Gaurakishora das Babaji

[Guest guest]

i read that Gaurakishora das Babaji was unlearned and even he dont know writte or read, how can a person who is ileterated be an acharya?, as much as I read the acharya or guru has to be very expert in the scriptures.

[Guest guest]

"One who searching for the Ultimate Truth must surrender to a guru who knows the inner meaning of the Vedas, is fixed in the absolute truth AND IS EXPERT IN THE SASTRA." bhag. 11.3.21

???????????????????????????????????????????

[Guest guest]

One can be an expert in the Sastra if one lives the teachings. Example is the ultimate teacher. There are plenty of people who can memorize a few verses and never apply them to their lives.

[stonehearted]

My understanding is that he was illiterate in the sense that he couldn't read Sanskrit. If I remember correctly, he was a merchant in his family life, so it would make sense that he could read and write in Bengali. Also, I remember reading that he had one book that he carried everywhere--Narottama's Prarthana? I can't remember off the top of my head. In any event, I think the point is that Babaji Maharaja wasn't a scholar in the way that his aspiring disciple, Vimala Prasad Dutt, was, so he told him such a connection was probably not a good idea.

 

I'm open to correction by anyone who has ready access to more accurate information. I'm getting ready to go to work, so I don't have time to dig this up.

[Pankaja_Dasa]

 

 

I'll make a seperate thread. For list of 'Great spiritual masters'.

 

______

Srila Gaurakisora das Babaji

(From articles by Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati)

 

Appeared at the beginning of the 16th century (Bengali era), was a householder for 29 years until his wife died and then he took Babaji initiation from Srila Bhagavata dasa Babaji (the disciple of Srila Jagannatha dasa Babaji). Gaurakisora next went to Vrindavana, travelling from village to village for about 30 years. Honored by the title 'bhajananandi', he never, even secretly, endeavored for as much as a drop of material sense gratification. In 1897 Srila Gaurakisora came to Sri Navadvipa dhama (when the Yoga-Pitha in Sri Mayapur dhama was revealed) and from then until his disappearance he lived in this area, realizing the non difference from Vrindavana. He lived by begging, cooking in discarded pots found by the roadside or along the bank of the Ganges, eating out of a human skull, and clothing himself with the washed, discarded cloth used to cover the corpses in the burning ghat. His only possesions were his tulsi neck and chanting beads, and sometimes having no beads he would chant japa on a torn, knotted cloth.

 

On Ekadasi he would always fast without water (nirjala). No one could ever find the opportunity to serve him, hot even Bhaktivinoda, his intimate friend or Srila Bhaktisiddanta, his only disciple. He possessed the highest love in separation for Lord Sri Krishna. He was also able to perceive the exact intentions and psychological nature of everyone around him, especially pretenders, and when he was visited by such people he would give them devastatingly pertinent advice. Sometimes he would act as though insane and blind, and sometimes he did not know whether he was dressed or not.

 

[sumedh]

Hare Krishna and dandavat pranam

 

It has been revealed by Srila BhaktiSiddhanta Saraswati that Gaura Kishore Babaji is an eternal associate of Sri Krishna (Guna manjari), so i guess the rule that expertise in shashtras is somewhat proportional to the amount of learning etc. does not apply.

[Guest guest]

 

 

"Book knowledge without realization of the Supreme Truth is useless. This is stated as follows:

 

atah sri-krsna-namadi na bhaved grahyam indriyaih

sevonmukhe hi jihvadau svayam eva sphuraty adah

 

 

"No one can understand the transcendental nature of the name, form, quality and pastimes of Sri Krsna through his materially contaminated senses. Only when one becomes spiritually saturated by transcendental service to the Lord are the transcendental name, form, quality and pastimes of the Lord revealed to him." (Padma Purana)

 

This Bhagavad-gita is the science of Krsna consciousness. No one can become Krsna conscious simply by mundane scholarship. One must be fortunate enough to associate with a person who is in pure consciousness. A Krsna conscious person has realized knowledge, by the grace of Krsna, because he is satisfied with pure devotional service. By realized knowledge, one becomes perfect. By transcendental knowledge one can remain steady in his convictions, but by mere academic knowledge one can be easily deluded and confused by apparent contradictions. It is the realized soul who is actually self-controlled because he is surrendered to Krsna. He is transcendental because he has nothing to do with mundane scholarship. For him mundane scholarship and mental speculation, which may be as good as gold to others, are of no greater value than pebbles or stones."

 

Srila A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada... Bhagavad-gita 6.8 (purport)

[Kulapavana]

"as much as I read the acharya or guru has to be very expert in the scriptures."

 

the expertise in scriptures can be understood is several ways. living your life in accordance with the topmost conclusion of the scriptures is a true mark of an acharya.

[Guest guest]

Babhru:

 

I remember reading that he had one book that he carried everywhere--Narottama's Prarthana?

 

-----------

 

Yes, he used to keep that book with him. He could read, but as you said, not sanskrit.

[Guest guest]

"the expertise in scriptures can be understood is several ways. living your life in accordance with the topmost conclusion of the scriptures is a true mark of an acharya."

 

anny support from the scriptures to this affirmation?

 

 

[gHari]

The following comes from the Garland of Vaisnava Truths by Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura:<blockquote>THIRD CHAPTER - HE IS KNOWABLE BY ALL THE VEDAS

 

Q. How can one know the truth of the Lord (Bhagavat-tattva)?

 

A. This can be known by the soul's knowledge of the self-evident truth (svatah-siddha-jnana).

 

Q. What is self-evident truth?

 

A. There are two types of knowledge (jnana):

 

1) self-evident (svatah-siddha), and

2) that which depends on the senses (indriya-paratantra).

 

Self-evident knowledge is the natural truth that is inherently a feature of the pure spirit soul's original form. It is eternal, just as the totality of the divinely conscious realm is also eternal. This self-evident knowledge is called veda or amnaya. This veda, in the form of pure knowledge (siddha-jnana-rupa) has incarnated in the material world in the shape of Rk, Sama, Yajur and Atharva, along with the conditioned souls (baddha-jivas); this alone is the self-evident knowledge (svatah-siddha-jnana).

 

Whatever knowledge that ordinary souls can gather through the use of their material senses is only the second type of knowledge, or indriya-paratantra (dependent on the senses).

 

Q. Can anyone know the Bhagavat-tattva (the truth of the Lord) by indriya-paratantra-jnana (sensual knowledge)?

 

A. No. Bhagavan, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, is beyond the scope of all the material senses. For this reason, He is known as Adhoksaja. The senses, as well as all the material conceptions gathered from the sense perceptions, always remain very far away from the Bhagavat-tattva, the truth of the Lord.

 

Q. If Bhagavan is attainable through self-evident knowledge (svatah-siddha-jnana), then we should be able to attain Him by whatever svatah-siddha-jnana that we presently have. What then is the need to study the Vedic scriptures?

 

A. The Veda is present in every pure spirit soul's existence in the form of svatah-siddha-jnana. According to the different levels of different souls in the materially conditioned state, this Veda will spontaneously manifest itself to one person, or may remain veiled to someone else. Therefore, to help reawaken the forgetful conditioned souls to the eternally self-evident truths, the Veda has also incarnated in the form of written books which may be studied, recited and heard.

 

Q. We have heard that Bhagavan is perceivable only through bhakti (devotional service). If this is true, then how can we say that He is perceivable by jnana, even svatah-siddha-jnana?

 

A. That which is called svatah-siddha-jnana is another name for bhakti. When speaking of topics related to the supreme truth (para-tattva), some call it jnana and some call it bhakti.

 

Q. Then why is jnana condemned in the devotional scriptures (bhakti-sastras)?

 

A. The devotional scriptures express a great reverence for svatah-siddha-jnana; indeed, they state that other than this purely self-evident spiritual knowledge, there is no auspicious welfare. The types of jnana that are condemned in the bhakti sastras are:

 

 

1) indriya-paratantra-jnana (knowledge based on sense perception) and

2) nirvisesa-jnana (impersonal non-distinct knowledge), the latter of which is merely an absence of the former.

 

Q. All the Vedic scriptures speak of

 

1) karma (fruitive activities),

2) jnana (speculative knowledge) and

3) bhakti (devotional service).

 

By which of these can the Bhagavat-tattva (the truth of the Lord) be known?

 

A. By examining the statements of all the Vedas collectively, it is seen that they are all in complete agreement that other than Bhagavan, there is nothing but nothing else worth knowing. All the karma (fruitive activities) mentioned in the Vedas ultimately lead to Bhagavan. When jnana (speculative knowledge) fructifies into its pure condition, then one gives up all dualities that arise from both visesa-jnana and nirvisesa-jnana. One then aims for Bhagavan. The process of Bhakti (devotional service) naturally cultivates a direct relationship with Bhagavan; therefore the Lord can be known by all the Vedas. </blockquote>

 

[Guest guest]

According to this:

Is not necesarrily that a pure devotee know the scrptures in the way we learn or study them?

means, to know by memory texts and books?

if is like this is really new for me.

Really thank you very much for your interesting quotations.

[Kulapavana]

If a brilliant scholar like Srila Bhaktisiddhanta found him worthy his acceptance I would tend to think Srila Gaurakishora das Babaji was sufficiently qualified in that area as well.

[theist]

I have a question. Surely literacy is not a required qualification for knowing & loving God. And one who knows and loves God can surely transmit that to others. But in terms of transmitting that understanding to the broader society and establishing the siddhanta wouldn't it be necessary to be strong in the sastra for convincing others? Strong in the sense of knowing the works and arguments presented therein by past acaryas?

 

I am really unclear in this area and am not sure I even formulated the question well. Do you know what I am trying to say?

[Kulapavana]

as far as I know S.G.D.B was literate but did not know sanskrit and never wanted any disciples. I think he only had one or two formally accepted disciples. He was a bhajan-anandi, not concerned with preaching to the society in general.

 

I know what you are trying to say, and in general, being scholarly is a requirement for effective preaching by an acharya. In our sampradaya, acharyas were mostly scholarly, but not always. S. Gaurakishora was a great mystic and devotee of the highest caliber. One of his greatest contributions to our sampradaya was his disciple, S.Bhaktisiddhanta. That alone is good enough to immortalize him in the Vaishnava tradition.

[theist]

General but not a hard and fast requirement. It's good to remember that someone may know lots of quotes but still may be far from God and only operating from an the intellecual plane.

 

I was thinking this morning about how Gaurakishore das babaji would make attempts to keep from the public spotlight. And now here so many years later he is being praised on the WWW.

[Pankaja_Dasa]

 

 

Does Bhaktisiddhanta Maharaja mention if Gaura Kishora Dasa Babaji was only acting like this. Actually He knew Sanskrit?

 

Also even now most devotees are not could say 'expert in Scriptures'. But they are devoted. Suffice to say meeting a Vedanist with no devotion for Krishna, or an illiterate Vaishnava. Take your pick.

 

So when it says expert in scriptures it means expert in KC. Not 'expert in professional recitation.'

 

Even I can chant Gita verses. I read somewhere maybe Bhaktisiddhanata Maharaja says this. That if a Pure devotee chants its perfect. But if non-devotee does then its valueless. So draw your own conclutions to this.

 

Krishna says: vedais ca sarvair aham eva vedya= By ALL! The Vedas I am to be Known!

 

Hare Krishna