"Sri-Krsna" Caitanya or Caitanya Mahaprabhu, you decide.

[YourServant]

This is a thread on the controversy regarding whether or not Caitanya is Sri Krsna or Mahaprabhu.

 

Please post transliteration, word for word translation, and none of your propogandized purports. We deal only with scripture here, no speculation or purport by whoever regardless of their status.

 

As of now I have found no actual evidence about this matter stating that he is "Sri-Krsna" Caitanya. And don't waste our time with fake scriptures/reference or what so-and-so says. Whatever it is it must be validated by sastra.

 

Post what you feel is adequate but show me the real translation and real evidence. That is the beauty of our belief system, that we have so many scriptures we can make evidence of what is real.

[Guest guest]

I would like to request that the moderator transfer the posting I have made on this subject here.

 

- K

 

[Guest guest]

 

Please post transliteration, word for word translation, and none of your propogandized purports. We deal only with scripture here, no speculation or purport by whoever regardless of their status.

 

 

 

In that case, can we safely assume that Raama-charita-manasa is not to be considered scripture?

 

While refusing to entertain "propogandized" (sic) purports, one would be encouraged to respond if he knew that you were going to apply the standards of pramaana uniformly.

 

 

[gHari]

Do you expect something? I wouldn't give such an obnoxious character the time of day. I don't give a hoot what you believe or don't believe, and I don't imagine that Sri Krsna or Sri Caitanya care either.

 

Damned if my servant will talk to me like that!

 

 

[Guest guest]

With the software of this forum, we are not able to transfer a post from one thread to another. Any posts you have made that you want included in a different thread, you would have to copy and paste it as a reply to a post in the new thread. That is what we did for one of your posts a few days ago.

 

As a side note, it is expected of all that any discussion be carried on in a respectful manner.

[YourServant]

Look, I would like to believe that the merciful Mahapurush Caitanya Mahaprabhu is Bhagwan if you give me a reason to. The lack of posts here only shows your lack of evidence. If you want sure, post RCM but please show me that Caitanya Mahaprabhu is Bhagwan.

 

Thanks.

 

I apologize if I have offended anyone.

[stonehearted]

Admin5: As a side note, it is expected of all that any discussion be carried on in a respectful manner.

 

Thanks. It's getting a little weird in here.

[Guest guest]

No nonsense talk

sharp cutting edge krsna

katha

Let us unite under

the banner:

 

"True eloquence is truth spoken succinctly"

/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Govindaram]

Hare Krishna

 

You mentioned you are a Vaisnava who is devoted to Lord Ramachandra, whom you can have the relationship of servant only, so you are following different path (kind of), Krishna Bhaktas have a good old choice i.e. friend, mother etc, so in each respect it is the same, we all have our Ishta devas (personal favs), and you wanting evidence of Lord Chaitanya, I don't think you'll be convinced, I think its a matter of faith as well, but you're half way there, you consider Mahaprabhu a great devotee/guru, so my suggestion is that if you live in India(I think u do), then go to Vrindavana and you'll find out about Lord Chaitanya Mahaprabhu to your hearts content.

 

 

<font color="red"> HARE </font color> <font color="orange"> KRISHNA </font color> <font color="red"> HARE </font color> <font color="orange"> KRISHNA KRISHNA KRISHNA </font color> <font color="red"> HARE HARE

</font color> <font color="red"> HARE </font color> <font color="blue">RAMA </font color> <font color="red"> HARE </font color> <font color="blue"> RAMA RAMA RAMA </font color> <font color="red"> HARE HARE </font color>

 

 

 

 

[YourServant]

I am Krsna devotee as well but it pains me to see if something wrong is going on within in other devotees beliefs. I would like myself to believe that Caitanya Mahaprabhu is Bhagwan but you have not provided me any scriptural evidence which states this. I believe in another thread all of the ones you provided me with were not refrenced properly and hence open to question. If you indeed believe in Caitanya Mahaprabhu then please light the way, give the torch of knowledge to this ignorant one who is lost in the dark.

 

The other posts were useless moreorless, I could use the evidence because when other people will ask me why is Caitanya Mahaprabhu Bhagwan? And what will I say? I have no evidence, some Vaisnava I am.

 

I cannot give nonsense to scholars, I can only give them the truth.

[theist]

it might be best to accept the neutral positon on this one. That is, "rather he is Visnu-tattva or jiva-tattva I cannot say at this moment. But surely from Him flows oceans upon oceans of Krsna bhakti, each ocean like a wave and ever flowing to bless this fallen world."

 

So please accept this much, help spread vaishnavism through Krsna maha-mantra as He has directed. He will reveal Himself to us as He sees fit.

 

Nothing of this nature can be firmly fixed through the intellect. We may believe today and not believe tommorrow. Realization is another thing, and it is realization we need.

 

In a way you are confirming that He is the hidden avatar. It will be taken that way by His devotees.

 

So if I may suggest, please just for now keep an open mind and do Him some service either as a prophet of Krsna or Avatar of Krsna.

 

There will be no loss.

 

Hare Krsna

[Govindaram]

Hare Krishna

 

Quote by Yourservant:

I could use the evidence because when other people will ask me why is Caitanya Mahaprabhu Bhagwan?

 

You can look at His life, study it carefully, then with a some chanting of Krishna's name you will realise He is Krishna, It seems all you are looking for is evidence that Chaitanya Mahaprabhu is Bhagavan, thats all, do you think when Krishna 5000 years ago was present on this earth any top/dick and harry knew Krishna to be the Supreme Lord, don't think so Prabhu! Same with Mahaprabhu, in-fact exactly the same.

 

 

<font color="red"> HARE </font color> <font color="orange"> KRISHNA </font color> <font color="red"> HARE </font color> <font color="orange"> KRISHNA KRISHNA KRISHNA </font color> <font color="red"> HARE HARE

</font color> <font color="red"> HARE </font color> <font color="blue">RAMA </font color> <font color="red"> HARE </font color> <font color="blue"> RAMA RAMA RAMA </font color> <font color="red"> HARE HARE </font color>

 

 

[YourServant]

OK I have given up on this forum on this matter.

 

All I am asking for is some evidence? Such a small request for your Bhagwan Caitanya and you still cannot provide?

 

Topic Closed...

[Govindaram]

Hare Krishna

 

This is from a Bhakta (raga). Please read carefuly prabhuji /images/graemlins/smile.gif

 

Faith evolves through experiences. One who does not follow the path is hard to convince of anything. There are infinite ways to interpret the scripture, and each will accept the interpretation which suits him. Since Mahaprabhu is known to be a channa-avatAra (channaH kalau yad abhavas tri-yugo 'tha sa tvam || bhAg. 7.9.38), I wouldn't personally try to convince someone about Mahaprabhu based on old sastric statements. For those who believe, the statements declare the truth, and for the disbeliever they convey a different meaning. Each sees according to his faith and insight. There is hardly anything one could label "objective", although each believer would like to believe that their point of view is objective

[YourServant]

Listen Sir cut the garbage here. The truth which you fail to admit is that as of now you haven't provided me any evidence that Caitanya is Bhagwan much less an avatar. You can preach your faith to me but the real truth is that we believe Krsna is God because sastra says this, you would not know Nrsimha Bhagwan is God if sastra did not say this, similarly we cannot say that Caitanya is God if sastra does not say this. Don't give me your purport on faith and the like. There are much more who are more qualified than you will ever be and even their purports I wish I had the time to read. The fact of the matter is quit your preaching if you cannot quote the sastra. The fact is Caitanya is not God, he is not mentioned once in Bhagavatam, Gita, Puran, Upanisad, Mahabharat, Ramayan, and Dharma Sastra these are real veda not your puport.

[stonehearted]

YS: Caitanya is not God, he is not mentioned once in Bhagavatam, Gita, Puran, Upanisad, Mahabharat, Ramayan, and Dharma Sastra these are real veda not your puport.

 

Perhaps it hasn't occurred to you that many of the participants here have other things to do than hop immediately to your bidding. My dear servant, it would behoove you to be a little patient with those you profess to be your masters. (Look: don't think we're too damned stupid to see the sarcasm in your username.) These sources aren't given as certain proof that Chaitanya Mahaprabhu is Bhagavan. Shastra-pramana isn't the only pramana, but it s used to help verify evidence provided by the others. I'm sure you have plenty of reasons to reject many if not all these sources, but here goes anyway:

 

SB 11.5.32:

krsna-varnam tvisakrsnam

sangopangastra-parsadam

yajnaih sankirtana-prayair

yajanti hi su-medhasah

 

In the age of Kali, intelligent persons perform congregational chanting to worship the incarnation of Godhead who constantly sings the names of Krsna. Although His complexion is not blackish, He is Krsna Himself. He is accompanied by His associates, servants, weapons and confidential companions.

 

 

Mahabharata, Dana-dharma-parva, Ch. 189:

 

suvarna-varno hemango

varangas candanangadi

sannyasa-krc chamah santo

nistha-santi-parayanah

 

"In His early pastimes He appears as a householder with a golden complexion. His limbs are beautiful, and His body, smeared with the pulp of sandalwood, seems like molten gold. In His later pastimes He accepts the sannyasa order, and He is equipoised and peaceful. He is the highest abode of peace and devotion, for He silences the impersonalist nondevotees."

 

SB 7.9.38:

ittham nr-tiryag-rsi-deva-jhasavatarair

lokan vibhavayasi hamsi jagat pratipan

dharmam maha-purusa pasi yuganuvrttam

channah kalau yad abhavas tri-yugo 'tha sa tvam

 

In this way, my Lord, You appear in various incarnations as a human being, an animal, a great saint, a demigod, a fish or a tortoise, thus maintaining the entire creation in different planetary systems and killing the demoniac principles. According to the age, O my Lord, You protect the principles of religion. In the age of Kali, however, You do not assert Yourself as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and therefore You are known as Triyuga, or the Lord who appears in three yugas.

