Madhva-Gaudiya parampara

[kaisersose]

 

Yep. They have been on my ignore list for some time now.

 

Of course, people who point out flaws in your system and back them up real with evidence, must be hate mongers. What else can they possibly be?

 

Here is the MO,

 

1) Argue in support of ridiculous assertions made by Gaudiyas.

2) Any argument goes..try all tricks in the book. For instance,

3) First try "Gaudiyas fully follow Madhva and add to his doctrine".

4) If that is countered, then try "the succession is through the mood, a mental/diksha connection"

5) If that is countered, then there are no more arguments left. Now take one of the following two positions.

 

A) I personally never cared for the parampara system or

B) These people are hate mongers. Let us put them on our ignore list and continue in our blissful state of ignorance and/or denial.

 

So what else is new?

 

Cheers

[Beggar]

Kaiser = <!--n--><!--m-->

SOSE = Save Often, Save Early. But how can the Kaiser save anyone since the Great War has been lost?

 

 

OR

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[theist]

 

Baladeva Vidyabhusana has found theseteachings to be unacceptable toGaudiya Vaishnavas: Only a brahmana iseligible for liberation, thedemigods are the foremost devotees, LordBrahma attains sayujya-mukti,and Lakshmi Devi is a jiva. NeverthelessMadhavendra Puri and someothers in Bengal were initiated intoMadhvacarya's line.

 

There are also other differences with the Tattvavadis, e.g. theyteachthat there are different types of jivas some of which areinherentlyevil and are damned for eternity. They teach a strict dualismbetweenjiva and Vishnu, and between Vishnu and maya-shakti. And thereare someother minor differences having to do with bhava and rasa.

 

I do have to agree with perhaps the main point of the antagonists. Why would GV's need to emphasize a connection Madhva considering the above differences?

 

The above are enough to put me off receiving Madhva's siksa.

[andy108]

 

I do have to agree with perhaps the main point of the antagonists. Why would GV's need to emphasize a connection Madhva considering the above differences?

 

The above are enough to put me off receiving Madhva's siksa.

 

Andy, Gaudiya teachings do disagree with Madhva's teachings on some aspects of siddhanta that have nothing to do with rasa, e.g.

Thanks Shiva and Theist, I actually knew of those differences in general, but had no access to the evidence. This fit my earlier example of how Sri Madhva was pulling a Sankaracarya act by seeking to gradually elevate his audience, meeting them in their crystalized traditional miasm and adding what they were ready to hear.

 

This whole issue makes me wonder if there is a single personalist outside of those who caught wind of Srila Bhaktivinode's revolution who considers their self a brahmana who is in reality NOT a smarta.

 

Talk about a dark age. The Jesus Christ influenced intellects of the Constitutional Republic of the United States of America are more inclined to support a philosophy of assessing and engaging people strictly according to observed qualities of character and inclination than the entire Bigoted "intellectual" claass of the continent of India who have had access to the full panorama of Vedic scriptures.

 

Dark, paradoxical, IRONIC, and fitting actually.

[Ganeshprasad]

 

Frankly, none of this parampara business means a hoot to me.

 

This parampara issue means NOTHING TO ME.

 

How very convenient all the time Hindus have to put up with these quotes like not bonafide acharya or not authorized Sampradaya, and therefore great personalities like Mira, Tulsidas, Narshimehta, Jalarambapu and the list goes on, are scorned upon

And now that ones own sampradaya comes in to question suddenly it does not matter.

Great debating I say where everyone is a winner but Dharma.

 

Jai Shree Krishna

[kaisersose]

 

Thanks Shiva and Theist, I actually knew of those differences in general, but had no access to the evidence. This fit my earlier example of how Sri Madhva was pulling a Sankaracarya act by seeking to gradually elevate his audience, meeting them in their crystalized traditional miasm and adding what they were ready to hear.

 

This whole issue makes me wonder if there is a single personalist outside of those who caught wind of Srila Bhaktivinode's revolution who considers their self a brahmana who is in reality NOT a smarta.

 

Talk about a dark age. The Jesus Christ influenced intellects of the Constitutional Republic of the United States of America are more inclined to support a philosophy of assessing and engaging people strictly according to observed qualities of character and inclination than the entire Bigoted "intellectual" claass of the continent of India who have had access to the full panorama of Vedic scriptures.

 

Dark, paradoxical, IRONIC, and fitting actually.

 

Mathematically speaking,

 

The above post + ( you asking me for proof -> me showing you proof -> you going silient) = you concede your earlier positions that the Gaudiyas have a link to the Madhva sampradaya - neither by doctrine nor by magical diksha*.

 

Let me know if I am wrong.

 

*The Doctrine connection has been refuted because they are different. A real no-brainer, this one.

The diksha connection is refuted because allowing such a connection, would also mean allowing a Hridayananda dasa to allow same sex couples Krishna Bhakti against the wishes of his Guru. So by similar logic, no diksha connection exists between Madhva and Prabhupada either.

 

Cheers

[Ganeshprasad]

Pranam

 

 

Our sampradaya should drop all pretenses to Madhva's lineage - we are nowhere near these Vaishnavas in both philosophy and mood of service. We should simply claim lineage from Lord Caitanya.

 

The rejection of the actual guru of Srila Bhaktivinoda, Bipina Bihari Goswami, was also a very controversial move, based on rather personal animosity of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta towards that Vaishnava.

 

There is too much reliance on idividual gurus in our line - once they make a controversial decision you are stuck with it. That is why our lineage is so fragmented.

 

Take the essence I say, parampara is what’s handed down from time in memorial from guru to sisya and the whole Vedic tradition has grown and thus we have a vibrant colourful culture, all 4 varans abide in it and lived in harmony, first the Muslims then the Christians did their best to break us down yet we survived, what we don’t really need to do is internally combust.

Sampradaya I have no time for, in my observation I have noticed, a great deal of time and effort, in the guise of seva, is spent on upkeep and betterment of such institute so that a lot of people can have a nice cosy life style, many a times actual dharma takes a secondary place, at times undharmic practice is justified in the name of Krishna or God.

Dharma can not be confined to any institute, it would get stifle, the soul can never be happy shackled, confined to boundaries of an institute.

 

Krishna says Parampara and not sampradaya.

 

Jai Shree Krishna

[Sonic Yogi]

 

For me, the only reason I even read Srila Prabhupada's books was that he represented an ancient disciplic succession. I do not care for self made gurus.

 

I read the books because they were the most incredible books I have ever seen.

 

If there was no parampara at all and Srila Prabhupada claimed to be representing Krishna that would be fine with me.

 

The books clicked with me from the first second I touched one.

 

I never had to put faith in some theoretical sweetness or Nectar of Devotion.

 

I could taste the nectar from the first moment I touched the book and I have been tasting it ever since.

 

All this parampara business doesn't matter a fig to me.

 

Krishna is not bound by any Vedic injunction.

Krishna can start a new sampradaya any time he wants.

 

I don't give a hoot about "Vedic" tradition.

 

I believe in Prabhupada and I don't need anything or anyone to confirm that he is a messenger from Krishna.

[andy108]

 

Our sampradaya should drop all pretenses to Madhva's lineage - we are nowhere near these Vaishnavas in both philosophy and mood of service. We should simply claim lineage from Lord Caitanya.

Ah, Kulapavana, Founder-Acarya of the Brahma-Gaudiya Sampradaya. Oh but wait, there are great expansions and additions that Mahaprabhu made available to the world compared to the revelations given originally by Lord Brahma and has offered different moods of service also.

So why don't we drop all pretenses to being part of Lord Brahma's lineage while we are at it. Srila Bhaktivedanta Swami was just a silly sentimentalist pandering to the masses right?

The rejection of the actual guru of Srila Bhaktivinoda, Bipina Bihari Goswami, was also a very controversial move, based on rather personal animosity of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta towards that Vaishnava.

What a crock. Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakur is on record glorifying his Diska Guru's qualities and there is no actual factual evidence presented by any bonafide researcher that he "rejected his diksa guru" as the myth goes.

The truth goes more like this according to the schollary research presented by Bhaktarupa das and Rupa Vilasa Das.

http://www.vnn.org/editorials/ET9906/ET15-4106.html

**snip**

However, Bhaktivinoda Thakura referred to Jagannatha dasa Babaji Maharaja as the commander-in-chief of the Vaisnava community, and he was the authority who certified the place of Caitanya Mahaprabhu's appearance. Not all links are listed in our sampradaya, and it was the judgment of Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura, that the siksa link to Jagannatha dasa Babaji was of paramount significance. It is not at all necessary to attack anyone in this regard or to try to discredit anyone.

**end snip**

 

Which is consistent with Srila Bhaktisiddhanta's and Bhaktivedanta's mission to emphasize the importance of Siksa.

 

And as far as Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati's position regarding Srila Bipin Bihari

http://www.vnn.org/editorials/ET9906/ET15-4106.html

**snip**

In spite of all the things that Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakur is reported to have said about Bipin Bihari Goswami, it should be marked that not a single piece of written information is available. And there are volumes and volumes of written information from Saraswati Thakur. Sometimes teams of stenographers were engaged to carefully preserve every word he spoke. Still, there is no criticism of Bipin Bihari Goswami anywhere there.

Not only that, but there is not, to our knowledge, a single piece of written information from any DISCIPLE of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakur reporting that he criticized Bipin Bihari Goswami, or even themselves criticizing Bipin Bihari Goswami.

 

 

 

There is too much reliance on idividual gurus in our line - once they make a controversial decision you are stuck with it. That is why our lineage is so fragmented.

 

For one looking to win a popularity contest, controversy is anethma.

 

To one seeking to give the most treasurable and generally unappreciated and unwanted gift, controversy is lived, eat, breathed, and has no deleterious effect.

 

The real lineage is never fragmented but consistently passes on the essence to those receptive in an unbroken chain.

 

The succession gets broken when there is noone left with a sincere desire to take the gifts available, and thus the one's in possession of the gift experience separation and are forced into isolation due to the circumstance and then eventually get reunited with the Lord in Lila of Union instead of vipralumba.

 

It is NOT that the ones with the gift can't figure out how to give it to willingly receptive surrendered souls. Or that they whimsically break from tradition in a controversial way, thus ruining the whole thing. That makes no sense.

[Sonic Yogi]

 

 

The real lineage is never fragmented but consistently passes on the essence to those receptive in an unbroken chain.

 

Is that an unbroken chain of bodies or an unbroken chain of knowledge?

 

The Saraswata Gaudiya sampradaya is clearly a siksha based sampradaya.

 

A chain of bodies means NOTHING.

[Kulapavana]

 

What a crock. Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakur is on record glorifying his Diska Guru's qualities and there is no actual factual evidence presented by any bonafide researcher that he "rejected his diksa guru" as the myth goes.

 

Yes, Bipin Bihari was the actual guru (in every way) of Srila Bhaktivinoda and so technically speaking our sampradaya should have been drawn through his line. He was the one who arranged for the title 'Bhaktivinoda' be given to his disciple by the assembly of learned Vaishnavas. Unfortunately, after BVT passed on, Bipin Bihari rejected him as a disciple on account of suspicion that some of the ancient texts used by BVT in support of his preaching were actually forgeries. That incident might have played a role in a way BST formulated our disciplic line.

[raghu]

 

Raghu you may already know this. There is no evidence of Sri Chaitanya writing any philosophical work or commentaries to any vedic literature. He is known for writing siksataka, a 8 verse poem. His autobiography was written years later after he passed away.

 

Precisely my point. In other words, there is no record that *Sri Caitanya* ever claimed to be in a "siksha parampara" from Sri Madhva.

 

As far as the Gaudiya parampara is concerned, no one made this claim until about the time of Sri Baladeva, nearly 200 years later.

[raghu]

 

Frankly, none of this parampara business means a hoot to me.

 

 

If there was no parampara at all and Srila Prabhupada claimed to be representing Krishna that would be fine with me.

 

In that regard, you people have a lot more in common with the followers of Vivekananda and Sai Baba than you do with any Vaishnava Vedanta traditions.

[raghu]

 

Are you guys know what you are talking? From where are you recording events that say the envious Sri Vaishnavas wanted gaudiyas to get the boot?

 

Justin, are you asking them to provide evidence for their controversial views?

 

Don't you know that you are supposed to just believe whatever they say? Asking them for evidence is just proof of your bigotry.

 

 

WoW! what a scam. Do these swamijis know that their letters are all making the rounds in the internet!

 

They may or may not know. Typically, whenever you ask the Gaudiya Vaishnavas on this forum a question, they fly into a blood shot rage when they cannot provide sensible answers, begin calling you bigot, Christ-hater, etc, and then they spam these letters.

