Not a "preaching strategy". How Prabhupada speaks according to Śrila Jiva Goswami

Prabhupada uses words like "reestablish" and "lost" to describe the eternal relationship with the soul with Krsna, which we somehow forgot. Some say this is a preaching strategy. We prove it is not.

You can receive new articles directly in your inbox. Subscription is free; donations are welcome.

In Teachings of Lord Caitanya (chapter 21), Srila Prabhupada says:

“When one takes to this process of transcendental devotional service leading to love of Godhead, he relishes his relationship with Kṛṣṇa directly, and from this reciprocation of relishing transcendental dealings with Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa gradually becomes a personal associate of the devotee. Then the devotee eternally enjoys blissful life. Therefore the purpose of the Vedānta-sūtra is to reestablish the living entity’s lost relationship with the Supreme Lord Kṛṣṇa, to describe the execution of devotional service, and to enable one to ultimately achieve the highest goal of life, love of Godhead. The Vedānta-sūtra describes these three principles of transcendental life and nothing more.”

Here, Prabhupada uses words like “reestablish” and “lost relationship” to describe the relationship with the soul with Krsna. Everyone agrees that the relationship with the soul with Krsna is eternal in the sense that when the soul attains love for Krsna, he doesn’t come back to this material world, as Krsna Himself describes in the Bhagavad-Gita, but Prabhupada goes a step beyond that, claiming that the relationship of the soul with Krsna is eternal not only in the sense of a hypothetical future but eternal in the full sense, meaning also the past. Taking the term in this sense, he uses the word “lost” to indicate that although this eternal relationship is currently forgotten, it existed in the past, and will be “reestablished” as soon as we again agree to serve Krsna.

This “lost” relationship of the soul with Krsna is very directly described in Srimad Bhagavatam 4.28.52-55, where Krsna Himself (in the form of the Supersoul) takes the form of a Brahmana and speaks to King Puranjana in his next life as the daughter of King Vidarbha:

“Who are you? Whose wife or daughter are you? Who is the man lying here? It appears you are lamenting for this dead body. Don’t you recognize Me? I am your eternal friend. You may remember that many times in the past you have consulted Me. My dear friend, even though you cannot immediately recognize Me, can’t you remember that in the past you had a very intimate friend? Unfortunately, you gave up My company and accepted a position as enjoyer of this material world. My dear gentle friend, both you and I are exactly like two swans. We live together in the same heart, which is just like the Mānasa Lake. Although we have been living together for many thousands of years, we are still far away from our original home. My dear friend, you are now My very same friend. Since you left Me, you have become more and more materialistic, and not seeing Me, you have been traveling in different forms throughout this material world, which was created by some woman.”

Here, it is not about interpretation. This is the direct meaning of the verse originally spoken by Narada Muni and included by Srila Sukadeva Goswami in the scripture.

However, many Vaiṣnavas disagree with this idea that the soul may have an eternal relationship with Krsna since it’s extremely hard to understand how such a relationship could have been forgotten. This is a topic of discussion not only in our Brahma Gaudiya sampradaya but also in other Vaiṣnava sampradayas. In the Sri sampradaya, for example, there are two different factions, one that accepts the soul has an innate relationship with Krsna and another that does not.

This in itself is not really an issue, because, as in other advanced spiritual topics, there are different dimensions to the question, and different passages of the scriptures can be understood in different ways. Certainly, the fact that one believes that there is an eternal relationship that needs to be reestablished, or if one is establishing his eternal relationship with Krsna for the first time, doesn’t change the fact that we are currently in the material world and the ultimate goal is to attain or re-attain love for Krsna. Devotees in different schools may have different opinions following the conclusions of the teachers in their respective lines.

The problem is that often devotees who believe the soul doesn’t have an innate relationship with Krsna can’t understand what Srila Prabhupada writes, and thus accuse him of using “preaching strategies” or “ teaching only the ABCD”. Others, noticing that Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura also speaks similarly in different passages, also extend the same accusations to him, while others go as far as criticizing Srila Jiva Goswami himself. This kind of gratuitous accusation is what makes it dangerous, creating negative consequences for their own spiritual lives and for others.

A work that is frequently quoted when this point is discussed is the Sat Sandarbhas of Srila Jiva Goswami, where it is supposedly revealed that Prabhupada and Bhaktivinoda Thakura were speaking differently from Sri Jiva or the Six Goswamis. Since most don’t have the time or energy to study the dense philosophy explained in the Sandarbhas, this argument frequently goes undisputed.

However, a careful study of the Sat Sandarbhas reveals that’s not the case. The same language of forgetfulness of one’s eternal relationship with Krsna is also used by Srila Jiva Goswami in his works and frequently explained through similar examples to those used by Srila Prabhupada.

Let’s take, for example, the passage from Srila Prabhupada I quoted earlier:

“Therefore the purpose of the Vedānta-sūtra is to reestablish the living entity’s lost relationship with the Supreme Lord Kṛṣṇa, to describe the execution of devotional service, and to enable one to ultimately achieve the highest goal of life, love of Godhead.”

