|You Forced Krishna to Allow You to Come
". . . so we have to pray Nityananda
Prabhu. He's very merciful. He's so kind, Baladeva.
He gives spiritual strength. Then we can approach the Supreme Lord. . . Nityananda Prabhu is the spiritual master. Or spiritual
master is the replica, representation, of Nityananda
Prabhu. So when Nityananda Prabhu is pleased, then we
become detached from this material attraction." - Cc. Adi 7.4 Lecture on
The person here in this world was originally something different; on this, everyone agrees. Now, the question is specifically what he or she was originally, prior to this conditioning. We accept Srila Prabhupada as our authority. When he makes statements in his purports, room conversations, or lectures--statements that directly refer to how conditioned souls originally came here--these constitute evidences and proofs. When he was directly asked about this topic by an initiated devotee, a student, or a curious guest—and when he gave answers to this question—we must give those great weight. Those answers best resolve any and all apparent contradictions in relation to this so-called controversial topic.
Now, the neo-Gaudiya devotees, as well as other occult Hindustan leaders, specifically question the purpose--and even the validity—of those essential answers. By doing this, they sow doubt about the inviolable Truths by which Srila Prabhupada clearly says we were originally with Lord Krishna in the spiritual world. They infer that anytime Srila Prabhupada presented that answer, it was ultimately a ruse. Falling under the sway of this allegation, we can--and will--then wind up questioning virtually any answer on any topic Srila Prabhupada has given us, eventually including any order he has enjoined. The neo-Gaudiya people also dispute the initial fall-down of the jiva. They postulate that it (fall-down) cannot take place from spiritual world, since there is no Maya there.
This belief system produces a question: How could we be ultimately responsible for the terror and misery we experience in samsara? We have been created outside of the spiritual world, according to the neo-Gaudiyas. As per the latest variation or mutation that has come down the pike, we originally emerged into existence in a passive (shanta-rasa) relationship with Lord Aniruddha in the mahat-tattva—apparently after having first been created by and then injected into the mahat-tattva by Maha Vishnu. But, if such was the case (direct association with Lord Aniruddha), then that must have also been the spiritual world--and how could we have fallen from His perfect association?
acarya kahe—tumi yahan, sei vrndavana: “Advaita Acarya disclosed the whole situation, telling Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, ‘Wherever You are, that is Vrndavana.’” - Cc. Madhya 3.33
Lord Aniruddha has His own Vaikuntha planet in the paravyoma. So, what’s the difference--whether it is there or in the mahat-tattva? After all, Lord Aniruddha, in His form of Ksirodakashayee Vishnu, has His own spiritual planet even within the brahmandas; it is called Svetadvipa.
“Regarding your question
concerning the spirit souls falling into Maya’s influence, it is not
that those who have developed a passive relationship with
Is evil then supreme? We are currently entangled in the evils of birth, death, disease, old age, grief, temporariness, and occasionally extreme terror and pain. If we were created as imperfect beings, how could this ultimately be considered our fault? We somehow or other hanker for a higher rasa than a passive relationship with Lord Aniruddha. How could we realize the perfected pleasure from the mahat-tattva?
So, Maya must have tempted us with perverted pleasure. According to the latest “no-fall” apa-siddhanta—we left Lord Aniruddha’s association and fell from the mahat-tattva to the material world. Is that what we needed to do in order to develop an inherently desired higher rasa with the Lord? If so, what real choice did we have?
Now, Srila Prabhupada nowhere presents such an epistemology of our origination. Accepting it nevertheless entails that Srila Prabhupada’s clear statements in his verse translations and purports are wrong or merely figurative or imaginative or speculative interpretations. How is this any different from the method employed by the Mayavada scholars?
The purva-paksha has presented an explanation. According to the philosophy of the neo-Gaudiya school, Srila Prabhupada compromised the siddhanta in his lectures, letters, or when he spoke on this topic with his disciples or guests. He supposedly did this because they were not actually ready to accept the Reality. Even though he preached a kind of subterfuge in his letters, morning walks, and room conversations, throughout his translations and purports, he planted—here and there--the actual Truth. And the “real siddhanta” is that the nitya-baddha jiva-tattva has never been with Lord Krishna in the spiritual world.
