Shakti-Fan Posted August 21, 2006 Report Share Posted August 21, 2006 All Glories to Sri Sri Guru & Gauranga! Swami B.V. Narayan Founder Acharya of Bhaktivedanta Trust International [bHAKTI] and International Gaudiya Vedanta Trust Sri Kesavji Gaudiya Math - Mathura [uP] 281001 India - Ph.: + 91 565.2502334 President of Sri Gaudiya Vedanta Samiti Trust and Vice President of Sri Gaudiya Vedanta Samiti <HR> Delhi, August 19, 2006 Dear Devotees, My heartly blessings are for you. All glories to Sri Sri Guru and Gauranga, all glories to Sri Sri Radha Vinode Bihariji. This is very important for all to understand. “sanga tyagat sato vrtteh”, if we desire pure bhakti, at all cost we must avoid unfavorable association and follow the ideal example of our Gurudeva and the previous acaryas. If anyone is not obeying his Gurudeva, not following the scriptures, especially not following Srimad Bhagavatam, you should not hear anything from this person. Cut all his arguments, especially never hear from him. This is my strict order, whoever he may be. Also sastra has said, those who are not following Gurudeva, nor the scriptures, one should never hear from them. If someone has received sannyasa and gives up this ashram, coming in grhasta ashram, he is vantasi. Moreover, although he is vantasi but he does not regret for this, this is extremely dangerous. The example of Vallabhacarya is quite wrong, he was never sannyasi until three days before his departure from this world. Also, I know very well that the disciple of Srila Bhakti Raksak Sridhar Gosvami Maharaja, Srila Bhaktisundar Govinda Maharaja, he was first in grhasta ashram, then he received sannyasa. His outstanding character is that he never disobeyed his Gurudeva. For this quality Param Pujyapada Sridhar Maharaja gave him sannyasa, and up to this day he is still sannyasi. Whether a disciple is grhasta, sannyasi or brahmachari, he should follow his spiritual master and please him in all respects. If a disciple does not follow the ideal of his Gurudeva and he does not please him, he does not deserve honor from anyone. I want to inform all of you that from ancient times we are accepting Guruparampara. In Srimad Bhagavatam it has been said: tasmad gurum prapadyeta jijnasuh sreya uttamam sabde pare ca nisnatam brahmany upasamasrayam Therefore any person who seriously desires real happiness must seek a bona fide spiritual master and take shelter of him by initiation. The qualification of the bona fide guru is that he has realized the conclusions of the scriptures by deliberation and is able to convince others of these conclusions. Such great personalities, who have taken shelter of the Supreme Godhead, leaving aside all material considerations, should be understood to be bona fide spiritual masters. (SB–11.3.21) Also it has been told in Svetasvatara Upanisad 6.38: yasya deve para bhaktir yatha deve tatha gurau tasyaite kathita hy arthah prakasante mahatmanah "Only unto those great souls who have implicit faith in both the Lord and the spiritual master are all the imports of Vedic knowledge automatically revealed." Again in Bhagavatam: bhayam dvitiyabhinivesatah syad isad apetasya viparyayo 'smrtih tan-mayayato budha abhajet tam bhaktyaikayesam guru-devatatma Fear arises when a living entity misidentifies himself as the material body because of absorption in the external, illusory energy of the Lord. When the living entity thus turns away from the Supreme Lord, he also forgets his own constitutional position as a servant of the Lord. This bewildering, fearful condition is affected by the potency for illusion, called maya. Therefore, an intelligent person should engage unflinchingly in the unalloyed devotional service of the Lord, under the guidance of a bona fide spiritual master, whom he should accept as his worshipable deity and as his very life and soul. In Sri Caitanya Caritamrta: vande ’ham sri-guroú sri-yuta-pada-kamalam sri-gurun vaisnavams ca sri-rupam sagrajatam saha-gana-raghunathanvitam tam sa-jivam sadvaitam savadhutam parijana-sahitam krsna-caitanya-devam sri-radha-krsna-padan saha-gana-lalita-sri-visakhanvitams ca I offer pranama unto the lotus feet of Sri Gurudeva—which includes the diksa-guru, the bhajana-siksa-guru, the superlative succession of gurus, meaning the succession predominated by Sri Madhvacarya and Sri Madhavendra Puri, and the Vaisnavas of all four yugas—to Sri Rupa Goswami, his elder brother Sri Sanatana Goswami, Raghunatha dasa Goswami, Jiva Goswami and their associates, to Sri Advaita Acarya, Sri Nityananda Prabhu, Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu and all of His associates, and to Sri Radha and Krsna accompanied by all of Their sakhis and manjaris headed by Sri Lalita and Visakha. Without Guru anyone cannot attain Krsna prema. Krsna has told by His own lotus mouth: prathamamtu gurum pujyam tatasheiba mamarchanam kurvan siddhimavapnoti hyanyatha nisphalam bhavet First you have to go to your Gurudeva and worship him and please him in all respects, after this you can worship Me and perform My bhajan. If anyone adopts this process, easily he or she will attain perfection in bhajan. Those who