Post by Uttamasloka on Aug 7, 2023 11:54:17 GMT -5
I recently had an extensive eMail discussion about the Jiva Fall issue with Radheshyama dasa (a disciple of Radhanatha swami) from Pune, India.
This is the last exchange which summarizes the essence of the previous exchanges.
His response in this eMail was actually to Patita Pavana NItai Gaura, who started the eMail thread and also participated. I decide to respond to Radheshyama’s eMail to him.
US = Uttamasloka
PP = Patita Pavana Nitai Gaura
RS = Radheshyama
US: Radheshyam - I thought you said you were finished with our discussion?
Apparently not.
And it’s clear from your statements that your mindset in this discussion is one of ‘jalpa’ - not ‘vada’. I have engaged only in a ‘vada’ discussion.
From Jiva Gosvami:
In a vada discussion the motive of all concerned is to find out the truth. This is the ideal kind of discussion. It is for persons who are sober and impartial about the outcome; they simply want to know what is the truth of the matter. They are in the mode of goodness.
Jalpa is a discussion wherein one is not interested in what is said by others, whether it has some truth or all of the truth, because one simply wants to be heard. Any other view or contribution is of no interest. This is the way for a person in the mode of passion.
A vitanda discussion is in the mode of ignorance. In this version the truth is of no value. One simply wants to win at all costs.
I have provided irrefutable evidence from Krsna, sastra, the previous acaryas and Srila Prabhupada, all of which checkmated your speculative non-evidence, but for some unknown reason, you don’t accept that overwhelming evidence - even from Srila Prabhupada.
That’s why I said your logic was ‘low-level’. Actually it was mostly faulty and completely wrong, being against sastra and the previous acaryas and even Srila Prabhupada. But that doesn’t seem to bother you. Very strange.
I’m going to expose your willful ignorance by commenting on your statements below to prove with evidence that they are wrong.
Again.
RS: I have gone through [what you posted, Patita Pavana]. According to Gaura Govinda Maharaja, the jivas in Spiritual world are like the aquatics which are already in the Ocean happily swimming.
Maharaja asked, “why should they leave the Ocean and come to the shore?” On the other hand the tatastha jivas are watching the Ocean and the Shore and thus the fallen jivas are like the ones who chose the shore instead of the Ocean.
I didn’t feel any contradiction from what Maharaja spoke and what SP spoke. HH Gaur Govinda Swami Maharaja is saying : Because jivas in Spiritual world are like aquatics happily swimming in water with no reason to come to shore.
HDG Srila Prabhupada is saying from another angle of view below that, although it is rare, still we have come from Spiritual world long long ago and subsequently handed over to Maha Visnu to be in tatastha position :
Because we have also come down from Vaikuntha some millions and millions of years ago. Anadi karama-phale. Anadi means before the creation. We living entities, we are eternal. Even the creation is annihilated after millions and trillions of years, the living entities, they are not annihilated. Na hanyate hanyamäne sarire. They remain. So when this whole cosmic manifestation will be annihilated, the living entities will remain in the body of Visnu. Then when again another creation will take place, they will come out again to fulfill their desires. The real desire is how to go to home, back to Godhead. (Srila Prabhupada in his Bhagavad Gita lecture, London, August 6, 1973)
US: The tatastha-sakti jivas were NEVER in Vaikuntha with Krsna millions of years ago. And Srila Prabhupada knew that and confirmed it in his books, but you ignore his legacy statements and instead foist this lecture as proof to contradict and cancel what Srila Prabhupada wrote in his books.
And you have repeatedly condemned the no fall proponents for ‘minimizing Srila Prabhupada’ which is exactly and precisely what you have done here and in your other statements. Not good - and hypocritical.
Here are absolute, irrefutable, unambiguous facts - from Srila Prabhupada’s BOOKS:
The nitya-siddha devotees NEVER FALL DOWN to the region of the material atmosphere. SB, 3.3.26, Purport
In the Vaikuṇṭha world there is no disharmony between the Lord and the residents. Therefore God's creation in the Vaikuṇṭha world is perfect. There is no cause of fear. The entire kingdom of God is such a completely harmonious unit that there is no possibility of enmity. Everything there is absolute. SB, 3.15.33, Purport
From Vedic scriptures it is understood that sometimes even Brahmā and Indra fall down, but a devotee in the transcendental abode of the Lord NEVER FALLS. SB, 3.15.48, Purport
The CONCLUSION is that no one falls from the spiritual world, or Vaikuṇṭha planet, for it is the eternal abode. SB, 3.16.26, Purport
A devotee, once accepted by the Lord, can never fall down. That is the CONCLUSION of this incident. SB, 3.16.29, Purport
The eternally liberated living entities are in the spiritual world, Vaikuṇṭha jagat, and they never fall into the material world. SB, 5.11.12, Purport
Therefore it is to be understood that when Jaya and Vijaya descended to this material world, they came because there was something to be done for the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Otherwise IT IS A FACT that no one falls from Vaikuṇṭha. SB, 7.1.35, Purport
Radheshyama: What part of NEVER and CONCLUSION are you having a hard time understanding or accepting?
Seriously.
Why are you engaging in guru-aparadha by constantly ignoring Srila Prabhupada’s statements - in his books - that prove conclusively, without any doubt that NO ONE EVER FALLS FROM THE SPIRITUAL WORLD AND NO ONE HAS EVER FALLEN - EVER?
In fact you never even try to reconcile these statements - you (and all others) just ignore them as if they aren’t consequential or conclusive and your absurd unfounded speculations are factual.
Why?
CHECKMATE!
RS: SP, BSST, BVT all of their quotes I had supplied in my attached file, a part of which I am reproducing here :
In text 19 of Anuccheda 37 of Sri Paramatma-sandarbha, Jiva Goswami says: ata evavidya-vimoksa-purvaka-svarupavasthiti-laksanayam muktau tal-linasya tat-sadharmyapattir bhavati “When he becomes free from ignorance and situated in his original constitutional position, the soul is said to be liberated. In this liberated condition his spiritual nature is like that of the Lord Himself.”
US: Original constitutional position means as a pure jiva freed from avidya and the gunas. Period. Nowhere does sastra or any acaryas say that one’s original constitution position is in the spiritual world. It is simply referring to the svarupa of the jiva, ie: the jiva’s spiritual nature. That’s it.
Case in point: the four Kumaras. They were mukta-jivas still in the material world - before they became Vaisnavas - but eternally freed from avidya and the gunas and free to do whatever they desire or will, just like it is described in the Vedanta-sutras when discussing liberation and the svarupa of the tatastha-sakti jivas.
CHECKMATE!
RS: ata eva: therefore; avidya: ignorance; vimoksa: liberation; purvaka: before; svarupa: own form; avasthiti: situation; laksanayam: in the nature; muktau: liberated; tal-linasya: merged into Him; tat-sadharmyapattih: attainment of His nature; bhavati: is.
The words purvaka-svarupavasthiti indicate that the original constitutional position was in fact experienced in the past, before the soul entered the conditioned state.
US: No they do not indicate that in any way. Here are the facts directly from Krsna.
Do you accept Krsna’s words, Radheshyam?
O intelligent Uddhava! The bondage of the jiva, who is my one part or tatastha-sakti, by avidya, IS WITHOUT BEGINNING. By vidya, he achieves liberation which has a beginning. SB, 11.11.4
Read any commentary by any previous acaryas for that verse and you will see that none of them say anadi means ‘a long time ago’ or ‘millions of years ago’. It means what it says: WITHOUT BEGINNING - and all the acaryas accept that literal meaning.
Srila Prabhupada is not in a position to change that meaning. He cannot change Krsna’s words and there are no indications anywhere in sastra or the writings of the previous acaryas that anadi means anything other than BEGINNINGLESS - ETERNALLY.
So the tatastha-sakti jivas in the material worlds have never been in a liberated state before. EVER. And this speculative extrapolation is not proof. Not even close. It’s just more worthless unsupported speculation.
CHECKMATE!
RS: Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura in his “Sri Kalyana Kalpataru” —
jiba jadi hoilena Krishna-bahimukha
mayadevi tabe ta’r jachilena sukha
“If by chance a living entity becomes averse to the Supreme Lord Krishna, then Mayadevi’s duty is to voluntarily offer her temptations of material happiness.”
US: Srimad-bhagavatam, 2.9.10 proves conclusively that this can never happen in the spiritual world and Srila Prabhupada confirms it in his purport.
CHECKMATE!
RS: Similarly, the famous verse i.e. Śrī Jagadānanda Paṇḍita in his Śrī Prema-vivarta 6.2 states
kṛṣṇa bhuliya jīva bhoga vañcha kare pāśate māyā tāre jāpaṭiyā dhare
“As soon as the living entity forgetting Krishna desires to enjoy independently, Māyā pounces upon him and catches him.”
US: Srimad-bhagavatam, 2.9.10 proves conclusively that this can never happen in the spiritual world and Srila Prabhupada confirms it in his purport.
CHECKMATE!
RS: Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura in his work, ‘Sri Chaitanya’s teachings’, page no. 615, says —
“Sri Radhika is the Source of all individual souls whose function is to be employed in the service of Sri Krishna by the alternative methods of loyal conscious submission, neutrality or actual opposition. The individual souls serve Sri Krishna as constituents of Sri Radhika. When they forget that they are constituents of Sri Radhika they forget the nature of their own selves, and engage in the abnormal activities of the mundane plane.”
He writes three pages later: “The connection of jiva with Siva and mahamaya is established only when he is disassociated from the service of Sri Sri Radha Krishna.”
US: Srimad-bhagavatam, 2.9.10 proves conclusively that this can never happen in the spiritual world and Srila Prabhupada confirms it in his purport.
CHECKMATE!
RS: Srila Prabhupada’s lecture at Tokyo, April 1972 below : Fallen means when one falls down from his actual position. That is called fallen. So every conditioned soul is fallen because he has fallen down from his actual position. What is his actual position? The position is that he is eternal servant of Kåñëa. That is the constitutional position of living entity. But he has fallen means he has given up the service of Kåñëa and he has taken the service of mäyä, means so many things. Somebody is serving country, society, friendship, love, and so many things. They have created service. At last dog service, cat service. But because they have forgotten Kåñëa's service, therefore they are called fallen. These fallen conditioned soul are claimed by the Vaiñëavas. Patitänäà pävanebhyo vaiñëavebhyo namo namaù. That is Vaiñëava's duty. (Lecture, Tokyo, April 20, 1972)
US: Srimad-bhagavatam, 2.9.10 proves conclusively that this can never happen in the spiritual world and Srila Prabhupada confirms it in his purport.
CHECKMATE!
RS: Śrīla Prabhupāda’s purport to Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam 4.28.54 — “The original home of the living entity and the Supreme Personality of Godhead is the spiritual world. In the spiritual world both the Lord and the living entities live together very peacefully. Since the living entity remains engaged in the service of the Lord, they both share a blissful life in the spiritual world. However, when the living entity wants to enjoy himself, he falls down into the material world.”
US: My father and mother are from Italy. I am 100% of Italian ancestry. Thus, ‘my original home’, from a genealogical perspective, is Italy.
But I have never lived in Italy - EVER. Even though it’s ‘my original home’, being a person with an Italian body and ancestry.
THAT is the correct meaning of Srila Prabhupada’s statement. It does NOT mean we fell from the spiritual world because Srila Prabhupada confirmed above that NO ONE EVER FALLS FROM THE SPIRITUAL WORLD. That is ‘your’ mistaken extrapolation - with no support - as usual.
CHECKMATE!
PP: Śrila Prabhupāda (and our previous acaryas such as Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura and Bhaktivinoda Thakura) write Krsna interchangeably for Paramatma and Visnu, so do not consider this as referring to Krsna in Goloka essentially.
RS: Yes Prabhu. That certainly may be the case in certain quotes; besides them, there are innumerable quotes, some of which I have shared above, which also seem to indicate jiva’s original position in Spiritual world.
US: No they do not ’seem to indicate’ any such thing and I proved it conclusively.
The quotes you’ve provided so far only prove you don’t understand this topic and you’re not very good at sastric analysis. Very unqualified by accepted standards.
PP: An acarya writes poetry and songs to impart Krishna consciousness in the hearts of the sadhakas - saying that we have forgotten Krsna, become envious of Him, left His service, wanted to be like Him, enjoy like Him (exactly knowing Krsna in Goloka and trying to become like Him) - this is also a preaching strategy and not essentially describing the core-tattvas to establish the pramanas.
RS: I agree. Therefore I didn’t quote any of the Vaishnava songs. I only quoted Purports, Lectures, Writings or Essays of Acaryas. I had already gone through all the evidence you provided in your file.
PP: I will say the same thing again - One who has not realized the jiva-tattva cannot understand the statements of an acharya in the right sense. Only after proper realization of jiva-tattva, one can put all these statements in the right sense/perspective. That's why it is recommended to study the conclusive statements on the subject, by becoming simple-minded and submissive to Sri Guru.
RS: When we ask the question, “WHEN did Krishna decide to expand Himself as Maha Visnu, to facilitate the jivas independent desire?” The natural answer is `anadi’ and difficult to comprehend when such a thing happened.
US: It is very difficult for us to wrap our limited minds around the idea of something being ‘without beginning’, and that’s understandable.
But how difficult is it to have sraddha in the words of Krsna, sastra and the purva acaryas, and to accept them as they presented them, ie: in a straight forward, unambiguous way? You clearly have a problem with that.
The material worlds and spiritual world have existed SIMULTANEOUSLY and ETERNALLY. There is no support for the idea that the material world ’started’ at some point in time. None.
RS: But whenever it happened, that means, there were jivas who needed a separate facility for enjoyment, who were sent with Maha Visnu (by Lord Krishna) as He expanded Himself as portion of portion as Maha Vishnu.
US: And here we go again with more absurd and unfounded speculation. You completely ignore the meaning and import of ‘anadi’ and just ‘assume’ that there must have been a ’starting point’ somewhere in the past, even though not one single previous acarya has indicated such a thing. It’s certainly not in sastra or any of the Sandarbhas - the ultimate authorities. And Krsna made it clear.
But you don’t seem to care.
RS: And those `tatastha jivas’ got the material world facility. This is my understanding as of now Prabhu. May be I am wrong.
US: You are 100% wrong because there is absolutely no basis in sastra or the previous acaryas to support such a ridiculous idea.
You will never find any statements which prove that unlimited jivas somehow overcame their overwhelming and ever increasing prema - the most intense experience in existence - and decided that being in ecstasy all the time and loving Krsna wasn’t good enough, so maybe there’s something better somewhere else.
It’s hard for me to even write such ignorant offensive nonsense, but this is precisely what you and other fall proponents are suggesting - without any supporting evidence whatsoever! It is blatantly obvious that you have no clue at all what prema is like. Zero.