Accepting these presuppositions, we are supposed to conclude that Srila Prabhupada compromised the real preaching by (deceptively) saying that the nitya-baddha souls were once with Lord Krishna in the spiritual world. This is the fundamental argument of the neo-Gaudiya camp and the various personality cults associated with it. But their presentation is circular, fallacious logic. It begs the question. Its conclusion is already assumed in its premise. Fundamentally underlying its acceptance is a poor fund of knowledge. It is an argument against the presumption, and we do not accept their premise.
Any of Srila Prabhupada’s original 1967 disciples (and any of his dedicated disciples thereafter, for that matter) would have accepted that we were only originally with Lord Aniruddha in shanta-rasa—if that’s what he had actually told us. Personally, I would have had no problem whatsoever with it, if that is what he had actually said. Very few of us came from some kind of hard-core “Christian” environment. As such, no former hippy would have had any difficulty whatsoever with Srila Prabhupada telling us anything about that which is beyond our limited comprehension.
Fall-down from spiritual world
“He is fallen already from
Vaikuntha planet. He is fallen in this material world, and he is again
trying to make progress.” -
Lecture on S.B. 2.3.19 in
Here Srila Prabhupada directly says that we have fallen from Vaikuntha—and this does not necessarily rule out having fallen from the highest planet in the spiritual sky. Then, a fortnight later, he repeats it:
“He is fallen already. From
Vaikuntha planet, he is fallen in this material world. And he is again
trying to make progress.” -
Lecture on S.B. in
It’s a fact that Srila Prabhupada also (here and there) says “no one falls from Vaikuntha.” But he clearly says (above) that the soul “is fallen already from Vaikuntha planet.” By comparing the jiva to a dreaming man, Srila Prabhupada gives us the proper understanding of his “no one falls from Vaikuntha” statements. The dreaming man simply thinks he is fallen and has gone somewhere else. This reconciles the apparent contradiction.
Srila Prabhupada has confirmed that souls can and do fall from Vaikuntha. This siddhanta must stand—and we must give the greater weight--because it is the general conclusion. It is the major premise. A disciple of His Divine Grace best not lean toward other indicators--such as “no one falls from Vaikuntha”--and use them to dispute Srila Prabhupada’s major premise that the conditioned souls in this material world have fallen from Vaikuntha. We can easily adjust the apparent contradiction, because he also informs us that actually we do not fall from the spiritual world. Instead, the Supreme Lord creates a situation by which we only think that we have fallen.Acyutananda Maharaj: In
Srila Prabhupada: “Yes.”
Room conversation in
It’s really presented quite definitively here.
“Like Jaya and Vijaya”
In Srimad-bhagavatam, 7.1.34, King Yudhisthira inquires: “What kind of curse could affect even liberated Visnu-bhaktas? And what sort of person could curse even the Lord’s associates? For unflinching devotees of the Lord to fall again to this material world is impossible. I cannot believe this.”
Maharaj Yudhisthira is astounded that unflinching nitya-muktas could be sent down into the material world. However, the subtlety is that he is not referring to souls who have misused their free will and have turned away from the Lord—and were thus sent into material existence. The key word is “unflinching devotees”—ekantinam--“of those exclusively devoted as exalted attendants”.
Such unflinching devotees do not fall down from Vaikuntha—the falldown of Jaya and Vijaya was arranged for the purpose of the Lord’s fighting lila. Jaya and Vijaya did not turn away from the service of the Lord. Although they mistakenly offended the Kumaras, they were the Lord’s unflinching attendants even when they made this little mistake. But, in the case of the nitya-baddha jiva-tattva, we did not remain unflinching in our devotional service. The unflinching devotee who remains a servant of the Lord—either here or in the spiritual world—does not fall into the clutches of karma, vikarma, or mishra-karma.
“. . . it is to be understood that when Jaya and Vijaya descended to this material world, they came because there was something to be done for the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Otherwise, it is a fact no one falls from Vaikuntha.” - S.B. 7.1.35, purport
“Otherwise” here means that, other than (“otherwise”) this special circumstance of the unflinching devotees Jaya and Vijaya. As long as devotees in Vaikuntha remain unflinching servants of the Lord, they are never sent down into the material world--unless the Lord wants them to engage in a particular lila with Him in this world. Srila Prabhupada considered the history of the fall-down of the conditioned jiva to be similar to, but not exactly the same as, that of Jaya and Vijaya. We were once in Vaikuntha, like they were.
example, Jaya and Vijaya. They had their lila with
Srila Prabhupada compares the fall-down of the conditioned soul to the history of Jaya and Vijaya. The nitya-baddha jiva-tattva is similar to Jaya and Vijaya. All of us were, like those two gatekeepers, also originally serving the Supreme Lord’s nitya-lila. Srila Prabhupada used the analogy of the fall of Jaya and Vijaya as a comparison. The difference between the two analogous elements, however, is that the fall-down of the nitya-baddha jiva-tattva (ourselves) was not arranged by the Lord. We fell by misuse of free will and not by Divine arrangement.
the spiritual sky, when the living entity is in his pure state of
consciousness . . . does something act upon him to make him illusioned
at that point also?
“After all, the living entity
falls down from the spiritual world, just like Jaya Vijaya.
There is possibility. I you do not stick to the spiritual principle, even
if you are in Vaikuntha, you will fall down--what to speak of this
material world?” Bhagavad-gita 17.1-3 Lecture in
“Now, we wanted to enjoy this
material world. We have fallen down, just like Jaya-Vijaya.
Now we are trying to go back again. Therefore we say, ‘Go
back to home, back to Godhead.’” - <>
“The answer to your question
about the marginal energy is that the jiva soul is always called marginal
energy, whether he is in the spiritual world or in the material world. There are
instances where marginal energy jiva souls have fallen from the spiritual
world, just like Jaya and Vijaya. So the
potency to fall under the influence of the lower energy is always there. And
thus the individual jiva soul is called as
“There is a dormant
attitude for forgetting
Obviously, the “edge of the beach” is a reference to the tatastha-sakti. The liberated side is with Lord Krishna. The original state is not “fallen”; it is on the dry side. Our original situation is not different from our final situation upon going back to Godhead.
“Those who are in the brahman effulgence, they are also in the fallen condition. So
is no question of falling down from a fallen condition. When fall takes
place, it means falling down from the non-fallen condition.” -
Letter to Revatinandan
The nitya-baddha jiva-tattva is not originally from the brahman effulgence. The realization of the most-powerful impersonalists is incomplete; they may have fallen from and re-entered the brahmajyoti many times during the course of any particular creation (kalpa) of the universe. Therefore, for any individual soul, it can be authoritatively stated that we do not know if he is coming from Vaikuntha or from the brahmajyoti. Whenever we use this term nitya-baddha, we do so in terms of material time, in context to the immensity of the duration of the kalpas. This is the context for calling us eternally conditioned souls, although, in point of fact, ultimately we are not.
Srila Prabhupada: Instead of using independence properly, when he misuses independence,
he falls. . .
Srila Prabhupada implys that the nitya-baddha jiva-tattva is linked to the population of the spiritual world. If no one falls from the spiritual world—if “not even a leaf falls” from the spiritual world--then Srila Prabhupada could have clarified it. Instead, he implys the opposite, namely, that 90 percent of the souls there are “always good.” He could have instead said that one hundred percent would have always been good; the nitya-baddha jiva-tattva have fallen from somewhere other than the spiritual world.
“So, because we are living
entities, we are not as powerful as
His Divine Grace is constantly referring to Lord Krishna and not to any of the twenty-four Narayanas in the paravyoma. As such, the fall-down can also be from Goloka Vrndavana; that can be strongly inferred.
“And there are millions and
millions of liberated souls who are engaged in
Reviving the Lost Relationship
“Regarding your question
concerning the spirit souls falling into Maya’s influence, it is not
that those who have developed a passive relationship with
What an abundance of
transcendental revelation! The excerpt
even supplies a subtle argument that could be used by the neo-Gaudiya camp. First of all, notice the adverb
“usually.” This means that the general
rule is that one does not fall from the spiritual world (“usually anyone who has developed
his relationship with
“ . . . it is not that those who have developed a
passive relationship with
Say you have a friend, and, ten years later, he is still your friend. At the end of that time, it can be rightly said that you have developed your relationship. We shall constantly be developing our relationship with the Lord in the eternal atmosphere. The eternal relationship with the Lord “may be regained or revived”; this is “revival only, nothing new.” This part of the letter also eliminates the mental speculation that the original relationship with Lord Krishna was undeveloped, i.e., had to be developed.
“ . . .the rasas were originally exchanged between the spiritual living being and the spiritual whole, the Supreme Personality of Godhead. . . one who attains full knowledge of these different rasas, which are the basic principle of activities, can understand the false representations of the original rasas which are reflected in the material world. - S.B. 1.1.3, purport
Notice, “rasas” is in plural.
Return to Our Original Home
“We live together in the same
heart, which is just like the
Transliteration: abhutam—became; antara—separated; va—indeed; okah—from the original home.
Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura has apparently purported that this friendly relationship refers to one between the soul and Supersoul. But there is nothing contradictory in that interpretation, even if it appears to be evidence that the soul may initially be only in a relationship with Lord Aniruddha.
We find that suddha-sattva and Lord Aniruddha are manifest in the shining mahat-tattva: “Thus, after manifesting variegatedness, the effulgent mahat-tattva, which contains all the universes within itself, which is the root of all cosmic manifestations and which is not destroyed at the time of annihilation, swallows the darkness that covered the effulgence at the time of dissolution.
The mode of pure goodness, which is the clear, sober status of understanding the Personality of Godhead . . . then becomes manifest in the mahat-tattva.” - S.B. 3.26.20-21, verses
Here we find verification
that suddha-sattva was indeed manifested in the mahat-tattva. And, in
this manifestation of the mahat-tattva, the four expansion
aides-de-camp, including Lord Aniruddha, also occur. So, it is very possible that the living
entity realized the Lord there, upon being injected into it. He could have contacted
and realized Lord Aniruddha there, because the suddha-sattva state of clear understanding or
It can be realized in due course of time by practice of bhakti yoga. After all, the rare men who can practice ashtanga-yoga themselves meditate upon Lord Aniruddha, because He is the Supersoul. When they realize Him, with His four symbols of club, disc, lotus, and conch arranged as they are on His Vaikuntha planet, they attain shanta-rasa. So, even in connection to the yoga process, there is a relationship here in this world of the conditioned soul with Lord Aniruddha and shanta rasa. It is not at all unlikely that the latest and greatest “no-fall” theory had its origins in these transcendental facts.
But the key thing to always
remember is that all of this must have happened after having falling from
Vaikuntha. So, when Visvanatha
Cakravarti Thakur purports
to 4.28.54 that the friendly relationship spoken of in that verse refers to the
relationship between the soul and Supersoul, it is
not at all contradictory. It is
clarified by Srila Prabhupada in his very next purport, viz., 4.28.55. There he
clearly says that, “Actually, it is
Certainly the conditioned soul, during the dissolution, lives within Maha Vishnu. But S.B. 4.28.54 says that the two friends were both far from their home. The Lord was also still far from His home. It is a stretch to consider that the home being referred to is within Maha Vishnu. That’s not our goal now, neither is it the goal of the neo-Gaudiya devotees. And, over and above this, Srila Prabhupada (above) says “to return home, back to Godhead”, which clarifies the question completely. Later he adds:
“Generally people are not aware of their interest in life—to return home, back to Godhead. People do not know about their real home in the spiritual world. In the spiritual world, there are many Vaikuntha planets, and the topmost planet is Krishnaloka, Goloka Vrndavana. . . . The real attempt should now be to return home, back to Godhead. Srimad-Bhagavatam 4.29.48, purport
“The words nijam padam are significant (nijam—his own, padam—original position). The living entity, being part and parcel of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, has the birthright to a position in Vaikunthaloka or the spiritual world, where there is no anxiety. Therefore, one should follow the instructions of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Then, as stated in Bhagavad-gita, tyaktva deham punar janma naiti mam eti so ‘rjuna: After giving up one’s body, one will return home, back to Godhead. . . . As a spiritual person, such a devotee returns to the Personality of Godhead and plays and dances with Him.” S.B. 8.24.51, purport
“So we are playing
with the big fire very nice, but there is chance of falling down. That chance
is there. . . the small fire, although it is
possessing the same quality of fire, it may fall down. So, we are small
particle--very, very small, atomic portion God. Therefore, we have got the tendency
to be separated from the big fire . . .” -
Dr. John Mize: From where
does that tendency come?
This independence is also known as free will, and it is an intrinsic or fundamental component of the self. Its use or misuse does not depend upon anything external. There is no meaning to free will if it cannot be misused; that is irrefutable logic.
“As fragmental parts and parcels of the Supreme Lord, the living entities also have fragmental portions of His qualities, of which independence is one. Every living entity, as an individual soul, has . . . a minute form of independence. By misuse of that independence one becomes a conditioned soul, and by proper use of independence he is always liberated.” - Bg. 15.7, purport
We are not talking about animals here; we are talking about human beings or those higher than them. There is no transcendental benefit to be gained by denying this intrinsic, dynamic quality of independence within every living entity. It is there; it is there eternally--the tendency will never go away. It is even there when the jiva returns to the spiritual world. The living entity can never become God, and he can also never become something without this quality, e.g., he can never become shakti-tattva. There is no Maya in the spiritual world. But forever there is free will within every jiva, whether he is in Vaikuntha or in the material world. When he returns to the spiritual world, he does not misuse it, that’s all.
External illusion does not
cause misuse of independence.
Reason for fall-down
“Whatever the material energy
dictates, the conditioned soul does. He has no responsibility; he is simply the
witness of the action. But he is forced to act in that way due to his offense in his eternal
It’s not the Lord’s fault; jiva has a tendency to be attracted to independence.
Srila Prabhupada: Why we are
in this material world? We are part and parcel of
Ginsberg: How did the
material covering begin?
Fall-down of Kala-Krishnadasa
“Even associate of Caitanya Mahaprabhu failed, personal
associate. So there is chance of falling down even from the personal
association of God. Jaya-Vijaya, they had to become
Room conversation in
"He left My company to associate with the Bhattatharis, but I rescued him from their company and brought him here." - Cc. Madhya 10.64
Kala Krishnadasa left the sva-dhama. Prabhupada clarifies it a purport later:
"This is factual evidence showing that it is possible at any time to fall down from the Lord's association. . . Once fallen and separated from the Supreme Personality of Godhead's association, one becomes a candidate for suffering in the material world." Cc. Madhya-lila 10.65, purport
The neo-Gaudiya and other
In virtually everything he has spoken and written, Srila Prabhupada targets personal devotional service and association with the Supreme Lord as transcendental to the material energy. It does not matter if the situation is in the material world or in Vaikuntha--it is the sva-dhama of the Lord. All of Kala Krishnadasa's activities as personal servant of Lord Caitanya, before he left Him, were in Lord Gauranga’s sva-dhama or personal abode.
Acarya kahe—tumi yahan, sei vrndavana: “Advaita Acarya disclosed the whole situation, telling Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, ‘Wherever You are, that is Vrndavana.’” Cc. Madhya 3.33
“We should mark the difference between maya and sva-dhama—for devotees the sva-dhama acts, whereas in the case of non-devotees, the Maya energy acts.” S.B. 4.9.7, purport
“Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu is well known as Patita-pavana, the savior of all fallen souls, and He proved this in His behavior toward His personal servant, Krishnadasa, whom He saved.” Cc. Madhya, 1.112
All emphases have been added for your enhanced understanding.
namo namo 'niruddhaya
OM TAT SAT.
Quotes from the books of His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada are copyright by the Bhaktivedanta Book Trust