http://krishna1008.blogspot.com/2020/09/ananta-das-babaji-program-tinged-with.html
http://krishna1008.blogspot.com/2015/07/the-fall-of-jeeva-soul-pt-1.html
http://krishna1008.blogspot.com/2018/06/the-fall-of-jeeva-soul-update.html
Dear PADA: My personal conviction is that we were originally in this tathastha and from this place, after coming to consciousness, we made our choice after seeing, as much time as we wanted, both the material world and the spiritual One with Krsna. And to have this vision of the Lord and of His World is not a little thing !!!!!!!! We can never completely forget that.
Therefore the remembrance of Him and of the spiritual world is deeply hidden in the deepest part of our unconscious psychology. That's the reason why when people see a real pure devotee who draggs with him the spiritual world, those people have the feeling of something not completely new, of something they have already seen. Therefore, the nitya-baddha is forgetfulness of Krsna but when he starts sadhana-bhakti after having met a pure devotee, he starts more and more to remember Krsna, meaning remembering what he has seen immemorial time ago even if he never put a toe in the spiritual world Itself.
For the expression "Back to Krsna" used by S.Prabhupada, it seems to be more or less the same thing: no need to have been before in the spiritual world to use those words. To have only seen Krsna is already a way to have been with Him and in His lila. It is very very high. Do you see yourself Krsna at the moment in exactly the same way that you see your neighbour ? Therefore my opinion is that S. Prabhupada juggled a little with words and that for very excellent reasons. In his books, he did not say so much that we really came from the spiritual world. He did that only in conversations which are more within the frame of time and circumstances. And he was perfectly right. He was surrounded with many devotees - mayavadis or potentially mayavadis. We have the proof of that today!!! There are many insoluble issues with this idea of coming from the spiritual world itself, topic which I have developed in articles in the Sampradaya sun from the year 2016 to the year 2018. Ys PNd
[PADA: I simply do not accept the Vatican's idea that God originates some "pre-chosen" souls to be with Him in heaven, and He also makes a lesser sub-class of lower -- pre-chosen inferior consciousness souls -- who are not with Him as their original status. I do not believe that God is biased with His children and He would cause some souls to pre-selected to be liberated -- and some to pre-selected to have to be lesser and inferior beings, and to thus be prone to fall here and suffer.
That would make God the cause of our suffering, He forgot to manifest us fallen jeevas in heaven where we would never suffer. So this is all the same idea I heard growing up in the Church, the angels are always in heaven, you are an inferior lesser being -- because God makes inferior things, so you are here because God pre-selected you to be here.
Why didn't God place us all there with Him then, and save all of us this trouble, including trouble for Him to make all these hellish realms for no reason? And why would we say God makes superior things and also inferior things? That blames God for the inferior acts of the fallen souls. Yes as a matter of fact, I am here because God makes inferior souls who fall, God is thus to blame for me being a bank robber and a thief! Hee hee!
So God is making all this trouble by pre-selecting us as inferior. We are not the cause of the fallen state? So this is envy of God in my opinion, God is biased, when even I am not biased with my own children. God is less advanced, than me? So God makes superior souls who never fall, and inferior souls who will fall, that makes God the cause of the inferior souls, and their fall.
DEAR PADA continues: Impersonal Brahman is a hellish and fallen condition only if you go there on your own. Like anything else: if you do something on your own, independently from Krsna s will, you become fallen But if Krsna puts you Himself in tathasva in "the beginning ", it is not a hellish or fallen position. But S.Prabhupada had to be extremely cautious.
[PADA: Srila Bhaktivinode says brahman is worse than hell, because in hell you might hear of Krishna, but in brahman no one ever hears about Krishna. So you are simply recycling the argument that God not only originates us in hell, He originates us in a state that is worse than hell.
And Srila Prabhupada says from brahman you can only fall to here. So its the same thing as the Church, you have to fall here because God is the efficient cause of your falling. God is an evil tyrant who caused you to suffer. Its the same reason we are here in the material world, we are blaming God as being defective and causing us to fail, instead of blaming ourselves for leaving His association. ys pd
Dear PADA: I understand your point and agree with you. But I simply never said what you suppose me to say. All jivas are in the same position in the "beginning " and THEY do their own choice, not God.
ReplyDelete[PADA: So there are no jeevas starting off originally with Krishna? Its just an empty Krishna loka planet. The jeevas are all originally in tatashta, and gradually some of them go to Him, many do not? Why would Krishna make an empty planet with no jeevas as the original situation? There is Krishna, on an empty planet, waiting for people to chose to come to Him from Tatastha? I have never heard of such an idea? If we go back to Godhead, back to our original position, what is our original position? It is -- jeevara swarupa haya, nitya Krishna das. That is our original status, not that all the souls are originally hanging out in some dormant situation? Srila Prabhupada says we originated in Krishna's leela or sport, then we became envious and fell. You have not explained how, where, when, or why, we fell?]
