Tattva-viveka
Goloka and Gokula- references in sastras?
Braja-sundari Dasi - December 30, 2007 9:23 am
I have a discussion with one devotee on another forum- he wants me to prove that there are no childhood pastimes of Krishna in Goloka or that there are no demons there. But he wants me to quote verses from sastras. He does not accept Vaisnava`s commentaries (although he claims to be follower of our sampradaya). I tried to search on internet but I wasn`t much succesful. Can anyone help me? Do such verses exist?
Zvonimir Tosic - December 30, 2007 2:00 pm
.. he wants me to prove that there are no childhood pastimes of Krishna in Goloka ...
..?
Dear Braja-sundari, can you please elaborate more?
Thank you.
Ys, Z.
Braja-sundari Dasi - December 30, 2007 2:51 pm
..?Dear Braja-sundari, can you please elaborate more?
Thank you.
Ys, Z.
I remember how much I was disappointed after hearing about it for the first time. I was 
There are many things that appear only as conceptions in Goloka: Krsna`s birth and childhood pastimes, gopis husbands, demons...
Here is some explanation from Jaiva Dharma:
Gosvami: This is a very difficult problem. We are forbidden to reveal our own confidential realization to others. When you also have some confidential realization by Krsna’s mercy, you should always keep it hidden. I will explain this subject to you only as far as our previous acaryas have revealed it, and by Krsna’s mercy, you will be able to see the rest yourself. Perception in Goloka is purely spiritual, and there is not the slightest tinge of material perception. To nourish rasa there, the cit-sakti has manifested varieties of bhava in many places, and amongst them there is one spiritual conception known as abhimana. For instance, Krsna has no beginning and no birth in Goloka, but to assist the lila, vatsalya-rasa is personified there by the conception (abhimana) in the spiritual existence of fatherhood and motherhood in the forms of Nanda and Yasoda. Again, wonderful varieties of srngara-rasa, such as separation (vipralambha) and meeting (sambhoga), exist in this conception (abhimana) form. Although the actual situation in parakiya-bhava is suddha-svakiya, the self-conceptions (abhimana) of paramour beloved (parakiya) and paramour lover (upapati) are eternally present in it.
Just see! All these abhimana are completely convincing in Vraja, for they are exhibited in a gross outward form by the potency of yogamaya. For example, in Vraja, Yasoda labors to give birth to Krsna in her maternity room, and the nitya-siddha-gopis have a parakiya-abhimana that arises from their marriages to husbands such as Abhimanyu and Govardhana-gopa. In other words, the abhimana of Goloka are all visible in Vraja in very tangible forms, which are managed by yogamaya from the exceedingly subtle, original reality. There is not even the slightest trace of falsity in Vraja, and it resembles Goloka in all respects. Differences in vision arise only according to the degree of material obstruction of the observer.
Babhru Das - December 30, 2007 4:57 pm
Braja, what would your correspondent accept as shastra? Would he or she include the Goswami's books? Visvanath Chakravarti? Anyone more recent, such as Bhaktivinoda Thakura?
Braja-sundari Dasi - December 30, 2007 5:08 pm
Braja, what would your correspondent accept as shastra? Would he or she include the Goswami's books? Visvanath Chakravarti? Anyone more recent, such as Bhaktivinoda Thakura?
I asked him but he did not reply. It is obvious that he does not consider Bhaktivinoda Thakura`s books as sastras. The same with commentaries of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta and Srila Prabhupada.
Zvonimir Tosic - December 30, 2007 10:42 pm
I asked him but he did not reply. It is obvious that he does not consider Bhaktivinoda Thakura`s books as sastras. The same with commentaries of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta and Srila Prabhupada.
Dear Braja-sundari,
If I'm correct, he believes sastra is something solid, immovable .. say, an ancient library full of dusty books written by some dispassionate author. And for him they represent the law, the knowledge, the ultimate state of fact. However, if we arm ourselves with just a simple logic, it proves his approach in acquisition of knowledge is wrong. Logic says that there's more unknown than known in our understanding of the absolute. In other words, so little is written about vast and immeasurable absolute. Even sastra confirms it in so many instances.
I. So all those ancient books written on palm leaves, they're not enough to know everything. They can't even scratch the surface of the absolute. However, sastra also emphasises personal realisation as an all important mean of understanding the absolute. Krishna himself says, "dadhami buddhi yogam tam ..", which means, absolute gives the knowledge required. How Krishna does that? That's a wonder in itself. So, that person not only denies the very purport and meaning of the sastra, but also denies sastra as a whole. He conforms to it only when it serves his standpoints. But as soon as sastra flowers in someone's heart through realisation, like Krishna says, he denies it. That's one problem.
II. There's second problem as well: sastra is not cemented in time. Because it reflects the ever moving and endlessly dynamic absolute, sastra also moves. Observe Srimad Bhagavatam -- with each iteration, with every new recital, Srimad Bhagavatam expanded. They say, Sukadeva's Bhagavatam is so sweet. What it means? It means that Sukadeva has added something of significant value, something never tasted before.
Sukadeva was a perfect servant of the Bhagavatam and yet he added something to it. Because Bhagavatam wanted it. And now, that person wants to cement the sastra, strip it off its own sweet, dynamic nature and its natural need for expansion. The work of the Goswamis and Bhaktivinode Thakur is nothing else but a natural flow and expansion of the sastra, reflecting the ever sweet reality. It has flowered through their own realisation. Similarly, Sukadeva had a deep realisation of the absolute based on that what Vyasa had (and added more), and he was inspired by that what Narada had (and added more), and he was inspired by that what Brahma had (and added more). In this uninterrupted line, we can clearly see the voice of the inner realisation is the one that constitutes the sastra. And it's ever expanding.
If we cement the sastra, it's same as if we stop the wind, day and night, disperse the clouds filled with calming, refreshing raindrops of spiritual realisation. Our spiritual life turns into a desert. And he asks you now to show him some fragrant flowers growing in that scorched wasteland.
III. Then third problem emerges too: inability to see the connection between the seed and the fully developed flowering plant. Sastra can be observed as the seed, and our spiritual realisation as the fully developed flower. One transforms into another. There must be a connection between them. Vyasa has planted a seed from which the Sukadeva's divine realisation emerged. In the same way, Sukadeva and Sri Mahaprabhu have planted a seed from which the realisation of the Goswami's flowered. The whole purpose of the seed is to transform itself. That's its natural desire. Same is with sastra; it's a seed that longs for some fertile ground, a humble heart filled with love for the absolute, where it can develop itself into a floriferous plant.
I'm just observing my gorgeous white Lamarque. It's 4m tall and flushes in beautiful, white, fragrant blooms. But just a year ago it was a little plant, not even 60 cm tall. And few years before that it was just a seed. But now I'm also looking at those big, swollen hips, full of seeds, hanging on those branches. I've crossed Lamarque with another rose. From that tiny, innocent looking white seed, some new amazing rose variety will take its place under the sun next year.
Ys, Z.
Syamasundara - December 31, 2007 7:03 am
This person seems like a waste of time, but just for the sake of this thread, I think a couple of things need to be clarified.
First, what does this devotee mean when he says he is in our sampradaya? Madhva sampradaya? Gaudiya sampradaya? Rupanuga gaudiya sampradaya? Rupanuga gaudiya sarasvata sampradaya?
The Gaudiya family is larger than most of us are accustomed to think. Narottama dasa thakura, Syamananda pandita, they are all in our sampradaya, but they also have their own parivara, and members of those parivaras don't necessarily include Jagannatha dasa babaji, BVT, and so on in their lineage.
For that matter, you don't even have to be a Gaudiya to worship Radha-Krsna; take the Vallabha sampradaya, sanctioned by Mahaprabhu and mentioned by Rupa Gosvami as a parallel to ours, with its pushti marga.
So, where does this devotee come from?
Also, what does he mean by sastra? The four Vedas? Good look finding such an intimate knowledge in those texts that are so concise and for the most part (75%) dealing with how to behave at best in this world (so you can get out of it, says the other 25%).
Are the puranas, and itihasas accepted? The Gosvami books?
Maybe this devotee is in turn preaching to some Mayavadi or hard core Hindu that won't consider the Gosvami books, but I doubpt it.
Zvonimir Tosic - December 31, 2007 9:20 am
This person seems like a waste of time, but just for the sake of this thread, I think a couple of things need to be clarified.
I sympathise with Syama. It does look like a waste of time.
However, such requests and people's attitudes are common. People challenge Gaudiyas, same as we challenge them. I've seen it many times and it will happen more and more in the future.
Those not quite familiar with our tradition usually ask why Hare Krishnas are so stubborn in explaining everything through the scriptures only. I feel they would be much more relieved if we could use common logic, common knowledge and arguments springing from their own traditions in order to support our claims. They also value words coming from our own experience, much more than endless recitatives from "the holy texts".
That approach requires tons of patience, understanding and inspiration. It is quite challenging but is highly rewarding. In my experience, I then start to think in most unusual ways, challenging myself on every step.
Those more familiar with "all this Krishna stuff" challenge Gaudiya purports, commentaries, songs, books, vedanta. Just observe all the opinions about Srila Prahupada's Bhagavad-Gita As It Is on Amazon.com, for example. They ask, why is everything so finely tuned to support Gaudiya conclusions only, Gaudiya favour only? Gaudiyas jump on everyone else's neck in their books. So naturally, they don't like our books because Goswamis and acaryas afterwards, as they see it, draw everything into a single conclusion -- Gaudiya vedanta is "the only way".
I symphatise with them. I can understand that they feel somehow .. abandoned. Intimidated. Ignored. All good things are reserved for Gaudiyas only .. and then, what's left for them? Some "lower truth", lower form of salvation?
It is all our fault. I think we should extend our arms and accept their scriptural conclusions too, be more friendly and open. Be less talkative and more compassionate. But also demonstrate that we can play their tunes too. That's how we should prove ourselves. Good dancers are good dancers if they are ready to dance unprepared, on every new song and not just on that piece they've used to practise hard at home.
It's all part of our seasoning. So questions like this pump our muscles, refine our intelligence, soften our hearts too. These are good questions, no matter who asks them, and they challenge us and our own understanding of things, starting from chocolate, Calvin & Hobbes, Newtonian mechanics, global warming to the origin of species and the meaning of life. So, shall we mambo?
Ys,
Vivek - December 31, 2007 1:36 pm
Vallabhas don't worship radha-krsna. The nimbarakas worship radha krsna. I agree with zvonomir about the perception of gaudiay vedanta being sectarian. Same has happened to madhavas as well. I think without reference to presentation by GM or sridhar Maharaj people really miss so much of the understanding of GV in ISKCON.
Generally it is best to explain the krsna conception as the synthesis of all conceptions- it being all inclusive. Most of the presentation is so strong that it can discourage even very sincere souls from taking up GV. This is greatest thing which troubles my heart- GV is perceived very much as a sectarian movement.
