By Kesava Krsna Dasa
Is this a daring and overconfident claim? It seems to be an assertion of finality on the fall / no-fall issue. Does this risk jumping over Srila Prabhupada and our previous acaryas? The discussions on this matter continue to produce no outright winners of the debate. Such finality may ‘bore’ the philosopher within us, but we cannot deny its profoundness.
Who does not want to know their true origin? Ancestry firms help people trace their family lineage and possible place of origin through birth-given names. By providing one’s DNA sample one might learn of more interesting information involving genetic links to ancestors going back thousands of years. We can be forgiven if this natural curiosity spills over onto the spiritual frontier.
The curiosity debate about where we originate can be impulsive however. We can convince ourselves of being right simply by quoting authorities like Srila Prabhupada and previous acaryas. This is where the problem lies. It is not that what they say on the matter is the problem, but it is how we quote one authority or another and claim finality, is the problem.
As followers of Srila Prabhupada, we should ideally rest our case with him. This can be a ‘problem’ because he says that we fall from the spiritual world and were with Krishna, and he says that we never fall – both of which are not a problem. Srila Prabhupada is agreeing faithful to our previous acaryas and giving his own realised perspectives on the matter – both are right. We make it a problem.
Quoting Srila Prabhupada one way or another and then claiming finality or victory is a problem. Both sides will be legitimate and right, so why does the debate continue? What do we hope to achieve by proving that another is wrong when in fact they are right? Many devotees also agree this is a problem and so avoid philosophical adrenaline rushes.
If we cannot get distinct finality from Srila Prabhupada, although it is already there, and we cannot quote our previous acaryas because of variance in explanations according to time, places and circumstance, whom do we turn to?
We turn to Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu the original teacher of our previous acaryas, in particular His Sri Siksatakam. Have any of us noticed how Lord Chaitanya is seldom, if ever referenced from His eight prayers covering all levels of devotional progress from beginning to Krishna-prema? And the Lord does mention the fall of us jivas (Verse 5).
“O son of Maharaja Nanda [Krishna], I am Your eternal servitor, yet somehow or other I have fallen into the ocean of birth and death. Please pick me up from this ocean of death and place me as one of the atoms at Your lotus feet.”
What is very interesting is that the same rudimentary human curiosity is mentioned in the fifth verse describing the advanced level of Ashakti, which Srila Prabhupada usually defined as “Attachment.” Considering that this attainment comes just before the extremely rare attainment stage of Bhava, we can reasonably ask the question, “What is this basic ‘fallen’ reference doing way up there on the Ashakti level?”
First, we can see why this can be “boring” for us budding philosophers. Lord Chaitanya, humbly taking our human role admits, “I have fallen into the ocean of birth and death.” Here we can see Srila Prabhupada’s Tal fruit analogy come to life. How does the Tal fruit (jiva) fall? “…Yet somehow or other…” says the Lord.
The omniscient Lord knows our argumentative tendencies and accommodates both the fall / no fall standpoints ad infinitum with “yet somehow or other.” He is saying that we have “fallen” here into this world, yet some of us choose to debate it. “Keep it simple…and be deeply attached to Krishna” is His message. Is this sufficient to end the debate? What is the “profound” import of the verse?
Lord Chaitanya always wishes He could do more for His Lord (Krishna). He laments His inability to chant the holy names. He continually cries because He can never get to see the Lord, even if momentarily – it is never enough on the prema platform. In the same way, the Lord is begging from the Ashakti level, “Please pick me up from this ocean of death and place me as one of the atoms at Your lotus feet.”
When Ashakti matures into Bhava, the first sporadic visual glimpses of Lord Krishna, the personification of the holy name appears within one’s heart. This is the same as, “…and place me as one of the atoms at Your lotus feet.” How is this relevant? Is there any proof of this correlation? “Please pick me up from this ocean of death…” correlates with the growth of our devotional creeper:
“”As one waters the bhakti-lata-bija, the seed sprouts, and the creeper gradually grows to the point where it penetrates the walls of this universe and goes beyond the Viraja River, lying between the spiritual world and the material world. It attains brahma-loka, the Brahman effulgence, and penetrating through that stratum, it reaches the spiritual sky and the spiritual planet Goloka Vrrndavana.” (CC Madhya 19.153)
When Lord Chaitanya prays, “…and place me as one of the atoms at Your lotus feet,” we may symbolically liken this to having our Bhakti-creeper placed at Krishna’s lotus feet, but it is a factual form of progress. Nature operates differently on the spiritual plane:
“Being situated in one’s heart and being watered by sravana-kirtana, the bhakti creeper grows more and more. In this way it attains the shelter of the desire tree of the lotus feet of Krishna, who is eternally situated in the planet known as Goloka Vrndavana in the topmost region of the spiritual sky.” (CC Madhya 19.154)
Srila Prabhupada further elaborates: “There the creeper takes shelter at the lotus feet of the Lord, and that is its final destination. At that time the creeper begins to grow the fruits of ecstatic love of God.” (CC Madhya 19.155 purport)
On several occasions disciples would ask Srila Prabhupada about the symptoms of say, perfected yogis, pure devotees or of those who perfect their chanting of Hare Krishna. To these type of enquires he would encourage such questioning devotees to simply take Krishna consciousness seriously, then one shall eventually know these things.
Sometimes the same sort of questions would vary, leading to, “How do we know if we are making spiritual advancement…or, how can we tell if our chanting of japa is succeeding?” Srila Prabhupada would sometimes refer to the example of a hungry man Knowing he is getting relief and satisfaction simply by the act of eating.
In relation to the same Siksataka fifth verse, Lord Chaitanya is teaching us the same Knowing principle given by Srila Prabhupada. Those who choose to argue over whether we fell, or did not fall from the spiritual sky can be compared with the hungry man – there is a constant hunger to Know the answer about our origins.
But Lord Chaitanya is also indicating that we cannot possibly Know the answer until we reach the level of Ashakti and beyond. When we are qualified to get these glimpses of Lord Krishna, we shall also Know something of our original spiritual position. As explained previously, spiritual nature functions differently from our gross experiences of matter.
Around the time of reaching the juncture of Ashakti and Bhava, there is a descent of Cit-shakti or the revelation of causeless spiritual knowledge. This knowledge likewise functions differently from acquired knowledge and learning. Such Cit-knowledge can be expansive and instant. Do we remember how Dhruva Maharaja received such Cit-shakti thrpugh being touched by the conchshell of Lord Vishnu?
Lord Chaitanya is indirectly saying to us, “First come to this Ashakti / Bhava level and then you will understand…do not worry about how you came here, but pray to be attached to the lotus feet of Krishna…” This mirrors how Srila Prabhupada would answer similar questions of this nature. This can be an austerity for our curiosity.
Simply to focus on how to get out of this world might seem a type of limitation to our ability to think freely about such things and to debate them. It might also create an impression of encouraging over-simplicity. Both these objections are the product of impatience and branched intelligence. It requires great natural focus, through krpa (mercy) to attain the Ashakti stage.
Such simple focus is actually a symptom of healthy intelligence – one has to be intelligent to be truly simple and focused (BG 2.41). Lord Chaitanya is demonstrating patience and simplicity and then the answers to our origins will be revealed through Cit and Krpa. Until such a time, it might be more useful and within our grasp to know what a Tal fruit is.
Ys Kesava Krsna Dasa – GRS.
It is not so much a matter of fall or no fall, as it is understood by everyone that we, as eternal sat cit ananda spirit souls, have fallen into this ocean of nescience, asat, acit & nirananda, and have accepted temporary bodies, which, on top of that, we tend to identify to…!
But I agree with the gist of this article of our dear Kesava Krishna Prabhu.
What matters is not where we are coming from…
What really matters is where we are going to….!
Even more important, is to develop ahaituki bhakti, unmotivated devotional service and Krishna prema, pure love of God, for then, even our destination will not matter, as we will be happy and ready to serve Sri Guru & Sri Gauranga anywhere they may wish us to…!
But for clarity sake, we cannot just ignore, or worse disregard, what Sastras and our previous Acaryas have stated about the origin of the jiva, as well as what Srila Prabhupada said and mostly wrote in accordance with them in many instances, as well as in the specific wording of “the conclusion is”.
Now, if he may have said something, at times, apparently contradictory in the course of his preaching, then that might have to be understood as belonging to the realm of pedagogy or to be classified as inconceivable anyway, for the conditioned souls that most of us still are…
Thus, best is to dive deep in service, be it the chanting of the Holy Names of Sri-Sri Radha and Krishna, Sri-Sri Gour-Nitai, Sri-Sri Jagannath-Baladeva-& Subhadra Devi, or in any form of seva, manifesting as an expansion of our chanting and as an expression of our eternal spiritual nature:
jivera svarupa haya, Krishnera nitya das
There are quite a few problems with this presentation but I’ll focus on the main ones to keep it simple and straight-forward. Before that, it’s important to be clear that the overall issue isn’t exactly whether we fell or not, but rather, what are the correct tattvas and siddhantas as presented by Lord Caitanya and His appointed acaryas, in accordance with enteral Vedic knowledge. I’m going to break up my posts into small parcels to accommodate the restrictions given here on Dandavats.
Yes, we can say, ‘what does it matter – let’s concentrate on getting out’. No one will argue with that notion. However, what ‘is’ important is to understand the actual truth of the matter and it is important that devotees do not spread apasiddhanta because of THEIR misunderstanding of Srila Prabhupada’s presentation. Srila Prabhupada didn’t make any mistakes, but many of his followers continue to do so due to their misinterpretation of his teachings on this matter. That is the crux of the matter.
First of all, Lord Caitanya did ‘not’ say, ‘some how or other’. Those words are not there in the original Sanskrit. Sometimes Srila Prabhupada translated verses and imbedded explanatory phrases in them to convey the intended meaning. That’s fine, but to say that Lord Caitanya said those exact words is incorrect and thus, a major part of the premise of this presentation is fatally flawed. This indicates a lack of research and quite a bit of speculative extrapolation instead of understanding the core tattvas as they are given by the previous acaryas, from whom Srila Prabhupada emphatically declared he would never deviate.
In fact, here is the exact translation as found in CC, 3.20.32, which differs from other translations Srila Prabhupada gave. Please also note that the phrase “because of my own fruitive acts” is also not in the original Sanskrit, which simply has the word ‘patita’, ie: fallen:
O My Lord, O Kṛṣṇa, son of Mahārāja Nanda, I am Your eternal servant, but because of My own fruitive acts I have fallen into this horrible ocean of nescience. Now please be causelessly merciful to Me. Consider Me a particle of dust at Your lotus feet.
Thus, all of the speculative extrapolation of “some how or other” presented in the article is rendered null and void. Another faulty extrapolation is to consider the phrase “I am your eternal servant” as meaning we were serving actively in Krsna’s lila. It does not. It is simply a statement of the jiva’s constitutional nature or svabhava.
Taking this issue systematically, we should understand with absolute certainty that maya cannot enter into the svarupa-sakti, ie: Krsna’s internal potency, the spiritual realm. This is repeatedly confirmed in Brahma-samhita and other sastras. Maya has no influence in that realm and neither do the inhabitants there even know of the existence of the material realm. They are fully absorbed in prema, especially the residents of Goloka, where the highest prema exists.
Therefore, they cannot ‘choose’ maya or even think about the material worlds as some sort of alternative option because it’s not even remotely within the scope of their possibilities. Notwithstanding the jiva’s minute idependence, the fact is that there is not one single example in sastra of a jiva in the spiritual realm having envious thoughts of Krsna and being banished. Jaya and Vijaya are not examples of this, as their situation was personally arranged by Krsna and they had no envious thoughts.
Bhaktivinoda Thakura explains the source of the nitya-baddha jivas in Jaiva-dharma, Chapters 15 and 16, which conclusively establishes the truth (tattva) of the jiva’s origins. Considering that JD is BVT’s magnum-opus, you’d expect to find detailed information about ‘the big fall’, where trillions and trillions of jivas thought there was something better than being in Goloka and were subsequently banished to material existence. But we find nothing of the sort. Not even close. We do find concrete and unambiguous information about how the jivas enter material existence. In chapter 7 BVT also addresses this issue. Note the phrase “the jiva’s ‘first’ location”:
Yādava dāsa: Why have we fallen into this illusory relationship?
Ananta dāsa: Bhagavān is the complete spiritual entity and the jīvas are particles of spirit (cit-kaṇa). The jīva‘s first location is on the boundary line between the material and spiritual worlds. The jīvas who do not forget their relationship with Kṛṣṇa are empowered with cit-śakti, and are drawn from that position into the spiritual realm, where they become His eternal associates and begin to relish the bliss of His service.
Those jīvas who turn away from Kṛṣṇa desire to enjoy māyā, and māyā attracts them towards her by her potency. From that moment, our material state of existence comes into being and our true spiritual identity disappears. We therefore think, “I am the enjoyer of māyā”. This false egoism covers us with many varieties of false identities.
More from JD:
Babaji: …Innumerable jivas appear from Sri Baladeva Prabhu to serve Vrndavana-vihari Sri Krsna as His eternal associates in Goloka Vrndavana, and others appear from Sri Sankarsana to serve the Lord of Vaikuntha, Sri Narayana, in the spiritual sky.
Eternally relishing rasa, engaged in the service of their worshipable Lord, they always remain fixed in their constitutional position. They always strive to please Bhagavan, and are always attentive to Him. Having attained the strength of cit-sakti, they are always strong.
They have no connection with the material energy. In fact, they do not know if there is a bewildering energy called maya or not. Because they reside in the spiritual world, maya is very far away from them and does not affect them at all.
Always absorbed in the bliss of serving their worshipable Lord, they are eternally liberated and are free from material happiness and distress. Their life is love alone, and they are not even conscious of misery, death or fear.
There are also innumerable, atomic, conscious jivas who emanate as rays in Karanodakasayi Maha-Visnu’s glance upon His maya-sakti. Because these jivas are situated next to maya, they perceive her wonderful workings.
Although they have all the qualities of the jivas that I have already described, because of their minute and marginal nature, they sometimes look to the spiritual world, and sometimes to the material world. In this marginal condition, the jiva is very weak because at that time he has not attained spiritual strength from the mercy of the object of his worship.
Among these unlimited jivas, those who want to enjoy maya become engrossed in mundane sense gratification and enter the state of nitya-baddha. On the other hand, the jivas who perform cid-anusilanam of Bhagavan receive spiritual sakti (cid-bala) by His mercy, and enter the spiritual world. JD, Chapter 16, Page 377-378
Bhaktivinoda Thakura thus dispels all doubts and confusion. The jivas in the material world have originally emanated from Maha-Visnu, as part of the marginal potency (tatastha-sakti), and some of them go directly to the spiritual realm, whereas others go directly to the material world.
Bhaktivinoda Thakura wrote more on this subject in those two chapters, which expand greatly on these truths. Many other questions are answered there, such as:
Vrajanatha: Prabhu, I understand that this marginal position is situated in tatastha-svabhava, or the junction, of the spiritual and material worlds. Why is it that some jivas go from there to the material world, while others go to the spiritual world?
Vrajanatha: Krsna is karunamaya (full of mercy), so why did He make the jiva so weak that he became entangled in maya?
Vrajanatha: Why must the jivas suffer for the sake of Bhagavan’s pastimes?
Vrajanatha: What harm would there have been if the jiva had not been given independent desire? Krsna is omniscient, and He gave this independence to the jivas, even though He knew that they would suffer on account of it, so isn’t He responsible for the jiva’s suffering?
Vrajanatha: Is maya-sakti the cause of our misfortune then? Would the jivas have had to suffer like this if the omnipotent and omniscient Sri Krsna had kept maya away from them?
These chapters would have been the perfect place for BVT to explain how countless jivas fell from the lila due to enviousness, but there is not one single word about ‘the big fall’. There are no such statements in any of the major books of our prominent acaryas.
Since we know Srila Prabhupada would never deviate from the previous acaryas, and since we know he said numerous times that “it is a fact that no one falls from Vaikuntha”, we can conclude that any statements he made the ‘appear’ to be contradictory to that tattva, only appear that way due to the limited understanding of those who interpret his words according to their own pre-disposed ideas of what the facts are. This is a flawed approach and this is why there is the controversy we see today.
Srila Prabhupada – “We never had any occasion when we were separated from Krsna. Just like one man is dreaming and he forgets himself. In dream he creates himself in different forms: now I am the King discussing like that. This creation of himself is as seer and subject matter or seen, two things. But as soon as the dream is over, the “seen” disappears. But the seer remains. Now he is in his original position”. Letter to Madhudvisa Swami 1972
Srila Prabhupada – “Our separation from Krsna is like that. We dream this body and so many relationships with other things. First the attachment comes to enjoy sense gratification. Even with Krsna desire for sense gratification is there. There is a dormant attitude for forgetting Krsna and creating an atmosphere for enjoying independently. Just like at the edge of the beach, sometimes the water covers, sometimes there is dry sand, coming and going. Our position is like that, sometimes covered, sometimes free, just like at the edge of the tide. As soon as we forget, immediately the illusion is there. Just like as soon as we sleep, dream is there”. Letter to Madhudvisa Swami 1972
Srila Prabhupada – “We cannot say therefore that we are not with Krsna. As soon as we try to become Lord, immediately we are covered by Maya. Formerly we were with Krsna in His lila or sport. But this covering of Maya may be of very, very, very, very long duration, therefore many creations are coming and going. Due to this long period of time it is sometimes said that we are ever-conditioned. But his long duration of time becomes very insignificant when one actually comes to Krsna consciousness. Just like in a dream we are thinking very long time, but as soon as we awaken we look at our watch and see it has been a moment only. Just like with Krsna’s friends, they were kept asleep for one year by Brahma, but when they woke up and Krsna returned before them, they considered that only a moment had passed”. Letter to Madhudvisa Swami 1972
Srila Prabhupada – “So this dreaming condition is called non-liberated life, and this is just like a dream. Although in this material calculation it is a long, long period, as soon as we come to Krsna consciousness then this period is considered as a second. For example, Jaya and Vijaya. They had their lila with Krsna, but they had to come down for their little mistake. They were given mukti, emerging into the Brahmasayujya after being killed three times as demons. This Brahmasayujya mukti is non-permanent”. Letter to Madhudvisa Swami 1972
Srila Prabhupada – “Every living entity wants pleasure, but Brahmasayujya is minus pleasure. There is eternal existence only. So when they do not find transcendental bliss, they fall down to make a compromise with material bliss. Just like Vivekananda founded so many schools and hospitals. So even Lord Brahma, he is still material and wants to lord it over. He may come down to become a germ, but then he may rise up to Krsna consciousness and go back to home, back to Godhead. This is the position”. Letter to Madhudvisa Swami 1972
Srila Prabhupada – “So when I say Yes, there is eternal lila with Krsna, that means on the evidence of Jaya-Vijaya. Unless one develops full devotional service to Krsna, he goes up only up to Brahmasayujya but falls down. But after millions and millions of years of keeping oneself away from the lila of the Lord, when one comes to Krsna consciousness this period becomes insignificant, just like dreaming”. Letter to Madhudvisa Swami 1972
Srila Prabhupada – “Because he falls down from Brahmasayujya, he thinks that may be his origin, but he does not remember that before that even he was with Krsna. So the conclusion is that whatever may be our past, let us come to Krsna consciousness and immediately join Krsna. Just like with a diseased man, it is a waste of time to try to find out how he has become diseased, better to spend time curing the disease”. Letter to Madhudvisa Swami 1972
Srila Prabhupada – “On the top of the tree there is a nice tal-fruit. A crow went there and the fruit fell down, Some panditas, big big learned scholars saw this and discussed: the fruit fell due to the crow agitating the limb. No, the fruit fell simultaneously with the crow landing and frightened the crow so he flew away. No, the fruit was ripe and the weight of the crow landing broke it from the branch, and so on and so on. What is the use of such discussions? So whether you were in the Brahmasayujya or with Krsna in His lila, at the moment you are in neither, so the best policy is to develop your Krsna consciousness and go there, never mind what is your origin”. Letter to Madhudvisa Swami 1972
Srila Prabhupada – “Brahmasayujya and Krsna lila–both may be possible, but when you are coming down from Brahmasayujya or when you are coming down from Krsna lila, that remains a mystery. But at the present moment we are in Maya’s clutches, so at present our only hope is to become Krsna conscious and go back to Home, back to Godhead. The real position is servant of Krsna, and servant of Krsna means in Krsna lila”. Letter to Madhudvisa Swami 1972
Srila Prabhupada – “Directly or indirectly, always we are serving Krsna’s lila. Even in dream. Just like we cannot go out of the sun when it is daytime, so where is the chance of going out of Krsna lila? The cloud may be there, it may become very gray and dim, but still the sunlight is there, everywhere, during the daytime. Because I am part and parcel of Krsna, I am always connected. My finger, even though it may be diseased, remains part and parcel of my body. Therefore, we try to treat it, cure it, because it is part and parcel. So Krsna comes Himself when we forget Him, or He sends His representative”. Letter to Madhudvisa Swami 1972
Srila Prabhupada – “Awakening or dreaming, I am the same man. As soon as I awaken and see myself, I see Krsna. Cause and effect are both Krsna. Just like cotton becomes thread and thread becomes cloth, still, the original cause is cotton. Therefore, everything is Krsna in the ultimate sense. When we cannot contact Krsna personally, we contact His energies. So there is no chance to be outside Krsna’s lila. But differences we see under different conditions. Just like in the pool of water and in the mirror the same me is reflecting, but in different reflections. One is shimmering, unsteady, one is clear and fixed. Except for being in Krsna consciousness, we cannot see our actual position rightly, therefore the learned man sees all living entities as the same parts and parcels of Krsna”. Letter to Madhudvisa Swami 1972
Srila Prabhupada – “Material existence is impersonal because my real personality is covered. But we should think that because I am now covered by this clay, I am diseased, and we should think that I must get to business to get myself uncovered, not wonder how I got this way. Now the fruit is there, take it and enjoy, that is your first business. God is not bound by cause. He can change, He is the Cause of all Causes. Now don’t waste your time with this “Kaka taliya nyaya,” crows and tal-fruit logic.” Letter to Madhudvisa Swami 1972
“Formerly we were with Krsna in His lila”: In 1972, a devotee in Australia began saying that the living entities in this material world were originally situated in the brahmajyoti. According to Madhudvisa Prabhu and Caru Prabhu, who were both in Australia at the time, this caused some fairly widespread disturbance. Srila Prabhupada therefore dictated a response, a typed copy of which was retained by Madhudvisa Prabhu. This is the famous crow and tal fruit message. Madhudvisa has said that it was distributed to the Australian temple presidents. In this statement, given in direct response to inquiries from his students on the question of the origin of the jiva, Srila Prabhupada gives many definitive answers to the questions facing us. He intended these not just as answers to a particular devotee but as his official answer to a philosophical controversy that had arisen in the ISKCON Society”
The conclusion, Srila Prabhupada – “Because he falls down from Brahmasayujya, (impersonal Brahmajyoti) he thinks that may be his origin, but he does not remember that long before that even he was with Krsna.”
The jiva soul is expanded for the purpose of exchanging loving service with the Infinite Supreme Personality of Godhead in any manner that He sees fit. We will not care how the fall from the spiritual world occurred when we are there. The ecstatic love we will be drowned in will suffice. We can look for evidence in the shastra, and we can look for indications from the Acharyas. The Acharyas do not want us to become fixated on such knowledge if it detracts from Sri Krishna. For example, if one thinks that I can come to Krishna again if I neglect the opportunity for devotional service that is before us now, then the illusory independent enjoying mood will overtake us.
Many times, Srila Prabhupad would say that you can know how you are advancing in Krishna consciousness by how much eagerness and yearning you have for Krishna. There is no doubt that we are fallen souls, dwelling within the world of birth and death, although existentially the soul is beyond birth and death. The best position to take is that “where ever I may be, we must aspire to the service of the Lord and His devotees.” Whether in heaven, whether in hell, or in the spiritual world beyond the contact with matter…all that remains for us is to hanker for Krishna.
Pusta Krishna das
Kesava Krsna Prabhu,
Your thesis seems to be that the most important thing is to go back to godhead; and not try to understand things beyond our capacity at this point. I accept that point.
I acknowledge that your perspective is, at least, consistent. Sometime devotees say a conclusion is not possible within a certain realm, and at the same time, they try to defeat one position in that realm and establish another. So you are true to the muni school of analyzing from various angles without coming to a conclusion.Except the one described in the paragraph above which we are in agreement with.
You say,”Quoting Srila Prabhupada one way or another and then claiming finality or victory is a problem”. Well sometimes it is and sometimes it isn’t. Regarding social/ cultural issues, which are subject to time and place, this is most always the case. An example where it is not the case is that the conclusion of the Bhagavada Gita is Krishna is The Supreme Personality of Godhead. Yet there are those (outside of ISKCON) who will endlessly argue against this clear thesis. I not saying that one who does not accept that back to godhead means back to godhead is the same as rejecting Krishna. But to me Srila Prabhupada’s teachings on the origin of the jiva is as clear as his teaching on Krishna being The Absolute Truth.
So we have people, like you, who say no conclusion is possible, those who say a certain conclusion is the only one possible and those who say the opposite conclusion is possible. We can’t all be right, so at some we have to rely on the leaders of the movement to be the judges. We can all make our best case but a judgement by leaders must be there as a remedy. I will accept whatever conclusion is made because I know by doing so I am in line with the teachings of Srila Prabhupada who set up the governance structure of ISKCON and asked us to kindly cooperate with it. Of course people can argue for and against this also. Among other things,some will say we can’t be sure the GBC is right. I would argue that, because they may not be right all the time does not mean they are wrong all the time and we also can’t be sure we are right and they are wrong. So unless we feel the GBC is absolutely wrong we should accept the conclusion of a group of senior devotees ovre our independent opinion as per the order of Srila Prabhupada.
Yes, it is time that the whole controversy be put to rest. Krishna consciousness is scientific, “religion with philosophy”. It should not be subject to schisms over doctrines that are based mainly on appeals to emotions and loyalties.
It is a fact that Srila Prabhupada said things about this issue that contradict one another. It is a fact that previous acaryas have done the same. It is not because one side is right and one side is wrong, or that one group of statements is a “trick” for those who cannot handle the actual conclusion. It is because some things are inconceivable. When we deal with Krishna, we soon recognize there are things about Him that are inconceivable.
It is built right into our slogan. The “acintya” in “acitya-bhedabheda tattva” means there is something inconceivable. We can try to explain how Krishna and His energies are one, nondual whole, and yet that He is also distinct from His energies (including the individual jivas, who can never be His equal). But no matter how well we explain this fundamental principle of Krishna theology, we cannot encompass it within our logic.
It is at the very heart of Bhagavad-Gita: Krishna pervades everything by the expanse of His various energies, and yet He is not these manifestations but rather is their transcendental source. Or we can say, “Krishna is everything but not everything is Krishna.” He is both immanent and transcendent. This is a contradiction, but such contradictions are resolved in Krishna consciousness, which transcends philosophical logic.
The same sort of thing is going on in the mutually true statements that no one ever falls from the spiritual world and that we were once with Krishna in His lila but “somehow or another” (it cannot be explained how or when, but Lord Caitanya says ‘kinkaram”), since before the beginning of time, since before the creation when we were sleeping inside Maha-Vishnu, somehow we did fall.
How we can be progressing toward our original state from one of eternal illusion is mysterious to us. Curious. Yet we know are truly fallen, we are grappling with material energy, we are drowning and we need to reach up to Krishna who is extending His hand to lift us out of this material ocean.
Some may misunderstand the 1995 GBC resolutions. They did not reject half of Srila Prabhupada’s teachings on the issue and accept the other half. They just said we cannot teach that Srila Prabhupada was wrong, or was tricking us.
Kesava Krsna Prabhu,
Part 1 of 2:
It is certainly true that we must come to a purified state to understand transcendental knowledge. But in order to begin purification we must be able to theoretically understand what is correct and incorrect. For instance I may not have realization of simultaneous oneness and difference but I can say- total oneness is incorrect and total difference is incorrect. I must be able to identify either erroneous conclusion and deny them although my knowledge is still theoretical.
Another example is that the Scriptures say there is no time when the individual soul does not exist nor will there ever be a time when the soul ceases to exist: it has no beginning or end. This is the Vedic understanding of eternity. Yet sometimes our scriptures say the One became many. We cannot deny this by way of realization but we can refer to prominent thesis. Thus we can say, without doubt, that the statement that the One became many is not literal; it is a manner of speaking so the souls engrossed in a body that has a beginning and an end can grasp the thesis that the One is the origin.
The concept of an eternal rasa with Krishna is similar; eternal means that there is no time when it does not exist. Our rasa is pure loving service to Krishna and this is distinct from our indirect connection with Krishna energies in the material world or the brahman effulgence. Our direct rasa with Krishna must exist (in a dormant state) when we are connected with the external energy because if the rasa does not always exist it is not eternal. The conclusion is we have forgotten the rasa in a way similar to forgetting a material identity when we are sleeping. Waking up is the proof that our identity still remains although we forget it while we sleep.
I cannot claim to be awake to my spiritual rasa but I can say for certain that the scripture teaches it always exists. It follows; I can also say that the concept of our origin being the brahma jyoti is not a statement of the ultimate conclusion because this would defy the thesis of there never being a circumstance when our rasa does not exist. So although I do not have full realization I can determine what is correct and what is incorrect.
Part 2 of 2.
Beyond this, Srila Prabhupada answered the question for those whose theoretical understanding is not strong enough for them to identify erroneous conclusions. As cited in, “Back to Godhead Means Back to Godhead( Dandavats) “Because he falls from brahma-sayuja he thinks that may be his origin, but he does not remember that before that even he was with Krishna (Srila Prabhupadas letter to Madhuvisa, Sikshamrta Volume 2 pages 1771-1774.) There are numerous similar statements.
So in some cases, such as the present topic, if we say, we must wait for realization before we determine what is correct or incorrect we dissolve the preliminary step of correct theoretical understanding.
“Jaya and Vijaya are not examples of this, as their situation was personally arranged by Krsna and they had no envious thoughts.”
I recently read about this in the Third Canto, and yet I found creative ambiguity there as well. In some verses it indicated that Lord Narayana was angry with Jaya and Vijaya because they really should not have spoken to the Four Kumaras in that way. But in later verses Lord Narayan says that Jaya and Vijaya were faultless it was all an arrangement for lila. I find such ambiguity throughout my reading of Srila Prabhupada’s books. The devotee has to be humble and simply accept without challenging. Or one can ask, “But this statement seems inconsistent with that. How come?”
When devotees asked Srila Prabhupada why his statement that we fell from Krishna’s lila seemed inconsistent with other acaryas’ statements that we originated in Maha-Vishnu (or in His glance that impregnated Devi Maya), he said that the followers of these acaryas do not know that before we were in Maha Vishnu we were with Krishna.
That is, when the lifetime of Brahma is over and the universe is inhaled, the jivas again remain dormant in Visnu’s body, and come out again in another universe. Srila Prabhupada taught that as eternally-conditioned souls, we have gone through many, many such dissolutions and periods of sleep within Visnu, but that our eternal home (whether we think of it as a place we will return to and remember “for the first time” as it were, or as a place we forgot long, long ago), is with Krishna.
I do not think Uttamasloka has faced Srila Prabhupada’s specific statements about this.
I do want to thank Uttamasloka for disabusing me of the notion that “kinkaram” means “somehow”. As one who does not know Sanskrt, I speculated that it meant “kim” (how) + “karana” (cause), but I see now that Srila Prabhupada translated it as “servant”.
I see Bhaktivinode Thakur’s explanation as perfect, and Srila Prabhupada’s explanation as also perfect. There is a great passage in the “long purport” in Brahma-Samhita where Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakur explains that Rupa Gosswami and Jiva Goswami do not actually disagree on the issue of Adi-rasa, but it appears that way to their imperfect followers.
As for whether there would have had to be a kind of “big fall” (like the big bang), that is just the product of mundane speculation. When we deal with infinity and transcendence things do not follow our common expectations.
” Thus we can say, without doubt, that the statement that the One became many is not literal; it is a manner of speaking so the souls engrossed in a body that has a beginning and an end can grasp the thesis that the One is the origin.”
That may be one valid way to look at it (that the Vedic statement “eko bahu syam” is not literal), but Srila Prabhupada seems to favor literal acceptance.
Another approach might be to say that the One did become the Many, and at the same time both the One and Many are eternally so (“nityo nityanam cetanas cetananam”). To accept this approach entails accepting two contradictory ideas simultaneously. It is just a fact of proper understanding of Vedanta that certain seemingly contradictory conceptions are both, inconceivably, perfectly valid.
Of course this should not be overused to banish the idea of logic or philosophy altogether, but in Vedic epistemology, logic must give way at certain precisely-defined pressure points, to genuine Sabda.
The idea that logic and empirical perception are inferior to Sabda is more than just a fundamentalist’s circular way of supporting his own ideology (“God said it, I believe it, that settles it.”) It is a recognition that for the student of the ultimate science of God and Spirit there are certain truths which are truly trans-logical, but which can be appreciated as true by the qualified disciple through the grace of Guru and Krishna.
From what I can tell, this jiva origin, fall/no-fall controversy is just another manifestation of one of those many instances when two valid but seemingly contradictory conceptions must be accepted as Absolute Truth.
This one controversy seems to have somehow or another become freighted with the politics of religious institutions, however. I think it is time now to move beyond that.
One thing I can say is, in Srimad Bhagavatam, I see Srila Prabhupada over and over again stresses that no one can say when or how the jivas first fell into the material world. It seems to be an important point, and I have to believe he is quoting some important Vedic authority (as he always does).
He also says that nitya-siddhas are never in illusion, which does raise the question as to whether Jaya and Vijaya or Narada Muni are among the nitya-siddhas. Even Arjuna was placed in illusion by Krishna for the purpose of speaking Bhagavad-Gita, though we know Arjuna is one of Krishna’s eternal associates (see, B.G. 4.5)
These are valid questions.
“Since we know Srila Prabhupada would never deviate from the previous acaryas, and since we know he said numerous times that “it is a fact that no one falls from Vaikuntha”, we can conclude that any statements he made the ‘appear’ to be contradictory to that tattva, only appear that way due to the limited understanding of those who interpret his words according to their own pre-disposed ideas of what the facts are. This is a flawed approach and this is why there is the controversy we see today.”
I guess the real question, then, is how we ought to interpret the many statements of Srila Prabhupada quoted by Gauragopala and Sita Rama Prabhus. How do you interpret them?
Maybe we just have to accept them at face value and recognize that there are equally valid but apparently contradictory answers to some of these questions.
But if there are specific statement that must be taken as conclusice, such as statements from Srimad-Bhagavatam or Vedanta Sutra or the Upanisads, I would like to hear what they are. I think that could shed more light on why the “no fall” partisans feel so strongly about this sometimes.
I can understand why the “fall” partisans feel that Srila Prabhupada is being slighted by the others. To say “Srila Prabhupada did not really mean what he said”, or that he invented a kind of fairy story for immature disciples never sat right with me. It seems a dangerous approach to hearing from Srila Prabhupada, which calls into question his authority, and in some cases seems to unnecessarily and improperly place him in a lower position than previous acaryas (as some of his godbrothers may have done). As they say, a saint is not recognized in his own family.
Besides, there are many authoritative statements of Lord Caitanya and the six Goswamis and Srimad Bhagavatam that seem to support the “fall” position, that when an eternally bound jiva achieves perfection and comes to reside in a Vaikuntha planet, it is more of a homecoming than an entry into a brave new world. It is repeatedly described as a kind of remembering of something wonderful but long forgotten, as in Brhad-Bhagavatamrta when Gopa Kumar finally meets Lord Krishna in Goloka and is told his eternal identity.
The “nitya-siddha krsna-prema ‘sadhya’ kabu naya” verse, seems to establish that prema is not something to be gained from outside but is dormant in the heart of all jivas and needs only to be awakened (re-awakened?)
At least, I have to be open-minded about this.
This is incredibly beautiful and powerful. Hearing these statements, how can anyone imagine that Krsna would banish anyone from His lila, or that any residents of the spiritual realm could possibly have envious thoughts?
Govinda Bhasya, verse 4.4.22, from the commentary by Baladeva Vidyabhusana:
The worlds, beginning with the world of Brahma, they come and go, O Arjuna but he who cometh unto me, O Kaunteya, he knoweth birth no more. (Gita, 18, 15, 16).
Nor indeed can it be feared that the Supreme Lord, the blessed Hari, will ever wish to throw down from his world, His servant, the Mukta, or that the Mukta would ever wish to leave his Beloved. For has not the Lord said in the Gita (7.17):
I am supremely dear to the wise and he is dear to me.” Or does not the Bhagavata Purana also say, “I am the heart of the Sadhus, and the Sadhus are verily my heart.” Thus there is excess of reciprocal love between the two, leaving no room for any such doubts, unworthy both of the Lord and His Devotee.
Also in the Bhagavata Purana, we have the following : Those who leaving aside wives, sons, houses, lives and riches sought shelter in me, how can I allow myself to desert them?
A clean-souled man never leaves the feet of Sri Krishna, just as a traveller who has reached his home after undergoing all sorts of trouble, does not leave it.
Thus, on the one hand, the Lord has a strong determination not to leave His devotees and, on the other hand, His devotees have an equally strong love for Him, which does not allow them to leave Him.
To sum up, the Lord never abandons His own extremely beloved children, who are a fragment of His own essence, after having brought them to His home, and after having washed away their ignorance, which had caused them to turn their face from the Lord.
More so when it is remembered that the promises of the Lord are ever true, that His resolutions are never frustrated, that He is an ocean of protecting kindness for all those who take shelter under Him, and that He is the Lord of all. Such a being will never renounce His devotees, who have abandoned everything.
