Diksa Parampara

[Indradyumna_das]

As I know, there is no any diksa-parampara in Siddhanta Saraswati teaching school. There is only bhagavata-shiksha parampara, which members lived in different times and even did't know that they would be in Saraswati Bhagavata-shiksa parampara presented by him. Does it work? /images/graemlins/confused.gif

[Dervish]

"The initiating spiritual master (diksa-guru) shows his cause-less mercy by giving his disciples instructions in chanting the mantra. By so doing, he points the disciples in the direction of the truths pertaining to the Supreme Lord, Sri Krsna. I consider the numerous instructing spiritual masters (siksa-gurus) to be more important, for they show more mercy by training the sadhakas in all the essential aspects of sadhana-bhakti."

 

Srila Bhaktivinode Thakur (Kalyana-kalpataru)

[Indradyumna_das]

 

"The initiating spiritual master (diksa-guru) shows his cause-less mercy by giving his disciples instructions in chanting the mantra. By so doing, he points the disciples in the direction of the truths pertaining to the Supreme Lord, Sri Krsna. I consider the numerous instructing spiritual masters (siksa-gurus) to be more important, for they show more mercy by training the sadhakas in all the essential aspects of sadhana-bhakti."

 

Srila Bhaktivinode Thakur (Kalyana-kalpataru)

 

 

 

But, to understand siksha-guru correctly one musy first accept initiation into spiritual life (diksha) according to the teaching of six gosvamis, Lord Chaitanya and other acharyas:

 

Sri Catanya Caritamrita (Antya-lila 4.192), Lord Caitanya to Sanatana Goswami:

 

dIkSA kAle bhakta kore Atma samarpaNa |

sei kAle kRSNa tAte kore Atma sama ||

sei deha korena tAra cid-Anandamoy |

aprAkRta dehe tAra caraNa bhajoy ||

 

“At the time of initiation, when a devotee fully surrenders unto the service of the Lord, Krishna accepts him to be as good as Himself. When the devotee’s body is thus transformed into spiritual existence, the devotee, in that transcendental body, renders service to the lotus feet of the Lord."

 

Then, what is guru-pranali (the parampara line on initiating (diksha) guru?) of Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati? /images/graemlins/confused.gif

 

The parampara line of Srila Bhaktivinoda is as follows (found in his works):

 

1. (Nityananda Prabhu) Jahnava Mata

2. Ramacandra Goswami

3 Rajavallabha Goswami

4. Kesavacandra Goswami

5. Rudresvara Goswami

6. Dayarama Goswami

7. Mahesvari Goswamini

8. Gunamanjari Goswamini

9. Ramamani Goswamini

10. Yajnesvara Goswami

11. Vipina Vihari Goswami

12. Bhaktivinoda Thakur

 

 

 

 

[Dervish]

Where is Lord Caitanya in your parampara? He did not give diksa to anyone. He has given siksa. The essense of what he has given is summed up best here;

 

CC Adi Lila 1.4

 

anarpita-carim cirat karunayavatirnah kalau samarpayitum unnatojjvala-rasam sva-bhakti-sriyam harih purata-sundara-dyuti-kadamba-sandipitah sada hrdaya-kandare sphuratu vah saci-nandanah

 

"May that Lord who is known as the son of Srimati Sacidevi be transcendentally situated in the innermost chambers of your heart. Resplendent with the radiance of molten gold, He has appeared in the Age of Kali by His causeless mercy to bestow what no incarnation ever offered before: the most sublime and radiant spiritual knowledge of the mellow taste of His service."

 

Gaudiya Saraswat is not anti-diksa. If that were the case, nobody would have initiation. Your position is apparent in your writings; you believe siksa is not a bonefide connection in the parampara. That's fine, I don't become upset that somebody believes something different than what I believe in, but in essense, what you're saying is Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu is not in your parampara, and everything described in CC Adi Lila 1.4 is lost.

 

"All diksa versus some siksa" is a very tired old argument that has been beaten over and over and over again. Do a google.com search on it, and you will see a plethora of articles and other message board threads where opposing sides go back and forth. Everyone here is tired of this discussion. If you just search, you will find the satiety that you seek.

[Guest guest]

This is an old discussion that has been talked about many times before.

 

Please read this booklet which details this history of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Goswami's teachings about Guru Parampara.

 

http://www.mandala.com.au/books/sixgoswamis.pdf

 

An initiated disciple of Srila Bhaktivinode Thakur, Sripad Bhakti Pradip Tirtha Maharaj, wrote this in his book Srila Saraswati Thakur, published in 1941.

 

Srila Bhakti Siddhanta Saraswati Goswami was exceedingly fortunate in breathing an

atmosphere of pure devotional surroundings from his cradle. He showed unique aptitude

for a pure life of religious devotion and formation of various pious habits and practices

from the seventh year of age. At that time he committed to memory the whole of the Gita

and could explain it. While a student in Serampur Missionary School, in or about 1884-5,

Srila Saraswati Thakur was initiated into Nrisimha Mantra and Sri Harinama by Srila

Thakur Bhaktivinode... (Srila Saraswati Thakur, Page 1)

 

Since 1895 Srila Saraswati Thakur had been attending the Viswa Vaishnava Raja Sabha

then situated in Krishna Sinha Lane (now Beadon Row). In 1901 he took iniation into the

greatest Mantras of Gaudiya Vaishnavas from Srila Gaura Kishoredas Babaji Maharaj, the

well-known saint of Nabadwip. (Srila Saraswati Thakur, Page 3)

 

[Guest guest]

 

Sri Catanya Caritamrita (Antya-lila 4.192), Lord Caitanya to Sanatana Goswami:

 

dIkSA kAle bhakta kore Atma samarpaNa |

sei kAle kRSNa tAte kore Atma sama ||

sei deha korena tAra cid-Anandamoy |

aprAkRta dehe tAra caraNa bhajoy ||

 

“At the time of initiation, when a devotee fully surrenders unto the service of the Lord, Krishna accepts him to be as good as Himself. When the devotee’s body is thus transformed into spiritual existence, the devotee, in that transcendental body, renders service to the lotus feet of the Lord."

 

 

 

Oh boy, here we go again. The old "they didn't get the initiation ceremony so they are bogus.... unlike us who did get the ceremony and thus we are orthodox" argument.

 

vyAsa never gave dIkSa (as you understand it) to madhva. No mAdhva ever gave dIkSa to mAdhavendra purI or caitanya. Caitanya, by the admission of his own followers, did not give dIkSa to anyone.

 

kRSNa never gave dIkSa to arjuna. sukadeva rishi never gave dIkSa to parIkSit mahArAja.

 

By your own logic, your whole sampradAya is bogus. Unless of course, you accept certain "shiksha" connections as equivalent to dIkSa.

