Not signed in (Sign In)

Vanilla 1.1.10 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

Welcome Guest!
Want to take part in these discussions? If you have an account, sign in now.
If you don't have an account, apply for one now.

Philosophy: So... does the jiva fall down or nothing falls from vaikuntha?

Bottom of Page

51 to 98 of 98

  1. <
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. >
    •  
      CommentAuthorccd
    • CommentTimeJan 4th 2009
     
    The nature of the soul is the basis of sambhandha jnana. When it is explained from the samkya or devotional analytical point of view, it should be clear that soul does not fall from vaikuntha. If the same sambandha jnana is explained in the perspective of abhideya in terms of practice of developing of the rasas, it is said that originally the soul is of neutral rasa and develops the rasa in the process of practice of bhakti. On the other hand from the point of view of prayodjana, all souls are originally Krishna conscious servants of Krishna, and a devotee of Radha Krishna sees all souls as originally servants of Radha. Thus the development of the basic sambandha presentation according to the context will change the nature of the answer, however it is clearly wrong to suggest that one is right and another is wrong. One needs to be able to accommodate all the above views, as all are ultimately right, as all lead to the same goal of life of the jiva. Without understanding the context of the presentation and the very same ultimate nature of the jiva, 'cut out quotes' are actually WRONG and confusing.
    •  
      CommentAuthorsitapati
    • CommentTimeJan 4th 2009 edited
     
    Mishra prabhu, what's with the ad hominem attacks on myself and Kula-pavana?
    •  
      CommentAuthorccd
    • CommentTimeJan 4th 2009 edited
     
    sitapati:Mishra prabhu, what's with the ad hominem attacks on myself and Kula-pavana?
    My view is that it is a common tactic if you are not able to relate to the unity in diversity by the means of the spiritual intellect. BTW Sitapati and Kula-pavana Prabhus, your answers and input are highly appreciated. Just as the following words of Bhagavata: tan me sva-bhartur avasayam alaksamanau - These servants of Mine have transgressed against you, not knowing the mind of their master. Prabhupada states: "From this statement we can understand how anxious the Lord is to get his servitor back into Vaikuntha. This incident, therefore, proves that those who have once entered a Vaikunthaplanet can never fall down. The case of Jaya and Vijaya is not a falldown; it is just an accident." So lets be positive and intelligent about the issue.
    •  
      CommentAuthorccd
    • CommentTimeJan 4th 2009 edited
     
    Another interesting quote confirming that for an ordinary person there are obvious difficulties in conceiving logically the reality of the descend of a jiva and the Vaikuntha:

    "This very significant question would be difficult for an ordinary person to answer, but Narada Muni, being an authority, could answer it. Therefore Maharaja Yudhisthira inquired from him, saying, etad akhyatum arhasi: "only you can explain the reason." From authoritative sources it can be discerned that associates of Lord Visnu who descend from Vaikuntha do not actually fall. They come with the purpose of fulfilling the desire of the Lord, and their descent to this material world is comparable to that of the Lord. ... 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 Vaikuntha." SB 7

    Lets leave behind the fighting spirit of Jaya and Vijaya and not look for enemies in the places where enemies do not exist.
  5.  
    This topic comes up time after time on devotee forums and discussion groups. It causes heated debates due to everyones different understandings of the explanations.

    I perfer to remember Prabhupada's response to the question of how we got here.

    Don't worry about how we got here. Just work on getting out.

    That simple statement satisfies me.
    •  
      CommentAuthorsitapati
    • CommentTimeJan 4th 2009
     
    Pankajadasa prabhu, please read through the answers given so far and step back a little for a wider view.

    What is the purpose of describing something that is beyond our experience? If we cannot interact with it, then what purpose does such an explanation serve?

    For example, if I tell you something about how to deal with snakes, then you are able to deal with a snake when you see it

    On the other hand, if I talk to you about something that is completely outside your realm of experience and also your realm of possible experience, then what purpose will this serve?

    This is an argument put forward by the karma-mimamsa school, and addressed by Baladeva Vidyabhusana in his Govinda Bhasya. The Karma-mimamsa school argues that scriptural injunctions must consist of a practical command to action. Anything else should be rejected, as it has no practical value.

