tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31351038.post7502580635367881375..comments2024-03-26T13:06:41.178-04:00Comments on Jagat: Identity with the sādhaka-dehaJagadananda Dashttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05887720845815026518noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31351038.post-62319795376466749842015-04-12T11:00:31.739-04:002015-04-12T11:00:31.739-04:00So is the body not made out of material aggregates...So is the body not made out of material aggregates?<br />buddha dharma never states dukkham is our " real" or inherent mode of existence, this is a misunderstanding. If we have to have a soul, it might as well be vidya (rigpa), it is after all, permanent, unconditioned, a knower, stainless, and free from the three realms. But If we don't have to have one, vidya (rigpa) still has these characteristics. It is our essenceless essence.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11289157254663651322noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31351038.post-57894743648024698392015-04-05T10:28:02.620-04:002015-04-05T10:28:02.620-04:00What's with all the devotees becoming Buddhist...What's with all the devotees becoming Buddhists? You are a real being, not an aggregate of material factors. Dukkham is not our real or inevitable state of existence. Love is real and transcendental to limited existence.<br /><br />That being said, you are correct. Jagadananda Dashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05887720845815026518noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31351038.post-4324814502946562932015-04-05T10:04:26.199-04:002015-04-05T10:04:26.199-04:00Your reply is somewhat technical, Ananda Gopal, be...Your reply is somewhat technical, Ananda Gopal, because our actions, etc., all spring out of a sense of identity. Who am I? is Sanatan's first question. Mahaprabhu's answer is "You are Krishna das." So what does that mean? Yours is an attempt to answer that second question. But, as Jiva Goswami says, just to think you are a servant of God is really all that is needed. Everything else will follow that.<br /><br />Second point is that this was an attempt to explain the psychological aspect of rasa, which according to Rupa Goswami can only come out of identification. Jagadananda Dashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05887720845815026518noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31351038.post-67535476599240527912015-04-04T13:16:10.722-04:002015-04-04T13:16:10.722-04:00This is one of the reasons why in CV the sadhaka w...This is one of the reasons why in CV the sadhaka won't ever be able to complete the utpatti-krama.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11289157254663651322noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31351038.post-91110637691056345982015-03-09T18:31:33.483-04:002015-03-09T18:31:33.483-04:00Thanks for an interesting article.
The key words...Thanks for an interesting article. <br /><br />The key words here appear to be the active verb "identify" and the concept or resulting construct called "identity". What you are saying, Jagat-ji, implies that the process of sadhana itself causal and that one's identity comes from identifying one's self with a desire. Not surprisingly, this gives me some insight into how Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakur may have really meant the term 'sahajiya' to be applied to the so-called apasampradaya lines of Vaisnava culture. <br /><br />The act of identifying with the expectation of possessing an identity as a result of identification is presumptive of a causal relationship. What it asserts to cause is the creation of an attachment by dint of desire, the establishment of relevance. It's a mental projection that is then encountered in the mirror of mind as a product of imagination. Perhaps now I finally understand why I just cannot accept the description of bhakti sadhana by some as "fake it till you make it." That is what the ethos you are describing feels like. <br /><br />Whereas, if the sadhaka is focused on service and the recursive outflow as compassion of the inflow of grace, then the seva is not about his identity at all. He's like a baby who is not conscious of any body other than the extremities that are of use to him. He is not fascinated with his siddha-svarupa in the least, unless of course the seva that has been identified for him/her involves the use of that svarupa for the fulfillment of divine lila. The sadhaka-deha then would be nothing more than a utility. A desire to keep it maintained well enough for seva would really be the ultimate pure necessity. <br /><br />It seems to me that identifying the physical body as the sadhaka-deha could lend itself to sahajiya moods that would ultimately seek to prematurely enjoy high concepts and sidetrack the sadhaka in fantasy. How can having any attachment to the physical body other than utility be of value in sadhana-bhakti? That is the result of identifying - projecting images onto the mind. <br /><br />On the other hand, being identified is not the same thing at all. Being chosen, receiving mercy, is the process of being identified by our desire. Why should one ever need to imagine what one's siddha-deha looks like, what to speak of what one's sadhana-deha looks like? They are only of relevance to the relationships that are established, are they not? Perhaps this is why the manjaris are so special. They absolutely resist any requests to play with Krishna. Then what need would they ever have to look into their own reflection with any thought other than how they might adorn themselves so that they blend into the scenery of the kunja? <br /><br />My understanding is that what the sadhaka is hoping to do is to receive the mercy to be identified by a type of seva. They will be known for this special seva and they will become devoted to that seva. Perhaps it is helpful to think of the analogy of the disciple being in the guru's heart rather than the guru being in the disciples heart. In the latter, it is all about the disciple. In the former, it is all about the guru (associate of Radha and Krsna). <br /><br />The servitor has no need to identify but to be identified. I feel that is the secret to success on this path. <br /><br />Radhe Shyam <br /><br />(Apologies for the haphazard reply. I hope it makes some sense.)Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11598099318802554223noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31351038.post-14112837193211558482015-03-04T10:43:54.805-05:002015-03-04T10:43:54.805-05:00To learn how all things are ultimately spiritual a...To learn how all things are ultimately spiritual and how karma is really yajna read this article I authored that explains the true nature of karma. Karma is more than just reactions of good and bad actions,,,Karma IS yajna. Anything that is used in the service of God (krishna) is spiritual.<br />https://www.academia.edu/10323241/The_True_Nature_Of_Karma<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />truth speakerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10788006913827731306noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31351038.post-13099733377747451072015-03-02T10:08:36.478-05:002015-03-02T10:08:36.478-05:00Last year I was speaking with a Catholic theologia...Last year I was speaking with a Catholic theologian, who insisted, that our spiritual body will be exactly as our material one, with which we progress spiritually.<br /><br />As he couldn't hear anything else regarding such arguments, I calmed him down by agreeing,that our Gaudiya Vaisnava tradition, being inclusive to various theological doctrines, also encompasses such view.<br /><br />We have devotees in earthly bodies entering Heavenly planets, heavenly sages entering Vaikuntha in their bodies, etc. Our previous acaryas may appear to us in their sadhaka-deha, rather than manjari-deha, etc.<br /><br />In spirituality there are many legitimate and perennial ways, but the siddha-anta (the ultimative conclusion) states the difference between the eternal spiritual body (avatara-deha), descending from that reality and 'spiritualized' material body (sadhaka-deha), not to equate.<br /><br />Mahaprabhu Gauranoreply@blogger.com