Syamasundara - December 31, 2007 3:46 pm
Sorry for the inaccuracy, I did research it, though.
As to the other points, I prefer Vivek's wording. It's better to show that all conclusions are included in the the Krsna conception, than to accept the other scriptures, or trying to find a lowest common denominator.
We don't need followers. In the store you find Wonder bread and 12-grain Orowheat. It's beyond me how someone could choose Wonder bread, yet some people are attracted to it. Should the Orwheat bread go white and lower its price?
Zvonimir Tosic - January 1, 2008 12:09 am
Lots of people who contact Gaudiyas in some way are distinguished, educated people. And we should treat them as such.
Vivek suggests lovely approach, which I always embrace too. Krishna Consciousness is all inclusive, and everyone can discover himself / herself there. So I'm so glad we have Sridhara Maharaja and Swami, very rare individuals. For example, for people coming from Christianity, Krishna Consciousness is a natural extension, an added value that embellishes their lives. If approached mindfully, they can embrace Krishna more readily than majority of others, more even than a Hindu. Thank democracy for that.
On the other hand, if you come in the largest Gaudiya mission in the west, you'll often hear all negative talk about democracy. It's "for the society of dogs", a "source of all evils" and similar They still want to establish varnasrama dharma, and I've heard it on few occasions, some authorities believe monarchy is preferred system over democracy for them. Can you believe that?
So no wonder people believe we're sectarian (they don't distinguish branches), out of date, dogmatic. They want to go forward, not backwards. They've had enough of bad history caused by similar, doctrinal ideas. Although I understand the emotion behind those statements about monarchy -- it's a rather naive idea on what they think Krishna's Dvapara yuga looked like -- but it's completely out of context, out of time.
Add to that some popular jokes, like, "Christians go to heaven at the max; Gaudiyas go to Krishna", or "Jesus was a Mayavadi" (8 centuries before Sankara -- let's drink to that!) or sayings by some authorities, like "We don't care about the extinction of whales, or the climate change. We care about Krishna only .." and you're badged as a medieval age doctrinal relic.
Embracing people and extending arms doesn't necessarily mean accepting the lowest common denominator. I'd say, it asks for sincerity, love for people and mindfulness, which are the very high and rare common denominators. If you extend me your arms like that, and treat me respectfully and mindfully, I'll be willing to listen what you have to tell me.
If we go back to the original questions, I still think they're very important, we encounter with them very often and it's important to understand the reasons behind them. We can try our best and pray for inspiration to Sri Guru and Krishna.
Ys,
Vivek - January 1, 2008 6:12 am
In Sridhar Maharaj's one book there is material which a person in ISKCON won't be able to know in 30-40 years after reading all possible scriptures. Such is his realization. Yes manytimes I prefer talking to sincere individuals rather than GV devotees. As it is embarassing for open-minded Christians to see what is happening in their fundamentalist sections I am sure many open minded GV will also be embarassed with its representation in the modern world.
I am sure any fanatic sectarian approach always will get some followers because even fundamentalist wings of Islam and Christianity are successful in many parts of the world. Many people like the comfort of rigidity and dogma in an institution where all the thinking has been done for them and the world is black or white.
Other thing is although it is very essential to eat only prasadam cooked by devotees as far as possible but if we apply it too rigidly in all circumstances that can be a problem. In Krsna's age also Pandavas and Kauravas did share the same food- one section devotees and other non-devotees.
As far as possible we should eat prasadam but in exceptional circumstance we should be willing to be flexible.
Syamasundara - January 1, 2008 1:11 pm
Embracing people and extending arms doesn't necessarily mean accepting the lowest common denominator.
Oh no, more word shuffling...
When I mentioned the lowest common denominator, I was referring to these factual, inequivocable words:
"I think we should extend our arms and accept their scriptural conclusions too."
Now, if you word it like : "Embracing people and extending arms" in light of the examples you gave, of course I agree with you. Somewhat.
I just don't understand why you blame "us" as the Gaudiyas, while it's only a few groups among us. I'd understand more if you were admonishing us not to become like them, or spurring us to always keep vigilant in our approach to matters, or active in a healthy preaching that counteracts the bad examples you mentioned.
Speaking of them, to me they sound like from another planet. Srila Prabhupada never really expressed himself in those terms, such as "We don't care about the whales, but only about Krsna." What I got from his teachings is that Mahaprabhu's message is one of love that goes way beyond things such as monarchy vs democracy, and that obviously includes the concern for all living beings.
I firmly believe that false ego is the cause of all our problems in this material world, and that harinama is the solution to all problems. It's as simple as it's true and potent, and I don't see the need to accept any conclusion from another scripture.
If the separate interest and exploitive nature are eradicated, naturally there won't be any whale hunting, deforestation, sex crimes, and on and on and on.
However, I do realize that my approach has been illumined and polished by SSM and GM, and that SP could make very harsh statements, that are easy to harmonize if someone reads all his books and gets to know him, but they can also lead superficial devotees to the attitude you mentioned.
Braja-sundari Dasi - January 1, 2008 2:16 pm
First, what does this devotee mean when he says he is in our sampradaya?
He is initiated in Iskcon but in many cases his opinions are different than official Iskcon doctrine
Also, what does he mean by sastra?
As I mentioned before- he did not answer my question about it. He is materially very smart and good in arguments based on his intelligence. I am not going to waste my time on convincing him- although it would be great... But many new devotees read this discussion and I feel it would be bad if they got impression that Prabhupad and Bhaktivinod Thakur preached something that is not exactly true...
So for my purpose any verses or commentaries from previous acaryas (exept from SBT, SBSST and SP) would be helpful because at least I will be able to show people- "Look he is not accepting all these acaryas that means he has no right to present himself as their follower"
Or maybe there are some written statements from previous acaryas that sometimes some secrets of spiritual world are revealed only by saintly presons and therefore we cannot find them in sastras...
Syamasundara - January 1, 2008 11:01 pm
I don't know, he seems to stand nowhere. As far as the newcomers, I am not so sure they would attribute so much authority to him. A healthy reaction would not be to come to his terms, but to actually prove that for a Gaudiya Sarasvata the words of our latest acaryas are as bona fide as any other sastra. That would put things into a more proper perspective, especially for newcomers, especially in Iskcon, where history before 1967 becomes a blur.
Braja-sundari Dasi - January 2, 2008 11:23 am
A healthy reaction would not be to come to his terms, but to actually prove that for a Gaudiya Sarasvata the words of our latest acaryas are as bona fide as any other sastra. That would put things into a more proper perspective, especially for newcomers, especially in Iskcon, where history before 1967 becomes a blur.
I fully agree but I am not enough learned to prove it. I believe it but I cannot say from where my conviction comes and in this discussion I cannot quote from Guru Maharaja to support my view.
Zvonimir Tosic - January 3, 2008 2:00 am
When I mentioned the lowest common denominator, I was referring to these factual, inequivocable words:"I think we should extend our arms and accept their scriptural conclusions too."
Dear Syamasundara
Last few decades were, among other things, filled with criticism towards other theologies and philosophical conclusions. It seems to be a constant lowest denominator in all our dealings with other people and other groups. I'd say that many have their feet stuck in empty philosophical debates, and they've forgot all about other, more important things.
By accepting their scriptural conclusions I meant to take them as they are, respect them, but not indulge in the endless process of philosophical proofing how wrong, inadequate, low or whatever else they are. We have a very strong tendency to do that, let's face it, because our theology and philosophy is very complex, subtle and allows us to do whatever we want with it -- including elegantly bashing others.
I've seen so many times. I say that approach is completely wrong and our philosophy shouldn't be used for such purposes. Counter-effects are strong and severely damaging us, and sincere people who want to step closer then step aside. Our philosophy should be used to connect us with others and others with us, not to separate us from the rest of the world. This is a very small world after all -- Krishna Consciousness is a delight best experienced when shared.
I hope this clarifies my words.
Ys
Braja-sundari Dasi - January 3, 2008 9:13 am
Once again I have doubt whether I was properly understood... 
I do appreciate your discussion very much but it in no way gave me more knowledge about the the description of Goloka and Gokula in sastras. Forget about the person with whom I discussed. Speaking about him leads us nowhere. Here I am- a new devotee who wants to know all references that may be found in sastra that say about some differences in Krishna`s pastimes in Goloka and Gokula (except for Jaiva dharma, Srila Prabhupada`s books and articles of Dr. Kapoor). Anyone can help?
Bhrigu - January 3, 2008 4:39 pm
Well, if nobody else will give you an answer, I will begin one:
In Laghu-Bhagavatamrita 1.5.435-520, Srila Rupa Goswami explains the difference between the prakata- and aprakata-lila. The prakata lila is that which is seen in the material world. In the prakata lila, Krishna travels between Vraja, Mathura and Dvaraka, but in all of them, he is always present in an unmanifest form (aprakata). After explaining how Krishna in prakata-lila takes birth from Devaki, Rupa Goswami writes (Lbh 1.5.450):
so 'ya.m nitya-sutatvena
tasyâ râjaty anâdita.h
k.r.s.na.h praka.ta-lîlâyâ.m
tad-dvâre.nâpy abhût tathâ
"Even though he is beginninglessly her [Yasoda's] eternal son, in the prakata-lila he takes birth also in this way [as the son of Devaki]."
Also (Lbh 1.5.463):
atha praka.ta-rûpe.na
k.r.s.no yadu-purî.m vrajet
vrajezatvam âcchadya
sva.m vyañjan vâsudevatâm
"Now, in his prakata-form, Krishna goes to the town of the Yadus [Mathura]. Hiding his nature as the master of Vraja, he manifests himself as Vâsudeva."
However, in this passage, there is nothing about there not being any demons in the aprakata-lila, or that Krishna never takes birth (even from Yashoda) there. If someone has access to Kushakratha's translation of the Krishna-Sandarbha, could you please look up what Jiva Goswami writes there (I don't have the time to look through the Sanskrit)? It should be towards the end, around anuccheda 170.
Otherwise, in the tradition of the asta-kaliya-lila (beginning with Rupa Goswami's poem), there is of course no scope for demons, birth etc, since every day is more or less the same!
Braja-sundari Dasi - January 3, 2008 7:54 pm
However, in this passage, there is nothing about there not being any demons in the aprakata-lila, or that Krishna never takes birth (even from Yashoda) there. If someone has access to Kushakratha's translation of the Krishna-Sandarbha, could you please look up what Jiva Goswami writes there (I don't have the time to look through the Sanskrit)? It should be towards the end, around anuccheda 170.
Thank you Bhrigu! I found the text. There are so many amazing things there but it will take a lot of time untill I complete reading it...