 

Anyway, this is not a problem for mAdhvas, since we do not make such distinctions like "Oh, he didn't perform the agni-hotra yagna, therefore he is not my guru." Nonsense. Only a sampradAya which has no real philosophy to speak of relies on external pomp as the sole criterion for determining succession. A real guru is one who has initiated his disciple into brahma-jnAna - this is the real sense of the word "dIkSa." Everything else is icing on the cake.

 

 

[Guest guest]

 

what is guru-pranali

 

 

 

Yes yes, you people have this Prabhu! what is your vamsa?

 

Sounds more like "what is your gotra yajmAn?" before we can settle the marriage !

[Indradyumna_das]

Well, I’m freshman in spiritual life and on this forum. Please, forgive me if some questions which I’ll be asking were already been asked. But I want to know the following things:

 

1. As I know from sastra, there is only one diksa-guru. And there are many siksa-gurus. Then what is the criterion following which one should produce bhagavata-siksa-parampara? Whom should he include in this parampara and whom should exclude? And what should I consider a proper siksa?

 

2. There is nothing bad in that Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu wasn’t included in the diksa parampara of Srila Sachidananda Bhaktivinoda Thakur. He is Lord and He is giving example. And the real diksa-parampara lines are going from His personal companions and His expansions who were authorized by Him to begin they own lines. They are: Sri Nityananda Prabhu, Sri Advaita Prabhu, Sri Jahnavi Mata (the wife of Lord Nityananda). Then why should Lord Caitanya personally be in diksa-parampara?

 

3. About Arjuna, Pariksit Maharaj etc.:

There is no any diksa-parampara from them. Gita and Bhagavatam are siksa. But Gita and Bhagavatam aren’t the mantra (diksa) which gives the knowledge about my personal relationships with Krishna. How may one whithout diksa receive Gopala-mantru and Kama-gayatri?

 

[Guest guest]

 

Where is Lord Caitanya in your parampara? He did not give diksa to anyone. He has given siksa. The essense of what he has given is summed up best here;

 

CC Adi Lila 1.4

 

anarpita-carim cirat karunayavatirnah kalau samarpayitum unnatojjvala-rasam sva-bhakti-sriyam harih purata-sundara-dyuti-kadamba-sandipitah sada hrdaya-kandare sphuratu vah saci-nandanah

 

"May that Lord who is known as the son of Srimati Sacidevi be transcendentally situated in the innermost chambers of your heart. Resplendent with the radiance of molten gold, He has appeared in the Age of Kali by His causeless mercy to bestow what no incarnation ever offered before: the most sublime and radiant spiritual knowledge of the mellow taste of His service."

 

 

Exactly in appropriate place, as He is Bhagavan Himself. As in Paddhati of Sripad Dhyanachandra Gosvami:

 

atha japa-kramo yathA --

 

prathamaM gurudevasya mantra-gAyatrIM saMsmaret |

tataH zrI-gauracandrasya gAyatry uccAraNaM tathA || 70 ||

 

Concerning the process of japa, first the zrI-guru-mantra and gAyatrI should be contemplated,

and then the gAyatrI of ZrI Gauracandra.

 

zrIlAvadhUtendrAdvaita-mantra-gAyatrIM saMsmaret |

tataH zrI-gadAdharasya zrIvAsa-paNDitasya ca || 71 ||

 

In that way, the mantras and gAyatrIs of ZrI NityAnanda Prabhu, ZrI Advaita Prabhu, ZrI GadAdhara PaNDita and ZrI ZrIvAsa PaNDita shall be contemplated.

 

zrI-gurudevasya mantro yathA -- zrIM guM bhagavad-gurave svAhA |

atha gAyatrI -- zrIM gurudevAya vidmahe, gaura-priyAya dhImahi, tan no guruH pracodayAt |

 

iti zrI-guru-gAyatrI-smaraNAnantaraM guru-vargAn smaret; smaraNa-kramo yathA --

zrI-guru-parama-gurur ityAdi-krameNa sva-sva-praNAly-anusAreNa sva-sva-parivArezvara-parama-parameSThi-guru-paryantaM dhyAnaM kRtvA svIya-svIya-nAmAni caturthyantaM kRtvA japAnantaraM zrI-zrI-caitanya-mahAprabhor mantraM gAyatrIM ca smaret |

 

The zrI-guru-mantra is zrIM guM bhagavad-gurave svAhA.

The guru-gAyatrI is zrIM gurudevAya vidmahe, gaura-priyAya dhImahi, tan no guruH pracodayAt.

 

The meaning of the guru-gAyatrI is that although the guru is actually a direct form of ZrI Hari, he is to be meditated on as being a dear one of ZrI Gauracandra. May that gurudeva engage us in the service of his lotus feet. Then the sAdhaka shall do smaraNa of the other gurus of his paramparA, beginning with his parama-guru, and going up through his parameSThi-guru and the head of his

parivAra (family), chanting their individual names in the dative case. (parama-gurave parAtpara-gerave ityAdi rUpe)

 

After that, he shall meditate on the mantra and gAyatrI of ZrIman MahAprabhu as such:

 

mantro yathA - klIM gaurAya svAhA |

gAyatrI yathA - klIM caitanyAya vidmahe vizvambharAya dhImahi tan no gauraH pracodayAt |

 

Then, ZrI NityAnanda Prabhu:

 

mantro yathA - klIM deva-jAhnavI-vallabhAya svAhA |

gAyatrI yathA - klIM nityAnandAya vidmahe saGkarSaNAya dhImahi tan no balaH pracodayAt |

 

ZrI Advaita Prabhu:

 

mantro yathA - klIM advaitAya svAhA |

gAyatrI yathA - klIM advaitAya vidmahe mahA-viSNave dhImahi tan no advaitaH pracodayAt |

 

ZrI GadAdhara PaNDita:

 

mantro yathA - zrIM gadAdharAya svAhA |

gAyatrI yathA - gAM gadAdharAya vidmahe paNDitAkhyAya dhImahi tan no gadAdharaH pracodayAt |

 

ZrI ZrIvAsa PaNDita:

 

mantro yathA - zrIM zrIvAsAya svAhA |

gAyatrI yathA - zrIM zrIvAsAya vidmahe nAradAkhyAya dhImahi tan no bhaktaH pracodayAt |

 

ZrI ZrI Gaura-GadAdhara mantra:

 

zrI zrI gaura-gadAdhara mantro yathA - klIM zrIM gaura-gadAdharAya svAhA |

 

anantaraM stava-praNAmAdi kRtvA zrI-gauracandrASTa-kAlIya-sUtrAnusareNa smaret --

 

gaurasya zayanotthAnAt punas tac-chayanAvadhi |

nAnopakaraNaiH kuryAt sevanaM tatra sAdhakaH || 72 ||

 

Then, after offering various stavas and praNAmas, he shall meditate on the aSTakAlIya-lIlA of ZrI Gauracandra. In his mAnasa-deha, he shall offer sevA with various articles from the time of ZrI GaurAGga’s awakening in the morning until the Lord falls asleep at night.</font color>

 

It is obvious from this quote, that parampara goes to the head of particular parivar, not to Lord Caitanya Himself.

