lal
Junior Member
Posts: 57
|
Post by lal on Oct 19, 2013 0:24:36 GMT -5
You can have your head packed with all kind of references, it will not change the fact that Krishna is simultaneously one with and different from his hladini shakti. Well, in one sense yes, but they are still the same person. They are not one and different in the same way a jiva and Krishna is. The difference is in manifestation of tattva, not of a difference in identity. It's like saying Sri Ramachandra and Sri Krishna are one and different - they are in one sense, in the sense of of how they manifest and what they do, but still they are nondifferent and identical in essence because they are the exact same supreme person - see Brahma-Samhita 5.46. The same is for Sri Radhika, which is why you can find countless sutras and verses and acharyas describing her and Krishna as identical, non-different, one soul in two bodies, Radha as Krishna in a female form etc., but none saying they are one and different. Bhaktivinoda quoted this to explain how hladini sakti, which is an aspect of cit-sakti, is non-different from Krishna. This is a description of cit-sakti: The difference between them is in function, not in identity. Śrī Caitanya Caritāmṛta Ādi 1.75-81 The kāya-vyūha expansions of Krishna are identical to him, this is taught over and over. I don't know why people argue against this since it is repeated so many times, and you never find any contradiction to it. My guess is that people are basing their ontology of Radha Krishna and their personal expansions on a literal understanding of lila, rather than on the philosophical discourses which explain the tattva of that lila.
|
|
|
Post by prisnidd on Oct 19, 2013 3:50:13 GMT -5
"Rasa shastra is not meant to be taken as literal truth." That is impersonalist philosophy, and lal is repeating the impersonalist understanding in the post.
Sahajiya according to bhaktisiddhanta means to take material qualities and considerations as being spiritual.
What I am missing in these philosophical discussions are self-realization, like 'I realized my siddha-deha first at the level of asakti or nistha.' After all, eating the cake gives immediate proof of it. What is the use of theorizing? When eating the cake of rati, realization comes as taste of the cake.
|
|
|
Post by niscala on Oct 19, 2013 7:19:23 GMT -5
Prsni: What I am missing in these philosophical discussions are self-realization, like 'I realized my siddha-deha first at the level of asakti or nistha.' After all, eating the cake gives immediate proof of it. What is the use of theorizing?
But one is not supposed to advertise one's level of advancement- so one cannot use that as testimony. Also, who would believe it? It is after all, hearsay. But of course, for oneself, and oneself alone, that is the most definitive proof. To others, we have to refer to standard pramanas- guru, sadhu and sastra.
Lal, since we are continuing the discussion on this thread anyway, your last post seems to be on track with my understanding- that Krsna and His expansions are not different and identical. What I have a problem with is your first post- that the manjaris are a metaphorical concept.
>>The details on the nature of manjaris is simply describing in metaphor, the nature of new souls entering into bhava and then prema-bhakti as sakhis. They are like young girls. The idea of that stage being permanent is a mistake, like Uttama pointed out, the sakhis are actually said to be in a higher position. That is because manjaris are a metaphoric concept, they evolve or grow up into sakhis.
How can a metaphoric concept grow up to become anything- real at least, and how can anything truthful be written about it? If I say “the moon was a crystal ball” that may be very poetic, but when writing about the specific nature of the moon, I write about the moon, not crystal balls. The reason is that at some point, an an analogy or metaphor breaks down. A metaphor is meant to illuminate one aspect of an object- in this case, the moon's luminosity. The nature of metaphors is that they do not equate, in all aspects, with the object they are being compared to. This being so, how foolish it would be to write a book, or many books, about the moon and call it “the crystal ball”, referring again and again to crystal balls and not the actual moon, which amounts to what the acaryas have done in relation to the manjari's, if what you say is true. They have written so much about manjaris. Why should they not write about the actual real thing?
Covering all aspects of the manjari's, as they have done, this logically would amount to multiple lies about their nature, as much as if I write what I claim is about the moon, and in actuality describe only crystal balls- their size, composition and so on, what I write will actually be one lie after another: “It is seven inches across. It is made of glass. It is transparent etc etc”.