    Baladeva counters that descriptions of Brahman are also useful information. He gives an example: if I tell you that treasure is buried under your house then I have not given you any practical command. However, that information will act to inspire you to dig under your house to find that treasure.

    In the same way, the discussion of a doctrine of the "origin of the jiva" is intended to pacify the intellect and motivate the individual to action. It is not meant to allow people to say "we have the right answer about this!", and settle for some intellectual understanding.

    If nothing else, we should understand that such a subject is ultimately inconceivable to the material mind, as it takes place purely beyond the realm of space and time. We have no material experience or terminology to conceive of or explain it.

    In order to pacify the minds of the people and help to motivate them to action that will propel them beyond space and time to realize the reality of these things through direct perception the acaryas have explained this subject in various ways.

    Srila Prabhupada has followed the standard Gaudiya Vaisnava theology of "no fall from Vaikuntha", as we have seen many examples quoted from his purports in this thread. He has also given a strong motivational message of "Back Home, Back to Godhead!". He has also indicated that understanding or considering this subject is meant for increasing our motivation in practical action, otherwise it is useless speculation. We have seen all three of these aspects discussed in this thread. Different devotees have emphasized different ones. All three are there, and they all co-exist for a reason.
  7.  
    mishra:We know by now KP that you endorse anything that differs from what Srila Prabhupada says; is your favorite pastime. Did you watch that video up there? Ah, yes. Of course.
    Outside of Iskcon nobody thinks jivas fell from Vaikuntha... go figure... GBC made that 'philosophical determination' by a vote... now, THAT is a way to settle a siddhantic matter!
    •  
      CommentAuthormishra
    • CommentTimeJan 5th 2009
     
    Srila Prabhupada said and did so many things outside the "norm". Thanks God, so you and me can discuss and even be here talking about this.
    And again, even if Srila Prabhupada clearly and distinctly says so as the the testimony in the video states, that has no value for you. What was your name again?
    •  
      CommentAuthorPandu das
    • CommentTimeJan 6th 2009
     
    Pankajadasa:Hare Krishna, Saw the video Misra prabhu, The devotee there says when he asked Prabhupada that Krishna says nobody ever falls from Goloka, Prabhupada says Krishna means Practically Never, (prabhupada says with wry smile). Now being an Indian person, (okay maybe that doesn't make a difference), but for me its just Prabhupada being funny, and saying to his disicples that if you dunno follow then you'll fall. BECAUSE.. Krishna is GOD not some person who will say Never and Mean 'maybe never. Prabhupada gave something difference, no he didn't, he gave something thats been given since 5000 Years ago.
    Are there any clear instances of Srila Prabhupada using sarcasm to give instruction on a perplexing subject? I wouldn't just assume Srila Prabhupada is joking.
  10.  
    mishra:Srila Prabhupada said and did so many things outside the "norm". Thanks God, so you and me can discuss and even be here talking about this. And again, even if Srila Prabhupada clearly and distinctly says so as the the testimony in the video states, that has no value for you. What was your name again?
    What I take from this is that in his preaching Srila Prabhupada was very keen on promoting the idea of 'original sin' (rejection of Krsna in his personal aspect), and that of 'Paradise lost' (fall from Vaikuntha), making the centerpiece of his mission the idea of 'BACK to Godhead'. These ideas were part of his preaching TACTICS in the West. However, what is good for the beginner (child) may not be so appropriate for the more mature devotee (adult). An adult will recognize the usefulness of these concepts as a preaching tactic but will also understand the actual siddhanta of our tradition, coming from Lord Caitanya and the six Goswamis.
    •  
      CommentAuthorccd
    • CommentTimeJan 6th 2009 edited
     
    I do not think that Prabhupada was joking or making some simplifications etc. for 'stupid' disciples. He spoke from his personal realization and supported all three different answers according to the context. Yes concept of Back to Godhead and the word Godhead is also a Christian concept, but not in the same meaning. So is the word 'soul', completely different meaning behind the word in Christianity, Judaism, Sikhism (not only according to the religion, but also according to the context and realization of the speaker).

    So origin of the soul, jiva and atma and jivatma are all different things as well if you wish.

    The origin is again different to the constitutional position (word used by Prabhupada).

    Just try to read everything in the context and do not project into the mind on the acharya please.

    It also helps to understand limitations of the intelligence of a particular individual. Seriously helps.
    •  
      CommentAuthormishra
    • CommentTimeJan 6th 2009
     
    I heard in the past, actually, many many years ago, from other Srila Prabhupada undercover denigrants that argument...."when you grow" "one day you will understand"
    I take no checks at this point of my spiritual life. I take the cash of the direct statements of the pure devotee. That "preaching tactics" argument means ultimately that you seers of the truth are more mature. To this date, all those who proposed that twist continue to be as confused as ever or simply completely astray. But very happy to be the ones that truly understand the ins and outs of the preaching "strategy". Sad.
    Kula pavana, seriously, what are you doing in a Srila Prabhupada oriented forum? Just spew your own misgivings and doubts? Its kind of fun for a while, but, please focus on what you really are. And you are not a Srila Prabhupada follower.
    •  
      CommentAuthorPandu das
    • CommentTimeJan 6th 2009
     
    Pankajadasa:
    Pandu das:
    Pankajadasa:Hare Krishna, Saw the video Misra prabhu, The devotee there says when he asked Prabhupada that Krishna says nobody ever falls from Goloka, Prabhupada says Krishna means Practically Never, (prabhupada says with wry smile). Now being an Indian person, (okay maybe that doesn't make a difference), but for me its just Prabhupada being funny, and saying to his disicples that if you dunno follow then you'll fall. BECAUSE.. Krishna is GOD not some person who will say Never and Mean 'maybe never. Prabhupada gave something difference, no he didn't, he gave something thats been given since 5000 Years ago.
    Are there any clear instances of Srila Prabhupada using sarcasm to give instruction on a perplexing subject? I wouldn't just assume Srila Prabhupada is joking.
    Its perplexing?
    I was going to say 'inconceivable,' but that seemed maybe a little too restrictive. Maybe someone really understands it. I figure most just take the side that sounds good at first and say others who disagree are mistaken. That's not the same as understanding. The only way the subject makes any sense to me is neither fall nor no-fall, but more like a dream. However, I don't presume this to be correct, more like a suitable model that helps me to think about something else, which apparently was what Srila Prabhupada wanted us to do. At the same time, I find it a very natural question and one that's hard to resist. Finding oneself in a difficult spot, who wouldn't wonder "How did I get here?" Sometimes the way out of a situation is the same as the way in, except in reverse. Also, it's hard to imagine spending much time in spiritual pursuits without developing some kind of model for conceptualizing one's pre-material history.
  14.  
    mishra: Kula pavana, seriously, what are you doing in a Srila Prabhupada oriented forum? Just spew your own misgivings and doubts? Its kind of fun for a while, but, please focus on what you really are. And you are not a Srila Prabhupada follower.
    Sure, you can only follow SP your way... But I can take a hint... and since this is your forum, I respect your wishes. Dandavat pranams and good bye...
    •  
      CommentAuthormishra
    • CommentTimeJan 6th 2009
     
    If the only thing you can do is create doubt after doubt about the authenticity of Srila Prabhupada´s legacy, then, good bye and fare well my friend.
  16.  
    Kula-pavana is not a disciple of Srila Prabhupada. He has said his initiating guru was someone else.
    Pankajadasa:
    Kula-pavana:
    mishra: Kula pavana, seriously, what are you doing in a Srila Prabhupada oriented forum? Just spew your own misgivings and doubts? Its kind of fun for a while, but, please focus on what you really are. And you are not a Srila Prabhupada follower.
    Sure, you can only follow SP your way... But I can take a hint... and since this is your forum, I respect your wishes. Dandavat pranams and good bye...
    Kula-pavana has been regular on Audarya forum for many many years, and is disicple of Srila Prabhupada for old days as I know (i talked many times with him, (i thought it was she before haha, the name confuces me), hope you stay prabhuji. But i doubt you will, never heard you say you would leave (even on audarya_)
    • CommentAuthordeena
    • CommentTimeJan 6th 2009
     
    mishra:I take no checks at this point of my spiritual life. I take the cash of the direct statements of the pure devotee.
    Mishraji, the direct statements of Srila Prabhupada support both positions on this fall topic. Do you consider both positions as cash? As for Kula-pavana's comments, he has not said anything that I have not heard from thoughtful and respected Prabhupada disciples, from both inside and outside of ISKCON. As one of the admin people on this site, you have a particular responsibility to ensure that ad hominen attacks are not an inevitable part of any discussion. Otherwise if you yourself perpetuate it, what kind of discussion can we expect from this site?
    •  
      CommentAuthorPandu das
    • CommentTimeJan 6th 2009
     
    Pankajadasa: The fact that we 'whoever' are confuced just goes to show, who is right and who is wrong, should'nt we approach somebody higher in knowledge and devotion then ourselves to find the answer then?
    It's perplexing because arguments between persons higher in knowledge and devotion have been going on for a very long time and with no apparent resolution. I can go to one senior devotee one day and hear convincing arguments, and the next day go to another who refutes the first. If they cannot come to agreement, then it makes little sense to ask one of them. I would have to focus on the subject for a while and reach my own conclusion anyway, but I think Srila Prabhupada had said it wasn't a good use of time. So that leaves me without knowing and without a good way to find out, rather than believing something that may or may not be true.
    •  
      CommentAuthorccd
    • CommentTimeJan 7th 2009
     
    I find it ridiculous that someone is forcing ones personal understanding of Srila Prabhupada on others! We should respect all the different understanding of what Prabhupada said and how he is understood by his followers - for the danger of becoming another Catholic church... with millions of schisms. But hey by that definition J-M is himself a schism! Maybe its worth writing an apology letter to Kulapavana?
    •  
      CommentAuthormishra
    • CommentTimeJan 7th 2009
     
    I did not insult KP, just express my strong feelings at his carpet bombing the forum with his posts filled with doubts about the authority of Srila Prabhupada. Is he initiated by SP? So, what? More shame on him.
    Just analize his posts on this site and others and you will conclude he has rejected Srila Prabhupada. And not like a gentleman, just plain, but still posing as a disciple for the perks that position still gives.
    Who is forcing a particular opinion, me expressing my own personal feelings in a couple of posts or KP hammering again and again and everywhere that one particular issue: Srila Prabhupada is relative... huh?
    He has said he is going but I doubt it very much. I know the move, invoking attention, but he is not going.
    And the fact remains that here he has not been expelled, banned or censored in any way.
    •  
      CommentAuthormishra
    • CommentTimeJan 7th 2009 edited
     
    Pandu das: It's perplexing because arguments between persons higher in knowledge and devotion have been going on for a very long time and with no apparent resolution. I can go to one senior devotee one day and hear convincing arguments, and the next day go to another who refutes the first. If they cannot come to agreement, then it makes little sense to ask one of them. I would have to focus on the subject for a while and reach my own conclusion anyway, but I think Srila Prabhupada had said it wasn't a good use of time. So that leaves me without knowing and without a good way to find out, rather than believing something that may or may not be true.
    I always try to learn from other devotees, but taking into consideration their and my relative stands. In the present circunstances, a good dose of common sense and trying to understand what Srila Prabhupada is directly saying, that will do. That puts us on the right path. And at the end Krishna will reveal everything crystal clear if we are sincere.
    •  
      CommentAuthorccd
    • CommentTimeJan 7th 2009 edited
     
    mishra:I did not insult KP, just express my strong feelings at his carpet bombing the forum with his posts filled with doubts about the authority of Srila Prabhupada. Is he initiated by SP? So, what? More shame on him. Just analize his posts on this site and others and you will conclude he has rejected Srila Prabhupada. And not like a gentleman, just plain, but still posing as a disciple for the perks that position still gives.
    I do not see your point, a disciple of Srila Prabhupada (initiated or not is not important) may have some doubts in the way other interpret Srila Prabhupadas teachings. Of course he is wrong to suggest that nobody outside of ISKCON suggests that jivas can fall from Vaikuntha, for one 7th canto of the Bhagavatam is an example of such discussion as quoted. BTW Misra, you are yourself not officially in ISKCON, others such as IRM and Haribols are not in ISKCON. Just because one selects one way to interpret the relationship with Prabhupada as the guru and it is a different way to someone who is a bit more fanatical, does not make one 'rejecting' Prabhupada. That does not make sense. Just as if one chooses the words from Prabhupada's purports quoted above that 'nobody falls from Vaikuntha', that does not mean that he rejects Prabhupada. It is Prabhupada's words after all!
  23.  
    ccd, sure there are different was to understand WHAT Srila Prabhupada said. We all understand according to our abilities. And I guess most devotees can live with this variety (diversity).