[Dervish]

Answer 1: The problem is, there are a lot of proponents and opponents on both sides who say this side is anti-diksa, or the side doesn't care at all about siksa, etc. Diksa is not disregarded, but rather, the greatest contributor, be they diksa guru, siksa guru, or both, is regarded. Srila BR Sridhar Maharaj explains this best.

 

<u>Sri Guru and His Grace Chapter 10</u>

Srila Bhakti Raksaka Sridhar Maharaj

 

Madhavendra Pun

Isvara Puri (Nityananda, Advaita)

Sri Krsna Caitanya Mahaprabhu

Rupa Goswami (Svarupa Damodara, Sanatana Goswami)

Raghunatha dasa Goswami, Jiva Goswami

Krsnadasa Kaviraja Goswami

Narottama dasa Thakura

Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura

(Baladeva Vidyabhusana) Jagannatha dasa Babaji

Bhaktivinoda Thakura

Gaurakisora dasa Babajl

Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura

 

Devotee: Can you explain how the principle of disciplic succession works? I Was under the impression that in your teaching there must ke an unkroken chain of disciplic succession beginning with God Himself, in order for the knowledge to be properly understood. But when I read Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada's Bhagavad-gita As It Is, I found that the disciplic succession contains only thirty-eight names, although it says that the system is fifty centuries old. Is this a complete list, or are some names left out? How are we to understand these apparent historical discrepancies?

 

Srila Sridhara Maharaja: Our guru parampara, disciplic succession, follows the ideal, not the body; it is a succession of instructing spiritual masters, not formal initiating spiritual masters. In a song about our guru parampara written by Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati, it is mentioned, mahaprabhu sri caitanya radha krsna nahe anya rupanuga janera jivana : the highest truth of Krsna consciousness comes down through the channel of siksa gurus, instructing spiritual masters. Those who have the standard of realization in the proper line have been accepted in the list of our disciplic succession. It is not a diksa guru parampara, a succession of formal initiating gurus.

 

Diksa, or initiation is more or less a formal thing; the substantial thing is siksa, or spiritual instruction. And if our siksa and diksa gurus or instructing and initiating spiritual masters are congruent, then we are most fortunate. There are different gradations of spiritual masters. In the scriptures, the symptoms of the guru and the symptoms of the disciple have been described: the guru must be qualified in so many ways, and the disciple must also be qualified. Then when they come in connection, the desired result will be produced.

 

We are concerned with Krsna consciousness, wherever it is available. In the Bhagavad-gita and especially in the Srimad-Bhagavatam, Krsna says, "I start the Krsna consciousness movement, but gradually by the enervating influence of the material world, it weakens. When I find that it has diminished considerably, I return and begin a fresh movement. Again, when I find that it is becoming degraded by the adverse influence of the environment, I send one of my representatives to clear the path and give some fresh energy, invest some fresh capital in my Krsna consciousness movement."

 

What is Krsna consciousness? We must examine the standard of knowledge. The guru should try to impart to his disciple the capacity of reading what Krsna consciousness really is. Krsna consciousness is not a trade; it is not anyone's monopoly. The sincere souls must thank their lucky stars that they can appreciate what Krsna consciousness is, wherever it may be.

 

Devotee: How are we to understand that in the history of our disciplic succession, it appears that there are gaps where there was no initiating guru present to formally accept disciples?

 

Spiritual Light Years

 

Srila Sridhara Maharaja: We are not concerned with a material connection. The mediator is not this flesh and body as we generally think. In studying the development of scientific thought, we may connect Newton to Einstein, leaving aside many unimportant scientists. We may trace the development of science fromGalileo to Newton, and then to Einstein, neglecting the middle points. If their contributions are taken into account, then the whole thing is taken into account, and lesser scientists may be omitted. When a long distance is to be surveyed, the nearest posts may be neglected. Between one planet and another, the unit of measurement is the light year; distance is calculated in light years and not from mile to mile, or meter to meter. In the disciplic succession, only the great stalwarts in our line are considered important.

 

Devotee: There was one question still in my mind on guru parampara which was not clarified. Between Baladeva Vidyabhusana and Jagannatha Dasa Babaji is a gap of almost a hundred years. How is it that between the two of them no one is listed in our guru parampara ?

 

Srila Sridhara Maharaja: We have to forget material consideration when we consider the spiritual line. Here in this plane, the spiritual current is always being disturbed and interrupted by material obstructions. Whenever truth is interrupted by a material flow and becomes mixed or tampered with, Krsna appears to again reinstate the truth in its former position of purity (yada yada hi dharmasya glanir bhavati bharata ). That attempt is always being made by the Lord and his devotees.

 

The flow of spiritual truth is a living thing, not a dead thing. The vigilant eye of the Lord is always over our heads, and whenever it is necessary to keep the current pure and flowing in full force, help descends from above. Krsna says to Arjuna, "What I say to you today, I spoke to Vivasvan many, many years ago. Now, by the influence of material conception, that very truth has become contaminated, and so again I say the same thing to you today."

 

 

Religious Mutations

 

Here in the material world, the material consideration is always tampering with the spiritual current; the purity of the truth is always being disturbed. So, sometimes Krsna has to come himself, and sometimes he sends his personal representative to again reestablish the truth in its former and pure state.

 

When the truth is sufficiently covered, disturbed, and mutilated by the influence of maya, the illusory energy, then an attempt is made by the devotees of the Lord, or by the Lord himself, to rejuvenate it and return it to the previous standard of purity. We cannot expect truth to continue here in this world of misunderstanding without any tampering or interruption. It is not possible.

 

The intelligent will understand how to apply these principles practically. Suppose we are writing a history: we will note the main figures in the history, set aside those who are not so qualified, and begin the dynasty in order of their importance. Those who are negligible will not be mentioned. In a similar way, those who are really thirsty for spiritual truth like to see the line of pure spiritual heritage. They search out where it is to be found, connect the dynasty of stalwart teachers together, and say "This is our line."

 

The disciplic succession is not a bodily succession. Sometimes it is present, and sometimes it is lost and only appears again after two or three generations, just as with Prahlada Maharaja. He was a great devotee, but his son was a demon; then again his grandson was a devotee. Even in the physical line we see such interruptions. In the spiritual line we also see the channel of truth affected by the influence of maya or misconception. So, the experts will seek out the important personages in the line.

 

 

Copernicus, Galileo, Newton and Einstein

 

Suppose a scientist researches some truth. After a few generations, another scientist comes and takes up that thread and continues his research. Then after a few more generations, another comes and takes up that thread and goes on. If we are to understand the real channel through which the particular research is progressing, we will have to study the important thinkers who helped bring it out.

 

We see that Copernicus has contributed something before Galileo began, then Newton came. Then there may be a gap for some time, and from Newton, we find that Einstein took it up. In this way, there may be a gap, but still that thread is continued. An intelligent man will see that it began with a particular person, and then it came to another, and then came here. That will be the proper line of research. So, in the spiritual line this also holds true.

 

Those who cannot understand this simple point are guided by physical considerations. They do not understand what is real spiritual truth. For them, the physical continuation is the guru parampara. But those who have their spiritual eyes awakened say, "No. What was there in the first acarya is not found in the second or the third. But again we find the same standard of purity in the fourth acarya. " The Gaudiya sampradaya of Mahaprabhu is one, and whoever contributes to that real line will be accepted.

 

Srila Baladeva Vidyabhusana's contribution to the sampradaya is no less important than that of the other great stalwarts in the line. He may be a member of another line, the Madhva sampradaya in the physical sense, but his contribution, especially in attracting people to Gaudiya Vaisnavism with his commentary on the Vedanta-sutra, cannot be neglected by the students of posterity. So, his contribution has been utilized by our acaryas, considering the degree, the essence and the purity of his thought in our spiritual line.

 

Sastra guru, siksa guru, diksa guru, and nama guru are all taken together; in this way, a real channel has been given to save us, to keep up the flow of the highest truth from that world to this world. This policy has been adopted by the acaryas. Wherever we have found any contribution that is, by the will of Krsna, the highest contribution to the line, we have accepted . So, we accept sastra guru, siksa guru, diksa guru, mantra guru, nama guru--we accept them all as our guru .

 

We give respect to Ramanuja, who is the head of another school of Vaisnavas, but we do not give respect to a sahajiya, an imitationist who is in the line of Mahaprabhu only in the physical sense, but who is mutilating and tampering with the real teachings of Mahaprabhu. The imitationists are not considered. Although in a physical sense, they are in the line of Mahaprabhu and Rupa and Sanatana, when we go to judge the very spirit of the line we see that they are nowhere. Their connection with Mahaprabhu is only a physical imitation.

 

On the other hand, we find that Ramanuja has made a substantial contribution to Vaisnavism, Madhvacarya has given a sufficient contribution to Vaisnavism, and Nimbarka has also made his contribution, so we accept them, according to our necessity. But we reject the physical so-called current-keepers because what is found there is all mutilated and tampered.

 

There is a proverb. "Which is more useful: the nose or the breath?" The intelligent will say that the breath is more essential than the nose. To sustain the life, the nose may be cut off, but if the breath continues, one may live. We consider the breath to have more importance than the nose. The physical form will misguide people to go away from the truth and follow a different direction.

 

We don't consider the body connection important in the acaryaship. It is a spiritual current, and not a body current. The disciple of a true devotee may even be a nondevotee. We admit that, because we see it, and the Lord Himself says in Bhagavad-gita, sa kaleneha mahata, yogo nastah parantapa : "The current is damaged by the influence of this material world." In the line, some are affected, go astray, and may even become nondevotees. So, the continuation through the physical succession is not a safe criterion to be accepted. We must trace only the current of spiritual knowledge.

 

Wherever we can get that, we must accept it, even if it comes from the Ramanuja, Madhva, or Nimbarka sampradaya. As much as we get from them substantially, we accept, and we reject the so-called followers of our own tradition if they are mere imitationists. The son of a political leader may not be a political leader. A political leader may also have a political succession, and his own son, although brought up in a favorable environment, may be rejected. A doctor's son may not be a doctor. In the disciplic order also, we admit the possibility that they may not all come up to the same standard. Those who do not, should be rejected.

 

And if the truth is found in a substantial way somewhere else, that should be accepted. Wherever there is devotion and the correct consideration about Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, our guru is there. Who is our guru? He is not to be found in the physical form; our guru is to be traced wherever we find the embodiment of the pure thought and understanding which Sri Krsna Caitanya Mahaprabhu irnparted to save us.

 

Baladeva Vidyabhusana was very akin to the Madhva sampradaya. But when he came in connection with Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura, he showed great interest in Gaudiya Vaisnavism. He has also commented on the Srimad-Bhagavatam and Jiva Goswami's Sat Sandarbha. And that enlightened thought is a valuable contribution to our sampradaya. We cannot dismiss him. He is our guru.

 

At the same time, if my own relatives do not give recognition to my guru or to the service of Mahaprabhu, I must eliminate them. Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Prabhupada has explained the siksa guru parampara in this way. Wherever we find the extraordinary line of the flow of love of God, and support for the same, we must bow down. That line may appear in a zigzag way, but still, that is the line of my gurudeva. In this way it is accepted. We want the substance, not the form.

 

 

The Zigzag Line of Truth

 

We have left all social concerns and so many other shackles. For what? For the Absolute Truth. And wherever I shall find that, I must bow down my head. And if a great soul shows us, "This is the path to where you will find your thirst quenched. The line is in this zigzag way," we must accept that for our own interest. We are worshipers not of form, but of substance. If the current of spiritual substance comes another way, but I think that I must try to go this way to reach my goal, it is only jealousy, blind tenacity to stick to the physical thing. We must free ourselves from this material contamination and try to understand the value of spiritual truth. We should always be prepared for that. We must follow what is necessary, for our own interest.

 

I am not a servant of A, B, C, or D. I am a servant of Mahaprabhu. I may have to turn this way or that way, or whatever way will be favorable to reach my Lord. Wherever I feel the presence of my Lord in an intense form, I must be attracted to that side. We are out for that thing, and not for any fashion or formality; that will hamper our cause.

 

Krsna says, sarva-dharman parityajya, mam ekam saranam vraja. Wherever we shall find him, we must run in that direction. The direction may not be always straight. It may go in a zigzag way, but if Krsna comes from that side, I must run there. Again if he appears on this side, I must run to this side. My interest is with him. Not that we can challenge, "Why did Krsna appear here, and why is he appearing there? That may be a doubtful thing, so I must stay on this side." No. If I have genuine appreciation for the real thing, the proper thing, I must go to that side, the side of Krsna.

 

If I am blind, that is another case. Then, I must have to suffer for my inability. But, if anyone has the ability to understand things properly, he will run wherever he finds help. If a man in a boat is passing through the current and finds himself in danger, then from whatever side help may come, he must run to that side.

