Jagat

In the last three articles, Another look at Aropa and Vatsalya , Worshiping Krishna as the substratum in all beings and The natural loves and prema , I have been responding to Muralisvara Dasa's letter. In these posts we have established several things that beginner devotees find problematic. Indeed, it takes a bit of a paradigm shift to move from the beginning level of duality between God and man in aiśvarya to the eradication of this difference in mādhurya . This is the human dimension of love. To summarize: Without giving up the basic practice of arcanā , one has to cultivate the middle stage of devotion, which is, as we have all read in the Bhāgavatam: īśvare tad-adhīneṣu bāliśeṣu dviṣatsu ca | prema-maitrī-kṛpopekṣā ṁ yaḥ karoti sa madhyamaḥ || One who behaves with love towards God, friendship to those who depend on the Lord, with compassion to those who are innocent, and indifference to those who hate the Lord, is on the middle level of devotional achievement ...

I started publicly professing to be a Sahajiya when I saw various individuals promoting an agenda that I was not in tune with. I do not believe that sexuality is meant to be "free," or to be indulged in wantonly. The Prema we talk about is pure . That is the axiomatic basis. Just because sexuality is involved does not mean that it is necessarily kāma , any more than any other activity transformed by relation ("dovetailing") to Krishna is kāma . It is part of the process of converting the innate desire that is expressed towards matter ( kāma ) into prema , i.e., that same desire directed towards God. There is only one energy in the soul, that is desire for union. Everything else is subordinate to that, and everything else is a servant of that. sarve vidhi-niṣedhāḥ syur etayor eva kiṅkarāḥ . I fully expect Sahajiyaism and the other paths related to Gaudiya Vaishnavism -- good, bad and ugly -- to manifest in the course of time, just as happened in Bengal. There is ...

The other day I was attending Satyanarayana Dasaji’s Bhāgavata class and something came into my head when I heard it said that we are not these bodies. So I asked him the question, “If a devotee’s body is spiritualized when he takes initiation, then would he not identify with it as the sādhaka-deha ?” Babaji’s answer was no, the spiritual identity is internal, we do not identify with the material body. I told him I would prepare my argument and submit it to him when it was ready. My thinking goes like this: Vaishnavism is all about identity . “I am a servant of God.” That identity exists as a servant in the material body, which once we become sādhakas ceases to be, strictly speaking, material. This is the sampradāya-siddhānta : Since all the senses are engaged in devotional service, the body can no longer be called material. There is only one energy of God, which serves different functions, parāsya śaktir vividhaiva śrūyate . The appearance of difference is illusion. So, thi...

This is from a couple of old posts from Gaudiya Discussions. I made no changes. utpanna-ratayaḥ samyaṅ nairvighnyam anupāgatāḥ kṛṣṇa-sākṣāt-kṛtau yogyāḥ sādhakāḥ parikīrtitāḥ “ These devotees who have attained rati (or bhāva ), yet are still not completely free from obstacles, who are worthy of attaining a direct vision of the Lord, are known as sādhakas . ” ( Bhakti-rasām ṛ ta-sindhu 2.1.276) Bhaktivedanta Swami : “A person who has attained the stage of attraction for Krishna and who is not freed from the material impasse, but who has qualified himself to enter into the kingdom of God, is called sādhaka. Sādhaka means one who is cultivating devotion in Krishna consciousness.” (NOD, 203) Dhanurdhara Swami : “ Sādhaka refers to an advanced devotee, not just to any practitioner. Only one who has ecstatic love can inspire that love to arise in others. Therefore, in this context , Srila Rupa Goswami has defined sādhaka as a devotee on the platform of rati , or one who feel...

From Jayadev Foundation Trust . (3) Radharani's māna viharati vane rādhā sādhāraṇa-praṇaye harau vigalita-nijotkarṣād īrṣyā-vaśena gatā'nyataḥ kvacid api latā-kuñje guñjan-madhu-vrata-maṇḍalī mukhara-śikhare līnā dīnāpy uvāca rahaḥ sakhīm|| When Radha saw Hari frolicking in the forest, treating all the women with equal affection, she felt her own special status had melted away. Envy and anger arose in her, and she went off. Somewhere, in a vine covered bower, where bees buzzed in circles overhead, she hid, and forlorn in her solitude, confided to her friend. If the first two verses of our five described Krishna as the viṣaya and then as the āśraya of love; now this verse points to the essential mechanism that transforms him from the one role to the other. This will be further explained in our analysis of the fifth verse. The third verse of the Gīta-govinda pañca-ślokī appears in the latter portion (verses 25-35) of BRS 3.5, the abbreviated chapte...

(2) Krishna, the Lover of Radha Our second verse is taken from Gīta-govinda 's third chapter— kaṁsārir api saṁsāra-vāsanā-baddha-śṛṅkhalām | rādhām ādhāya hṛdaye tatyāja vraja-sundarīḥ || Krishna, the enemy of Kamsa, took Radha, who is the link that makes all his hopes for happiness possible, into his heart and left aside all the other cowherd beauties. (3.1) The context in GG is provided by the next verse we will cite. Radha has seen Krishna as described in verse 1.48 and is not pleased. She has become overwhelmed by jealous anger and has left the scene of the rāsa . We shall discuss this further in the appropriate place. In Rupa Goswami's categorization of the madhura-rasa in Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu , this verse is given as an example of kṛṣṇa-rati, which in this case does not mean (as is customary in BRS) love for Krishna, but Krishna's own love for another, in this case Radha. Although from the theological point of view it goes without saying that God ...

(1) Krishna, the Embodiment of the Erotic Rasa viśveṣām anurañjanena janayann ānandam indīvara- śreṇī-śyāmala-komalair upanayann aṅgair anaṅgotsavam | svacchandaṁ vraja-sundarībhir abhitaḥ praty-aṅgam āliṅgitaḥ śṛṅgāraḥ sakhi mūrtimān iva madhau mugdho hariḥ krīḍati || By his pleasure giving, he brings joy to all the worlds; With his limbs, as soft and dark as blue lotus flowers, he inaugurates the festival of love. O friend Radhe! Hari frolicks in the spring, like the embodiment of śṛṅgāra-rasa ; completely enchanted by the beauties of Braja, who surround him and wantonly embrace his every limb. Our first "essential" verse is GG 1.48, which as already stated above, is pivotal in the introduction both to the Gīta-govinda and to Rupa Goswami's treatment of the madhura-rasa . In GG, it comes after the scene has been set for the story by describing the springtime ( prabandha 3) and the rāsa dance as performed in the spring ( prabandha 4). The first two son...

Radha's superiority is not because she is a woman. And Chaitanya's taking Radha bhava shows what is meant. It is about love. Radha's superiority comes because she is more expert in loving; she is an āśraya , whereas Krishna is the  viṣaya , the object of love. In my experience of my own personal character and observing other men, I think that it is true that men, by virtue of both nature and nurture, tend to be more driven in the direction of being a  viṣaya  than an  āśraya  of love. But it is better to love than to be loved. Better to give than to receive. This is the clichéd truism that lies at the basis of the myth. At the same time, no woman is free from the desire to be loved. No one is so selfless. And in fact, it is wrong to be selfless in such a way. The normal spiritual state is to experience the reciprocation of God, and all love seeks reciprocation, otherwise it is not in fact love. Love of necessity invites reciprocation, and if it is appropr...

Love and Truth were lovers. Love became the Love of Truth, and Truth became the Truth of Love, and together, they were True Love. Love should be looked at as a verb, not just a noun. Love is as love does. There is no place in love for abuse. Unless we uproot the untruth from our self knowledge, there is no possiblity of love. There are no magical beliefs that we can dress our ignorance in: not even the most noble-sounding of lies, can make us eligible of love. Krishna is a man. Like all men, he thinks he is God. And this is his problem. His lie. Until he gives it up and becomes a man, he is lost to love. This is our current working theory. And because Krishna is a man, having nara-līlā , we have to make the connection to our human lives and our human reality. Here is what Bell Hooks says in her book All About Love : "All my life I have thought of love as primarily a topic women contemplate with greater intensity and vigor than anybody else on this planet. I still hold t...