Varnashrama Dharma, A Morning Walk Conversation

[brajeshwara das]

 

Anadi, dandavats, thing is that lets say you become a grhastha Vaishnava and your children also eventually want to get married. Is it ok for you that all those grhastha Vaishnavas go for work to the karmis in order to pay the bills and maintain their families? But this is what you're teaching. This is of course demoniac to tell young devotees listen in our movement you can be only monks and if you want to have family this is not possible because family require money and where should this come?

 

I completely agree. I think it is misunderstanding bhakti to think that daiva-varnashrama is outside of bhakti. If it is userful in the service of sadhana, then it is part of bhakti. Whatever we do should be connected with Krishna. We naturally have to do something. How else to organize our society if not with some sort of structure? Structure is already in place now in a perverted way that leads to cow slaughter and murder, this is a move to a better structure that allows bhakti to be more easily cultivated. Why reject that? Bhakti is internal, not external. A house built on a firm foundation will be strong, a house built on sand will fall. Varnashram is the foundation, and bhakti is the house.

Here is a talk by Srila Sridhar Maharaj about kavacas and how they can be used in Bhakti, but they are not the highest thing. It seems to me varnashrama is in a similar position, so maybe it isn't the highest thing but if used to protect our sadhana it is useful.

 

We all aren't babajis; some of us come to the Lord with families, some of us fall into family life, and some of us aren't ready to fully surrender. Someone needs to grow the food to feed the sanyassis, the pujaris, even the begging babajis.

 

Anyhow, as someone living in general western society I dearly wish I could live in a community doing what comes most naturally to me, with my children in the association of devotees and learning what really needs to be learned, not how to become a demon in the current society.

[Guest guest]

Anadi I am not going to bother continuing a discussion with you about this. I didn't read all your comments because I have heard it all before from Madhavananda and others.

 

Just consider this fact: nobody can broadcast the glories of the holy name of Krishna unless they are empowered to do that by Sri Krishna himself.

 

You are against Bhaktivinode and his descendents such as His Divine Grace Srila A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, who Srila Yajabara Maharaj said was a saktyavesha avatara, a statement my Guru Maharaj Om Visnupada Srila Sridhar Dev Goswami Maharaj agreed with. You follow your own path, and in your lifetime you might see the number of disciples of Radha-kunda babajis grow a little bit. But still you will see that the followers of Saraswati Thakura are growing in numbers in an unlimited way like the way that the cows being bred by the transcendental Vrajabasis are constantly growing in numbers.

[Guest guest]

Anadi perhaps your attacks on Bhaktivinoda Thakura's teachings have something to do with the fact that you are trying to build up faith in your new found Spiritual Masters. If you prove to yourself that Ananta das Babaji etc are presenting a superior philosophy to Bhaktivinoda Thakura then it will make you feel more comfortable that you are on the right track now. God only knows.

[Guest guest]

BOYCOTT THE SAHAJIYA-BABAJIS

Holland, June 10, 2001 AM

Tridandisvami Sri Srimad Bhaktivedanta Narayana Maharaja

 

I want to explain something so that you will be very careful. I am receiving questions about the books published by the babajis of Vraja. They accept Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, Sri Nityananda Prabhu, and Sri Sri Radha-Krsna Conjugal. They have not written their own books. They only take books like Stava-mala by Srila Rupa Gosvami, Stavavali and Vilapa Kusumanjali by Srila Raghunatha dasa Gosvami, Radha-rasa-sudhanidhi by Sri Prabhodananda Sarasvati, and other Gosvami books. They have taken our Gosvamis' explanations, which are in Sanskrit, and they are simply translating them into Bengali. Everything seems to be okay. However, you should know what are the defects of these babajis, and you should be very careful. You should carefully note down their defects in your hearts and your notebooks.

First of all they don't accept that the Gaudiya Vaisnava Sampradaya is one of the sakhas, branches, of the Brahma-Madhva Sampradaya, although this fact has been clearly explained by Sri Kavi Karnipura, Srila Jiva Gosvami, and then by Sri Baladeva Vidyabhusana Prabhu. It has also been explained by Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura, by my Gurudeva, that is, Srila Bhakti Prajnana Kesava Gosvami Maharaja, and also by Srila Bhaktivedanta Swami Maharaja.

Secondly, they think that Sri Prabhodananda Sarasvati and Prakasananda Sarasvati are the same person, although there is so much difference between them. This cannot be so. Will a person of the Ramanuja Sampradaya go down to become a Mayavadi like Prakasananda Sarasvati, and then again become Prabhodananda Sarasvati, who was so exalted that he became the guru of Srila Gopala Bhatta Gosvami? This idea is absurd. Prabhodananda Sarasvati and Prakasananda Sarasvati were contemporaries. Will the same person go back and forth, being a Vaisnava in South India, then becoming a Mayavadi, again becoming a Vaisnava in Vrndavana, and again becoming a Mayavadi? Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura has vividly written about this, and great historians and research scholars have also rejected the idea that they are the same person.

Thirdly, they don't give proper honor to Sri Jiva Gosvami, and this is a very big blunder. This is a vital point. They say that Jiva Gosvami is of svakiya-bhava, that he never supported parakiya-bhava, and that he is against parakiya-bhava. They say that in his explanations of Srimad Bhagavatam and Brahma-samhita, in his own books like Gopala Campu, and especially in his Sri Ujjvala-nilamani tika, he has written against parakiya-bhava. This is their greatest blunder. We don't accept their statements at all.

Srila Jiva Gosvami was rupanuga, a pure follower of Srila Rupa Gosvami and Sri Rupa Manjari. However, for some devotees who were not very qualified at that time, who were beginners, and who did not know what is parakiya-bhava -- and even in Vraja there are so many like this -- he seemed to favor svakiya-bhava. For some followers, so that they would be able to come at least to vidhi-marga (worship according to the rules and regulations of Narada-pancaratra), Jiva Gosvami wrote as if he was a supporter of svakiya-rasa. He wanted that through this they should become qualified, and then they should come to the mood of parakiya. For qualified persons he has written that parakiya-bhava is in Vraja and svakiya-bhava is in Dvaraka. He has vividly written this, and he also accepted this. He can never be against the teachings of Srila Rupa Gosvami, Srila Sanatana Gosvami and Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu. He can never be so. He was a follower of the same root idea of parakiya-bhava as Rupa Gosvami. For some unqualified persons he has written in that other way, but the babajis of Vraja cannot reconcile this. They are ignorant persons. They became opposed to Srila Jiva Gosvami and took the side of Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura, even though in fact there is no dispute between Jiva Gosvami and Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura.

Whatever Jiva Gosvami wrote for the benefit of those unqualified followers is in the line of tattva-siddhanta, established philosophical truths. He wrote that, by tattva, the gopis are krsna-svakiya.

ananda-cinmaya-rasa-pratibhavitabhis

tabhir ya eva nija-rupataya kalabhih

goloka eva nivasaty akhilatma-bhuto

govindam adi-purusam tam aham bhajami

(Brahma Samhita)

["I worship Govinda, the primeval Lord, who resides in His own realm, Goloka, with Radha, who resembles His own spiritual figure and who embodies the ecstatic potency (Hladini). Their companions are Her confidantes, who embody extensions of Her bodily form and who are imbued and permeated with ever-blissful spiritual rasa."]

Nija-rupataya kalabhih. The gopis are Krsna's power. They cannot be parakiya in the eyes of tattva-siddhanta. They are the same as Krsna. They are the power of Krsna. They are also not the wives of any gopas, cowherd men, of Vrndavana. They are all beloved of Krsna, and they are not different from Him. Thus, by tattva, they are svakiya. (Sva means 'own' and kiya means sampatti, wealth.) This means they are of Krsna, Krsna's own, and they are His power. Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura has written in the line of rasa-siddhanta or rasa-tattva. In rasa-tattva Yogamaya has arranged that both the gopis and Krsna think that the gopis are married to other gopas, and therefore they have a paramour relationship. If it were not like this, there would be no rasa at all. (Para means 'greatest', one's own greatest wealth, and it also means 'another', another's wealth. Therefore the meaning in both tattva-siddhanta and rasa-siddhanta is harmoniously reconciled.)

Srila Rupa Gosvami has explained all these things, especially in Ujjvala Nilamani, and also in his other books. The gopis are Krsna's own, His power, but for rasa it is said that they are parakiya.

What is parakiya? There are two principles: atma-rasa and para-rasa, or eka-rasa and aneka-rasa. Krsna is eka-rasa or atma rasa. He is one rasa. In other words He is the complete embodiment of rasa. He is atmarama and aptakama. He is always full and satisfied in Himself. He doesn't need anything from anyone in order to be happy. The gopis are His own power.

Sakti-saktimatayor-abheda. Sakti, the energy, and saktiman, the possessor of that energy or power, are both one. They are identical. However, although Krsna has this quality, He is also para-rasa. Para-rasa means that the gopis are vaishisteya; that is, they also have a speciality that distinguishes them from Krsna. Although they are part of Krsna, although they are one with Him, their speciality is that they serve Him in the mood of rasa. Krsna is the enjoyer and they are the container or reservoir of love and affection. Krsna also wants to taste their mood. Aneka-rasa or para-rasa is the gopis' rasa, and Krsna wants to taste that rasa in various ways. That rasa is in the form of parakiya rasa, and this is the meaning of parakiya rasa -- nothing else. These are a very high-class of philosophical understandings, and Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura has explained all these truths.

Therefore, Jiva Gosvami is not of a different opinion than Rupa Gosvami. They have the very same opinion. Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura has proven that Jiva Gosvami was in parakiya-bhava, and that he accepted Srimad Bhagavatam and Ujjvala-nilamani. [in his own Ujjvala-nilamani tika, Srila Jiva Gosvami has written, "Svecchaya likitam kincit, atra kincid parecchaya. I have written some things by my own desire and some things by the desire of others. The portions which are consistent, in which svakiya and parakiya are reconciled and in the line of Rupa Gosvami, is my desire, and the portions that are not reconciled are written by the desire of others." I have written about all these topics in my book called Prabandha Pancakam, Five Essential Essays. You should try to know these things fully.

The babajis say that we are not a branch of the line of Madhvacarya. They say Madhvacarya is of a different opinion than the Gaudiya Vaisnavas. But this is quite wrong. We have so many specialties that are there in the line of Madhvacarya.

Also, they say that because Caitanya Mahaprabhu took sannyasa from Kesava Bharati, a Mayavadi, He, Himself, must be a Mayavadi. We don't accept this. Mahaprabhu's actual guru was Isvara Puripada, He only took vesa, red cloth, from Kesava Bharati, and there is no harm in this. Madhvacarya also did this, and Ramanujacarya as well. [Another point is as follows. Sri Madhvacarya accepted sannyasa from Acyutapreksa, who was also a kevaladvaita-vadi. Suppose we accept the opinion of the opposing party, just for the sake of argument. In that case, if Mahaprabhu is a kevaladvaita-vadi sannyasa, then by the same logic so is Madhvacarya. Where, then, is the obstacle to Sriman Mahaprabhuji's being in the Madhva Sampradaya, if both of them accepted the advaita-vadi Sankara's sampradaya? There is a second point here. Sri Madhvacarya accepted eka-danda (a single staff of renunciation) according to the customs and regulations of the Sankara Sampradaya. It would be logically consistent to say that Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu followed his ideal example, and also accepted eka danda-sannyasa from a sannyasi of the Sankara Sampradaya, namely Sri Kesava Bharati. From this it seems clear that Gaudiya Vaisnavas are in the line of Sri Madhvacarya.(from Five Essential Essays)] Sannyasa can be taken in this way. [During the time of Lord Caitanya, the influence of Sankaracarya in society was very strong. People thought that one could accept sannyasa only in the disciplic succession of Sankaracarya. Lord Caitanya could have performed His missionary activities as a householder, but He found householder life an obstruction to His mission. Therefore He decided to accept the renounced order, sannyasa. Since His acceptance of sannyasa was also designed to attract public attention, Lord Caitanya, not wishing to disturb the social convention, took the renounced order of life from a sannyasi in the disciplic succession of Sankaracarya, although sannyasa was also sanctioned in the Vaisnava sampradaya. (Cc. Adi-lila 3.34 purp.)]

However, Mahaprabhu took gopal-mantra and other mantras from Isvara Puripada. Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura, Srila Rupa Gosvami, and Srila Jiva Gosvami have accepted this -- that Caitanya Mahaprabhu was not a Mayavadi. Madhavendra Puripada also took sannyasa from a Mayavadi, but he took diksa initiation in the line of Madhva, and Laksmipati Tirtha was his guru.

We are thus in one line. There is some little difference in upasana-marga, but by tattva we are both the same. Sri Baladeva Vidyabhusana Prabhu has written about this very vividly, and the opinion of Kavi-karnapura is also that we are in the Madhva Sampradaya. He wrote a sloka about this.

Another point is that the babajis don't accept that Srila Baladeva Vidyabhusana is in the Gaudiya Vaisnava line. They are vehemently opposed to this understanding. However, if Baladeva Vidyabhusana Prabhu is out of our Gaudiya Sampradaya, then who is our savior? He went to Galta Gaddi in Jaipura and defeated the Sri Vaisnavas. He told them that Srimati Radhika should be on the left of Krsna. He wrote a commentary on Vedanta Sutra called Govinda-bhasya, and that commentary has been accepted as the Gaudiya-bhasya (commentary representing the Gaudiya Sampradaya).

[Guest guest]

[As far as we in the Madhva-Gaudiya Sampradaya are concerned, our acaryas accepted Srimad-Bhagavatam as the natural commentary on Brahma-sutra. The Gaudiya Sampradaya did not make any commentary on the Brahma-sutra because they accepted, and Caitanya Mahäprabhu accepted, that Srimad-Bhagavatam is the natural commentary because it was also written by Vyasadeva, the original author of Brahma-sutra. If the author has made his own commentary, there was no need of another. This is the Gaudiya-vaisnava-siddhanta. Sometime back, however, in Jaipur, there was a challenge that the Gaudiya Sampradaya has no commentary on the Vedanta-sutra. Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura was requested to go there, because he was the most senior Vaisnava scholar. He was living in Vrndavana at that time, and because he was very advanced in age at that time, he authorized Baladeva Vidyabhusana, "You do it. There is no need, but people are demanding, 'Where is your commentary on the Vedanta-sutra?'" Therefore, by the dictation of Govindaji at Jaipur, Baladeva Vidyabhusana, wrote the commentary on Brahma-sutra called Govinda-bhasya. In this way, the Brahma-Madhva- Gaudiya Sampradaya has also got a commentary on Brahma-sutra, and that is required. (from Srila Prabhupada's lecture on Sept. 30, 1973)]

If Baladeva Vidyabhusana Prabhu is not in our sampradaya, then what sampradaya is He in? All his commentaries are in the line of Srila Rupa Gosvami and our Gaudiya Vaisnava acaryas. If Baladeva Prabhu is out of our sampradaya, everything will be finished. This is a vital point.

Also, these babajis say that if anyone wears the saffron cloth of sannyasa, he is not in the Gaudiya Vaisnava line. They have no correct idea. It is stated in Caitanya Caritamrta:

kiba vipra, kiba nyasi, sudra kene naya

yei krsna-tattva-vetta, sei 'guru' haya

["It does not matter whether a person is a vipra (learned scholar in Vedic wisdom) or is born in a lower family, or is in the renounced order of life. If he is master in the science of Krsna, he is the perfect and bona fide spiritual master." (Madhya-lila 8-128)]

Krsna dasa Kaviraja Gosvami has written 'kiba nyasi'. Nyasi means sannyasi. Isvara Puripada, Madhavendra Puripada, and all renunciates in their line were sannyasis in saffron cloth. There are so many associates of Caitanya Mahaprabhu who wore saffron cloth. Svarupa Damodara also wore saffron cloth. What harm was there? Saffron cloth is the sign of renunciation. It is the color of anuraga, attachment for Krsna. Because it is a color, it is worn by sadhvis. Sadhvi means a married lady, a lady who is not a widow. 'Married' means having Krsna as one's beloved. We are not widows, but those who wear white cloths are widows.

From where has this word 'babaji' come in our line? From whom has it come? Isvara Puripada, Madhavendra Puripada, Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, Nityananda Prabhu, and after Him, Sri Rupa Gosvami, Sri Sanatana Gosvami, Srila Raghunatha Bhatta Gosvami, Sri Jiva Gosvami, Sri Gopala Bhatta Gosvami, and Sri Raghunatha dasa Gosvami. After them, Krsna dasa Kaviraja Gosvami and Vrndavana dasa Thakura, and then Narottama dasa Thakura, Syamananda dasa, Srinivasa Acarya, and Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura. Where is the word babaji? Was anyone known as Babaji? From where did this word babaji come? The babajis have no reply. These Vaisnavas were all paramahamsa, not babaji.

Sri Sanatana Gosvami did not wear saffron cloth because he had great honor for Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu's saffron or reddish cloth. He was thinking, "I cannot be like Him, I am not so high." Therefore, out of honor and reverence he wore white cloth, and he used to worship this saffron cloth.

In Vraja, the Vrajabasis all used to call Sanatana Gosvami 'baba'. They called Sanatana Gosvami bara-baba, elder sadhu, and Rupa Gosvami chota-baba, younger sadhu. After them, others in their line took white cloth; but then, after the time of Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura, they deviated. Some, like Jagannatha dasa Babaji, Madhusudana dasa Babaji, and Gaura Kisora dasa Babaji, took this babaji name out of humility, and everyone used to call them that. [baba means sadhu or father, and ji is a suffix meaning respectable. These mukta-mahapurusas are paramahamsas, and they are also the eternal associates of Radha and Krsna. They are far above the conception of babaji or sannyasa (which is within the varnasrama system). For them to accept the nomenclature babaji, therefore, is their humility.] [After Sriman Mahaprabhu, His lila-parikaras (eternal pastime associates) such as the six Gosvamis, Sri Lokanatha and Bhugarbha, and later Sri Krsnadasa Kaviraja, Sri Narottama Thakura, and Sri Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura were naturally niskincana paramahamsa Vaisnavas. There was no need for them to wear sannyasa-vesa, saffron cloth. Secondly, Sriman Mahaprabhu had performed the lila of wearing sannyasa-vesa and saffron cloth. Thus considering themselves to be worthless, lowly and unqualified, these mahatmas did not wear sannyasa-vesa and saffron cloth in order to show honor and respect to the vesa of Sriman Mahaprabhu and also to maintain their own identities as servants under the shelter of His lotus feet. On the other hand, in order to express veneration for the niskincana paramahamsa-vesa of the associates of Sriman Mahaprabhu, and, under their guidance to preach His message throughout the entire world, many akincana Vaisnavas on the path of raganuga-bhajana, holding the paramahamsa-vesa upon their heads, have accepted a position below their worshipable superiors by wearing the saffron cloth of the sannyasa asrama which is included within the system of varnasrama dharma. These two customs, each having their own place, are both exquisitely beautiful and also completely in accordance with siddhanta. Today suddha-hari-bhakti has been, is being, and will continue to be, preached and spread throughout the world by these mahapurusas, great perfected saints, who wear this second type of niskincana sannyasi-vesa. (from Five Essential Essays)]

When Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura saw that many babajis were now bogus, that they were with widow matajis and producing sons, he became very furious and said that we will again accept the same saffron cloth of others like Ramanujacarya, Madhvacarya, Mahaprabhu, and Isvara Puripada. He then preached everywhere in the world.