Hmm, so it seems there are some childhood lila in Goloka accept for Krishna being born.3 Although in the unmanifest (aprakata) pastimes of the spiritual world, Lord Krsna appears in all ages, beginning with His form as an infant, nevertheless, His form as a newly blossoming youth is prominent. This is also true in the Lord’s manifest pastimes on this earth, where His pastimes as a youth are prominent. In His aprakata pastimes in the spiritual world, which remain invisible to the residents of the material world, Lord Krsna eternally appears as a fresh youth and eternally enjoys pastimes in Dvaraka, Mathura and Vrndavana as the youthful son of Maharaja Vasudeva and Maharaja Nanda, the king of Vraja. In this way it may be understood that of all ages in which Lord Krsna manifests His form, the age of fresh youth (kisora) is the most important).
Anuccheda 180
1 Lord Krsna explains His prakata appearance and pastimes by giving the following example (Srimad Bhagavatam 11.12.18):
“When firewood is rubbed together, heat is produced by contact with air, and by vigorously rubbing the sticks, a spark of fire appears. Once the fire is kindled, ghee is added and the fire blazes. Similarly, I become manifest in this world in My prakata pastimes.”***
2 In this verse an example is given to explain the Lord’s birth-pastimes within this material world. The same example was also given by Sri Uddhava in the following words (Srimad Bhagavatam 3.2.15):
“The Personality of Godhead, the all-compassionate controller of both the spiritual and material creations, is unborn, but when there is friction between His peaceful devotees and persons who are in the material modes of nature, He takes birth just like fire, accompanied by the mahat-tattva.”*
Swami - January 3, 2008 9:06 pm
There are numerous referencs to the fact that Sri Krsna appearas as a nitya kishore in his aprakat-lila. Whereas in his prakata-lila you can experience him as Bala Gopla. Of course it is also only in his prakata-lila that his takes birth. Kavikarnapura goes so far as to say that Sri Krsna's prakata-lila is for the purpose of giving Yasoda-mayi the opportunity to experience her son's birth. At any rate the idea is that, in the least, Govinda's childhood patimes are more fully manifest in Gokula.
Bhrigu - January 4, 2008 4:09 pm
Could you post the main points from these sections of the Krishna-sandarbha, Brajasundari? I'm interested to hear what Jiva Goswami has to say about this topic, as it seems to be one that has developed over time within the sampradaya.
It would be interesting to read what Kavi Karnapura writes on the topic. In which book does he deal with this subject, Guru Maharaja?
Braja-sundari Dasi - January 5, 2008 11:43 am
Could you post the main points from these sections of the Krishna-sandarbha, Brajasundari? I'm interested to hear what Jiva Goswami has to say about this topic, as it seems to be one that has developed over time within the sampradaya.
Well, he is rather stressing non difference of prakata and aprakata lila. He`s proving that names, forms and pastimes are the same in both with the only difference that prakata lila may be seen by conditioned souls and aprakata lila is invisible to them.
Anuccheda 175 text 9:
One example of slight difference is in the same anuccheda, text 5:9 Someone may raise the objection: If previously (Srimad Bhagavatam Canto 10 Chapter 28) Lord Krsna had shown the highest planet in the spiritual world (goloka) to the cowherd men in Vrndavana and thus revealed that the Vrndavana of this earth planet is in truth non different from the Goloka Vrndavana in the spiritual world, then why did He take them to the Goloka Vrndavana in the spiritual world, if the earthly Vrndavana and the Goloka Vrndavana planet are actually identical? There is an adage “Why should one go to a mountain in search of honey, if honey is easily available nearby?” According to this understanding, therefore, there is no reason for Lord Krsna to transfer the residents of Vrndavana to the Goloka planet, because they are actually already living there.
The answer to this objection follows: In the tenth Canto, 28th chapter of Srimad Bhagavatam, Lord Krsna reveals His aprakata (invisible to the eyes of ordinary conditioned souls) presence in Vrndavana. In the spiritual world (goloka), Lord Krsna, His associates, and His pastimes are all aprakata (invisible to the conditioned souls), whereas in the Lord’s pastimes in the earthly Vrndavana, these are all prakata (visible to the conditioned souls). Therefore when this passage says that the Lord travelled to Goloka Vrndavana with His associates, the primary understanding is that the Lord remained with them in His aprakata (invisible to the conditioned souls) form. These aprakata pastimes are known as the pastimes of Goloka Vrndavana, the highest planet in the spiritual world. Many scriptural passages confirm this explanation of the Lord’s eternal pastimes in the Goloka Vrndavana planet.
The phrase ‘nandadayah dara-sahitah’ in this passage means that Nanda Maharaja, Krsna, Yasoda-devi, and all the cowherd men, boys, and gopis went to Goloka Vrndavana. Krsna remained with them, appearing as the youthful son of Maharaja Nanda and all the residents of Vrndavana became unaware that Krsna had ever gone to Mathura, or that they had ever been separated from Him.
They all go to Goloka in aprakata lila wheras Krishna goes back to Dvaraka in prakata lila.
I admit that description of Krishna going back to Goloka with all inhabitants of Vrindavan including even beasts and creepers is overwhelming. What remained then? Some illusory forms of gopis and gopas?
Bhrigu - January 5, 2008 6:35 pm
So there was nothing about no demons etc in aprakata lila in the Krishna-sandarbha?
Braja-sundari Dasi - January 5, 2008 6:47 pm
So there was nothing about no demons etc in aprakata lila in the Krishna-sandarbha?
I haven`t found anything. I may go through it once again...