will not adopt this process, everything done by them will go in vain.One may be properly initiated by Swami Bhaktivedanta Narayana, Srila Bhaktivedanta Swami Maharaja, Srila Bhakti Raksak Sridhar Gosvami Maharaja, Srila Bhaktisidhanta Sarasvati Gosvami Thakur Prabhupada and others in their line, no harm. So, without the mercy of Guru and Siksa Guru, anyone cannot achieve Krsna prema. Someone may say that there is no need of exactly following scriptures, but it is clearly stated in Sri Bhakti-rasamrta-sindhu 1.2.101 : sruti-smrti-puranadi- pancaratra-vidhim vina aikantiki harer bhaktir utpatayaiva kalpate Devotional service to the Lord that ignore the authorized Vedic literatures like the Upanisads, Puranas, Narada Pancaratra, etc., is simply an unnecessary disturbance in society. Pseudo-devotional activities without reference to the standard scriptures as above mentioned are simply acts of disturbances in the name of spirituality, and Krsna has said Himself in Bhagavad Gita: yah sastra-vidhim utsrjya vartate kama-karatah na sa siddhim avapnoti na sukham na param gatim He who discards scriptural injunctions and acts according to his own whims, attains neither perfection, nor happiness, nor the supreme destination. To follow Bhagavad Gita, Vedas, and especially Srimad Bhagavatam, this is essential. Gurudeva always follows the scriptures. Those who deny that one must follow scriptures, they are not disciples. A disciple should follow the example and ideal of his Gurudeva. This has been instructed by Srila Rupa Gosvami very clearly in Sri Upadesamrta, text 3: utsahan niscayad dhairyat tat-tat-karma-pravartanat sanga-tyagat sato vrtteh sadbhir bhaktih prasidhyati Progress in bhakti may be obtained by the following six practices: (1) enthusiasm to carry out the rules which enhance bhakti, (2) firm faith in the statements of the sastra and the guru whose words are fully in line with the sastra, (3) fortitude in the practice of bhakti, even in the midst of obstacles, or patience during the practice stage of bhakti, even when there is delay in attaining one's desired goal, (4) following the limbs of bhakti such as hearing ( sravana) and chanting ( kirtana) and giving up one's material sense enjoyment for the pleasure of Sri Krsna, (5) giving up illicit connection with women, the association of those who are overly attached to women and the association of mayavadis, atheists and pseudo-religionists, and (6) adopting the good behaviour and character of pure devotees. Your ever well-wisher, Swami B.V. Narayan <!-- end of cut paste --> <!-- Start tempfoot2.shtml --> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theist Posted August 21, 2006 Report Share Posted August 21, 2006 On vantasi or one who returns to eat his own vomit like a dog, I would not want to over-emphasize this myself in how I look for one to hear from. Like many of Srila Prabhupada's disciples who took sannyasa in their twenties's and early thirties out of exuberance for serving Srila Prabhupada. Yeah it may have been premature for them to enter that ashrama and most have found it hard to maintain that strict standard. Of them the honest one's make give up sannyasa and become householders. I applaud their honesty and have no problem listening to such a person based on the consideration of their ashrama staus. It' the oones who feel they must keep walking around with a danda and have fallen into a pretentious mode while keeping up the external look of a renunciate that I fear. They are the one's who are speaking poison. Another angle is I also have no problem hearing from an ex drug addict or bank robbery or protitute if he is now Krsna conscious. Afterall what is our own record of past mistakes, Considering we have been floundering in the material world since time immemorial I don't think any of us has a very pristine past. Who is honest NOW. Who is realizaize NOW, in this moment, that is who I want to hear from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 21, 2006 Report Share Posted August 21, 2006 All Glories to Sri Sri Guru & Gauranga! Swami B.V. Narayan If someone has received sannyasa and gives up this ashram, coming in grhasta ashram, he is vantasi. Moreover, although he is vantasi but he does not regret for this, this is extremely dangerous. The example of Vallabhacarya is quite wrong, he was never sannyasi until three days before his departure from this world. Also, I know very well that the disciple of Srila Bhakti Raksak Sridhar Gosvami Maharaja, Srila Bhaktisundar Govinda Maharaja, he was first in grhasta ashram, then he received sannyasa. His outstanding character is that he never disobeyed his Gurudeva. For this quality Param Pujyapada Sridhar Maharaja gave him sannyasa, and up to this day he is still sannyasi. Well, I don't know why Narayana Maharaja wants to talk out of the side of his mouth like this. His exact reasoning is a mystery. But, the truth is well known that Govinda Maharaja took sannyasa at an early age and left sannyasa for grhasta ashram. It has been told that Govinda Maharaja felt that he could support Sridhar Maharaja and the Matha better as a grhasta. Anyway, after Govinda