The Origin of the Jiva

QUICK PATH

For those pressed for time, I would suggest reading: 1. Introduction, 2. Teachings of Srila Prabhupada, up to and including section 2.4.2, the introductory paragraphs of section 4.5, section 4.5.5.1, and the general conclusion at the very end. In between one will find many selections from the teachings of Srila Prabhupada, Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati, Srila Jiva Goswami, and Srimad-Bhagavatam. The headlines give an indication of the subject matter. One can simply skim these, picking out those of interest.

CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 THE QUESTIONS

1.2 THE ANSWERS

1.3 HOW SHOULD WE ARRIVE AT AN ANSWER?

2. TEACHINGS OF SRILA PRABHUPADA

2.1 HAS SRILA PRABHUPADA ALREADY ANSWERED THE QUESTION OF THE ORIGIN OF THE JIVA?

2.2 A PROPOSED SOLUTION TO THE CONTROVERSY

2.3 THE STRONGEST EVIDENCE: SRILA PRABHUPADA’S DIRECT RESOLUTION OF A CONTROVERSY IN ISKCON

2.3.1 “Formerly we were with Krsna in His lila”

2.4 SRILA PRABHUPADA’S DIRECT ANSWERS TO DIRECT QUESTIONS

2.4.1 Introduction

2.4.2 “Actually he has not fallen”

2.4.3 “So actually we are always in the spiritual world”

2.4.4 “In this world or spiritual world, he has got the potency of coming down”

2.4.5 “We may fall down from Vaikuntha at any moment”

2.4.6 “The soul may fall down from any position”

2.4.7 “If someone has a relationship with Lord Krsna on Krsna-loka, does he ever fall down?”

2.4.8 “We have got the independence to give up His company”

2.4.9 “Can he still fall?”

2.4.10 “If we are originally in the spiritual world...”

2.4.11 “As eternal servitors of Krsna—our constitutional position—we fall down when...”

2.4.12 “You are not eternally conditioned”

2.4.13 “Marginal energy jiva souls have fallen from the spiritual world”

2.4.14 “Not from the impersonal brahman”

2.4.15 “There is possibility, but he does not come”

2.4.16 “Potency of falling down is always there”

2.4. 17 “If the conditions in the spiritual world are so nice”

2.4.18 “Yes,” Krsna says, “yes, you go.”

2.4.19 “You forced Krsna to allow you to come”

2.4.20 “We should remain with Krsna in the spiritual world”

2.4.21 “Our endeavor should be how to get our again original spiritual body”

2.4.22 “Because we are small, minute fragments, sometimes we fall down”

2.4.23 “If he desires, he can come again”

2.4.24 “If we were originally in the spiritual world, why don’t we remember that?”

2.4.25 “Then again his liberated life begins”

2.4.26 “We are playing with the big fire very nice, but there is chance of falling down”

2.4.27 “When he misuses independence he falls”

2.4.28 “When the living being imitates the Supreme Personality of Godhead, then he falls down”

2.5 FURTHER CONCLUSIVE STATEMENTS

2.5.1 “He is fallen already from Vaikuntha planet”

2.5.2 “Down from Vaikuntha”

2.5.3 “Every living entity is originally a devotee of Krsna”

2.5.4 “Just try to revive your lost relationship with God, or Krsna”

2.5.5 “To revive our old relationship with God”

2.5.6 “Fallen means he has given up the service of Krsna and he has taken the service of maya”

2.5.7 “Our natural position is ever liberated, eternally liberated”

2.5.8 “Just to try to revive your original consciousness”

2.5.9 “You shall come back again to Me”

2.5.10 “Every living entity, even if he is in the Vaikuntha Loka, has chance of falling down”

2.5.11 “We are all originally situated on the platform of Krsna consciousness”

2.5.12 “We have given up the company of Krsna”

2.5.13 “I have given up service of Krsna”

2.5.14 “He falls down from his real engagement in the service of the Lord”

2.5.15 “To enjoy independently, without Krsna”

2.5.16 “Even if he is elevated to a Vaikuntha planet, he falls down”

2.5.17 “Even if you are in Vaikuntha, you will fall down”

2.5.18 “They cannot remain in Vaikuntha world”

2.5.19 “We have fallen down, just like Jaya-Vijaya”

2.5.20 “All spirit souls are coming from Vaikuntha”

2.5.21 “Revive his original state of loving service”

2.5.22 “Leaving His place, I have come to this material world”

2.5.23 “The servants who have rebelled against Krsna”

2.5.24 “We shall revive our original spiritual body”

2.5.25 “He revives his spiritual body”

2.5.26 “He has forgotten his relationship with Krsna”

2.5.27 “We will be reinstated in our original constitutional position”

2.5.28 “If we revive our original intimate relationship with Krsna”

2.5.29 “When the pure soul wants to give up the Lord’s service”

2.5.30 “There is only a material world for those who want to imitate the Lord”

2.5.31 “The rasas were originally exchanged between the spiritual living being and the spiritual whole”

2.5.32 “The original position is one of rendering service”

2.5.33 “Return them to the normal stage of engaging the senses in the service of the Lord”

2.5.34 “Separated from the Supreme Lord”

2.5.35 “He should be restored to his pure identity”

2.5.36 “The omnipotent Lord displays his pleasure potency as the living entities”

2.5.37 “In our original relationship with the Supreme Lord there is real love”

2.5.38 “It is originally a part and parcel of the pleasure potency”

2.5.39 “The living entity again becomes reinstated in his original position”

2.6 CONCLUSION

3. EVIDENCE FROM SRIMAD-BHAGAVATAM

3.1 INTRODUCTION

3.2 FOURTH CANTO: THE BRAHMANA AND QUEEN VIDARBHI

3.2.1 “In the past you had a very intimate friend”

3.2.2 “Even while in that position, the Lord remains with him as the Supersoul, his intimate friend”

3.2.3 “We are also associated with Krsna, as Paramatma within the heart”

3.2.4 “You gave up My company and accepted a position as enjoyer of this material world”

3.2.5 “We are still far away from our original home”

3.2.6 “The person I have described as unknown is the Supreme Personality of Godhead”

3.2.7 “The living entity falls down from the service of the Lord”

3.2.8 “Since you left Me, you have become more and more materialistic”

3.2.9 “You have forgotten your spiritual life”

3.2.10 “He regains his original Krsna consciousness, which was lost because of his material attraction”

3.2.11 “When he forgets his supreme master, the Personality of Godhead”

3.2.12 “Not being interested in their real home, they are illusioned and search after other homes”

3.2.13 Conclusiveness of the Fourth Canto Evidence

3.3 SECOND CANTO: LORD BRAHMA

3.3.1 “The eternally transcendental living entity”

3.4 SECOND CANTO: SUKADEVA GOSWAMI

3.4.1 “Spiritual and original bodies”

3.5 THIRD CANTO: LORD KAPILA

3.5.1 “Conditional life is due to his forgetfulness of his relationship with the Supreme Personality of Godhead”

3.5.2 “He is forced to act in that way due to his offense in his eternal relationship with Krsna”

3.5.3 “I am separated from the Supreme Lord”

3.6 FOURTH CANTO: MAHARAJA PRTHU

3.6.1 “The forgetful living entity gradually remembers his eternal relationship with You”

3.7 SIXTH CANTO: VRTRASURA

3.7.1 “Will I again be able to be a servant of Your eternal servants?”

3.8 SIXTH CANTO: SUPREME LORD’S TEACHINGS TO CITRAKETU

3.8.1 “When a living entity, thinking himself different from Me, forgets his spiritual identity”

3.9 SEVENTH CANTO: PRAHLAD MAHARAJA

3.9.1 “You are my eternal master”

3.10 EIGHTH CANTO: KING SATYAVRATA

3.10.1 “One regains his original identity”

3.10.2 “The intelligent person receiving such knowledge is quickly situated in his original constitutional position”

3.11 TENTH CANTO: THE SAGES AT KURUKSETRA

3.11.1 “Such a person loses his memory and cannot know You”

3.12 ELEVENTH CANTO: REVERSAL OF POSITION

3.12.1 “Instead of being the eternal servant of Krsna, he becomes Krsna’s competitor”

3.13 ELEVENTH CANTO: CAMASA RSI

3.13.1 “If we do not serve the Supreme, then we fall down from our specified place”

3.14 ELEVENTH CANTO: PINGALA THE PROSTITUTE

3.14.1 “He falls into the dark well of material existence”

3.15 ELEVENTH CANTO: LORD KRSNA

3.15.1 “The spirit soul returns to its original position of serving Me in the spiritual world”

3.15.2 “He regains his ability to see Me, the Absolute Truth, in My subtle spiritual form”

3.16 TWELFTH CANTO: SUKADEVA GOSWAMI

3.16.1 “Material false ego obstructs the individual soul from realizing the Absolute Truth”

3.16.2 “He regains his original spiritual awareness”

3.16.3 “When the gross and subtle bodies die, the living entity within resumes his spiritual identity”

3.17 WHAT ABOUT JAYA AND VIJAYA?

3.17.1 “So when I say Yes, there is eternal lila with Krsna, that means on the evidence of Jaya-Vijaya”

3.18 CONCLUSION

4. STATEMENTS OF THE PREVIOUS ACARYAS

4.1 INTRODUCTION

4.2 TEACHINGS OF BHAKTIVINODA THAKURA

4.2.1 “When they forget their natural function as Krsna’s servitors”

4.2.2 “The jiva, having forgotten his eternal relation with Krsna, has fallen into the sea of Samsara”

4.2.3 “The jiva has forgotten that he is the eternal servitor of Krsna”

4.2.4 “Chit body of Jiva which was existent prior to its contact with matter”

4.2.5 “I am in essence, the eternal servant of Krsna”

4.2.6 “Jiva takes recourse to chit i.e. transcendental everlasting time in Vaikuntha”

4.2.7 “Forgetfulness of his essential swarup”

4.2.8 “Jiva’s aversion to Krsna”

4.2.9 “That rasa which taking to chit-swarup was pure bhava before has been perverted by its impure reflection”

4.2.10 “When pure rati falls down in this mundane world, it mixes up with matter and becomes perverted”

4.2.11 “Nature that springs up with the formation of a thing is eternal and remains latent though it is perverted or changed”

4.2.12 “When he forgets Krsna he is averse to serve Krsna”

4.2.13 “When he forgets this relationship he is overwhelmed by the influence of Maya”

4.2.14 “The Jiva is eternal and ever-existing, and his function (dharma) in the form of love for Sri Krsna is also eternal”

4.2.15 “Forgetfulness of the reality that ‘I am Krsna’s eternal servant’“

4.2.16 “The worldly course makes its appearance simultaneously with the Jiva’s loss of all recollection of the servitorship of Krsna”