... Therefore God is not responsible of the jiva's condition after his choice. You read me wrongly. So you have also to give answers to the insoluble issues related to the idea that we came from the spiritual world if you want to be complete in your argumentation. I simply believe that there are two different conditions in impersonal Brahman, the one (hellish) of jivas coming from the material world and the one of jivas placed by Krsna there. But it is a fact that there no quote of any acarya about this point. So I am damned to just wait for your answers and explanations about the issues (giant ones!) I spoke about in some papers ... And not only my own papers !!! So many other excellent arguments coming from other devotees, the Sastras etc....
[PADA: When we were in Mayapura, some of the Gaudiya Matha people said that the "Back to Godhead" title is bogus, because we were never with Godhead. And some people came to tell Srila Prabhupada about their complaint. He told us, they do not understand we were once with Krishna "because they are tinged with mayavada." I was there. So if people do not understand that God is a person, and we are also persons, and both God and us originate as persons, its mayavada. Back to Godhead is about as clear as it gets, we have to RETURN HOME, to our ORIGINAL STATUS and Krishna's servants. There are literally many quotes about this issue, and we have put some of them into various articles on this blog. As far as the idea that tatastha / brahman is only hell for the people who chose to go there, but its not hell for the people Krishna places there, makes no sense. What difference does it make if we are placed in hell by God, or we placed ourselves there originally, if that is our original condition? We originated in hell, either by God's choice or ours, that does not even make sense.
Why would we chose to go to hell as our original status? What this really means is -- we had no chance to choose one way or other, God places us in hell, that means, He chooses for us. So I have asked these types of questions for maybe decades, and no one seems to have a reasonable counter explanation? It seems to me the explanations go further and further off the reservation and drift into many more questions than answers? ys pd
LW: The tatastha is hell ... only when we decide to go there? It is not hell ... if Krishna puts us in that hell? What is this? Where do these speculations ... come from? Srila Prabhupada never spoke like this. That proves ... they are listening to the unauthorized source.
ReplyDeleteThey always say same thing ... we need to listen to shastra and sadhu. The sadhu Srila Prabhupada already gave us the shastra. His shastra says ... we have to return back to home ... back to God. Back to our original ... eternal constitutional position. That means not going back to tatastha. That is not an original condition. And neither tatastha is eternal.
They are not studying the quotes ... of the acharya. This is funny ... we all start away from Krishna in tatastha. You said, that means Krishna loka starts originally as an empty planet. Meanwhile Krishna waits for us to decide to come to serve Him ... from dormant tatastha state.
This sounds like some weird science fiction movie ... God is sitting on an empty planet, waiting for us to get out of dormant state to come to Him. We are all asleep and dormant ... that means originally ... there is no one there with Krishna doing the eternal service?
These fellows keep piling it on. What will they say next? They really do not explain this ... at all. They are listening to the wrong people. Thanks to God ... at least we few have the acharya's original explanation.
Dear PADA: Well......if there is a "beginning" of everything ( it is said that God was One but decided to become many for His pleasure") it means that He could also be alone and fully in bliss without any problem before He decided to become many. So yes......why not an empty spiritual world (with certainly, anyway, Krsna 's plenary and partial expansions) but without the jivas. Krsna is not in passion. is Self-sufficient and had time, full time..... therefore why not?
ReplyDeleteFor the jivas in the Brahmajyoti on their own, I was only speaking about jivas who reach the Brahmajyoti from this world as the mayavadis do. The difference with those who are placed originally by Krsna in the same Brahmajyoti can be only the consciousness. Some can see both the material world and the spiritual One with Krsna and are not in hellish condition and can go to the spiritual world from that and others (mayavadis) cannot have all what I said. Like in this world, in exactly the same conditions and place, some will be miserable and some will be very happy, depends on their consciousness. I see that everyday.
About the question of being a person, if the Brahmajyoti is not our ultimate and definitive goal itself, like it is for the mayavadis, we are anyway always persons in the case of Krsna putting us originally in the Brahmajyoti, persons waiting to decide one day which body (and world) they will choose, material or spiritual. Do you cease to be a person when you get rid of your clothes? Were not you a person when you came to this present life, out of your mother, without any cloth?
Apart that, I completely agree with you. I could never accept for instance Narayana Maharaja's credo based on so-called Srila Jiva's Goswami writings saying that 2/3 of jivas are emanating from Sri Balarama or Sankarsana and CANNOT fall (therefore why and how are they jivas? The definition of a jiva is precisely to have free-will and there is no free-will if you have absolutely no possibility to use it....) and others coming from Maha Visnu who can fall and therefore suffer. That would be completely in contradiction with Krsna's quality of justice, goodness, impartiality and fairness and would disqualify Krsna as God and make Him a tyrant and a monster. I completely agree with you. I believe that the Kali-celas (said by Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Maharaja) who took power in the sankirtana Movement after the disappearance of Lord Caitanya and the Goswamis put voluntarily that in Srila Jiva's Goswami writings in order to discredit Krsna and to make the development of love for Him become quite impossible. Very easy to do ! Which sane and intelligent person could love such a God?
PADA: OK but we still need to explain how, why, when, the jeevas fell, and where they fell from etc. I do not believe the jeevas originally determine their own bodily relationships with Krishna by "deciding what relationship they will have while they are in tatastha." I believe Krishna manifests the jeevas as gopis, cows, shoes, flutes, peacocks etc. and that is our original swarupa.
ReplyDeleteHow could we decide what bodily shape we will have and what service we will have if we are in a dormant state in tatastha to begin with? There needs to be a fuller explanation, and the idea we all originated with Krishna in the shapes and forms He created originally is the explanation that makes more sense to me. And that is why Srila Prabhupada says we can fall from any relationship, because all of these relationships are based on our voluntary serving.
It does not make sense to me that a dormant soul in tatastha could then decide what bodily relationship and rasa he could have with Krishna, when he has no idea what these activities are in the tatastha. We can maybe change our rasa later, because its based on desires, but at that stage it means we know extensively what rasas are what, and we could perhaps choose to change from there, which means choosing based on knowledge.
Tatastha is not a position of knowledge, its a dormant state. ys pd
Dear PADA: Yes! You are right. We don't decide our svarupa but we decide to serve Krsna through this svarupa (if we can speak like that) or not to serve Krsna and to have this svarupa not manifested or covered by a material body and to serve ourselves (or we will say Maya). Easy to understand I think ..... For LW commentary, why does he (she) say that my idea is a speculation when it is, on contrary, the very basis of our philosophy ? If we do something on Krsna's order or will, we are never fallen or we never suffer even if we go to hell. But if we go there out of our own fantasy, we will be fallen and will suffer. The whole BG is about this idea. So Krsna is speculating, through BG, in LW opinion?
ReplyDelete[LW is saying that it does not matter if we originate in the hell of tatastha / brahman because of our own desires, or because Krishna put us there, the children of the Supreme God are not going to originate in a hellish condition either way. The souls may LATER ON go to a hellish condition -- by misuse of their independence, but they originate as serving Krishna and then its up to them to continue that service, or fall.
It would also NOT be possible for a dormant soul in brahman to know what is going on in Krishna's leela, so that means the original svarupa of the jeeva is given to that jeeva by Krishna originally, he does not chose that svarupa from brahman. That means we did not originate in brahman and then decide to have a specific svarupa and join Krishna's leela.
We already have a original svarupa and its covered at present. So that negates the idea we originated in brahman and choose a specific svarupa to join in Krishna's leela, we do not know about His leela there. At the same time Srila Prabhupada says we cannot go straight to the leela from brahman, we have to fall here first. So on many levels, tatastha or brahman cannot be our original state. ys pd]
Dear PADA: But I told you that we don't, ourselves, choose our svarupa. So I am ok with you. Krsna only did that and He does that naturally. Therefore, does not matter where we are in the beginning. We were manifested from Krsna at one time and sent directly to tathasta, that's what I say.
ReplyDelete[PADA: And Srila Bhaktivinode says tatastha is worse than hell because no one can hear about Krishna from there. And Srila Prabhupada says we have to come to the material world from there, so both ways, that means God places us first in tatastha hell, and then the hell of coming here, as our original status.]
"And tathasta is precisely not hellish for the jiva sent by Krsna there who does not stay dormant.
[PADA: Hell is hell, if we got there ourselves, or Krishna put us there, either case ... that is not our original status, nor have you provided any quotes from Srila Prabhupada to confirm that idea.]
