There is nothing called tatastha region but tatastha shakti

This is a very important philosophy related to jiva tattwa. We have seen some recent acaryas use ontological value of tatastha sakti as  a location or boundry in order to preach the ignorant mass about the complicated topic of jiva tattwa in a simple way. But to understand the aspect of prema and bhakti understanding the actual philosophy is very important.Failing to understand the philosophy properly may lead to misinterpreted philosophy of
1. Fall Vada(Fall of Jiva from Vaikuntha)
2. Inhererent sleeping Swarupa and Rasa of the Jiva
3. Bhakti being present in the swarupa of the jiva etc to name a few.

We have to understand that these modern acharyas had deviced such theory only for the purpose of preaching the neophyte devotees and it has nothing to question their crediblity .

The below blog is taken from and is presented as a discussion between two devotees(one being the blogger himself).


Dāmodar Das

The conception that the jīvas are from a taṭastha-region and choose between the spiritual and material world is false?”


“This is nowhere in śāstra and makes no sense.”

Dāmodar Das

“They quote

jīvera svarūpa hoy kṛṣṇera nitya dāsa;
kṛṣṇera taṭastha śakti bhedābheda prakāśa.”


“Where is a taṭastha REGION? South of Vladivostok? It says taṭastha ŚAKTI, not REGION. śakti means an ontological value, not a location, like east of Amsterdam. What does the verse say?
jīvera svarūpa hoy kṛṣṇera nitya dāsa;
kṛṣṇera taṭastha śakti bhedābheda prakāśa –
“The true form of the spirit soul is being an eternal servant of Kṛṣṇa. He is Kṛṣṇa’s marginal energy, being both different and non-different from Him.”

Where is it mentioned it is a region or he made a choice? Where is this mentioned anywhere else? In the six Sandarbhas? Śrīmad Bhāgavata? Bhagavad Gītā? Caitanya Caritāmṛta? Caitanya Caritāmṛta also says the jīva is anādi bahirmukha, disinclined towards Kṛṣṇa from beginningless time. How they explain the word ‘anādi’ in the very same book?”
Dāmodar Das:

“Do you have Bṛhad Āranyaka Upaniṣad? They say that text 4.3.9 there proves their theory as presented in Jaiva Dharma . They translate it as:

“The jīva has 2 places: the material region and the cit-region. And there is another place, a border-region called tatastha, which forms the contact of the material and spiritual regions. Being in that region, the jīva sees these both places.”

That text is about consciousness, not about the jīva –

tasya vā etasya puruṣasya dve eva sthāne bhavataḥ: idaṁ ca para-loka-sthānaṁ ca; sandhyaṁ tṛtīyaṁ svapna-sthānam; tasmin sandhye sthāne tiṣṭhann, ubhe sthāne paśyati, idaṁ ca para-loka-sthānaṁ ca atha yathākramo’yaṁ para-lokasthāne bhavati, tam ākramam ākramya, ubhayān pāpmana ānandāṁś ca paśyati. sa yatra prasvapiti, asya lokasya sarvāvato mātrām apādāya, svayaṁ vihatya, svayaṁ nirmāya, svena bhāsā, svena jyotiṣā prasvapiti; atrāyam puruṣaḥ svayaṁ-jyotir bhavati.
“There are two states for that person, one here in this world, one in the other world, and a third in an intermediate state, the dream-place. When in that intermediate state, he sees both those states together, the one here in this world, and the other in the other world. Now whatever his admission to the other world may be, having gained that admission, he sees both the evils and the blessings. And wherever he dreams, then after having taken away with him the material from the whole world, destroying and building it up again, he dreams by his own light. In that state the person is self-illuminated.”
Otherwise the Upaniṣads would contradict Śruti and Vedānta, which unanimously say that ignorance and karma are beginningless. These verses are speaking about the position of ātma in different states of existence i.e. waking, dream and birth and death. You can see this from the context. It is a dialogue between Janaka and Yajñavalkya. The king asks about ātma in 4.3.7. Yajñavalkya is explaining how ātma is different from all the modifications of the mind experienced in the waking and dream state:

“He, remaining the same, wanders along the two worlds, as if thinking, as if moving. During sleep (in dream) he transcends this world and all the forms of death.”

In 4.3.8 he explains about the transmigration of the ātma – “On being born that person, assuming his body, becomes united with all evils; when he departs and dies, he leaves all evils behind.”

In 4.3.9 he combines what he said in 4.3.7 and 4.3.8. There is no talk of any spiritual world. Paraloka refers to next body or birth. In 4.3.18, another text they quote to prove the tatastha region-point, even the word svapna-sthāna, ‘dream-place’, is stated explicitly, “As a fish swims between two banks, the ātma experiences the waking and dream states.”
tad yathā mahā matsya ubhe kule’ nusancārati pūrvaṁ ca paraṁ caivam
evāyam puruṣa etav ubhāv antav anusancārati svapnāntam ca buddhāntam ca
(Fall-vādī translation:) “Just as a large fish living in the river wanders from one bank to the other, so the jīva is of similar quality, and is equipped to wander in the Kāraṇa waters between the material and spiritual worlds (svapnānta and buddhānta).” Bṛhad-Āraṇyaka Upaniṣad

Here again are the words svapnāntam, dreaming state and buddhāntam, wakeful state of consciousness. Where is there any mentioning of the Kārana ocean? It does not fit in the context at all. That whole section of the Upaniṣad, texts 8-18, is all about consciousness.“



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

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

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )


Connecting to %s

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 2,835 other followers

%d bloggers like this: