Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati on caste goswamis and brahmanas
Expressions researched:
"bhaktisiddhanta"
|"caste"
Sri Caitanya-caritamrta
CC Adi-lila
Balarāma had three wives and nine sons. The youngest son of his first wife was known as Madhusūdana Gosvāmī. He took the title Bhaṭṭācārya and accepted the path of the smārta or Māyāvāda philosophy. Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura notes that the son of Gosvāmī Bhaṭṭācārya, Śrī Rādhāramaṇa Gosvāmī Bhaṭṭācārya, refused the title gosvāmī because it is generally meant for sannyāsīs, those who have taken the renounced order of life. One who is still in family life should not misuse the title gosvāmī. Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura did not recognize the caste gosvāmīs because they were not in the line of the six gosvāmīs in the renounced order who were direct disciples of Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu—namely Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī, Śrīla Sanātana Gosvāmī, Śrīla Bhaṭṭa Raghunātha Gosvāmī, Śrī Gopāla Bhaṭṭa Gosvāmī, Śrī Jīva Gosvāmī and Śrīla Raghunātha dāsa Gosvāmī. Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura said that the gṛhastha āśrama, or the status of family life, is a sort of concession for sense gratification. Therefore a gṛhastha should not falsely adopt the title gosvāmī. The ISKCON movement has never conferred the title gosvāmī upon a householder. Although all the sannyāsīs we have initiated in ISKCON are young, we have awarded them the titles of the renounced order of life, svāmī and gosvāmī, because they have completely dedicated their lives to preach the cult of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu.
Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura said that the gṛhastha āśrama, or the status of family life, is a sort of concession for sense gratification. Therefore a gṛhastha should not falsely adopt the title gosvāmī. The ISKCON movement has never conferred the title gosvāmī upon a householder. Although all the sannyāsīs we have initiated in ISKCON are young, we have awarded them the titles of the renounced order of life, svāmī and gosvāmī, because they have completely dedicated their lives to preach the cult of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu. Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura mentions that not only do the householder caste gosvāmīs disrespect the title gosvāmī, but also, following the principles of the smārta Raghunandana, they exhibit great foolishness by burning a straw image of Advaita Ācārya in a śrāddha ceremony, thus acting like Rākṣasas and disrespecting the Hari-bhakti-vilāsa, which is the guide for Vaiṣṇavas. Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura says that sometimes these smārta caste gosvāmīs write books on Vaiṣṇava philosophy or commentaries on the original scriptures, but a pure devotee should cautiously avoid reading them.
CC Madhya-lila
According to Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura, the regulative principles of devotional service compiled by Gopāla Bhaṭṭa Gosvāmī do not strictly follow our Vaiṣṇava principles. Actually, Gopāla Bhaṭṭa Gosvāmī collected only a summary of the elaborate descriptions of Vaiṣṇava regulative principles from the Hari-bhakti-vilāsa. It is Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Gosvāmī’s opinion, however, that to follow the Hari-bhakti-vilāsa strictly is to actually follow the Vaiṣṇava rituals in perfect order. He claims that the smārta-samāja, which is strictly followed by caste brāhmaṇas, has influenced portions that Gopāla Bhaṭṭa Gosvāmī collected from the original Hari-bhakti-vilāsa. It is therefore very difficult to find out Vaiṣṇava directions from the book of Gopāla Bhaṭṭa Gosvāmī. It is better to consult the commentary made by Sanātana Gosvāmī himself for the Hari-bhakti-vilāsa under the name of Dig-darśinī-ṭīkā.
The prākṛta-sahajiyās are not even worthy of being called Vaiṣṇavas. They think that only caste gosvāmīs should be called Prabhupāda. Such ignorant sahajiyās call themselves vaiṣṇava-dāsa-anudāsa, which means the servant of the servant of the Vaiṣṇavas (CC Madhya 13.80). However, they are opposed to addressing a pure Vaiṣṇava as Prabhupāda. In other words, they are envious of a bona fide spiritual master who is addressed as Prabhupāda, and they commit offenses by considering a bona fide spiritual master an ordinary human being or a member of a certain caste. Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura describes such sahajiyās as most unfortunate. Because of their misconceptions, they fall into a hellish condition.
"Foolish people will blaspheme You, but I shall not tolerate the words of such mischievous people."
Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura remarks that although the brāhmaṇa did not belong to a superior community, he fearlessly chastised so-called caste brāhmaṇas because he was situated on the platform of pure devotional service. There are people who are opposed to Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu’s accepting a Vaiṣṇava belonging to a lower caste. Such people do not consider mahā-prasādam transcendental, and therefore they are described here as mūrkha (foolish) and duṣṭa (mischievous). A pure devotee has the power to challenge such high-caste people, and his brave statements are not to be considered proud or puffed up. On the contrary, he is to be considered straightforward. Such a person does not like to flatter high-class brāhmaṇas who belong to the non-Vaiṣṇava community.
The unwanted creepers have been described by Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura. He states that if one hears and chants without trying to give up offenses, one becomes materially attached to sense gratification. One may also desire freedom from material bondage like the Māyāvādīs, or one may become attached to the yoga-siddhis and desire wonderful yogic powers. If one is attached to wonderful material activities, one is called siddhi-lobhī, greedy for material perfection. One may also be victimized by diplomatic or crooked behavior, or one may associate with women for illicit sex. One may make a show of devotional service like the prākṛta-sahajiyās, or one may try to support his philosophy by joining some caste or identifying himself with a certain dynasty, claiming a monopoly on spiritual advancement. Thus with the support of family tradition, one may become a pseudo guru, or so-called spiritual master. One may become attached to the four sinful activities—illicit sex, intoxication, gambling and meat-eating—or one may consider a Vaiṣṇava to belong to a mundane caste or creed. One may think, "This is a Hindu Vaiṣṇava, and this is a European Vaiṣṇava. European Vaiṣṇavas are not allowed to enter the temples." In other words, one may consider Vaiṣṇavas in terms of birth, thinking one a brāhmaṇa Vaiṣṇava, another a śūdra Vaiṣṇava, another a mleccha Vaiṣṇava and so on. One may also try to carry out a professional business by means of chanting the Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra or reading Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, or one may try to increase his monetary strength by illegal means. Also, one may become a cheap Vaiṣṇava by trying to chant in a secluded place for material adoration, or one may desire mundane reputation by making compromises with nondevotees concerning one’s philosophy or spiritual life, or one may become a supporter of a hereditary caste system. All these are pitfalls of personal sense gratification. Just to cheat some innocent people, one makes a show of advanced spiritual life and becomes known as a sādhu, mahātmā or religious person. All this means that the so-called devotee has become victimized by all these unwanted creepers and that the real creeper, the bhakti-latā, has been stunted.
If a so-called spiritual master accepts a disciple for his personal benefit or for material gain, the relationship between the spiritual master and the disciple turns into a material affair, and the spiritual master becomes like a smārta-guru. There are many caste gosvāmīs who professionally create some disciples who do not care for them or their instructions. Such spiritual masters are satisfied simply to get some material benefits from their disciples. Such a relationship is condemned by Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura, who calls such spiritual masters and disciples a society of cheaters and cheated. They are also called bāulas or prākṛta-sahajiyās. Their aim is to make the connection between the spiritual master and the disciple into a very cheap thing. They are not serious in wanting to understand spiritual life.
CC Antya-lila
Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura writes in his Anubhāṣya that in the opinion of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, the govardhana-śilā, the stone from Govardhana Hill, was directly the form of Kṛṣṇa, the son of Mahārāja Nanda. The Lord used the stone for three years, and then in the heart of Raghunātha dāsa the Lord awakened devotional service to the stone. The Lord then gave the stone to Raghunātha dāsa, accepting him as one of His most confidential servants. However, some envious people conclude that because Raghunātha dāsa had not taken birth in the family of a brāhmaṇa, Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu did not give him the right to worship the Deity directly but instead gave him a stone from Govardhana. This kind of thought is nārakī, or hellish. As stated in the Padma Purāṇa, arcye viṣṇau śilā-dhīr guruṣu nara-matir vaiṣṇave jāti-buddhiḥ . . . yasya vā nārakī saḥ. If one thinks that the worshipable śālagrāma-śilā is a mere stone, that the spiritual master is an ordinary human being or that a pure Vaiṣṇava preaching the bhakti cult all over the world is a member of a particular caste or material division of society, he is considered a nārakī, a candidate for hellish life. When Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu instructed that the govardhana-śilā, the stone taken from Govardhana, is nondifferent from the body of Śrī Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, He indirectly advised such foolish persons that one should not be envious of a Vaiṣṇava who belongs to a different caste or sect. One should accept a Vaiṣṇava as transcendental. In this way one can be saved; otherwise, one is surely awaiting a hellish life.
Because Rāmacandra Purī was a disciple of Mādhavendra Purī, both Paramānanda Purī and Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu offered him respectful obeisances. Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura comments that although Rāmacandra Purī was naturally very envious and although he was against the principles of Vaiṣṇavism—or, in other words, against the principles of the Supreme Personality of Godhead and His devotees—common people nevertheless addressed him as Gosvāmī or Gosāñi because he was superficially in the renounced order and dressed like a sannyāsī. In the modern age the title gosvāmī is used by a caste of gṛhasthas, but formerly it was not. Rūpa Gosvāmī and Sanātana Gosvāmī, for example, were called gosvāmī because they were in the renounced order. Similarly, because Paramānanda Purī was a sannyāsī, he was called Purī Gosvāmī. By careful scrutiny, therefore, one will find that gosvāmī is not the title for a certain caste; rather, it is properly the title for a person in the renounced order.
| Page Title: | Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati on caste goswamis and brahmanas |
| Compiler: | Labangalatika |
| Created: | 07 of Sep, 2009 |
| Totals by Section: | BG=0, SB=0, CC=9, OB=3, Lec=0, Con=0, Let=0 |
| No. of Quotes: | 12 |