Guest guest Posted July 25, 2005 Report Share Posted July 25, 2005 ....soon thereafter the Gauòéya published a scorching analysis of why Çréla Bhaktisiddhänta Sarasvaté differed with the ideas of gauräìga-nägarés, and especially with Haridas Goswami's flavor of the gauräìga-nägaré deviation: 1) Gauräìga-nägarés imagine themselves to have the sentiment of gopés toward Lord Caitanya. They fail to realize that He placed Himself not as Kåñëa, the enjoyer, but as an enjoyed devotee of Kåñëa. This mistake is technically called rasäbhäsa, a contradictory and distasteful overlapping of one humor (rasa) with another. This attempt of the gauräìga-nägarés to be gaura-bhogés (enjoyers of Gauräìga) is ever rejected by authentic gaura-bhaktas (servants of Gauräìga). 2) Gauräìga-nägarés accept guruship by seminal succession, which was never the teaching or policy of Çré Caitanya or His devotees. 3) Caitanya Mahäprabhu and His devotees recognized as Gauòéyas only those who purely and strictly followed the authorized path. But Çré Haridas Goswami considers all thirteen apa-sampradäyas bona fide, and their crippled notions of devotion as bhakti. (end of list) Is it correct to place a period at the end of list items 1 and 2? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.