Tattva-viveka
Question beyond reason
Premarnava - December 18, 2006 2:20 pm
Hello everybody, this is my first question here so be kind 
We know that intelligence and logic is useless in some point of spiritual live because some things are beyond our intelligence and reason. Krishna arrange this world like that. But I wonder why he did not give us enough intelligence to uderstand why we are here? I mean, why do he need material world filled with infinite number of suffering beings to be complete in his happiness. Krishna egsistance is all about happiness and so it is with everything he creates.
I'm asking this because I never got satisfying answer to this question. Every time I ask it, it turns out that logic and reason can't help me. So naturally next question arise - why Krishna do not give me enough intelligence and reason to understand such elemental thing?
Premarnava - April 16, 2007 3:19 am
I don't know if I step on some taboo subject, or I'm making some offense here. To clean up my intentions and shed a little light to my doubts I will ask you to imagine following, hypothetical situation (Please forgive me all faults and my bad english)
* * *
One day I woke up in prison, not even knowing where I'm, what I'm doing there, why I'm there and what was tomorrow. I'm getting there not knowing what is my name and even that I'm imprisoned. Despite suffering that I'm experiencing I'm getting used to it with some time, and I'm starting to not thinking about it.
Until one day... when one of my fellow prisoners told me there is a world where peoples are free, where is no tortures and everybody are happy. With time I'm gaining confidence in his words and after a while it's becoming obvious to me that he's speaking a truth.
Then I learn that I have a father, and that he sends me there. It turns out that I also have a brothers and sisters, which are free, outside of prison, and that my father will never let them land up here. Naturally a question rises in my head - why I was imprisoned and my brothers and sisters are not. I'm getting an answer that I'll not able to understand it until I don't love my father. When I ask why - then I'm getting answer that it's beyond my logic.
With time I also learn that my father build this prison to be able to experience full happiness and to be able to fulfill as a liberator he send some of his childs to prison. He calls this a pastime, a "sristi lila" pastime.
Next my fellow prisoner who became my close friend after some time started telling me that there is infinite number of prisoners suffering just like I am. And what shocked me most - most of them will stay here forever. When I open up my mind to him saying that this is unjust and that I think that my father is doing wrong he says to me that I'm offending my father, and for those who are offending him there is no hope to get out of prison. At the same time he told me to use my intelligence and common sense and that doubts are symptoms of an intelligence.
When I start talking about my doubts to other prisoners, they all start looking at me as some kind of evil. They are afraid and don't want to talk with me about that topics, giving me one advice to not think about that anymore.
When I ask for personal meeting with my father, prison guards tells me that I'm not loving my father enough to have a honor to see him. Then I start to realize that in order to love him I will need to pretend that I don't know what I know, and that I understand what I don't understand. So I start to cry...
* * *
This is some kind of feeling that I have for some time now. Please don't judge me too quickly. I'm frustrated and suffering.
I don't want to be provocative, I just want to feel love... which I don't feel.
Your humble servant,
Premarnava das
Vivek - April 16, 2007 3:56 am
I think the fall theory or BVT's analysis in Jaiva Dharma tries to put this point of the blame on jiva but then it also is just a preaching strategy and there are deficiencies in that logic too(some people like that logic and it fosters their bhakti by putting blame on themselves). I think Gaudiya theology doesnt say that some souls will perpetually stay in material world, everybody will be be delivered in due course.
The idea that we are suffering is out of the idea that our existence is independent of krsna, once our connection to krsna is established even our suffering will become a source of pleasure in assisting the lord in sristi lila. And the jivas here in material world have a unique experience of strengthening themselves from weak position and attaining the love of God so we experience a variety which even nitya siddhas dont!. The reason we cant completly understand this by intellect is that we are pleasure seeking or "rasa" ecstacy seeking beings more than knowledge seeking beings( that can be understood after good application of one's intellect and the soul itself is beyond the intellect) and that rasa can only be attained in selfless unadulterated love. Variety is the spice of life, and this variety has sristi lila as one of different varieties of plays of krsna. Even if nitya siddha devotees suffer externally when they come to material world( like jaya and vijaya being sisupala etc) they take pleasure in serving the lord, like BVT said my anxieties in devotional service are the greatest source of my happines. Once we find our connection with krsna, we dont identify with any personal or provincial interest then we are willing to undergo suffering for his pleasure. It is counterintuitive but when we suffer externally for krsna internally we get greatest happiness.
All trouble is because of the thought of being seperate from krsna. But krsna can be known only by devotional service. We have to harmonize our will with krsna's will and participate and facilitate his play or lila whether it is sristi lila or any lila and by doing so we also gain greatest nourishment and happiness.
I know your question is very genuine, especially the fact that it is not extremly simple to understand all these things by intellect. Then why did God give us intellect if he doesnt want us to understand him by intellect?
Maybe he just wants us to harmonize with his will and experience the real joy of the self.
I am sorry for i couldnt help you much
Margaret Dale - April 16, 2007 4:20 am
I know your question is very genuine, especially the fact that it is not extremly simple to understand all these things by intellect. Then why did God give us intellect if he doesnt want us to understand him by intellect?Maybe he just wants us to harmonize with his will and experience the real joy of the self.
I am sorry for i couldnt help you much
I really like this part of Vivek's answer. It makes me think about how we are taught to use our intelligence from a very young age to understand things so that we can take advantage of them. It IS possible for us to understand why we are here using our intelligence; this process is known as jnana yoga. Jnana yoga take a lot of time and a lot of study, and it is usually not possible to complete the process in our short and confused life spans in kali yuga.