RS: But I will perform my Sadhana and pray sincerely over years and if Lord and Guru Parampara reveals another angle of Truth different from what I understand now, I will be open to accept it.
US: You are not open at all. You’re bluffing and just saying you are open because it makes you look good to others.
And the proof is that Krsna has provided overwhelming evidence of the actual truth of this matter right in front of your face right here, but you refuse to accept it, and continue with your foolish unfounded speculations and faulty logic. You refuse to accept Srila Prabhupada’s conclusions in his books too.
That’s not being open. That is a sign of cognitive dissonance and sentimental bias.
PP: While you accuse the "no-fall theorists" of interpreting Srila Prabhupada's and previous acaryas' statements, conclusions rather, this is exactly what you (and your friends) are doing in the attached file, by using one's logic and mental intellect to derive an improper meaning out of the statements.
Yes, an acarya can make so many statements, not only in his letters/conversations, but also in his classes for the sake of preaching - imparting Krishna consciousness in the heart of his disciples, in a step-by-step manner. How foolish one has to be not to understand this simple subject?
I have seen so-called great scholars in the Movement fall prey, adopting to their scholarly skills to analyze spiritual subjects simply by reading and using their present mental faculties to arrive at wrong conclusions. What is needed is simple submission and devotion and not scholarly skills to arrive at proper conclusions. A simple-minded practitioner, therefore, looks for conclusive statements and fixes them deeply in their conscience and thereby gets the realizations sooner - than a scholar who relishes back and forth debates and in the end, overlooks all conclusive statements on the subject because he derives taste from intermediary statements which were used as a preaching strategy and thus becomes lost finally and propagates apa-siddhanta in their own preaching.
RS: I am certainly not a learned Scholar who has fathomed the vastness and depth of Scriptures.
US: That much is more than clear.
At least we agree on this one point! 🤔
RS: What I learn and speak is basic philosophy and all the quotes I have supplied are all direct quotes of SP and Previous Acaryas.
US: The quotes are not at issue. It’s your unsupported speculations that are off, as I have exposed.
RS: There are many Scholarly Vaishnavas who are learned in nyaya sastra, who may be able to debate expertly. I am not one.
US: This is not about ‘debating’. I am not ‘debating’ here. This is not a game for me.
I am presenting hard core, irrefutable, unambiguous evidence from guru, sadhu and sastra and Krsna to establish the correct tattvas and siddhantas as they relate to this subject matter.
And my analyses of those statements is properly aligned and harmonious with their conclusions. I have not screwed out some absurd misunderstanding like you do all the time - and all other fall proponents for that matter.
RS: So, there is a need for this causeless mercy from Sri Guru and Sri Gauranga for understanding spiritual subjects in their actual meaning.
Thank you for inspiring me to aspire for the causeless mercy of Sri Guru and Sri Gauranga.
US: You just got it!
Many eMails worth.
Hello? Knock knock! Is anybody home? 🤔
RS: I always pray for that and I will continue doing that.
US: Your prayers have been answered. Now let’s see what kind of spiritual integrity you really have in the face of irrefutable evidence and the exposure of how everything you presented is not correct or supported. Just weak speculation and faulty logic.
PP: Sanatana Goswami never used the word '' long-lost friend" in his Brhad-bhagavamrita (you mentioned Rupa Goswami?). He never used the word "original position" as well. These were added by the translator. Please see Bhanu Swami's translation.
RS: Here below the verse from Sri Brhat Bhagavatamrita 2.6.76 Prabhu. I am reproducing it along with word to word translation. You can see the meanings yellow highlighted, which is what I had written in my Article. You can see for yourself, whether, what I wrote
makes sense or not:
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
cirādṛṣṭa-prāṇa-priya-sakham ivāvāpya sa tu māṁ
kare dhṛtvā vāma-sva-kara-kamalena prabhu-varaḥ
vicitraṁ sampraśnaṁ vidadhad akhilāṁs tān vraja-janān
samānandya śrīmān aviśad ibha-gāmi vraja-varam
cira-for a long time; adṛṣṭa-not seen; prāṇa-life; priya-dear; sakham-friend; iva-as if; avāpya-attaining; saḥ-He; tu-indeed; mām-me; kare-by the hand; dhṛtvā-taking; vāma-sva-kara-kamalena-in His own left lotus hand; prabhu-varaḥ-the Lord; vicitram-wonderful; sampraśnam-question; vidadhat-placing; akhilān-all; tān-them; vraja-of Vraja; janān-the people; samānandya-delighting; śrīmān-handsome; aviśat-entered; ibha-as an elephant; gāmi-walking; vraja-varam-to Vraja.
Having attained me, a friend more dear than life He had not seen for a long time, taking my hand in His left lotus hand, asking me wonderful questions, bringing happiness to all the people of Vraja, and walking as gracefully as an elephant, the handsome Lord entered the village of Vraja.
US: There you go cherry picking verses and speculating about what they mean and extrapolating them beyond their intended meanings.
Did Sanatana Gosvami support your idea in his commentary? No he did not. He didn’t even talk about that. And not in any commentaries prior or after this verse.
Why not?
Do you know something Sanatana Gosvami doesn’t know?
Stick to his commentaries and stop making up nonsense.
RS: Bhaktivinoda Thakura discusses in Jaiva Dharma how Maha-Visnu sends "new jivas" into the material worlds, when the material universes get depleted of the existing jivas. These new jivas are devoid of prior karma and not those returned from the material worlds after annihilation.
Jīvas fall from the spiritual world to Mahā-Viṣṇu who is in the borderline of the spiritual & material world known as taṭastha. He thus transfers them into the material world from his taṭastha region, as described in Śrī brahma-saṁhitā. Jīvas don’t literally originate from Him, it appears like that.
US: Wow!
Your apasiddhanta knows no bounds. Unbelievable speculative nonsense with no support anywhere.
Where do you come up with this bogus offensive nonsense?
Where is the evidence to support this? It’s not in Brahma-samhita that’s for sure.
I’ll help you - there is none. It’s not true.
RS: Srila Sanatana Gosvami himself in his work “Brihad Vaishnava Toshani”, an extensive commentary on the Tenth Canto of the Bhagavata Purana, while commenting on Srimad Bhagavatam (10.87.30), quotes Vishnu-dharmottara Purana —
King Vajra said; “O Brahmana, because time has no beginning therefore even if one person achieved liberation in each of the by gone kalpas, by now the world would be empty.”
Markandeya replied: “When someone is liberated, the Supreme Lord who possesses unlimited potency, creates another jiva (replaces) and thus always keeps the world full.”
Here the saying of Markandeya Rishi that Jīvas are created is not literal. It rather means that some Jīvas fall down to material world from the spiritual world & also act as a replacement of the liberated soul into the material world.
US: Here we go again.
Where does it state that those jivas ‘fall from the spiritual world’?
You’re just making up anything to suit your misunderstanding. Shame on your willful ignorance.