 

If we are worshipers of Siva, when we understand the special superiority of Narayana, should we stick to Siva? And if we are worshipers of Narayana and are shown the superiority of Krsna, should we stick to our Narayana worship? And then should we not try to go from Krsna's Bhagavad-gita to Srimad-Bhagavatam ? One may think, "I have read the Bhagavad-gita, I like the Krsna who is the speaker of the Gita. " Then when the Srimad Bhagavatam is given to us, should we stick to that Gita Krsna, or should we try to go to the Krsna given in Srimad-Bhagavatam ? If we have our interest in Krsna, we must run to his side, wherever he appears.

 

In the Brhad-bhagavatamrta the story is told of how Gopa-kumara, by chanting his Gopala mantra, gradually leaves one stage and progresses to the next. There, the gradation of devotion is traced from the karma-kanda brahmana, to a devotee king, then to Indra, then to Brahma, then to Siva, from him to Prahlada, then to Hanuman, then the Pandavas, then to the Yadavas, to Uddhava, and finally to the gopis.

 

In this zigzag way he is passing. In the sincerity of his quest, his thirst is not being quenched. He is going from this side, to that side, and going up. So, all of them have their guru parampara. There is Prahlada's guru parampara, Hanuman's guru parampara, the Pandava's guru parampara, Mahadeva's guru parampara. They have their own guru parampara. Brahma and Mahadeva are gurus themselves; they are the creators of their own lines of guru parampara, but Gopa-kumara passes them also. Why? His thirst is not quenched until he goes to Vrndavana. So, the Brhad-bhagavatamrta has shown us the line of guru parampara, or the real line of our quest, of our search.

 

If we are sincerely searching after real truth, then wherever we go may be a contribution to our experience for further preaching in the future. If we go somewhere, hoping with all sincerity that our thirst may be quenched there, but find that it is not quenched, and feel some uneasiness, then, by the grace of the Lord, a connection with higher truth will comes, and we will go somewhere else, thinking that there our thirst will be quenched. Gradually we will again find dissatisfaction, the need for something higher, and again we will progress further. In this way, we may cross many guru paramparas before ultimately attaining the Vraja lila of Krsna, as given by Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu.

 

We are not interested in fashion or form; if we want the real truth, then wherever it will be found, we must accept it. Mahaprabhu says, "Kiba vipra, kiba nyasi sudra kene naya, yei krsna-tattva-vetta, sei 'guru' haya : Anyone, regardless of caste or social position, may become guru if he knows the science of Krsna." Sometimes the father may not be our guardian. Our uncle may be our guide, and not the father. It is possible. The line of interest is to be considered the most important. So, our line is the siksa guru parampara.

 

I am thankful to those that are helping my spiritual understanding not only in a formal way, but in the real sense. Whoever is untying the knots of our entanglement in this material world, giving us light, and quenching our thirst for inner understanding and satisfaction is our guru. In this way, we live on the contribution of all these spiritual masters. They are all our siksa gurus. All the Vaisnavas are more or less our instructing spiritual masters. Our spiritual life may live on their contribution. But we do not accept the imitationists. They are our enemies, asat-sanga, bad association. They will take us away from the real path of understanding and progress.

 

We must ask our sincere hearts, "From whom do I really get the benefit of spiritual life?" Our sincere conscience will be the best judge, not form. If in an earthen pot there is Ganges water, and in a golden pot there is ordinary water, which should we select? In a case like that, brahmanas, the intelligent class of men, take the holy Ganges water in the earthen pot. So, the substance contained, and not the container, should be given the real importance .

 

 

Am I This Body?

 

I am not this physical body. My own physical identification should be challenged if I am too much addicted to the physical guru parampara. "Who am l? Am I this physical body?" If I am spiritual, then in the spiritual sphere I shall have to look with spiritual eyes, and pursue whoever will come before me who is really following the path of Mahaprabhu.

 

When the Pandavas retired to the Himalayas, Yudhisthira Maharaja was going ahead. Nobody believed they would fall. Arjuna couldn't believe that his brothers had fallen. But even after Arjuna had fallen, a dog was going on, following Maharaja Yudhisthira. We may see many men fall down in the path of our journey towards the spiritual goal, but still we should try to reach the goal. And with the help of whoever comes along, I shall go.

 

Some may be eliminated; even a madhyama-adhikari guru may sometimes be eliminated when he falls down. It is not a happy thing, but it may even occur that my guru was going ahead, taking me forward and fell down. Then with fresh energy, invoking the help of the Lord, I shall have to go on. Even such a disaster may come in our journey. But still, we must not be cowed down. Sometimes alone, and sometimes with company we must go on.

 

First there must be sukrti, accumulated merit, and then sraddha, faith will guide us. The quality of faith must be examined. Sraddha, faith, is a general term, but sraddha may be defined into different classes. The high form of faith will be our fare on the way back to Godhead. Sometimes we may find co-workers, and sometimes we may have to go alone. What of that? We cannot but go to the goal because we shall have the grace of so many unseen gurus.

 

 

Unseen Gurus

 

There are others also who are working, and their ideal will inspire me, although physically I am not seeing any companion or any follower with me. The inspiration of the unseen gurus will be our fare. They will inspire us to go on with the journey. And our own sincere hankering for the truth will be our real guide. That is guru parampara.

 

Who is guru? Is guru a body? Or is the guru a vairagi, a renunciant? Or is the guru only a formal guise, a hypocrite who is showing the appearance of a sadhu, but within is doing something else? Who is a guru? Only one who will exclusively guide me to Krsna and Mahaprabhu, with devotion . He is my guru, whatever he may be.

 

Mahaprabhu told Ramananda Raya, "Ramananda, why do you shrink away? Do you think that I am a sannyasi and you are a grhastha ? You are always hesitating to reply to my questions. Do you think it does not look well for you to advise a sannyasi brahmana ? Don't hesitate. You know Krsna best. Give Krsna to me. Have courage." In this way, Mahaprabhu was encouraging Ramananda. "By the grace of Krsna, you have that capital. Give it to me. You are a real capitalist. I have come to preach to the world that you are the wealthiest capitalist of the spiritual world. And that must be used for the good of the public. Don't hesitate. Don't shrink away. Come out."

 

Ramananda said, "Yes, it is your capital. You have deposited it with me, and today you have come to withdraw it from me. It is your property. I understand. And you press and push me to take it out. All right. I am a mere instrument, used by you. Whatever you want me to say, I am ready to say." In this way, Ramananda was going on. But is Ramananda a member of a sampradaya ? We are so much indebted to Ramananda Raya, but he is not in the guru parampara. Still, he is more than many of the gurus who are in the guru parampara.

 

Srimati Radharani is not in the guru parampara. Should we dismiss her? First there should be guru, and then there is the question of parampara. The question of first importance is who is guru? And then there can be a chain of them coming down.

