Bhagavata-Parampara vs.Pancharatriki-Parampara - Bhagavata-Parampara vs. Pancharatriki-Parampara

All glories to Sri Sri Guru-Gauranga-Gandharvika-Giridhari! All glories to Srila Varshabhanavidayitadasa Brahmcahari a.k.a. Srila Prabhupada Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Goswami Thakur.

As Madhavananda Prabhu has requested of me, I will submit one proof of the Bhagavata Parampara. It comes from Srimad Bhagavad-gita, Ch.2, Verse 7 which states:

karpanya-dosopahata-svabhavah prcchamitvam dharma-sammudha-cetah/yac chreyah syan niscitam bruhi tan me sisyas te'ham sadhi mam tvam prapannam.

Translation:Now I am confused about my duty and have lost all composure because of weakness. In this condition I am asking You to tell me clearly what is best for me. Now I am Your disciple, and a soul surrendered unto You. Please instruct me.

This verse clearly shows that without even taking the mantra diksha from a guru like Sri Krishna, Arjuna is considered to be a disciple of Sri Krishna. And Sri Krishna corroborrates this in the Ch.4, Verses 2 and 3 of Srimad Bhagavad-gita:

evam parampara-praptam
imam rajarsayo viduh
sa kaleneha mahata
yogo nastah parantapa

This supreme science was thus received through the chain of disciplic succession, and the saintly kings understood it in that way. But in course of time the succession was broken, and therefore the science as it is appears to be lost.

sa evayam maya te 'dya
yogah proktah puratanah
bhakto 'si me sakha ceti
rahasyam hy etad uttamam

That very ancient science of the relationship with the Supreme is today told by Me to you because you are My devotee as well as My friend; therefore you can understand the transcendental mystery of this science.

Note: Off course, we conditioned souls (baddha-jivatmas) need to take the pancharatriki-diksha from a bonafide guru, still, for higher personalities this isn't required. And, even after taking diksha, siksha is still requried. That is why, I consider the Bhagavat Parampara (which advocates both the diksha and siksha systems) to be better than only pancharatriki parampara (which advocates only diksha).

What are your views?

QUOTE

This verse clearly shows that without even taking the mantra diksha from a guru like Sri Krishna, Arjuna is considered to be a disciple of Sri Krishna.

Have you ever met anyone who descends in the parampara of Arjuna? Who was Arjuna's disciple, who was Arjuna's disciple's disciple, and did they worship their guru, Arjuna and Krishna as their guru pranali every day?

Of course anyone who instructs someone else is his teacher, and correspondingly the other is the teacher's student (sisya).

QUOTE

That is why, I consider the Bhagavat Parampara (which advocates both the diksha and siksha systems) to be better than only pancharatriki parampara (which advocates only diksha).

Where did you get your lessons on pancharatriki parampara from? (Where is the term "pancharatriki parampara in the scriptures to begin with?) Particularly, where did you get the idea from that there is a parampara which advocates diksa without siksa? Considering the definition of diksa, this is an oxymoron to begin with.

I would just like to ensure that you know what you are speaking about or arguing against, and moreover, I am curious whether the object of your discourse exists at all.

QUOTE

Off course, we conditioned souls (baddha-jivatmas) need to take the pancharatriki-diksha from a bonafide guru, still, for higher personalities this isn't required.

Why not? To set the proper example for others to follow, the higher personalities, including Bhagavan Himself, set the proper example to be followed. As in the Gita:

yad yad Acarati zreSThas tat tad evetaro janaH |
sa yat pramANaM kurute lokas tad anuvartate || 3.21 ||
"In whichever way a higher personality acts, in such a way certainly the common men will act, and whichever standards he sets, people will follow accordingly."

Following in the wake of this instruction of Sri Bhagavan, the higher personalities set the proper example to be followed by common men to bring about auspiciousness for one and all.

QUOTE

Off course, we conditioned souls (baddha-jivatmas) need to take the pancharatriki-diksha from a bonafide guru, still, for higher personalities this isn't required

Arjuna is an eternal associate of Sri Krsna in the Dwaraka lila. Bhagavan Sri Krsna not only revealed Himself to Arjuna, but was acting as Arjuna's CHARIOT DRIVER. They slept together, ate together, joked together. There was no sadhana required for Arjuna for he is an eternally accomplished nitya siddha. Diksa is a part of sadhana, the gateway into sadhana.

Srimad Bhagavata says:

labdhanugraha acaryat tena sa darsitagamah
Taking the mantra from the Guru one must attain the rules concerning the mantras and knowledge from the sastras from him (tena)(From Ananta Das Pandit's Sri Guru Tattva Vijnana)

Bhagavan Sriman Mahaprabhu appeared in this world an acted as a sadhaka by taking diksa from Iswara Puri. Sri Nityananda and Sri Adwaita, who are also personalities of Godhead, took diksa during Their pastimes on earth. They in turn initiated disciples and left a parampara on earth. It was not for vain They did so. Otherwise they too could have just given siksa without diksa.

All glories to Sri Sri Sad-Guru Pranali, Sri Sri Vrindavaner Chaya Gosvami , Sri Sri Gaurangadeva, Sri Sri Nityananda Prabhu, Sri Sri Sitanatha Prabhu, Sri Sri Gadadhara Pandita, Sri Sri Srivasadi Gaura-bhakta-vrinda, Sri Sri Radha-Gopinatha, Sri Sri Asta Sakhi Vrinda and Sri Sri Asta Manjari Vrinda! All glories to holy mother Paurnamasi Devi, and all glories to Srimati Vrinda Devi and her messengers! All glories to all the parrots of Vraja-dhama, all glories to Sri Krishna's pet deer Suranga, all glories to Sri Radha's beautiful pet swan Tundikeri who joyfully swims in the waters of Sri Sri Radha's beautiful Kunda! All glories to Sri Krishna's cows headed by Mangala, Pingala, Ganga, Pisangi, Manikastani, Hamsi and Vamsipriya, all glories to Srimati's chubby pet calf Tungi, and all glories to the old she-monkey Kakkhati! And all glories to all glories, and to everyone else, too!

The verse Radhapada has quoted is from Bhagavata 11.3.48. The second part of it is equally interesting.

labdhvAnugraha AcAryAt tena sandarzitAgamaH |
mahA-puruSam abhyarcen mUrtyAbhimatayAtmanaH ||
The word "anugraha" literally means "favor", "kindness". Jiva comments that it refers to diksa. Some key words in the verse also refer to the acarya's giving diksa: "sandarzitAgamaH" -- "revealing the agama (manuals of worship)"; "abhyarcen mUrtyA" -- "he should engage in worshiping the murti". THe word "abhimatayAtmanaH" is also interesting -- "of his own preference".

"Receiving the grace of the acarya who reveals unto him the manuals of worship, one should engage in worshiping a particular form of the Lord in accordance with one's specific preference."

To whom is this recommendation addressed? The previous verse explains:

ya Azu hRdaya-granthiM nirjihIRSuH parAtmanaH |
vidhinopacared devaM tantroktena ca kezavam ||
"He who is desirous of quickly cutting the knot of bondage from within his heart, thus experiencing the divinity of the self, should worship the splendid Lord Kesava according to prescriptions in the manuals of worship."

This process is not for those who have become higher personalities (atibadi). It is for humble souls who desire to follow the teachings of the sampradaya. The history has shown that those who become atibadi (too great) will form their own traditions, separating themselves from the lowly followers of the established tradition.

Jiva discusses necessity of receiving of diksa in his Bhakti Sandarbha (Anuccheda 283), having first quoted the aforementioned verse of the Bhagavata:

yadyapi zrI-bhAgavata-mate paJcarAtrAdivad arcana-mArgasyAvazyakatvaM nAsti, tad vinApi zaraNApatty-AdInAm ekatareNApi puruSArtha-siddher abhihitatvAt, tathApi zrI-nAradAdi-vartmAnusaradbhiH zrI-bhagavatA saha sambandha-vizeSaM dIkSA-vidhAnena zrI-guru-caraNa-sampAditaM cikIrSadbhiH kRtAyAM dIkSAyAm arcanam avazyaM kriyetaiva |

"Although in the opinion of the Bhagavata Purana, the path of arcana, like the Pancaratra and so forth, is not necessary, since, even without that, one can achieve the goal of human life by one of the other methods like surrender (saranapatti) and the rest, still those who are following the path of Narada and others and who desire the particular relationship with the Lord that is effected at the feet of the guru by the rite of diksa necessarily perform arcana when diksa is completed."

Jiva then proceeds to quote a verse from the agamas to illustrate the substantial import of receiving diksa:

divyaM jJAnaM yato dadyAt kuryAt pApasya saGkSayam |
tasmAd dIkSeti sA proktA dezikais tattva kovidaiH ||
ato guruM praNamyaivaM sarvasvaM vinivedya ca |
gRhNIyAd vaiSNavaM mantraM dIkSA pUrvaM vidhAnataH ||
"The teachers who are knowers of the truth say that since it gives (da) divine knowledge and destroys (ksi) sin it is called diksa. Therefore, paying obeisance to the guru and offering him one's all, one should receive a Vaisnava mantra diksa preceded with proper procedures."

Jiva further illuminates the meaning of "divya-jnana", or the divine knowledge which is transmitted in diksa:

divyaM jJAnaM hy atra zrImati mantre bhagavat-svarUpa-jJAnaM, tena bhagavatA sambandha-vizeSa-jJAnaM ca |

"Divine knowledge means here knowledge of the true nature of the Lord in the mantra and, by that, knowledge of one's own special relationship with Him."

Carefully considering the above, we may understand that at the time of diksa, the divine preceptor initiates the disciple into the methods of worshiping that particular form of the Lord for which the disciple has attraction, and the diksa-mantra transmitted by the preceptor contains information which reveals this relationship for which the initiate aspires.

Thus we are bound to note that at the time of diksa, the most essential elements for the growth of the sadhaka are given -- the very elements which will outline the path of his inner evolution from this very moment to the concrete attainment of his cherished specific relationship with the Lord. Alas, this is the essence of all wisdom!

Why, therefore, would anyone attempt to minimize the glory of those unbroken diksa-lineages through which this most essential divine wisdom has been received since the days of Sri Caitanya's dear associates? These very lineages preserve the authentic message of Sri Gaurangadeva and the Gosvamis of Vrindavana. Departing from allegiance to these divine lineages will only cast clouds of unnecessary suspicion over the rebel.

QUOTE(GITGOVINDA @ Aug. 23 2002,10:07)

I think that Bhagavat-Parampara is lot better than the Pancharatriki-Parampara.

Dear Gita Govinda,

Can you explain what it means in your terms that Bhagavat parampara is better than Pancaratriki(i really never have heard of that one)parampara?Do you under Pancaratriki mean, unbroken lineage which have support from Guru,sadhu and sastra in any evidence since time immemorial,while system you are talking about( the better one) doesn't have any evidence for its existence until 20th century?According to my understanding of the parampara you are mentioning(the better one) you can take initiation from Srila Rupa Goswami.I try to read and study books of both parampara systems and i mean no disrespect,but can you explain my statements and questions.
With respect,
Thanks,

To begin with, I would like to hear from Gita brief definitions of both styles of parampara he compares against each other, as she sees them. Then we may better understand what he means.

Gita, could you do that please?

Kanai, as far as paramparas of instructors go, it is a fact that there may be a succession of instructors without initiation, and this may be considered a valid succession in which wisdom is transmitted. However, when it comes to a tradition in which the methods and concepts of worship of the istadevata (pancaratra) is an essential factor, the passing onwards of these concepts requires diksa.

Nevertheless, for a parampara of instructors to be valid, the instructors must have carefully studied under each others' tutelage. It is not that we may pick any names from the history and lump them together on a piece of paper, declaring it as our parampara of predecessors. Particularly so if many of these persons have never even met each other, there being gaps of decades between their lives.

The example of passing down the science of Bhagavad Gita, as in Krishna-Visvasvan-Manu-Iksvaku, is an instance of a situation where ceremonial diksa is not required. A careful student of Bhagavad Gita will note that there are no specific patterns of worship presented there, but it is rather a generic outline of philosophical conclusions which does not delve into the details of worship. I am not familiar of any statements on whether there has been diksa or not in the lineage Sri Krishna mentions in the Gita.

In our Gaudiya sampradaya, the worship of the ista-devata or the mantra-devata (zraddha-vizeSataH prItir zrI-mUrtir aGghri-sevane) is one of its core practices meant to establish a proper self-conception of the worshiper in a specific mood in relation with the Worshipable One. Since these methods and conceptions of bhajana (worship) are transmitted from a guru to a disciple over generations, it is only natural that disciplic lineages are understood as lineages of diksa-gurus. This is how our Gaudiya-mahajanas have presented their respective lineages.

QUOTE(Madhava @ Aug. 24 2002,06:43)

Kanai, as far as paramparas of instructors go, it is a fact that there may be a succession of instructors without initiation, and this may be considered a valid succession in which wisdom is transmitted.

Madhava,

Thank you,i understand that like a valid siksa or instructions.I was to lay stress on the points you made further in your posting above.

Kanai

QUOTE

Since these methods and conceptions of bhajana (worship) are transmitted from a guru to a disciple over generations, it is only natural that disciplic lineages are understood as lineages of diksa-gurus. This is how our Gaudiya-mahajanas have presented their respective lineages.

Dear Madhavaji, if « it is only natural that disciplic lineages are understood as lineages of diksa-gurus” could you please explain following examples in Gaudiya lineage:

Sanatana Gosvami was actually the disciple of Vidyavacaspati.

Rupa Gosvami was a disciple of Sanatana Gosvami.

Jiva Gosvami was a disciple of Rupa Gosvami.

Raghunatha das Gosvami was a disciple of Yadunandana Acarya.

Narottama Das Thakura was a disciple of Lokanatha Gosvami, not of Krsnadas Kaviraja.

Visvanatha Cakravarti was a disciple of Radha Ramana Cakravarti and never met Narottama, for they lived a century apart.

Baladeva Vidyabhusana was a disciple of Radha Damodara Gosvami, not of Visvanatha Cakravarti.

Jagannatha das Babaji lived 150 years after his would-be guru Baladeva Vidyabhusana.

Bhaktivinoda was a disciple of Vipin Bihari Gosvami, not of Jagannath das Babaji.

So, there must be that we have very strong influence of siksya in Gaudiya lineage.
Srila Sridhara Maharaja very clear talk about that :
«Srila Sridhara Maharaja: Our guru parampara, disciplic succession, follows the ideal, not the body; it is a succession of instructing spiritual masters, not formal initiating spiritual masters. In a song about our guru parampara written by Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati, it is mentioned, mahaprabhu sri caitanya radha krsna nahe anya rupanuga janera jivana : the highest truth of Krsna consciousness comes down through the channel of siksa gurus, instructing spiritual masters. Those who have the standard of realization in the proper line have been accepted in the list of our disciplic succession. It is not a diksa guru parampara, a succession of formal initiating gurus. Diksa, or initiation is more or less a formal thing; the substantial thing is siksa, or spiritual instruction. And if our siksa and diksa gurus or instructing and initiating spiritual masters are congruent, then we are most fortunate»

QUOTE

Dear Madhavaji, if « it is only natural that disciplic lineages are understood as lineages of diksa-gurus” could you please explain following examples in Gaudiya lineage:

Let's see.

Sanatana Gosvami was actually the disciple of Vidyavacaspati.

Bhakti Ratnakara (1.598-602): "Vidyavachaspati was the religious guide of Sri Sanatana and from time to time he stayed at Ramkeli. Sri Sanatana studied many scriptures under him and his respect for Vidyavacaspati knew no bounds. He respectfully mentioned the name of his guru in his book Sri Dasama Tippani."

Sanatana received diksa from Vidyavacaspati.

Rupa Gosvami was a disciple of Sanatana Gosvami.

Invocation to Laghu Bhagavatamrita (1.5): "Of Sri Brhad-bhagavatamrtam, manifested by the lotus words of my master, this book is a summary."

Rupa received diksa from Sanatana.

Jiva Gosvami was a disciple of Rupa Gosvami.

In this connection, you may read the excerpts from Bhakti Ratnakara I have presented in my compilation on the life of Rupa Gosvami in this forum.

Jiva received diksa from Rupa.

Raghunatha das Gosvami was a disciple of Yadunandana Acarya.

Vilapa Kusumanjali (3) "I take shelter of my teacher Yadunandana Acarya, who is so powerful because he is so dear to Yadunandana Sri Krishna, and who personally showered me with the nectar of his matchless mercy."

Raghunatha received diksa from Yadunandana Acarya.

Narottama Das Thakura was a disciple of Lokanatha Gosvami, not of Krsnadas Kaviraja.

Prema-Bhakti-Candrika (6): "Sri Guru, you are an ocean of mercy and the savior of the fallen! O Lokanatha, you are the life of the world! O! O master! Be merciful unto me and give me the shelter of your lotus feet! Let the three worlds proclaim your glory!"

Prarthana (17): "O, when will Prabhu Lokanatha take me, placing me at the feet of Sri Rupa?"

Prarthana (19): "The Divine couple, smiling with compassionate hearts, ask: 'O Rupa Manjari, from where have you found this new dasi?' Hearing this, Rupa Manjari will say, 'Manjulali gave this maidservant to me.'"

Narottama received diksa from Lokanatha. There are no records of a significant relationship of receiving instructions between Krishnadas and Narottama.

Visvanatha Cakravarti was a disciple of Radha Ramana Cakravarti and never met Narottama, for they lived a century apart.

Narottama appeared sometime in 1531. His disciple was Ganga Narayana Cakravarti. Ganga Narayana's disciple was Krishna Carana Cakravarti. Krishna Carana's disciple was Radha Ramana Cakravarti, the diksa-guru of Visvanatha.

To underline the essence of his diksa-guru-pranali, Visvanatha has presented in his Sankalpa Kalpadruma the corresponding siddha-pranali (a succession of manjaris) in allegiance to whom and under whose guidance he serves the Divine couple.

The exact year of Visvanatha's birth is not known. It is estimated to be somewhere between 1620-1640. He departed in 1708. Having taken birth a century later than Narottama, it is obvious that the two never met each other. Narottama was the diksa-guru of his diksa-guru's diksa-guru's diksa-guru.

Baladeva Vidyabhusana was a disciple of Radha Damodara Gosvami, not of Visvanatha Cakravarti.

Baladeva accepted Radha-Krishna mantra from Radha Damodara Gosvami, who was initiated in the disciplic lineage descending from Syamananda Pandit, and studied the Sat-sandarbha under his guidance. Observing that his disciple had mastered all the conclusions of Gaudiya siddhanta, Radha Damodara requested him to write the Vedanta Syamantaka.

In the epilogue of the title, Baladeva playfully submits the following sentence in praise of both his guru and Bhagavan: "Chanting the names Radha-Damodara, a certain brahmana offers this Vedanta-syamantaka to Srimati Radharani. He hopes this book will please Her."

Jagannatha das Babaji lived 150 years after his would-be guru Baladeva Vidyabhusana.

Baladeva was no longer a young man when Visvanatha departed in 1708, having been born sometime in the middle of the 17th century.

It is said that Jagannatha Das lived for 147 years. Unfortunately I was unable to find an exact date for his departure. Drawing from the biography of Bhaktivinoda, he was present in this world at least as late as 1893, making his year of birth no earlier than 1746, dating his birth to approximately a century after that of Baladeva.

