Prabhupada's instructions on godbrothers "misunderstood"

[Guest guest]

Prabhupada's instructions on godbrothers "misunderstood"

 

by Bhagavat das

 

Posted April 30, 2005

 

Rocana prabhu considers Aniha prabhu's response inadequate as accounts offered after Srila Prabhupada's departure are "suspect." I will answer using Srila Prabhupada's and Srila Bhaktisiddhanta's verifiable actions and words -- books, lectures, articles, letters, and conversations.

 

Rocana writes: "Narayana Maharaja's own Spiritual Master, along with his fellow Gaudiya Matha spiritual masters . . . reinstated a guru parampara system that Srila Bhaktisiddhanta had essentially rejected." I believe Rocana das has misunderstood Srila Prabhupada's instructions.

 

Srila Prabhupada wrote to Trivikram Maharaja, a disciple of Kesava Maharaja on 22/10/1968:

 

"I have a very close connection with Sri Gaudiya Vedanta Samiti. . . . I am one of the three persons who founded Sri Gaudiya Vedanta Samiti. . . even before Srila [Kesava] Maharaja accepted sannyasa. Respecting the order of [Kesava] Maharaja, I started writing articles for the Gaudiya Patrika regularly. Srila [Kesava] Maharaja greatly appreciated whatever I wrote . . . and many of my articles were published."

 

On receiving the news of the departure of Kesava Maharaja, Srila Prabhupada said in a lecture:

 

"He carried out the wish of my spiritual master and forced me to accept the sannyasa order. . . . My godbrother, Srila Bhakti Prajnana Kesava Maharaja, Krpambudhi, did this favor upon me because he was an ocean of mercy. . . . I am offering my respectful obeisances unto His Holiness, because he forcefully made me adopt this sannyasa order. . . . We are writing like this, 'Resolved that we, the undersigned members and devotees of International Society for Krishna Consciousness, Inc., in a condolence meeting under the presidency of His Divine Grace A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami, today the 21st of October, 1968, at our Seattle branch, express our profound bereavement on hearing the passing of His Divine Grace Om Visnupada Sri Srimad Bhaktiprajnana Kesava Gosvami Maharaja, the sannyasa guru-preceptor of our spiritual master. . . .' "

 

Srila Prabhupada's asking forgiveness from his godbrothers "was simply a gesture of genuine humility and magnanimity" and did not refer to "previous contentious critical comments," claims Rocana das. However, Srila Prabhupada's voice in this lecture is filled with emotion for his diksha-guru Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati and for his sannyasa-guru Kesava Maharaja. To dismiss this mood in the above letter and lecture as insincere is unfair to Srila Prabhupada, whose statements are practically identical in both.

 

In a recorded Bengali conversation with Srila Narayana Maharaja, Srila Prabhupada directly asks forgiveness: "While preaching, many times we say things contrary to each other, or we cut each other's philosophical arguments. That happens. Please ask my godbrothers to forgive my offenses." It is not difficult to hear the remorse, forgiveness and love. Srila Prabhupada was genuinely sorry for having spoken harshly; to do so had not been a mistake, but he wanted to show the impropriety of speaking about them contentiously and, for us, offensively.

 

Also, in the letter to Trivikrama Maharaja, Srila Prabhupada writes: "If you have any nice photograph of [Kesava Maharaja], then kindly send it to me. I will get a life-size oil painting made of it and, along with a picture of [bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati] I will place it in my prominent centers, particularly New York, Hollywood, London and so forth."

 

If Kesava Maharaja had offended Srila Bhaktisiddhanta, why would Prabhupada start a preaching society with him? Why would Prabhupada do editing and writing, "respecting the order of Srila Kesava Maharaja," if he had been offensive to Bhaktisiddhanta? Why would Prabhupada take sannyasa from him and want his picture displayed?