 

These letters were actually written to rebut a position paper that made some unflattering remarks about iskcon and claimed to be representing one of the madhva maths. Probably the authors of this position paper got frustrated because the gaudiya vaishnavas they would debate with were similar to these guys here - basically a bunch of unqualified, sectarian-minded, cultists who are happy to preach any false idea and *claim* to have the sanction of scripture but unwilling to have their ideas scrutinized the way they scrutinize others.

 

So these swamijis responded to smooth things over. There is nothing in these letters that answers any of the questions I raised. I'm ok with there being a "Madhva-Gaudiya link" if it makes people happy. But let's be honest and admit that the "link" is NOT a link of "diksha" and NOT a link of "siksha." Whatever else it is, who knows? But Prabhupada's Gita is NOT Madhva's Gita commentary unchanged, and achintya bedha abedha is NOT tattvavada unchanged. Tattvavada and achintya bedha abedha contradict each other on numerous significant points. And Tattvavadis have been practicing a hereditary system of varnashrama dharma for centuries. And so have the Sri Vaishnavas. And the pushti-margis. And the pre-iskcon Gaudiyas. And so has basically everyone else excluding the last 200 years of free-thinking, politically-correct, pseudo-vedic, new age, neo-Hinduism.

 

But let us not despair that the Ashta-matha swamis's letters are being taken out of context. For soon they will see another set of comments making the rounds on the internet - those of Sonic Yogi's and andy108's and shiva's hate-spewing comments against mAdhva Vaishnavism. These include comments such as these (just from this thread alone):

 

 

Talk about a dark age. The Jesus Christ influenced intellects of the Constitutional Republic of the United States of America are more inclined to support a philosophy of assessing and engaging people strictly according to observed qualities of character and inclination than the entire Bigoted "intellectual" claass of the continent of India who have had access to the full panorama of Vedic scriptures.

 

Dark, paradoxical, IRONIC, and fitting actually.

 

 

I do have to agree with perhaps the main point of the antagonists. Why would GV's need to emphasize a connection Madhva considering the above differences?

 

The above are enough to put me off receiving Madhva's siksa.

 

 

Look, don't waste your time anymore with these simpletons, they are clearly offensive in mood and mission and are obviously going to reject any rational or spiritual truth, be it from shastra or from sadhu.

 

 

But, lets face it, these guys have heard it all before and they simply don't care because they are not in the business of sadhu sanga here, they are in the business of Jagai and Madhai, i.e. being envious rascals. So, best to ignore them.

 

 

The Gaudiya acharyas have explained that the Madhvas practice hereditary principles of caste.

The Gaudiyas do not accept hereditary caste system.

 

That is the bigoted caste system that kept India in chains for hundreds of years until the Gaudiya acharyas broke the monopoly and proved that caste should never be determined by birth.

 

 

Doesn't matter, both you and your smarta "brahmana" pal Raghu are disqualified from ever being able recognize actual Vaisnava Brahmana qualites in a person until you get over your holier than thou, anachronistic, impersonal view that a only a person born to brahmana parents can develop brahminical qualities.

 

But the last thing a condescending petty tyrant wants to admit is that they don't have a monopoly on the truth already, and that there is actually a person much more supreme than them, so the tyrant temporarily gets his petty little world to rule over, because the Lord they don't believe in is so kind that he will even arrange for his master illusionist to fulfill their desires for a while.

 

 

I have already printed out the inflammatory comments above along with the web URL and will be mailing this to the Ashta-Matha Swamis and CCing a copy to iskcon's leadership. I want the Ashta-Matha swamis to see the deep-seated prejudice which the Western iskcon devotees have towards our varnashrama culture, and I think this will certainly give them a better idea of who they are dealing with.

 

To the moderators: I request that you not censor any of the postings including this one so that the proper context of the comments can be examined in detail. This thread should remain here a public monument of the hatred which iskcon devotees have towards varnashrama culture.

[Amlesh]

 

Pranam

 

 

 

Take the essence I say, parampara is what’s handed down from time in memorial from guru to sisya and the whole Vedic tradition has grown and thus we have a vibrant colourful culture, all 4 varans abide in it and lived in harmony, first the Muslims then the Christians did their best to break us down yet we survived, what we don’t really need to do is internally combust.

Sampradaya I have no time for, in my observation I have noticed, a great deal of time and effort, in the guise of seva, is spent on upkeep and betterment of such institute so that a lot of people can have a nice cosy life style, many a times actual dharma takes a secondary place, at times undharmic practice is justified in the name of Krishna or God.

Dharma can not be confined to any institute, it would get stifle, the soul can never be happy shackled, confined to boundaries of an institute.

 

Krishna says Parampara and not sampradaya.

 

Jai Shree Krishna

 

You are blessed, Ganeshprasad.

Your thinking goes as deep as the sea.

[Sonic Yogi]

 

In that regard, you people have a lot more in common with the followers of Vivekananda and Sai Baba than you do with any Vaishnava Vedanta traditions.

 

Well, Srila Prabhupada also recognized Jesus and Mohammad.

Neither one of them had any Vedic parampara.

 

Now, why he recognized them two and none of the Indians without proper parampara is certainly curious.

 

All I am saying is that the books of Srila Prabhupada spoke to me in a way that I don't need any proof that he is in the parampara.

[tackleberry]

 

Well, Srila Prabhupada also recognized Jesus and Mohammad.

Neither one of them had any Vedic parampara.

 

Now, why he recognized them two and none of the Indians without proper parampara is certainly curious.

 

All I am saying is that the books of Srila Prabhupada spoke to me in a way that I don't need any proof that he is in the parampara.

 

SP recognized Jesus and Mohammed, because he didn't have a choice. He was trying to appeal to a western audience, so he couldn't dare antagonize them, it was a clever political move, if I may say so. Of course, he didn't recognize Indians and he called people like Vivekananda/Sai Baba/others 'rascals' simply because the Vivekananda fan club (or Sai or the rest) wasn't big enough to make an impact at any rate.

[Sonic Yogi]

 

Justin, are you asking them to provide evidence for their controversial views?

 

Don't you know that you are supposed to just believe whatever they say? Asking them for evidence is just proof of your bigotry.

 

 

 

They may or may not know. Typically, whenever you ask the Gaudiya Vaishnavas on this forum a question, they fly into a blood shot rage when they cannot provide sensible answers, begin calling you bigot, Christ-hater, etc, and then they spam these letters.

 

These letters were actually written to rebut a position paper that made some unflattering remarks about iskcon and claimed to be representing one of the madhva maths. Probably the authors of this position paper got frustrated because the gaudiya vaishnavas they would debate with were similar to these guys here - basically a bunch of unqualified, sectarian-minded, cultists who are happy to preach any false idea and *claim* to have the sanction of scripture but unwilling to have their ideas scrutinized the way they scrutinize others.