I think God gives us intelligence to allow us to question our existence, just like you are doing. If we didn't have intelligence, we would never be able to ask why our intelligence is so limited! With proper inquiry, as you are doing, you will find someone who is able to explain the answers to your questions in a way suitable for your current level of understanding. What you figure out with your intelligence quickly is that the universe is too big and your intelligence is too limited to really understand God and your position beyond understanding it by words. You have already reached this step, it seems. When you get here, Krsna asks you to exercise your service muscle instead of your brain muscle under the guidance of a guru. Our eternal position is to serve Krsna, but we have forgotten that. The only way for us to realize it in kali yuga is hearing from guru parampara and practicing service - which translates into chanting and other service. Our eternal position is NOT intellectually analyzing Krsna's pastimes. So it works for us that we are forced to exercise our service muscle in preparation for eternally fulfilling our purpose in existence.
It is hard to struggle with such large questions, but your struggle is a good one!
Please correct me if I have made errors in my answer.
Audarya-lila Dasa - April 16, 2007 4:12 pm
I believe the problem is that you are asking the wrong question. You want to know why others have a better position than you or why Krsna arranges for some souls to be a part of the srsti lila and some to be in his nitya lila. You seem to be troubled by the injustice you perceive.
There really are many things that we cannot understand. Krsna's will and movement are beyond the limited realm of logic and reason. You are not the first to be troubled by such questions. They come in all varieties but the basic question is, why is there injustice?
As a parent I have the same issue being raised by my kids - why does she get that, or why did you punish me and not him? Of course, as a parent I have a much different perspective than my children and they cannot understand the why of so many things that come down to parental discretion. That analogy only goes so far though I believe it has it's usefulness in trying to understand the situation a little bit.
The real question is, 'what should I do?' We are all seeking happiness, so the real question is, 'how to achieve the most happiness and how to find lasting happiness?' How can our vision be changed from one where we perceive suffering and injustice to one where we see the world as 'an abode of joy'? The prison isn't external - it is a consciousness prison. How will you tell the 'prisoner' that his 'cell' is of his own making and that isn't physical or tangible, but rather it is only his perception that makes it so?
The reality is that you are indeed the master of your own destiny. What will you choose to do? How will you choose to act? How will you utilize your independence?
Vivek - April 16, 2007 4:53 pm
I believe the problem is that you are asking the wrong question. You want to know why others have a better position than you or why Krsna arranges for some souls to be a part of the srsti lila and some to be in his nitya lila. You seem to be troubled by the injustice you perceive.
There really are many things that we cannot understand. Krsna's will and movement are beyond the limited realm of logic and reason. You are not the first to be troubled by such questions. They come in all varieties but the basic question is, why is there injustice?
As a parent I have the same issue being raised by my kids - why does she get that, or why did you punish me and not him? Of course, as a parent I have a much different perspective than my children and they cannot understand the why of so many things that come down to parental discretion. That analogy only goes so far though I believe it has it's usefulness in trying to understand the situation a little bit.
The real question is, 'what should I do?' We are all seeking happiness, so the real question is, 'how to achieve the most happiness and how to find lasting happiness?' How can our vision be changed from one where we perceive suffering and injustice to one where we see the world as 'an abode of joy'? The prison isn't external - it is a consciousness prison. How will you tell the 'prisoner' that his 'cell' is of his own making and that isn't physical or tangible, but rather it is only his perception that makes it so?
The reality is that you are indeed the master of your own destiny. What will you choose to do? How will you choose to act? How will you utilize your independence?
Good point audarya lila prabhu but still it is not a completly wrong question.
It is interesting to note that madhavas don't consider that there is any freewill at all. Everything is predestined all through and some souls will perpetually suffer in hell according to them. Similar in christian theology where some souls will perpetually suffer in hell. Even the christians say that why God makes some souls suffer perpetually in hell is beyond our reason or logic. But to me ,these two views are completly difficult to harmonize with God being supremely compassionate( as madhavacarya doesnt even admit free will to begin with and some souls are destined to hell forever).
So I think completly foregoing logic is not possible in many cases. Why do we then put through any logical analysis any philosophy like mayavada because we cant understand anything by logic anyway? There has to be some room for logic though it will retire ultimately.
Audarya-lila Dasa - April 16, 2007 6:20 pm
Maybe a better way to say the same thing regarding the question is that such a question will never have a logically satifying answer. That does not mean we should not use our intelligence or that we should leave logic behind altogther - it is just admitting a simple fact - some questions can never be answered to the satisfaction of the intellect.
This question is answered in so many different ways - but ultimately all the answers leave one feeling unsatisfied if the desire is to have an answer that completely satisfies the mind's need to know beyond doubt. Doubt will be removed not by logic and reason ultimately, but by developing love. Doubt is a function of the mind and real knowing is beyond the mind. What can we really know with our minds? Our minds are limited and we are trying to approach the unlimited.
The salient point I was really trying to make is that we are where we are, regardless of why and the fairness of it or not will not change that fact. We are embodied, we do suffer from disease and we will have to exit these bodies in due course of time.
The idea of karma, to me is more satisfying an answer to why some seemingly innocent beings suffer - but that answer has it's logical problems as well - especially if you try to go back in your mind to a fixed point and try to ascertain why some souls are in the material world and some are not. I know of no good answer to that question. The only one that has helped me to get beyond that question is that it is Bhagavan's lila, which is beyond reason. Guru Maharaja has said that it will not satisfy many people but ultimately life has no meaning - there is no logic or reason to it ultimately - it is lila.
