Are there two eternal svarupas? - In Vraja and in Gaura-lila

Radhe!

Haberman mentions in that interview with Satyaraja das that actually it is not mentioned anywhere in the granthas of six Goswamis that one has two eternal svarupas, one in Krishna-lila, one in Gaura-lila.

So, what is the siddhanta on that one? One form? Two forms? Both?

Please help.

Thanks,

Tarun

Habermann is correct. It is for all to see (or rather: not to see) in the 6 Goswamis' granthas.

As far as I know, the concept of a svarupa for Gaura-lila first appears in the paddhatis of Gopal Guru and Dhyanancandra. Since then, it has become a widely accepted concept, prominently featured for instance in the writings of Siddha Krishnadas of Govardhan, who has explained the intertwined asta-kala lila of Gaura and Radha-Krishna.

The six Gosvamis did not write much at all about Mahaprabhu aside from a couple of astakams and mentions in several mangalacharanas in their writings. In fact, as far as I've seen, even the popular doctrines of Panca-tattva and the three-fold reasons for Mahaprabhu's appearance are first explored in Caitanya Caritamritam, said to be derived from Svarupa's notes. It has sometimes puzzled me that the six Gosvamis spent so little time in even explaining the basic theology surrounding Caitanya, what to speak of His lila.

The Gaudiya tradition evolved on many fronts and developed somewhat distinct characteristics. In Vraja the six Gosvamis wrote elaborately on the theology of bhakti and composed prayers and narrations on Krishna-lila, in Puri Gopal Guru and others composed manuals explaining systematic raganuga-sadhana, and in Navadvipa the more spontaneous, less "systematic" tradition flourished. They really met on a bigger scale for the first time in the festival of Kheturi, and gradually began to integrate into one tradition; an integration which has never become completed, leaving the tradition with various branches expounding slightly different approaches to Gaudiya Vaishnavism.

The six Goswamis did the work they were assigned by Mahaprabhu. They did not venture into other works. Through the system of parampara, Krishnadas Kaviraja compiled the teachings of Mahaprabhu and those teachings and the work and evolution of Gaudiya Vaishnavism evolved through authorized work assigned through the system of Parampara. The cult and culture of Vaishnavism is only partially represented in the works of the six Goswamis and the fullfillment and elaboration and exposition of Gaudiya Vaishnavism become refined and defined into what is nowadays known as the Krishna consciousness movement. It is the authorized movement that adapted and evolved according to the authorized acharyas who were empowered to bring Krishna consciousness onto the world stage and take it out of the shacks and bowers of India.

Trying to get a complete picture of Gaudiya Vaishnavism through a direct approach to the Goswami granthas is not an authorized approach. We need the input and instructions of the successor acharyas to understand how krishna-bhakti fits into modern living. We cannot eliminate any acharya in the parampara and understand the Goswamis directly. We understand the Goswamis through the eyes of our own guru and not by going around him to get a direct connection which is impossible to attain.

However, the reality of Navadvip and the corresponding svarup of the nitya-parshadas is quite obvious. There are many things in Gaudiya Vasihnavism that is not covered in the granthas of the six-goswamis. You might want to look at the rest of the parampara to get a complete picture, as what you get from the six-goswamis is just the first stage of growing and living tree of Vaishnava culture.

Yes, that goes for their followers like Kaviraja, Narottam and Visvanatha, but not for any later acarya that might contradict them.



Does not sound very respectful to the holy dhamas, or am I mistaking?



So what you suggest? Throw them in the dustbin? Burn them?



We are discussing here at length eligibility for raganuga bhakti and attainment of the siddha deha. Is contradicting the Gosvamis on this a 'modern teaching or version'?



The Gosvamis say you see your siddha svarupa at the stage of bhava, the modern acaryas say at asakti, nistha, ruci and whatnot. Modern approach or just damn confusing for their poor misled flock?



What was to be gained after the Gosvamis were some nice synopses by Narottam and Kaviraja and some nice elaborations by Visvanath. Nothing is to be added and certainly not to be changed however. It seems to me you are trying to introduce or justify changes to the teachings of the Gosvamis?

No no, you do not understand. This is a part of modernizing the tradition, Westerners want it all and they want it now, so therefore the compassionate acaryas have made arrangements to help you realize your siddha-deha before attaining the level of bhava-bhakti.

The gospel of Gaudiya Vaishnavism according to Sparky (Sparkopanishad).

We already are fully acquainted with your dogma, as we have all studied it at one time or another. You are not going to get any support here by beating that drum, just embarassment for yourself. So why do you persist in this exercise in futility?

When you say 'we' you are talking about your own group, which you claim to represent and for which you are supposedly defending the faith.

It is only your teachers that are putting forth this doctrine of having no direct access to the doctrines of the Goswamins. Everywhere else you will find it taught that those books they wrote are meant for everyone that follows the tradition and to be studied directly by them. This notion of people that read those books somehow making an end run around the paramparA is nothing short of laughable. Of course, in your case it would have to involve something like that, since your institutional leaders set themselves up as gatekeepers to prevent your very access to the core teachings of the tradition. It is all that propaganda that amounts to this: "We are the only true keepers of the flame and our acharyas are the only authorized teachers. Without them you are lost in the wilderness and can understand nothing about bhakti." Rubbish and balderdash!

Your so-called 'complete picture' is not very comprehensive at all. It is in fact a very narrow and bigoted view.

I remember Haberman stating this in that same book by Satyaraja; that Visvanatha was really the "cap" of the whole tradition. Very true.

Rasesh,

Your argument is EXACTLY the same as Kirtanananda's argument as to why one must not "jump over" him to the books of Bhaktivedanta Swami.

Yet somehow, you are comfortable with the idea of people "jumping over" Kirtanananda and taking "unauthorized" instruction from Bhaktivedanta Swami.

Please try to understand. The way you feel about Bhaktivedanta Swami, many others feel about the Six Goswamis. Once you accept that it ws OK for Bhaktivedanta to cut devotees off from direct access to the Six Goswamis, you must accept that the next logical step is for Bhaktivedanta's successors to cut THEIR followers off from direct access to Bhaktivedanta.

Except when it comes to siddha-pranali. If that is not in Rupa Goswami's books, it is unauthorized.

there can be more than one take on the "guru given name and service".
We just happen to have a slightly different understanding of how, when and where the guru gives these things. we have not the least argument about this issue. what we do disagree on is the method and process by which the guru gives these things. he gives. no doubt. how, when and where seems to be the bone of contention.

Radhe!

already earlier, i was confused by this "two svarupas" -issues.

so, i don´t have to worry about my svarupa in Gaura-lila and just go on reading the GRANTHAS of THE SIX GOSWAMIS. or do i have to meditate one the lila of Sri Gauranga in parallel ways?

actually, i am more attracted to Krischna -lila instead of Gaura-lila. please, all except Rasesh, help me.
is this wrong?

of course i like to hear about Gaura-lila very much, but mainly i ´m into Krischna´s pastimes.

yeah, i know, Rasesh,because of colourful underwear.

Tarunji

According to our understanding, Gaur lila is there to teach the perfect example of devotional practise, whereas Radha-Krishna lila is the ultimate and eternal goal of life. Hence we find in the 6 Goswamis' books Radha-Krishna nitya lila and Gaur's prakat lila. Such was the wish of Mahaprabhu. sri caitanya mano'bhistham sthapitam yena bhu-tale so'yam rupah - "Rupa Goswami established the heart's desire of Sri Caitanya on earth."

yathA yathA gaura padAravinde
vindeta bhaktim krta punya rashi
tathA tathot sarpati hrdy akasmAt
rAdhA padambhoja sudhambhurAshih

Finally you got something straight, pal. At least, if you see this verse as saying Gaur is the means and Radha the goal.......

There are probably more differences on this point than any other. Saraswati Thakur worshiped Mahaprabhu (alone) with Radha Krishna. Bhaktivinoda Thakur and Lalita Prasad Thakur worshiped Gaura Gadadhar and Radha-Krishna. Bhaktivedanta Swami worshiped Gaura Nitai with Radha-Krishna. Different concepts, each one.

Saraswati Thakur was saying, Gaura is Radha-Krishna milita-tanu.

Bhaktivedanta Swami was emphasizing Nitai's preaching mood and perhaps a tendency to sakhya rasa.

Bhaktivinoda Thakur saw Gaur as Krishna and Gadadhar as Radha. This is our buddy Gadadhar Pran's mood also.

Radhe!

found this interesting:

it seems to support Advaitajis reply:
smaranam of Krischna-lila, surrendering to and following the practice given by Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu

SRILA PRABODHANANDA SARASVATI'S
SRI VRNDAVANA-MAHIMAMRTA
SATAKA 1

1. MEDITATING on the lotus feet of Sri Sri Radha-Muralimanohara, PLACING MYSELF AT THE DUST (SURRENDERING TO THE DUST) of Lord Caitanya's feet, and respectfully offering obeisances to the great devotees of the Lord, who are so many oceans of transcendental virtue. I shall now happily begin to praise the transcendental opulences of Sri Vrndavana.

Tarunji

Yes, Tarun, that is exactly the format in which not only Prabodhananda's books (with the exception of Caitanya Candramrita) are written, but ALL of the Gosvamis books - offer obeisances to Mahaprabhu in the beginning and the rest of the books is Radha Krishna Lila all the way; this is how the Gosvamis meant it. As in the books, so also in one's own bhajan. Nowadays, though, when you attend a GV lila kirtan, they sing about Gaura for 80% of the time, and then if you are lucky, all the way at the end there will be a single song about Radhakrishna, like a showstopper or so, or a dessert.....

Radhe!

Yeah, if you start singing "radha krishna prana mora" , ooouuuuups, the vibrations targeted at your back mean: "kill that "ahead-jumper, guru-tyagi, sahajiya,...". And if you start explaining that particular wonderful song, cruzifiction is at hands or BLANK STARES knock you out. How sad!

But everytime i go to our nearest ISKCON-temple its just like you said. Worst thing:
there are really wonderful people there... So i decided to hang out there from time to time to chat "secretly" with like-minded people! And sell some of your and Panditjis books, hehehehehehe.

Radhe!

Tarunji

Hmmm......Depends on which Iskcon temple you serve in. I was singing 'radha krishna prana mor' daily before the deities in ISKCON Vrindavan in 1981, with a whole group. Of course, that is Vrindavan...... Iskcon Zurich is very liberal, too....

Bhaktivinod's "Yugal Arati" (jay jay radha-krishna yugala-milan | aroti koroye lalitadi-sakhi-gan || etc.) is sung in some temples with Radha-Krishna deities installed, along with Gaura-arati.