At that time, those family persons who were of loose character and had no status in society honored these bogus babajis. That is why Srila Prabhupada Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura re-introduced the reddish cloth and sannyasa. Presently, those who are bogus persons, but were previously in the Gaudiya Matha, have become lusty and have thus been kicked out from the Gaudiya Matha. Now they have become babajis.

The babajis especially criticize Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura, saying that he didn't have a guru. This is a bogus idea. Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura preached the name and the glories of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu and the Gaudiya Vaisnava Sampradaya to the whole world. He wrote hundreds of books. Still, the babajis say he did not have a proper guru, and that Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Prabhupada also had no proper guru. [A sadhaka may receive bheka (sannyasa vesa) from some suitable guru and alternatively, when genuine vairagya (in bhava-bhakti) arises, he may accept bheka from himself. Haridasa Thakura, the Six Gosvamis, Lokanatha Gosvami, and others are examples of the practice of accepting bheka from oneself. This is also the way that Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura accepted sannyasa vesa after the disappearance of Srila Gaura Kisora dasa Babaji, from whom he had received the diksa mantra. We see from these examples that acceptance of bheka in this way is fully in agreement with sastra. Sri Ramanujacarya also accepted tridandi-sannyasa from himself after the disappearance of his guru Srila Yamunacarya. (from Five Essential Essays)] You should know that Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura was in the Bhagavata-parampara of Srila Jagannatha dasa Babaji Maharaja. Srila Prabhupada Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura was also in the line as the same Jagannatha dasa Babaji Maharaja, Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura, and his guru, Srila Gaura Kisora Das Babaji Maharaja. They were all in the same line.

Those in the babaji line say that our Guru Maharaja, Srila Bhakti Prajnana Kesava Gosvami Maharaja, and even Srila Bhaktivedanta Swami Maharaja, were not in the proper disciplic line, and that they have no guru-parampara. But it is actually the babajis who are not in the guru-parampara.

I saw in France that so many devotees have given up Srila Bhaktivedanta Swami Maharaja, and they have become babajis. They took babaji-vesa, dor-kaupin and so on. Then, after two years, they fell down with mataji-babajis. They accepted and lived with divorced ladies. They are bound to do this. Thus, those who are not accepting that Srila Bhaktivedanta Swami Maharaja, our Guru Maharaja, Srila Bhakti Prajnana Kesava Gosvami Maharaja, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura Prabhupada, Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura, and all other high-class Vaisnavas are in the Gaudiya line, are completely ignorant. If you read their books this poison may come.

avaisnava-mukhodgirnam putam hari-kathamrtam

sravanam naiva kartavyam sarpocchistam yatha payah

(Padma Purana)

["One should not hear anything about Krsna from a non-Vaisnava. Milk touched by the lips of a serpent has poisonous effects. Similarly, talks about Krsna given by a non-Vaisnava are also poisonous."]

Srila Raghunatha dasa Gosvami's Vilapa Kusumanjali, and other books like Krsna Bhavanamrta, Radha-rasa-sudhanidhi, and Stava-vali are all good books. They are amrta, nectar. However, you should not hear them from non-Vaisnavas; otherwise the bogus ideas of such non-Vaisvnavas will come, and you will be deviated. Be very careful about this.

Another point is regarding bhajana-pranali. Instead of giving the proper process to the appropriate persons, without giving proper training, without considering whether a person is qualified or not, these babajis give their own version of bhajana-pranali. Their so-called disciples do not know who is Krsna or what is bhajana. They don't know any definition of bhakti, and they don't even know how to clean themselves after passing stool. They don't know anything. What will become of them?

naitat samacarej jatu

manasapi hy anisvaram

vinasyaty acaran maudhyad

yatharudro 'bdhi-jam visam

["One who is not a great controller should never imitate the behavior of ruling personalities, even mentally. If out of foolishness an ordinary person does imitate such behavior, he will simply destroy himself, just as a person who is not Rudra would destroy himself if he tried to drink an ocean of poison." (SB. 10.33.31)]

If someone is not qualified, but he wants to drink poison as Sankara did, he will die at once. First be Sankara, and then take poison. First be qualified.

First you should know Srila Rupa Gosvami's Upadesamrta: vaco vegam manasa krodha vegam. Also read Manah Siksa. First learn tattva: maya-tattva, jiva-tattva, and krsna-tattva. Afterwards, if you have actual greed, then you can read those other books. Otherwise, if you don't learn these principles first, you will be lusty, and you will be bound to deviate and give up bhajana and sadhana.

We should read Jaiva Dharma. There, Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura has explained all the ideas of Srila Rupa Gosvami. First learn trnad api sunicena taror api sahisnuna / amanina manadena kirtaniyah sada harih. "One can chant the holy name of the Lord in a humble state of mind, thinking himself lower than the straw in the street. One should be more tolerant than the tree, devoid of all sense of false prestige and ready to offer all respects to others. ln such a state of mind one can chant the holy name of the Lord constantly." This was advised by Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu:

ye-rupe la-ile nama prema upajaya

tahara laksana suna, svarupa-rama-raya

["O Svarupa Damodara Gosvami and Ramananda Raya, hear from Me the symptoms of how one should chant the Hare Krsna maha-mantra to awaken very easily one's dormant love for Krsna." (Antya 20.21)]

Caitanya Mahaprabhu Himself gave us the instruction to have these qualities. Try to develop these qualities, and then you can read the other books. There are so many devotees around the world, especially in France, who are reading all these elevated books. However, they don't know krsna-tattva or any other tattva, and they have no nistha, steady and strong faith, in their gurudeva. Gradually they are giving up Srila Swami Maharaja, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura, and the entire guru-parampara. They criticize this line. Therefore, although the books which have been translated by these babajis are themselves bona fide, we should boycott them. Don't read them. If you are qualified like a hamsa, a swan, if you can separate milk from water, then you may read their translations -- otherwise not.

About ten years ago I went on Vraja Mandala Parikrama with Pujyapada Janardana Maharaja. We went to Radha-Kunda, and there we challenged the babajis. We had a discussion for three hours, but no one came. I have also challenged those babajis in my book, Five Essential Essays, but no one responded. After reading that book they wanted to take us to court, and I challenged them, "Yes, we will see you in court." But they never came. Their lawyers had advised them not to go to court, as they would have lost everything.

