that Srila Prabhupada did not deem appropriate,maybe you and Jagat,should rewrite his books,

Dear Shiva, Jagat did not ignore what Swami AC Bhaktivedanta said. How could he have done it, since you never posted the exact words of the Swami here.

 

He only said your understanding was incorrect. Would you admit it might be possible, that at least once in your life, you might by accident misunderstand something?

 

adding your own thoughts,wherever you think is necessary,due to your advanced state of realization,after all you have read a few books,wow,your right up there with anybody who reads them,you must therefore be self realized to the fullest extent,there is no room for growth by you guys,hmm,by the way, have you talked to Radha or Krsna lately? No,oh well,maybe when you give up your ego driven thought process,...

Hodge-podge aside, let us discuss the subject matter. Quote the reference for us to make your point.

 

I would like to quote the learned words of Swami AC Bhaktivedanta in this connection:

<blockquote>

"You should immediately, who has no reference to the sastra, immediately take him as a rascal number one. This is the conclusion."

 

============ REF. Bhagavad-gita 1.24-25 -- London, July 20, 1973

 

"You should immediately, who has no reference to the sastra, immediately take him as a rascal number one. This is the conclusion."

 

============ REF. Bhagavad-gita 1.24-25 -- London, July 20, 1973

 

"You should immediately, who has no reference to the aastra, immediately take him as a rascal number one. This is the conclusion."

 

============ REF. Bhagavad-gita 1.24-25 -- London, July 20, 1973

</blockquote>

 

I have cited it three times to make the point strong, since you have apparently not understood it from the earlier references. This is a Vedic custom supported by Swami AC Bhaktivedanta:

<blockquote>

The sastra reminding us three times. Just like we stress upon something that "Do this! Do this! Do this!" Thrice. So therefore it is said three times.

 

============ REF. Srimad-Bhagavatam 6.2.7 -- Vrndavana, September 10, 1975

</blockquote>

So you may kindly do this.

 

As for the other things I attributed to Srila Prabhupada,like I said,(are you Blind),they are in the intro to the C.C.

Dear Shiva, I am not blind. Thanks for telling us where they are. Now, it is about 40 pages long the introduction, so perhaps you could do us a favor and present the exact words of the Swami? Thank you.

 

[Rati]

Originally posted by jijaji:

I think you need to re-word this shamanji....

 

btw..you ever sneak up close to those cows for a direct hit..?

 

 

[This message has been edited by jijaji (edited 05-03-2002).]

 

You might get a good buzz, but there is the risk of getting a hoof in the face.

 

 

 

 

[This message has been edited by Rati (edited 05-03-2002).]

[Guest guest]

 

The verse is in the Caitanya Caritamrta,so what if its in the purport?

look up the verse,you will find ,if the vedabase is not faulty,Srila Prabhupada giving Jivas commentary.

The other point,I did give Srila Prabhupadas quote,and where it was located,maybe you should read the intro to the Caitanya Caritamrta.

Also,when you are actually self realized,then being able to speak to Radha Krsna,is part of the equation.

So if your not speaking to the Personality of Godhead,then automatically, this excludes you from the ranks of the self realized,thereby leaving room for growth,if you know it all,you would have it all.

[Bhaktavasya]

 

Shiva; here's some verses by Krishna das Kaviraj in Chaitanya Chaitamrita:

 

CC adi lila txt 6

 

"Desiring to understand the glory of Radharnai's love, the wonderful qualities in him that she alone relishes through her love and the happiness she feels when she realizes the sweetness of his love, the Supreme Lord Hari, richly endowed with her emotions, appears from the womb of Srimati Sachidevi as the moon appears from the ocean."

 

adi lila ch.4 txt 55

 

" The loving affairs of Sri Radha and Krishna are manifestations of the Lord's internal pleasure-giving potency. Although Radha and Krishna are one in their identities they have separated themselves etenally. Now these two transcendental identities have again UNITED, in the form of Sri Krishna Chaitanya. I bow down to him, who has manifested himself with the SENTIMENT and COMPLEXION of Srimati Radharani, although he is Krishna himself."

 

adi lila ch.4 txt 220 & 221

 

"Lord Chaitanya appeared with the sentiment of Radha. He preached the dharma of the age- the chanting of the holy name and pure love of God.

In the mood of Srimati Radharani, He also fulfilled his own desires. This is the principal reasons for his appearance.