4.2.17 “So long as the Jiva continues pure, he cherishes his function as his own”

4.2.18 “Turned away from Krsna and as such, became punishable”

4.3 TEACHINGS OF BHAKTISIDDHANTA SARASVATI THAKURA

4.3.1 “Jiva is eternal and is for eternity and without a beginning joined to the Supreme Lord by the tie of an eternal kinship”

4.3.2 “When jivas begotten of the marginal potency (tatastha-sakti) forget the service of Krsna, they are confined in the mundane prison house”

4.3.3. “Enjoy, cease to enjoy and go back to his original position”

4.3.4 “When we show our diffidence to serve the Absolute”

4.3.5 “We want to go back to our eternal Abode”

4.3.6 “Liberation is nothing but going back to the original position, that is offering our services to the Eternal Being”

4.3.7 “We can go back to the higher Rasa’

4.3.8 “The eternal friend servitor will regain his position as such”

4.3.9 “It is the jivas who are the attendants in His sports”

4.3.10 “Whenever he chooses deliberately not to serve the Absolute he thereby ipso facto looses this natural or free state”

4.3.11 “It is not good to be enticed to stay here for a long time, forgetting our original abode”

4.3.12 “When we want to deprive our Lord”

4.3.13 “The members of this potency are apt to be forgetful of their eternal situation”

4.3.14 “His original function of remembering his own eternal exploits”

4.3.15 “The individual souls serve Shri Krsna as constituents of Shri Radhika”

4.3.16 “The connection of jiva with Shiva and mahamaya . . . is established only when he is disassociated from the service of Shri Radha-Krsna”

4.4 TEACHINGS OF THE MADHVA SAMPRADAYA

4.5. TEACHINGS OF JIVA GOSWAMI

4.5.1 SRI BHAGAVAT-SANDARBHA

4.5.1.1 No one falls from Vaikuntha?

4.5.1.2 “Regaining your natural position”

4.5.1.3 “The pure spirit souls, who are His marginal potencies”

4.5.1.4 “The individual soul becomes bereft of his natural spiritual opulences”

4.5.1.5 “One’s own home, where the Supreme Personality of Godhead lives”

4.5.1.6 “The fault of ignorance, which makes the living entity forget the Supreme Personality of Godhead”

4.5.1.7 “The material ignorance potency makes the conditioned souls in the material world forget the Supreme Personality of Godhead”

4.5.2 SRI PARAMATMA-SANDARBHA

4.5.2.1 “By nature pure”

4.5.2.2”The individual soul . . . is, in his original spiritual nature, a servant of Lord Hari”

4.5.2.3 “The ignorance that covers their true knowledge”

4.5.2.4 “The individual soul becomes bereft of his natural spiritual opulences”

4.5.2.6 “The pure soul enters the material world”

4.5.2.7 “In his original constitutional position”

4.5.2.8 “In his original spiritual nature he is a knower, a doer, and an enjoyer”

4.5.2.9 “His conception of life is reversed”

4.5.2.10 “The soul’s natural spiritual knowledge”

4.5.2.11 “When the gross and subtle bodies die, the living entity within resumes his spiritual identity”

4.5.2.12 “He regains his original spiritual awareness”

4.5.2.13 “He loses all of his spiritual qualities”

4.5.2.14 “The conditioned soul has forgotten his true identity”

4.5.2.15 “The maya potency, which covers the real forms of the individual spirit souls”

4.5.3 SRI TATTVA-SANDARBHA

4.5.4 SRI BHAKTI-SANDARBHA

4.5.4.1 “Because the living entity has turned away from the Supreme Lord, the material energy makes him forget and thus his own original spiritual form is no longer manifested”

4.5.4.2 “Originally pure”

4.5.4.3 “He regains his ability to see Me”

4.5.4.4 “Returns to its original position of serving Me in the spiritual world”

4.5.4.5 “Engagement in pure devotional service is the natural position of all living entities”

4.5.4.6 “The individual soul’s original nature is to be a servant of the Supreme Lord”

4.5.4.7 “When the spirit souls . . . become averse to the Lord”

5. GENERAL CONCLUSION

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 THE QUESTIONS

1. Were the conditioned souls now in this material world originally engaged in a direct and developed relationship of devotional service with Krsna in a spiritual planet in the spiritual world, and if so how could they fall from such a perfect relationship?

2. If the conditioned souls now in this material world were not originally engaged in a direct and developed relationship of devotional service with Krsna in a spiritual planet in the spiritual world, then where did they come from?

1.2 THE ANSWERS

Here are the main answers that have been proposed to the jiva question:

1. Yes, the conditioned souls now in this material world were originally engaged in a direct and developed relationship of devotional service to Krsna in a spiritual planet in the spiritual world. They fell from that position by misuse of free will, and by properly using free will they can regain their original position.

2. The conditioned souls now in this material world were originally situated in the brahmajyoti, and they have eternally turned away from Krsna. Falling from the brahmajyoti to this material world, they get a chance to develop their relationship with Krsna, which exists in them in seed form.

3. The conditioned souls in this material world were always here, always conditioned.

4. The conditioned souls in this material world originally emerged from the Viraja River, at which time some chose Krsna and others chose Maya.

5. The conditioned souls in this material world were originally with Krsna in a spiritual planet, but not in a fully developed relationship of service.