Don't be attracted to these sahajiya babajis of Vraja. You should be attracted to our guru-parampara: Srila Bhaktivedanta Swami Maharaja, Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura Prabhupada, Sri Baladeva Vidyabhusana, Srila Jiva Gosvami, Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura, and all those in our Bhagavata-parampara.

I have come to tell you these things only to make you all careful. Don't be bewildered. Try to be very strong, knowing all these points.

[anadi]

 

Anadi, Dandavats. Everything you say about bhakti is true but you are not considering that that Srila B.V. Prabhupada and now other Gaudiya Math derived sadhus have come to the Western world to also distribute preliminary sukrti for this bhakti.

Dear beggar, dandavats,

 

Varna-ashram dharma is no sukriti for bhakti.

Mixing it with angas of bhakti might create the sensation one performes bhakti, and instead of it one performs ... „book distribution” to finance himself and the familiy or the temple one is living in, or both, in the name of distributing sukriti for bhakti, under the false illusion he is practicing bhakti, chanting 16 rounds and thinking of ... „book distribution” ... "distributing bhakti" and by that his possible future place in Vaikuntha.

 

The current situation is now that the second generation, those born of Prabhupada's followers, their friends and new converts and many of the first generation have found a niche in the mainstream society and only engage in Krsna Conscious activites on a very part-time basis. The only regulative principle that most follow is no meat or fish (except for the Deer Hunters!) So so-called followers of the Gaudiya path in today's society are getting some sukrti but then going out and getting a heavy dose of dukrti. This is why Prabhupada dreamed and contemplated a regulated life of DVD for those on the pre-bhakti path.

Reply:

What they miss is the association with the carriers of bhakti, the association with Radha-Krishna katha, not the changing of society.

Bhakti doesn’t point on the changing of society but on the change of the individual.

Bhakti is an individual journey under guru’s assistance, far away from society.

 

For whatever reason it was not to be. Now thirty years later, even the basis for such a society has been shattered, consequently it is really a mute point. The only issue we are really left with (except for delusional kings who hunt deer) is tridandi sannyasa vs. babaji vesa which goes back to the days of Sarsawati Thakur and Lalita Prasada..

In this way you tell that Saraswati Thakur was a deviator because he instituted tradandi sannyasa and renounced babaji vesa. And we will tell you that he is a great reformer and great perfector of phlagu vairagya, using everything in Krsna's service.

 

In the beginning and stil nowadays in the gaudiya mat they give babaji vesha, but as Iskcon is the second wave of inventions (and distortions) there is no babaji vesha in Iskcon, than Iskcon is two times farther from the traditional Gaudiya Bhakti.

I’ve seen many devotees from Gaudiya Mat that buy original books from the Traditional Gaudiya followers, (in bengali or hindi) and they know more than the iskcon people, that are not allowed to read even books from the second source: the Gaudiya Mat.

This invention of "phlagu vairagya" and that „everything” should be used in Krishna’s service is

1. against the first rule of self surrender anukulyasa sankalpa:

one should use only that which is favorable for Krishna’s service - implementing varna-ashrma dharma isn't.

2. against the second verse of Upadeshamrita

-atyAhAraH accumulating more than necessary for keeping body and soul together (as in the case of varnashram dharma) destroys bhakti

<u1></u1>-prayas - undergoing endeavors, others than for attaining bhava - the goal of sadhana bhakti (like varnashrama dharma, which according “prabhupada” a sadhaka should try to implement in the world)- destroys bhakti

<u1></u1>-prajalpa – speaking of something else than about bhakti (like about varnashram dharma and the politics involved in it)– destroys bhakti

<u1></u1>-niyamAgrahaH – not following the rules of sadhana bhakti (inventing new rules –like the invention of endeavoring for the implementation of DVD, ...against the Teachings of Lord Caitanya, or doing only for the rules’ sake ) –destroys bhakti

<u1></u1>-jana-saGgaz – associating with those that follow something else than bhakti, (like those engaged in varnashram dharma)–destroys bhakti

<u1></u1>-laulyamM- greed for something else than bhakti, (like greed for the implementation of the new coined dvd)–destroys bhakti.

<u1>

</u1>

[Guest guest]

 

Varna-ashram dharma is no sukriti for bhakti

 

 

THis is wrong.

 

In the course of doing activities within the varnasrama system a person will naturally be involved in various kinds of activities that bring him ajnata sukriti (the preliminary impetus that enables us to attain bhakti)

[Guest guest]

We Will Never Leave ISKCON

A Lecture on Prabhupada's Disappearance Day, Nov 20 2001 eve

Tridandisvami Sri Srimad Bhaktivedanta Narayana Maharaja

[srila Narayana Maharaja:] I offer my humble obeisances unto the lotus feet of my transcendental guru, om visnupada Sri Srimad Bhaktiprajnana Kesava Gosvami Maharaja, and also unto the lotus feet of my siksa-guru, om visnupada Sri Srimad Bhaktivedanta Swami Maharaja.

I want to clarify something. We know that Srila Bhaktivedanta Swami Maharaja established Iskcon. What is Iskcon? He himself has clarified the meaning:

krsnah bhakti rasa bhavita matih

kriyatam yadi kuto 'pi labhyate

tatra laulyam api mulyam ekalam

janma-koti-sukrtair na labhyate

["Pure devotional service in Krsna consciousness cannot be had even by pious activities in hundreds and thousands of lives. It can be obtained only by paying one price; that is, intense greed to obtain it. If it is available somewhere, one must purchase it without delay." (Caitanya-caritamrta Mad.8.70)]

Those persons who follow this verse are actually Iskcon members. (from Prabhupada's folio - "I have translated the words Krsna consciousness from krsna-bhakti-rasa-bhavita.") Iskcon is not new. Your Prabhupada did not actually establish Iskcon. Iskcon was established by Brahma, and by Krsna Himself. Brahma is one of the four sampradaya gurus, and he established Iskcon by the mercy of Krsna. Narada is the first Iskcon member, Srila Vyasadeva is the second, and Sri Sukadeva Gosvami is the third. All pure devotees in the guru-parampara are Iskcon members. (from Prabhupada's folio - "I have given you the process of disciplic succession: from Krsna, Brahma; from Brahma, Narada; from Narada, Vyasa; from Vyasa, Madhva; from Madhva, Madhavendra Puri; from Madhavendra Puri, Isvara Puri; from Isvara Puri, Lord Caitanya. So, evam parampara. In the parampara system, in that disciplic succession, you will find no change…They are not foolish to manufacture something new… If you want the real thing, then you have to take the old - the oldest. You cannot change anything. Can you change the law of the sun rising or setting? The old laws are going on, and you have to follow them.")

