caste goswamis

[cbrahma]

 

The jata-gosani are a hereditary caste of so-called spiritual masters. Their qualification to give initiation is too often limited to the boast of family connections to associates of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu or to disciples of these associates. A famous example of such a family is the so-called Nityanandavamsa. They claim seminal descent from Lord Nityananda through persons who were actually disciples, not sons, of Lord Nityananda's only and childless son Sri Virabhadra Gosvami.

The jata-gosani use of "gosvami" as a family name is a deviation peculiar to this apasampradaya. Though sunken in mundane family affairs, they think themselves as important as the renounced gosvamis of the Gaudiya Sampradaya.

"One who is still in family life should not misuse the title gosvami. Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakur did not recognize the caste gosvamis because they were not in the line of the six Gosvamis in the renounced order who were direct disciples of Lord Caitanya -- namely, Srila Rupa Gosvami, Srila Sanatana Gosvami, Srila Bhatta Raghunatha Gosvami, Sri Gopala Bhatta Gosvami, Sri Jiva Gosvami and Srila Raghunatha das Gosvami. Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakur said that the grhastha-ashrama, or the status of family life, is a sort of concession for sense gratification. Therefore a grhastha should not falsely adopt the title gosvami. The ISKCON movement has never conferred the title gosvami upon a householder. Although all the sannyasis we have initiated in ISKCON are young, we have awarded them the titles of the renounced order of life, svami and gosvami, because they have completely dedicated their lives to preach the cult of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu." (Caitanya-caritamrta, Adi 12.27, purport)

A popular superstition in Bengal, alluded to in the purport of Caitanya-caritamrta, Madhya 10.23, is that persons born in caste gosvami families are automatically uttama-adhikaris. Thus the title Prabhupada is theirs by birthright. The Gaudiya Vaishnava Sampradaya rejects this.

"It is said, phalena pariciyate: one is recognized by the result of his actions. In vaishnava society, there are many types of vaishnavas. Some of them are called gosvamis, some are called svamis, some are prabhus, and some are prabhupada. One is not recognized, however, simply by such a name. A spiritual master is recognized as an actual guru when it is seen he has changed the character of his disciples." (Caitanya-caritamrta, Antya 3.143, purport)

In Vrindavan, many of the important temples are managed by caste gosvamis. The history of two such prominent families illustrates how the jata-gosani contamination can divert even highly-qualified persons from the path of the great acaryas. To avoid the unpleasantries of controversy, some names are omitted.

One clan has temples in Mathura, Jatipur, Gokul and Kaman. They descend from a brahmana who is a famous contemporary of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu who, as described in Sri Caitanya-caritamrta, became formally linked with Gaudiya Vaishnava Sampradaya when he received initiation from Sri Gadadhara Pandita. Srila Prabhupada remarked that Lord Caitanya accepted him as a great scholar, but not necessarily as a great devotee. At Govardhana, he took over the management of a temple that had been established by a great Gaudiya Vaishnava acarya. During this time, the learned brahmana associated with the six Gosvamis, especially Rupa and Sanatana. Because his own men lacked training, Gaudiya Vaishnavas were appointed to do the puja under his supervision.

The brahmana had two sons; after he left the world in the year 1530, Srila Raghunatha das Gosvami requested one son to take over the temple management. The temple duties continued to be shared between Gaudiya Vaishnavas and the learned brahmana's disciples until around the year 1550, when an intrigue was begun against the Gaudiya devotees. Once, while they were worshiping the Deity, an envious disciple of the brahmana set fire to the homes of the Gaudiya pujaris and drove them out. Thereafter, the Deity was claimed as the sole property of the brahmana's clan. (In 1699, due to threat of Muslim attack, the Deity vacated Vrindavan and eventually came to Rajasthan.)

Though the brahmana's son was not part of the intrigue, he took no steps to heal the rupture with the Gaudiya Sampradaya. To block a challenge to his authority from among his father's disciples, he appointed his seven sons as acaryas and willed that only they and their descendants could use the title "Gosvami Maharaja" and give initiation. Later on, the family propagated a myth that the great brahmana's son was an incarnation of Krishna; the same pseudo-divinity was appropriated by succeeding generations and used as means of explaining away the "amorous pastimes" of some of the clan.

The second line of Vrindavan caste gosvamis under discussion was started by someone who took sannyasa from Gopala Bhatta Gosvami. As if in imitation of Lord Nityananda, he later married two sisters and claimed that he had been ordered to do so by Sri Krishna personally. The Gaudiya Vaishnava community disapproved both his deed and defense. In the year 1585, he established a mandira near Kaliya Ghat. The caste gosvamis who manage this mandira today are descendants of his first son. Descendents of his second son manage another famous Vrindavan temple.

This clan takes a dim view of what they think are the unnecessary austerities of the gosvamis of the Gaudiya Vaishnava Sampradaya. Krishna loves his devotees, they argue, and He becomes pleased when He sees them living a life of material comfort and sense gratification. They uphold their founder's example as superior to that of the Six Gosvamis. One Priyadas of this clan composed a work called Suslokamanimala in which he asserts that the founder was the spiritual master of Sanatana Gosvami and Jiva Gosvami. With this and other fabrications, they defend their apasampradaya as the genuine sampradaya.

Several historical accounts, including the biography of Srinivasa Acarya entitled Prema-vilasa, relate that the founder met his death by having his head chopped off, either by robbers or by a disgruntled pujari.

In 1932, the caste gosvamis of Vrindavan opposed the Vraja Mandala Parikrama of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakur and his Gaudiya Matha disciples on the grounds that he had deviated from the Vedic system by offering the sacred thread to persons not of brahminical parentage. Srila Prabhupada explained the fallacy of the jata-gosani in this regard in a letter to Acyutananda Swami: "Regarding the validity of the brahminical status as we accept it, because in the present age there is no observance of the garbhadhana ceremony, even a person born in a brahmana family is not considered a brahmana, he is called dvijabandhu or unqualified son of a brahmana. Under the circumstances, the conclusion is that the whole population is now sudra, as it is stated kalau sudra sambhava. So for sudras there is no initiation according to the Vedic system, but according to the pancaratrika system initiation is offered to a person who is inclined to take Krishna consciousness."

In Bengal, besides caste gosvamis who at least have a valid genealogical link to some vaishnava of the past, there are even pretenders whose claim to the name "gosvami" lacks any foundation whatsoever. Many of the important temples and holy places connected with Lord Caitanya's pastimes remain under jata-gosani control. Up until the early part of this century, they held the lower-caste vaishnavas in an iron grip of ignorance and exploitation.

Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakur challenged the jati-gosani in such works as Jaiva Dharma and Hari Nama Cintamani by proclaiming that it is not enough to accept a spiritual master merely on the basis of his caste. Before initiation, the candidate must be completely satisfied that the initiator is fully conversant with the scriptures and can lift his disciples out of ignorance. The guru must be of spotless character: if he is addicted to sinful acts, even those he may have already initiated must reject him. Bhaktivinoda's books unleashed a wave of reform in Bengal that pushed the jata-gosani into a defensive stance. But the confrontation came to open war when his son, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati, took over the Gaudiya mission.

In 1912, he was invited to attend a samminlani (assembly) of vaishnavas sponsored by the Maharaja of Kossimbazar. But some jata-gosani and their sahajiya supporters prevented him from giving a public lecture; in protest, he fasted for four days straight. According to the account of his disciple Sambidananda das, Acarya Siddhanta Sarasvati refuted all the arguments placed before him by the caste's proponents in a discussion separate from the main program. The jata-gosani thus learned to fear Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati as the singlemost threat to their privileged existence.

After taking sannyasa in 1918, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati mounted a concerted effort to smash the influence of the jata-gosani even in their strongholds. He fearlessly toured Jessore and Khulna (now in Bangladesh), the home turf of Priyanath Nandi, who was the leading spokesman of the caste gosvamis. Priyanatha met defeat in a public debate held at the village of Toothpada.

Things came to a head in February-March 1925, just as the Gaudiya Matha began nine days of a Navadvipa parikrama leading up to that year's Gaura Purnima festivities. The party of devotees, numbering several thousand and personally lead by Srila Bhaktisiddhanta, was viciously attacked by goonda hirelings of the jata-gosani when it entered the city of Navadvip without paying a tax for maintenance of caste gosvami temples. Armed with brickbats and other weapons, the goondas charged the elephant procession, injuring many pilgrims. The shocked public sided with the Gaudiya Matha devotees and the pilgrimage continued under police protection. This incident permanently tarnished the reputation and influence of the jata-gosani. Overnight, their stubborn opposition to Srila Bhaktisiddhanta's preaching lost all force.

http://krishnascience.com/Vaisnava%20Library/Philosophy/Articles%20from%20Suhotra%20Swami/Apasampradayas.htm

 

[Kulapavana]

It is important to point out that none of the 6 Goswamis actually took sannyasa in the sense of accepting formal sannyasa initiation, saffron cloth, danda, etc.

[vraja1]

c-brahma refers to devotees who follow the scriptures as caste-goswamis. His quotations are all from "Prabhupada's" books which were actually written down by ISKCON followers who desired to take over as guru after Prabhupada's departure, and thus added many unscriptural comments to make it appear as one need not be born in a Brahmana family to become Guru. The fact is that the scriptures state that one must be a Brahmana to become an initiating guru. Brahmana means born in a Brahmana family, according to the scriptures. People like c-brahma never substantiate their claims with any scriptural quotes other than those from ISKCON's mistranslated books. It is a pity that Prabhupada's original Srimad Bhagavatam's, which he brought over from India, have all been destroyed by ISKCON. So have the tapes which he dictated what he desired his books to say onto.

c-brahma goes on to point fingers at the many "caste-goswami"s in Vrindaban. The scriptures state that one should never find fault in those born and raised in the land of Vraja, who are the real Vrajavasis, and are descendents of the spiritual world. (those who have taken initiation from a Vrajavasi are also called Vrajavasis, but are not at as high of a level as those born and raised there). Is it a wonder that in the land of Krsna, Vrindaban, most of the devotees there know that you have to be born a Brahman to become a Diksa-guru? (initiating guru) Doesn't it seem more logical that in Krsna's land, most people would be aligned with the scriptural injunctions than against them? I have trouble comprehending how people think that the Vrajavasis are not scripturally oriented. Why would Krsna make most people in his own land against the real scriptural injunctions? Wouldn't it seem logical, that if Krsna is all powerful, that he would keep mostly real devotees in his own spiritual abode descended upon the earth?

And doesn't it seem more logical that in India, the country of Krsna, people would follow the scriptures more closely than outside of India? But, people in ISKCON think that their Western concept of Varna not being by birth is scripturally true, while the Indian concept of Varna being by birth is false!

Of course, ISKCON people think that their Western concept is the real Vedic injunction. The whole earth is influenced heavily by kali-yuga right now, that is why most "devotees", especially westerners, do not know the real scriptural injunctions, or at least pretend not to know them.

The Vedic scriptures DO say one must be Brahama born to be an initiating guru. But that does not mean that the scriptures say that everyone who is a Brahmana can be a guru. One must ALSO have the scriptural qualifications. Also, the scriptures say that a devotee is merciful to all living entities, no matter what their birth. So those of us who know the scriptural injunctions do not discourage people like me for taking a low birth.

Even one (such as myself) who has been born mleccha (not knowing his Varna), can become a devotee. And if he take initiation from an authentic guru, and advance enough in this lifetime, but falls short of reaching the spiritual world, he can become a diksa-guru in his next lifetime when he takes birth in a Brahmana family. Thus, the Vedic scriptures do not discourage anyone. Those low born people who are truly humble realize that because they have grown up eating meat, taking intoxication, having illicit sex, and possibly gambling, they are unqualified to become diksa-guru. Dirty vices are the qualities that mlecchas are born with. Even a Brahmana who has once drunk wine in his life cannot become diksa-guru.

There are two kinds of Brahmanas. Devotee brahmanas, and smarta brahmanas. Smarta brahmanas are not devotees, they should be respected but not followed or worshipped. Devotee brahmanas were devotees in a past life. You can tell them because of their devotional attitude and their dedication to following the scriptural injunctions. Smarta brahmanas were demons in a past life and received a boon from Lord Brahma to receive liberation, thus they were born into Brahmana families. It is true that a low born devotee is better than a non-devotee Brahmana. Even a low born devotee who has Brahmana-like qualities is considered equally respectable to that of a Brahmana born devotee. But he must wait until his next birth to become diksa-guru.

I personally know a pure devotee diksa guru. He shows all the qualities of a real diksa-guru, including humility, kindness, vast knowledge of the scriptures, ability to remove doubts from the questioners mind, and being born in a Brahmana family. He is an expert ayurvedic doctor and expert astrologist. He is not against the low born, but he knows what the scriptures state and he preaches them without deviation. Just consider all the fallen ISKCON gurus who break regulative principles. Just because some of them are not known to be fallen doesn't mean they aren't fallen, they just haven't been found out yet. Who among the ISKCON gurus shows the qualities of a real guru such as the one whom I know, even leaving alone the fact of their low birth? Not one of them.

If one knows what the scriptures state about the personification of kali-yuga, he is aware that kaliyuga wears devotional robes. That is why we have so many demons in this age who pretend to be devotees. In their hearts they are insincere, but they are accepted by the less intelligent as pure until they are found out. It is no wonder that ISKCON has a history of child molestation, drug use, rape, incest, and murder. This is kaliyuga's influence. Some people in ISKCON are innocents who are being misled, but there are those in ISKCON who are not innocent at all and are actually the complete opposite of a real devotee. They preach one thing and practice another.

[theist]

 

c-brahma refers to devotees who follow the scriptures as caste-goswamis. His quotations are all from "Prabhupada's" books which were actually written down by ISKCON followers who desired to take over as guru after Prabhupada's departure, and thus added many unscriptural comments to make it appear as one need not be born in a Brahmana family to become Guru. The fact is that the scriptures state that one must be a Brahmana to become an initiating guru. Brahmana means born in a Brahmana family, according to the scriptures.

 

Oh no. Another one. Guru by birth. What dog dung philosophy.

[Amlesh]

Janmane Jayante Sudra (Purana).

 

By birth everyone is a Sudra.

 

We get our identity according to our nature.

[vraja1]

 

c-brahma refers to devotees who follow the scriptures as caste-goswamis. His quotations are all from "Prabhupada's" books which were actually written down by ISKCON followers who desired to take over as guru after Prabhupada's departure, and thus added many unscriptural comments to make it appear as one need not be born in a Brahmana family to become Guru. The fact is that the scriptures state that one must be a Brahmana to become an initiating guru. Brahmana means born in a Brahmana family, according to the scriptures. People like c-brahma never substantiate their claims with any scriptural quotes other than those from ISKCON's mistranslated books. It is a pity that Prabhupada's original Srimad Bhagavatam's, which he brought over from India, have all been destroyed by ISKCON. So have the tapes which he dictated what he desired his books to say onto.

c-brahma goes on to point fingers at the many "caste-goswami"s in Vrindaban. The scriptures state that one should never find fault in those born and raised in the land of Vraja, who are the real Vrajavasis, and are descendents of the spiritual world. (those who have taken initiation from a Vrajavasi are also called Vrajavasis, but are not at as high of a level as those born and raised there). Is it a wonder that in the land of Krsna, Vrindaban, most of the devotees there know that you have to be born a Brahman to become a Diksa-guru? (initiating guru) Doesn't it seem more logical that in Krsna's land, most people would be aligned with the scriptural injunctions than against them? I have trouble comprehending how people think that the Vrajavasis are not scripturally oriented. Why would Krsna make most people in his own land against the real scriptural injunctions? Wouldn't it seem logical, that if Krsna is all powerful, that he would keep mostly real devotees in his own spiritual abode descended upon the earth?

And doesn't it seem more logical that in India, the country of Krsna, people would follow the scriptures more closely than outside of India? But, people in ISKCON think that their Western concept of Varna not being by birth is scripturally true, while the Indian concept of Varna being by birth is false!

Of course, ISKCON people think that their Western concept is the real Vedic injunction. The whole earth is influenced heavily by kali-yuga right now, that is why most "devotees", especially westerners, do not know the real scriptural injunctions, or at least pretend not to know them.

The Vedic scriptures DO say one must be Brahama born to be an initiating guru. But that does not mean that the scriptures say that everyone who is a Brahmana can be a guru. One must ALSO have the scriptural qualifications. Also, the scriptures say that a devotee is merciful to all living entities, no matter what their birth. So those of us who know the scriptural injunctions do not discourage people like me for taking a low birth.

Even one (such as myself) who has been born mleccha (not knowing his Varna), can become a devotee. And if he take initiation from an authentic guru, and advance enough in this lifetime, but falls short of reaching the spiritual world, he can become a diksa-guru in his next lifetime when he takes birth in a Brahmana family. Thus, the Vedic scriptures do not discourage anyone. Those low born people who are truly humble realize that because they have grown up eating meat, taking intoxication, having illicit sex, and possibly gambling, they are unqualified to become devotees. Dirty vices are the qualities that mlecchas are born with. Even a Brahmana who has once drunk wine in his life cannot become diksa-guru.

There are two kinds of Brahmanas. Devotee brahmanas, and smarta brahmanas. Smarta brahmanas are not devotees, they should be respected but not followed or worshipped. Devotee brahmanas were devotees in a past life. You can tell them because of their devotional attitude and their dedication to following the scriptural injunctions. Smarta brahmanas were demons in a past life and received a boon from Lord Brahma to receive liberation, thus they were born into Brahmana families. It is true that a low born devotee is better than a non-devotee Brahmana. Even a low born devotee who has Brahmana-like qualities is considered equally respectable to that of a Brahmana born devotee. But he must wait until his next birth to become diksa-guru.

I personally know a pure devotee diksa guru. He shows all the qualities of a real diksa-guru, including humility, kindness, vast knowledge of the scriptures, ability to remove doubts from the questioners mind, and being born in a Brahmana family. He is an expert ayurvedic doctor and expert astrologist. He is not against the low born, but he knows what the scriptures state and he preaches them without deviation. Just consider all the fallen ISKCON gurus who break regulative principles. Just because some of them are not known to be fallen doesn't mean they aren't fallen, they just haven't been found out yet. Who among the ISKCON gurus shows the qualities of a real guru such as the one whom I know, even leaving alone the fact of their low birth? Not one of them.

If one knows what the scriptures state about the personification of kali-yuga, he is aware that kaliyuga wears devotional robes. That is why we have so many demons in this age who pretend to be devotees. In their hearts they are insincere, but they are accepted by the less intelligent as pure until they are found out. It is no wonder that ISKCON has a history of child molestation, drug use, rape, incest, and murder. This is kaliyuga's influence. Some people in ISKCON are innocents who are being misled, but there are those in ISKCON who are not innocent at all and are actually the complete opposite of a real devotee. They preach one thing and practice another.

 

I would like to make a correction from my above post. I said that low-borns who are truly humble realize that because of growing up with dirty vices, know that they are unqualified to become devotees. What I meant to say was that in this lifetime they are unqualified to become diksa-guru or initiate. Anyone can become a devotee in this lifetime provided he gives up his bad habits.

[vraja1]

 

Janmane Jayante Sudra (Purana).

 

By birth everyone is a Sudra.

 

We get our identity according to our nature.

You are quoting from ISKCON's books which were grossly mistranslated by disciples of Prabhupada's who wished to become guru after his departure. Try reading Vedic scriptures other than ISKCON's and you will find out what the real scriptural injunctions are. When a Brahmana is born, he is *equal* to a Sudra, but he *is* a Brahmana. His high birth (unless he is a Smarta-Brahmana) is due to him being an advanced devotee in his past life. According to the Gita, one who falls from the devotional path at a less advanced level is born into a rich aristocratic family. One who falls from an advanced level is born into a Brahmana family. I was born in the West, so I don't know which Varna I am, which makes me a mleccha. Therefore I am unqualified to be diksa-guru. The idea that eveyone who thinks that a guru must be Brahmana born is a Brahmana himself is not true, and I am evidence to this.

 

By the way, Prabhupada was Brahma-kayastha. Some say he is not a Brahmana because his last name is not a Brahmana name. But Brahma-kayasthas have different names from the rest of the Brahmanas. Nevertheless, brahma-kayasthas are considered equivalent to Brahmanas in the sense that they can perform fire sacrifices and become diksa guru. The chain of disciplic succession from Krsna down to Prabhupada, following with Krsna Balaram Swamiji, is authentic. Where the chain broke off to ISKCON gurus is not. All of the authentic gurus were Brahmana born and qualified to initiate, despite the misinformation tactics of ISKCON that say otherwise. Krsna Balaram Swamiji is the only disciple of Prabhupada who is qualified to be diksa-guru. Why not follow the real thing? Why follow an imposter guru who breaks regulative principles?

 

If you have taken initiation from an ISKCON guru, ask yourself this:

Do I follow ALL regulative principles?

Do I chant a minimum of 16 rounds a day or at least make up for the rounds that I missed the next day if I don't

Am I determined to follow ALL vedic fasts strictly?

Do I offer ALL my food to the Lord?

Do I try to constantly engage myself in service to the Lord, instead

of engaging in material activities like watching material movies, reading

material books, or excessive association with materialists without preaching to them?

If you answered "no" to any one of these questions, this is why Krsna led you to a bogus guru and not an authentic one. Consider following all the rules and taking initiation from a real guru before it is too late.

 

If you haven't taken initiation but are currently following ISKCON, follow all the rules so that Krsna will lead you to a real guru. If you do, you will soon realize that ISKCON is preaching non-vedic principles.

 

Anyone can be a show-bottle devotee and convince the unintelligent that they are pure. One can claim that he is in constant ecstacy when he chants or reads Srimad Bhagavatam. But a show-bottle devotee knows in his heart what's really going on inside of him, even though he has others convinced otherwise.

[theist]

One after another these Indian religionists just keep on coming saying the same stupid things. Now he has amended his ignorant statements by saying one can be a devottee if low born just not a diksa guru unless he is born into a brahmana family. He s convinced diksa refers to a ceremony and not to the reception of transcendental knowledge.

 

I really feel sorry for these people because they are obviously so indoctrinated into this material mode of thinking themselves closer to God then others BY BIRTH that they appear beyond rescue in this lifetime. Maybe they will have to take birth as an outcast and then take shelter of Haridas Thakur to learn the lesson.

 

Of course they could just straight away take the lesson of Haridas Thakur and avoid the trouble but alas they most likely won't.

 

Two ways of learning; one is by hearing and the other is from the school of hard knocks.

[vraja1]

 

One after another these Indian religionists just keep on coming saying the same stupid things. Now he has amended his ignorant statements by saying one can be a devottee if low born just not a diksa guru unless he is born into a brahmana family. He s convinced diksa refers to a ceremony and not to the reception of transcendental knowledge.

 

I really feel sorry for these people because they are obviously so indoctrinated into this material mode of thinking themselves closer to God then others BY BIRTH that they appear beyond rescue in this lifetime. Maybe they will have to take birth as an outcast and then take shelter of Haridas Thakur to learn the lesson.

 

Of course they could just straight away take the lesson of Haridas Thakur and avoid the trouble but alas they most likely won't.

 

Two ways of learning; one is by hearing and the other is from the school of hard knocks.

Who do you think Krsna, Arjuna, Mother Yasoda, and Lord Chaitanya were?

Weren't they Indian religionists? I amended my statements because I made a mistake while typing. If you would remember what I posted in the original article, I said in another point in THE SAME ARTICLE that anyone can become a devotee. I made a simple mistake. Can you not forgive others for their mistakes?

 

You said maybe people like me may have to take birth as an outcast. I ALREADY HAVE TAKEN BIRTH AS AN OUTAST. I already said I am mleccha born. And I have no problem with what the scriptures state.

[theist]

 

Who do you think Krsna, Arjuna, Mother Yasoda, and Lord Chaitanya were?

Weren't they Indian religionists? I amended my statements because I made a mistake while typing. If you would remember what I posted in the original article, I said in another point in THE SAME ARTICLE that anyone can become a devotee. I made a simple mistake. Can you not forgive others for their mistakes?

 

You said maybe people like me may have to take birth as an outcast. I ALREADY HAVE TAKEN BIRTH AS AN OUTAST. I already said I am mleccha born. And I have no problem with what the scriptures state.

No Krsna Arjuna Mother Yashoda and Lord Caitanya were not Indian religionists. They are transcendental personalities exlemplfying transcendental relations. This is the essential point to remember.

 

Yes any soul can become a devotee because devotion to God is the constitutional position of the soul. Becoming a devotee has NOTHING to do with birth. One can become a cent per cent pure devotee even and such a pure soul gives diksa constantly via his instructions. Diksa as rebirth into transcendental consciousness has nothing to do with threads and banana roasts.

 

You are not an outcast, you never have been and never will be. You are the most glorious part and parcel of the Supreme Lord Sr Krishna. You are more brilliant than ten thousand suns shining at once. You are eternity, knowledge and bliss in your relationship to Sri Krishna. Krishna is the only King and you are one of His princes.

 

Why place unnecessary designations upon yourself due to race, religion or species considerations? These things have nothing to do with you. Forget the unnecessary trappings of religion Vraja and claim your right to walk in our Fathers kingdom with dignity and allow that for others as well.

[vraja1]

 

No Krsna Arjuna Mother Yashoda and Lord Caitanya were not Indian religionists. They are transcendental personalities exlemplfying transcendental relations. This is the essential point to remember.

 

Yes any soul can become a devotee because devotion to God is the constitutional position of the soul. Becoming a devotee has NOTHING to do with birth. One can become a cent per cent pure devotee even and such a pure soul gives diksa constantly via his instructions. Diksa as rebirth into transcendental consciousness has nothing to do with threads and banana roasts.

 

You are not an outcast, you never have been and never will be. You are the most glorious part and parcel of the Supreme Lord Sr Krishna. You are more brilliant than ten thousand suns shining at once. You are eternity, knowledge and bliss in your relationship to Sri Krishna. Krishna is the only King and you are one of His princes.

 

Why place unnecessary designations upon yourself due to race, religion or species considerations? These things have nothing to do with you. Forget the unnecessary trappings of religion Vraja and claim your right to walk in our Fathers kingdom with dignity and allow that for others as well.

I stand corrected on the point about Krsna, Mother Yasoda, and Chaitanya being Indian Religionists. Basically, what I should have said was that they are Indian

spiritualists or transcendentalists. My basic point is that those in India are generally more aligned with the correct scriptural injunctions than those elsewhere.

 

Becoming a devotee has nothing to do with birth, that is correct.

But performing purificatory functions such as fire sacrifices does.

I'm not going to argue on that point any further as it will do no good, I have already stated the main points on that in previous replies. Anyone who wishes to read further on the topic can do an internet search for guru nirnaya dipika. I suggest that people read the entire online book Guru Nirnaya Dipika, The Scriptural Decision on Who Can Become Guru and Who Cannot, from beginning to end before drawing a conclusion. I do

not harbor any enemity towards anyone who has posted on this topic, regardless of what they say about the Guru issue.

 

In regards to ISKCON gurus being pure devotees, my understanding is they are not. (aside from Prabhupada) Look at how many of them have fallen. There may be a few who are not openly fallen, but I think they have just not been found out yet. However, if someone wants to believe that there are pure gurus in ISKCON today, that is their karma.

 

In regards to me being glorious and brilliant, that sounds very nice and I appreciate your kindness. I assume what you are saying is that we are all glorious and brilliant because we all come from Krsna. But those who live in the material world who are not yet pure devotees are still contaminated, at least to some extent, by material consciousness. Therefore our brilliance is yet to be realized.

 

It is true that we are all equal spirit souls regardless of race, caste, religion, or species. However, a tree cannot take to devotion, unless it is a tree, for example, in the spiritual world. Human beings are the species who are given the chance to receive liberation. So even though the wise see all with an equal eye, still they know there is a difference in character between a snake and a cow, or an animal and a human. Those born in India probably had a closer connection to God in a past life than those born elsewhere. Those born into a faithful religious family such as a Christian family probably had stronger faith in God in a past life than those born into agnostic or atheist families. Lord Brahma decides a particular family for us to live in based on who we were in our past life. Whatever our nature was, we are given an according birth. The Gita explains about how those who were devotees and did not become purified enough to go back to Godhead are either born in a rich aristocratic family or a family of learned transcendentalists. Therefore, we can understand that what birth one takes is an indication of their past life.

[theist]

 

In regards to me being glorious and brilliant, that sounds very nice and I appreciate your kindness. I assume what you are saying is that we are all glorious and brilliant because we all come from Krsna. But those who live in the material world who are not yet pure devotees are still contaminated, at least to some extent, by material consciousness. Therefore our brilliance is yet to be realized.

 

Yes of course because we all come from Krishna.

 

And what is that contamination you speak of? It is falsely identifying ourselves as products of the material world such as outcast, brahmana, Indian, human, Hindu etc.

 

The method for purification from that contamination is the chanting of God's holy names.

 

I have no interest in Iskcon but I do in Srila Prabhupada and your doctrine of no diksa guru's unless born in brahmana families is diametrically opposed to his teachings. And I must admit I have even less interest in you Himduism than I do in today's Iskcon except to oppose the spread of the doctrine you here espouse about the need for a brahmana birth.

[vraja1]

 

Yes of course because we all come from Krishna.

 

And what is that contamination you speak of? It is falsely identifying ourselves as products of the material world such as outcast, brahmana, Indian, human, Hindu etc.

 

The method for purification from that contamination is the chanting of God's holy names.

 

I have no interest in Iskcon but I do in Srila Prabhupada and your doctrine of no diksa guru's unless born in brahmana families is diametrically opposed to his teachings. And I must admit I have even less interest in you Himduism than I do in today's Iskcon except to oppose the spread of the doctrine you here espouse about the need for a brahmana birth.

 

 

Falsely identifying oneself as designations such as outcast, brahmana, Indian, human, Hindu, etc.. refers to

misunderstanding that these are temporary designations and not our eternal position, being a spirit soul. I fully understand this. Nevertheless, it still holds that we currently have a certain nature based on whatever birth we have taken. The nature of a snake

is vastly different from that of a cow, even though they are equal in the eyes of the Lord. Just as a dog in the material world cannot become a devotee in this lifetime because he does not have the capacity to understand how to serve the Lord, a low-born person cannot be a diksa guru in this lifetime because he was not a devotee in his past life, and he needs to prove himself by becoming an advanced devotee in this life so he will be born into a Brahmana family in the next life.

 

I am well aware of the effects of chanting, as I myself chant a minimum of 16 rounds a day and feel love in my heart as a result of doing so. Furthermore, if one has taken initiation from an unauthorized guru, the Lord does not recognize his chanting, as not finding a proper guru is offensive in the eyes of Krsna.

[cbrahma]

 

If you don't understand what the scriptural injunctions on guru are now,

you will find out after you die.

Yah but if you understood scripture you would know that we forget after taking birth again. The corruption of caste brahminism is a commonplace of Indian history. Do you need examples?

[theist]

 

Quote:

<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="100%"> <tbody><tr> <td style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding-left: 3ex; padding-right: 3ex;" bgcolor="#e0e0e0"> Originally Posted by theist

Yes of course because we all come from Krishna.

And what is that contamination you speak of? It is falsely identifying ourselves as products of the material world such as outcast, brahmana, Indian, human, Hindu etc.

The method for purification from that contamination is the chanting of God's holy names.

I have no interest in Iskcon but I do in Srila Prabhupada and your doctrine of no diksa guru's unless born in brahmana families is diametrically opposed to his teachings. And I must admit I have even less interest in you Himduism than I do in today's Iskcon except to oppose the spread of the doctrine you here espouse about the need for a brahmana birth.

</td> </tr> </tbody></table>

If you don't understand what the scriptural injunctions on guru are now,

you will find out after you die.

 

A very aneamic response to my post. Maybe you don't want to be challenged and only want to pontificate but that is not how it works.

 

By your statement you are actually saying Srila Prabhupada didn't understand since it was he that I referrenced.

[vraja1]

 

A very aneamic response to my post. Maybe you don't want to be challenged and only want to pontificate but that is not how it works.

 

By your statement you are actually saying Srila Prabhupada didn't understand since it was he that I referrenced.

It would have been in better taste for me not to have made the comment about what will happen after you die, but I have already made it and I am sorry. After I posted that comment, I thought I deleted it because I realized it probably shouldn't have been said, but it was kept up anyways.

 

I am not saying Prabhupada didn't understand. I am saying Prabhupada's philosophy has been misconstrued. Now, you are entitled to your view that I am incorrect and my views are not in accordance with the Vedic scriptures or Prabhupada. However, the way I see it, the "anyone can be guru" idea is not what Prabhupada propagated because his books were mistranslated. The tapes which he dictated his books onto have been destroyed. Prabhupada is not here today to confirm that what is written in his books are what he intended to put in his books. I have complete respect for Prabhupada and his mission, but I do not buy the idea that his books the way they have been published are what he intended them to be. In the book Monkey On A Stick, written by some people who were in ISKCON, it is documented that Prabhupada's disciples who were in charge of publishing his books actually were thinking of publishing the Gita in their own name and not giving Prabhupada credit for it. I think this book is just the tip of the iceburg. Is it any surprise that such people would alter the true Vedic message, destroy the tapes which are evidence to it, and destroy his original Srimad Bhagavatam's, written before he founded ISKCON, which he brought over from India, which were further proof of his true message? After all, we are in the age of kali-yuga. No one has produced the missing tapes, or the missing Bhagavatam's to this date.

 

I realize that you have respect for your idea of who Prabhupada was, and I have respect for my idea of who Prabhupada was. For the sake of making a point, I will present this as if either you or me could be correct, even though I am already convinced. So, taken from each of our personal viewpoints which we each understand to be true (although only one of us can actually be right) neither one of us is against Prabhupada, as we understand him to be. However, whichever one of us is incorrect believes in a philosophy that, in truth, is not in accordance with what Prabhupada taught. But that is not the same as being against Prabhupada becuase whoever is incorrect is actually just innocently misunderstanding what Prabhupada actually taught.

 

Now, the way I see it, anyone who knows that Prabhupada's books were mistranslated, like those who mistranslated them, and present such books as true, are not innocent. Also, anyone who has read Guru Nirnaya Dipika from cover to cover and understands that those scriptural quotes are in the scriptures, or at least *possibly* are in the scriptures, yet tries to deny this because they are too proud to admit they took initiation from a wrong guru, are knowingly going against the scriptures.

 

If one knows an Indian language in which the books of Prabhupada's predecessors were written in, then they are fortunate because they can investigate this issue by reading authentic commentary that hasn't been mistranslated. I think this is why less people from India are misled on this topic. I admit that I haven't read such commentaries because I don't know an Indian language. But if one did know such a language, the intelligent thing for them to do would be to investigate the issue. I am confident that anyone who reads Prabhupada's predecessor's books or other authentic Vaisnava commentaries from India would find out the truth in this issue. I have only read the books that the author of Guru Nirnaya Dipika wrote, and Prabhupada's books. Besides that, I have read a version of the Brahma Vaivarta Purana, which was not translated by devotees, so it is probably less reliable. My guru told me to stop reading books translated by non-devotees. Nevertheless, caste and Varna were one and the same by that translation, and I think this is one of the things that the authors correctly translated. Also, I went to a website on the internet that had quotes from the scriptures about kali-yuga. One quote said that in the age of kali-yuga

those who were low born would criticize Brahmana born people and become jealous of them, saying, "Why are you any better than me? A brahmana is one who knows brahman." So aside from ISKCON's books, I have only seen things which substantiate the position that varna is by birth. However, my guru's books are the only ones I can truly trust, because I know that by his character he can't mislead, and if I knew an Indian language, I would read other authentic commentaries that are trustable.

[theist]

So your conclusion is that none of Srila Prabhupada's disciples outside of Indian born brahmana's can become guru because there is no possiblity of there having taken such a birth themselves.

 

Prabhupada taught the principle that anyone who knows the science of God and be guru.

 

You strike me as a nice fellow Vraja but you are being sorely mislead.

 

Who is the author Guru Nirnaya Dipika?

 

PS Monkey on a Stick was not written by devotees.

[vraja1]

 

So your conclusion is that none of Srila Prabhupada's disciples outside of Indian born brahmana's can become guru because there is no possiblity of there having taken such a birth themselves.

 

Prabhupada taught the principle that anyone who knows the science of God and be guru.

 

You strike me as a nice fellow Vraja but you are being sorely mislead.

 

Who is the author Guru Nirnaya Dipika?

 

PS Monkey on a Stick was not written by devotees.

 

To your first question, yes.

 

the author of Guru Nirnaya Dipika is Krsna Balaram Swamiji, but I cannot post URLs yet.

 

I think what I said was that Monkey on a Stick was written by people in ISKCON. Is that incorrect? If so, I didn't know.

I read it once. It was a shocking book, but it was evident from the way it was written that the authors weren't devotees. I just thought they were non-devotees who spent time with people in the ISKCON movement.

 

I am taking my viewpoints on faith in Krsna Balaram Swamiji. Reasons I feel that he is correct:

judging by meeting him and talking to him, he isn't the kind of person who would intentionally mislead people or misrepresent the Vedic scriptures.

He is a Sanskrit scholar, and has vast knowledge in the Vedic scriptures. He not only frequently quotes the Vedic scriptures, but he knows what each word means, in its grammatical context. He personally owns Vedic scriptures which are thousands of years old; besides that he has read many other translations of Vedic scriptures and commentaries from authentic acharyas. He has written commentary on the Bhagavad Gita and Srimad Bhagavatam Canto 10. His lifetime goal is to publish the entire Srimad Bhagavatam in English, with commentaries, which he personally types himself and has editors correct his English. The reason that he types them himself is because he doesn't want the same thing that happenned to Prabhupada's books happen to his books. He was born and raised in Vrindaban, which makes him a descendent of the spiritual world. When he's around devotees, he talks almost exclusively about devotional subjects. When he's around non-devotees he may talk about material things a little, but only to develop a relationship with them so he can better preach to them and convince them to take to spiritual life.

Besides that, he was unanimously appointed to the position of Mahamandaleshwar by all the Mahants of the four Vaisnava Sampradayas of India. He is a disciple of Prabhupada, and was in ISKCON, but left mainly because of the guru issue. He has been a devotee his entire life, and was raised in a transcendentalist family. His father was an acharya himself.

Whenever I had doubts about the Vedic scriptures being true and asked Swamiji to explain things to me, he did an impressive job at removing my doubts and increasing my faith. When I ask him spiritual questions, his answers are more than sufficient.

So I will carry on following him.

 

I realize, though, that others have complete dedication to their gurus, whoever they may be. My sister follows Sri Sri Ravi Shankir and thinks he's great, but I personally wouldn't follow him because he's not a devotee.

 

Whatever it may be, wherever we may go in our next lifetime, it is still a wonderful thing that if we make a mistake, Krsna will eventually give us another chance. Even though the scriptures sometimes talk about eternal condemnation, the real meaning is that if someone does something grievously sinful, they are condemned for a time that seems like an eternity. But Krsna always gives everyone another chance.

[theist]

Let me approach the question this way. Is there anything a fully realized devotee of Krishna cannot give give you to raise you up to being a similarily fully realized devotee of Krishna?

[vraja1]

 

Let me approach the question this way. Is there anything a fully realized devotee of Krishna cannot give give you to raise you up to being a similarily fully realized devotee of Krishna?

 

I think a fully realized devotee can show me the way, and then it is up to me to follow the prescription. Isn't that what a guru is for? If one strictly follows a realized guru's instructions after taking initiation, then he will surely become self-realized in this lifetime. But if the guru one is following is not self-realized himself, or if the follower hesitates to surrender completely, then the follower will fall short of self-realization. If the guru is a complete hypocrite, and the follower doesn't know it, then it is a great misfortune for both of them.

 

Hypothetically speaking, if Krsna Balaram Swamiji were unauthorized, which I am certain is not the case, then I would hope that Krsna would guide me to a correct guru. If I didn't have the right karma to recognize the difference, then I would have to wait until a future lifetime to get it right because in this current lifetime my karma would not be good enough. If I made a mistake and took initiation from an incorrect guru, whatever karmic consequences were dealt to me by Krsna I would accept, given my current attitude. So I am satisfied with whatever happens to me because I know that Krsna is never unjust. Even if I had to take birth as a snake or a dog, I would simply look forward to the day where I got a human birth and had another chance.

 

I have only been Krsna conscious for 3 years, by the way. I think I'm the newest and youngest western follower of his that's either approaching him for initiation, or initiated. In my case, I'm not initiated yet.

[radha_das]

Some quotations from scriptures which claims brahmin by caste are right. If you need more I will give you.

 

"According to the three modes of material nature and the work associated with them [guna and karma; qualification and activity], the four divisions of human society are created by Me. And although I am the creator of this system, you should know that I am yet the nondoer, being unchangeable." (Bhagavad-Gita 4.13)

In kaliyug, the one will only get Brahman-tatv by birth not by tap or worship (Kaushiki Sahinta)

If Brahman gives you abuses, beats you; do namashkaar to him otherwise I will punish you.

(Lord Krsna to Yaduvanshis in Srimad Bhagwatam)

If I have guts to do this doesn’t mean you are allowed to get permission for Brahmin Initiation. Scriptures needs divine energy for this. (Mimansa Darshan)

[radha_das]

Why dont you find out first how your Bhakti Siddhant Saraswati took Sanyas?

 

So called SANYASI. He took sanyas diksha by the Photograph of Sri Gaura Kishore Das Babaji.

 

 

 

“Advaita follows a disciple’s succession from Narayana and follows Varna by birth.

Sri Vaishnavism follows a disciple succession from Narayana and follows Varna by birth.

Tattavada follows a disciple succession from Vishnu and follows Varna by birth.

Gaudiya Sampradaya follows a disciple succession from Lord Krishna and follows Varna by birth.

Iskcon claims to follow a disciple succession (indirectly through Tattavada but in reality neither they are Gaudiya nor Tattavada) from Krishna and does not follow Varna by birth.”

 

 

So were Lord Mahaprabhu, these great Achrayas who were the founder of Sampradayas wrong and was Sri Prabhupad right?

 

 

If you are a follower of ISKCON or Gaudiya Math, find out in SIX GOSWAMI photograph what kind of cloths are they wearing?

They are wearing white dress. They never adopted sanyas. Read Caitanya Charitamrta what kind of diksha Mahaprabhu gave to them. In Caitanya Charitamrta Mahaprabhu instructed us NO SANYAS. and after Sri Mahaprabhu NO one took sanyas. They why the hell Bhakti Sidd Saraswati took so called sanyas.

In Gaudiya Sampradaya, We have Bheka Dhari Sanyas (White cloth sanyas) not saffron sanyas. And this Bheka Pranali is coming from Gopal Guru.

 

 

 

Why did Mahaprabhu pick up Caste Brahmins (in 6 Goswamis 5 were caste brahmins) who were Goswamis to spread Sri Radha and Krsna name?

[stonehearted]

Hmm . . . why did He call Hari das the namacharya?

[radha_das]

Please read his biography. You would get your answer in that.

[raghu]

"Dog-dung philosophy?" Hmmm. Would theist like me to provide quotes by the Six Gosvamis (aka Rupa, Sanatana, Gopala-Bhatta) of the chaitanya sampradAya stating very explicitly that one must be born into the right family as a prerequisite for becoming a guru?

 

Oh no, we can't have that. They are respectable gurus when they agree with us, but when they disagree with us, then they are just "Indian religionists" and we should feel sorry for them....