Krsna's curd and butter obsession, escapades with married and unmarried women, stealing and killings are explained away by Krsna's Purna Avatar status. Once again, as devotees of Krsna love to do, all of these "immoral" actions simply do not apply to Lord Krsna because he is beyond morality and is God. Period. Perceived desires and actions are NOT what determine a "Purna Avatar". The manifestations of various powers are.
This comment took place within a discussion about the ontological nature of poorna-avatars. Whereas an objection is made that it is not in the inherent nature of an avatar (much less a poorna avatar) to have desires, the above refutation is made giving Krishna as an example of a poorna avatar who had "desires" but it is argued that the exhibition of various powers is the defining characteristic of a poorna avatar rather than any "desires".
I'd like people to help analyse this concept. As we all know, the Gaudiya conception is that Krishna is not an avatar (much less a poorna avatar) but Svayam Bhagavan Himself. This is based on SB 1.3.28. How do we understand the concept of Krishna's supremacy in tattva? Is His position based on the "manifestation of various powers" alone? Aren't there any other factors for determining who is a poorna avatar.Svayam Bhagavan? Perhaps we could use this topic to define Svayam Bhagavan from a scriptural point of view?
As far as I have understood, Sri Rupa Gosvami analyses this concept in Bhakti-rasamrta-sindhu, listing all of the qualities that Krishna possesses and then stating that Krishna has four qualities that even Vishnu does not posssess, thereby showing how Krishna possesses all 64 qualities in full. Is Sri Rupa Gosvami speaking from the viewpoint of tattva or of rasa? The pastime of playing a flute which is "above Vishnu" is not necessarily a "manifestation of power".
So how can we determine the supremacy of Krishna as Svayam Bhagavan? Does it depend exclusively on "manifestation of various powers" or not?