Srila Swami Maharaja translated the name 'Iskcon' into English, but Vaisnava society has actually existed since the origin of creation, the beginning of time. As he himself has said, it is 'the same wine in a new bottle.' He never created anything new. He gave the same philosophy that Krsna gave in His Gita, the same philosophy that was given by Srila Vyasadeva in his Srimad Bhagavatam, and the same philosophy that was given by Krsna dasa Kaviraja Gosvami in Sri Caitanya-caritamrta. He took all these teachings from his guru, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Gosvami Thakura. He also took something from his sannyasa guru. He received the sannyasa mantra from him, the mantra for attaining the service of Radha. After that, he preached this mission. In this way, only the name of his mission was new, and it was mainly only new to Western countries. In India Iskcon has been extant from the beginning of time.

We should not give up Iskcon. Those who have left that eternal Iskcon are really very unfortunate. Those who are following Srila Vyasadeva, Srila Sukadeva Gosvami, and Srila Rupa Gosvami are actually in Iskcon. They can never give up Iskcon. They can give up their lives, but they cannot change. Those who are not following the principles of Srila Rupa Gosvami, Srila Swami Maharaja, and our guru-parampara are not in Iskcon. They have nothing to give up. They always remain outside.

[srila Maharaja then noticed a devotee in the audience who had received sannyasa from our Srila Prabhupada and who, after Prabhupada's disappearance, took babaji-vesa. He then commented:] "I have not seen any instance that a devotee who took sannyasa from Srila Prabhupada Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura has ever taken babaji-vesa. There is no example at all."

[The devotee in the dress of the babaji:] What about Krsna das Babaji?

[srila Maharaja:] Krsna dasa Babaji was not directly the sisya (disciple) of Srila Prabhupada Sarasvati Thakura. My Guru Maharaja never accepted him as a babaji. He always called him by his brahmacari name, Svadhikarananda Brahmacari. Krsna dasa Babaji had not previously accepted Srila Prabhupada as his sannyasa-guru. Also, he was not previously a sannyasa. He had been a brahmacari. There is no example in the entire history of Srila Prabhupada's sannyasis that anyone has given up his sannyasa dress and taken the dress of a babaji. The proper conceptions and principles of sannyasa is in line with the principles of Iskcon. We are Iskcon, and we will be Iskcon forever. One who is actually a member of Iskcon will never leave Iskcon, in this life or any future life.

[Devotee:] Srila Puri Maharaja gave some babaji-vesa.

[srila Maharaja:] We are not speaking about giving babaji-vesa. He never gave babaji- vesa to anyone who was previously given sannyasa. [it is offensive to one's sannyasa-guru if one gives up sannyasa and takes babaji-vesa from another person.] Our Guru Maharaja also gave babaji-vesa, and Srila Prabhupada Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura also gave babaji-vesa to some, but they never changed anyone from sannyasa to babaji. There is almost no difference between sannyasa and babaji, in the sense that the mantra of both is the same. The main difference is that the babaji is mostly a bhajananandi and the sannyasi is a gosthyanandi. Only those who don't know the principles of either can change their dress. We should not change. We should always be Iskcon. Don't try to be out of Iskcon.

I know hundreds of devotees who pretend to be the disciples of Srila Bhaktivedanta Swami Maharaja, but they were not actually initiated by him, because they never followed him. [There are two kinds of initiation: formal initiation (anustanika-diksa), the fire sacrifice and the utterance of svaha and so on, and the other initiation is called vidvad-rudhi, which is internal, and it comes when the disciple actually follows the guru in the real sense. The formal initiation is also real, but only when vidvad-rudhi also occurs.]

Nowadays, the rtviks pretend that they are all disciples of Srila Bhaktivedanta Swami Maharaja. They were never his disciples. If they are his disciples, why are they acting against him? Can we say that the rtviks are Iskcon? Never were they Iskcon, and never can they be, even after thousands of lives.

We should follow the words of Srila Swami Maharaja. What is his internal mood? It is the same as that of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu. What is His internal mood? It is the same as that of Srila Rupa Gosvami, our guru-parampara, and Srila Prabhupada Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura. We in this world have forgotten Krsna, and we are deprived of Krsna's service. We are bahir-mukha, opposed to serving Krsna, and the only business of the guru-parampara is to bring us to Krsna's service. That is the internal mood of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu.

Krsna came to this world as Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu. He is Parama-karuna and Rasika-sekhara. He is causelessly merciful, but somewhat 'weak,' and therefore He took the mood of Srimati Radhika to become stronger for preaching this mission. By the strength of Her moods, He was able to give krsna-prema even to trees, creepers, and animals, and He turned the moods of all kinds of living entities. It was amazing, however, that although Kala Krsnadasa was traveling with Him, He was not able to help him. This is because Kala Krsnadasa was only engaged in Mahaprabhu's external service. He did not inquire from Him about bhakti, neither did he have taste for His hari-katha, neither did he have a taste for chanting. In other words, he could not adopt Mahaprabhu's inner mood.

Similarly, your Prabhupada attracted everyone in just a couple of years and spread the holy names everywhere, but are the rtviks actually his disciples? A doubt comes. Are they actually following his principles? Actually, they are not qualified to say, "We are disciples of Prabhupada." They are actually against his teachings. Their interests are in collecting money and winning court cases, and some of them engage in smuggling.

They say that Srila Swami Maharaja was not omniscient. They question, "If he was omniscient, then why did he give sannyasa to so many who later fell down from the sannyasa order?" They say, "If he was omniscient, he would have known about the abuses in Gurukula, and that omniscience would have disqualified him from being a bona fide guru." Actually, Srila Swami Maharaja did give sannyasa to so many who returned to a material life of drinking, eating meat, and engaging in other sinful activities, and some of those who remained became rtvik.

Was your Prabhupada's mission successful or not? He himself has said, "If even one really follows me and hears me, then I'm successful." Hundreds and thousands may have come, but all are not following. So many of those who claim to be disciples of Prabhupada neither have faith in him nor in nama-bhajana. Rather, they have faith in universities and mayavada professors. Did Prabhupada tell anyone to learn from mayavadi professors? How can we accept them as Iskcon devotees? They have no faith in Iskcon and Iskcon principles.

[Now addressing a devotee who had given the previous speech, and had said that Srila Prabhupada had given nama-prema to everyone. Srila Maharaja continued:] "We cannot say that Prabhupada delivered so many (otherwise they would now be liberated souls), but even if one person follows, the mission is successful. You cannot say that he gave nama-prema to all. If that were the case, why have so many fallen? You should try to fully surrender, and try to realize his internal mood."

I have read in Bhagavad Gita (2.40):

nehabhikrama-naso 'sti

pratyavayo na vidyate

sv-alpam apy asya dharmasya

trayate mahato bhayat

["In this endeavor there is no loss or diminution, and a little advancement on this path can protect one from the most dangerous type of fear."]

This verse is true for one is not committing vaisnava-aparadha, sastra-aparadha or tadiyavastu-aparadha (aparadha to things and people in relationship to Krsna). If one actually accepts bhakti-yoga, then even if he dies before perfection, or even if he gives up practicing before he dies, there is no harm. He can continue practicing in his next life. Krsna will give preference to him, and from there he will begin.

prapya punya-krtam lokan

unitva sasvatih samah

sucinam srimatam gehe

yoga-bhrasto 'bhijayate

["The unsuccessful yogi, after many, many years of enjoyment on the planets of the pious living entities, is born into a family of righteous people, or into a family of rich aristocracy." (Bg 6.41)]

Also, in Srimad Bhagavatam it has been told:

tyaktva sva-dharmam caranambujam harer

bhajann apakvo 'tha patet tato yadi

yatra kva vabhadram abhud amusya kim

ko vartha apto 'bhajatam sva-dharmatah

["If someone gives up his occupational duties and works in Krsna consciousness and then falls down on account of not completing his work, what loss is there on his part? And what can one gain if one performs his material activities perfectly?" Or, as the Christians say, "What profiteth a man if he gains the whole world yet suffers the loss of his eternal soul?" (1.5.17)]

The navarshis said to Vyasadeva that if one performs his material duties perfectly and regularly, there is no true benefit. If he follows varnasrama-dharma perfectly, there is actually no spiritual gain. On the other hand, if one begins chanting the holy name, is initiated by a pure guru, and is trying to follow him, but he comes under the clutches of maya; as long as he does not commit offenses he has a chance for spiritual progress. What is the gain in varnasrama? Even if one performs his duty, still, the spiritual result is nil.

Srila Swami Maharaja's internal mood is the same as that of Caitanya Mahaprabhu and our guru-paramapara - to change the direction of the living entities' mood towards Krsna. This is the best mercy, and he endeavored throughout his life for this. In his last days he told me he was not satisfied, because he was remembering so many of his disciples who were not following him and not trying to be real Iskcon. He therefore ordered me, "Help my disciples and give me samadhi." He also told me, "I made some mistakes. Please ask my god-brothers to forgive me, because I preached to my disciples that they are not preaching." I replied to him, "You made no offense. It was your duty at that time. You said your god-brothers are not preaching. This was just to give your less intelligent neophyte disciples enthusiasm. You have not done a wrong thing. You spoke appropriately for the needs of your students at that time. Your internal desire was to turn their mood toward Krsna. Now you are seeing that they are offensive to your god-brothers, by saying they have not preached."

What is preaching? If one is 'preaching' and not following bhakti, then his activity is karma-marga (the path of fruitive activities). Where are the persons who were preaching all over the world? So many are not in Iskcon. Your Prabhupada therefore requested me to help them to become Iskcon in the real sense.

Don't follow the rtviks. They are not disciples of Prabhupada. They never actually served him in a real sense, and they are opposed to his teachings. You should try to realize what instructions Srila Swami Maharaja has given. He has never given anything other than the instructions of Srila Rupa Gosvami. He always followed Rupa Gosvami, and therefore he is a rupanuga-vaisnava. He wanted to very clearly give the path of rupanuga (manjari-bhava), but he first had to cut down the jungles of mayavada and atheism. Because he wanted to give this path, he requested me to help them. He could have given it then, but they were not ready at that time. He told me to help them so that they could become strong in bhakti; more strong than iron; as strong as thunderbolts. You should therefore preach your Prabhupada's real mission, Rupa Gosvami's mission, everywhere.

Only those who have had a high class of sadhu-sanga can realize his mission and his glories. Only a maha-bhagavata can understand another maha-bhagavata. You cannot realize this. You have heard from Srila Prabhupada Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura that Vamsidasa Babaji was a paramahamsa. Unless you heard it from Srila Sarasvati Thakura, how could you have understood? [Vamsidasa Babaji would, for example, keep fish bones in front of his hut, and sometimes he wouldn't dress his Deities. On other occasions he wouldn't follow Ekadasi, and sometimes he would offer tea and coffee to his Thakurji.] Prapujacarana Srila Bhakti Raksaka Sridhara Maharaja has also said about your Prabhupada that his power came from Sri Nityananda Prabhu, and therefore he is a saktyavesa-avatara. Who can realize this? Only one who is following him in the real sense.

I used to see him when he was singing Sad Gosvami-astakam and Gauranga Bolite Habe. He used to sing in a pathetic tune (filled with feelings of separation and longing for Krsna), with his voice choked up and tears in his eyes.

Gaura Premanande!

[Guest guest]

 

This invention of "phlagu vairagya" and that everything” should be used in Krishna’s service is

1. against the first rule of self surrender anukulyasa sankalpa:

one should use only that which is favorable for Krishna’s service - implementing varna-ashrma dharma isn't.

 

According to Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakur if one engages in phalgu-vairagya, or renouncing material things that are favourable to the service of Sri Krsna, one runs the risk of being polluted by the impersonalist conception. On the other hand, by sticking to the principle of yukta-vairagya, engaging everything for Krsna without personal desire, one can remain aloof from the danger of material sense gratification and gradually come to the platform of a first-class devotee.

Here is possibly an example of this from the biography of, Sri Ananta Das Babaji found on Wikipedia [most likely written by Madhvananda]:

“Eventually he decided to renounce the world, departing for a journey to Radha-kunda, this time to stay for good. Having arrived at this holiest of all the holy places, he received the cloth of an ascetic from Sri Kunjabihari Das Babaji. Over the decades to come, he engaged himself in a deep study of the Gaudiya canon of sacred texts, at the same time becoming more and more deeply absorbed in bhajana, both in the external and the esoteric internal methods of worship.