Jagannatha Das Babaji was initiated by Jagadananda Gosvami of Sringaravat. He later received bheka (garb of an ascetic) from Siddha Krishnadas Baba of Govardhan. According to others, he received bheka from Madhusudana Das Baba of Suryakund.

Bhaktivinoda was a disciple of Vipin Bihari Gosvami, not of Jagannath das Babaji.

Though it is beyond doubt that Bhaktivinoda derived inspiration from Jagannatha Das Babaji, he wrote the following about his diksa-guru Vipin Vihari Gosvami.

Bhagavat-arka-marici-mala: vipina-vihari prabhu mama prabhu-vara | sri-vamsi-vadanananda-vamsa-sasadhara || -- "Vipina-vihari Prabhu, the greatest of my masters, is the brilliant moon in the family of Sri Vamsi Vadanananda."

Amrita-pravaha-bhasya: vipina-vihari hari, tara sakti avatari | vipina-vihari prabhu-vara || sri-guru-goswami-rupe, dekhi more bhava-kupe | uddharilo apana kinkara || -- "The eminent Vipina-vihari Prabhu, an avatara of the sakti of Lord Hari Who sports in the forests of Vraja, has descended in the form of the Gosvami spiritual preceptor. Seeing me in the dark well of worldly existence, he has delivered this humble servant of his."

In the end of his Gita-mala (Siddhi-lalasa), Bhaktivinoda praises his diksa-guru in his manjari-svarupa alongside with Ananga Manjari and Rupa Manjari, submitting his eternal dependence on them.

In this connection, it is also in place to mention that Gaurakisora Das Baba received diksa from Nandakisora Gosvami of Shantipura, and later on bheka from Bhagavata Das Baba. Gaurakisora in turn gave the bheka of an ascetic to Bhaktivinoda.

QUOTE

So, there must be that we have very strong influence of siksya in Gaudiya lineage.

There is certainly a strong influence of siksa, for diksa in itself implies siksa (giving of instructions, transmitting divine knowledge).

However, the parampara (guru-pranali) is traced according to diksa-gurus, despite the fact that there may be one or more influential siksa-gurus in the life of a devotee, for diksa-gurus may be many, whereas diksa-guru is one. Drawing a comprehensive chart of one's siksa-lineage would result in an infinite web of lineages.

Moreover, as is evident from the example of Visvanatha, for each diksa-guru-pranali there is a corresponding siddha-pranali (channel of siddha-dehas) in allegiance to whom the initiate serves the Divine Couple. Hence drawing one's disciplic lineage according to diksa is the only reasonable and scripturally correct way of understanding disciplic lineages in the Gaudiya tradition.

QUOTE

Srila Sridhara Maharaja very clear talk about that:

The precepts of Sridhar Maharaja and Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati are somewhat different from the rest of the Gaudiya tradition in this regard. Hence it will be helpful if we can refer to earlier sources in discussing the subject matter.

QUOTE

It is not a diksa guru parampara, a succession of formal initiating gurus. Diksa, or initiation is more or less a formal thing; the substantial thing is siksa, or spiritual instruction.

As I have demonstrated earlier, drawing from Jiva's Bhakti Sandarbha, diksa is by no means a formality -- to the contrary, the most essential elements for the aspirant's spiritual practice (sadhana) are given at the time of diksa. Of course siksa must be there -- guru-pAdAzrayas tasmAt kRSNa dIkSAdi zikSaNam (BRS 1.2.74) -- to take shelter of the feet of the guru, to receive diksa in Krishna-mantra and to receive adequate instructions, this is the standard in the Gaudiya sampradaya.

All glories to Paramhamsa Universal Illustrious Preceptor His Divine Grace Simha-Acarya Nitya-Lila Pravista Om Vishnupada Ashtottarashata Sri Srimad Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Goswami Thakura Prabhupada! All glories to Sri Sri Guru-Gauranga-Gandharvika-Giridhari!

I just want to ask you: Did Namacharya Srila Haridasa Thakura take diksha from anyone. And if not, why?

QUOTE

Dear Madhuji,thank you for your answer and comments. Could you please describe on what topics teachings of Sridhar Maharaja and Bhaktisidhantha Sarasvati are different from the rest of Gaudiya tradicion.
One more request.Can you please answer why in Gaudiya tradicion we have lineage ( Iskcon, Sridhara Maharaja, Bhaktisidhantha...) where is present siksa lineage in some cases We can understand ,as you previouslu described that many of previous acaryas like Bhaktivinoda, Visvanatha, Narotamma etc had their diksa gurus as we both mentioned, but why in their lineages siksa guru is in lineage, and not diksa guru? (as far as I know)
I just opened A.C Bhaktivedanta's Gita, and Sridhara' Maharaja's Sri Guru and His Grace - in parampara lineage there are many siksa gurus and not diksa ( like Vidyavacaspati.Yadunandana Acarya,Radha Ramana Cakravarti ,Vipin Bihari Gosvami etc}
From my understanding it is clear that siksya is present and siksya gurus are worshiped as acaryas in parampara (in some cases)
Thank you for your time and answers.

All glories, all glories to the Sri Sri Sad-Guru Pranali, Sri Sri Gaurangadeva and Sri Sri Radha Gopinathajiu! All glories to Sri Krishna's jolly pet dogs Vyaghra and Bhramaraka, and all glories to His pet swan Kalasvana! All glories to Daksa and Vicaksana, His two parrots, and also all glories to Srimati's pet parrots Suksmadhi and Subha! And all glories to Her pet elephant Madhuri! And all glories, all glories to Paramaradhya Paramahamsa 108 Radha-Kunda-vasi Mahanta Pandit Sri Srila Ananta Das Babaji Maharaja! And all glories to all glories!

QUOTE

I just want to ask you: Did Namacharya Srila Haridasa Thakura take diksha from anyone. And if not, why?

Thank you for asking, Gita. Namacarya Srila Haridasa Thakura received diksa from Sri Advaita Acarya. The following passage appears in the Prema Vilasa:

advaita prabhur pade loila sarana
tar thai bhakti sastre koilo adhyayana
advaitera sthane tinho hoila diksiti
tin lakho harinama jape diva rati
lakho harinama mane lakho kane sune
lakho nama ucca kori kore sankirtane'
“Haridasa took shelter of Advaita Prabhu’s lotus feet and studied the bhakti sastras under Him. He became initiated by Advaita (diksita) and was chanting three lakhs of harinama day and night. One lakh was in the mind, one softly and one loudly.”

Moreover, in the Advaita Prakasa:

"After instructing Haridasa in this way, Advaita had him shave his head and decorate his body with tilaka and tulasi beads. Advaita had Haridasa dress in kaupina and outer cloth, and then He initiated him in chanting the holy names. Haridasa then began chanting the holy names in a cave on the bank of Ganges. As he became intoxicated with love of God, he became known as the crest jewel amongst the Vaisnavas. Coming to his external consciousness, Haridasa offered his obeisances to Advaita, who blessed him by saying, "May you attain Krishna. Your name is Brahma Haridasa."

In the reference from Advaita Prakasa, there is no mention of diksa, but nevertheless the giving of sampradayika-tilaka and kanthi-mala -- items associated with the ceremony of diksa in the Hari Bhakti Vilasa -- are present. "nama dila prabhu shakti sancariya" -- Giving the Name to him, Advaita Prabhu empowered him.

Dear Balgavi,

QUOTE

Could you please describe on what topics teachings of Sridhar Maharaja and Bhaktisidhantha Sarasvati are different from the rest of Gaudiya tradicion.

There are several differences between the Gaudiya Matha and the tradition, but the most significant ones are their conceptions on (1) Parampara, and (2) Raganuga-bhakti, both of which are radically different from the tradition.

(1) Parampara -- this is already under discussion.

(2) Raganuga-bhakti -- there are various conflicting conceptions in the Gaudiya Matha about eligibility for raganuga-sadhana. Common conceptions are that raganuga-sadhana is only for those who are beyond anartha-nivritti or those who are liberated from the clutches of matter.

QUOTE

One more request.Can you please answer why in Gaudiya tradicion we have lineage ( Iskcon, Sridhara Maharaja, Bhaktisidhantha...) where is present siksa lineage in some cases We can understand ,as you previouslu described that many of previous acaryas like Bhaktivinoda, Visvanatha, Narotamma etc had their diksa gurus as we both mentioned, but why in their lineages siksa guru is in lineage, and not diksa guru? (as far as I know)

If you mean in the lineages of ISKCON and Gaudiya Matha, I have no answer for this one. It was a novelty introduced by Bhaktisiddahanta Sarasvati. Elsewhere in the tradition guru-lineages had always been diksa-lineages.

It is significant to note that many of the personalities who appear in the disciplic description of Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati and his followers have themselves described their disciplic lineage in a different way. None of the predecessors, on whose lives I have briefly elaborated upon earlier in this thread, have described such a lineage for themselves as the one attributed to them in ISKCON and Gaudiya Matha.

This topic has been a matter of concern and disagreement since the very days when Bhaktisiddhanta started his reformist movement. Most of the tradition does not consider this innovation to be orthodox.

QUOTE

I just opened A.C Bhaktivedanta's Gita, and Sridhara' Maharaja's Sri Guru and His Grace - in parampara lineage there are many siksa gurus and not diksa ( like Vidyavacaspati.Yadunandana Acarya,Radha Ramana Cakravarti ,Vipin Bihari Gosvami etc}
From my understanding it is clear that siksya is present and siksya gurus are worshiped as acaryas in parampara (in some cases)

As you may easily understand from the dates I have presented in my earlier post, Narottama never met Visvanatha in person, nor did Jagannatha Das Babaji ever meet Baladeva Vidyabhusana, for they took birth one century apart. It is beyond my comprehension how such a lineage can be called an unbroken guru-pranali. A list of top ten of acaryas we like, that would be all right with everyone I'm sure, but certainly it is not an unbroken disciplic succession.

Certainly siksa-gurus are worshipable, but the guru-pranali (channel of gurus) is traced according to diksa. Take the example of Narottama: He studied under Jiva, but in his works we find rather exclusive praise of Lokanatha as his guru, though Jiva is also acknowledged on occasion. The essential function of the siksa-guru is to assist the aspirant in his inner service to his guru-pranali in their manjari-forms (siddha-pranali). Thus the siksa-guru through his instructions contributes to the significance of the diksa-guru.

All glories to Sri Sri Guru-Gauranga-Gandharvika-Giridhari! All glories to Paramhamsa Sri Srimad Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Goswami Thaukura!

I will give brief descriptions on the personalities of Srila Bhaktivinod Thakura and Srila Prabhupada Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswat Goswami Thakura Prabhupada.

Sri Bhaktivinoda Thakura: According to the pancaratrika-guru-parampara, the diksa-guru of Sri Bhaktivinoda Thakura is Sri Vipina Vihari Gosvami, who is situated in the pancaratrika-parampara of Sri Sri Jahnava Thakurani. From our other viewpoint, no one can deny that Sri bhaktivinoda Thakura's life is imprinted with the stamp of Srila Jannnatha Dasa Babaji Maharaja's anugatya (guidance). Vaisnava Sarvabhauma Srila Janannatha Maharaja is a disciple of the famous Madhusudana Dasa Babaji Maharaja in the parampara of Sri Baladeva Vidyabhusana. It is not necessary to say that Vaisnava Sarvabhauma Srila Jagannatha Dasa Babaji Maharaja is superior to Sri Vipina Vihari Gosvami in tattva-jnana, bhajana-siksa, etc.

Sri Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura: According to pancaratrika-guru-parampara Sri Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura's diska-guru is Sri Gaura Kisora Dasa Babaji Maharaja who is a descendant in the pancaratrika-guru-parampara from Sri Jahnava Thakurani. Srila Babaji Maharaja accepted the attire of a renunciate (vesa) from a disciple of Srila Jagannatha Dasa Babaji Maharaja named Sri Bhagavata Dasa Babaji Maharaja. Thus by bhagavata-parampara, Sri Gaurakisora Dasa Babaji Maharaja is in the branch of Srila Jagannatha Dasa Babaji Maharaja. According to this, by pancaratrika-parampara Srila Sarasvati Thakura is in the parampara of Sri Jahnava Thakurani, and in bhagavata-parampara he has been connected with Srila Jagannatha Dasa Babaji Maharaja.
It is clear from Srila Sarasvati Prabhupada's life history that Sri Bhaktivinoda Thakura's practices, precepts and bhajana-pranali were his very life and soul, and that he made the fulfilment of the Thakura's aspirations the sole aim and object of his life. Thus his guru in bhagavata-parampara was Sri Bhaktivinoda Thakura, whose guru was Srila Jagannatha Dasa Babaji Maharaja. Therefore there is not even the slightest justification for raising a finger against the guru-parampara of Srila Sarasvati Thakura, the Founder-Acarya of the All India Sri Gaudiya Matha and Sri Gaudiya Mission Society. Several additional facts are worthy of our consideration on the subject of pancaratrika-guru-parampara and the bhagavata-parampara -
1) The guru of lower rasa
If a pancaratrika-diska-guru in his siddha-svarupa (constitutional spiritual form) is situated in a rasa which lower than that of his disciple, how can he give bhajana-siksa pertaining to the more elevated rasa? In this situation, the disciple must go elsewhere and take shelter of a Vaisnava who is qualified to give the apporpriate superior guidance. For example, Sri Hrdaya Caitanya is an associate in sakhya-rasa in Krsna lila, whereas his disciple Sri Syamananda Prabhu (Duhkhi Krsna Dasa) is an associate in madhura-rasa. Therefore Sri Hrdaya Caitanya personally sent Duhkhi Krsna Dasa to Srila Jiva Gosvami to receive higher bhajana-siksa pertaining to madhura-rasa.

2) The less qualified guru
It may happen that guru and disciple in pancaratrika-guru-parampara are in the same rasa, but that the guru is not so highly qualified as the disciple. Under such circumstances, the disciple must go and take shelter of an uttama vaisnava for higher bhagana-siksa, and this Vaisnava will be called his guru in bhagavata-parampara.
We can see from these two considerations that the pancaratrika process has some inherent defects, whereas the bhagavata-parampara is completely free from these defects, and is flawless in all respects.

3) Sriman Mahaprabhu is not pancaratrika-guru of anyone. All members of the Gaudiya Sampradaya accept Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu as jagad guru, and consider themselves to be his followers. however, on what basis do they maintain this conviction? There is no recorded account anywhere of Sriman Mahaprabhu giving diksa-mantra to anyone. This means that Sriman Mahaprabhu is not the guru of anyone else in pancaratrika-parampara, although He Himself is a disciple of Sri Isvara Puri. Therefore, if the Gaudiya Vaisnava community accepts the anugatya and discipleship of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, it can only be on one basis, and that basis is bhagavata-parampara.

4) All Gaudiya Vaisnavas are rupanuga on basis of bhagavata-parampara only. Each and every Gaudiya Vaisnava is proud to call himself rupanuga. But let us consider this point: How many disciples did Sri Rupa Gosvami initiate by the pancaratrika method? The fact is that Sri Jiva Gosvami is his one and only diksa disciple, and he himself is not actually a diksa disciple of Sri Caitanyha Mahaprabhu. So on what basis do members of the Gaudiya Vaisnava community accept Sri Rupa Gosvami as their guru/ How is it possible to be a follower of Sri rupa Gosvami and at the same time be a follower of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu? Even Sri Sanatana Gosvami, who is the siksa-guru of Sri Rupa Gosvami, has no second thoughts about calling himself rupanuga. The basis of all these examples is one - bhagavata-parampara. It is only on the basis of bhagavata-parampara that Sri Rupa Gosvami is the disciple of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, and that the Gaudiya Vaisnava community considers Sri Rupa Gosvami to be their guru.
Who is the pancaratrika-disa-guru of srila Krsnadasa Kaviraja Gosvami? We cannot say, because he has not mentioned the name of his pancaratrika-disa-guru in any of his literatures, but he has named his siksa-gurus in Sri Caitanya-caritamrta, Adi 1.37:
ei chaya guru, siksa-guru ye amara
tan-sabara pada-padme koti namaskara
"These six gurus (the Six Gosvamis of Vrndavana) are my siksa-gurus and I offer countless obeisances at their lotus feet."
At the end of each chapter os Sri Caitanya-caritamrta he has written:
sri-rupa-raghunatha-pade yara asa
caitanya caritamrta kahe krsna dasa

In these statements he has accepted Sri Rupa Gosvami and Sri Raghunatha Dasa Gosvami as his main siksa-gurus. Thus he has also accepted them as gurus on the basis of bhagavata-parampara.
From these facts it becomes thoroughly obvious that bhagavata-parampara, which includes pancaratrika-parampara, always shines forth brilliantly. What can we say, then, about those who ignore these facts, about those who cast aspersions on the guru-pranali of Sri Baladeva Vidyabhusana, Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura and Sri Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura, and about those who doubt that they are rupanuga Vaisnavas? Such people are certainly staunch opponents of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu and secret agents of Kali.

QUOTE

According to pancaratrika-guru-parampara Sri Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura's diska-guru is Sri Gaura Kisora Dasa Babaji Maharaja who is a descendant in the pancaratrika-guru-parampara from Sri Jahnava Thakurani.

Dear Gita,
1) Why is it if Bhaktisiddhanta took diksa from Gaura Kishor Das Babaji, then why is he not seen wearing the tilak of the Nityananda parivar, of which his Guru should have given him?

2) Do you know what the Nityananda parivar tilak looks like?

3) Why doesn't he reveal his param Guru to his disciples for them to respect and honor, as done today in ISKCON and Gaudiya Math--respecting the Guru of the Guru of the Guru?

4) Why did he take the dress of a sannyasi without having received blessings from a Vaisnava to do so?

5) Did you know that since the time of Rupa and Sanatana Goswami, no follower of Gaudiya Vaisnavism took sannyas?

Radhapada Das

QUOTE

I will give brief descriptions on the personalities of Srila Bhaktivinod Thakura and Srila Prabhupada Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswat Goswami Thakura Prabhupada.

Dear Gita,

It is not you who gives the descriptions. What you have presented is excerpts from Narayan Maharaja's "Prabandha Pancakam -- Five Essential Essays", second chapter.

From your very first post I noted that you are a follower of Narayan Maharaja.

I was once a disciple of Narayan Maharaja, but left him for good after extensively studying the slander he leveled towards several sincere and highly advanced Vaishnavas outside of his lineage. The book from which you have quoted contributed significantly to my decision of rejecting him, coupled with the infamous lecture "Boycott the Sahajiya Babajis" broadcast all over the internet. During the times when I reflected on these matters and studied his writings, as well as the writings and history of the rest of the sampradaya, I compiled reviews of the aforementioned lecture, as well as of this very chapter of Prabandha Pancakam from which you have quoted.

Instead of flooding the forum with the lengthy document (17 pages), I have uploaded the text in pdf-format for downloading. You can download it by right clicking on the link below and selecting "Save As...".

Pancaratrika and Bhagavata Parampara

Should anyone be interested in reading the review of the "Boycott the Sahajiya Babajis" lecture, you may download it from here.

As the discussion proceeds, I'd request everyone to avoid quoting lengthy chunks of text, but rather only quoting the relevant passages and making concice comments to keep the thread readable.

