Relative Points of View BY: SANKARSHAN DAS

Relative Points of View

BY: SANKARSHAN DAS

Jan 11, 2011 — SINGAPORE (SUN) — The difference between my postings and Rocana das's postings is that there is sastric basis for my explanations, while he is giving his own opinions. There are prominent acharyas, but the concept of Sampradaya Acarya and one should discriminate that exclusive acharya from the rest is alien to me. Please verify from scriptures.

"Nobody should give his own opinion he must quote the authoritative statement to support his proposition"
(Srila Prabhupada Lecture on Bhagavad-gita 1.43, London, July 30 1973)

I'm not interested in opinions because the mind is affected by prejudice. Prejudice meaning because he is a disciple of Srila Prabhupada, he is speaking in a way which makes his acharya the most exalted, and at the same time degrading all others. We should stop and think with our brains, what if Rocana das is following another acharya from another institution -- would he have the same "Sampradaya Acarya" notion"? Therefore we consult the scriptures, which is above all sectarian and relative points of view. What does the scripture say, or from the words of His Divine Grace A.C Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada?

"When we speak of the fundamental principle of gurudev or acharyadev we speak of something that is universal application. There does not arise any question of discriminating my guru from yours or anyone else's. There is only one Guru, who appears in an infinity of forms to teach you, me and all others."
(Science of Self-Realization, pg. 70-71)

So it's very clear that Rocana das is making a discrimination of his Guru Maharaj, Srila Prabhupada, as the most exalted and at the same time undermining the rest. The guru-tattva is certainly been misrepresented. I have read Rocana das's postings, and much of it is based on his opinions, and I'm not really interested. Rather I would pick those which contradict shastra.

1. We must discriminate among pure devotees.

Is there a shastric evidence for this? Again let me quote:

"One should not be envious considering one preacher to be very great and another to be very lowly. This is a material distinction and has no place on the platform of spiritual activities."
(Caitanya-caritamrta Adi 10-7 purport)

"Krsnadasa Kaviraja Gosvami therefore offers equal respect to all preachers of the cult of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, who are compared to the branches of the tree. ISKCON is one of these branches and it should therefore be respected by all sincere devotees of Lord Caitanya Mahaprabhu."
(Caitanya-caritamrta Adi 10-7)

The conclusion is we should not discriminate among those exalted preachers. If somebody is discriminating then he is envious. It seems Rocana das does not accept this etiquette. Furthermore Srila Prabhupada is Founder-Acharya of ISKCON and ISKCON is just one branch of the tree. Which also indicates that Mahaprabhu is the tree and ISKCON or Srila Prabhupada is one of the many branches from that tree. His other Godbrothers and other acharyas represent the other branches. This is how we should see things from the proper perspective in the light of the books.

2. Srila Prabhupada criticize his godbrothers, not to mix with them, and not qualified to be acharyas.

In my previous article, "We Should Not Take Sides", I have already given evidences to suggest that Srila Prabhupada in the end wanted unity, asked for forgiveness for his comments and also cited his godbrothers as examples of being acharyas in his lectures. If Rocana das is implying that Srila Prabhupada had criticized his Godbrothers with intention, then indirectly Srila Prabhupada becomes a sectarian personality with a criticizing nature. This disqualifies one from the "pure devotee" status, especially when Vaishnavas are involve.

"One should associate with and faithfully serve that pure devotee who is advanced in undeviated devotional service and whose heart is completely devoid of the propensity to criticize others."
(Sri Upadesamrta, verse 5)

I personally do not want to see an exalted uttama-adhikari such as Srila Prabhupada have to criticize other Vaishnavas. It was very clear that Srila Prabhupada used the term "for the sake of preaching" that he has criticized in his meetings with his godbrothers during his last few months, which means he never meant it and wanted unity thereafter. So instead of digging out quotes from letters, conversations, etc., which are actually meant according to time, place and circumstances, we should see the squabblings of senior Vaisnavas as transcendental, just like Rukmini and Satyabama. The central point is always Krsna.

"Those, whose judgment is made of mundane stuff, being unable to enter into the spirit of the all-loving controversies among pure devotees, due to their own want of unalloyed devotion, are apt to impute to the devotees their own defects of partisanship and opposing views."
(Brahma-samhita 5.37 purport, p.72, BBT edition)

Rocana das wrote:

"some of Srila Prabhupada's godbrothers have reached great heights of spiritual advancement on account of following the sadhana program set down by the Acaryas"

Indirectly Rocana das is implying that there is only One Nitya Siddha, which contradicts Srila Bhaktisiddanta Sarasvati Thakur's written article called "Thakur Bhaktivinode":

"Thakur Bhaktivinode's greatest gift to the world consists in this: that he has brought about the appearance of those pure devotees who are, at present, carrying on the movement of unalloyed devotion to the Feet of Sri Krishna by their own whole-time spiritual service of the Divinity."
(Thakur Bhaktivinode, published in The Harmonist, December 1931, vol. XXIX No.6)

Please see my previous article, "We Should Not Take Sides" for the comments as to "appearance of pure devotees refers to Nitya siddas".

Rocana das wrote:

"There are no other godbrothers who can point to such a literary achievement. The only others we can compare him to are his Spiritual Master, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakur, and of course Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakur – the three successive nitya-siddha Sampradaya Acaryas."

Now we are simply ignoring the sastric injunctions and comparing based on literary achievement. If that is the case, is Srila Prabhupada better than Srila Gaura Kishore Das Babaji Maharaj? This is not how we should discriminate. It's offensive.

Rocana das wrote:

"Many ISKCON devotees got totally converted or influenced by the Gaudiya Matha leaders and left Srila Prabhupada's movement, adopting almost exclusively their new siksa guru's attitude and position."

Caitanya-caritamrta Adi 1.47 purport states:

"There is no difference between the shelter -giving Supreme Lord and the initiating and instructing spiritual masters. If one foolishly discriminates between them, he commits an offense in the discharge of devotional service."

The concept of this acharya movement or that acharya movement is the result of losing the line of thought. This is Mahaprabhu's movement and we are Rupanugas, not Prabhupadanugas. The acharyas are instruments in spreading this movement.

"We Gaudiya Vaisnavas are known as Rupanuga. Rupanuga means the followers of Rupa Gosvami. Why should we become followers of Rupa Gosvami? Because sri-caitanya-mano 'bhistam sthapitam yena bhu-tale. He wanted to establish the mission of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu."
(Srimad-Bhagavatam 5.5.2, Hyderabad, April 13, 1975)

Rocana das wrote:

"Krsna Consciousness is not being spread around the world in the manner and mood that the Sampradaya Acaryas demonstrated and desire to have perpetuated."

Krsna consciousness is NOT limited to any particular sectarian institution or any particular acharya, it's universal. Srila Prabhupada confirms:

"The disciples of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Goswami are all godbrothers, and although there are some differences of opinion and we are not acting conjointly, every one of us is spreading this Krsna consciousness movement according to his capacity and producing many disciples to spread it all over the world".
(Srimad Bhagavatam 4.28.31)

Srila Prabhupada continues:

There are primarily four parties spreading devotional service all over the universe. These are the Ramanuja-sampradaya, the Madhva-sampradaya, the Visnusvami-sampradaya and the Nimbarka-sampradaya. The Madhva-Gaudiya-sampradaya in particular comes from Lord Caitanya Mahaprabhu. All these devotees are spreading this Krsna consciousness movement very widely and giving protection to innocent people.."
(Srimad Bhagavatam 4.28.31 purport)

The above quote also refutes George Smith's claim that everyone should adhere to only Srila Prabhupada. In his latest article he quotes from His Divine Grace Srila B.P Puri Goswami:

"In a very short time, there will exist only one school of Vaisnava teaching, which will be named the Brahma sampradaya. All other Vaisnava schools will come into the fold of that one disciplic succession."
(Mahaprabhura Siksa)

Puri Maharaja further elaborates:

"Bhaktivinoda Thakura continues his discussion of the subject by asking the question, 'Is the list of names of spiritual masters in the disciplic succession given without any breaks?' His answer: 'From time to time, only the more important spiritual masters' names are included in these lists."

And then he says:

"Every disciple has the duty to remember the names of the spiritual masters in his disciplic succession as a part of his daily meditation. This is confirmed by Baladeva Vidyabhusana in his Prameya-ratnavali."

In conclusion: Sri Brahma-Sampradaya would remain, that does not mean ISKCON only. ISKCON is just one branch in the Brahma Sampradaya, again confirmed by Srila Prabhupada in another verse:

Our International Society for Krishna Consciousness is one of the branches of the Caitanya tree.
(Caitanya-caritamrta Adi-Lila 9-18)

This Caitanya tree represents the Brahma-Madhva-Gaudiya Sampradaya and ISKCON is a branch of it.

As quoted, Srila B. Puri Goswami, who explains:

"Every disciple has the duty to remember the names of the spiritual masters in HIS disciplic succession as a part of his daily meditation."

This "his" refers to an individual. If a devotee is from ISKCON he follows his Gurudev and Srila Prabhupada, another devotee from Sri Caitanya Sarasvati Math will follow Srila Sridhara Maharaj, and one who follows the Gaudiya Vedanta school would follow Srila Narayana Goswami. This is how we should see the many branches of disciplic succession.

This is Krsna consciousness. It is not limited to any particular acharya or his mood. If somebody is saying this then such a person is envious, that's all.

"The doctrine of universal love must therefore stand opposed to all sectarian ideas. A sectarian missionary preaching universal love is but a great inconsistency."
(Bhaktivinode Thakur in the Hindu Idols Jan, 1899)

Hare Krsna
Yours in Service
Sankarshan das