Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura's sannyasa

[Guest guest]

Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura's sannyasa

 

 

Siddhanta Sarasvati now started a new chapter in his life: wholesale war on

maya. He inaugurated it by taking sannyasa at age forty-four on

Gaura-pürnima, 29 March 1918, in Vrajapattana, Mayapur. Seeing no suitable

person present to act as his sannyasa-guru, Siddhanta Sarasvati took

sannyasa by taking the tridanda of a Vaisnava sannyasi and sitting in

meditation in front of a picture of Srila Gaura Kisora dasa Babaji Maharaja.

(Ideological enemies accused Sarasvati Thakura of impropriety for taking

sannyasa "by himself," but the precedent had previously been set by the

great Vaisnava acarya Ramanuja.) Thus Siddhanta Sarasvati became

Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Goswami.

 

Being transcendentally perfect even before coming to this world, Srila

Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura did not take sannyasa for his own

spiritual benefit. But sannyasa is required for preaching, because those who

follow it strictly are generally respected and their authority accepted.

Therefore just as Lord Caitanya took sannyasa to attract others to hear His

message, so did Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura.

 

Like many of his other activities, his taking sannyasa was certain to be

controversial. Traditionally renunciates in the Gaudiya Vaisnava sampradaya

became babajis, dressing in simple white cloth like the six Gosvamis of

Vrndavana and withdrawing from the world to become absorbed in hearing and

chanting the names of Krsna. But most contemporary babajis were far from the

ideal set by the six Gosvamis; indeed they were widely rejected as a class

of immoral knaves. Yet even if actually observed immaculately, the ascetic

life was largely irrelevant to the practical spiritual needs of the general

populace, most of whom thus ended in the clutches of worldly-minded caste

Goswamis. Even the few caste Goswamis who themselves strictly observed

devotional ideals were largely unable to discipline or train their so-called

disciples. And virtually none of the supposed followers of Caitanya

Mahaprabhu had any inkling of the Lord's desire for widespread preaching or

the wherewithal to fulfill it. Clearly, a change of paradigm would be

required if Gaudiya Vaisnavism in its pure form was to survive, and

Mahaprabhu's edict of worldwide preaching be fulfilled. Sarasvati Thakura's

acceptance of sannyasa was the first of several measures in his giving new

direction and emphasis to the Gaudiya tradition and transforming it into a

global mission presenting Krsna consciousness in a manner relevant to the

modern world.

 

Vaisnava sannyasa being unheard of at that time in Bengal, Sarasvati Thakura

and his followers had to repeatedly uphold its validity to often skeptical

inquirers. Detractors noted that Caitanya Mahaprabhu had Himself quoted

Brahma-vaivarta Purana, that in Kali-yuga sannyasa is forbidden:

 

asvamedham gavalambham

 

sannyasam pala-paitrkam

 

devarena sutotpattim

 

kalau panca vivarjayet

 

In this Age of Kali, five acts are forbidden: the offering of a horse in

sacrifice, the offering of a cow in sacrifice, the acceptance of the order

of sannyasa, the offering of oblations of flesh to the forefathers, and a

man's begetting children in his brother's wife.

 

In reply, Sarasvati Thakura noted that Mahaprabhu had given this reference

when rebutting a sinful anti-Vedic Muslim magistrate who wanted to justify

beef eating on the basis of Vedic scripture, and that the topic of sannyasa

was only circumstantially mentioned in that debate. In other words,

Mahaprabhu had never stressed that sannyasa be forbidden, and that He

Himself did not to this understanding was demonstrated by the

Lord's Himself accepting sannyasa shortly thereafter. In doing so He did not

violate sastra, for the injunction that sannyasa is forbidden in Kali-yuga

is from a rajasic Purana meant for karmis, and as such applies to

karma-sannyasa, which is to be undertaken only by pure Vedic brahmanas, who

no longer exist in Kali-yuga and whose mode of renunciation should therefore

not be imitated by unqualified men. However, this scriptural directive was

never meant to restrain suitable persons from dedicating their whole beings

in the intrinsic function of the soul, namely service to the supreme lord

Krsna. Indeed, the great recognized acaryas Ramanuja, Madhva, Visnusvami,

Nimbarka, and numerous others in their disciplic lines had accepted the

order of sannyasa in Kali-yuga. Even smarta Raghunandana, a near

contemporary of Mahaprabhu, had prescribed one day's fasting as atonement

for failing to offer respect upon seeing a sannyasi.