RS: Sri Baladeva Vidyabhushan in his Vedanta Sutra’s 3rd Pada, 1st Adhikara’s introduction says — ❝Individual spirit souls always existed, there not being a point in time when they were created.❞
Then in Adhikarana 11, Sutra 16, Acarya says — ❝The individual spirit souls are said to be created because they are effects of the Supreme. The Supreme Personality of Godhead has two potencies, and these are said to be His effects. In this way the scriptural description of the souls’ creation is not contradicted. In this way the scriptures are correct, and in this way, also, the individual spirit souls are never born.❞
In text 19 of Anuccheda 37 of Sri Paramatma-sandarbha, Jiva Goswami says: ata evavidya-vimoksa-purvaka-svarupavasthiti-laksanayam muktau tal-linasya tat-sadharmyapattir bhavati
“When he becomes free from ignorance and situated in his original constitutional position, the soul is said to be liberated. In this liberated condition his spiritual nature is like that of the Lord Himself.”
ata eva: therefore; avidya: ignorance; vimoksa: liberation; purvaka: before; svarupa: own form; avasthiti: situation; laksanayam: in the nature; muktau: liberated; tal-linasya: merged into Him; tat-sadharmyapattih: attainment of His nature; bhavati: is.
The words purvaka-svarupavasthiti indicate that the original constitutional position was in fact experienced in the past, before the soul entered the conditioned state.
US: Unbelievable! And 100% wrong - again. As usual.
I quoted Anuccheda 37 from Paramatma-sandarbha in a previous eMail. That Anuccheda is part of Jiva Gosvami’s analysis of the svarupa of the tatastha-sakti jivas, and this reference is about their eternal relationship with Paramatma. It proves my points completely. It is a CHECKMATE quote and now you’re trying to twist it to support your nonsense?
Here is the excerpt I quoted, which proves conclusively that the tatastha-sakti jivas in the material world are eternal parts of Paramatma, even after liberation. These jivas emanate from Paramatma, who is an expansion of Maha Visnu. They were never in the spiritual world in any lila, nor have they ever had a spiritual identity in any lila.
"Now the jiva as a dependent of Paramatma will be discussed. The jiva is an amsa of Paramatma or is secondary to Paramatma. That is the jiva’s nature (svabhava). This is the case at all times even when the jiva is liberated. That is jiva’s svarupa, not that Brahman when cut in pieces becomes jiva. By the Lord’s intrinsic, inconceivable sakti, the jiva is by nature dependent as an amsa, like a particle of a ray of light. This is the meaning of svatah.
Jiva has the nature of being the Lord’s sakti because he is part of the tatastha-sakti: because he eternally takes shelter of the Lord, being His ray; because he is separate from the Lord, being different; and because he is a medium of the Lord in the production of the material world. Since pradhana is an insentient substance, it remains in a state of equilibrium (until the Lord places the jiva in it). Hetu jivo ‘sya sargadeh: the cause of sarga [creation of the universe] and visarga [subsequent creation by Brahma] of the universe is the jiva. (SB, 12.7.18)”
In the entire section of Paramatma-sandarbha, where Jiva Gosvami discusses the svarupa of the tatastha-sakti jivas, he never once states anything that indicates these jivas were previously in the spiritual world. This reference above confirms that.
CHECKMATE!
RS: In text 20 of Anuccheda 90 of Sri Paramatma-sandarbha, Jiva Goswami, in discussing how the soul becomes conditioned, again cites Srimad-Bhagavatam 10.87.38 —
“The illusory material nature attracts the minute living entity to embrace her, and as a result he assumes forms composed of her qualities. Subsequently, he loses all of his spiritual qualities (apeta-bhagah), and must undergo repeated deaths.”
Especially worthy of note is ‘apeta-bhagah’, which indicates the soul loses variegated opulences. This means the original position of the soul must have been a situation where these opulences were displayed. This cannot have been in the brahmajyoti or taṭastha region.
US: First of all, there is no support for the idea that the tatastha-sakti jivas are in the tatastha region. They are not. They are either in susupti within Maha Visnu, or engaged in karmic activities in the material world. That’s it. The tatastha region is where Maha Visnu lies and the jivas are within him. They are not loitering on the shore at the Tatastha Bar & Grill!
Second, your mistaken interpretation is invalidated by Srimad-bhagavatam, 2.9.10.
CHECKMATE!
RS: To cite a few more:
• In text 5 of Anuccheda 4 of Sri Bhagavat-sandarbha, Jiva Goswami cites Srimad-Bhagavatam 4.11.30. In this text, Manu says to Dhruva Maharaja:”Regaining your natural position and rendering service unto the Supreme Lord (Bhagavan)”.
• In text 19 of Annucheda 16, the jivas are also described as suddha, or pure spiritual beings, whereas the inhabitants of the brahmajyoti are elsewhere described as avisuddha-buddhayah, having impure intelligence (Srimad-Bhagavatam 10.2.32).
• In text 4 of Anuccheda 1 of Sri Paramatma-sandarbha, Jiva Goswami described the jiva as suddho ‘pi mayatah parah, “Originally pure“.
There can be many such references.
US: And they all refer to the jiva’s svarupa. Nothing more.
Jiva Gosvami goes into detail in Paramatma-sandarbha, describing 21 attributes of the jiva’s svarupa, which is of the same spiritual nature as Krsna - but different in quantity and other things. That’s all that’s being stated here and anyone would know that if they actually studied Paramatma-sandarbha carefully.
But it’s more than obvious to me that you haven’t actually studied these books. If you have, you have failed miserably at understanding properly what Jiva Gosvami has presented. You’re just shooting in the dark and hoping to hit something.
Sorry, but you’ve missed every time.
CHECKMATE!
PP: I have not commented on every interpretation you made in your long file. I think you will get a detailed response from Uttamasloka Prabhu to each and every contention you made to support the fall-theory.
RS: Yes. HG Uttamasloka Prabhu replied to my mail. I got a good chastisement.
US: You got an education.
Sometimes the truth hurts.
Especially when you are attached to your own speculations, ie: false ego.
RS: He is certainly a learned and exalted devotee, who didn’t appreciate my giving a list of quotes from SP, BSST, BVT and goswamis.
US: Wrong! I didn’t have a problem with the acaryas' quotes.
You are deliberately distorting things to try to make me look bad because ‘I didn’t appreciate the quotes of the acaryas’.
Now YOU are the one exposed for playing games like that. Shame on you.
The acaryas are fine. I didn’t ‘appreciate' YOUR ridiculous speculations about the meaning of those quotes.
Is that clear now?
RS: He told me to go through Goswami literature more deeply, which I will do more in the years to come.
US: Based on the fact that you have misunderstood so much on this topic, I advise you to find someone qualified to guide you. You’re not doing very well on your own, and if someone is teaching you this nonsense, you need to find a more qualified teacher.
RS: Nevertheless whatever I have presented is what I understand honestly now.
US: Now Krsna has given you all the evidence to support the correct understanding of these tattvas and siddhantas.
Are you going to continue to hold on to your mistaken unproven ideas, that have been exposed and defeated over and over with the correct evidence?
That will be an indication of your sraddha and adhikara and openness.
RS: I have no apprehension towards any Vaishnava who may have another outlook on this subject.
US: You have no apprehension because you just conveniently ignore anyone who disagrees, and you remain attached to your misconceptions even after they have been exposed with the correct understanding.
RS: Krishna and Guru Parampara are enlightening me in this way and if they feel They need to modify my understanding in future, They will do and I am always open to that.
US: They just did it!
And again, you are not ‘open’ in any way.
The proof is that you have never once responded to any of the evidence I presented, to either comment on it, refute it, or accept it. Nothing. You just ignored it. That’s not a discussion, nor is it being open minded. That’s Jalpa. I have responded in detail to everything you’ve presented and exposed it as being incorrect.
Time to really open your eyes and heart and shut down your ego, which is clearly preventing you from being genuinely humble and accepting of the truth and facts.
Uttamasloka dasa...
This is the last exchange which summarizes the essence of the previous exchanges.
His response in this eMail was actually to Patita Pavana NItai Gaura, who started the eMail thread and also participated. I decide to respond to Radheshyama’s eMail to him.
US = Uttamasloka
PP = Patita Pavana Nitai Gaura
RS = Radheshyama
US: Radheshyam - I thought you said you were finished with our discussion?
Apparently not.
And it’s clear from your statements that your mindset in this discussion is one of ‘jalpa’ - not ‘vada’. I have engaged only in a ‘vada’ discussion.
From Jiva Gosvami:
In a vada discussion the motive of all concerned is to find out the truth. This is the ideal kind of discussion. It is for persons who are sober and impartial about the outcome; they simply want to know what is the truth of the matter. They are in the mode of goodness.
Jalpa is a discussion wherein one is not interested in what is said by others, whether it has some truth or all of the truth, because one simply wants to be heard. Any other view or contribution is of no interest. This is the way for a person in the mode of passion.
A vitanda discussion is in the mode of ignorance. In this version the truth is of no value. One simply wants to win at all costs.
I have provided irrefutable evidence from Krsna, sastra, the previous acaryas and Srila Prabhupada, all of which checkmated your speculative non-evidence, but for some unknown reason, you don’t accept that overwhelming evidence - even from Srila Prabhupada.
That’s why I said your logic was ‘low-level’. Actually it was mostly faulty and completely wrong, being against sastra and the previous acaryas and even Srila Prabhupada. But that doesn’t seem to bother you. Very strange.
I’m going to expose your willful ignorance by commenting on your statements below to prove with evidence that they are wrong.
Again.
RS: I have gone through [what you posted, Patita Pavana]. According to Gaura Govinda Maharaja, the jivas in Spiritual world are like the aquatics which are already in the Ocean happily swimming.
Maharaja asked, “why should they leave the Ocean and come to the shore?” On the other hand the tatastha jivas are watching the Ocean and the Shore and thus the fallen jivas are like the ones who chose the shore instead of the Ocean.
I didn’t feel any contradiction from what Maharaja spoke and what SP spoke. HH Gaur Govinda Swami Maharaja is saying : Because jivas in Spiritual world are like aquatics happily swimming in water with no reason to come to shore.
HDG Srila Prabhupada is saying from another angle of view below that, although it is rare, still we have come from Spiritual world long long ago and subsequently handed over to Maha Visnu to be in tatastha position :
Because we have also come down from Vaikuntha some millions and millions of years ago. Anadi karama-phale. Anadi means before the creation. We living entities, we are eternal. Even the creation is annihilated after millions and trillions of years, the living entities, they are not annihilated. Na hanyate hanyamäne sarire. They remain. So when this whole cosmic manifestation will be annihilated, the living entities will remain in the body of Visnu. Then when again another creation will take place, they will come out again to fulfill their desires. The real desire is how to go to home, back to Godhead. (Srila Prabhupada in his Bhagavad Gita lecture, London, August 6, 1973)
US: The tatastha-sakti jivas were NEVER in Vaikuntha with Krsna millions of years ago. And Srila Prabhupada knew that and confirmed it in his books, but you ignore his legacy statements and instead foist this lecture as proof to contradict and cancel what Srila Prabhupada wrote in his books.
And you have repeatedly condemned the no fall proponents for ‘minimizing Srila Prabhupada’ which is exactly and precisely what you have done here and in your other statements. Not good - and hypocritical.
Here are absolute, irrefutable, unambiguous facts - from Srila Prabhupada’s BOOKS:
The nitya-siddha devotees NEVER FALL DOWN to the region of the material atmosphere. SB, 3.3.26, Purport
In the Vaikuṇṭha world there is no disharmony between the Lord and the residents. Therefore God's creation in the Vaikuṇṭha world is perfect. There is no cause of fear. The entire kingdom of God is such a completely harmonious unit that there is no possibility of enmity. Everything there is absolute. SB, 3.15.33, Purport
From Vedic scriptures it is understood that sometimes even Brahmā and Indra fall down, but a devotee in the transcendental abode of the Lord NEVER FALLS. SB, 3.15.48, Purport
The CONCLUSION is that no one falls from the spiritual world, or Vaikuṇṭha planet, for it is the eternal abode. SB, 3.16.26, Purport
A devotee, once accepted by the Lord, can never fall down. That is the CONCLUSION of this incident. SB, 3.16.29, Purport
The eternally liberated living entities are in the spiritual world, Vaikuṇṭha jagat, and they never fall into the material world. SB, 5.11.12, Purport
Therefore it is to be understood that when Jaya and Vijaya descended to this material world, they came because there was something to be done for the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Otherwise IT IS A FACT that no one falls from Vaikuṇṭha. SB, 7.1.35, Purport
Radheshyama: What part of NEVER and CONCLUSION are you having a hard time understanding or accepting?
Seriously.
Why are you engaging in guru-aparadha by constantly ignoring Srila Prabhupada’s statements - in his books - that prove conclusively, without any doubt that NO ONE EVER FALLS FROM THE SPIRITUAL WORLD AND NO ONE HAS EVER FALLEN - EVER?
In fact you never even try to reconcile these statements - you (and all others) just ignore them as if they aren’t consequential or conclusive and your absurd unfounded speculations are factual.
Why?
CHECKMATE!
RS: SP, BSST, BVT all of their quotes I had supplied in my attached file, a part of which I am reproducing here :
In text 19 of Anuccheda 37 of Sri Paramatma-sandarbha, Jiva Goswami says: ata evavidya-vimoksa-purvaka-svarupavasthiti-laksanayam muktau tal-linasya tat-sadharmyapattir bhavati “When he becomes free from ignorance and situated in his original constitutional position, the soul is said to be liberated. In this liberated condition his spiritual nature is like that of the Lord Himself.”
US: Original constitutional position means as a pure jiva freed from avidya and the gunas. Period. Nowhere does sastra or any acaryas say that one’s original constitution position is in the spiritual world. It is simply referring to the svarupa of the jiva, ie: the jiva’s spiritual nature. That’s it.
Case in point: the four Kumaras. They were mukta-jivas still in the material world - before they became Vaisnavas - but eternally freed from avidya and the gunas and free to do whatever they desire or will, just like it is described in the Vedanta-sutras when discussing liberation and the svarupa of the tatastha-sakti jivas.
CHECKMATE!
RS: ata eva: therefore; avidya: ignorance; vimoksa: liberation; purvaka: before; svarupa: own form; avasthiti: situation; laksanayam: in the nature; muktau: liberated; tal-linasya: merged into Him; tat-sadharmyapattih: attainment of His nature; bhavati: is.
The words purvaka-svarupavasthiti indicate that the original constitutional position was in fact experienced in the past, before the soul entered the conditioned state.
US: No they do not indicate that in any way. Here are the facts directly from Krsna.
Do you accept Krsna’s words, Radheshyam?
O intelligent Uddhava! The bondage of the jiva, who is my one part or tatastha-sakti, by avidya, IS WITHOUT BEGINNING. By vidya, he achieves liberation which has a beginning. SB, 11.11.4
Read any commentary by any previous acaryas for that verse and you will see that none of them say anadi means ‘a long time ago’ or ‘millions of years ago’. It means what it says: WITHOUT BEGINNING - and all the acaryas accept that literal meaning.
