I replied to Advaita Das's post below with:
This subject is very subtle and difficult to make short work of. I appreciate that both are possible models for reality. Both sides of the argument have their favorite verses to quote that they feel bolster their argument. I am surprised that you missed two biggies that the inherent svarup school uses- Madhya.22.160-161.
160: kṛṣṇaḿ smaran janaḿ cāsya
preṣṭhaḿ nija-samīhitam
tat-tat-kathā-rataś cāsau
kuryād vāsaḿ vraje sadā
Here nija samihitam (of one's own choosing) being critical.
161: dāsa-sakhā-pitrādi-preyasīra gaṇa
rāga-mārge nija-nija-bhāvera gaṇana
And here nija nija is echoed.
If there was not a process of hearing and purifying through association with Vaishnavas these words would absolutely no meaning.
This totally agrees with:
“Love of Krishna is eternally perfect, it is never merely produced by sadhana – when the heart is purified by hearing and so, it arises.”
With regards to sadhana there is no practical difference between the one who subscribes to the inherent or gifted svarup models. This was confirmed by a senior traditional devotee who I can cite in private to you if you wish.
Secondly the school of inherent svarup are of the opinion that
1. no one gets bhakti without mercy of Vaishnava and Krsna.
2. no one gets back to Godhead with out diksa.
3. the ananda that is inherent in the svarup is not of the same quantity or quality of those nitya-siddha-jivas.The inherent school also asks, "if there are two kinds of tatastha sakti jivas, both missing the svarup, as you say, Nitya-Baddha and Nitya-Siddha,
did the nitya siddha tatastha sakti get bhakti lata bija and from whom? And when?
Their svarup must be intrinsic otherwise from where is it coming? Some choose Krsna-dasya and some come here. The one who did not choose Krsna came her and got contaminated and need the diksa.
Point 2:
Now, supposing the jiva who comes here gets bhakti lata bija according to your conception. Let us also suppose for whatever reason he does not attain to Krsna upon dying and takes birth in a human body. if the ananda has been infused into the jiva- he now has his svarup, there would be no necessity to take diksa again?!
But diksa is necessary always.
But if the ontology of the jiva has been fundamentaly altered with the external infusing of the svarup, why take again? This is unworkable.
Please excuse my lack of intelligence and quarrelsome nature.
Joy Sitanatha Prabhu!
Advaita Das replied with:
Interesting comment, Visnudas. However, of the two points:
"Some choose Krsna-dasya and some come here. The one who did not choose Krsna came her and got contaminated and need the diksa."
It seems here you erred, since there is no such siddhanta of Sadhu Shastra and Guru that we made a choice and came here (fall-vada).
"But diksa is necessary always.
But if the ontology of the jiva has been fundamentaly altered with the external infusing of the svarup, why take again? This is unworkable."
As far as I understood from my Guru-bari, the Guru comes back for the submissive disciple. That would almost certainly mean that the disciple gets diksa again. I know that there is a class of Vaishnavas that say that the bhakti lata bija means diksa and can be given just once, but to my knowledge there is no independent confirmation of that. Because in that case your theory would be unworkable.
..............................................
>I will work on a proper reply to Advaita as I was not satisfied with his reply and that is probably due to my lack of clarity and intellect.
This subject is very subtle and difficult to make short work of. I appreciate that both are possible models for reality. Both sides of the argument have their favorite verses to quote that they feel bolster their argument. I am surprised that you missed two biggies that the inherent svarup school uses- Madhya.22.160-161.
160: kṛṣṇaḿ smaran janaḿ cāsya
preṣṭhaḿ nija-samīhitam
tat-tat-kathā-rataś cāsau
kuryād vāsaḿ vraje sadā
Here nija samihitam (of one's own choosing) being critical.
161: dāsa-sakhā-pitrādi-preyasīra gaṇa
rāga-mārge nija-nija-bhāvera gaṇana
And here nija nija is echoed.
If there was not a process of hearing and purifying through association with Vaishnavas these words would absolutely no meaning.
This totally agrees with:
“Love of Krishna is eternally perfect, it is never merely produced by sadhana – when the heart is purified by hearing and so, it arises.”
With regards to sadhana there is no practical difference between the one who subscribes to the inherent or gifted svarup models. This was confirmed by a senior traditional devotee who I can cite in private to you if you wish.
Secondly the school of inherent svarup are of the opinion that
1. no one gets bhakti without mercy of Vaishnava and Krsna.
2. no one gets back to Godhead with out diksa.
3. the ananda that is inherent in the svarup is not of the same quantity or quality of those nitya-siddha-jivas.The inherent school also asks, "if there are two kinds of tatastha sakti jivas, both missing the svarup, as you say, Nitya-Baddha and Nitya-Siddha,
did the nitya siddha tatastha sakti get bhakti lata bija and from whom? And when?
Their svarup must be intrinsic otherwise from where is it coming? Some choose Krsna-dasya and some come here. The one who did not choose Krsna came her and got contaminated and need the diksa.
Point 2:
Now, supposing the jiva who comes here gets bhakti lata bija according to your conception. Let us also suppose for whatever reason he does not attain to Krsna upon dying and takes birth in a human body. if the ananda has been infused into the jiva- he now has his svarup, there would be no necessity to take diksa again?!
But diksa is necessary always.
But if the ontology of the jiva has been fundamentaly altered with the external infusing of the svarup, why take again? This is unworkable.
Please excuse my lack of intelligence and quarrelsome nature.
Joy Sitanatha Prabhu!
Advaita Das replied with:
Interesting comment, Visnudas. However, of the two points:
"Some choose Krsna-dasya and some come here. The one who did not choose Krsna came her and got contaminated and need the diksa."
It seems here you erred, since there is no such siddhanta of Sadhu Shastra and Guru that we made a choice and came here (fall-vada).
"But diksa is necessary always.
But if the ontology of the jiva has been fundamentaly altered with the external infusing of the svarup, why take again? This is unworkable."
As far as I understood from my Guru-bari, the Guru comes back for the submissive disciple. That would almost certainly mean that the disciple gets diksa again. I know that there is a class of Vaishnavas that say that the bhakti lata bija means diksa and can be given just once, but to my knowledge there is no independent confirmation of that. Because in that case your theory would be unworkable.
..............................................
>I will work on a proper reply to Advaita as I was not satisfied with his reply and that is probably due to my lack of clarity and intellect.
posted by skippy longbeach at 11:54 PM
2 Comments:
Radhe
Nice to know you are back blogging.
You have very good points too. And there can be many angles, but I guess for me, narrowing my source of knowledge will help me not to get confused that much.
Too much into knowledge will get us bog down into being jnanis. Pray that we find the mercy of a Guru and then let us be fixed unto that guru.
BTW, that is just how I approach things.
Malati dasi
So funny!
I did not know anyone actually read these.
You are so right about taking shelter of Guru and resisting the urge to engage in useless debate. That is why I am engaging in these debates and controversies. My process of pariksha means that I must find Sri Gurudeva by teasing out and combing thru the various interpretations of sastra that are out there.
This has so far been very rewarding for me and I hope I will get the ultimate prize at the end of Sri Gurucarana Padma.
Thank you,
Nitai Gaur!
Post a Comment
<< Home