Maharaja completed his householder duties he came back to the sannyasa ashram as a mature elder person and has done quite fine. I don't know if this is Narayana Maharaja being vicitious or what his thinking is or why he is talking about vantasi and Govinda Maharaja in the same breath, but trying to gloss it over with some feighned compliments. Maybe Narayana Maharaja has got wind that there is some movement against him and he is trying to neutralize the offensive with feighned compliments about Govinda Maharaja. However, these two groups have been rivals for several decades and it is really peculiar that Narayana Maharaja would make such peculiar remarks. Sincere flattery is not how the other group will receive this kind of talk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 21, 2006 Report Share Posted August 21, 2006 I don't know if this is Narayana Maharaja being vicitious or what his thinking is or why he is talking about vantasi and Govinda Maharaja in the same breath, but trying to gloss it over with some feighned compliments. What I don't understand is why shakti-fan decided to post this letter in the first place. Obviously it is going to cause some unnecessary controversy and invite offenses, being that this letter has not been placed into context or perspective. The fact of the matter is that this is a letter (not a class or darshana lecture) from Srila Narayana Maharaja to his disciples and followers, directed at one of his own disciples who is being quite disobedient, who fell down from sannyasa and who is not at all remoresful, but justifies his falldown based upon so-called falldowns of others, and continues to remain proud, and gives classes in which he speaks of high subject matters, for which he is not qualified to speak, and for which the disciples of Srila Narayana Maharaja find offensive. They have complained about this disciple before, but the disciple refuses to take good advice from senior devotees or his Gurudeva. Therefore, his own Guru has now asked the Sanga to not hear from him. When understood in this context, one can see that he has great respect for Srila Govinda Maharaja. Anyway, this letter was not intended to be an "open letter" to the entire Vaishnava community, as far as I know. It was taken from the hari-katha list which the disciples of Srila Narayana Maharaja to. I just wish that shakti-fan would have shown some discretion here, or at least offered some initial perspective so that the readers would better understand what this letter was all about. Maybe Narayana Maharaja has got wind that there is some movement against him and he is trying to neutralize the offensive with feighned compliments about Govinda Maharaja. I can see how you might draw this conclusion without understanding the overall context of this letter. I hope that the context I have offered will clear this matter up. Simply put, a disciple of Srila Narayana Maharaja was justifying his falldown from sannyasa, using Srila Govinda Maharaja and others, as examples. Srila Narayana Maharaja vehemently disapproved of this unremorseful rationalization, and only mentioned Srila Govinda Maharaja to show that he is and has been rightly situated all along. Hope this helps to clear things up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 21, 2006 Report Share Posted August 21, 2006 Actually this very same letter is found on the main page of purebhakti dot com which is a public website, surfed by thousands of people, vaishnava and non, worldwide. If it was meant to be a personal letter to a small group of people, then it would not have been posted at that sanga's official and public website. No background information was given there either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 21, 2006 Report Share Posted August 21, 2006 If it was meant to be a personal letter to a small group of people, then it would not have been posted at that sanga's official and public website. Good point. I wasn't aware of that. Still, the instructions in that letter are valid, irregardless of who reads it. For those not involved with the Sanga, there is a possibility of misunderstanding the intent of the letter. I hope that the perspective I offered will help explain that intent. The letter had nothing to do with politics or so-called feuds with other Maths or anything of that nature. It was an internal issue. It appears that the issue is now being made open to the public, which isn't necessarily a bad thing. Perhaps those outside the Sanga can be swan-like and try to extract a positive message from this, rather than jumping to hasty conclusions and making unkind remarks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 21, 2006 Report Share Posted August 21, 2006 A few years ago two brahmacaris left Narayana Maharaja together and Brajanatha issued an APB that no one in the sangha should help the two persons, who were mentioned by name, as "they were being disobedient". The APB said that the two brahmacaris might be representing themselves as doing the work of the Guru. In the sangha householders usually provide food, medical care, a car ride, a place to stay for the itinerant