An excerpt from the Sanga CD, 'Rama-Navami,' recorded April 12, 2000.
Rama and Raganuga-bhakti
Volume IV, No. 31
http://www.swami.org/sanga/archives/pages/..._four/m206.html
Q. The Hare Krsna mantra is supposed to be uttered as Hare Rama Hare Rama Rama Rama Hare Hare, Hare Krsna Hare Krsna Krsna Krsna Hare Hare, still some chant it in the reverse way. Why is this so? Rama-avatara was before rather than after Krsna-avatara; therefore, Rama's name should appear first.
A. I have seen two versions of the Kalisantarana Upanisad. In one the maha-mantra begins with Hare Krsna and in the other it begins with Hare Rama. However, this is the only place that I have seen this maha-mantra mentioned in which it begins with Hare Rama.
In the Gaudiya sampradaya this nama-mantra is consistently referred to as the Hare Krsna maha-mantra. Predating the sampradaya, both the Agni and Brahmanda Puranas glorify this maha-mantra and describe it as beginning with Hare Krsna. Sanata-kumara Samhita describes how to chant it thus: "The words Hare Krsna are repeated twice, then Krsna and Hare are both separately repeated twice. In the same way, Hare Rama, Rama and Hare are repeated two times."
Ramacandra may have appeared in this world before Krsna, but Krsna is nonetheless the origin of Ramacandra, being the source of all avataras--svayam bhagavan.
Krsna’s primal position is described thus is in Srimad-Bhagavatam (10.85.31) where Devaki tells Lord Krsna:
"O Lord of the universe, O original Supreme Person, by a portion of a portion of a portion of yourself you create, maintain, and destroy the material universes. Now I take shelter of you."
Sridhara Swami comments on this verse as follows: "The first portion mentioned here is the purusa-avatara." The purusa-avatara is the source of all the avataras, save and except for Krsna, who although appearing as if an avatara, is the source of the purusa-avatara. Srimad-Bhagavatam states this after mentioning the principal avataras: ete camsa-kalah pumsah krsnas tu bhagavan svayam, "All of the above-mentioned incarnations are either plenary portions or portions of the plenary portions of the Lord, but Lord Sri Krsna is the original Personality of Godhead."
When Ramacandra passed through the Dandakaranya forest, the sages residing there in meditation desired to become his devotees in the emotion of transcendental conjugal love. However, Ramacandra informed them that in this incarnation he was not able to fulfill their desire because he had taken a vow to have only one wife--eka patni vrata. He then told them that they could only attain this devotional status in relation to his appearance as Krsna. Thus Krsna is transcendentally more complete than Ramacandra in that he has greater capacity to reciprocate in varieties of love. In this sense he is supreme and whatever we find in Ramacandra is also there in Krsna along with something more as well. Thus Ramacandra and all the avataras have their origin in Krsna.
Furthermore, the name Rama in the maha-mantra does not necessarily refer to Ramacandra. It can also refer to Balarama, who also has his origin in Krsna in spite of the fact that within the lila he appears has Krsna's older brother. This Rama considers himself a servant, friend, and well-wisher of Krsna.
Finally the name Rama in the maha-mantra can also refer to Krsna himself, Radha-ramana. However, there is no harm in chanting this mantra beginning with Hare Rama. Mahaprabhu taught that we should chant it constantly, and when our chanting becomes constant--entering eternity--we will go beyond all sense of beginning and end.
Jesus and the Raga-Marg
Volume VI, No. 10
http://www.swami.org/sanga/archives/pages/...e_six/m244.html
Q. Gaudiya Vaisnavas teach that outside of Vrndavana and Navadwipa pure vatsalya rasa isn't possible, so even the "parents" of other manifestations of God don't have pure vatsalya bhakti. But isn't the mood of the parents of other manifestations of God considered some form of mixed vatsalya/dasya and can't other devotees attain that? Or is it only open to the eternal associates of God (nitya-siddhas)? For example, in Rama-lila aren't there many devotees with a mixed vatsalya/dasya relationship with Ramacandra? The following quote from Sanatana Goswami's Brhad-Bhagavatamrta seems to remotely support this idea:
"The Personality of Godhead is a vast ocean of many different moods of loving exchange. His various devotees respond to His various pastimes by developing individual varieties of ecstasy, and the Lord reciprocates with these ecstasies by showing himself in different ways. His devotees are concerned with him alone, and therefore whenever a devotee becomes extremely anxious to see him in a particular form, the Lord at once shows that form to the devotee."
A. In this case the quote you have cited from Sanatana Goswami refers to dasya bhakti in Vaikuntha. The dasya bhaktas there can change forms (not rasas) to serve Narayana. If they desire to see Narayana in one of his many avatara forms, he grants them that darsana.
According to Gaudiya acaryas, it is possible to attain dasya rasa in Rama bhakti. Sri Rama-lila is unique in Vaikuntha in that he has a mother and father. Other forms of the Lord in Vaikuntha all have their Laksmidevi and dasya bhaktas bordering on friendship, but Ramacandra also tastes vatsalya bhakti. However, you are correct in saying that the vatsalya there is not pure vatsalya, in the sense that it is not exactly the same as Yasodamayi's motherly love. Yasodamayi's love for her son Krsna is free from maryada, or awe and reverence. In fact, all the ragatmikas of Vrndavana love Krsna free of awe and reverence. This is what the raga-marg is all about. Rama-lila is maryada, steeped in awe and reverence, which is the opposite of raga.
There is a sect that pursues all rasas with Sri Ramacandra, including madhurya. As far as we Gaudiya Vaisnavas are concerned, the practices and theology of this sect are very questionable. They have practically rewritten the essence of the Bhagavatam and put Rama's name in place of Krsna.
Lilas, Avataras, and Demons
Volume IV, No. 16
http://www.swami.org/sanga/archives/pages/..._four/m189.html
Q. I recently married. I am devoted to Krsna but find it difficult to convince my wife that Krsna is the Supreme Personality. She says that Krsna used unfair means to defeat the Kauravas and if he is supreme why did he have to cheat to win the Mahabharata war? And if Krsna is such a cheat why should she accept what he said in Bhagavad-gita?
A. How can God cheat another, when all are but aspects of himself? Try to understand the meaning of lila, divine play. Saints tell us that Rama and Krsna are the same person. Rama was most moral, and Krsna appeared to be a cheater in some respects. So we must consider Krsna's immorality in light of Rama's morality. God can be moral or immoral in appearance, yet whatever he does is absolute good. The moral realm is not absolute. That which is immoral today may be moral tomorrow. Morality is the means to check the evil of exploitation arising from material attachment, but if one has no such attachment, then what is one's position? Does moral law bind such a soul? Certainly not. Such is the position of Krsna.
While Rama lila emphasizes morality for good reason, Krsna lila appropriately emphasizes the possibility of life beyond the reach of morality. While it is important to be moral, it is also important to know that moral life in and of itself is not the zenith of spiritual pursuit.
The apparent immorality of Krsna is actually something altogether different. Caitanya Mahaprabhu was a perfect sannyasi, yet he meditated constantly on Krsna's apparent immoral affairs with the Vraja gopis. In doing so he himself was never attracted to ordinary women. From this we can conclude that the gopi lila of Krsna, while appearing immoral, is not so. Careful study of the precepts of Sri Caitanya casts Krsna lila in the proper light and leaves one with the clear conclusion as to the supremacy of Krsna, krsnas tu bhagavan svayam.
Regarding the Gita, your wife can trust what Krsna says there because in the Gita he is speaking to his devotees. While he may cheat the nondevotees, he will never cheat his devotees. This means that she should become his devotee and not only will he never cheat her, but he will do whatever necessary to protect her from evil even if he has to resort to cheating others to do so. He loves his devotees so much that he will do anything for them. Who in their right mind would take shelter of anyone else?
Q. You said "love of God (Rama/Krsna) far exceeds adherence to principles of morality." This is true but adherence to morality gives pleasure to Lord Rama. Therefore, love of God includes adherence to morality. So isn't it true that if one does not adhere to moral values then that person is not a good devotee?
A. The point is that one can be morally good yet not be a devotee. If this is never stressed, morality, which in and of itself is merely a corrective measure, will be considered the goal of religious life. Adherence to morality outside of devotion does not necessarily give pleasure to Rama. It may enable one to take birth in heavenly realms and please God in the sense that his general law for this world is that one must be moral, but it will not please him directly as bhakti does.
It should be clear that we are advocating a life of devotion that includes within it a moral basis, but that morality itself does not constitute bhakti. There is no need to distort this idea as if it were a case for being immoral in the name of devotion. Those who erroneously read this into my words should measure their faith in devotion against their faith in morality.
Furthermore, it is worth noting that Sri Krsna has said that if one is his devotee but nonetheless somehow or other has a moral lapse, that does not change his stasis as a devotee. Such is the nature of love.
Q. Lord Rama is considered an expansion of Balarama and Laksmana is called the same. Can you explain how Ramacandra and Laksmana are both expansions of Baladeva?
A. Even Mathuresa and Dvarakesa Krsna are expansions of Balarama, who is Krsna's first expansion, as is Sankarsana (Balarama) of Mathura and Dvaraka. Still Mathuresa and Dvarakesa are forms of Krsna rather than Rama. Similarly, although Ramacandra manifests from Balarama in a general sense, he is not Balarama but Krsna appearing as Ramacandra, whereas Laksmana is Balarama appearing as his younger brother.
For more insight into the subtle differences between these forms of Godhead, read Srila Rupa Goswami's Laghu-bhagavatamrta.