I am very confused......... - when the center of gravity shifts

This is not an easy thing for me to say. I have my pride, though not much. I am actually a very humble man. I guess that is why I am going to say what I am about to say.

I am baffled and bewildered how a young devotee 23 years old, that took to Krishna conciousness a mere 10 years ago, has surpassed so many so-called "senior" devotees in learning, study and understanding of the Gaudiya Vaishnava epistemology. I'm talking about Madhava das.

I saw the Nitai-pada-kamala website probably more than a year ago, and at that time I felt a real attraction. It just seemed to captivate my mind. I didn't pursue an interest, because I didn't know anything about who was behind it or what they were all about. It is a very lovely website.

I have been in here for several days now, playing the part of the critic, the sceptic and the naysayer. In the course of the experience, I have taken some time to read some of his works. After some time, I started to break down and feel a great sense of affinity for his works. Now, I have been defeated. His works have become like a new center of gravity for me. When I go to VNN or Chakra or Dipika, they all just seem tasteless in comparison to the saffron dust I taste when I read Madhava's works which are like a lake of lotus flowers just waiting to be bathed in.

How can this be? How can this young guy from Finland be coming out with a movement of works that are conquering me and defeating my pride. How can this young guy from Finland be teaching me things that Prabhupada and Sridhar Maharaja never gave us? How is it that his presentation of Gaudiya epistemology seems to be the complete fulfillment of everything that Mahaprabhu and the Goswamis came to give? How is it that this young guy from Finland has captured my faith and love with his most sweet and nectarean saffron nectar of the Rupanuga siksha?

Madhava das, I really appreciate your works. I think you are nothing short of incredible. I am not too proud to admit that you are now a siksha guru to me.
I don't care that I became a so-called devotee 28 years ago. I can respect your learning and your acheivements as superior to me and mine.

Your translations and writings are succulent with a sweet nectar tinged with the flavor of the saffron mercy particles that have been left by the lotus feet Mahaprabhu and all the great saints of the Rupanuga-dhara.

I see my guru in you, though it is a little awkward to figure out how to deal with this situation. This morning I was driving to the Dannon water bottling plant and on the way the thought just came through my mind "your name is Kusuma Manjari". I didn't even know what the name meant. Then I came home and looked on raganuga.com and Madhva was telling me my name could be Kusuma Manjari. I was really broke-up over that and I cried for about two hours for some unexplainable reason.
My center of gravity has shifted. The siksha of Madhava das just seems to strike my inner chord. I just seem to have a strong taste for his works. I think he is a very special devotee. I don't see how he could be any ordinary human being. I think he is an incarnation of some really special devotee.
I have been around too long not to recognize his outstanding acheivements.


Sri Guruve Namaha

In some circles, he is known as a self-effulgent acharya.

Jay Radha Madhava!

Radhe!

Rasesh,
are serious?

if yes, happy birthday!



Radhe

Tarunji

Hari bol?

Yes, Madhavananda is a very remarkable individual. He has an apparently inexhaustible supply of energy, which is directed into numerous projects simultaneously.

Is this the Ksamabuddhi I know?

Who would of thunk it!

Nice to see you grow!

Much love for you man!

YS

Arnie

The image that has been consistently spun to westerners is that the Saraswat 'lineage' equates to Gaudiya Vaishnavism. The theory goes that Gaudiya Vaishnavism completely declined into Sahajiya practices only to be rescued by Bhaktivinode Thakur.
This kind of rhetoric can only possibly be held by those who have had no recourse to the facts of Bengali history. Those of us in ISKCON at the time had practically no chance to verify this, we simply believed what we where told was true. The same thoery goes that those gaudiya vaishnavas outside of the Sarasvata line must be sahajiyas.
If we just look at Srila Prabhupad's achievements in themselves they are more that worthy of glorification. However, there comes a point where the glorification of SP goes over the top. This has grown over the years into a kind of acharya cult worship, rather like Christianity.My ISKCON Guru even went so far as to state in a poem presented to Srila Prabhupada, that everything outside of ISKCON is maya.

A year or two back at my local temple there was an incident where Giri-raja fell from the alter during Guru-puja. At this time the devotees have their backs to the alter, some devotees turned to see what had happened and saw that a piece had broken from Giri-raja, a friend of mine being very concerned at what had happened approached the temple president relating what had transpired, the reply was,
"What do you want me to do about it?, it's Guru-puja!"
This kind of over-glorification of Guru is closer to the Kartabhajas philosophy the very (asampradaya) sect that Bhaktivinode was so vehemently opposed to.

When I last went to a large Janmastami celebration in my area the preaching was almost entirely based on how great Srila Prabhupada is. Isn't it supposed to be ISKCON. What happened to preaching about Krishna? This is the movement that developed the idea of being Prabhupadanuga's, rejecting the notion that we are to follow in the footsteps of Rupa Goswami. Then when topics of raganuga come up they defend themselves as the real raganugas and everyone else is a sahajiya!
This maybe why it's difficult to understand our gratitude towards Srila Prabhupada, if it's not accompanied by Jaya Prabhupadaah!, Prabhupadaah!, Prabhupadaah!, Jaya Prabhupada!

Am i mistaken or was this post supposed to be in another thread?

I suppose I should say something. It's just that I am a bit at a loss of words here. Jay Radhe.

Whatever you think.

If you are saying that I have to submit and admit defeat, then here it is!

You win! I lose!

madhava das knows what he is talking about and has a very fine understanding of the Rupanuga espistemology.

A genius walks amongst us! I am a nobody. An ISKCON reject.
Madhava is the MAN!

my hero..........................

I have to admit to being somewhat speechless, as well.

I am glad that you are happy with what has happened. No one has been defeated. There is only victory for those who advance in devotion. No one here is looking for scalps or trophies.

Nor, I think, is Madhava quite ready to take disciples, even though we are all humbled by his knowledge, nishtha and service attitude.

Oh, I meant the post of Jagannathdas. It looked like a logical continuation of another thread. Your post was certainly original enough to merit its own thread!

Not that I was planning to!

Oh why not be generous, he is qualified to make disciples all over the world just as soon as he gets his vaca-mana-udara sorted out. We just have to take care that his effulgence doesn't wear off or something.

I have only little time to spend on this website, but after short time I came to the conclusion that I must have misread Madhavananda das' profile about his age, considering the wisdom and maturity that shows in each and every word of his. I also envy Madhava's command of the English language, assuming that it is a foreign language to him as well. It never sounds like it.
Rasesh, I congratulate you as well to your great inner growth and your courage to show it to the outside world, us. I know you from San Jose of your brahmachari days. Madhava and Rasesh - a great couple (?), a great pair... (my Engllish...)

We need to install emergency halo-emitters.

Radhe!

hoho!
we in Germoney have very good halo-emitters.

make you cheap price!

Tarunji

If you ever invent a good "sadhana pill", let me know, I would like to buy a case of it.

Of course, I meant to put a smiley beside that comment. It is not for me to say if or when Madhava takes disciples. I assume that Ananta Dasji will likely having something to say about it.

He's already fulfilling the role of siksa guru here, and doing a very commendable job.

I think you are referring to the first verse of Sri Rupa Goswami's verse of Upadeshamrta. It may be of interest that the translation of that verse generally known to us "...is qualified to make disciples all over the world" is incorrect. According to Nitai's translation of the verse it means:

The impulses of speech, mind, anger,
tongue, belly, and genital;
the wise who can tolerate these
can rule all the earth.

Nitai explained it that was not Sri Rupa Goswami's intention to instigate megalomania within Vaisnavas. Therefore the translation, 'is qualified to make disciples all over the world' is incorrect.

Well, since Vaishnavas in the line of Mahaprabhu and Rupa Goswami have not the least interest or impetus to "rule the Earth", I find Nitai's translation to be quite unlikely. Srila Rupa Goswami was interested in spreading Krishna conciousness all over the world and bringing fallen souls into Krishna consciousness through authorized spiritual masters. He was not the least bit encouraging that Vaishnavas should "rule the Earth". All the Gaudiya epistemolgy teaches quite the contrary.

Nitai's translation does not smack of anything Rupa Goswami has taught anywhere else. I think it is a departure from anything Rupa Goswami has ever taught.

I don't think you have to be a Sanksrit scholar to see that Nitai's translation is misleading and misconceived.

I don't know of anywhere in the writings of Rupa Goswami where he has advocated any attempt to "rule the Earth".

Er... How many times did Sri Rupa Goswami travelled on the Mayflower to preach to Squanto's Indian community and the Pilgramas in New England? Nay, how many times did he hitch a ride with Vasco de Gama to the coast of western Europe from India to preach to the fallen souls there? Nay, how many times did Sri Rupa Goswami travel to Delhi from Vrndavan to sell copies of his Upadeshamrta within the tea stalls of the Moghuls? An Acarya is one who teaches through example.

Sorry, I like Nitai's translation better.

Radhapadaji, I was just using Prabhupada's translation to make a humorous comment about Madhavaji's candidacy for "guruship" and so it served my purpose just to crack a joke.

However I have read Nitai's translation elsewhere and I agree with it in principle, but if we look at the original text we can see that 'ziSyAt' is mentioned quite clearly. This does not seem to be reflected in Nitaiji's translation. Any comments?

pRthiviM sa ziSyAt, the earth is his disciple. If one can control himself, he can control the world. I believe there is a legend of a Moghul ruler associated with the phrase. Details, anyone?

A question arises: when person is intended to take his own disciples? When receives an order from his guru? What did Gosvamis say on the matter?
Two cases comes to my mind: first from varta of Sur Das. When he met Sri Vallabhacarya, he already weared title 'Svami' and had his own disciples. After receiving diksa from Vallabha he asked about diksa for all his former disciples, and Vallabhaji gave them diksa also.
The second one is from our modern life. There is one russian devotee, who left ISKCON several years ago and started his own 'math'... In last year he took shelter at Srila Narayan Maharaj, and received diksa from him. AFAIK, when he asked for initiations for his former disciples, Narayan Maharaj said, that they are his disciples, and he must take care for them himself...

I don't think the "translation" in question is really the last line of that verse but the concept of preaching/megalomania itself--something that probably deserves a thread of its own (especially considering both that this was a thread meant to praise an individual's seva and therefore not really a place for debate, IMO, and, ironically, is an example of someone teaching on a widespread basis.

That said, and Moghul rulers aside, there is a very clear connection between the self-control advocated in this verse and the qualifications for being a guru. For instance, within three pages of Ananta Das Babaji's Sri Guru Tattva Vijnana, we find:
"He should be upasamasraya, or devoid of lust, anger and greed. The heart of anyone who is enlightened by bhakti cannot be covered by the darkness of lust and greed and so on."

"4) He is not overcome by vices like lust and greed."

"{He} has defeated the six enemies headed by lust."

"{He} has control over his senses."

"{He} is free from anger"

"Non-violent."

These quotes are all based on Hari Bhakti Vilasa and Bhagavatam.

I don't think it is a huge extrapolation to see the term "sisyat," connect it with self-control and come out with a concept of the qualification for instructing others. Certainly, I doubt that Rupa Gowami uses "prthivim sa sisyat" as mere poetry or as a mundane enticement, ala karma kanda: "control your senses and rule the world!"

I think the objection being raised here is an attempt to tie Rupa Goswami's instruction in BRS to not accept many disciples to the verse at hand, and that is a fair enough argument. Although it is worth noting that whereas Upadesamrta instructs us to ignore faults in the Vaisnava's body, Hari Bhakti Vilasa (as quoted in Sri Guru Tattva Vijnana) tells us to seek a guru who does not have physical defects. Contradictions, or--and I'd prefer this term--shifting of focus abound.

As far as someone connecting and identifying with a particular statement and ornamenting it, I don't see the problem. An objective reader--if such a person exists--might see the verse for what it says (I happen to like Madhava's translation) but if someone in their service mood uses it in another way, finds meaning and applies it to their own life, I don't think they have done anything that has not happened umpteen times in the history of Gaudiya Vaisnavism, and is indeed perhaps inevitable and even desirable. Take, for instance, the "extrapolation" of Nityananda being told to marry and preach becoming the basis for the Nityananda vamsa. Or a rasika bhakta's hearing "vraja" in Gita 18.66--everyone hears meaning and applies it according to their own bhava.

And while we are speaking of individual inspiration from words and the connection between different sources, how can someone in a particular service mood of trying to spread Mahaprabhu's teachings not come across the Nectar of Upadesa and not tie it to "yare dekha, tare kaha 'krishna'-upadesa"?

There is a symmetry there for those who want to see it. Certainly as much symmetry as dissymmetry.

I don't know. But, the term "sisyat" has been translated to mean "disciple".
Isn't there some difference between a "disciple" and "subject" as would be the underlings of a King or great ruler? Doesn't "sisya" have some particular reference to a student or a disciple as opposed to being the "subject" of a ruler or king?
I think it is quite standard in the writings of the Goswamis that "sisya" usually refers to discipleship more so than "subjectship".

The "earth" is his disciple? Would that mean that planet Earth is his disciple? Or, that the ground (dirt) will be his disciple? Or, that people from all over the Earth planet will be his disciple.

Clearly, translating the writings of Rupa Goswami requires more than just Sanskrit scholarship. Isn't there some sort of spiritual realization that one needs to understand what Rupa Goswami was saying?

I guess if one does not know Sanskrit very well, it would be very hard to know what Sri Rupa Goswami is saying. Just like if English was a second language, it would very hard to understand Shakesperean literature.

The issue at hand is the matter of trying to come to some sort of concensus as to what Srila Rupa Goswami meant by pritivim sa sisyat.
Surely, he had something specific that he was trying to say. I don't think he was saying that "dirt will be his disciple" or that "planet Earth will be his disciple". I think that the translation of Swami Bhaktivedanta is a good extrapolation of the inner meaning of that verse by Srila Rupa Goswami.
Any other explanation just doesn't seem in line with the spirit of the cult of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu.

Even Madhvaji is demonstrating this principle as he is making disciples all over the world in the line of Ananta das Babaji, who is known to be one in control of his senses.

There are a couple of points from the Sanskrit. ziSyAt is "vidhi-liG" which is somewhat ambiguous. It may indicate both prescriptions ('should') or hypotheses ('may'). This is quite a difference in this case. The verb root ziS also has a number of different meanings. I also wonder whether this verse is Rupa's originally, or one that he picked up elsewhere (like the dadAti pratigRhNAti verse). This would be significant also.