 

adi lila ch.7 txt 6

 

"Let me offer my obeisances unto Lord Sri Krishna, who has manifested himself in five as a devotee, expansion of a devotee, incarnation of a devotee. pure devotee and devotional energy"

 

adi lila ch.7 txts 18 &19

 

"The INTERNAL devotees or potencies are all eternal associates in the pastimes of the Lord. Only with them does the Lord advent to propound the sankirtan movement, only with them does the Lord taste the mellow of conjugal love, and only with them does he distribute this love of God to people in general."

 

BTW, could you please post the exact reference when AC Bhaktivedanta Swami said (in purport?) that Krishna becomes Radha?

 

 

[raga]

Originally posted by shiva:

 

The verse is in the Caitanya Caritamrta,so what if its in the purport?

look up the verse,you will find ,if the vedabase is not faulty,Srila Prabhupada giving Jivas commentary.

The other point,I did give Srila Prabhupadas quote,and where it was located,maybe you should read the intro to the Caitanya Caritamrta.

Also,when you are actually self realized,then being able to speak to Radha Krsna,is part of the equation.

So if your not speaking to the Personality of Godhead,then automatically, this excludes you from the ranks of the self realized,thereby leaving room for growth,if you know it all,you would have it all.

The verse is in the Caitanya Caritamrta,so what if its in the purport? Well, it's not written by Krishnadasa Kaviraja if it's in the purport, that's the difference. It is not in Caitanya Caritamrta, it is in a commentary on the Caitanya Caritamrta.

 

if the vedabase is not faulty,Srila Prabhupada giving Jivas commentary.

 

Will you please post it here? Is it possible, please? I think not. I just read through the Introduction, and Jiva Gosvami is not mentioned once in there, what to speak of his commentaries on anything.

 

And if this is my fault because I am blind and the fault of the Vedabase because it is deaf and dumb, then perhaps at least you can send this reference?

[Guest guest]

 

I quote you," In the mood of Radha he fulfilled his desire".

What does this mean?

That the desire of the ONE supreme lord,is fullfilled,by becoming,adopting,whatever,the mood of Radha.

Gods highest desire is fullfilled,as Radha.

Not Krsna,Radha.Experiencing life as Radha is the fullfillment of the desire of the Ultimate supreme Person,Sri Gauranga.

Go back a page,you will find, when I said- I chuckle when I hear people saying, they are trying to see their inner self as female.-There I quote Srila Prabhupada,and reference it.

[Guest guest]

I didn't say the Jiva reference was in the intro.It's in a Purport.

I think also it's in a purport in The Srimad Bhagavatam.

The author of the entire Caitanya Caritamrta,is Sri Caitanya,using his pure devotees as vessels.

Whether or not something is in a purport,or verse is irrelevant.

This is the nature of sastra,otherwise why give any credence to any sastra?

Also,do not get hung up on finding some verse,the meaning is important.

Radha,Krsna,Sri Caitanya,are one.

 

[raga]

The exact words are:

 

"When Krsna desired to enjoy His pleasure potency, He manifested Himself in the separate form of Radharani, and when He wanted to understand Himself through the agency of Radha, He united with Radharani, and that unification is called Lord Caitanya."

 

============ REF. Adi Introduction

 

This does not mean that Radharani is the one who enjoys. It means She is enjoyed by Krishna. Krishna enjoys Her. "When Krsna desired to enjoy His pleasure potency... Sri Radha is this pleasure potency to be enjoyed. Right?

 

To gather the conversation together, what exactly is the point you are trying to make, Shiva?

[jijaji]

Originally posted by shiva:

This is the nature of sastra,otherwise why give any credence to any sastra?

hagiographies of saints from the middle ages are not considered as shastra in any school of Vedanta outside the Gaudiya school.

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

You are wrong,"When Krsna desired to enjoy his pleasure potency",What does that mean?

That he deires to enjoy,and he has a specific potency for that.

"He manifests as Radha to enjoy"

How is Krsna enjoying the pleasure potency?

By enjoying it as Krsna?

No,he becomes Radha in order to enjoy,that is the meaning of pleasure potency.

Your limited understanding,is missing the point.

There is one supreme lord,that one, becomes two to enjoy,still they are the same person,different forms.

One is male,one is female.

What is Mahaprabhu?

He is that same one supreme lord,who has eternally split into two,rejoined.

What is his mood?

That is the predominant mood of God.

This is Mahaprabhus message.

"Radha,She is, who I am ,in my heart,my internal self"

"My highest desire for fullfillment is fullfilled in the mood of Radha"

"Yes,I am that flute playing cowherd boy,yet my highest aspiration is fullfilled not as Him,but as Radha".

This is my point.

The supreme lords highest pleasure is not enjoying Radha,as you have assumed,there is one god,that one has become two,they are both the same person,enjoying Radha,is the illusion created for the benefit of the devotees of Vraja.

Mahaprabhu is elevating us to the highest understanding.

His mood,the predominant mood of the ONE SUPREME LORD,Sri Caitanya,is that of Radha.

She is the highest manfestation of the desire of the Lord.

Otherwise,if it were not so,Mahaprabhu would have been in the mood of Krsna.

He does not NEED to manifest as Mahaprabhu,in order to taste the mood of Radha.

That is for our benefit.

He is Radha,He is Krsna,He/she is always tasting the nectarine mood of Srimati Radharani.

 

[jijaji]

Shiva is against all the Babajis because they don't accept A.C. Bhaktivedanta as being the ONLY source for valid Gaudiya information or inspiration.

 

debate all you want about this verse that verse blah blah blah..that is not the REAL issue here!

 

cut to the chase guys!

 

 

[This message has been edited by jijaji (edited 05-03-2002).]

[Guest guest]

 

To jijaji,I do not think you are correct,every disciple of every guru,usually considers his Gurus teaching as sastra.

Why should only ancient texts be accepted?

What is sastra?

That which is revealed knowledge.

Guru,in book form.

The highest understanding,is that sastra is all written by God,flowing through the words of the medium,the Guru.

Otherwise why accept any sastra?

They are being written by people.

At the highest level,sastra is appearing everywhere,in everything.

Neophytes are advised to see god,only in the guru,or the book.

As he progresses,he begins to see god in everything,nothing is seperate from god.

This is trance vision,Samadhi.

Not the bogus samadhi of the psuedo-yogi,but the actual ability to percieve the direct hand of God,in all things,at all times.

To him,god is able to communicate constantly.

 

[Rati]

Originally posted by jijaji:

hagiographies of saints from the middle ages are not considered as shastra in any school of Vedanta outside the Gaudiya school.

 

 

 

Nobody (at least no one credible) in the Gaudiya tradition has included medieval texts in the category of zAstra, which is reserved for upNiSads, puRaNas, itihAsa, etc.

 

It is curious, however, that all the major religions only consider ancient texts to be scripture.

[Rati]

Originally posted by jijaji:

Shiva is against all the Babajis because they don't accept A.C. Bhaktivedanta as being the ONLY source for valid Gaudiya information or inspiration.

 

debate all you want about this verse that verse blah blah blah..that is not the REAL issue here!

 

cut to the chase guys!

 

 

[This message has been edited by jijaji (edited 05-03-2002).]

What is the REAL (or unreal for that matter) issue is simply a matter of personal opinion. Nothing wrong with differences of opinion. Better to have an opposing view than none at all, I say.

 

The REAL ISSUE, is when are your UFO fleets due to arrive and pick us up for our inter-galactic journey, Jijaji? Have you had any transmissions from your space alien shiksha gurus lately?

[Guest guest]

Jijaji,what are you babbling about now?

Babajis?

I am against them?

I only accept A.C.Bhaktivedanta?

Wow,you are quite the editor.

Instead of putting words in my mouth,how about you thinking through, what you write,before you write it.

You are the one who seems to have an agenda?

What is the reason for your fabrication?

Is your allperfectallknowing vision disturbed?

[jijaji]

Originally posted by Rati:

What is the REAL (or unreal for that matter) issue is simply a matter of personal opinion. Nothing wrong with differences of opinion. Better to have an opposing view than none at all, I say.

 

The REAL ISSUE, is when are your UFO fleets due to arrive and pick us up for our inter-galactic journey, Jijaji? Have you had any transmissions from your space alien shiksha gurus lately?

Indeed the Mothership is dropping off a load of Salvia Divinorum later on tonight.

 

The Salvia Divinorum serves as a kind of diksha transmission elixer if you will, in place of the physical presence of the Alien Adi-Guru.

 

You just burn a little Diviners Sage and instantly you receive the alien diksha, pranali and all.

 

They do not wear white however, grey mainly with pink bonnetts!

 

 

 

[raga]

<a name="shiva"></a>

 

<center><font face="Verdana" size=7 color=red> Shiva,

for God's sake,

what is your point? </font></center>

 

 

[This message has been edited by raga (edited 05-04-2002).]