"It is not the same condition than the mayavadi reaching impersonal Brahman, that's all. You should better, I think, publish the mail I sent you with 2 insoluble issues with this idea of the jiva coming from the spiritual world, the answer of which you seem not to have instead of presenting only the positive arguments concerning this idea of falling from Vaikuntha. It would be more honest and brahmanical. I just believe that S. Prabhupada, as the acarya, preached this topic according to time and circumstances as any acarya does. And it was time to say that we come from the spiritual world even if many acaryas seem to have said exactly the contrary. And as far as I know, S Prabhupada taught people to establish their Krsna consciousness on at least 3 legs: guru, sastras and sadhus and not on only one leg. We therefore have to be balanced between at least those 3 legs in order to have an opinion about anything. And especially this topic.
Personally, I have absolutely nothing against this idea of coming from the spiritual world. It was anyway my first belief. Therefore, if you are able to give clear and intelligent answers to those insoluble issues I presented to you, it will be ok. But, on contrary, you seem to carefully avoid those questions.
But maybe we are not in tathasta before falling but in another neutral special place the name of which we don't know. But to come from the spiritual world is quite impossible.
PADA: OK your did not read the links to the articles we posted here. Srila Prabhupada says: we are originally with Krishna in His leela or sport; we all came from Vaikuntha; we can fall from any position in the spiritual world; we fell because we are envious of Krishna; we are originally Krishna conscious living entities; we are nitya Krishna das originally (not tatastha); we were with Krishna and then forgot Krishna; we have all seen Krishna face to face; and moreover those who do not accept Back to Godhead and think we DO NOT come from being with Krishna -- are tinged with mayavada. And so on and so on and so on. We already provided all these quotes. You have not cited Srila Prabhupada to prove we originated in the tatastha. Nor explained why God would place us in one hell, from which we have to come to this hell? And Back To Godhead was already going on in the 1940s, it was not something he started when he came to the West to adjust his preaching. Anyway, if you have any actual citations to prove your idea, I never see any from you? We have given many citations from Srila Prabhupada in the article links we provided. Show us some direct citations that we come from a dormant state, but so far I have not seen -- any? Meanwhile we have provided dozens if not hundreds of counter quotes. ys pd
ReplyDeleteLW: Narayan Maharaja people ... same thing. Originally ... jeeva is in svapna status, sleeping. They said, dreaming state. I ask ... where are we located then? They say ... located in brahmajyoti. Same thing ... as tatastha.
ReplyDeleteSrila Prabhupada says ... not possible ... we originated in brahmajyoti is mayavada. He says in many places. We become envious of Krishna, how is that possible .. from dormant and ... asleep? We are sleeping, and then made criminals who have to fall down here. Even police do not arrest people ... who are sleeping. They cannot commit crime while sleeping. That means ... crime happened before sleep. We are with Him ... and become envious. Then only! Krishna puts us into sleep, and makes us fall here, as punishment. Sleeping is Krishna's punishment, it means criminal has to be stopped from acting.
They think we start off original as sleeping. Prabhupada says sleeping is modes of ignorance. They think Krishna makes us in ignorance and dormant, so Krishna is causing our problem. You are right. It is blaming Krishna. And that is mayavada ... envious of Krishna ... they make Him the bad person. We need to give up all form of envy ... to attain Krishna.
M Dasi: He says ... "But maybe we are not in tathasta before falling but in another neutral special place the name of which we don't know. But to come from the spiritual world is quite impossible."
ReplyDeleteNo explanation then. Neti neti. Not this, not that. What then? No one can say. It is the Zen question ... that has no answer.
These people have no clue ... what does "Back to Krishna" means. Back to Krishna is the whole point ... of knowing about Krishna. The aim of our Krishna religion is to "return back to home ... with Krishna" ... and they simply don't believe Krishna's statements. So its every other explanation except ... the one given by our acharya. They have little faith. Doubters.
They doubt these clear statements. Bhagavad Gita says ... persons with weak faith will have a hard time on the path. They question everything. Doubt everything. Intelligence is then many branches, they cannot keep on focus. I always believed Back to Krishna means, back to Krishna. What is the problem? It is hard for me to understand ... why anyone would oppose this. Such a nice idea, and they want to spoil it. That is why the faithless and doubters are mentioned in the Gita, we have to not be one of them.
Dear PADA: Yes prabhu ! I read your links and thank you for that but it does not answer the insoluble issues I presented you.
ReplyDelete[PADA: It is not insoluble. We were with Krishna, we became envious of Krishna, and we fell from Krishna. Therefore our original constitutional position is -- to be with Krishna and to serve Krishna but we "misused our independence" and fell to the material world. This happens all the time as Srila Prabhupada explains. People are serving the government nicely, but then they break the law, so they are sent to to state prison. Similarly we are serving Krishna, but when we violate His laws, we are sent here to the prison. That is the type of example he gives over and over, and in the same theme gives many times. You are not giving us the logical explanation, at all, you said its not logical we are sent to prison, then what is logical? You have to show us, and cite shastra.]
*** But anyway..... I see that it is mainly just a deaf conversation. Your people obviously don't even really read what I write. One says for instance that I am a Narayana Maharaja's follower when I wrote clearly that I rejected NM's credo so it is not worthwhile to go on with this conversation. You want to remain only mainly dogmatic so, ok, it is your choice but no dogmatic people ever reach Krsna, I tell you. It is not so easy!
[PADA: It is you who are not giving a proper explanation from shastra. You have given no quotes that say we start off originally as tatastha, or we start as dormant. etc. Nor do you explain how a dormant person could commit a deviation that would land him in the prison of the material world. Nor do you explain how we started as tatastha, when Srila Prabhupada says we start out as "jivera svarupa haya -- nitya das -- Krishna's servants." Nor do you explain how the fallen jeeva is "bahir mukha" -- he turned away from God, when he was never with God? There is also no service to Krishna in tatastha, it is considered as worse than hell. So why is God placing us there? You have to give us citations from shastra to prove your points and you are not. We are showing quotes, you are not, that means you are being dogmatic, mundane dogma is contaminated and not based on shastra.]
*** About BTG in 1940, it is a good point but does not matter it was India at this time or the West, everywhere in the world and specially in India (!), the spiritually orientated people were heavily contaminated with mayavadi credo so it does not change anything.
[PADA: So Srila Prabhupada simply makes up the idea we were with Krishna, he is cheating us? That is also what the Sridhara Maharaja and Narayana Maharaja people say, and that is why people might think you are with them. Again, you have to show us a superior explanation, and your idea God places us in worse than hell is -- not it.]
We know also that we fall from the spiritual world in order to enjoy the material nature and so, satisfaction of material desires. And in one way or other to be ourselves God or to try to become God.
ReplyDelete[PADA: How do we desire to become God if we originated in tatastha?]
We know also that the desire that someone of this world can have to go to impersonal Brahman is described by Srila Prabhupada to be still material as well as other mundane desires, even if a little different... And we also know that through trying to reach Brahmajyoti, mayavadis try (and think) they become (or are) themselves God.
[PADA: Tatashta is another material desire, therefore it is not something Krishna places us in, we place ourselves in material desires when we try to be independent.]
So, there are many similarities between desiring the material world or willing impersonal Brahman: both are described as material desire and trying to be or become God. And we know that there are many many jivas in this Brahman.
[PADA: If tatastha is forbidden desire, its not our original status. God does not originate the souls in forbidden desires.]
So, for we are said to have fallen from Vaikuntha because of both those desires, why is it never said that, at least, a little percentage of those falling jivas go from the spiritual world directly to Brahmajyoti?
[PADA: OK so that tatastha / brahman is a fallen state, its not where God places us originally.]
They are all said to fall and go to the material world. Never to Brahman! Brahman is only another kind of material desire, as Prabhupada said! Some could have the desire to stop action and see. To become sleepy Gods. This going to Brahmajyoti is only from the material world. Never from the spiritual one! Only one flight! What are the travel agencies doing???!!!
[PADA: Maybe we sometimes do fall to brahman, but its a fallen state.]
From the material condition, there are two ways if someone wants to stop completely his suffering and one of them is to stop action and to go to Brahman, and we know it is not the best one! But the tendency to choose it instead of choosing to reach pure spiritual action is anyway there. So why, for an already deluded jiva who leaves the spiritual world, would this choice never be there?
[PADA: It may or may not be there, but its fallen either way in any situation.]
Furthermore, for only Krsna can "create" this Brahman area, why add and create one more object of material desire that the falling jivas did not even want from the right beginning of their leaving the spiritual world? For not even one is ever said to go to Brahmajyoti from Vaikuntha... Why add one more temptation which was not even the goal and desire of anyone at the time of falling?
If all that was human, we would say that it is some kind of perversity. But we know that Krsna is not like that! And even exactly all the contrary!
[PADA: Correct, we could not start in a conditioned state. This article proves my point. We fall from the spiritual world, it does not matter if we fall to the material world or brahman, both are fallen states. ys pd]
I think this persons has gone around in a big circle and come back to what we said in the first place. He says -- we fall from the spiritual world. And that is what we said at the outset. I asked him to make a comprehensive position paper with citations from Srila Prabhupada's shastra if he wants to add more to this. Lets see if he can come up with something. In other words, it appears he answered his own question -- by essentially agreeing with our answer. ys pd
ReplyDelete