At this point, I should warn you (particularly Gita) that should any doubts awaken in your mind in regards to the subject matters discussed here, it may well be that you will not receive adequate answers in response to your queries. I have experienced it myself, and a number of others have experienced the same -- the senior followers of BV Narayan warning others about the doubter, imposing feelings of guilt upon him for doubting the legitimacy of their lineage, and in the end digging up every other fault you have and pointing to it as the reason for your doubts and the consequent spiritual disaster.

All the best.

QUOTE(Radhapada @ Aug. 24 2002,15:12)

QUOTE

All glories to Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura! All glories to Sri Guru-Gauranga-Gandharvika-Giridhari!

Refutation of Allegation #1 made by Radhapada: Has Caitanya Mahaprabhu ever taken the customs of the Mayavadi Sannyasis, since he took sannyas from Keshava Bharati of Sankara Sampradaya.

2) It would have been better that you had scanned the tilak and post it on your reply, rather than asking me regarding the cognizance of it.

3) Because he found Bhaktivinod Thakura to be more effective in spreading the message of Krishna Conciousness and Chaitanya Mahaprabhu all over the world according to the time, place, and circumstance. Remember, conservativeness is not the nature of Gaudiya Sampradaya; rather, it is the broadminded views either authorized by the shastra, or revealed by a bonafide acarya which fit into the time, place, and circumstance for spreading the message of Sriman Mahaprabhu effectively in this rapidly changing modern world, which are the true symptoms of the Gaudiya Sampradaya.

4)He had blessings from Srila Gaura Kishor Dasa Babaji in the form of a dream. Even, great paramhamsa like Vamidasa Babaji was very friendly with Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura. And, beware, a paramhamsa (actually, nayana-manjari) from the birth does not need any blessings from anyone. He already got blessings when he bowed down in front of Sri Jagannatha in Puri in the form of a garland suddenly falling from sri Jagannatha to on him, when he was just a small child of maybe 3 years.And, if you still have doubts, then let me tell you this: Krishna Sahkti Vina Nahe Tara Pravartana: what the sarasvati lineage of the Sri Gaudiya Sampradaya has done to spread the message of Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu since 1923 to the present day, cannot be compared to the contribution made by any other branch, (it doesn't mean that they are not bonafide, but, rather, even they may be bonafide, still if Krishna wants some other paramahamsa vaishnava to do the preaching work then, no one can hinder his preaching, noone.) Do not make the mistake that Sahajiyas make unto the lotus feet of Baladeva Vidyabhusana Prabhu, and Sripada Jiva Goswami. Vaishnava Aparadha is the biggest of all the offenses. do you not remember that day when other brothers of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Thakura burned the body of Sri Bhaktivinod Thakura considering him to be a mere mortal father and not the Kamal-manjari, when Bhaktisiddhanta was late during the rain and the heavy traffic on the road when he wanted to come to Calcutta from Mayapura to put this Saptama gosvami into the Samadhi. Do you not remember that regrettable day?
5)o my dear foolish brother, why do you still pretend to criticize srila Sarasvati Thakura like this? Not everyone is like Rupa or Sanatana nowadays. Babaji dress is a paramhamsa dress, whereas sannyasi dress can either indicate the kutichaka, bahudaka, hamsa, or paramhamsa stages. To associate with women while wearing the white dress of a paramhamsa babaji, (as what the babajis were doing at the time of srila saraswati thakura) is a shame. that is why once Srila Gaura Kishor Dasa babaji maharaja went to bhaktivinod thakura weaing the opulent dress of a grihastha , just to make him distinct from the bogus babajis. Since sannyasa dress indicates all kinds of sadhakas, those who have reached the uttama adhikari stage or not, there is no harm in giving it to anyone and everyone (provided that they are really having renunciation from inside, but are still not perfect in spiritual life, i.a. not attained manjari svarupa). This was the reason that Srila Chakravarti thakura never adapted the goswami title his whole life, even though he was qualified to have it, because the jati-gosais were misusing it, even though being the grihasthas. Still, Saraswati Thakura, even though formally and externally only, having an inferior dress of a sannyasi, gave thirteen trija or babaji initiations to qualified candidates, Siddha Akinchana Krishnadasa babaji being the most famous among them. Giving the elevated gopi mantra of sannyas and babaji (trija) diksha or initiation to anyone and everyone is not the mood of srila Kaviraja goswami. Is that day somewhere in 1931 gone when Sri vipina vihari goswami called sri ragunatha dasa goswami (rati-manjari) to be a sudra by birth and thus proclaimed that he should get the blessings of a brahmana by birth. This was the reason saraswati thakura didn't become much interested in him. Try to understand. Try to be a saragrahi and not a barabahi. Alas, afterall, O Radhapada Prabhu, what difference it makes to wear either the white cloth or the saffron cloth in relation to the Suddha bhakti, when evern, our Gaurasundara Mahaprabhu wore it? krishne matirastu!

QUOTE

5)o my dear foolish brother, why do you still pretend to criticize srila Sarasvati Thakura like this?

Gita, this is a Vaishnava forum. In Vaishnava forums while discussing, we do not insult others.

Discuss the subject matter of the thread in a dispassionate way and respect everyone's contributions. Do not come here to rage, calling others names, trying to establish your own conclusion no matter what.

I will warn you twice. This is the first one. The third one will go unexcused.

Thank you for considering.

QUOTE

1) Has Caitanya Mahaprabhu ever taken the customs of the Mayavadi Sannyasis, since he took sannyas from Keshava Bharati of Sankara Sampradaya.

Yes, he shaved his head including his sikha and dressed in the robes of a mayavadi sannyasin. He also gave up his brahmin-thread.

QUOTE

2) It would have been better that you had scanned the tilak and post it on your reply, rather than asking me regarding the cognizance of it.

This was a simple question from Radhapada. Do you know how it looks like or not?

QUOTE

And, beware, a paramhamsa (actually, nayana-manjari) from the birth does not need any blessings from anyone.

This is a very subjective statement. Besides, no living entity is independent from the blessings of perfected saints.

Do understand that you have your predecessors whom you revere as paramahamsas, and likewise we have ours? How can you prove that someone was a paramahamsa to others? Your arguments:

a) Even, great paramhamsa like Vamidasa Babaji was very friendly with Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura.

Saints are the friends of all living entities.

By the way, did you know that Vamsidas worshiped Gaura in Gaura-nagari bhava? See the biography of Vamsidas for songs he composed in nagari-bhava.

b) He already got blessings when he bowed down in front of Sri Jagannatha in Puri in the form of a garland suddenly falling from sri Jagannatha to on him, when he was just a small child of maybe 3 years.

Garlands have fallen to quite a few people, including the lowly person who is writing this post. The Lord does not show his kindness to paramahamsas only.

c) And, if you still have doubts, then let me tell you this: Krishna Sahkti Vina Nahe Tara Pravartana:

Ramdas Babaji spread the chanting of Bhaja Nitai Gaura Radhe Shyam Japa Hare Krishna Hare Rama far and wide, influencing many more people than Bhaktisiddhanta. According to your logic, you should accept Ramdas Baba as a higher authority than Bhaktisiddhanta.

d) what the sarasvati lineage of the Sri Gaudiya Sampradaya has done to spread the message of Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu since 1923 to the present day, cannot be compared to the contribution made by any other branch

Please do study the Gaudiya history outside the Gaudiya Matha a bit, you may come to other conclusions. Gaudiya Matha has a following of maybe some tens of thousands. All in all, there are millions of Gaudiya Vaishnavas. This means that even if there were a hundred thousand Gaudiya Math people, it would only form an insignificant percentage of the Gaudiya tradition.

QUOTE

Babaji dress is a paramhamsa dress

This is a common claim from those of Gaudiya Math, but do you have any evidence to back up this claim?

QUOTE

To associate with women while wearing the white dress of a paramhamsa babaji, (as what the babajis were doing at the time of srila saraswati thakura) is a shame.

Is this again the aggregate of all babajis? Who was doing?

And tell me about all the horrendous things all these saffron-clad men have done over the decades!

QUOTE

Is that day somewhere in 1931 gone when Sri vipina vihari goswami called sri ragunatha dasa goswami (rati-manjari) to be a sudra by birth and thus proclaimed that he should get the blessings of a brahmana by birth. This was the reason saraswati thakura didn't become much interested in him.

This story is a complete fabrication. This incident is told to have taken place at Radha Kund. However, Vipin Vihari Gosvami was nowhere nearby during those years. In fact, he departed from this world in 1919.

So let us tone down the rumors and try to rather discuss the facts.

All glories to srila Saraswati thakura. all glories to Gandharvika-giridhari!

Dear Madhava Prabhu and Radhapada Prabhu,
I do not have any personal hatred towards radhanatha prabhu, but, I could not see Sri Varshabhanavi Devi Dayita Dasa Prabhu being criticized. if, still anyone feels that i am a wretched person, which i am, just give me all the ill names. I am like a dog. I have no quality. I consider Sri Anantadasa Babaji, Sri Lalita prasad thakura and Srila Vimala Prasad Thakura to be the devotees of krishna far superior to me. But, what nayana-manjari has done, who has the power to fathom? I want to lick the dust of the lotus feet of Sri radhaoada prabhu and sri madhavananda prabhu if they feel or not feel offended by me.Afterall, whad does Bhaktirasamrita sindhu tells us regarding hearing about the chatisement of pure devotees of krishna? But, alas, my heart shatters as I reflect on my chastizement of sri radhapada prabhu, who is so much senior to me in every respect. what should i do. May be just say what you want to say without saying anything to anyone execpt for one's own mind, re dusta mana, tumi kishera vaishnava? - srila bhaktisiddhanta saraswati thakura prabhupada

QUOTE

If you mean in the lineages of ISKCON and Gaudiya Matha, I have no answer for this one. It was a novelty introduced by Bhaktisiddahanta Sarasvati

Dear Madhuji, Gita,,Radhapada and others, I offer you my dandavats. There are several topics that I would like to discuss.

First of all I want to remember us all that words of pure vaishnavas are themselves as good as the sastra and that they are highest authirity. Guru-mukhya padma vakya...and latter on it is said dharitvena samasta-sastrair. That is true.
Lord Krsna said that also in Bhagavatam:
acaryam mam vijaniyam navamanyeta karhicit
na martya-buddhyasuyeta sarva-deva-mayo guruh
"One should know the Acharya as Myself and never disrespect him in anyway. One should not envy him, thinking him an ordinary man, for he is the representative of all the demigods." (SB.11.17.27)»

There are meny quotation like this. So we can see that the words of such great acaryas like Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura, Srila Bhaktisidhantha Sarasvati, Srila Sridhara Maharaja, Srila A.C.Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada are not words and thinking of a ordinary man.Lineage that we can see in case of Bhaktisidhantha is not act of ordinary man, and it is not novelty, as you said.

At the beginning of this discussion there was question what is bhagavata and pancaratrika parampara. We all know that decent of the Absolute Truth came to us through the chain, succession of gurus, of pure devotees. Bhagavat parampara, is that chain of pure devotees, but it is not physically succession. No. I will try to explain on few examples.
The most essential scripture for all Gaudiya Vaisnavas is Bhagavatam . Bhagabatam rasam alayam! But, we can see that the history of Bhagavatam is history of bhagavata or siksa parampara! Krsna , at the beginning spoke to Lord Brahma, krsna hoite catur vyuha, and later on “brahma hoite naradera mati”. Then Narada said Bhagavatam to Vyasa. Great Sukadeva Gosvami had never received diksa, but he is great narrator of Bhagavatam. And it was just beginning Sukadeva,Pariksit, Suta, Saunaka… There was no diksa. So transcendental knowledge is above diksa, it is transcendental.. (I am not saying that diksa is not important, it is of course very important).
But we can see, the history of Bhagavatam is history of siksa parampara.

This is just one example, but we can see – bhagavata parampara. Just in the Bhagavatam history. That is fact. It's most important thing. Diksa is more or less formal thing. ; the substantial thing is siksa, or spiritual instruction. That is true. We can see it in lives of such a great personalities like Bhaktivinoda, or Bhaktisidhantha.

Parampara is not based on material connection. That is false opinion. Just like example of Srila Baladeva Vidyabhusana. He had so great contribution to Gaudiya Sampradaya. But he was not a member of Gaudiya sampradaya by diksa! He was a member of Madhva sampradaya, but we all know His great commentaries on the Vedanta Sutra. There was no diksa connection, but he is one of the greatest acaryas in our sampradaya. He also wrote commentaries on Bhagavatam and Sat Sandarbha.

So, that is glory of Bhagavata, such was Bhaktivinoda,Bhaktisidhantha, Srila Sridhara Maharaja, or Srilla Prabhupada.
There are hundreds of examples. We all know Brhad bhagavatamrta and the story about Gopa Kumara. He was chanting gopala mantra and on that way he was making progress.AS far as I can remember there was brahmana (karma-kanda), great king, Indra, Lord Brahma,Siva, great devotee Prahlada, Hanuman…and at and gopis. And what is interesting! All of them have their parampara! Brahma or Siva parampara etc. But Gopa Kumara didn’t take diksa from any of those paramparas. So we can see the example of siksa parampara, bhagavata parampara.

There are thousands of examples. Kiba vipra, kiba nyasi sudra kene naya, yei krsna-tattva-vetta, sei 'guru' haya Thoose are words of Lord Caitanya. We can see that he show us that practically.We all read Caitanya caritamrta. We all read discussion between Lord Caitanya and Ramananda Raya. It was most confidential talk. Lord Gauranga enjoyed so much in presence of Ramananda Raya. But he was not guru, he was not in guru parampara!

That is essencial principal of transcendence, as we can see from history of Bhagavatam, as we can see from Mahaprabhu’s life, life of Ramananda Raya, Baladeva Vidhyabhusana ,Gopa Kumar and other examples.

Therefore, I must say the lineage of pure bhakti, as I can see from so many examples is not physical, diksa lineage. So lineage of Bhaktisidhantha is not novelty.It is transcendental system that originally came from Krsna- tene brahma hrda ya adi-kavaye.

QUOTE

I do not have any personal hatred towards radhanatha prabhu, but, I could not see Sri Varshabhanavi Devi Dayita Dasa Prabhu being criticized.

If you cannot tolerate discussions which analyze the innovations of Bhaktisiddhanta in the light of the Gaudiya tradition's history and precepts, then I suggest you don't open provoking threads at Raganuga Discussions. "The Concept of Bhaktisiddhanta vs. The Rest of the Tradition", if you open a thread like that, what do you expect? We have not said any ill words about him. Only we dispassionately examine what you post regarding his precepts and compare it to the orthodox Gaudiya tradition as we have learned from our predecessors and the writings of the Gosvamis.

Please read this article first:
Sri Srimad Bhaktivedanta Narayana Maharaja

BOYCOTT THE SAHAJIYA-BABAJIS

(Holland, June 10, 2001, am)

http://www.vnn.org/world/WD0107/WD27-6844.html

[edit -- Madhava: Please don't post these eternally long articles. If it's not written by you, just post a link to the source and anyone who likes can go and read it. Otherwise attach a file to your posting.]

QUOTE

First of all I want to remember us all that words of pure vaishnavas are themselves as good as the sastra and that they are highest authirity. Guru-mukhya padma vakya...

Dear Balgavi,

You must understand that people have varying perceptions of individuals in this world. Whom one considers paramahamsa, another considers a mediocre devotee, and whom one considers a beginning devotee, another considers a siddha.

Therefore when we discuss Gaudiya siddhanta between Vaishnavas of different lineages, we must refer to a common epistemic basis -- the writings of mutually accepted acaryas. Just as I cannot just quote Pandit Ananta Dasji's words and demand that you accept them as the absolute and final word in transcendence (or otherwise gurusu nara-matir...naraki sah), so you cannot demand the same from us in regards to Bhaktisiddhanta. I trust you understand.

As far as various examples of initiation go, we must first and foremost consider the example of the Gosvamis. There are innumerable traditions with a great variety of differing vicara, and they are entitled for it. For us, as Gaudiya Vaishnavas, followers of Sri Caitanyadeva, we must obey the commands of the Gosvamis whom He empowered to lay down the law and standards to be observed.

You have mentioned the example of the parampara in the Bhagavata. To begin with, Brahmaji was initiated into the Gayatri-mantra by Sri Krishna, this is a very famous example. Brahma initiated his son Narada, and Narada bestowed pancaratrika-diksa upon Vyasadeva. However, Vyasa's son Suka Muni never received diksa, though he taught the Bhagavata. If you can stay in your mother's womb for sixteen years and walk around naked without provoking anyone, you can do the same. There is no present-day parampara descending from Suka Muni as far as I know.

QUOTE

So lineage of Bhaktisidhantha is not novelty.

Of course there have always been instructing gurus and they have had disciples. The question is according to which standard is the guru-parampara drawn? It has been already pointed out on a number of occasions that in the Gaudiya tradition, it has always been according to diksa.

QUOTE(GITGOVINDA @ Aug. 24 2002,17:27)

Please read this article first:
Sri Srimad Bhaktivedanta Narayana Maharaja

BOYCOTT THE SAHAJIYA-BABAJIS

(Holland, June 10, 2001, am)

http://www.vnn.org/world/WD0107/WD27-6844.html

Dear Gita,

Do you read our postings very carefully? Earlier in this thread I posted a link to a review I once wrote of this lecture. You can download it by clicking on the link below. Please let me know when you've read it.

Review of Boycott the Sahajiya Babajis

I suggest we only discuss concerns which are not already covered in my essay examining this lecture. For the most part, the allegations Narayan Maharaja presents are false or vague, he presents allegations against non-existing issues while condemning the Babajis. In my document, I have reviewed the allegations of Narayan Maharaja and the teachings of Radha Kunda's present Mahanta Pandit Ananta Das Baba side by side to help everyone see how they are not a valid object for the critique presented in the lecture provided to us by Gita.

PS. I was personally present to attend the aforementioned lecture. It was one of the main events which provoked me to study deeper the Gaudiya tradition and the object of his critique.

QUOTE(GITGOVINDA @ Aug. 24 2002,16:45)

I hear or read non stop from some people this statement.Does anybody know anything about this statement?Seems like many cling on onto that.Is that true or not?

Regarding your comments Gita, i am aspiring to be a devotee, and i really have tried to understand Bhagavata parampara as presented by Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati,but by reading your posting it really makes me wonder why do i still want to be even in any association with devotees representing Gaudiya Matha or Iskcon.Because out of your postings you appear like very angry follower of GM or Iskcon.

You have to ask yourself maybe;Why am i so disturbed?Do i really want to be so angry at vaisnavas or other people from different lineages or Maths,because my organization,math or society is imposing such mentality on me?Do i want to think,read or hear rationally or just blindly accept statements and teachings which others are imposing on me?Can i discriminate according to my understanding of what i have read,hear or see?Or do i just want to be part of some big (or small) organization or society which is making claims that only what they are talking or teaching is the correct.

I really respect books and some very nice and uplifting teachings in GM/Iskcon,but this behaviour in many of their followers like:We are the best!,this behaviour is not for modern times and belongs to dark history.