It makes more sense to me that our acaryas are not fools, that the manjari's are not merely metaphorical, but as the sastra says, many forms, one identity. The commonly given example is that of a candle lighting other candles, which are identical with the original. Their identity with the original does not make their existence merely metaphorical- it is real. Similarly the jiva is real- jiva tattva- and though it is separate from the Lord, (unlike the internal potency,) it can be reunited with Him and attain the same status as the manjaris of the hladini sakti.
But there is a serious consequence of your claim as well. I am real- jiva tattva. I am not a metaphor, nor do I want to be, what to speak of a concept only. Now if the goal of my undertaking raganuga bhakti is to become a manjari, then you are seriously undermining my determination- as I do not want to become just a concept, a metaphor, or some other poetic tool. I want to keep my reality.
In addition, there is no indication that the manjari is just a phase of growing up, and they become sakhis later on, when they are older. Rupa manjari does not become Rupa sakhi- she is eternally a manjari as the spiritual form reflects the mood therein, and the manjari's NEVER desire conjugal union in the same way as the sakhis do.
|
|
|
Post by prisnidd on Oct 19, 2013 9:12:43 GMT -5
Niscala, yes I simplify stuff almost to the order of naivety. But my point is that when you reach the various stages, you change at each point. Your emotions, your understanding changes. Bhakti goes from being a throretical subject matter to something real and something personally intimate. That changes also our reasoning. Sometimes when I read I get the feeling of lack of self-experience. Raga bhakti is characterized of just that self-experienced mystic esoteric experience. Of course, some are scholars too, analyzing raga bhakti in minute detail. My own feeling is that calling someone on the platform of raga-bhakti for sahajiya is lucidous. What is there to pretend?
|
|
|
Post by mahashaktidas on Oct 19, 2013 11:14:16 GMT -5
Dearest Vaishnavas,
I am excited by the exalted comments being made here. Uttamasloka, Niscala, Ameyatma and Lal prabhus have made such nice commentary; others as well. This is very good, very good indeed. The topic at hand concerns detailed aspects of the raganuga practice, which is the crown jewel of Gaudiya Vaishnavism. As I have stated on the FB forums, both UP and PPP are well versed in the stages of raganuga practice. Their clash concerns various points. UP takes his direction from the literal works of BVT and VCT yet PPP attempts to show that there are scholarly discrepancies, thus causing the intending results to be skewed and appear as sahajiya siddhanta. PPP argues that this common discrepancy is caused by not having the direct association of a living rasik guru who can clarify these apparently conflicting points. PPP goes one step further in his critique and concludes that based on these egregious errors, the entire book is invalid. This conclusion has greatly angered UP who responded that PPP is making a mountain out of a mole hill. Since PPP has stuck to his guns and is not willing to give any ground , UP has gone into greater detail to show that PPP is misrepresenting the facts and skewing everything with the sole intent of discrediting the author. So, in this forum, let us do away with the hyperbole, threats and accusations and just stick to the facts. The point by PPP: "This conclusion is typical sahajiya siddhanta. Don't get offended. It's nothing personal. Sahajiya is just a technical term for a person who recommends meditation on service in the siddha-deha before it awakens naturally in the stage of asakti." The summarized response by UP: " There it is in black and white. And the same essential things are stated in JD. It doesn't say anything about waiting until asakti to hear about and accept your identity or begin the first stages of meditation. Nothing like that. And the same is clear from BRS. What you've said makes no sense either. What is the devotee compelled by greed supposed to do with all that knowledge in the meantime during nistha and ruci? Just ignore it? PPP continues: " It is not such a easy thing. To encourage persons to contemplate siddha-deha whose sadhana is not sufficiently developed is fraudulent." UP response: " I have done no such thing. " Again, PPP: Srila Bhaktisddhanta Sarasvati Thakura would not approve of your direction to do smarana of siddha deha and asta-kaliya-lila in the stage of nistha. In his Upadesavali he has written: UP responds: "How many times do I have to reiterate that I never said that?"
Here I have summarized one of their differences on a particular point, namely when proper meditation on one's siddha-deha should begin. PPP argues that if someone is encouraged to mentally conceive of his siddha deha too early in his/her spiritual practice, this would be detrimental. UP does a good job of defending his points, only to find a blistering and escalating attack from PPP. To me, PPP sounds dogmatic in his approach. My suggestion to UP is not to be so unnerved by PPP. His verbal attacks are actually signs of his own insecurity and weakness. He is overbearing on protecting confidential subject matter. When you wrote your book, you knew you would be misunderstood and attacked. Here is a good example of that, albeit not from someone you would have expected. So be it. I say, stop attacking PPP. Let him go. Take the points he has made and just develop them here on your own. Thank him for bringing them to your attention and lets move on. PPP is part of a sanga that believes the living guru must be there to direct and confirm one's raganuga inspirations. You do not believe that. SP was your inspiration and he continues to be alive for you and I and many, many others. God Bless! Radhe Radhe!
|
|
lal
Junior Member
Posts: 57
|
Post by lal on Oct 19, 2013 14:00:39 GMT -5
Niscala
What you said about metaphor is true, but only if the metaphor is meant to be openly understood by everyone. The rasa shastra on one level is meant literally, but there are other esoteric levels where the metaphors won't be obvious and are not meant for all, unlike your metaphor of the moon, which is an open and obvious metaphor.
To give an analogy, common ones used in Gaudiya teachings is of your vision getting better from taking some medicine or of getting closer to an object. At first things are fuzzy and not well understood; as your vision improves you start noticing things from further away which you couldn't see before; details also become more easily seen up close. As your vision improves your ability to understand what you're seeing improves as well. What that is about is adhikara, qualification. The rasa shastra has a literal level to it, but on that literal level there are many contradictions, some of which I've pointed out, as have past acharyas. That is because they are not meant as literal ontological guides to Krishna lila.
Their true purpose on the literal level isn't to give an exact ontology of lila, it's to teach about rasa. The ontology of manjari bhava is not important on the literal level because it's more esoteric than the teachings on rasa in general, you will understand their true import when you need to understand, when you're ready to enter into that bhava. That's opposed to the interactions between Krishna and the nitya-sakhis - which on the literal level teach about rasa. On the esoteric level those teachings have another metaphoric meaning since we are taught that Radha, Krishna, and the nitya-sakhis are all identical - or as Prabhupada put it, the sakhis are "female forms of Krishna." If we take their lila only on the literal level, we are missing a bigger more detailed picture. As our vision improves, as our adhikara grows, we will more and more understand the hidden or esoteric details and a bigger picture will emerge of what lila is truly about.
Still, by reading their literal interactions we imbibe their mood, i.e. the playful erotic mood that is displayed in the writings of the empowered acharyas. That mood is needed to move into the higher level of bhakti (bhava) where the esoteric truths are revealed. I think this is the real reason Bhaktisiddhanta wasn't so keen on his followers reading rasa shastra, the tendency until qualified is to take all of it too literally, and to then get too enamored of literalistic details that only have deep meaning on the esoteric level. This is why you don't see Rupa Goswami go into the ontology of manjari bhava in BRS, it's an esoteric subject, BRS is more for the vaidhi bhaktas, as opposed to his other writings on rasa lila which are meant for raganuga bhaktas.
Only those qualified to enter into bhava (ragaunga bhaktas) will be illumined from within to truly understand the hidden intent of what is being taught in the more esoteric works of the acharyas, e.g. the books Bhaktisiddhanta warned against.
|
|
|
Post by Uttamasloka on Oct 19, 2013 15:05:51 GMT -5
Lal: Thanks so much for expanding on this particular aspect of the main discussion. You've provided very valuable insights into this complex subject to broaden and deepen our understanding.