Braja-sundari Dasi - January 6, 2008 9:38 am
I still couldn`t find anything in Krishna-sandarbha but I found something else on internet:
Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura, Bhagavatamrita-kana 14
His lila (pastimes) are of two kinds, namely prakata (manifest) and aprakata (unmanifest). When Krishna's simultaneous balya (childhood), pauganda (boyhood) and kaisora (youth) pastimes with His associates are manifest endlessly and forever, the aprakata-lila is enacted, and when all the pastimes Sri Krishna and His associates are all sequentially manifest in the universe only, that is the prakata. Prakata-lila, the pastimes beginning from janma-lila (birth) to the final mausala-lila (club-fighting pastime), are seen to sequentially appear in each and every universe, one after the other. Only in prakata-lila, Vrindavana, Mathura and Dvaraka, amidst the millions of universes in the land of Bharata (India), are seen by their residents. It is like the presence of waves of sunrays in the zodiac. Just as the sun in the zodiac is visible in one place from the forenoon onwards, and somewhere it sheds light at times, and at times it doesn't shed light, so Krishna's prakata-prakasa (manifest appearance) present in His own abode appears somewhere in the aggregate of universes as balya-lila (childhood pastimes) and so forth, and in some universes He is manifest, while in others He is not manifest.
In the prakata, the pastimes beginning with childhood are eternal and in sac-cid-ananda-rupa (form of eternity, knowledge and bliss), but the final mausala-lila (club-fighting) and the mahisi-harana-lila (abduction of the Queens) are known to be artificial like magic, concealing the eternity of the other pastimes. This is so because of the absence of the upasaka (servants) in them. What, then, do His associates perceive in the prakata-lila, amidst Vrindavana's gem-studded trees, ground and so forth? Some of them do not perceive that, in accordance with His desire. However, some who are eager and accomplished in bhajana can constantly perceive the unfolding of the prakata-lila even after its conclusion. This is known to be so on account of their inner impressions and desires following the lila. Thus the pre-eminence of Vrajendra-nandana among all the svarupa (forms of God) and the pre-eminence of Gokula among all dhama (abodes of God) is established. He possesses four varieties of madhuri (sweetness) in Vraja -- prema (love), krida (pastimes), venu (flute) and sri-vigraha (beautiful form).
Braja-sundari Dasi - January 8, 2008 7:16 pm
Well I found that Bhagavatamrita kana is a summarize of Laghu-bhagavatamrita. So nothing new... I just cannot find anything- maybe the books that describe it are still in Sanskrit or bengali? 
I had the same problem few years ago when one of my friends asked why there is army on Vaikuntha if there are no demons there. We posted his question on one big Vaishnava forum and there was no reply...
Syamasundara - January 9, 2008 6:35 am
You seem to hang out with a funny bunch ; meanwhile their house is on fire....
Zvonimir Tosic - January 9, 2008 9:35 am
I had the same problem few years ago when one of my friends asked why there is army on Vaikuntha if there are no demons there. We posted his question on one big Vaishnava forum and there was no reply...
We may ask the similar question, based on Srimad Bhagavatam: why put guards on the gates of Vaikuntha, if it's a place of freedom, "so far away" from this world? If someone can reach it, he or she obviously can approach it, and probably deserves so because the road was as long as eternity.
So, why put guards? Why make it even more difficult for someone to enter?
Or maybe, those guards, maybe they are a metaphor, a visual explanation for something else important in place?
Bhrigu - January 9, 2008 10:26 am
I'm also surprised to not find more references to this issue, but I'm still waiting for Guru Maharaja to share something with us. He mentioned Kavi Karnapura, but I only have access to his Gaura-ganoddesa-dipika and Alamkara-kaustubha, neither of which deals with this issue at all. I also read through Visvanatha Cakravarti's Aisvarya-kadambini, which gives a very interesting description of Goloka, but nothing there either.
As for the army in Vaikuntha, I think the answer is pretty obvious. What could be more majestic (aisvarya) than huge multitudes of marching, fully armed troops in splendid uniforms? Even the most insignificant petty cheftain will have at least a few guards of honour.
Zvonimir Tosic - January 9, 2008 11:45 am
As for the army in Vaikuntha, I think the answer is pretty obvious. What could be more majestic (aisvarya) than huge multitudes of marching, fully armed troops in splendid uniforms? Even the most insignificant petty cheftain will have at least a few guards of honour.
Braja-sundari Dasi - January 9, 2008 12:00 pm
Thanks Bhrigu! So simple explanation yet so logical and convincing...Zvonimir Tosic - January 9, 2008 1:01 pm
We can find similar metaphors in other cultures too.
First in mind comes an excerpt from the Bible:
You are as beautiful as Tirzah*, my beloved,
as lovely as Jerusalem,
as awe-inspiring as bannered troops.
/ Pulchra es, amica mea, sicut Thersa,
decora sicut Ierusalem,
terribilis ut castrorum acies ordinata. /
* Tirzah: the meaning of this word is uncertain. Probably meaning "pleasant". Also, it was the early capital of the northern kingdom of Israel (1 Kings 16).
Here the beauty of the beloved one is described as awe-inspiring, majestic as bannered troops (army).
It seems this metaphor is an awe-inspiring concept in humankind throughout history. For example, it is present in 15-18th century poetry in my country (Kacic-Miosic, Gundulic, Marulic). It describes a feeling that is majestic: it thrills, excites and overwhelms, and yet gives confidence, a sense of victory over the "enemy" (a fear of loss, rejection, abandonment, loneliness), but also describes proudness and belonging to something "larger that life". An ultimate shelter.
I think we can benefit from analysing the scripture from this point of view as well; translating metaphors and visual clues, similarly as psychology deciphers images and ideas from our dreams (in Jung's terminology: archetypes), and in turn helps us in understanding of our own emotional self.
Swami - January 9, 2008 4:39 pm
It would be interesting to read what Kavi Karnapura writes on the topic. In which book does he deal with this subject, Guru Maharaja?
Ananda Vrndavana Campu, I believe.
Braja-sundari Dasi - January 9, 2008 6:53 pm
Ananda Vrndavana Campu, I believe.
I don`t have the book but I found some excerpt form it on internet:
It`s from second chapter:
The time for an appearance of the Lord coincided with two internal desires of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. First the Lord desired to descend on earth to increase the fortune of Yasoda and Nanda. Also at that time Krishna wanted to relish the sweet mellow of srngara rasa (paramour love) while enacting His worldly pastimes. For these two reasons the Lord appeared within the material creation on Bhuloka, (earth planet), along with His parents, friends, and other eternal associates.
Another distinction of Lord Krishna’s earthly pastimes is that when the eternally liberated gopis such as Srimati Radharani, Candravali, and others appeared, the Srutis personified also appeared in the homes of other gopis, because they had previously cultivated the desire to serve Sri Krishna as Vraja gopis. The Dandakaranya sages, upon seeing the svakiya bhava (the sweet conjugal relationship) of Lord Ramacandra and Sitadevi, desired to have the same relationship with their Lord Madana Gopala. Upon attaining perfection in their sadhana they achieved the fortunate position of appearing as gopis in Vrindavana. Yogamaya, Lord Krishna’s pastime potency who possesses unlimited abilities, appeared invisibly in Gokula to arrange this, and perform other difficult tasks on behalf of the Lord.
Braja-sundari Dasi - January 9, 2008 7:11 pm
Third chapter:
120. Then Madhukantha openly said, "Narada will not mind if I now reveal the secret of Nanda's son. Rather, by revealing it in this assembly I will attain perfection. Lord Krsna Himself is reflected in the loving hearts of the love-anointed people of Vraja. Controlled by His devotees love, Lord Krsna manifests himself. In the absence of love He does not manifest Himself. Before those who love him as parents love a son, Lord Krsna appears as a son. He does not appear in that way before others. Before devotees who love Him as a son, He takes birth as their son.
121. "Once every kalpa in every lifetime of Brahma, Krsna appears before Nanda, Yasoda, and the people of Vraja, People who love Him dearly, to give them a chance to love Him as Nanda's son. He will not appear before other persons even for a single sesame-seed worth of time.
Jagadish - January 13, 2008 7:08 pm
I still couldn`t find anything in Krishna-sandarbha but I found something else on internet:Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura, Bhagavatamrita-kana 14
I have been reading a beautiful elucidation on the topic of manifest and unmanifest pastimes in the Sri Brahma-Samhita, 5th Chapter. Verse 37. This is the more recent Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Math edition which is a faithfully rendered version with the commentary of Bhaktivinoda Thakur. Very readable too!
If you study this commentary of Verse 37 which begins: ananda cinmaya rasa pratibhavitabhis
It will help you get a feeling for how deeply immersed spiritual thinkers in our line think/feel about this topic of manifest/unmanifest pastimes which correlates very importantly to our own state of purity/ realization.
I hope that you find this helpful.
-Jagadish
Braja-sundari Dasi - January 14, 2008 3:58 pm
Thank you. It`s a beautiful text, much beyond my capacity to understand it. I`m not very good in English so may anyone help me to understand these two statements from Brahma samhita 5.37 purport? Does it mean that devotees who came from Goloka perceive Krishna`s birth and so on, through the influence of Yogamaya whereas others through Maha-maya?
From the conclusions just stated it is clear that there is no distinction between the visible and nonvisible pastimes. The apostle Jiva Gosvami in his commentary on this sloka as well as in the gloss of Ujjvala-nilamani and in Krsna-sandarbha remarks that "the visible pastimes of Krsna are the creation of His cit (spiritual) potency. Being in conjunction with the reference to mundane function they exhibit certain features which seem to be true by the influence of the limiting potency (Maya); but these cannot exist in the transcendental reality.The destruction of demons, illicit paramourship, birth, etc., are examples of this peculiarity.
Let us pause to consider what the absolute reality is in Himself. Sri Rupa Gosvami says, purvokta-... saratah. In regard to these slokas Sripada Jiva Gosvami after mature deliberation has established the transcendental paramourship as vibhrama-vilasa, something seemingly different from what it appears to be; such are the pastimes of birth, etc., accomplished by Yogamaya.
Braja-sundari Dasi - January 19, 2008 4:09 pm
Thank you. It`s a beautiful text, much beyond my capacity to understand it. I`m not very good in English so may anyone help me to understand these two statements from Brahma samhita 5.37 purport? Does it mean that devotees who came from Goloka perceive Krishna`s birth and so on, through the influence of Yogamaya whereas others through Maha-maya?
Anyone to help me... ?
Bhrigu - January 29, 2008 3:07 am
I would also very much appreciate some more input here. Bhaktivinoda seems to be saying that there is some mahamaya in the prakata lila, which does sound odd -- especially when he lists paramourship among these things.