Srila Prabhupada is not in a position to change that meaning. He cannot change Krsna’s words and there are no indications anywhere in sastra or the writings of the previous acaryas that anadi means anything other than BEGINNINGLESS - ETERNALLY.
So the tatastha-sakti jivas in the material worlds have never been in a liberated state before. EVER. And this speculative extrapolation is not proof. Not even close. It’s just more worthless unsupported speculation.
CHECKMATE!
RS: Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura in his “Sri Kalyana Kalpataru” —
jiba jadi hoilena Krishna-bahimukha
mayadevi tabe ta’r jachilena sukha
“If by chance a living entity becomes averse to the Supreme Lord Krishna, then Mayadevi’s duty is to voluntarily offer her temptations of material happiness.”
US: Srimad-bhagavatam, 2.9.10 proves conclusively that this can never happen in the spiritual world and Srila Prabhupada confirms it in his purport.
CHECKMATE!
RS: Similarly, the famous verse i.e. Śrī Jagadānanda Paṇḍita in his Śrī Prema-vivarta 6.2 states
kṛṣṇa bhuliya jīva bhoga vañcha kare pāśate māyā tāre jāpaṭiyā dhare
“As soon as the living entity forgetting Krishna desires to enjoy independently, Māyā pounces upon him and catches him.”
US: Srimad-bhagavatam, 2.9.10 proves conclusively that this can never happen in the spiritual world and Srila Prabhupada confirms it in his purport.
CHECKMATE!
RS: Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura in his work, ‘Sri Chaitanya’s teachings’, page no. 615, says —
“Sri Radhika is the Source of all individual souls whose function is to be employed in the service of Sri Krishna by the alternative methods of loyal conscious submission, neutrality or actual opposition. The individual souls serve Sri Krishna as constituents of Sri Radhika. When they forget that they are constituents of Sri Radhika they forget the nature of their own selves, and engage in the abnormal activities of the mundane plane.”
He writes three pages later: “The connection of jiva with Siva and mahamaya is established only when he is disassociated from the service of Sri Sri Radha Krishna.”
US: Srimad-bhagavatam, 2.9.10 proves conclusively that this can never happen in the spiritual world and Srila Prabhupada confirms it in his purport.
CHECKMATE!
RS: Srila Prabhupada’s lecture at Tokyo, April 1972 below : Fallen means when one falls down from his actual position. That is called fallen. So every conditioned soul is fallen because he has fallen down from his actual position. What is his actual position? The position is that he is eternal servant of Kåñëa. That is the constitutional position of living entity. But he has fallen means he has given up the service of Kåñëa and he has taken the service of mäyä, means so many things. Somebody is serving country, society, friendship, love, and so many things. They have created service. At last dog service, cat service. But because they have forgotten Kåñëa's service, therefore they are called fallen. These fallen conditioned soul are claimed by the Vaiñëavas. Patitänäà pävanebhyo vaiñëavebhyo namo namaù. That is Vaiñëava's duty. (Lecture, Tokyo, April 20, 1972)
US: Srimad-bhagavatam, 2.9.10 proves conclusively that this can never happen in the spiritual world and Srila Prabhupada confirms it in his purport.
CHECKMATE!
RS: Śrīla Prabhupāda’s purport to Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam 4.28.54 — “The original home of the living entity and the Supreme Personality of Godhead is the spiritual world. In the spiritual world both the Lord and the living entities live together very peacefully. Since the living entity remains engaged in the service of the Lord, they both share a blissful life in the spiritual world. However, when the living entity wants to enjoy himself, he falls down into the material world.”
US: My father and mother are from Italy. I am 100% of Italian ancestry. Thus, ‘my original home’, from a genealogical perspective, is Italy.
But I have never lived in Italy - EVER. Even though it’s ‘my original home’, being a person with an Italian body and ancestry.
THAT is the correct meaning of Srila Prabhupada’s statement. It does NOT mean we fell from the spiritual world because Srila Prabhupada confirmed above that NO ONE EVER FALLS FROM THE SPIRITUAL WORLD. That is ‘your’ mistaken extrapolation - with no support - as usual.
CHECKMATE!
PP: Śrila Prabhupāda (and our previous acaryas such as Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura and Bhaktivinoda Thakura) write Krsna interchangeably for Paramatma and Visnu, so do not consider this as referring to Krsna in Goloka essentially.
RS: Yes Prabhu. That certainly may be the case in certain quotes; besides them, there are innumerable quotes, some of which I have shared above, which also seem to indicate jiva’s original position in Spiritual world.
US: No they do not ’seem to indicate’ any such thing and I proved it conclusively.
The quotes you’ve provided so far only prove you don’t understand this topic and you’re not very good at sastric analysis. Very unqualified by accepted standards.
PP: An acarya writes poetry and songs to impart Krishna consciousness in the hearts of the sadhakas - saying that we have forgotten Krsna, become envious of Him, left His service, wanted to be like Him, enjoy like Him (exactly knowing Krsna in Goloka and trying to become like Him) - this is also a preaching strategy and not essentially describing the core-tattvas to establish the pramanas.
RS: I agree. Therefore I didn’t quote any of the Vaishnava songs. I only quoted Purports, Lectures, Writings or Essays of Acaryas. I had already gone through all the evidence you provided in your file.
PP: I will say the same thing again - One who has not realized the jiva-tattva cannot understand the statements of an acharya in the right sense. Only after proper realization of jiva-tattva, one can put all these statements in the right sense/perspective. That's why it is recommended to study the conclusive statements on the subject, by becoming simple-minded and submissive to Sri Guru.
RS: When we ask the question, “WHEN did Krishna decide to expand Himself as Maha Visnu, to facilitate the jivas independent desire?” The natural answer is `anadi’ and difficult to comprehend when such a thing happened.
US: It is very difficult for us to wrap our limited minds around the idea of something being ‘without beginning’, and that’s understandable.
But how difficult is it to have sraddha in the words of Krsna, sastra and the purva acaryas, and to accept them as they presented them, ie: in a straight forward, unambiguous way? You clearly have a problem with that.
The material worlds and spiritual world have existed SIMULTANEOUSLY and ETERNALLY. There is no support for the idea that the material world ’started’ at some point in time. None.
RS: But whenever it happened, that means, there were jivas who needed a separate facility for enjoyment, who were sent with Maha Visnu (by Lord Krishna) as He expanded Himself as portion of portion as Maha Vishnu.
US: And here we go again with more absurd and unfounded speculation. You completely ignore the meaning and import of ‘anadi’ and just ‘assume’ that there must have been a ’starting point’ somewhere in the past, even though not one single previous acarya has indicated such a thing. It’s certainly not in sastra or any of the Sandarbhas - the ultimate authorities. And Krsna made it clear.
But you don’t seem to care.
RS: And those `tatastha jivas’ got the material world facility. This is my understanding as of now Prabhu. May be I am wrong.
US: You are 100% wrong because there is absolutely no basis in sastra or the previous acaryas to support such a ridiculous idea.
You will never find any statements which prove that unlimited jivas somehow overcame their overwhelming and ever increasing prema - the most intense experience in existence - and decided that being in ecstasy all the time and loving Krsna wasn’t good enough, so maybe there’s something better somewhere else.
It’s hard for me to even write such ignorant offensive nonsense, but this is precisely what you and other fall proponents are suggesting - without any supporting evidence whatsoever! It is blatantly obvious that you have no clue at all what prema is like. Zero.
RS: But I will perform my Sadhana and pray sincerely over years and if Lord and Guru Parampara reveals another angle of Truth different from what I understand now, I will be open to accept it.
US: You are not open at all. You’re bluffing and just saying you are open because it makes you look good to others.
And the proof is that Krsna has provided overwhelming evidence of the actual truth of this matter right in front of your face right here, but you refuse to accept it, and continue with your foolish unfounded speculations and faulty logic. You refuse to accept Srila Prabhupada’s conclusions in his books too.
That’s not being open. That is a sign of cognitive dissonance and sentimental bias.
PP: While you accuse the "no-fall theorists" of interpreting Srila Prabhupada's and previous acaryas' statements, conclusions rather, this is exactly what you (and your friends) are doing in the attached file, by using one's logic and mental intellect to derive an improper meaning out of the statements.
Yes, an acarya can make so many statements, not only in his letters/conversations, but also in his classes for the sake of preaching - imparting Krishna consciousness in the heart of his disciples, in a step-by-step manner. How foolish one has to be not to understand this simple subject?
I have seen so-called great scholars in the Movement fall prey, adopting to their scholarly skills to analyze spiritual subjects simply by reading and using their present mental faculties to arrive at wrong conclusions. What is needed is simple submission and devotion and not scholarly skills to arrive at proper conclusions. A simple-minded practitioner, therefore, looks for conclusive statements and fixes them deeply in their conscience and thereby gets the realizations sooner - than a scholar who relishes back and forth debates and in the end, overlooks all conclusive statements on the subject because he derives taste from intermediary statements which were used as a preaching strategy and thus becomes lost finally and propagates apa-siddhanta in their own preaching.
RS: I am certainly not a learned Scholar who has fathomed the vastness and depth of Scriptures.
US: That much is more than clear.
At least we agree on this one point! 🤔
RS: What I learn and speak is basic philosophy and all the quotes I have supplied are all direct quotes of SP and Previous Acaryas.
US: The quotes are not at issue. It’s your unsupported speculations that are off, as I have exposed.
RS: There are many Scholarly Vaishnavas who are learned in nyaya sastra, who may be able to debate expertly. I am not one.
US: This is not about ‘debating’. I am not ‘debating’ here. This is not a game for me.
I am presenting hard core, irrefutable, unambiguous evidence from guru, sadhu and sastra and Krsna to establish the correct tattvas and siddhantas as they relate to this subject matter.
And my analyses of those statements is properly aligned and harmonious with their conclusions. I have not screwed out some absurd misunderstanding like you do all the time - and all other fall proponents for that matter.
RS: So, there is a need for this causeless mercy from Sri Guru and Sri Gauranga for understanding spiritual subjects in their actual meaning.
Thank you for inspiring me to aspire for the causeless mercy of Sri Guru and Sri Gauranga.
US: You just got it!
Many eMails worth.
Hello? Knock knock! Is anybody home? 🤔
RS: I always pray for that and I will continue doing that.
US: Your prayers have been answered. Now let’s see what kind of spiritual integrity you really have in the face of irrefutable evidence and the exposure of how everything you presented is not correct or supported. Just weak speculation and faulty logic.
PP: Sanatana Goswami never used the word '' long-lost friend" in his Brhad-bhagavamrita (you mentioned Rupa Goswami?). He never used the word "original position" as well. These were added by the translator. Please see Bhanu Swami's translation.
RS: Here below the verse from Sri Brhat Bhagavatamrita 2.6.76 Prabhu. I am reproducing it along with word to word translation. You can see the meanings yellow highlighted, which is what I had written in my Article. You can see for yourself, whether, what I wrote
makes sense or not:
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
cirādṛṣṭa-prāṇa-priya-sakham ivāvāpya sa tu māṁ
kare dhṛtvā vāma-sva-kara-kamalena prabhu-varaḥ
vicitraṁ sampraśnaṁ vidadhad akhilāṁs tān vraja-janān
samānandya śrīmān aviśad ibha-gāmi vraja-varam
cira-for a long time; adṛṣṭa-not seen; prāṇa-life; priya-dear; sakham-friend; iva-as if; avāpya-attaining; saḥ-He; tu-indeed; mām-me; kare-by the hand; dhṛtvā-taking; vāma-sva-kara-kamalena-in His own left lotus hand; prabhu-varaḥ-the Lord; vicitram-wonderful; sampraśnam-question; vidadhat-placing; akhilān-all; tān-them; vraja-of Vraja; janān-the people; samānandya-delighting; śrīmān-handsome; aviśat-entered; ibha-as an elephant; gāmi-walking; vraja-varam-to Vraja.
Having attained me, a friend more dear than life He had not seen for a long time, taking my hand in His left lotus hand, asking me wonderful questions, bringing happiness to all the people of Vraja, and walking as gracefully as an elephant, the handsome Lord entered the village of Vraja.
US: There you go cherry picking verses and speculating about what they mean and extrapolating them beyond their intended meanings.
Did Sanatana Gosvami support your idea in his commentary? No he did not. He didn’t even talk about that. And not in any commentaries prior or after this verse.
Why not?
Do you know something Sanatana Gosvami doesn’t know?
Stick to his commentaries and stop making up nonsense.
RS: Bhaktivinoda Thakura discusses in Jaiva Dharma how Maha-Visnu sends "new jivas" into the material worlds, when the material universes get depleted of the existing jivas. These new jivas are devoid of prior karma and not those returned from the material worlds after annihilation.
Jīvas fall from the spiritual world to Mahā-Viṣṇu who is in the borderline of the spiritual & material world known as taṭastha. He thus transfers them into the material world from his taṭastha region, as described in Śrī brahma-saṁhitā. Jīvas don’t literally originate from Him, it appears like that.
US: Wow!
Your apasiddhanta knows no bounds. Unbelievable speculative nonsense with no support anywhere.
Where do you come up with this bogus offensive nonsense?
Where is the evidence to support this? It’s not in Brahma-samhita that’s for sure.
I’ll help you - there is none. It’s not true.
RS: Srila Sanatana Gosvami himself in his work “Brihad Vaishnava Toshani”, an extensive commentary on the Tenth Canto of the Bhagavata Purana, while commenting on Srimad Bhagavatam (10.87.30), quotes Vishnu-dharmottara Purana —
King Vajra said; “O Brahmana, because time has no beginning therefore even if one person achieved liberation in each of the by gone kalpas, by now the world would be empty.”
Markandeya replied: “When someone is liberated, the Supreme Lord who possesses unlimited potency, creates another jiva (replaces) and thus always keeps the world full.”
Here the saying of Markandeya Rishi that Jīvas are created is not literal. It rather means that some Jīvas fall down to material world from the spiritual world & also act as a replacement of the liberated soul into the material world.
US: Here we go again.
Where does it state that those jivas ‘fall from the spiritual world’?
You’re just making up anything to suit your misunderstanding. Shame on your willful ignorance.