(continued in part 2)
Continued…
The jiva also, on the other hand, whose quest was ever happiness, and who had constantly been deluded by a show of it in the shape of wives, children, etc., and who had passed innumerable lives in the pursuit of these false pleasures, will not leave that infinity of true joy and wisdom, the best friend and master, the most merciful, when he has found Him through the grace of a good teacher and through the arising of his good fortune.
The soul, when it has once found its origin, never has any desire for things other than the Lord and follows Him alone and never wishes to be away from Him. This is not a question for logical arguments, it is a matter learnt through the scriptures alone and must be so believed, whose sole authorities are the scriptures.
The bone of an animal is impure, yet a conch shell is pure. The stool of an animal is impure. What is cow manure but the stool of an animal? Yet it is pure. So these statements simply have to be accepted.
I guess in this controversy, the problem is that the “no fall” advocates are saying that Srila Prabhupada’s statements such as “but before that we were with Krishna” are unprecedented. They believe no support can be found for such statements in Vedic sruti, smrti, or even in the writings of previous acaryas.
If that were really the case, it should be a challenge for disciples of Srila Prabhupada to explain why he would say such things.
I am always learning new things. I fully expect to find support for such statements in the Vedas and Puranas. I have already seen some such statements.
I know from past experience that everything Srila Prabhupada says about these kinds of philosophical points is backed up by scriptures. It may be the job of those who feel Srila Prabhupada’s authority is being slighted to find the verses in the Upanisads or in Vedanta-sutra or in the Puranas and explain them with all reference to Sanskrt grammar, in a way that would satisfy any honest pandit that Srila Prabhupada was not just making this stuff up.
I once asked Hrdayananda Maharaja about it and he quoted me a section of the Fourth Canto (I think) — it might be in the story of King Puranjana — where someone is reminded of an old forgotten friendship. My recollection is vague, but I have seen it in these discussions here on Dandavats in the past month.
Mainly I think if we keep an open mind and try to enlighten ourselves and one another I think this controversy should just disappear. It seems far less important than people make it out to be.
Yes, everything in the spiritual world is eternal, and it is a fact that everything there is infallible and no one who goes there ever returns.
And yes, everyone in samsara has been so for eternity and without a beginning. Anadi-karma.
But also, Srila Prabhupada keeps saying that means no one can trace out when we came here because it is something that happened “since time immemorial”. It happened outside the scope of time. But somehow it did happen.
We can be sure Srila Prabhupada was not just making it up. He never did that sort of thing. So what is the basis in sruti and smrti for those statements? I have to think we will find it, and that should really rest the case.
In Rāga-vartma-candrikā, Second Diffusion, Viśvanātha Cakravartī provides these illuminating details about how the jiva enters Krsna’s lila. Note that there are no indications of resuming their original status before they left. Also, why does VCT say that Krsna “gives them a gopi body”? Why doesn’t he say that their original body reappears? Why do they have to establish their family context, ie: their mother, father, etc if they already had these things in place? Where are the statements indicating being welcomed home again? Here is the excerpt:
One may ask, “Why don’t you say that when the sādhaka attains the stage of prema and leaves his body, he will take a gopīka body in the spiritual world without taking birth from the womb of a gopīka, after which he manifests sneha and so on (i.e., the higher stages of prema), in that body through the association of the eternally perfect gopīs?”
The answer here is: No, that will not happen, because then one cannot get a harmonious acquaintance according to the human-like pastimes there, like: ‘Whose daughter is this sakhī? Whose wife is she? Whose daughter-in-law is she?’
‘Alright then’ one may say, ‘then what is the harm in taking birth in the aprakaṭa līlā?’ Then the answer is no, that also cannot be. Sādhakas or materially conditioned souls cannot enter into the transcendental manifestation named Śrī Vṛndāvana Dhama. Only perfected souls can enter it. Even through one’s own sādhana the moods of sneha and so on are not easily attained.
Therefore, those devotees for whom yogamāyā, for the sake of perfecting their moods like sneha and so on, arranges that prema is manifest in them after they take birth in Kṛṣṇa’s materially manifest pastimes (bhauma-līlā) in Śrī Vṛndāvana Dhama, and before they attain Kṛṣṇa’s bodily association, they are taken to Kṛṣṇa’s materially manifest pastimes in Vṛndāvana. Because practicing devotees, karmis and perfected devotees can all be seen to enter into the materially manifest Śrī Vṛndāvana Dhama, it is experienced as both sādhaka bhümi and siddha bhümi.
Continued…
Then if you say, “Where will those most eager sādhakas stay after they attain prema and until they attain a gopīka body, after leaving their material bodies?”
Then I answer: “After the sādhaka body perishes, that loving devotee, who has eagerly desired direct devotional service for a long time, will at once, by the Lord’s grace, receive the gift of the desired service and the audience of the Lord and His eternal associates, just as He once bestowed direct audience to Nārada Muni.”
He (Kṛṣṇa) will give the sādhaka a transcendental gopīka body. Yogamāyā will make that body take birth from a gopīka mother in the manifest pastimes when Kṛṣṇa descends to earth with His eternal associates. There will not be a second delay in that because the prakaṭa-līlā goes on without interruption. He will take birth in that material universe where Kṛṣṇa plays His manifest Vṛndāvana līlā at that time. Kṛṣṇa and His associates appear when the loving practicing devotee leaves his body. RVC, 2.7
Uttamasloka Prabhu,
You write,
“These chapters would have been the perfect place for BVT to explain how countless jivas fell from the lila due to enviousness, but there is not one single word about ‘the big fall’. There are no such statements in any of the major books of our prominent acaryas.
Since we know Srila Prabhupada would never deviate from the previous acaryas, and since we know he said numerous times that “it is a fact that no one falls from Vaikuntha”, we can conclude that any statements he made the ‘appear’ to be contradictory to that tattva, only appear that way due to the limited understanding of those who interpret his words according to their own pre-disposed ideas of what the facts are. This is a flawed approach and this is why there is the controversy we see today.”
To paraphrase your conclusion, you say- the previous acaryas did not describe, “the big fall”, and from the previous acaryas we derive the ultimate conclusion- the big fall is an erroneous idea. Srila Prabhupada must have the same conclusion. If we think his conclusion is different it is because we are injecting our, ” pre-disposed” idea onto Srila Prabhupada’s teaching.
Your logic is flawed because you leave out the premise that it is only through the current acarya that we learn what the past acaryas and the scripture actually teach. There is no way to read Srila Prabhupadas answers to the direct question and conclude anything except that we fell from Vaikuntha .( see, Srila Prabhupada Siksamrta Volume 2 Pages 1157 to 1176 and other quotes cited Gauragopala Prabhu) We must take the unarguable teaching of Srila Prabhupada and if anything from previous acarya seems to contradict it we know we misunderstand the previous acarya. You present things in the exact opposite sequence.
Sita Rama Prabhu, the problem is that you do not take into account Srila Prabhupada’s conclusion, neither do you take into account his many statements which are in agreement with Sastras and our Acaryas.
So not only can you claim not to understand our Acaryas, but also Srila Prabhupada…!
Indeed, your intelligence is selective, as you and Gauragopal das have chosen to believe in the thesis which may suit you, for whatever reason, best…!!!!
“The main point as always is whether we were with Krsna in His lila and were subsequently banished to the material universes.”
One thing everyone agrees on. There is no question that Krishna “banished” anyone from the spiritual world. The problems we now have are our own fault, and we cannot blame Krishna or the devas.
Also, there is no point in being obsessed with our guilt of having once upon a time given up our station in paradise to become forgetful. We should rectify the mistakes we make every day, and recognize that we presently suffer from mistakes of our past. But we needn’t look for the “one big mistake” that occurred at some remote time in history. We should look for the practical solution to our predicament.
The Judeo-Christian concept of “original sin” — that even an innocent man still has to atone for something that was done by Adam and Eve — seems foreign to me. Because Judeo-Christians somewhere along the line lost the thread of reincarnation and karma, they have had to resort to these concepts. They cannot understand how we are now reaping what we have sown in previous lives.
The idea that we sow what we reap, that there is a universal law of justice on the principle of “an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth”, is found in the Bible. The Christian concept that we are saved by grace and not by “works” is a refutation of purva-mimamsa philosophy. It seems funny that they still bother to refute the idea that we become perfect through karma, though they appear completely in the dark about the workings of karma! Karma is described in their scriptures more or less only as some hazy vestige of a previous era when specific sacrifices were made for specific purposes, which are no longer important.
For Christians, the idea that God was once legalistic and a stickler for strict administration of justice, but that with His sacrifice of Jesus on the cross He established a new, more loving and forgiving relationship with “believers” (no longer just with observant Jews), is a central part of their theology.
I appreciate their realization that God’s grace surpasses what we could ever deserve, but the whole view of Jesus as a crucial turning point in the history of God’s special relationship with the Hebrew people seems suspiciously influenced by concerns about racial or national identity. The universal moral laws that apply to all actions as a scientific principle seem missing, under-apprecitaed.
Akuranatha,
You mention trans-logic, which I understand to mean beyond logic. You also say, “From what I can tell, this jiva origin, fall/no-fall controversy is just another manifestation of one of those many instances when two valid but seemingly contradictory conceptions must be accepted as Absolute Truth.”
There are both rational and irrational grounds for accepting things that are beyond logic. Depending on how you define “fall” and, “no-fall” you argument may be rational or not. First, we need to operationalize our definitions for this specific discussion. It may help to agree on what we mean when we say, “logical/beyond logic” as opposed to “rational/irrational”. Rational can be defined as, reasonable; so we can define irrational as, “deprived of reason”. Logic can be defined a necessity; “If we can prove that something is true because “it could not be otherwise,” then it is logically necessary”.(http://www.rit.edu/cla/philosophy/quine/necessity.html. When we say, “beyond logic” it means there is no reason for it to necessarily be so; it is because it is.
An example of using these terms can be in regard to gravity. There is no logical necessity for two objects to be attracted to each other. Gravity is beyond logic, it is a force that just exists. But it would be irrational to deny gravity. So for anyone to be rational, they must accept that there are things beyond logic. But we do not have to accept arguments that are irrational. Krishna Conscious is entirely rational although it is beyond logic.
I agree when you say there are aspects of our original position that are beyond logic and require us to accept seeming contradictions. For example if I, as a conditioned soul, go back to godhead, I can’t say I left for a certain amount of time because there is no time in the Spiritual World. And Srila Prabhupada explains the fall is, “superficial”. We have forgotten our rasa but it still exists like a dreaming man forgetting the relationships he has in the world while he is awake. So we can say we fell and we can also say we never fell (we just forgot). If you define fall/no- fall in this manner we can say it is rational to accept two seemingly contradictory statements as the Absolute Truth.
However, if you define, “fall” as the understanding that we fell from Vaikuntha, and you define, “no-fall” as we cannot fall from Vaikuntha, and our ultimate origin is the Brahman effulgence, then it is irrational to say these are both the Absolute Truth.
Puskaraska Prabhu,
You say, “Sita Rama Prabhu, the problem is that you do not take into account Srila Prabhupada’s conclusion, neither do you take into account his many statements which are in agreement with Sastras and our Acaryas.”
When you say, “…his many statement which are in agreement with Sastra and our Acarya”; it might be taken to mean that many, BUT NOT ALL, of Srila Prabhupada statements agree with the Sastra and our Acaryas .But I know you do not really mean that.
What we are discussing here is Srila Prabhupada’s conclusion- which is the ultimate sidhanta of the Gaudiya Vaisnava lineage. To say I do not accept it does not prove anything, it is just an empty restatement of the debate.
Akr: “I guess the real question, then, is how we ought to interpret the many statements of Srila Prabhupada quoted by Gauragopala and Sita Rama Prabhus. How do you interpret them?”
Most of SP’s statements are such that the fall advocates “assume” that he meant we were with Krsna, but the could easily be understood according to the no-fall position. eg: We were always with Krsna: Yes, Krsna as the Supersoul has been with us since eternity. It doesn’t necessarily mean we were with Him in His lila. “we are eternal servants of Krsna”. That is a statement of our svabhava, our eternal nature and it does not conclusively imply that we were with Him in His lila.
Akr: “ Maybe we just have to accept them at face value and recognize that there are equally valid but apparently contradictory answers to some of these questions.” In Ujjvala-nilamani Jiva Goswami argues against parakiya-rasa and tries to establish only svakiya-rasa in Vraja. At the end he says that his statements supporting parakiya-rasa are in harmony with Rupa Gosvami and are his own personal conclusions, but he presented the opposing view for his followers who could not accept that. Thus, there is some precedent for presenting apparently contradictory positions.
Akr: “But if there are specific statement that must be taken as conclusice, such as statements from Srimad-Bhagavatam or Vedanta Sutra or the Upanisads, I would like to hear what they are. I think that could shed more light on why the “no fall” partisans feel so strongly about this sometimes.”
You won’t find any such statements because this controversy never existed to be dealt with. Rather, the onus is on the fall advocates to find multiple, direct and unambiguous statements which support their position. Here are two purports from SP’s Isopanishad, which no one seems to ever address:
The all-pervading feature of the Lord-which exists in all circumstances of waking and sleeping as well as in potential states and from which the jiva-sakti (living force) is generated as both conditioned and liberated souls-is known as Brahman.” SI, 16, Purport
As we have learned from previous mantras, the brahmajyoti emanating from the transcendental body of the Lord is full of spiritual sparks that are individual entities with the full sense of existence. Sometimes these living entities want to enjoy their senses, and therefore they are placed in the material world to become false lords under the dictation of the senses. SI, 17, Purport
Akr: “I can understand why the “fall” partisans feel that Srila Prabhupada is being slighted by the others. To say “Srila Prabhupada did not really mean what he said”, or that he invented a kind of fairy story for immature disciples never sat right with me. It seems a dangerous approach to hearing from Srila Prabhupada, which calls into question his authority, and in some cases seems to unnecessarily and improperly place him in a lower position than previous acaryas (as some of his godbrothers may have done). As they say, a saint is not recognized in his own family.”
Who in this discussion has said such things? Let’s stay on topic and not bring up things outside of the scope of our discussion. It creates an unnecessary diversion.
Akr: “Besides, there are many authoritative statements of Lord Caitanya and the six Goswamis and Srimad Bhagavatam that seem to support the “fall” position, that when an eternally bound jiva achieves perfection and comes to reside in a Vaikuntha planet, it is more of a homecoming than an entry into a brave new world. It is repeatedly described as a kind of remembering of something wonderful but long forgotten, as in Brhad-Bhagavatamrta when Gopa Kumar finally meets Lord Krishna in Goloka and is told his eternal identity.”
I disagree completely. The acaryas never describe it like that. In fact Visvanatha Cakravarti describes one’s entry into Bhauma-lila as the place where the jivas perfect their prema. Why would they need to do that if they were simply reawakening their previous status? There are no such statements about a homecoming. Please provide multiple direct examples to support your position.
Akr: “The “nitya-siddha krsna-prema ‘sadhya’ kabu naya” verse, seems to establish that prema is not something to be gained from outside but is dormant in the heart of all jivas and needs only to be awakened (re-awakened?)”
In BRS it is explained that bhava and prema are eternal aspects of the svarupa-sakti and that they descend into the hearts and minds of the sadhana-siddhas by the mercy of Krsna.
Akruranatha “ I find such ambiguity throughout my reading of Srila Prabhupada’s books. The devotee has to be humble and simply accept without challenging. Or one can ask, “But this statement seems inconsistent with that. How come?”>
SP did not want his disciples be blind followers. Disciples are supposed to inquire from the guru to resolve such details.
Akr: “When devotees asked Srila Prabhupada why his statement that we fell from Krishna’s lila seemed inconsistent with other acaryas’ statements that we originated in Maha-Vishnu (or in His glance that impregnated Devi Maya), he said that the followers of these acaryas do not know that before we were in Maha Vishnu we were with Krishna.”
I wasn’t referring to the “followers” of the acaryas, but the acaryas themselves.
Akr: “That is, when the lifetime of Brahma is over and the universe is inhaled, the jivas again remain dormant in Visnu’s body, and come out again in another universe. Srila Prabhupada taught… or as a place we forgot long, long ago), is with Krishna.”
Jivas who are already nitya-baddhas do not make the choice every time a new universe is manifest. They pick up where they left off as SP and the acaryas have stated. BVT was only referring to the first choice of jivas who originate from the tatastha-sakti via Maha Visnu, ie: “the jiva’s first position”. That point in time cannot be ascertained, but the choice was made at some point nonetheless.
Akr: “I do not think Uttamasloka has faced Srila Prabhupada’s specific statements about this.”
SP stated that his private letters to specific individuals (from which several of these statements have been drawn) should not be used to establish tattvas and siddhantas. That’s why he established these details in his books. Here’s an anecdote from Bhagavata Maharaja that illustrates an important point:
“The problem with many ISKCON devotees is that they do not understand one simple rule. Srila Prabhupada himself said that in general my letters are not for everyone but they are written according to time place and circumstance to address the issues that need to be addressed to that individual.
Just like he wrote to one disciple that Rahu was an allegory. Then when he was questioned about it later he explained that he had written that only to placate the mind of that scientist devotee temporarily and that later he was going to explain the truth to him about Rahu being reality.”
Akr: “And that was always my main gripe with Kundali. Assuming, for the sake of argument, that Srila Prabhupada had really adopted a strategy of explaining things from the “fall” position–as a never-before adopted innovation–to make it easier for people of the modern age to understand. Shouldn’t we, as his disciples, support his strategy?”
Neophytes should repeat what they have learned, but madhyama devotees who have some sastric understanding and spiritual maturity are encouraged to speak from their own realizations and back up their assertions with solid references. Those who are qualified should speak according to the time and circumstances they are dealing with.
Akr: “Rather, the Jaiva-Dharma story of tatastha-sakti souls emerging (from nothingness) on a border between Vaikuntha and the realm of karma has a ring of over-simplification to me, as if it is just one angle for viewing a multi-dimensional truth.”
BVT never said “from nothingness”. Don’t muddy the waters. There are 3 main energies, internal, external and marginal. The tatastha-sakti is the origin of the jivas and they manifest through Maha Visnu according to BVT.
Akr: “In modern science we are familiar with models that serve as heuristic devices, in which an electron may be thought of as being bound by a rubber-band to a proton, or something like that…. Even if they are “over-simplifcations”, they open our path to devotional service, in the same way that Krsna comes in a Deity form to accept service of neophytes who cannot perceive His imperceptible form.”
The main point as always is whether we were with Krsna in His lila and were subsequently banished to the material universes. None of the other acaryas make this statement conclusively or even implied. That does not require over-simplification. It is either a fact or not.
Akr: “What I never seem to get from the hard “no fall” advocates is a clear explanation of why they say that Srila Prabhupada’s “fall” statements are so unprecedented. I see such statements in Srimad Bhagavatam and in the writings of previous acaryas, including Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakur, Bhaktivinode Thakur, Sanatana Goswami and Lord Caitanya.”
Please provide us with some specific examples. I have found none.
Akr: “As disciples of Srila Prabhupada it seems we should be trying to follow and justify his strategies rather than now “exposing” them as tricks.”
No one here has said such things about SP’s statements. Why are you bringing that up?
Akr: “From what I can tell, this jiva origin, fall/no-fall controversy is just another manifestation of one of those many instances when two valid but seemingly contradictory conceptions must be accepted as Absolute Truth.”
There are no seeming contractions in the statements of the acaryas. There was no controversy indicated in any of their writings. It has only been an issue for contemporary Vaisnavas.
Akr: “One thing I can say is, in Srimad Bhagavatam, I see Srila Prabhupada over and over again stresses that no one can say when or how the jivas first fell into the material world. It seems to be an important point, and I have to believe he is quoting some important Vedic authority (as he always does).”
When or how is not the key question or point of contention. The main question is whether or not the jivas started their existence in Krsna’s lila and fell from there. There is no support for that notion in any of the previous acaryas’ teachings.
Akr: “He also says that nitya-siddhas are never in illusion, which does raise the question as to whether Jaya and Vijaya or Narada Muni are among the nitya-siddhas.”
Narada is identified as a vaidhi-sadhana-siddha by the acaryas in BRS and other books.
Akr: “Even Arjuna was placed in illusion by Krishna for the purpose of speaking Bhagavad-Gita, though we know Arjuna is one of Krishna’s eternal associates.”
That’s an entirely different situation and not a valid example for consideration.
Akr: “As for whether there would have had to be a kind of “big fall” (like the big bang), that is just the product of mundane speculation.”
I disagree. It is completely logical and reasonable to expect to find something specific about a supposed incident that was responsible for the creation of the material universes involving countless jivas.
Akr: “I am always open to hear why some hard “no-fall” advocates so vigorously assert that Srila Prabhupada’s statements cannot be reconciled with Gaudiya siddhanta, but when I ask them directly they usually seem to just insist, quoting Jaiva Dharma and similar statements. They seem dogmatic…”
I have shown that SP’s statements regarding “no one falls from Vaikuntha” are fully reconciled with the previous acaryas. And without wanting to address every single one of his apparent contradictory statements, in the majority of cases they can easily be understood to support that position, whereas the fall advocates choose to interpret them to suit their particular view point.
Part 2 of 2.
The above statements( saying we fall from Vaikuntha) are in the context of us condition souls who demonstrate a desire to forget Krishna in order to be enjoyers of this world. Srila Prabhupada said, “No one ever falls from Vaikuntha” in the context of Jaya and Vijaya who demonstrated an unwillingness to forget Krishna. In the Brahma jyoti we are in forgetfulness of our relationship with Krishna, Srila Prabhupada makes it clear we forgot because we want to forget and this is further evinced by the conditioned souls continued forgetfulness. Any soul in the Brahma jyoti is there because they want to forget Krishna not because they just happen to be placed there.
Someone may attempt to refute my previous comment( that we must take the direct meaning of Srila Prabhupada’s words) by saying “no one falls from Vainkuntha” means, no one falls from Vaikuntha. This is not a valid rebuttal.
The no-fall argument fails because we see no statement where Srila Prabhupada directly says our ultimate origin is the brahma jyoti; rather, there are direct statements that the brahma jyoti is not our original position. Srila prabhupada writes, “Because he falls from Brahma-sayuja , he thinks that may be his origin, but he does not remember that before that even he was with Krishna( letter to Madhuvisa 1972 Siksammrta Volume 2 page 1172). Thus, it is not valid to say that Srila Prabhupada statements about being with Krishna previously might not indicate a fully awakened rasa with Krishna. Srila Prabhupada explicitly says our original state is something other than brahma- sayuja. Srila Prabhupada also wrote, ” We are all originally situated on the platform of Krishna Consciousness in OUR ETERNAL PERSONAL RELATIONSHIP OF LOVE WITH KRISHNA( Sriman Stan 11/17 1970 capitals added). It is not possible to construe this as a no- fall, position.
The other argument is that Srila Prabhupada said we fell from Vaikuntha to trick devotes who needed to be placated due to a preconceived notion. Those who make this claim should be able to show how several of the people to whom Srila Prabhupada told the we fell were unable to handle the truth (numerous letters are found in Siksamrita Volume 2 pages 1157 to 1176). In contrast we see a letter where a devotee has the no- fall preconception which Srila Prabhupada refutes, “The next question, about the living entities falling down in this material world is not from the impersonal brahman. Existence within the impersonal Brahman is also within the category of non- Krishna Consciousness. Those who are in the Brahman effulgence are also in the fallen condition, so there is question of falling down from a fallen condition. When the fall takes place it means falling from the non- fallen condition”.
Rather than placating a pre concieved notion of the fall, Srila Prabhupada unarguable refuted the no- fall fallacy.
Please allow me to make a concise summary. Srila Prabhupada made statements that no one falls from Vaikuntha. In the case of Jaya and Vijaya, they did not want to forget Krishna and their entering this world was part of Krishna’s pastime so although in the material world they really did not fall. In terms of the conditioned souls Srila Prabhupada says, “… the fall is superficial, just like the relation between the father and the son can never be broken…”( letter to Jananivasa 8/27/1967); however, Srila Prabhupada also said, “ fallen conditioned souls” many times. So the sense in which no one falls and the sense in which we do fall is distinct, not some mysterious conundrum. We forget our relationship but it still exists. Therefore the statement that no one falls is not inconsistent with the concept of falling from Krishna Loka. It does not prove the no- fall position. The no- fall position requires a direct statement by Srila Prabhupada that our ultimate origin is the brahma- jyoti. I have not seen any such statement; however I have seen direct refutations of it.
Srila Prabhupada says that those in the Brahman effulgence are fallen and, “when the fall takes place it means falling down from the non-fallen condition” (letter to Revatinandana 7/13/1970). And, “ Because he falls down from the Brahma- sayuja he thinks that is his original position but he does not remember that before that even he was with Krishna”( letter to Madhuvisa, Siksamrita Volume 2 page 1172). And we are originally situated in, “..our eternal personal relationship of love of Krishna..”.( letter to Sriman Stan 11/17/1970).These statements cannot be misconstrued to mean that our ultimate origin is the Brahman effulgence. And they are obviously a refutation of the no- fall position; therefore the argument that they are tricky agreement with a preconceived idea of the fall, fails. This is a true resting of the case!
Srila Prabhupada did not improve upon the philosophy of Vaishnavism first presented to the West by Srila Bhaktivinode Thakur. Prabhupada instead repeated what the Thakur said. Sure, using some subtle and esoteric techniques in transcribing the Bengali, a number of the Thakur’s commentaries lend themselves to the no-fall belief explanation. However, just as many– actually more–dovetail very explicitly into the understanding that the jiva was originally with Lord Krsna in the spiritual world before coming here. Ultimately, this topic may boil down (for some) to nit-picking about the Bengali interpretation of the Thakur or his great son, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Maharaj. However, for devotees of His Divine Grace Srila Prabhupada, he is the authority.
We look to the previous acharyas in our line, as well as other Vaishnava lines, in order to buttress and elucidate the philosophical Truths which Prabhupada unequivocally presents. That is not an offense toward the previous acharyas; indeed, it would be an offense to do otherwise. Srila Prabhupada is the most recent uttama-adhikari, and it’s his books that will be the manuals establishing Absolute Truth and its lawful application by humanity for the next 9,500 years. He is now the prominent acharya. If somebody actually becomes God-realized acharya after Prabhupada, that exalted personality will have to be repeating Prabhupada exactly. Ways and means may differ, but philosophy of the Absolute cannot differ a bit. Prabhupada did not differ a bit from the Thakur, and the accurate translations from Bhaktivinode’s Bengali only highlight that transcendental reality.
“But in his functional, manifest nature, the jiva is also infinite, pure, and eternal. As long as the jiva is pure, for that long his nature manifests as perfectly pure. But when, by contact with maya, the jiva becomes impure, then a distortion of his proper functional nature occurs. He becomes impure, devoid of shelter, and pummeled by happiness and distress. As soon as the jiva has forgotten his servitude to Krsna, the paths of samsara confront him”. – Jaiva Dharma, second chapter.
Chaitanya Siksamrtam by Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakur.
“From the knowledge of that sambandha tattva, we have learned that the jiva, having forgotten his eternal relation with Krsna, has fallen in to the sea of samsara . . .”. -Sri Caitanya-siksamrtam, p.43.
“The thought of the cit body of the jiva, which was existent prior to its contact with matter, is just and natural”.?- Sri Caitanya-siksamrtam, p. 157.
Krsna consciousness is the ultimate supernatural process. When the living entity makes his or her move toward ultimate evolution, Krsna consciousness becomes more and more a natural and holistic process in thought, feeling, and action. The intelligence (buddhi-yoga) becomes naturally and spontaneously attuned to Krsna consciousness. Herein, the Thakur is referring to devotees. He is saying that, for devotees, the natural process is to think about their original relationships with Krsna. They are also completely justified when they do so (“just and natural”).
“The jiva, who is essentially cit . . . had the sense of determining right and wrong and also pure intellect for enjoying . . He had knowledge that God is the Ultimate Being”. – Sri Caitanya-siksamrtam, p. 220.
“Even in his unalloyed spiritual state, the jiva is infinitesimal. He is liable to undergo change of condition . . . The worldly course makes its appearance simultaneously with the jiva’s loss of all recollection of the servitorship of Krsna”. – Jaiva Dharma, Chapter One.
We were in one condition, but we underwent a change of condition. We do not at all recollect our original condition, but, when we become devotees–if we are not misled by false philosophy–we may indeed begin to recollect it in due course.
“In his true nature, the jiva is the devoted servant of Krsna. The jivas, who have gone astray against that nature of theirs–due to their seeking after their own pleasure–turned away from Krsna and, as such, became punishable”. – Jaiva Dharma.
“In his true nature, the jiva is the devoted servant of Krsna. The jivas, who have gone astray against that nature of theirs–due to their seeking after their own pleasure–turned away from Krsna and, as such, became punishable”. – Jaiva Dharma.
The jiva was originally a servant–as in a personal relationship with God in one of the five rasas (or, technically, you could say in one of the four higher rasas, but we get very esoteric at that point). He went astray from his originally relationship with God. More powerfully stated, he turned away, indicating an intentional act of responsibility and volition. He became punishable for this offensive act of rebellion. How could you become punishable for falling out of the impersonal brahmajyoti?
The Thakur has also something to say about the understanding of the enigmatic–and very relevant Sanskrit adjective–“anadi”. The no-fall theorists use their interpretation of this Sanskrit word as a pillar of their philosophy. Anadi also happens to be a part of two very famous and oft-quoted citations:
Krsna bhuli sei jiva anadi-bahirmukha
“Forgetting Krsna, the living entity has turned his face away from the Lord from time immemorial”. – Caitanya-caritamrita, Madhya lila, 20.108.
na karmavibhagad iti can nanaditvat?- Vedanta-sutra, 2.1.35.
“Not activity, because of non-distinction. No, because it is beginningless”.
In both of these cases, the no-fall philosophers use anadi to make their point. They say that the living entity has eternally been averse to the service of the Lord. They say that Vedanta-sutra proves that everyone did not have the same karma at the beginning of creation, because both karma and the living entity’s entanglement in it is beginningless or eternal. These appear to be stalwart points, but they both fall apart when the proper interpretation of anadi for these texts is applied. The Thakur says:
“. . . the seed of karma lies in the matrix of jiva’s marginal position. Since karma’s source within the material world is untraceable, it is described as beginningless”. – Jaiva Dharma
“Service of Sri Krsna is the eternal nature of a jiva. When he forgets this relationship, he is overwhelmed by the influence of maya . . . (s)ince the backward condition of a jiva springs up along with his coming into this mayika world, the history of his downfall within the bounds of time and space is out of the question. Hence, the significance of the expression bahirmukha, eternally backward”.?- Jaiva Dharma, First Chapter.
“When he forgets Krsna, he is averse to serve Krsna, and his aversion has no beginning as it dates before his incarnation within the four walls of time and space”. – Jaiva Dharma, First Chapter.
“. . . the origin of jiva’s karma, i.e., aversion to God, is coming even prior to material time. . . therefore, karma has been designated as anadi, i.e., without any beginning”. – Sri Caitanya-siksamrtam, p. 158
Here’s another verification from His Divine Grace Srila Prabhupada on the accurate interpretation of anadi:
“This external energy of the Lord covers up the pure knowledge of the living entity’s eternally existing with Him, but the covering is so constant that it appears that the conditioned soul is eternally ignorant”. – Srimad Bhagavatam, 2.5.19, purport.
Srila Bhaktivinode’s view of the origination of the jiva continues:
“When we are imprisoned in the material world, we search for what had been in the Vaikuntha-rasas”. – Prema-pradipa, p. 96.
“However, because of contact with matter, the imprisoned soul loses the memory of his original spiritual form in Vaikuntha. . . material rasas are perverted reflections of the soul’s original spiritual rasas”. – Prema-pradipa, p. 83.
Now, it may be debated that Srila Prabhupada was more explicit about the personal origination of the jiva than the Thakur. In light of the last quote (above), one would be hard-pressed to claim that Bhaktivinode did not explicitly preach that we originally came from a personal relationship with Krsna. The comparative debate can still be made, but Srila Bhaktivinode presented one hard-hitting quotation that even Srila Prabhupada only inferentially touched upon:
“Jiva’s imprisonment commenced due to his offenses. The original offense is jiva’s forgetfulness of his position as the eternal servant of Krsna”. – Jaiva dharma.
We fall down due to aparadha. The seed of the aparadha first sprouts when we forget that we are dasa, dasa, dasa . . . not God, but dasa . . . servant, servant.
Jivera svarupa haya nityera krsna dasa. Try to remember that, prabhus. Try to remember. Try to remember, because you–like me and like all of us–made original offense. Now the offense is continuing, covering everybody up with the no-fall, no responsibility, no (real) free will, no ultimately personal source theory of apasiddhantic aparadha polluting the Hare Krsna movement worldwide. Jivera svarup haya nitya krsna das, prabhus. Jivera svarupa haya–dasa, dasa, dasa.
“Jiva is the proprietor of an eternal identity that is extremely esoteric and subtle”. – Jaiva Dharma.
“No amount of plans, either of five, ten, or thousands and millions of years, can therefore bring in permanent happiness to us unless and until we take up the plan of the Supreme Lord and execute it sincerely. That is called the Standard Service”. – The Mahatma and The Mahajan, Back toGodhead.?Emphases not added.
“‘Improvement’ makes straight roads, but the other roads, without improvement, are roads of genius”. – William Blake.
Spiritual realization is undoubtedly difficult and subtle. First jnana, then vijnana. But the jnana must be jnana–otherwise, there will only be hallucination, not wisdom. Esoteric realization in devotional service must be based upon the standard service, but how can there be standard service when the Absolute Philosophy is warped into the no-fall presentation? It’s not all that esoteric to understand that the Standard Philosophy is the Standard Service.
I did not intend to get involved in any unwinnable discussion on this Acintya subject. I am surprised at the quantity of comments. By taking one side or another, a “somehow or other” game of Tal fruit Ping-Pong is being played.
Whether some belong to the ping side or the pong side, all manner of top spin, bottom spin, gravity-defying shots are made, but still the game goes on unabated. This “somehow or other” game is precisely how Srila Prabhupada succinctly encapsulated this game, on behalf of Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu.
Uttama Sloka Prabhu thinks this “somehow or other” is speculation, yet he comes preloaded with his unwinnable ‘conclusions’ which mean he is part of the problem. Anyone who claims finality either way belongs to the ping or pong side, and is part of the problem. This is not the way of siddhanta if one jumps over Srila Prabhupada for finality.
The way of siddhanta is through Srila Prabhupada. Yet others will claim that finality rests with Sastra and the Vedas. Guess what? All the Vedas and Sastra culminate in Sanbandha, Abhideya and Proyojana. And where are these three located? In the Sri Siksastakam.
Lord Chaitanya’s Siksastakam verses may be translated differently, especially the 5th verse, but Srila Prabhupada chose to include “somehow or other” when referencing the 5th verse in his Srimad Bhagavatam purports. Is it speculation to use this? No.
Somehow or other the Tal fruit gets hit. I do not know how well a Tal fruit can bounce or quirt, but it still might be more useful to know about it than to prematurely understand Acintya subjects while not on the Ashakti/Bhava stage.
Ys Kesava Krsna Dasa.
Nrsinghadeva Prabhu,
You write,”Herein, the Thakur is referring to devotees. He is saying that, for devotees, the natural process is to think about their original relationships with Krsna. They are also completely justified when they do so (”just and natural”)”. Thank you for supplying this Vaisnava sidhanta to us.
I had a similar sentiment even before hearing this stated so concisely.Of course,we must acknowledge that sentiment is not valid grounds to establish Vaisnava Philosophy; however it gives a valid reason why we must insist on the correct conclusion.
This is a very big point in this discussion The no-fall conception prohibits me from thinking that an original loving relationship between me and Krishna already exists- and it is there for me to remember. Therefore the no- fall conceptions attempts to prohibit something that is natural and just for the devotee.
I am not willing to allow anyone to take this away from me and I feel I am serving the spiritual interests of other by encouraging them to also not allow anyone to take away this most cherish-able truth.
SR: “The above statements (saying we fall from Vaikuntha) are in the context of us condition souls who demonstrate a desire to forget Krishna in order to be enjoyers of this world.”
According to sastra and all of the acaryas there are NO conditioned souls in the spiritual realm. Everyone there is fully absorbed in prema, especially Goloka Vrndavana. There is no maya nor modes of nature, so there is no possibility for having mundane envy or forgetfulness. That conditioned state begins when the tatastha-jivas choose maha-maya instead of the spiritual realm, exactly as BVT described in the quote I provided earlier.
SR: “Srila Prabhupada said, “No one ever falls from Vaikuntha” in the context of Jaya and Vijaya who demonstrated an unwillingness to forget Krishna.”
That is not correct. SP said it in the context of all of the residents of the spiritual realm.
SR: “Someone may attempt to refute my previous comment (that we must take the direct meaning of Srila Prabhupada’s words) by saying “no one falls from Vainkuntha” means, no one falls from Vaikuntha. This is not a valid rebuttal. The no-fall argument fails because we see no statement where Srila Prabhupada directly says our ultimate origin is the brahma jyoti; rather, there are direct statements that the brahma jyoti is not our original position.”
I am not specifically arguing that the brahma-jyoti is the origin of the jivas, since BVT stated that jivas emanate from Maha Visnu as well. However, your statement is contrary to SP’s statement in Sri Isopanishad:
“The all-pervading feature of the Lord-which exists in all circumstances of waking and sleeping as well as in potential states and from which the jiva-sakti (living force) is generated as both conditioned and liberated souls-is known as Brahman.” SI, 16, Purport
Your other evidence comes primarily from private letters that SP never intended us to use as absolute validation for our philosophy and he stated this emphatically. You cannot use a few quotes from private letters to contradict eternal Vedic tattvas and statements SP made in his books. That is not the accepted process. None of the previous acaryas have stated that we were with Krsna in His lila and we then fell from that position. That is not found in any other Vedic sastras either. Therefore, SP’s statements that no one falls from the spiritual realm are in full congruence with those eternally established conclusions.