 

So these swamijis responded to smooth things over. There is nothing in these letters that answers any of the questions I raised. I'm ok with there being a "Madhva-Gaudiya link" if it makes people happy. But let's be honest and admit that the "link" is NOT a link of "diksha" and NOT a link of "siksha." Whatever else it is, who knows? But Prabhupada's Gita is NOT Madhva's Gita commentary unchanged, and achintya bedha abedha is NOT tattvavada unchanged. Tattvavada and achintya bedha abedha contradict each other on numerous significant points. And Tattvavadis have been practicing a hereditary system of varnashrama dharma for centuries. And so have the Sri Vaishnavas. And the pushti-margis. And the pre-iskcon Gaudiyas. And so has basically everyone else excluding the last 200 years of free-thinking, politically-correct, pseudo-vedic, new age, neo-Hinduism.

 

But let us not despair that the Ashta-matha swamis's letters are being taken out of context. For soon they will see another set of comments making the rounds on the internet - those of Sonic Yogi's and andy108's and shiva's hate-spewing comments against mAdhva Vaishnavism. These include comments such as these (just from this thread alone):

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I have already printed out the inflammatory comments above along with the web URL and will be mailing this to the Ashta-Matha Swamis and CCing a copy to iskcon's leadership. I want the Ashta-Matha swamis to see the deep-seated prejudice which the Western iskcon devotees have towards our varnashrama culture, and I think this will certainly give them a better idea of who they are dealing with.

 

To the moderators: I request that you not censor any of the postings including this one so that the proper context of the comments can be examined in detail. This thread should remain here a public monument of the hatred which iskcon devotees have towards varnashrama culture.

 

Petty little caste priests as your good self have been saying this same thing for almost 500 years.

Yet the Gaudiya caravan just passes by the barking dogs.

 

You are not nearly as significant as you presume to be.

In fact you are just totally significant.

 

You come on the forum to discredit the Gaudiya sampradaya and you expect to be received with open arms?

 

We are quite sure you will never do anything except blow hot air lest your identity be exposed as the man who wants to destroy the Gaudiya sampradaya.

 

You are in deeper than you know.

 

You are showing a grave lack of common sense.

[Sonic Yogi]

 

Justin, are you asking them to provide evidence for their controversial views?

 

 

 

mam hi partha vyapasritya

ye 'pi syuh papa-yonayah

striyo vaisyas tatha sudras

te 'pi yanti param gatim

 

O son of Prtha, those who take shelter in Me, though they be of lower birth, women, vaisyas [merchants] and sudras [workers] can attain the supreme destination. (Bhagavad-gita 9.32)

 

 

asmat kulino 'nanucya

brahma bandhur iva bhavati

 

"A brahma-bandhu, or a mere relative of a brahmana, is one who belongs to our brahmana community but has not studied the Vedas." (Chandogya Upanisad)

Om. There once lived Svetaketu, the grandson of Aruna. To him his father said: "Svetaketu, lead the life of a brahmacari; for there is none belonging to our family, my dear, who, not having studied the Vedas, is a brahmana only by birth." (Chandogya Upanisad 6.1.1)

tam hovaca na etad abrahmano vivaktum arhati. samidham saumya ahara upayitva nesye. na satyad aga iti.

"Gautama then said: My dear son, no one other than a brahmana can speak such truth that you have spoken. Therefore you are a brahmana, and i accept you. O gentle one, go bring wood for sacrifice. Jabala replied: 'I am going right now to bring wood.' Gautama said: 'Never divert from the truth'." (Chandogya Upanisad of the Sama Veda, 4th prapathaka, 4th khanda)

Vajrasucika Upanisad (the whole text) download

Smrti:

 

 

kirata-hunandhra-pulinda-pulkasa

abhira-sumbha yavanah khasadayah

ye 'nye ca papa yad-apasrayasrayah

sudhyanti tasmai prabhavisnave namah

 

Kirata, Huna, Andhra, Pulinda, Pulkasa, Abhira, Sumbha, Yavana, members of the Khasa races and even others 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. (Srimad Bhagavatam 2.4.18)

 

 

yan-namadheya-sravananukirtanad

yat-prahvanad yat-smaranad api kvacit

svado 'pi sadyah savanaya kalpate

kutah punas te bhagavan nu darsanat

 

To say nothing of the spiritual advancement of persons who see the Supreme Person face to face, even a person born in a family of dog-eaters immediately becomes eligible to perform Vedic sacrifices if he once utters the holy name of the Supreme Personality of Godhead or chants about Him, hears about His pastimes, offers Him obeisances or even remembers Him. (Srimad Bhagavatam 3.33.6)

 

 

aho bata sva-paco 'to gariyan

yaj jihvagre vartate nama tubhyam

tepus tapas te juhuvuh sasnur arya

brahmanucur nama grnanti ye te

 

Oh, how glorious are they whose tongues are chanting Your holy name! Even if born in the families of dog-eaters, such persons are worshipable. Persons who chant the holy name of Your Lordship must have executed all kinds of austerities and fire sacrifices and achieved all the good manners of the Aryans. To be chanting the holy name of Your Lordship, they must have bathed at holy places of pilgrimage, studied the Vedas and fulfilled everything required. (Srimad Bhagavatam 3.33.7)

 

 

sva-dharma-nisthah sata-janmabhih puman

virincatam eti tatah param hi mam

avyakrtam bhagavato 'tha vaisnavam

padam yathaham vibudhah kalatyaye

 

A person who executes his occupational duty properly for one hundred births becomes qualified to occupy the post of Brahma, and if he becomes more qualified, he can approach Lord Siva. A person who is directly surrendered to Lord Krsna, or Visnu, in unalloyed devotional service is immediately promoted to the spiritual planets. Lord Siva and other demigods attain these planets after the destruction of the material world. (Srimad Bhagavatam 4.24.29)

 

 

yaviyamsa ekasitirjayanteyah pitur adesakara maha-salina

maha-srotriya yajna-silah karma-visuddha brahmana-babhuvuh.

