8.4 million species and those born of sweat

[muralidhar_das]

 

These quarrels of long ago dont interst me very much. Who did what to whom and why - so many angles, so many different opinions. There is for example no single evidence from Bhaktivinoda that he ever rejected Bipin B. Goswami as his guru as he wrote a very elevated verse in his praise shortly before his departure from this world.

 

What verse is that?

 

I once had an unpleasant quarrel with JNDas on this forum where JNDas said that Bipin BIhari was not the guru of Thakur Bhaktivinode, since it says this in the introduction to CC

 

 

"The direct disciple of Srila Krsnadasa Kaviraja Gosvami was Srila Narottama dasa Thakura, who accepted Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti as his servitor. Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura accepted Srila Jagannatha dasa Babaji, who initiated Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura, who in turn initiated Srila Gaurakisora dasa Babaji, the spiritual master of Om Visnupada Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Gosvami Maharaja, the divine master of our humble self."

 

 

 

Also:

 

 

 

one of the central ideas stemming from Bhaktivinoda's SKS is that leela is essentially imaginary on the physical plane, therefore you can imagine more leela and that becomes "shastra" if you are a "realized soul". Very few devotees currently in the Saraswata parivar would put it so bluntly but that is the gist of it.

 

The view that the Leela is not on the physical plane at all is explained in great detail (maybe 20 pages or more) in Sri Krishna Chaitanya by professor sanyal, with an introduction by Saraswati Thakura.

 

Fact is, Saraswati Thakur didn't preach the "literalist" view of stories in Puranas and shastra. He taught that you need to enter into the deeper view of Reality before you can appreciate divine Leela.

[Guest guest]

 

What verse is that?

 

 

Actually, there are several:

 

Vipina-vihari hari tara shakti avatari Vipina-vihari prabhu-vara, sri-guru-gosvami-rupe dekhi more bhava-kupe uddharilo apana kinkara

 

"Vipina-vihari, my exalted Master is the manifestation of the potency of Hari, Who plays in Vraja's forests. Seeing me in the dark hole of mundane existence, he appeared in the form of a Guru Gosvami, to save this servant of his." (Srila Bhaktivinoda's commentary on Caitanya-caritamrita)

 

vilasa manjari, ananga manjari, sri rupa manjari ara

amake tuliya, loha nija pade, deha more siddhi sara

 

"Vilasa Manjari (Srila Vipinavihari Gosvami's manjari name), Ananga Manjari and Sri Rupa Manjari, please uplift me and give me the shelter of your lotus feet. For by your mercy I shall be awarded the essence of all spiritual perfection." (Gita Mala)

 

Bhagavat-arka-marici-mala: vipina-vihari prabhu mama prabhu-vara | sri-vamsi-vadanananda-vamsa-sasadhara || -- "Vipina-vihari Prabhu, the greatest of my masters, is the brilliant moon in the family of Sri Vamsi Vadanananda."

 

Amrita-pravaha-bhasya: vipina-vihari hari, tara sakti avatari | vipina-vihari prabhu-vara || sri-guru-goswami-rupe, dekhi more bhava-kupe | uddharilo apana kinkara || -- "The eminent Vipina-vihari Prabhu, an avatara of the sakti of Lord Hari Who sports in the forests of Vraja, has descended in the form of the Gosvami spiritual preceptor. Seeing me in the dark well of worldly existence, he has delivered this humble servant of his."

[muralidhar_das]

 

Amrita-pravaha-bhasya: vipina-vihari hari, tara sakti avatari | vipina-vihari prabhu-vara || sri-guru-goswami-rupe, dekhi more bhava-kupe | uddharilo apana kinkara || -- "The eminent Vipina-vihari Prabhu, an avatara of the sakti of Lord Hari Who sports in the forests of Vraja, has descended in the form of the Gosvami spiritual preceptor. Seeing me in the dark well of worldly existence, he has delivered this humble servant of his."

 

Thanks for those verses.

 

Do you know where this is written in Amrita pravaha bhasya? I have it here with me.