 

In a biography of Srila Kesava Maharaja it states that after Bhaktisiddhanta left this world, some of his disciples, including Kesava Maharaja's brother Audulomi, opposed Bhaktisiddhanta's instructions. Kesava Maharaja uncompromisingly said: "I don't want to see the face of anyone opposed to Srila Gurupada-padma [bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati]. Audulomi Maharaja is my brother from my previous ashram and in paramarthika (spiritual) life he is my godbrother. Even so, from now on I have no connection or relationship with him whatsoever." Kesava Maharaja never saw or spoke to Audulomi again. Srila Prabhupada appreciated Kesava Maharaja's strict standards, writing to Sripad Trivikram Maharaja: "Srila Kesava Maharaja used to deal with these guru-tyagis (those who renounce their guru) and guru-bhogis (those who enjoy the property of their guru) with sword in hand."

 

Why would Kesava Maharaja renounce his brother if he himself were guilty of the same offense? The above letter, lecture, and the conduct of Kesava Maharaja contradict Rocana's claim that Narayana Maharaja's guru disobeyed Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati's order. That Srila Prabhupada engaged in an intimate spiritual relationship with Kesava Maharaja proves that he could not have been an offender to Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati.

 

Srila Prabhupada wrote Trivikrama Maharaja: "This desire of [bhaktisiddhanta] was transmitted into his heart, and it was thus that my sannyasa was accomplished." In the lecture he states: "I am feeling very much obliged to [Kesava Maharaja] that he carried out the wish of my spiritual master and forced me to accept the sannyasa order."

 

According to the Srimad Bhagavatam, transcendental knowledge is transmitted from guru to disciple via the heart (tene brahma hrdaya). For Bhaktisiddhanta's desire to have been transmitted into his heart, Kesava Maharaja must have been a transparent via media and pure devotee himself. How could he have given sannyasa in the Bhagavat-parampara if he himself were not in the Bhagavat-parampara? For the ten thousand disciples of Kesava Maharaja, he is the preceptor who carried on the Bhagavat-parampara lineage.

 

Srila Prabhupada refers to Kesava Maharaja as his "sannyasa guru-preceptor" for having forcibly taught the lesson of renunciation. Prabhupada respected Kesava -- on whose order he regularly wrote articles for the Gaudiya Patrika -- and joined him in starting a Vaisnava society. Kesava Maharaja was Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati's Yogapitha manager; he risked his own life to save Bhaktisiddhanta from an angry mob by changing clothes with him; he renounced his brother for his Guru Maharaja.

 

While Rocana das is technically correct that Srila Prabhupada made no direct statement about Kesava Maharaja being in the Bhagavat-parampara, Prabhupada recognized him as part of the guru-parampara by writing the letter and publicly declaring (21/10/1968) his gratitude for "forcing" him to accept sannyas. Unless Rocana disputes Prabhupada's words, I believe he will have to admit that Bhakti Prajnana Kesava Maharaja received transcendental knowledge in the Bhagavat and Guru-parampara.

 

In "Thakur Bhaktivinode," a 1931 article, Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati writes: "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." The use of the word 'appearance' proves that the pure devotees took birth by the order of Krishna and Guru [srila Bhaktivinode Thakur], not as conditioned jivas who became sadhana-siddha pure devotees by the practice of sadhana. He is speaking of nitya-siddhas, eternally liberated souls who never took birth in the material world through ahankara and karma. By using the plural 'pure devotees,' he indicates there were many, not just him, and the word 'appeared' indicates they were eternally liberated.

 

In 1931 the Gaudiya Matha was preaching far and wide, spreading the sankirtan movement in India. Some leading devotees were Srila Bhakti Prajnana Kesava Maharaja, Srila Sridhar Maharaja, Srila Madhava Maharaja, and Srila Bhakti Pramod Puri Maharaja, to name a few. Bhaktisiddhanta said these devotees were rendering unalloyed devotional service not tinged by karma or jnana and solely for the satisfaction of the senses of Sri Sri Radha Krishna. The statements of Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati are clear and unambiguous. Srila Prabhupada concurs: "There are many societies and associations of pure devotees, and if someone with just a little faith begins to associate with such societies, his advancement to pure devotional service is rapid." (Nectar of Devotion, Ch. 19)

 

Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu established service in its highest form. Of the different limbs of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu's pure devotional movement, the quote from Rupa Goswami's book could only be referring to the disciples of Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati.

 

Srila Prabhupada expresses in the following letter to Bhagavat Maharaja (21/8/1969) almost the same sentiment as in his Srimad Bhagavatam purport (4.28.31)

 

"Practically there is no difference of opinion in our missionary activities, especially because we all are deriving inspiration from His Divine Grace Prabhupada Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Goswami Maharaja. I think all of our godbrothers are doing the same missionary activities without a doubt, but still the regrettable fact is we are doing all separately, not in conjunction."

 

Srila Prabhupada is not simply being humble and magnanimous when he appreciates his godbrothers; he sincerely means what he says because he has "indelibly enshrined [it] within his purports to divine scriptures," as Rocana das poetically states. Furthermore Srila Prabhupada is echoing the sentiments of his own Guru Maharaja, who wrote that Bhaktivinode Thakur's greatest gift was bringing about the appearance of pure devotees. If Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati and Srila Prabhupada recognize these devotees as unalloyed nitya-siddha devotees, how can we argue?

 

Nitya-siddhas are qualified to initiate and train disciples in the principles of pure devotional service. In the time of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, several persons are listed as carrying on the Sampradaya. However, Ramananda Roy, Sarvabhauma Bhattacharya, Gadadhar Pandit and Srivas Thakur are not listed, yet are surely qualified and must be in the Bhagavat-parampara. Though his godbrothers did not preach as extensively nor make Prabhupada's profound impact, Bhaktisiddhanta and Prabhupada considered them pure representatives of the Sampradaya and recommended that one can receive siksha and diksha from them. Such exalted disciples as Kesava Maharaja, Sridhar Maharaja, Madhava Maharaja, and B.P. Puri Maharaja have demonstrated by their books, articles and preaching that they are also topmost teachers of the Sampradaya doctrine.

 

On January 14, 1975, Srila Prabhupada wrote Madhava Maharaja:

 

"I understand from the letter of Asita das that he has gone to your place in Jagannatha Puri. He has asked permission from me for taking [Gayatri mantra] initiation from you. I have given him my permission and you can initiate him if you like so that he may increase his devotional service there."

 

Srila Prabhupada addresses Madhava Maharaja with respect and indicates that he can, by the spiritual power Bhaktisiddhanta invested in him, increase the devotional service of Prabhupada's Hari Nam disciple; this is a guru's activity. Only nine months prior, Srila Prabhupada forbade us to associate with his godbrothers. His letter to Rupanuga das (28/4/1974) accused Madhava Maharaja of being part of a group including Tirtha Maharaja and Bon Maharaja trying to pollute his disciples and said they were unfit to be Acharya. Yet now he was offering his Hari Nam disciple to Madhava for Gayatri mantra initiation in tacit recognition of Madhava Maharaja's qualifications to be Guru or Acharya (these two are interchangeable terms, according to Srila Prabhupada's 1936 Vyasa Puja homage). Thus Srila Prabhupada countered his earlier letter to Rupanuga with new instructions; I believe it was his intention all along to work conjointly with the Gaudiya Matha when we were more mature in our devotional service.

 

To imply that Srila Prabhupada did not accept Madhava Maharaja as a guru but was just trying to encourage him would mean that Prabhupada was cold-heartedly sacrificing a Hari Nam disciple for political reasons. I believe Srila Prabhupada's criticism of his godbrothers was encouragement, similar to a teammate's chastising another for not performing to the utmost. Srila Prabhupada kept us from his godbrothers till we matured enough to deal with them correctly. His godbrothers were not in accord with his style of preaching but were one in Siddhanta and service, as his purports to Srimad Bhagavatam 4.28.31 and 4.30.8 declare. It is dangerous for us to weigh in on a controversy that Srila Prabhupada says is "not material" but "to be taken as spiritual." That is why Prabhupada often forbade their association. Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati is of the same opinion, which is obviously where Srila Prabhupada gets it from:

 

"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)

 

We should beware of judging disciples of Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati, even if we rationalize it as on behalf of and in defense of our guru. Srila Prabhupada writes Brahmananda das about this: "Even amongst our godbrothers we have misunderstanding but none of us is astray from the service of Krishna. . . . Even if there was misunderstanding amongst the godbrothers of my Guru Maharaja, none of them deviated from the transcendental loving service of Krishna."

 

Rocana would have us believe that Srila Prabhupada enshrined only criticisms of his godbrothers in his purports but the quotes from Srimad Bhagavatam, Nectar of Devotion, Bhaktisiddhanta's articles and Brahma-samhita recognize the godbrothers' pure devotion and the danger of criticizing them.

 

"The cult of Caitanya philosophy . . . has been taken up by some enthusiastic sages like Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Gosvami Maharaja and his disciples. We shall eagerly wait for the happy days of Bhagavata-dharma, or prema-dharma, inaugurated by the Lord Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu." -- Srimad-Bhagavatam, Introduction

 

Bhaktisiddhanta declared his disciples nitya-siddhas, Prabhupada accepted them thus, and both warn that pure devotees' apparent quarreling is an all-loving controversy only understandable by unalloyed devotees. The godbrothers of Srila Prabhupada do not deviate from unalloyed devotional service to Krishna even when they quarrel and, therefore, they never fall down.

 

That "all of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta's disciples who didn't fall down are also members of the Bhagavata parampara" is not 'innuendo,' as Rocana claims, but is the teaching of both Bhaktisiddhanta and Prabhupada.

 

Finally, Rocana prabhu asks about ISKCON gurus.This article describes the standards for being in the Bhagavata parampara. If any ISKCON guru fulfils those standards he is in the Bhagavata parampara. Let readers make their own decisions.

 

 

 

[theist 1]

It is possible to simply not hear from someone in favor of hearing from someone else without feeling such strong aversion and animosity towards those you choose not to hear from.

 

A student goes to college. He enrolls in one persons class who he has wanted to study under. That means he has not chosen to hear from the other teachers who are teaching the same subject. It is nothing against them it is just his attraction has taken him in a different direction.

 

Now others will make an opposite choice to his and become students of those he has not chosen for himself.

 

Now is it considered very mature if when these students of different teachers happen to meet they start criticizing each others teachers and fighting over which teacher is best?

 

Or is it more mature to politely discuss the common subject matter when they meet even as they are both walking to the rooms of their separate classes where they will split up and enter different doors.

 

Can't devotees show a level of maturity that is common amongst ordinary school kids?

 

Good lord! Decades are passing.

[Guest guest]

Bhagavat Prabhu's essay was recently published on Jagannatha's Charkra. It's a reply to Rochan Prabhu's article published months before. It seems that Chakra must have found this essay very controversial since it took them so long to post it. So the eternal war goes on. Some have known about it for decades and some will discover it tommorrow as life in Krsna Consciousness goes on eternally. Of course it only goes on by His Divine Grace.

[Guest guest]

Haribol. We are required by Srila Prabhupada to become paramahamsa. A swan can drink from a mixture of milk and water, and take only one and leaving the other, as desired.

 

No one else is dying here, just me, Im dying, imminent and inevitable. So I read, and rejection or acceptance is all in my hands. I have a spiritual master, actually, a whole bunch of them, and they guide me, and they all tell me one thing in common. Scrutinizingly understand this philosophy. This means thay all require the truth to be discerned by the disciple. They speak plainly so we dummies can perhaps get a grasp. But discerning the truth is up to the disciple.

 

So, I read one, and do not get all buzzy if someone disagrees with what I agree with. I use an example of one I consider my guru as presented on:

 

http://www.geocities.com/mahaksadasa/dsp.html

 

This is how we handle disagreement, dont sacrifice spiritual life because you disagree with a vaisnava, celebrate the diversity. Hare Krsna, ys, mahaksadasa

[Guest guest]