If we go to the Paramatma Sandarbha, Anuccheda 83 (text 1-2), we will find that Srila Jiva Goswami explains it similarly:

sa cadhyāsa-parityāgah svato na bhavati. kintu paramātma-jijñāsayā tat-prabhavenaiveti vaktum parvavad eva drstanta-paripătim aha

ghano yadārka-prabhavo vidīryate cakṣuḥ svarūpaṁ ravim īkṣate tadāyadā hy ahaṅkāra upādhir ātmano jijñāsayā naśyati tarhy anusmaret

Here, he explains the process by which a soul can become free of material influence and regain his eternal spiritual nature. He starts by explaining that this can be done through the mercy of the Lord:

“By his own power, the individual spirit soul cannot become free of his entanglement in the material world. However, when a soul becomes eager to know the truth of the Supreme Lord, the Lord Himself frees the soul from material bondage. This is described in the following example:”

Next, he quotes a verse from Srimad Bhagavatam (12.4.33):

“When the cloud originally produced from the sun is torn apart, the eye can see the actual form of the sun. Similarly, when the spirit soul destroys his material covering of false ego by inquiring into the transcendental science, he regains his spiritual awareness.”

Here, the sun is used as an example to describe the conditioning of the soul. A cloud is created by the energy of the sun, but as soon as the cloud is there, it can block the sun. Similarly, the false ego is created by the choice of the soul, but once there, it obstructs the soul’s real consciousness, making one identify himself as part of the material world. However, when one destroys this covering by inquiring about transcendental knowledge, this covering is removed, and one regains his original spiritual consciousness.

The word used for regaining is “anusmaret”, which implies remembering something that was previously forgotten. Srila Jiva himself explains the meaning of the word in text five of the same Anuccheda:

kadăcit tad-ikṣaṇonmukhaḥ san ravim cekṣate. tatha darstantike ‘py anusmaret. smartum anusandhâtum yogyo bhavati. atmānam paramātmānam ceti seṣaḥ.

“Sometimes a person is so eager to see the sun that he sees the sun in his memory. Thus, in the second part of this example the word “anusmaret” (he remembers) means “seeing Him in his memory, a person searches for the Supreme Personality of Godhead”.

Here, Srila Jiva Goswami substantiates the previous example by explaining that sometimes, when we are eager to see something again, we can see it in our minds, recovering it from memory. A person who is very eager to see the sun, for example, can “see” the sun in his mind, from his memory. Having a memory of something implies that he had seen it previously. It’s not possible to remember something one never saw. He then insists that “seeing Him in his memory, a person searches for the Supreme Personality of Godhead”, using the same language of forgetfulness and separation from one’s eternal relationship with Krsna that is used by Srila Prabhupada.

These ideas are reinforced in text four, where he explains:

atra copădhir iti višeṣanena svarupa-bhūtāhankāras tv anya eveti spaşți-bhūtam. evam yatha drṣtante ghanamaya-mahāndhakarāvaraṇabhāvāt tat-prabhavena yogyată-labhac ca cakṣuḥ kartṛ-bhūtam svarupam karma-bhūtam ikṣate, sva-

“Here the words “ca upadhih” mean “the false ego covering the individual spirit soul”. This example explains that when the darkness of the clouds is removed, then the eyes (caksuḥ) can see (ikṣate) the original form (svarupam) of the soul. By thus seeing the original form of the soul, one understands the true nature of the soul. In this way the soul’s original power is again openly manifested. That is the meaning.”

Again, we can see that the analogy of a cloud being removed, allowing one to again see the original form of the soul, understand his true nature, and manifest his original power, is used.

In this context, it’s also important to correctly understand the meaning of the words “nityā” (continuous) and “anădita” (beginningless) used by Srila Jiva Goswami to describe the conditioning of the soul. Some interpret these words in the literal sense, meaning that the soul has always been under the spell of Maya, and thus was never anywhere else, but this contradicts many other passages from Jiva Goswami and the scriptures that state that the original position of the soul is different from the present conditioned state.

Right at the beginning of the Paramatma Sandarbha, for example, Jiva Goswami mentions that, yah suddho ‘pi mayataḥ paro ‘pi māyā-racitasya vakṣyamānasya sarva-kṣetrasya mayayā kalpitasya manaso ‘ntahkaranasyaitaḥ prasiddha vibhutir vṛttir vicaste visesena pasyati. pasyams tatrāvisto bhavati. sa khalv asau jiva-nāma sva-sarira- dvaya-laksana-kṣetrasya jñātṛtvāt kṣetrajña ucyata ity arthaḥ:

“Even though he is by nature pure (suddhah), that is to say beyond the touch of the illusory potency maya, the individual spirit soul sees (vicaste) the (etah) activities (vibhutih) of the mind (manasah), the mind having been created by the illusory potency maya (maya-racitasya). The mind sees all fields of activity. The mind will be further described later in this book. By seeing these activities, the individual soul, who is called the ‘jiva’, enters into them. Because he thus has knowledge of two different material bodies, the soul is thus called ‘ksetrajña’ (the knower of the field of action).”

