​Various theological queries + replies + feedbacks + testimonials (in Hindi, Sanskrit & English languages) from ‘BRVF – Vedanta – 1st & 2nd’ groups on the WhatsApp cyber platform —

A) [30/11, 08:53 PST] Mr. Vasu – Bangalore, Karnataka, Bharata (+91 9743599954): 
“What is soul? I just wanted to know what is it function? How our papa & punya are connected with it?”

B) [02/12, 06:57 PST] College Student Mr. Mohit Sharma – Panipat, Haryana, Bharata (+91 8929686619): 
“जय हो महाराज जी– अति उत्तम समाधान– आपके चरणो मे बारंबार प्रणाम🌺😊🙏”

C) [02/12, 19:13 PST] Mrs. Kuheli / Sudevi Mukherjee Chatterjee – West Bengal & Delhi, Bharata (+91 9650916060): 

“Hare Krishna. Dandavat pranām acharyashree. Kindly help me in understanding the aasuram bhavam of kamsa hiranyakashipu etc as they are associates of Lord and What their real svarupa is. are there divisions as bhakta,ajñāni,shatrû?

Also I had heard that dikshaguru brings a jivatma back to its svarupa-deha. I am not sure if it is right to ask this with my incomplete knowledge.

 Kindly clear my doubts. Koti pranām.”

D) [02/12, 23:26 PST] Entrepreneur (Brand Sparrow) Mr. Shishir Katote R – Pune, MH, Bharata (+91 9765730977): 

“Dandavat Pranam. I am posting the query on Facebook on the latest post here. 
 Thank you. My doubt has been dispelled. Regarding the last comment by Your Holinesss, I have following doubts. 
1) If scholarship does not make one adhikari for raganuga sadhana, isn’t it still needed to be a scholar to properly even start sadhana? Because “yadrsi bhavana yasya siddhir bhavati tadrsi”. We find today that neo gaudiyas think about mixture of vaidhi and raganuga finally turning into absolute raganuga. We also find big institutional gurus promoting the deviated concept of vaidhi bhakti getting transformed into raganuga bhakti in advanced stage. So, according to me, even if sastra nipuna may not claim to be adhikari for raganuga sadhana bhakti, it would be absurd to think that scholarship is not needed at all. Because unnatojvala rati that we are desiring is the crest jewel of all rasas and only one of the billions will attain it. 
2) We have various deviated philosophies being promoted about raganuga bhakti. Isn’t is MORE imperative in raganuga bhakti that one has to be a scholar when there is such a thin difference between pure raganuga and vaidhi bhakti like in case of mixture of raganuga and vaidhi? Bigger battle needs bigger weapons. 
3) What will happen to those aspirants who think of attaining manjari bhava but follow the mixture of vaidhi and raganuga due to ignorance? Will they fall to Goloka vrindavana or attain bhauma vrindavana after realizing the philosophical difference between madhurya and aisvarya misra madhurya?”

E) [03/12, 02:12 PST] College Student Mr. Mohit Sharma – Panipat, HR, Bharata (+91 8929686619): 

“महाराज जी भजन मार्ग मे निष्कामता की क्या महिमा है?? निष्काम क्यो बनना चाहिये?? भगवान की प्रीति निष्कामियो पर अधिक क्यो होती है?? ओर निष्काम कैसे बना जाए??– 🌺🙏”


Replies by Bhakti-rasa-vedanta-pithadhishvara Gurupadacharya Shri-charana —

1) Towards Mr. Vasu —
“Soul is a minute spark of consciousness (anu-cit) and an eternally separate expansion (nitya-vibhinna-amsha) of Paramaatmaa Vishnu sourced in His marginal potency (tatasthaa / kshetrajnaa / jeeva shakti). Its function is eternally conscious existence (nitya-sattaatmaka). It is the ultimate responsible entity for all vices and virtues (paapa/punya) which it performs through the agency of material gross and subtle bodies (trigunaatmaka sthoola / sookshma vapu) during its engagement within illusory external potency maayaa.
Evidences — 
“sookshmaanaam apy aham jeevah” (Shreemad-bhaagavatam 11.16.11) + “nityo nityaanaam cetanas cetanaanaam eko bahoonaam yo vidadhaati kaamaan” (Katha Upanishad 2.2.13) + “mamaivaamsho jeeva-loke jeeva-bhootah sanaatanah” (Shreemad-bhagavad-geetaa 15.7) + “svaamshashchaatha vibhinnaamsha iti dvedhaamsha ishyate” (Varaaha Puraana) + “..jeeva-bhootaam mahaabaaho yayedam dhaaryate jagat” (Shreemad-bhagavad-geetaa 7.5) + “vishnu-shaktih paraa proktaa kshetrajnaakhyaa tathaa’paraa…” (Vishnu Puraana 6.7.61) + “karttaa shaastraartha-vattvaat” (Brahma-sootra 2.3.33) + “yayaa sammohito jeeva aatmaanam trigunaatmakam….” (Shreemad-bhaagavatam 1.7.5).”