 

Mundaka Upanishad 3.3:

 

yada pasyah pasyate rukma-varnam

kartaram isam purusam brahma-yonim

tada vidyan punya-pape vidhuya

niranjanah paramam samyam upaiti

 

"When one realizes the golden form of Lord Gauranga, who is the ultimate actor and the source of the Supreme Brahman, he attains the highest knowledge. He transcends both pious and impious activities, becomes free from worldly bondage, and enters the divine abode of the Lord."

 

Sri Krsna to Vyasadeva, from the Upapuranas (sorry, I don't have a more specific citation at the moment):

aham eva kvacid brahman

sannyasasramam asritah

hari-bhaktim grahayami

kalau papa-hatan naran

 

"O learned brahmana, sometimes I accept the renounced order of life to induce the fallen people of the age of Kali to accept devotional service to the Lord."

 

from Adi Purana (I'm working on a more specific citation):

 

aham eva dvija-srestha nityam pracchana-vigrahah

Bhagavad-bhakta-rupena lokan raksami sarvada

 

O best of the brahmanas, My disguised form is eternal. In this way, with My own form hidden from ordinary sight I take the form of a devotee and appear among the people in general in order to establish and protect religious principles.

 

I'm sure I could find others who may be able to come up with further references. In the meantime, these do appear to be from sources you said you would honor.

 

Babhru das

 

[Guest guest]

The Divinity Of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu

 

OBJECTION: Madhva has said in his commentary to the Kathopanisad that there are nine types of offense to Lord Visnu, such as ascribing divinity to an ordinary mortal. You are guilty of this because you claim that Caitanya is an incarnation of God. The result of this is that you will go to the darkest regions of hell.

 

REFUTATION: There are many evidences to prove the divinity of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu. First we will present those statements of sastra which are from sruti, and then those from the Puranas and other Vedic literatures.

 

for complete article:

 

http://www.gosai.com/dvaita/madhvacarya/Caitanya.html

[YourServant]

Finally, thanks this is what I was looking for, has anyone read this? Your thoughts?

[Govindaram]

Hare Krishna

 

Hey, Babhru you may have turned a Hare-Krishna into a Hare-Krishna! Make sense?

[stonehearted]

Excellent link! I thought of checking out their site later and was delighted to find this link here this morning.

[stonehearted]

Govindaram: Hey, Babhru you may have turned a Hare-Krishna into a Hare-Krishna! Make sense?

 

Not if you mean YourServant. I'm afraid I was a little cranky in response to his impatient and rather insulting posts. If you mean me, that's certainly possible, eventually.

 

The real conversion won't be effected by any arguments or shastra-pramana we try to overwhelm other with. It comes when they see the character of Mahaprabhu's real devotees. When the Lord met Prakashananda Sarasvati, He changed Prakashananda's heart by His effulgence, not by His arguments.

[Guest guest]

Reed: CcI 1.107-109 / CcI,8.21-24 / CcI 29-30 / Cci,8.31 / CcI8,43 / CcII,1.29-30 / CcII 25.269-270 /

[Guest guest]

Yes, I have read one of them ... the one from Srimad Bhagavatam and it makes perfect sense to me. Caitanya Mahaprabhu was a hidden Avatar (anyone ... correct me if I'm wrong) and so his divinity is only understood by those that have faith in the Acarya and the scriptures.

 

 

Finally, thanks this is what I was looking for, has anyone read this? Your thoughts?

[Kulapavana]

My thoughts?

 

I studied the evidence at one time and I was satisfied. Many great Vaishnava scholars (infinitely more scholarly than myself) also concluded that Caitanya Mahaprabhu is Lord Krishna's avatar. That is good enough for me.

 

Some Vaishnavas do not see Caitanya Mahaprabhu as Lord Krishna's avatar. That is usually not due to envy, but due to the reluctance to easily accept anyone as Bhagavan. Given the history of the last 500 years or so, such reluctance is both understandable and commendable. Just on another thread here there were some fellows arguing that Guru is God... go figure..

[Guest guest]

LOL Prabhu, I found that amusing as well ... the 'Guru is God' argument. It's a dangerous mentality and Srila Prabhupada was very strict in dealing with those that claimed he (Prabhupada) might be god. We really don't need another Swami Narayan kind of tradition.

 

 

My thoughts?

 

I studied the evidence at one time and I was satisfied. Many great Vaishnava scholars (infinitely more scholarly than myself) also concluded that Caitanya Mahaprabhu is Lord Krishna's avatar. That is good enough for me.

 

Some Vaishnavas do not see Caitanya Mahaprabhu as Lord Krishna's avatar. That is usually not due to envy, but due to the reluctance to easily accept anyone as Bhagavan. Given the history of the last 500 years or so, such reluctance is both understandable and commendable. Just on another thread here there were some fellows arguing that Guru is God... go figure..