Claims and counterclaims

[Guest guest]

Why does there have to be so much quibbling about who

genuinely represents Chaitanya Mahaprabhu? Human

experience is multi-faceted and different historical

situations give rise to different interpretations and

different contexts to different responses. Is it not

then possible that there are more than one way of

looking at Chaitanya Vaishnavism, and indeed, that

some approaches may be better in some times and

circumstances than in others?

 

 

 

 

 

Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.

http://mailplus.

[Guest guest]

achintya, Jan Brzezinski <jankbrz> wrote:

> Why does there have to be so much quibbling about who

> genuinely represents Chaitanya Mahaprabhu?

 

I thought this was obvious. This whole discussion, here at least,

started because remarks have been published on the internet, some

presumptuous while others were more inflammatory, suggesting that the

Gaudiiya Saarasvata paramparaa is not orthodox Gaudiiya Vaishnavism,

that it has deviated in so many ways, and that consequently this

excuses those who chose to reject Srila A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami and

seek instruction elsewhere.

 

Human

> experience is multi-faceted and different historical

> situations give rise to different interpretations and

> different contexts to different responses.

 

Lord Chaitanya's instructions to preach far and wide, as recorded in

Chaitanya Charitamrita, were pretty clear and do not need

interpretation.

 

Is it not

> then possible that there are more than one way of

> looking at Chaitanya Vaishnavism,

 

Perhaps, but then why in the name of preserving "doctrinal purity,"

do comments like:

 

"that is still no excuse for just fabricating a guru-parampara"

 

"...what to speak of knowing Sanskrit, the men don't even know Hindi

or Bengali, or even what the weather is like in India. No one knows

even basic sadacara, the practices of cleanliness and chastity."

 

"Envy is the cause of the mentality: "Nowadays brahmanas are full of

faults, so now we will launch our own varnasrama-system." A human

being can and should not do that, for it is created by God Himself,

and He is the highest authority (caturvarnyam maya srstam "The four

castes are created by Me (God, Krsna),") and not by the human being

Bimal Prasad Datta."

 

"Throughout this essay it is shown that the followers of

Bhaktisiddhanta distribute namaparadha. The 1st (satam ninda, blanket-

blasphemy of the non-Iskcon-Vaisnavas), the 3rd (guroravajña not

accepting guru parampara), the 4th (sruti-sastra-nindanam, knowingly

deviating from the scriptures), the 8th (considering mundane piety

other than the holy name, like their own varnasrama dharma, to be

alternative means of salvation), the 9th (asraddadhane

vimukhe 'pyasrnvati yas copadesah, preaching to the faithless, the

averse and the unwilling, and the 11th (?) (aham mamadiparamo namni

so 'pyaparadhakrt), chanting the holy name with false ego (envy and

ambition). Is their 'success' then really so great? All their

followers are encouraged to commit and spread namaparadha."

 

.... get made by people whom you consider "Gaudiiya Vaishnavas?" When

philosophy is used to question the authenticity of a great aachaarya

like Srila Bhaktisiddhanta (what to speak of shamelessly attacking

his pristine character), then it behooves us to analyze that

philosophy and see what is and is not correct.

 

The critics of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta have brought this down on

themselves. If they thought we were going to roll over and takes

this, or simply answer with sentimental whitewash, then they were

gravely mistaken.

 

and indeed, that

> some approaches may be better in some times and

> circumstances than in others?

 

As long as there are fallen people who have no knowledge of Krishna-

consciousness, then the instruction of Lord Chaitanya to go out and

preach to them is still relevant. Would you have me believe that the

all-knowing Lord Chaitanya could not forsee the situation 500 years

ahead of His time? Why would solitary bhajan be more ideal today than

500 years ago?

 

yours,

 

- K