preachers, whether brahmacari, householder, vanaprastha, or sannyasa. As such, the APB was given so that no kind-hearted person would be duped and misled. So it would be nice to know who is disobeying, please, especially since in the past specific persons were mentioned by name so we could avoid their association. Thank you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 21, 2006 Report Share Posted August 21, 2006 The eternal truth I read in the communique is that "Guru is One." When Prabhupada was Abhay Charan De he gave and introduction to a Vyasa Puja celebration for his guru stating that "Guru is One". So I can apply the instructions in that way from Narayana Maharaja even if I do not follow him specifically. However, I find the difficulty in the application. I have found that in this world some people can hide their secret sins very well. For example in the United States we find public figures are charged with crimes, or after revered figures die, then come to find out that they violated societal norms. So I take this communique to admonish myself to become as pure as possible, so that one day I can have the spiritual vision to see who is following and who is not. I take it as an admonition to work on myself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 21, 2006 Report Share Posted August 21, 2006 I am sorry, I don't mean to offend anyone who is a student of ANY teacher. First I offer my pranam is to all of you, to the Eternal Light that shines in all of you which is a spark of the Divine. I bow to all of your eternal selves. My question is: shouldn't the gurus of people in this tradition who "fall down" share bear some of the responsibility? I am not saying blame, but responsibility. I have studied what type of hoops people had to jump through in some of these traditions to become sannyasis and I wouldn't like it happened to one of my children or any of my friends' children. For example, Prabhupada told little boys, basically, that they "weren't really sannyasis" AFTER the first one of them had fallen down. They were in a state of shock. He said that they were in a war with maya and that none of them were qualified. He said that it was like in a war if all the generals died you make every fifth soldier a general, like in a crisis mode. So doesn't the guru bear some responsibility for doing this? If that happened to my son I would feel so sorry for him, like he had been tricked and duped. I understand that it was for a higher cause but I would tend to feel more sorry for the student that it had happened to than the older teacher who knew that they weren't qualified and led them to believe that they were. Especially because in some branches of Hinduism they do not "award" sannyasa to unqualified people. So it is like setting up your religion to be a farce. Isn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 21, 2006 Report Share Posted August 21, 2006 From "An Important Message from Srila Gurudeva": re: "Devotional Service to the Lord that ignores the Vedic literature like the Upanisads, Puranas, Narada Pancaratra is simply a disturbance in society." Then couldn't it be argued that giving unqualified people sannyasa is a disturbance to society? In the Vedas and the Upanisads there is mentioned Jyotish that one should use to determine who is qualified to take sannyasa. A person needs to have certain planets in certain houses. So wouldn't someone who doesn't use Jyotish to determine which of his shisya should be best suited for sannyasa be causing an unnecessary disturbance in society? Also in the Veda is says that in the age of Kali NO ONE should take sannyasa. So wouldn't someone who is encouraging people to take sannyasa in Kali Yuga be creating an unnecessary disturbance in society? If not, then why isn't there a big clamour for also getting our brothers' wife pregnant, killing horses [asvamedha] sacrifice? Other acts forbidden in Kali. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 21, 2006 Report Share Posted August 21, 2006 A few years ago two brahmacaris left Narayana Maharaja together and Brajanatha issued an APB that no one in the sangha should help the two persons, who were mentioned by name, as "they were being disobedient". The APB said that the two brahmacaris might be representing themselves as doing the work of the Guru. In the sangha householders usually provide food, medical care, a car ride, a place to stay for the itinerant preachers, whether brahmacari, householder, vanaprastha, or sannyasa. As such, the APB was given so that no kind-hearted person would be duped and misled. So it would be nice to know who is disobeying, please, especially since in the past specific persons were mentioned by name so we could avoid their association. Thank you! The person referred to in this letter is Premprayojana dasa. Formerly known as Aranya Mahraja. He was NOT encouraged by his guru to take sanyaasa so young. But his guru gave it to him, with caution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 21, 2006 Report Share Posted August 21, 2006 thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 21, 2006 Report Share Posted August 21, 2006 I have a question: Why, if Lord Chaitanya is an Incarnation of God, would He chose in Kali Yuga to come as a sannyasi then, if sannyasa is forbidden in Kali Yuga? Or it that an example of the Lord can do this but not us? Because it seems like it would be tempting to young men to take sannyasa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 21, 2006 Report Share Posted August 21, 2006 Without a doubt it is not advisable to give formal sanyass to practically anyone nowadays. Old people maybe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theist Posted August 21, 2006 Report Share Posted August 21, 2006 I have a question: Why, if Lord Chaitanya is an Incarnation of God, would He chose in Kali Yuga to come as a sannyasi then, if sannyasa is forbidden in Kali Yuga? Or it that an example of the Lord can do this but not us? Because it seems like it would be tempting to young men to take sannyasa. I basically had the same question. Can't remember the source so be forewarned. As I understand it it was deemed necessary to draw in the mayavadi's to offer respect to Him. This may be covered in the CC if I remember right. My brain is becoming increasingly lazy or I would look for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 21, 2006 Report Share Posted August 21, 2006 Is Sannyasa Forbidden in Kali-yuga? by Swami B.V. Giri ------------------------------ Krsna Talk No. 34 Some time ago, a sannyasi that could not maintain his vows of renunciation wrote an apologetic letter on the internet addressed to his disciples and friends wherein he explained the numerous reasons why he could not continue in the renounced order of life. In order to excuse his weakness, the apologetic sannyasi quoted a verse from the Brahma-vaivarta Purana to substantiate his opinion that sannyasa is not meant for the people of Kali-yuga. asvamedham gavalambham sannyasam palapaitrkam devarena sutopattim kalau panca vivarjayet "Five things are forbidden in the age of Kali -- horse-sacrifice, cow-sacrifice, acceptance of sannyasa, offering flesh to the forefathers and begetting a child in the womb of the wife of one's elder brother." (Brahma-vaivarta Purana, Krsna-jnama Khanda 185.180). Regrettably, by quoting this verse from the Brahma-vaivarta Purana as evidence that the sannyasa-asrama is ineffective in Kali-yuga, our former sannyasi has inferred that his own spiritual master, Srila Prabhupada, as well as his parama-guru, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura and all other great acaryas like Sri Ramanuja and Sri Madhva were misguided or even foolish for having accepted sannyasa and having awarded sannyasa to their disciples in Kali-yuga. The now retired sannyasi has unwittingly fallen into the clutches of the anti-devotional parties who use this very same argument against Srila Sarasvati Thakura and his pure representatives. The anti-devotional parties argue that in the Caitanya-caritamrta, Sri Caitanyadeva Himself quotes this verse indicating that even if one has the qualities of a sannyasi, it is not recommended in the age of Kali. However this verse was quoted by the Lord in connection with cow killing during his conversation with the Chand Kazi, and not in connection with sannyasa. Furthermore, soon after His dialogue with the Kazi, Mahaprabhu traveled to Katwa in order to take sannyasa Himself from Sri Kesava Bharati. We also find that when Mahaprabhu resided in Purusottama-dhama, many of His close associates were sannyasis. Sri Svarupa Damodara, Paramananda Puri, Ranga Puri, Visnu Puri, Brahmananda Bharati, Kesava Puri, Govinda Puri, Sukhananda Puri, Brahmananda Puri, Nrsingha Puri, Nrsingha Tirtha and others were all in the renounced order of life. Mahaprabhu's own diksa-guru Sripada Isvara Puri Gosvami was also a sannyasi, so how could Mahaprabhu possibly be against the acceptance of sannyasa in Kali-yuga? In the book, The Golden Staircase, Srila Sridhara Deva Gosvami Maharaja explains what type of sannaysa has been forbidden in this present age. "The answer is explained in Sri Caitanya-caritamrta. This is a general question not only for the Gaudiya sampradaya, but also for the followers of Ramanuja, Madhvacarya, and even Sankaracarya. The Buddhists may not care for the directions of the Puranas, but the Sankara school and the Vaisnava schools accept sannyasa. Sankara was a sannyasi and for the most part his successors were all sannyasis as well. This is true of Ramanuja also, Madhvacarya, and the Visnusvami sampradaya also. The interpretation is this: in Kali-yuga, sannyasa in the strict sense of karma-sannyasa is forbidden. Karma-sannyasa means that you leave everything, and that type of sannyasa is not possible in Kali-yuga. It is described in the sastras that in Satya-yuga, as long as a man's bones exist, that is how long he will live. Along with the longevity of the bones, the life will be there. In Treta-yuga, life may be maintained by the nervous system; but it is stated that in Kali-yuga 'kalav-annagatah pranah' -- one's longevity depends on food. Therefore sannyasa in the strict sense is not possible in Kali-yuga. Previously, Valmiki was engaged in tapasya for so