 

 

Alexander the Great--Formbreaker

 

Sometimes the formal must be left aside. Once, Alexander the Great was with his father, and they came upon a chariot with a thick knot tied in its rope. There was an inscription above the knot, and there it was written, "Whoever can untie this knot will be a great king in the future." The young Alexander asked his father, "What is it Papa?" His father replied, "This knot has been firmly tied here, and there it is written that whoever can unloose it will be a great king in the future." Alexander said, "I shall do it." He took out his sword and cut the rope. Is it clear? The formality was not kept. A man stood by the side. He came out and said, "Yes, he will be a great king. It cannot be otherwise." The formality was left aside, the realistic view taken, and immediately Alexander cut the Gordion knot. It is a famous story. Sticking to formality, he would have been lost. This happened also in the case of Columbus. Someone challenged, can you make an egg stand on a nail? Columbus pushed it in, a portion broke and he stood it on the nail and said, "Yes, I have done so." This is practical knowledge.

 

So, the real disciplic line provides practical knowledge in support of the divine love which is coming down. We must bow down our heads wherever we find support of that. We should not become formalists, but substantialists; not fashionists, not imitationists, but realistic thinkers. That should always be our temperament.

[Dervish]

Answers 2 and 3

 

We agree Mahaprabhu did not give diksa to anyone. OK. I don't think it is such a cut and dry argument to directly compare Mahaprabhu's siksa contribution to Sri Krsna's siksa contribution to Arjuna in Dvarpara yuga. In addition to the Sri Siksastaka, Sri Caitanya has given us the maha-mantra, laced with prema.

 

True, Sri Advaita Acharya has given mahamantra first, but still, Mahaprabhu was required.

 

Sri Caitanya Caritamrta Adi Lila 6.34

 

yanhara tulasi-jale, yanhara hunkare

sva-gana sahite caitanyera avatare,

 

"He (Sri Advaita Acharya) worshiped Krsna with tulasi leaves and water of the Ganges and called for Him in a loud voice. Thus Lord Caitanya Mahaprabhu appeared on earth, accompanied by His personal associates."

 

CC Adi Lila 12.66

 

mali datta jala advaita skandha yogaya

sei jale jiye sakha phula phala paya

 

"The Advaita Acarya branch received the water supplied by the original gardener, Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu. In this way, the subbranches were nourished, and their fruits and flowers grew luxuriantly.

 

CC Adi Lila 6.39-42:

 

esaba laiya caitanya prabhura vihara

esaba laiya kerana vanchita pracara

 

madhavendra purira inho sisya ei jnane

acharya gosanire prabhu guru kari mane

 

laukika lilate dharma maryada raksana

stuti bhaktye kerna tanra carana vandana

 

caitanya gosanike acarya kare prabhu jnana

apanake karena tanra dasa abhimana

 

"With all of them Lord Caitanya performed His pastimes, and with them He spread His mission. Thinking 'He [sri Advaita Acarya] is a disciple of Sri Madhavendra Puri,' Lord Caitanya obeys Him, respecting Him as His spiritual master. To maintain the proper etiquette for the principles of religion, Lord Caitanya bows down at the lotus feet of Sri Advaita Acarya with reverential prayers and devotion. Sri Advaita Acarya, however, considers Lord Caitanya Mahaprabhu His master, and He thinks of Himself as a servant of Lord Caitanya Mahaprabhu."

 

namo maha-vadanyaya

krsna-prema-pradaya te

krsnaya krsna-caitanya-

namne gaura-tvise namah

 

"I offer my respectful obeisances unto the Supreme Lord Sri Krsna Caitanya, who is more magnanimous than any other avatara, even Krsna Himself, because He is bestowing freely what no one else has ever given--pure love of Krsna."

 

"Gadahara madana nitaiyera pranadhana

advaitera prapujita gora

nimai visvambhara srinivasa isvara

bhakata samuha citacora"

 

He (Sri Sacinandana) is the very life of Gadadhara Pandit and Nityananda Prabhu, and the woshipful lord of Advaita and Srinivas Acaryas. He has many names like Nimai and Visvambara and He steals the minds of His devotees."

 

Srila Bhakti Vinode Thakur, Kali Kukkura, 2nd Shloka

 

--

Ultimately, anyone can become a guru, brahmana or not;

--

 

CC Madhya-lila, 8.128

 

kiba vipra, kiba nyasi, sudra kene naya yei krsna-tattva-vetti, sei 'guru' haya

 

"Whether one is a brahmana, a sannyasi or a sudra - regardless of what he is - he can become a guru if he knows the science of Krsna."

 

---

 

Our most fervent need is described in both Brhan-naradiya Purana 38.126 and CC. Adi Lila 17.21;

 

Harer Nama Harer Nama Harer Nama Eva Kevalam

Kalau nasty eva nasty eva nasty eva gatir anyatha

 

"In this age of quarrel and hypocrisy, the only means of deliverance is the chanting of the holy name of the Lord. There is no other way. There is no other way. There is no other way."

 

Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu has given that to us.

[Guest guest]

 

1. As I know from sastra, there is only one diksa-guru. And there are many siksa-gurus. Then what is the criterion following which one should produce bhagavata-siksa-parampara? Whom should he include in this parampara and whom should exclude? And what should I consider a proper siksa?

 

2. There is nothing bad in that Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu wasn’t included in the diksa parampara of Srila Sachidananda Bhaktivinoda Thakur. He is Lord and He is giving example. And the real diksa-parampara lines are going from His personal companions and His expansions who were authorized by Him to begin they own lines. They are: Sri Nityananda Prabhu, Sri Advaita Prabhu, Sri Jahnavi Mata (the wife of Lord Nityananda). Then why should Lord Caitanya personally be in diksa-parampara?

 

 

 

Let me see if I got this straight.

 

According to the standards and "orthodox" traditions of the Caitanya sampradAya, even Caitanya himself is NOT in the guru paramparA?!?

 

Boy, these guys are just brilliant.

 

[Guest guest]

 

Baladeva Vidyabhusana was very akin to the Madhva sampradaya. But when he came in connection with Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura, he showed great interest in Gaudiya Vaisnavism. He has also commented on the Srimad-Bhagavatam and Jiva Goswami's Sat Sandarbha. And that enlightened thought is a valuable contribution to our sampradaya. We cannot dismiss him. He is our guru.

 

 

So, Sripad Baladeva Vidyabhusana was a disciple of Sripad Visvanatha Cakravarti... Naturally, he must pay his humble obeisances and glorify his revered guru in his works... Feel free to enlighten us on the matter with quotations from works of Sri Baladeva. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Guest guest]

 

Let me see if I got this straight.

