"Perskaičiau tavo laišką, kurio data 24 d. Aṣta-kālīya-līlā, apie kurią girdėjai Vrindavanoje iš Vaišnavų, be abejonių, turėtų būti labai gerbiama. Tačiau tas būdas, kuriuo esant užterštoje būsenoje suprantami šie žaidimai, yra visiškai pagadintas.
Kai kurie sėkmingi asmenys turi sugebėjimą pažinti šiuos dalykus po to, kai labai ilgai kartojo šventą vardą, kadangi tai yra tikrojo "aš" tapatybė. Bet tai galima sužinoti tik po to, kai žmogus išvaduojamas nuo mentalinių užterštumų. Kai prabunda ši dvasinė tapatybė, žmogus savaime turi nuolatinį savo dvasinės formos suvokimą.
Tie, kas sako, kad gali pamokyti ar atskleisti šią tapatybę, užsiima apgavyste; to neįmanoma padaryti. Iš kitos pusės, jeigu bhaktas gauna atitinkamą įkvėpimą po to, kai ilgą laiką nuoširdžiai kartojo, jis turėtų eiti pas sad-guru ar pažengusius bhaktus ir prašyti, kad jie tą patvirtintų ir apvalytų.
Dvasinė tapatybė turi vienuolika aspektų (ekadāśa-bhāva). Yra daug tokių nesąžiningų guru, kurie dirbtinai per prievartą maitina šiais įvardijimais nekvalifikuotus praktikuotojus, bet mes negalime to vadinti dvasinio tobulumo požymiu.
Tie, kas pasiekė buvimo fiksuotais jų dvasinėje tapatybėje tobulumą (svarūpa-siddhi), pasiekė tokį suvokimą per vidinį apreiškimą, ir dvasinio mokytojo vienintelis dalyvavimas šituose dalykuose yra padėti tolesnei mokinio pažangai. Kai praktikuotojas daro pažangą link dvasinio tobulumo, visi šie dalykai yra natūraliai apreiškiami širdyje, kuri nuoširdžiai siekia tarnystės."
I have noted your letter dated the 24th. The aṣta-kālīya-līlā, about which you have heard from the Vaiṣṇavas in Vṛndāvana, should be highly regarded no doubt. But the way in which these pastimes are conceived of in the contaminated state is totally corrupt.
Some fortunate individuals are capable of knowing these things after chanting for a long time, for that is the identity of the true self. But it can only be known after one is freed of mental contaminations. With the awakening of this spiritual identity, one automatically has constant cognition of his spiritual form.
Those who say that they can teach or reveal this identity are practicing a kind of deception; it cannot be done. On the other hand, if a devotee receives some inspiration after sincerely chanting for a long time, he should go to the sad-guru or advanced devotees and ask for it to be confirmed and purified by them.
The spiritual identity has eleven aspects (ekadāśa-bhāva). There are many cases of unscrupulous gurus who artificially force-feed these designations on unqualified practitioners, but we cannot call this the mark of spiritual perfection.
Those who have achieved the perfection of being fixed in their spiritual identity (svarupa-siddhi) have attained such a realization through internal revelation, and the spiritual master’s only involvement in these matters is to help the further advancement of a disciple. As a practitioner progresses toward spiritual perfection, all these things are revealed naturally within the heart that sincerely seeks service.
(September 4th, 1976)
There seems to be a major problem with Nitāi dāsa, Prabhupāda's former servant. He was supposed to be helping to establish the gurukula here as well as the Deity worship, but he has not been seen since visiting Prabhupāda in Bombay two weeks ago. Rūpa Vilāsa dāsa, who has been here about six months and is heading up the gurukula, came to see Prabhupāda in the evening to discuss what to do.
Śrīla Prabhupāda questioned Rūpa Vilāsa about Nitāi's propensities. His approach was that if Nitāi was not happy in his service then that could be adjusted to something that he liked to do.
Rūpa Vilāsa said that Nitāi was a good scholar; he liked to study languages and to write, but he was not an effective teacher.
Prabhupāda asked if he had written anything, and when Rūpa Vilāsa said he had done some Back to Godhead articles, Prabhupāda asked, "So why does he not write? If he has got a taste for something particular he can do that. But nobody knows where he is." He shook his head in disapproval and disappointment. "He's not fixed up. He wanted to take charge of the Deity worship, then he went away."
It was mentioned by Gopāla Kṛṣṇa and Harikeśa Maharāja that he left with 4,000 rupees and was said to be now living in Rādhā-kuṇḍa.
Prabhupāda was a little disgusted. "Just see."
One of the devotees added, "One boy came from Bombay, he told me [Nitāi said], 'If I leave, I have to go.'"
Prabhupāda shook his head. "Then he's [at] Rādhā-kuṇḍa. He has taken 4,000 rupees and gone to Rādhā-kuṇḍa. This is his taste. Sit idly, and become famous as very good scholar."
Rūpa Vilāsa said that Nitāi did not attend many classes, nor even teach very often.
Prabhupāda curled his lips a little in dissatisfaction. "Restless, that's all. Mind not fixed-up. Restless. Now what he'll do with that 4,000 rupees? It is very good program. If I get some thousands of rupees and sit down in Rādhā-kuṇḍa and eat, that is very good idea."
Gopāla Kṛṣṇa said he thought they could find him.
Prabhupāda, however, said it wasn't a question of finding him. "That is not difficult. But what is his mentality. Why he has gone to Rādhā-kuṇḍa if he was teaching here? You cannot rely upon him." Prabhupāda paused for a second and then said, "Rādhārāṇī's place, if anyone thinks that it is very easy to remain in Rādhā-kuṇḍa, the topmost place ... Rūpa Gosvāmī has spoken—he must speak about Rādhā-kuṇḍa. But what he has spoken about other things? Atyāhāraḥ prayāsaś ca prajalpo niyamāgrahaḥ / jana-saṅgaś ca laulyaṁ ca ṣaḍbhir bhaktir vinaśyati. So Rādhā-kuṇḍa, who will live Rādhā-kuṇḍa? One who is topmost devotee, and if he mixes with third-class devotee, how he is fit for living in Rādhā-kuṇḍa? There is no difference between Rādhā-kuṇḍa and Rādhārāṇī. So how you can jump over Rādhārāṇī?
Rādhā-kuṇḍa and Rādhārāṇī nondifferent. How you can enjoy Rādhā-kuṇḍa by swimming? You cannot touch with your feet even Rādhā-kuṇḍa. You can take little water and keep it on the head. That is respectful to Rādhā-kuṇḍa. Of course, things are going on like that, but strictly speaking, Rādhā-kuṇḍa should be respected as Rādhārāṇī herself. That is Rādhā-kuṇḍa consciousness. Highest Rādhā-kuṇḍa consciousness. And if you want to live in Rādhā-kuṇḍa, then why he has taken 4,000 rupees from Giriraja?"
Gopāla informed Prabhupāda that the money was given to Nitāi to buy books for the library in the new temple.
Prabhupāda, practical as always, asked, "So why should he take the responsibility for purchasing if he's interested in Rādhā-kuṇḍa?"
Gopāla added that Nitāi had also received a few hundred dollars recently from his wife in America.
Prabhupāda's focus wasn't on how much money Nitāi had; he was concerned about his consciousness. "That's all right. Money is not the strength for understanding Rādhārāṇī. If you have got some money, by the strength of money you'll understand Rādhārāṇī—that is another bogus thing."
Bhagatji said that Nitāi had been running around to hear from one big gosvāmī after another.
Śrīla Prabhupāda felt that this was the real point. "Here there are very big saints and gosvāmīs. But we have accepted a very simple and insignificant work, that, as Caitanya Mahāprabhu wants, pṛthivīte āche yata nagarādi grāma ... this is what we want. [CB Antya-khaṇḍa 4.126] We don't want to be big, big gosāi, we don't want to be famous. We want to be simply a menial servant of Caitanya Mahāprabhu and preach to others. Caitanya Mahāprabhu said that you chant the holy name—bas. We don't want to be very famous. This is our work."
His voice became stern. "All of them are my disciples. They have accepted me as their spiritual master and they should follow me and do as I am doing. We accept a guru, we should accept his order. Why he is going here and there? Why he is going to meet big, big gosāis?"
Bhagatji said that Nitāi had taken money from Bombay to buy books, but no one really knew where he was; the Vṛndāvana devotees thought he was in Bombay and the Bombay devotees thought he was in Vṛndāvana. "Meanwhile he is going to see these big gosāis."
"So where are the books?" Prabhupāda asked.
Gopāla said Girirāja was asking him for the books.
Prabhupāda shook his head. "Just see. The man who paid him, he was inquiring where are the books."
Prabhupāda said that Lord Caitanya had rejected Mukunda, a classmate of His, for going here and there to hear from non-devotee scholars. "Caitanya Mahāprabhu did not like this type of person. He said khaḍajāṭhiyā beṭā. Caitanya Mahāprabhu has given this title for this type of person, khaḍajāṭhiyā beta."
What does khaḍajāṭhiyā beṭā mean Śrīla Prabhupāda?" Gopāla Kṛṣṇa asked.
"Khaḍajāṭhiyā beṭā is an address. It means one who is rejected," Prabhupāda told him.
Someone mentioned that Nitāi had learned to write Bengali script. But Prabhupāda was not impressed. "He has learned Bengali. He cannot speak Bengali; what he has learned? What can he read? If he can read then he can speak. Writing, reading and speaking—then perfection comes. You say he can simply write. Only that person who can read, he can speak as well, then others can hear. Whatever we read, another person can hear. If he cannot read, speak, then how will others get the opportunity of hearing?"
He stressed that Lord Caitanya's mission was to go out and instruct others in the science of Kṛṣṇa consciousness. "Yāre dekha, tāre kaha 'kṛṣṇa'-upadeśa, This is the instruction of Caitanya Mahāprabhu. I did not tell anything else."
And in this regard he had a few words to say about the men that Nitāi was going to see. "Caitanya Mahāprabhu says on His order become a guru. How? Whoever you meet, tell them about Kṛṣṇa. Caitanya Mahāprabhu Himself gave the order. He gave the order to everyone, not only us. Why haven't these Vṛndāvana-vāsīs done it? It is Caitanya Mahāprabhu's order to spread Kṛṣṇa consciousness all over the world."
He looked over at Bhagatji. "They are big, big saints, gosāis, but why haven't they gone? Why not? Please tell me. Answer."
Bhagatji nodded. "Nobody did."
"Was it right to do it or not?" Prabhupāda asked. "Why did they not do before us? Caitanya Mahāprabhu gave the order 500 years ago. Why they did not preach? Can you answer? It was right to do it or not?"
He referred to his disciple as a 'sentimental paṇḍita' and asked, "What good are they?"
So now it seems Nitāi has actually fallen away due to his association with outside influences. Prabhupāda has been at such great pains to warn and protect us from this. Having lived here for so many years Śrīla Prabhupāda knows very well the mentality of the so-called bābājīs and their ability to poison one's understanding so that one becomes useless for any preaching.
(September 9th, 1976)
Complaints about Nitāi dāsa have been increasing daily. Apparently, he has been telling the devotees that it is not possible to go back to Godhead in this life unless one chants 100,000 names of Kṛṣṇa (about sixty-four rounds) every day. He has been claiming that if one only chants sixteen rounds, it will take many births. Many devotees are affected by this nonsense, which Nitāi got from some "advanced devotee" in Govardhana.
Prabhupāda said he has become a sahajiyā. He pointed out that at initiation we agree to chant not less than sixteen rounds. "We are not saying only sixteen rounds. You can chant more if you want—sixty-four. But actually we are not capable of chanting sixty-four, 100,000 names a day. This is not possible for you."
(September 14th, 1976)
Nitāi dāsa sent Śrīla Prabhupāda a letter today, explaining his reasons for leaving ISKCON. At first, Harikeśa Mahārāja didn't want to read the letter to Prabhupāda because it was so offensive. But when Hansadūta Mahārāja saw it, he insisted that it be shown so that we could hear Prabhupāda's rebuttals to the points. So this afternoon, after his nap, we went into his room and sat before him. Prabhupāda was grave as Harikeśa read out the letter. He responded point by point, not to dictate a reply as he normally does, but simply for our benefit.
Nitāi began by disclaiming the authenticity of our disciplic line. He cited Rādhāramaṇacaraṇa dāsa Bābājī, a contemporary of Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura, who claimed that Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta was never initiated by Śrīla Gaura Kiśora. "It was well known that Gaura Kiśora never had any disciples."
Prabhupāda responded that Rādhāramaṇacaraṇa dāsa Bābājī was a kaniṣṭha-adhikārī whom Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta had strongly criticized for advertising himself as a great preacher without his having any actual knowledge of the Gauḍīya-Vaiṣṇava philosophy.
Nitāi went on to say that he now doubted ISKCON's teachings: "They are just the opposite to, or a misrepresentation of, what is actually in the śāstra." As an example he offered a quote from Caitanya-bhāgavata where Lord Caitanya says that one cannot become one of His associates unless one chants one lakh of names daily.
Prabhupāda's reply was practical. "If you take all of the so-called gosvāmīs, bābājīs and mahātmās in the whole of the Vṛndāvana area together, they have not advanced Caitanya Mahāprabhu's movement one inch!"
Nitāi's next point was that Śrīla Haridāsa Ṭhākura was the nāma-ācārya. Since he chanted three lakhs of names a day, we either have to imitate that, or keep it as our goal. Nitāi asserted that if we chant at least one lakh of names daily, then "Kṛṣṇa will automatically give us premā."
But Prabhupāda disagreed. He said that Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta condemned the idea of sitting down and chanting in one place as merely a cheating process adopted by unscrupulous people desirous of obtaining name and fame as a so-called advanced devotee. He added that the idea that Kṛṣṇa will 'automatically give premā' is karma-mīmāṁsā philosophy. Kṛṣṇa is not obligated to give premā to anyone, he said, no matter how many rounds they chant.
Incredibly, at the end of Nitāi's letter, he had the audacity and hypocrisy to tell Prabhupāda that he was now going out to seek the shelter of some other great mahātmā "in whom I can place greater faith," and he asked for his blessings "so that I may advance more and more."
Śrīla Prabhupāda's response was very strong. "Yes. I bless you that you shall never advance!"
He then dictated a telegram to be sent to all the GBCs: "Please let it be known that Nitai has become a venomous serpent. Be careful of him. Your ever well-wisher, A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami."
I have advocated for a long time the purging of Bhaktisiddhanta from Caitanya Vaisnavism. Unfortunately, it has become like a cancer and has wrapped its tumors so tightly around the organs of the body of Caitanya Vaisnavism that it is hard to remove them without damaging the host. But, remove them we must if the organism is to survive.
My Gurudev [mano pastaba: jo guru - Tinkadi Goswami, (1906-1984) ] felt no animosity or hatred towards towards anyone, what to speak of ISKCON / Gaudiya Math. Nevertheless, he did not regard the members of ISKCON / Gaudiya Math as initiated members of the Caitanya Vaisnava community. When I came to him, there was no doubt in his mind that I needed to be initiated, though I had received initiation from Bhaktivedanta, both Harinama and Mantra. So he put me on a program of purification similar to the purascarya or mantra purification described in shastra. He ordered me to do three lakhs of Harinama every day and I was not allowed to do any other seva. When we ate I was not allowed to sit with the others because I was not initiated. It is a great honor to be allowed to sit in line (pankti) with the other Vaisnavas and honor prasad with them. I was only allowed that honer after I had been given the mantras. Sometimes one's name is also changed, but who would change a name like Nitai Das?
Anyway, that is the reality of the Vaisnava world I was introduced to after I left ISKCON.
"Nitai savo laišką pradėjo paneigdamas mūsų mokytojų sekos autentiškumą. Jis pacitavo Rādhāramaṇacaraṇa dāsa Bābādžį, Šrilos Bhaktisiddhantos Sarasvačio Thakuros amžininką, kuris tvirtino kad Šrila Bhaktisiddhanta nebuvo inicijuotas Šrilos Gaura Kišoros: "Buvo gerai žinoma, kad Gaura Krišora neturėjo mokinių"
Prabhupada atsakė, kad Rādhāramaṇacaraṇa dāsa Bābādžis buvo kaništha-adhikaris, kurį Šrila Bhaktisiddhanta stipriai sukritikavo už tai, kad tas skelbėsi didžiu pamokslautoju, nors neturėjo jokio tikro žinojimo apie Gaudija vaišnavų filosofiją.
Yra vienas suomis, facebook'e nick'u Markus Ananda Ode, (žr. https://www.facebook.com/bababom ) įvairiais gyvenimo tarpsniais įvariose vietose prisistatęs įvairiais vardais (vardu, pavarde, įšventinimo vardais ir nick'ais) tokiais kaip Oskari "Ode" Loponen, Ekatma, Atul Krišna, Madhavananda, Ananda Anagarika. Jis buvo labai aktyvus "sahadžija"** babadžių* idėjų puoselėtojas internete. 2003 m. jis buvo įšventintas vieno babadžio, o 2008 galutinai nusivylė babadžiais ir iš viso prarado tikėjimą Gaudija vaišnavizmu. Tuo laikotarpiu nuo 2003 iki 2008 metų jis stipriai kritikuodavo tai, kad Šrilos Bhaktivinodos Thakuros ir Šrilos Bhaktisiddhantos Sarasvačio Thakuros linijos Gaudija vaišnavai nepripažįsta sahadžija babadžių idėjų ir praktikų srovės kaip visais atžvilgiais teisingos ir atstovaujančios autentišką Gaudija tradiciją. Nors ši Markuso Anandos Odės nuostata kažkiek išliko ir po nusivylimo 2008 m., ir jis nepageidavo, kad jo rašymai būtų naudojami babadžių nenaudai, bet visgi, susipažinkime su jo tiesiogine praktine patirtimi, tiesioginiais liudijimais, tam, kad įsitikintume, kad tai, ką apie neautoritetingas didelės dalies babadžių praktikas bei tų praktikų pasekmes kalbėjo ir dėl ko perspėjo Šrila Bhaktivinoda Thakura, Šrila Bhaktisidhanta Sarasvatis Gosvamis Prabhupada, ir jų ištikimi mokiniai bei mokinių mokiniai, yra tikri, liūdni faktai.
* dėl žodžio "babadžis" - Gaudija vaišnavų tradicijoje būna autentiškų babadžių, pvz. bhagavat-paramparoje, pačių iškiliausių dvasinių mokytojų sekoje, yra Šri Džaganath dasa Babadžis Maharadžas, Šrila Gaurakišora dasa Babadžis Maharadžas; Šrila Bhaktivinoda Thakura irgi priėmė babadži gyvenimo tvarką po šeimos gyvenimo laikotarpio. Taigi, čia kalbama ne apie babadžius iš principo, ne apie bona fide babadžius, bet apie netikrus (kažkuo iš esmės klystančius) babadžius. Tikras babadžis yra paramahamsa - asmenybė, visiškai atsijusi nuo materalių savybių ir materialus pasaulio. Tam ir skirtas babadžio - atsižadėjusio asmens, neturinčio padėties varnašramos sistemoje, statusas. Babadži gyvenimo tvarka yra viena iš dviejų Gaudija vaišnavų sanjasos rūšių, kita rūšis - tridandi sanjasa. Tridandi sanjasa yra daivi-varnašramos sistemos ketvirtasis, aukščiausias gyvenimo tvarkos statusas, kiti trys yra brahmačaris, grihastha, vanaprastha.
** dėl žodžio "sahadžija": išvertus "lengvumas", manymas, kad dvasinis tobulumas yra lengvai, be didelio apsivalymo ir rimtumo, pasiekiamas dalykas, kur vadovaujamasi dažnai iracionaliais impulsais tapatinant tai su dvasingumu. Terminas turi platesnes ir siauresnes taikymo reikšmes Gaudija vaišnavizmo kontekste. Viena iš apasampradajų, netikrų, iškraipytų mokymų srovių vadinama "sahadžija", tai siauresnė reikšmė. Plačiau šiuo žodžiu neretai vadinamos visos materialistinės miskoncepcijos, kai sekimui trūksta autentiškumo ir ištikimybės, kai dvasiniai dalykai maišomi su materialiais, ir bandoma imituoti ar išgalvoti tariamai aukšto lygio praktikas, nors iš tikro tai daroma materialistišku protu ir jutimais, nevengiant nuodėmių ir įžeidimų, kai yra tradicijos iškraipymų ar neteisingų praktikų. Epitetas "sahadžija" kartais gali būti taikomas nenuoširdžiai, imituojančiai sekančių mokinių atžvilgiu, nors jie ir priklausytų autentiškai sampradajai ir būtų įšventinti tikro bona fide guru. Mūsų dabar aptariamu atveju, epitetas daugiau galioja platesne ir plačiausia prasme, kai trūksta autentiškumo ir nuoširdumo.)
Atskirų liūdnų faktų netrūksta ir Gaudija Mathose bei ISKCON'e, visur (bet GM / ISKCONe priežastys atrodo kitos, tai atsitinka ne dėl neteisingo mokymo, bet dėl asmeninio nesekimo teisingu mokymu gautu iš tikro, bona fide guru). Tačiau kiek matyti iš eilinio žmogaus, tokio kaip aš, perspektyvos, Bhaktivinodos ir Sarasvačio linijos ačarjos buvo nepriekaištingo būdo ir turėjo šventųjų savybes, trancendentinius požymius, bei pateikė aukšto lygio mokymą, elgdamiesi pagal savo mokymą, kaip ir priklauso ačarjai - mokyti tiek tuo, kas jis yra ir kaip elgiasi, kokią dvasinę veiklą atlieka transcendentiniu lygiu, tiek išsakant pamokymus kitiems žodžiu. Kiek matyti, jų mokymas yra nuoseklus, autentiškas ir pagrįstas pirminiais Gaudija vaišnavizmo autoritetais, o taip pat Vedomis, Upanišadomis, Puranomis ir t.t.
Tuo tarpu kai kurios neaiškios sahadžija babadžių idėjos ir praktikos atsiranda kažkur pusiaukelėje, jų pačių daliniu pripažinimu tai yra naujovės, kurių pirminiai Gaudija vaišnavizmo autoritetai nedavė.
Tai ką Bhaktivinodos linijos ačarjos sako apie sahadžija babadžių veiksmų, tokių kaip sidha-pranali, sidha-deha detalių (ekadaša-bhava, 11 transcendentinių bhavų (jausenų/kokretybių)) išsigalvojimą iš vaizduotės ir dalinimą nekvalifikuotiems žmonėms, problematiškumą yra įtikinama.
Pvz. nėra prasmės medituoti į dvasinį pavidalą bei Šri Šri Radhos ir Krišnos bei gopių žaidimus nekvalifikuotiems asmenims, nes prote egzistuoja blogos savybės, tokios kaip pyktis, geismas, iliuzija, beprotybė, kurios tokią meditaciją pavers į neišvengiamus įžeidimus Krišnai ir dvasiniams Golokos gyventojams, ir pakenks pačiam praktikuojančiajam. Apskritai, nekvalifikuotoje būsenoje proto sugebėjimo medituoti nėra.
Taip pat, logiška atrodo tai, kad nekvalifikuoti arba žemos kvalifikacijos asmenys, nevertai prisiimantys guru padėtį, negali regėti dvasinio pavidalo, taigi ir jo pasakyti kitiems. Taigi, vadinamos sidha-pranali, sidha-deha detalių atskleidimo ir dalijimo visiems ir bet kam praktikos yra įtartinos grynai sveiko proto pagrindu; dėl to, kad aukštos kvalifikacijos šventųjų yra labai reta. Todėl nepanašu, kad sidha-deha detalės gali būti teikiamos kaip automatinis dikšos priedas ar trumpam laikui praėjus po dikšos (kaip tai daroma kai kuriose babadžių sekose) ir kad tai gali būti plačiai praktikuojama tradicija. Greičiau jau, sielos dvasinio pavidalo detalių atskleidimas sėkmingam praktikuotojui turėtų būti labai retų bhadžanos, dvasinės praktikos, pasiekimų kontekste ir turėtų vykti labai retai; o su tuo susiję procesai autentiškoje Gaudija sampradajoje greičiausiai bus atliekami labai privačiai, aukšto lygio mokiniui gaunant aukšto lygio mokytojo pamokymus, ir niekam apie tai nežinant. Tai tiesiog neįmanoma bet kokio lygio mokinio ir bet kokio lygio mokytojo susitikime. O būtent toks susitikimas paprastai atrodo būdingas ir dažnas pradinio lygio priartėjime prie Gaudija sampradajos - daug žmonių dar neturi kvalifikacijos, jie tik pradeda vaduotis iš materializmo, ir sampradajos pakraščiuose sutinka ne aukščiausios kvalifikacijos mokytojus; duok Dieve, didelė sėkmė, jeigu tie mokytojai yra bona fide, o ne apsišaukėliai. Daug yra apgavikų ir apgautųjų, ir istorija tuos atvejus jau parodė, Vakaruose taip pat.
Argi įmanoma tapti tobulam, ką tik nustojus daryti nuodėmes, ir dar nepriėjus transcendentinio tikėjimo? Ar įmanoma meditacija į pačius aukščiausius, slaptingiausius dalykus tokioje būsenoje, Kali jugoje, kai žmonės yra sutrikdyti tiek vidujai, tiek išoriškai?