many years that the insects captured his whole body and reduced his flesh into earth, yet he remained present within his bones. Then later, by the help of some spiritual miracle his whole body was restored. But in Kali-yuga, without food it is not possible to live. All penances have been especially adjusted for Kali-yuga, and the only continuous fast allowed in Kali-yuga is for twenty-four hours - not more than that. In other ages, at least twelve days fasting was generally done. If a person had done anything wrong, then according to the smrti-sastra, twelve days fasting was the standard punishment for any sins. But in Kali-yuga, twenty-four hours fasting is the maximum because without food a man cannot survive. If he were to take karma-sannyasa while being so extremely dependent on material giving and taking, then he wouldn't be able to maintain his existence. But the life of Vaisnava tridandi-sannyasa, which is not very extreme -- take prasadam, do service -- is a sort of modified form based on yuktahara viharas ca, and one living according to this principle can take sannyasa. Mahaprabhu took sannyasa, Sankaracarya, Ramanuja -- all the pioneers of the different sampradayas took sannyasa. That has been interpreted as karma-sannyasa, but still, sannyasa is of several kinds. There is also vidvat-sannaysa, which is considered by the salvationist section to be the highest. Their idea is that when one has fully realized that his connection with this material realm is a negative one, he will finish his material encasement and enter into the spiritual sphere. When he is fully established in this firm consciousness that 'my connection with the material world will be injurious to me,' he will then relinquish his body and go away to the spiritual sky. That is vidvat-sannyasa. There is also narottama-sannyasa: yah svakat parato veha jata-nirveda atmavan hrdi krtva harim geyat pravrajet sa narottamah In the narottama system of sannyasa, one has realized the presence of or existence of God within his heart, and thinking of Him, he leaves his present engagement and duties of the household and remains outside, anywhere and everywhere -- under a tree or in a cave or wherever -- careless of his physical needs. He does not immediately relinquish his body, but he takes whatever food he gets and when he does not get any food he fasts, and in this way he goes on. He leaves his household for good; that is narotttama-sannyasa. And there are also different stages of sannyasa mentioned in the sastra: kuticaka, bahudaka, hamsa and paramahamsa progressively. But tridandi-sannyasa is when the sannyasi engages himself in the service of Godhead by spreading His message and doing some good to the public, and that characteristic is different. It is categorically different. The tridandi-sannyasi is not adopting an attitude or tactic of leaving all the engagements of this world as a result of becoming disgusted with its many temptations. Rather, he is engaging himself in the higher duty of the upper world through an agent, so his body has got utility. Remaining here, maintaining connection here, he is drawing some higher thing from above and distributing that in the environment. That is another conception of sannyasa, and it has positive value. This is a similar engagement to that performed by the Lord's closest associates. When an incarnation of God comes down, His favorite parsadas, His friends and servitors, are also sent by Him to come down to do some service to help Him. There are also sub-agents who have received some engagement from the higher agent, and by moving within this world in that capacity, they can earn more spiritual wealth than those who are very eager to disconnect completely from this material plane. They want to try to utilize their connection with this mundane plane to earn some substantial wealth of the upper house. So like the Lord's parsadas, the tridandi-sannyasis want to work as God's agents." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gHari Posted August 21, 2006 Report Share Posted August 21, 2006 I'm afraid I have to "Hear From One Who is Disobeying His Gurudeva". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonehearted Posted August 21, 2006 Report Share Posted August 21, 2006 I'm not closely associated with Narayana Maharaja's camp, but I was under the impression that Prema-prayojana had approached his guru-maharaja rather contritely. I saw him and spoke very briefly with him here this past winter. I heard then that NM really wanted him to take up vesha again and wasn't happy to see him as a grihastha, but I wasn't aware that Pp was still acting independently, or preaching in any renegade fashion. Here's a little something about sannysasa: etam sa asthaya paratma-nistham adhyasitam purvatamair mahadbhih aham tarisyami duranta-param tamo mukundanghri-nisevayaiva "[As a brahmana from Avanti-desa said:] ‘I shall cross over the insurmountable ocean of nescience by being firmly fixed in the service of the lotus feet of Krsna. This was approved by the previous acaryas, who were fixed in firm devotion to the Lord, Paramatma, the Supreme Personality of Godhead.'" PURPORT