In fact, there is actually no “no-fall” theory, as we fall al in all cases,
“Innumerable jivas appear from Sri Baladeva Prabhu to serve Vrndavana-vihari Sri Krsna as His eternal associates in Goloka Vrndavana, and others appear from Sri Sankarsana to serve the Lord of Vaikuntha, Sri Narayana, in the spiritual sky. Eternally relishing rasa, engaged in the service of their worshipable Lord, they always remain fixed in their constitutional position. They always strive to please Bhagavan, and are always attentive to Him. Having attained the strength of cit-sakti, they are always strong. They have no connection with the material energy. In fact, they do not know if there is a bewildering energy called maya or not. Since they reside in the spiritual world, maya is very far away from them and does not affect them at all. Always absorbed in the bliss of serving their worshipable Lord, they are eternally liberated and are free from material happiness and distress. Their life is love alone, and they are not even conscious of misery, death or fear.
There are also innumerable, atomic, conscious jivas who emanate as rays in Karanodakasayi Maha-Visnu’s glance upon His mayasakti. Since these jivas are situated next to maya, they perceive her wonderful workings. Although they have all the qualities of the jivas that I have already described, because of their minute and marginal nature, they sometimes look to the spiritual world, and sometimes to the material world. In this marginal condition, the jiva is very weak because at that time he has not attained spiritual strength from the mercy of the object of his worship (seva-vastu). Among these unlimited jivas, those who want to enjoy maya become engrossed in mundane sense gratification and enter the state of nitya-baddha. On the other hand, the jivas who perform cidanusilanam of Bhagavan receive spiritual sakti (cid-bala) by His mercy, and enter the spiritual world.” (Jaiva Dharma -Chapter 16)
and hold responsibility for having chosen Maya over Krishna, i.e. Devi-dhama, over Vaikuntha and Krishna-loka.
So, whether one should place one’s faith in either of the contradictory statements Srila Prabhupada made on the subject for preaching purposes, or simply accept his conclusion, that is a matter of personal choice and inclination.
Ultimately, my personal stand would be that it doesn’t really matter as it is irrelevant, for the most part, to our developing Krishna prema, which is really what matters!
Śrī Caitanya Caritāmṛta Madhya 20.118
kabhu svarge uṭhāya, kabhu narake ḍubāya
daṇḍya-jane rājā yena nadīte cubāya
SYNONYMS
kabhu — sometimes; svarge — to higher planetary systems; uṭhāya — he rises; kabhu — sometimes; narake — in hellish conditions of life; ḍubāya — he is drowned; daṇḍya-jane — a criminal; rājā — a king; yena — as; nadīte — in the river; cubāya — dunks.
TRANSLATION
“In the material condition, the living entity is sometimes raised to higher planetary systems and material prosperity and sometimes drowned in a hellish situation. His state is exactly like that of a criminal whom a king punishes by submerging him in water and then raising him again from the water.
PURPORT
In the Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad (4.3.16) it is stated, asańgo hy ayaḿ puruṣaḥ: the living entity is always free from the contamination of the material world. One who is not materially infected and who does not forget Kṛṣṇa as his master is called nitya-mukta. In other words, one who is eternally liberated from material contamination is called nitya-mukta. From time immemorial the nitya-mukta living entity has always been a devotee of Kṛṣṇa, and his only attempt has been to serve Kṛṣṇa. Thus he never forgets his eternal servitorship to Kṛṣṇa.
Any living entity who forgets his eternal relationship with Kṛṣṇa is under the sway of the material condition. Bereft of the Lord’s transcendental loving service, he is subjected to the reactions of fruitive activity. When he is elevated to the higher planetary systems due to worldly pious activities, he considers himself well situated, but when he is subjected to punishment, he thinks himself improperly situated. Thus material nature awards and punishes the living entity. When the living entity is materially opulent, material nature is rewarding him. When he is materially embarrassed, material nature is punishing him.
“There are two types of jivas liberated from maya, nitya-mukta, eternally liberated, and baddha-mukta, those who were bound but became liberated. The jivas who were never bound by maya are called nitya-mukta. The nitya-muktas are also of two types, aisvarya gata nitya mukta and madhurya gata nitya mukta. The former are the associates of Lord Narayana in Vaikuntha and are the atomic particles from Mula Sankarsana. The latter are the associates of Lord Krsna in Goloka. They are the atomic particles of Sri Baladeva situated in Goloka Vrndavana.”
(Jaiva-Dharma, Chapter 17)
BHAKTISIDDHANTA SARASVATI THAKURA has written on the nature of jiva as follows:
“Before acquiring material designations, the living entity is supremely pure. Even though he is not engaged in serving the Supreme Lord, he remains situated in the neutral position of santa-rasa due to his marginal nature. Though the living entity born from the marginal potency does not at that time exhibit a taste for serving the Lord due to a lack of knowledge of self-realization, his direct propensity of serving the Supreme Lord nevertheless remains within him in a dormant state. Though the indirect propensity of material enjoyment, which is contrary to the service of the Lord, is not found in him at that time, indifference to the service of Hari and the seed of material enjoyment, which follows that state of indifference, are nevertheless present within him. The living entity, who belongs to the marginal potency, cannot remain indifferent forever by subduing both devotional and non-devotional propensities. He therefore contemplates unconstitutional activities from his marginal position. As a sleeping person dreams that he is active in the physical world without actually being involved in activities, when the dormant indifferent living entity of the marginal potency exhibits even a little apathy to the service of the Supreme Lord and situates himself in a neutral, unchanging condition for even a little time, he is infected by impersonalism. That is why the conditioned soul desires to merge in the impersonal Brahman, thus exhibiting his mind’s fickle nature. But due to neglecting the eternal service of the Lord and thereby developing the quality of aversion to the Lord, he cannot remain fixed in that position. In this way aversion to the Lord breaks his concentration of mind and establishes him as the master of this world of enjoyment.
…/…
…/…
“Due to being situated in the marginal position, living entities who are averse to Hari assume the nature of mixed consciousness; in other words, when the marginal energy living entities mix with the external energy, they consider themselves the enjoyers and then enter the material world. The cause of the spirit soul’s coming to live in this world in aversion to Krsna is his misuse of his free will. When this aversion becomes strong, the living entities accept a material mind and body in order to enjoy the temporary material world and thus come under the control of fruitive reactions. And when, on the strength of pious activities, they become transcendental to the varnasrama principles, which distinguish superior and inferior behavior in this world, they become paramahamsas by perfecting themselves through sadhana. Those who become paramahamsas are the Hari-janas. And those who fall from the platform of paramahamsa and engage in fruitive activities while associating with matter are situated on the platform of varnasrama. (From ‘Brahmana & Vaisnava’)
“Lying in between the cit (internal spiritual) and acit (external deluding cosmic) potencies of the Lord, the jiva souls are freed from the shackles of the triple qualities of maya by the loving service to the Supreme Lord Sri Krsna.” (From the essay – Sri Krsna)
Uttamasloka: There are no seeming contractions in the statements of the acaryas. There was no controversy indicated in any of their writings. It has only been an issue for contemporary Vaisnavas.
It’s not even an issue for all contemporary vaisnavas- only those in ISKCON. Ask any gaudiya matha mission, they are in complete agreement that no one falls from vaikuntha. Then try the other groups as well. While in Vrindavan we visited so many temples, some descending through Madhva, many with many branches of our family tree in common. Try to find one, not ISKCON affiliated, that thinks nitya siddhas fall from Vaikuntha or Goloka. A devotee did that, and the reply was incredulous “In ISKCON they believe THAT?”
Srila Prabhupada presented two opposing viewpoints, one completely in accord with the family tree (paramapara) and one at odds with it. Can one contradict the parampara and still be an authority? Absolutely! Visvanatha Chakravarti Thakura contradicted Jiva Goswami’s direct words regarding the topic of parakiya rasa being present in aprakata lila. Their opinions were at complete odds. He contradicted Jiva G whose word is considered as good as sastra. VCT proved that Jiva was making adjustments according to time, place and circumstance. Jiva’s followers were opposed to parakiya rasa, considering it immoral.
Similarly many westerners would be opposed to the idea we have never been with Krsna as the Christian idea of the fallen soul is the idea of a prodigal son rejecting the father then returning to him. It is perfectly acceptable for an acarya to say, to please them “Yes you were with Krsna, then you rejected Him” Jiva G also wrote to please and appease his followers.
When SP wrote that he did not deviate an inch from the previous acaryas, it is the same way that VCT never deviated from the previous acarya, who was Jiva G. Acaryas such as Jiva G and SP preserve the essence, unchanged, while making adjustment to non-essential details. The essence- what we need to know to achieve perfection- is that we belong with Krsna. We are His servants. This is true whether we fell or did not fall. SP himself indicated that whether we fell or did not fall was a detail only- he said it was not important. In comparison, parakiya rasa being present in Goloka is a relatively essential aspect of our philosophy- yet even that could be changed by Jiva G. What to speak of an unimportant detail for the sake of the western world’s sensibilities.
I have a question for Nrsinghadeva Prabh. Based on:
SB: 3/26/22
After the manifestation of the mahat-tattva, these features appear simultaneously. As water in its natural state, before coming in contact with earth, is clear, sweet and unruffled, so the characteristic traits of pure consciousness are complete serenity, clarity, and freedom from distraction.
PURPORT
The pure status of consciousness, or Kåñëa consciousness, exists in the beginning; just after creation, consciousness is not polluted. The more one becomes materially contaminated, however, the more consciousness becomes obscured. In pure consciousness one can perceive a slight reflection of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. As in clear, unagitated water, free from impurities, one can see everything clearly, so in pure consciousness, or Kåñëa consciousness, one can see things as they are. One can see the reflection of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and one can see his own existence as well. This state of consciousness is very pleasing, transparent and sober. In the beginning, consciousness is pure. [End of purport]
We know from other sections of the Srimada Bhagavatam that at the end of Lord Brahma’s life the conditioned souls remain in a dormant state during the in- breath of Maha Visnu. They are then reawakened at the beginning of Maha Visnu’s out-breath or creation of new universes.
The description above is, “just after creation”. Srila Prabhupada says, “originally” but it is in the context of the beginning of a universe when we pop out of Maha Visnu, this is after being conditioned and thus not our ultimate origin.
We are in goodness and we can, “perceive a slight reflection of the Supreme Personality of Godhead” but our consciousness becomes polluted by contact with matter.
I am not versed in the writings of Bhaktivinoda Thakur but it seems plausible that some of his writing which devotees take to mean our origin is Maha Visnu (or the brahma jyoti) is a description of what is described above but misunderstood to be our ultimate origin. Can you spread any light on this?
Kesava Krsna: “I did not intend to get involved in any unwinnable discussion on this Acintya subject. I am surprised at the quantity of comments. By taking one side or another, a “somehow or other” game of Tal fruit Ping-Pong is being played. Whether some belong to the ping side or the pong side, all manner of top spin, bottom spin, gravity-defying shots are made, but still the game goes on unabated. This “somehow or other” game is precisely how Srila Prabhupada succinctly encapsulated this game, on behalf of Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu.”
This is a big part of your problem. You think this is a game that someone is trying to win. It’s not. That is a misrepresentation designed to obscure the real issue, which is to establish the correct tattvas and siddhantas according to sastra and the acaryas. Once those elements are properly established, then the self-evident truth is revealed. And those facts are not “acintya”. Your analysis is way off base.
KK: “Uttama Sloka Prabhu thinks this “somehow or other” is speculation,”
I never said that. Why are you distorting my words? That is dishonest.
KK: “yet he comes preloaded with his unwinnable ‘conclusions’ which mean he is part of the problem.”
Who are you to proclaim final judgement that what I have presented is “unwinnable”? You haven’t even addressed what I wrote directly, nor have you provided anything tangible or relevant.
KK: “Anyone who claims finality either way belongs to the ping or pong side, and is part of the problem. This is not the way of siddhanta if one jumps over Srila Prabhupada for finality.”
Here we go again with this nonsense idea of “jumping over Srila Prabhupada”. I am doing no such thing. SP instructed us to study the acaryas‘ books after thoroughly studying his books, which I and others have done. SP made some conflicting statements but overall he was perfectly aligned with the previous acaryas. I will prove that conclusively in subsequent posts.
KK: “Somehow or other the Tal fruit gets hit. I do not know how well a Tal fruit can bounce or quirt, but it still might be more useful to know about it than to prematurely understand Acintya subjects while not on the Ashakti/Bhava stage.”
These subjects are not so inconceivable that we cannot understand the proper tattvas and siddhantas. None of the acaryas say one must be at the stage of bhava before discussing or understanding these topics. The facts are clear and readily available.
Sita Rama: “We know from other sections of the Srimada Bhagavatam that at the end of Lord Brahma’s life the conditioned souls remain in a dormant state during the in- breath of Maha Visnu. They are then reawakened at the beginning of Maha Visnu’s out-breath or creation of new universes.
The description above [from SB] is, “just after creation”. Srila Prabhupada says, “originally” but it is in the context of the beginning of a universe when we pop out of Maha Visnu, this is after being conditioned and thus not our ultimate origin. We are in goodness and we can, “perceive a slight reflection of the Supreme Personality of Godhead” but our consciousness becomes polluted by contact with matter.
I am not versed in the writings of Bhaktivinoda Thakur but it seems plausible that some of his writing which devotees take to mean our origin is Maha Visnu (or the brahma jyoti) is a description of what is described above but misunderstood to be our ultimate origin. Can you spread any light on this?”
I have studied BVT’s major books very carefully, especially Jaiva-dharma, so I can offer some insights. The existing nitya-baddha jivas who were lying dormant within Maha Visnu after the dissolution of the previous universes are again manifest and they return to the newly manifested universes to continue their material entanglement as nitya-baddhas.
However, the excerpts from Jaiva-dharma that I provided before are not dealing with those existing nitya-baddha jivas, so there is absolutely no misunderstanding. BVT’s statements are very clear and unambiguous. He is talking specifically about the jivas’ initial choice which either entangles them in maya or gives them entrance to the spiritual realms.
The tatastha-sakti jivas do not originate within the spiritual realm – they originate from the tatastha-sakti itself which exists in between the spiritual and material worlds. And from that marginal position they make their initial choice regarding their eternal destinations, ie: either the spiritual worlds or the material worlds.
Read those passages again from Jaiva-dharma which I provided and you’ll see clearly that this is the case. And read the passage quoted from SBSST’s essay provided by Puskaraksa prabhu.
I’m going to present a summary analysis that is conclusive and fully based on sastra and the acaryas, including Srila Prabhupada. It will be posted in multiple parts. Here is the first part.
The issue of inconceivability is actually a non-issue in this discussion because we are not debating inconceivable things like eternity, without beginning, etc. The issue of “when” the jivas entered material existence is not the focus or concern of our discussion, at least not based on what I’ve presented. The focus has been about “where” the jivas were when their entry into material existence took place, ie: were they in the lila or were they somewhere else? This is a matter of Vedic tattvas and Gaudiya siddhantas, both of which are fully within the scope of acceptable subjects for discussion and they are not beyond our adhikara.
And yes, the repeated notion, “what does it matter, let’s focus on getting out of here” is also a valid point, but that alone is not the basis for ignoring what the correct tattvas and siddhantas are. Our lineage is not tolerant of apasiddhanta and mental speculation about core truths, and if someone is espousing such blatant misconceptions, it is fully acceptable to point them out and present the correct version according to our acaryas. Srila Prabhupada was very strict about these principles and that is my primary motivation for presenting the evidence I’ve provided.
There is no “live and let live” in that regard. These particular topics are not merely matters of interpretive opinions – there are axiomatic truths involved. The truth according to our acaryas should be properly established and understood. I don’t see why anyone would have a problem with that. They are matters which can be easily resolved by examining the evidence provided by SP and the acaryas. Let’s do that beginning with some established facts.
FACT: There are no direct statements in the Srimad-bhagavatam, Caitanya-caritamrita, Vedanta-sutra, Upanisads and Bhagavad-gita stating unequivocally that the jivas in the material universes have all fallen from within Krsna’s lila, either Vaikuntha or Goloka. I’ve not seen any from the Puranas either.
FACT: There are also no direct statements like that in any of the major books of the previous acaryas. At least not in any of the 25-30 major books I recently studied. It is very important for devotees to understand these facts clearly.
Part two:
Was SP mistaken? Of course not. Did SP misunderstand the philosophy in this regard or what the previous acaryas had written? Of course not. Did SP intend to change what the Vedas and the previous acaryas have established? Of course not. Then why did he make those statements privately? First, let’s look at the other position.
Did SP say anything that was in complete harmony with the previous acaryas? Yes, he said repeatedly that “no one falls from the spiritual realm”, just as the acaryas have said and as is repeatedly confirmed in Vedic literatures, as well as by Krsna Himself directly. Did SP actually say directly in his books – not letters or room conversations – that the jivas in the material universes have all fallen from Krsna’s lila? Not to my knowledge.
So far the main evidence has been from private letters, conversations and lectures. According to SP, his books are his foundational legacy in terms of establishing the core philosophical tenets of Gaudiya Vaisnava philosophy – not his private letters to specific individuals or conversations.
Did SP say anything else that concurs with the previous acaryas about this subject? Yes he did. Like all of the acaryas he said things like, “we turned away from Krsna,” “we have fallen into the material world,” “we have rejected Krsna,” “we desired to enjoy separate from Krsna,” “we were bewildered by maya,” and so on. It’s very important to note that when SP said these things in his books, he never specifically stated therein that this took place within the lila, and neither did any of the acaryas.
Here are some more facts that are axiomatic. FACT: There is no possibility of maya entering the spiritual realm. There are no material modes of nature there. It is pure suddha-sattva existence within Krsna’s most powerful svarupa-sakti. The inhabitants of the spiritual realms do not even know that there are material universes or maya.
In that personal abode of the Lord, the material modes of ignorance and passion do not prevail, nor is there any of their influence in goodness. There is no predominance of the influence of time, so what to speak of the illusory, external energy; it cannot enter that region. Without discrimination, both the demigods and the demons worship the Lord as devotees. SB, 2.9.10
Goloka is self-revealing, full of eternity and bliss, and superior to anything else. It is the place for those who have no material interests, and it has no contact with the material world. BS, 6
Part three:
Here is more proof from Jaiva-dharma, Chapter 16, Jīvas Possessed by Māyā:
Bābājī: …Innumerable jīvas appear from Śrī Baladeva Prabhu to serve Vṛndāvana-vihari Śrī Kṛṣṇa as His eternal associates in Goloka Vṛndāvana, and others appear from Śrī Sankarsana to serve the Lord of Vaikuṇṭha, Śrī Nārāyana, in the spiritual sky.
Eternally relishing rasa, engaged in the service of their worshipable Lord, they always remain fixed in their constitutional position. They always strive to please Bhagavān, and are always attentive to Him. Having attained the strength of cit-śakti, they are always strong.
They have no connection with the material energy. In fact, they do not know if there is a bewildering energy called māyā or not. Because they reside in the spiritual world, māyā is very far away from them and does not affect them at all.
Always absorbed in the bliss of serving their worshipable Lord, they are eternally liberated and are free from material happiness and distress. Their life is love alone, and they are not even conscious of misery, death or fear. JD chapter 16.
Therefore, it is not possible for liberated jivas who reside in the spiritual realms to even contemplate another alternative to their 24/7 experiences of ever-expanding prema in the personal association of the most attractive personality in all existence. Logically, you cannot choose between two options if you don’t even know about the existence of the 2nd option. And maya cannot influence anyone there either, so there is no question of them becoming enamored by maya.
The only possible position from which the tatastha-sakti jivas can perceive both options together is from their marginal position situated between the spiritual and material realms. SP describes that position as being like where the ocean water meets the shore sand. It is from that inbetween position that they make their first choice, which has eternal consequences.
Part four:
Again from Jaiva-dharma:
There are also innumerable, atomic, conscious jīvas who emanate as rays in Karanodakasayi Mahā-Viṣṇu’s glance upon His māyā-śakti. Because these jīvas are situated next to māyā, they perceive her wonderful workings.
Although they have all the qualities of the jīvas that I have already described, because of their minute and marginal nature, they sometimes look to the spiritual world, and sometimes to the material world. In this marginal condition, the jīva is very weak because at that time he has not attained spiritual strength from the mercy of the object of his worship.
Among these unlimited jīvas, those who want to enjoy māyā become engrossed in mundane sense gratification and enter the state of nitya-baddha. On the other hand, the jīvas who perform cid-anuśilanam of Bhagavān receive spiritual śakti (cid-bala) by His mercy, and enter the spiritual world. JD, Chapter 16, Page 377-378
It is in direct reference to being in this marginal position that SP and the acaryas have made their statements, “we turned away from Krsna,” “we have fallen into the material world,” “we have rejected Krsna,” “we desired to enjoy separate from Krsna,” “we became bewildered by maya” and so on. That did not happen within the lila because it cannot happen there. “When” this event happened is irrelevant, but “where” it happened is very important to understand because it is an important philosophical tenet about the marginal nature of the jivas. From Jaiva-dharma:
Yādava dāsa: Why have we fallen into this illusory relationship?
Ananta dāsa: Bhagavān is the complete spiritual entity (pūrṇa-cidvastu), and the jīvas are particles of spirit (cit-kaṇa). The jīva‘s first location is on the boundary line between the material and spiritual worlds. The jīvas who do not forget their relationship with Kṛṣṇa are empowered with cit-śakti, and are drawn from that position into the spiritual realm, where they become His eternal associates and begin to relish the bliss of His service.
Those jīvas who turn away from Kṛṣṇa desire to enjoy māyā, and māyā attracts them towards her by her potency [which cannot happen within the lila]. From that moment, our material state of existence comes into being and our true spiritual identity disappears. We therefore think, “I am the enjoyer of māyā”. This false egoism covers us with many varieties of false identities. JD, Chapter 7, page 145
Part five:
According to the Vedic literatures, Krsna Himself, the previous acaryas, and SP, “no one falls from the spiritual realm having once gone there.” Even though it may be theoretically possible – it never actually happens. And it certainly didn’t happen to the extent that Krsna had to create unlimited material universes to accommodate these fallen souls. There is no support for that in sastra nor in the acaryas’ teachings.
If SP’s statements are viewed from this perspective, they take on a whole new meaning and clarity, and show that he was in full agreement with the previous acaryas. I don’t claim to fully understand “why” SP chose to make those private statements about falling from the lila, but a first logical step in understanding his motives and reasoning would be his consideration of time, place, and circumstances, ie: his specific target audience at that time – his neophyte disciples. I leave it up to each individual to come to their own conclusions in this regard.
I would like to hear other devotees’ direct responses or refutations to what I’ve presented here. This is the crux of the matter as I see it, ie: did we fall from the lila or not.? It’s as simple as that, and it’s a very important philosophical point to understand and the evidence is overwhelming and conclusive. We did not fall from the lila into the material world.
Dear Kesava Krsna Prabhu
I think you are a little severe with Uttamasloka Prabhu. He is supporting Tattva, as presented by all our Acaryas, including Srila Prabhupada.
Besides,
siddhanta baliya chitte na kara alasa
iha ha-ite krishne lage sudridha manasa
A sincere student should not neglect the discussion of such conclusions, considering them controversial, for such discussions strengthen the mind. Thus one’s mind becomes attached to Sri Krishna. (C.c. Adi-lila 2.117)
Moreover, while the Goloka-patanavada theory (the fall-down from Goloka Vrindavana) is neither presented in Sastras nor by our previous acaryas, the Goluka-patanavada (fall-down from Gokula Vrindavana – Bhauma lila) is accepted by the four schools of Vaishvavism.
So, there is also a possibility that some may misconstrue not taking part in Krishna lila in the material world or even leaving it, with the absolute spiritual world where one never comes back from, after having reached it.
Indeed,
avajananti mam mudha
manusim tanum asritam
param bhavam ajananto
mama bhuta-mahesvaram
Fools deride Me when I descend in the human form. They do not know My transcendental nature and My supreme dominion over all that be. (B.g. 9.11)
Whereas, Krishna promises,
kṣipraṁ bhavati dharmātmā
śaśvac-chāntiṁ nigacchati
kaunteya pratijānīhi
na me bhaktaḥ praṇaśyati
He quickly becomes righteous and attains lasting peace. O son of Kunti, declare it boldly that My devotee never perishes. (B.g. 9.31)
and Krishna concludes,
mām upetya punar janma
duḥkhālayam aśāśvatam
nāpnuvanti mahātmānaḥ
saḿsiddhiḿ paramāḿ gatāḥ
After attaining Me, the great souls, who are yogīs in devotion, never return to this temporary world, which is full of miseries, because they have attained the highest perfection. (B.g. 8.15)
ā-brahma-bhuvanāl lokāḥ
punar āvartino ‘rjuna
mām upetya tu kaunteya
punar janma na vidyate
From the highest planet in the material world down to the lowest, all are places of misery wherein repeated birth and death take place. But one who attains to My abode, O son of Kuntī, never takes birth again. (B.g. 8.16)
which Srila Prabhupada also confirms,
“It is a fact that no one falls from Vaikuntha.” (S.B. 7.1.35 – Purport)
KRSNA BOOK, Chapter 28, ‘Releasing Nanda Maharaja from the Clutches of Varuna’.
BHAKTIVEDANTA PURPORT: “All conditioned souls under the impression of the bodily concept are working according to their particular types of body. These activities are creating their future conditional life. Because they have very little information of the spiritual world, they do not generally take to spiritual activities, which are called bhakti-yoga.
Those who successfully practice bhakti-yoga, after giving up this present body, go directly to the spiritual world and become situated in one of the Vaikuntha planets.
The inhabitants of Vrindavan are all pure devotees. Their destination after quitting the body is Krishnaloka. They even surpass the Vaikunthas.
The fact is that those who are always engaged in Krishna consciousness and mature, pure devotional service are given the chance, after death, to gain Krishna’s association in the universes within the material world. Krishna’s pastimes are continually going on, either in this universe or in another universe. Just as the sun globe is passing through many places across this earthly planet, so Krishna-lila or the transcendental advent and pastimes of Krishna, are also going on continually, either in this or other universes.
The mature devotees, who have completely executed Krishna consciousness, are immediately transferred to the universe where Krishna is appearing. In that universe the devotees get their FIRST opportunity to associate with Krishna PERSONALLY and DIRECTLY.
The training goes on, as we see in the Vrindavan-lila of Krishna within this planet. Krishna therefore revealed the actual feature of the Vaikuntha planets so that the inhabitants of Vrindavan could know their destination.”
Niscala,
You write,”While in Vrindavan we visited so many temples, some descending through Madhva, many with many branches of our family tree in common. Try to find one, not ISKCON affiliated, that thinks nitya siddhas fall from Vaikuntha or Goloka. A devotee did that, and the reply was incredulous “In ISKCON they believe THAT?””
I do not see the utility of going around telling other organizations that Srila Prabhupadas conclusion differs from theirs; if we are not are capable of bringing them to acceptance of Srila Prabhupada’s conclusion. Rather we should emphasize points of agreement in a mood of mutual respect.
I do not see how your point is relevant to our discussion. Other branches of the guadiya math and other bonafide sampradaya’s may have different conclusions,that is their concern. Our concern is the conclusion of Srila Prabhupada; which all ISKCON devotees accept as most perfect.We do not need confirmation from other organizations that Srila Prabhupada is right.
Uttamalsoka,
You write, “Your other evidence comes primarily from private letters that SP never intended us to use as absolute validation for our philosophy and he stated this emphatically”.
SrilaPrabhupada may have said that INDIVIDUAL INSTRUCTIONS are not to be accepted by devotees in general. But where did Srila Prabhupada emphatically say that his consistent (essentially identical) answers to numerous devotees, regarding a changeless ontological point, cannot be accepted as factual? I see no reason to accept that Srila Prabhupada gave numerous devotees clear statements that are opposed to the Absolute Truth!
You write, “You cannot use a few quotes from private letters to contradict eternal Vedic tattvas and statements SP made in his books. That is not the accepted process.”
It is more than a few quotes, and you are confused regarding the, “accepted process”. The accepted process is found in:
BG 4, 34:
Just try to learn the truth by approaching a spiritual master. Inquire from him submissively and render service unto him. The self-realized souls can impart knowledge unto you because they have seen the truth.
In the purport Srila Prabhupada describes futile attempts for knowledge then writes ”,“ Nor by independent study of books of knowledge can one progress in spiritual life”. We can become confused by apparent contradictions regarding scripture; therefore we need to question the acarya to clear up the confusion. But you say the answers of the Founder Acharya are invalid and you want us to accept that your conclusion is the correct one.
You want us to accept, based your understanding of Vedic conclusions that, “None of the previous acaryas have stated that we were with Krsna in His lila and we then fell from that position. That is not found in any other Vedic sastras either”.
With all due respect (although it is implicit in your claim) I question whether you have read and thoroughly understood, “ALL” the statements of the previous acaryas and, “ALL” the Vedic sastras. If you can convince individuals to believe that your knowledge of the past acharyas and the Scripture is more valid then Srila Prabhupadas numerous direct answers to the question- let it be so. But I accept the answers given by Srila Prabhupada as more valid than your interpretation.
Part 1 of 2.
The argument that falling from Vaikuntha is not a conclusion found in Srila Prabhupadas books and that it is drawn only from several of Srila Prabhupada letters militates against the facts.When Srila Prabhupada said, “Back to Godhead”, he was encouraging us to go back to Vaikuntha not back to the Brahma-jyoti or Maha Vishnu. Srila Prabhupada used the phrase, “Back to Godhead 650 times in the Srimada Bhagavatam alone. I will cite a few of the hundreds of examples.
SB 2/10/1(capitals added)
çré-çukaù uväca—Çré Çukadeva Gosvämé said; atra—in this Çrémad-Bhägavatam; sargaù—statement of the creation of the universe; visargaù—statement of subcreation; ca—also; sthänam—the planetary systems; poñaëam—protection; ütayaù—the creative impetus; manvantara—changes of Manus; éça-anukathäù—the science of God; nirodhaù—GOING BACK HOMEBACK TO GODHEAD; muktiù—liberation; äçrayaù—the summum bonum.
TRANSLATION
Çré Çukadeva Gosvämé said: In the Çrémad-Bhägavatam there are ten divisions of statements regarding the following: the creation of the universe, subcreation, planetary systems, protection by the Lord, the creative impetus, the change of Manus, the science of God, RETURNING HOME BACK TO GODHEAD, liberation, and the summum bonum.
SB 9/24 58 (Capitals added)
SYNONYMS
yat—whatever; mäyä-ceñöitam—the laws of material nature enacted by the Supreme Personality of Godhead; puàsaù—of the living entities; sthiti—duration of life; utpatti—birth; apyayäya—annihilation; hi—indeed; anugrahaù—compassion; tat-nivåtteù—the creation and manifestation of cosmic energy to stop the repetition of birth and death; ätma-läbhäya—THUS GOING BACK HOME, BACKTO GODHEAD; ca—indeed; iñyate—for this purpose the creation is there.
TRANSLATION
The Supreme Personality of Godhead acts through His material energy in the creation, maintenance and annihilation of this cosmic manifestation just to deliver the living entity by His compassion and stop the living entity’s birth, death and duration of materialistic life. Thus He enables the living being to RETURN HOME, BACK TO GODHEAD.
Part 2 For those who maintain that by, “back to godhead” Srila Prabhupada did not really mean BACK to godhead” we can choose other terms Srila Prabhupada used, for instance, “reinstated”
Reinstated: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/
1. To restore to a former rank or condition.
Collins English Dictionary – Complete and Unabridged © HarperCollins Publishers 1991, 1994, 1998, 2000, 2003.
Nectar of Devotion 9, Further Consideration of Devotional Principals: Submission( Capitals added).
When one realizes something of his constitutional relationship with the Supreme Personality of Godhead, he understands his original position and wants to be REINSTATED IN THIS POSITION, EITHER AS A FRIEND, SERVANT, PARENT, OR CONJUGAL LOVER.
Mukunda Mala Stotra Mantra 2 Purport (capitals added).
The living being himself, of course, is eternal, and if He so desires he can realize his eternality by merging into the body of the Absolute Truth OR BEING REINSTATED IN HIS CONSTITUIONAL POSITION AS AN ETERNAL SERVANT OF THE LORD.
SB 11/10/31 Purport( Capitals added)
“The best results, however, can be attained by one who engages in the devotional service of the Lord with A DESIRE TO BE REINSTATED IN HIS CONSTITUTIONAL POSITION AS THE LORD’S LOVING SERVANT.”
So to accept the no-fall position we must accept that in numerous letters Srila Prabhupada told his disciples a conclusion in direct opposition to the truth; however, beyond that we must accept that he did not really mean what he wrote hundreds of times in his books.
The proponents of the no-fall position claim that there is no scriptural evidence of the fall position( it only exists in a few personal letters).The citations below are not from Srila Prabhupadas letters but rather his translations of Krishna Himself regarding the PURPOSE OF ALL VEDIC TEACHINGS. To deny that we fell means to say that Srila Prabhupada ,did not mean it when he said, revive, reestablish, regain( and other synonyms) our lost relationship by going BACK to godhead.
“The Techings of Lord Caitanya” Chapter 21, the Supreme Personality of Godhead explains that the purpose of Vedanta sutra is to REESTABLISH the living entities LOST RELATIONSHIP with Krishna and achieve love of godhead.
“ For this reason, it is the purpose of the Vedänta-sütra to reestablish the living entity’s lost relationship with the Supreme Lord Kåñëa and to enable him to execute devotional service and ultimately achieve the highest goal of life, love of Godhead. This is the real purpose of Vedänta-sütra”.
Lord Caitanya further explains in TLC 22. That REESTABLISHING our eternal relationship with the Supreme Lord is the PURPOSE OF THE UPANISADA, VEDANTA SUTRA AND SRIMADA BHAGAVATAM.
“In other words, the purpose of the Upaniñads, Vedänta-sütra and Çrémad-Bhägavatam is one and the same. If one studies Çrémad-Bhägavatam carefully, he will find that all the Upaniñads and the Vedänta-sütra are nicely explained therein. Çrémad-Bhägavatam teaches us how to reestablish our eternal relationship with the Supreme Lord, how to act in that relationship, and, lastly, how to achieve the highest benefit from it.”
In the purport to Mukunda Mala Stotra, Mantra 1, Srila Prabhupada says Krishna created the VEDAS and PURANAS so the jivas can REVIVE their LOST RELATIONSHIP with Him
“He creates scriptures for them like the Vedas and Puräëas in order to revive their lost relationship with Him and awaken their divine consciousness.”
In SB 10,7,1-2., Srila Prabhupada saya “ALL VEDIC LITERATURE is to REVIVE OUR KRISHNA CONSCIOUSNESS”
“All the Vedic literatures presented by Vyäsadeva and other great sages are therefore intended to revive our Kåñëa consciousness, which begins to revive with çravaëa-kértanam”.
BG. 2/46: Purport:
The living entities are parts and parcels of Kåñëa; therefore, REVIVAL of Kåñëa consciousness by the individual living entity is the HIGHEST PERFECTIONAL STAGE OF VEDIC KNOWLEDGE
I read through the many comments again this evening. It is amazing how the bhaktas are so intellectually curious, and can quote so many sources for the inspiration of themselves and others. It is not a waste of time, but Srila Prabhupad’s responsibility as Sri Gurudeva is to not allow us to be stuck in this issue. Fortunately, Krishna is also Mukunda. One of His many lilas is to save the conditioned souls who take to bhakti. Again, if we judge a thing by its result (phalena pariciyate), then if our hankering for Krishna is increased by a certain line of discussion, then it is of value. Certainly, I have relished many of the scholarly discussions in the many comments by the devotees who have taken part in this discussion.
When we awaken from the materially based covered consciousness, our loving propensity will be granted by Sri Krishna and His Hladini Shakti. Sri Gurudeva is a representative of the Hladini Shakti, Srimati Radharani and Her agents. The Bhagavad Gita suggest that bhakti is transcendental. Brahma bhuta prasannatma….mad bhaktim labhate param. The soul will be granted super-excellent bhakti after liberated…and such liberation is granted by Mukunda. We cannot save ourselves, but we must develop the incessant (never ending) sense that to please Krishna is the vital need for the jiva soul. We can practice this choice to please Krishna by use of our free will, choosing Krishna at every moment. Krishna is “bhoktaram yajna tapasam”, the Enjoyer of our sacrifices, which are in fact a moment to moment endeavour by the tiny jiva soul to remain dependent upon Krishna, rather than falsely consider one’s self to be the center of pleasure. The infection of trying to enjoy matter is counter to the reality of Krishna consciousness, just as mayadevi appears as the shadow at the back of Krishna.
Srila Prabhupad viewed the sleeping humans as just so many moving cadavers. Without Krishna consciousness, there is no real life. His mercy upon the sleeping souls is manifestation of Srila Nityananda Prabhu’s mercy. Book distribution is a manifestation of His mercy. In any case, to say that we were at some time with Krishna in His lila, and we have fallen away, certainly is a source of inspiration and hope for the bhakta. On the other hand, if one thinks that I can put off serious efforts at deepening faith in Krishna in so many ways, that is very detrimental. Sri Guru is not a pet, but our master and guide.
Pusta Krishna das
Niscala,
You write, “Similarly many westerners would be opposed to the idea we have never been with Krsna as the Christian idea of the fallen soul is the idea of a prodigal son rejecting the father then returning to him.
As a western Christian I was taught that worshiping images, bowing to a man, or believing in any scripture other then the Bible is grounds for eternal damnation.The idea that God has many girlfriends who are married to other men,does not exactly jibe with any Christian doctrine I am aware of either. Srila Prabhupada did not teach a conclusion apposed to Vedic truth in regards to these issues so I cannot believe he felt compelled to regarding the fall of the jiva either.
I am aware of the story of the prodigal son but regarding our origin, the only western Christian idea I have ever heard is that the soul begins at the time of birth in the present material body. As a Christian I was taught that we were not with God previous to this birth, in fact, previous to our current birth we did not exist.
The no-fall idea is most compatible with my Christian sentiments. But I have accepted many ideas of Kriahna Consciousness that are much more dramatically apposed to my Christian sentiments about either the fall or the no-fall position.
Also I find it hard to believe that Srila Prabhupada’s disciples in the 1960’s and 1970’s were such strong believers in Christianity(or any other conservative social phenomena) that Srila Prabhupada had to appease it.
If a Christian can accept,among numerous other foreign ideas, that God is a little blue cowheard boy with a flute and a peacock feather whose mother bathes Him in cow urine, who sucks the life out of a witch that rides on a tree branch, who was taught in school to train cocks for fighting, etc, they can also accept either the fall or the no- fall position. Srila Prabhupada had no need to teach us a conclusion apposed to the truth to appease us in this regard.
The argument that the letters by Srila Prabhupada on this topic were tailored toward individual devotees and not pertinent to the entire society is erroneous. One principal letter (known as the “Crow and Tal-fruit letter”) was to Madhuvisa Swami who was a GBC secretary. Obviously Srila Prabhupada’s intention was for the leading member to teach the conclusion to devotees in general. This obvious point is corroborated by devotees who were exposed to the letter.
“Çréla Prabhupäda gives a more elaborate description of the nature of the jéva’s bondage in the paper entitled “Crow-and-Täl-Fruit Logic.” He sent this paper to the GBC representative in Australia in June of 1972 to settle a controversy that had arisen there over this issue. I saw it in Philadelphia that year and studied it carefully”. Ravindra Svarupa Prabhu,BTG 30-01 1996.
Çréla Prabhupäda had read Madhudviña’s letter enquiring into the origin of the living entities, and dictated a lengthy reply to his secretary, Çyämasundara. When Madhudviña Swami received Prabhupäda’s detailed three-page response, he copied it and sent it out to all the Australasian centres. In the letter, entitled “Käka taliya nyäya—Crow and Tal-Fruit Logic”, Çréla Prabhupäda shed light on the controversy about whether the conditioned souls fell from the Brahman effulgence or from Vaikuëöha. Kurma Prabhu, “The great Transcendental Adventure”, Chapter 5.
Dear Sita Rama Prabhu
You interpret things in a certain way, to support your belief.
Indeed, the living entities are parts and parcels of Krishna. As such they are not this body.
So, under the spell of maya, when we identify to the material body and pursue some material goals, such as trying to enjoy through our material senses or searching for some form of more subtle sex life, in the form of name, fame, profit and adoration, we forget our real constitutional position, as eternal servants of Krishna.
Hence, to revive our original consciousness, before our having opted for Maya and Devi-dhama, means to revive our intrinsic spiritual nature, i.e. jivera svarupa haya, Krishnera nitya das, which Srila Prabhupada confirms:
SB 11/10/31 Purport (Capitals added)
“The best results, however, can be attained by one who engages in the devotional service of the Lord with A DESIRE TO BE REINSTATED IN HIS CONSTITUTIONAL POSITION AS THE LORD’S LOVING SERVANT.”
In other words, this potential is with us, eternally…
Now, whether a gopi can leave the rasa dance or a manjari Srimati Radharani’s loving service to become a monster and a gross materialist in the material world, is for you to believe so.
As far as I am concerned, I see no “source of inspiration and hope for the bhakta” in this, as our dear Pusta Krishna puts it…
Rather, I like to think that the spiritual world and Krishna are perfect, along with all the residents of Vaikuntha and Goloka Vrindavana and that their lilas are eternal and not subject to any of the material imperfections or demonic attributes which are to be found in the material world only…!
SR: “You write, “You cannot use a few quotes from private letters to contradict eternal Vedic tattvas and statements SP made in his books. That is not the accepted process.” It is more than a few quotes, and you are confused regarding the, “accepted process”. The accepted process is found in: BG 4, 34. In the purport Srila Prabhupada describes futile attempts for knowledge then writes ”,“ Nor by independent study of books of knowledge can one progress in spiritual life”. We can become confused by apparent contradictions regarding scripture; therefore we need to question the acarya to clear up the confusion. But you say the answers of the Founder Acharya are invalid and you want us to accept that your conclusion is the correct one.”
Your analysis is completely off-base. I NEVER said that SP’s statements are invalid. Why are you distorting my words? I am an initiated disciple of Srila Prabhupada and I am following his instructions in that purport. You insinuate that I have merely “made an independent study of books of knowledge”. My study of our Gaudiya acaryas was and is done with the full blessings and guidance of my spiritual master, along with the guiding mercy of the Supersoul. That is a big difference. If you don’t understand this fundamental principle of the guru-disciple relationship on the path of bhakti then you have a lot more studying to do.
The confusion regarding this issue is solely in the minds of devotees who have not thoroughly studied SP’s books along with the books of the acaryas as SP instructed us to do. There are no such contradictions in the acaryas’ books, nor in the Vedic literatures. In order to rectify this issue we must examine which of SP’s statements are in harmony with the previous acaryas and the Vedic literatures – from whom he said repeatedly he would never deviate.
The statements SP made that no one falls from the spiritual world are in complete harmony with the previous acaryas. Therefore, I am supporting SP 100% and NOT contradicting him. Both things he said cannot be simultaneously true. You cannot say that no one ever falls and then say the everyone in the material universes fell.
Because these posts on Dandavats are not fully interactive, you have not yet read my analysis presented in posts #53-57, wherein I prove – using evidence from SP and the acaryas – that it is impossible to fall from the spiritual world. I also proved that SP was in full agreement with the previous acaryas in his books.
Sita Rama: “Srila Prabhupada may have said that INDIVIDUAL INSTRUCTIONS are not to be accepted by devotees in general. But where did Srila Prabhupada emphatically say that his consistent answers to numerous devotees, regarding a changeless ontological point, cannot be accepted as factual? I see no reason to accept that Srila Prabhupada gave numerous devotees clear statements that are opposed to the Absolute Truth!”
You are repeatedly and conveniently ignoring the established fact that Srila Prabhupada made conflicting statements on this issue. He said numerous times, in full agreement with the previous acaryas and Krsna Himself, that “no one falls from the spiritual world once having gone there”. There is no wiggle room in those statements – they are absolute and unambiguous.
The issue at hand is which of his two conflicting positions are in accordance with the previous acaryas, Krsna and the Vedic literatures? You support the fall side of his statements from letters and conversations and I support the no fall side as found in his books. I am not disagreeing with SP, but YOU are ignoring the other side.
SR: “You want us to accept, based your understanding of Vedic conclusions that, “None of the previous acaryas have stated that we were with Krsna in His lila and we then fell from that position. That is not found in any other Vedic sastras either”. With all due respect (although it is implicit in your claim) I question whether you have read and thoroughly understood, “ALL” the statements of the previous acaryas and, “ALL” the Vedic sastras.”
You can question all you want but that doesn’t prove anything. I have done the research under the guidance of my guru. Have you done this yet? Unless you can find statements to contradict this fact, your argument is invalid.
SR: “If you can convince individuals to believe that your knowledge of the past acharyas and the Scripture is more valid then Srila Prabhupadas numerous direct answers to the question- let it be so. But I accept the answers given by Srila Prabhupada as more valid than your interpretation.”
Once again you (and others) are trying to distort this discussion by implying that I am disagreeing with SP or that I know something he doesn’t. I AM NOT DOING THAT SO PLEASE STOP SAYING THAT! I am fully supporting SP’s statements that are in harmony with the previous acaryas. Why are you ignoring this fact? Why do you continue to distort the issue like this? It is dishonest and a diversionary tactic.
SR: “The proponents of the no-fall position claim that there is no scriptural evidence of the fall position (it only exists in a few personal letters). The citations below are not from Srila Prabhupadas letters but rather his translations of Krishna Himself regarding the PURPOSE OF ALL VEDIC TEACHINGS. To deny that we fell means to say that Srila Prabhupada, did not mean it when he said, revive, reestablish, regain (and other synonyms) our lost relationship by going BACK to godhead.”
No it does not mean that. Those who don’t understand this subject repeatedly make these incorrect extrapolations. Read carefully how Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati explains this in his essay, “Brahmana and Vaisnava”:
“Before acquiring material designations, the living entity is supremely pure. Even though he is not engaged in serving the Supreme Lord, he remains situated in the neutral position of santa-rasa due to his marginal nature. Though the living entity born from the marginal potency does not at that time exhibit a taste for serving the Lord due to a lack of knowledge of self-realization, his direct propensity of serving the Supreme Lord nevertheless remains within him in a dormant state.
Though the indirect propensity of material enjoyment, which is contrary to the service of the Lord, is not found in him at that time, indifference to the service of Hari and the seed of material enjoyment, which follows that state of indifference, are nevertheless present within him.
The living entity, who belongs to the marginal potency, cannot remain indifferent forever by subduing both devotional and non-devotional propensities. He therefore contemplates unconstitutional activities from his marginal position.”
SBSST clearly states that “Before acquiring material designations” the propensity to serve Krsna is there, but dormant. He did not imply that there was a previous relationship in Krsna’s lila. Read the 1st paragraph again carefully and you will understand clearly.
In the statements you quoted SP did not mean that we were in the lila and that is the part that devotees continually misconstrue. And counting how many times SP said, “back to Godhead” is a ridiculous exercise in futility. That does not constitute sastric or sadhu evidence. Our constitutional nature is that we are eternal servants of Krsna, but as SBSST stated it remains dormant. THAT dormant propensity is what is revived, re-established or re-awakened. Not our previous rasa in Krsna’s lila.
SR: “The argument that falling from Vaikuntha is not a conclusion found in Srila Prabhupadas books and that it is drawn only from several of Srila Prabhupada letters militates against the facts. When Srila Prabhupada said, “Back to Godhead”, he was encouraging us to go back to Vaikuntha not back to the Brahma-jyoti or Maha Vishnu. Srila Prabhupada used the phrase, “Back to Godhead 650 times in the Srimada Bhagavatam alone. I will cite a few of the hundreds of examples.”
The phrase, “Back to Godhead” as used by Srila Prabhupada should not be misconstrued as absolute evidence that we were previously with Krsna in His lila. That is not a valid extrapolation when you examine all of the evidence, such as what SBSST stated in the essay excerpt I gave earlier.
The examples you gave here are not conclusive proof either. When Srila Prabhupada translated those words as “back home, back to Godhead” that was not a literal translation of those Sanskrit words. In his mission to spread Krsna consciousness world-wide he was expertly focusing all attention on Krsna and the goal of bhakti, ie: to attain love of God (prema) and to enter Krsna’s eternal lila.
In translating Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura’s commentary on SB, Bhanu Swami (expert translator, GBC and ISKCON guru) rendered those verses more literally as follows:
Śukadeva said: In this Purāṇa there are ten topics: creation, secondary creation, protection, mercy of the Lord, material activities, the conduct of the Manus, stories of the Lord, destruction of the universe, liberation and the ultimate shelter.
Even the actions of the Lord in the form of the puruña in relation to maya for creation, maintenance and destruction of the universe, are his mercy alone. That mercy acts to produce detachment from the world and attainment of the Lord in the spiritual world.
And this should not be misinterpreted as me saying that SP made translation mistakes. I’m not saying that. I’m saying you can’t use that as direct conclusive evidence that the fall from the lila is in his books. If that’s all you have, then your argument is null and void. Find some direct unambiguous statements that all of the jivas in the material world were previously in Krsna’s lila and were banished to material existence. Good luck with that.
From Bhaktivinoda Thakura’s Mahaprabhura-siksa, chapter 7:
The jiva is a spiritual, conscious, knowing entity. The jiva appeared by the marginal energy at the dividing line between spirit and matter. From that position, he began to gaze at the spiritual and material worlds. Those jivas who were attracted somewhat to realization of the Supreme Person became desirous of the spiritual realm- because of that contact of knowledge. They then obtained strength from the hladini potency of the abundant cit sakti, which made them favorable to the Lord eternally, and they were brought into the spiritual world as associates of the Lord.
Those who, by their own free will, became bewildered and became greedy for maya situated on the opposite side, being beckoned by maya, then became attracted to the material universe, and were thrown in the universe by Karanarnavasayi Visnu, the controller of maya. That was but the result of their eternal aversion to the Supreme Lord. The moment they entered the material realm, they became overcome by ignorance, the function of maya. Overcome by ignorance, they fell into the wheel of binding karma in order to become fully absorbed in their task.
Sita Rama, I was also raised a western Christian and imbibed the idea, very strongly, that going to God was returning to Him, that we had once turned our back on him and the prodigal son was an analogy of us, encouraging us to go back home from whence we had come. That was the unambiguous message from my teachers. Many Christian hymns are also about “returning home”. In regard to the differences in doctrine we have with the Christians, Srila Prabhupada was able to explain their source. He addressed all the issues you brought up- bowing down to a human being, deity worship and parakiya rasa, explaining how they are not of the ilk of the Christian prohibitions. So he tried to bridge the gap between western and eastern sensibilities, through explanations that were very reasonable. Srila Bhaktivinode Thakura was famous for doing the same thing.
But these angas of bhakti (accepting a guru, arcanam… the nature of Krsna lila) are essential aspects of the process of becoming Krsna conscious. Where we have come from, is not an essential aspect, and when pressed on the point, Srila Prabhupada would often describe it as “not important”. I am sure you know the references. His opinion that it is not important means that it is a detail. It is up to the acarya to always adjust details, if they will help people become Krsna conscious. If it makes you more Krsna conscious, or more desirous of entering Krsna’s pastimes, to feel you are going home to where you belong, rather than a place you have never been before, then you should keep to that understanding. But for other devotees, whose desire for Krsna’s pastimes has awakened to a point that they know they belong there, even if they have never been before, it is quite suitable that they know the siddhantic tattva, presented by the parampara.
The fact you’re avoiding is that Srila Prabhupada never said that nitya siddhas fall from vaikuntha. When asked if nitya siddhas can misuse their independence, he replied that they can, but they never do. Well, we have, so logically that means we were never nitya siddhas. In regard to Srila Prabhupada’s statements that we were once with Krsna, or once in Krsna’s lila, they are not “lies” as some choose to call them, as this material world is also a lila of Krsna. It’s the place where He constantly resides, as Bhagavan Sri Krsna in His bhauma lila, and it is the place where He constantly resides as Paramatma, Garbhodaksayi Vishnu, the murti and in the hearts of his devotees.
(continued) Srila Prabhupada described that we are always in Krsna’s lila, even in this material world, “Directly or indirectly, always we are serving Krsna’s lila. ” letter to Madhudvisa, 1972. This indicates that the breadth and scope of his understanding what it means to be “in Krsna’s lila” and in that context it is in no way a misrepresentation of the truth, to say “We were in Krsna’s lila and have forgotten it” If even the material world is Krsna’s lila, for He is always in some part of it, in His Bhauma lila, and is always in every part of it, as Paramatma, and is the very seed of it, as Garbhodaksayo Vishnu, then we are never separate from Krsna- except in our memory. Repeatedly that memory gets revived by Krsna or His representatives and repeatedly we still forget that eternal relationship.
Thus the position presented by Srila Prabhupada is not at all at odds with the sampradayaic understanding, as presented in great depth by his grand spiritual master, in Jaiva Dharma. There every question about the origin of the jiva was asked, and answered in detail. Srila Prabhupada never deviated at all in his representation of these answers. With great skill and expertise, and avoiding outright lies, he adjusted the understanding so we would have some sense of belonging in Goloka, which would not have been possible if he had answered these questions in another way. How can one have a sense of belonging, in regard to a place where we have never been? So he laid stress on another truth- that Krsna and His lila and associates are present even here in this material world and in that sense, we were with Krsna, and have just forgotten it and this is the cause of our falldown and entrapment by maya.
In addition, of course, in many places in his books, he lay stress on the fact that no one ever falls from vaikuntha, it being the eternally effulgent abode wherein the influence of the darkness of maya cannot enter even to the minutest degree.
The danger Srila Prabhupada wanted to prevent us from might not have been so much in relation with the story of Adam and Eve and of their fall from the garden of Eden, even though this might have been one of the reasons for his presenting a variety of statements, so as to satisfy everyone’s inclination on the issue of the origin of the soul.
He first wanted to stress the intrinsic nature as well as the constitutional position of the soul, as Krishnera nitya das, as eternal servant of Krishna !
This is why one may find so many such formulas as “going back to”, “recovering”, restoring” etc, as while opting for the material world, when we were in the tatastha region, we forgot our intrinsic nature, as we became bewildered by Maya, developed an ahankara, i.e. a false identification to something and someone who is not our real self, and became frantic about trying to enjoy through our material senses.
Thus, the biggest danger Srila Prabhupada wanted to prevent us from, was the desire to merge in Brahman, had we misunderstood the real Tattva on this topic and considered that since it was the place where we were coming from, it ought to be the place where we were meant to go back to…!
Hence, Srila Prabhupada made some of us believe that they were with Krishna and that they forced Krishna to allow them to come to the material world to suffer, rather than remain in the Spiritual World and enjoy eternal spiritual bliss…!
Indeed, it is a very subtle subject and one has to be firmly established in bhakti, before one can face the question of our origin, without being deviated from the devotional path…
Therefore, as a constant reminder, Srila Prabhupada used formulas such as “Back home, back to Godhead”, inducing us not to deviate, neither from the supreme goal of life, Krishna prema, nor from our ultimate destination, Goloka Vrindavana…
Indeed, danger was there, not only because Mayavadi philosophy had been preached and broadcasted in the West prior to his coming, but because our Scriptures may also be subtle to understand.
As it is, Krishna Himself declares:
“I am the basis of the impersonal Brahman, which is immortal, imperishable and eternal and is the constitutional position of ultimate happiness. “(B.g. 14.27)
In this regard, Srila Prabhupada’s purport to this verse is also very interesting…
Bhaktivedanta Purport to B.g. 14.27
“The constitution of Brahman is immortality, imperishability, eternity, and happiness. Brahman is the beginning of transcendental realization. Paramātmā, the Supersoul, is the middle, the second stage in transcendental realization, and the Supreme Personality of Godhead is the ultimate realization of the Absolute Truth. Therefore, both Paramātmā and the impersonal Brahman are within the Supreme Person. It is explained in the Seventh Chapter that material nature is the manifestation of the inferior energy of the Supreme Lord. The Lord impregnates the inferior, material nature with fragments of the superior nature, and that is the spiritual touch in the material nature. When a living entity conditioned by this material nature begins the cultivation of spiritual knowledge, he elevates himself from the position of material existence and gradually rises up to the Brahman conception of the Supreme. This attainment of the Brahman conception of life is the first stage in self-realization. At this stage the Brahman-realized person is transcendental to the material position, but he is not actually perfect in Brahman realization. If he wants, he can continue to stay in the Brahman position and then gradually rise up to Paramātmā realization and then to the realization of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. There are many examples of this in Vedic literature. The four Kumāras were situated first in the impersonal Brahman conception of truth, but then they gradually rose to the platform of devotional service. One who cannot elevate himself beyond the impersonal conception of Brahman runs the risk of falling down. In Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam it is stated that although a person may rise to the stage of impersonal Brahman, without going further, with no information of the Supreme Person, his intelligence is not perfectly clear. Therefore, in spite of being raised to the Brahman platform, there is the chance of falling down if one is not engaged in the devotional service of the Lord. In the Vedic language it is also said, raso vai saḥ, rasaṁ hy evāyaṁ labdhvānandī bhavati: “When one understands the Personality of Godhead, the reservoir of pleasure, Kṛṣṇa, he actually becomes transcendentally blissful.” (Taittirīya Upaniṣad 2.7.1)
…/…
…/…
The Supreme Lord is full in six opulences, and when a devotee approaches Him there is an exchange of these six opulences. The servant of the king enjoys on an almost equal level with the king. And so eternal happiness, imperishable happiness, and eternal life accompany devotional service. Therefore, realization of Brahman, or eternity, or imperishability, is included in devotional service. This is already possessed by a person who is engaged in devotional service.
The living entity, although Brahman by nature, has the desire to lord it over the material world, and due to this he falls down. In his constitutional position, a living entity is above the three modes of material nature, but association with material nature entangles him in the different modes of material nature—goodness, passion and ignorance. Due to the association of these three modes, his desire to dominate the material world is there. By engagement in devotional service in full Kṛṣṇa consciousness, he is immediately situated in the transcendental position, and his unlawful desire to control material nature is removed. Therefore the process of devotional service, beginning with hearing, chanting, remembering—the prescribed nine methods for realizing devotional service—should be practiced in the association of devotees. Gradually, by such association, by the influence of the spiritual master, one’s material desire to dominate is removed, and one becomes firmly situated in the Lord’s transcendental loving service. This method is prescribed from the twenty-second to the last verse of this chapter. Devotional service to the Lord is very simple: one should always engage in the service of the Lord, should eat the remnants of foodstuffs offered to the Deity, smell the flowers offered to the lotus feet of the Lord, see the places where the Lord had His transcendental pastimes, read of the different activities of the Lord, His reciprocation of love with His devotees, chant always the transcendental vibration Hare Kṛṣṇa, Hare Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa Kṛṣṇa, Hare Hare/ Hare Rāma, Hare Rāma, Rāma Rāma, Hare Hare, and observe the fasting days commemorating the appearances and disappearances of the Lord and His devotees. By following such a process one becomes completely detached from all material activities. One who can thus situate himself in the brahma-jyotir or the different varieties of the Brahman conception is equal to the Supreme Personality of Godhead in quality.” End of Bhaktivedanta Purport
Some say we should only accept what Srila Prabhupada has written in his books about this subject, and more or less ignore what he has written in letters. It seems to me that the ‘crow and talk’ fruit letter was directly intended to respond to the questions of devotees generally and was not just a private instruction under some unique circumstances.
But even reading Bhagavatam I frequently come across passages lik this:
“When a living entity falls down to the material world from his original position, he becomes ‘cyuta’, which means that he forgets his relationship with Acyuta.” (S.B. 4.21.12, Purport)
We may try to reconcile such statements with other statements that no one falls from the Acyuta world, but we should expect to find the reconciliation directly in the teachings of Srila Prabhupada.
For me it just appears to be one of the many seemingly contradictory, inconceivable aspects of Krishna consciousness, such as “The Supreme lord walks and He does not walk.”. No big deal. There are many such inconceivable things about Krishna. We fall and we don’t fall. Why over complicate it?
Regarding the fall/no-fall issue, devotees sometimes cite the story of Jaya and Vijaya, which we know is not an example of jivas falling from Vaikuntha – it was a special case. However, everyone seems to forget the question posed by King Yudhisthira to Narada Muni which started the story. In his question, King Yudhisthira establishes the absolute fact that, ” For unflinching devotees of the Lord to fall again to this material world is impossible. I cannot believe this.” Even he knew, as did everyone, that no one can fall from Vaikuntha and he was shocked to hear that these two devotees had fallen.
This proves that the prevailing understanding is that it is not possible for devotees to fall from the spiritual realms. That was 5,000 years ago and he was a pure devotee of Krsna and His dear friend. It’s also important to note that Narada Muni did not go on to explain that all of the jivas in the material universes had fallen from Vaikuntha. This would have been an ideal place to present that information, but he said nothing of the sort. In the purport, Srila Prabhupada confirms this fact twice.
Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira inquired: What kind of great curse could affect even liberated viṣṇu-bhaktas, and what sort of person could curse even the Lord’s associates? For unflinching devotees of the Lord to fall again to this material world is impossible. I cannot believe this.
Srila Prabhupada’s Purport:
In Bhagavad-gītā (8.16) the Lord clearly states, mām upetya tu kaunteya punar janma na vidyate: one who is purified of material contamination and returns home, back to Godhead, does not return to this material world. Elsewhere in Bhagavad-gītā (4.9) Kṛṣṇa says:
“One who knows the transcendental nature of My appearance and activities does not, upon leaving the body, take his birth again in this material world, but attains My eternal abode, O Arjuna.” Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira, therefore, was surprised that a pure devotee could return to this material world. This is certainly a very important question.
Part 1 of 2
Although Srila Prabhupada gave specific instruction in his letters that were not applicable to devotees in general it is also a well-known fact the Srila Prabhupada answered philosophical questions from leaders and expected them to teach the correct understanding to devotees in general. Several of the most explicit answers regarding our fall from Vaikuntha( cited below) were written to Jagadia Prabhu when he was engaged as Temple president for Toronto. He also opened up four Temples and was a member of the GBC at this time.
02/27/70
I am glad to learn that after deliberation between Jayapataka and Raktaka, you have been asked to become the president of Toronto temple.
11/26/70
So far as Canadian expansion is concerned, your suggestion to open centers in Ottawa, Hamilton, Quebec and Winipeg is very nice, so do it practically and Krishna will be pleased by your sincere efforts.
01/16/71
The report from both Hamilton and Vancouver centers is very encouraging.
11/28/70
As you are a member of the governing body.
Jagadisa Prabhu asked Srila Prabhupada if those in the passive relationship were more likely to fall. The letter from Srila Prabhupada of 02/27/1970 reads:
“Regarding your questions concerning the spirit souls falling into Maya’s influence, it is not that those who have developed a passive relationship with Krsna are more likely to fall into nescient activities. Usually anyone who has developed his relationship with Krsna does not fall down in any circumstance, but because the independence is always there,THE SOUL MAY FALL DOWN FROM ANY POSITION OR ANY RELATIONSHIP BY MISUSING HIS INDEPENDENCE. But HIS REALTIONSHIP WITH KRISHNA IS NEVER LOST, SIMPLY FORGOTTEN BY THE INFLUENCE OF MAYA SO IT MAY BE REGAINED OR REVIVED by the process of hearing the Holy Name of Krsna and then the devotee engages himself in the service of the Lord which is his original or constitutional position. The relationship of the living entity with Krsna is eternal as both Krsna and the living entity are eternal; THE PROCESS IS ONE OF REVIVAL ONLY, NOTHING NEW.(capitals added).
Part 2 of 2.
Letter to Jagadisa Prabhu, 4/25/1970.
Regarding your questions about how and from where did the conditioned souls fall, your first question if someone has a relationship with Lord Krsna on Krsnaloka, does he ever fall down? The souls are endowed with minute independence as part of their nature and THIS MINUTE INDEPENDECE MAY BE UTILIZED RIIGHTLY OR WRONGLY AT ANY TIME, SO THERE IS ALWAYS A CHANCE OF FALLING DOWN by misuse of one’s independence.
Letter to Jagadisa 7/9/1970
Regarding your several questions: Where are the spirit souls coming from that are taking microbe bodies? It is not a matter of any particular body. THESE SPIRIT SOLULS AND ALL SPIRIT SOULS ARE COMING FROM VAIKUNTHA, but in these material worlds they are taking various grades of bodies according to their material activities. THERE IS NO “ NEW” SOUL. “New” and “old” are due to this material body, but the soul is never born and never dies, so if there is no birth how there can be new soul?
For the pleasure and possible edification of at least some of the gentle devotees, I am posting two anecdotes, which I remembered after reading the last post on this thread.
HELL
Srila Prabhupada is said to have told that story to illustrate the point that a preacher should give examples according to the level of his audience. In that story, a Christian preacher went to a coal mine and told the miners that unless they surrendered to Jesus they would go to hell. “What is hell?” they asked. “Hell is a dark and damp place” the preacher gravely replied. The miners were not impressed, as they were exposed to such a situation on a daily basis. Seeing this, the preacher continued, “And in hell there is no newspapers.” The miners were horrified at the thought of living without newspapers and resolved to hear from the preacher how to avoid such a terrible fate.
YOU DECIDE
This anecdote has been told several times by H. H. Giriraj Swami. It happened at the Ardha Kumbha Mela in 1971 and involved Yamuna Devi, a former sannyasi, and H. H. Tamal Krishna Goswami. Yamuna Devi and the former sannyasi (let’s say X for short) were arguing as to the position of Lord Balaram. X was saying that the only difference between Krsna and Balaram was their bodily hue: Balaram is white and Krsna is black. Baas. Yamuna Devi was arguing that there was another difference between Them: that Krsna alone is the enjoyer of Srimati Radharani. H. H. Tamal Krishna Goswami overheard the conversation and he was puzzled because both Yamuna and X were making valid points. So he went and reported the argument to Srila Prabhupada. He first recounted that X had said that there is no difference between Krsna and Balaram besides Their bodily hue and Srila Prabhupada said that X was right. So then TKG said, “But Yamuna says that there is another difference. She says that Krsna is the only enjoyer of Srimati Radharani.” Srila Prabhupada replied, “She is right.” “But Srila Prabhupada, they are both saying contradictory things, they can’t BOTH be right!” TKG retorted. “You are right,” Srila Prabhupada replied. Now at his wits end, H. H. Tamal Krishna Goswami asked: “But then, WHO is right?” And Srila Prabhupada replied, “You decide.”
Hare Krsna!
Your servant,
Visakha Priya dasi
Part One:
Some revealing information has surfaced in these comments, and others. One, is the inconsiderate ease by which to brush aside Srila Prabhupada’s instructions contained in his letters, as though they are an apartheid fourth class tier of reference.
It is clear that many letter instructions are specific-but-general instructions which make them more than just irrelevant specific references.
Secondly, we find Uttama Sloka Prabhu saying he agrees with Srila Prabhupada’s words that agree with out previous acaryas. By reading in between the lines of his admission, he is disagreeing with Srila Prabhupada’s often used “We were with Krishna” output in comment 69. Quote:
“we must examine which of SP’s statements are in harmony with the previous acaryas and the Vedic literatures – from whom he said repeatedly he would never deviate.
The statements SP made that no one falls from the spiritual world are in complete harmony with the previous acaryas. Therefore, I am supporting SP 100% and NOT contradicting him. Both things he said cannot be simultaneously true. You cannot say that no one ever falls and then say the everyone in the material universes fell.”
The inference is that Srila Prabhupada is in disagreement with our acaryas when he says that “We were with Krishna.“ This is evidence of selectiveness, and is problematic. It is Plng-Pong prone.
Whenever Uttama Sloka Prabhu quotes Sastra and our previous acaryas on the No-fall issue, they are all correct, and I take such knowledge upon my head. But to say that ONLY these are correct, is again part of the problem, because what Srila Prabhupada says is also correct, even though some of us do not like it.
A faithful follower of Srila Prabhupada will accept the Fall and No-fall stance presented by him. They are not contradictions. We make them contradictions. Sometimes Srila Prabhupada would reconcile two apparently contradictory positions held by either of our previous acaryas, by accepting both positions, and not taking sides – this is considerate Vaisnava behaviour.
Ys Kesava Krsna Dasa.
Part Two:
Otherwise, as Uttama Sloka Prabhu claims, why would Srila Prabhupada purposefully oppose our previous acaryas? Why would he do this to his followers knowing full well that his words and literary output are recorded for posterity? Is he inventing something new? Is he tricking his followers? Is he sugar-coating bitter philosophical medicine? Is he accommodating Christian pre-conditioning?
Since Uttama Sloka Prabhu has claimed such disparity, we are interested to know from him, why and how Srila Prabhupada ‘chose’ to disagree with our previous acaryas please?
Uttama Sloka Produced some FACTS in 52/53. Here are some obvious FACTS that have to be considered.
FACT: We are …jivera svarupa haya nitya Krsna dasa. Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu says we are eternal servants of Krishna. This has to factor-in when origins from Maha-Sankarsana, Sankarsana, Maha-Visnu, and so on are quoted.
FACT: We eternally have minute independence to use or misuse our free will. This free choice remains whether we are here in Devi-dhama or in Goloka.
FACT: Our acaryas variously write that “We turned away from Krishna.”
FACT: We are tastastha.
Certain information can be theoretically known to us, like the 5 primary relationships (Stayi-bhava), but vijnana of those happen at Ashakti-Bhava. Same applies for Raganuga-bhakti. Same again applies for this Tal-fruit problem. Our theory of these matters is not convincing until we develop vijnana.
By accepting Srila Prabhupada’s explanations both ways of the fall / no-fall debate as being faithful to our acaryas, we shall remain on safe ground. Otherwise, Ping-Pong, ping-pong…
Ys Kesava Krsna Dasa.
Uttamasloka, Part 1:
I wrote: “But I accept the answers given by Srila Prabhupada as more valid than your interpretation.” You replied “Once again you (and others) are trying to distort this discussion by implying that I am disagreeing with SP or that I know something he doesn’t. I AM NOT DOING THAT SO PLEASE STOP SAYING THAT!
The problem is we have diametrically opposed opinions on the way to reconcile seeming contradictions found in Srila Prabhupada’s books. There is a prescribed solution. We ask an authority. Srila Prabhupada is not here but he answered these questions as a living guru and we can refer to these answers. It is a well-known fact that Srila Prabhupada explained the correct understanding regarding the philosophy to leading devotees (Temple Presidents and GBC) with the direct intention that they would teach the correct understanding to devotees in general. So his letters, to one who was a Temple President and GBC at the time, contain the conclusion, and this is more valid than either of our opinions on how to resolve the seeming contradictions.
A summary of our different opinions:
I cite several statements from Srila Prabhupada’s books and then I say we should accept the direct meaning when he writes, regain, revive, reinstate, reestablish, etc, our personal loving relationship with Krishna or our, “sac-chid ananda body”. You reply “No it does not mean that. Those who don’t understand this subject repeatedly make these incorrect extrapolations”. Then you cite Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati to prove that accepting the normal dictionary meaning of these words constitutes this, “incorrect extrapolation”
On the other hand you say we must accept the direct meaning regarding other statements. You write “ Srila Prabhpada said numerous times, in full agreement with the previous acaryas and Krsna Himself, that “no one falls from the spiritual world once having gone there”, and there is no way to, “wiggle”, around this. I see it differently.
Uttamasloka, Part 2:
First I beg to point out that I did a veda base search for ““no one falls from the spiritual world once having gone there”, and got 0 hits. I did a search for, “falls from Vaikuntha” and got one hit from Srila Prabhupada’s books.
SB 7/1/35
Translation:
The bodies of the inhabitants of Vaikuëöha are completely spiritual, having nothing to do with the material body, senses or life air. Therefore, kindly explain how associates of the Personality of Godhead were cursed to descend in material bodies like ordinary persons.
Purport (partial):
From authoritative sources it can be discerned that associates of Lord Viñëu who descend from Vaikuëöha do not actually fall. Therefore it is to be understood that when Jaya and Vijaya descended to this material world, they came because there was something to be done for the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Otherwise it is a fact that no one falls from Vaikuëöha.
Previous verse:
Mahäräja Yudhiñöhira inquired: What kind of great curse could affect even liberated viñëu-bhaktas, and what sort of person could curse even the Lord’s associates? For unflinching devotees of the Lord to fall again to this material world is impossible. I cannot believe this.
My position is, the question was not whether anyone ever falls from Vaikuntha. Maharaja Yudhisthira could not believe an associate of the Lord could be FORCED out of Vainkuntha by the CURSE of another jiva soul. Then he asked Narada Muni to explain. Srila Prabhupada explains that, “associates of Lord Viñëu who descend from Vaikuëöha do not actually fall”, they come to do something for Krishna.
I argue that we cannot equate ourselves with Jaya and Vijaya. They had no desire to forget Krishna and as such, IN THIS ONE CONTEXT Srila Prabhupada says no one falls from Vaikuntha.
Uttamasloka, Part 3:
So we have different opinions of what Srila Prabhupada’s ultimate conclusion is. Lets look at how he responds when he is asked about it.
Jagadisa Prabhu asked Srila Prabhupada several questions on this topic. He was Temple President and GBC at the time. Srila Prabhupada was not answering a private letter. He was presenting an answer which would certainly be reiterated to those under Jagadisa’s authority, particularly if there was a controversy about the issue as there is at present.
Proof of Jagadisa Prabhu’s position is from Srila Prabhupad’s letters:( 02/27/70) I am glad to learn that after deliberation between Jayapataka and Raktaka, you have been asked to become the president of Toronto temple. (11/26/70) So far as Canadian expansion is concerned, your suggestion to open centers in Ottawa, Hamilton, Quebec and Winipeg is very nice, so do it practically and Krishna will be pleased by your sincere efforts.(01/16/71) The report from both Hamilton and Vancouver centers is very encouraging.(11/28/70) As you are a member of the governing body.
The letter of (02/27/70) states, THE SOUL MAY FALL DOWN FROM ANY POSITION OR ANY RELATIONSHIP BY MISUSING HIS INDEPENDENCE. But HIS RELATIONSHIP WITH KRISHNA IS NEVER LOST, SIMPLY FORGOTTEN BY THE INFLUENCE OF MAYA SO IT MAY BE REGAINED OR REVIVED by the process of hearing the Holy Name of Krsna and then the devotee engages himself in the service of the Lord which is his original or constitutional position. THE PROCESS IS ONE OF REVIVAL ONLY, NOTHING NEW (capitals added)
(04/25/70) “THIS MINUTE INDEPENDENCE MAY BE UTILIZED RIGHTLY OR WRONGLY AT ANY TIME, SO THERE IS ALWAYS A CHANCE OF FALLING DOWN (capitals added).
(07/ 09/70) THESE SPIRIT SOULS AND ALL SPIRIT SOULS ARE COMING FROM VAIKUNTHA( capitals added).
If Srila Prabhupada had reiterated his, “no one falls from Vaikuntha”, statement I would accept this as more valid than my interpretation of how to resolve the seeming contradictions. In contrast, he reiterated the statements(found in his books) that the ultimate goal is to, revive, regain, reestablish, and be reinstated in, our loving service to Krishna. Therefore I accept this as more valid than any contrary interpretation. The ultimate authority on Srila Prabhupada’s conclusion is Srila Prabhupada himself, not you or I.
We have to realize that being marginal means free will, even in Goloka. Without it how can there be genuine Love? Prabhupada tells us that originally all of us were nitya siddha in Vaikuntha or Goloka Vrndavana and now we have chosen to be nitya baddha in the material creation.