[Guruvani]

Bhaktivinode was preaching and giving lectures at the Jagannatha Vallabha Garden at Puri and writing Sri Krishna Samhita before he ever heard of Vipina-vihari Goswami, but when he moved to Mayapura he knew he would need formal diksha to get any sort of respectability in that part of India that was totally dominated by the smarta brahmanism.

 

His relationship with Vipina-vihari "Goswami" was just a formality that Bhaktivinode used to his advantage until he met Jagannatha das Babaji and realized he shouldn't play that game anymore.

 

Bhaktivinode was self-realized siddha before he ever heard the name of Vipina-vihari Goswami.

[muralidhar_das]

 

Bhaktivinode was preaching and giving lectures at the Jagannatha Vallabha Garden at Puri and writing Sri Krishna Samhita before he ever heard of Vipina-vihari Goswami, but when he moved to Mayapura he knew he would need formal diksha to get any sort of respectability in that part of India that was totally dominated by the smarta brahmanism.

 

His relationship with Vipina-vihari "Goswami" was just a formality that Bhaktivinode used to his advantage until he met Jagannatha das Babaji and realized he shouldn't play that game anymore.

 

Bhaktivinode was self-realized siddha before he ever heard the name of Vipina-vihari Goswami.

I agree with almost all of this.

 

The only thing I'm not sure about is the idea that his accepting of diksa from Bipin Bihari Goswami was a formality.

 

 

Vipina-vihari hari tara shakti avatari Vipina-vihari prabhu-vara, sri-guru-gosvami-rupe dekhi more bhava-kupe uddharilo apana kinkara

 

"Vipina-vihari, my exalted Master is the manifestation of the potency of Hari, Who plays in Vraja's forests. Seeing me in the dark hole of mundane existence, he appeared in the form of a Guru Gosvami, to save this servant of his." (Srila Bhaktivinoda's commentary on Caitanya-caritamrita)

 

vilasa manjari, ananga manjari, sri rupa manjari ara

amake tuliya, loha nija pade, deha more siddhi sara

 

"Vilasa Manjari (Srila Vipinavihari Gosvami's manjari name), Ananga Manjari and Sri Rupa Manjari, please uplift me and give me the shelter of your lotus feet. For by your mercy I shall be awarded the essence of all spiritual perfection." (Gita Mala)

 

Bhagavat-arka-marici-mala: vipina-vihari prabhu mama prabhu-vara | sri-vamsi-vadanananda-vamsa-sasadhara || -- "Vipina-vihari Prabhu, the greatest of my masters, is the brilliant moon in the family of Sri Vamsi Vadanananda."

 

Amrita-pravaha-bhasya: vipina-vihari hari, tara sakti avatari | vipina-vihari prabhu-vara || sri-guru-goswami-rupe, dekhi more bhava-kupe | uddharilo apana kinkara || -- "The eminent Vipina-vihari Prabhu, an avatara of the sakti of Lord Hari Who sports in the forests of Vraja, has descended in the form of the Gosvami spiritual preceptor. Seeing me in the dark well of worldly existence, he has delivered this humble servant of his."

 

My understanding is that he had great faith in Bipin Bihari initially but later realized that Bipin Bihari was compromising himself by supporting the anti-Mayapura brahmins from Prachin Mayapura.

 

Jagannatha das Babaji had envisaged the Yogapitha in his transcendental vision when he first came to Mayapura, and Bhaktivinode Thakur had faith in Jagannatha and in his own vision.

 

A Vaishnava can sometimes be more advanced than his Guru. As for example Sukadeva, who explained Bhagavatam in such a wonderful way that Narada (his param guru) and Vyasa (his Guru) found what he said had more sweetness (ananda) that what they themselves had experienced.

 

 

nigama-kalpa-taror galitaḿ phalaḿ

śuka-mukhād amṛta-drava-saḿyutam

pibata bhāgavataḿ rasam ālayaḿ

muhur aho rasikā bhuvi bhāvukāḥ

 

O expert and thoughtful men, relish Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, the mature fruit of the desire tree of Vedic literatures. It emanated from the lips of Śrī Śukadeva Gosvāmī. Therefore this fruit has become even more tasteful, although its nectarean juice was already relishable for all, including liberated souls.

 

[Guest guest]

 

You're the one who has the cheek to disregard the siksa of Bhaktivinoda and Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati. I prefer to stay connected to the main trunk of the parampara, instead of deviate to the point of fitting the description of a fringie quite aptly. Read the Sri Krsna-samhita. Krsna consciousness is not synonymous nor dependent on mythology and hyperbole.

 

What is their siksa so I can figure out if I disregarded them? I have read the Sri Krsna-samhita long time ago and I considered the introduction chapters an interpolation b/c it has things which I consider completely false.

 

Do not call me a fringie, fringies turn out to be right quite often!

[Vikram Ramsundar]

 

I did not get the impression that Vikram on referring to Krsna Samhita was suggesting we take that work on blind faith. Rather I took it he was pointing to a principle that Bhaktivinode took in making the great work of the Bhagavatam accessable to modern readers.

 

To reject Krsna Samhita because of some habits the Thakur had (and was later to overcome) is like rejecting the vedas because of some insignificant spots found here and there.

 

 

Thank you for your sympathetic and accurate reading of my words, Theist Prabhu. This is exactly what I in fact meant. Sri Krsna Samhita is useful in the sense that it purveys one a means of realising the Bhagavatam's beautiful message of bhakti even whilst staying true to the principle of rationality. Any religious pursuit is, to some extent, irrational, because God and the atma cannot be empirically proven to exist. However, that does not mean that we abandon reason and allow ourselves to fall prey to mythological thinking at its worst. Guru and sastra are to be respected always, but Guru is human and thus fallible, and sastra is relative, not absolute. Both only serve as guides to lead a sadhaka to his/her sadhya, not as authorities in themselves who are not prone to sometimes make biased pronouncements. Perspective derived from careful reasoning is just as valid, if not more so, than scripture.

 

Radhe Radhe

[Guest guest]

 

His relationship with Vipina-vihari "Goswami" was just a formality that Bhaktivinode used to his advantage until he met Jagannatha das Babaji and realized he shouldn't play that game anymore.

 

 

Please show me in his writings that this is indeed true. Can you quote his verses praising Jagannatha das Babaji in a way he is praising his diksa guru?

 

This is my challenge to you and other supporters of the theory that Bhaktivinoda rejected his diksa guru and only took shelter of Jagannatha das Babaji.

[Guest guest]

 

The view that the Leela is not on the physical plane at all is explained in great detail (maybe 20 pages or more) in Sri Krishna Chaitanya by professor sanyal, with an introduction by Saraswati Thakura.

 

Fact is, Saraswati Thakur didn't preach the "literalist" view of stories in Puranas and shastra. He taught that you need to enter into the deeper view of Reality before you can appreciate divine Leela.

 

That is a misunderstanding. True, the leela does not happen ONLY on this physical plane - but it most certainly happens ALSO on this physical plane.

 

The theory that leela never happend physically here on earth is nothing new - it was not invented by Bhaktivinoda but has been around for many, many centuries. For centuries many Mayavadis preached for example that Battle of Kurukshetra never actually took place, that it is simply a metaphor, etc. ALL four Vaishnava sampradayas held an opposing view and these debates are well documented in the writings of Madhva, Ramanuja, Nimbarka, and Vishnusvami, thus any concept that denies leela actually happened in our physical world is completely bogus and constitutes an apasiddhanta. Prabhupada spoke about it more than once or twice.

 

The concept that you can tell lies in order to inspire others is very slippery as so much in spiritual life rests on faith. Generally you dont trust those who tell you lies. And more importantly, what if they are lying to you that they are actually realized and liberated? Perhaps this is just another lie to keep you "inspired"?

[Guruvani]

 

Please show me in his writings that this is indeed true. Can you quote his verses praising Jagannatha das Babaji in a way he is praising his diksa guru?

 

This is my challenge to you and other supporters of the theory that Bhaktivinoda rejected his diksa guru and only took shelter of Jagannatha das Babaji.

What I can say is this, that Bhaktivinoda was first converted to the following of Mahaprabhu at about the age of 30 when he was appointed the Deputy Magistrate at Dinajpura under the patronage of Raya Saheb Kamala Lochana, the Zamindar of Dinajpura and who was a descendent of Ramananda Vasu - a great devotee of Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu.

 

At Dinajpur Bhaktivinoda came into the association of some of the prominent local Vaishnavas and was fortunate to thus acquire a copy of Sri Chaitanya Caritamrita and a Bengali translation of Srimad Bhagavatam as well as a copy of Bhakta-mala.

 

Upon his first reading of Sri Chaitanya Caritamrita he was converted to the Gaudiya theology and accepted Mahaprabhu as his Lord and master.

 

At Dinajpur Bhaktivinoda regularly associated with the Vaishnavas there and shared religious sentiments with the Vaishnavas.

He also did some comparitive study of Brahmoism, Christianity and Islam.

 

He found his own faith to be irreversibly reposed in Mahaprabhu and the Gaudiya theology.

 

After a short transfer to Champran he was then posted at Puri.

 

His two favorite books at that time were Sri Chaitanya Caritamrita and Srimad Bhagavatam.

He studied them profusely and entered into a deep understanding of the Gaudiya history and tradition.

 

At Puri, Bhaktivinoda undertook an exhaustive study of the Bhagavat and the commentary by Sridhar Swami with the assistance of Gopinatha Pandita. It is said that two other prominent scholars named Harihara das and Markendeya Mahapatra who were scholars of Nyaya and Vedanta also joined with Bhaktivinoda in study of the Bhagavat.

 

Bhaktivinode had already studied Sanskrit in college under Isvara Chandra Vidyasagar and Dwijendranatha Tagore and others and he continued his Sanskrit studies all along.

 

After completing his study of the Bhagavatam, Bhaktivinoda studied Jiva Goswami's Satsandarbha, Baladeva Vidyabhusana's Govinda-bhasya, Rupa Goswami's Bhakti-rasamrita-sindhu and many other Gaudiya literatures that were available from the library of the Raja of Puri.

 

At this point, Bhaktivinoda had "mastered" the Gaudiya philosophy.

 

All BEFORE he had ever taken formal initiation from Vipina-bihari Goswami.

 

It's obvious Bhaktivinoda was primarily a "book man" whose conversion to the Gaudiya sampradaya was effected by the reading of the classic Gaudiya literatures.

 

Bhaktivinoda had become so well educated and dedicated to the movement of Mahaprabhu and the theology of the Bhagavat that he started a preaching program he styled as "Bhagavat Samsat" that was regularly held at the Jagannatha Vallabha Garden of the Temple of Lord Jagannatha.

 

He also started another study group styled as "Vidvat Sabha" where he lectured on the teachings of the prominent Bhakti literature of the Gaudiya sampradaya.

 

During that period Bhaktivinoda came in contact with a great ascetic devotee name Svarupa das that he had very high regard for.

 

So, Bhaktivinoda Thakur had plenty of connection and association with Vaishnavas that he had at least been informally intiated through hearing from genuine devotees in the lineage of Mahaprabhu.

 

While at Puri, Bhaktivinoda write Sri Krishna Samhita.

 

By commenting on the Vaishnava scriptures in this way, it is obvious that Bhaktivinoda had attained very high realizations and the symptoms of a siddha-bhakta.

 

After about 5 years at Puri Bhaktivinoda was re-assigned to duty in Bengal.

 

In Bengal Bhaktivinoda pilgrimaged all the important places associated with the pastimes of Mahaprabhu.

 

Bhaktivinoda was highly respected and highly regarded by many of the local Vaishnavas for his great learning and devotion. Sometimes local kirtan singers would like to come and perform for Bhaktivinoda.

 

Around this time he published Sri Krishna Samhita which was highly praised by such notable figures as Sir Reinhold Reist of the India Office, London.

 

It was sometime after that when Bhaktivinoda came in contact with Vipina Vihari Goswami and took formal diksha from him.

 

So, looking at the actual situation and the life of Bhaktivinoda, it's quite obvious that Bhaktivinoda's spiritual advancement and cultivation had already attained a very high level before he ever took formal initiation from Vipina Bihari goswami.

 

After formal diksha Bhaktivinoda adopted more of the external signs and symptoms of a Gaudiya Vaishnava and enhanced his reputation as an orthodox Gaudiya.

 

Bhaktivinoda was a writer and a preacher.

 

His acceptance of formal initiation certainly boosted his image and his reputation in Bengal and aided him in his mission to revive and restore the Gaudiya society to the dignified and splendid stature it deserved.

 

How significant was the formal initiation of Bhaktivinoda in regards to his actual spiritual development in Bhakti Dharma is certainly up for question when we really understand that Bhaktivinoda was already a liberated soul before he every received formal initiation.

[Guest guest]

 

It's obvious Bhaktivinoda was primarily a "book man" whose conversion to the Gaudiya sampradaya was effected by the reading of the classic Gaudiya literatures.

(...)

After formal diksha Bhaktivinoda adopted more of the external signs and symptoms of a Gaudiya Vaishnava and enhanced his reputation as an orthodox Gaudiya.

 

Bhaktivinoda was a writer and a preacher.

 

His acceptance of formal initiation certainly boosted his image and his reputation in Bengal and aided him in his mission to revive and restore the Gaudiya society to the dignified and splendid stature it deserved.

 

How significant was the formal initiation of Bhaktivinoda in regards to his actual spiritual development in Bhakti Dharma is certainly up for question when we really understand that Bhaktivinoda was already a liberated soul before he every received formal initiation.

 

Based on his own autobiography, Bhaktivinoda's first direct contact with Vaishnavism was through a Karta-bhaja guru, who made a very powerful impression on him. This guru was a powerful mystic who made a stunning and very accurate prediction in regards to the outbreak of deadly plague in Bhaktivinoda's home village and the fate of his family. This event, more than anything else, strikes me as his point of conversion. At least based on his autobiography.

 

I would also trust Bhaktivinoda's own writings on the reasons for taking a formal initiation and the role this initiation and his guru played in his life. To say that this was done for some political ("good for preaching") reasons is a blatant falsehood.

 

Like I said: Can you quote his verses praising Jagannatha das Babaji in a way he is praising his diksa guru?

[theist]

Lowborn, what is a Karta-bhaja guru?

[Guruvani]

 

 

Like I said: Can you quote his verses praising Jagannatha das Babaji in a way he is praising his diksa guru?

What we do know is what Srila Bhaktsiddhanta Saraswati Thakur wanted the Saraswata Parivar to understand about the mood and the feelings of Bhaktivinoda Thakur.

What we do know is what the most elevated and learned disciples of Srila Saraswati Thakur have expressed about the true inner feelings of Bhaktivinoda in regards to raga-marga and his Jagannatha das Babaji.

 

In the system of parampara we are supposed to understand Bhaktivinoda in the way that Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakur and then his disciples, our gurus, have told us to understand.

 

We can't step over their heads and think we can understand Bhaktivinoda differently than he has been portrayed by Srila Saraswati Thakur and then his most intimate disciples.

 

The Saraswata parampara does not recognize Vipina Bihari Goswami as within the lineage.

 

That is a well-known fact.

 

Maybe a couple of branches of Gaudiya Matha present Vipina Bihari Goswami as in the parampara, but I don't follow any of those branches.

 

I follow a branch of the Saraswata parivar that doesn't recognize Vipina Bihari Goswami as within the actual spiritual current of the lineage.

 

Srila Sridhar Maharaja and Srila Prabhupada neither one recognized Vipina Bihari Goswami as within the Saraswata parivar.

 

Srila Saraswati Thakur took diksha from Gaura-kisora babaji.

 

The diksha line of the Saraswata parivar does not include Vipina Bihari Goswami.

 

Neither do they give any position to Vipina Bihari Goswami as being any sort of architect of or contributor to the Bhaktivinoda spiritual dynasty.

[Guest guest]

 

Lowborn, what is a Karta-bhaja guru?

 

It is a guru belonging to the Karta-bhaja sect of Gaudiya Vaishnavism (btw. considered by our Sarasvata Sampradaya to be an apasampradaya). Their spectacular rise to power and then subsequent disintegration is the stuff of legends, enjoyed not just among the Gaudiyas. There are some interesting paralels between them and Iskcon, on many levels It was a very powerful social and religious movement in India, started by Aul Chand and his followers. Aul Chand (c.1686-1779) was a daravesa (mystic) regarded by his followers as incarnation of Lord Caitanya.

[Guruvani]

 

Based on his own autobiography, Bhaktivinoda's first direct contact with Vaishnavism was through a Karta-bhaja guru, who made a very powerful impression on him. This guru was a powerful mystic who made a stunning and very accurate prediction in regards to the outbreak of deadly plague in Bhaktivinoda's home village and the fate of his family. This event, more than anything else, strikes me as his point of conversion. At least based on his autobiography.

 

Like I said: Can you quote his verses praising Jagannatha das Babaji in a way he is praising his diksa guru?

 

Well, I am most familiar with the biography as described by B.V. Tirtha Maharaja, one of the most intimate disciples of Srila Saraswati Thakur and who presented the biography of Bhaktivinoda in a way that he understood it from Srila Saraswati Thakur.

 

Srila Saraswati Thakur knew the quintessential Bhaktivinode and the Bhaktivinoda of the final proof.

 

According to B.V. Tirtha Maharaja, Srila Bhaktivinoda really came to know the personality of Mahaprabhu after coming to Dinajpur and becomign encouraged by the prominent Vaishnavas there to make a study of Sri Chaitanya Caritamrita.

 

Really, before that Bhaktivinoda himself writes in the "Bhagavat" that before he read Sri Caitanya Caritamrita that he had very bad impression of the Gaudiyas and a bad opinion of Srimad Bhagavatam.

 

I will find that reference and post it to show you where Bhaktivinoda confesses that before he read Sri Chaitanya Charitamarita he was actually quite against the Gaudiya people.

[Guruvani]

Bhaktivinoda (the Bhagavat)

 

 

Accidentally, we fell in with a work about the Great Chaitanya, and on reading it with some attention in order to settle the historical position of that Mighty Genius of Nadia, we had the opportunity of gathering His explanations of Bhagavata, given to the wrangling Vedantist of the Benares School. The accidental study created in us a love for all the works which we find about our Eastern Savior. We gathered with difficulties the famous Karchas in Sanskrit, written by the disciples of Chaitanya. The explanations that we got of the Bhagavata from these sources, were of such a charming character that we procured a copy of the Bhagavata complete and studied its texts (difficult of course to those who are not trained up in philosophical thoughts) with the assistance of the famous commentaries of Shridhar Swami. From such study it is that we have at least gathered the real doctrines of the Vaishnavas. Oh! What a trouble to get rid of prejudices gathered in unripe years!

In the words of Bhaktivinoda we can here see that he personally attributes his the study of the CC and some other books of the Goswamis as having really brought him into Vaishnavism.

[Guruvani]

Bhaktivinoda (the Bhagavat)

 

 

We are ourselves aware of the fact. When we were in the college, reading the philosophical works of the West and exchanging thought with the thinkers of the day, we had a real hatred towards the Bhagavata. That great work looked like a repository of wicked and stupid ideas, scarcely adapted to the nineteenth century, and we hated to hear any arguments in its favor. With us then a volume of Channing, Parker, Emerson or Newman had more weight than the whole lot of the Vaishnava works. Greedily we poured over the various commentations of the Holy Bible and of the labors of the Tattwa Bodhini Sabha, containing extracts from the Upanisads and the Vedanta, but no work of the Vaishnavas had any favor with us. But when we advanced in age and our religious sentiment received development, we turned out in a manner Unitarian in our belief and prayed as Jesus prayed in the Garden.

[Guest guest]

 

What we do know is what Srila Bhaktsiddhanta Saraswati Thakur wanted the Saraswata Parivar to understand about the mood and the feelings of Bhaktivinoda Thakur.

 

The questions I posed are ultimately unavoidable, at least from the scholarly and historical point of view. A tradition ultimately cannot avoid the facts, or attempt to adjust the facts to the promoted concepts.

 

There is very little doubt that for Bhaktivinoda Thakura himself, Bipin Bihari Goswami played a much more prominent role than Saraswatas would like to admit, and likely was more influential than Jagannatha das Babaji. However, from the perspective of the Sarasvata branch of the Sampradaya, the influence over the sampradaya was stronger from the JDB side. Thus our lineage is traced through JDB and not BBG.

[Guest guest]

 

Thank you for your sympathetic and accurate reading of my words, Theist Prabhu. This is exactly what I in fact meant. Sri Krsna Samhita is useful in the sense that it purveys one a means of realising the Bhagavatam's beautiful message of bhakti even whilst staying true to the principle of rationality. Any religious pursuit is, to some extent, irrational, because God and the atma cannot be empirically proven to exist. However, that does not mean that we abandon reason and allow ourselves to fall prey to mythological thinking at its worst. Guru and sastra are to be respected always, but Guru is human and thus fallible, and sastra is relative, not absolute. Both only serve as guides to lead a sadhaka to his/her sadhya, not as authorities in themselves who are not prone to sometimes make biased pronouncements. Perspective derived from careful reasoning is just as valid, if not more so, than scripture.

 

Radhe Radhe

 

"Any religious pursuit is, to some extent, irrational, because God and the atma cannot be empirically proven to exist."

 

You do not need empirical science to prove God for it to be a rational idea, belief, or knowledge. There are other means such as self-reflection, pure logic, and the list goes on. Really, you need to study epistemology (vaisnava is good) and stop living in the means of knowledge of modern science as superior. Are you saying humans cannot know if God is real with rational thinking? Is mysticism all irrational to you too? Really, it is just a matter of IQ!

[Guest guest]

"but Guru is human and thus fallible"

 

So there are demigod Gurus. Are they fallible too? Also, not all Gurus are human but just look human.

[Guruvani]

 

The questions I posed are ultimately unavoidable, at least from the scholarly and historical point of view. A tradition ultimately cannot avoid the facts, or attempt to adjust the facts to the promoted concepts.

 

There is very little doubt that for Bhaktivinoda Thakura himself, Bipin Bihari Goswami played a much more prominent role than Saraswatas would like to admit, and likely was more influential than Jagannatha das Babaji. However, from the perspective of the Sarasvata branch of the Sampradaya, the influence over the sampradaya was stronger from the JDB side. Thus our lineage is traced through JDB and not BBG.

the bottom line is that Bhaktivinoda encouraged his son Srila Saraswati Thakur to take diksha from a different parivar than the one he had recieved formal diskha in through Vipina Bihari Goswami.

 

The Saraswata Parivar follows a diksha line that does not include Vipina Bihari Goswami and none of his siksa ever shows up even in the books of Bhaktivinoda.

 

It only seems logical that if Vipinia Bihari Goswami had any truly significant contribution to the spiritual conception of Bhaktivinoda that you would find some references to some siksha or some instructions that he gave to Bhaktivinoda in the writings of Bhaktivinoda.

 

The only reference Bhaktivinoda ever made to Vipina Bihari Goswami was some formal offering of respect as a diksha guru.

 

In the teachings and writings of Bhaktivinoda this Vipina Bihari Goswami is non-existant in any form of thought or contribution he made towards the formation of Bhaktivinoda's devotional realizations.

 

The formal nature of their relationship is quite obvious as Bhaktivinoda never refers to Vipina Bihari Goswami in his writings as having enlightend him with any particular conception or understanding of Gaudiya siddhanta.

 

In the writings of Bhaktivinoda this Vipina Bihari Goswami is a non-entity.

 

Unlike Srila Saraswati Thakur and Srila Prabhupada who often refer to their spiritual masters in their wriitngs and commentaries, Bhaktivinoda never made any reference to Vipina Bihari Goswami as having any input into the formation of his thought.

 

I think it is quite obvious the relationship was formal and not genuinely spiritual.

As far as that goes, Bhaktivinoda was probably more spiritually advanced than Vipina Bihari Goswami at the time he took diksha from him.

[Murali_Mohan_das]

No, actually it's a not a matter of IQ, it's a question of understanding what science and empiricism are.

 

By the definition of science and empiricism it's impossible to prove that God exists in the same way it is impossible to determine with 100% certainty that humans are behind the currently observed global warming trend.

 

In the IPCC reports, language like "high confidence" is used when making pronouncements. Elsewhere in the documents, "high confidence" is defined to be 80% certainty or something like that--which, in itself, is just an estimate.

 

A good scientist knows he or she can state nothing with certainty, merely express a degree of confidence in his/her assertions.

 

Sorry if that bothers you, but that's just the way it is. If you can't accept that, it doesn't mean you have a higher IQ than we do, it just means you are stubbornly ignorant in this regard.

 

I'm not saying to abandon logic and reason. St Augustine was very fond of logic and reason, and used them to take him as far as they would take him. At a certain point, he found it necessary to take a leap of faith.

 

 

"Any religious pursuit is, to some extent, irrational, because God and the atma cannot be empirically proven to exist."

 

You do not need empirical science to prove God for it to be a rational idea, belief, or knowledge. There are other means such as self-reflection, pure logic, and the list goes on. Really, you need to study epistemology (vaisnava is good) and stop living in the means of knowledge of modern science as superior. Are you saying humans cannot know if God is real with rational thinking? Is mysticism all irrational to you too? Really, it is just a matter of IQ!

[Guest guest]

 

It only seems logical that if Vipinia Bihari Goswami had any truly significant contribution to the spiritual conception of Bhaktivinoda that you would find some references to some siksha or some instructions that he gave to Bhaktivinoda in the writings of Bhaktivinoda.

 

The only reference Bhaktivinoda ever made to Vipina Bihari Goswami was some formal offering of respect as a diksha guru.

 

 

Even if that was true (and it is not, because the teachings of his diksa line can easily be seen in Bhaktivinoda's later writings), the very same can be said about the absence of Jagannatha das Babaji in Bhaktivinoda's writings. I am not aware of any such references and that is why I challenged you all to show me where exactly does Bhaktivinoda even refers once to Jagannatha das Babaji as his guru.

 

I posted Bhaktivinoda's verses praising BBG in a very elevated way. Now it is your turn to present Bhaktivinoda's verses showing JDG as his siksa guru.

 

Good luck.

[theist]

 

It is a guru belonging to the Karta-bhaja sect of Gaudiya Vaishnavism (btw. considered by our Sarasvata Sampradaya to be an apasampradaya). Their spectacular rise to power and then subsequent disintegration is the stuff of legends, enjoyed not just among the Gaudiyas. There are some interesting paralels between them and Iskcon, on many levels It was a very powerful social and religious movement in India, started by Aul Chand and his followers. Aul Chand (c.1686-1779) was a daravesa (mystic) regarded by his followers as incarnation of Lord Caitanya.

 

Thanks. Never heard of them. Maybe I will run a google on 'em and see what pops up.

[theist]

 

Even if that was true (and it is not, because the teachings of his diksa line can easily be seen in Bhaktivinoda's later writings), the very same can be said about the absence of Jagannatha das Babaji in Bhaktivinoda's writings. I am not aware of any such references and that is why I challenged you all to show me where exactly does Bhaktivinoda even refers once to Jagannatha das Babaji as his guru.

 

Whoops! Got my babaji's mixed up so I deleted my questions.