At times, Srila Prabhupada said the question of the origin of the jiva is not as important as trying to go back to Godhead. Nevertheless, he always answered the question. However, it is not the origin of the jiva itself that is so important here but the larger issues of how Srila Prabhupada’s teachings are to be understood and applied and how the teachings of the previous acaryas (and current acaryas outside ISKCON) are to be approached. These larger issues have an importance that goes far beyond the jiva question. They also have relevance to many other important philosophical and practical questions facing ISKCON, such as the establishment of varnasrama, the practice of raganuga-sadhana, etc. If we accept the views of some advocates, or allow them to spread unchecked, this will set a precedent in ISKCON for interpreting thousands of Srila Prabhupada’s statements in a way that was not directly done by Srila Prabhupada himself.

1.3 HOW SHOULD WE ARRIVE AT AN ANSWER?

Any philosophically inclined devotee with good writing ability, logical skills, and a broad acquaintance with the books, letters, and conversations of Srila Prabhupada, as well as the works of the previous acaryas, can put together a convincing (to some) case for any of the 5 answers to the origin of the jiva question. Practically speaking, we have seen this to be true. And it is this situation that has caused some confusion among devotees. The statements of Srila Prabhupada, the Vedic scriptures, and the previous acaryas seem to provide ample materials for the advocates of all the above mentioned views.

But perhaps there is a way out. The above state of affairs may be Krsna’s way of instructing us about the meaning of this famous text from the Mahabharata:

tarkos ’pratisthah srutayo vibhinna

nasav rsir yasya matir na bhinnam

dharmasya tattvam nihitam guhayam

mahajano yena gatah sa panthah

“Dry arguments are inconclusive. A great personality whose opinion does not differ from others is not considered a great sage. Simply by studying the Vedas, which are variegated, one cannot come to the right path by which religious principles are understood. The solid truth of religious principles is hidden in the heart of an unadulterated self-realized person. Consequently, as the sastras confirm, one should accept whatever progressive path the mahajanas advocate.”

Given that argument and reason can lead to different conclusions, that the sastras and sayings of the previous acaryas contain many apparent contradictions, the safest thing is to follow the statements of “an unadulterated self-realized person.” I would suggest that for members of ISKCON this person is Srila Prabhupada. The previous acaryas may also have a role to play, but Srila Prabhupada said in a Srimad-Bhagavatam lecture given in Los Angeles on December 8, 1973:

You cannot imagine what my spiritual master said. Or even if you read some books, you cannot understand unless you understand it from me. This is called parampara system. You cannot jump over to the superior guru, neglecting the next acarya, immediate next acarya.

This would mean that in answering any difficult question, where there are apparent contradictions that cannot be easily resolved, our primary resource should be the words of Srila Prabhupada—our “immediate next acarya.” We should not immediately go to the previous acaryas and various Vedic texts to resolve the contradictions. Sastra undoubtedly has an important role, but our approach to it should be through Srila Prabhupada. If we were capable of independently absorbing sastra, why did Srila Prabhupada write purports to all of his translations? So the first resource should be Srila Prabhupada’s words.

But what if Srila Prabhupada’s words appear to be contradictory? We have seen in practice that different devotees with good writing abilities, some familiarity with logic, and broad acquaintance with Srila Prabhupada’s teachings can competently produce statements in support of contradictory conclusions, even if they use only Srila Prabhupada’s teachings. Everyone claims to have Prabhupada on their side of the question.

So what can be done? I propose that we have to look carefully at the kind of statements from Srila Prabhupada being presented by different advocates. If we can see that some statements made by Srila Prabhupada have greater weight than others, then perhaps it will be possible to say that one advocate has presented a more conclusive statement of Srila Prabhupada’s views on a controversial topic than another.

The strongest statements by Srila Prabhupada are, I propose, those that directly deal with the specific question under consideration. Since the specific question here is the original situation of the conditioned soul now in the material world, the best statements by Srila Prabhupada are those that directly refer to conditioned souls in the material world and how they got there.

Statements about souls in Vaikuntha would have less value in this connection (unless they also directly address the specific issue of the conditioned souls in this material world). One may connect statements about souls in Vaikuntha with the question of the origin of the conditioned souls in this material world, but it takes a step of logic by the advocate to do this. The step of logic may appear obvious. But there are many ways for a logician to make a mistake, especially in matters that lie far beyond the range of our mind and senses. So I propose that more weight has to be given to statements by Srila Prabhupada that directly address the origin of the conditioned souls now in this material world. Such strong statements do not require any steps of fallible logic to connect them with the exact question under consideration.

And among such strong statements, answers given to direct questions, especially those that seek the resolution of specific contradictions, must be given more weight. In Vedic knowledge, the question is typically used for clarification of difficult points. The statements may be there, but the answers to the questions about these statements bring out the real meaning in a clearer way. That is why most of the Vedic texts are in the form of questions and answers.

For example, in some statements Srila Prabhupada says “no one falls from Vaikuntha.” But he has also said that the spirit soul in this material world “is fallen already from Vaikuntha planet.” The statements appear contradictory. But in a lecture, Srila Prabhupada once said:

Sometimes it appears to the student contradictory. But actually, the master who is well conversant, he does not say anything contradictory. It is the misunderstanding of the student that sometimes he thinks that it is contradictory. Therefore the question is allowed. You’ll find that a student is advised to question to the spiritual master. [Lecture on Bhagavad-gita 3.1-5, Los Angeles, December 20, 1968]

Srila Prabhupada, being well conversant, cannot therefore be presenting contradictory information. If there seems to be a contradiction in his statements, it is only in the mind of the student. To clear up the apparent contradiction, the student should inquire. And he should accept the guru’s conclusion.