In connection with this verse, which is a quotation from Srimad-Bhagavatam (11.23.57), Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura says that of the sixty-four items required for rendering devotional service, acceptance of the symbolic marks of sannyasa is a regulative principle. If one accepts the sannyasa order, his main business is to devote his life completely to the service of Mukunda, Krsna. If one does not completely devote his mind and body to the service of the Lord, he does not actually become a sannyasi. It is not simply a matter of changing dress. In Bhagavad-gita (6.1) it is also stated, anasritah karma-phalam karyam karma karoti yah/ sa sannyasi ca yogi ca: one who works devotedly for the satisfaction of Krsna is a sannyasi. The dress is not sannyasa, but the attitude of service to Krsna is. The word paratma-nistha means being a devotee of Lord Krsna. Paratma, the Supreme Person, is Krsna. Isvarah paramah krsnah sac-cid-ananda-vigrahah [bs. 5.1]. Those who are completely dedicated to the lotus feet of Krsna in service are actually sannyasis. As a matter of formality, the devotee accepts the sannyasa dress as previous acaryas did. He also accepts the three dandas. Later Visnu Svami considered that accepting the dress of a tri-dandi was paratma-nistha. Therefore sincere devotees add another danda, the jiva-danda, to the three existing dandas. The Vaisnava sannyasi is known as a tridandi-sannyasi. The Mayavadi sannyasi accepts only one danda, not understanding the meaning of tri-danda. Later, many persons in the community of Siva Svami gave up the atma-nistha (devotional service) of the Lord and followed the path of Sankaracarya. Instead of accepting 108 names, those in the Siva Svami sampradaya follow the path of Sankaracarya and accept the ten names of sannyasa. Although Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu accepted the then-existing order of sannyasa (namely eka-danda), He still recited a verse from Srimad-Bhagavatam about the tridanda-sannyasa accepted by the brahmana of Avantipura. Indirectly He declared that within that eka-danda, one danda, four dandas existed as one. Accepting ekadanda-sannyasa without paratma-nistha (devotional service to Lord Krsna) is not acceptable to Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu. In addition, according to the exact regulative principles, one should add the jiva-danda to the tri-danda. These four dandas, bound together as one, are symbolic of unalloyed devotional service to the Lord. Because the ekadandi-sannyasis of the Mayavada school are not devoted to the service of Krsna, they try to merge into the Brahman effulgence, which is a marginal position between material and spiritual existence. They accept this impersonal position as liberation. Mayavadi sannyasis, not knowing that Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu was a tridandi, think of Caitanya Mahaprabhu as an ekadandi-sannyasi. This is due to their vivarta, bewilderment. In Srimad-Bhagavatam there is no such thing as an ekadandi-sannyasi; indeed, the tridandi-sannyasi is accepted as the symbolic representation of the sannyasa order. By citing this verse from Srimad-Bhagavatam, Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu accepted the sannyasa order recommended in Srimad-Bhagavatam. The Mayavadi sannyasis, who are enamored of the external energy of the Lord, cannot understand the mind of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu. To date, all the devotees of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, following in His footsteps, accept the sannyasa order and keep the sacred thread and tuft of unshaved hair. The ekadandi-sannyasis of the Mayavadi school give up the sacred thread and do not keep any tuft of hair. Therefore they are unable to understand the purport of tridanda-sannyasa, and as such they are not inclined to dedicate their lives to the service of Mukunda. They simply think of merging into the existence of Brahman because of their disgust with material existence. The acaryas who advocate the daiva-varnasrama (the social order of catur-varnyam mentioned in the Bhagavad-gita) do not accept the proposition of asura-varnasrama, which maintains that the social order of varna is indicated by birth. The most intimate devotee of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, namely Gadadhara Pandita, accepted tridanda-sannyasa and also accepted Madhava Upadhyaya as his tridandi-sannyasi disciple. It is said that from this Madhavacarya the sampradaya known in western India as the Vallabhacarya sampradaya has begun. Srila Gopala Bhatta Gosvami, who is known as a smrty-acarya in the Gaudiya-Vaisnava-sampradaya, later accepted the tridanda-sannyasa order from Tridandipada Prabodhananda Sarasvati. Although acceptance of tridanda-sannyasa is not distinctly mentioned in the Gaudiya Vaisnava literature, the first verse of Srila Rupa Gosvami's Upadesamrta advocates that one should accept the tridanda-sannyasa order by controlling the six forces: vaco vegam manasah krodha-vegam jihva-vegam udaropastha-vegam etan vegan yo visaheta dhirah sarvam apimam prthivim sa sisyat [NoI 1] "One who can control the forces of speech, mind, anger, belly, tongue and genitals is known as a gosvami and is competent to accept disciples all over the world." The followers of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu never accepted the Mayavada order of sannyasa, and for this they cannot be blamed. Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu accepted Sridhara Svami, who was a tridandi-sannyasi, but the Mayavadi sannyasis, not understanding Sridhara Svami, sometimes think that Sridhara Svami belonged to the Mayavada ekadanda-sannyasa community. Actually this was not the case. (Cc. Madhya 3.6) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pankaja_Dasa Posted August 22, 2006 Report Share Posted August 22, 2006 Is this what is called Krishna-katha? What did Narayana Maharaja say that your're all jumping up and down? This letter was private for DEVOTEES WHO HAVE FAITH IN NARAYANA MAHARAJA. Anybody else reading with some motive will.. well.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonehearted Posted August 22, 2006 Report Share Posted August 22, 2006 I'm not jumping up and down. How about you? And I kind of think the verse and purport I posted qualify as Krishna-katha. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pankaja_Dasa Posted August 22, 2006 Report Share Posted August 22, 2006 Not you prabhuji, some of the Guests. After all the refusbishment. Audarya still allows guest posting.. If i read CC, I have to be alert. I can hardly ever understand the Purports. But I'll read what you posted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 22, 2006 Report Share Posted August 22, 2006 Excerpts from the Sannyasa Upanisad part of the Sama Veda translated by Prof A A Ramanathan Theosophical Publishing House Chennai The Sannyasa Upanisad is Upanisad #73 of 108 Upanisads verses #23 - 29) There are six kinds of sannyasa verse 74) No worship of Gods, no observance of temple festivals 75) No scripture study, no worship externally of Gods 93 - 94) He shall avoid ghee, honey, oil, condiments, milk 95) Only eat 1x a day 97) Avoid taking food in one house, pleasant company, and salt 98) Staying one place continuously, gathering disciples, begging bowl are sins of sannyasis 111) Take no provisions on trips 114 - 115) Don't accept clothes from others Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 22, 2006 Report Share Posted August 22, 2006 re: Post #11 If my kid wanted to drive but he can't even pass the basic driver's license exam because he is too young to drive, should I let him drive my brand new Porsche anyway just because he wanted to drive a car so badly? If my son then totals the beand new Porsche I gave him, who is to blame? Should I put a big ad in the Sunday paper: "Nobody lend my son their car, because he crashed my brand new Porsche" ? I mean, I gave my son my brand new Porsche to drive, but I told him to be careful. I gave it to him with caution, because he was still underage. So if my son crashes the car that I told him he was qualified to drive, is that the best I can come up with? Go and publicly blame the kid? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 22, 2006 Report Share Posted August 22, 2006 re: Post #11 If my kid wanted to drive but he can't even pass the basic driver's license exam because he is too young to drive, should I let him drive my brand new Porsche anyway just because he wanted to drive a car so badly? If my son then totals the beand new Porsche I gave him, who is to blame? Should I put a big ad in the Sunday paper: "Nobody lend my son their car, because he crashed my brand new Porsche" ? I mean, I gave my son my brand new Porsche to drive, but I told him to be careful. I gave it to him with caution, because he was still underage. So if my son crashes the car that I told him he was qualified to drive, is that the best I can come up with? Go and publicly blame the kid? but, would the case be any different if the car was a Ford Pinto? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 22, 2006 Report Share Posted August 22, 2006 I have a suggestion for God. Next time he wants us to do something, can he just do whatever it is he wants us to do as part of his leela? Because it is too confusing to tell someone five acts are forbidden and then next thing you know he is doing it himself. Like if I tell my kid here are the rules in our house: you can do anything you want in this house except for 1. no running with scissors 2. no jumping up and down on the beds 3. no yelling 4. no swearing 5. no staying up past 9 pm and then if I start running with scissors everywhere I go, then what kind of an example is that? It doesn't even make any sense. Kid: "Dad, dad, you are running with scissors! You told us not to do that." Dad: "But son, that is the ony way people will understand how good our family is." K: "But no one is supposed to run with scissors. It's one of the five forbidden acts of our family!" D: "But I am only doing it to attract more people to our family." K: "But won't you just attract a bunch of people who like to run with scissors?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts