Tattva-viveka
Puzzling approach
Nanda-tanuja Dasa - June 22, 2005 12:58 am
Can anybody explain what does this mean and how to take it?
Babhru Das - June 22, 2005 2:33 am
It appears to be Gaura-Gadadhara murtis, with Gaura dressed as Gopala and Gadadhara as Sri Radhika. I know of a devotee in Bengal who worships Gaura-Gadadhara in this way, at least sometimes, but he is influenced by an entirely different line from ours, one which our guru-varga considers sahajiya. I don't know enough about such matters to offer further comment with any confidence.
Swami - June 22, 2005 2:49 am
This is sometimes called Guara-nagara bhava, in which Gaura is seen like Krsna and consorted with. However, both Krsnadasa Kaviraja Goswami and Vrndavana dasa Thakura have rejected this idea. Can anyone cite the relevant verses from these Mahajana's texts, Caitanya-caritamrta and Caitanya Bhagavata.
Nanda-tanuja Dasa - June 22, 2005 3:03 am
Has it something to do with Sri Gadadhara Prabhu being a sakti-tattva? I mean where is this concept originated?
Radhanama Dasa - June 22, 2005 3:40 am
I've been googling alot while i do transcribing, boy is it handy. 
ei mata capalya karena saba sanesabe strimatra na dekhena drstikane
stri 'hena na prabhu ei avatare
sravane o na karila-vidita samsare
ataeva sata yata maha mahima sakale
'gauranga-nagara' hena stava nahi bale
"The Lord was apt to indulge in indiscriminate, merciful behavior towards all, except that he never looked at a woman, even by a sidelong glance. It is known to all the world that He did not even allow the name of a woman to enter His ear. Those who are His real devotees, therefore, never address Sri Gauranga as 'Gauranga-nagari' or the enjoyer of women. Although all forms of praise are applicable to the Lord, the wise only sing that which is in accordance with His nature." CB 15.28-31
So I'm wondering does this imply that we should worship Mahaprabhu's sanyasa lila over his other lila? or is this simply dealing directly with this issue of gauranga-nagari? I'm not entirely sure i worded this correctly, but i hope someone will get the gist.
Brianfeather - June 22, 2005 4:03 am
I thought it was Nitai Gaura in the mood of Sri Radha Krishna.
Nanda-tanuja dasa why dont you just join GD and ask her yourself?
Swami seems to not like his quotes being placed over there so I imagine most folks at GD feel the same way if posts/info are dragged into here, especially peoples home dieties who are under the impression that they are only sharing with the intimate group even though we all know its public.
Haribol,
Brian
Brianfeather - June 22, 2005 5:31 am
This is sometimes called Guara-nagara bhava, in which Gaura is seen like Krsna and consorted with. However, both Krsnadasa Kaviraja Goswami and Vrndavana dasa Thakura have rejected this idea. Can anyone cite the relevant verses from these Mahajana's texts, Caitanya-caritamrta and Caitanya Bhagavata.
"From the life of Çré Caitanya Mahäprabhu, an intelligent person engaged in pure devotional service can understand that He always felt separation from Kåñëa within Himself. In that separation He sometimes felt that He had found Kåñëa and was enjoying the meeting. The significance of this separation and meeting is very specific. If someone tries to understand the exalted position of Lord Caitanya without knowing this, he is sure to misunderstand it. One must first become fully self-realized. Otherwise one may misidentify the Lord as nägara, or the enjoyer of the damsels of Vraja, thus committing the mistake of rasäbhäsa, or overlapping understanding."
C.C. Adi 4.106
?
Nanda-tanuja Dasa - June 22, 2005 6:38 am
Nanda-tanuja dasa why dont you just join GD and ask her yourself?I imagine most folks at GD feel the same way if posts/info are dragged into here, especially peoples home dieties who are under the impression that they are only sharing with the intimate group even though we all know its public.
Brian, I’m asking this question here because I have my spiritual master here. I’m interested in what he has to say. I’ve found the picture on a public forum and you making it sound like I’m a Peeping Tom and stealing and putting on display something private. I am a member of GD already though visit it rarely and just to read on some relevant topics, so theoretically I can ask this question there, but at my stage of development I’m interested in siddhanta coming only from my Guru and his close associates. Is it so immoral?
The difference between GD and TV is that TV is actually a private forum -- to read postings you must be a member and membership is approved on a case-by-case basis by Audarya. Some GD members had on many occasions expressed animosity toward Guru Maharaja and his godbrother and close friend Swami BG Narasingha Maharaja, so it’s understandable that Guru Maharaja doesn’t want GD to discuss his private postings intended for a small group. Besides, most active members of GD are not in Bhaktivinoda Parivar, so why should I ask their opinion?
Swami - June 22, 2005 3:06 pm
Chris has located one the pramana verse from Caitanya Bhagavata. Here is what Sri Krsnadasa Kaviraja says in Caitanya-caritamrta:
gopikä-bhävera ei sudrdha niscaya
vrajendra-nandana vinä anyatra nä haya
"It is firmly established that gopi bhava is experienced only in relation to Vrajendranandana and no one else."
Although Gaura is Vrajendranandana Krsna, he comes to the world to taste Radha's love for himself, not to accept worship in conjugal love from his devotees. This is reserved for his Vraja lila.
Thakura Bhaktivinoda openly condemed this sentiment, as did Sri Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati. Although one can find some lines in BVT's poetry that seem to indicate this sentiment, these lines have to be explained in light of his criticism of it, which is not hard to do. The same holds true for the Goswamis, who either openly rejected this sentiment or were silent on it.
One or two associates of Mahaprabhu like Narahari and Locana dasa do seem to express this sentimet, but they have not discussed any sadhana for attaining it. For that matter it is possible that the poetry along these lines attributed to them was in fact written by other later day persons in an effort to lend support to this sentiment. Indeed, without such apparent support, advocates of it would have nothing to stand on.
In the very least it should be emphasized that no eternal associate of Mahaprabhu has taught any sadhana corresponding with Gaura-nagara bhava. Sadhana is not to be maufactured. It decsends from above and corresponds with a particular sadhya. Without the sadhana, how can there be such a sadhya? We are not to make up a sadhana corresponding with an imagined sadhya in the name of bhakti. In fact doing so is nothing more than a disturbance to the society of devotees.
sruti-smrti-puranadi-
pancaratra-vidhim vina
aikantiki harer bhaktir
utpatayaiva kalpate, "
“Devotional service performed without reference to the Vedas, Puränas, Pancarätras, etc., must be considered sentimentalism, and it causes nothing but disturbance to society.”
Swami - June 22, 2005 3:08 pm
I thought it was Nitai Gaura in the mood of Sri Radha Krishna.
How can Gaura Nitai be in the mood of Radha and Krsna?
Brianfeather - June 22, 2005 3:50 pm
Brian, I’m asking this question here because I have my spiritual master here. I’m interested in what he has to say. I’ve found the picture on a public forum and you making it sound like I’m a Peeping Tom and stealing and putting on display something private. I am a member of GD already though visit it rarely and just to read on some relevant topics, so theoretically I can ask this question there, but at my stage of development I’m interested in siddhanta coming only from my Guru and his close associates. Is it so immoral?The difference between GD and TV is that TV is actually a private forum -- to read postings you must be a member and membership is approved on a case-by-case basis by Audarya. Some GD members had on many occasions expressed animosity toward Guru Maharaja and his godbrother and close friend Swami BG Narasingha Maharaja, so it’s understandable that Guru Maharaja doesn’t want GD to discuss his private postings intended for a small group. Besides, most active members of GD are not in Bhaktivinoda Parivar, so why should I ask their opinion?
Boy you are pretty upset when I simply encouraged you to join in the forums and ask a simple question. Thanks for bitting my hand off
You really took my post out of context, I do not wish to have your association.
Thank you very much
Brianfeather - June 22, 2005 3:52 pm
Swami - June 22, 2005 4:23 pm
Nitai is Balarama and Mahaprabhu is Krsna. Mahaprabhu is also in the mood of Radha. If he is in the mood of Radha, Nitai steps back to facilitate that.
Srila Prabhbupada taught, as all of our acaryas have, that Garua is Krsna and Nitai is Rama, never Radha and Krsna. Garua can stand on the altar next to Radha Krsna to make the statement that he is one with them, but Nitai, being Rama will not stand next to Radha Krsna. Either he will leave the room when they are together or Radha will leave the room.
Again, Mahaprabhu can be seen as Radha Krsna becasue he is Radha Krsna, but Garua Nitai will never been seen as Radha Krsna because they are not Radha Krsna. They are Krsna Balarama.
However, some people do try to say that Nitai is Radha. Prabhupada vehemently against this proposal. You will not find much support for this concoction anywhere in Gaudiya Vaisnavism.
I can see how you might have misunderstod this point. I hope my explanation is clear.
Nanda-tanuja Dasa - June 22, 2005 4:27 pm
I hope my explanation is clear.
Thank you, Maharaja, for the great explanation.
Brianfeather - June 22, 2005 4:33 pm
Yes thank you very much. 
Radhanama Dasa - June 23, 2005 12:15 am
Thanks for the explanation Guru Maharaja, but this brings up another question to me, however trivial it may be.
When we say that Gaura-Nitai should not be on the same alter as Radha-Krishna does this mean the exact same alter?