There are inherent controversial points in Bhagavat's essay which was recently posted on Jagannatha’s Chakra. It’s very difficult to give an objective view point without trying to plug our guru or mission. I think that he does a good job trying to be objective but it’s obvious that the perspective is from the Narayana Maharaja camp. For instance if it was coming from the Sridhar Maharaja camp there would have been stress on the historical fact that Keshava Maharaja took sannyasa from Sridhar Maharaja. The big split between these groups was triggered, according to Sridhar Maharaja’s disciple and official acharya of his Math, Govinda Maharaja, by Keshava Maharaja’s disciples not following their guru’s sannyasa guru (Sridhar Maharaja). Yet according to Sridhar Maharaja, Keshava Maharaja and another godbrother left the Sri Caitanya Saraswat Math a quarter of a century earlier because they often stood opposed to his wishes. Of course this is another historical point that’s missing, that of Keshava Maharaja’s affiliation with Sridhar Maharaja’s Math in the early days before the Gaudiya Vedanta Samiti. It’s amazing how political the idea of offenses can become. Sridhar Maharaja expressed his opinion in his Math’s publication that Rathayatra in Navadvipa was rasa bhasa and that it is wrong to hold Rathayatra in the big cities of the world for “so called preaching” purposes. This set off a war between these two maths which many of Sridhar Maharaja’s followers are still fighting currently some thirty five years later. Yet it’s ironic that there was not so much as a peep out of ISKCON as Srila Prabhupada chose to ignore the whole issue and the split between his relatives. Its also very curious how many current day followers of Sridhar Maharaja continue to bash Narayana Maharaja over this issue as if Vaishnava aparadha is some sort of sport. Of course their enthusiastic offense making is not helped by the fact the Gaudiya Vedanta Samiti never accepted the validity of Govinda Maharaja’s “appointment” as acarya. Perhaps this could be construed as an offense by some but the Samiti not under any obligation to accept that Sridhar Maharaja had appointed a successor. Anyway you would think that all these points could be settled in a reasonable manner for the sake of a combined preaching effort.

[theist 1]

 

Anyway you would think that all these points could be settled in a reasonable manner for the sake of a combined preaching effort.

 

 

Or they could just be let go and fade off into the past unsettled and forgotten. What would be the loss? What could be the gain?

 

[Guest guest]

Maybe Daslave is trying to stir things up? Of course have you ever thought that if others commit more offenses it could be on you (Daslave)? It would be great if these things would just fade away, yes. But just recently when Western followers of Narayana Maharaja went to Govinda Maharaja's Math to visit Sridhar Maharaja's Samadhi , a Western Sannyasi was not allowed to speak, even to his own group. I would expect this in contemporary ISKCON but at the Samadhi of the author of "Sri Guru and His Grace"? Sad but true. So now I've stirred things up, but let the "truth" be known. Anyway Daslave seems to have more info on the background of all this.

[Guest guest]

Hare Krsna! Now I'm stirred up. I have a hard time with Right Wing so-called spiritual leaders. If the free flow of information which will help others make an informed choice is repressed then that's what I call Right Wing. Let the devotees have their say, unless someone is an overboard offender, why not? What are you afraid of? It's always the group that's afraid of loosing their members and dollars that's gaging others voices. So whether its a GBC in S. California or a math in India... This is why Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati wrote that article oppossing organized religion.

[muralidhar_das 0]

You people shouldn't talk about these things since neither of you know the real facts.

[Guest guest]

So let the "real facts" be know. We are all grownups here (I think) and can handle it, Proceeed...

[muralidhar_das 0]

Srila Sridhar Maharaj: "I avoided Keshava Maharaj, Madhava Maharaj and so many others. I came to live alone."

 

Just leave this. There is no need to continue.

 

You won't make any progress on the path back home, back to Godhead, by stirring up controversy.

[Guest guest]

Muralidhara Prabhu, Can you quote Sridhar Maharaja's explanation of Bhaktisiddhanta's poem: matala harijana kirtana range/pujala raga-patha gaurava bhange. I notice that you put it at the end of all your posts. So it must be relevant and not controversial to all the followers of Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati.

[muralidhar_das 0]

matala harijana kirtana range

pujala raga-patha gaurava bhange

- Srila Bhakti Siddhanta Saraswati Thakur

 

Go to this page to read the explanation:

http://scsmath.com/memories/04/040114_nbdwp_jms_webpage/index2.htm

 

 

I have just decided to change my signature to the Hare Krishna Mahamantra. See below.

[Guest guest]

I understand that Sridhar Maharaja sent Prabhupada (Swami Maharaja) to Keshava Maharaja for sannyasa initiation. Sridhar Maharaja felt too close to Prabhupada's family. So if he did not revere Keshava Maharaja, why would he do this? Obviously after the breakup of the Gaudiya Math Sridhar maharaja became almost like a babaji and did not want friction and competition within his own small mission. He stood alone, yes, but he still had connection with Keshava Maharaja, Swami Maharaja, B.P. Puri Maharaja and a few others. Sridhar Maharaja was not one to adapt a style to facilitate world preaching. Certainly Keshava Maharaja had at least several maths in different regions of India. And Prabhupada was preparing to preach far and wide, by hook or by crook. Still it was Sridhar Maharaja who was their godbrother-siksha guru and his opinions on siddhanta were generally given deference. But for the sake of preaching we see that Swami Maharaja and Keshava Maharaja took the risk of taking Rathayatra "on the road". Sridhar Maharaja and his godbrother-sannyasa sishyas continued to have great love and trust for each other during their manifest pastimes despite what transpired amongst the next generation of their lines. If all of us our really followers of Prabhupada Swami Maharaja, either directly or indirectly, then how is it incumbent upon us to take sides in this controversy. Obviously Prabhupada did not. The only way that we could take sides is to actually pretend to be something that we are not; that we were not given the chance for Krsna Consciousness by Prabhupada's coming to the West and the ensuing miracle. Therefore if we must not impune material motives to the mahapurusha pure devotees in their apparent disagreements. Pray that the cloud of offenses and counter offenses passes from above our heads and then as Sridhar Maharaja has stated, we will see only the holy feet of Visnu there.

[muralidhar_das 0]

<blockquote>

I understand that Sridhar Maharaja sent Prabhupada (Swami Maharaja) to Keshava Maharaja for sannyasa initiation.

</blockquote>

No. Srila Sridhar Maharaj told him to go to Sripad Bhakti Vilasa Tirtha Maharaj.

 

May I ask, please find out the real facts about the life of Srila Sridhar Maharaj before you go making statements about how he was "like a babaji" and wotnot. This is just untrue. Besides the temple in Nabadwip which Srila Sridhar Maharaj established after he separated from Keshava Maharaj in the early 1940's, Srila Sridhar Maharaj opened up a temple in Calcutta too. Srila Sridhar Maharaj sent his disciple Gaurendu Brahmacari (Srila Govinda Maharaj) to live at that temple. Where was that temple? It was upstairs at 7 Sitakanta Banerjee Lane - the family home of Srila Bhaktivedanta Abhay Charan De.

 

Srila Sridhar Maharaj had hundreds of disciples in Bengal and he preached widely in India in 1940-1960. Get your facts right. Please.

 

Srila Govinda Maharaj:

<blockquote> Even when Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Math was just two thatched houses, there would be many thousands of people coming to attend the festivals and take prashadam - just like now. Srila Guru Maharaj was able to provide prashadam for everyone by the energy of the devotees' collection. Every year Madhusudan Maharaj would go out to collect for the festivals with us, and sometimes Jajavar Maharaj would also come.

</blockquote>

 

And also, Srila Sridhar Maharaj was never against holding Ratha Yatra festivals "in the big cities of the world". Before saying anything about this, please understand exactly what Srila Sridhar Maharaj really taught us about Ratha-yatra, Gaura-lila, the meeting of Radha-Govinda at Kurukshetra and other related events. It is there in the books. Read these books carefully, before making any more scrambled-brains statements about what Srila Sridhar Maharaj said or did.

 

 

[Guest guest]

So you are saying that Sridhar Maharaja first sent Prabhupada to Bhakti Vilas Tirtha Maharaja. But obviously Prabhupada declined to go. So was it then that Sridhar Maharaja suggest that he take sannyasa from Keshava Maharaja? Certainly it is a fact that Keshava Maharaja took Sannyasa from Sridhar Maharaja. Obviously you have a better knowledge of the history of Sridhar Maharaja but Samvad was seemingly just echoing the point of Prabhupada (Swamiji), to put aside diferences and preach in a combined way. By the way the pictures of the "pujala raga patha..." relief at your math are very amazing and your Govinda Maharaja has done a great service.

[muralidhar_das 0]

I understand that Srila Prabhupada did go and ask Sripad Bhakti Vilasa Tirtha Maharaj for sannyas.

[Guest guest]

Preaching in a combined way for this was, according to Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, the desire of Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Prabhupada. And then it was in turn Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada's desire. Not ISKCON GBC Style, where there is an attempt to amalgamize everyone, including gurus, into a Vaticanized central administration. But rather way in which the maths are decentralized but working together to more effeciently utilize Krsna's energy in their approach to the public. For each mission to stay so seperate also leads to suspicion and mistrust. During the 1950's Anti-Communist hysteria, the opposition would often joke that, "they are looking for a Communist under every bed". So why look for a Sahajiya in every group except our own; in other words a Sahajiya under every bed. Such an approach may help neophyte disciples stay at home, but it will surely repress those in the next stage from venturing out of the nest and "flying there own airplane" (of course never outside of the guidance of the advanced devotees).

[Guest guest]

The signature is the wrong way around. It says 'Hare Rama' first before 'Hare Krishna'.

[muralidhar_das 0]

Sorry!

[Guest guest]

There is no hard and fast rules. Harinam cannot be polluted by mistakes. See Narada to Vyasadeva, concerning imperfect composition having no effect on transcendental science.

 

haribol, ys, mahaksadasa

[Guest guest]

Here are a few facts from the lips of Srila Govinda Maharaj

he speaks quite candidly about these early histories with loving rememberance of a great era of vaisnavas. The few discordant moments, in a whole life of audarya distribution around many great souls, he generally dissmises as mere hickups at a glorious feast. But he never dwells on such matters in the light of his present service to Srila Sridhara Maharaj.

I have personally heard Srila Govinda Maharaj address Srila Kesava Maharaj as a Siddha purush devotee with the uttmost respect for him. We have to be careful who we hear from, and especially how we pass that on to others.

 

 

Devotee: What influence do you feel Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Math has had on other vaishnava missions?

 

Srila Govinda Maharaj: Actually Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Math is the ashram of Srila Sridhar Maharaj. The name may be anything but the person behind that is very important – Guru Maharaj. Everybody came and joined his

programme in those early days. They would come at least four times a year to see Guru Maharaj, more if they felt it necessary. Guru Maharaj influenced everybody, even his enemies respected him. Whatever Guru Maharaj would say they always would at least consider it. Maybe eighty percent of his Godbrothers who came out from the Gaudiya Math with him respected him as their Guru. Jajavar Maharaj, Madhava Maharaj, Goswami Maharaj, Kesava

Maharaj, Bhakti Prakasharanya Maharaj, Ashram Maharaj, Bhakti Hriday Bon Maharaj, many Godbrothers of Guru Maharaj who were great preachers all over India would come to the Math, at least twenty sannyasis from time to time

would visit Guru Maharaj. Only Sripad Tirtha Maharaj didn’t come. He was living with Vasudev Prabhu. Some Godbrothers thought they knew more than Guru Maharaj but his decision they would always respect and take on their

head.

 

After Prabhupad Srila Saraswati Thakur left many Godbrothers took sannyas from Guru Maharaj, that is, Sripad Paramahamsa Maharaj, Goswami Maharaj, Kesava Maharaj, Madhusudan Maharaj, Acharyya Maharaj, Nrsimha Maharaj. They

were all good preachers. I have one photo of them when they came to our Math. Guru Maharaj gave me a camera to take their photograph. Within two years of me joining many changes occurred. They were critical years of my

life.

 

Devotee: Did you oversee the design and construction of the buildings in Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Math?

 

Srila Govinda Maharaj: Yes, I was in charge of that, but Guru Maharaj would direct things at times.

 

Devotee: Were you responsible for many duties in the Math?

Srila Govinda Maharaj: Formerly five years after I joined I was the secretary. At that time Guru Maharaj was staying in our Math just advising and directing and we would just follow his instructions.

 

Devotee: Some in Iskcon appear to see Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Mission as an opposing mission instead of complementing Swami Swami Maharaj’s mission.

Can you clarify this unfortunate conception?

 

Srila Govinda Maharaj: Actually Guru and Maharaj and Swami Maharaj were both very intimate friends. Also Swami Maharaj considered Guru Maharaj to be his siksa guru. That is a fact. Swami Maharaj wanted to make Guru Maharaj

the head of his mission when he was in his grhastra life. At that time he tried but Guru Maharaj was not eager to take the position of president of any society. Guru Maharaj declined and with honour he advised Swami Maharaj

to go to Goswami Maharaj who was also very great. Goswami Maharaj was preaching heavily all over India and was a very dear friend of Swami Maharaj. Swami Maharaj was my guardian. I lived in his house for some

years. Guru Maharaj gave that guardianship to him asking him to “keep this boy.” Swami Maharaj taught me Srimad Bhagavad Gita. At that time he was Abhay Babu, but a great preacher.

 

 

So my fortune is very good. I have two Gurus, one sika guru and one diksa guru. Ten to twelve years I stayed in Swami Maharaj’s house. I was in charge of cleaning the house, washing clothes etc. I would rise at 3am. At

that time there was no electricity, only kerosene lamps. I studied Sanskrit while Guru Maharaj was in Navadwip. He told me to learn Bhagavad Gita from Swami Maharaj. From eight to nine-thirty most mornings he would teach me.

Our relationship was very much family, sometimes I would quarrel with his son Mathura, but he gave nourishment and affection happily to both of us.

 

 

Before Srila Prabhupad Saraswati Thakur left, Srila Swami Maharaj maybe had only a few months association with him all told. Swami Maharaj associated mostly with Guru Maharaj in his life, maybe ten or twelve years in Swami

Maharaj’s house. Guru Maharaj would go to Calcutta preaching and Swami Maharaj would bring people to hear from Guru Maharaj. We saw when he returned form his world tours that he would always go to Guru Maharaj to report and discuss his preaching and missionary work. Guru Maharaj was very happy to hear about his programme. At that time Swami Maharaj proposed to Guru Maharaj, “You are not going to the west but the west is coming to you.

So you can come to Mayapur and stay there with me. My disciples will make two houses, one for you and one for me and we shall stay together. Also you can’t walk down to the ground floor, so I will arrange an elevator for you.”

Their relationship was very intimate, they were close friends. Swami Maharaj always conversed with Guru Maharaj and got much satisfaction through those talks with him. Anyhow, one day Swami Maharaj told Guru Maharaj, “I

have no real association to consult about Krsna consciousness and preaching work and no Godbrothers will help. So I am inviting you to please come and stay in Mayapur and we will be very happy together.” But Guru Maharaj said he would come from time to time but could not stay in Mayapur all the time as Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Math was already established and he didn’t want to

leave aparadha-bhanjan-pat in Koladwip.

 

[jagatpurush 0]

to hear a pre-ISKCON view of Prabhupada. thanks, Guestji.

[Guest guest]

What Bhagavat fails to address is the letter to Rupanuga itself. Srila Prabhupada instructs his disciples to avoid his godbrothers because they may sometimes impede his mission. Srila Prabhupada does not say to offend them or judge them, or critisize them, just don't mix. If he later sent one person for Gayatri innitiation, that doesn't change the original instruction to his disciples, whether we like that instruction or not, or whether we label ourselves as "mature" or not.

Srila Prabhupada accomplished amazing things in a very short time. I assume he saw some subtle differences that would take his mission down a different road then where he wanted it to go. So far Srila Prabhupada has been right on again and again. All the ISKCON screw-ups (and my personal screw-ups) are due to a deviation from his instructions.

[krsna 3]

Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saravati Goswami

 

The idea of an organized church in an intelligible form, indeed, marks the close of the living spiritual movement. The great ecclesiastical establishments are the dikes and the dams to retain the current that cannot be held by any such contrivances. They, indeed, indicate a desire on the part of the masses to exploit a spiritual movement for their own purpose. They also unmistakably indicate the end of the absolute and unconventional guidance of the bona-fide spiritual teacher.