Srila Prabhupada – “The actual constitutional position of every living entity is nitya-siddha” Caitanya Caritamrta Madhya 20.107 New York, July 13, 1976
Srila Prabhupada is very clear. Originally we have a direct personal relationship with Krsna in the spiritual world (As nitya-siddha). But when we want to take Krsna’s position, we put ourselves into a dreaming state (As nitya-baddha) that can only exist in the mahat-tattva, the impersonal Brahmajyoti or the Body of Maha-Vishnu after the dissolution of the mahat tattva if we’re not qualified for Vaikuntha.
Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura – “As long as the jiva takes full shelter of the Supreme Lord he remains a resident of Vaikuntha. But when his innate spiritual knowledge of the Lord is covered by forgetfulness, he is placed outside the transcendental realm.” (Caitanya Siksamrita, Sanmod-ana Bhasya-sloka-1)
Srila Prabhupada – ” So, even in the Vaikuntha, if I desire that ‘Why shall I serve Krishna? Why not become Krishna?’ I immediately fall down. That is natural. A servant is serving the master, but sometimes he may think that, “If I could be come the master.” They are thinking like that; they are trying to become God. That is delusion. You cannot become God. That is not possible. But he’s wrongly thinking”. July 8, 1976 in Washington, D.C
Vipina Purandara – “Why doesn’t Krishna protect us from that desire?
Srila Prabhupada – “He’s protecting. He says, “You rascal, don’t desire. Surrender unto Me.” But you are rascal; you do not do this”.
Vipina Purandara – “Why doesn’t He save me from thinking like that? ”
Srila Prabhupada – “That means you lose your independence”.
Srila Prabhupada – “That is force, in Bengali it is said, ‘If you catch one girl or boy, ‘You love me, you love me, you love me.’ ” Is it love? “You love me, otherwise I will kill you!’ Is that love? So Krishna does not want to become a lover like that, on the point of revolver. ‘You love me, otherwise I shall kill you!’ That is not love; that is threatening. Love is reciprocal, voluntary, good exchange of feeling. Then there is love. Not by force; that is rape. Why one is called lover, another is called rape?” July 8, 1976 in Washington, D.C
“The child, Bimala Prasad, pretending the childish nature, ate up the mangoes without the knowledge of his father”. – Back to Godhead, Volume One, Part IX, March, 1952 Article entitled: Paramahansa Sree Sreemad Bhakti Siddhanta Sarasvati Goswami Maharaj
“Instead of passing our time here, we want to go back to our eternal abode”. – Sri Caitanya’s Teachings, p. 111.
Many devotees in the Madhva-Gaudiya sampradaya are inclined to call our spiritual master “Swami Maharaj” but are loath to call him “Prabhupada”. Sometimes, they say “your Prabhupada” or something like that. Still, these devotees, without exception, all glorify Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakur with the term “Prabhupada”. All of us agree there. What we may not agree upon, however, is whether or not Srila Bhaktisiddhanta actually (and explicitly) preached the doctrine of the fall of jiva from the spiritual world.
Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Prabhupada was the foremost sidereal astrologer in modern (20th Century) times, as well as the foremost scholar of the Vaishnava teachings. He was so scholarly in fact, that some parts of his English writings are practically incomprehensible. His Bengali tract on Surya-siddhanta is likewise a tour-de-force in esoteric astronomical science. He was preaching to a scholastic crowd in much of his writings. These kinds of people, when they study Vedic or Vaishnava teachings, are invariably attached to the Mayavada interpretation of the Vedas. After his father Bhaktivinode put a big dent in the prominent sahajiyaism of that time, mayavada pollution started to seep into the Vaishnava teachings. The modern age was on the ascendant during the era of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta, and sophisticated mayavada (mixed with so-called bhakti) was coming into vogue.
Srila Bhaktisiddhanta needed to blunt and, wherever possible, convert that influence. As such, his prolific writings do not contain an over-abundance of references to the personal fall of the jiva, as this epistemology was interpreted (by the sophisticated set) to be retro, a fallback to the dangerous sentimentality of a religion they both despised and rejected. If the scholarly understanding of Vaishnavism ultimately led to the conclusion that there was not much difference between it and Christianity, they would reject it out of hand. Srila Prabhupada Bhaktisiddhanta had to maintain his connection to Western scholasticism, and, at the same time, not compromise our teachings. It was a daunting task, and, befitting a God-realized acharya, he carried it out perfectly.
So, in our research, we have not found a plethora of references by Bhaktisiddhanta Srila Prabhupada to the personal origination of the jiva. In other words, we didn’t find as many as we did from his illustrious father, Bhaktivinode Thakur. But find some we did, and, although a few of these may be considered cryptic, others are quite direct:
“Jiva is a spiritual atomic part of Krsna. When he forgets his service of Krsna, he is at once deflected by the attracting power of maya in this world, who throws him into the whirlpool . . .” – Brahma-samhita, purport to Text 44.
No service to forget in brahmajyoti. No service to forget in susupti, either.
“It is the jivas who are the attendants in His Sports. They become attached to matter, having deviated from their own essential nature as the result of their desire for enjoyment. But when again the soul . . . gains true wisdom of the transcendental region of God . . . he begins to get back his pure essential nature . . .”?- Sri Caitanya’s Teachings, p. 323.
This quotation contra-indicates the no-fall conclusion to such an extent that we cannot help but wonder how devoted followers of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta could possibly think that he represented their modern viewpoint. It could be argued that Bhaktivinode Thakur was trying to preach to Western religious sentimentality, but the writings of Siddhanta Sarasvati were of a radically different nature. How can any sane person rationalize that Srila Prabhupada Bhaktisiddhanta was simply tailoring his presentation to the Western religious mindset in this quotation?
“This stage is known as regaining the true function after the expiry of his term of imprisonment as an enjoyer”. – Explorations in Vedantic Truth
Regaining? How can you regain something if you never had it in the first place?
Regaining the true function is what the whole process of Krsna consciousness is meant for, and the no-fall philosophy is a huge stumbling block put in the soul’s way.
“We can go back to the higher rasa if we are anxious to be eternal rasikas”. – Sri Caitanya’s Teachings, p. 116.
“We can go back to the higher rasa if we are anxious to be eternal rasikas”. – Sri Caitanya’s Teachings, p. 116.
The state of brahman (floating in the brahmajyoti) or the state of susupti (lying dormant like under anesthesia in the body of Maha Visnu) are never considered states of higher rasa. Something else is being referred to, something else that entails a personal relationship (rasa) with God.
“Liberation is nothing but going back to the original position, that is, offering our services to the Eternal Being”. – Sri Caitanya’s Teachings, p. 116.
All devotees should philosophically return to square one and go back to the original position: the Truth Absolute that the living entity was once in a position of offering services to God in a personal relationship. Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakur preached this, and any other conclusion is belied by these quotes.
Srila Prabhupada was initiated by Srila Bhaktisiddhanta. Srila Prabhupada perfectly represented his spiritual master; they both stood for the same things. They both preached the same Truths. We can plainly see that they were in essential agreement on this important subject. They may have pretended many things in their lives, because preaching will always entail that. Srila Bhaktisiddhanta, while he was known by the childhood name of Bimal Prasad, pretended to steal away bhoga (an unoffered mango), but his transcendental purposes were nevertheless accomplished in that act.
As such, we should never try to predicate the minds of mahabhagavats. The intelligence of the saktyavesh avatar is beyond our comprehension. We should not label direct preaching of the Absolute Truth as subterfuge. It is as dangerous to do so as it is nonsense. Prabhupada said we must know when to laugh and when not to laugh. Similarly, we must know when there may be some kind of transcendental trickery (for the spiritual evolution of all concerned) and when there cannot be, i.e., when there is mukhya-vritti in the form of straight preaching of the Absolute. These empowered incarnations were never ordinary men. We should not think even for a moment that they were bewildered in any way–or engaged in a kind of metaphysical sleight of hand–when they preached the original position of the jiva and his fall from a personal relationship in the Godhead.
“The position of the jiva is a part of the tatastha-sakti that can enjoy, cease to enjoy, and go back to his original positon”.?- Sri Caitanya’s Teachings, p. 101.
“The position of the jiva is a part of the tatastha-sakti that can enjoy, cease to enjoy, and go back to his original positon”.?- Sri Caitanya’s Teachings, p. 101.
The bakery attendant says: “Buy some bread–it’s fresh out of the oven”. So, you could say that the oven is the source of the bread. It’s not false to say so, although it’s not ultimately the case. There were previous stages for the bread; its source was ultimately the field. For many if not most jivas (as referenced previously in the Prabhupada quotation from Australia), their most recent source may well have been the brahmajyoti. All of us may have climbed up there and fallen from there repeatedly. A conditioned soul cannot know. So, someone can say that his or her source is from his or her mother’s womb. That would not be inaccurate. But someone else could say, before even that, his or her source was the brahmajyoti. That could very well be accurate, also. However, before that even, the ultimate source was the Godhead, the personal relationship with Krsna. The tatastha-sakti originally comes from that position, and Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Gosvami Maharaj Prabhupada also expounded upon that revelation.
“Then, being bewildered and covered, he is fallen from advaya-vaikuntha”. – Vivritti commentary on Srimad Bhagavatam, 11.2.48.
Niscala,you write, “Srila Prabhupada described that we are always in Krsna’s lila, even in this material world, “Directly or indirectly, always we are serving Krsna’s lila. ” letter to Madhudvisa, 1972. This indicates that the breadth and scope of his understanding what it means to be “in Krsna’s lila” and in that context it is in no way a misrepresentation of the truth, to say “We were in Krsna’s lila and have forgotten it” If even the material world is Krsna’s lila, for He is always in some part of it”.
Yes in material existence we are still with Krishna because the external energy is Krishna’s. And we are eternal servants of Krishna; we serve either the internal or the external energy. And thus in the Crow and Tal- Fruit letter Srila Prabhupada says there is no time when we were not with Krishna. And of course this is the truth.
The point is we are not always Krishna Conscious; that is the distinction. Being fully Krishna Conscious means to be in Vaikuntha. Srila Prabhupada said we are always WITH Krishna but we WERE previously in full Krishna Consciousness. Below are a few of quotes many others can be supplied upon request.
In Raja Vidya chapter 6 Srila Prabhupada writes, “That is the whole process of Krishna Consciousness- the REVIVAL of our ORIGINAL SAC- CID- ANANDA BODY (capitals added).
From, Nectar of Devotion, Chapter 9, Further Consideration of Devotional Principals: Submission
“When one realizes something of his constitutional relationship with the Supreme Personality of Godhead, he understands his original position and wants to be REINSTATED IN THIS POSITION, EITHER AS A FRIEND, SERVANT, PARENT, OR CONJUGAL LOVER(capitals added).
In a letter to Revatinandana 6/13/1970, Srila Prbhupada said, brahman realization is in the category of, “NON KRISHNA CONSCIOUSNESS” and, “WHEN THE FALL TAKES PLACE IT TAKES PLACE FROM THE NON FALLEN POSITION”. So we have fallen from a state beyond that of brahman realization.
Srila Prabhupada to Jagadisa Prabhu, 02/25/1970 “….YOUR FIRST QUESTION-IF SOMONE HAS A RELATIONSHIP WITH LORD KRISHNA ON KRISHNALOKA, DOES HE EVER FALL DOWN? THE SOULS ARE ENDOWED WITH MINUTE INDEPENDENCE AS PART OF THEIR NATURE AND THIS INDEPENCE CAN BE UTTILIZED RIGHTLY OR WRONGLY AT ANY TIME, SO THER IS ALWAYS THE CAHNCE OF FALLING DOWN BY MISUE OF ONES INDEPENDENCE.
Niscala,
You write,
If it makes you more Krsna conscious, or more desirous of entering Krsna’s pastimes, to feel you are going home to where you belong, rather than a place you have never been before, then you should keep to that understanding. But for other devotees, whose desire for Krsna’s pastimes has awakened to a point that they know they belong there, even if they have never been before, it is quite suitable that they know the siddhantic tattva, presented by the parampara.
As your position is that Srila Prabhupada taught the fall position because most devotees needed to be taught this way And there are also those whose desire for Krishna’s pastimes have awoken to a point that they do not need to believe this. Why would you not just let those who need to believe continue to believe and let those who do not need to believe just be satisfied with their own conviction?
letter to Jagadish dasa, Los Angeles, April 25, 1970
“Regarding your questions about how and from where did the conditioned souls fall, your first question if someone has a relationship with Lord Krsna on Krsnaloka, does he ever fall down? The souls are endowed with minute independence as part of their nature and this minute independence may be utilized rightly or wrongly at any time, so there is always the chance of falling down by misuse of one’s independence. But those who are firmly fixed up in devotional service to Krsna are making proper use of their independence and so they do not fall down.
Regarding your second question, have the conditioned souls ever seen Krsna? Were they with the Lord before being conditioned by the desire to lord it over material nature? Yes, the conditioned souls are parts and parcels of the Lord and thus they were with Krsna before being conditioned. Just as the child must have seen his father because the father places the child in the womb of the mother, similarly each soul has seen Krsna or the Supreme Father. But at that time the conditioned souls are resting in the condition called susupti which is exactly deep sleep without dream, or anesthetized state, therefore they do not remember being with Krsna when they wake up in the material world and become engaged in material affairs. I hope this will satisfy your questions.”
Your ever well-wisher,
A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami
Srila Prabhupada – “There are two kinds of living entities: nitya-siddha, nitya-baddha. Nitya-baddhas are within this material world. Beginning from Brahma down to a small ant, insignificant ant, they are all nitya-baddha. Anyone who is in this material world–nitya-baddha. And nitya-siddhas, they belong to the spiritual world. They never come in contact with this material world, and even they come for some business under the order of the Supreme Lord, they do not touch these material qualities They remain always transcendental. As Krsna remains always transcendental, even though He is in this material world, similarly, Krsna’s nitya-siddha associates, they are also transcendental. They never touch this material world.” Lecture on Bhagavad-Gita 13-14, July 14, 1973
However, the above comment is further expanded when Srila Prabhupada explains that actually originally we are all nitya-siddha devotees
Srila Prabhupada – “Eternally conditioned (nitya-baddha)? We cannot be eternally conditioned (nitya-baddha), because we are part and parcel of Krishna. Our natural position is ever liberated, eternally liberated (nitya-siddha). lecture, Mayapur, June 20, 1973)
So the nitya-siddha and nitya-baddha are NOT separate marginal living entities as some believe, they are in fact different dispositions of the one individual marginal living entity or jiva tattva.
Srila Prabhupada – “By following the rules and regulations and instructions of the spiritual master, he can also become siddha. He can become again nitya-siddha. So the Krsna consciousness movement is to make the nitya-baddhas AGAIN nitya-siddha. Caitanya Caritamrta Madhya 20.107 New York, July 13, 1976
Nitya-siddha and nitya-baddha are two characteristics of each individual marginal living entity or jiva tattva; they are not separate marginal beings as some schools of thought believe. Lord Krishna states that our constitutional nature is that all marginal living beings are eternal nitya siddha servants of the Lord. So to say that ‘conditioned or nitya baddha’ souls have never been ‘unconditioned or nitya siddhas’ in Goloka-Vrndavana is incorrect because originally we were all nitya siddha.
Also Srila Prabhupada says this about never loosing our marginal identity – “The answer to your question about the marginal energy is that the jiva soul is always called marginal energy whether he is in the spiritual world or in the material world’. (Letter to Rayarama, December 2, 1968)
I have seen several statements from the proponents of the no-fall position that Maya has no influence in Goloka Vrindavana. For example Uttamasloka Prabhu cites Bhaktivinoda Thakura, regarding the residents of Vaikuntha, “They have no connection with the material energy. In fact, they do not know if there is a bewildering energy called māyā or not. Because they reside in the spiritual world, māyā is very far away from them and does not affect them at all”.
I do not know anyone who that thinks that Maya can spring up into the Spiritual World and control a devotee in the same way we are controlled in this world as a result of our conditioning. Anyone who does think like that is, of course, wrong.
Yet the fact is, even though there is no connection or influences by Maya, the free will to forget Krishna always exist in the jiva. We do not fall because of Maya we fall because of desire. It is only after entering the material world that Maya, in one sense, has the power to entrap the soul; this is known as conditioning. Every act creates a seed to perform the act again and these seeds go with the subtle body as the soul leaves one gross body and takes another. After billion of billions of births we are so controlled by our habits that free will is almost absent. Maya has no force like that over the pure souls in Vaikuntha. The affect begins after entering into Maya’s kingdom due to misuse of free will.
It is clear that there can be no Maya in the Spiritual World because Maya, by definition, means the illusion of separateness form Krishna. The desire for separateness means we are go out of Vaikuntha, not that Maya has entered into Vaikuntha.
Sita Rama: “Although Srila Prabhupada gave specific instruction in his letters that were not applicable to devotees in general it is also a well-known fact that SP answered philosophical questions from leaders and expected them to teach the correct understanding to devotees in general. Several of the most explicit answers regarding our fall from Vaikuntha were written to Jagadisa Prabhu when he was engaged as Temple president for Toronto. He also opened up four Temples and was a member of the GBC at this time.”
Jagadisa was my first TP and GBC and I was one of his right hand men in Toronto. It was me who recommended that they open the Hamilton temple as I was born there and I helped to open it. Most of the new devotees from Hamilton were my friends, so I know this whole history better than anyone. Later, I was TP of Montreal, Toronto and Chicago, so I am well aware of SP’s letters to his leaders, having been one of them.
SR: “Usually anyone who has developed his relationship with Krsna does not fall down in any circumstance, but because the independence is always there, THE SOUL MAY FALL DOWN FROM ANY POSITION OR ANY RELATIONSHIP BY MISUSING HIS INDEPENDENCE. But HIS REALTIONSHIP WITH KRISHNA IS NEVER LOST, SIMPLY FORGOTTEN BY THE INFLUENCE OF MAYA SO IT MAY BE REGAINED OR REVIVED by the process of hearing the Holy Name of Krsna and then the devotee engages himself in the service of the Lord which is his original or constitutional position. The relationship of the living entity with Krsna is eternal as both Krsna and the living entity are eternal; THE PROCESS IS ONE OF REVIVAL ONLY, NOTHING NEW.”
Once again SP is simply stating the theoretical possibility, which in fact, never happens. The lost relationship SP refers to is the truth of the jiva’s constitutional position as an eternal servant of Krsna, which SP clearly states. He is NOT referring to a previous position in the lila, which is also not explicitly stated. That is your speculation only from your limited perspective and it is not supported by the sastras, the acaryas, nor SP’s other statements which are in full agreement with them.
In Kṛṣṇa Book, Śrīla Prabhupāda also confirms the truth of a new beginning:
The mature devotees, who have completely executed Kṛṣṇa consciousness, are immediately transferred to the universe where Kṛṣṇa is appearing. In that universe the devotees get THEIR FIRST OPPORTUNITY to associate with Kṛṣṇa personally and directly. KB, Chapter 28, 6th paragraph
Sita Rama: “Letter to Jagadisa Prabhu, 4/25/1970. Regarding your questions about how and from where did the conditioned souls fall, your first question if someone has a relationship with Lord Krsna on Krsnaloka, does he ever fall down? The souls are endowed with minute independence as part of their nature and THIS MINUTE INDEPENDECE MAY BE UTILIZED RIIGHTLY OR WRONGLY AT ANY TIME, SO THERE IS ALWAYS A CHANCE OF FALLING DOWN by misuse of one’s independence.”
Another clear theoretical statement by SP. This is not conclusive proof that trillions of jivas all fell from the lila. You are grasping at straws and desperately spinning words to fit your own misunderstanding.
In this SB purport, SP clearly states, “In the spiritual world there is NO DUALITY, NOR THERE IS HATE”. Then he goes on to say that the jivas “develop a consciousness of DUALITY and come to HATE THE SERVICE of the Lord”. Since this consciousness cannot exist in the spiritual world, the conclusion is that it can only happen in the tatastha region inbetween both worlds, as confirmed repeatedly by SP’s guru SBSST and BVT, whose teachings SP is representing.
In the spiritual world there is NO DUALITY, NOR THERE IS HATE. The Supreme Personality of Godhead expands Himself into many. In order to enjoy bliss more and more, the Supreme Lord expands Himself in different categories. As mentioned in the Varaha Purana, He expands Himself in vishnu-tattva (the svamsha expansion) and in His marginal potency (the vibhinnamsha, or the living entity).
These expanded living entities are innumerable, just as the minute molecules of sunshine are innumerable expansions of the sun. The vibhinnamsha expansions, the marginal potencies of the Lord, are the living entities. When the living entities desire to enjoy themselves, they develop a consciousness of DUALITY and come to HATE THE SERVICE of the Lord. In this way the living entities fall into the material world. SB, 4.28.53 purport
You still have not addressed and explained those statements by BVT and SBSST, which are unambiguous and irrefutable evidence of the correct tattva and siddhanta. SP’s statements do not nullify nor replace the facts given by the previous acaryas and we must harmonize SP’s statements with theirs because they are the authorities whom SP is following. Most of SP’s statements are already in direct agreement with theirs, and only these contradictory ones must be harmonized for the proper understanding.
Akruranatha: “Some say we should only accept what Srila Prabhupada has written in his books about this subject, and more or less ignore what he has written in letters. It seems to me that the ‘crow and talk’ fruit letter was directly intended to respond to the questions of devotees generally and was not just a private instruction under some unique circumstances.”
That is not exactly what was said or meant. All of SP’s statements have validity but there is a weighted hierarchy of importance. SP’s books are the ultimate authority, followed by his lectures, conversations and letters. Only when there is an apparent conflict in his letters and conversations should his books be given preference for the correct understanding. SP said not to distribute his letters publicly and not to use them as conclusive evidence in the same way that he wanted us to use his books.
AK: “But even reading Bhagavatam I frequently come across passages lik this:
“When a living entity falls down to the material world from his original position, he becomes ‘cyuta’, which means that he forgets his relationship with Acyuta.” (S.B. 4.21.12, Purport)
We may try to reconcile such statements with other statements that no one falls from the Acyuta world, but we should expect to find the reconciliation directly in the teachings of Srila Prabhupada.
For me it just appears to be one of the many seemingly contradictory, inconceivable aspects of Krishna consciousness, such as “The Supreme lord walks and He does not walk.”. No big deal. There are many such inconceivable things about Krishna. We fall and we don’t fall. Why over complicate it?”
This is not a question of over complicating things. It is a question of establishing the correct tattvas and siddhantas of our Gaudiya Vaisnava philosophy and not presenting philosophy that is patently incorrect, which is not good for the establishing the foundational philosophy of our movement. That is the purpose of trying to understand and reconcile SP’s contradictory statements.
It is not inconceivable either. The unambiguous truth and facts are there in the sastras and acaryas’ teachings and SP’s statements in his books are in complete harmony with them. Those statements have already been given and have been largely ignored by those who cannot reconcile them. They simply ignore them and hold fast to only one side of SP’s statements. That is not the proper use of logic and reason, nor is it the accepted method for clearing up philosophical issues.
Kesava Krsna: “Some revealing information has surfaced in these comments. One, is the inconsiderate ease by which to brush aside Srila Prabhupada’s instructions contained in his letters, as though they are an apartheid fourth class tier of reference. It is clear that many letter instructions are specific-but-general instructions which make them more than just irrelevant specific references.”
When you have to resort to blatant distortion of the facts, it shows how weak your position really is. That is not what was said or meant. All of SP’s statements have validity but there is a weighted hierarchy of importance. SP’s books are the ultimate authority, followed by his lectures, conversations and letters. Only when there is an apparent conflict in his letters and conversations should his books be given preference for the correct understanding. SP said not to distribute his letters publicly and not to use them as conclusive evidence in the same way that he wanted us to use his books. Please try to be more honest.
KK: “Secondly, we find Uttama Sloka Prabhu saying he agrees with Srila Prabhupada’s words that agree with out previous acaryas. By reading in between the lines of his admission, he is disagreeing with Srila Prabhupada’s often used “We were with Krishna” output in comment 69. Quote:
“we must examine which of SP’s statements are in harmony with the previous acaryas and the Vedic literatures – from whom he said repeatedly he would never deviate.
The statements SP made that no one falls from the spiritual world are in complete harmony with the previous acaryas. Therefore, I am supporting SP 100% and NOT contradicting him. Both things he said cannot be simultaneously true. You cannot say that no one ever falls and then say the everyone in the material universes fell.”
The inference is that Srila Prabhupada is in disagreement with our acaryas when he says that “We were with Krishna.“ This is evidence of selectiveness, and is problematic. It is Plng-Pong prone.”
And that is exactly what you and others have been doing all along. Do you not see the blatant hypocrisy in your statement? You are outright rejecting all of the acaryas’ and Krsna’s many infallible statements, as well as those of SP which are in full agreement with them, in favor of your chosen position asserting the fall side of this issue, which has zero support from sastra, the acaryas and Krsna Himself. This is precisely why we’re having this discussion.
KK: “Whenever Uttama Sloka Prabhu quotes Sastra and our previous acaryas on the No-fall issue, they are all correct, and I take such knowledge upon my head. But to say that ONLY these are correct, is again part of the problem, because what Srila Prabhupada says is also correct, even though some of us do not like it.
A faithful follower of Srila Prabhupada will accept the Fall and No-fall stance presented by him. They are not contradictions. We make them contradictions.”
That is completely ridiculous and is an example of a lack of critical thinking. Both positions CANNOT be correct. It is a literal impossibility. None of the acaryas, nor Krsna nor sastra support the fall notion. NONE. And it is not being offensive to take the position that only those statements by SP that are in complete harmony with the acaryas are the correct tattva and siddhanta.
KK: “Sometimes Srila Prabhupada would reconcile two apparently contradictory positions held by either of our previous acaryas, by accepting both positions, and not taking sides – this is considerate Vaisnava behaviour.”
Can you give us several concrete examples please?
KK: “Otherwise, as Uttama Sloka Prabhu claims, why would Srila Prabhupada purposefully oppose our previous acaryas? Why would he do this to his followers knowing full well that his words and literary output are recorded for posterity?…
Since Uttama Sloka Prabhu has claimed such disparity, we are interested to know from him, why and how Srila Prabhupada ‘chose’ to disagree with our previous acaryas please?”
I believe the essence of the answer to that question lies in SP’s purport here, using the example of renunciation:
To broadcast the [path] of Kṛṣṇa consciousness, one has to learn the possibility of
renunciation in terms of country, time and candidate. A candidate for Kṛṣṇa consciousness in the Western countries should be taught about the renunciation of material existence, but one would teach candidates from a country like India in a different way.
The teacher (ācārya) has to consider time, candidate and country. He must avoid the principle of niyamagraha – that is, he should not try to perform the impossible. What is possible in one country may not be possible in another. The ācārya’s duty is to accept the essence of devotional service. There may be a little change here and there as far as yukta-vairāgya is concerned. CC, 2.23.105, Purport
KK: “Uttama Sloka Produced some FACTS in 52/53. Here are some obvious FACTS that have to be considered. FACT: We are …jivera svarupa haya nitya Krsna dasa. Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu says we are eternal servants of Krishna. This has to factor-in when origins from Maha-Sankarsana, Sankarsana, Maha-Visnu, and so on are quoted.”
This does not mean we were with Krsna in His lila. It simply means that our constitutional nature as jivas is to be servants of Krsna, ie: it is our raison d’être.
KK: “FACT: We eternally have minute independence to use or misuse our free will. This free choice remains whether we are here in Devi-dhama or in Goloka.”
SP stated repeatedy that although free will remains, it is never misued once one has entered the spiritual realm. It is only a THEORETICAL possibility – it never happens.
KK: “FACT: Our acaryas variously write that “We turned away from Krishna.”
And ALL of the acaryas say that this “turning away” happened at the tatastha region – NOT in the lila. Several quotes have already been given to prove that conclusively.
KK: “FACT: We are tastastha. Certain information can be theoretically known to us, like the 5 primary relationships (Stayi-bhava), but vijnana of those happen at Ashakti-Bhava.”
One’s sthayi-bhava can only be known when one attains the stage of bhava and after that bhava begins to develop into the first stages of prema. Not before.
KK: “Same applies for Raganuga-bhakti. Same again applies for this Tal-fruit problem.”
I hope you are not saying that raganuga-bhakti cannot begin until asakti, because that is not correct. But I don’t want to side-track this discussion.
KK: “Our theory of these matters is not convincing until we develop vijnana.
By accepting Srila Prabhupada’s explanations both ways of the fall / no-fall debate as being faithful to our acaryas, we shall remain on safe ground. Otherwise, Ping-Pong…”
By saying such things the only thing that is ping-ponging is your understanding. We can absolutely understand these things conclusively here and now by examining the statements of sastra, Krsna and the previous acaryas, which is exactly what I and others are doing. That is the true “safe ground” with a solid foundation. That is precisely how SP taught us to think critically.
A sincere student should not neglect the discussion of such conclusions [about Kṛṣṇa], considering them to be controversial, for such discussion strengthens the mind. Thus, one’s mind becomes attached to Śrī Kṛṣṇa. CC, 1.2.117
Sita Rama: “I wrote: “But I accept the answers given by Srila Prabhupada as more valid than your interpretation.” You replied “Once again you are trying to distort this discussion by implying that I am disagreeing with SP or that I know something he doesn’t. I AM NOT DOING THAT SO PLEASE STOP SAYING THAT! The problem is we have diametrically opposed opinions on the way to reconcile seeming contradictions found in Srila Prabhupada’s books. There is a prescribed solution. We ask an authority.”
SP taught us to consult all of the books of the acayas as well as his, but that is not for neophyte devotees. We find the consensus in all of their books.
SR: “It is a well-known fact that Srila Prabhupada explained the correct understanding regarding the philosophy to leading devotees (Temple Presidents and GBC) with the direct intention that they would teach the correct understanding to devotees in general. So his letters, to one who was a Temple President and GBC at the time, contain the conclusion, and this is more valid than either of our opinions on how to resolve the seeming contradictions.”
That is not a “well-known fact”. SP said repeatedly to use his books as the primary source for understanding this philosophy. I was TP of 3 temples and most TPs did NOT use his letters for that pupose. We all used his books primarily. You were not there – I was.
SR: “I cite several statements from Srila Prabhupada’s books and then I say we should accept the direct meaning when he writes, regain, revive, reinstate, reestablish, etc, our personal loving relationship with Krishna or our, “sac-chid ananda body”. You reply “No it does not mean that. Those who don’t understand this subject repeatedly make these incorrect extrapolations”. Then you cite Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati to prove that accepting the normal dictionary meaning of these words constitutes this, “incorrect extrapolation”
Using a dictionary in this way is a matter of semantics and does not constitute a valid method to establish a philosophical position.
SR: “On the other hand you say we must accept the direct meaning regarding other statements. You write “Srila Prabhpada said numerous times, in full agreement with the previous acaryas and Krsna Himself, that “no one falls from the spiritual world once having gone there”, and there is no way to, “wiggle”, around this. I see it differently.”
Go ahead and disagree with Krsna’s repeated infallible statements. Unfortunately, that won’t get you very far.
SR: “First I beg to point out that I did a veda base search for ““no one falls from the spiritual world once having gone there”, and got 0 hits. I did a search for, “falls from Vaikuntha” and got one hit from Srila Prabhupada’s books.”
Well, your defective searching missed many such statements. Here are some, starting with Bhagavad-gita:
One who knows the transcendental nature of My appearance and activities does not, upon leaving the body, take his birth again in this material world, but attains My eternal abode, O Arjuna. BG, 4.9
From the highest planet in the material world down to the lowest, all are places of misery wherein repeated birth and death take place. But one who attains to My abode, O son of Kuntī, never takes birth again. BG, 8.16
That supreme abode of Mine is not illumined by the sun or moon, nor by fire or electricity. Those who reach it never return to this material world. BG, 15.6
From Srila Prabhupada’s purport:
As long as a living entity is in this dark material world, he is in conditional life, but as soon as he reaches the spiritual sky by cutting through the false, perverted tree of this material world, he becomes liberated. Then there is no chance of his coming back here.
The nitya-siddhas never fall in the realm of the material atmosphere. SB, 3.3.26
A devotee who is in the spiritual abode of the Lord never falls from it. SB, 3.15.48
The conclusion is that no one falls from the spiritual world, or Vaikuntha planet, for it is the eternal abode. SB, 3.16.26
Sometimes it is asked how the living entity falls down from the spiritual world to the material world. Here is the answer. Unless one is elevated to the Vaikuntha planets, directly in touch with the Lord, he is prone to fall down, either from the impersonal Brahman realization or from an ecstatic trance of meditation. SB, 3.25.29
The eternally liberated living entities are in the spiritual world, vaikuntha jagat, and they never fall into the material world. SB, 5.11.12
The eternally liberated souls never come in touch with material energy. CC Madhya 22.14, 15 and CC Madhya 20.269, 270
from Srila Prabhupada’s purport to Srimad Bhagavatam 7.1.35
Therefore it is to be understood that when Jaya and Vijaya descended to this material world, they came because there was something to be done for the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Otherwise it is a fact that no one falls from Vaikuṇṭha. SB, 7.1.35
There are more, but that’s a good start.
SR: “Maharaja Yudhisthira inquired: What kind of great curse could affect even liberated visnu-bhaktas, and what sort of person could curse even the Lord’s associates? For unflinching devotees of the Lord to fall again to this material world is impossible. I cannot believe this. My position is, the question was not whether anyone ever falls from Vaikuntha. Maharaja Yudhisthira could not believe an associate of the Lord could be FORCED out of Vainkuntha by the CURSE of another jiva soul. Then he asked Narada Muni to explain. Srila Prabhupada explains that, “associates of Lord Visnu who descend from Vaikuntha do not actually fall”, they come to do something for Krishna. I argue that we cannot equate ourselves with Jaya and Vijaya. They had no desire to forget Krishna and as such, IN THIS ONE CONTEXT Srila Prabhupada says no one falls from Vaikuntha.”
That is not the correct understanding. You are speculating. King Yudhisthira’s statement applies to any and all persons in the spiritual worlds, not just Jaya and Vijaya. That is very clear from the other verses and purports. Not one mention was made by him or Narada about how all of the jivas in the material world fell from the lila. Why not? Because as Yudhisthira stated, “it is impossible”.
ALL of the residents of the spiritual worlds are unflinching devotees. That has already been established conclusively. You cannot enter that realm unless you are fully pure with prema. Why didn’t Narada say, “Why are you astonished about these two devotees, when trillions of jivas have already fallen from Vaikuntha to populate the material universes?” You are spinning things because your understanding is incomplete.
There is no possibility of maya affecting anyone in the spiritual realms as has been shown, so no one there can be influenced by maya. That can only happen at the tatastha region between the two worlds as explained by BVT and SBSST. Tatastha jivas do not start their existence within the lila. That is a contradiction to the very idea of tatastha-sakti.
There are two classes of beings, the fallible and the infallible. In the material world every living entity is fallible, and in the spiritual world every living entity is called infallible. BG, 15.16
From SP’s purport:
Those who are in oneness with the Supreme Personality of Godhead, however, are called infallible. Oneness does not mean that they have no individuality, but that there is no disunity.
SR: “So we have different opinions of what Srila Prabhupada’s ultimate conclusion is. Lets look at how he responds when he is asked about it. Jagadisa Prabhu asked Srila Prabhupada several questions on this topic. He was Temple President and GBC at the time. Srila Prabhupada was not answering a private letter. He was presenting an answer which would certainly be reiterated to those under Jagadisa’s authority, particularly if there was a controversy about the issue as there is at present.”
I was one of those under Jagadisha’s authority at that time. We were all neophytes and we hadn’t fully studied SP’s books because most of them were not even available then, what to speak of the acaryas’ books. As such, there wasn’t a controversy then. So your understanding is limited and completely speculative as to the disposition of such letters and their intended purposes at that time and under those circumstances.
SR: “If Srila Prabhupada had reiterated his, “no one falls from Vaikuntha”, statement I would accept this as more valid than my interpretation of how to resolve the seeming contradictions. In contrast, he reiterated the statements (found in his books) that the ultimate goal is to, revive, regain, reestablish, and be reinstated in, our loving service to Krishna. Therefore I accept this as more valid than any contrary interpretation. The ultimate authority on Srila Prabhupada’s conclusion is Srila Prabhupada himself, not you or I.”
Well then you have to accept all of SP’s statements – AND Krsna’s statements – that NO ONE FALLS from the spiritual worlds – EVER. I have already provided numerous quotes to substantiate that position. SP would NEVER contradict Krsna.
And you still have not addressed the irrefutable statements of BVT and SBSST about the jiva’s first location being at the tatastha region, which is the only place where the jiva can see both worlds and thus make a choice or be influenced by maya. No one can be influenced like that while in the lila. That has also been proven conclusively.
Sita Rama: “I have seen several statements from the proponents of the no-fall position that Maya has no influence in Goloka Vrindavana. For example Uttamasloka Prabhu cites Bhaktivinoda Thakura, regarding the residents of Vaikuntha, “They have no connection with the material energy. In fact, they do not know if there is a bewildering energy called māyā or not. Because they reside in the spiritual world, māyā is very far away from them and does not affect them at all”.
I do not know anyone who that thinks that Maya can spring up into the Spiritual World and control a devotee in the same way we are controlled in this world as a result of our conditioning. Anyone who does think like that is, of course, wrong. Yet the fact is, even though there is no connection or influences by Maya, the free will to forget Krishna always exist in the jiva.”
And Srila Prabhupada repeatedly states that it never happens. As I quoted earlier, all residents of the spiritual world are infallible according to Krsna in the Gita.
SR: “We do not fall because of Maya we fall because of desire. It is only after entering the material world that Maya, in one sense, has the power to entrap the soul; this is known as conditioning.”
And no one in Vaikuntha has desires that are separate from pleasing Krsna. That has already been established. They are infallible and fully protected by Krsna. What you have stated makes no sense at all and contradicts SP, Krsna and all of the acaryas. Entering the material world means you have been allured by maya and that can only happen at the tatastha region – NOT in the lila.