2) Towards Mrs. Kuheli Chatterjee — 
“There are two types of demons viz., the original demons (moola-daityas) and the pastime associate demons (paarshada-daityas). The latter are divided further twofold viz., eternal associate demons (nitya-siddha-paarshada-daityas) and the turned associate demons (saadhana-siddha-paarshada-daityas). Kamsa, the incarnation of Kaalanemi is a moola-daitya. Hiranyakashipu (in normal eons or saamaanya kalpas) is a nitya-siddha-paarshada-daitya who is an incarnation of eternal associate Vijaya, the gate-keeper of Mahaa-vaikuntha/paravyoma (aadhyaatmika Vaikuntha). King Citraketu turned as God’s associate Citraketu, in the form of Vritraasura, is saadhana-siddha-paarshada-daitya. 
If you have gravely perused over our serialized presentation of ‘Raagaanugaa-vivrittih’ renamed as ‘The Divine Identity & Its Acquirement’ released in total 12 parts so far (many upcoming portions are not prepared yet due to timely shortage), you should come to know by now that the hypothetical element known as ‘svaroopa-deha’ (denoting a form or body innately inherent and integral to marginal jeeva’s constitutional identity) doesn’t exist. Because, jeevaatmaa’s svaroopa itself is a form; it doesn’t need any other layer of a marginal body enveloping its tatastha-svaroopa (marginal form). Or else, redundancy shall occur. Therefore, the bodies enveloping the marginal soul are not of marginal type, but are of either external (produced from external inferior potency / bhagavad-bahirangaa-shakti) of Bhagavaan which is trigunaatmikaa maayaa) or belonging to His internal self-potency (bhagavad-antarangaa-shakti). 
As far as the acquired (not innate to marginal jeeva’s identity; hence, acquired from the internal potency of Bhagavaan) siddha-deha (divinely acquired subtle body) and the paarshada-deha (divinely acquired gross body) are concerned, since, they do not manifest from the original marginal identity (moola tatastha-svaroopa) of a jeeva, but, are acquired from the internal self-potency (antarangaa/aatma-bhootaa/bhagavat-svaroopa-shakti) through the agency of the nitya-siddha paarshadas (eternally perfect associates), the term ‘svaroopa-deha’ (literally meaning ‘the body of one’s identity’) is a hypothetical term so far as the case of a marginal soul (tatastha jeeva) is concerned.
Hence, when the ‘svaroopa-deha’ doesn’t exist for a marginal soul (for nitya-siddha paarshadas who are manifestations of the internal self-potency, their very paarshada-deha is their svaroopa; their deha is not separate from their svaroopa; when their svaroopa is of the calibre of internal potency, they don’t require another body or deha from the same internal potency; so, ‘svaroopa-deha’ doesn’t exist for them, too, for avoiding the fault of redundancy), its hypothetical bringing back doesn’t exist, as well.”

3) Towards Mr. Shishir Katote R —
“Of course, scholarship in scriptures is an imperative pre-requisite not just in the domain of doubled path of pure devotion (vaidhee & raagaanugaa types of bhakti), but even mandatorily required for entrance cum progressive enhancement into other paths like karma, jnaana and yoga etc. Scholarship in detecting the subtle distinction between various types of vaidhee-bhakti and the raagaanugaa-bhakti is a must and therefore, direction-less practice or saadhanaa leads nowhere. Hence, the formula for raagaanugaa-bhakti is ‘first know, then desire, then deserve, lastly practice and finally obtain’. In vaidhee-bhakti, it is ‘first know, then deserve, then desire, lastly practice and finally obtain’ (there is no ‘shaastra-varnita-vraja-leelaa-cintana-moolaka-lobha-janyaa icchaa’ or desire generated from greed arousing from the contemplation of the scripturally depicted Vraja-leelaa — in vaidhee-bhakti; desire in vaidhee-bhakti is ‘shaastraadesha-moolaka-karttavya-buddhi-janyaa icchaa’ or the desire of duty sprouting from the injunctions of scriptures). In ucchrinkhala-maarga of haphazardous devotion, it is ‘first practice in concoction, later achieve a disastrous destination’. Knowledge of scriptures is assimilated with distortion. 
First of all, anybody who has obtained the genuine ‘lobha’ in raaga-maarga – won’t be mistaken with an admixture of aishvarya-bhaava and maadhurya-bhaava. Such genuine ‘lobha’ obtained saadhaka will, always, traverse on the path of pure raagaanugaa-bhakti. 
Simply thinking of obtaining manjaree-bhaava doesn’t translate into ‘lobha’; because, such thinking could be based on the ‘yukti’ or logic that since the manjaree-bhaava is considered topmost by the connoisseurs of ‘rasa’ (divinely succulent mellows of Godly devotion), let me aspire for the manjaree-bhaava. Hence, ‘lobha’ is not generated either from the injunctions of scriptures (shaastra-aadesha-prasoota) nor from the inferential logic based thereupon (shaastra-moolaka-yukti/anumaana-prasoota). Rather, such ‘lobha’ emerges from experiencing the sample taste of the divine sweetness / maadhurya-anubhava given by a raagaanuga-guru or by a raagaatmika-guru after when the saadhaka comes into such guru’s ideological association (not necessarily, a physical proximity) and contemplates on the scripturally depicted Vraja-leelaa under such able guru’s ideological guidance (raaga-maargeeya-guru-anugraha-aashrita-shaastra-varnita-vraja-leelaa-shravana-manana-udbhoota-maadhurya-anubhava-janya).
The conclusion is that when actual genuine ‘lobha’ is obtained, no confusion prevails. Confusion tantamounts to the absence of ‘lobha’.”

4) Towards Mr. Mohit Sharma —
“निष्कामता से सम्बन्धित चारों प्रश्नों का उत्तर श्रीमद्भागवतम् में यथा —
“मुक्तानामपि सिद्धानां नारायण-परायणः । सुदुर्लभः प्रशान्तात्मा कोटिश्वपि महामुने ॥” + “नारायणपराः सर्वे न कुतश्चन बिभ्यति । ..स्वर्गनरकेष्वपि तुल्यार्थ-दर्शिनः ।।” + “तुलयाम लवेनापि न स्वर्गं नापुनर्भवम् । भगवत्सङ्गीसङ्गस्य मर्त्त्यानां किमुताशीष: ॥” + “न नाकपृष्ठम् न च पारमेष्ठ्यम् न सार्वभौमं न रासाधिपत्यम् । …समञ्जस त्वाम् विरहय्य कांक्षे ॥” + “मत्सेवया प्रतीतं ते सालोक्यादि-चतुष्टयम् । नेच्छन्ति सेवया पूर्णा: कुतो’न्यत्त्काल-विप्लुतम् ॥” + “सालोक्य-सार्ष्टि-सामीप्य…दीयमानं न गृह्णन्ति विना मत्सेवनम् जना: ॥” + “राजन्पतिर्गुरुरलं….मुक्तिम् ददाति कर्हिचित्स्म न भक्तियोगम् ॥” + “न साधयति मां योगो….. यथा भक्तिर्ममोर्ज्जिता ॥” + “…भक्त्याहमेकया ग्राह्यः” + “नैष्कर्म्यमप्यच्युतभाववर्ज्जितम्….” + “ये’न्ये’रविन्दाक्षविमुक्तमानिनस्…” + “ज्ञाने प्रयासमुदपास्य नमन्त एव…” + “….नोत्पादयेद्यदि रतिं श्रम एव हि केवलम् ॥” + “….यथा स्थूलतुषावघातिनाम् ॥” + “धर्म: प्रोज्झितकैतवो’त्र…..” + पद्मपुराणान्तर्गत श्रीमद्भागवत्माहात्म्य से — “…मुक्तिम् दासीम् ददौ तुभ्यम् ज्ञानवैराग्यकाविमौ ॥”

— Gurupadacarya Svami / गुरुपादाचार्य स्वामी

(Anand, Gujarat, Bharata & Lodi, CA, USA)

One thought on “Prashnamala 4th / प्रश्नमाला चतुर्थ

  1. Thanks to Swamiji for resolving many prevalent confusions that are so widespread today due to the unchecked spread of Neo-Gaudiya groups & errors. May the pure Truth of Sriman Mahaprabhu’s & the Shad Goswami’s teachings shine forth brilliantly from this time forward!

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s