RS: Sri Baladeva Vidyabhushan in his Vedanta Sutra’s 3rd Pada, 1st Adhikara’s introduction says — ❝Individual spirit souls always existed, there not being a point in time when they were created.❞
Then in Adhikarana 11, Sutra 16, Acarya says — ❝The individual spirit souls are said to be created because they are effects of the Supreme. The Supreme Personality of Godhead has two potencies, and these are said to be His effects. In this way the scriptural description of the souls’ creation is not contradicted. In this way the scriptures are correct, and in this way, also, the individual spirit souls are never born.❞
In text 19 of Anuccheda 37 of Sri Paramatma-sandarbha, Jiva Goswami says: ata evavidya-vimoksa-purvaka-svarupavasthiti-laksanayam muktau tal-linasya tat-sadharmyapattir bhavati
“When he becomes free from ignorance and situated in his original constitutional position, the soul is said to be liberated. In this liberated condition his spiritual nature is like that of the Lord Himself.”
ata eva: therefore; avidya: ignorance; vimoksa: liberation; purvaka: before; svarupa: own form; avasthiti: situation; laksanayam: in the nature; muktau: liberated; tal-linasya: merged into Him; tat-sadharmyapattih: attainment of His nature; bhavati: is.
The words purvaka-svarupavasthiti indicate that the original constitutional position was in fact experienced in the past, before the soul entered the conditioned state.
US: Unbelievable! And 100% wrong - again. As usual.
I quoted Anuccheda 37 from Paramatma-sandarbha in a previous eMail. That Anuccheda is part of Jiva Gosvami’s analysis of the svarupa of the tatastha-sakti jivas, and this reference is about their eternal relationship with Paramatma. It proves my points completely. It is a CHECKMATE quote and now you’re trying to twist it to support your nonsense?
Here is the excerpt I quoted, which proves conclusively that the tatastha-sakti jivas in the material world are eternal parts of Paramatma, even after liberation. These jivas emanate from Paramatma, who is an expansion of Maha Visnu. They were never in the spiritual world in any lila, nor have they ever had a spiritual identity in any lila.
"Now the jiva as a dependent of Paramatma will be discussed. The jiva is an amsa of Paramatma or is secondary to Paramatma. That is the jiva’s nature (svabhava). This is the case at all times even when the jiva is liberated. That is jiva’s svarupa, not that Brahman when cut in pieces becomes jiva. By the Lord’s intrinsic, inconceivable sakti, the jiva is by nature dependent as an amsa, like a particle of a ray of light. This is the meaning of svatah.
Jiva has the nature of being the Lord’s sakti because he is part of the tatastha-sakti: because he eternally takes shelter of the Lord, being His ray; because he is separate from the Lord, being different; and because he is a medium of the Lord in the production of the material world. Since pradhana is an insentient substance, it remains in a state of equilibrium (until the Lord places the jiva in it). Hetu jivo ‘sya sargadeh: the cause of sarga [creation of the universe] and visarga [subsequent creation by Brahma] of the universe is the jiva. (SB, 12.7.18)”
In the entire section of Paramatma-sandarbha, where Jiva Gosvami discusses the svarupa of the tatastha-sakti jivas, he never once states anything that indicates these jivas were previously in the spiritual world. This reference above confirms that.
CHECKMATE!
RS: In text 20 of Anuccheda 90 of Sri Paramatma-sandarbha, Jiva Goswami, in discussing how the soul becomes conditioned, again cites Srimad-Bhagavatam 10.87.38 —
“The illusory material nature attracts the minute living entity to embrace her, and as a result he assumes forms composed of her qualities. Subsequently, he loses all of his spiritual qualities (apeta-bhagah), and must undergo repeated deaths.”
Especially worthy of note is ‘apeta-bhagah’, which indicates the soul loses variegated opulences. This means the original position of the soul must have been a situation where these opulences were displayed. This cannot have been in the brahmajyoti or taṭastha region.
US: First of all, there is no support for the idea that the tatastha-sakti jivas are in the tatastha region. They are not. They are either in susupti within Maha Visnu, or engaged in karmic activities in the material world. That’s it. The tatastha region is where Maha Visnu lies and the jivas are within him. They are not loitering on the shore at the Tatastha Bar & Grill!
Second, your mistaken interpretation is invalidated by Srimad-bhagavatam, 2.9.10.
CHECKMATE!
RS: To cite a few more:
• In text 5 of Anuccheda 4 of Sri Bhagavat-sandarbha, Jiva Goswami cites Srimad-Bhagavatam 4.11.30. In this text, Manu says to Dhruva Maharaja:”Regaining your natural position and rendering service unto the Supreme Lord (Bhagavan)”.
• In text 19 of Annucheda 16, the jivas are also described as suddha, or pure spiritual beings, whereas the inhabitants of the brahmajyoti are elsewhere described as avisuddha-buddhayah, having impure intelligence (Srimad-Bhagavatam 10.2.32).
• In text 4 of Anuccheda 1 of Sri Paramatma-sandarbha, Jiva Goswami described the jiva as suddho ‘pi mayatah parah, “Originally pure“.
There can be many such references.
US: And they all refer to the jiva’s svarupa. Nothing more.
Jiva Gosvami goes into detail in Paramatma-sandarbha, describing 21 attributes of the jiva’s svarupa, which is of the same spiritual nature as Krsna - but different in quantity and other things. That’s all that’s being stated here and anyone would know that if they actually studied Paramatma-sandarbha carefully.
But it’s more than obvious to me that you haven’t actually studied these books. If you have, you have failed miserably at understanding properly what Jiva Gosvami has presented. You’re just shooting in the dark and hoping to hit something.
Sorry, but you’ve missed every time.
CHECKMATE!
PP: I have not commented on every interpretation you made in your long file. I think you will get a detailed response from Uttamasloka Prabhu to each and every contention you made to support the fall-theory.
RS: Yes. HG Uttamasloka Prabhu replied to my mail. I got a good chastisement.
US: You got an education.
Sometimes the truth hurts.
Especially when you are attached to your own speculations, ie: false ego.
RS: He is certainly a learned and exalted devotee, who didn’t appreciate my giving a list of quotes from SP, BSST, BVT and goswamis.
US: Wrong! I didn’t have a problem with the acaryas' quotes.
You are deliberately distorting things to try to make me look bad because ‘I didn’t appreciate the quotes of the acaryas’.
Now YOU are the one exposed for playing games like that. Shame on you.
The acaryas are fine. I didn’t ‘appreciate' YOUR ridiculous speculations about the meaning of those quotes.
Is that clear now?
RS: He told me to go through Goswami literature more deeply, which I will do more in the years to come.
US: Based on the fact that you have misunderstood so much on this topic, I advise you to find someone qualified to guide you. You’re not doing very well on your own, and if someone is teaching you this nonsense, you need to find a more qualified teacher.
RS: Nevertheless whatever I have presented is what I understand honestly now.
US: Now Krsna has given you all the evidence to support the correct understanding of these tattvas and siddhantas.
Are you going to continue to hold on to your mistaken unproven ideas, that have been exposed and defeated over and over with the correct evidence?
That will be an indication of your sraddha and adhikara and openness.
RS: I have no apprehension towards any Vaishnava who may have another outlook on this subject.
US: You have no apprehension because you just conveniently ignore anyone who disagrees, and you remain attached to your misconceptions even after they have been exposed with the correct understanding.
RS: Krishna and Guru Parampara are enlightening me in this way and if they feel They need to modify my understanding in future, They will do and I am always open to that.
US: They just did it!
And again, you are not ‘open’ in any way.
The proof is that you have never once responded to any of the evidence I presented, to either comment on it, refute it, or accept it. Nothing. You just ignored it. That’s not a discussion, nor is it being open minded. That’s Jalpa. I have responded in detail to everything you’ve presented and exposed it as being incorrect.
Time to really open your eyes and heart and shut down your ego, which is clearly preventing you from being genuinely humble and accepting of the truth and facts.
Uttamasloka dasa...