Thank you,

Dear Madhava, I respect your answer.
As far as I can see this discusion can go forever. I wrote my understanding before and I think that there are numerous exsamples to support it. I trylu belive what I wrote.
You have also many exsamples to support your points. So that is nature of truth, just like diamond, two persons see diamond from diferent side.
You think that diksa is most important, I think that siksa is most important. Just like Ram devotee's they have their love for Ramacandra. And in Vraja Jaya Radhe Shyam, and Krsna Balarama.
I just want to say that there are alweys diferences. That is nature of spirit, nature of Absolute. Let us all together try our best, to whatewer lineage we may belong to develop higher understanding and to develop love for God.
I will not take any comments more about this topic. What I have to say,I said in letter before. It seem to me that it's become to "hot" between Radhapadji, Gita and you.
vancha-kalpatararubhyas ca...
Accept my dandavats.
It's 2.00 A.M now (In my country) I wish you many tolerancy.
Let's us see simmilaritiies,not differences.

QUOTE(kanai @ Aug. 24 2002,17:56)

QUOTE(GITGOVINDA @ Aug. 24 2002,16:45)

I hear or read non stop from some people this statement.Does anybody know anything about this statement? Seems like many cling on on that.Is that true or not?

A quote from an article by Bhaktarupa Das, in which he responds to several common allegations against Vipin Vihari Gosvami:

>> "(7) Bhaktivinoda Thakura did for sometime show formal respect to Bipin Bihari Goswami. But when the Goswami disrespected Srila Raghunatha dasa Goswami by thinking that he can give blessings to Raghunatha dasa, the prayojana-acarya, because Raghunatha dasa was from a 'lower caste', the Thakura distanced himself more from Bipin Bihari Goswami."

The evidence for this supposed statement by Bipin Bihari Goswami about Raghunath Das Goswami is also missing. There is evidence, however, for a statement of this type being made by one disciple of Bipin Bihari Goswami, a young zamindar by the name of Choudhary Jadabendranandan. Perhaps this got twisted into a rumor, which has now become a "fact" due to being put in writing. Since Bipin Bihari Goswami spoke strongly at the Midnapur debate that vaisnavas were superior than brahmanas, this supposed statement becomes even more doubtful." <<

You can find the full article attached to this letter.

Attachment: vipina_vihari.pdf

QUOTE(balgavi @ Aug. 24 2002,18:06)

Let us all together try our best, to whatever lineage we may belong to develop higher understanding, and to develop love for God.

Let us see similarities,not differences.

Thank you,Balgavi for this nice statements.

QUOTE

You think that diksa is most important, I think that siksa is most important. Just like Ram devotee's they have their love for Ramacandra. And in Vraja Jaya Radhe Shyam, and Krsna Balarama.
I just want to say that there are alweys diferences. That is nature of spirit, nature of Absolute. Let us all together try our best, to whatewer lineage we may belong to develop higher understanding and to develop love for God.

I appreciate your views, Balgavi. As you may have noted, generally our board is very peaceful and conflict-free, and we are absorbed in sweet hari katha. Sometimes people come for a visit and provoke discussions about differences between various lineages, as you may see from the original post in this thread. It is unclear to me why Gita started this discussion, since he/she obviously knew that Raganuga.Com is affiliated with traditional Gaudiya raganuga lineages which do have conceptions which differ from the Sarasvata line. Perhaps he/she wants to save us or convert us, I do not know. It is evident by now that he/she did not open this thread to learn about the concept of parampara in the classical raganuga tradition, which is what we (try to) represent our level best, but rather to challenge our vicara. I wonder why people start these crusades against others. Let everyone be happy wherever they are -- and let them be there if they have different conceptions, instead of mixing with everyone and trying to make the whole world agree with them. Some fortunate people have the capacity for being able to extract the nectar from everywhere without getting into quarrels.

It may not have become clear earlier, but the discussion was not about which one is more important, diksa or siksa -- rather it was about according to which one of them are disciplic lineages drawn. Of course we can all undestand that diksa without siksa -- if such a thing exists, that is -- is more or less a formality, and the absorption of divine wisdom is the essence of the dynamics in a guru and a disciple.

Dear Gita,
Thanks for your compliment of calling me 'brother'. I wasn't offending BS just bringing up contraversal issues which I believe any objective thinker would consider, especially if they have studied Goswami granthas, and in my particular case, lived in Vraja dhama some years, left ISKCON, to take diksa and practice raganuga bhakti in pranali. It is a fact that there is a lot of mystique surrounding BS that would naturally make one cautious about accepting everything he said and is said about him. That's life. For those that have never known anything before, or for those who accept 100% everything in the Gaudiya Math/ISKCON, then it appears as a great thing what BS and the Gaudiya Math has done.

Balgavi keeps trying to hammer his point about siksa sampradaya over diksa sampradaya, but I don't accept it. Somehow or other there is this misconception that outside of Gaudiya Math/ISKCON one gets diksa and its finished, I take my mantras, bye, bye. No siksa. Well, from my personal experience, I got more relevent siksa the four years in pranali than the twenty years of being in ISKCON, doing seva, preaching, reading all the books and reading Gaudiya Math literature as well. Siksa can be inspiriing, but it remains theoritical, unless one has recieved the EMPOWERED DIKSA MANTRAS and is receiving handed down instructions in bhajan, externally and internally. I think you would like to believe that siksa sampradaya is superior, but I have the experience it is not. The siksa sampradaya doesn't reveal the ekadash bhava, though they claim they do, in some point in time. They never gave me the mantras that I now have. They never helped me understand rasa tattva properly, asta kalina lila, etc.

Gita, you say that Bhaktisiddhanta didn't need blessings from anyone. Maybe he didn't.

tomara sakti vinu ei jive nahe vani
tumi sakti diya kohao heno anumani
prabhu kohe—prayage ihara hoilo milana
ihara gune ihate amara tusta hoilo mana
madhura prasanna ihara kavya salankara
aiche kavitva vinu nahe rasera pracara
sabe krpa kori ihare deho ei vara
vraja lila prema rasa varne nirantara

This individual soul (Rupa Goswami) can never speak like that without being empowered by You (Sri Caitanya). Hence, I suppose that he speaks with Your power.” The Master said, “When I met him at Prayaga My mind was pleased with his qualities. I am very pleased with his sweet poetry with all its embellishments; without such poetry there can be no preaching of rasa. Everyone should be merciful to him and bless him with this boon – let him always describe the loving flavors of Vraja-lila!

However, if Vaisnava blessings are good for Sri Rupa Goswami, why not for anyone else?

Radhapada Das

QUOTE(Madhava @ Aug. 24 2002,18:18)

. Some fortunate people have the capacity for being able to extract the nectar from everywhere without getting into quarrels.

Nice quote Madhavaji,

That is a true that would be better as rule than exception...

Brahma is the spiritual master of the universe. He is the first person in the disciplic succession. For this reason, Srila Bhaktivinode Thakura said that we belong to the Brahma-Sampradaya. All the Vaishnavas schools will be joined together within the Brahma-Sampradaya.So the original spiritual master of the disciplic succession is Brahma; he is the guru of us all.

sri-svarupa-raya-sanga-gambhirantya-lilanam
dvadasabda-banhi-garba-vipralambha-silanam
radhikadhirudha-bhava-kanti-krishna-kunjaram
prema-dhama-devam eva-naumi-goura-sundaram...

" Diving deep into the reality of His own beauty and sweetnees, Krishna stole the mood of Radharani and, garbing Himself in Her brilliant luster,appeared as Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu. For the last twelve years of His manifest pastime, He was deeply absorbed in the mood of union and separation and shared His heart's inner feelings with His most confidential devotees. In the agony of separation from Krishna, volcanic eruptions of ecstasy flowed from His heart, and His teachings, known as Siksastakam, appeared from His lips like streams of golden lava. I fall at the feet of Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, the Golden Volcano of Divine Love "
Swami B.R. Sridhar

" The love and affection that the residents of Vraja feel for Krishna is natural and spontaneous. The love that Krishna feels for them is similarly natural and spontaneous. We take up the chanting of the Holy Names in the hope that we may develop the transcendental greed that allows us to purshase a consciousness imbued with the divine taste of devotion to Krishna. krishna-bhakti-rasa-bhavita matih. We wish to develop this divine geed. "

Srila Bhakti Promode Puri Gosvami Maharaj's conversation about " the mercy of Sri Radhika "

I have mentioned the above prayer and instructions of these two great personalities in the mood of reconize what they did for me and for many others that "at that very moment when there was nothing else but Iskcon for one to be considered a devotee. At that stage, Books like The Golden Volcano Of Divine Love and later on The Heart Of Krishna came in one's life, like if Sri Krishna Himself was revealing His presence within a Kunja"
But I can not forget to reconize those days when I first joined the Iskcon temple, the exemple could be compared as: someone in the desert realizing that the Oasis was just feel steps away, and that was after a long travel in the middle of that hot place.

Just to be short I consider that the exemple of Gopal Kumar is perfect to illustrate our journey towards the infinity beauty and sweetness of Sri Radhika's smille face, when meeting Her beloved Sri Krishna in the Kunjas of Vridavana forest.

Lord Krishna said to Uddhava:

" One should neither praise nor condemn the acts of others, all of which are the result of their situation within nature. Rather, he should remain aware of the single, unified character of the universe, which is a product of the combination of matter and spirit"
(S.B. 11.28.2)

Your servant
Harisaran das " PEACE... "

:

QUOTE

" One should neither praise nor condemn the acts of others, all of which are the result of their situation within nature. Rather, he should remain aware of the single, unified character of the universe, which is a product of the combination of matter and spirit"
(S.B. 11.28.2)

Nice verse!

We should make a distinction however between condemning the acts of others and what is the conclusions of the bhakti sastras presented by the Goswamis.

prabhu ajnaya kaila saba sastrera vicara
vrajera nigudha bhakti karila pracara

The Goswamis carried out the preaching work of devotional service on the basis of an analytical study of all the confidential Vedic literatures. This was in compliance with the order of the Master (Sri Caitanya). Thus one can understand the most confidential devotional service of Vrindavan. (C.C. Madhya-lila 1.34)

sri caitanya mano ‘bhistam sthapitam yena bhutale
so’yam rupa kada mahyam dadati sva padantikam

When will Srila Rupa Goswami, who established the wish on Sri Caitanya’s mind on the surface of the earth, give me a place at his lotus feet? (Narottama Das Thakur, Prema Bhakti Candrika 2)

Otherwise if we don't submit to the statements of the sastras and verdict of the Goswami, then we will never reach any conclusions, but go round and around perpetually.

QUOTE(balgavi @ Aug. 24 2002,18:06)

You think that diksa is most important, I think that siksa is most important.

If you accept the siksa, then you will accept the siksa about diksa .

Just a few words on statements regarding sastra and Gopakumar:

-If someone said that the guru's word is final,then I can say the guru also has his guru,who had a guru...In this way one will reach Krsna from whom the sastra comes and who himself sticks to sastra.
So,one is back where he started-with the sastra as the ultimate pramana.

-Gopakumar,actually, receives a mantra from a spiritual master who then disappears without giving him any further instruction other than to chant constantly. Gopakumar goes on chanting and the mantra leads him to various siksa gurus until he reaches Goloka.

QUOTE

-Gopakumar,actually, receives a mantra from a spiritual master who then disappears without giving him any further instruction other than to chant constantly. Gopakumar goes on chanting and the mantra leads him to various siksa gurus until he reaches Goloka.

Thanks for reminding us about this Jiva. I read a note of Gopakumar earlier but didn't pay much attention to thinking about his example, but it is indeed a fact that the mantra he received played a very essential part in his journey.

QUOTE(Radhapada @ Aug. 25 2002,04:42)

QUOTE

Nice verse!

We should make a distinction however between condemning the acts of others and what is the conclusions of the bhakti sastras presented by the Goswamis.

[

That is true and particularly I think that all this deliberations are importante to clarify our doubts and to improve our Bhajan.
My only concern is to commit Aparadha. But I known, that is the hard part of it. But at last we have to have that in mind and really be afraid of that. In my opinion all that Srila Bhaktisiddhanta did in his time, like challenge the traditional Gaudiya, in one sense it is difficult not analize after so long.

1- We have to consider no one of us were there.

2- The real politic situation that everyone were living in the Country under the oppression of Britsh Impire

3-What if the Gosvamis were actually not following accordily the Vaisnava principles (I do not mean all but if one or a group, that would make a difference)

4- What about Ideology, Gandhi was present at that time the whole Country was into great transformations so the revolutionary spirit was freely running in everyone' blood.

He Srila Bhaktisiddhanta may too heavy as his own brother Srila Lalita Prasada said, but if one is a revolutionary by nature, that is the only way, there must be an enemy or the other part or the other group... So that helps to fuel the spirit of others who thinks like that: There must be a urgent changes in our Country or Community, etc...

Changes and challenges are importante for improviment. That is a fact even in our life, we are in a constant transformation. Dont you remember the 60's time...? That was a necessity for a majority of American people but not for all. So similarly for some that were having the same necessity at the time of Sri Bhaktisiddhanta came and joined his mission. And right now we are somehow part of the result of that revolution. Be happy for what that man did at his time, and if we were to think deeply, we would come to a conclusion that he S.B.S. had enormous corage to challenge all that traditionalism just by himself ( although I'm in the process of re-analize all, based in the difference of time and place that we are living and of course, my own experience in life)

Your servant
harisaran das :wink: "PEACE"

diksa kale bhakta kore atma samarpana;sei kale krsna tare koren atma sama
sei deha koren tar cidanandamoy; aprakrta dehe tar carana bhajoy

At the time of diksa (initiation) the devotee surrenders himself; at that time Krsna makes him equal to Himself. He makes the devotee's body transcendental so that he can serve His lotus feet in a spiritual body.(Caitanya Caritamrta)

Sriman Mahaprabhu tells the above to Sanatan Goswami. Therefore, diksa is not a mere formality, but a very essential part of bhajan.

QUOTE

3-What if the Gosvamis were actually not following accordily the Vaisnava principles (I do not mean all but if one or a group, that would make a difference)

Certainly not all of them were maha-bhagavatas. Certainly some of them were after labha, puja and pratistha. But again, this can be said of so many others -- Babajis, Gaudiya Math sannyasis & acaryas, ISKCON gurus & GBCs, and of whom not?

However, a considerate person will not launch campaigns of blanket condemnation. Rather, that is, if there is an urgent need to do so, he will address the individuals concerned. Otherwise it is but a religious form of racism.

We would also have to assess what does "following Vaishnava principles" mean. It is very likely that they did not follow them according to Bhaktisiddhanta's conception. But again, why should his conception be the law for all the worlds?

QUOTE

He Srila Bhaktisiddhanta may too heavy as his own brother Srila Lalita Prasada said, but if one is a revolutionary by nature, that is the only way, there must be an enemy or the other part or the other group...

The Bhagavata glorifies the sadhu as "ajAta-zatravaH zantaH". "ajAta-zatravaH" means "he whose enemy is not born", "zantaH" means "peaceful". Such are the ornaments of a sadhu. In other words, a saint does not view anyone as his enemy. Dividing the world into friends and enemies is the same old story of the material world: "O descendant of Bharata, O conqueror of the foe, all living entities are born into delusion, bewildered by the illusion arising from the duality of desire and hatred."

The progressive path of a Vaishnava should lead one out of delusion instead of fostering it under the convenient guise of religion.

All glories to Sri Sri Guru-Gauranga-Gandharvika-Giridhari! All glories to Srila Prabhupada Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Goswami Thakura Maharaja!

According to me, I think that now we are getting to the objective. As Madhavananda Dasa Prabhu said, the real question is whether the guru-pranali should have the names of only the diksha-gurus (pancharatriki parampara) or the siksha + diksha gurus (bhagavata-parampara). You think that it should only have diksha-gurus. I think quite opposite. Nowhere in Caitanya-caritamrita has Srila KrishnaDasa Kaviraja Goswami ever mentioned even the name of his diksha-guru, (doesn't mean that his diksha-guru - whoever he may be - was not bonafide or paramhamsa). Rather, he krishnadasa kaviraja goswami only mentions the name of his siksha-gurus profusely at the end of every chapter of the caitanya-caritamrita. this means he had more love for the six goswamis. Excluding bhajana-gurus or siksha-gurus from the pranali and only putting the diksha-gurus means that you don't consider them to be of an equal status. Actually, while the diksha-guru is krishna's rupa, siksha-guru is krishna's rupa. Furthermore, if we don't want to make the guru-pranali or guru-parampara very much crowded, we might have to exclude certain diksha-gurus and rather only count some siksha-gurus instead, who might have done more preaching to liberate the jivas. this is the mood of krishnadasa kaviraja goswami. try to understan, prabhu.

QUOTE(Madhava @ Aug. 25 2002,12:04)

Yes, dear Madhava, my only point is to evoid malicious talkings.
Whatever he Srila Bhaktisiddhanta did I may not agree with all but againg we have to consider how brave he was how determinated and carismatic personality, that even knowing that he was from a inferior cast(according to the tradicionalist Brahmans) the aderence for his missions was growing fast and supported by many of so called Brahmans of superior cast, as you known, Sri Sridhar Maharaj was one of them.
So the mercy of Lord Gouranga had to come down to us according to His own disire... My point now is: where are the Sukadeva Gosvamis and Parkisti Maharajs of our time to distribuite that Prema? Even Swamiji Bhaktivedanta when starting his own mission he asked to his disciples to chant 64 rounds, but unable to follow that order, Swamiji had to drop down to
16.
I think Sri Krishna has His own plans and way to distribute His mercy, I'm just happy for the fact that Him, the Supreme Lord, had my name in His list. And I hope He keeps it there as long as I remain in this Material World.

In the Srimad-Bhagavatam we find the following statement:

tad-vag-visargo janatagha-viplavo
yasmin prati-slokam abaddhavaty api
namany anatasya yaso 'nkitani yac
chrnvanti gayanti grnanti sadhavah

" On the other hand,that literature which is full of descriptions of the transcendental glories of the name, fame, form and pastimes of the unlimited Supreme Lord is a transcendental creation meant for bringing about a revolution in the impious life of a misdirected civilization. Such trancendental literature, even thought irregulaly composed, is heard, sung and accepted by purified men who are thoroughly honest"
(1.5.11)

Your servant
harisaran das :wink:

QUOTE

As Madhavananda Dasa Prabhu said, the real question is whether the guru-pranali should have the names of only the diksha-gurus (pancharatriki parampara) or the siksha + diksha gurus (bhagavata-parampara). You think that it should only have diksha- gurus. I think quite opposite.

As you wish you may think. Perhaps you can explain why everywhere in the Gaudiya tradition outside the Gaudiya Matha the guru-pranali is and has always been traced according to diksa-gurus back to the associates of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu?

QUOTE

Nowhere in Caitanya-caritamrita has Srila KrishnaDasa Kaviraja Goswami ever mentioned even the name of his diksha-guru, (doesn't mean that his diksha-guru - whoever he may be - was not bonafide or paramhamsa). Rather, he krishnadasa kaviraja goswami only mentions the name of his siksha-gurus profusely at the end of every chapter of the caitanya-caritamrita.

Many are of the opinion that Raghunatha Bhatta was the diksa-guru of Krishnadas Kaviraja. They draw support to this from the "zrI-rUpa-raghunAtha pade yara Aza" stanza of Caitanya Caritamrita, as well as from his Govinda-lilamrita, where in the end of each chapter he praises Rupa, Raghunatha Das and Jiva, but particularly states of Raghunatha Bhatta: "kAvye zrI raghunAtha bhaTTa viraje govinda lIlAmRte" -- "The poem Govinda Lilamrita is born from the blessings of Sri Raghunatha Bhatta Gosvami".