The interpretation of "making disciples all over the world" appears to suggest that whoever controls the aforesaid urges can actually make disciples all over the world.

I am now browsing through the tikas of Radha Raman Goswami and Bhaktivinod, the GVS edition. Unfortunately I don't have the original text at hand.

RRG: "It is essential to note here that by subduing the six passions described already, what is obtained is merely the qualification to enter the realm of bhakti. These are not direct limbs of devotional practice (sadhana-bhakti) but, rather, the doorway through which one may enter the realm of bhakti."

This doesn't seem to suggest that any qualification of a guru is being spoken of, since the aforesaid limbs are not even direct sAdhanAGgas.

BVT: When the agitation of the mind is withdrawn or, in other words, when one is devoid of thirst for material enjoyment, the impetuosity of the eyes, the life air, the hearing propensity and all other drives become pacified. Therefore, persons who have gained victory over these six overwhelming passions can conquer the entire world.

Bhaktivinod seems to support the "conquering the world" idea. Of course (in my opinion) that should be taken as a symbolic expression of the greatness of victory over senses; not that we are planning to conquer the world.

Bhaktisiddhanta doesn't comment a word on "pRthiviM sa ziSyAt".

Does anyone have any other tikas at hand? What other tikas are there, anyway?

Forgive my ignorance, but 1. who is radharaman goswami, 2. what or who is GVS?

Regarding prthivim sa sisyAt, I discovered back in my Radhakunda-days that all Bengali translators, including the GM ones, gave another artha to it than A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami's. Like the artha you quote above, about conquering the senses being the hallmark of a devotee in general, not as a qualification of a Guru per se.

1. In his tika on the opening shloka, Radha Raman Goswami introduces himself by offering obeisances to his guru and grand-father, Sri Jivana-lala, along with Sri Gopinatha Das, the sevaite of Radha-ramana and a disciple of Gopal Bhatta Gosvami, as well as to Bhatta Gosvami himself. Beyond this, I don't know anything of him.

2. Gaudiya Vedanta Samiti, they've published an English edition with three tikas.

But, isn't the Gaudiya Vaishnava doctrine known for advocating that the only way one can actually control the mind and senses is in devotional service? Isn't it said somewhere that without devotional service one cannot possibly get the mind and senses under control without engaging them in devotional service. Isn't it a given, that when Rupa Goswami talks about controlling the senses that he is refering to the process of doing so through practicing the principles of bhakti? And, if so, doesn't his statement automatically indicate that such person is fully engaged in devotional service and has thus conquered the senses. Wouldn't that also go to say that such a person who has controlled his senses through the positive engagement in devotional service, would thereby be qualfified to teach and preach this science of devotional to others and thus be qualified as a spiritual master?

I can't recall reading that bhakti is the only way for controlling the senses. There is karma-yoga, there is jnana-yoga. As far as I know, they are advocated as means for attaining mukti. One who attains mukti has controlled his senses.

Let's say that a person has controlled his senses through bhakti. Which level of advancement would this qualify him for? Would that automatically indicate the presence of sufficient spiritual potency for acting as a guru? Detachment from the worldly is only one of the aspects indicating a genuine guru, zabde pare ca niSnAtam must also be there in addition to brahmaNy upasamAzrayam.

Straying a bit from the topic, if it was indeed the intended rationale that through bhakti one can come to conquer his senses, why would Rupa Gosvami first speak of sense-control, and afterwards move on to discussions of bhakti? Not that I disagree with the premise, just a curious observation.

What´s artha?

Well, since we know that Rupa Goswami would consider mukti as hellish, we can know for certain that he was not talking about attaining mukti, or controlling the senses through the methods aimed at attaining mukti. Since Rupa Goswami was advocating bhakti, we can understand that he was referring to controlling the senses through bhakti and then making disciples anywhere in the world.



Here again, we would be assuming that Rupa Goswami was not speaking on the subject of bhakti. As well, we would be suggesting that he is saying that one can artificially control his senses through some process other than zabde pare ca niSnAtam. I think that since Rupa Goswami said that such a person can make disciples all over the world that it can be assumed that he is refering to a Goswami who attained that platform by being zabde pare ca niSnAtam.



Then you agree that Rupa Goswami said that one must be free of anarthas before he can take to the process of Raganuga bhakti?

Jai Radhe

I'd say that his translation as vanquishing the world is rather drastic, as that is probably not what Sri Rupa wanted to convey.

The point is not about freedom from anartha. Visvanatha Cakravartipada relates in Madhurya-kadambini that it is possible to be afflicted by anarthas (gross or subtle) throughout one's devotional career. It is only at the attainment of prema can one be said to be completely freed from anarthas, so it is quite possible to be relatiely "advanced" and yet afflicted by anarthas. Strictly speaking, anarthas vanish in proportion to one's spiritual advancement. So an "advanced" sadhaka will have less anarthas to deal with than a beginner devotee despite the fact that the anarthas in question may be subtle and not gross, but they are still "there" until one attains prema.

When Rupa Gosvami speaks of sense control, or about one who can control the senses, this is not related to freedom from anarthas. Kindly correct my errors, if any. Nice picture by the way, I could hardly stop myself from staring at Her.

So, was Rupa Goswami then saying that a person with anarthas, even though he is controlling his senses can, can make the world his disciple?
Is Rupa Goswami saying that the whole world should thus become the disciple of one who has anarthas?



I am now accepting disciples. Send your donations to:

Anarthananda Swami
High Springs, Florida

(isn't the mind also one of the senses that has to be controlled?)

this is the verse

This may be a topic of its own, but...since everyones talking about anarthas...

Does ANYONE think that ANY material "being" other than the Lord Himself, be free of ALL anarthas?

Besides, does it really matter if the person you are aspiring for is still growing themselves?

Are not anarthas relative to say the least?

YS

Wouldn't "vaco-vegam" have a rather deep meaning in the rupanuga conception? Wouldn't that imply perfect control of the speaking capacity by only speaking about Krishna 24/7?

Doesn't the rupanuga school of thought advocate that the only real control of the speaking capacity is to speak about Krishna and nothing esle?

Therefore, doesn't this first word of Upadeshamrita say that one must speak only of Krishna and nothing else?

Where does Upadeshamrita stand in the curriculum of the rupanuga siksha?
Was it before NOI, after it, or does it even matter?

Was NOI meant for non-devotees or for devotees who were already cultivating Krishna-bhakti?

This is how Narayana Maharaja translates the verse in discussion:

Haribol

In this verse Rupa Goswami doesn't even mention that one need be a Krsna bhakta in order to accept disciples all over the world what to speak of a devotee who is beyond the harrowing stage of anartha nivrtti. Rupa Goswami is giving good advice for anyone who wants to accept disciples for whatever reason. Even school teachers should understand that this verse is also applicable for them.

You might like to take a look at the first few posts of this discussion. It should answer these questions. The discussion there is not so much about anarthas, but rather over the question of a "realized" guru.

Well, how many people do you know speak about Krishna 24/7? It would be obvious that such a person would be a siddha-guru who has attained prema, and is thus "perfect." This does not in itself imply that advanced sadhakas who have not attained prema are not speaking about Krishna 24/7, as they may very well be doing so, but let's face facts: what are the odds on meeting a siddha-guru who spends all of his time in "Krishna-bhakti-rasa-bhavita-matih"? They're very rare and hard to find.

When you say "perfect control," you are referring to someone who has attained perfect control. What about those who are trying to control their kaya-mana-vakya and such in order to gain perfect control? Do they get a look-in?


Well, the text is Rupa Gosvami's "tips" for the sadhaka. This would be obvious for anyone who reads it considering that he lists six things we should not do, six things that we should do, six things devotees should do with each other, and so on. After all, even Bhaktivedanta Swami states in his preface that Upadesamrta "constitutes the first instructions for neophyte devotees. One should follow these instructions very strictly. Then it will be easier to make one's life successful."


It's highly likely that the text was meant for those trying to cultivate Krsna-bhakti i.e.:- sadhakas. One would think that those wholly uninterested in the topic would not bother reading the book in the first place.

The gopis? The gopalas? Nanda and Yasoda? All the nitya-siddhas? Even a sadhana-siddha guru?

I see that you've edited your post while I was replying to it. Anyway, considering the number of opinions of people in this thread who are in favour of the 'disciples' and 'no disciples' interpretation of this text, I think we can safely say that it is "each to their own" in regards to interpretation. In one way Rupa Gosvami could be speaking that "it is important to control these things"; whereas in another way Rupa Gosvami could be saying "one who has controlled these things is qualified to make disciples."

In any case, does it matter? Who's talking so much about disciples anyway? Rather, it is very important to control all of the things mentioned in the verse. That has not been in dispute so far.

But are not these manifestations of the souls in Krsna -lila in Vaikuntha, being reflected in the material creation. They have maifested along with Krsna to join Him in His "earthly" lilas? They have already been "liberated", being free of ALL anarthas and are now taking part in Krsnas enjoyment of His material creation?

YS

Then "vaco-vegam" means that nobody should ever say anything?

oooops!

We are all in trouble!

How can a teacher not ever say anything?

Come to think of it...who is to say that these souls manifesting with the Lord reached enlghtenment and then liberation on this one little planet and not on any of the higher planets?

YS

No, I never said that one should not say anything. The idea is obviously that one should do his level best to restrict his talking facility to topics of Krishna, while one who is highly advanced will already know how to engage his talking facility. Hrsikena hrsikesa-sevanam bhaktir ucyate.

No, they are nitya-siddhas. 'Nitya' means eternal. They were never "liberated" (in the sense of being liberated from the mahat-tattva) and never had any anarthas to remove.

A sadhana-siddha is a completely different thing altogether. Can any learned devotee explain how far the two are different in regards to prakata and aprakata-lila?

So what your saying is that these souls NEVER "fell" into material existence? They were eternally perfect! Why were they the lucky ones?

Besides, this seems to contradict some teachings I remember reading that if one truly desired to be part of a certain lila (parental, conjugal, friend) it could possibly manifest for them! These being souls in the material manifestation.

How do we know that some of these "materially manifested souls" were not part of these lilas?

YS

They just are, I guess. That's the logic of eternity. Time is a relevant element only in the mahat-tattva and does not apply to a transcendent spiritual reality. Time probably doesn't even exist as far as the Vrajavasis are concerned. The "days" and "nights" that take place there are supervised by Krishna's own Yoagamaya. What's fascinating is that Krishna Himself gets "deluded" by this.


Sure, if you're talking about sadhakas. But for a sadhaka to experience such things is an act of mercy and there is no guarantee that one will experience such things no matter how "perfect" we are in our sadacara and sadhana, etc.


What do you mean by "materially manifested" souls?

P.S. BTW I edited my previous post for clarity.

Those souls who have taken birth in our world.

YS

Sorry, artha means 'the meaning'.

The NCC mentions only the UpadezaprakAzikA of RAdhArAmaNadAsa.

Sincerely,
Elpis

That's probably one of the reasons why people here aren't so enthusiastic over the "make disciples all over the world" interpretation.

Only a premi-bhakta is free from all anartha. Can no-one else act as a guru?

I unfortunately can't see the bridge you've built between my statement and your conclusion.

If we wish to interpret the Upadesamrita as an absolute set of step-by-step injunctions, then one should first control his senses and make disciples all over the world, and then afterwards adopt the six items favorable and reject the six items unfavorable for bhakti, and only after that is done, to lovingly associate with devotees, and so forth. This is obviously an absurd proposal.

The point I wanted to bring up is, why did Rupa mention sense-control as the first issue?

The body of the sadhaka becomes spiritualized in the course of his sadhana. When one attains prema, the body and mind are no longer material, and are therefore not riddled by the matters of this world.

Yes, this is certainly so. It is, however, a good question why Rupa chose to compose a verse which didn't clearly indicate the positive aspect of devotion, but rather spoke of conquering various urges.



As far as I know, Upadesamrita is the same thing as NOI (Nectar of Instruction).

It's a guidebook which leads one from the very beginning to the essence of raganuga-sadhana. As for where it's in the curriculum, I suppose it's a handy reference of the basics for all grades.

On pRthivIM sa ziSyAt, ziSyAt is in the fifth, ablative case, indicating "from", or otherwise comparison with something. How does that fit into the verse?

ziSyAt is also in singular case, the plural, "disciples", would be ziSyebhyaH.

Jagat?

Dear Madhava,

In this verse, ziSyAt is not the ablative singular of ziSya (although the form is the same), but the third person singular of the optative (liG) active (parasmaipadam).

The etymological root is zAs, which has a weakened form ziS. This weakened form is used in the liG formation.

There are two optatives in the verse: viSaheta and ziSyAt. The first, with the relative yas, conveys something of a general import. The second, ziSyAt, I would interpret to express fitness or capability.

My translation of the two last lines of the verse would be:

"A wise man who subdues these agitations can [is capable of, fit to] instruct the entire Earth."

zAs can also mean to rule or govern, so it is also possible to have "rule the entire Earth" at the end of the translation.

Sincerely,
Elpis

Thanks for reminding me. That is the meaning I saw in the different Bengali translations all these years ago!

So, we need to recruit an army of sense-controlled Krishna conscious soldiers to take over the world and to establish varnasrama-dharma and a Krishna conscious president (or monarch?).

This verse obviously has two meanings, for two different classes of men. Those who feel like ksatriya can start conquering the world by force, and those who feel brahminish can start preaching all over the world. Thus the Krishna consciousness movement conquers the world on two different fronts under the guidance of Rupa Goswami. Once the job is done, we can move on to verse 2, and as we reach verse 8, we can go to Vraja and engage in bhajan.

Rupanuga bhajan-sadhan ki jay!

In Holland we have a saying: "Change the world, start with yourself". Perhaps it is written in this mood. "I conquer my senses, and in this way I started making the world a better place."

In the interests of public safety, can someone PLEASE attribute this verse to someone else! What about that Moghul ruler you mentioned? A connection like that might lessen the urge to militancy...or not.

Yay!

Sorry, I meant Jaya! I think Advaitaji has hit upon the most sensible meaning, and it certainly fits in with the theme of Upadesamrita by Rupa Gosvami.

What exactly do you mean by the body becoming "spiritualized"? The physical body of a premi-bhakta will still continue to be made of flesh and blood, no? Else what is meant by "spiritualized"?

The Tantric understanding would be based on their process of uniting the inner and outer mandala.

'The World' is indeed within!

'He who conquers his senses truly conquers the universe'.
Does this verse quote from or paraphrase an older Tantric verse?

but isnt it once a person reaches prema, they are no longer in need of their physical form? doesnt this soul give up its body? can the physical form actually contain prema? if once a soul reaches prema and they leave their bodies because of it , then doesnt that mean that no living thing can be free of all anarthas?

You been drinking again?

Dont be a smartass...just give me your two cent sense! LOL!
These are paraphrased questions from a Christian friend who is interested in KC. I have given him what I can find by Prabhupada (to a point) on prema...but he has these questions?

My two cents? My two cents is that Madhvaji is like unbeatable and everything he says he can back up with shastra. You better get outa here quick unless you wanna be turned into a gopi.
If Madhava said it, it is true.

This is the land of no return!

It's kinda like Sivaloka; anybody who enters there gets turned into a female.
Anybody who enters this forum gets turned into a mind-slave of Madhavanandaji. He even makes the old timers like Jagat look like mental-midgets.

Madhavaji is an incarnation of some divinity. It's kinda scarey to know that a 23 year old boy has acheived what he has.

Your best bet is to just ask him some sincere questions. Don't come in here challenging him like you know better than he does. He is not some blowhard mouthing off concocted philosophy. The kid is a genius. If you have some question about something, just ask him to explain it to you. Don't even think you can defeat him in a debate.

I tried to debate with the guy and got turned into a gopi. You better get outta here quick. It wouldn't look right if a grizzly biker dude like you with all them tattoos is going around telling everybody that he is a little cowgirl in heaven.

No. Cid-ananda-maya.

prabhu kohe, vaiSNava-deha prakRta kabhu naya |
aprAkRta deha bhakter cid-Ananda-maya || CC 3.4.191 ||

"Prabhu said -- The body of a Vaishnava is not material; a devotee's body is supramundane, and infused with spiritual joy."

Also,

dIkSA kAle bhakta kore Atma-samarpana |
seil-kAle kRSNa tAre kore Atma-sama || 192 ||
sei deha kare tAra cid-Anandamaya |
aprAkRta-dehe tAGra caraNa bhajaya || CC 3.4.193 ||

"At the time of diksa, as the devotee surrenders his soul, Krishna makes him as good as Himself.
His body is transformed into one infused with spiritual joy, and in that supramundane body, he worships His feet."

This is the logic of nAdevo devam arcayet.

The apparent bodily defects in the body of a premi-bhakta are nothing but an illusory veil covering it, just like the holy dhama, also an abode of Bhagavat-lila, appears mundane to the mundane eyes. The astonishing results of bhakti are veiled from the faithless.

Also, the tikakaras on 1.2.2 (kRti sAdhya bhavet ... ) explain how the material senses cannot serve the transcendent Lord, and therefore the both the senses and the mind become spiritualized as bhakti-sadhana, a transcendent reality, descends into the senses. This is also explained in Brihat Bhagavatamritam, the section discussing bhajana. Perhaps someone can look up the verses and post them in, I don't have a Sanskrit text at hand.

I wasnt trying to "defeat" him. I was asking sincere questions. Ones that were asked of me and I wasnt too clear on the topic...so...I did what someone should do and go to a good source!

YS

BTW..."put the beer down!"

I don't really much appreciate my seniors like Jagat compared to mental midgets. I happen to be in the habit of posting relevant references amidst my ramblings, and that makes them appear authoritative. If Jagat were to have the same habit, he would far outshadow me in this regard.

"If Madhava said it, it is true."

Agreed?

And I won't let that slip without evidence:

jagad-vAcitvAt || Vedanta-sutra 1.4.16

"It is for Jagat to be said."

Ok, what's nAdevo devam arcayet? Something like "you become who you worship"?

Considering the relative illusoriness that you speak of, we may have to consider some very "real-life" situations when the guru gets an illness and may even leave this world as a result of such illness. Even if the result is not that drastic, anyone may suffer from disease and other physical obstacles during the normal course of their lives. If this is to be considered as a "illusory veil," then that does not sound very fair from the disciple's point of view. Come to think of it, it does not sound very fair for the guru either!

Seems to me that this is where Upadesamrta 6 comes into play; that despite such "faults" being perceived in the guru's body, it is the duty of a disciple to see the guru (and/or his body) as a Bhagavad-svarupa or whatever. Of course I am speaking of the situation from a disciple's point of view. I do accept that the actual situation as related to the spiritualization of the physical body is as you say.


Do you know which part it is, One or Two? Because I don't have Part Two at the moment.

No, "One who is not deva cannot worship the Deva," that's the idea. Whatever is used for the worship of the Spirit must be of the same nature.



It is also not fair that the holy dham looks very dirty, right? However, is the nitya-dhama which is veiled affected in the least?

Of course this doesn't mean that if you see a great sadhu tripping over and hurting his leg, you just say "Hare Krishna, that's just maya," or something like that. There is a deep theological consideration, and there is a practical consideration in the realm of human activities.



2.3.136 onwards, ten verses or so. The entire chapter is very interesting.

Interesting questions. Madhavaji?


I had a discussion about this concept recently. I believe that according to Visvanatha's Raga-vartma-candrika (2.7), the answer is an emphatic yes. Visvanatha happens to describe everything very clearly as follows:

atha rAgAnugA bhakti majjanasyAnartha nivRtti niSThA-rucy AsaktyantaraM prema-bhUmikArUDhasya sAkSAt svAbhISTa-prAptiprakAraH pradarzyate

"Now it will be described how the rAgAnugIya bhaktas gradually advance through the stages of anartha nivritti (cessaton of bad habits), niSThA (fixation), ruci (taste), and Asakti (attachment to the beloved deity) upto the stage of prema (love of God) and the direct attainment of their beloved deity.

This clearly shows that prema is the final goal, at least in the material body. What of more advancement? Sri Visvanatha continues:

yathojjvala nIla-maNau “tad bhAva baddha rAgA ye janAs te sAdhane ratAH. tad yogyam anurAgaughaM prApyotkaNThAnusArataH. ta ekazo’thavA dvi-trAH kAle kAle vraje’bhavan” iti. anurAgaughaM rAgAnugA bhajanautkaNThyaM na tv anurAga sthAyinaM sAdhaka-dehe’nurAgotpatty asambhavAt. vraje’bhavann iti avatAra samaye nitya priyAdyA yathA Avirbhavanti tathaiva gopikA-garbhe sAdhana-siddhA api Avirbhavanti.

"In ZrI Ujjvala-nIlamaNi it is said, 'Those who are specially attracted to the ecstasy of the Vraja-vAsIs, and thus perform rAgAnugA-bhajana, will attain the abundance of eagerness that is fit for performing rAgAnugA-bhajana and will take birth in Vraja in groups of one, two or three in their own time, according to their eagerness.'
"Here the word anurAgaugha means 'that eagerness which makes one qualified for doing rAgAnugA-bhajana.' The anurAga mentioned here does not refer to the sthAyi-bhAva (permanent mood) of that name, because the sthAyi-bhAva called anurAga cannot be attained within a sAdhaka-body. The words 'having taken birth in Vraja' means that the sAdhana-siddhas take birth from the womb of a gopikA, just as KRSNa's eternally beloved gopIs appear with Him when He descends to earth (prakaTa-lIlA)."

One may like to clarify Visvanatha's purpose here: What is the necessity of mentioning anurAga when he is not speaking of the sthAyi-bhAva called 'anurAga'? This is probably because Visvanatha is referring to the eagerness for doing rAgAnugA-bhajana, as opposed to describing the advanced stages of prema viz., sneha, mAna, praNaya, rAga, anurAga, and mahAbhAva. And he specifically states that anurAga cannot be attained within a sAdhaka body. However the question is about prema. Let us read on:

tataz ca nityasiddhAdi gopInAM mahA-bhAva-vatInAM saGga mahimnA darzana zravaNa kIrtanAdibhiH sneha mAna praNaya rAgAnurAga mahAbhAvA api tatra gopikA-dehe utpadyante. pUrva janmani sAdhaka-dehe teSAm utpattya-sambhavAt.

"Thereafter, by associating with, seeing, hearing and glorifying the mahAbhAva-filled, eternally liberated Vraja-gopIs, gradually sneha, mAna, praNaya, rAga, anurAga and mahAbhAva will appear in that gopika-body. These feelings could not possibly have arisen in the material body of the sAdhaka in his previous birth."

The simple fact that Visvanatha starts talking about the advanced symptoms starting with sneha show that prema has already been attained by the sAdhaka. In the first part, he confirms that the sAdhaka is to go through anartha-nivritti, niSTha, ruci, Asakti upto prema. Later, however, he starts talking about sneha, etc., and specifically states that these feelings cannot be attained in a material body, unlike prema.

So it is not "enough" to just get into prakata-lIla, oh NO mistah! You still have yet to progress even as a gopi before you can get to serve Radha-Krishna all by yourself! Although I should say at this point that the very reason which caused me to delineate all of these points is because I had read a transcript of some Sarasvata maharaja's talks, and in that talk he is firmly of the opinion that prema cannot be attained in a material body though he provides no evidence for this assertion. That is unfortunate and clearly contradicts Visvanatha Cakravartipada. Very strange.

The siddha-mahatma is no longer in need of his physical form, but others may be in need of his presence among them ...

=D> =D> =D>

(hmmm... there're no applause smiley... )

"The body is the only form of the soul."

- Immanuel Kant

This seems to be reflected in how Narottama Mahasaya's body melted into milk, because it was a completely spiritual body and not physical. What a relief!

Generally, however, the spiritualized sadhaka-deha merges with the siddha-deha as the premi-bhakta leaves this world. What is left behind is an illusory form, just like it at the time of Krishna's departure, when He was accidentally shot by a hunter.