So let’s suppose a disciple of Srila Prabhupada has presented Srila Prabhupada a question about the apparent contradiction between statements about falling and not falling from Vaikuntha. And let us then suppose that Srila Prabhupada gives an answer that affirms one of these two views and explains the other view in terms of that view. At that point, we would have to admit that the controversy has been resolved. We cannot go back to other statements by Srila Prabhupada and try to raise the same contradiction again. We should accept the resolution given by Srila Prabhupada. In this paper, I will show that Srila Prabhupada’s disciples did in fact repeatedly put questions to Srila Prabhupada concerning his apparently contradictory statements about the origin of the jiva. I will also show that Srila Prabhupada repeatedly and consistently resolved the contradictions in favor of the position that the souls in this material world can and did fall from Vaikuntha planets. He also gave clear explanations of how the “no fall” statements can be understood in that light. For example, he said that we do not really fall from Vaikuntha, but Krsna creates a situation where we think we have fallen. So the general principle is that questions put to Srila Prabhupada about his apparently contradictory statements and the answers that Srila Prabhupada gave to those questions have to be given special weight as we attempt to resolve the same contradictions.

Finally, among direct answers to specific questions, those given by Srila Prabhupada in order to resolve controversies that have arisen in the general society of ISKCON devotees must be given the most weight. Among conclusive statements, they are the strongest of the strong. They are a direct guide in resolving the same controversy when it arises again.

Now if it happens that Srila Prabhupada gives apparently contradictory answers to the same question, then we may have a problem. But if the question was always answered in the same way, then the problem is solved. We should simply answer the question the way Srila Prabhupada answered it. We don’t have to strain our brains trying to come up with a conclusion about the inconceivable. All we have to do is repeat the answer that Srila Prabhupada gave to the question. With the answer given by Srila Prabhupada firmly in mind, one can then enter into the statements of the sastras and previous acaryas with some degree of confidence that one will be able to resolve apparent contradictions in their statements in the proper way. And if some contradictions cannot be resolved in favor of the answer given by Srila Prabhupada, these can be put into the category of “differences among the acaryas.” We accept Srila Prabhupada’s version and conclude that in truth the other bona fide Vaisnava acarya must be saying the same thing, but in a way that we are not yet able to understand. I am proposing this procedure as a general method for approaching the resolution of controversial philosophical questions.

If an answer to a controversial question includes several elements, then it is also helpful if an advocate can point to statements by Srila Prabhupada that contain all the elements of the answer. An answer that puts together various statements from Srila Prabhupada in a way that Srila Prabhupada never put them together himself is weaker than an answer that puts together elements in the same way that Srila Prabhupada did. For example, there are many statements by Srila Prabhupada in which he gives the whole story of the soul’s original position as a servant of Krsna in the spiritual world, his misuse of free will, his fall into the material world, and his return back to his original position. The following letter to Umapati Dasa, dated March 30, 1970, provides one example:

You have written to say that French people are eager to understand Vaisnava philosophy, and the summary of Vaisnava philosophy is as follows: God is a person like us, but He is all-powerful with all opulences in full. The living entities are His eternal servants. There are varieties of living entities that have inherited the opulences of God in different degrees. There are two kinds of nature, the spiritual nature and the material nature. The living entities belong to the spiritual nature and being part and parcel of God they have all the qualities of God in minute proportion. There are innumerable living entities both in the spiritual world and in the material world. The spiritual world is far, far greater than the material world. As such, the number of living entities living in the spiritual world is many more times greater than the number of living entities living within the material world. The living entities, when they try to lord it over the God’s property, forgetting their constitutional position to remain as eternal servant of God, they are given the material world to act according to their desires. In such endless varieties of desires the living entities are seen in varieties of bodies beginning from Brahma, down to the most insignificant insect. In this way, when someone is fortunate, he, by the grace of Spiritual Master and Krsna, revives his Krsna Consciousness. And if he makes progress under the direction of the Spiritual Master, then he revives his original Krsna Consciousness in full and thus he regains his position in the eternal Kingdom of God. So you know very well all these facts, and while preaching you have to explain all these things nicely. Then you become a good preacher. Now you try your best in this line of preaching work and be successful as you have taken birth as a human being. Our Vaisnava philosophy is in summary the Teachings of Lord Caitanya. You read them very carefully, word to word, and immediately begin translation into French language so they may be published in French BTG as well as in future they may be published in a book.

Here we find all the elements of this account put together in one complete summary statement by Srila Prabhupada himself. On the other hand, presentations of the brahmajyoti idea involve advocates putting together various unrelated statements by Srila Prabhupada. Nowhere, to my knowledge, does Srila Prabhupada put these pieces together himself in a clear, explicit statement of the jiva’s origin in the brahmajyoti, fall, and liberation. In fact, he directly rejects this idea.

Also, Srila Prabhupada made a big point of using the common, dictionary meanings of words. One of his main preaching points was to argue against the impersonalists’ giving up the direct dictionary definitions of the words of the Vedic scriptures. An answer that takes Srila Prabhupada’s words according to their direct, commonly understood meaning would be stronger than one that relies on indirect or hidden meanings.

