We Were Originally in Krishna's Pastimes

Some say that the soul did not originate in the pastimes of Krishna in the spiritual world. They say that the soul has originally come from the tatastha shakti which is neither in the spiritual world or the material world, and that the soul then had a choice of entering the spiritual world or the material world. They say that we here in this material world chose it instead of the spiritual world. This philosophy is not in line with teachings of Srila Prabhupada who has written in his purport to Srimad Bhagavatam 4.28.54 as follows:

"The original home of the living entity and the Supreme Personality of Godhead is the spiritual world. In the spiritual world both the Lord and the living entities live together very peacefully. Since the living entity remains engaged in the service of the Lord, they both share a blissful life in the spiritual world. However, when the living entity wants to enjoy himself, he falls down into the material world. Even while he is in that position, the Lord remains with him as the Supersoul, his intimate friend. Because of his forgetfulness, the living entity does not know that the Supreme Lord is accompanying him as the Supersoul. In this way the living entity remains conditioned in each and every millennium. Although the Lord follows him as a friend, the living entity, because of forgetful material existence, does not recognize Him."

Lord Caitanya teaches us:

jiīvera 'svarūpa' haya--kṛṣṇera 'nitya-dāsa'

"The constitutional position of the living entity is that he is the eternal servant of Krishna."

By stating that the conditioned souls were never engaged in serving Krishna casts doubt on Lord Caitanya's teaching that the soul is the eternal servant of Krishna and thus encourages impersonalism. Therefore it is a very dangerous philosophy that should be avoided. We should accept Srila Prabhupada's words, as given above, as authoritative.

Krishna and Cowherd Boys in Goloka, Vrindavan

Answers by Citing the Vedic Version

Question: How to Disprove that the Supreme is Impersonal?

What is not good with the Vaishnava point of view is this: I realized that you don't have to think about Krishna or think about something else. You don't have to do something or become someone else to be happy. Happiness is already here. The cause of that happiness is just BEING. Being "I", self. Miseries begin then you see something outside this self.

How can you disprove that the Supreme is ultimately impersonal?

R.D.

Answer: There's No Happiness Without Love

The impersonalists can find a temporary sense of satisfaction by negating the miseries of material existence and embracing in the impersonal conception of the one universal formless self. But because this is ultimately artificial after some time they come down again to the plane of material miseries. This is stated in the Srimad Bhagavatam, plus it is my own personal experience as well. Previously I was an impersonalist, and I experienced a great sense of happiness in the impersonal Brahman conception. But it did not last. It went away. And then I was miserable like anything. The depression was intolerable until I realized that the only permanent happiness is on the platform of Bhagavan realization or Krishna consciousness. Then I entered into on ocean of unlimited, ever-increasing bliss, which I have been tasting now for over 41 years. It is practical. Love does not exist in impersonal Brahman, and no one can be happy for very long without love.

It is impossible for the Supreme or the original source of all existence to not be a person because every machine requires an operator. You cannot find anywhere a machine that does not require an a operator. Therefore we can logically deduce that the gigantic universal machine also requires an operator. If you want to disprove the personal conception of the Absolute, show me one machine that can function without an operator.

Sankarshan Das Adhikari