 

Sarasvati Thakura would cite that not only had Lord Caitanya taken sannyasa,

but before Him His guru and parama-guru had also; that nine sannyasi

associates are listed in Caitanya-caritamrta (Adi 9.13-15) as roots of the

Caitanya tree; and that Prabhodananda Sarasvati, a prominent devotee of Lord

Caitanya, was a tridandi sannyasi. Although no subsequent generations of

Gaudiyas had accepted sannyasa, Sarasvati Thakura did so in the spirit of

the six Gosvamis, who had not simply led uneventful lives in Vrndavana but

had been busy researching, writing books, and preparing disciples for the

preaching mission. The discipline and dynamism of the Gaudiya Matha was

actually more akin to the monastic life of Rüpa and Sanatana than that of

the indolent babajis, despite some differences in externals.

 

Various critics argued that because the position of sannyasa invites honor

from all, embracing it goes against Lord Caitanya's teaching of considering

oneself lower than a straw in the street. Others contended that adopting

sannyasa and going out for preaching was a deviation from the line of Rüpa

and other Gosvamis, who had lived peaceful lives of contemplation and

meditation in Vrndavana.

 

Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati explained that by embracing sannyasa a devotee

maintains a position within varnasrama-dharma, thus indicating that he is

still endeavoring for liberation rather than posing as if he has already

attained it. Both of Sarasvati Thakura's gurus, Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura

and Srila Gaura Kisora dasa Babaji, had donned the babaji dress of

paramahamsas. A true paramahamsa has fully mastered his senses and is thus

above the temptations of the world. One such soul is hardly to be found

among millions, yet at that time many rascals, despite not even following

basic moral principles, shamelessly imitated the dress of Rüpa Gosvami.

Sarasvati Thakura wanted to demonstrate by personal example that the status

of a paramahamsa cannot be attained simply through mimicry. Although

certainly a topmost paramahamsa himself, by donning the attire of a sannyasi

rather than that of a babaji, Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati exhibited the

humility of placing himself in lower standing than his gurus. And actually,

although the six Gosvamis had worn white and his red was a new introduction,

Sarasvati Thakura had maintained the original spirit of Rüpa and Sanatana

while modifying the form, whereas the ignoble babajis mindlessly adhered to

the form but had not the spirit.

 

In response to criticisms of Vaisnava renunciates adopting a style of dress

different from that of the six Gosvamis, Sarasvati Thakura commented,

"Nowadays many people who do not even perform devotional service, but

instead indulge in crass immorality, are wearing garb reserved for devotees

on the topmost level of spiritual realization and renunciation. We thus

propose that it is more appropriate to wear clothing suited to our

activities and position in life, and wherefrom inwardly turn to the Lord."

 

Moreover, sannyasa was required for preaching. Whereas paramahamsa babajis

were expected to withdraw from the world, living simply and peacefully and

concentrating on their own bhajana, sannyasis of the Vaisnava schools and

even of the Sankaracarya sampradaya had traditionally moved in the world to

disseminate their message, often engaging in severe doctrinal struggle to do

so. It was exactly this kind of sannyasa that Sarasvati Thakura wanted to

institute: men ready to sacrifice everything to fight for Krsna.

 

Reintroduction of Vaisnava sannyasa was especially a challenge to the

Mayavadis, who absurdly maintained that merely by assuming the saffron of

sannyasa a man becomes liberated and equal to God; and was in simulation of

and to counteract the Ramakrishna Mission, whose sannyasis' saffron dress

had become much familiar and respected in Bengal. Sarasvati Thakura desired

to establish that sannyasa is meant neither for self-aggrandizement nor

self-abnegation, but for acknowledging one's position of unflinching

servitorship to the Lord. Particularly, tridanda-sannyasa is meant to fix a

devotee's mind, body, and words in service to Krsna.

 

Sarasvati Thakura wanted to demonstrate the real standard of renunciation.

He referred to the deceitful abnegation of lascivious babajis who smoked and

consorted with women, as markata-vairagya: "monkey-like renunciation." Like

saintly persons, monkeys live in forests, go naked, and eat only fruit, but

they are always busy enjoying with dozens of female monkeys. Similarly,

although commonly referred to as vairagis (renunciates), many renegade

babajis clandestinely or even openly had illicit connections with unchaste

women who congregated in holy places after having been banished from

respectable society. Most contemporary babajis in Bengal, and especially in

Navadvipa, lived in akhras with vaisnavis who were mostly pre-menopausal

widows or rejected adultresses. These philanderers and their concubines were

mostly from the lowest strata of society and of direly uncultured behavior,

hardly fit to be considered saintly in any sense of the term. The words

akhra, vairagi, and vaisnavi had thus become epithets associated with

fornication and other illicit and immoral activities far beyond the pale of

respectable society.

 

 

(From my upcoming book on Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura)