In the Chaitanya Charitamrita (2.8.226–27 & s 52) Prabhu replies to Ramanand, “The mahabhagavata looks at animate and inanimate objects, and everywhere is the glowing of Sri Krishna. They look at animate and inanimate objects, but do not see those images; rather everywhere they see the blossoming of their own ista-deva. ‘He who sees his own god in all things of the earth, and sees all things as in his own Bhagavan, he is the greatest of bhagavatas (BP 11.1.45).’”

This profound statement comes right before Chaitanya reveals his true form as Radha-Krishna in one body, which Tony Stewart calls, “theologically, the climax of the book.”

Chaitanya, quoting the Bhagavat Puran, clearly offers a panentheistic view as the perspective of the great devotees of God-dess. This is clearly an incarnate theology that eliminates the duality of nature and spirit. It is later manifested by Ramanand in his service of two temple dancing girls as an enactment of his service to Radha.

Therefore, Universalist Radha-Krishnaism embraces life, nature, body, sex, and all the good things God-dess offers us seeing him-her glowing lovingly through them all. We live life fully on many different levels following God-dess’ lead. Enjoy freely.

Both lines of thought contain strengths and weaknesses. We need both for an adequate, full explanation of the situation. God-dess reconciles beliefs of identity and difference in a higher synthesis outlined by Krishna Chaitanya and developed by his followers like Jiva Goswami.

Simultaneous oneness and difference encourages a high tolerance for ambiguity like quantum theory. Rather than either/or, it is both/and, which gives much room for complementary perspectives and differing interpretations. Chaitanyaism is a diverse heterodoxy despite efforts of certain camps to establish an orthodoxy. Nevertheless, ambiguity is fundamental to the spiritual quest for that which remains unknowable in our present state of existence.

Transcendence and immanence exist as associated aspects of an inherent unity in God-dess, as a form of panentheism. The immanent aspect of God-dess called Cosmic Consciousness exists simultaneously with God-dess’ full splendor of infinite perfection, potencies, and attributes transcending all finite things. Cosmic Consciousness regulates and observes the actions of the finite souls and unifies all things. This is symbolic language used to help us comprehend God-dess’ omnipresence and fullness of knowledge. God-dess exists as the blissful, personal absolute above and beyond the world of our senses. God-dess simultaneously pervades the universe in a hidden form in which all beings exist. He-she supports all, yet exists beyond all as the source of everything.

God-dess remains simultaneously different from the world and identical with it. God-dess creates the world from him-herself and remains separate. Identity and difference paradoxically exist simultaneously.

Simultaneous oneness and difference applies not only to God-dess and his-her energies, but to all objects and their energies. God-dess appears in many forms but remains one. God-dess’ sports, names, and forms are simultaneously different and non-different. Even the various parts of God-dess’ body are one and different. Each part can carry out the functions of the other parts and of the whole. The part is identical with the whole, but still a part, thus different from the whole.

God-dess’ form remains inconceivable because it is infinite and immeasurable, mostly beyond our conception. The Vedic scriptures describe God-dess:

as “the greatest of the great” and “the smallest of the small,” as “one who moves and yet moves not,” as “one who is far as well as near, immanent as well as transcendent,” and as one who does not have the mind or sense organs like ours and yet performs all the functions of these. (Kapoor 156)

God-dess paradoxically indicates union of the opposite ideas of difference and non-difference leading to a higher, fuller unity. This means perfection, or the ability to encompass all extremes of experiencing reality. God-dess’ potency reconciles transcendence with immanence and maintains her-his fullness in relation to the material world by reconciling real difference with real identity. This pertains to God-dess, the living entities, and nature, as well as to all energies and their possessor.

We cannot fully express the infinite unbounded Absolute in words, but this does not mean we cannot express it at all. We reject the idea of the Absolute as ultimately pure, undifferentiated being. The Absolute must exist as a positive concept to be intelligible and real. Since nothing positive exists without attributes, the Absolute must be qualified. Being infinite, the Absolute must be determined and qualified in endless ways. It encompasses all and lacks nothing. The idea of personality remains consistent and essential to the infinite Absolute. God-dess possesses character, which implies something definite and limiting, but God-dess remains unlimited in the sense of being immeasurable and all encompassing.

Vedic writings portray the Absolute as both qualified and unqualified, often clearly describing the Absolute as both qualified and unqualified in the same breath. Those who wish to merge with the unqualified Absolute may do so. Those who wish a relationship with the personal Absolute, God-dess, may do so. The Absolute is both-and. God-dess reciprocates according to our mode of approach.

______
⁽¹⁾* Panentheism is a constructed word composed of the English equivalents of the Greek terms pan, meaning all, en, meaning in, and theism, meaning God. Panentheism understands God and the world to be inter-related with the world being in God and God being in the world. It offers an increasingly popular alternative to traditional theism and pantheism. Panentheism seeks to avoid both isolating God from the world as traditional theism often does and identifying God with the world as pantheism does. Traditional theistic systems emphasize the difference between God and the world while panentheism stresses God’s active presence in the world.

Pantheism emphasizes God’s presence in the world but panentheism maintains the identity and significance of the non-divine. Anticipations of panentheistic understandings of God have occurred in both philosophical and theological writings throughout history. However, a rich diversity of panentheistic understandings has developed in the past two centuries primarily in Christian traditions responding to scientific thought. [Borrowed from Stanford’s Encyclopaedia of Philosophy, Stanford University. Please see links below for more.]

Interested to learn more? Just click here to visit Stanford’s Encyclopaedia of Philosophy, here for Wikipedia’s article on panentheism. To learn more about Symbiotic Panentheism — A Universal Philosophy for Humankind, just click here. The purpose of that fifty-year project is to fuse Ontological, Cosmological, and Metaphysical Systems into one system in order that we, humankind, (as the authors suggest) may ‘put our house in order. Here’s their excerpt about the history of panentheism.

In the devotional sense, Universalist Radha-Krishnaism is not at all unusual and should run into no conflicts with any Vaishnavas. By this I mean that URK emphasizes a deep, personal relationship with Radha-Krishna that emphasizes the lila, etc. It emphasizes that God-dess’ highest reality is profoundly personal. It encourages common devotional practices like japa, praying, reading, and hearing.

In the historical sense, Universalist Radha-Krishnaism is radical (and I mean that in the good sense). It treats even Radha-Krishna as “myth”, in the deepest and most significant sense of “myth”. It moves the “accuracy” of the lila and the details of Krishna’s life out of the historical sphere and into the transcendental sphere. There will likely be energetic opposition to this
among those who view the scriptures in a literalist manner.

In the behavioral sense, Universalist Radha-Krishnaism is liberal. By that I mean that it views many behaviors (forbidden foods, sexual morality) as not being essential, even if many of them would be ideal. Universalist Radha-Krishnaism does not see sexual love between lovers as bad; rather, it is even good and healthy. Homosexuality is not targeted by Steve’s theology as something evil at all, for example.

In the intellectual sense, Universalist Radha-Krishnaism is liberal. This means that it believes that empirical evidence and reason may sometimes come into conflict with scriptures at a certain level, and that the way this works itself out is not to be determined a priori in terms of a literal interpretation of scripture.

In the political sense, Universalist Radha-Krishnaism is moderate. This means that it is accessible to people of different political persuasions. It emphasizes the importance of the world but also keeps it in perspective in terms of our ultimate goal as associates of God-dess. There should be no conflicts here with the other movements out there.

– Michael Valle