I ask because obviously in most, if not all, the ISKCON temples i've ever been too there is Gaura-Nitai deities, Radha-Krishna deities and typically a third set on the alters, but obviously not in the exact same alter space, but not exactly seperated either. (Does my wording make sense?) I have also noticed (via photos) that at some of the other Gaudiya groups temples there is Radha-Krishna with Gaurachandra and seemingly no Nityananda so it seems they are setting up there alters in this manner as you've described.
Jason - June 23, 2005 1:35 am
As an example for what Chris is saying, in San Jose, the main altar features Sri Sri Radha Madan-mohan AND Lord Caitanya on the same altar? This may seem odd at first, but Maharaja is stating that Mahaprabhu can appear on the altar with Radha Krsna because he is non-different....However, Lord Nityananda isn't on the same altar. Is this correct?
Babhru Das - June 23, 2005 2:23 am
In ISKCON centers, Gaura-Nitai's, Radha-Krishna's, and Jagannath's altars are actually separate altars in the same room. Even though the structure may appear to be integrated, they're considered separate altars. Each altar will have its own plate of bhoga for offerings, and bigger temples, such as New Dvaraka, provide a separate pujari for each altar. Even in San Diego, at Janmastami three senior men offer arati at the midnight arati. While I was there, Badrinarayana would offer to Sri Sri Radha-Giridhari, Dharmasetu to Jagannatha, and I would offer to Gaura-Nitai.
Radhanama Dasa - June 23, 2005 2:49 am
Jason - June 23, 2005 6:37 am
I understand that most ISKCON temples have three seperate altars for three sets of Deities, but what about the San Jose temple where Lord Caitanya appears on the same altar with Sri Sri Radha Madan-mohan? Why is that not as common?
Swami - June 23, 2005 1:51 pm
It is not as common ISKCON, but common throughout Gaudiya Matha. Otherwise my Gurudeva, Srila Prabhupada, established many Gaura Nityananda deities out of defference to Nityananda Prabhu, who had empowered him (Nityanadavesa). He did this also in consideration of his preaching field, which for the most part involved preaching to persons who from the standpoint of varnasrama were outcastes. In other words he sought to invoke the special mercy of Nityananda Prabhu. Srila Prabhupada was aslo from a family that had been graced by Nityanada Prabhu some generations earlier. He also expressed affinity for sakhya rasa and the worship of Krnsa and Balarama (Gaura and Nityananda).
Jason - June 25, 2005 6:58 pm
Is this also why Srila Prabhupada suggested that grhastha devotees should worship Gaura-Nitai deities in their homes as opposed to Radha-Krsna worship?
Nanda-tanuja Dasa - June 25, 2005 10:51 pm
I’ve been told that it has to do with Gaura-Nitai Deities being the most merciful thus more forgiving inaccuracies and omissions in the process of performing arcana by grhasthas, because worship at home typically is less elaborate then in the temple.
Swami - July 2, 2005 8:47 pm
Here Pujyapada Sridhara Maharaja explains how to view the apparant Gaura-nagara-bhava of devotees like Narahari.
“There are three sections amongst the devotees. One is charmed more by Krsna lila, another more by Gaura lila, another keeping the balance. The school of Narahari Sakara is more fond of Krsna-lila. Their vision is that “we don't recognize you (Gaura) to be a sannyasi. You are that Krsna of Vrndavana. We know you better. Here you have only got the garment, you have wrapped the garment of a sannyasi, it is your external acquaintance. But really who are you, we know well. So we don't like this force identity, we are not going to admit to that. That is their temperament. Rather they feel much pain, “what necessity that you are practicing penances as a sannyasi doing so much hardships, not taking food and rest, bed properly. Our heart is aching. You don't care for that. How can we tolerate all these things.” That will be their nature and complaint to Mahaprabhu.”
SM is saying that when such devotees seem to speak of Gaura as their lover they are speaking of him as Krsna disguised as Gaura, and thus they are not interested in consorting in a nagari svarupa with Gaura but with Krsna, who they detect is hiding as Gaura. This is how he explained that which is misconstrued to be an advocacy of Guara-nagara-bhava among some of Mahaprabhu’s eternal associates.
Swami - July 3, 2005 1:22 am
Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura offers the following strong opinion in hisCaitanya Bhagavata commentary.
kali-yuge sankirtana-dharma pälibäre
avatirna hailä prabhu sarva-parikare
“In Kali-yuga the Lord incarnates with His associates in order to maintain the religious principle of sankirtana.
The word sarva-parikare indicates that the five types of Krsna devotees neither considered the incarnation of vipralambha, Sri Gaurasundara, as the object of madhura-rasa nor did they assist him in conjugal affairs in the course of his magnanimous pastimes; rather, they nourished his feelings of separation from Krsna by helping Him cultivate those mellows. Those who want to contradict the Gaura pastimes of the supreme shelter, Krsna, by putting a flute or cowherd stick in Gaurasundara's hands, imposing the mood of a paramour on him, can never be counted amongst Gaura's associates or servants.