 

According to the standards and "orthodox" traditions of the Caitanya sampradAya, even Caitanya himself is NOT in the guru paramparA?!?

 

Boy, these guys are just brilliant.

 

 

Your bitter irony can't help Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu to appear in parampara. Or you must throw out all, who wrote down their paramparas in a different way, and who instructed to praise a parampara in such way, like Sri Dhyanacandra. Actually, I guess, you must reject all acaryas, previous to Bhaktisiddhanta Thakura, even his father Bhaktivinoda...

[Guest guest]

 

Srila Baladeva Vidyabhusana's contribution to the sampradaya is no less important than that of the other great stalwarts in the line. He may be a member of another line, the Madhva sampradaya in the physical sense, but his contribution, especially in attracting people to Gaudiya Vaisnavism with his commentary on the Vedanta-sutra, cannot be neglected by the students of posterity. So, his contribution has been utilized by our acaryas, considering the degree, the essence and the purity of his thought in our spiritual line.

 

 

 

If you show children a candy and a diamond, they will fight over the candy. This is what is happening with these people here fighting over bodily designations. That baladeva wrote a bhASya on the brahmasUtra seems to be of no concern. Those who have not read govinda bhASya will never be clear about achintya bhedAbheda.

[Guest guest]

 

Or you must throw out all, who wrote down their paramparas in a different way, and who instructed to praise a parampara in such way

 

 

 

Precisely, the orthodoxy should sometimes reflect on its own sayings :-)

[Guest guest]

 

Your bitter irony can't help Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu to appear in parampara.

 

 

 

This again reminds me about the political system that was in vogue in India in the recent past -- support from outside !!!

 

This minister of BJP, Pramod Mahajan found it difficult to explain it to the chinese how on earth the minority party was the government and the stronger one was "supporting from the outside" !!! (And the majority party was the opposition). Poor fellas.

[Guest guest]

 

Your bitter irony can't help Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu to appear in parampara.

 

 

Dear confused soul,

 

I have no interest to "help Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu to appear in parampara." You tradition's extreme confusion is obviously its own, and I want no part in it.

 

I just wanted to point out the extreme foolishness in a faith that held that one's own, revered sampradAya AcArya is not in one's paramparA.

 

If it doesn't bother you that your standards of paramparA are so stringent that they effectively exclude your paramparA's founder, then so be it. Obviously, one can't force people to think. Though it is frankly entertaining that those same people then turn around and claim to represent the orthodoxy.

[Indradyumna_das]

1.

 

1. As I know from sastra, there is only one diksa-guru. And there are many siksa-gurus. Then what is the criterion following which one should produce bhagavata-siksa-parampara? Whom should he include in this parampara and whom should exclude? And what should I consider a proper siksa?

 

 

Dervish:

 

Srila Sridhara Maharaj

Those who have the standard of realization in the proper line have been accepted in the list of our disciplic succession. It is not a diksa guru parampara, a succession of formal initiating gurus.

 

[skip]

 

We are not concerned with a material connection. The mediator is not this flesh and body as we generally think. In studying the development of scientific thought, we may connect Newton to Einstein, leaving aside many unimportant scientists. We may trace the development of science fromGalileo to Newton, and then to Einstein, neglecting the middle points. If their contributions are taken into account, then the whole thing is taken into account, and lesser scientists may be omitted. When a long distance is to be surveyed, the nearest posts may be neglected. Between one planet and another, the unit of measurement is the light year; distance is calculated in light years and not from mile to mile, or meter to meter. In the disciplic succession, only the great stalwarts in our line are considered important.

 

[skip]

 

Suppose we are writing a history: we will note the main figures in the history, set aside those who are not so qualified, and begin the dynasty in order of their importance. Those who are negligible will not be mentioned. In a similar way, those who are really thirsty for spiritual truth like to see the line of pure spiritual heritage. They search out where it is to be found, connect the dynasty of stalwart teachers together, and say "This is our line."

 

 

 

 

Personalities such as Srinivasa Acarya and Syamananda Pandit, who were among the most prominent preachers of the Gosvami granthas, and Jahnava Thakurani, who was the crest-jewel of all Gaudiyas in the post-Gosvami era, have been excluded from this parampara.

 

On the other hand, persons such as Aksobhya, Jayatirtha, Jnanasindhu, Dayanidhi, Vidyanidhi, Rajendra, Jayadharma, Purusottama, Brahmanya Tirtha and Vyasa Tirtha have been included in the parampara. Can you explain how they have contributed to the siksa-parampara of Gaudiya Matha?

 

I think if parampara means a collection of the most prominent individuals who have influenced the Gaudiya tradition, you would do well to remove the aforementioned ten persons (with all due respect to these maha-bhagavatas) and replace them with Gaudiya mahajanas such as Gadadhara, Srivasa, Gopala Bhatta, Raghunatha Bhatta, Jahnava Thakurani, Syamananda, Srinivasa, Virabhadra, Krishna Mishra and Radha Krishna Das, who have had a considerable influence in our history.

 

Srila Sridhara Maharaj

We have to forget material consideration when we consider the spiritual line. Here in this plane, the spiritual current is always being disturbed and interrupted by material obstructions. Whenever truth is interrupted by a material flow and becomes mixed or tampered with, Krsna appears to again reinstate the truth in its former position of purity (yada yada hi dharmasya glanir bhavati bharata ). That attempt is always being made by the Lord and his devotees.

 

The flow of spiritual truth is a living thing, not a dead thing. The vigilant eye of the Lord is always over our heads, and whenever it is necessary to keep the current pure and flowing in full force, help descends from above. Krsna says to Arjuna, "What I say to you today, I spoke to Vivasvan many, many years ago. Now, by the influence of material conception, that very truth has become contaminated, and so again I say the same thing to you today."

 

 

 

Well, we should admit that there was no even an idea about the conception of bhagavata-siksa-parampara in the Goudiya Vaishnava tradition since Lord Caitanya and the six goswamis time before Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati. Otherwise the six goswamis had to introduce that kind of parampara in their scriptures. But we see that any other acaryas except Srila Bhaktisiddhanta used and use to bring their diksa-parampara line instead of bhagavata-siksa parampara. None (except Srila Bhakti Siddhanta Saraswati Thakur) didn’t ever use the conception of bhagavata-siksa-parampara. And for traditional lines of Goudiya Vaisnavas it seems to be doubtful to accept it. We deal rather with Saraswati Vaisnavism then with traditional Goudiya Vaisnavism. For example, even Srila Bhaktivinoda used to adduce his diksa-parampara beginning from Sri Jahnavi Mata.

 

2.