Here, he mentions that the pure and transcendental soul comes in contact with the activities of the mind, which is created by the illusory potency of Maya. Seeing these activities, the soul “enters” into them. If we accept that the soul has never been out of material conditioning, this passage (just like many others) would not make any sense.

Srila Prabhupada explains this point by explaining that “anadi” simply means that it has been so long in the past that it is not possible to trace the origin. He thus doesn’t translate the word “anadi” as “beginningless” but as “from time immemorial”, making the real meaning clear. Just as in many other passages, we may misunderstand the words of Jiva Goswami when we try to interpret them according to our limited intelligence, but when we accept the conclusions and definitions given by Srila Prabhupada, everything becomes clear.

We can see thus that what Prabhupada speaks is in line with the original teachings of Srila Goswami, as well as Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura and other previous acaryas. Srila Prabhupada deeply studied books such as Jaiva Dharma and the Sat Sandarbhas and gave us the conclusions in his purports. It’s important to note that apart from being a pure devotee, with a vision of the past, present, and future, Srila Prabhupada was very learned in Sanskrit and had Bengali as his native language, and could thus study these works in the original.

One of the problems in this discussion is that often we misrepresent the words of Srila Prabhupada by implying that we are all gopis and cowherd boys who “fell” from the association of Krsna, an idea that Prabhupada doesn’t agree with. He mentions that “The conclusion is that no one falls from the spiritual world, or Vaikuṇṭha planet, for it is the eternal abode.” (SB 3.16.26) and “it is a fact that no one falls from Vaikuṇṭha.” (SB 7.1.35).

Instead, Srila Prabhupada gives a much more nuanced, “acintya-bhedabheda-tattva” conclusion, explaining that the soul does have intrinsic love for Krsna and an eternal relationship with Him, a relationship that is never lost but is somehow circumstantially forgotten or covered. He uses examples such as someone forgetting himself while dreaming, experiencing many illusory situations while never leaving his bed, or a traveler experiencing a long and difficult journey to try to explain such a delicate point.

The correct understanding of this topic passes thus through rejecting baseless accusations that Prabhupada was being deceptive in his explanations, as well as avoiding cheap conclusions such as that we are all fallen gopis, and instead carefully studying the works of Srila Prabhupada and trying to properly understand the nuanced explanations he gives. Armed with such conclusions, one can then study the works of our previous acaryas and realize they are all in agreement, something that both the partisans of “fall” and “no-fall” theories often fail to realize.

Even if one would go as far as insinuating that Jiva Goswami himself could be misrepresenting previous teachers, one can go all the way to Manovalala Muni, the great saint from Sri Sampradaya, on whom Sri Jiva bases many of his conclusions, and find the same language of forgetfulness and remembrance being used.

How can we understand that we have an intrinsic propensity to love Krsna and that we have an eternal personal relationship with Him, that was active before our entering material conditioning, “from time immemorial”, without implying that we are all fallen gopis?

The point is that this is a very nuanced point, and most of us don’t have the intelligence or spiritual realization to go deep into it. That’s why we are advised to avoid it as far as possible, since the discussion is prone to result in all kinds of incorrect conclusions, as we can see in practice. Unfortunately, nowadays this is often a topic of unlimited controversy.

Srila Jiva Goswami himself offers a few simple explanations that can help one to understand without entering into deep philosophical details. On Anuccheda 46 (text 6), for example, he states that, tad evam jīvas tad-amsatvät sukṣma-jyoti-rupa ity eke. tathaiva hi kaustubhamśatvena vyanjitam.

“Some thinkers say that the individual spirit souls are tiny particles of light. It is sometimes said that the individual spirit souls are particles of light from the Supreme Lord’s Kaustubha jewel.”

Here he doesn’t say that this is the absolute truth, or that it applies to all jivas, limiting to say “ity eke” (some say), giving it as a possibility for the ones who are looking for a simple explanation.

If we imagine that we are particles of light emanating from the Kaustubha jewel worn by the Lord, we can understand that our eternal constitutional position is one of a personal relationship with the Lord and that we were relating personally with Him, in His personal form, before somehow or other starting our material conditioning. Material life becomes thus an opportunity to regain this forgotten relationship, or to deepen it, achieving the position of a direct associate of the Lord in one of his lilas.

This is certainly a much better explanation than the idea of the soul never being out of this material world, or coming from the Brahmajoti, where there is no service, no understanding of the Lord’s personal form, and no propensity for loving the Lord. Srila Prabhupada explains that the Brahmajoti is an already fallen position (which is proved by the fact that it is an unstable position, from which one can fall back into the material world), and thus it’s not the origin of the soul. We can see that again this is in accordance with the teachings of Srila Jiva Goswami.

If you want to know more, there is a whole book on this topic:

The “Fall” of the Jīva, as Explained by Śrīla Prabhupāda

---

This is a publication for thoughtful readers who want to go deeper into Kṛṣṇa consciousness. I publish daily, trying to offer high-quality spiritual content, and all posts are available to free subscribers. If you wish, you can also choose a paid subscription to support this work.

You can also receive the updates on WhatsApp or Telegram.
If you would like to contribute further, you can find the donation links here.