SR: “Maya has no force like that over the pure souls in Vaikuntha. The affect begins after entering into Maya’s kingdom due to misuse of free will. It is clear that there can be no Maya in the Spiritual World because Maya, by definition, means the illusion of separateness form Krishna. The desire for separateness means we go out of Vaikuntha, not that Maya has entered into Vaikuntha.”
You are speculating again and there is no sastric support for this statement. There can be NO desire for separateness in the spiritual realms. You are contradicting yourself and the established siddhanta. What you said makes no sense. Your understanding of these matters is very limited yet you persist in asserting your faulty understanding as being conclusive.
Uttamasloka,
I made an appeal that, regarding the seeming contradiction, we accept Srila Prabhupada answers to a leading devotee. In comment 100 you reply that you were with this devotee (Jagadisda Prabhu) at the time and you were his right hand man. But you do not explain why you do not accept the purposed method for resolving this debate. Instead you attempt to establish that Srila Prabhupada’s answers to these statements are inconclusive. You claim Srila Prabhupada is stating a, “theoretical possibility that never happens”.
If Srila Prabhupada had answered this question by saying it never happens I would accept it. But he didn’t. He said it is always possible from to fall from any relationship at any time. This is the complete answer given. This means it is a misunderstanding to claim that no one can fall from Vaikuntha, per se.
Utmasloka,
I wrote that, it was a well-known fact that Srila Prabhupada excpected his leading disciples to ask him questions and then teach the answers to devotees in general. In comment 100 you reply, “That is not a “well-known fact”. SP said repeatedly to use his books as the primary source for understanding this philosophy. I was TP of 3 temples and most TPs did NOT use his letters for that pupose. We all used his books primarily. You were not there – I was”.
I can tell you for certain, if I was there; and after reading Srila Prabhupada’s books I had a question regarding seeming contradictions, and I asked Srila Prbahupada directly, I would accept his answer. I would not consider my own opinion regarding how to resolve the seeming contradictions to be more valid than SrilaPrabhupada’s direct answer. And frankly I would not have much faith in a Temple President who felt they had the liberty to answer questions of this nature differently than Srila Prabhupada did!
“All the liberated souls in ancient times acted with this understanding of My transcendental nature. Therefore, you should also perform your duty, following in their footsteps”. – Bhagavad-gita 4.15
“It is not possible to be disconnected, but it is possible to be covered”. – Srimad Bhagavatam commentary to 3.25.13, Bombay, April, 1974
“No one can manufacture a new path of religion, as is the fashion for certain ambitious persons”. – Commentary to Srimad Bhagavatam 1.8.35 From Teachings of QueenKunti, Ch. 18,
Strong evidence has been presented in the preceding section that shows Prabhupada’s depiction of the origination of the jiva is non-different from his predecessor spiritual masters, viz. Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati and Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakur. However, what about spiritual masters further back and what about gurus in other lines? Is personal origination also part of their siddhanta?
Let us consider the pratisthacharya of the Sri sampradaya, Srila Ramanujacharya:
atma-svarupa-matrasya prag eva siddhatve’pi karma-bandha-vinirmuktaparicchinna-jnanadi-svarupasya hy atravirbhava ucyate.
“Here it’s stated that the specific form of the jiva’s constitutional body was known, existing in perfection. Upon the manifestation of that form of unlimited knowledge, the jiva is freed from karmic bondage”. – Vedanta-sara commentary on Vedanta sutra 4.4.2
Especially consider the clause prag eva siddhatve ‘pi. Siddha means the perfection of existence, especially in the context of this condition being known or manifested. Prag means before that time, i.e., before the time that the perfect condition is manifested–or, more precisely and accurately, re-manifested. The spiritual body has spiritual senses. These senses are meant for reciprocation with the Lord of those senses, the Supreme Person.
Their previous existence in perfection could only indicate their previous activity–otherwise, there would be no perfect existence of those transcendental senses in that constitutional body. The other clause adds emphasis to this point: the jiva existed in personal form and personal sensual perfection prior to his (or her) re-manifestation of that perfection at vimukti, complete liberation.
Or, as Lord Caitanya puts it: nitya-siddha krsna-prema. Originally, the soul was (is) perfectly active in a loving, eternal relationship with the Supreme Lord. Sripad Ramanujacharya is in complete agreement with this understanding, as evidenced by his commentary to the above-mentioned verse of Vedanta-sutra.
Most of Prabhupada’s devotees remember that he consulted a thick, greenish book of commentaries on Srimad Bhagavatam while he was compiling his own of the Bhagavat. That book is still available today. For example, the Varanasi library has a copy of it. Basically, the book contains the commentaries of various acharyas in the four sampradayas on each verse of the Bhagavatam. Of course, they didn’t all comment on every one of the verses. The initial commentary is by Sridhar Svami, and this turned out to be a subject of some contention between Lord Caitanya and Vallabha. That pastime is tangental to our current topic, but suffice it to say that these commentaries had value to His Divine Grace Srila Prabhupada, otherwise he would not have consulted them.
One of those commentators is Sri Viraraghavacharya:
Sri Viraraghavacharya:
evam svasya guna-traya-karma-bandhbhvam uktva jivasyapi
samsara-banddha aupadhikatvad anitya ity aha soketi.
“There is no karmic bondage of the three modes for God, and, in the verse beginning with lamentation, the jiva’s bondage to the cycle of birth and death is said to not be eternal (anitya), because it is based on material designations”. – Commentary on Srimad Bhagavatam 11.11.2
Many of our friends in the no-fall camp are considered advanced scholars in Sanskrit, Vaishnava literature, and the study of siddhanta. The Sanskrit in this commentary is neither cryptic, nor obscure, nor complicated. The meaning is self-evident. Viraraghavacharya states that karmic bondage is anitya. Anitya. Not eternal. Temporary, like everything else concocted in this material world–including the no-fall apasiddhanta.
Another commentator to the Bhagavatam is Sri Vijayadhvaja Tirtha:
nija varnam paramatma-gatim ananda-svarupam ca bhajeta
kinca sa jivah punar avyayo’samvrtah avarana-rahito bhavati.
“Upon attaining the goal of the Supreme Soul, He serves in his own personal luster and color and in his own personal form of bliss. At that time, the jiva again attains his imperishable form, completely uncovered and free from impediment”. – Pada-ratnavali commentary to Srimad Bhagavatam 8.24.48
Notice “again attains”. Trying to explain away punah (“again”) to not mean what it so self-evidently means is like the mayavadis trying to say that aham does not mean “I”. We once were active in a personal, loving relationship with God. When we attain liberation in the original form of our lustrous body and color, we shall again be actively engaged in that original relationship. The process of devotional service is really to learn about Krsna: it is to become educated about Him.
The Latin educare means “to bring out”. We need to bring out what has always been there and always will be there. We have to bring out those memories. We have to again (punah) bring out that transcendent devotional experience. This is what it means to remember Krsna. Thus the concept of revelation, indicating that Krsna is again revealed to us.
Realization is important, but, having not even understood the ultimate origination of the jiva–such an essential point of philosophy–how can our friends in the no-fall camp possess any great level of realization or revelation? Hopefully, this will help jar some of those memories a bit.
And, last but certainly not least, what about the great scholar Jiva Gosvami? He is one of the prominent commentators on the Bhagavatam, and you’ll find his purports often in that aforementioned book of commentaries. What does he have to say on this important topic? Here’s his commentary on Srimad Bhagavatam 11.11.3:
vastuto nitya-mukto’pi pratitito ‘nadi-baddha
iti yugapad ubhayatvam ghatata ity arthah.
“Simultaneously, both are transpiring: the jiva is eternally liberated in substantive form and is bound without beginning”.
(Gauragopala prabhu, very nicely further elucidates Jiva Go swami’s seemingly paradoxical concept. Thank you prabhu!)
The Sanskrit anadi-baddha embodies the exact same concept as nitya-baddha; they are absolutely non-different in meaning–and not much different even in the Sanskrit. So Prabhupada has been previously quoted about the concept of nitya-baddha (“Eternally conditioned means we do not know when we have been conditioned like this. It is not possible to trace out the history”.). This is the correct context for understanding Sri Jiva Gosvami’s use of anadi-baddha in the referenced commentary.
We are considered eternally conditioned, because it has been such a long, long time. The history can never be traced out. The history may well be previous to this kalpa’s Brahma. The history of our conditioning is before the material creation:
“And some of them, those who are not fit to live in that spiritual world, they are–I mean to say–sent to this material world”. – Lecture, Buffalo, April 23, 1969.
There’s no need to beg the question. If you’ve not proved something, you can’t use it as evidence for arguing another point (circular logic). We shall never ascertain the conclusion by such a bogus method. Prabhupada tells us what nitya-baddha means, and he goes on to inform us that we have all fallen from a personal relationship with God in the spiritual world. Srila Bhaktisiddhanta and Bhaktivinoda Thakur concur with his conclusion. So does Ramanuja, Viraraghava, and Vijayadhvaja-tirtha. And so does Sri Jiva Gosvami.
All the liberated souls acted with this understanding in the past. Ambitious persons should stop trying to manufacture a new philosophy in the name of Vaishnava siddhanta as it applies to the origination of the soul. The standard philosophy is necessary for the practice of the standard service, and the means and the end are the same: re-establishing a loving personal relationship with Lord Sri Krsna.
“The Supreme Personality of Godhead is known as bhava-grahi janardana, because He takes only the essence of the devotee’s attitude. . . Thus, even though, externally, a devotee may not render full service, if he is internally sincere and serious, the Lord welcomes his service nonetheless. Thus the Lord is known as bhava-grahi janardana, because He takes the essence of one’s devotional mentality”. – Srimad Bhagavatam 8.23.2,purport
“By this attitude of service, God will reveal Himself . . . you have to create a situation–you have to put yourself in a situation–in which God will be revealed”. – Perfect Questions, Perfect Answers, The Real Goal of Life, pp. 25-26.
“You see, corruption is part of us, all of us, the very heart of us”. – Gorky Park, 1983.
What is the essence of the devotee’s attitude if he or she accepts no-fall? Down deep, at that very essence, how is it possible to uproot hatred for God? How can there not be hatred for God, when one believes that he or she is not personally responsible for having come to this place of terror, grief, and temporariness Evil-is-supreme will continue to haunt all those afflicted by such a covert form of impersonalism.
If we did not make the original offense that sent us here from the spiritual sky, then how can we ultimately accept responsibility for having become stationed here? We are in an obvious state of corruption. That corruption is due to our original betrayal of the Lord in the spiritual world, our initial aparadha. As Prabhupada said, “All hatred starts at the top”. Indeed, that original betrayal is intrinsically linked to our current state of corruption, to the point that they are, for all practical purposes, an inseparable quality. And a most evil quality it is, a quality that we must, in the words of Friedrich Nietzsche, “shake off with one shrug (that) vermin that would have buried itself deep in others”.
In the material world, we must get free from intrigue, treachery, and betrayal during the probationary period in order to regain our relationship with God. The cause will always remain in the effect, and the effect will always demonstrate the cause.
We have repeated what Prabhupada has said from his tapes, his letters, and, yes, from his books. We have repeated what his direct predecessor gurus have said on this topic, as we have read it in their writings, from their books. We have repeated from acharyas even previous to them, as per their written commentaries in the Book Bhagavat. What more can we do then this? This is the process: to hear and then to repeat:
BOB:But presently you do not receive information directly from Krishna. It comes through the disciplic succession from the books.
PRABHUPADA: There is no difference. – Perfect Questions, Perfect Answers, p 28.??
The siddhanta has been established, and no-fall is not that siddhanta. There can only be a bizarre form of service emanating from a devotee caught in the throes of no-fall. The Supreme Lord knows well the essence of all of our service attitudes. Our philosophical conceptions (and misconceptions) reflect that hidden service attitude–or, conversely, other (usually impersonal) attitudes. The most disastrous effect of the no-fall apasiddhanta is its intoxicating and insidious power to keep the original offense–the tendency toward exploitation and corruption–energized by not recognizing its very source of existence. It’s hard to uproot an aparadha you don’t even believe in.
We cannot possibly get free from this dreadful land
as long as we allow this impersonalism to stand.
“As soon as we try to become Lord, immediately we are covered by Maya. Formerly, we were with Krsna in His lila or sport, but this covering of Maya may be of very, very, very, very long duration. . .
. . . Unless one develops full devotional service to Krsna, he goes up only to brahma-sayujya but falls down. After millions and millions of years of keeping oneself away from the lila of the Lord, when one comes to Krsna consciousness, this period becomes insignificant, just like dreaming. Because he falls down from brahma-sayujya, he thinks that may be his origin, but he does not remember that before that even he was with Krsna”. – Australian conversation transcribed in BBT Report. Nectar of the Month, January 1982.
Srila Prabhupada knows how many fall down to the material world from the Vaikuntha Planets, fall down is due to free will and choice and NOT Maya, in this way there is NO material cause for our fall down, we simply have independence and the ability to choose. Without a doubt, ALL marginal living entities or jiva tattvas originate from Vaikuntha as Srila Prabhupada explains
The following Conversation took place in Los Angeles, June 23, 1975 between Srila Prabhupada and Dr. John Mize
Dr. John Mize – “Did all the souls that were in the spiritual sky fall out of the spiritual sky at once or at different times, or are there any souls that are always good, they’re not foolish, they don’t fall down?”
Srila Prabhupada – “No, there are… Majority, 90%, they are always good. They never fall down”.
Dr. John Mize – “So we’re among the 10%.
Srila Prabhupada – “Yes. Or less than that. In the material, whole material world all the living entities they are… Just like in the prison house, there are some population, but they are not majority. The majority of the population, they are outside the prison house. Similarly, majority of living being, part and parcel of God, they are in the spiritual world. Only a few fall down”.
Dr. John Mize – “Does Krishna know ahead of time that a soul is going to be foolish and fall?”
Srila Prabhupada – “Krishna? Yes, Krishna may know because He is omniscient”.
Dr. John Mize – “Are more souls falling all the time?”
Srila Prabhupada – “Not all the time. But there is the tendency of fall down, not for all, but because there is independence… Everyone does not like to misuse their independence. The same example: Just like a government constructing a city and constructs also prison house because the government knows that somebody will be criminal. So their shelter must be also constructed. It is very easy to understand. Not that cent percent population will be criminal, but government knows that some of them will be. Otherwise why they construct prison house also? One may say, “Where is the criminal? You are constructing…” Government knows, there will be criminal. So if the ordinary government can know, why God cannot know? Because there is tendency”
“Existence in the impersonal brahma is also within the category of non-Krsna consciousness. Those who are in the brahman effulgence, they are also in the fallen condition. So there is no question of falling down from a fallen condition”. – Letter, June 13, 1970.
The purport is self-evident. . .
“We are all originally situated on the platform of Krsna consciousness in our eternal personal relationship of love of Krsna”. – Letter, November 17, 1970.
. . . and even more self-evident here, so let’s run with a string of these easily understood statements:
“(H)e has fallen means he has given up the service of Krsna”. – Lecture in Tokyo, April 20, 1972.
“(L)ittle independence, we can misuse that. Krsna-bahirmukha hana bhoga vancha kare: that misuse is the cause of our falldown”. – Room conversation in Mayapur, February 19, 1976.
“After all, the living entity falls down from the spiritual world. Just like Jaya-Vijaya. There is possibility . . .even if you are in Vaikuntha, you will fall down, what to speak of this material world”. – Bhagavad-gita lecture of July 4, 1974
“Because by independence, you can become foolish. Otherwise, there is no meaning of independence”. – Room conversation in Los Angeles, June 23, 1975
DISCIPLE: When we are in the spiritual sky and serving Krsna, we have a perfect relationship with Krsna. What causes us to fall down in the material world, because we’re already serving Krsna”?
PRABHUPADA: Because you desire to fall down. – Bhagavad-gita lecture in Melbourne, June 25, 1974.
In the final part of the treatise, we’ll examine why the no-fall philosophy is resorted to for a false sense of psychological security. The two following references will be relevant to that examination. These quotations all concern the eternal truth that, a conditioned soul–once having cast off his or her conditioning and regained entrance into the spiritual world–can once again fall back down into the material world.
DISCIPLE: . . . so, if the conditions in the spiritual world are so nice and everything is spiritual, how is it that one can become envious of Krsna in such conditions?
PRABHUPADA: That is independence. . . you have got little independence, proportionately, because you are a part and parcel.
DISCIPLE: But in the Gita it says: ‘Once coming there, he never returns’.
PRABHUPADA: But if he likes, he can return. – Room conversation, Mayapur, February 19, 1976.
DISCIPLE: When the souls that were never conditioned at all . . . do they also have the independence?
PRABHUPADA: Yes, but they have not misused.
DISCIPLE: Could they ever misuse it?
PRABHUPADA: Yes, they can misuse it, also. That power is there.
DISCIPLE: Well, I believe you once said that once a conditioned soul becomes perfected and gets out of the material world and goes to Krsnaloka, there’s no possibility of falling back.
PRABHUPADA: No, there is possibility. – Conversation after a lecture on Caitanya-caritamrita, San Francisco, February 18, 1967.
Although there are many points to be gleaned from these two discussions, there’s only need to consider one of those at this time. If Prabhupada says that a living entity can go back to the spiritual world and fall again to the material world, then, logically, a living entity can fall from the spiritual world. He doesn’t–but he can. There may be rare instances even where he does. How can the conditioned soul know? Only God can know whether or not any conditioned soul has ever exercised the option. Since it is possible, then fall from the spiritual world is substantiated.
Let’s consider this logically. Theoretically, let’s accept the living entity falls from the brahmajyoti “originally”. It’s not so, but for argument’s sake, let’s accept it. O.K. Now, he gets liberation back to the spiritual sky in the spiritual planets. Then he misuses his free will and falls from there. How could you differentiate him from the other conditioned souls who “originally” fell from the brahmajyoti, i.e., who have never entered Vaikuntha?
Here are some more quotations from His Divine Grace(direct from his books no less):
“O friend, do you remember the unknown friend, the soul? Leaving Me, searching for a posiiton, he went away, absorbed in worldly enjoyment.” – Srimad Bhagavatam 4.28.53.
“When the living entity falls down into the material world, the Supreme Lord, through His svamsa expansion, keeps company with the living entity. In this way, the living entity may some day return home, back to Godhead.” – Purport to this Bhagavatam verse.
“This conditional life is due to his forgetfulness of his relationship with the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Therefore, without the Lord’s mercy, how can he again engage in the transcendental loving service to the Lord”? – Purport to Srimad Bhagavatam 3.31.15.
“Therefore, if we practice devotional service . . . we will be reinstated in our original, constitutional position and thus be saved.” – Purport to Srimad Bhagavatam 10.2.39
“Therefore, the rasas were originally exchanged between the spiritual living being and the spiritual whole, the Personality of Godhead.” – Purport to Srimad Bhagavatam, 1.1.3.
“When the pure soul wants to give up the Lord’s service to enjoy the material world, Krsna certainly gives him a chance to enter the material world”. – Introduction to Srimad Bhagavatam (5.14)
There’s no service in the brahmajyoti. That’s one of the reasons the brahmajyoti exists: so part and parcels who develop maximum aversion to devotional service have somewhere to go and exist.
“He should be restored to his pure identity, in which he engages his senses in the service of the proprietor of the senses.” – Purport to Srimad Bhagavatam, 4.24.61.
“Therefore, the whole process of God consciousness is meant to rectify the conditional activities of the senses and to re-engage them in the direct service of the Lord”. -Purport to Srimad Bhagavatam, 2.9.39.
Re-engage? How can you be re-engaged in “direct service” of the Lord if you’ve originally come from the brahmajyoti or some other place that does not facilitate direct, personal engagement in devotional service?
“If we revive our original intimate relationship with Krsna, our distressed condition in the material world will be mitigated”. – Purport to Caitanya-caritamrita, Madhya-lila, 20.130
Everything I’ve read about the brahmajyoti contra-indicates that there’s anything intimately related to Krsna there. You just get void-comped of personality and sent there into an eternal position of floating existence without feeling.
“As stated in the Srimad Bhagavatam, liberation means reinstatement in one’s original position. The original position is one of rendering service to the Lord”. -Purport to Srimad Bhagavatam, 3.27.1
Or, as Prabhupada so famously said: “We are all originally Krsna conscious entities”. But where did he also say that he was speaking like this in order to placate our Christian conditioning? Our protagonists sometimes dismiss all of the above-listed references with one fell swoop, rationalizing that Prabhupada preached in this way in order not to alienate his Western devotees. After all, the overwhelming majority of them come from a karmic background seeped in Judeo-Christian conceptions. As exemplified in Milton’s Paradise Lost, that tradition teaches that we all fell from some kind of personal contact with God. It’s a hazy conception, but it definitely has that element to it. So the no-fall theorists have a convenient escape clause from having to explain away all of these crystal clear quotes from Prabhupada: just did it to keep all the (former) Christians engaged. Nice strategy. But where is this self-serving and very convenient rationalization verified? Are all of our protagonists on this topic great mind readers? In other words, do they have ready access to the motives of the mahabhagavat? Although for many of them, they were never his disciples, do they know Srila Prabhupada better than we do?
We need some mukhya-vritti here, gentlemen: we need some direct evidence. If you’ve got a quote where Prabhupada supposedly said this, by all means bring it into the light of day. It would be a devastator, but bring it out if you’ve got it. If you don’t have it, then we say that your tactic of preaching like this is most disingenuous.
In conclusion, Jaya and Vijaya’s falldown was not like ours. Yes, they made some offense to the Kumaras, but that was arranged by the Lord. For this reason, It could be said that they “accidentally” fell down from Vaikuntha. Establishing the no-fall philosophy by quoting Prabhupada where he says “otherwise it is a fact that no one falls from Vaikuntha” is tantamount to pouring clarified ghee on ashes. You are not just relishing your relationship with God in the spiritual sky and then, accidentally, you step into some worm-hole and get sucked back into the material world. The falldowns don’t happen like that. We didn’t fall down like that. And “it is a fact that no one falls from Vaikuntha” like that. We choose to leave our relationship of service to Krsna; that’s why we come down here. We do not come down here because the Lord wishes it directly; we come down here because we wish it.
Nrsinghadeva dasa: “Srila Bhaktisiddhanta needed to blunt and, wherever possible, convert that influence. As such, his prolific writings do not contain an over-abundance of references to the personal fall of the jiva, as this epistemology was interpreted (by the sophisticated set) to be retro, a fallback to the dangerous sentimentality of a religion they both despised and rejected. If the scholarly understanding of Vaishnavism ultimately led to the conclusion that there was not much difference between it and Christianity, they would reject it out of hand. Srila Prabhupada Bhaktisiddhanta had to maintain his connection to Western scholasticism, and, at the same time, not compromise our teachings.”
What support do you have for these speculative statements? How do you know for a fact that SBSST took this approach specifically in regard to the jiva’s entry into nitya-baddha status?
ND: “So, in our research, we have not found a plethora of references by Bhaktisiddhanta Srila Prabhupada to the personal origination of the jiva.”
Let me help you out with that. Here is one very conclusive and unambiguous reference from an essay by SBSST:
Jivas are of two kinds – (1) Nitya-Mukta (eternally free), (2) Nitya-Baddha (eternally enslaved). Free jivas are NEVER enslaved. They are serving the Supreme God in five different functions in His eternal blissful abode, where there is no change, no destruction, no misery. Jiva, once entered there never comes back here.
The inconceivably narrowest line of demarcation between land and water or the line where land and water meet is called ‘tata’; so also the meeting line of the cit world or the eternal abode of the Supreme Lord and the acit world or the tata region of Maya is called tata. The power of the Supreme Lord displayed at the tata is known as the tatastha (lying at the tata) or marginal power.
All the jivas being the display of this power, have the inherent oscillating tendency and capability of going to the cit or the acit world. Tata not being a resting place, jivas must go this side or that; those preferring the acit, fell into the clutches of the octopus Maya, when these mortal costumes of mind and body were put on him as a punishment.
There is no mention of these jivas being in the lila, because they were NEVER in the lila. This choice took place at that tata region. Note the phrase, “Free jivas are NEVER enslaved.” This clearly means no one falls from the lila.
ND: “…we didn’t find as many as we did from his illustrious father, Bhaktivinode Thakur. But find some we did, and, although a few of these may be considered cryptic, others are quite direct”
“Jiva is a spiritual atomic part of Krsna. When he forgets his service of Krsna, he is at once deflected by the attracting power of maya in this world, who throws him into the whirlpool . . .” – Brahma-samhita, purport to Text 44. No service to forget in brahmajyoti. No service to forget in susupti, either.”
This does not prove we fell from the lila. Not even close. Here is a non-cryptic reference from BVT’s JD. Take special note of the sentence beginning, “The jīva‘s FIRST LOCATION…”
Yādava dāsa: Why have we fallen into this illusory relationship?
Ananta dāsa: Bhagavān is the complete spiritual entity (purṇa-cidvastu), and the jīvas are particles of spirit (cit-kaṇa). The jīva‘s first location is on the boundary line between the material and spiritual worlds. The jīvas who do not forget their relationship with Kṛṣṇa are empowered with cit-śakti, and are drawn from that position into the spiritual realm, where they become His eternal associates and begin to relish the bliss of His service.
Those jīvas who turn away from Kṛṣṇa desire to enjoy māyā, and māyā attracts them towards her by her potency. From that moment, our material state of existence comes into being and our true spiritual identity disappears. We therefore think, “I am the enjoyer of māyā”. This false egoism covers us with many varieties of false identities. JD, chapter 7
This is the correct and clear understanding of BVT’s purport from BS you quoted. You and others are continually making the neophyte-level mistake of trying to use semantics to prove your point instead of the direct evidence from the acaryas, Krsna and sastra which I have continually provided. Anyone with a modicum of intelligence can see that you are ignoring direct evidence and keep trying to word juggle your way to proving your mistaken understanding of SP’s final position on this matter. So far, you have all failed in that attempt.
All such statements by SP and the acaryas about “forgetting” or “turning away”, etc did NOT take place in the lila because such behaviors and mentalities cannot exist in that realm, and I have given direct evidence to support that. It can only happen at the tata region as clearly stated by both BVT and SBSST.
ND: “It is the jivas who are the attendants in His Sports. They become attached to matter, having deviated from their own essential nature as the result of their desire for enjoyment. But when again the soul . . . gains true wisdom of the transcendental region of God . . . he begins to get back his pure essential nature . . .”?- Sri Caitanya’s Teachings, p. 323.
This quotation contra-indicates the no-fall conclusion to such an extent that we cannot help but wonder how devoted followers of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta could possibly think that he represented their modern viewpoint.”
I cannot help but wonder how you and other fall proponents consistently ignore direct statements from Krsna Himself, the acaryas and SP which unequivocally state that no one can fall from the spiritual worlds. I have also given proof that maya cannot enter the spiritual realm, so if you are implying that the first statement indicates jivas in the lila becoming attached to matter and deviating therein, you are wrong. It cannot happen.
ND: “It could be argued that Bhaktivinode Thakur was trying to preach to Western religious sentimentality, but the writings of Siddhanta Sarasvati were of a radically different nature. How can any sane person rationalize that Srila Prabhupada Bhaktisiddhanta was simply tailoring his presentation to the Western religious mindset in this quotation?”
No one in this discussion has made any such claims or rationalizations about SBSST. This is a straw-man argument, which further reveals your weak position. Please stick to giving proper evidence instead of not-so-veiled insults to imaginary opponents.
ND: “This stage is known as regaining the true function after the expiry of his term of imprisonment as an enjoyer”. – Explorations in Vedantic Truth
Regaining? How can you regain something if you never had it in the first place?
Regaining the true function is what the whole process of Krsna consciousness is meant for, and the no-fall philosophy is a huge stumbling block put in the soul’s way.”
This is seriously flawed logic and more semantic spinning, based on an incomplete understanding of core tattvas. All jivas are constitutionally servants of Krsna. It is a foundational aspect of their eternal svarupa, which is covered when they become nitya-baddhas. That constitutional nature as Krsna’s servant is what is being regained, re-established, restored, remembered, reawakened, revived, etc, by the process of bhakti. It’s as simple as that.
ND: ““We can go back to the higher rasa if we are anxious to be eternal rasikas”.
The state of brahman (floating in the brahmajyoti) or the state of susupti (lying dormant like under anesthesia in the body of Maha Visnu) are never considered states of higher rasa. Something else is being referred to, something else that entails a personal relationship (rasa) with God.”
No one is talking about floating in brahman or susupti, so please stop with the straw-man arguments. They are a waste of our time and they simply reveal the weakness and flaws in your presentation.
ND: “Liberation is nothing but going back to the original position, that is, offering our services to the Eternal Being”.
All devotees should philosophically return to square one and go back to the original position: the Truth Absolute that the living entity was once in a position of offering services to God in a personal relationship. Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakur preached this, and any other conclusion is belied by these quotes.”
It’s quite incredulous that you can make such lofty claims based on such a weak and flawed presentation of evidence that clearly does not support your position. SBSST did NOT preach that conclusion. That is your mistaken misconception and you have not proven otherwise.
This statement also refers to our original constitutional nature as servants of Krsna. There is no mention of the lila. You and others imagine that this is implied in this and other similar statements, but strangely enough, the acaryas never actually say that directly. I wonder why they didn’t? You have to speculatively spin things to make them fit your misconceptions.
ND: “Srila Prabhupada was initiated by Srila Bhaktisiddhanta. Srila Prabhupada perfectly represented his spiritual master; they both stood for the same things. They both preached the same Truths. We can plainly see that they were in essential agreement on this important subject.”
You have not even remotely proven that. However, we can accept and conclude that SP agrees with SBSST’s (and BVT’s) statement I posted above about the jivas at the tata region. That would put all 3 of them in full agreement, since SP would never contradict SBSST nor BVT and their statements are crystal clear. And neither SBSST nor BVT ever said directly and explicitly that all of the jivas in the unlimited material universes fell from the lila. Quite the contrary as I have show with the incontrovertible evidence I have provided in previous posts.
Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakur explains clearly:
“Bābājī: …Innumerable jīvas appear from Śrī Baladeva Prabhu to serve Vṛndāvana-vihari Śrī Kṛṣṇa as His eternal associates in Goloka Vṛndāvana, and others appear from Śrī Sankarsana to serve the Lord of Vaikuṇṭha, Śrī Nārāyana, in the spiritual sky.
Eternally relishing rasa, engaged in the service of their worshipable Lord, they always remain fixed in their constitutional position. They always strive to please Bhagavān, and are always attentive to Him. Having attained the strength of cit-śakti, they are always strong.
They have no connection with the material energy. In fact, they do not know if there is a bewildering energy called māyā or not. Because they reside in the spiritual world, māyā is very far away from them and does not affect them at all.
Always absorbed in the bliss of serving their worshipable Lord, they are eternally liberated and are free from material happiness and distress. Their life is love alone, and they are not even conscious of misery, death or fear.”
“There are also innumerable, atomic, conscious jīvas who emanate as rays in Karanodakasayi Mahā-Viṣṇu’s glance upon His māyā-śakti. Because these jīvas are situated next to māyā, they perceive her wonderful workings.
Although they have all the qualities of the jīvas that I have already described, because of their minute and marginal nature, they sometimes look to the spiritual world, and sometimes to the material world. In this marginal condition, the jīva is very weak because at that time he has not attained spiritual strength from the mercy of the object of his worship (sevā-vastu).
Among these unlimited jīvas, those who want to enjoy māyā become engrossed in mundane sense gratification and enter the state of nitya-baddha. On the other hand, the jīvas who perform cid-anuśilanam of Bhagavān receive spiritual śakti (cid-bala) by His mercy, and enter the spiritual world. (Jaiva Dharma, Chapter 16, Page 377-378)
This third category concerns us. So, yes, we were with Krishna, as Krishna is our Father, in His lila as Karanodakasayi Vishnu, as Krishna declares:
“Aham bija prada pita”, I am the seed-giving father of all living entities. (B.g. 14.4)
But, we made the choice, as tatastha-sakti, while we were in the tatastha region, to go for Maya. So, despite our constitutional nature as nitya das, i.e. eternal servants, which implies eternally liberated in essence, we became conditioned, which is a paradox…!
ND: “As such, we should never try to predicate the minds of mahabhagavats. The intelligence of the saktyavesh avatar is beyond our comprehension. We should not label direct preaching of the Absolute Truth as subterfuge. It is as dangerous to do so as it is nonsense.”
Where are you coming up with these nonsense ideas? Who said “subterfuge” in any posts? I have fully supported SP’s position which is in complete agreement with the parampara. More time-wasting straw-man arguments on your part.
ND: “These empowered incarnations were never ordinary men. We should not think even for a moment that they were bewildered in any way–or engaged in a kind of metaphysical sleight of hand–when they preached the original position of the jiva and his fall from a personal relationship in the Godhead.”
More straw-man nonsense. No one here has said that any acaryas were “bewildered” nor any other such ridiculous things. If you have to continually resort to these offensive and distracting tactics, I suggest that you stay out of this discussion.
And none of the acaryas have preached the fall from the lila. You have completely failed to prove that. Not even close.
ND: ““The position of the jiva is a part of the tatastha-sakti that can enjoy, cease to enjoy, and go back to his original positon”.
…For many if not most jivas their most recent source may well have been the brahmajyoti. All of us may have climbed up there and fallen from there repeatedly. A conditioned soul cannot know. That would not be inaccurate. But someone else could say, before even that, his or her source was the brahmajyoti. That could very well be accurate, also. However, before that even, the ultimate source was the Godhead, the personal relationship with Krsna. The tatastha-sakti originally comes from that position, and Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Gosvami Maharaj Prabhupada also expounded upon that revelation.”
I have not taken the position that the jivas originated from the brahmajyoti. You still haven’t given direct explicit evidence that we were with Krsna in His lila before entering materinal existence, nor have you proven that this was SBSST’s position. SBSST clearly stated that the jivas originate from the tatastha-sakti which is inbetween the two worlds and from that marginal position they make their first and eternal choice to go to one or the other worlds. This is the conclusive truth SBSST and BVT and SP have given us.
All this is confirmed by Srila Prabhupada in his letter to Jagadish dasa, Los Angeles, April 25, 1970
“Regarding your questions about how and from where did the conditioned souls fall, your first question if someone has a relationship with Lord Krsna on Krsnaloka, does he ever fall down?
The souls are endowed with minute independence as part of their nature and this minute independence may be utilized rightly or wrongly at any time, so there is always the chance of falling down by misuse of one’s independence. BUT THOSE WHO ARE FIRMLY FIXED UP IN DEVOTIONAL SERVICE TO KRISHNA ARE MAKING PROPER USE OF THEIR INDEPENDENCE AND SO THEY DO NOT FALL DOWN.
Regarding your second question, have the conditioned souls ever seen Krsna? Were they with the Lord before being conditioned by the desire to lord it over material nature?
Yes, the conditioned souls are parts and parcels of the Lord and thus they were with Krsna before being conditioned. JUST AS THE CHILD MUST HAVE SEEN HIS FATHER BECAUSE THE FATHER PLACES THE CHILD IN THE WOMB OF THE MOTHER, SIMILARLY EACH SOUL HAS SEEN KRISHNA AS THE SUPREME FATHER.
BUT AT THAT TIME, THE CONDITIONED SOULS ARE RESTING IN THE CONDITION CALLED SUSUPTI WHICH IS EXACTLY LIKE DEEP SLEEP WITHOUT DREAM, OR ANAESTHETISED STATE, THEREFORE THEY DO NOT REMEMBER BEING WITH KRISHNA WHEN THEY WAKE UP IN THE MATERIAL WORLD and become engaged in material affairs.
I hope this will satisfy your questions.”
So, we were with Krishna, in the form of our seed-giving Father, in His lila as Karanodakasayi Vishnu, and we do not emanate from the Brahmajyoti. We just happened to be injected by Maha-Vishnu’s glance into that tatastha region, where we could exercise our free will.
Moreover, “THOSE WHO ARE FIRMLY FIXED UP IN DEVOTIONAL SERVICE TO KRISHNA ARE MAKING PROPER USE OF THEIR INDEPENDENCE AND SO THEY DO NOT FALL DOWN.”
Indeed,
“The third-class person in Krsna consciousness may fall down, but when one is in the second class he does not fall down, and for the first-class person in Krsna consciousness there is no chance of falling down.”
(Bg. 9.3, purport)
Thus, it is for you to think, to which category you constitutionally belong to…!
Fortunately,
“The pure devotee has no actual chance to fall down, because the Supreme Godhead personally takes care of His pure devotees.” (Bg. 9.34, purport)
So, the spiritual world is perfect and so are its residents, who are all pure devotees.
Sita Rama: “I made an appeal that, regarding the seeming contradiction, we accept Srila Prabhupada answers to a leading devotee. In comment 100 you reply that you were with this devotee (Jagadisda) at the time and you were his right hand man. But you do not explain why you do not accept the purposed method for resolving this debate.”
Your proposed method for resolution of this issue is unacceptable to me and many others because it is not the correct method according to our parampara system. SP’s private letters do not supersede the previous acaryas, nor the conclusions presented in SP’s books.
I have shown with a preponderance of evidence that SP was in full agreement with Krsna, sastra and the acaryas that no one falls from the spiritual realms. You still have not refuted that evidence, nor dealt with most of it directly. You are desparately clinging to some private letters that were never widely distributed at that time for that purpose.
SR: “Instead you attempt to establish that Srila Prabhupada’s answers to these statements are inconclusive.”
I never said SP was inconclusive. What is inconclusive is your flawed understanding of the full scope of his teachings, as well as some basic tenets of Gaudiya philosophy. SP fully agrees with Krsna and the acaryas that no one falls from the spiritual worlds. You are rigidly stuck on one side of what he presented and you refuse to acknowledge that he said the very opposite and fully agreed with Krsna’s infallible statements.
SR: “You claim Srila Prabhupada is stating a “theoretical possibility that never happens.” If Srila Prabhupada had answered this question by saying it never happens I would accept it. But he didn’t.
Yes he did say that. Re-read those statements again. And after making those theoretical statements, he also never said anything remotely like, “…and that’s how unlimited jivas fell into material existence.”
SR: “He said it is always possible from to fall from any relationship at any time. This is the complete answer given. This means it is a misunderstanding to claim that no one can fall from Vaikuntha, per se.”
Unbelievable! Did you not read Krsna’s direct words from Bhagavad-gita that I posted? Are you asserting that SP is contradicting Krsna? It may be possible but it never happens. That is Krsna’s infallible guarantee and statement of the absolute truth on this matter. Time for you to deal with that. Please carefully read my post #107 and try to spin those statements if you can.
SR: “I wrote that, it was a well-known fact that Srila Prabhupada excpected his leading disciples to ask him questions and then teach the answers to devotees in general. In comment 100 you reply, “That is not a “well-known fact”. SP said repeatedly to use his books as the primary source for understanding this philosophy. I was TP of 3 temples and most TPs did NOT use his letters for that pupose. We all used his books primarily. You were not there – I was”.
I can tell you for certain, if I was there; and after reading Srila Prabhupada’s books I had a question regarding seeming contradictions, and I asked Srila Prabhupada directly, I would accept his answer. I would not consider my own opinion regarding how to resolve the seeming contradictions to be more valid than Srila Prabhupada’s direct answer. “
Please focus on the philosophical issues and stop foolishly trying to turn this into me being offensive to my spiritual master. That is ridiculous and insulting. By resorting to distorted and offensive insinuations all you are revealing is your own immature and weak position.
Your statements show how out of touch you are with the reality back then in the early 70s. Hardly anyone had read SP’s books because many of them had not been published or even written. Only the first few cantos of SB, BG, but no CC until later. Even still, most temples did not focus on extra studies or additional classes either. So most of the devotees were not actually well-read. They knew only the basics of the philosophy. In retrospect, even many of the so-called leaders were still neophytes. No one had read or knew much about the books of the acaryas either. At that time, I also thought we fell from the lila. Everyone did. There was no controversy back then.
SR: “And frankly I would not have much faith in a Temple President who felt they had the liberty to answer questions of this nature differently than Srila Prabhupada did!”
I haven’t done that. As TP, I instituted 4 classes each day and when SP asked me personally, “So, you are distributing the books but are you reading them too?” I answered, “Yes, Srila Prabhupada, we have 4 classes every day.” He broke into a huge smile full of gratitude, amazement and satisfaction. I’ll never forget that look. He said, “Thank you very much!” You can imagine how that made me feel. The temples I managed had more classes than any others that I’m aware of. And I instituted a library in Chicago which benefited the devotees greatly.
Prabhupada: It is a very important question. Pariksit Maharaja inquired… Many people inquired that “How the living entity was with Krsna, he became fallen in this material World?” Is not done? This question is raised? So this question is answered here, that “How the living entity who was with Krsna became fallen down in contact with this material qualities?” So this is the answer. Read the translation.
Srimad-Bhagavatam 2.9.1 — Tokyo, April 20, 1972
This inquiry seems to be a very important question according to Srila Prabhupada, and the answer to this very important question seems to be hidden in verse 2.9.1 of the Srimad-Bhagavatam. This lecture is one of my favorit by Srila Prabhupada.
It is interesting that Srila Prabhupada also says the following about this verse:
Srila Prabhupada: If you chant this mantra, that vibration will cleanse the atmosphere. And wherever you go, in any part of the World, if you chant this mantra, oh, you’ll be received like God. It is so nice.
Srimad-Bhagavatam 2.9.1 — Tokyo, April 20, 1972
I urge those who have not read this lecture to enrich themselves with this nectar.
“Śrīla Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura has written that the living entity has been executing fruitive activities since time immemorial. Thus his conditioned life may be called beginningless.
Such conditioned life, however, is not endless, since the living entity may achieve liberation through the loving devotional service of the Lord. Since the living entity may acquire liberation, Śrīla Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura states that his liberated life begins at a certain point but is endless, because liberated life is understood to be eternal.
In any case, one who has achieved the shelter of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Kṛṣṇa, may be understood to be eternally liberated, since such a person has entered into the eternal atmosphere of the spiritual sky.
Since there is no material time in the spiritual sky, one who has achieved his eternal spiritual body on Lord Kṛṣṇa’s planet is not subject to the influence of time. His eternal blissful life with Kṛṣṇa is not designated in terms of material past, present and future and is therefore called eternal liberation. Material time is conspicuous by its absence in the spiritual sky, and every living entity there is eternally liberated, having attained the supreme situation.
Such liberation can be achieved by vidyā, or perfect knowledge, which is understood in three phases called Brahman, Paramātmā and Bhagavān, as described in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. The ultimate phase of vidyā, or knowledge, is to understand the Supreme Personality of Godhead. In Bhagavad-gītā such knowledge is called rāja-vidyā, or the king of all knowledge, and it awards the supreme liberation.”
(ISKCON Vedabase – Purport to S.B. 11.11.4)
yad yad iṣṭatamaṁ loke
yac cāti-priyam ātmanaḥ
tat tan nivedayen mahyaṁ
tad ānantyāya kalpate
Whatever is most desired by one within this material world, and whatever is most dear to oneself — one should offer that very thing to Me. Such an offering qualifies one for eternal life. (S.B.11.11.41)
ND: “Siddha means the perfection of existence, especially in the context of this condition being known or manifested. Prag means before that time, i.e., before the time that the perfect condition is manifested–or, more precisely and accurately, re-manifested. The spiritual body has spiritual senses. These senses are meant for reciprocation with the Lord of those senses, the Supreme Person.
Their previous existence in perfection could only indicate their previous activity–otherwise, there would be no perfect existence of those transcendental senses in that constitutional body. The other clause adds emphasis to this point: the jiva existed in personal form and personal sensual perfection prior to his (or her) re-manifestation of that perfection at vimukti, complete liberation.”
When you constantly have to resort to semantic word jugglery to try to find hidden, implied or referential meanings it becomes more and more clear that you are looking for a phantom that does not exist. The support for your position should be direct, obvious and unambiguous, exactly like when Krsna says repeatedly that absolutely NO ONE FALLS from the spiritual realms, and when SBSST and BVT both describe the jivas at the tata region making their first choice. But you and others have nothing like that from sastra nor the acaryas. Nothing.
Other than the few letters from SP and some conversations, there are no sastric statements that are direct and unambiguous which support the fall from the lila, and there is a preponderance of such direct support for the no-fall position as I have presented repeatedly. Those on your side have repeatedly demonstrated a lack of solid direct supporting references, very weak logic and constant semantic word jugglery to support your position.
ND: “Or, as Lord Caitanya puts it: nitya-siddha krsna-prema. Originally, the soul was (is) perfectly active in a loving, eternal relationship with the Supreme Lord.”
You’ve got to be joking. You can’t possibly be serious about ascribing this distorted interpretation to that verse. There is nothing in that verse which implies the meaning you have given. Please try to be more honest in your presentation. You already have very little credibility with the weak arguments you’ve given so far, so why compound that by being blatantly dishonest?
ND: ““There is no karmic bondage of the three modes for God, and, in the verse beginning with lamentation, the jiva’s bondage to the cycle of birth and death is said to not be eternal, because it is based on material designations”. SB, 11.11.2
Many of our friends in the no-fall camp are considered advanced scholars in Sanskrit, Vaishnava literature, and the study of siddhanta. The Sanskrit in this commentary is neither cryptic, nor obscure, nor complicated. The meaning is self-evident. Viraraghavacharya states that karmic bondage is anitya. Anitya. Not eternal. Temporary, like everything else concocted in this material world–including the no-fall apasiddhanta.”
You regularly speak with a flippant attitude towards me and others who have presented strong and conclusive evidence to support the correct siddhanta. Are you so brave that you would speak with that tone about Krsna’s repeated direct statements that no one falls?
In his commentary on this verse from SB, VCT, does not agree even remotely with your distorted and incorrect misinterpretation of the facts given in this verse. Here are some excerpts which reveal the correct understanding:
… Bondage and liberation of my śakti, the jīva, which are apparent only, is caused by my avidyā-śakti, which produces the imposition of the body, and liberation is produced by my vidyā-śakti which removes the imposition of the body. This is brought about under the influence of my śakti which functions for the pastime of creation and destruction of the universe. That is explained in this verse. Though the jīva is my part or aṁśa, it should be understood to be different from me
…The jīva-śakti or taṭastha-śakti is one, but from its many expansions appear many jīvas. Similarly, the one external energy called māyā-śakti has two aspects avidyā and vidyā, which affect many jīvas by expansion into many functions. Just as all the expansions of māyā are simply called māyā, so all the expansions of the jīva-śakti are called jīva. The many expansions of the jīva-śakti and māyā-śakti should be understood to be eternal.
The jīva is eternal, but by vidyā the jīva becomes liberated. It is said that when avidyā is destroyed the jīva attains liberation. But “destruction” simply means that avidyā ceases its influence on a particular jīva (since avidyā is eternal). Liberation or nirvāṇa means the jīva merges in Brahman.
ND: Your posts #116 and 117 are more examples of inconclusive word jugglery and no direct support, yet you still make unfounded, insulting and arrogant statements like this, “Realization is important, but, having not even understood the ultimate origination of the jiva–such an essential point of philosophy–how can our friends in the no-fall camp possess any great level of realization or revelation? Hopefully, this will help jar some of those memories a bit.”
Ironically, goddess Sarasvati has used your own words to reveal your own faulty position. She did that here as well when you stated, “There’s no need to beg the question. If you’ve not proved something, you can’t use it as evidence for arguing another point (circular logic). We shall never ascertain the conclusion by such a bogus method.”
ND: “Ambitious persons should stop trying to manufacture a new philosophy in the name of Vaishnava siddhanta as it applies to the origination of the soul. The standard philosophy is necessary for the practice of the standard service, and the means and the end are the same: re-establishing a loving personal relationship with Lord Sri Krsna.”
If you had actually demonstrated a reasonable understanding of sastra and the acaryas’ teachings I would take your words with some obligatory respect, but unfortunately, your condescending arrogance, juxtaposed with your lack of evidence and extremely weak logic skills lead me to take the position of not wasting any more valuable time responding to your posts, all of which suffer from the same deficiencies.
Devotees will understand these things according to what their adhikara allows them to perceive, but those with reasonable intelligence will be able to examine the evidence objectively and come to the right conclusions.
ND: “If we did not make the original offense that sent us here from the spiritual sky, then how can we ultimately accept responsibility for having become stationed here? We are in an obvious state of corruption. That corruption is due to our original betrayal of the Lord in the spiritual world, our initial aparadha. As Prabhupada said, “All hatred starts at the top”.
In this SB purport, SP clearly states, “In the spiritual world there is NO DUALITY, NOR THERE IS HATE”. Then he goes on to say that the jivas “develop a consciousness of DUALITY and come to HATE THE SERVICE of the Lord”. Since this consciousness cannot exist in the spiritual world, the obvious conclusion is that it can only happen in the tatastha region inbetween both worlds, as confirmed repeatedly by SP’s guru SBSST and BVT, whose teachings SP is representing.
In the spiritual world there is NO DUALITY, NOR THERE IS HATE. The Supreme Personality of Godhead expands Himself into many. In order to enjoy bliss more and more, the Supreme Lord expands Himself in different categories. As mentioned in the Varaha Purana, He expands Himself in vishnu-tattva (the svamsha expansion) and in His marginal potency (the vibhinnamsha, or the living entity).
These expanded living entities are innumerable, just as the minute molecules of sunshine are innumerable expansions of the sun. The vibhinnamsha expansions, the marginal potencies of the Lord, are the living entities. When the living entities desire to enjoy themselves, they develop a consciousness of DUALITY and come to HATE THE SERVICE of the Lord. In this way the living entities fall into the material world. SB, 4.28.53 purport
Caitanya-caritamrita 20 Texts 108-109
jīvera ‘svarūpa’ haya—kṛṣṇera ‘nitya-dāsa’
kṛṣṇera ‘taṭasthā-śakti’ ‘bhedābheda-prakāśa’
sūryāṁśa-kiraṇa, yaiche agni-jvālā-caya
svābhāvika kṛṣṇera tina-prakāra ‘śakti’ haya
“It is the living entity’s constitutional position to be an eternal servant of Kṛṣṇa because he is the marginal energy of Kṛṣṇa and a manifestation simultaneously one with and different from the Lord, like a molecular particle of sunshine or fire. Kṛṣṇa has three varieties of energy.
PURPORT BY SRILA PRABHUPADA
“Śrīla Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura explains these verses as follows: Śrī Sanātana Gosvāmī asked Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, “Who am I?” In answer, the Lord replied, “You are a pure living entity. You are neither the gross material body nor the subtle body composed of mind and intelligence. Actually you are a spirit soul, eternally part and parcel of the Supreme Soul, Kṛṣṇa. Therefore you are His eternal servant. You belong to Kṛṣṇa’s marginal potency. There are two worlds—the spiritual world and the material world—and you are situated between the material and spiritual potencies. You have a relationship with both the material and the spiritual world; therefore you are called the marginal potency. You are related with Kṛṣṇa as one and simultaneously different. Because you are spirit soul, you are one in quality with the Supreme Personality of Godhead, but because you are a very minute particle of spirit soul, you are different from the Supreme Soul. Therefore your position is simultaneously one with and different from the Supreme Soul. The examples given are those of the sun itself and the small particles of sunshine and of a blazing fire and the small particles of fire.” Another explanation of these verses can be found in Adi-līlā, Chapter Two, verse 96.”
We obviously find our origin in Krishna – “Aham bija prada pita”, I am the seed-giving father of all living entities” – and the Tatastha region is only the place where we started, as tatastha-shakti, by the merciful glance of Karanodakasayi Vishnu – Maha Vishnu, where we had to make a choice in between the material world and the spiritual world.
So, our responsibility is obviously engaged, as we made the choice to come to this material world, while we had the opportunity to go straight to the spiritual world, where one never comes back from, unless one has a particular mission to fulfil in the service of the Supreme Lord and His eternal associates.
Many sceptics and those who foolishly believe we originate from the Impersonal Brahmajyoti, a ‘clear sheet of consciousness’ or the Vraja River or the Body of Maha Vishnu ask- “Please where have you heard this idea that we originally came from Goloka? Who is teaching you this? ”
ANSWER-
Srila Prabhupada teaches us we were once with Krishna – “These spirit souls and all spirit souls are coming from Vaikuntha, but in these material worlds they are taking various grades of bodies according to their material activities”. (letter to Jagadisa das, 1970)
Srila Prabhupada – “So because we are living entities, we are not as powerful as Krsna, therefore we may fall down from Vaikuntha at any moment. Iccha-dvesa samutthena sarge yanti parantapa. (Lecture Washington DC Temple 1976)
Srila Prabhupada – “Whatever it may be, the falldown is there. So because we are living entities, we are not as powerful as Krsna, THEREFORE WE MAY FALL DOWN FROM VAIKUNTHA AT ANY MOMENT iccha-dvesa samutthena sarge yanti parantapa”. (Letter to Madhudvisa Swami and Australian devotees 1972)
Srila Prabhupada – “We cannot say therefore that we are not with Krsna. As soon as we try to become Lord, immediately we are covered by Maya. FORMERLY WE WERE WITH KRSNA IN HIS LILA OR SPORT. But this covering of Maya may be of very, very, very, very, very, very, very long duration; therefore many creations are coming and going. Due to this long period of time it is sometimes said that we are ever-conditioned (nitya-baddha). (Letter to Madhudvisa Swami and Australian devotees 1972)
Srila Prabhupada was very clear that WE HAVE ALL come from Goloka Vrndavana some millions of years ago – Srila Prabhupada – “So to go to God or Krishna means you will have to acquire your original, spiritual body. The spiritual body is already there, but we are now covered by this material body”. His Divine Grace A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada Homburg, Germany, June 22, 1974
This seems to be pretty clear according to Srila Prabhupada, who rejects the ‘impersonal Brahmajyoti origin that claims that the marginal living entity is originally in a dormant state from where one can use their free will to choose either Vaikuntha or the mahat-tattva. Many follow that misunderstanding, they have incorrectly used the word ‘tatastha’ to describe this dormant origin state of the jiva however, long, long before being in that already fallen position he was with Krishna in Vaikuntha.
Crow and Tal Fruit explanation by Ravindra Svarupa dasa
Srila Prabhupada gives a more elaborate description of the nature of the jiva’s bondage in the paper entitled “Crow-and-Tal-Fruit Logic.” (16) He sent this paper to the GBC representative in Australia in June of 1972 to settle a controversy that had arisen there over this issue. (17) “Crow-and-Tal-Fruit Logic” presents Prabhupada’s most thorough statement of the solution, and the paper was circulated throughout ISKCON. I saw it in Philadelphia that year and studied it carefully. Upon it I have based my reflections in the Back to Godhead article on eternity and time.
Prabhupada begins his paper by asserting our eternal and permanent relation with Krsna. “We never had any occasion when we were separated from Krsna,” he says, and then he uses Srimad-Bhagavatam’s analogy of a dream to explain how the illusion of separation arises. He also takes care to explain how it is possible for even a liberated soul to become illusioned:
Our separation from Krsna is like that. We dream this body and so many relationships with other things. First the attachment comes to enjoy sense gratification. Even [when we are] with Krsna the desire for sense gratification is there. There is a dormant attitude for forgetting Krsna and creating an atmosphere for enjoying independently.
He then continues his exposition:
We cannot say, therefore, that we are not with Krsna. As soon as we try to become the Lord, immediately we are covered by maya. Formerly we were with Krsna in His lila, or sport. But this covering of maya may be of very, very, very, very long duration; therefore [in the interim] many creations are coming and going. Due to this long period of time it is sometimes said that we are ever-conditioned. But this long duration of time becomes very insignificant when one actually comes to Krsna consciousness.
It is like in a dream: We are thinking it is a very long time, but as soon as we awaken we look at our watch and see it has been a moment only. To give another example: Krsna’s friends were kept asleep for one year by Brahma, but when they woke up and Krsna returned before them, they considered that only a moment had passed.
So this dreaming condition is called non-liberated life, and this is just like a dream. Although in material calculation it is a long, long period, as soon as we come to Krsna consciousness this period is considered a second.
Here Srila Prabhupada explains how this condition of illusion is “very insignificant.” Not only is it insubstantial like a dream, but it is also momentary. Although within the dream unlimited years seem to pass, in reality the dream lasts virtually no time at all a “moment” or a “second.”
Then Srila Prabhupada offers another example of how a seeming long duration of time can last only an instant. He recalls the story of how the cowherd boys napped under the spell of Brahma for only one truti (or 8/13,500 of a second) of Brahma’s time while an entire year passed in human time.
Srila Prabhupada invokes the relativistic temporal structure of creation to explain how the illusion of the jiva is insignificant, and I followed him in my article. I attempted only to elaborate Srila Prabhupada’s explanation in a more systematic and explicit manner. In the example of the cowherd boys, one truti of Brahma’s time is contrasted to one year of human time.
If we consider the case of the sleeping jivas rather than the sleeping cowherd boys, how much greater would be the contrast between real time (in the spiritual world) and dream-time (in the material world)? Obviously, the “moment” in real time would become vanishingly small infinitesimally small while in “dream-time” it would become infinitely great anadi, without a traceable beginning.
In short, Srila Prabhupada uses the example of dreaming to say that the soul never really leaves Vaikuntha. And he alludes to the contrast between eternity and time to show that the soul’s period of illusion is objectively instantaneous, that it lasts virtually no time at all. In short, Srila Prabhupada uses the example of dreaming to say that the soul never really leaves Vaikuntha. And he alludes to the contrast between eternity and time to show that the soul’s period of illusion is objectively instantaneous, that it lasts virtually no time at all. This is how I derived my explanation from Srila Prabhupada. I focused my article on the relation between time and eternity because that seems the source of much of the difficulty in thinking about the jiva issue – Ravindra Svarupa Dasa is ISKCON’s Governing Body Commissioner for the U.S. mid-Atlantic region.
In the Fourth Canto of Srimad-Bhagavatam, Narada Muni narrates the allegorical story of King Puranjana. In the part that concerns us, Puranjana has just died and his widow, Vaidarbhi, is lamenting piteously. A brahmana approaches the queen and introduces himself as her “eternal friend.” The brahmana, who symbolizes the Supersoul, says to the grieving queen:
My dear friend, even though you cannot immediately recognize Me, can’t you remember that in the past you had a very intimate friend? Unfortunately, you gave up My company and accepted a position as enjoyer of this material world. My dear gentle friend, both you and I are exactly like two swans. We live together in the same heart, which is just like the Manasa lake. Although we have been living together for many thousands of years, we are still far away from our original home.
Commenting on these verses, Srila Prabhupada explains that the passage “gave up My company and accepted a position as enjoyer of this material world” refers to the soul’s fall from the spiritual into the material world. To explain “how the living entity falls down into this material world,” Srila Prabhupada quotes Bhagavad-gita 7.27: “All living entities are born into delusion, overcome by the dualities of desire and hate.”
“In the spiritual world there is no duality, nor is there hate,” Prabhupada says. But “when the living entities desire to enjoy themselves, they develop a consciousness of duality and come to hate the service of the Lord. In this way the living entities fall into the material world.” He elaborates further: “The natural position of the living entity is to serve the Lord in a transcendental loving attitude. When the living entity wants to become Krsna Himself or imitate Krsna, he falls down into the material world.”
In Narada’s allegory, the brahmana speaks of himself and the queen as two swans symbolically the Supersoul and the soul who have wandered together far away from their “original home.” What place is that? Prabhupada explains:
The original home of the living entity and the Supreme Personality of Godhead is the spiritual world. In the spiritual world both the Lord and the living entities live together very peacefully. Since the living entity remains engaged in the service of the Lord, they both share a blissful life in the spiritual world. However, when the living entity wants to enjoy himself, he falls down into the material world.
It is clear that Narada Muni teaches here in Srimad-Bhagavatam that the conditioned souls dwelt originally in the spiritual world, their homeland, where they enjoyed a relation of active service with Krsna. However, these souls willfully gave up Krsna’s company in order to become enjoyers.
Srila Prabhupada explains that they wanted to imitate Krsna rather than serve Him. As Prabhupada states it elsewhere in his Bhagavatam commentary: “The first sinful will of the living entity is to become the Lord, and the consequent will of the Lord is that the living entity forget his factual life and thus dream of the land of utopia where he may become one like the Lord.”
In addition, Srimad-Bhagavatam repeatedly speaks of liberation in Krsna consciousness as a restoration, a return, a reawakening, a recovery, a remembering. Narada Muni uses such language himself a little further on in his allegory of the soul and Supersoul:
In this way both swans live together in the heart. When the one swan is instructed by the other, he is situated in his constitutional position. This means he regains his original Krsna consciousness, which was lost because of his material attraction.
In this verse “regains his original Krsna consciousness” is a translation of nastam apa punah smrtim. Krsna consciousness is literally a lost (nastam) memory (smrtim) which is gained (apa) once again (punah). In Srimad-Bhagavatam this terminology of forgetting and once again remembering is invoked over and over.
Remembering, regaining, returning, recovering all these terms presuppose a past state that had once been ours, had then become lost, and will be ours once more. Srimad-Bhagavatam teaches it, and so, of course, does Srila Prabhupada. Srila Prabhupada as Authority
What I have given is sufficient to establish the authority of the account of the jiva’s fall, and I will leave it at that. I may disappoint readers who will want proof-texting from authorities who stand between Narada Muni and Srila Prabhupada in the disciplic succession. I am confident, however, that Srila Prabhupada is a bona fide spiritual master.
As such, he is a “transparent medium” who represents (literally, presents over again) the entire tradition coming from Krsna. To those readers who claim not to have found in those authorities confirmation of the teaching spelled out here, I can only suggest that you go back and look again.
Srila Prabhupada undoubtedly understands those authorities better than you or I. Go back, and this time use Srila Prabhupada as your guide.
Srila Prabhupada is uniquely qualified to understand spiritual teaching. Such understanding is hardly a matter of academic scholarship. The Svetasvatara Upanisad, in its concluding verse (6.23), tells who among its readers will have revealed to them the purport of what they’ve read: only a great soul, a mahatma, who possesses pure devotion (para bhakti) to the Lord and, in equal measure, to his spiritual master.
Srila Prabhupada himself exhibited extraordinary devotion to the Lord and to his guru. Only because of that devotion was he empowered to achieve unprecedented success in preaching Krsna consciousness throughout the world. I take the greatness of his success as a measure of his greatness of soul, and therefore I accept him as empowered by Krsna also with the ability to penetrate deeply into the meaning of spiritual teaching. It is therefore my policy to follow him in his understanding.
This is what I tried to do in my Back to Godhead article. It is not that Srila Prabhupada was silent on the “jiva issue.” His disciples brought it up a number of times, and there are lectures, letters, and conversations in which he addressed it head on. Never once do we find him so much as hinting that Narada Muni’s account of the origin of bondage is a myth or fiction. Rather, he defends that account vigorously and teaches his disciples how to reconcile it with the statements that there is no fall from Vaikuntha, the spiritual world.
Explanation above is by Ravindra Svarupa dasa
The conclusion
By stating things like we cannot fall from Krsna’s presence, you obliterate (destroy) free will. What is the meaning of free will if it cannot be misused? In this way we CAN fall down from Vaikuntha however, most ‘choose’ not to
Dear Puskaraksa Prabhu,
Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada.
Your last comment on this thread (#144) makes me think that my #12 comment on “Bona-fide Study Rests the Case–We fell from Love” would have been better placed here as an example of how the jiva situated at the line of demarcation makes his choice. It is not that the jiva is a helpless victim. He knows what is right and what is wrong because Paramatma is with him at all times to offer His merciful guidance, but somehow the jiva chooses to discard the good advice and to exercize his free will in another way–as narrated in my experience in front of Sri Sri Radha-Syamasundara last month.
Thank you very much. Hare Krsna.
Your servant,
Visakha Priya dasi
Part One:
I admire the position taken by Uttama Sloka Prabhu in being demanding of Sastric evidence to prove the Fall-theory, though with strident means, not for the popularity of others.
I am still concerned that either side of this debate do not consider wider reasons why Srila Prabhupada would say we fell and not fall. By rigidly sticking to either side or either side is quoting Prabhupada or Sastra without even considering why he did so, we might be closing ourselves from something that happens all the time throughout our Gaudiya history. If we only see one side, which means taking sides, we could run into a blockage. For instance Srila Bhaktisiddhanta wrote:
“Those, whose judgment is made of mundane stuff, being unable to enter into the spirit of the all-loving controversies among pure devotees, due to their own want of unalloyed devotion, are apt to impute to the devotees their own defects of partisanship and opposing views.” (Brahma-samhita 5.37 purport, p.72, BBT edition)
And again in the:
(Sri Gaudiya Bhasya of Sri Caitanya Bhagavata, June 5,1932) There he says: “While inquiring into the Absolute Truth, we cannot remain steady in one conclusion after hearing various apparently opposing statements of many acaryas. Considering the weakness of the audiences, the instructing acarya often does not have the opportunity to disclose many subjects.”
Whether this means – as some might imply – that Srila Prabhupada did not fully explain his Fall-reasoning with Sastra because of a lack of opportunity, would defy his saying that “everything is in my books.”
Ys Kesava Krsna Dasa.
Part Two;
At the same time, Srila Prabhupada would point out various differences between acaryas’ statements on certain subjects, but would not outright take sides. He would speak of the merits of each case, like we see below:
“According to Sripada Sridhara Svami, the original commentator on the Bhagavatam, there is not always a devastation after the change of every Manu. And yet this inundation after the period of Caksusa Manu took place in order to show some wonders to Satyavrata. But Sri Jiva Gosvami has given definite proofs from authoritative scriptures (like Visnu-dharmottara, Markandeya Purana, Harivamsa, etc.) that there is always a devastation after the end of each and every Manu. Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti has also supported Srila Jiva Gosvami, and he (Sri Cakravarti) has also quoted from Bhagavatamrta about this inundation after each Manu. Apart from this, the Lord, in order to show special favour to Satyavrata, a devotee of the Lord, in this particular period, incarnated Himself.” (SB 1.3.15 purport)
We a;so observe that His Divine Grace was not opposed to there being differing viewpoints because as our acaryas are individuals with various opinions, and so are we who might want to espouse what we feel is correct:
“As for your question about Santa Rasa and the opinions of Rupa Goswami and Sridhara Swami, I don’t remember. You can send me the appropriate passages. There is no reason why Acaryas cannot differ on certain points.” (Letter to Upendra / 19 February 1972)
“Wherever there are individuals there is bound to be difference of opinion.” (Letter to Rupanuga / 14 February 1973)
“So far as your question about controversy amongst the disciples of Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Goswami Maharaja, that is a fact. But this controversy is not material. Just like in a national program, different political parties are sometimes in conflict and make propaganda against each other, but their central point is always service to the country. Similarly, amongst the disciples of Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati there may be some controversy, but the central point is how to preach the mission of His Divine Grace. If the central point is fixed up then there is no harm in such controversy. Every individual being must have his opinion; that is the significance of individuality, but all such differences of opinions must coincide in Krishna.” (Letter to Mandali Bhadra / 28 July 1969)
Ys Kesava Krsna Dasa.
Part Three:
This discussion we generate heated feelings. The fact remains, considering the above quotes, we still have to say that Srila Prabhupada was right on both the Fall / no-fall phenomena. For example, when Srila Jiva Goswami espoused Svarakiya as opposed to parakiya, was he wrong for doing this? No. The Sastric orthodoxy will disagree.
In the same way, why should Srila Prabhupada be wrong to say “we were originally with Krishna in His lila” if this message is intended for a particular time, place and circumstance, Uttama Sloka Prabhu? Because you contend that both the fall / no-fall versions can never be right.
If Srila Jiva Goswami was right to do what he did, then why not Srila Prabhupada as well? By saying that both sides can never be right, and since you follow the no-fall versions, then the other side must be wrong. Was Srila Prabhupada wrong to say we fell, Uttama Sloka Prabhu? We have not seen this word “Wrong” used thus far, but that is the implication.
Once again, seeing the futility of arguing back and forth and reaching no consensus, it should rest with Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu who indicated that, in spite of our theory of where we come from, be it tastastha or other places, we still need to realise such facts with solid vijnana. This is not speculation.
Ys Kesava Krsna Dasa.
“KKD: The fact remains, considering the above quotes, we still have to say that Srila Prabhupada was right on both the Fall / no-fall phenomena.”
It’s not a question of whether Srila Prabhupada was right or wrong. You are distorting the discussion. That’s not the core issue. And you haven’t proven with even a shred of sastric evidence that devotees can fall from the spiritual world, nor have you proven that the evidence from sastra, Krsna and the acaryas which I have given is not correct, so you are in no position to declare a decisive verdict on this matter.
“KKD: For example, when Srila Jiva Goswami espoused Svarakiya as opposed to parakiya, was he wrong for doing this? No. The Sastric orthodoxy will disagree.”
Jiva Gosvami admitted that he did this just to placate some of his followers who could not understand nor accept parakiya-rasa. So again, it’s not a question of JG being ‘wrong’, but an understanding that he said something that was not part of Gaudiya siddhanta because of the circumstances and individuals he was dealing with at that time, and the same applies to Srila Prabhupada.
“KKD: In the same way, why should Srila Prabhupada be wrong to say “we were originally with Krishna in His lila” if this message is intended for a particular time, place and circumstance, Uttama Sloka Prabhu?”
I never said SP was wrong so why are you distorting things like that? Can’t you discuss this honestly and in a straight-forward way? Because your position is indefensible you continually resort to dishonest tactics to skew the issue. SP said these things in private letters and some conversations. He did not teach this in his books – he agreed fully with Krsna, sastra and the previous acaryas that no one can fall from the spiritual world.
Part 2:
“KKD: Because you contend that both the fall / no-fall versions can never be right.”
It is not ‘my’ contention – it is the verdict of sastra and Krsna Himself. The very last concluding section of Vyasadeva’s Brahma-sutras, 4.4.22, is: “There is no return from the Lords abode, because of scriptural statements.” This is followed by 1.5 pages of quotes confirming this incontrovertible truth. Here are some excerpts from Baladeva Vidyabhusana’s commentary which should put this matter to rest:
One should never worry that ‘the Supreme Lord would desire to make the jiva who is dependent on Him fall from His planet, and that the devotee would ever desire to give up the Lord,’ since scripture describes their mutual affection for each other.
‘The Lord can never let His devotees fall’ because smriti says the devotees have exclusive devotion to Him and the Lord is determined never to give them up, and because the Lord is without faults like cruelty or miserliness and the devotees are without fault, having devotion exclusively for the Lord.
“KKD: If Srila Jiva Goswami was right to do what he did, then why not Srila Prabhupada as well?”
JG was right to employ his approach but what he said was not the accepted siddhanta and he openly admitted that. Similarly, SP was right to employ his approach even though only one version is the accepted Vedic siddhanta and is the only version in his books, which are SP’s legacy.
Part 3:
“KKD: By saying that both sides can never be right, and since you follow the no-fall versions, then the other side must be wrong. Was Srila Prabhupada wrong to say we fell, Uttama Sloka Prabhu? We have not seen this word “Wrong” used thus far, but that is the implication.”
No, that is your distorted implication because you have nothing to back up your position so you have to resort to trying to make me look like the bad guy. That’s a cheap and transparent tactic which simply exposes your weak position and incorrect understanding.
This is not about SP being right or wrong. This is about you and others misunderstanding what SP taught by limiting yourselves to statements that were never intended by SP to be used for conclusive evidence on this matter, and ignoring the preponderance of evidence to the contrary which has been accepted and understood without debate since Lord Brahma gave us Vedic knowledge.
“KKD: Once again, seeing the futility of arguing back and forth and reaching no consensus, it should rest with Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu who indicated that, in spite of our theory of where we come from, be it tastastha or other places, we still need to realize such facts with solid vijnana.”
The futility resides solely on the side of those who will not accept the clear statements of sastra, Krsna and the acaryas, including SP. Those who are reasonable will see the facts clearly and come to the proper conclusions.
Kesava Krsna wrote: If Srila Jiva Goswami was right to do what he did, then why not Srila Prabhupada as well?
This is the point that Uttamasloka prabhu is making- that adjustments to time, place and circumstances do not render statements “wrong”. “Wrong” is the opposite of “right”, and it is certainly “right” for an acarya to make adjustments according to the receptive understanding of his audience. It would be “wrong” not to do so.
At the same time we should see adjustments for what they are, when it is clear that they differ from the tattva given in the sruti and the smriti, and more so when Srila Prabhupada himself said “The conclusion is that no one falls from Vaikuntha, for it is the eternal abode” which is completely in line with the conclusion given in sastra.
Why is there a need for adjustment?
The statements that we were with Krsna, in His lila, gives us a sense of belonging to that supreme abode. Without such a sense, our impetus for going back to godhead would be clouded by an anxiety that we would not fit in, having never been there before… so Srila Prabhupada assured us that this was our home. There is a natural feeling of longing for one’s native land, for returning to one’s roots, and Srila Prabhupada, the expert psychologist, knew this, and exploited it for our benefit. Thus, we proceeded on the path of bhakti with absolute confidence “We’re going back home!” and absolute pride “We belong there!”
A spiritual master must do this, it is imperative, for his disciples are very vulnerable in the beginning of their spiritual lives. Every word that issues from his mouth is a carefully calculated formula to inspire us with spiritual desire. He would adjust every tattva, not just jiva tattva, if it meant it would inspire us to hanker for Vraja.
But as we get strong, with an actual taste for bhakti, learning the actual sad truth of our eternal conditioning as “nitya baddha” no longer has any power to discourage us. Indeed such knowledge serves to make us extremely humble, with paramount feelings of disqualification and ineptitude. We can pray from a feeling of desolation and eternal lostness, which evokes further feelings of dependency and desperation- all necessary ingredients for the fire of lobha to burst forth from our depths in heartfelt prayers. There is no sense of our birthright or right to what we once lost. Only a sense of utter helplessness.
Therefore, we should follow in Srila Prabhupada’s wise footsteps and preach to newcomers that “Vraja is your home” while knowing in truth the real conclusion- that no one falls from Vaikuntha, and that the residents there have free will “but they never misuse it”. Only at a suitable time should this truth be given to the sadhaka. As mature devotees we should certainly be clarified in regard to statements in the sruti and smriti, as well as the need for acaryas to make adjustments.
Revatīnandana: You very clearly explained to me once in a letter that if the spirit soul then goes into the brahma-jyotir, he is considered still fallen. Still fallen. Does that means the whole brahma-jyotir is composed of fallen souls? You see my question? If I go there, I’m a jīva soul, and I go to the brahma-jyotir I’m still fallen.
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Revatīnandana: That means all jīva souls there are also fallen souls.
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Revatīnandana: That follows?
Prabhupāda: That is explained in the Bhagavad-gītā. Vibhinnāṁśa. Separated parts. Separated parts, vibhinnāṁśa. You can call it fallen.
Revatīnandana: But we usually think of fallen as being forgetful.
Prabhupāda: Yes. This is also forgetfulness. In the brahma-jyotir you are forgetful still. Because you are… That is stated in the śāstra, anādhṛta yuṣmad anghrayaḥ. Anādhṛta. They do not know how to adore the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa. That is forgetfulness.
Śyāmasundara: So they become separated.
Prabhupāda: Yes.
Room Conversation — August 17, 1971, London
Going back to Krishna in Goloka Vrindavana.
Srila Prabhupada writes in the last chapter of the Krishna book:
“One who is thus drawn to the Krishna consciousness movement and tries to keep himself in constant touch with such consciousness certainly gets the supreme salvation, going back to Krishna in Goloka Vrindavana.” (Bhaktivedanta purport of the Ninetieth Chapter of Krishna, “Summary Description of Lord Krishna’s Pastimes.”)