These tattvas that you've presented are the foundational understandings of the meaning and purpose of Vraja-lila. However, these truths remain eternally hidden in the background and what takes precedence is the lila itself, which supersedes all other considerations. It is the lila which exists eternally and at no time do things return to their root level foundational realities.
The ultimate purpose of the lila is the experience of rasa, ie: the continuous perfection of the combination of all relevant elements which results in the paramount experiences of the participants. Although prema is said to be the highest goal, it is but one contributing factor in the overall experience of rasa.
In order to perfect rasa, the participants must be fully immersed in various self-conceptions (abhimana), such as the gopis believing they are young girls who are married and cheating on their husbands. No one in the lila is pretending - they actually believe these things. They have to or rasa cannot be perfected. This is the work of yoga-maya, and even Krsna Himself is under the sway of yoga-maya.
Thus, my statements regarding the manjaris' self-conception of themselves as being very young and thus not so qualified to satisfy Krsna, is not based on a superficial or literal understanding of the lila, rather, it is supported by an understanding that takes all of the above facts into consideration.
|
|
|
Post by mahashaktidas on Oct 19, 2013 15:26:56 GMT -5
Dandavats Lal,
I don't buy any of what you're saying. No, not one bit. You put way too much emphasis on speculation. There is absolutely no need to do that. Krishna is not playing mind games with us. Neither is He an actor. He is real, His leela is real, His feelings for Radha are real, Her feelings for Him are real and our feelings for Them are real. Through practice, we can conceive of our spiritual body and place all of our emotional bhava into that form, through which we can experience our unique relationship with Them. This is exactly what is written in the rasa shastras. It is clear as day and that is what Krsna wants. He wants us to attain Him and get out of the material world. It is not so esoteric, at least not when you have conceived of your spiritual form. If you try to understand everything through your intelligence, then maybe it is inconceivable. Bhakti is about love and attachment. The siddhanta of achintya bheda abheda tattva is to help establish the supremacy of Sri Krsna. We have a process of understanding Sri Krsna. It is a gradual cleansing and compression of the mind that leads to complete surrender, devotion and attachment to Him. One pointed focus. That seems pretty darn clear. We don't need to speculate beyond what is written. Everything is there for the trusting soul. Complete revelation. To paraphrase, " For the disciple with implicit faith in his guru, all the purports of the Vedas are revealed as clear as day." I truly appreciate the confidence I have gained from these statements. The entire Gita is about gaining confidence, to have " no doubts" about Krsna. " O Madhusudhana, slayer of the demon of doubt". But you would like us to make the Absolute Truth complicated and very esoteric. Perhaps some secret that only a few gifted souls understand and they either cannot be found or too much in samadhi to speak. In Krsna Consciousness, literal is good, metaphorical is bad. Too many people try to gloss over the Lord's leela as either metaphorical or mythological. We know they are deep and have multitudes of meanings; Krsna accomplishes many things at once. But beyond that, it is not in our interest to speculate. God controls us, we do not control Him. He reveals what He wants about Himself. Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Prabhupada did not want his disciples to read intimate details of the leela because it might be misconstrued as mundane sexual activity. If he wanted his disciples to not take the leela literally, he would have said so. He would have said that Govinda Lilamrta is metaphorical. But he never, ever said that. So your conclusions are purely speculative. Rather, they ARE to be taken literally and they ARE rather erotic and before a bhakta indulgences in reading about Krsna's lusty desires for amorous union with Radhe, there better be some personal level of qualification. Besides, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta was on a one man mission to destroy the Sahajiya cult. Well, enough said for now. Thanks for listening. Radhe Radhe
|
|
|
Post by niscala on Oct 19, 2013 17:30:05 GMT -5
Prsni: Niscala, yes I simplify stuff almost to the order of naivety. But my point is that when you reach the various stages, you change at each point. Your emotions, your understanding changes. Bhakti goes from being a throretical subject matter to something real and something personally intimate.