Though often ascetics would wear nothing but one or two pieces of ragged cloth, Sri Kunjabihari Das Babaji requested his disciple to dress in orderly clothes, as he was to instruct the mankind at large, and should therefore look respectable in the eyes of everyone. Over the years to come, Sri Ananta Das Babaji traveled around the holy land of Vraja, lecturing extensively on the scriptures, instructing saints and laymen alike.

In accordance with the request of his guru, Sri Ananta Das Babaji began to write extensive commentaries elucidating the concepts presented in the foundational writings of the Six Goswamis of Vrindavan and in the writings of the later great teachers following in their footsteps. In his old age, he has retired to Radha-kunda, focusing on his inner worship and on his writing work.

He has initiated some 3.500 disciples into the Gaudiya Vaishnava tradition, including people from Vraja, from Bengal, and from dozens of Western countries. He has been elected as the Mahanta of Radha-kunda, thus being the 34th representative of the seat of Sri Raghunatha Das Goswami. He is widely recognized as one of the foremost teachers of the Gaudiya Vaishnava tradition on account of his voluminous and comprehensive writings as well as due to his humility and purity of heart.”

[Guest guest]

Bhaktivedanta VedaBase: Śrī Caitanya Caritāmṛta Madhya 23.105

yukta-vairāgya-sthiti saba śikhāila

śuṣka-vairāgya-jñāna saba niṣedhila

SYNONYMS

yukta-vairāgya — of proper renunciation; sthiti — the situation; saba — all; śikhāila — instructed; śuṣka-vairāgya — dry renunciation; jñāna — speculative knowledge; saba — all; niṣedhila — forbade.

TRANSLATION

Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu then told Sanātana Gosvāmī about proper renunciation according to a particular situation, and the Lord forbade dry renunciation and speculative knowledge in all respects.

PURPORT

This is the technique for understanding śuṣka-vairāgya and yukta-vairāgya. In the Bhagavad-gītā (6.17) it is said:

yuktāhāra-vihārasya yukta-ceṣṭasya karmasu

yukta-svapnāvabodhasya yogo bhavati duḥkha-hā

"He who is temperate in his habits of eating, sleeping, recreation and work can mitigate all material pains by practicing the yoga system." To broadcast the cult of Kṛṣṇa consciousness, one has to learn the possibility of renunciation in terms of country, time and candidate. A candidate for Kṛṣṇa consciousness in the Western countries should be taught about the renunciation of material existence, but one would teach candidates from a country like India in a different way. The teacher (ācārya) has to consider time, candidate and country. He must avoid the principle of niyamāgraha — that is, he should not try to perform the impossible. What is possible in one country may not be possible in another. The ācārya's duty is to accept the essence of devotional service. There may be a little change here and there as far as yukta-vairāgya (proper renunciation) is concerned. Dry renunciation is forbidden by Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, and we have also learned this from our spiritual master, His Divine Grace Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura Gosvāmī Mahārāja. The essence of devotional service must be taken into consideration, and not the outward paraphernalia.

Sanātana Gosvāmī wrote his Vaiṣṇava smṛti, Hari-bhakti-vilāsa, which was specifically meant for India. In those days, India was more or less following the principle of smārta-vidhi. Śrīla Sanātana Gosvāmī had to keep pace with this, and his Hari-bhakti-vilāsa was compiled with this in mind. According to smārta-brāhmaṇas, a person not born in a brāhmaṇa family could not be elevated to the position of a brāhmaṇa. Sanātana Gosvāmī, however, says in the Hari-bhakti-vilāsa (2.12) that anyone can be elevated to the position of a brāhmaṇa by the process of initiation.

yathā kāñcanatāḿ yāti kāḿsyaḿ rasa-vidhānataḥ

tathā dīkṣā-vidhānena dvijatvaḿ jāyate nṛṇām

"As bell metal is turned to gold when mixed with mercury in an alchemical process, so one who is properly trained and initiated by a bona fide spiritual master immediately becomes a brāhmaṇa."

There is a difference between the smārta process and the gosvāmī process. According to the smārta process, one cannot be accepted as a brāhmaṇa unless he is born in a brāhmaṇa family. According to the gosvāmī process, the Hari-bhakti-vilāsa and the Nārada-pañcarātra, anyone can be a brāhmaṇa if he is properly initiated by a bona fide spiritual master. This is also the verdict of Śukadeva Gosvāmī in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (2.4.18):

kirāta-hūṇāndhra-pulinda-pulkaśā

ābhīra-śumbhā yavanāḥ khasādayaḥ

ye 'nye ca pāpā yad-apāśrayāśrayāḥ

śudhyanti tasmai prabhaviṣṇave namaḥ

"Kirātas, Hūṇas, Āndhras, Pulindas, Pulkaśas, Ābhīras, Śumbhas, Yavanas and members of the Khasa races, and even others who are addicted to sinful acts, can be purified by taking shelter of the devotees of the Lord, due to His being the supreme power. I beg to offer my respectful obeisances unto Him."

A Vaiṣṇava is immediately purified, provided he follows the rules and regulations of his bona fide spiritual master. It is not necessary that the rules and regulations followed in India be exactly the same as those in Europe, America and other Western countries. Simply imitating without effect is called niyamāgraha. Not following the regulative principles but instead living extravagantly is also called niyamāgraha. The word niyama means "regulative principles," and āgraha means "eagerness." The word agraha means "not to accept." We should not follow regulative principles without an effect, nor should we fail to accept the regulative principles. What is required is a special technique according to country, time and candidate. Without the sanction of the spiritual master, we should not try to imitate. This principle is recommended here: śuṣka-vairāgya-jñāna saba niṣedhila. This is Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu's liberal demonstration of the bhakti cult. We should not introduce anything whimsically, without the sanction of the bona fide spiritual master. In this connection, Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura comments on these points by quoting two verses by Śrī Rūpa Gosvāmī (Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu 1.2.255-256).

anāsaktasya viṣayān yathārham upayuñjataḥ

nirbandhaḥ kṛṣṇa-sambandhe yuktaḿ vairāgyam ucyate

prāpañcikatayā buddhyā hari-sambandhi-vastunaḥ

mumukṣubhiḥ parityāgo vairāgyaḿ phalgu kathyate

"When one is not attached to anything but at the same time accepts everything in relation to Kṛṣṇa, one is rightly situated above possessiveness. On the other hand, one who rejects everything without knowledge of its relationship to Kṛṣṇa is not as complete in his renunciation." To preach the bhakti cult, one should seriously consider these verses.

[Guest guest]

Instead of just cutting and pasting a long winded speech by a sadhu, why not paraphrase in your own words. Perhaps then you will receive some realisation.