To summarize. In attempting to answer a controversial philosophical question, we should first consider the words of Srila Prabhupada. Among these the best are, in order of most importance: (1) Srila Prabhupada’s direct answers to the same question, given for the specific purpose of resolving it for the Society. (2) Srila Prabhupada’s direct answers to specific questions raised by his individual disciples in order to clarify apparent contradictions they saw in connection with these questions. (3) Statements by Srila Prabhupada (other than answers to questions) that directly and specifically deal with the exact topic under consideration. Only if questions cannot be resolved on the basis of these three kinds of evidence should we proceed with utmost caution to arrive at a conclusion not specifically given by Srila Prabhupada, but derived from careful study of his teachings in light of the Vedic literatures and writings of the previous acaryas.

2.TEACHINGS OF SRILA PRABHUPADA

2.1 HAS SRILA PRABHUPADA ALREADY ANSWERED

THE QUESTION OF THE ORIGIN OF THE JIVA?

Srila Prabhupada has already answered the questions about the origin of the jiva. These answers can be found in all three of the above mentioned strong categories of evidence. The answer found therein is that the conditioned souls in this material world were originally in a direct and developed relationship of devotional service to Krsna in a spiritual planet in the spiritual world. By misuse of independence, manifesting as a desire to imitate Krsna or take His position as supreme enjoyer, the soul gave up its natural state and was placed in the material world. By proper use of free will one can take up the process of Krsna consciousness and regain one’s original position. Srila Prabhupada also directly rejects the ideas that we were originally situated in the brahmajyoti or that we were always existing as conditioned souls in this material world. Srila Prabhupada has never said we were originally from the Viraja River. Nor does he say that our original condition was fundamentally different from our final condition on going back to Godhead. Below I will give examples supporting these statements from the above-mentioned three strong categories of evidence. But first I will outline a proposed resolution to this controversy.

2.2 A PROPOSED SOLUTION TO THE CONTROVERSY

My solution is based on the following conclusions and proposals:

1. The origin of the souls now in this material world is undoubtedly a question beyond the range of our direct perception. We can therefore answer this question only by repeating the answer that Srila Prabhupada repeatedly gave when asked the same question. We were once in a direct and developed relationship of service to Krsna in a spiritual planet in the spiritual world. By misuse of independence we desired to imitate Krsna or take His position. Therefore we have been placed in the material world. But by becoming Krsna conscious we can regain our original position. No other view shall be presented as conclusive in any ISKCON media (print, video, electronic), classes, seminars, etc.

2. Srila Prabhupada directly rejected the idea that we are from the brahmajyoti.

3. In resolving philosophical controversies, the teachings, instructions, and personal example of Srila Prabhupada are the first and primary resource. If a conclusion, recognized by the GBC, can be drawn from careful study of this resource, it shall guide further research into the Vedic literature, the writings of previous acaryas, and the teachings of current bona fide Vaisnava acaryas outside ISKCON. Everything that can be harmonized to the conclusion arrived at from Srila Prabhupada’s teachings shall be accepted. Any contradictions that cannot be resolved shall be placed in the category of “differences among the acaryas.” But ISKCON members shall follow the conclusion of Srila Prabhupada when there is such a difference.

Regarding the jiva question, the practical application would be as follows. If a devotee sincerely and submissively inquires about the origin of the jiva, he should be given a brief answer as outlined above and be told that it is better to busy oneself in going back to Godhead than to worry extensively about such questions. If someone is persistent, they can be directed to publications prepared by devotees who have accepted the conclusions mentioned above (such as this one). Those who cannot accept these conclusions would be free to petition the GBC to change them. Reasonable research and private discussion that do not constitute a disturbance would not be forbidden. But until the GBC resolutions accepting the above conclusions change, no contradictory conclusion could be presented in official ISKCON publications, courses, seminars, etc. It would be up to the GBC to decide whether or not any “research and private discussion” are reasonable.

2.3 THE STRONGEST EVIDENCE:

SRILA PRABHUPADA’S DIRECT RESOLUTION

OF A CONTROVERSY IN ISKCON

2.3.1 “Formerly we were with Krsna in His lila”

In 1972, a devotee in Australia began saying that the living entities in this material world were originally situated in the brahmajyoti. According to Madhudvisa Prabhu and Caru Prabhu, who were both in Australia at the time, this caused some fairly widespread disturbance. Srila Prabhupada therefore dictated a response, a typed copy of which was retained by Madhudvisa Prabhu. This is the famous crow and tal fruit message. Madhudvisa has said that it was distributed to the Australian temple presidents. In this statement, given in direct response to inquiries from his students on the question of the origin of the jiva, Srila Prabhupada gives many definitive answers to the questions facing us. He intended these not just as answers to a particular devotee but as his official answer to a philosophical controversy that had arisen in the Society:

We never had any occasion when we were separated from Krsna. Just like one man is dreaming and he forgets himself. In dream he creates himself in different forms: now I am the King discussing like that. This creation of himself is as seer and subject matter or seen, two things. But as soon as the dream is over, the ‘seen’ disappears. But the seer remains. Now he is in his original position.

Our separation from Krsna is like that. We dream this body and so many relationships with other things. First the attachment comes to enjoy sense gratification. Even with Krsna desire for sense gratification is there. There is a dormant attitude for forgetting Krsna and creating an atmosphere for enjoying independently. Just like at the edge of the beach, sometimes the water covers, sometimes there is dry sand, coming and going. Our position is like that, sometimes covered, sometimes free, just like at the edge of the tide. As soon as we forget, immediately the illusion is there. Just like as soon as we sleep, dream is there.

The jiva is originally with Krsna. But even with Krsna “there is a dormant attitude for forgetting Krsna and creating an atmosphere for enjoying independently.” Srila Prabhupada sets up a very strong identity between the original state and the final state of liberation. He says we are just like a man dreaming. The man forgets himself. He creates a dream identity. And when he wakes from that dream identity, he is once more in his original position. There are two states. The free state and the covered state. The free state is “with Krsna.” There is no suggestion that the original state is “fallen.” There is also no suggestion of an original free state that is different from the final free state.

We cannot say therefore that we are not with Krsna. As soon as we try to become Lord, immediately we are covered by Maya. Formerly we were with Krsna in His lila, or sport. But this covering of Maya may be of very, very, very, very long duration, therefore many creations are coming and going. Due to this long period of time it is sometimes said that we are ever-conditioned. But his long duration of time becomes very insignificant when one actually comes to Krsna consciousness. Just like in a dream we are thinking very long time, but as soon as we awaken we look at our watch and see it has been a moment only. Just like with Krsna’s friends, they were kept asleep for one year by Brahma, but when they woke up and Krsna returned before them, they considered that only a moment had passed.

The idea that we were always conditioned is directly rejected. Srila Prabhupada says, “Formerly we were with Krsna in His lila, or sport.”

So this dreaming condition is called non-liberated life, and this is just like a dream. Although in this material calculation it is a long, long period, as soon as we come to Krsna consciousness then this period is considered as a second. For example, Jaya and Vijaya. They had their lila with Krsna, but they had to come down for their little mistake. They were given mukti, merging into the Brahmasayujya after being killed three times as demons. This Brahmasayujya mukti is non-permanent. Every living entity wants pleasure, but Brahmasayujya is minus pleasure. There is eternal existence only. So when they do not find transcendental bliss, they fall down to make a compromise with material bliss. Just like Vivekananda founded so many schools and hospitals. So even Lord Brahma, he is still material and wants to lord it over. He may come down to become a germ, but then he may rise up to Krsna consciousness and go back to home, back to Godhead. This is the position.

So when I say Yes, there is eternal lila with Krsna, that means on the evidence of Jaya-Vijaya. Unless one develops full devotional service to Krsna, he goes up only to Brahmasayujya but falls down. But after millions and millions of years of keeping oneself away from the lila of the Lord, when one comes to Krsna consciousness this period becomes insignificant, just like dreaming.

Here Srila Prabhupada directly compares the history of the souls in this material world with the history of Jaya and Vijaya. He speaks of “keeping oneself away from the lila of the Lord.”

Because he falls down from Brahmasayujya, he thinks that may be his origin, but he does not remember that before that even he was with Krsna. So the conclusion is that whatever may be our past, let us come to Krsna consciousness and immediately join Krsna. Just like with a diseased man, it is a waste of time to try to find out how he has become diseased; better to spend time curing the disease.

Here Srila Prabhupada directly rejects the idea that the conditioned soul was originally in the brahmajyoti. Srila Prabhupada then recommends that we not waste time with the question of our origin. But note that he first gave clear answers to the question. We should follow the same policy. Answer the question as above, and then suggest we not waste further time with it.

On the top of the tree there is a nice tal-fruit. A crow went there and the fruit fell down. Some panditas, big big learned scholars, saw this and discussed: the fruit fell due to the crow agitating the limb. No, the fruit fell simultaneously with the crow landing and frightened the crow so he flew away. No, the fruit was ripe and the weight of the crow landing broke it from the branch, and so on and so on. What is the use of such discussions? So whether you were in the Brahmasayujya or with Krsna in His lila, at the moment you are in neither, so the best policy is to develop your Krsna consciousness and go there, never mind what is your origin.

Brahmasayujya and Krsna lila—both may be possible, but when you are coming down from Brahmasayujya or when you are coming down from Krsna lila, that remains a mystery. But at the present moment we are in Maya’s clutches, so at present our only hope is to become Krsna conscious and go back to Home, back to Godhead. The real position is servant of Krsna, and servant of Krsna means in Krsna lila. Directly or indirectly, always we are serving Krsna’s lila. Even in dream. Just like we cannot go out of the sun when it is daytime, so where is the chance of going out of Krsna lila? The cloud may be there, it may become very gray and dim, but still the sunlight is there, everywhere, during the daytime. Because I am part and parcel of Krsna, I am always connected. My finger, even though it may be diseased, remains part and parcel of my body. Therefore, we try to treat it, cure it, because it is part and parcel. So Krsna comes Himself when we forget Him, or He sends His representative.

What about the statement “Brahmasayujya and Krsna lila—both may be possible, but when you are coming down from Brahmasayujya or when you are coming down from Krsna lila, that remains a mystery.” Is Srila Prabhupada taking away everything he has said up to this point, and leaving the matter once more in confusion? Does he mean that we really could originally be from the brahmajyoti? No. This statement has to be considered in light of what has come before, in such a way that all the statements remain true. Srila Prabhupada has made two points absolutely clear. First, the original position of the soul is with Krsna in His lila, or sport. Second, the souls are not originally from the brahmajyoti, but impersonalists in this material world, themselves fallen from their original position in Krsna’s pastimes, may enter and fall down from the brahmajyoti many times during the course of successive creations of the universe. Therefore, for any particular soul it may be said that we do not know if it is coming, during this particular creation, from Krsna’s eternal lila or from the brahmajyoti. Taken in this way, all the statements remain true in a consistent way. Of course, we know from other statements by Srila Prabhupada, quoted elsewhere in this paper, that the jiva is not from the brahmajyoti and was originally with Krsna in His spiritual abode. At the very end, Srila Prabhupada puts things in clear perspective when he says that we are always part and parcel of Krsna, just as a finger is always part of the body although it may be diseased. So in the same way we are always in touch with Krsna, either in his eternal lila or his lila of manifesting this material creation.

Awakening or dreaming, I am the same man. As soon as I awaken and see myself, I see Krsna. Cause and effect are both Krsna. Just like cotton becomes thread and thread becomes cloth, still, the original cause is cotton. Therefore, everything is Krsna in the ultimate sense. When we cannot contact Krsna personally, we contact His energies. So there is no chance to be outside Krsna’s lila. But differences we see under different conditions. Just like in the pool of water and in the mirror the same me is reflecting, but in different reflections. One is shimmering, unsteady, one is clear and fixed. Except for being in Krsna consciousness, we cannot see our actual position rightly; therefore the learned man sees all living entities as the same parts and parcels of Krsna. Material existence is impersonal because my real personality is covered. But we should think that because I am now covered by this clay, I am diseased, and we should think that I must get to business to get myself uncovered, not wonder how I got this way. Now the fruit is there, take it and enjoy, that is your first business. God is not bound by cause. He can change, He is the Cause of all Causes. Now don’t waste your time with this “Kaka taliya nyaya,” crows and tal-fruit logic.

What about this statement: “When we cannot contact Krsna personally, we contact His energies. So there is no chance to be outside Krsna’s lila”? I have heard some say that when Srila Prabhupada earlier said that we were originally with Krsna in His lila, or sport, this might just mean that we were in contact with one of Krsna’s energies—maya or the brahmajyoti. In other words, it doesn’t mean we were with Krsna personally. But this interpretation is not supported by the text. Srila Prabhupada compares the history of the conditioned soul directly with the history of Jaya and Vijaya. This clearly indicates a direct personal relationship, and not some other kind of lila. Srila Prabhupada also has directly stated in this text that we were not originally in the brahmajyoti. And in the first part of the text he said: “We cannot say therefore that we are not with Krsna. As soon as we try to become Lord, immediately we are covered by Maya. Formerly we were with Krsna in His lila, or sport. But this covering of Maya may be of very, very, very, very long duration.” So when Srila Prabhupada said we were in Krsna’s lila, he meant before we were covered by the material energy, maya. In this context, the only allowable reading of lila is Krsna’s pastimes as we commonly understand them from the Tenth Canto of the Bhagavatam. But when we come to the material world, we remain in Krsna’s lila in the sense of being in contact with Krsna’s energies.

So in this famous crow and tal fruit message, which was given by Srila Prabhupada in order to resolve the same controversy that faces us today, Srila Prabhupada makes the following points about the conditioned souls:

1. We were originally with Krsna in His lila, or sport.

2. We are not originally from the brahmajyoti.

3. By comparing the situation of the conditioned souls with that of Jaya and Vijaya, Srila Prabhupada indicates that the original relationship was one of active service in a spiritual planet.

4. There is no mention of an origin in the Viraja River.

5. We are not eternally conditioned, in the sense of being always in the material word and never having been with Krsna in the spiritual world.

On the basis of this statement alone, we can confidently answer the questions raised at the beginning of this paper. Yes, we were originally with Krsna. No, we are not from the brahmajyoti. No, we are not eternally conditioned. No, we are not originally from the Viraja River. No, our relationship with Krsna was not undeveloped. The reason that we can answer the questions so confidently in this way is that the crow and tal fruit message was given by Srila Prabhupada in direct answer to the same controversy that faces us today. In this message, Srila Prabhupada also offers adjustments to other statements that appear contradictory. To the impersonalists it appears that they are from the brahmajyoti because in any particular creation they may indeed be coming down from there. But before that they were with Krsna. It is sometimes said we are eternally conditioned, but that is only because we cannot trace out the exact moment when we departed from Krsna’s lila. By comparing the state of the conditioned soul to a dreaming man, Srila Prabhupada implicitly gives an adjustment of the “no one falls from Vaikuntha” statements. The dreaming man simply thinks he has gone somewhere else. The conditioned soul may think he has left Krsna’s lila, but actually he is still in touch with Krsna. In the same way, we are never out of Vaikuntha, but we are just dreaming that we are somewhere else. In other statements, Srila Prabhupada expresses this more explicitly. As we shall see, this view is also in harmony with the statements of the previous acaryas as well as the Srimad-Bhagavatam, which Jiva Goswami calls the topmost Vedic authority.

2.4 SRILA PRABHUPADA’S DIRECT ANSWERS

TO DIRECT QUESTIONS

2.4.1 Introduction

The conclusions outlined above find additional support in Srila Prabhupada’s direct answers to questions about the origin of the jiva. These questions were put to Srila Prabhupada by disciples and followers in classes and letters. Sometimes Srila Prabhupada rhetorically raised them in his own classes. Specific answers given to specific questions, especially those that refer to the classic apparent contradictions in the