Your realizations are not naiive, they are wise, full of experience. As Uttamasloka prabhu has pointed out, when one has greed, one will not wait around for some later stage when one is qualified. Actual greed throws all caution to the wind. If its actually not based on fear, but attraction, I will not care for rules and prohibitions about when I may or may not start. After all, the devotee never feels himself qualified- and more so when one is more advanced. There comes a point when the dry argument "you cannot do this. You are not ready" holds no attraction, and one runs eyes closed. There is the assurance that even if one runs with his eyes closed on the path of bhakti, he cannot fall. So whoever ends up winning the debate in theory will have no effect in the long run. But the advantage of Uttamaslokas position is that it ignites hope, wherefrom one can at least cultivate attraction. Because we are actually fearful and worried about doing the right thing at the right time. So that is why we need a debate. But to the extent that we have greed, we don't need this debate at all.
|
|
|
Post by niscala on Oct 19, 2013 19:05:10 GMT -5
Prsni prabhu, I just got some realization how important is your point. A debate cannot and should not take place of personal inner endeavour. I have this realization- sometimes while chanting, I am mulling over the debate, its logical inconsistencies and so forth. Then I realise "What the hell am I doing?" Then I pick up a picture of Radha and Krsna, I like the one by Vishnu dasa where they are actually looking at me, and pray to them while chanting, and absorb myself in how beautiful, kind, friendly, sweet etc They are. While looking at Them looking at me, I feel a personal connection. I just want to share this with everyone, because it has been a powerful catalyst for me to throw out my absorption in my cerebral activity. The mind is very restless, but the eyes are controlled by attraction, and where they go, the mind follows. We crave sense gratification. These pictures therefore make attraction very easy, because they are incredibly attractive. I would say that it is completely sense indulgent to gaze at them, over and over. It makes it so easy. Krsna IS all-attractive, and I feel He is inspiring these artists who have so much desire to perceieve how beautiful He is. At the same time, this forum, the book, and all the arguments have value in that compassion is essential, and as we needed very persuasive argumentative logic and reason to even consider the path of attraction, so we must help others in this way. The path is covered by obstacles of misconception and disempowering and false ideas, which have no basis in sastra. The idea I got from ISKCON is that raganuga is for liberated souls. Another idea, is that it will come automatically when I am ready. Such false thoughts need to be disepnsed with- to open the path for all who are at the stage of anartha nivritti. PP's attempt to trash the book that is so powerful in dispelling all these misconceptions needs addressing, for this reason.
|
|
|
Post by amalapurana on Oct 19, 2013 22:37:34 GMT -5
Niscala, I like the description of your experience while chanting and meditating on the 'All Attractive Couple', the painting of Radha and Krishna. Lately, I have also experienced similar emotions while chanting in front of that same painting by Visnu das I cannot help but feel that Radha must be whispering to Krishna something like: "Krishna, let's give this one a chance! What do you think? In spite of all his faults and failures, he is obviously trying."
amala purana
|
|
|
Post by niscala on Oct 20, 2013 1:26:15 GMT -5
Yes, that the one, the All-attractive couple, and yes I get the same feeling- Radharani just looks so friendly! Their faces are so very beautiful and sweet and compassionate, it is a veritable feast for the eyes and the heart, and therapy for the soul. But the best part is that they are looking at you- and smiling.
|
|
|
Post by Uttamasloka on Oct 20, 2013 16:45:22 GMT -5
First of all I would like to thank those devotees who have contributed valuable and insightful comments to this thread.
I want to discuss the issue of the stages of progress and when to implement the various practices of raganuga-bhakti, which was a point of contention for PP. I'm going to change my approach by not focusing on PP's specific points, rather, I'm going to summarize what actually goes on in one's life through these stages under discussion. I want to redirect our attention to the real-world realities that unfold for devotees who have developed greed and have awakened their desired relationship, because that's what it's all about. This will then shed light on precisely what I’ve presented in my book and will tie together all of the evidence found in the acaryas’ books, which I have also provided in my book.
As we all know, the path of bhakti takes many lifetimes to perfect. During those lifetimes of continuous development on this path, two major things occur: purification of material contamination (anarthas) and the accumulation of spiritual samskaras that progressively define and refine our spiritual development and perception. Thus, it should be understood that not all devotees are going to attain prema in Vraja-lila in this lifetime. Everyone is at a different stage of progress in this multi-lifetime endeavor regardless of how much time they have spent is this particular lifetime engaged in sadhana-bhakti.
All of the acaryas agree that the primary qualification for entrance on the path of raganuga-bhakti is the appearance of greed (lobha), ie: an intense longing (laulyam) for a specific personal relationship with Krsna, following after the example of a particular ragatmika Vraja associate. This means you have had an awakening realization of your eternal relationship with Krsna, either in dasya, sakhya, vatsalya or madhurya. For Gaudiya Vaisnavas, madhurya is most prevalent, followed by sakhya. This awakening does not mean you have full cognizance of all details related to your relationship. It means you are completely clear about which one of the four types of relationship you desire.
The further development of this realization is the understanding of which Vraja associate most exemplifies the type of relational moods and services you aspire for. Thus, you choose that associate as your personal guide and mentor for entering Vraja-lila. The combination of these realizations along with intense desire (lobha) are the absolute prerequisite qualifications for beginning the path of raganuga-bhakti.
Whenever this awakening of your desired relationship and the appearance of greed occurs (and it may even occur before nistha), until you reach the stage of nistha, you won't be able to make any significant progress. If one is still going through anartha-nivritti and has not yet attained nistha, it is not recommended that they begin to implement the more esoteric aspects of raganuga-bhajana. There is too much risk that their anarthas will adversely interfere with such attempts. These are obvious and practical considerations. Success in raganuga-bhakti requires a very dedicated and one-pointed focus such as manifests at the stage of nistha.
Thus, in my book I have stated that nistha is the effective starting point for serious practice, providing the prerequisite awakening and greed have already manifest in one’s heart. If these realizations and greed appear before nistha, one can and should use that impetus to first attain nistha. None of the acaryas say exactly when this realization or greed will appear and VCT states in RVC that greed may even appear before one meets a suitable guru, having already manifest in one’s previous life.
The first natural and logical thing one should do upon such an awakening is to inquire about the details regarding what to do with this newfound milestone change in one’s progress. One should be eager to know what instructions have been given by our acaryas about this stage and its related processes. When you finally know what type of relationship you want to have with Krsna, naturally you’ll want to know how to properly utilize this gift to fully realize your eternal identity and relationship with Him in Vraja-lila, and how that relates to attaining the prema specific to your desired relationship.
Bhakti-yoga is the path of both self-realization and God realization, but the first realization that manifests is your desired relationship with Krsna. You don’t realize Krsna first and then realize your identity and relationship thereafter. It doesn’t work like that. In fact, you cannot realize Krsna unless you first realize your relationship, because that is the prerequisite stepping-stone to realizing Krsna. You cannot enter Vraja-lila if you don’t know your relationship with Krsna. Realization of Krsna has no meaning outside of the context of realizing your relationship with Him. They go hand in hand. It should also be understood that there is no such thing as generic prema. The varieties of prema in Vraja are all relationship specific. So attaining prema means specifically in the context of your desired relationship.
Raganuga-bhakti is the process by which you gradually and progressively manifest your desired relationship directly in the context of your awakening eternal identity. Thus the need to understand the knowledge regarding your siddha-deha and its ekadasa-bhavas, which is the only medium of identity transformation that allows us to transfer our consciousness into the transcendental sphere via our new identity. You cannot meditate on participating in the lila in the context of your material identity.
The first stage of sravana-dasa is hearing and learning all of these details, ideally from your guru(s). But in the circumstantial abscense of any suitable gurus, you should alternatively take shelter of the acaryas’ teachings on these subjects. In both cases, studying the acaryas’ teachings should be considered a mandatory prerequisite. Regardless of which stage you are at, if you are qualified for raganuga-bhakti as described above, you are qualified to at least learn about these details. However, as I also stated, you should not prematurely attempt to implement this knowledge until you are at least at the stage of nistha. The reasons for this should be more than obvious to everyone.
This stage of sravana-dasa may take several months or years. There is no time-based formula, because everyone’s adhikara is different. An experienced teacher can guide one properly and Krsna will also provide internal guidance. Once you’ve properly learned and understood these details, the next logical and natural step is to apply them to your own unique circumstances. This means crystalizing the specifics of the ekadasa-bhavas for your own siddha-deha, for however long it takes to attain complete clarity and confidence in these details.
Other than one reference in BVT’s Bhajana-rahasya, there is no indication from the acaryas that after learning the theory of these details one must wait until asakti before fully accepting (varana-dasa) and implementing this knowledge. Quite the opposite actually. In BVT’s JD and HNC, teaching the disciple about these details is concurrent with working out the details specific to the disciple and implementing them immediately. It makes absolutely no sense in the reality of the life of one who is compelled and obsessed by greed for these things to learn about this and then do nothing with this knowledge until a very advanced stage is attained, perhaps years later. No such extended waiting period is mandated by any acaryas.
Thus, if you learn about these details at the stage of nistha, you will naturally want to unfold the details related to your own circumstances. You’ve already fully accepted which type of relationship you want and you have an intense desire to attain it, so why would you not immediately proceed with developing and fully accepting those details that will directly facilitate attaining that very relationship? Thus, when everything is in order and fully clear, one accepts and begins.
When I say ‘begins’, I don’t mean direct asta-kaliya-lila-smaranam in full 24 hour immersion in your siddha-deha, and I’ve repeatedly made that point clear in my book, contrary to PP’s misrepresentations. Beginning means according to the process prescribed in the third stage, smarana-dasa, wherein there are five progressively intensifying stages of remembrance. During the first stages of smarana-dasa, as a preparation for these later stages, one is also recommended to first concentrate on Krsna’s name, form and qualities before undertaking lila-smaranam.
All of these stages of remembrance are intrinsically part of one’s nama-bhajana. It is what nama-bhajana in raganuga-bhakti is all about. And it should be understood that a major part of raganuga-sadhana from the very beginning is regular hearing about Vraja-lila, specifically the lila you desire to enter. So how will you not spontaneously remember what you’ve read while chanting and contemplating, even though you are in the beginning stages? Deep and full immersion in asta-kaliya-lila in one’s siddha-deha will only begin when one is blessed by the Holy Name at the more advanced stage of asakti, but the path to that stage is gradual and progressive and has its logical beginning as I’ve just described.
Thus, it is in this context that I've stated that these things are learned and begin effectively at nistha, providing one has the requisite realizations and greed. It could be that full acceptance (varana-dasa) and the subsequent beginning of smarana-dasa occur at ruci, but that is an indeterminate technicality and not a mandatory principle. All of the supporting statements from our acaryas are presented in full detail in my book, along with the expanded version of this summary, most of which is in chapter 5. I hope this clears up any confusion about these details and my position.
|
|
lal
Junior Member
Posts: 57
|
Post by lal on Oct 20, 2013 16:51:35 GMT -5
Uttama, you wrote
I disagree that they remain hidden for everyone all of the time. Do you have any pramana?
The scenario you described goes like this:
1. The purpose of lila is rasa, i.e. tasting the enjoyment of relationships (bhava)
2. In order to perfect rasa the participants must be delusional.
3. Yoga-maya even deludes Krishna.
The problems I have with that understanding of Gaudiya siddhanta:
1. If the purpose is to taste rasa from bhava (relationships), if the relationships are not what they appear to be from the external vision, i.e. Radha, Krishna, and the various gopis, queens, etc., all being the same person - how can there be rasa between them when there is no real relationship - since they are the same person in different forms? There can be no real rasa since the relationship isn't actually real, it's one person talking to himself/herself which precludes actual bhava and therefore rasa. There has to be a metaphoric meaning otherwise it makes no sense that the purpose of lila is God trying to enjoy a relationship with himself. For vaidhi bhaktas it's unnecessary to get into these ontological details since they are focused on vaidhi sadhana, but a raganuga bhakta needs to move beyond their understanding in order to truly understand rasa lila.
2. The idea that to enjoy rasa you must be delusional sounds counterintuitive on the face of it. That belief is due to taking metaphoric teachings on lila too literally, which is fine for vaidhi bhaktas as it helps deal with the contradiction above. But raganuga bhaktas need to learn to let go of certain previous illogical conceptions, since it really doesn't make sense that the highest realm of ecstasy for Krishna would be to live in delusion playing with expansions of himself. It isn't. The higher conception of lila is really about Krishna enjoying rasa with actual *other people.* The rasa displayed in rasa shastra is meant to be educational for the jiva, it's not a literal guide to Goloka. On the literal level it is meant for vaidhi bhaktas since they aren't ready to move into bhava and rasa, but for raganuga bhaktas, you need to move beyond the literal, since it makes little sense if looked at closely.
3. Yoga-maya is not a separate entity from Krishna, nothing is a separate entity from Krishna. Bhaktivinoda teaches us in Jaiva Dharma:
Yogamaya is what Krishna uses to delude jivas, the idea of yogamaya being able to literally delude Krishna is a mistaken ideology which comes from taking esoteric teachings too literally. Logically, yogamaya cannot delude Krishna because Krishna is the all-pervading supreme being, he is present in every heart and ruling the universe, and engaged in countless lilas. What does it mean to say that Krishna is deluded by yogamaya if he is and in control of yogamaya, and controls the universe and everyone and everything in it?
It cannot be taken literally, it is a metaphoric teaching to say that Krishna is influenced by yogamaya to forget the truth. Nothing can think or act without Krishna manifesting that power for them (BG 3.27 , 9.10 , 13.30 , 15.15 , 18.59-61). Krishna cannot be deluded otherwise everything would cease to function, so there has to be a metaphoric meaning to the idea of Krishna and his expansions being under yogamaya. But for vaidhi bhaktas it is enough for them to believe the literal teaching. Raganuga bhaktas need to accept that their previous conceptions based upon a literal reading of Gaudiya siddhanta is not necessarily all there is to understand. If they can understand that, then they are ready to move into higher realms.
You based that understanding on a literal understanding of what was written, i.e. manjaris are younger than sakhis, with more inhibition towards Krishna than older sakhis, deluded by yogamaya for eternity into believing that. How is your understanding not a literal take on what is written? What is different in what you wrote than the literal idea of manjaris being eternally with the same temperament of a young inexperienced girl?
|
|
|
Post by prisnidd on Oct 21, 2013 2:06:09 GMT -5
Uttamasloka, here you wrote a fantastic text. Reason I know it is true, is due to spontaneous self experience of certain things. I also know the point where I got stuck due to lack of instructions. [this was a few years ago].
Living guru or no corporotal guru is a tricky point. If someone succeeds on the raga path without ever having had association of a raga bhakta, I give up and say it is possible, but until then I believe association of a raga bhakta is needed. It does not need to be an iskcon-style guru.
I don't believe so much the intellectual raganuga practicioners, that are in vouge today. The reason is that I experience the whole thing emotionally extremely demanding. Unless being prepared you can easily go nuts. The intellect is needed to navigate, stabilize yourself, but otherwise only become an onlooker. A person who is not strong without his intellect, just gets swiped away. A person trying to keep his sexuality in check with his intellect, would fall victim without his intellect.
Another thing I feel like I hear sometimes is the idea that we can be erotic with Krishna also. wrong. erotism between humans on earth is just a weak shadow reflection of the real thing. A mercy gift to the conditioned soul. Kama with Krishna is the real thing, and human sex and love is not more than a shadow reflection. Therefore illicit sex need to be rejected. We are staring at the mirror reflection, and think it is real. It is insane. Rasa-shastra as a metafor for human dealings similarly falls on its absurdity. It is descriptions of reality, where this world is just a shadow reflection.
|
|