 

In addition to these nineteen sons mentioned above, there were eighty-one younger ones, all born of Rsabhadeva and Jayanti. According to the order of their father, they became well cultured, well behaved, very pure in their activities and expert in Vedic knowledge and the performance of Vedic rituals. Thus they all became perfectly qualified brahmanas. (Srimad-Bhagavatam 5.4.13)

 

 

nalam dvijatvam devatvam

rsitvam vasuratmajah

prinanaya mukundasya

na vrttam na bahu jnata

na danam na tapo nejya

na saucam na vratani ca

priyate 'malaya bhaktya

harir anyad vidambanam

 

My dear friends, O sons of the demons, you cannot please the Supreme Personality of Godhead by becoming perfect brahmanas, demigods or great saints or by becoming perfectly good in etiquette or vast learning. None of these qualifications can awaken the pleasure of the Lord. Nor by charity, austerity, sacrifice, cleanliness or vows can one satisfy the Lord. The Lord is pleased only if one has unflinching, unalloyed devotion to Him. Without sincere devotional service, everything is simply a show. (Srimad Bhagavatam 7.7.51-52)

 

 

viprad dvi-sad-guna-yutad aravinda-nabha-

padaravinda-vimukhat svapacam varistham

manye tad-arpita-mana-vacanehitartha-

pranam punati sa kulam na tu bhurimanah

 

If a brahmana has all twelve of the brahminical qualifications [as they are stated in the book called Sanat-sujata] but is not a devotee and is averse to the lotus feet of the Lord, he is certainly lower than a devotee who is a dog- eater but who has dedicated everything - mind, words, activities, wealth and life - to the Supreme Lord. Such a devotee is better than such a brahmana because the devotee can purify his whole family, whereas the so-called brahmana in a position of false prestige cannot purify even himself. (Srimad Bhagavatam 7.9.10)

 

 

yasya yal laksanam proktam

pumso varnabhivyanjakam

yad anyatrapi drsyeta

tat tenaiva vinirdiset

 

If one shows the symptoms of being a brahmana, ksatriya, vaisya or sudra, as described above, even if he has appeared in a different class, he should be accepted according to those symptoms of classification. (Srimad Bhagavatam 7.11.35)

Five brahmins, though as learned as Brhaspati, are never honoured: the impatient, the harsh, the haughty, the ill-clad and the uninvited. (Garuda Purana 1.115.22)

 

 

brahmananam sahasrebhyah

satra-yaji visisyate

satra-yaji-sahasrebh yah

sarva-vedanta-paragah

sarva-vedanta-vit-kotya

visnu-bhakto visisyate

vaisnavanam sahasrebhya

ekanty eko visisyate

 

 

"A brahmana qualified to offer sacrifices is better than an ordinary brahmana and better than such a brahmana is one who has studied all the Vedic scriptures. Among many such brahmanas, one who is a devotee of Lord Visnu is the best; and among many such Vaisnavas, one who fully engages in the service of the Lord is the best." (Garuda Purana)

 

 

bhaktir asta-vidha hy esa

yasmin mlecche'pi vartate

sa viprendro muni-sresthah

sa jnani sa ca panditah

tasmai deyam tato grah ya-

msa ca pujyo yatha harih

 

"There are many different kinds of devotees, but even a Vaisnava coming from a family of mlecchas or yavanas is understood to be a learned scholar, complete in knowledge, if he knows the Vaisnava philosophy. He should therefore be given charity, for such a Vaisnava is as worshipable as the Supreme Personality of Godhead." (Garuda Purana)

 

 

maha kula prasuto'pi sarva yajnesu diksitah

sahasran sakhadhyayi ca na guruh syad avaisnavahc

 

Even if one is a famous brahmana, born in a high class family, who is expert in performing sacrifices, who has achieved a Vedic education and who is well versed in Vedic injunctions in a thousand Vedic scriptures, if he is not a Vaisnava, he is unable to become a spiritual master. (Hari Bhakti Vilasa 1.54, from Padma Purana)

 

 

grhita visnu diksako visnu pujaparo narah

vaisnavo'bhihito'bhijnair itaro'smad avaisnavahc

 

A person who is initiated in Visnu mantras, and who is expert in worshiping Lord Visnu, such a person is known as a Vaisnava. Besides this, everyone else is an avaisnava. (Hari Bhakti Vilasa 1.55, from Padma Purana)

 

 

yatha kancanatam yati kasyam rasa-vidhanatah

tatha diksa vidhanena dvijatvam jayate nrnam

 

As bell metal is turned into gold when mixed with mercury in an alchemical process, so in that very way, by the process of proper initiation by a bona fide spiritual master, a person becomes a brahmana. (Hari Bhakti Vilasa 2.12, from Tattvasagara)

 

 

avaisnava upadistena mantrena nirayam vajet

punas ca vidhina samyag grahayed vaisnavad guroh

 

If someone, due to some circumstance is initiated by a nonvaisnava spiritual master, he is destined to go to hell. He should again accept reinitiation from a Vaisnava spiritual master according to Vedic instructions. (Hari Bhakti Vilasa 4.366, from Narada Pancaratra)

(Srila Sanatan Gosvami writes a commentary on this verse, stating) "Either he is situated properly or he is situated improperly." From this quote, it should be understood that the spiritual master is never to be rejected, but if somebody has accepted a nonvaisnava spiritual master then according to scriptures, it is allowable that such a spiritual master be rejected because such a spiritual master remains selfish while delivering the mantra. A real sadhu or a saintly person (Vaisnava) is not like that. He is very merciful upon a person to whom he is delivering the sacred mantra. Vaisnava generally means a twice born person who knows the scriptures properly.

 

 

sarvopadhi-vinirmuktam

tat-paratvena nirmalam

hrsikena hrsikesa-

sevanam bhaktir ucyate

 

"Bhakti, or devotional service, means engaging all our senses in the service of the Lord, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, the master of all the senses. When the spirit soul renders service unto the Supreme, there are two side effects. One is freed from all material designations, and, simply by being employed in the service of the Lord, one's senses are purified." (Narada-pancaratra)

 

 

asuddhah sudra-kalpa hi brahmanah kali-sambhavah

tesam agama margena suddhir na srauta vartmana

 

The brahmanas born in Kali-yuga are impure and no better than sudras. In Kali- yuga, whatever brahmanas take birth are equal to sudras and are equally impure. According to scriptural injunctions, they are purified, but in Kali-yuga, they cannot be purified by chanting or learning Vedic mantras. (Hari Bhakti Vilasa 5.5, from Visnu Yamala)

 

[Sonic Yogi]

 

 

striyo va yadi va sudra brahmanah ksatriyadayah

pujayitva sila cakra labhante sasvatam padam

 

Worship of Salagram Sila can be done by women, sudras (low caste), brahmanas (twice born), ksatriyas (administrators), etc. and they can all achieve the eternal abode of Lord Krsna perfectly. (Hari Bhakti Vilasa 5.452, from Skanda Purana, conversation between Lord Brahma and Narada Muni)

 

 

sudram va bhagavad-bhaktam

nisadam sva-pacam tatha

viksatam jati-samanyat

sa yati narakam dhruvam

 

A Vaisnava, even if he is born in a sudra, dog-eater or even lower class family than that, if somebody sees such a devotee in bad behavior (due to being born in that kind of family), he is certainly said to be going to hell. (Hari Bhakti Vilasa 10.119, from Itihasa Samuccaya, Lomasa Rsi speaks)

 

 

na me'bhaktas catur-vedi

mad-bhaktah sva-pacah priyah

tasmai deyam tato grahyam

sa ca pujyo yatha hy aham

 

If someone is not My devotee, even if he is expert in the four Vedas, he is not dear to Me. If someone is My devotee, even if he is lowborn, he is dear to Me. Therefore, one should give charity to such a low born person and accept charity from him. Even a low born devotee is equally worshipable as Me. (Hari Bhakti Vilasa 10.127, from Itihasa Samuccaya, spoken by the Supreme Lord)

 

 

ye tyakta loka dharmartha visnu bhakti vasam gatah

bhajanti paramatmanam tebhyo nityam namo namah

 

Any person who is not attached to sons, wife, varnasrama system, wealth and even liberation, and worships Lord Sri Visnu properly with devotion, to such a devotee, I pay my obeisances again and again. (Hari Bhakti Vilasa 10.248, from Narayana Vyuha)

 

 

kim vedaih kimu va sastraih kimu tirthati sevanaih

visnu bhakti-vihinanam kim tapobhih kimadhvaraih

 

Those people who are bereft of devotional service, what is the result of their performing Vedic studies, Vedic activities, study of scriptures, going to places of pilgrimage, great austerities and acquiring knowledge? (Hari Bhakti Vilasa 10.302, from Brhan Naradiya Purana)

 

 

vahni-surya-brahmanebhyas tejiyan vaisnava sada

na vicaro na bhogas ca vaisnavanam sva-karmanam

 

 

 

likhitam samni kauthumyam kuru prasnam brhaspatim

 

"The Vaisnavas are always more powerful than Agni, Surya, and the brahmanas. Vaisnavas do not have to suffer the reactions of fruitive activities or concern themselves with analyzing these activities. This is stated in the Kauthumi branch of the Sama Veda. You may ask Brhaspati for confirmation of this." (Brahma-vaivarta Purana, Krsna-janma-kanda, ch. 59)

 

 

harer abhakto vipro'pi vijneyah svapacadhikah

hari bhakta svapako'pi vijneya brahmanadhikah

 

Any person who is not a devotee of Lord Sri Hari, even though he is a brahmana, he is lower than a dog-eater. Even if one is a dog-eater, if he is a devotee of Lord Sri Hari, he is understood as being better than a brahmana. (Padma Purana, Kriya Yogasara 16.3)

 

 

arcye visnau sila-dhir gurusu nara-matir vaisnave jati-buddhir visnor va vaisnavanam kali-mala-mathane pada-tirthe 'mbu-buddhih sri-visnor namni mantre sakala-kalusa-he sabda-samanya-buddhir visnau sarvesvarese tad-itara-sama-dhir yasya va naraki sah

 

"One who thinks the Deity in the temple to be made of wood or stone, who thinks of the spiritual master in the disciplic succession as an ordinary man, who thinks the Vaisnava in the Acyuta-gotra to belong to a certain caste or creed or who thinks of caranamrta or Ganges water as ordinary water is taken to be a resident of hell." (Padma Purana)

 

 

sat-karma-nipuno vipro

mantra-tantra-visaradah

avaisnavo gurur na syad

vaisnavah sva-paco guruh

 

"A scholarly brahmana, expert in all subjects of Vedic knowledge, is unfit to become a spiritual master without being a Vaisnava, or expert in the science of Krsna consciousness. But a person born in a family of a lower caste can become a spiritual master if he is a Vaisnava, or Krsna conscious." (Padma Purana)

 

 

na sudra bhagavad-bhaktas

te tu bhagavata matah

sarva-varnesu te sudra

ye na bhakta janardane

 

"A devotee should never be considered a sudra. All the devotees of the Supreme Personality of Godhead should be recognized as bhagavatas. If one is not a devotee of Lord Krsna, however, even if born of a brahmana, ksatriya or vaisya family, he should be considered a sudra." (Padma Purana)

 

 

sva-pakam iva nekseta

loke vipram avaisnavam

vaisnavo varno-bahyo'pi

punati bhuvana-trayam

 

"If a person born in a brahmana family is an avaisnava, a nondevotee, one should not see his face, exactly as one should not look upon the face of a candala, or dog-eater. However, a Vaisnava found in varnas other than brahmana can purify all the three worlds." (Padma Purana)

 

 

guror apy avaliptasya

karyamkaryam ajanatah

utpatha-pratipannasya

karyam bhavati sasanam

 

Anyone who is supposed to be a guru but who goes against the principle of visnu-bhakti cannot be accepted as guru. If one has falsely accepted such a guru, one should reject him. (Mahabharata, Udyoga Parva (5.)178.24)

 

 

yudhisthira uvaca

satyam danam ksama-silam anrsamsyam damo ghrna

drsyante yatra nagendra sa brahmana iti smrtah

 

"Maharaja Yudhisthira replied: A person who possesses truthfulness, charity, forgiveness, sobriety, gentleness, austerity, and lack of hatred is called a brahmana." (Mahabharata, Vana Parva (3.)177.16)

 

 

yudhistira uvaca

sudre tu yad bhavel laksma dvije tac ca na vidyate

na vai sudro bhavec chudro brahmano na ca brahmanah

 

 

 

yatraital laksyate sarpa vrttam sa brahmanah smrtah

yatraitan na bhavet sarpa tam sudram iti nirdiset

 

"Maharaja Yudhisthira replied: If such symptoms are found in a sudra he should never be called a sudra, just as a brahmana is not a brahmana if he does not possess these qualities. O snake, only a person who is endowed with the characteristics of a brahmana can be called a brahmana, otherwise he is a sudra." (Mahabharata, Vana Parva, (3.)177.20-21)

 

 

sudra-yonau hi jatasya

sad-gunanupatisthatah

vaisyatvam bhavati brahman

ksatriyatvam tathaiva ca

arjave vartamanasya

brahmanyam abhijayate

 