Before one chant diksa-mantra for purifying his heart, he should first glorify the guru-pranali (dika-guru parampara) coming up to Sri Nityananda, Sri Jahnavi Mata, Sri Advaita, Srila Gopala Bhatta Goswami or any other first acharya of his shcool. How can one do that if Srila Bhaktisiddhanta didn’t accept the reliability of diksa-parampara at his time and didn’t gave guru-pranali to his disciples?

 

3.

If there is no any diksa-parampara before Srila Bhaktisiddhanta (because he didn't leave any in his writings for his disciples) should we think that we are free either accept or not diksa in our school and in any case the result will be the same?

 

4.

Should we consider Srila Bhaktisiddhanta's teaching in full accordance with the teaching of six Goswamis and why?

 

5.

If diksa is of less importance than siksa does it mean that one can receive harinam from one guru and diksa from another and siksa from one more guru?

[Guest guest]

 

On the other hand, persons such as Aksobhya, Jayatirtha, Jnanasindhu, Dayanidhi, Vidyanidhi, Rajendra, Jayadharma, Purusottama, Brahmanya Tirtha and Vyasa Tirtha have been included in the parampara. Can you explain how they have contributed to the siksa-parampara of Gaudiya Matha?

 

 

 

Proof that the orthodoxy does not like being associated with madhvAchArya.

[Guest guest]

 

Proof that the orthodoxy does not like being associated with madhvAchArya.

 

 

What proof do you need? Isn't the teaching of Mahaprabhu different in many ways from that of Madhva?

----

madhvasya mataH -- bhaktAnAM viprANAm eva mokSaH | devA bhakteSu mukhyAH | viriJcasyaiva sAyujyam | lakSmyA jIvakoTitvam ity evaM mata-vizeSaH | dakSiNAdidezeti tena gauDe'pi mAdhavendrAdayas tad-upaziSyAH katicid babhUvur ity arthaH || Tattva-sandarbha-tippani (Baladeva), 28 ||

 

"In the opinion of Madhva ... only a brahmana devotee is eligible for liberation, the demigods are foremost among devotees, Brahma attains sayujya-mukti (merging in brahman), and Laksmi belongs to the category of jivas --- these are differences of opinion. Nevertheless Madhavendra Puri and some others from Bengal became his followers."

 

In addition, of course our upasana is entirely different. We worship Radha-Krishna, and the worship is in manjari-bhava. The Madhvites worship Krishna alone. Thei also do not lay all that much emphasis on the Bhagavata; Madhva's Bhagavata-tatparya is by no means a prominent work of his. I believe the concept of bhakti-rasa is also alien to them. The Madhvites teach the doctrine dvaita, while the followers of Caitanya embrace the concept of acintyabhedAbheda.

----

 

Madhvites also declare their difference from Gaudiyas:

http://www.dvaita.org/shaastra/iskcon.shtml

[Guest guest]

 

"In the opinion of Madhva ... only a brahmana devotee is eligible for liberation, the demigods are foremost among devotees, Brahma attains sayujya-mukti (merging in brahman),

 

 

This is WRONG. BrahmA does not attain "merging into Brahman." As far as I can tell, this definition of sayujya-mukti is exclusively a gaudIya definition only. MAdhvas regard BrahmA and Mukhya PrAna aka vAyu as the foremost devotees of Vishnu (the latter being His chief aide).

 

 

and Laksmi belongs to the category of jivas --- these are differences of opinion. Nevertheless Madhavendra Puri and some others from Bengal became his followers."

 

 

 

So on one hand, you are not associated with madhvAcArya, yet on the other hand your pUrvAcAryas are his followers? Ok....

 

 

In addition, of course our upasana is entirely different. We worship Radha-Krishna, and the worship is in manjari-bhava. The Madhvites worship Krishna alone.

 

 

 

Unlike gaudIyas, mAdhvas do not distinguish between worship of Krishna vs worship of other forms of Vishnu. They do not restrict their worship to only Krishna.

 

Worship of other entities (i.e. Lakshmi) is only performed as agents of Lord Vishnu.

 

 

Thei also do not lay all that much emphasis on the Bhagavata; Madhva's Bhagavata-tatparya is by no means a prominent work of his. I believe the concept of bhakti-rasa is also alien to them. The Madhvites teach the doctrine dvaita, while the followers of Caitanya embrace the concept of acintyabhedAbheda.

 

 

More correctly, Madhva teaches tattvavAda which teaches of *five* differences:

 

Difference between Ishvara and jIva-s

Difference between Ishvara and the nonsentient

Difference between different jIva-s

Difference between jIva-s and the nonsentient

Difference between different nonsentients

 

These differences are spelled out clearly in TattvavAda.

 

What is different and nondifferent in gaudIya vaishnavism is somewhat unclear.

[Guest guest]

 

What proof do you need? Isn't the teaching of Mahaprabhu different in many ways from that of Madhva?

 

 

 

You quote baladeva who in prameya ratnAvali accepts without contest, the nine tenets propounded by madhva "SrI madhva prAha viSNum parataram...." and who categorically delineates the paramparA coming down from madhva to caitanya. Perhaps according to you this is a fabrication that caught baladeva offguard.

 

BTW, Where is caitanya in your paramparA?

 

This is nothing but conceit that you have completely sidelined the AcAryas who have fought toot and nail to drive away the dark clouds of mAyAvAda. You even doubt your own AcArya who you prefer to quote when it is convenient.

[Guest guest]

 

"merging into Brahman." As far as I can tell, this definition of sayujya-mukti is exclusively a gaudIya definition only.

 

 

 

According to baladeva in govinda bhASya, sAyujya has threefold closeness:

1. hari inside jIva

2. jIva inside hari

3. proximity to an external form of hari

[Indradyumna_das]

The example of Madhva is not the main point of that discussion. The one of my questions above were whom should we include and whom exclude brom bhagavata-suksa-parampara??

 

 

Personalities such as Srinivasa Acarya and Syamananda Pandit, who were among the most prominent preachers of the Gosvami granthas, and Jahnava Thakurani, who was the crest-jewel of all Gaudiyas in the post-Gosvami era, have been excluded from this parampara.

 

On the other hand, persons such as Aksobhya, Jayatirtha, Jnanasindhu, Dayanidhi, Vidyanidhi, Rajendra, Jayadharma, Purusottama, Brahmanya Tirtha and Vyasa Tirtha have been included in the parampara. Can you explain how they have contributed to the siksa-parampara of Gaudiya Matha?

 

I think if parampara means a collection of the most prominent individuals who have influenced the Gaudiya tradition, you would do well to remove the aforementioned ten persons (with all due respect to these maha-bhagavatas) and replace them with Gaudiya mahajanas such as Gadadhara, Srivasa, Gopala Bhatta, Raghunatha Bhatta, Jahnava Thakurani, Syamananda, Srinivasa, Virabhadra, Krishna Mishra and Radha Krishna Das, who have had a considerable influence in our history.