A Goloka for everyone - Individual views of Goloka

Does this not suggest that actually we create our own heavens as someone wrote in another topic?

No.

sadhane bhavibe jaha , siddha dehe pabe taha
raga narge ei sei upaya (Narottama dasa Thankura,P.b.c.-54)

'' The siddha-deha is formed by what we contemplate during sadhana - for this is the method on the raga marga .''

Here is the motto for the raganuga bhaktas . In practical application this principle is simple and logical . It works as the law of karma does in this world . For example , just our present body with its particular set of senses , mentality and desires is the result of our previous desires and activities - our spiritual body is formed from our concentrated desires for Jugala-seva accumulated during sadhana. Yet the deciding factor is prema .

The way one conceives of oneself in the lila will form one's eternal role which is called svarasiki sthiti . Svarasiki means one's peronal ruci , and because such bhajana directly follows the course of one's yearning , it is rightly termed .

Although every individual's svarasiki bhajana will vary to form a unique personal relish , there are some guidelines to follow . For example , the transcendental enviroment that one enters , the mood (of the sakhis) that one encounters , and the lilas that one envisions , should all match the Gaudiya Mahajanas' descriptions. And moreover , one's manasi seva should submissively follow one's guru manjari and manjari parampara .

with respect,

Let me give you an example: Vaisnavas say that Krsna is God, He is one.

Now, let us take the different Krsnas of different organizations.

• The Krsna of Iskcon is quite heavy on rules: he would not allow you to eat chocolate or drink tea.
• The Krsna of Gaudiya Math is a bit more leniant person, He may allow you to eat chocolate.
• Then the Krsna of the Babajis is another different type, He has no objections against tea as I heard from some disciples.
• Then there are those Vaisnavas in India who - despite being serious devotees - are not vegetarians, I personally know some, and I have to say they are just as serious in their worship as veggie devotees. Their Krsna does not send them to hell for that, they would refuse this idea.

So far we have at least four different Krsnas, not to speak of all the other concepts people may have of Him. Also, Iskcon's Krsna - as His guru devotees bring us the message - is not happy when devotees read higher literature, their main focus should be ACBS books. In GM Krsna is happy when people read the works of SSM, but He is angry when they read the Babajis' books. To me it is evident that here we do not have many Krsnas, all we have is different ideas of Krsna created by humans. Just remember the endless debates over what is bona fide and what is not.

Your Krsna, for instance, is happy to see you engaged in Gaura-nagari worship, this is your firm conviction. Some others people's Krsna thinks you are not bona fide. Considering all this, one may get to the conclusion that it is people who create their numberless different ideas of what God is like, how one can get to "heaven," etc.

If you ask the question, "What is Krsna like and what does He exactly expect from us?" you will get many many different answers, often totally contradictory statements from different lineages and different people. So where is the famous "Absolute Truth" we were promised to possess?

Thank you Openmind! this is exactly why we just worship God with LOVE and AFFECTION without desire for reward. We open ourselves for the direct experience of God - when it happens and in the different ways it happens - all experientially - which brings real wisdom - wisdom born of direct experience! Horaay! ps: as we know 'absolut truth' is something the mind cannot experience - it has to be left behind and therefore 'it' is beyond the mind - inconcievable! nothing to talk about other than 'Radhey, Radhey'; 'Ha Gour!' 'Jai Sri Nityananda Ram!'

ye yatha mam prapadyante tams tathaiva bhajamy aham- Gita 4.11

'' I reciprocate in the way that My devotees worship Me .''

If one can approach Krsna in whatever way one wants and He will reciprocate accordingly, then:

1. What is the use of a guru?
2. What is the use of shastras?

Even without a guru or shastra, God still reciprocates with us according to our surrender.

If this is so, then it begs the question why we should follow a guru with his own conception of Goloka, Krishna, or whatever. If the four Gaudiya personages whom you describe do indeed describe their conceptions in slightly different ways - yet remain in the same "lineage" - what does this say for the ordinary sadhaka on the street?

The above paragraph is not very convincing to people who may actually want to attain the abode where Krishna resides, and not worry about attaining their own speculations as it were. If the above was true, what need is there to follow a guru to his own speculation? The role of the guru is to show you (or take you) to Goloka; but is that what he is doing? It might be better if we speculate and attain our own speculation! But would this be guaranteed, as Kishalaya mused in another topic.

There are families of faith. Finding your God also means finding your family. But even different children in the same family may have differing perceptions and experiences of their own parents.

If you can speculate your own God, you are free to try, but you will be cheating yourself of a faith community, unless you can create one through your own charisma.

Moreover, if you think you can do it alone without grace, then go ahead and try. We don't find God alone. We find God with God's help. God helps us through the Guru.

Yes, but this doesn't answer the original point which you made. It may be true that different children in the family perceive their parents differently, but the residence is still the same. You more or less declared that there is a different Goloka for everyone, simply because Jiva, Sanatana et al. described them a little differently.
If I come from a big family in Beverley Hills 90210, it may be so that I view my parents differently than my siblings may do. However, there is only one house in Beverley Hills 90210 where we come from. There are not hundreds of thousands of Beverley Hills 90210's are there?

If those Gaudiya personages described Goloka differently, I would say it is down to their respective realisations. I would not agree to the idea that there is a Goloka for every soul no matter if such an idea is metaphorical or so, and I don't think that this is what those personages were doing either. I don't even understand what you mean by this precisely either, would you mind giving some clearer examples?

Nice to see you again, by the way.

It would seem that this is just a matter of perception or definition. To say that there are more than one goloka for each individual etc. is the same as saying they have respective realisations of goloka.

We indeed perceive a great many Vraja-dhams. Look at the Sankalpa-kalpadruma of Visvanatha. There he serves in his manjari-svarupa throughout the day, accompanied by his guru-manjari and other intimate manjari-companions. The place is not crowded by multitudes of maidservants, one million, say, or more.

Another loving bhakta, contemplating on these very same pastimes, will serve in the company of some other seva-dasis, her very own guru-manjari-varga and the main nitya-lila-parshadas. If we were speaking of one single physical location to which all would have to conform, we would expect to see all the people who attained siddhi during the unlimited descents of Gaura, as he gave manjari-bhava to the world, standing there, each trying to have her turn in doing some service.

However this is obviously not the way it goes. We are talking about a destination beyond time and space. Hence, concerns over whether it is a single place, or whether there are multiple places, become irrelevant. Even if it all took place at the same time, there would be unlimited facets to the fabric of the dhama. Even if it all took place in a single place, there would be unlimited time in which all the unlimited dasis could relish the nectar of seva with just their dear companions and Radha-Shyama.

dyustho'pi nikhilavyApItyAkhyAn mUrtimAn vibhuh/
yugapad dhyAtRvRndeSu sAksAtkArAc ca tAdRzah//

Though dwelling in heaven, the expression " he pervades all" shows that the lord is both all-pervading, as well as having a form simultaniously. Because of this it is possible for him to appear simultaniously to all, who meditate on him, in whatever region of the universe they may be, and who all see him in one and the same form.

( Baladeva Vidyabhusan, Prameya Ratnavali)