Braja-sundari Dasi - January 29, 2008 12:03 pm
The following article was written by my friend Rasasthali, who is disciple of Krsna Ksetra Prabhu. I don`t have Ananda Vrindavan Champu nor Brihad Bhagavatamrita to check the references.
Demons in Goloka Vrndavana
1. Prakata and aprakata pastimes
There are two aspects of Krsna’s pastimes: prakata-lila (manifested, or visible pastimes), and aprakata-lila (pastimes in the spiritual world). Both are essential to understand Krsna’s pastimes1,2. In prakata-lila Krsna and his pastimes seem to be dependent on time so there is always a beginning and an end of each pastime, while when performing aprakata pastimes, Krsna enjoys the same pastimes eternally – they are free from the limitations of material time3. Whatever Krsna does in his prakata-lila, he also does in aprakata-lila, but many thousands of times4, and it also refers to the killing of demons5.
2. There is no facility for the demons in the spiritual world
Above statements may appear to be contradictory to Srila Prabhupada’s words: “So in the spiritual world there is no facility for the demons. Therefore when Krsna likes to fight, because after many many years not fighting, because in the spiritual world there is no fight… Therefore sometimes He comes here to fight with the demons.”6 So there is no rebellious spirit in Goloka Vrndavana, and therefore there is no place for demons.
3. Yogamaya`s manufacture
However, demons do sometimes appear in aprakata-dhama, only to satisfy Krsna. They do not stay there permanently and they also do not disturb the residents of the holy dhama, as it happens in the material world, but they come only at the moments they are desired by Krsna and his devotees. Thus the demons in Goloka Vrndavana are products of Yogamaya’s potency7, what can also happen in prakata-dhama8. Yogamaya does another thing: it makes the residents of Vraja forget the previous pastimes of Krsna killing demons. In this way, when these and other pastimes are repeated again, they are completely new to Goloka-vasis, and, what’s more, this forgetfulness can even refer to Krsna himself8.
_________________________________________________ _______________________References:
1. Jiva Gosvami, Krsna-sandarbha 153.5
2. Rupa Gosvami, Laghu-bhagavatamrta 1.5.435
3. Jiva Gosvami, Krsna-sandarbha 153.7
4. Rupa Gosvami, Laghu-bhagavatamrta 1.5.451
5. Srila Sanatana Gosvami, Sri Brhad-bhagavatamrta 2.6-7
6. Lecture by Srila Prabhupada on Bhagavad-gita 13.4, Paris, August 12, 1973
7. Sanatana Gosvami, Sri Brhad-bhagavatamrta 2.6.209
8. Srila Kavi Karnapura, Ananda-vrndavana-campu (18.40-44)
9. Sanatana Gosvami, Sri Brhad-bhagavatamrta 2.6.209
Prepared according to Sivarama Swami’s Krsna-sangati (pages 35-48)
Rasasthali Dasi, Oxford 2006
Zvonimir Tosic - January 29, 2008 8:03 pm
However, demons do sometimes appear in aprakata-dhama, only to satisfy Krsna. They do not stay there permanently and they also do not disturb the residents of the holy dhama, as it happens in the material world, but they come only at the moments they are desired by Krsna and his devotees. Thus the demons in Goloka Vrndavana are products of Yogamaya’s potency, what can also happen in prakata-dhama.
Now, with all these Yogamaya's arrangements in place, why there's a need for Mahamaya then?
I also remember one lesson by Krishna Ksetra Prabhu, mentioned above, where he was explaining references about Sri Caitanya in various Vedic scriptures. He noted jokingly that someone would say how Gaudiyas interpret everything according to their own needs and stretching everything to fit their philosophy.
Now, isn't this, an apparent confusing mix of prakata/aprakata elements, one of such cases where people can rightfully ask us "what on Earth are we trying to accomplish now"? Just wondering what would be the right answer ..
Thank you so much for this.
Braja-sundari Dasi - January 29, 2008 8:12 pm
Now, isn't this, an apparent confusing mix of prakata/aprakata elements, one of such cases where people can rightfully ask us "what on Earth are we trying to accomplish now"? Just wondering what would be the right answer ..
Thank you so much for this.
I did not see original texts so I cannot be sure. Article was written according to Sivarama Maharaja`s book and I think references were taken from there. But many things depend on translation. Let`s wait for someone who has the books.
Braja-sundari Dasi - January 30, 2008 1:28 pm
Well, one person found the book on line and sent me this:
Sri Brhad-bhagavatamrta 2.6.209 doesn't provide for the statements in the article:
kritsnam etat param cettham
tatratyam viddhy asamshayam
purvokta-naradoddishöa-
siddhantady-anusaratah
kritsnam-complete; etat-this; param-great; ca-also; ittham-in this way; tatratyam-there; viddhi-know; asamshayam-without doubt; purva-previously; ukta-said; narada-by Narada; uddishöa-explained; siddhanta-cnclusion; adi-beginning with; anusaratah-according to.
"Without doubting, please understand all this according to the explanations previously spoken by Narada."
The commentary to this verse, it provides for the statements from your quoted article.
Zitat:
Shrila Sanatana Gosvami gives the following doubts as examples: If Goloka is actually superior to Vaikuëöha, then
why do Kamsa and other demons live there?
Why do carts and other objects made of wood and other materials, as well as grains of dust and other lifeless things exist in Goloka?
Why do Nanda Maharaja and the other residents of Goloka incarnate as the Lord's associates in Vaikuëöha? ...
The commentator does not provide evidence for his statements.
I asked who the commentator was but this guy doesn`t know it. 
Anyone knows?