    What I see as problem, is when one attempts to interpret WHY Srila Prabhupada said what he said. This is very tricky, because through this ones own conditioning is heavily imposed upon Srila Prabhupada, and instead of Srila Prabhupada we get something else imposed upon us (in the name of Srila Prabhupada said).

    When we start interpreting WHY, it is almost as if Srila Prabhupada is dragged down to the level of interpreter. I can speak for myself, that this is very disturbing to me, and distasteful. It is just unnecessary. Discussing WHAT is very helpful, but discussing WHY is disturbing, and I can understand that one may easily feel threatened by it.

    Is seems to me, that a good lesson from this discussion is, that we can discuss WHAT Srila Prabhupada said, but we better not poke our nose into WHY he said what he said. I mean, we can ask WHY, of course, but answer will be limited by our own limits, and most probably completely off - in any case it will always be below the truth, and so it will be disturbing, if not even harmful to some.
    •  
      CommentAuthorccd
    • CommentTimeJan 7th 2009
     
    Giri-nayaka das: Is seems to me, that a good lesson from this discussion is, that we can discuss WHAT Srila Prabhupada said, but we better not poke our nose into WHY he said what he said. I mean, we can ask WHY, of course, but answer will be limited by our own limits, and most probably completely off - in any case it will always be below the truth, and so it will be disturbing, if not even harmful to some.
    Sure that is my understanding too, as one should not try to understand the mind of the acharya. But if someone does it does not mean that he or she rejects Prabhupada, it is just another type of relationship. In a way unless Prabhupada himself states why he does give a certain view, I prefer not to see words put into his mouth. He said many different things, all on the jiva turning away from Krishna issue. All are valid, and as I pointed out should be always taken in a context. That's why making a heated debate on it is a pure nonsense. It is rather subject for personal introspection.
    • CommentAuthordeena
    • CommentTimeJan 7th 2009
     
    mishra:I did not insult KP, just express my strong feelings at his carpet bombing the forum with his posts filled with doubts about the authority of Srila Prabhupada. Is he initiated by SP? So, what? More shame on him. Just analize his posts on this site and others and you will conclude he has rejected Srila Prabhupada. And not like a gentleman, just plain, but still posing as a disciple for the perks that position still gives.
    Why don't you start another question about Kula-pavana's modus operandi? Perhaps it could be: 'Has Kula-pavana rejected Prabhupada?" Or, "Does Kula-pavana's posts indicate the mentality of an insincere disciple?" Then you and he and whoever else can discuss the point to your hearts content and those who don't want to hear about it don't have to. On the other hand, if you are absolutely convinced that Kula-pavana is bona-fide poser that is determined to destroy others faith in Prabhupada, then why not use your admin authority and ban his account? Otherwise, is this what we can expect forever on pariprashnena?
    Thankful People: mishra
  26.  
    ccd: In a way unless Prabhupada himself states why he does give a certain view, I prefer not to see words put into his mouth. He said many different things, all on the jiva turning away from Krishna issue. All are valid, and as I pointed out should be always taken in a context.
    Yes, speculating about Srila Prabhupada's motives is not good. Devotees try to extract some motives out of Srila Prabhupada's quotes, to support our own condition, but thus we artificially create contradictions, and then we must reject some other Prabhupada's quotes. It is dragging Srila Prabhupada down on our level. But all Srila Prabhupada's statements are valid. It is on us to accept them all, and pray that we may understand them and see them all as part of bigger picture. But sometimes we don't approach Srila Prabhupada in humble mood of "pariprashnena", but we rather try to use his words to strengthen our conditioned situation. Even "stalwarts of ISKCON" do that quite often.... It is unfortunate.
    Thankful People: Hari Bhakta dasa
  27.  
    Sorry Mishra,

    As mush as I appreciate your sentiments, for individuals to start quoting what Srila Prabhupada said to them in private conversations that cannot be substantiated in any way simply wont hold. Guru, Sadhu, Sastra. All statements made by the Guru must be consistent with previous Sadhus and shastra we all know that. Want to quote what Srila Prabhupada said? then quote his purports in his books, not private conversations that no one can verify.

    In the absence of Srila Prabhpada his writings (the next best thing and why do you think he went to so much trouble to write these?) so no one could present different angles.

    How can one attain the devine existence of Goloka Vrindaban where everyone is 100% Krishna concious then fall down, that is to say that somewhere in deepest perfection ... imperfection is to be found? Where Krishna states in many texts within chapter 8 ... that jiva will not return to the material world.

    As you say yourself there are many quotes by Sri Krishna in the Bhagavad Gita that states once having attained my abode one never falls down into the material world again. These cannot be refuted by personal conversations, one has to accept Sila Prabhupada's books in the absence of Srila Prabhuada's physical form.

    By presenting these angles it only serves to confuse and contradict Prabhupada's teachings. As far as Videos go these can be edited and taken out of context, yes books can be changed as well. But copies of Srila Prabhupada's orginal Gita translation are still around. The one he authorized.

    And I disagree with Devotees that say it is not an important question, it is important as it alludes to the faith of many disciples and not having blatent contradictions in the teachings. To say all views are correct under certain circumstances? What circumstance where a jiva reaches Krishina Goloka does he fall? Lets be specific the jiva does not fall from this position. Even you ccd admit one does not fall from Vaikuntha, and Krishna Goloka Vrindaban is deeper and sweeter than Vaikuntha.

    Chaitanya Mahaprabhu did not come offereing Moksa liberation in the Brahma Joyti (yes where one can awaken and again fall again into material world) he offered entrance into the deepest, sweetest personal pastimes of Radha and Krishna in full servitude and conciousness and to suggest one could fall from this realm cannot be supported by any Shastra reference.

    The question is did we orginally come from Vaikuntha or Krishnas Goloka Vrindaban? No if we did as Shastra says we wouldnt fall from those places, but did we come from the spirtual sky the Brahma Joti? Yes.
    Thankful People: Kula-pavana
    •  
      CommentAuthorPandu das
    • CommentTimeJan 27th 2009 edited
     
    manasi_seva:Sorry Mishra, As mush as I appreciate your sentiments, for individuals to start quoting what Srila Prabhupada said to them in private conversations that cannot be substantiated in any way simply wont hold. Guru, Sadhu, Sastra. All statements made by the Guru must be consistent with previous Sadhus and shastra we all know that. Want to quote what Srila Prabhupada said? then quote his purports in his books, not private conversations that no one can verify.
    Are you saying that a personal instruction from Srila Prabhupada should be dismissed because it can't be proven to others? If someone who had Srila Prabhupada's association tells me that Srila Prabhupada told him something, I should assume he cannot be trusted?
    •  
      CommentAuthorVEDA
    • CommentTimeJan 28th 2009
     
    > If someone who had Srila Prabhupada's association tells me that Srila Prabhupada told him something, I should assume he cannot be trusted?

    Imho, yes - if it contradicts what we already know from SP and it can't be supported from other sources.
    •  
      CommentAuthorccd
    • CommentTimeJan 28th 2009
     
    VEDA:> If someone who had Srila Prabhupada's association tells me that Srila Prabhupada told him something, I should assume he cannot be trusted? Imho, yes - if it contradicts what we already know from SP and it can't be supported from other sources.
    There are so many 'imagined' Prabhupada Said 'facts' that it is better to be cautious at least! Vrindaban 2 September, 1975 75-09-02 Los Angeles My Dear Omkara dasi: Please accept my blessings. I have seen your letter dated August 17, 1975 and have noted the contents. I never said there should be no more marriage. By all means legally you can get married. How can I object? They misunderstand me. Unless it is there from me in writing, there are so many things that "Prabhupada said.''
    • CommentAuthorK.C sena
    • CommentTimeFeb 18th 2009
     
    so Srila Prubhupada said it is a dream state...................................................................................................................................................................................
    ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
    ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
    ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
    SO CAN ANY 1 FILL IN THE DOT'S
    read between the lines
    :-)

    the "thing" goes, in a topic as "this" it like when 1 thinks of this enough then we don't know where to go... like in some dream eh mate?
  32.  
    Sudama 'fell' from Goloka Vrindavana after Radha cursed him and later regretted it.

    But Krishna assured Her that this was good for he was shy to consummate a love affair with one of the sakhas there, and would return very soon.

    So Sudama and his lover were born on earth to consummate their love.

    Jaya and Vijaya (Vishnus door-keepers) 'fell' from Vaikuntha after the sages cursed them.

    When asked by Vishnu (who could have cancelled the curse) if they wanted hundred human births as devotees; or three as enemies, they wished the latter for a speedy return. So they were born Hiranyaksha and Hiranyakashipu; next as Ravana and Kumbhakarna and finally as Sisupala and Dantavaktra.

    Jaya and Vijaya thus rendered service to the Supreme Lord by participating in His leelas.

    Sudama was blessed by Krishna to enjoy sambhoga.

    Yes, even devotees can 'fall' from Vaikuntha or Goloka Vrindavana, but this is very temporary, and they will be recalled soon.

    Other souls who 'fall' do so for an unimaginable time.
  33.  
    Neither the Sudama nor the Jaya-Vijaya stories have anything to do with a falldown of an ordinary jiva - they are part of Krsna-leela, and have nothing to do with a living entity supposedly 'becoming envious of Krsna' and thus sent to the material world. There is not a single example in the Vedic writings of a living entity falling from Vaikuntha out of envy for Lord Vishnu to become a worm in stool.

    You have to be extremely desperate to use the Sudama or the Jaya-Vijaya stories to support your claim that living entities fall from Vaikuntha and not from the Viraja river in Brahmajyoti as is written in the Vedic literatures.
  34.  
    All Glories to Sri Sri Guru and Sri Gauranga! Hare Krsna, even if one has not read sastra it's common sense that once you reach the spiritual world there is no chance of falling. Therefore, if there is no chance of falling we have not come from the spiritual world. If some argue that we have fallen, what is the point of practicing bhajan if we can fall again???
    •  
      CommentAuthorccd
    • CommentTimeNov 1st 2009
     

    For those of you who want to separate love from the free will..
    •  
      CommentAuthorVEDA
    • CommentTimeNov 1st 2009
     
    This reminds me that in some Puranas it's stated, usually in the form of a phala sruti, that one can go to Vaikuntha temporarily by doing this or that spiritual activity.
  37.  
    subala_sakha: If some argue that we have fallen, what is the point of practicing bhajan if we can fall again???[/quote]

    This is desire for liberation not pure devotional service.

    Prabhupada smiled. “Once,” he said, “Krsna had a headache. He asked His servant, Narada Muni, to get dust from the feet of any of His devotees. He said that only such dust could cure Him.

    “Narada went everywhere, but no one cooperated. They all asked, ‘How can we put the dust of our feet on Krsna’s head? We will go to hell for such an offense!’

    “Finally he went to Vrndavana where the gopis live. Since they are Krsna’s most surrendered devotees, they all agreed to help.” Prabhupada dramatized the scene using his own hands, feet and facial expressions to show the gopis taking dust from their feet and offering it to Narada.

    “Narada asked, ‘Do you not fear going to hell for such an offense?’

    “So they replied, ‘Never mind. We shall go to hell, but let Krsna be cured.’

    “This is the kind of selfless devotion that Lord Caitanya has come to teach. This is love.

    In the stage of pure devotional service, devotee doesn't think "What is the point of Bhajan if we can fall again?"

    bhukti-mukti-siddhi-kami sakali asanta
    krsna-bhakta niskama ataeva santa

    bhukti-kami, the material persons who are desiring improvement in this world, in this life, and going to the heavenly planet next life... That is called bhukti. And mukti... Desiring liberation, that is called mukti, and... Or become one with the Supreme Brahman, that is mukti. And siddhi, yogis, they are trying to achieve some success in asta-siddhi, anima, laghima. So everyone is desiring. So therefore Krsna Caitanya Mahaprabhu says, krsna-bhakta niskama: "A devotee of Krsna is not desirous of anything, either bhukti, mukti, or siddhi." The purport is, so long you desire something, you'll never get peace of mind. And a bhakta does not desire anything. He is satisfied with any position, whatever is offered to him by Krsna.

    your servant
    dweller-in-peace
    •  
      CommentAuthorVEDA
    • CommentTimeNov 1st 2009
     
    Related story is from the life of Sri Ramanujacarya who publicly announced the secret Narayana mantra for everyone's benefit, while himself ready to go to naraka for transgressing the will of his guru who told him that he should keep it secret.

51 to 98 of 98

  1. <
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. >
Add your comments

    Username Password
  • Format comments as
 
Back to Discussions Top of Page
 
Powered By ISKCON Tech