That is why I said it was the wrong question. Shall we ask why Krsna likes certain things and not others? We are persons and we do many things that cannot be understood with logic and reason - Krsna is a person as well - the Supreme person - why should we expect that all his actions will fit nicely within our small minds or that his actions must ultimately fit our idea of logic or fairness?
Vivek - April 16, 2007 6:38 pm
Yes but devotees like BVT or prabhupada talk about eternal damnation theory of no hope for some souls as illogical. Because we know that krsna possesses all qualities in extreme measure more than us, so compassion is one of the quality. The fact that there is no hope for some souls and those souls are predestined to be like that is kind of hard to fit not in logic but even from the heart. A parent may punish a child but to punish a child eternally is very unlikely.
so i think gaudiya theology is great in that it finds hope for everybody in that repeated choices will be available to souls to cultivate love of God.
Premarnava - April 17, 2007 12:52 am
This question is answered in so many different ways - but ultimately all the answers leave one feeling unsatisfied if the desire is to have an answer that completely satisfies the mind's need to know beyond doubt. Doubt will be removed not by logic and reason ultimately, but by developing love.
How can I develop love for somebody from whom I don't fell love (It dosent mean that it not exists, just I'm not feeleing it). How can I love somebody who sends infinite number of souls to hellish type of existence?
Our minds are limited and we are trying to approach the unlimited.
But with this argument we can win any debate... using this argument alone we can justify anything. "Your mind is limited so just accept it blindly, because you will not understand it". But god gives us logic and reason for some... reason - to inquiry and rise a doubts.
Why one who is unlimited don't give us intellect to understand reason behind causing infinite souls to suffer in extreme way... not knowing why they suffer.
That is why I said it was the wrong question. Shall we ask why Krsna likes certain things and not others?
I think - yes. We have right to ask why Krishna like certain things as a "sristi lila". Why? because it is related to us. Why we should not have right to ask? If we are loved by god, why we could not ask why he let us be catched by laws of karma, and terrify suffering? Just like a child have right to ask his father why he beat him. If he beat him because he does something wrong, and indeed child see that he is doing something wrong, then naturally he want to repair that. Problem is I don't remember that I have done something wrong. Not in that scale that cause me to suffer like that... and I'm not alone. And child can talk to his father face to face... I cannot.
We are persons and we do many things that cannot be understood with logic and reason - Krsna is a person as well - the Supreme person - why should we expect that all his actions will fit nicely within our small minds or that his actions must ultimately fit our idea of logic or fairness?
Because if I cause pain to somebody there is no excuse that I'm just a person who make many things that cannot be understand with logic and reason - I have to apologize for my activity, or explain to that person why I done this, and I must do it in a way that person will understand. While in my relation to god it seems that I should be sorry for something... and if I'm not enough humble and submissive I will be further punished for this. So in that way I don't really feel a love.
Yes... I can't reconcile my fate. Why should I?
The real question is, 'what should I do?'
I'm not only thinking about myself. As for myself - I will probably burn in hell for all that I'm saying here, and for not being submissive enough, but I think about all that poor beings suffering in ignorance. Milions and milions of extremly suffering souls... and nobody know how come that god needs it for his joy. If Krishna wants all souls to became pure he can make it in tiny fraction of second. Sometimes in act of exceptional mercy he gives prema to somebody. Why he can not give it right now to everybody and make every soul free of struggle in one second? why?
The point I try to make here is like that - I can't only think about my self - if just only one living being left here suffering how can I enjoy in spiritual world?
How can I be happy if only one person suffers here?
And if my enjoyment there means that I will not think about that souls suffering in this material world, I better stay here rotting forever for my ideals. 
Nitai Joseph - April 17, 2007 1:20 am
As for myself - I will probably burn in hell for all that I'm saying here, and for not being submissive enough,
I think that is nonsense. It is totally valid that you have these questions. This is one thing that separates Vaishnavas from people who have blind faith, we have a philosophy that does not require blind faith. When I say we, I don't mean me though . Although these things are not currently an issue for me, and I could try to calm these concerns, I do not think I would be successful. I think that overall this is a very important topic, and there are also many threads of the question that are intertwined in your head. I think it would be best for you to submit your thoughts to Swami, he can sort out and explain the whole situation.
It is admirable that you are taking advantage of this forum and revealing your doubts even though it makes you feel vulnerable.
All Glories to Honesty!
Audarya-lila Dasa - April 17, 2007 3:53 am
Don't worry about going to hell for having doubts - it is good to voice your doubts. My response was not meant to tell you not to question, rather I was simply pointing out that there really are no completely satisactory answers to this line of questioning. Guru Maharaja can help you, but be prepared for the answer that it is God's lila. Of course, we are responsible for our own predicatment - it is not that Krsna wants you to suffer. We have to learn to see our own conditioning and our own choices as the source of our troubles.
Don't think that Krsna wants you to suffer. No, actually He wants you to love him and engage in your eternal constitutional position of servitorship. Our suffering is a function of our rebellion and our inclination toward independence and wanting to be the center. We want Krsna to serve us. Krsna - remove my suffering is what we think. But your idea about helping others is very good and certainly something Krsna likes. Of course, if we are caught up and suffering ourselves due to our material consciousness, how will we be able to help others?
Love is never forced - for it to have meaning, it must be freely given. Krsna will not force anyone to surrender or to serve him. Krsna wants everyone to love him and he certainly loves everyone - but reciprocation can never be forced.
Swami - April 17, 2007 4:25 am
One day I woke up in prison, not even knowing where I'm, what I'm doing there, why I'm there and what was tomorrow. I'm getting there not knowing what is my name and even that I'm imprisoned. Despite suffering that I'm experiencing I'm getting used to it with some time, and I'm starting to not thinking about it.
Until one day... when one of my fellow prisoners told me there is a world where peoples are free, where is no tortures and everybody are happy. With time I'm gaining confidence in his words and after a while it's becoming obvious to me that he's speaking a truth.
Then I learn that I have a father, and that he sends me there. It turns out that I also have a brothers and sisters, which are free, outside of prison, and that my father will never let them land up here. Naturally a question rises in my head - why I was imprisoned and my brothers and sisters are not. I'm getting an answer that I'll not able to understand it until I don't love my father. When I ask why - then I'm getting answer that it's beyond my logic.
Hold it. The truth is that it is Mahavisnu himself who came here! Not you. And he did not go elsewhere or send anyone else to the freeland. He desired to become many and upon doing so entered his world. This is his world. He has no other world of his own, no other lila to speak of. He has shakti--tatastha-sakti--and through it and out of love he becomes many. However, becasue the many are small they do not fare well in relation to his maya-sakti. So Narayana sends avataras of himslef to help Mahavisnu in his plight. This is sristi-lila.
Vivek - April 17, 2007 5:18 am
Great insight maharaja. Sometimes some people say that the plight of the jivas compromise Mahavisnu's being all powerful and all knowing as he could know beforehand that jivas will suffer in relation to maya then why then he do this lila!!
So that was a theology question about all good and all powerful God also.
Anyway I like the idea that the absolute truth is uncovered slowly and mysteriously and in the end we will graduate to pure love of God. There is great deal of fun in rendering the path of purification also. Aritsts, musicians or even scientists like mysterious challenges so in that sense if everything would have been so clear to us in the lila how can there be any sport.
By as you said maharaja it is all lila after all, how can you blame God when we are part of him and he has a part of himself into the play and we are not helping him in his play by continuing to pursue our provincial interest instead of harmonizing our will with him.
Does only the madhyama adhikari devotee feel compassion for fallen souls or does uttama adhkiari also feel the same sort of compassion. I am asking this questions as uttam adhikari cannot see any fault anywhere and any suffering anywhere right?
Premarnava - April 17, 2007 11:53 am
Thank You maharaja for your insight. It puts things in another perspective, although it is still hard to swallow. But it seems that I have no choice and have to make it.
Thank you all for your responces. If you have anything further to add, I'll be glad to hear.
Swami - April 17, 2007 12:22 pm
Thank You maharaja for your insight. It puts things in another perspective, although it is still hard to swallow. But it seems that I have no choice and have to make it.
Thank you all for your responces. If you have anything further to add, I'll be glad to hear.
There is much more to say. One point to consider is that in your story someone told you you were living in a prison, etc. and this made sense to you. However, although you did not mention this, he or she also told the same thing to other so called prisoners, but they did not blive him. They thought he was illogical, if not crazy. Why? It did not make sense to them but it was true and made perfect sense to you and others. Then as you hear more, although further details make sense to others they do not make sense to you, not completely. Why?
The tuth may be hard to swallow. That is why preachers somtimes don't tell the whole truth. People want a nice little story to explain everything. But they need to hear that they need to change--that they are living like animals while they are souls. So sometimes stories are woven to help them to a point. Stories like "You rebelled against the all good God." Metahysiscs, however, are another thing.
I will try to write more later. Others should feel free to continue to contribute to this thread as well.
Syamasundara - April 17, 2007 2:10 pm
I understand what makes you question like that, the frustration, and the provoking tone to make your point, so I hope you can also forgive me if my tone and language may also sound little diplomatic, but I'd like to get my points across.
Your questioning reminds me a lot of my niece. She is sincere, and we have many nice talks on the phone, but sometimes I really feel like saying, "Off course you speak like that, you don't know anything!"
Similarly, as rightful as your questions sound, your premises seem to be kept together with tape.
When I read that you don't feel loved by Krsna I went in absolute denial, "That can't be", like when years ago someone would admit his or her homosexuality and they would tell them they just needed a friend...
How can a devotee who knows a little about Krsna and has chanted his name, and has met a sadhu not feel Krsna's love? Krsna is constantly smashing us with his love; that's how he operates.
I don't really feel guilty for having material desires or not having enough love for Krsna as much as I do when despite all this he showers me with his love time and again, and one day he'll win.
Another thing that stood to my eyes was all the talk of enjoying in the spiritual world. If I'm not wrong you are Polish, so there may be some catholic cultural overlapping in your reasoning.
There is no burning in hell or enjoying in heaven here, not with that emphasis and exclusivity.
In the spiritual world what you call enjoyment is actually absorption, the epitome of absorption in Krsna, and that's exactly what qualifies those souls to be there, while you are not yet. The extasy they feel is a side effect, when you get to that level of absorption you feel one with the universe, and your universe is Krsna and whatever he is about at the moment.
Otherwise your compassion is a noble feeling expressed and discussed in the Caitanya Caritamrta (by the way, you may want to read that story), but without the proper knowledge of the main tattvas it's very easy to slip into sentimentalism, which is a waste of time, you might as well at first spend the same energy in trusting what the sadhus tell you about reality. That will purify you in turn and you will understand better and better in time. In our process you get knowledge first from the outside, though sadhus, sastra and guru, then from within your heart, through the realization that comes from chanting and serving. Do you think that the great Vaisnavas of our past and present are just resigned people who have blind faith in some not-so-compassionate God they can't really understand? They have a very solid fund of knowledge that comes from hands-on experience. That's why they are called tattva-darsinah.
The analysis of the extreme suffering also felt a little warped. This world is really like a huge pac-man game. No one ever cried or despaired when the ghost got eaten by pac-man, that's just a game really, nor was it that serious when pac-man would die, he always had other lives. Yet, for those who were playing, and identifying with pac-man, it was a cause of distress and frustration, but who asked them to play in the first place? Then the game is over, they come back to their real identity, and they forget about all the anxiety of pac-man. That's the Bhagavad Gita according to Atari or Nintendo.
As far as God not giving us enough intelligence, I went to say good-bye to my niece and her son who is 14 months old. At some point he reached for the DVD player, she explained to him verbally that he couldn't do that, and grabbed his hand at the same time, but, although he has all the intelligence and brain tissues to become a functional adult, he doesn't understand our verbal language yet, so he started to cry and despair, but then he reached out for the neck of that very mean mom that made him suffer without reason and she promptly hugged him. In time, after more "unjustified punishing" and displays of love, he will grow, learn our language, so that it will suffice to tell him "Don't touch the DVD player" then he will learn to use a DVD player, and who knows, he might be able to build one.
Krsna is exactly like a caring parent. If we want to run after a ball down a steep slope even if behind us they are shouting it's not so wise, then whose fault is it? But as soon as we cry out for help, Krsna sends us all we need and more, he comes personally, he appears as scriptures, he appears as the sadhus, and you may not feel loved by all these agencies of the divine and how they operate to respond to your own call for help, but please try to love them and trust them anyway.
Premarnava - April 17, 2007 8:21 pm
When I read that you don't feel loved by Krsna I went in absolute denial, "That can't be"
How can a devotee who knows a little about Krsna and has chanted his name, and has met a sadhu not feel Krsna's love? Krsna is constantly smashing us with his love; that's how he operates.
You are right - that was of course exaggeration... to sake of an argument. I feel love of Krishna, that's only thing that matters here after all. That's why I'm devotee.
For ~10 years I didn't though about these things, I was thinking that I'm a "regular devotee". But after seeing so much pain an distress in this world and my own life I started to dig deeper. I started to ask more questions. More I asked, more unsatisfied and frustrated I became. Don't read my sharp words in bad way... yes, I'm exaggerating, but sometimes I fell just like that.
Another thing that stood to my eyes was all the talk of enjoying in the spiritual world. If I'm not wrong you are Polish, so there may be some catholic cultural overlapping in your reasoning.There is no burning in hell or enjoying in heaven here, not with that emphasis and exclusivity.
I have no catholic background (fortunately), but maybe my English is not good enough to explain it properly. I didn't wanted to say that in spiritual world there is enjoyment like on heavenly planets. By saying "enjoy in spiritual world" I mean "being on my original position without material suffering".
you might as well at first spend the same energy in trusting what the sadhus tell you about reality. That will purify you in turn and you will understand better and better in time.
That's what I try to do now posting this thread... It wasn't easy, but soon or later I knew that I can't hide that doubts, so as I think I'm sharing them in perfect company
Do you think that the great Vaisnavas of our past and present are just resigned people who have blind faith in some not-so-compassionate God they can't really understand?
Of course not.
They have a very solid fund of knowledge that comes from hands-on experience. That's why they are called tattva-darsinah.
So that's why I'm here... and asking.
The analysis of the extreme suffering also felt a little warped. This world is really like a huge pac-man game. No one ever cried or despaired when the ghost got eaten by pac-man, that's just a game really, nor was it that serious when pac-man would die, he always had other lives. Yet, for those who were playing, and identifying with pac-man, it was a cause of distress and frustration, but who asked them to play in the first place? Then the game is over, they come back to their real identity, and they forget about all the anxiety of pac-man. That's the Bhagavad Gita according to Atari or Nintendo.
well... it is not exacly like that. Their suffering is real, in spite of what can be seen from the outside. After all they don't know that they
are just playing (at the most part), and we do know when we play games. Their suffering is real, because for them all they got is what they see.
And well... in light of what I understand from our acharyas we didn't choose to play this game - it was side effect of Maha Visnu desire.
As far as God not giving us enough intelligence, I went to say good-bye to my niece and her son who is 14 months old. At some point he reached for the DVD player, she explained to him verbally that he couldn't do that, and grabbed his hand at the same time, but, although he has all the intelligence and brain tissues to become a functional adult, he doesn't understand our verbal language yet, so he started to cry and despair, but then he reached out for the neck of that very mean mom that made him suffer without reason and she promptly hugged him. In time, after more "unjustified punishing" and displays of love, he will grow, learn our language, so that it will suffice to tell him "Don't touch the DVD player" then he will learn to use a DVD player, and who knows, he might be able to build one.
That's right - as for this example: he doesn't understand verbal language... but Krishna can make us understand his language... so my question was kind of "why he don't give us understanding of his language and then speak to us in his language so we can understand why..."
and you may not feel loved by all these agencies of the divine and how they operate to respond to your own call for help, but please try to love them and trust them anyway.
Well... as far as I know there is no other way after all... so I will.
Audarya-lila Dasa - April 17, 2007 8:44 pm
And well... in light of what I understand from our acharyas we didn't choose to play this game - it was side effect of Maha Visnu desire.
This isn't what our acharyas say actually. Tatastha shakti means border - neither this side or that - choice is involved and implied. I think you'll find that our acharyas are fairly unanimous on this issue of where to place 'blame' if that is what your are looking for. The jiva is responsible by dint of his/her choice.
So one vision of the world from the perspective of the conditioned jiva is that it is a terrible place of suffering - but another vision is given in sastra - visvam purnam sukayate (sorry if I misquoted that) - the world is an abode of joy. It is not that one has to be in Vaikuntha to have this vision or be freed from suffering. The world is an abode of joy is talking about this world. That is the world of our Guru Maharaja and he is inviting us to join him!
Vivek - April 17, 2007 10:20 pm
This isn't what our acharyas say actually. Tatastha shakti means border - neither this side or that - choice is involved and implied. I think you'll find that our acharyas are fairly unanimous on this issue of where to place 'blame' if that is what your are looking for. The jiva is responsible by dint of his/her choice.
But Maharaja said that is BVT's preaching strategy to shift the blame on jiva. Otherwise when we don't have full knowledge of spiritual and material world how much choice do we have anyway. The choice comes now when Maharaja is instructing us and we have the choice to make to accept him wholeheartedly or not and therein lies in free will. Now we cant blame anybody as we know krsna's intructions which are coming to us through his devotee and we can reform ourselves to align our will with guru and krsna's will.
Syamasundara - April 17, 2007 10:44 pm
That's right - as for this example: he doesn't understand verbal language... but Krishna can make us understand his language... so my question was kind of "why he don't give us understanding of his language and then speak to us in his language so we can understand why..."
I think it's a matter of point of view. From Krsna's point of view it is us that have to get on his terms rather than him getting on our terms. When my mother was teaching me how to swim she was stretching her arms toward me and calling me (while slowly backing up....), so I was forced to count on my legs and arms to reach her. So Krsna is calling us: "Come live my way! You belong here! You have an eternal spiritual body!"
Being constituted of tatastha sakti, we had the choice between serving under the svarupa sakti, or ruling under the influence of maya-sakti. In the second instance, we necessarily need to be deluded and forget Krsna. Birth after birth, our conditioning becomes so thick, that even when we call out for Krsna to help us, it may take us some time to see and hear clearly.
From the point of view of reality, bhakti is the easiest and most natural thing, and as Srila Sridhara Maharaja says, from the point of view of transcendence all our material problems and attachments are just like mushrooms, big and massive, but with very thin and shallow roots. Krsna could just flick them off, and he does, but only if we ask him, and according to the intensity and sincerity of our request. Ye yatha mam prapadyante.
Vivek - April 17, 2007 10:50 pm
I think it's a matter of point of view. From Krsna's point of view it is us that have to get on his terms rather than him getting on our terms. When my mother was teaching me how to swim she was stretching her arms toward me and calling me (while slowly backing up....), so I was forced to count on my legs and arms to reach her. So Krsna is calling us: "Come live my way! You belong here! You have an eternal spiritual body!"Being constituted of tatastha sakti, we had the choice between serving under the svarupa sakti, or ruling under the influence of maya-sakti. In the second instance, we necessarily need to be deluded and forget Krsna. Birth after birth, our conditioning becomes so thick, that even when we call out for Krsna to help us, it may take us some time to see and hear clearly.
From the point of view of reality, bhakti is the easiest and most natural thing, and as Srila Sridhara Maharaja says, from the point of view of transcendence all our material problems and attachments are just like mushrooms, big and massive, but with very thin and shallow roots. Krsna could just flick them off, and he does, but only if we ask him, and according to the intensity and sincerity of our request. Ye yatha mam prapadyante.
No,according to sristi lila we get the choice only when we met Sri Guru in human form of life and know the scriptures and then can choose to obey or disobey them.Before that we never had any tangible choice.
Syamasundara - April 17, 2007 11:19 pm
OK then can someone who's got it right make a little scheme with all the official theories, specifying which ones are the preachy ones, which are siddhantic, and which are mixed?
I'm gradually getting lost.
Nanda-tanuja Dasa - April 17, 2007 11:26 pm
The prison isn't external - it is a consciousness prison. How will you tell the 'prisoner' that his 'cell' is of his own making and that isn't physical or tangible, but rather it is only his perception that makes it so?
Story from one of the talks Guru Maharaja gave in Vrindavan:
Guru had a brahmachari disciple. They’ve been meeting on a bank of Yamuna every day to have hari-katha. During one such meting guru told his disciple that he would like to go and do long pilgrimage. Guru left, his disciple practice dwindled, he got married, got children, house, cow. After several years guru came back and knocked on disciple’s door.
“Let’s go to the bank of Yamuna and talk about Krishna!” – said guru
“Oh, I cannot, I have to take care of some business, would you just like some milk?” – said disciple
“Let’s go to the bank of Yamuna, I need to tell you about my pilgrimage!” – said guru
“Oh, I cannot leave my family like that, I have so many things to do” – said disciple
“Then I will just go and take a bath in the river, please prepare some Prasad” – said guru
“Yes, Guru Maharaja” – said disciple, happy that guru left him alone
In the middle of the river there was an old tree drugged there by the monsoon, with only branches stuck out of the water. Guru swam to the tree, grabbed on of the branches and start screaming “Help! Help!” Disciple have heard this scream and ran to the river – “What is going on, Guru Maharaja?”
"Help! Help! The tree got me; it doesn’t want to let me go!"
"But it’s you who is holding the tree!"
Smiling guru swam to the shore and ashamed disciple has learned his lesion.
Syamasundara - April 17, 2007 11:36 pm
That's exactly the story I wanted to mention (!) but seen that it's 1:30 am here, and I have to wake up in 4 hours to catch my flight, I gave up. Thanks.
Tomorrow, i'll be in the same time zone as most of you
Vivek - April 18, 2007 12:43 am
OK then can someone who's got it right make a little scheme with all the official theories, specifying which ones are the preachy ones, which are siddhantic, and which are mixed?
I'm gradually getting lost.
I think that Maharaja said that all theories of the initial blame being put on jiva for choosing the position in material world are preachy and the theory of beginnless karma and of sristi lila being eternal is siddhantic. Maharaja, do correct me if i am wrong on this point.
Audarya-lila Dasa - April 18, 2007 12:52 am
It would seem that we are in need of some sastra pramana to sort all of this out. The idea that free will only starts after one meets a Guru in physical form doesn't seem like a plausible idea. Tatastha shakti is described as a type of border shakti - neither here nor there - the implication is that choice is always involved. Sri Guru is always present and when he sees the sincerity of the seeker he comes before such a seeker in physical form. We can certainly provide backing for that. Minute independence is always there in the jiva - it is not imparted at some point in time by Sri Guru.
From a purely philosophical point of view I don't like the idea that I am not responsible. It certainly makes more sense to me - and that is the excercise here - trying to make sense of things - that as you sow, so you reap. Krsna says in Bhagavad Gita that everyone follows his path and that as the individual approaches him, he reciprocates. That statement certainly implies free will and volition and also implies that it is an inherent quality of the jiva.
It's interesting to me that most people have no problem with eternity going forward, but it's the history thing that seems to be hard to deal with. If we are nitya baddha - eternally conditioned that implies that there is no single point in history where this all began and we made some particular choice. It also implies that Maha vishnu didn't at some point in time start the sristhi lila either - it's eternal. If there is no fixed point in time where this all began there is no choice on anyones part since choice implies a fixed point in time.
At any rate I do agree with Vivek that now that we have more knowledge we are more accountable for our actions (uh oh - am I ever in for a ride!) :Nail Biting:
Swami - April 18, 2007 3:12 am
If we are nitya baddha - eternally conditioned that implies that there is no single point in history where this all began and we made some particular choice. It also implies that Maha vishnu didn't at some point in time start the sristhi lila either - it's eternal. If there is no fixed point in time where this all began there is no choice on anyones part since choice implies a fixed point in time.
Yes, there is no beginning to karma. It is anadi. The sristi-lila is beginningless as well. But Visnu choses to become many at the dawn of each manifstation of the world order. Then from homogenity the hetrogenity of tatastha-sakti begins to manifest and the jivas take their place in the world in comformity with karma. Once they are manifest in the world they can choose to turn toward Bhagavan or continue to face away from him. They always have the choice during the manifestation of the world. They are either manifest or unmanifest (in sususpti). So the opportunity to choose is clearly during the world order. Furthermore, the more knowledge they have the more informed their choice will be. When they meet sri guru they can make an informed choice.
If this sounds unfair to anyone, they should listen to my leture on this topic given in NC. The lecture was an answer to a questin along these lines. Some of you must have listened to it. The position of the baddha jiva who chooses to serve Bhagavan is most glorious.
Vinode Vani Dasa - April 18, 2007 4:35 am
I find it helpful to think of their being two different kinds of free will: conditioned, and unconditioned. Unconditioned free will is the free will of God, who can do whatever he wants whenever he wants. So if he wants to perform srsti-lila, he can, and he can also choose to perform Krishna-lila. There are no restrictions on God's will. The soul also has free will, but its will is always conditioned by the situation it finds itself in. The situation it finds itself in is a direct result of its previous choices of free will. So the soul cannot choose to sprout wings and fly away whenever it wants, but it can choose its reaction to its present situation based on its present knowledge and the facilities at its disposal. A soul in a prison is still free; it can choose to rail against the bars in anger, or work toward getting let out early on good behavior! I think it is important for us to always consider carefully the choices that present themselves to us in whatever situation we find ourselves in, and search sincerely and earnestly for the most appropriate response, again based on our knowledge and ability. This is a broad definition of morality. Morality is only possible within a conditioned situation; for God, morality does not exist, because he can do whatever he wants to. Thus, God's actions cannot be questioned on the basis of morality. We, in our conditioned situation, must act in accordance with our situation, and thus the concept of good and bad actions is relevant to us. I believe this condition would continue into the spiritual world, for the soul does not become unconditionally free in the sense that God is unconditionally free upon liberation, at least in the Vaishnava sense of liberation; rather, it becomes conditioned by a different situation, that of absorption within the spiritual energy. Souls there retain their free will, but the situation in which they exercise that free will is different.
Vivek - April 18, 2007 9:22 am
Yes, there is no beginning to karma. It is anadi. The sristi-lila is beginningless as well. But Visnu choses to become many at the dawn of each manifstation of the world order. Then from homogenity the hetrogenity of tatastha-sakti begins to manifest and the jivas take their place in the world in comformity with karma. Once they are manifest in the world they can choose to turn toward Bhagavan or continue to face away from him. They always have the choice during the manifestation of the world. They are either manifest or unmanifest (in sususpti). So the opportunity to choose is clearly during the world order. Furthermore, the more knowledge they have the more informed their choice will be. When they meet sri guru they can make an informed choice.
If this sounds unfair to anyone, they should listen to my leture on this topic given in NC. The lecture was an answer to a questin along these lines. Some of you must have listened to it. The position of the baddha jiva who chooses to serve Bhagavan is most glorious.
Is homogenity of sususpti different from homogenity of brahman undifferentiated cosciousness
Swami - April 18, 2007 12:35 pm
Is homogenity of sususpti different from homogenity of brahman undifferentiated cosciousness
It is quite similar, enough that Srila Sridhara Maharaja sometimes used the term Brahman when describing susupti with regard to the movement of tatastha from homogenity to hetrogenity. This deep dreamless sleep (susupti) is also compared to Brahman is sastra, the difference being that it is a homogenity that does not endure. Although there are obviously other differences as well.
Vivek - April 19, 2007 3:25 am
Now that we know the difference between the sastric stand of beginnless karma, I had a question on which I am cornered many times. Whenever I cite the krsna samhita to deal with relativity of scripture on issues like astronomy and planet descriptions and women , devotees say that the book just shows a preaching strategy from bhakivinoda thakur to attract badra loka or intellectualizing speculators of his time. That is the reason why he has spoken of hell as allegory in his essay on bhagavata. Otherwise sastric evidence shows that each time a person drinks wine he will have to drink molten iron, similarly swim in ocean of semen for some other karma etc.
Is it alright if I put the issues of exact one to one correspondence between each karma and the hell, and prahlada becoming a calf and supplying liquor as a grey area whose literal accuracy has no bearing on my devotional service or do i have to take a stand on this issue also. Maharaja mentioned that the incident of prahlada becoming a calf in allegorical section of bhagavata, which section of the bhagavata is allegorical?
I just wanted to know that am i given a license right now to ignore these issues but have to believe in everything literally later?
Anyway even if it is a license i dont mind it, as there is no hope in this world except performing devotional service as the charm of material world fades away each day.
Swami - April 19, 2007 4:21 am
Before we get to viveka's questions, more on anadikarma.
Audarya-lila asked for scriptural references.
These are perhaps the most pertinent ones. They are from Vedanta-sutra 2.1.34-35.
vaisamya nairghrinyena na sapeksavat tatah hi darsayati
na karma avibhagat iti cet na anaditvat
The gist and spirit of these terse sutras is,
“There is no favoritism or neglect on God’s part because the happiness and distress of jivas is determined by karma, as per scripture. Thus it is their doing, not God’s.”
“No” the second sutra responds, “The theory of karma does not absolve God of unequal dealings and thereby the responsibility for the evil we see in the world because in the beginning of creation there was no karma. Therefore in the beginning the jivas must have been created unequally.”
“No.” the second half of the second sutra replies, “Karma is has no beginning. It is anadi.”
In other words, just as God is eternal, so too are the jivas and the principle of justice (karma). Jivas interacting with maya-sakti have been doing so forever, for Mahavisnu has always existed and continually performs his sristi-lila.
This interaction of the jivas with maya binds them to material nature. They exploit her and she responds. Indeed, we see that this is the very nature of the world. There are consequences for actions. No one escapes the long arm of the law. “You shouldn’t have took more than you gave.” The metaphysical position taken in scripture is our practical reality. Everyone believes that “people get what they pay for,” “no one gets away with anything,” etc. These are common statements that express the scriptural truth, however imperfectly.
It is true that some people seem to suffer for no apparent reason. The theistic theory of karma seeks to explain the reason for this. We have had many lives. Scripture is only explaining the why of that which we are experiencing. It also explains how to change our experience by forgoing exploitation, leading to a life of loving.
Thus God makes himself available to the jivas of this world in every creation. Thereby they can choose to end their bondage through bhakti. This opportunity is always available. Indeed, although Bhagavan honors the principle of justice that implicates the jivas in suffering, he also intervenes. This is called mercy. No justice, no mercy. So karma makes mercy possible. Even those in less complex forms of life are extended this mercy, animals, vegetables, etc., predisposing them in future lives to make the right choice when they are in a position to do so. Does Bhagavan override the jivas free will in such instances in a positive way?
Lila transcends logic, thank God.
To say that one could use this argument--that an answer escapes logic--to win any argument does not change the obvious fact that some things are beyond logic. Here we are not using it for just any argument, but with regard to a question that a universally accepted answer to has never been given since the dawn of creation, after creation, after creation . . .
However, although beginninglessness (new word) transcends logic, it is not entirely outside of the scope of our experience. We see that the tree comes from the seed and the seed from the tree, and there is no beginning to such. Was there a chicken first or an egg?
Swami - April 20, 2007 5:06 pm
One point to consider is that in your story someone told you you were living in a prison, etc. and this made sense to you. However, although you did not mention this, he or she also told the same thing to other so called prisoners, but they did not believe him. They thought he was illogical, if not crazy. Why? It did not make sense to them but it was true and made perfect sense to you and others. Then as you hear more, although further details make sense to others they do not make sense to you, not completely. Why?
In one sense this post of mine that was not replied to answers the issue. We identify with the logic of our tradition to a greater or lesser extent because of our psychology. Our emotions impact our reasoning, and our psychology, our emotional content, propensities, samskaras, etc. are the result of our previous life's actions, be they karmic or devotional. Reason is hardly the final arbitrator in any of our decisions. It may seem to be, but if we look beneath the surface we will find other casues. Thus while spiritual life should make sense to us, there are good reasons why it may not in all respcts and not at all to others. Thus scripture recommends a transrational approach to comprehensive knowing.