Following Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu

[Guest guest]

Krishna Susarla has raised a question on the theme of a befitting course of

action for the followers of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu.

 

>>> We are debating about which aachaaryas truly represent the spirit of Lord

Chaitanya's sampradaaya - Srila Bhaktisiddhanta or the babajis who criticize

him. Whether or not the babajis "preach" (however they define it), is not the

issue. The issue is whether or not they preach as Lord Chaitanya did, and as He

expected His followers to do. That is a perfectly reasonable course, since we

are being made to believe that they are more "orthodox" in their Gaudiiya

Vaishnavism than Srila Bhaktisiddanta and his followers. I will not take issue

with saints who spend their lives sitting in solitude, absorbed in

Radha-Krishna seva. I will take issue when someone tries to imply that this is

what Lord Chaitanya expected of us. First follow Lord Chaitanya's example, then

presume to criticize others who allegedly do not. It is a simple and very

reasonable request. <<<

The paragraph above was followed by numerous citations from the Caitanya

Caritamrita which encourage everyone to carry the message of Sri Caitanya to

others.A genuine follower of Sri Caitanya is indeed committed to conveying His

message to the mankind. This we agree on. However, let us reflect on how He

desired this desire of His to be fulfilled.

 

It is universally agreed among the Gaudiyas that the six Gosvamis are the

role-models to be followed. Sri Caitanya Himself gave the mandate to fulfill

his desires to Sri Rupa and Sri Sanatana Gosvamis, as documented in the

Caitanya Caritamrita in His instructions to them. According to Narottama Das

Thakura:

 

zrI-caitanya-mano-’bhISTaM sthApitaM yena bhU-tale

svayaM rUpaH kadA mahyaM dadAti sva-padAntikam

 

“When will Sri Rupa, who established Sri Caitanya's inner desire in this world,

give me the shelter of his feet?”

 

Among other places, this is declared in Visvanatha's Raga Vartma Candrika (in

commenting on the famous "seva sadhaka-rupena" verse):

 

tatra prakAram Aha, vraja-lokAnusArataH sAdhaka rUpeNAnugamyamAnA ye vrajalokAH

zrI rUpa gosvAmy AdayaH ye ca siddha rUpeNAnugamyamAnAH vraja-lokAH zrI rUpa

maJjaryyAdayas tad anusArataH.

 

“In one’s physical body, one follows in the footsteps of Srila Rupa Gosvami and

other saints who lived in Vraja, and in the mentally conceived spiritual body,

one follows in the footsteps of Srimati Rupa Manjari and other eternal

associates of Krishna.” (1.11)

 

When we examine the lives of the six Gosvamis, we can readily observe that they

did not travel around to preach the message of Sri Caitanya. Their mission was

four-fold, as instructed by Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu (CC 3.1.218-219,

3.4.79-80):

 

(1) Rasa-sastra nirupana, rasa-bhakti pracara -- Write scriptures on rasa,

present the theology of rasa-bhakti;

(2) Lupta-tirtha uddhara -- Discover the lost holy places;

(3) Vaisnava-acara nidhara -- Establish the proper conduct for Vaishnavas;

(4) Krishna-seva pravartana -- Establish the service of Krishna (in the temples).

 

On the order of Sri Caitanya, Rupa and Sanatana traveled to Vraja and undertook

the mission they'd been given. The others joined the two to help them in the

task.

 

We can see that even today, sincere followers of the six Gosvamis of Vraja are

residing at Radha Kunda, Govardhana and the other holy places of Vraja,

dedicated to writing commentaries on the rasa-sastras, delivering deep

discourses on the teachings of the Gosvamis, doing parikrama of the holy places

of Vraja and explaining the truths of these places to others, observing the

proper conduct befitting a Vaishnava and teaching it to others, as well as

maintaining temples and organizing festivals where Krishna-seva is going on.

 

Therefore there can be no doubt of the fact that the devotees who reside in

Vraja, having taken to heart this four-fold mission given to the six Gosvamis,

are strict followers of Sri Caitanya and absorbed in fulfilling His heart's

deepest desires.

 

The question may arise, "But how, then, will preaching be conducted outside of

Vraja?" Again, we need not go further than the six Gosvamis in our search for

the answer. To broadcast the writings of Rupa-Sanatana, Sri Jiva Gosvami taught

Narottama, Srinivasa and Syamananda, then sending them to Bengal and Orissa to

preach the proper devotional conclusions of the beautiful religion of Sri

Caitanya. In the wake of the example set by Sri Jiva, the mahatmas residing in

Vraja enthusiastically instruct others in the chanting of the holy names and in

the science of rasa-tattva, encouraging them to in turn deliver the message to

whomsoever they meet. Thus preaching is going on here and there in various

places of the world and the movement of Sri Caitanya expands.

 

 

>>> Madhava wrote;

 

> Aside this, most Babaji are not very concerned with the Gaudiya Math at all,>

Krishna Susarla answers:

And such dismissal is very disappointing indeed. Other Vaishnava sampradaayas,

who have even less in common philosophically with Srila Bhaktisiddhanta, are

very vocal in their support and their regard for Srila Prabhupada's efforts. I

would expect that, as a matter of basic culture, that the babajis would at

least be appreciative of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta and Srila Bhaktivedanta. <<<

There is certainly respect for their tremendous contribution in the realm of

preaching the holy name around the world. Certainly so. I have witnessed some

of it myself in discussing with my guru.

 

In drawing parallels with the other Vaishnava sampradayas' vocal support and

regard for Prabhupada's efforts, we must understand that they are not directly

concerned in preserving the doctrinal purity of the Gaudiya sampradaya. The

members of the Gaudiya tradition, though (for the most part) respectful, are

generally less vocal about it on account the fact that so much blanket

condemnation towards the rest of the tradition has been presented by those

belonging to the Sarasvata lineage. Undoubtedly some faults have been

legitimately pointed out, but aside this, much unnecessary critique has been

cast on undeserving, sincere saints.

 

 

>>> Yes, yes, I understand that everyone likes to claim that they represent the

innocent party, who never fired first and was always on the receiving end until

now. I'm not buying it. I can only speak for myself, but I had never even heard

of these babaji critics until their followers appeared on the internet and

started criticizing Srila Prabhupada. <<<

 

I agree wholeheartedly that much of the critique that has been presented is in

bad taste. In my experience, this does not arise so much from the babajis (or

whoever their holy gurus be), but from their negative experiences from the time

they spent either in ISKCON or in the Gaudiya Math. The discovery of a whole new

world of Gaudiya Vaishnavism often becomes a poor excuse for inconsiderate and

often harsh critique. I see the same phenomenom in many who leave ISKCON to

take shelter of any Gaudiya Matha guru, the group of B.V. Narayana Maharaja

perhaps standing out from the crowd as the foremost in this regard. I trust our

considerate audience can evaluate this in a proper way and direct the critique

to where it's due, to immature individuals with bad experiences from the past.

Agreed, generally disciples of some Baba or Gosvami, but whether their views

are approved of by the Baba or the Gosvami, that is the question. You may ask,

next time you are faced with inconsiderate critique, "Dear Sir, what do you

think your guru would say if he read this text of yours?" That should provide

some food for thought for the critic.

 

 

Regards,

 

Madhava

[Guest guest]

achintya, "Madhava" <harekrishna@s...> wrote:

 

> >>> We are debating about which aachaaryas truly represent the

spirit of Lord Chaitanya's sampradaaya - Srila Bhaktisiddhanta or the

babajis who criticize him. Whether or not the babajis "preach"

(however they define it), is not the issue. The issue is whether or

not they preach as Lord Chaitanya did, and as He expected His

followers to do.<<<

>

> The paragraph above was followed by numerous citations from the

Caitanya Caritamrita which encourage everyone to carry the message of

Sri Caitanya to others.A genuine follower of Sri Caitanya is indeed

committed to conveying His message to the mankind. This we agree on.

However, let us reflect on how He desired this desire of His to be

fulfilled.

>

> It is universally agreed among the Gaudiyas that the six Gosvamis

are the role-models to be followed. Sri Caitanya Himself gave the

mandate to fulfill his desires to Sri Rupa and Sri Sanatana Gosvamis,

as documented in the Caitanya Caritamrita in His instructions to them.

>

 

After reading this entire message, the sense that I got is that, yes,

Lord Chaitanya did in fact set a certain example, and yes, He did

indeed give instructions to the general body of devotees that they

should travel everywhere and spread Krishna-consciousness to

everyone. But still, because Rupa and Sanaatana Gosvamis did not do

this, we should not consider Lord Chaitanya's instructions (which

were delivered to large audience of devotees) to represent the spirit

of the Gaudiiya tradition, since strictly speaking, we are all

supposed to be Ruupanugas. Rather, we should look at what Ruupa and

Sanaatana did, even if that wasn't what Lord Chaitanya had asked.

 

Of course, Ruupa and Sanaatana got specific instructions by Lord

Chaitanya to settle down, write books, etc. Even if they had not

received such instructions, clearly such activities are also

devotional service, and every tradition requires devotees who will

devote time to such intellectual activities. In all other respects,

we follow Ruupa and Sanaatana, since they laid out much of the

written foundation for Gaudiiya Vaishnavism.

 

But the fact remains that Lord Chaitanya did want His followers to

travel everywhere and preach, and this was His own example as well.

Citing the example of Ruupa and Sanaatana is fine for devotees who

wish to follow that approach. But it is not fine for devotees who

wish to take issue with Bhaktisiddhanta's authenticity as a Gaudiiya

Vaishnava. Since it is obvious that Srila Bhaktisiddhanta's followers

have done what Lord Chaitanya Himself requested:

 

ataeva aami aaj~naa dilu.n sabaakaare |

yaahaa.n taahaa.n prema-phala deha'yaare taare || CC, aadi, 9.36 ||

 

Therefore I order every man within this universe to accept this

Krishna consciousness movement and distribute it everywhere. (shrii

chaitanya charitaamR^ita, aadi-liila, 9.36)

 

ataeva saba phala deha'yaare taare |

khaaiyaaha-uk loka ajara amare || CC, aadi, 9.39 ||

 

Distribute this Krishna-consciousness movement all over the world.

Let people eat these fruits and ultimately become free from old age

and death. (shrii chaitanya charitaamR^ita, aadi-liila, 9.39)

 

jagat vyaapiyaa mora habe puNya khyaati |

sukhii ha-iyaa loka mora gaahibeka kiirti || CC, aadi, 9.40 ||

 

If the fruits are distributed all over the world, My reputation as a

pious man will be known everywhere, and thus all people will glorify

My name with great pleasure. (shrii chaitanya charitaamR^ita, aadi-

liila, 9.40)

 

bhaarata-bhuumite haila manuShya janma yaara |

janma saarthaka kari'kara para-upakaara || CC, Aadi, 9.41 ||

 

One who has taken his birth as a human being in the land of India

[bhaarata-varsha] should make his life successful and work for the

benefit of all other people. (shrii chaitanya charitaamR^ita, aadi-

liila, 9.41)

 

.... one cannot call Himself a follower of Mahaaprabhu and call into

question Bhaktisiddhanta's authenticity as a Gaudiiya Vaishnava. What

Ruupa and Sanaatana did, we don't find fault with, since they are

also activities of devotional service, and because Mahaaprabhu

specifically instructed them to write books. But for everyone else,

He clearly instructed that they should spread Krishna-consciousness

everywhere. Note that this does not preclude writing books, as Srila

Bhaktivedanta Prabhupada did both.

 

The spirit of Gaudiiya Vaishnavism is defined by Lord Chaitanya's

example and instructions. Lord Chaitanya instructed that His

followers travel everywhere and preach to everyone, and this is what

He himself did. Therefore, widespread preaching in the devotional

mood, not solitary bhajan, is one of the defining attributes of the

Gaudiiya tradition. Refusing to preach is not tantamount to following

Ruupa Gosavmi's example; it is refusing the instruction of Shrii

Chaitanya Mahaaprabhu. When Srila Prabhupada was encouraged by

certain babajis to not travel to America and instead sit down and do

bhajan, he very correctly criticized this attitude. For one thing, it

was not in the spirit of Lord Chaitanya's instructions or example.

For another thing, the attitude of not wanting to go out among the

sinful people (the attitude that Srila Prabhupada encountered) was

selfish. Finally, it wasn't what his own guru wanted, and to do so

would have been to defy his own guru. There are many Vaishnavas who

remain in a solitary place, perform austerities, and do bhajan. I

don't wish to criticize them. But why must I accept this as equal to

the Vaishnavas who travel and preach? Did Mahaaprabhu instruct all

these babajis to give up preaching and just do bhajan? I don't think

so. At the very least, they should recognize Bhaktisiddhanta as a

true Gaudiiya Vaishnava based on the fact that he did what

Mahaaprabhu wanted.

 

> Therefore there can be no doubt of the fact that the devotees who

reside in Vraja, having taken to heart this four-fold mission given

to the six Gosvamis, are strict followers of Sri Caitanya and

absorbed in fulfilling His heart's deepest desires.

>

 

Except that I doubt it when they criticize the devotees who did

execute Shrii Chaitanya's clear instructions - to travel everywhere

and preach to the conditioned souls.

 

> In drawing parallels with the other Vaishnava sampradayas' vocal

support and regard for Prabhupada's efforts, we must understand that

they are not directly concerned in preserving the doctrinal purity of

the Gaudiya sampradaya.

>

 

And I must say that, while I am sympathetic with such concerns in

theory, I most certainly am not very sympathetic with them here.

By "doctrinal purity," if they refer to things like the color of

one's cloth or the exact order of the paramparaa rather than the

loyalty to Mahaaprabhu's instruction, then I cannot find it very

reasonable at all.

 

> The members of the Gaudiya tradition, though (for the most part)

respectful, are generally less vocal about it on account the fact

that so much blanket condemnation towards the rest of the tradition

has been presented by those belonging to the Sarasvata lineage.

Undoubtedly some faults have been legitimately pointed out, but aside

this, much unnecessary critique has been cast on undeserving, sincere

saints.

>

>

> I agree wholeheartedly that much of the critique that has been

presented is in bad taste. In my experience, this does not arise so

much from the babajis (or whoever their holy gurus be), but from

their negative experiences from the time they spent either in ISKCON

or in the Gaudiya Math.

>

 

Yes, the good old fashioned, "it's not our fault, they started it"

excuse. All I'm saying is that regardless of who started what (and

personally, I don't think it was Srila Prabhupada), two wrongs don't

make a right, and pure Vaishnavas don't need to stoop so low

regardless of who abuses them. Rather, they follow Lord Chaitanya's

example of:

 

tR^iNaad api suniichena taror api sahiShNunaa |

amaaninaa maanadena kiirtaniiyaH sadaa hariH ||

 

One should chant the holy name of the Lord in a humble state of mind,

thinking oneself lower than the straw in the street; one should be

more tolerant than a tree, devoid of all sense of false prestige, and

should be ready to offer all respect to others. In such a state of

mind one can chant the holy name of the Lord constantly.

 

 

> The discovery of a whole new world of Gaudiya Vaishnavism often

becomes a poor excuse for inconsiderate and often harsh critique. I

see the same phenomenom in many who leave ISKCON to take shelter of

any Gaudiya Matha guru, the group of B.V. Narayana Maharaja perhaps

standing out from the crowd as the foremost in this regard. I trust

our considerate audience can evaluate this in a proper way and direct

the critique to where it's due, to immature individuals with bad

experiences from the past. Agreed, generally disciples of some Baba

or Gosvami, but whether their views are approved of by the Baba or

the Gosvami, that is the question. You may ask, next time you are

faced with inconsiderate critique, "Dear Sir, what do you think your

guru would say if he read this text of yours?" That should provide

some food for thought for the critic.

>

 

When I encounter harsh criticism by Srila Prabhupada's followers

against others, I always step in and point this out, even when the

critics turn around and lash out at me. It's my way of showing that I

care about fair play, regardless of what views are being discussed.

Perhaps you should consider that example, rather than remaining

silent when obviously outrageous criticism is being delivered in the

name of your so-called "rest of the Gaudiya tradition."

 

yours,

 

- K

[Guest guest]

On Thu, 26 Dec 2002, krishna_susarla <krishna_susarla wrote:

(Someone else said)

> > It is universally agreed among the Gaudiyas that the six Gosvamis

> are the role-models to be followed.

 

First things first; we do have a process that has proven itself to

be effective in awakening thousands of people to Krsna consciousness, which

is what Lord Caitanya asked us for. So let's give up sex, sleeping, and

eating, while chanting with utter humility constantly, surrendering

unconditionally to the pure Vaisnavas, and then once all this has been

documented as objectively as possible, we can continue following our

role-models from there.

 

 

 

 

> But the fact remains that Lord Chaitanya did want His followers to

> travel everywhere and preach, and this was His own example as well.

> Citing the example of Ruupa and Sanaatana is fine for devotees who

> wish to follow that approach.

 

I would qualify that the only ones who *truly* wish this are those

who have successfully done as I hinted above. The rest of us usually wish

this, *and many other things* too; but of course that isn't pure devotion,

what to speak of factually following Rupa and Raghunatha Gosvamis.

 

Similarly, this merits reiteration:

 

> But it is not fine for devotees who

> wish to take issue with Bhaktisiddhanta's authenticity as a Gaudiiya

> Vaishnava. Since it is obvious that Srila Bhaktisiddhanta's followers

> have done what Lord Chaitanya Himself requested:

>

> Therefore I order every man within this universe to accept this

> Krishna consciousness movement and distribute it everywhere. (shrii

> chaitanya charitaamR^ita, aadi-liila, 9.36)

>

> Distribute this Krishna-consciousness movement all over the world.

> Let people eat these fruits and ultimately become free from old age

> and death. (shrii chaitanya charitaamR^ita, aadi-liila, 9.39)

>

> If the fruits are distributed all over the world, My reputation as a

> pious man will be known everywhere, and thus all people will glorify

> My name with great pleasure. (shrii chaitanya charitaamR^ita, aadi-

> liila, 9.40)

>

> One who has taken his birth as a human being in the land of India

> [bhaarata-varsha] should make his life successful and work for the

> benefit of all other people. (shrii chaitanya charitaamR^ita, aadi-

> liila, 9.41)

 

Once someone has done all this, we can also talk most objectively about his

surrender to Rupa-raghunatha and the other gosvamis. Otherwise, especially

if they have a checkered personal history or dubious character, those who

fancy becoming self-appointed vanguards of Rupanuga doctrine seem awfully

naive to me, at best.

 

MDd