Download this in PDF format here:
http://www.mediafire.com/view/e3717aola66h1d8/True_History_of_Bhaktisiddhanta.pdf
Why Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Never Received
Initiation from Gaurakisora Dasa Babaji
1 ) Sri Kisori Mohana Gosvami and Sri Kisori Das
Babaji witnessed that Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati, when asked by Siddha Sri
Ramakrsna das Pandit Baba in the early 1930s, declared that he was initiated in
a dream. Based on abhava pramana (evidence based on absence of counter
evidence) I might as well claim that I received a dream-initiation from Sri
Rupa Gosvami. Who can confirm or deny it? In this way the whole principle of
initiation is undermined and made into a laughing stock. In Sri Isana Nagara's Advaita
Prakasa (8.118-122) it is described how Sita-devi, the consort of Advaita
Prabhu, received initiation in a dream from Srila Madhavendra Puri, but that
Advaita Prabhu still found it necessary to give her a concrete, audible
initiation.
sita kohe bahu bhagye toma painu dekha
dehatma sodhana koro diya mantra diksa
tabe puri sitare krsna mantra dila
jagi sita mata kohe kiba camatkare
svapnavese puriraja mantra dila more
acarye kohila sita sarva vivarana
tiho kohe bhagye tuya khandila bandhana
prabhu sei mantra puna vidhi anusare
subha ksane samarpila sva bharya sita re
"Sita devi told Madhavendra Puri: "I
am very fortunate to meet you. Please sanctify my body and soul by giving me
mantra initiation." Then Madhavendra Puri gave Sita krsna-mantra after
which he vanished. When mother Sita awoke, she said: "How amazing! Madhavendra
Puriraja gave me mantra in a visionary dream!" Sita devi told everything
to Advaita Acarya, who said: "You are so fortunate that now all your
bondage is destroyed." According to the rules, and on an auspicious
moment, Advaita Prabhu then gave His wife Sita that mantra again."
2) How can you take sannyasa in March 1918 while
your guru passed away in November 1915? Gaudiya Matha chronicles admit that
Bhaktisiddhanta took sannyasa in his room from a photo. Sannyasa cannot be
taken from a photo, without physical permission of the person on the
photograph, but from a living sannyasi.
3) How can you wear saffron cloth while your
would-be sannyasa guru wore white? A parampara that starts with white cloth and
then suddenly switches to saffron cloth and 'brahmana-initiation' is also not
an uninterrupted siksa-parampara. All colors of garment but white are forbidden
for a Gaudiya Vaisnava - rakta-vastra vaisnavera podite na yuyay
(Caitanya-caritamrta, Antya 13.61) "A Vaisnava should not wear red cloth."
nagno dviguna-vastrah syan nagno raktapatas tatha: "Wearing red cloth is
like walking naked," and sukla-vasa bhaven nityam raktam caiva vivarjayet
(both from Hari-bhakti-vilasa, 4.147,152): "Always wear white and give up
red cloth." raktam nilam adhautam ca parakyam malinam patam paridhaya
(Agamasastra quoted in Durgama-sangamani by Sri Jiva Gosvami on
Bhakti-rasamrta-sindhu, 1.2.120 ): "Wearing red, blue or unwashed garments
is a sevaparadha." In Sri Dhyanacandra Gosvami's Paddhati the guru is described
as wearing white cloth (svetambaram gaura-rucim sanatanam -"He wears white
cloth and his eternal form shines like gold"). And saffron dhotis do not
exist at all, only saffron bahirvasas (outer cloth) for Vedic eka-dandi
(mayavadi) sannyasis and white dhotis for householders. Grhasthas should not
wear a kaupina (loincloth), and this is also not 'brahmana-underwear'. A
kaupina is given during the ceremony of sannyasa for a lifelong vow of
celibacy. It drags anyone down to hell who takes it off to have sex. Shaving
the head is also only for sannyasis and not for others.
To say one is wearing saffron, not red, is a
useless escape manoeuvre, because there is also a positive injunction, namely
suklavaso bhaven nityah, "one should always wear white and neither red nor
saffron." This is also not a question of 'the form ("what does it
matter what color your cloth is?") versus the substance. It is not
narrow-minded smarta-ism, because obedience is the substance. The Gosvamis have
ordered us to wear white and bhakti means that you obey the orders of those who
are both ordered and empowered by Mahaprabhu to lay down the law. One Gaudiya
Vaisnava acarya who may be an avadhuta may wear burlap, but he did not tell his
thousands of disciples to do so. He told them all to wear white cotton. The
Srimad Bhagavata verse (3.5.38) does not mean that Gaudiya Vaisnavas can wear
saffron or red cloth, there was no Gaudiya sampradaya yet in the time of the
Bhagavata, and, Srila Sanatana Gosvami comments on this verse: yatibhir
maha-prayatnena samsarasagaram sribhagavadbhakta helayaiva sukham taranti,
"the ocean of samsara, which is hard to cross by yatis (mayavadi
sannyasis), is easily and blissfully crossed by the Lord's devotees." The
verse rakta vastra vaisnavera porite na yuyay is not taken out of context here.
The story indeed is a personal question between Jagadananda Pandita and
Sanatana Gosvami, but the moral of the story, expressed in the rakta
vastra-verse, is an objective, absolute statement for all.
4) If Bhaktisiddhanta is Gaurakisora Das
Babaji's disciple, then why didn't he give us Gaurakisora's guru-parampara,
instead of saying that Gaurakisora Das Babaji was the disciple of Bhaktivinoda?
Rather, Bhaktivinoda worshipped Gaura Kisora and approached him for bhekh.
(Gaurakisora took bhekh from Bhagavat das Baba, the bhekh-chela of Siddha
Jagannatha das Baba). Regarding Bhaktisiddhanta's version of the rest of the
guru-parampara:
Sanatana Gosvami was actually the disciple of
Vidyavacaspati.
Rupa Gosvami was a disciple of Sanatana Gosvami.
Jiva Gosvami was a disciple of Rupa Gosvami.
Raghunatha das Gosvami was a disciple of
Yadunandana Acarya.
Narottama Das Thakura was a disciple of
Lokanatha Gosvami, not of Krsna das Kaviraja.
Visvanatha Cakravarti was a disciple of Radha
Ramana Cakravarti and never met his would-be guru Narottama, for they lived a
century apart.
Baladeva Vidyabhusana was a disciple of Radha
Damodara Gosvami, not of Visvanatha Cakravarti.
Jagannatha das Babaji lived 150 years after his
would-be guru Baladeva Vidyabhusana.
Bhaktivinoda was a disciple of Vipin Bihari
Gosvami, not of Jagannath das Babaji.
5) Why do all Gaudiya Matha-chronicles give
different dates and places of Bhaktisiddhanta's supposed initiation, some
saying that he received Nrsimha mantra, as if Gaura Kisora dasa Babaji was a
worshipper of Nrsimha?
6) Where did Bhaktisiddhanta get his
brahmana-thread from? Gaura Kisora das Babaji did not wear it (as the photos
show), for he was born a vaisya. The proof that brahmana-initiation does not
exist in reality is that there is a separate 10-syllable Gopala Mantra for
brahmanas and an 18-syllable mantra for non-brahmanas. This means that 2nd
initiation is not the same as brahmana-initiation. And if you do become a
brahmana through such initiation, then why not receive the 10-syllable mantra
instead of the 18-syllable mantra they now receive?
7) Then there is the argument: "Ah, then
you have an uninterrupted succession with so many ladies, but what was their
realisation?" What were the realisations of Jahnava Thakurani, Hemalata
Thakurani, Krsnapriya Thakurani, Siddhesvari Mata, etc.? The Gita proclaims
that ladies can attain the Supreme Abode, but those who do not follow the
scriptures (be they men) can forget about it-
mam hi partha vyapasritya ye 'pi syuh
papayonayah
striyo vaisyas tatha sudras te 'pi yanti param
gatim
(Bhagavad Gita, 9.32)
"O Partha, anyone who surrenders to Me,
even low born women, merchants and laborers, will reach the Supreme
Abode."
Better a submissive lady than a wayward,
independently operating pandit, svami, etc. And even if these ladies did not
have so many spiritual realisations that is still no excuse for just
fabricating a guru-parampara.
Gaudiya Matha preachers attract followers from
family gurus ('caste Gosvamis') by pointing to Sri Jiva Gosvami's statement in
Bhakti-sandarbha (210): tad etat paramartha-gurvasrayo vyavaharika-gurvadi
parityagenapi kartavyam, "One should give up a mundane guru and take a
spiritual guru", but this 'mundane guru' refers to a village elder or
parent, not to a family guru, for in Hari-bhakti-vilasa (4.141) the
Brahma-vaivarta Purana is quoted:
upadestaram amnayagatampariharanti ye
tan mrtan api kravyadahkrtaghnannopabhuñjate
"Even the vultures will not eat the dead corpse
of the ungrateful one who abandons the amnayagatam guru."
In his commentary to this verse Srila Sanatana
Gosvami writes: amnayagatam kula-kramayatam: This amnayagata guru means a guru
who has come in a family succession."
8) What is the tilaka svarupa of Bhaktisiddhanta
Sarasvati and his followers? For instance, the Nityananda parivara-initiates
have a Nim-leaf on the nose, the Advaita Parivara-initiates have a Banyan-leaf
on the nose, the Syamananda Parivara-initiates have an anklebell-form on the
nose and so every bonafide Gaudiya Vaisnava parampara has its own tilaka
svarupa, which is revealed by the guru and personally placed on the 12 parts of
the disciple's body by him at the time of initiation. In Hari-bhakti-vilasa
(2.85) it is quoted: sampradayika mudradi bhusitam tam krtañjalim, "At the
time of initiation the disciple receives the sectarian signs from the
guru". In the commentary to this verse Srila Sanatana Gosvami writes:
sampradayikam guru-paramparasiddham, "This sampradayika refers to the
guru-parampara," and mudra tilaka maladi, "And mudra refers to tilaka
and strings of beads." If Bhaktisiddhanta was a disciple of Gaurakisora
then why do they put on this gopicandana tilaka without any fixed and distinct
svarupa? Gaurakisora was initiated in the Advaita parivara. Why did
Bhaktisiddhanta not wear his guru's tilaka if he was really his disciple?
9) The guru-parampara is placed in the wrong
order on Iskcon-altars. The guru is seated on the disciple's right side at the
time of initiation and remains there eternally. On Iskcon-altars the guru is on
the left of the disciple. The latest guru should be to the right and the
earliest guru leftmost.
10) Who is a brahmana? a) In ISKCON/Gaudiya
Matha we see everyone ultimately receiving brahmana-initiation. But which
varnasrama-society has only brahmanas? Even from their viewpoint "we judge
people on their qualities and not on their birth," most of Bhaktivedanta's
followers are not qualified brahmanas. ISKCON/Gaudiya Math "brahmana"-women
leave their husbands, have children from different men (this is lower than a
sweeper's wife in India), and, what to speak of knowing Sanskrit, the men don't
even know Hindi or Bengali, or even what the weather is like in India. No one
knows even basic sadacara, the practices of cleanliness and chastity. 90% of
Iskcon members are businessmen ("qualified vaisyas" perhaps?) Quality
and birth are anyway non-different: karanam gunasango 'sya sadasadyonijanmasu
(Gita, 13.22). "The cause of birth in either a good or a bad species is
one's attachment to a certain psychological quality (culture, habit)." The
fact that most of Bhaktisiddhanta's Western followers are not even brahmana by
quality, but there is still 'brahmana initiation' proves that their
brahmana-campaign is motivated by envy. Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu has taught His
followers trnad api sunicena "One must consider oneself lower than a blade
of grass," not an ignorant mleccha considering himself equal to a
brahmana.
b) Envy is the cause of the mentality:
"Nowadays brahmanas are full of faults, so now we will launch our own
varnasrama-system." A human being can and should not do that, for it is
created by God Himself, and He is the highest authority (caturvarnyam maya
srstam "The four castes are created by Me (God, Krsna),") and not by
the human being Bimal Prasad Datta. 'Religious principles are created by God
Himself" (dharmam tu saksad bhagavat-pranitam, Srimad Bhagavata, 6.3.19)
Envy of brahmanas will cost you dearly, for Sri Krsna Himself says in the
Bhagavata (10.64.41-42):
vipram krtagasam api naiva druhyata mamakah
ghnantam bahusapantam va namaskuruta nityasah
yathaham praname vipran anukalam samahitah
tatha namata yuyam ca ye 'nyatha me sa
danda-bhak
"O My relatives! Do not harm a brahmana,
even if he mistreats you! Even if he is a sinner, you should still bow down to
him. Even I bow down to the brahmanas. Whoever acts otherwise is punishable by
Me!" The best example is Indra, who had to suffer severely for killing the
brahmana Vrtrasura, even though he was a demon.
The Lord further tells Srideva in Srimad
Bhagavata (10.86.53):
brahmano janmana sreyan sarvesam praninam iha
tapasa vidyaya tustya kim u mat kalaya yutah
"The brahmana is superior to all living
beings by birth, let alone when he is austere, learned, content and devoted to
Me."
dusprajña aviditvaivam avajananty asuyavah
gurum mam vipram atmanam arccadavijyadrstayah
(S.Bhag. 10.86.55)
"Men of crooked understanding, who do not
know this, disrespect a brahmana and are envious of him, who is identical with
Me and their very self."
c) The Bhagavata (7.11.13) declares that a
brahmana must first be born in a family that has always, throughout the
generations, followed all the samskaras for brahmanas.
d) The Vedas teach that a sannyasi renounces his
brahmana-thread when he takes sannyasa (sutra-sikha-tyaga, C.C.), but in
Gaudiya Matha/Iskcon sannyasis continue to wear the thread, even though they
are not born as brahmanas in the first place!
e) The brahma-sutra (thread) is only for
practising the brahma gayatri, not for the Vaisnava diksa-mantras like the
gopala mantra and the kama Gayatri. Only the last two are mentioned in
Hari-bhakti-vilasa as Gaudiya Vaisnava diksa mantras.
f) A brahmana is called dvija, or twice born.
How can you have the second birth (upanayana-samskara) without having had the
first one (saukra or seminal birth)? The brahma gayatri investment is done by
the father of a brahmin boy when he is 11 years old. The boy should not see the
sun for many days (since the brahma gayatri is a solar mantra) and is locked up
in a room with the windows shut and given only havisyanna (porridge without
salt, spices or sugar) to eat. Initiation into krsna-mantra is a separate
initiation which is only given to active Vaisnava brahmanas. This is called the
brahmana's third birth (daiksa janma). For instance, Mahaprabhu already wore
His thread when He received krsna mantra from Isvara Puri and Advaita Prabhu
had been doing brahma gayatri for decades when He received krsna mantra from
Madhavendra Puri.
g) Sanatana Gosvami says in Brhad-bhagavatamrta
(2.2.57):
esam yajñaikanisthanam aikyenavasyake nije
jape ca sadguruddiste mandyam syad drstasatphale
The Maharsis offered Gopa Kumara the status of a
brahmana, but he thought to himself: "If I accept the position of a
brahmana, I will surely slacken in my practise of the mantra that I received
from the bonafide guru, and that is certainly not good. brahmanas are only
engaged in yajñas and are not engaged in other matters."
h) Introducing varnasrama dharma, which is an
institution of karma-yoga, is a namaparadha -
dharma-vrata-tyaga-hutadi-sarva-subhakriyasamyam: "To consider Hari Nama
equal to any auspicious activity like (varnasrama) dharma, vows (sannyasa),
tyaga and sacrifices."
11) Who is a sannyasi? A Vaisnava tyagi is not
called sannyasi. In India a mayavadi is called sannyasi. In his
Durgama-sangamani commentary on the Bhakti-rasamrta-sindhu (1.2.113) Sri Jiva
Gosvami sees a difference between a sannyasi and a Vaisnava-nivrtta (tyagi):
sisyan naivanubadhniyad ityadiko yadyapi sannyasa-dharmas tathapi nivrttanam
api bhaktanam upayujyata iti bhavah - "Just as it is wrong for a sannyasi
to take too many disciples, so it counts also for renounced bhaktas."
12) There has never been a prohibition by the
Gosvamis or the scriptures against calling householder-acaryas 'Gosvami'. On
the contrary, Sri Narottama Thakura Mahasaya sang: doya koro sitapati, advaita
gosai addressing the householder guru Advaita Prabhu with gosai. Advaita is
also repeatedly called gosvami in Kavi Karnapura's Caitanya-candrodaya Natakam.
To see the Gosvamis as different from the Lords - Nityananda and Advaita - who
they directly descend from in family line is an offence to Nityananda and
Advaita, for the Vedas teach us atma vai jayate putrah - "As father, so
son", or: "The child is the image of the father." Saying that
Sukracarya, the guru of the demons, refers to the 'caste Gosvamis', (sukra
meaning sperm), is not only very offensive but also hypocritical, because Sri
Bhaktivinoda Thakura is only famous due to glorification by his own son
Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati.
Regarding family-succession, there is no reason
that one should not be initiated by one's parents: Hemalata Thakurani, guru of
Yadunandana Thakura, took initiation from her father Srinivasacarya, Krsna
Misra took initiation from his mother Sita-devi and Virabhadra Prabhu took
intiation from his co-mother Jahnavi Devi. Virabhadra was a son of Nityananda
Prabhu, but according to the Advaita Prakasa he went to Advaita Prabhu for
diksa. Advaita Prabhu sent him back to his own family to take diksa there,
which confirms that it was the wish of Nityananda and Advaita Prabhu that these
family-guru paramparas would be created.
13) It is also not true that a person cannot
give initiation when his guru is still alive. This practise is widespread
throughout Gaudiya Vaisnava history. For instance, Rasikananda gave initiation
while his guru Syamananda Thakura was still alive.
14) Deviating from the sastras a) Is often
apologised for with the argument: "Yes, Prabhupada/Bhaktisiddhanta was a
pure devotee, therefore he was empowered to introduce new injunctions." If
that is so, then everyone can say the same of their gurus, including the
followers of Jayatirtha, who introduced the use of hashish and LSD as a
'sadhana.' A genuine pure devotee will surrender to the sastras.
tasmacchastram pramanam te
karyakaryavyavasthitau
jñatva sastravidhanoktam karma kartum iharhasi
(B.Gita, 16.24)
"Therefore one should follow the scriptural
authority in what is to be done and what is not to be done. Once knowing the
scriptural injunctions, one should act accordingly."
b) Some say: "Well, all that scriptural
evidence is very nice, but Prabhupada is beyond that. He is empowered by Krsna
Himself, you can see that in these 208 temples in 184 countries, 25.000
followers, etc. etc." The answer lies in the well-known saying:
"Religion without (scriptural) philosophy is sentimentalism and/or
fanaticism." Quantity does not prove quality. Rajneesh has millions of
followers, many more than Prabhupada, but does that make him an 'empowered'
pure devotee?
yah sastravidhim utsrjya vartate kama karatah
na sa siddhim avapnoti na sukham na param gatim
(Bhagavad Gita, 16.23)
"He who rejects scriptural injunctions and
acts according to his own whims, will not attain perfection, nor will he become
happy or attain the Supreme Abode."
srutismrti mamaivajñe yas tu ullanghya vartate
ajña-cchedi mama dvesi madbhakto 'pi na
vaisnavah
Sri Krsna says (quoted in Bhakti-sandarbha,
para. 312): "The Srutis and Smrtis are My orders. Those who violate,
disregard and disobey these orders are haters of Me. Though they may be my
devotees, they are still not Vaisnavas."
Disregarding the scriptures is the 4th offence
to the holy name (sruti-sastra-nindanam). Moreover, Srila Narottama Thakura
Mahasaya says (in the Prema-bhakti-candrika): sadhu-sastra guru vakya, hrdaye
koriya aikya - "The words of the guru must be compatible with the words of
sadhu and sastra, just as the words of sadhu must be compatible with guru and
sastra and the words of sastra must be confirmed by sadhu and guru." Not
that the guru can say whatever he wants merely on the strength of his large
number of temples and his large material success.
Throughout this essay it is shown that the
followers of Bhaktisiddhanta distribute namaparadha. The 1st (satam ninda,
blanket-blasphemy of the non-Iskcon-Vaisnavas), the 3rd (guroravajña not
accepting guru parampara), the 4th (sruti-sastra-nindanam, knowingly deviating
from the scriptures), the 8th (considering mundane piety other than the holy
name, like their own varnasrama dharma, to be alternative means of salvation),
the 9th (asraddadhane vimukhe 'pyasrnvati yas copadesah, preaching to the
faithless, the averse and the unwilling, and the 11th (?) (aham mamadiparamo
namni so 'pyaparadhakrt), chanting the holy name with false ego (envy and
ambition). Is their 'success' then really so great? All their followers are
encouraged to commit and spread namaparadha.
15) Vaisnava ninda - Even if there were any kind
of parampara in Gaudiya Math/Iskcon, their initiation must still be rejected on
the basis of their systematic and collective slander of the Vaisnavas, with
most of whom they are not even acquainted. Sri Jiva Gosvami quotes Narada
Pañcaratra in Paragraph 238 of Bhakti-sandarbha:
yo vyakti nyayarahitam anyayena srnoti yah
tav ubhau narakam ghoram vrajatah kalam aksayam
iti naradapañcaratre ataeva durata evaradhyas
tadrso guruh vaisnava-vidvesi cet parityajya eva - guror apy avaliptasya
karyakaryam ajanatah utpathapratipannasya parityago vidhiyate iti smaranat
tasya vaisnavabhavarahityenavaisnavataya 'avaisnavopadistenah' ityadi
vacanavisayac ca
"'A person who speaks contrary to the morale
enunciated by the Vaisnava-sastras, and the person who hears such immoral
teachings will both live in a foul hell for eternity'. If an instruction of Sri
Gurudeva is contrary to the sastras, then association with such a guru should
be given up and he should be worshipped from a distance. If the guru is an
enemy of the Vaisnavas, it is most auspicious to give him up altogether. The
word dvesa (hatred) also stands for ninda (slander) (nindapi dvesasamah,
Bhakti-sandarbhah). Therefore an offender to the Vaisnavas is not qualified to
be a guru, and he must be abandoned. A guru who is attached to sense
gratification, who does not know what is to be done and what is not to be done,
or who acts contrary to the bhakti sastras must be abandoned. He has no Vaisnava-feelings,
therefore he is an non-Vaisnava (non-devotee). The scriptural saying 'A mantra
received from a non-Vaisnava will drag one to hell' also shows that an
non-Vaisnava guru is to be abandoned."
There is no justification whatsoever for
slandering Vaisnavas, for Sri Krsna Himself proclaims in Bhagavad-gita (9.30):
api cet suduracaro bhajate mam ananyabhak
sadhur eva sa mantavyah samyag-vyavasito hi sah
"Even if he commits the most abominable
activities, whoever exclusively worships Me (without worshipping demigods or
endeavouring for liberation - Visvanatha) is to be considered a saint, since he
is on the right way."
Satam nindam paramam aparadham vitanute:
"Blaspheming the saints is the first and foremost offence to the holy
name."
In the Vrndavana-mahimamrta (17.83) Sri
Prabodhananda Sarasvati has written:
svananda sac cid ghana rupata matir yavan na
vrndavana vasi jantusu
tavat pravisto'pi na tatra vindate tato'paradhat
padavim paratparam
"As long as one is so offensive as not to see
all the creatures who live in Vrndavana as transcendentally blissful and full
of ecstatic love and transcendental flavours, the supreme position of Radha's
maidservant will remain unattainable, even if one has already entered
Vrndavana."
Unless one gives up the company of a slanderer
one is sure to fall down. The Srimad Bhagavata (10.74.40) confirms this:
nindam bhagavatah srnvan tat-parasya janasya va
tato napaiti yah so 'pi yatyadhah sukrtaccyutah
"Anyone who hears the Lord or His devotee
(tat-parasya janasya va) blasphemed, and does not leave, will fall down."
b) Some call Radhakunda Narakakunda, and say
'there is not a single rupanuga Vaisnava there.' To this it can be replied -
yattirthabuddhih salile na karhicit janesvabhijñesu sa eva go-kharah (Srimad
Bhagavata, 10.84.13) "Anyone who comes to a holy place (like Radhakunda)
only to bathe without meeting the learned persons there or recognising them, is
like a cow or an ass." If one wants to keep one's men for the
preaching-mission - for this is the only reason why other Vaisnavas are
systematically slandered - then one may say 'you are not qualified to associate
with such deeply realised souls.' Then one has caught two flies in one blow -
one has glorified the Radhakunda Vaisnavas and at the same time have kept one's
money-machine erect.
c) Babajis are not sahajiyas, for sahajiyas are
Saktas or Mayavadis who have tantric sex with other men's wives, identifying
themselves with Radha and Krsna. Babajis don't do this. They do not imitate the
Gosvamis, but follow them, by wearing the dress Goswamis not only wore
themselves, but also advised all other Vaisnavas to wear in works like the
Hari-bhakti-vilasa and Caitanya-caritamrta (cited previously). Even if they are
playing Vaisnava by falsely wearing the dress it is said:
sadhu sangera alaukika apara sakti hoy
chale sad-vesa-dhari jiva jivanmukti pay
(Advaita-prakasa 9.61)
"The power of saintly association is so
endless that even when one pretentiously dresses as a saint, one will attain
liberation."
No comments:
Post a Comment