Others have proposed that Raghunatha Das was his diksa-guru, drawing from the aforementioned stanza of Caitanya Caritamrita in which "Raghunatha" is open to interpretation, as well as from the 18th chapter of Prema Vilasa which describes how Krishnadas Kaviraja took shelter of the lotus feet of Raghunatha Das.

On the other hand, A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami proposes the following in his translation of Adi-lila 1.40:

"Srila Nityananda Rama is the plenary manifestation of the Lord, and I have been initiated by Him. I therefore offer my respectful obeisances unto His lotus feet."

If indeed one of the six Gosvamis was the diksa-guru of Krishnadas, it would explain his pranama to mantra-guru and chaya-gosvami without specifying the mantra-guru.

At any rate, Krishnadas has not presented a parampara here. If you can point out to me who is a disciple of Krishnadas Kaviraja, then we may study if he has written about the kind of parampara his guru gave to him.

QUOTE

Excluding bhajana-gurus or siksha-gurus from the pranali and only putting the diksha-gurus means that you don't consider them to be of an equal status.

Yes, and excluding diksa-gurus and replacing them with siksa-gurus who never even met each other makes it all right, does it not? Moreover, according to your logic, picking out diksa-gurus and replacing them with siksa-gurus gives the diksa-gurus an inferior status.

Visvanatha had the highest regard for his diksa-guru-pranali as you may have noted in his Sankalpa Kalpadruma and Stavamrita Lahari. However, poor Visvanatha has been picked out of his pranali and placed in a parampara in which some of the acaryas never met each other.

If you have carefully read the earlier posts in this thread, you have probably noted that Narottama never met Visvanatha, and Jagannatha Das Baba never met Baladeva. Is this a very good parampara in which people do not even meet each other? It is not a parampara at all, because parampara means a succession of gurus. If there is no succession, there is no parampara. Is it not so?

QUOTE

Furthermore, if we don't want to make the guru-pranali or guru-parampara very much crowded, we might have to exclude certain diksha-gurus and rather only count some siksha-gurus instead, who might have done more preaching to liberate the jivas.

Would you propose that the transcendence is too much crowded? If it is because of a lack of paper and pencils that you wish to keep it brief, I will gladly donate your sampradaya ten thousand sheets of paper and one thousand pencils.

Personalities such as Srinivasa Acarya and Syamananda Pandit, who were among the most prominent preachers of the Gosvami granthas, and Jahnava Thakurani, who was the crest-jewel of all Gaudiyas in the post-Gosvami era, have been excluded from this parampara.

On the other hand, persons such as Aksobhya, Jayatirtha, Jnanasindhu, Dayanidhi, Vidyanidhi, Rajendra, Jayadharma, Purusottama, Brahmanya Tirtha and Vyasa Tirtha have been included in the parampara. Can you explain how they have contributed to the siksa-parampara of Gaudiya Matha?

I think if parampara means a collection of the most prominent individuals who have influenced the Gaudiya tradition, you would do well to remove the aforementioned ten persons (with all due respect to these maha-bhagavatas) and replace them with Gaudiya mahajanas such as Gadadhara, Srivasa, Gopala Bhatta, Raghunatha Bhatta, Jahnava Thakurani, Syamananda, Srinivasa, Virabhadra, Krishna Mishra and Radha Krishna Das, who have had a considerable influence in our history.

QUOTE

this is the mood of krishnadasa kaviraja goswami. try to understan, prabhu.

I am trying hard, but it doesn't make any sense to me. You should edit this parampara and add in all the six Gosvamis to have it in your proposed mood of Krishnadas Kaviraja.

Did you carefully read the two documents to which I provided links earlier in this thread, one on the second chapter of Prabandha Pancakam and the other on this lecture you posted?

QUOTE

Whatever he Srila Bhaktisiddhanta did I may not agree with all but againg we have to consider how brave he was how determinated and carismatic personality, that even knowing that he was from a inferior cast (according to the tradicionalist Brahmans) the aderence for his missions was growing fast and supported by many of so called Brahmans of superior cast, as you known, Sri Sridhar Maharaj was one of them.

Yes Hari, admittedly Bhaktisiddhanta was a very courageous and charismatic person. There is no denying of this.

All glories to Sri Sri Guru-Gauranga-Gandharvika-Giridhari! All gories to Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura Prabhupada!

First, let me tell you that I have read your two articles and there is nothing new to me about your responses. I know them from before. But they don't deviate me, because I have strong answers against them. But, for now, I will just answer your obections that you have made to my replies to me directly. Now, I will present my top class arguments which I has just reserved for this moment. First tell me, did Caitanya Mahaprabhu gave anyone the pancaratriki diksha? Secondly, Bhaktisiddhanta Thakura specifically enunciated the names of the Madhva Sampradaya Sannyasis, so, as to make the Gaudiya Sampradaya look valid among other Vaishnava Sampradayas i.e. it has connection with the brahma-madhva sampradaya. A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, considered to be one of the stauch adherents of srila saraswati thakura, has mention guru-parampara in his introduction to his bhagavad-gita as it is. it is thus: 21. Ishavara Puri (Nityananda, Advaita acarya), 22. Caitanya Mahaprabhu, 23. Rupa (svarupa damodara, Sanatana), 24.raghunatha dasa, jiva goswami 25.krishnadasa etc. Strongly in opposition to your claim of not mentioning the names of the goswamis, he has mentioned those names being the representative of the sarasvata lineage. Additionally, we have no harm to include the name of all the vaishnavas, if you provide us the paper and pencils.

QUOTE

First, let me tell you that I have read your two articles and there is nothing new to me about your responses. I know them from before. But they don't deviate me, because I have strong answers against them.

If you later choose to present your strong responses to them, please do start a new thread for it. Let us try to keep this one focused on the topic.

QUOTE

Now, I will present my top class arguments which I has just reserved for this moment. First tell me, did Caitanya Mahaprabhu gave anyone the pancaratriki diksha?

No, he did not. Not everyone is meant to be a diksa-guru. Mahaprabhu appointed Gopala Bhatta Gosvami among the six Gosvamis to initiate disciples. Concerned over preserving the disciplic succesion, Rupa and Sanatana later appointed Raghunatha Bhatta Gosvami to initiate disciples. Gopala Bhatta was to give diksa to those from the western region, and Raghunatha Bhatta to those from Gauda. This is described in the Anuragavalli (2), paraphrased in OBL Kapoor's "Gosvamis of Vrindavana" (chapter six, page 197).

Mahaprabhu received mantra-diksa from Isvara Puri though, and was greatly devoted to His diksa-guru. Behold the astonishing change in His life after meeting Isvara Puri! Thus we may learn from his example that we should be enthusiastic to receive diksa. The very example of Mahaprabhu's receiving diksa is a significant demonstration of the potency of diksa.

QUOTE

Secondly, Bhaktisiddhanta Thakura specifically enunciated the names of the Madhva Sampradaya Sannyasis, so, as to make the Gaudiya Sampradaya look valid among other Vaishnava Sampradayas i.e. it has connection with the brahma-madhva sampradaya.

To begin with, what does this have to do with the subject matter of guru-parampara?

From where did you get this idea of Madhvite sannyasi names? Tirtha is the only title used in the Madhva sampradaya. Sri Madhva was initiated by Acyuta Preksa Tirtha, and his yati name was Ananda Tirtha. The Dvaita.Org website lists some of the most prominent scholars in the history of the Madhvite tradition ( http://www.dvaita.org/scholars/ ): Sri Vadiraja Tirtha, Sri Padmanabha Tirtha, Sri Jayatirtha, Sri Narahari Tirtha, Sri Vyasa Tirtha, Sri Vijayindra Tirtha, Sri Raghavendra Tirtha, and Sri Vidyadhisha Tirtha. All the present-day sannyasi acaryas in the different Mathas of Madhva-sampradaya carry the title "Tirtha". I recall seeing the (diksa-)paramparas of some Madhvite mathas, they were all "Tirtha".

You may also be interested to note that in Madhva-sampradaya, the sannyasis are ekadandi-sannyasis, not tridandi-sannyasis. Overall, their customs of sannyasa and methods of worship etc. are rather different from the Gaudiya sampradaya.

QUOTE

A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, considered to be one of the stauch adherents of srila saraswati thakura, has mention guru-parampara in his introduction to his bhagavad-gita as it is. it is thus: 21. Ishavara Puri (Nityananda, Advaita acarya), 22. Caitanya Mahaprabhu, 23. Rupa (svarupa damodara, Sanatana), 24.raghunatha dasa, jiva goswami 25.krishnadasa etc. Strongly in opposition to your claim of not mentioning the names of the goswamis, he has mentioned those names being the representative of the sarasvata lineage.

If you would have carefully read my post, you would have noted that I mentioned "all the six Gosvamis". Trust me, I have seen this parampara you presented before.

All glories to Sri Guru-Gauranga-Gandharvika-Giridhari! All glories to Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Goswami Thakura!

QUOTE

: No, he did not. Not everyone is meant to be a diksa-guru. Mahaprabhu appointed Gopala Bhatta Gosvami among the six Gosvamis to initiate disciples. Concerned over preserving the disciplic succesion, Rupa and Sanatana later appointed Raghunatha Bhatta Gosvami to initiate disciples. Gopala Bhatta was to give diksa to those from the western region, and Raghunatha Bhatta to those from Gauda. This is described in the Anuragavalli (2), paraphrased in OBL Kapoor's "Gosvamis of Vrindavana" (chapter six, page 197).

Can you give me any shastric quotation with sanskrit or bengali and its english translation to validate your proof?

QUOTE

Can you give me any shastric quotation with sanskrit or bengali and its english translation to validate your proof?

I don't have a copy of Anuragavalli at hand. You will get it, don't worry. I will write to a couple of friends who probably have it in their library and will get back to you with this. I recall also reading something of the kind in Bhakti Ratnakara (perhaps in the first vilasa), but don't have the original title at hand. Perhaps our learned audience has these titles at hand?

I invite you to also visit the samadhi mandir of Gopala Bhatta Gosvami on the yard of the Radha Raman Mandir in Vrindavan (next to Nidhuvan) and speak with the sevaites there if you have the chance. They will gladly describe the glory of Gopala Bhatta Gosvami's diksa-lineage to you.

The relevant passages from the aforementioned title by OBL Kapoor, an accomplished Gaudiya scholar and author, are as follows:

"Amongst the Gosvamins of Vrndavana the position of Gopala Bhatta Gosvami, who is regarded as the incarnation of Ananga Manjari, is unique in the sense that he had all the blessings of Mahaprabhu at the tender age of only ten or twelve, when Mahaprabhu stayed at his house for four months. Early at that age Mahaprabhu gave him His company, His caranamrta and His teachings. Not only this, He laid out the plan for his future life and later gave him His own dora-kaupina and installed him as guru by presenting to him the asana (patara or wooden seat) on which He used to sit." (ch. 6 - page 181)

. . .

"Mahaprabhu was also very happy to get the message [of Gopala Bhatta’s arrival to Vraja]. He conveyed it to the devotees of Nilacala and spoke to them about Gopala Bhatta's qualities of head and heart. He wrote a letter to Rupa-Sanatana, asking them to take care of him as their younger brother. Along with the letter he sent for Gopala Bhatta His dora-kaupina, bahirvasa and asana (patta).

When Gopala Bhatta learnt of this, he was so much overwhelmed with bhava that he could not control himself and became senseless. On regaining consciousness he repeatedly made obeisance to the dora kaupina, asana and bahirvasa. But even on Rupa-Sanatana's insistance he refused to sit on the asana. However when they explained to him that by sending the asana Mahaprabhu had authorised and commanded him to give diksa to people by sitting on that asana, he had to obey." (ch. 6 / p. 192-193)

[In a footnote to this, OBL Kapoor presents the following: "According to Gopala Kavi, Mahaprabhu had in His letter asked Gopala Bhatta to give diksa to Srinivasacarya, who had appeared as His own partial manifest. (Gopala Bhatta Caritra, p.8)"]

. . .

"The Gaudiya Gosvamis were all the very embodiments of humility. They did not want to accept disciples, because they thought they did not deserve to be guru. Rupa, Sanatana and Raghunatha did not take any disciples. Lokanatha had also vowed not to give diksa to anyone, though he had to break his vow in the case of Narottama Thakura. Rupa and Sanatana were concerned about the sisya parampara (the line of disciplic succession) of the sampradaya, which had to be maintained. Mahaprabhu had solved the problem to some extent by authorising and ordering Gopala Bhatta to give diksa; Rupa Gosvami tried to prepare at least one more person for the task. Jiva Gosvami was still young. Therefore he entrusted the responsibility to Raghunatha Bhatta. He asked Gopala Bhatta to initiate the people from the western region and Raghunatha Bhatta to initiate those coming from Gauda. (Anuragavalli 2, p. 14)" (ch. 6 / p. 197)

I apologize for not having all the Gaudiya books at my disposal.

Dear Madhava Prabhu!

I just want to tell you that although I have answers to many of your refutations, I don't know how to put them in a particular way as to conclude the debate. So i will show your two articles to some advanced devotee in my lineage and will try to gather proper and systematic answers. O.K. I am ending this debate here. many of your objections i have refuted in my answers and for many I have to look for higher guidance in my lineage. when I am ready i will again start the discussion under this same topic title. i am going to stop now.

QUOTE

I just want to tell you that although I have answers to many of your refutations, I don't know how to put them in a particular way as to conclude the debate. So i will show your two articles to some advanced devotee in my lineage and will try to gather proper and systematic answers. O.K. I am ending this debate here. many of your objections i have refuted in my answers and for many I have to look for higher guidance in my lineage. when I am ready i will again start the discussion under this same topic title. i am going to stop now.

Dear Gita,

It was nice to have your association here. It brought to our attention many excellent Vaishnava conclusions, from which I am certain many devotees will benefit. I hope you will not be disheartened if you will not receive answers to all of your queries. It was a rather unpleasant experience I had with devotees of Gaudiya Vedanta Samiti when I tried to clarify these topics. I wrote a private letter to my guru revealing the questions I had been pondering and the doubts which had awakened. However, instead of hearing personally from him, some of his leading disciples showed my letter to many others, including many friends from our congregation who were in Vraja at the time of my writing the letter, and people were warned to not associate with me.

When you ask these questions, try to reflect whether the answers you are receiving will be acceptable to everyone, or only to those inside your group. It is important in discussions between Vaishnavas of different groups that they can refer to the writings and history of the tradition beyond the precepts of the founder of their own group.

I tried to get answers to these questions on many occasions by writing, but did not succeed. I was told that only if I'd personally meet my guru I could receive answers to my questions, and even then it would only be possible if I'd fully submit to him and have no doubts at all about what he would reply. This was very difficult for me. At that time I was unable to travel to meet him due to the difficult economical situation I was in with my wife. I was told that I am an offender against my guru because I don't come to meet him.

Finally I thought that I'd phone to him (actually another devotee from his sanga suggested this to me). I conveyed a message to them asking about an appropriate time to call. I was told that first some of his followers wish to speak with me (to preach to me), some of them whom I did not trust on account of their strange dealings over the issue during the months (yes, it took months to get this clarified!) that passed by after my first letter.

With a sincere heart, I submitted my situation, I had no longer full faith in my guru and I was not able to accept everything he said as truth because I'd seen it very clearly and beyond a doubt that he'd presented outright lies and distorted truths in this lecture about sahajiya babajis (see the review to find out what I mean) as well as in his Prabandha Pancakam. I have now uploaded a review I once wrote on the first chapter of this title as well, just in case you are interested to read it. You can download it by clicking on the link below:

Review of Gaudiya Vaishnava Sampradaya and Sannyasa

Anyway, I then proceeded to write the following letter with a sincere heart, seeking for the truth:

"Dandavats, Jay Sri Guru Gauranga. Without further comments on the letters back and forth and so, we have a small request: Could you just ask Srila Gurudeva to send us a message directly from him, making it clear what we should do in regards to the phone call? Please read this letter to him and ask him to respond.

It should be evident by now that at present we don't have full faith in him, nor are we able to accept all of his statements in regards to babajis etc. due to a big contrast we see between what he says on some issues and the facts as we've learnt and studied to the best of our capacity. Without going to the details here.

It is quite impossible that we first believe in him, or anyone for that matter, and then ask the questions, because right now we do not have such belief, and in our experience faith is built over time by inquiry and answers. And somewhere one has to begin with. That's what we do with everyone -- no one has full faith in the beginning. They have their questions they want to ask first. So I guess we're doing a little backward tour here, but this is the situation, and we can't pretend otherwise.

Of course we are always open if anyone gives honest and thorough, well founded answers. Never mind who it is, Srila Gurudeva, any babaji or anyone else. We will honor the answers and consider adjusting our vision accordingly.

Could you please ask Srila Gurudeva to send a message to us on how to proceed from here, in his own words? Should we call him to ask our questions anyway and see if we are satisfied with them, or just forget about it? And practically, if the first, when should we call and where, and if the second, would there be any last advice he would like to give?"

I then received the following reply from his secretary:

"Please accept my dandavats pranams. All glories to Sri Guru and Sri Gauranga and all glories to Sri Sri Radha Vinode Bihariji. Srila Gurudeva says that you should go at once to the Babaji's. He said that when you came to him you were in ignorance and even though he has tried to help you, you have not changed. Now you have no belief in him and discover so many faults. Since you have so much regard for Babaji's, better you go there at once. Please do not bother to waste your time writing, I will no longer answer."

Though I was disappointed of the fact that my questions were being avoided, at the same time this final letter (to which I replied, though, thanking them for everything) was a relief after all those months of confusion. Finally a clear reply, based on which I could choose a direction for my spiritual life.

At any rate, I wish that you will meet the happiness of progressive bhajan in your spiritual life wherever you choose to practice it, either following the siksa-parampara or alternatively any of the more traditional diksa-paramparas. According to your desire you attain a particular kind of faith, and this faith is unshakeable due to the divine arrangement of the Lord. Only when our desires evolve can our faith and eligibility be refined.

All the best for your spiritual life, Gita. Welcome back whenever you find the time and inspiration for it.

Sincerely yours,

Madhavananda Das

Dear GitaGovinda

Let's face it, your 'top class' arguments haven't reached the heights you hoped for!
'Try to understand'...some humility perhaps!

I don't know whether to be heartened or disheartened to see these topics still coming up again and again. Anyway, I am glad that there is someone else to debate them, not me!

QUOTE(Jagat @ Aug. 25 2002,20:40)

I don't know whether to be heartened or disheartened to see these topics still coming up again and again. Anyway, I am glad that there is someone else to debate them, not me!

Yeah, you are a veteran in your own right on this field. I think you have earned your peace already. Anyway, it was the first time it happened here.

:cool:

QUOTE(Madhava @ Aug. 25 2002,19:32)

QUOTE

Dear Gita,

It was nice to have your association here. It brought to our attention many excellent Vaishnava conclusions, from which I am certain many devotees will benefit.

Sincerely yours,

Madhavananda Das

Radhe Radhe !

That was a very interesting and enlightening debate !

Dear Madhava, this devotee that indentifies as Gita is the son of a Govardhana-basi. His parents are Pujaris. I have the great fortune to meet him and his family in San Diego. My wife and I have been developing a good relationship with this interesting Bhaktas.
On the occasion of last Balarama Purnima we had the opportunity to talk about differents subjects and I perceived that he was an open mind person and told him about this Website and introduced him to Register.
The next day, he came to my house and I told him: you can make any question that you like to known, they are OK... I just turn my back to get some Prasada for breakfast, when I came back I asked : so what was your first question? He said : I wanted to ask something relevant so I asked : Bhagavat- Parampara vs. Pancharatriki- Parampara ! So, seeing his confidence I just said : go ahead we all have something new in life to learn ....

P.S. This Bhakta Gita is in his Kisore age ( only 15 years old )
That is not Beautiful... ?

Your servant
harisaran das

:tongue: :cool: :tongue: :love:

QUOTE

I just turn my back to get some Prasada for breakfast, when I came back I asked : so what was your first question? He said : I wanted to ask something relevant so I asked : Bhagavat- Parampara vs. Pancharatriki-Parampara ! So, seeing his confidence I just said : go ahead we all have something new in life to learn ....

Having read through the thread a couple of times, it appeared to me to be more of a challenge than a question, but never mind the details.

QUOTE

P.S. This Bhakta Gita is in his Kisore age ( only 15 years old )
That is not Beautiful... ?

Sweet indeed... Little Nimai. Not exactly as eloquent and successful in debates, but he obviously has a great urge to understand and to express himself, a healthy symptom in my opinion. A bit more study and toning down the attitude, and all success is his.

I was also a little Nimai not so long ago. Now I am already an old man, beard and everything. For the laughs of the day, read the following article:

http://www.vnn.org/editorials/ET0104/ET01-6682.html

That's me in my previous incarnation. Note the confidence, the use of powerful expression, and the lack of scriptural references. I guess I should now write a refutation of my own paper. Then I could play little Nimai again, refuting something I once established.

Traditional Gaudiya Vaisnavas don't advertise who their Guru is to outsiders. They don't go around saying, "Do you know who my Guru is? It's so and so maharaja," while thinking, "He is advanced and so am I because I chose him to be my Guru. If you want to be advance too then you should join our Guru club." Bhakti is not centered around a Guru cult, but around the Deity.

A Vaisnava considers her/himself an embarrassment to his Guru and unworthy to be a disciple. Therefore, they don't tell people who their Guru is. When asked by someone, the devotee lowers his head in humility, folds his hands and says in a meek voice, asta-tara-sata-sri..... Therefore, it is not strange that Krsnadas Kaviraja, and other Goswamis did not publicise their pranali out of humility.

QUOTE

A Vaisnava considers her/himself an embarrassment to his Guru and unworthy to be a disciple. Therefore, they don't tell people who their Guru is. When asked by someone, the devotee lowers his head in humility, folds his hands and says in a meek voice, asta-tara-sata-sri..... Therefore, it is not strange that Krsnadas Kaviraja, and other Goswamis did not publicise their pranali out of humility.

As in the Hari Bhakti Vilasa (first vilasa):

sri-narada-pancaratre

yatha tatha yatra tatra
na grhniyac ca kevalam |
abhaktya na guror nama
grhniyac ca yatatmavan || 94 ||
In Sri Narada-pancaratra it is said:

"One should never speak the sacred name of his spiritual master here and there. A self-controlled disciple will never speak the name of his spiritual master without respect and devotion."

pranavah sris tato nama
visnu-sabdad anantaram |
pada-sabda-sametam ca
nata-murdhajali-yutah || 95 ||
"When speaking his spiritual master's name, one should fold one's hands, bow one's head, and preface his spiritual master's name with the words Om - Sri Visnupada."

Note that here Gopala Bhatta quotes from the Narada Pancaratra. Consequently, the original verses describe particularly the appropriate protocol of behavior in relation to one's pancaratrika diksa-guru.

QUOTE(Madhava @ Aug. 26 2002,00:25)

That's me in my previous incarnation. Note the confidence, the use of powerful expression, and the lack of scriptural references. I guess I should now write a refutation of my own paper. Then I could play little Nimai again, refuting something I once established.

:cool:

Radhe Radhe !

Srimad Bhagavad-gita:

yuktahara-viharasya yukta-cetasya karmasu
yukta-svapnavabodhasya yogo bhavati duhkha-ha

For one who is moderate in eating and recreation, balanced in work and regulated in sleeping and wakefulness,his practice of yoga destroys all material miseries.
(Ch.6. 18.)

Bhavanuvada

A person's worldly and transcendental activities will lead to success if he is regulated in eating (ahara) and recreation (vihara).

by: Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura

Your well wisher
Harisaran das
:satisfied:

Since it appears that the discussion has more or less been concluded now, I would like to summarize some of the main points which have been covered, as well as to contribute something I feel is yet to be mentioned. I have not duplicated any of the references presented earlier in this thread. To read them in full, please refer to the earlier postings.

1. THE HISTORICAL PARAMPARA AND THE PARAMPARA IN THE POST-GOSVAMI ERA

While many arguments have been cast back and forth about the possibility of historical paramparas in which devotees were not linked through diksa to each other, as followers of Sri Caitanyadeva we ought to follow the standards set by the six Gosvamis, whom He empowered to lay down the law for future generations to come. In the Gaudiya sampradaya, throughout the centuries the guru-pranali (channel of gurus) has always been traced according to diksa-lineages.

The only exception to this rule is one reformist Gaudiya movement founded in 1919, whose founder presented a previously unseen guru-pranali, choosing prominent figures from the history of the Gaudiya sampradaya and placing them into his own succession of predecessors, despite the fact that many of them had presented themselves as belonging to a different guru-pranali in their writings.

It is not out of place to mention that it was the desire of Sri Caitanyadeva Himself that the upasana of the Gaudiya tradition would be preserved to the future generations through diksa-guru-pranalis. As we have discussed earlier, He particularly appointed Gopala Bhatta Gosvami for this service, and Raghunatha Bhatta was later appointed by Rupa-Sanatana and others. In addition to this, very significant diksa-guru pranalis were started by none other than Advaita Prabhu and Nityananda Prabhu along with His wife Jahnava Thakurani, as well as Gadadhara Pandit. In addition to this, the diksa-guru pranalis descending from Lokanatha through Narottama, from Gopala Bhatta through Srinivasa, from Gauridas Pandit and Lalita Sakhi through Syamananda, and from Vakresvara through Gopala Guru, are very famous.

Given the fact that diksa-guru is one while siksa-gurus may be many, tracing the guru-pranali according to diksa-gurus is also the only practically feasible option, for otherwise the pranali becomes an infinite tree of gurus. If, for instance, we were to trace the siksa-pranali over twelve generations back to the associates of Sriman Mahaprabhu, given that each person in the pranali would have had an average of two significant instructing gurus, we would end up drawing a pranali with 8190 siksa-gurus.

2. PARAMPARA AS AN UNBROKEN SUCCESSION OF GURUS

The word ”parampara” loses its meaning if there is no chain of persons connected with each other, whether it be a siksa-parampara or a diksa-parampara. In the parampara presented by Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati, we observe persons placed one after the other in the succession who never met each other during their lives. Visvanatha was born a century later than Narottama, and was in the fourth generation descending in the diksa-succession from Narottama through Ganga Narayana Cakravarti, Krishna Carana Cakravarti and Radha Ramana Cakravarti. Jagannatha Das Baba was born a century later than Baladeva Vidyabhusana and never met his proposed instructing guru.

A parampara means a succession of gurus. If there is no unbroken succession of gurus, it is not a parampara, but rather a collection of gurus. While there is certainly no objection to presenting a list of some of the most illustrious Vaishnavas in the history of the Gaudiya sampradaya, it is not befitting to call it a parampara.

Sri Advaita Prabhu speaks to His son Krishna Misra Gosvami in Advaita Prakasa (21.153-154): vaiSNavera madhye yei sampradAya hIne ... kRSNa bahirmukha sei korimu niryAsa –“Again, amongst the Vaishnavas, I consider those who have no sampradAya averse to Sri Krishna and I will oust them.”

3. POWERFUL PERSONALITIES FOLLOW THE ESTABLISHED RULES

Though an extraordinary maha-purusa may not have the necessity to undergo the ceremony of diksa and be engaged in worship according to the guru’s order and instructions, nevertheless he sets the example for the world to be followed by his own deeds (Bhagavad Gita 3.21). Even Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, Sri Nityananda Prabhu and Sri Advaita Prabhu received diksa and held their diksa-guru in high esteem, though They if anyone were independent of rules and regulations, being the Personalities of Godhead Themselves. The example of Sri Caitanyadeva’s meeting Isvara Puri is an illustrious example of the influence of the diksa-guru as well as of the power of receiving diksa-mantra.

The more advanced a devotee is, the more dependent and destitute he considers himself to be. No genuine Vaishnava will proclaim himself to be above the established rules and regulations. Should there be any exceptions to the rule, we will invariably see that such Vaishnavas do not place themselves in a position for others to be followed, far less starting preaching campaigns and recruiting followers.

4. DIKSA IS NOT A MERE FORMALITY

Sri Caitanyadeva Himself declared the significance of diksa while teaching Sanatana Gosvami (Caitanya Caritamrita 3.4.192-193), relating how at the time of diksa, when a devotee surrenders himself to the service of Sri Krishna, the Lord accepts him to be as good as Himself, and He makes his body transcendental so that he can serve His lotus feet in a spiritual body.

Speaking of surrendering, Visvanatha comments on a famous Bhagavata-sloka on surrender (11.29.34) as follows: niveditAtmA mat svarUpa bhUtAya manmantropadezakAya gurave – “Self-surrender means surrender to the mantra-guru who is My very form and who bestows My mantra.”

Jiva Gosvami has discussed the deep significance of diksa in his Bhakti Sandarbha (Anuccheda 283), relating how diksa is that religious undertaking in which divine knowledge is bestowed and sinful reactions are eradicated. Elaborating on the meaning of divine knowledge, Jiva states that in the guru-given diksa-mantra there are two kinds of divine knowledge, namely knowledge about the Lord’s particular form, and knowledge about the initiate’s special relationship with the Lord. In this connection, Jiva speaks of diksa as the key for attaining one’s desired relationship with the Lord.

Thus diksa is certainly not a mere formality, but rather one of the most substantial ingredients for facilitating progressive sadhana. Having reflected on the essential meaning of diksa, we may also easily understand how a diksa-parampara is simultaneously a siksa-parampara, since the very ceremony of diksa itself involves the transmission of essential divine wisdom.

5. DIKSA-GURU IS NOT LESS THAN SIKSA-GURU

The Caitanya Caritamrita (1.1) declares both diksa-guru and siksa-guru to be manifestations of Sri Krishna, without suggesting the inferiority or superiority of either of them. Indeed, he first offers respects to his mantra-guru, thereafter offering his respects to his many siksa-gurus (1.1.35). In the 44th verse, he again praises his mantra-guru: yadyapi AmAra guru caitanyera dAsa tathApi jAniye Ami tAGhAra prakAza – “Although I know that my guru is the servant of Sri Caitanya, nevertheless I know he is His manifestation.” We may easily understand that he speaks about his mantra-guru because the word “guru” is not in a plural form which would necessarily indicate his many siksa-gurus.

Brahma Vaivarta Purana (Krishna Janma Khanda 93.79) declares the glory of the mantra-guru: na gurur mantradAt paraH - “No guru is greater than the mantra-guru.” In Bhakti Sandarbha (Anuccheda 237), quoting from the Vamana Kalpa, Jiva Gosvami declares: yo mantraH sa guruH sAkSAd yo guruH sa hariH svayam – “That mantra is directly the guru, and that guru is directly Hari.”

Additionally, the entire second chapter of the Hari Bhakti Vilasa is dedicated to describing the ceremony of diksa and the qualification of the diksa-guru. Nowhere in Hari Bhakti Vilasa do we find a similar emphasis on siksa-guru.

Sometimes it is proposed that a siksa-guru is superior to diksa-guru on account of the siksa-guru’s superior influence on the spiritual progress of the aspirant, particularly in cases when the aspirant has early in his life received the diksa-mantra and his guru has since then disappeared. Let us employ a short story to illustrate this.

“Once upon a time there lived a successful businessman who was in charge of a successful company. As he grew old, he decided to testament his entire property to his only son, still very young at that time. The father soon departed from this world, having testamented everything to his son, leaving all the departments of his business under the son's supervision. The poor young man, though having a vast treasure in his hands, had no idea how to benefit from it, lacking the experience his father had had. However, the kind-hearted uncle of that young man, having considerable experience himself in the world of business, offered to assist him in gaining the optimal benefit from that which was given to him by his father. Thus they lived happily ever after.”

Morale of the story: The diksa-guru leaves a tremendous treasure to the disciple by bestowing unto him the diksa-mantras full of essential divine wisdom and by linking him up with a pranali of gurus and the corresponding siddha-pranali under whom he is to serve in the aprakrita world. Just as the uncle of the young man helped him to benefit from the treasure left by his father, so the siksa-guru helps the aspirant to gain the full benefit from the treasure left by his diksa-guru. The mantra-guru is the one who links up the aspirant with the divine pranali, and therefore the scriptures glorify: “No guru is greater than the mantra-guru.”

Thus my reflections for today. Perhaps there are still some essential considerations we may have missed?

QUOTE

If, for instance, we were to trace the siksa-pranali over twelve generations back to the associates of Sriman Mahaprabhu, given that each person in the pranali would have had an average of two significant instructing gurus, we would end up drawing a pranali with 8190 siksa-gurus.

Having written that, I began to ponder how would such a siksa-guru pranali look like. Walk your talk, I thought, and began to draw an outline of a twelve-generation siksa-pranali. Reaching the seventh generation, I was forced to stop. The image below speaks for itself.

user posted image

All glories to Sri Sri Guru Gauranga GandharvaGiridhari!

I just want to tell all of you (who have rejected the Gaudiya Math) that I will always follow Srila Sarasvati Thakur. Why noone questions the authority of the six goswami's taking up the white dress ( which is traditionally the dress of grihasthas and not sannyasis or renunciates) and why everyone is only after srila sarasvati thakura? seems, crazy. I may go to hell by following sarasvati thakura, but i will never reject him. o.k. i will not pick up this debate in the future. last time, i told everyone that i will resume the debate. i did,for the last time.

Dear Gita,

We do not question the standards of the Gosvamis because Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu Himself requested and empowered them to establish proper Vaishnava sadacara by their behavior and writings for future generations to come. Mahaprabhu Himself approved the dress codes of the Gosvamis, of Svarupa Damodara (who dressed in white) and others.

For the record, there is no injunction that white dress is only for householders.

While we appreciate your patriotic spirit in following the one whom you choose to follow, a good dose of common sense may be helpful on the way too. It is not recommended in the scriptures that one should blindly follow someone out of mere patriotic sentiment.

As we can see from Madhavananda's posts,to the orthodox Vaisnavas,the guru is Krsna.

5. DIKSA-GURU IS NOT LESS THAN SIKSA-GURU

The Caitanya Caritamrita (1.1) declares both diksa-guru and siksa-guru to be manifestations of Sri Krishna, without suggesting the inferiority or superiority of either of them. Indeed, he first offers respects to his mantra-guru, thereafter offering his respects to his many siksa-gurus (1.1.35). In the 44th verse, he again praises his mantra-guru: yadyapi AmAra guru caitanyera dAsa tathApi jAniye Ami tAGhAra prakAza – “Although I know that my guru is the servant of Sri Caitanya, nevertheless I know he is His manifestation.” We may easily understand that he speaks about his mantra-guru because the word “guru” is not in a plural form which would necessarily indicate his many siksa-gurus.

To the Sahajiya Vaisnavas,Krsna is diksa Guru and Radha is the siksa-guru.

This can be interesting topic regarding its theological implications
on siksa/bhagavata parampara...

Dear Gita,

I just had a look at the post with which you concluded your last session here. You wrote:

QUOTE

I understand if you do not wish to start a debate again, but nevertheless I'd be curious to know what your superiors said about the subject matter when you asked about it.

QUOTE

I just want to tell all of you (who have rejected the Gaudiya Math) that I will always follow Srila Sarasvati Thakur.

Your firm faith is impressive, Gita. However, your ability to assimilate what was presented demonstrates blind fanaticism on your part. You were not at all interested in philosophical debate, but more on attack like in some crusade. You were initially thinking you had all the right answers, but failed to come up with something substancial. Discussions with people like yourself are of value in that others can see how blind following closes the doors of golden opportunites.

All glories to Sri Sri Guru-Gauranga-Gandharvika-Giridhari!

What my superiors said has also been read by Sri Madhavananda Dasa in the form of Pancha Prabandhakam. However, there are certain points that are not mentioned in the books, even. Regarding the discussion of those points I can only discuss them in a live debate,since the variegatedness of the points just more implicate the debate and stray it from the central vertex. If sometime in future I might be interested in the debate, I will possibly again start this thread with new realizations. I am not a blind follower. However, I don't like impersonal discussions very much now. Whenever I have doubt, I just read the Pancha Prabandhakam more and more and it solves my doubts. For ex, both Virocana and Indra were disciples of Brahma, but Virocana didn't inquire further or thought deeply on the answer of Brahma, whereas,Indra thought deeply on it and considered the first answer of brahma in regards to the existence of the soul to be defective. You all know this story. In the same way, Madhavananda prabhu, didn't realize all the inticacies of the pancha prabandhakam, whereas i did. in future, i might be interested in sharing these intricacies. but for now, my gurudeva Srila Narayana gosvami Maharaja has oredered me to study shat sandarbhas. so haribol for now.

Dear Gita,

It is a source of great joy to me that you have realized the confidential purport of Prabandha Pancakam. I've read it cover to cover about a dozen times or so, but nevertheless failed to penetrate through its illusory layer of apparently incoherent arguments. When you feel inspired, please do share your realizations with us.

Should you not have the entire Sat Sandarbha at your disposal, you can find a complete Sanskrit version at the Gaudiya Grantha Mandira under the Darsan section. http://www.granthamandira.org .

Jai Radhe!

QUOTE(GITGOVINDA @ Sep. 15 2002,13:26)

In the same way, Madhavananda prabhu, didn't realize all the inticacies of the pancha prabandhakam, whereas i did. in future, i might be interested in sharing these intricacies. but for now, my gurudeva Srila Narayana gosvami Maharaja has oredered me to study shat sandarbhas. so haribol for now.

Dear Gita,

With all due respect,first learn to write answers yourself,and not from a paper written,or answer given by somebody else.Your last posting is somebody elses answer.This is not your english vocabulary.You have signed it like you wrote it.It just shows how institutionalized people(no matter of their age, or being male or female,black,white or yellow) respond to challenges or debates.Of course,with similar endings,like:I don't have to write nothing anymore,because i know the best,but i will come back in the near future.It is so sad to see how people love illusion instead of truth.

The another interesting thing in those institutions is that Gurus don't want their disciples to read certain books, and themselves they read them and then attack their authors and sometimes belittle them, while accepting and lecturing from their material.So,Gita be careful,you may study some ˝wrong˝˝ books and then you may come to some conclusions by yourself,instead of others thinking for you.After this we can expect soon some new postings on certain website about the glories of only one bonafide sampradaya again.

QUOTE(kanai @ Sep. 15 2002,14:36)

QUOTE(GITGOVINDA @ Sep. 15 2002,13:26)

Dear Gita,

What do you mean by saying that, my dear friend ?
Who can really afirm that has a complet realization of the complexities of spiritual path, tha person must be a Pure Devotee. Otherwise he would be a pretender. But that very elevated soul will never say things like that.
So my dear Gita, just try to be humble. A young man like yourself should not be so proud. Rather you should be willing to learn from those who have accumulated some realizations. Try to develop that into a more comprehenssive understanding of the multi-dimemsional-nature of the Vaishnava-Community. That could help the future thinkers of your generation, to have a better version of it.
My dear one, forum like this is just like a treasure house full of valuables jewels.
O son of a Govardhanavasi, focus your attention on this rare opportunity of philosophicals and Historical analizes of the Sampradayas and so on, and keep it as an gift of Mother Nature for the good things you did in your pass life.

QUOTE

It just shows how institutionalized people(no matter of their age, or being male or female,black,white or yellow) respond to challenges or debates.Of course,with similar endings,like:I don't have to write nothing anymore,because i know the best,but i will come back in the near future.It is so sad to see how people love illusion instead of truth.

Dear Kanai,

Instead you be sad, I think you should be happy to see someone in his early-age trying to understand what so many grown-up people will never understand; life is beautiful.

Your servant
harisaran das

There is an ongoing discussion in the IndiaDivine forums which brings out many more important conclusion in the matter of diksa and pancaratrika-marga. I will post some contributions of mine in this thread which I believe are of interest. For the full discussion, please refer here. The references I post here begin from the third page of the thread.

The discussion also touches the controversy between Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati and the classical Gaudiya tradition. There are some interesting historical details which may be of interest. Again, I am only posting things I find to be of interest here. To follow the entire discussion, please refer to the thread given above.

QUOTE(Anadi @ ,)

Who attacked first?
The babaji or the gaudya math? Does make any difference?
Important is that you attained the level to be there, where I hope to be one day.

Historically speaking I believe the main friction was actually between the Gosvami traditions (sometimes known as caste Gosvamis) and the Gaudiya Math. It eventually came to include more or less the rest of the entire classical Gaudiya tradition, among whom the renunciate class was known as Babajis. I do not know the exact origin of the Gaudiya Math vs. Babajis friction, though I am certain that the conflict between Pandit Ramakrishna Das Baba and Bhaktisiddhanta contributed to it as well as the Radha Kund incident of 1935. The radical approach of the Gaudiya Math created tension between them and just about anyone who wasn't among them and agreeing with their reforms.

QUOTE(Muralidhara @ ,)

This false story that Prabhupad Srila Bhakti Siddhanta Saraswati Goswami did not receive the sound of the sacred Name of Sri Hari from Srila Gaurkishore Babaji Maharaj...

There is no controversy over his receiving the name of Hari. The controversy is over whether he received diksa-mantras from Gaura Kishora or not.

QUOTE(Muralidhara @ ,)

On the web site of Nitai das he tells a story that Srila Bhakti Siddhanta Saraswati Goswami didn't receive direct, personal initiation from Srila Gaurakishore Babaji. That story really is false.

Nitai das is not the only person from whom I've heard this account. It is a common bit of history among the Vaishnavas of Vraja who were involved with Pandit Ramakrishna Das Baba, Advaita Das Baba and others present on the occasion.

QUOTE(Muralidhara @ ,)

Indeed, there is substantial evidence to prove the
fact that Srila Bhakti Siddhanta Saraswati Goswami was a direct, authorised, initiated disciple of Srila Gaurakishore Babaji.

It would be great if you presented this substantial evidence. I have often heard the claim, but as of today, I have not seen the evidence. In your post I saw two statements which could be interpreted as evidence:

1. Lalita Prasad did not disagree with this. Not true, as presented later on in my post.

2. Bhaktisiddhanta placed Gaurakisora in samadhi. This does not mean he received diksa-mantras from him. He was a disciple, that we all know. The question is whether he was a diksa-disciple or not.

In fact, could you present any one statement of Bhaktisiddhanta's where he states that he received diksa-mantras from Gaura Kisora?

QUOTE(Muralidhara @ ,)

The most significant point I would make is that Saraswati Thakur's brother Lalit Prashad, who in later years became a critic of Saraswati Thakur, was quite closely associated with Saraswati Thakur and his disciples until 1918.

...

We know for a fact that Lalit Prashad didn't break contact with Sarasvati Thakur until after 1918, and surely he would have heard that Srila Saraswati Thakur said he was a disciple of Srila Babaji Maharaj. Surely Lalit Prashad would have gone and asked Babaji Maharaj if Srila Saraswati Thakur was his disciple, if he had any doubts.

Lalita Prasad Thakura left no uncertainty over the subject matter when he was asked about it. His answer was a simple "no". I know several people who heard this from him. He cooperated with Bhaktisiddhanta for the sake of Bhaktivinoda's mission despite the disagreements, until finally he broke off when he felt that Bhaktisiddhanta's innovations had become unacceptable.

QUOTE(Muralidhara @ ,)

Srila Gaurakisore Babaji initiated Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati in 1900.

Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati took a vow to chant the Name constantly and lived in Mayapur.

In 1905 Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati initiated his first disciple, then he initiated two or three others not long afterwards.

In 1905 Bhaktisiddhanta went into seclusion to chant the holy names. He did not initiate people there.

Can you give me the names of those disciples and the years of their initiation? As far as I am aware of, the first initiations he gave took place in 1918. Ananta Vasudeva Paravidyaratna, Haripada Vidyaratna and Dhirendra Natha Bandopadhayaya were initiated in 1918. Bhaktiprajnana Kesava and Bhaktikevala Audulomi received diksa in 1919. Perhaps you can refer me to anyone who received diksa prior to that?

Interestingly, 1918 is the very year when Lalita Prasad ceased to cooperate with Bhaktisiddhanta.

QUOTE(Anadi @ ,)

What is your opinion about the IMPORTANCE of the transcendetal sound of gopi mantra given from the sad guru to the elevated disciple by the babaji or sannyasa initiation? Can you give a sastric sustainance of your opinion?

The gopi-bhava mantra is there only in the Gaudiya Math. Outside the Gaudiya Math there is no mantra to accompany the giving of babaji vesa, at least not in the traditions I am acquainted with (Nityananda Parivar, Advaita Parivar, Narottama Parivar). I wonder where that ... gopibhavAzrayAya ... mantra comes from.

Two things I noticed I didn't comment on in Murali's text.

QUOTE(Muralidhara @ ,)

Surely Lalit Prashad, who is affiliated with the "babaji group"...

Lalita Prasad Thakura is not nor ever was affiliated with any individual babajis or any group of babajis. If he was, please let me know which babajis he was affiliated with.

QUOTE(Muralidhara @ ,)

In about 1887 Bhaktivinod Thakur discovered the birthplace of Mahaprabhu in Mayapur. Srila Jagannatha dasa Babaji was taken to Mayapur and he said or agreed that it was the birthplace of Mahaprabhu. At that time Bhaktivinod Thakur stayed in Surabhi Kunj at Godrumadwip. From that time, all the problems arose with Bipin Bihari Goswami (Bipin Bihari Goswami was the diksa guru of Thakur Bhaktivinode; Lalit Prashad and his disciples see Bipin Bihari Goswami as a Guru in their parampara). But our Saraswati Thakur rejected Bipin Bihari Goswami, partly because Bipin Bihari didn't accept Mayapur as the real birthplace of Mahaprabhu. (The document of Bipin Bihari expressing his view that Mayapura is not Mahaprabhu's birthplace is kept at Bagh Bazaar Math in Calcutta). This was a major point of difference which caused Srila Bhaktivinode Thakur to turn more to Jagannatha dasa Babaji for inspiration in his later years. He certainly turned away from Bipin Bihari Goswami because of his views about Mayapur, and other issues.

The passage above contains several historical errors.

There is no evidence to prove that Vipina Vihari Gosvami was opposed to Bhaktivinoda's presentation of Mahaprabhu's birthplace during Bhaktivinoda's presence. In fact, Vipina Vihari was one of the first directors of the committee to oversee Mahaprabhu's worship in the newly founded Yogapitha. This took place in 1891.

There is no evidence to show that Bhaktivinoda would have rejected or become distanced from Vipina Vihari. Throughout his writings we find him praise Vipina Vihari as his revered guru: In Gitamala (1893), in Amrita Pravaha Bhasya (1895), in Svalikhita Jivani (1896) and in Bhagavat Arka Marici Mala (1901).

It is a fact, though, that there was controversy five years after the disappearance of Bhaktivinoda (in 1919) which led Vipina Vihari to reject the new Yogapitha. Many take it that this was because of the fierce propaganda made by Bhaktisiddhanta and his followers against the rest of the tradition, as the new Yogapitha had by then come under the control of Bhaktisiddhanta.

There is a very informative article concerning the relationship between Bhaktivinoda and Vipina Vihari Gosvami compiled by Jagadananda Das. You can read it at http://www.granthamandira.org/~jagat/artic...ticle.php?id=14 .

At this point, the discussion shifts over to Haridas Thakura's initiation by Advaita Prabhu and the necessity of diksa in addition to harinam for attaining the ultimate goal of life.

QUOTE(Muralidhara @ ,)

In regard to the "Guru Parampara of Srila Bhakti Siddhanta Saraswati Goswami", I will first of all present the direct quotes of Srila Bhakti Rakshak Sridhar Maharaj, from whom I received Harinama and Gayatri Diksa.

You must try to understand, with all due respect, that trying to prove siddhanta on the authority of Sridhar Maharaja means very little when the very conceptions of Bhaktisiddhanta are under scrutiny. You'll have to refer to sources older than that.

QUOTE(Muralidhara @ ,)

The point is, that this lady developed Krishna Prema after receiving Harinama from Srila Haridas Thakur. According to Chaitanya Charitamrta, these events happened in Benopala in Bangladesh when Srila Haridas Thakur was a young man. These events happened before Srila Haridas Thakur went to live near Shantipura, where he met Sri Advaita Acharya and the other devotees in that region.

...

My understanding is that Haridas Thakur that did not receive formal initiation. But even if he was initiated by Sri Advaita Acharya, that initiation would have happend AFTER HARIDAS INITIATED THE PROSTITUTE LADY.

Do you have any evidence to substantiate this idea?

The sixteenth chapter of Caitanya Bhagavata (Adi-khanda, 18-21) states:

buDhAna-grAmete avatIrNa haridAsa
se-bhAgye se saba deze kIrtana-prakAza
kata-dIna thAkiyA AilA gaGgA-tIre
AsiyA rahilA phuliyAya zAntipure
pAiyA tAhAna saGga AcArya-gosAJi
huGkAra karena Anandera anta nAi
haridAsa ThAkur o advaita-deva-saGge
bhAsena govinda-rasa-samudra-taraGge
"Haridasa Thakura appeared in the village of Budhana, and as a result that province is filled with kirtana even today. After residing there for some time, he came to the bank of the Ganges at Phuliya, near Santipura. Upon obtaining Haridasa's association, Advaita Acarya roared in unlimited ecstacy. Similarly, in the association of Advaita Prabhu, Haridasa Thakura floated on the waves of the ocean of Krishna consciousness."

You wrote to me in your letter: "According to Chaitanya Bhagavat, the incident where Haridas Thakur converted the prostitute woman into a devotee of Sri Krishna happened when he was a young man living in Benapole, in his native District of Jessore (Bangladesh)." This chapter entitled "Haridasa Mahima Varnana" does not mention the story of Haridas's meeting the prostitute. Indeed, I cannot find it anywhere in the Caitanya Bhagavata.

Here you say that this is actually confirmed in the Caitanya Caritamrita. I noticed that the verse 99 of the third chapter (Antya-lila) indeed states:

haridAsa yabe nija-gRha tyAga kailA
benApolera vana-madhye kata-dina rahilA
"After leaving his home, Haridasa stayed for some time in the forest of Benapola."

Advaita Prakasa (chapter nine) relates that at one point in time, Haridas wanted to leave the village of Phuliya, going to a remote place for engaging in solitary bhajan. He then traveled to Benapole again. The seventh chapter of Advaita Prakasa relates how Haridas was five years old when he left his home. I doubt Ramacandra Khan would have sent a prostitute to seduce a five year old boy to break his vow of celibacy.

At any rate, Haridas did not give diksa to the prostitute. There is no restriction over who can give harinam to others. Indeed, anyone can and should engage others in chanting harinama.

QUOTE(Muralidhara @ ,)

Now having said this, let me say that in regard to Srila Saraswati Thakur's initiation from Srila Gaurkishore Das Babaji Maharaj, it is just a waste of time arguing about exactly what was said at the time Srila Gaurkishore Das Babaji Maharaj accepted Srila Saraswati Thakur. The substantial thing at the time of Diksa is that the Guru gives the disciple His Divine Grace. The name of Hari will be spoken to the disciple, certainly, since the divine master is always chanting the Name and glorifying the Name. But the exact nature of the ritual of initiation may vary from time to time, and from place to place.

It is not a waste of time. If you feel it is a waste of time, feel free to stop wasting your precious time. As far as I am concerned, I do wish to know whether he received the pancaratrika diksa mantras from Gaura Kisora he later gave to others, for in the Padma Purana it is stated: sampradAya vihIna ye mantras te niSphala mataH -- "A mantra which is not received through the sampradaya will yield no fruit."

QUOTE(Muralidhara @ ,)

Srila Haridas Thakura gives the method for deliverance of (us) yavanas. We western born persons. His answer is loud sankirtan.

With all due respect, Mahaprabhu empowered the six Gosvamis to establish the methods of worship and write books accordingly. Aside this, the vast majority of Bhaktisiddhanta's disciples were Indian born. This hardly makes your point relevant to the situation of Bhaktisiddhanta.

QUOTE(Muralidhara @ ,)

Now in recent times some persons have started promoting the view that everyone should aspire to attain raganuga-bhajan. People can say this, but in our Chaitanya Saraswat Math we have a different idea.
...
I don't intend to offend anyone by presenting this strong statement. But my Guru Maharaj was very firm in saying that the "lila smarana" of beginners is only a mental exercise. The real duty of all followers of Mahaprabhu is to promote Nama-sankirtana, and by that service of promoting Nama-sankirtan then surely we will get the grace of Mahaprabhu, who is Radha Govinda combined. Attaining His Grace, we may find our swarup siddhi. But to try and imagine oneself as an associate within the group of the manjaris, this idea, according to my Guru Maharaj, is a terrible sort of vanity. And even if someone has been doing this smarana for 50 years at Radha Kunda, he may still be simply engaging in imaginary smarana.

You have the right to believe so. And I have the right to not believe or accept this idea unless you can establish your presentation by referring to the authoritative writings of the Six Gosvamis, Narottama and Visvanatha. Whenever there is a conflict between what they say and what a contemporary teacher says, I tend to accept the foundational conceptions of the Gosvamis.

It is explained by Jiva in his Bhakti Sandarbha and Visvanatha in his Raga Vartma Candrika that prior to svarupa siddhi, the inner contemplation will be on a mentally conceived siddha-body which one aspires for. But this would already be the subject matter of another lengthy conversation. Let us try to stick to this topic for now.

QUOTE(JNDas @ ,)

And I am sure you will equally agree that the authority of questionable babas who were aversive to Bhaktisiddhanta and who fabricated uncomfirmable stories to discredit Bhaktisiddhanta are also not relevant testimony.

To begin with, you would have to prove that they were adversible to Bhaktisiddhanta prior to this incident. Also you cannot claim the story to be fabricated just because you do not like it.

You call the eye-witness accounts of at least four recognized and respected Vaishnavas irrelevant. If you'd have read the biography of Pandit Ramakrishna Das Baba in the Krishna Talk section, you'd be aware of the fact that he was universally respected among the Gaudiya Vaishnavas of his time, and indeed even by acaryas of other sampradayas would approach him. Prior to this incident, even Bhaktisiddhanta took his entourage for the Baba's darshan on Vraja Mandala parikrama. You can read this in OBL Kapoor's "Saints of Vraja".

If we were to adhere to any decent standards of evaluating evidence in trying to attain certainty on an event which took place, I am certain that four eye-witness account would weigh more in the scale of an impartial judge than an unsubstantiated claim with no witnesses and many factors which give rise to suspicion which have been discussed before.

QUOTE(JNDas @ ,)

One must receive mantras through the sampradaya. Those mantras do not necessarily have to have been passed down from time immemorial. Mantras are realized through sadhana, thus the worshipper becomes a drashta of the mantra, or the seer of the mantra. This is the tradition, and it has been for thousands of years in all schools of Vedic philosophy.

What are the origins of the Gaudiya diksha mantras? How far back in history can they be traced? They were introduced into the sampradaya at a point in time by a drashta.

The mantras as we receive them are traced back to the eternal associates of Mahaprabhu. Some of the mantras (Gopala Mantra and Kama Gayatri) do and others (Gaura Gayatri etc.) don't have a history prior to that. We take the mantra as authorized because it was given on the command of Sri Caitanya, Sri Nityananda and Sri Advaita. Sri Caitanya delegated the giving of mantra to these two Prabhus, Nityananda and Advaita, who both have a massive following in the Gaudiya tradition. Additionally Lokanatha, Syamananda and others initiated vast diksa-paramparas which exist unbroken up to the present day. This does not yield support to broken zig-zag paramparas where diksa-mantras appear and disappear in the course of time.

Would you propose that when I become a seer I can give whatever mantra I wish without having received it from anyone?

QUOTE(JNDas @ ,)

The physical whispering of external sound in the ear of a person is not necessary.

In Hari Bhakti Vilasa (2nd vilasa) the giving of mantra from the mouth of the guru to the ear of the disciple is an essential aspect in the description of Vaishnava diksa. Diksa means the giving of mantra from the mouth of the guru to the ear of the disciple.

The Bhagavata (11.21.15) states 'mantrasya ca parijJAnaM' - the mantra is purified by the right knowledge". Sri Visvanatha Cakravarti writes in his commentary on this verse that one cannot just take mantras or their purports from books to reach the same effect: sad guru mukhAt yathAvat parijJAnam mantra-zuddhiH – "The mantra is purified when it properly emanates from the mouth of a sad-guru."

Brahma Vaivarta Purana (Krishna Janma Khanda 83.34) also leaves no uncertainty over the subject matter:

guru vaktrAd viSNu mantro yasya kare vizatyayam
taM vaiSNavaM mahApUtaM pravadanti manISiNaH
"The wise call those persons in whose ears the Vishnu-mantra enters, as it emanated from the Guru's mouth, greatly sanctified Vaishnavas."

QUOTE(Muralidhara @ ,)

The holy name of Krsna is so important that even the gayatri mantra may not be necessary. It is said: na ca sat kriya, na dikse na ca purascarya manadilate mantrayam rasana spri hanato sri krsna namatmaka: "One need not undergo all the purificatory processes, or follow the six ritualistic ceremonies mentioned in the Vedas for pious life; one need not even take initiation into the gayatri mantra. If one simply chants the holy name of Krsna without offense, everything will be successful." The holy name of Krsna is the most important consideration. The gayatri mantra may not even be necessary.

Have you read the Bhakti Sandarbha? There are many impressive incidents in the history of Gaudiya Vaishnavism, but Bhakti Sandarbha presents the conclusive philosophical thesis on the practice of devotion. Sri Jiva writes in Anuccheda 283:

yadyapi zrI-bhAgavata-mate paJcarAtrAdivad arcana-mArgasyAvazyakatvaM nAsti, tad vinApi zaraNApatty-AdInAm ekatareNApi puruSArtha-siddher abhihitatvAt, tathApi zrI-nAradAdi-vartmAnusaradbhiH zrI-bhagavatA saha sambandha-vizeSaM dIkSA-vidhAnena zrI-guru-caraNa-sampAditaM cikIrSadbhiH kRtAyAM dIkSAyAm arcanam avazyaM kriyetaiva |

"Although in the opinion of the Bhagavata Purana, the path of arcana, like the Pancaratra and so forth, is not necessary, since, even without that, one can achieve the goal of human life by one of the other methods like surrender (saranapatti) and the rest, still those who are following the path of Narada and others and who desire the particular relationship with the Lord that is effected at the feet of the guru by the rite of diksa necessarily perform arcana when diksa is completed."

Instead of imitating the miracles performed by the powerful Mahajanas we should follow the law they present.

You have quoted the "na dikse na ca purascarya" stanza without proper reference. Indeed, quoting this verse Sridhar Maharaja himself says in the ninth chapter of Sri Guru and His Grace, "it is said..." as the only reference. For the record, this is the 29th prayer of Rupa Gosvami's Padyavali, quoted from Laksmidhara's Bhagavan Nama Kaumudi.

The words of this prayer are certainly true. Looking at the context in which the word "diksa" appears in the verse, you will inevitably notice how it is surrounded by several karma-kandiya activities. It is an open question whether this refers to pancaratrika vaishnava diksa or initiation with Brahma Gayatri, the ritualistic sandhya-vandana of brahmins. Looking at the context, the latter option seems more likely.

In your translation, "one need not even take initiation into the gayatri mantra", the word "even" is used to make an impression that the diksa mentioned in the verse is far superior to sat-kriya and purascarana. However, the word "even" does not appear in the original Sanskrit of the verse. Additionally the fragment of a verse quoted by Sridhar Maharaja is reversed. Here is the original verse:

AkRSTiH kRta-cetasAM sumanasAm uccAManaM cAMhasAm
AcaNDAlam amUka-loka-sulabho vazyaz ca mukti-zriyaH |
no dIkSAM na ca sat-kriyAM na ca purazcaryAM manAg IkSate
mantro 'yaM rasanA-spRg eva phalati zrI-kRSNa-nAmAtmakaH ||29||
zrI-lakSmIdharANAm ||

Let me offer a verbatim translation of the same:

“The deeply thoughtful, pure-minded persons are attracted to it; it is the destroyer of sinful reactions of the candalas and the fools; the opulences of mukti are under its control; it does not even slightly depend on diksa, pious deeds and preparatory rituals; just by touching the tongue, this mantra consisting of Sri Krishna’s names is fruitful!”

First of all, you may note that the verse actually does not speak of Krishna-nama itself, but of mantra consisting of Sri Krishna's names. The independence of the nAmAtmaka-mantra is discussed in the 284th Anuccheda at great length. Sri Jiva presents several references stating how Bhagavan Namatmaka-mantra is independent from preparatory rituals, pious deeds and so forth. He mentions Gopala-mantra, Nrisimha-mantra and Varaha-mantra.

Sri Jiva Gosvami further discusses the theology nAmAtmaka-mantra and the necessity for diksa in this Anuccheda of Bhakti Sandarbha as follows:

nanu bhagavan-nAmAtmakA eva mantrAH | tatra vizeSeNa namaH-zabdAdy-alaMkRtAH zrIbhagavatA zrImad-RSibhiz cAhita-zakti-vizeSAH zrIbhagavatA samam Atma-sambandha-vizeSa-pratipAdakAz ca | tatra kevalAni zrIbhagavan-nAmAny api nirapekSANy eva parama-puruSArtha-phala-paryanta-dAna-samarthAni | tato mantreSu nAmato'py adhika-sAmarthye labdhe kathaM dIkSAdy-apekSA | ucyate | yadyapi svarUpato nAsti tathApi prAyaH svabhAvato dehAdi-sambandhena kadartha-zIlAnAM vikSipta-cittAnAM janAnAM tat-tat-saMkocIkaraNAya zrImad-RSi-prabhRtibhir atrArcana-mArge kvacit kvacit kAcit kAcin maryAdA sthApitAsti | tatas tad-ullaGghane zAstraM prAyazcittam udbhAvayati | tata ubhayam api nAsamaJjasam iti tatra tat-tad-apekSA nAsti |

“Indeed the mantra consists of the names of Bhagavan. Therefore the mantras chanted by great devotees and sages are characterized with the ornamented ‘namah’ and contain special potency nondifferent from Sri Bhagavan, and they cause one to obtain a special relationship with the Lord. Therefore the mere chanting the name of Bhagavan is sufficient for attaining the fruit of the supreme goal of life. Someone may say, ‘Then if the name is sufficient for attaining the goal, can diksa and so forth be rejected?’

To this it is said: ‘Although essentially there is no need for this, due to a connection with the material body and so forth people are engaged in unmeaningful acts which agitate the consciousness. For overcoming this, the sages have established the path of arcana-marga through which one attains the proper standards. To overcome this, the scriptures present preparatory deeds. Therefore it is improper to reject either of the two.”

The conclusion of Sri Jiva is very clear in this regard.

QUOTE(Muralidhara @ ,)

You neglect to consider an important fact.

Sri Chaitanyadev himself accepted the Bhagavatam philosophy, and didn't even write any scriptures himself.

And in Bhagavatam we read of how Sukadev, the main speaker in Bhagavatam, became connected with the Divine without receiving any of these mantras that have been passed down in Gaudiya Sampradayas for the past five hundred years. Sukadev is an obvious example in Bhagavatam but there are others throughout history. Who was the Guru of Jayadev. Did he get some special initiation so he could get the realizations to write Gita Govinda.

This is indeed an important consideration which is addressed in the fourteenth verse of Narottama's Prema Bhakti Candrika:

mahAjanera yei patha, tAte habe anurata
pUrbApara kariyA bicAra
sAdhana-smaraNa-lIlA, ihAte na kara helA
kAya mane kariyA susAra
"With great affection I will follow the path of the Mahajanas, differentiating between the previous and the later. Never neglect the sadhana of lila-smarana, for it is the very essence of the mind."

Sri Visvanatha comments on this verse:

daNDakAraNya-vAsi munayo bRhat vAmanokta zrutayaz ca candrakAnti jayadeva vidyApati caNDi dAsa bilvamaGgalAdayaz ca pUrva mahAjanAH SaD gosvAminaH para mahAjanAH.

"The sages of the Dandakaranya-forest, the Srutis mentioned in Brihad Vamanokta, Candrakanti, Jayadeva, Vidyapati, Candi Das, Bilvamangala and others are previous mahajanas. The six Gosvamis are later mahajanas."

Thus we follow both the bhava and the standards of the later mahajanas who were directly empowered by Mahaprabhu to write down His theology and to establish the standards to be followed by His followers.

QUOTE(Muralidhara @ ,)

I didn't notice that statement before. Anyhow, you are certainly wrong here. According to the book Prabhupada Srila Saraswati Thakur, the first disciples were initiated Srila Saraswati Thakur in 1905. The names are given in the book, which I unfortunately do not have here (someone borrowed it and didn't return it). But I am ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN OF THE DATE, 1905, AND THE NAMES OF THE DISCIPLES AND DETAILS ARE IN THAT BOOK. In fact Kunja Babu (Sri Bhakti Vilas Tirtha Maharaj) was present at the time Srila Gaurakisora Babaji entered samadhi. He was the person who brought the news to Saraswati Thakur that Babaji Maharaj had passed away the night before. Together they went to receive the Divine Form of Srila Gaurakisora Dasa Babaji and to make the samadhi. This was on 17 November 1915. Tirtha Maharaj was not initiated at that time, but took initiation soon after.

Kunja Babu (BV Tirtha) was certainly among the first ones. He is the one who brought Bhaktisiddhanta out from the forests and helped him establish the Gaudiya Matha institution. If he wasn't initiated before 1915 (when was the year of his initiation, by the way?), it appears unlikely that others were. So, I would like to see the facts. Even using ALL CAPITALS does not help, you just need to give me the names and the years of initiation.

I recall from my days in the Gaudiya Vedanta Samiti how it was told that Bhaktiprajnan Keshava Maharaja was the first one to receive guru-mantra from Bhaktisiddhanta. The account is also related in his biography, "Acarya Keshari", pages 31-33. There it is related how Bhaktisiddhanta first didn't give him the guru-mantra until BPK insisted to receive one. I was told (by BV Aranya Maharaja) that only after that the practice of giving guru-mantra became current in the Gaudiya Matha.

Interestingly, I noted that BPK received harinama from Bhaktisiddhanta in 1915, but diksa only in 1919. The biography mentions the first two lady disciples of Bhaktisiddhanta's, namely Sriyuta Sarojavasini and Priyatama devi, who were aunts of BPK. It is not specified there, though, whether they had received mantra-diksa, harinama, or indeed any initiation at all. When you do give any references about Bhaktisiddhanta's first initiates, it is important that you pay attention to whether they were initiated into diksa-mantra or harinama.

QUOTE(Muralidhara @ ,)

You say that Lalit Prashad has said Srila Saraswati Thakur was not a disciple of Srila Gaurakisora Babaji.

No. I am saying he said that Bhaktisiddhanta didn't receive pancaratrika diksa mantras from the Baba.

QUOTE(Muralidhara @ ,)

Yes, but I don't see an inconsistency here. The quote says, "knowledge of the true nature of the Lord in the mantra". And my Guru Maharaj is saying that the Name in the mantra is the worshipable Entity within the mantra. When the Guru gives a disciple true understanding that the Name of Hari within the mantra is Hari Himself, then that divine transmission is Diksa.

Why do you want to endlessly twist this around? It is very clear to any honest reader that the entire Anuccheda 283 discusses the subject matter of pancaratra, arcana and mantra-diksa. gRhNIyAd vaiSNavaM mantraM dIkSA pUrvaM vidhAnataH -- "One should receive a Vaisnava mantra diksa preceded with proper procedures." Is that so difficult to accept?

QUOTE(Anadi @ ,)

How could be that the gopala mantra can be used as a FORMAL INITIATION. Maybe I am wrong but formality is there where the real substance is missing. And the gopala mantra is transcendental.

DIKSA can be a formality only in a line with no substantiality.

I wish to congratulate you for your very brilliant observations here. Well done.

QUOTE(Anadi @ ,)

On the other hand we could say, the diksa ceremony is in a particular way anustany (formality), because diksa is a whole process but not really anustany because the diksa process is initiated with the diksa ceremony.

How does the word anustany (likely "anuSThAna", "anuSThAnika") imply formality? "anuSThAna" is translated as "carrying out", "undertaking", "religious practice". What is the origin of this term in defining a formal diksa?

In Tattva Sandarbha (46) I found it used as follows:

bhaktiyogaH zravaNa-kIrtanAdi-lakSaNaH sAdhana-bhaktiH, na tu prema-lakSaNaH | anuSThAnaM hy upadezApekSaM prema tu tat-prasAdApekSam iti

"Bhakti-yoga expressed through sravana, kirtana and so forth, lacking the characteristics of prema, is sadhana bhakti. Practice (anuSThAnaM) is that which depends on proper instructions, and prema is that which depends on the Lord's grace."

This stanza actually defines the kind of bhakti referred to in an earlier verse, but conveys the point alone in this context. Here the word "anuSThAna" is used to indicate "sAdhana". Baladeva comments: anuSThAnaM kRti-sAdhyam -- "anuSThAna brings about sAdhya."

Aside this, it only appears in the Sat Sandarbhas as a general expression of doing something, the kind of undertaking in question being defined by another word in the passage. In fact, you will often find the expression "bhakti-anusthana", engaging in acts of devotion, there.

Funny thing is that our friend is first so adament that Bhaktisiddhanta WAS initiated, and then suddenly changes his tune that initiation is anyway not necessary or essential. So much trouble to prove something which is not necessary.....

Is it okay to claim that this is my 'siksa sampradaya'?

Sri Caitanya
Gopal Bhatta Goswami
Syamananda Pandit
Visvanath Cakravarti
Baladeva Vidyabhusana
Bhaktivinoda Thakur
Sahkicarana Das Baba
Bon Maharaja
Harikesh Das

QUOTE(Radhapada @ Oct. 06 2002,11:11)

Sure. But since diksa connections don't matter to the siksa-parampara (sic), can't you fit Mirabai in there somewhere? :)

QUOTE(Advaitadas @ Oct. 06 2002,09:20)

The crux of the matter is that people in this group appear to have a conception of diksa rather different from the traditional understanding of mantra-diksa. The famous divyam jnanam verse has given rise to myriads of interpretations over the meaning of diksa all the way to attempts to replace diksa with siksa altogether. However, given the context in which the verse appears, there is little room for interpretation. The couplet of verses beginning with divyam jnanam is also quoted in the Hari Bhakti Vilasa (second vilasa) in the context of mantra-diksa.

Quoting verses out of context appears to be a common practice. Related with the subject matter of diksa there is another famous verse which is often picked out of context, "dvijatvaM jAyate nRNAm", which is taken to prove the validity of the practice of bestowing the status of brahminhood of varnasrama-dharma to the initiate along with the upavita (sacred thread). The entire text reads as follows (Bhakti Sandarbha, Anuccheda 298).

yAni cAtra vaiSNava-cihnAna nirmAlya-dhAraNa-caraNAmRta-pAnAdIny aGgAni teSAM ca pRthak pRthak mAhAtmya-vRndaM zAstra-sahasreSv anusandheyam |

“Some symptoms of a Vaishnava are the acceptance of flowers accepted by the Lord, acceptance of the nectarine water which has washed His feet, and so forth. In many many places in thousands of scriptures the multitude of their glory has been ascertained.”

athArcanAdhikAri-nirNayaH |

“Now eligibility for arcana is considered.”

etad vai sarva-varNAnAm AzramANAM ca sammatam |
zreyasAm uttamaM manye strI-zUdrANAM ca mAna-da || [BhP 11.27.4]
“Indeed, this [arcana] is befitting for members of all castes (varna) and orders (asrama) of life. O magnanimous one, in my opinion also ladies and the working class of men can attain the supreme benefit from it.

sarva-varNAnAM traivarNikAnAm | tathA ca smRty-artha-sAre pAdme ca vaizAkha-mAhAtmye -

“All castes here refers to three varnas. In the Vaisakhya-mahatmya of Padma Purana the essence of the import of smriti is presented:

Agamoktena mArgeNa strI-zUdrair api pUjanam |
kartavyaM zraddhayA viSNoz cintayitvA patiM hRdi ||
zUdrANAM caiva bhavati nAmnA vai devatArcanam |
sarve'py Agama-mArgeNa kuryur vedAnukAriNA ||
strINAm apy adhikAro'sti viSNor ArAdhanAdiSu |
pati-priya-ratAnAM ca zrutir eSA sanAtanI || [PadmaP 6.84.48, 52-4] iti |
“Through the path of the Agamas, ladies and workers may engage in the worship of Vishnu with faith, thinking of Him within their hearts. Indeed, also the working class of men can worship the Lord. The path of the Agamas, which follows the Vedas, is for everyone. Ladies who are dear and devoted to their husband are eligible for worshiping Vishnu and so forth. This is the eternal desire of the Srutis.

viSNu-dharme -
devatAyAM ca mantre ca tathA mantra-prade gurau |
bhaktir aSTa-vidhA yasya tasya kRSNaH prasIdati ||
tad-bhakta-jana-vAtsalyaM pUjAyAM cAnumodanam |
sumanA arcayen nityaM tad-arthe dambha-varjanam ||
tat-kathA-zravaNe rAgas tad-arthe cAGga-vikriyA |
tad-anusmaraNaM nityaM yas tan-nAmopajIvati ||
bhaktir aSTa-vidhA hy eSA yasmin mlecche'pi vartate |
sa muniH satya-vAdI ca kIrtimAn sa bhaven naraH || iti |
“In Vishnu-dharma:

‘Sri Krishna is satisfied with the one who is engaged in bhakti in eight ways, dedicated to the Lord, his mantra and the mantra-giving guru. (1) Being kind to His devotees, (2) Honoring and pleasing Him, (3) Regularly worshiping Him with a pure mind, (4) Renouncing hypocrisy, (5) Being attached to hearing narrations about Him, (6) Engaging all of one’s limbs in serving him, (7) Constantly meditating on Him, and (8) Accepting His name as one’s very life. These are the eight kinds of bhakti which even barbarians can adopt and become truthful sages and glorious among men.’

kiM ca tattva-sAgare -
yathA kAJcanatAM yAti kAMsyaM rasa-vidhAnataH |
tathA dIkSA-vidhAnena dvijatvaM jAyate nRRNAm || iti |
“Moreover in Tattva-sagara:

‘Just as bell-metal becomes gold when treated with mercury, so men become twice-born through the method of diksa.’

atha kRte zuklaz catur-bAhuH [BhP 11.5.19] ity AdinA yuga-bhede yaz copAsanAyAm AvirbhAva-bheda ucyate, sa ca prAyika eva | tebhyaz caturbhyo'nyeSAm upAsanA zAstrAd eva | anyathetaropAsanAyAH kAlAsamAvezaH syAt | zrUyante ca sarvatra yuge sarvopAsakAH | tasmAt sarvair api sarvadApi yathecchaM sarva evAvirbhAvAH pUjyA iti sthtitam | ata etad vai sarva-varNAnAM [BhP 11.27.4] ity AdikaM sarva-sammatam eva ||

“‘In the age of Satya the Lord is white and four-armed’ and so forth [BhP 11.5.19]. Here the upasana for the different manifestations of the Lord during different yugas are ordained. In this way the scriptures of worship describe four different kinds of worship. Aside this, other kinds of worship can also done at that time. It is heard [from the scripture] that in all yugas, all kinds of worship may be engaged in. Therefore during each yuga at all times, according to one’s desire one may worship any manifestation, thus it is established. ‘This is so for all castes’ and so forth [BhP 11.27.4] approves that it is for everyone.

|| 11.27 || uddhavaH zrI-bhagavantam || 298 ||

“Uddhava in the Srimad Bhagavata 11.27.”

Thus we may note that the entire Anuccheda discusses the subject matter of arcana according to the Agamas, or in other words, the path of pancaratra. The verse is quoted to illustrate the fact that by receiving pancaratrika-diksa anyone becomes qualified for arcana, the worship of the mantra-devata.

Upanayana-samskara (the ceremony of sacred thread) and receiving Brahma Gayatri are not a part of the path of pancaratra. The Brahma Gayatri, coming directly from the Rig Veda, is a part of the sruti tradition, and consequently different rules apply with it. Ladies are not given upanayanam and Brahma Gayatri for this very reason, though they receive pancaratrika mantras just as the men do.

Therefore, to connect this verse with Varnasrama-dharma and bestowal of brahminhood is to take it out of context and to utilize it for something it was never meant for.