"O brahmana, if a person is born in the family of a sudra and posesses good qualities, he becomes a vaisya or a ksatriya. And if he possesses the quality of simplicity, he is a brahmana." (Mahabharata, Vana Parva, (3.)203.11-12)

 

 

tam brahmanam aham manye vrttena hi bhaved dvijah

 

"Indeed, the only criteria for being a brahmana is to possess pure characteristics." (Mahabharata, Vana Parva, (3.)206.12)

 

 

sthito brahmana-dharmena

brahman yam upajiva ti

ksatriyo vatha vaisyo va

brahma-bhuyaya gacchati

ebhis tu karmabhir devi

subhair acaritais tatha

sudro brahmanatam gacched

vaisyah ksatriyatam vrajet

na yonir napi samskaro

na srutam na ca samnatih

karanani dvijatvasya

vrttam eva tu karanam

 

"If one is factually situated in the occupation of a brahmana, he must be considered a brahmana, even if born of a ksatriya or vaisya family. "O Devi, if even a sudra is actually engaged in the occupation and pure behavior of a brahmana, he becomes a brahmana. Moreover, a vaisya can become a ksatriya. "Therefore, neither the source of one's birth, nor his reformation, nor his education is the criterion of a brahmana. The vrtta, or occupation, is the real standard by which one is known as a brahmana." (Mahabharata, Anusasana Parva, (13.)131.8,26,49)

 

 

himsanrta-priya lubdhah

sarva-karmopajivinah

krsnah sauca-paribrastas

te dvijah sudratam gatah

 

"When the brahmanas commit violence, speak lies, become greedy, earn their livelihood by any and all activities, lose their purity by sinful activities, then they become degraded into sudras." (Mahabharata, Santi Parva, Moksa-dharma, (12.)181.13)

 

 

bhrgur uvaca

jata-karmadibhir yas tu samskaraih samskrtah suci

vedadhyayana-sampannah sah sukarmasvavasthitah

 

 

 

saucacara-sthitah samyak vighasasi guru-priyah

nitya-vrati satya-parah sa vai brahmana ucyate

 

 

 

satya-danam damo drohanrsamsyam ksama ghrna

tapas ca drsyate yatra sa brahmana iti smrtah

 

 

 

sarva-bhaksa-ratir nityam sarva-dharma-karo 'sucih

tyakta-vedas tv anacarah sa vai sudra iti smrtah

 

 

 

sudre caitad bhavel laksyam dvije caitat na vidyate

na vai sudro bhavec chudro brahmano na ca brahmanah

 

"Bhrgu replied: A person who has been purified by the reformatory processes like jata-karma, or name-giving ceremony, who is clean, devoted to studying the Vedas, expert in the six occupations like worship and teaching worship, situated in pure conduct, eating the remnants of his spiritual master, dear to the spiritual master, regularly engaged in performing vows, and fixed in truthfulness is considered a brahmana. A human being who is truthful, charitable, shy, not hateful, austere, not vengeful, and not cruel is a brahmana. One who is attached to eating all kinds of foods and performing all kinds of activities, who is impure, deviant from the principles of Vedic culture, and ill-behaved is known as a sudra. If the symptoms of a brahmana are found in a sudra and in the symptoms of a sudra found in a brahmana, then the sudra should not be called a sudra and the brahmana should not be called a brahmana." (Mahabharata, Santi Parva, (12.)182.2-4,7-8)

 

 

sarve varna brahmana brahmajas ca

brahmasyato brahmanah samprasutah

bahubhayam vai ksatriyah samprasutah

nabhyam vaisyah padatas capi sudrah

sarve varna nanyatha veditavyah

 

 

 

tat-stho brahma tasthivams caparo yas

tasmai nityam moksam ahur dvijendra

 

"Persons of all varnas are brahmanas, because they are all born from Lord Brahma. The brahmanas were born from the mouth of Brahma, the ksatriyas from his arms, the vaisyas were born from his navel, and the sudras were born from his legs. Do not consider the varnas in another way. One who is fixed in knowledge is a brahmana. Therefore, O king, this moksa-sastra was spoken for the benefit of those brahmanas and ksatriyas who have attained knowledge. This is the opinion of ancient scholars." (Mahabharata, Santi Parva, (12.)306.86-87,89)

(He who has not been initiated) should not pronounce (any) Vedic text excepting (those required for) the performance of funeral rites, since he is on a level with a Sudra before his birth from the Veda. (Manu-samhita 2.172)

 

 

kiba vipra, kiba nyasi, sudra kene naya

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

 

"Whether one is a brahmana, a sannyasi or a sudra--regardless of what he is--he can become a spiritual master if he knows the science of Krsna." (Caitanya-caritamrta, Madhya-lila 8.128)

 

 

tomara nama suni' haya svapaca `pavana'

alaukika sakti tomara na yaya kathana

 

"Simply by hearing Your holy name, dog-eaters become holy saints. Your uncommon potencies cannot be described in words." (Caitanya-caritamrta, Madhya-lila 18.124)

 

 

candalo 'pi dvija-srestho

hari-bhakti-parayanah

hari-bhakti-vihinas ca

dvijo 'pi svapacadhamah

 

"Even if one is born in the family of a candala, if one engages in the devotional service of the Lord, he becomes the best of brahmanas. But even a brahmana who is devoid of devotional service is on the level of the lowest dog-eater." (Srimad Bhagavatam 4.31.10, purport, source unspecified)

 

 

rg-vedo 'tha yajur-vedah sma-vedo 'py atharvanah

adhitas tena yenoktam harir ity aksara-dvayam

 

"A person who chants the two syllables Ha-ri has already studied the four Vedas--Sama, Rk, Yajuh and Atharva." (CC Adi-lila 7.72, purport, source unspecified)

Canakya's Niti-sastra, ch. 11:

13. The brahmana who is engrossed in worldly affairs, brings up cows and is engaged in trade is really called a vaishya.

14. The brahmana who deals in lac-die, articles, oil, indigo, silken cloth, honey, clarified butter, liquor, and flesh is called a shudra.

15. The brahmana who thwarts the doings of others, who is hypocritical, selfish, and a deceitful hater, and while speaking mildly cherishes cruelty in his heart, is called a cat.

16. The brahmana who destroys a pond, a well, a tank, a garden and a temple is called a mleccha.

17. The brahmana who steals the property of the Deities and the spiritual preceptor, who cohabits with another's wife, and who maintains himself by eating anything and everything is called a chandala.

<hr size="1" width="80%"> One cannot ascribe the prestige of a Satya-yuga brahmana to a Kali-yuga brahmana.

The Dharma-satras that support the seminal brahmanas do not contradict Vyasadeva. The evidence in Sri Mahabharata, however, is more important and more respected than that of the Dharma-sastras. The evidence of the Dharma-sastras is only theoretical, while the evidence in the Mahabharata is practical.

The various scriptural references describing the qualifications of brahmanas and showing respect for brahmanas refer to both seminal brahamanas and those who have become brahmanas by initiation. These references from scriptures on karma, jnana, and bhakti do not refer only to seminal brahmanas. In no case are brahmanas by initiation disregarded. Although in the opinion of some scriptures there is no possibility of becoming an initiated brahmana unless one is a seminal brahmana, this restriction was imposed only because of narrow-minded social traditions. When this narrow-mindedness is given up by deep research and higher education, then the entire world will be illuminated by the glories of the eternal Aryan culture. Then we will understand how futile is the attempt of frogs to fill the universe with the sound of their croaking.

 

[Gadadhara dasa (rus)]

Sonic Yogi,

 

Please do not disgrace yourself and Gaudiyas on this forum anymore.

[Sonic Yogi]

 

Sonic Yogi,

 

Please do not disgrace yourself and Gaudiyas on this forum anymore.

 

 

sure boss.....whatever you say.....

[Kulapavana]

Quote:

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #666666 1px solid; PADDING-RIGHT: 3ex; BORDER-TOP: #666666 1px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 3ex; BORDER-LEFT: #666666 1px solid; BORDER-BOTTOM: #666666 1px solid" bgColor=#e0e0e0>Originally Posted by Sonic Yogi

Well, Srila Prabhupada also recognized Jesus and Mohammad.

Neither one of them had any Vedic parampara.

Now, why he recognized them two and none of the Indians without proper parampara is certainly curious.

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

SP recognized Jesus and Mohammed, because he didn't have a choice. He was trying to appeal to a western audience, so he couldn't dare antagonize them, it was a clever political move, if I may say so.

 

I think there was more to it... IMO Srila Prabhupada wanted to transform Gaudiya Vaishnavism into a major religion like Christianity or Islam.

[andy108]

 

Yes, Bipin Bihari was the actual guru (in every way) of Srila Bhaktivinoda and so technically speaking our sampradaya should have been drawn through his line. He was the one who arranged for the title 'Bhaktivinoda' be given to his disciple by the assembly of learned Vaishnavas. Unfortunately, after BVT passed on, Bipin Bihari rejected him as a disciple on account of suspicion that some of the ancient texts used by BVT in support of his preaching were actually forgeries. That incident might have played a role in a way BST formulated our disciplic line.

 

This conclusion is unsubstantiated according to the research. This is made clear in the article I linked to. http://www.vnn.org/editorials/ET9906/ET15-4106.html

 

There was no wholesale REJECTION, although that would surely buttress your point if there was. The bias of those who claim such is apparent when such extremes are read into the actually ambiguous circumstances. To ascribe such caprice to a great soul like Bipin Bihari Goswami that on mere suspicion he would publicly reject his disciple is telling of their agenda.

 

In any event, if you read the most objective biography of Srila Bhaktivinode, you would see why his son BST viewed Srila Jagganatha Babaji as his father's Preeminent Siksa Guru, which is simply because his Father drew more inspiration from His Siksa in his later years than he did from his Diksa Guru.

 

Of course those who support the stifling "tradition" of disciplic succession by caste Diksa as being as or more important than Siksa are blind to these simple realities of inspiration of the Heart being more important to a devotee than who first gave them a mantra.

[IamNotHeeHee]

Shiva, thank you for publishing these letters. I was unaware that this issue was taken so further up to the head of the ashtamutts.

 

I agree with the Pontiffs that we need to respect others beliefs and not resort to blame. I agree with them that there are differences and there are common grounds.

 

After reading through the position papers in the Dvaita website, I get a feeling that there was nothing personal, but an attempt to show that there needs to be some reform done so to not blemish the ideals of Maadhva sampradaya. I assume the Gaudiyas visited Udupi and complained to the Swamijis and portrayed Maadhvas as envious attackers. This is what happens when one cannot win on the issues. It appears that the letters dictated by the Swamijis are more for reprimanding Maadhvas rather than an attempt to understand their side of the story. Which leads me to believe there was a lot of naivity and ignorance involved in these circumstances.

 

A few things that really concerns me, and I quote from the letters --

 

"He has put manure and water to the seed sowed by Sri Madhwacharya." - Sri Vidyadheesha swamiji of Palimar mutt

"Sri Vyasatheertha graced him offering "deeksha" to him and commanded him to spread the philosophic ideals fo Sri Madhwacharya." - Sri Vidyavallaba Tirtha Swamiji, Kaniyoor Mutt

 

Specifically what improvements did the Gaudiyas do to the Maadhvas? I have attended a number of Gaudiya/Isckon satsangs and there wasn't even one attribute taken from tattvavaada. They start their session praying to Prabhupada and not Brahma, Madhva, Lakshmi, et.al. They do not know the correct epistemology of Tattvavaada to even relate anything to panchabheda, taaratamya, saakshi, vishesha, jeevottama of vaayu, etc..

 

On one satsang the Gaudiyas said they perfected the philosophies of Madhvacharya and Ramanujacharya because these Acharyas did not know or deliver the right message! Perhaps this may be what is meant by 'pouring manure and water to the seed'.

 

"The sadhana achieved by Sri A. C. Prabhupada, Acharya of "Chaitanya Sampradaya" is to be welcomed by all Vaishnavites. It is due to him people all over the world have learned about Lord Krishna. This work should have been accomplished by Madhwa followers."

- Sri Lakshmivara thirtha swamiji of shiroor mutt

 

Absolutely, the sadhana achieved by Prabhupada is commendable. However, looking at the tone of the letter, is the shiroor mutt swamiji lambasting Maadhvas for not spreading the message of Lord Krishna!? Maybe I am reading too much into this, but the Swamiji sure has pointed out something here that he should be the one taking the leadership/ownership for i.e. spreading the word of Lord Krishna to the world.

 

"It is not correct for Madhwa followers to envy "Prabhupada" followers. Many facts that are in tune with Madhwa philosophy, are hidden in the works of Sri Prabhupada." - Sri Sri Vidyaprasanna Tirtha Swamiji, Subramanya Matha

 

Envy "Prabhupada" followers!!? Raising objections is not 'envy'. What is there to "envy" about Gaudiyas?

 

Sorry, I am not as learned as the Swamijis are. But I am aghast at these remarks.