Tikras, Šri Krišnos atsiųstas guru, dovanos mokiniui visų pirma tikrą trancendentinį tikėjimą, kalbėdamas šabda-brahmą, dvasinę hari-kathą, ir suteikdamas savo transcendentinį bendravimą, galimybę sukaupti dvasiškai palankius įspūdžius, bei bendravimą su kitais bona fide vaišnavais, o po to, duos tolesnių pamokymų apie tai, kaip tinkamu procesu laipsniškai prieiti iki labai aukšto dvasinio lygio (rūči, asakti, bhava), per bhadžana krija (užsiėmimą konkrečiais pasišventimo Krišnai tarnystės veiksmais), anartha nivriti (ydų pašalinimą), ir t.t. Toje aukštoje pakopoje suvokimas apie savąjį sielos dvasinį pavidalą pradeda skleistis praktikuotojo širdyje savaime, kaip spontaniškas be galo stiprus dvasinis-transcendentinis potraukis, iškylantis tyroje, stabilios ir trancendentinėmis patirtimis ir įspūdžiais turtingos dvasinės praktikos apvalytoje sąmonėje Krišnos ir guru malone. Iškyla be galo stiprus spontaniškas dvasinis ilgesys ir potraukis sekti tam tikra konkrečia Vradža ragatmika bhakti rasos rūšimi ir konkrečiu trancendentinės Vradžos gyventoju - tai vadinama raganuga bhakti godumu (lobha). Atsiradus šiam godumui tolesnėje praktikoje jis savo guru malone gali greitai išvysti Krišnos dvasinius žaidimus ir pradėti būti į juos įleidžiamas ar į juos medituoti. Būtent tuo momentu aukštos kvalifikacijos guru duos tinkamus pamokymus ir konkrečias ekadaša-bhava detales, kaip aprašo Šrila Bhaktivinoda Thakura savo knygoje "Džaiva-dharma", kurią visi Gaudija vaišnavai laiko vienu reikšmingiausių modernios epochos Gaudija vaišnavizmo veikalų.
Iš 2008 10 24 Markuso Anandos Ode įrašo interneto dienoraštyje (dienoraštis vis dar yra internete, žr. http://vrajajournal.gaudiya.com/blog/ ) :
Let's travel back in time to last spring and my falling out with Sanatana Das Babaji, my former mentor. Having spent most of the last three years with him, and as such having molded my practice and life almost entirely around his guidelines, the break obviously initiated a massive process of introspection and reflection. My disappointment with him was deep enough to merit questioning each and every bit of advice I had received. After a brief period of gloom I recolleted my inner assets and set myself to the path with renewed determination. Reviewing the entire period of the past three years and recompiling my routines and values anew was no mean task by any measure, but it was something that had to be done if things were to go on.
I would at times do my Giriraja parikrama with Balarama Dasji, a tyagi-mahatma with a capital T. He was the one who first inspired me to collect madhukari. At times we would do two parikramas daily; he was fierce in his determination, pain and agony of the flesh were no strangers to him. I am also not a timid person; yet our temperaments were different, with I being more of a studious fellow and he a hands-on tapasvi with little philosophical sophism or sympathy for silent meditations. It was all about active engagement in devotional austerity for him. My company with him overlapped with the falling out with Sanatana Dasji for two to three weeks, and was no doubt instrumental in developing the perspective that forced me to move on.
Our diverging temperaments aside, the eyes of the community also fell upon us. Ah, the ever-prying eyes of the so-called Vaisnava-samaja, filled with people who would rather live others' lives than their own, and who would project their every lust and greed unto others and gossip on the potentials of what such-and-such might be doing or thinking. We decided to walk our separate ways for the time being to let the minds of people settle once again. He gave me a sound advice I was to hear again on several occasions. "The times are bad. Do not mix with people. Keep to yourself and do your own bhajana." And indeed, we had also largely kept to ourselves during our years with Sanatana Baba.
With mastering Bengali language, I had grown more aware of the lives and natures of people, householders and renunciates alike. I would be lying if I'd say I wouldn't have grown cynical of human nature over my years here. While the phenomena I witnessed are universal beyond a doubt, malice, duplicity, lies, scheming, gossiping and hypocrisy seemed to be more vividly present here among the Bengalis than anywhere I'd ever seen before. I could speculate about the reasons for this, but this is neither the time nor the place for it. It is no exaggeration to say that nine out of ten who approached me with an aim of establishing a relationship were out to take advantage of me in one way or another. It was a bitter realization.
They say not to find fault with others, and I've certainly tried my level best to make it a point to not go out of my way to find fault with anyone or delve on anyone's evils. Yet sometimes the evils of the world enforce themselves into your horizon with such force and vigor that facing them is inevitable, if only as a matter of protecting oneself from exploitation. I knew only too well, having seen people go down under the weight of negative thought, the burden that'd befall if one were to let the mind loose and allow it to freely delve on and discuss the situation and condition of the contemporary samaja.
A word or two must be said, however, as a matter of giving a sense of direction to our readers. Most of the lay community, the Bengali householders that is, live their lives preoccupied with family and income. Far be it from me to criticize them for that, as no formal standard of expectation has been laid. Even if, as a matter of curiosity, one may observe that the spiritual standards of the average ISKCON householder are far above the average Bengali householder even at Radhakund, what to say of Bengal where fish often features as a part of meals so common it even hardly draws any attention. Of course, having people try to make friends with you with concealed (more often than not financial) motivations is a nuisance, but that's what life in the world seems to be all about.
It is the renunciates that are the cardialgia, the grating pain in a heart full of ideals. Of course there are good people, but the good are a handful while the essentially fallen are the masses. It was Pandit Baba who said the proverbial words almost a century back, warning of the bad times ahead. Times, when renunciates would be amassing money in their bank accounts, leading their lives in the way of householders. Pandit Baba's possessions were largely limited to his earthen pitcher and the kaupina he was wearing, he was a blameless man with the power to speak. In the seven decades that followed, the weeds that were in bud at his time have almost overgrown the garden.
Nowadays, it is not at all uncommon for a babaji to have a large sum of money, often several hundreds of thousands of rupees, sitting on a high interest bank account. Dealing in land and commodities is all too accepted in the community's eyes; for only a fool wouldn't seize a good opportunity. Wine is the only factor amiss from the famous trinity of wealth, women and wine. (Even if amply supplemented by ganja.) Even people in the highest ranks of the renunciate community are known to maintain illicit relationships with women. I will not narrate specific examples here, as I am not interested in having people refer to me as a source of gossip; they are common and undisputed knowledge, open secrets of the community if you will. Affairs with married women with the approval of the husband, aborted children of seva-dasis, swindling of funds to support illegitimate children. And none can do a thing about it. Even if someone had the will, he wouldn't have the means.
Among the handful of renunciates committed to their sadhana — and they have my greatest admiration for that! — few are well versed in the scripture. This lack of education leads to obvious problems as far as avenues of teaching are concerned. Just as a person devoid of grammatical understanding may fare well when it comes to speaking, and yet be unfit for the task of systematic and thorough teaching, so it is with the uneducated yet staunch mahatmas. Even with their best endeavors to formulate a conceptual framework to serve as a basis of teaching, drawing from their experiences and the occasional classes they've attended, the output can be incompatible in terms of the strict ideological setting of the acaryas' writings, and for someone even with a mediocre familiarity with our canon, it takes heaps of patience and essence-seeking to accommodate such teaching in a sustainable manner.
The good and the bad aside, there are of course the luke-warm. Renunciates who go about living their easy-going lives day in and day out, opening their mornings with tea and biscuits, doing a bit of kirtan or any other service to get pocket money, colleting their daily meals from the charity booth, prattling about village affairs and other trivialities by the road-sides, and gathering near the video stores to watch the latest kitchy Purana-movie or the ongoing cricket tournament. TVs and VCD players are becoming more popular now, a careful observer can even spot a dish antenna atop a kutir or two on the banks of Syama-kunda. Many, having failed in their material pursuits back in Bengal or Bangladesh, come and take bhekh for an easy lifestyle mixed with pious habits. It isn't about fervent pursuit for the other-worldly, it's about cultural conditioning and a way of life.
Iš 2008 03 14 interneto dienoraščio įrašo:
I no longer count myself to be a practicing Gaudiya Vaisnava in any orthodox sense of the word. Should someone interpret that to mean that I have fallen into the ditch of mundane life, giving up on my spiritual pursuit, please be aware that forsaking the quest for spiritual perfection is not on my agenda list. My quest continues, but not towards the specific metaphysical ideals I once shared with many of you. I do share many of the same bases of practice nonetheless — along with countless other spiritual traditions.
What led me to a situation where I felt the need to reconsider my direction? Three factors, namely people, doctrines and practicability, intertwined into a single fence of discontentedness I found myself unable to surmount. With this, I intend to address — and quite briefly for now — only the past six years in exploring the so-called orthodox Gaudiya Vaisnavism, as they have been the final phase of this twelve-year period of my life.
People. With learning Bengali, I became more and more familiar with the general landscape of Gaudiya Vaisnavas, renunciates and householders alike. With both groups, I found myself dismayed both in terms of the expected level of practice as well as the general adoption of sound ethical standards that one'd expect to find at the forefront in any form of elementary spirituality. I was also not too fortunate in my quest for guidance. My initiating guru, the wise and gentle old man that he is, never found the time or the energy for serious follow-up on my progress in actual practice. Things went a bit sour with my first instructing guru, with whom I studied for some three years, and the one final hope I had for a good master who would lead the "by-the-book" role of patiently showing the way from here to the summit turned out to be the worst of frauds I had ever met. While it wasn't the proverbial final straw, it certainly was one of the fat seals on the envelope containing my resignation.------------
So far we know, that Mirabai’s devotion is that of some mistype, not real type of devotion. Because her devotion only confined to Krsna and not any mention of any devotees. Krsna, where there is only mentioned the king that is imperfect. King means, so many ministers, generals, queens all these things… King is not one. So, Krsna is not one, the swarup shakti is there.
And that is real Krsna. And the other Krsna is a Krsna creation, a mental creation, a concoction. That is reflection of Krsna maybe in this world. Where we cannot see that Krsna with his different rasas is surrounded by different servitor groups. That is real Krsna. True Krsna is of that conception, that is in swarup shakti, otherwise in this area maya the sattva guna and Krsna has come and I and Krsna. And Krsna surrounded by his swarup shakti servitors that is real krsna, Chid-vilas. And in the transcendental world in His own position Krsna is such, and by crossing them, without caring to see them, my direct contact to Krsna that is a dream, that is an imagination, not reality.
So Gaudiya Math people and their acharyas and their consideration can not give assertion to so many sentimental, emotional that maybe, but the bottom the foundation is wrong. That sentiments can not give us Krsna, all those sentimental things. But Krsna is not alone and without submitting to his eternal devotees we can never approach Him properly.
The proper approach towards Krsna can not but be through his devotees. Not direct contact or contract to get Him is possible. Hare Krsna
Tik tyri Viešpaties tarnai, kurie gyvena Vradžoje, kad tarnautų Šri Jugalai (Dieviškajai Porai) yra tikrieji vradžavasiai. Jie nesvajoja net apie Vaikunthą, juolab apie išvadavimą ar juslinius džiaugsmus. Vradžoje jie gyvena tiek savo kūnu, tiek mintimis ir su meile tarnauja Šri Radha-Krišnai Jugalai. Jie laikytini aukščiausiojo lygio bhaktomis - utama-bhagavatomis. Be jų malonės raganuga-bhakti nepasiekiama. Būtina nugalėti puikybę, kuri verčia mus manyti: „Aš esu doriausias Viešpaties tarnas, išmanau dvasines tiesas ir niekuo nenusileidžiu Vradžos gyventojams“, - o jos atsikračius, pamilti vradžavasius visa širdimi.
Sudžanos - tai bhaktos, kurie priklauso keturioms Vaišnavų sampradajoms arba jų atšakoms, bet negyvena Vradžoje tikrąja to žodžio prasme. Tai reiškia, kad, fiziškai gyvendami Vradžoje, jie netarnauja Šri Radha-Krišnai Jugalai iš spontaniškos meilės su Vradžai būdingu nusiteikimu. Į tokius bhaktas nevalia žvelgti iš aukšto, maža to, juos reikia gerbti, kaip gerbiame madhjama-bhagavatas - tarpinį tarnystės lygį pasiekusius Viešpaties tarnus.
Brahmanus, kurie laikosi daiva-varnašramos priesakų ir skelbia varnašrama-dharmos tiesas, šventraščiai vadina žemės valdovais (bhūsura). Tai žemiausio lygio bhaktos, kaništha-bhagavatos. Jiems taip pat turime rodyti geriausius jausmus. „Šrimad-Bhagavatam“ (10.64.41), turėdamas galvoje karaliaus Nrigos istoriją, Svajam Bhagavanas Šri Krišna Dvarakos gyventojams taip sako:
vipraṁ kṛtāgasam api naiva druhyata māmakāḥ
ghnantaṁ bahu śapantaṁ vā namas-kuruta nityaśaḥ
„Mieli giminaičiai! Nelaikykit širdyse pagiežos brahmanams, net ir tiems, kurie nusidėjo ir nesilaiko priesakų. Lenkite prieš juos galvas net jei jie smurtauja ar svaidosi prakeiksmais. Užgniaužkite savo panieką ir rodykite jiems savo pagarbą“.
Srila Rupa Gosvami never said that we should only respect our god-brothers, or that we should only respect those in his own line. Never. Whoever is serving Radha-Krsna, anywhere in this world, we should honor that person. Even beginners who accept that Krsna is the Supreme Personality of Godhead and who also want to serve Radha and Krsna are to be honored. If one is not initiated, but he is not offensive and is not associating with mayavadis, he should also be considered as an ISKCON devotee; but as a kanistha-adhikari. Those who have given up all nonsense anarthas and misconduct, and who are not criticizing anyone – not even those who are fit to be criticized – and are always chanting and remembering Krsna, are madhyama-adhikari. There are so many categories in madhyama-adhikari: madhyama-kanistha, madhyama-madhyama, and madhyama-uttama, and we should try to respect these madhyama-adhikaris according to their degree of devotion.|
We should also honor those who are superior, who are serving Radha-Krsna in astakaliya-lila. They have no time to criticize anyone. Offering pranama to all, paying respect to all, they think that everyone is serving Radha-Krsna. They are more than Prahlada Maharaja. We should understand that they are maha-bhagavatas.
kriyatam yadi kuto 'pi labhyate
tatra laulyam ekalam mulyam
janma-kotibhis sukrtibhair na labhyate
(Caitanya-caritamrta. Madhya-lila, 8.70)
["Pure devotional service in Kṛṣṇa consciousness cannot be had even by pious activity in hundreds and thousands of lives. It can be attained only by paying one price — that is, intense greed to obtain it. If it is available somewhere, one must purchase it without delay."]
We should honor such a devotee, whether or not he is a disciple of our Gurudeva. He may be of the Syamananda-parivara, the family or disciplic succession of Syamananda Prabhu, or he may be of the Narottama-parivara, or he may be of the Bhirabhadra-parivara, that is, Jahnava-parivara; no harm. Wherever he is, we should understand that he is a maha-bhagavata.
http://www.purebhakti.com/teachers/bhak ... one-family
"Ir matydami jį, jausite vidinį patraukimą, patraukimą kylantį iš širdies. Tai testas, kurį galite suprasti, "taip, matydamas jį iš širdies jaučiu kažkokią trauką. Širdyje yra paramatma, širdies guru, taip, ir tai yra bona fide surengimas, Krišnos surengimas. Jeigu jūs iš tikro verkiate, ir toks guru apsireiškė, matydami jį galite jausti kažkokią trauką. Ar suprantate? Sakoma, Krišna yra visa traukiantis. Jis patraukia. Jis yra Krišna, absoliutus patrauklumas. Kaip Krišna patraukia šiame materialiame pasaulyje? Dviejomis formomis - Savo švento vardo forma, ir ačarjos forma. Taip, dviejomis formomis. Krišna yra patrauklus, ir kalbėjimas apie Jį yra patrauklus. Pasakojimai apie Krišną nesiskiria nuo Krišnos. Kaip Krišna yra patrauklus, taip ir kalba apie Krišną yra patraukli. Ačarja tyrai kalba apie Krišną. Jis patraukia. Čia, materialiame pasaulyje, Krišna patraukia dviejomis formomis - kaip šventas Jo vardas, ir kaip ačarja. Ši trauka tikra. Jūs ją jaučiate viduje. Ar suprantate? Tai jums padės. Visi šie dalykai egzistuoja, bet jūs turite verkti prieš Krišną. Visiškai priklausyti nuo Krišnos surengimo. Tai aukščiausia. Tada jokiais būdais nebūsite apgauti. Tai ne majos surengimas, tai Krišnos surengimas, bona fide surengimas. Priešingu atveju, majos surengimas, tai nebus bona fide, būsite apgauti."
"Bet jeigu asmuo palieka dvasinį mokytoją, gali būti kažkokia priežastis. Ta priežastis taip pat pateikiama šventraščiuose, gurur api avaliptasya karyakaryam ajanatah. Karya akarya. Jeigu dvasinis mokytojas nežino, kas iš tikro turi būti daroma, ir ko iš tikro negalima daryti, ir jeigu jis veikia prieš šventraščių taisykles ir nuostatas, tada toks dvasinis mokytojas turi būti paliktas. Bet kol neatrandate, kad dvasinis mokytojas ką nors daro prieš šastros (šventraščių) ar guru principus, tai nėra gerai jums jį atmesti, tai jūsų kritimas."
"Visų pirma, privalote skirti pakankamai laiko išstudijuoti dvasinio mokytojo veiksmus. Dvasinis mokytojas yra vienas - gali būti daug dvasinių mokytojų, bet jeigų jų užsiėmimas yra vienas - patenkinti Krišną, tai nors jų yra daug, jie yra viena"
"Bet kas, kas laikomas guru, bet eina prieš Višnu-bhakti principą negali būti priimtas kaip guru. Jeigu asmuo klaidingai priėmė tokį guru, jis turėtų jį atmesti."
In actual fact, all these fearful statements in regard to rejection of a spiritual master refer only to the case when the Guru was genuine or bona fide. On the contrary worldly gurus who are deviant from the true paths, shows enmity to the true devotees, or are simply famous public personalities can be rejected in the consideration that these gurus will not help us to achieve our spiritual objective.
Srila Jiva Gosvami in Bhakti Sandarbha explains:
paramartha guruasrayo vyavarika
gururadi parityagenapi kartavyah
Meaning :- An incompetent spiritual master who is worldly-minded and accepted on convenience for name sake should be rejected and a self-realized soul who can impart spiritual knowledge is to be chosen.
Further, in the Bhakti Sandarbha it is written:
vaisnavavidvesi cet parityajya eva
guror apya baliptasyeti smaranat
The purport being, if a spiritual master is antagonistic to the devotees, or if he is an ordinary materialistic sense enjoyer, then he should be rejected. Such a guru, not having had any real symptoms of a devotee, will also incur fault for awarding the Mantra in an unauthorized manner and will have to glide towards the hellish region as a consequence. The best course in this situation is to approach a great soul for guidance in humble submission. The famous verse in Mahabharata as quoted by Sri Jiva in his Bhakti Sandarbha commentary is stated:
guruapya baliptasya karya akaryam ajanatah
utpathapratipannasya parityago vidhiyate
One who is attached to sense gratification, who is indecisive of what is proper and not proper action and whose ways have deviated from the path of pure devotion, in other words a 'guru' by name only should be rejected.
Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura has mentioned when one has to reject a Guru in his Harinam Cintamani:
tabe yadi ei rupa ghatana kabu haya
asat-sange furura yogyata naya ksaya
prathame chilena tini sadguru-pradhana
pare nama-apvaradhe hoia hata jnana
viasnava vidvesa kari chadi nama-rasa
krame krame han artha-kaminira vasa
sei gur chadi sisya sri krsna krpaya
sad guru labhiya punah suddha-nama gaya
In Jaiva Dharma, Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura writes:
The initiating Guru (Diksa) is usually not to be given up but for two specific reasons can be renounced. Firstly when the disciple ignorantly accepts without any examination a Guru without consideration of his spiritual advancement and knowledge together with, whether or not he observes Vaishnava etiquette and conduct. Later when he understands his own dilemma and that no spiritual merit can be accomplished, that spiritual master needs naturally to be rejected. Narada Pancaratra's verdict:
yo vyakti nyayarahitam anyayena srnoti yah
tavubhau narakam ghoram vrajatah kalam aksayam
One who speaks in a manner contrary to the revealed conclusions of scripture and the disciple who strictly upholds such distorted conclusions, will both go down to the darkest well of hellish existence.
The second reason by which a disciple can be allowed to reject the initiating Guru is the instance when at the time of initiation the Guru could have been very pure of conduct and learned in Vaisnava conclusions. Gradually by force of bad association, he may become converted to be an Impersonalist or a reviler of the Vaisnavas (blasphemous). Such a spiritual master should be rejected.
If one's spiritual master is neither an offender of the Vaisnavas, an Impersonalist or attached to sinful activities then it is not warranted to reject such spiritual master simply on the grounds of his insufficient knowledge. Rather the proper etiquette is to keep adoring him as spiritual master but to take permission from him to approach another great self-realized soul for "Siksa" and to learn the higher spiritual truths from such an instructing spiritual master.
bodhaḥ kaluṣitas tena daurātmyaṁ prakaṭīkṛtam |
gurur yena parityaktas tena tyaktaḥ purā hariḥ ||
iti brahma-vaivartādau tat-tyāga-niṣedhāt |
tad-aparitoṣeṇāpy anyo guruḥ kriyate tato’neka-guru-karaṇe pūrva-tyāga eva siddhaḥ |
etac cāpavāda-vacana-dvārāpi śrī-nārada-pañcarātre bodhitam
The Brahma Vaivarta Purana confirms this by condemning the rejection of the Guru: "One who rejects his guru contaminates his understanding and reveals himself to be wicked, for he has previously rejected Hari.”
One who takes another guru out of dissatisfaction with this one, in taking a multiplicity of gurus, has in fact rejected the previous guru. This is further confirmed by the exception to the rule, as understood from Sri Narada Pancaratra:
“However, IF ONE’S GURU IS NOT SATISFACTORY, ONE SHOULD REJECT HIM AND ACCEPT ANOTHER GURU, tad-aparitoshenapy anyo guruh kriyate tat aneka guru karane purva-tyaga eva siddhah. In this way one may reject many (aneka) unsatisfactory spiritual masters.”
The key word here is apari toshen which means “dissatisfied or displeased with” one’s Guru. However, one must understand that rejecting a Guru is a serious matter.
The need for Bhaktivinoda’s appearance
After the disappearance of Sri Krishna Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, Svarupa Damodar, Ramananda Raya and the Six Goswamis, Srinivas Acharya, Narottama Das and Shyamananda Prabhu, a dark age descended on the world of Gaudiya Vaishnavism. Those unable to understand the transcendental purity of Mahaprabhu’s religion of love started numerous heretical sects or apasampradayas. Totarama Das Babaji named thirteen such heretical sects:
aul, baul, kartabhaja, neria, daravesha, sain
sahajiya, sakhibheki, smarta, jata-gosani
atibarii, curiadhari, gauranga-nagari
tota kahe ei teror sanga nahi kari
Educated upper class Bengali society was shocked and disgusted by the practices of these heretical sects and came to identify Mahaprabhu’s religion with the lower classes, the uneducated and immoral. People of the gentle classes thus had no understanding or faith in Mahaprabhu’s true religion. The most munificent incarnation Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu took pity on these bewildered persons and in order to reclaim them for his path of divine love sent his eternal associate Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakur into this world. Possessed of superhuman prowess, the Thakur wrote more than a hundred books in several different languages with the goal of defeating all the unorthodox views opposed to the true doctrines of Mahaprabhu’s religion. The result was that many members of discerning society and others from all over the world came to recognize the unequalled value of Mahaprabhu’s teachings. The founder of the Chaitanya Math and the worldwide Gaudiya Maths, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Goswami Thakur, based his mission on the books and teachings given by Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakur and set into motion the fulfillment of Mahaprabhu’s message, found in the Chaitanya Bhagavat:
prithivite paryanta ache jata desha-grama
sarvatra saļcara haibeka mora nama
My name will pervade every village and country in the world. (Chaitanya Bhagavat 3.4.126)
Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakur thus made an unequalled contribution to the ultimate, spiritual welfare of humankind. Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Goswami Thakur wrote in his preface to the Jaiva-dharma: “Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakur is an extremely dear associate of Sri Chaitanya Candra. In the course of time, when those who preached the desires of Chaitanya Deva had left this world to enter the Lord’s eternal pastimes, the sky over Bengal slowly darkened, covered by the thick clouds of sensual enjoyment and false renunciation. The sky was covered and the world was bereft of the rays of light coming from the sankirtan propagated by Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu. One by one, the sun, the moon and the unlimited stars of that sky faded from view, leaving only the occasional flash of lightning to disrupt the unending darkness of ignorance. Almost 350 years after the appearance of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakur came to illuminate the Gaudiya sky.
All the great virtues are present in the body of a Vaishnava. The good qualities of Krishna gradually develop in his devotees. All these transcendental qualities are the characteristics of pure Vaishnavas, and they cannot be fully explained, but I shall try to point out some of the most important. Devotees are always merciful; they are not bellicose. They are truthful, equal to all, faultless, generous, mild and clean. They are without material possessions, and they work for the welfare of all. They are peaceful, surrendered to Krishna and desireless. They are meek, resolute, and completely control the six character flaws of lust, anger, greed and so forth. They eat only as much as required and are prudent, respectful, and free from false prestige. They are grave, sympathetic, friendly, poetic, expert and silent.
“All these devotee qualities were perfectly displayed by Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakur throughout his life of pure devotion. The ocean of compassion, Sri Gaurahari, displayed this merciful nature to the conditioned souls in nine different ways. The same kind of distribution of mercy is seen in the life and work of Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakur.”
Kol kas man tai atviras klausimas, matysim, kokiu mokymu dalinsis toliau. O šiaip pats ieškojimų kelias yra Krišnos vedimas, ir galiu tik pagarbiai nusilenkti tokiam nuoširdžiam ieškojimui. Geras požiūris, kad tai yra sakralu ir asmeniška, tai šventa žmogaus širdies erdvė.
Vilius rašė:Kalbant apskritai, ar įmanomi kažkokie dideli skirtumai?