Jagat

I have been sitting on the following diagram for several weeks now, but got caught up in various distractions, but lately some additional insights have come and so I now come back to it and share it, for the pleasure of the devotees. I have been working on this concept for some time before becoming aware of the popular Christian use of the triangle image in a similar way. It seems that variations on the concept are quite widespread and you can see both Christian and secular versions of it on Google images . Since the image and symbolic potential of a triangle or pyramid is a simple one, it is not particularly surprising that it has been used so frequently. After all, what is the Star of David but two triangles? The triangle represents synthesis, and there is no spiritual achievement that is not represented by synthesis. It can furthermore blossom into countless other dialectical configurations, as is represented by the Shri Chakra. In the discussion that follows, however, I have ...

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...

In the conclusion to the previous article ( Part I ), I summarized my objectives there, which was to show that since any activity engaged in with expertise is yoga, or sādhanā , therefore there was no reason to think that sex could not be a part of that. I will continue on the same theme, and in so doing, will counter one or two of Abhaya Mudra's points. First of all, let me remind everyone that we have, after great good fortune, attained the human form of life, which is the plavaṁ sukalpaṁ , the most suitable boat for crossing the ocean of saṁsāra . The guru will do the steering, and the Lord will blow the winds of grace. Why would you not take this opportunity to attain the experience of prema, the summum bonum of human life? nṛ-deham ādyaṁ sulabhaṁ sudurlabhaṁ plavaṁ sukalpaṁ guru-karṇa-dhāram| mayānukūlena nabhasvateritaṁ pumān bhavābdhiṁ na taret sa ātma-hā|| This human body is the original form [for it is God's own svarūpa , and the human being was made in God...

Understanding the relationship of the pravartaka stage to the sādhaka stage. There is a gulf of difference between these stages, as the higher level is practically unrecognizable as part of the same path to one in the lower stage. As one progresses and gets closer to the subsequent stage, one inevitably thinks that he is coming close to either siddhi or to self-destruction. It is a confusing state until one has completed the transformation. That transformation is easy to misunderstand for numerous reasons, which is why it is often condemned in various ways, usually by using the sahajiyā label as a term of opprobrium. Such propaganda serves the purpose of creating a wall around the next stage. Like most steps prior to making a leap of progress, this can be characterized as the "wall of dharma" like the one the gopis had to cross to reach Krishna in the forest of Vrindavan on the night of the Rāsa-līlā. In the pravartaka stage, the practices of devotional service...

This article was written in answer to some questions from a Swami Prema Ananda. I revised it subsequently to make it less like a letter, but it still tends to feel like one. The tripartite system of sādhaka s has been frequently referred to on these pages. I recently made a decision that I will no longer use the term kaniṣṭha , as this is generally considered by orthodox Vaishnavas to be somewhat insulting, and is frequently used to condemn someone as not being very advanced. Someone recently told me a nice story about Bhakti Promode Puri Maharaj, though, which should put that into perspective. It seems that Sridhar Maharaj was talking about different levels of adhikar (or qualification for spiritual life) and, following the Bhagavata’s description of the kaniṣṭha being primarily interested in the worship of God in the temple, cited Puri Maharaj as an example. Some of Puri Maharaj’s followers were there, and eager to find insult in Sridhar Maharaj’s words, went and told Puri. But...

These essays have become a bit scrambled and perhaps lost their direction somewhat. They should be seen as notes for something that will come out of it all at some time in the future. I would, however, like to make a couple of points here, by way of a résumé: In my understanding of this process there is no fundamental difference in the sambandha or prayojana for the Orthodox and Sahajiya schools, though there are some differences in the abhidheya . Ahaṅgrahopāsanā is, as we have shown, acceptable when interpreted according to the correct sambandha and prayojana , and only rejected when it disagrees with the metaphysics and ultimate goal of Vaishnava practice. When it agrees, it is called āropa . This āropa is similar to, but not exactly the same as the āropa in āropa-siddhā bhakti that has been discussed in a previous post. The goal of bhakti is bhāva and prema . The word bhakti does not make a clear and specific difference between external activities and internal moods;...

After concluding my previous post , I thought it was a little ironic that I had to take refuge in Kierkegaard to confirm something that is stated with such vigor in the Upanishads, namely that God, or the life of faith, is known exclusively by the path of subjectivity, or by what the Indian system would call antarmukhatā or turning inward. And if any yoga system holds this to be more true than another, it is certainly that of bhakti, which opposes the empirical method of jñāna. yam evaiṣa vṛṇute tena labhyaḥ . I tend to want to defend the intellectual effort as an act of devotion in itself, since I hold that all human faculties, especially one as fundamental as reason, must have a devotional function. This is what is meant by jñāna-yajña in Gita 18.70. Since desire is the essence of bhakti, the desire to understand God, the way He works and His will for me personally, is what the power of reason was meant for. In terms of knowledge, it will always be inadequate, for one can neve...