One Bhakta wrote “Srila Prabhupada said these things – soul falls from Krishna- in private letters and some conversations. He did not teach this in his books”
Here is some quotes from the books only – we put practically no comments.
He used the following according to the Bhaktivedanta Vedabase, in his books.
Back to Goloka Vrndavana – 1 x
Back to the Vaikuntha planets – 2x
Go back to Jagannatha – 1x
Back to the rasa-lila dance – 1x
Back to Vaikuntha – 3x
Back to Krishna – 16x
Back to our eternal home in the kingdom of Krsna – 1 x
Return to the kingdom of God – 8 x
Back to the kingdom of God – 8x
Back to the kingdom of Godhead – 3x
Back to Godhead – 1003x
Back to home back to godhead 3x
Return to the spiritual world – 10x
Back home back to godhead – 448x
Back to our original home, back to God – 2 x
Back to the spiritual world – 6x
Back to the Vaikuntha – 1x
Back to Godhead means back to Krishna:
“Prabhupada: God means Supreme Person. But these advaitavadi, Mayavadis, they have made God everyone. God means Supreme Person, that is the dictionary word. “Supreme Being.” That is the dictionary meaning. God does not mean ordinary, but they have made ordinary, anyone God: “I am God, you are God, he is God.” Then what is meaning of God?
Devotee: Therefore we say Godhead.
Prabhupada: Yes. Head man. There are many men; He is the head man. Godhead word is also there in the dictionary. You find out.
Devotee: “Godhead: being God or a God, divine nature, Deity, the Godhead, God.”
(Room Conversation
with Professor Francois Chenique
August 5, 1976, New Mayapur
[French farm]
Lucay de La Male)
“Every living entity, beginning from Brahma, the first-born living being within the material world, down to the insignificant ant, desires to relish some sort of taste derived from sense perceptions. These sensual pleasures are technically called rasas… [here the rasas are listed]… Such rasas are displayed between man and man and between animal and animal. There is no possibility of an exchange or rasa between a man and an animal or between a man and any other species of living beings within the material world. The rasas are exchanged between members of the same species. But as far as the spirit souls are concerned, they are one qualitatively with the Supreme Lord. Therefore, the rasas were originally exchanged between the spiritual living being and the spiritual whole, the Supreme Personality of Godhead….. In the material existence, the rasa is experienced in a perverted form, which is temporary….
One who attains full knowledge of these different rasas, which are the basic principles of activities, can understand the false representations of the original rasas which are reflected in the material world.””
Srimad-Bhagavatam 1.1.3
“Oh, it is our good luck that we have come again today under Your protection by Your presence. Although Your Lordship is rarely visited even by the denizens of heaven, now it is possible for us to look upon Your smiling face, which is full of affectionate glances. We can now see Your transcendental form, full of all auspiciousness.”
PURPORT
..the inhabitants of Dvaraka, because of their being pure devotees without any tinge of the material contamination of fruitive activities and empiric philosophical speculation, can see Him face to face by the grace of the Lord. This is the original state of the living entities and can be attained by reviving our natural and constitutional state of life, which is discovered by devotional service only. (SB 1.11.8)
SB 2.9.1 p
Like a person who thinks of becoming a king without possessing the necessary qualification, when the living entity desires to become the Lord Himself, he is put in a condition of dreaming that he is a king. Therefore the first sinful will of the living entity is to become the Lord, and the consequent will of the Lord is that the living entity forget his factual life and thus dream of the land of utopia where he may become one like the Lord. The child cries to have the moon from the mother, and the mother gives the child a mirror to satisfy the crying and disturbing child with the reflection of the moon. Similarly, the crying child of the Lord is given over to the reflection, the material world, to lord it over as karmi and to give this up in frustration to become one with the Lord.
Srimad-Bhagavatam 2.9.39, p :
“The Supreme Personality of Godhead, Hari, is the object for fulfilling the senses of all living entities. Illusioned by the glaring reflection of the external energy, the living entities worship the senses instead of engaging them properly in fulfilling the desires of the Supreme… Originally the senses of the living entity were awarded for this purpose, namely to engage them in the transcendental loving service of the Lord or that of His devotees, but the conditioned souls, illusioned by the material energy, became captivated by sense enjoyment. Therefore the whole process of God consciousness is meant to rectify the conditional activities of the senses and to re-engage them in the direct service of the Lord……servants like Brahmaji, Naradaji, Vyasaji and their company become busy with the same purpose of the Lord: to reclaim the conditioned souls from the field of sense gratification and return them to the normal stage of engaging the senses in the service of the Lord.”
purport to Srimad-Bhagavatam 2.10.12, Srila Prabhupada states:
“The Lord is the supreme enjoyer, and the living entities are meant to assist the Lord in His enjoyment and thus participate in the transcendental enjoyment of everyone. The enjoyer and the enjoyed both participate in enjoyment, but, deluded by the illusory energy, the living entities want to become the enjoyer like the Lord, although they are not meant for such enjoyment.”
Srila Prabhupada further states:
“In the spiritual world the living entities are pure in nature, and therefore they are associates in the enjoyment of the Supreme Lord. In the material world the spirit of enjoyment of the living entities by dint of their own actions (karma) gradually fades by the laws of nature, and thus the illusory energy dictates in the ears of the conditioned souls that they should become one with the Lord. This is the last snare of the illusory energy. When the last illusion is also cleared off by the mercy of the Lord, the living entity again becomes reinstated in his original position and thus becomes actually liberated.
SB 3.15.33 writes:
“Just as there are different departments in each state in this material world—the civil department and the criminal department—so, in God’s creation, there are two departments of existence. All living entities who are residents of the material universes are considered to be more or less criminals because they do not wish to abide by the order of the Lord or they are against the harmonious activities of God’s will. The principle of creation is that the Supreme Lord, the Personality of Godhead, is by nature joyful, and He becomes many in order to enhance His transcendental joy. The living entities like ourselves, being part and parcel of the Supreme Lord, are meant to satisfy the senses of the Lord. Thus, whenever there is a discrepancy in that harmony, immediately the living entity is entrapped by maya, or illusion.”
SB. 3.16.35: “Here is clear proof of how a living entity coming originally from Vaikunthaloka (=planets) is encaged in material elements.”
SB 3.16.37…will go back to Godhead, back to the Vaikuntha planets.
“The Lord wanted to create the cosmic manifestation to give another chance to the conditioned souls who were dormant in forgetfulness. The cosmic manifestation gives the conditioned souls a chance to go back home, back to Godhead, and that is its main purpose. The Lord is so kind that in the absence of such a manifestation He feels something wanting, and thus the creation takes place. Although the creation of the internal potency was manifested, the other potency appeared to be sleeping, and the Lord wanted to awaken her to activity, just as a husband wants to awaken his wife from the sleeping state for enjoyment. It is the compassion of the Lord for the sleeping energy that He wants to see her awaken for enjoyment like the other wives who are awake. The whole process is to enliven the sleeping conditioned souls to the real life of spiritual consciousness so that they may thus become as perfect as the ever-liberated souls in the Vaikunthalokas. Since the Lord is sac-cid-ananda-vigraha [Bs. 5.1], He likes every part and parcel of His different potencies to take part in the blissful rasa because participation with the Lord in His eternal rasa-lila is the highest living condition, perfect in spiritual bliss and eternal knowledge.” (SB 3.25.4 purport)
“Similarly, there was no necessity to create this material world for the sufferings of the conditioned souls, but at the same time there are certain living entities, known as nitya-baddha, who are eternally conditioned. We say that they have been conditioned from time immemorial because no one can trace out when the living entity, the part and parcel of the Supreme Lord, became rebellious against the supremacy of the Lord. It is a fact that there are two classes of men… Without tracing out the beginning of the existence of these two classes, we can take it for granted that some of the living entities revolted against the laws of the Lord. Such entities are called conditioned souls… Covered by the material body, the spiritual identity is lost, and therefore the word mumuhe is used here, indicating that they have forgotten their own spiritual identity.” (Bhag. 3.26.5, purport)
“As stated in the Srimad-Bhagavatam, liberation means reinstatement in one’s original position. The original position is one of rendering service to the Lord (bhakti-yogena, bhaktya).” (Bhag. 3.27.1, purport)
Srimad-Bhagavatam (3.31.15), we find the following verse:
“The human soul further prays: The living entity is put under the influence of material nature and continues a hard struggle for existence on the path of repeated birth and death. This conditional life is due to his forgetfulness of his relationship with the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Therefore, without the Lord’s mercy, how can he again engage in the transcendental loving service to the Lord?”*
This passage is from the prayers spoken by the soul within the womb, as explained by Lord Kapila to His mother Devahuti, so this information is being related by the Supreme Lord Himself, as part of His teachings to Devahuti.
In his purport to the above text (3.31.15), Srila Prabhupada makes these statements:
“It is clearly said herein that our memory is lost because we are now covered by His material energy. Arguments may be put forward as to why we have been put under the influence of the material energy of the Lord. This is explained in Bhagavad-gita, where the Lord says, ‘I am sitting in everyone’s heart, and due to Me one is forgetful or one is alive in knowledge.’ The forgetfulness of the conditioned soul is also due to the direction of the Supreme Lord. A living entity misuses his little independence when he wants to lord it over material nature. This misuse of independence, which is called maya, is always available, otherwise there would be no independence. Independence implies that one can use it properly or improperly. It is not static; it is dynamic. Therefore, misuse of independence is the cause of being influenced by maya.”
Sridhara Svami gives the following commentary on this verse:
“By whose maya this living entity, his memory being lost, wanders on the path of samsara, with the suffering caused by that condition. Without the mercy of Him alone, of the Lord, by what means can the soul again fully accept his own constitutional position?”*
“Because the Supreme Personality of Godhead is all-spiritual, He can descend from the spiritual sky without changing His body, and thus He is known as acyuta, or infallible. When a living entity falls down to the material world, however, he has to accept a material body, and therefore, in his material embodiment, he cannot be called acyuta. Because he falls down from his real engagement in the service of the Lord, the living entity gets a material body to suffer or try to enjoy in the miserable material conditions of life. Therefore the fallen living entity is cyuta, whereas the Lord is called acyuta.” (Bhag. 4.20.37, purport)
Srimad-Bhagavatam 4.24.61, Srila Prabhupada summarizes the original constitutional position of the living entity as well as his falldown:
“This fact is explained by a Vaishnava kavi, or poet: krishna bhuli’ sei jiva anadi-bahirmukha/ataeva maya tare deya samsara-duhkha. When the living entity forgets the Supreme Lord and wants to enjoy himself independently, imitating the Supreme Lord, he is captured by the false notion that he is the enjoyer and is separated from the Supreme Lord.”
“O friend, do you remember the unknown friend, the Soul? Leaving Me, searching for a position, he went away, absorbed in worldly enjoyment.”*
Srila Prabhupada comments on this verse,
“This is an explanation of how the living entity falls down into this material world. In the spiritual world there is no duality, nor is there hate… When the living entities desire to enjoy themselves, they develop a consciousness of duality and come to hate the service of the Lord. In this way the living entities fall into the material world. In the Prema-vivarta it is said*:
“The natural position of the living entity is to serve the Lord in a transcendental loving attitude. When the living entity wants to become Krishna Himself or imitate Krishna, he falls down into the material world. Since Krishna is the supreme father, His affection for the living entity is eternal. When the living entity falls down into the material world, the Supreme Lord, through His svamsa expansion (Paramatma), keeps company with the living entity. In this way the living entity may some day return home, back to Godhead.
“By misusing independence, the living entity falls down from the service of the Lord and takes a position in the material world as an enjoyer. That is to say, the living entity takes his position within a material body.” (Bhag. 4.28.53, purport)
Srimad-Bhagavatam 4.29.48
“They do not know their own abode, where in fact there is God, Janardana. Those who have smoky intelligence say that the Veda facilitates fruitive activities because they do not know that [Veda].”*
In his commentary, Sridhara Svami states:
“‘They do not know that’ means ‘they do not know the Veda’ because they do not know svam lokam, ‘their own abode,’ which means their constitutional position, the truth about themselves, which is the real purport that one is to perceive in the Vedas. [And that constitutional position] is where God is.”*
SB 4.30.18 – return home, back to Godhead
The Pracetas were given special material facilities to enjoy…..at the end of their material enjoyment they would be promoted to the spiritual world and return to Godhead, which is Vaikuntha-loka according to SB 4.30.2 purport. The Pracetas came from the Vaikuntha-loka and returned to Vaikuntha-loka.
Later in the purport we read: “.. return to Godhead, the abode of the Lord, mam upetya, My abode and then will never take birth again, never return to the material world.”
SB 4.30.28 “…..the Lord in Vaikuntha immediately sent a chariot to bring the brahmana back home, back to Godhead.”
SB 4.30.30 “…..one returns home, back to Godhead…..Liberation begins with merging into the Brahman effulgence, realization of the Supreme Personality of Godhead is higher…One has to approach the Supreme Personality of Godhead through the impersonal Brahman effulgence just as one has to approach the sun through the sunshine.”
SB 4.31.24 “…..Then, meditating on the lotus feet of the Supreme Lord at the end of their lives, they advanced to the ultimate goal, Vishnuloka…..” where they came from according to SB 4.30.11 purport.
SB 4.29.5 – ‘return home, back to Godhead‘ – which is according to SB 4.29.13 the Vaikuntha planets.
SB 4.29.22 – ‘returns home, back to Godhead’ – which is also according to verse 20 purport ‘My eternal abode.’
SB 4.29.27 – The living entity’s constitutional position is very minute, and he can be misled in his choice. He may choose to imitate the Supreme Personality of Godhead. A servant may desire to start his own business and imitate his master, and when he chooses to do so, he may leave the protection of his master…Material bondage is caused by deviation from the service of the Lord”
SB 4.29.48 – “…their interest of life – to return home, back to Godhead.…their real home in the spiritual world… there are many Vaikuntha planets, and the topmost planet is Krishnaloka, Goloka Vrindavana…return home, back to Godhead 2 x ..return to Godhead…the spiritual Vaikuntha planets, and in particular the planet known as Goloka Vrindavana…One can go to the supreme planet (param vrajet) simply by chanting the Hare Krishna mantra…return home, back to Godhead.’
“When the pure soul wants to give up the Lord’s service to enjoy the material world, Krishna certainly gives him a chance to enter the material world.” (Bhag. 5.14, Introduction)
“One should be free from all material designations and cleansed of all material contamination. He should be restored to his pure identity, in which he engages his senses in the service of the proprietor of the senses. That is called devotional service.” Srimad-Bhagavatam 6.16.40 p
Srimad-Bhagavatam 6.16.57
“If the living being forgets this nature of Mine, then My nature becomes separated from him. At that time he undergoes material existence. From one body to another body, from death to death.”*
We have translated this verse literally, following the commentary of Sridhara Svami. Sridhara Svami states here that the first Sanskrit word of this verse, yat, means yadi, “if.” Similarly he translates the words etan mad-bhavam, “this My nature,” as mat svarupam, “My constitutional position,” or Brahman, “the Absolute Truth.” He further states that “if” the living being forgets the Lord’s nature, “then” the living being is separated from the Lord’s nature, and from that there is material existence. It is significant here that Sridhara Svami describes the process of forgetting Lord Krishna’s nature as an “if…then” process. “If this happens, then the following takes place.” One may claim that this is figurative language describing a nontemporal, nonchronological, nonsequential state of affairs, but of course that would simply be one’s own view on the matter. Sridhara Svami says something quite different. Vamsidhara in his commentary, which is meant to be an explanation of Sridhara Svami’s, gives no indication that anything figurative is taking place here. Vijayadhvaja Tirtha, in his commentary, paraphrases Sridhara Svami’s yadi… tada,”if… then,” with the words yadi… tarhi, “if… then, at that time.” There is nothing in the commentaries of the other acaryas that changes the obvious sense of this verse and of Sridhara Svami’s explanation of it.
In SB 7.1.25 purport Srila Prabhupada says:
“…takes the conditioned soul back home, back to Godhead and…Vritrasura was taken back to Godhead.
…and a demon or conditioned soul becomes completely pure, the Lord takes him back to Godhead.”
SB 7.1.26 purport:
“…Jaya Vijaya…then returned home, back to Godhead. They came from the Vaikuntha planets and they returned home, back to Godhead.”
Similarly the conditioned souls, described in the purport before 7.1.25 came from that home the spiritual planets and went back to their home.
Later in 7.1.26 purport again he says about conditioned souls:
“…desire to return home, back to Godhead.”
Srimad-Bhagavatam (8.24.48):
“One who wants to be free of material entanglement should take to the service of the Supreme Personality of Godhead and give up the contamination of ignorance, involving pious and impious activities. Thus one regains his original identity, just as a block of gold or silver sheds all dirt and becomes purified when treated with fire.”*
Srila Vijayadhvaja Tirtha comments on this verse:
“Then one should accept one’s own color [like gold], which is the destination of the Supreme Soul and one’s blissful spiritual form. Moreover, that jiva again (punar) becomes unperishing (avyayah), uncovered (asamvritah), free of covering (avarana-rahitah).”*
“Both the Lord and the living entity, being qualitatively spirit soul, have the tendency for peaceful enjoyment, but when the part of the Supreme Personality of Godhead unfortunately wants to enjoy independently, without Krishna, he is put into the material world, where he begins his life as Brahma and is gradually degraded to the status of an ant or a worm in stool.” (Bhag. 9.24.58, purport)
“…we should give up the idea that without Krishna we can enjoy freedom in this material world. This idea is the reason we have become entangled. Now it is our duty to seek shelter again at the Lord’s lotus feet. This shelter is described as abhaya, or fearless. Since Krishna is not subject to birth, death, old age or disease, and since we are part and parcel of Krishna, we also are not subject to birth, death, old age and disease, but we have become subject to these illusory problems because of our forgetfulness of Krishna and our position as His eternal servants (jivera ‘svarupa’ haya-krishnera ‘nitya-dasa’). Therefore, if we practice devotional service by always thinking of the Lord, always glorifying Him and always chanting about Him, as described in text 37 (srinvan grinan samsmarayams ca cintayan), we will be reinstated in our original, constitutional position and thus be saved.” (Bhag. 10.2.39, purport)
“One who is thus drawn to the Krishna consciousness movement and tries to keep himself in constant touch with such consciousness certainly gets the supreme salvation, going back to Krishna in Goloka Vrindavana.” (Bhaktivedanta purport of the Ninetieth Chapter of Krishna, “Summary Description of Lord Krishna’s Pastimes.”)
The Bhagavatam 11.14.25 states:
“Just as gold, when smelted by fire, gives up its impurity and again takes on its own form, similarly the soul, shaking off the contamination of karma by the practice of bhakti-yoga, attains to Me.”*
Srimad-Bhagavatam makes an even more remarkable statement at 12.5.5:
“Just as when a pot is broken the sky [within the pot] would continue to be sky as before, similarly when the body is dead the jiva again attains to the absolute status.”*
Srila Sridhara Svami explains this verse as follows:
“Just as before (yatha pura) means just as before the designation of ‘pot’ [i.e. before the sky in the pot became designated by the shape and covering of the pot as ‘the air in the pot’], so again when the pot is broken the sky that was within that pot would be sky alone [without the designation ‘pot’]. So as that is the case, similarly when the body is dead, that is when by knowledge of the truth the body is merged [back into matter].”*There is nothing in the commentaries of Vamsidhara, Viraraghava, Vijayadhvaja Tirtha, Sri Jiva Gosvami, Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura or the other commentators that in any way changes or even gives an indirect additional sense for what is obviously being stated here in Srimad-Bhagavatam: that the soul, once existing in a pure state, becomes covered by a material body and then returns to the same pure state as before. The words yatha pura, “just as before,” are significant, for if one wishes to claim that the soul originally comes from the brahma-jyotir or some other surrogate pure status that is not the abode of the Lord, then the soul will return to the same state
Caitanya Caritamrta
“In our original relationship with the Supreme Lord there is real love, and that love is reflected pervertedly through material conditions. Our real love is continuous and unending, but because that love is reflected pervertedly in this material world, it lacks continuity and is inebriating.” (Cc., Introduction, p. 9)
“The conditioned state is caused by misuse of the individual independence of the spiritual platform, for this separates the living entity from the association of the spiritual energy. But when the living entity is enlightened by the grace of the Supreme Lord or His pure devotee and becomes inclined to revive his original state of loving service, he is on the most auspicious platform of eternal bliss and knowledge. The marginal jiva, or living entity, misuses his independence and becomes averse to the eternal service attitude when he independently thinks he is not energy but the energetic. This misconception of his own existence leads him to the attitude of lording it over material nature.” (Cc. Adi 5.66, purport)
“One should understand that due to his desire to enjoy himself in competition with Krishna, the living entity comes into material existence.” (Cc. Madhya 20.117, purport)
“Thus Krishna knows the cause of the distressed condition of the conditioned soul. He therefore descends from His original position to instruct the conditioned soul and inform him about his forgetfulness of his relationship with Krishna. Krishna exhibits Himself in His relationships in Vrindavana and at the Battle of Kurukshetra so that people will be attracted to Him and will again return home, back to Godhead… If we revive our original intimate relationship with Krishna, our distressed condition in the material world will be mitigated.” (Cc. Madhya 20.130, purport)
Bhagavad-Gita
… the misguided student of Bhagavad-gita will certainly be bewildered on the path of spiritual guidance and will not be able to go back to home, back to Godhead. (Bg preface)
The material creation by the Lord of creatures (Visnu) is a chance offered to the conditioned souls to come back home—back to Godhead. All living entities within the material creation are conditioned by material nature because of their forgetfulness of their relationship to Visnu, or Krsna, the Supreme Personality of Godhead. (Bg 3.10 p)
After creating or impregnating the conditioned souls into the womb of material nature, He gave His directions in the Vedic wisdom as to how such conditioned souls can return home, back to Godhead. (Bg 3.15 p)
A liberated person no longer desires external material happiness. This state is called brahma-bhuta [SB 4.30.20], attaining which one is assured of going back to Godhead, back to home. (Bg 5.24 p)
“O scion of Bharata, O conqueror of the foe, all living entities are born into delusion, bewildered by dualities arisen from desire and hate.” (Bg 7.27)
On this verse Srila Prabhupada writes in SB 4.28.53-54:
“This verse (Bg 7.27) is an explanation of how the living entity falls down into this material world. In the spiritual world there is no duality, nor is there hate. The Supreme Personality of Godhead expands Himself into many. In order to enjoy bliss more and more, the Supreme Lord expands Himself in different categories. As mentioned in the Varaha purana, He expands Himself in visnu-tattva (the svamsa expansion) and in His marginal potency (the vibhinnamsa, or the living entity). These expanded living entities are innumerable, just as the minute molecules of sunshine are innumerable expansions of the sun. The vibhinnamsa expansions, the marginal potencies of the Lord, are the living entities. When the living entities desire to enjoy themselves, they develop a consciousness of duality and come to hate the service of the Lord. In this way the living entities fall into the material world. In the prema-vivarta it is said:
krsna-bahirmukha hana bhoga-vancha kare
nikata-stha maya tare japatiya dhare
The natural position of the living entity is to serve the Lord in a transcendental loving attitude. When the living entity wants to become Krsna Himself or imitate Krsna, he falls down into the material world. Since Krsna is the supreme father, His affection for the living entity is eternal. When the living entity falls down into the material world, the Supreme Lord, through His svamsa expansion (Paramatma), keeps company with the living entity. In this way the living entity may some day return home, back to Godhead.
By misusing his independence, the living entity falls down from the service of the Lord and takes a position in this material world as an enjoyer. That is to say, the living entity takes his position within a material body. Wanting to take a very exalted position, the living entity instead becomes entangled in a repetition of birth and death…
The original home of the living entity and the Supreme Personality of Godhead is the spiritual world. In the spiritual world both the Lord and the living entities live together very peacefully. Since the living entity remains engaged in the service of the Lord, they both share a blissful life in the spiritual world. However, when the living entity wants to enjoy himself, he falls down into the material world.”
There are many devotees who assume themselves to be in Krsna consciousness and devotional service but at heart do not accept the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Krsna, as the Absolute Truth. For them, the fruit of devotional service—going back to Godhead—will never be tasted. (Bg 9.12 p)
The Krsna consciousness movement is therefore distributing sublime information to the entire human society to the effect that by simply chanting the Hare Krsna mantra one can become perfect in this life and go back home, back to Godhead. (Bg 9.25 p)
It is clearly mentioned here: mam upaisyasi, “he comes to Me,” back home, back to Godhead. There are five different stages of liberation, and here it is specified that the devotee who has always lived his lifetime here under the direction of the Supreme Lord, as stated, has evolved to the point where he can, after quitting this body, go back to Godhead and engage directly in the association of the Supreme Lord… A person who is thus always engaged in the service of the Lord or is always thinking and planning how to serve the Lord is to be considered completely liberated at present, and in the future his going back home, back to Godhead, is guaranteed. (Bg 9.28 p)
“Take to My devotional service and come quickly back to Godhead, back home.” (Bg 9.33 p)
A person in Krsna consciousness has no fear because by his activities he is sure to go back to the spiritual sky, back home, back to Godhead. (Bg 10.4-5 p)
When one tries to go back home, back to Godhead, and takes fully to Krsna consciousness in devotional service, his action is called buddhi yoga. (Bg 10.10 p)
This cosmic manifestation is a chance for the conditioned souls to go back to Godhead, back to home. (Bg 11.33 p)
The Bhagavad-gita is meant to show how one can understand his spiritual existence and his eternal relationship with the supreme spiritual personality and to teach one how to go back home, back to Godhead. (Bg 11.55 p)
Although the common man is often not as capable as so-called philosophers, faithful hearing from an authoritative person will help one transcend this material existence and go back to Godhead, back to home. (Bg 13.26 p)
“The following information is there in the Madhyandi-nayana-sruti: sa va esha brahma-nishtha idam sariram martyam atisrijya brahmabhisampadya brahmana pasyati brahmana srinoti brahmanaivedam sarvam anubhavati. It is stated here that when a living entity gives up this material embodiment and enters into the spiritual world, he revives his spiritual body, and in his spiritual body he can see the Supreme Personality of Godhead face to face. He can hear and speak to Him face to face, and he can understand the Supreme Personality as He is…. That fragmental portion, when liberated from the bodily entanglement, revives its original spiritual body in the spiritual sky in a spiritual planet and enjoys association with the Supreme Lord” (Bg. 15.7, purport)
The living entities are essentially the parts and parcels of the Supreme Lord, and He is giving herewith the hint how they can come back to Godhead, back to home. (Bg 15.12 p)
The Vedas give the right direction to people so that they can properly mold their lives and come back to Godhead, back to home. (Bg 15.15 p)
“For a sannyasi or anyone who is aspiring to get out of the clutches of material nature and trying to elevate himself to the spiritual nature and go back home, back to Godhead, for him, looking toward material possessions and women for sense gratification—not even enjoying them, but just looking toward them with such a propensity—is so condemned that he had better commit suicide before experiencing such illicit desires.” (Bg 16.1-3 p)
Krsna consciousness is a scientific execution of transcendental activities which enables one to return home, back to Godhead. (Bg 17.23 p)
Acts should be performed for the ultimate gain of being transferred to the spiritual kingdom, back to home, back to Godhead. (Bg 17.25 p)
Anyone, however, who tries sincerely to present Bhagavad-gita as it is will advance in devotional activities and reach the pure devotional state of life. As a result of such pure devotion, he is sure to go back home, back to Godhead. (BG 18.68 p)
Srila Prabhupada uses the word “forget” in 6 purports. Here they are:
in the present status of our life, not only have we forgotten the Supreme Lord, but we have forgotten our eternal relationship with the Lord… The forgetful living entities or conditioned souls have forgotten their relationship with the Supreme Lord, and they are engrossed in thinking of material activities. (Bg intro.)
The forgetful living entities or conditioned souls have forgotten their relationship with the Supreme Lord, and they are engrossed in thinking of material activities. (Bg intro.)
Under the circumstances, it is admitted that Lord Krsna is the Supreme Lord, superior in position to the living entity, Arjuna, who is a forgetful soul deluded by maya. (Bg 2.13 p)
The consciousness of the individual soul is prone to be forgetful. When he is forgetful of his real nature, he obtains education and enlightenment from the superior lessons of Krsna. But Krsna is not like the forgetful soul. If so, Krsna’s teachings of Bhagavad-gita would be useless… Arjuna is the atomic soul, forgetful of his real nature; therefore he requires to be enlightened (Bg 2.20 p)
due to his long misuse of the senses in sense gratification, he is factually bewildered by the false ego, which makes him forget his eternal relationship with Krsna. (Bg 3.27 p)
The living entities, as separate parts and parcels of the Supreme, have a purpose to fulfill. Having forgotten that purpose since time immemorial, they are situated in different bodies, as men, animals, demigods, etc. Such bodily differences arise from forgetfulness of the transcendental service of the Lord… the living entities are deluded by the material energy, imagining themselves to have a separate identity. Thus, under different standards of material identity, they become forgetful of Krsna. (Bg 4.35 p)
Those who have forgotten Krsna must certainly be bewildered, but those who are in Krsna consciousness are not bewildered at all. (Bg 5.16 p)
There are many different kinds of living entities—human beings, demigods, animals, etc.—and each and every one of them is under the influence of material nature, and all of them have forgotten the transcendent Personality of Godhead. (Bg 7.13 p)
The relationship between the living entity and Krsna is fixed eternally; it cannot be forgotten, as we can see from the behavior of Arjuna. Although Arjuna has seen the opulence in the universal form, he cannot forget his friendly relationship with Krsna. (Bg 11.41-42 p)
Srila Prabhupada uses ‘reinstate’ in Bg 7.28 p:
“Unless one is reinstated in his own constitutional position, it is not possible to understand the Supreme Personality or to be fully engaged in His transcendental loving service with determination.”
Srila Prabhupada uses “revive” in 7 purports:
By the process of devotional service, one can revive that svarupa, and that stage is called svarupa-siddhi—perfection of one’s constitutional position… the whole purpose of Bhagavad-gita is to revive our sanatana occupation, or sanatana-dharma, which is the eternal occupation of the living entity. (BG intro.)
In the form of a human being, the living entity may revive a little Krsna consciousness, and, if he makes further development, the fire of spiritual life can be kindled in the human form of life. (Bg 3.38 p)
By Krsna consciousness, he can revive his real position and thus come out of his embodiment. (BG 5.13 p)
…..to act to revive this consciousness within the entire human society is the highest welfare work. (Bg 5.25 p)
It is the duty of the guardians of children to revive the divine consciousness dormant in them…the naradhama who is condemned by the Personality of Godhead can again revive his spiritual consciousness only by the mercy of a devotee. (Bg 7.15 p)
One’s memory of Krsna is revived by chanting the maha-mantra, Hare Krsna. (Bg 8.8 p)
Now the heart has to be purified of the material association, and that dormant, natural love for Krsna has to be revived. That is the whole process. (Bg 12.9 p)
The word ‘dormant’ is used in 3 purports
Lord Krsna, who is dwelling in everyone’s heart, acts as a best-wishing friend and purifies the devotee who constantly engages in hearing of Him. In this way, a devotee naturally develops his dormant transcendental knowledge. (Bg 7.1 p)
It is the duty of the guardians of children to revive the divine consciousness dormant in them. (Bg 7.15 p)
This love of God is now in a dormant state in everyone’s heart. And, there, love of God is manifested in different ways, but it is contaminated by material association. Now the heart has to be purified of the material association, and that dormant, natural love for Krsna has to be revived. That is the whole process. (Bg 12.9 p)
The word ‘awaken’ is used in 3 purports:
All the instructions of Bhagavad-gita are intended to awaken this pure consciousness, and therefore we find at the last stage of the Gita’s instructions that Krsna is asking Arjuna whether he is now in purified consciousness. (BG intro.)
The system is that they [the sannyasis] go from door to door to awaken the householders from the slumber of ignorance. (Bg 10.4-5 p.)
the sannyasi goes from door to door, not exactly for the purpose of begging, but to see the householders and awaken them to Krsna consciousness. (Bg 16.1-3 p)
The word ‘lost’ is used in 2 purports:
In each of these processes one has to realize the constitutional position of the living entity, his relationship with God, and the activities whereby he can reestablish the lost link and achieve the highest perfectional stage of Krsna consciousness. (Bg 6.37 p)
The civilized form of human life is meant for man’s reviving the lost consciousness of his eternal relation with the Supreme Truth, the Personality of Godhead (Bg 7.15 p)
Isopanisad
In the Sri Isopanisad mantra 1 at the end of the purport Srila Prabhupada writes: “if one is sober and knows the laws of nature, without being influenced by unnecessary attachment or abhorrence, he is sure to be recognized again by the Lord and thus become eligible for going back to Godhead, back to the eternal home.”
Mantra 4 purport: “When the part-and-parcel living entity forgets his particular activities under the Lord’s will, he is considered to be in maya, illusion.”
Thus the jiva had activities with the Lord. A few sentences later Srila Prabhupada writes: “…he can revive his original consciousness, which was lost due to association with maya…”
Mantra 8 purport: “The fallen condition of the living entities is due entirely to forgetfulness of their relationship with God….those who are captivated by the temporary beauties of the external energy forget the real aim of life, which is to go back to Godhead…. if he wants to go back home, back to Godhead, the Lord helps him. Real liberation means going back to Godhead. Liberation as conceived of by an impersonalist is a myth…”
Mantra 9 purport: “…the Supreme Lord is the proprietor of everything… to awaken this God consciousness in the forgetful living being… to bring one back to Godhead… revive the forgetful soul’s lost relationship with the Personality of Godhead… the lust (e.g. the attainment of heavenly pleasure for sense gratification) for which causes their material bondage in the first place… …find out the means by which one may regain his spiritual identity.”
Mantra 11 purport: “In order to attain a permanent life, one must be prepared to go back to Godhead. The process by which one goes back to Godhead is a different branch of knowledge… The conditioned living being has forgotten his eternal relationship with God… …remind the forgetful human being that his home is not here in this material world…returning to the spiritual home…. The living being is a spiritual entity, and he can be happy only by returning to his spiritual home… …return to Godhead… …every living being in his original, spiritual form has all the senses… The activities of the material senses are perverted reflections of the activities of the original, spiritual senses… In our pure spiritual form, free from all material contamination, real enjoyment of the senses is possible. A patient must regain his health before he can truly enjoy sense pleasure again…cure the material disease…recover from the disease”
Mantra 12 purport: “We must worship the Absolute Personality of Godhead, Krishna, who is all-attractive and who can bestow upon us complete freedom from material bondage by taking us back home, back to Godhead.…reestablishing the lost relationship between the living entity and the Supreme Lord.”
Mantra 18 purport: “Thus the spiritual master, the Vedic injunctions and the Lord Himself from within—all guide the devotee in full strength. In this way there is no chance for a devotee to fall again into the mire of material illusion.”
Science of self-realization
“The whole basis of Krishna consciousness and a relationship with Krishna is the pleasure potency of Krishna Himself. Srimati Radharani, the damsels of Vraja and Krishna’s cowherd boyfriends are all expansions of Krishna’s pleasure potency. We all have a tendency toward pleasure, because the source from which we emanate is fully potent in pleasure. Impersonalists cannot think in these terms, for they deny the pleasure potency… All relationships with Krishna which aim at satisfying Krishna’s senses are manifestations of Krishna’s pleasure potency. As far as the individual soul is concerned, it is originally a part and parcel of this pleasure potency, of the reservoir of pleasure Himself.” (The Science of Self-Realization, p. 301)
Extended list.
In all his writings and speeches Srila Prabhupada uses the following list of words to describe the fall of the soul from the spiritual planets 12,527 times. Back to the Brahmayjoti 0 (zero) x
Forget Krishna or Krishna consciousness – 637; Forgotten – 674; Forgetful – 119; Forgetfulness – 315; Reclaim – 81; Regain – 89; Revival – 46; Revive – 407; Reinstate – 10; Renovate – 20; Averse – 73; Misuse his independence – 57; Reestablished – 20; Lost – 322; Paradise lost – 19; Dormant – 428; Disagreed – 6; Sleep – 58; Sleeping – 62; Awakened – 297; Imprisoned – 26; Prison – 88; Condemned – 86; Unfettered – 1; Regain – 89; falls down – 86; original Krsna consciousness – 581; original consciousness – 149; original position – 207; come down – 57; return – 171; recover – 25; revert – 15; reunion – 6; again (to Krishna or Krishna consciousness) – 68; fallen conditioned – 65; fallen souls – 465; Back to Krishna consciousness – 7; Back to Krishna – 99; Rebel – 11; Rebellious – 32; back to Goloka Vrndavana – 4; back to Krsna loka – 2; back to the rasa-lila – 5; go back to Jagannatha – 2; go back to my planet – 1; back to the Vaikuntha planets – 8; back to Krishna – 9 times; back to the kingdom of Krsna – 1 time; back to our eternal home in the kingdom of Krsna – 1 time; return to the kingdom of God – 8 times; back to the kingdom of God – 16 times; back to the kingdom of Godhead – 5 times; back to Godhead – 2921 times; back to home back to godhead – 970 times; return to the spiritual world – 8 times; back home – 691 times; back home back to godhead – 528 times; all spirit souls are coming from Vaikuntha – 1; back to home – 1137 times; back to our permanent home – 1 time; back to our original home, back to God – 2 time; back to our original home, back to Godhead – 1 time; back to the spiritual world – 21 times; back to Vaikuntha – 14 times; back to the Vaikuntha – 1 time; Go back to My planet 2x
For extensive commentaries on these verses see: http://fallvada.blogspot.nl
For quotes from the original 5 vedas see: http://fallvada.blogspot.nl/2014/04/fall-vada-in-mahabharata-and-puranas.html