Questions on Vaishnavism and sampradayas

[dsaly1969]

Hi all,

I consider myself a relative uninformed newbie although I have been an independent Vaishnava for a few years (I have not yet taken diksha or siksha from any guru or formally joined any Vaishnava sampradaya). I revere Sri Sri Radha-Krishna as the Divine Couple through the practices of bhakti yoga: Mahamantra japa, and kirtan as well as study of the Srimad Bhagavatam, Bhagavad Gita, and the Siksastakam of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu.

I would eventually like to formally become part of a proper sampradaya. I am attracted to both the Nimbarki and Gaudiya sampradayas. I know ISKCON is readily available but it seems that they have some deviations from what Sri Caitanya taught in the Siksastakam as well as some other peculiarities. I'm not sure if there are any groups that follow the simple standards of Sri Caitanya. At the same time I recognize the need for discipline in sadhana and guidance by a qualified guru so I guess I am torn on the issue. I also do not want to select something simply based on my own prefences and bias as that defeats the whole purpose of Bhagavata Dharma.

Any guidance would be appreciated!

Namaste!

Dave

[smaranam]

Hare KRshNa

There are a few followers of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu here on HDF affiliated to other branches of Chaitanya (Gaudiya VaishNav) parampara.

I hope it is OK to list the member/user names. If not Satay may want to delete this post. I also hope the people I list will not mind (doubt it ), and this will just make them come forward and help you, since they do not come here very often.

1. anadi
2. jopmala - says he is really a simple and pure follower of Chaitanya (with no bells whistles frills and sequines)
3. uttam
4. Braja Bhushan Das

You may also want to browse the VaishNav forum (sub-section under "God in Hindu Dharma") for their threads and posts.

**Just curious - how does ISKCON deviate from the Chaitanya ShikshAshTak? Thanks.

_/\_

saMsAra dAvanalaliDha loka
trANAya kAruNya ghana ghanatvam
prAptasya kalyANa guNArNavasya
vande guroh shri charaNAravindam || GuruvAshTak 1 ||

[dsaly1969]

Well, perhaps "deviate" is a strong word and not quite accurate. Some of the regulative principles taught by ISKCON (not all of them, of course) seem outside of the mainstream and exceed what Sri Caitanya seems to have taught (which was no "hard and fast rules"). I would think that if one accepts Sri Caitanya as an avatar of Sri Sri Radha-Krishna in the guise of the perfect devotee then certainly his only extant writing should be given great weight and authority.

He wrote in the Siksastaka:

Verse 2: "O my Lord, Your holy name alone can render all benediction to living beings, and thus You have hundreds and millions of names like Krishna and Govinda. In these transcendental names You have invested all Your transcendental energies. There are not even hard and fast rules for chanting these names. O my Lord, out of kindness You enable us to easily approach You by chanting Your holy names, but I am so unfortunate that I have no attraction for them."

That is where he mentions "no hard and fast rules"

In verse 1, it says:

"Glory to the Sri Krishna sankirtana, which cleanses the heart of all the dust accumulated for years and extinguishes the fire of conditional life, of repeated birth and death. This sankirtana movement is the prime benediction for humanity at large because it spreads the rays of the benediction moon. It is the life of all transcendental knowledge. It increases the ocean of transcendental bliss, and it enables us to fully taste the nectar for which we are always anxious."

This seems to me to indicate that sankirtan and Mahamantra japa have a purifying effect upon a person so perhaps we should encourage everyone to do so, before following all of the "regulative principles" (not getting rid of them but having them be the fruit of a truly spiritual life of seva bhakti), as the practice of sankirtan will help evolve one spiritually to a point where their life is a demonstration of those "regulative principles" lived out.

[smaranam]

Hare KRshNa

Well, perhaps "deviate" is a strong word and not quite accurate.

It is not accurate, as I see now.

There used to be an ad for a refrigerator - the lady calls the repairman. He checks everything.
"food stays chilled" "oh yes it does! in minutes"
the temperature is steady
yes
it seems not to draw a lot of power
no. we are happy with the electricity bill

then what is the problem/complaint?
The lady: Well, it does not make noise like the other refrigerators



-----------

This seems to me to indicate that sankirtan and Mahamantra japa have a purifying effect upon a person so perhaps we should encourage everyone to do so, before following all of the "regulative principles" (not getting rid of them but having them be the fruit of a truly spiritual life of seva bhakti), as the practice of sankirtan will help evolve one spiritually to a point where their life is a demonstration of those "regulative principles" lived out.

This is precisely what happens with people who go to ISKCON.
People are not stopped at the Temple gates with "Do you follow regulative principles?"
However,
1. if you want to be serious about spiritual progress, which you have to be at some point,
2. if you want to serve at the Temple,
3. if you want to take initiation from a Guru

then you have to be on a certain platform at least. You have to be reliable, trustworthy, steady in faith.
Until then, you can keep reading scripture, attending arati, lecture, kirtan, associating w/ devotees and chanting Holy Names of KRshNa for eternity.
Nobody is going to stop you, right?

IF you are not following the principles, perhaps chanting on beads should be avoided to avoid offenses to the holy name - nAmAparAdha (especially tulasi beads - though no one will sell you real-tulasi beads, perhaps neem and kadamba ones).

_/\_

[hinduism♥krishna]

Namaste,

Many iskconites consider bhagavan govinda as supreme than bramh . They have stated bramh as partial blissful in their gita's interpretation. However, i think, chaitanya mahaprabhu did not teach these kind of things.
He only gave 8 shlokas which are considered authentic . However, The chaitanya charitamrita is not considered as a genuine scripture as it was written by some latter devotees.

Besides, chaitanya was an advaitian vaishnawa. His guru was an advaitian and i don't think iskcon has a root in chaitanya mahaprabhu's teachings.

Thank you. Best luck for your spiritual progress.

Jai shri govind narayan.

[smaranam]

Namaste,

When Dave suggested that shloka 1 and 2 of the ShikshAshTaka are where ISKCON deviates, I disagreed.

KRshNa is both personal and impersonal ParaBramhan.
Chaitanya Mahaprabhu's primary objective was to cultivate prema bhakti and He was saddened by people ignoring the kalyANa guNa of BhagvAn and simply resorting to nyaya tarka and dicephering tattva jnana. He also objected to SArvabhauma Bhattacharya's conclusions on VedAnta, aspects of the Shankaracharya school, and calling every other person NArAyaNa. He said "mAyAvAdi bhAshya sunile sarvanAsh" => Once you hear MAyAvAd, you will tend to be lured by its convenience and it will destroy your bhakti-latA (creeper of devotion), or the seed or any potential for it to sprout.

However, what you are saying here, has crossed my consciousness early on.

Chaitanya Mahaprabhu does not have a problem with my relationship with and devotion for Shri KRshNa, whereas ISKCON does have a problem with my bhakti - partly because they are RupAnugas - which I can understand. Surprisingly, despite all the purports, Shrila PrabhupAd also has no problem with my devotion (except he says don't read impersonal stuff) but ISKCON does.

Besides, chaitanya was an advaitian vaishnawa. His guru was an advaitian

No one can be on the prema bhakti level that Mahaprabhu was on. He showed extra-ordinary super symptoms - physical and subtle. This means Mahaprabhu was not just an advaita vadi vaishNav.

However, this has also independantly crossed my mind before reading any opinions on the net. (Although there are reasons why He took sannyAs from Keshav Bharti).
One clue is Mahaprabhu never objected to Shridhar Swami's BhAgavt commentary and held it in high esteem. Shridhar Swami was in the line of Shankaracharya. When Vallabhacharya objected to Shridhar Swami's commentary, Mahaprabhu Chaitanya asked Mahaprabhu Vallabhacharya to write his commentary following in footsteps of Shridhar Swami. "What is wrong with it?" he said.

Dongre Maharaj, who clearly propounds bhakti but with an advaitic angle, quotes Shridhar Swami.

Moreover, if you walk into the mind-consciousness of Chaitanya, I can relate to it ( - in quality, not in magnitude).
___________

Besides this, I do not have any problem with ISKCON and it is doing very good work. It is a wonder on earth for those whom it fits - hand-in-glove, OR for those who are blank-slates. Let ISKCON make the fresh imprints on the clean white board.

_/\_
Hare KRshNa

[brahma jijnasa]

Namaste

One clue is Mahaprabhu never objected to Shridhar Swami's BhAgavt commentary and held it in high esteem. Shridhar Swami was in the line of Shankaracharya. When Vallabhacharya objected to Shridhar Swami's commentary, Mahaprabhu Chaitanya asked Mahaprabhu Vallabhacharya to write his commentary following in footsteps of Shridhar Swami. "What is wrong with it?" he said.

Shridhara Swami was one of the most mysterious figures in the history of commentarial tradition on Srimad Bhagavatam. Although he officially belonged to the tradition of Shankaracharya, his comments do not reflect the ideas of Advaita Vedanta in a consistent manner. It can be easily seen that he compiled comments that illustrate both approaches, advaita and also vaishnava. So we can not pinpoint which of these two views he represents as a final conclusion. I heard that for this reason Shridhara Swami was considered a member of both communities, advaita and vaishnava.
Vaishnavas have even expressed the opinion that he was a Vaishnava disguised as an advaitin who intentionally wrote duplicate and conflicting conclusions just to attract advaitins to devotion (bhakti) towards Lord Krishna.
Sri Caitanya and Gaudiya vaishnavas have respected Shridhara Swami very much. However there is one important thing. Since he compiled mixed comments advaita and vaishnava, Jiva Gosvami have always commented Srimad Bhagavatam differently from him. Whenever Shridhara Swami would have commented on a verse from the Advaita point of view, Jiva Gosvami expressed his disagreement and would commented from Vaishnava point of view.

regards

[philosoraptor]

Shridhara Swami was one of the most mysterious figures in the history of commentarial tradition on Srimad Bhagavatam. Although he officially belonged to the tradition of Shankaracharya, his comments do not reflect the ideas of Advaita Vedanta in a consistent manner.

Correct me if I am mistaken, but I thought shrIdhar svAmI belonged to the sampradAya of one viShNusvAmI. At least, this is what I read in some books published by ISKCON.

[brahma jijnasa]

Correct me if I am mistaken, but I thought shrIdhar svAmI belonged to the sampradAya of one viShNusvAmI. At least, this is what I read in some books published by ISKCON.

Yes, it seems that it is him.

regards

[philosoraptor]

Besides, chaitanya was an advaitian vaishnawa. His guru was an advaitian and i don't think iskcon has a root in chaitanya mahaprabhu's teachings.

Pardon me? How was chaitanya an advaitin? Where did you get that idea? His sannyAsa-guru was an advaitin sannyAsi, but followers of the tradition don't attach any importance that initiation as any more than a means to an end. His dIkSha guru was Ishvara purI, but not all purI sannyAsi-s were advaitins.

jIvA gosvAmI was a direct disciplic descendent of chaitanya, and he refuted advaitic ideas in his tattva-sandarbha. If you are going to reject the writings of the gosvAmI-s on chaitanya, then all you have left is the shikShAShtakam, which has nothing about advaita in it.