|
|
Post by Nityānanda dāsa on Mar 19, 2020 18:30:54 GMT -6
Pranams to you all pundits. I am curious to know if the book Vaisnava Siddhante Sri Guru Svarupa by Sundaranandaq Vidyavinod was translated to English? Thank you Radhe Radhe Vidyasundarji. I'm not 'in the know' about this. From the very very little I know, this title has not been translated into English. I did a quick search and it looks like the BRC may have a scan of it (in Bengali). I've emailed them about it as their link is broken. I also saw that Jagadananda Dasji referenced this text on his blog, but nothing about it being in English. Sounds like it would be a good title to read! |
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Mar 20, 2020 14:01:57 GMT -6
Pranams to you all pundits. I am curious to know if the book Vaisnava Siddhante Sri Guru Svarupa by Sundaranandaq Vidyavinod was translated to English? Thank you I have a copy and I have scanned it, too. If that would be of use, I can post that. Minaketan Ram das started a translation of the work. Perhaps we can rattle his cage, get him to post what he has done and continue his work on it. This is where Sundarananda das presents an authoritative account of the nature and importance of the guru in CV and tacitly criticizes his ex-guru Bhaktisiddhanta. This was published posthumously in 1964 by his son.It should be available in English! Apart from the question of initiation, for just being Vaisnava aparadhis, Bhaktisiddhanta and Bhaktivedanta deserve to be rejected. So says Sri Jiva Goswami in the Bhakti-sandarbha. The references for that are in the Nectar of the Holy Name by Manindranth Guha now available as an e-book on Amazon and other online sellers. |
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Mar 25, 2020 9:31:07 GMT -6
I had a look at the thumb drive I have with me on this trip away from home and discovered that I do have Sundarananda Das's scan with me. So I decided to post the first chapter of the text. I will try to nudge Minaketana Ramadas to share his translation with us. Though I don't know how far he as gotten on the text, I assume he has not gotten too far on it, Nevertheless, it is something. Anyway, here is the first chapter.This is a large file. Sorry. I have a pdf optimizer with me, but it doesn't seem to work on this computer. If anyone else has an optimizer that can make the files smaller, please do and send it to me. I will replace the large file with a small file. I managed to optimize the file so that now it is now about one-sixth the size of the original. It is still very legible. राधे श्याम गौर ! |
|
|
|
Post by Ramdas on Mar 27, 2020 10:09:47 GMT -6
I did not get very far into the text. It was many years ago, so flash drives did yet not exist to back up files, nor did Google drives in the cloud. The hard drive on the PC I was using burned out, so the work was lost to the ages. Wish I had better news to report.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Mar 27, 2020 10:50:20 GMT -6
I did not get very far into the text. It was many years ago, so flash drives did yet not exist to back up files, nor did Google drives in the cloud. The hard drive on the PC I was using burned out, so the work was lost to the ages. Wish I had better news to report. So you don't have any little pieces to share. Are you interested in working on an English translation of the book? Or, are you strapped for time and unable to take it up? I am busy with Kanupriya Goswami's श्री श्री नाम-चिन्तामणि and the वैष्णव-वन्दना. |
|
|
|
Post by Nityānanda dāsa on Mar 27, 2020 17:32:14 GMT -6
I did not get very far into the text. It was many years ago, so flash drives did yet not exist to back up files, nor did Google drives in the cloud. The hard drive on the PC I was using burned out, so the work was lost to the ages. Wish I had better news to report. So you don't have any little pieces to share. Are you interested in working on an English translation of the book? Or, are you strapped for time and unable to take it up? I am busy with Kanupriya Goswami's श्री श्री नाम-चिन्तामणि and the वैष्णव-वन्दना. Nitai Dada, What is the वैष्णव-वन्दना you're working on? Siddha Manohar Baba's? |
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Mar 27, 2020 19:17:00 GMT -6
So you don't have any little pieces to share. Are you interested in working on an English translation of the book? Or, are you strapped for time and unable to take it up? I am busy with Kanupriya Goswami's श्री श्री नाम-चिन्तामणि and the वैष्णव-वन्दना. Nitai Dada, What is the वैष्णव-वन्दना you're working on? Siddha Manohar Baba's? Yes sir. I've been distracted a bit from it because of Gosvami Kanupriya and the लघु-पद-पारिजात, but I still think it is part of our ticket home, Siddha Baba's gift to us. |
|
|
|
Post by Nityānanda dāsa on Mar 28, 2020 2:34:56 GMT -6
Nitai Dada, What is the वैष्णव-वन्दना you're working on? Siddha Manohar Baba's? Yes sir. I've been distracted a bit from it because of Gosvami Kanupriya and the लघु-पद-पारिजात, but I still think it is part of our ticket home, Siddha Baba's gift to us. I agree! Let me know where you're at in the book and I can begin again with some of the transliterations. জয় রাধে!!! जय राधे!!! |
|
|
|
Post by narottamadasa on Apr 12, 2020 7:51:23 GMT -6
Thanks Nilamadhava and Ed for your work compiling this database of works connected to the Caitanya tradition. This will be a great aid in revealing how rich the literature is in Caitanya Vaisnavism even if we discount the works of IGM. I am sorry to have not been here to help out. Our move to Colorado has kept me busy for these last couple of weeks. Now things are settling down and I can spend more time on this site and working on my various projects. Colorado is beautiful and though hot (80s) not oppressively so. Kirksville get oppressive this time of year; it is hot and humid. The part of Colorado we are in is not humid. It is more like Vraja, though not as hot. Anyway, I am trying to get back to work. One question may arise in the minds of the readers of this site. Why not include IGM books? The simple answer is that IGM books have been poisoned by Vaisnava Apardaha and Apasiddanta. It is the old ISKCON example of snake venom spoiling milk, an example used in ISKCON to warn against non-ISKCON books. Ironic is it not that the books that truly fit that description are the IGM books. And it is plain for anyone to see. There are countless passages where other Vaisnavas (the babas, the Goswamis, etc) and other sadhus are put down, belittled, assigned immoral characters, called ignorant, called sahajiya (anyone who has lived among them knows that the life style of a baba is anything but easy and that they do not believe attaining Krsna's grace is simple) and so forth and so on. It would not be an overstatement to say that every IGM work includes some of this calumny. One might have slipped through without it, but that surely was an accident. As far as apasiddhanta is concerned, one can point to the embracing of sannyasa (no one did it until Bhaktisiddhanta and he did not even get properly initiated into the order), the ridiculous emphasis promoted in the phrase rupanuga (as if Sanatana and hundreds of other brilliant contributors to CV are unworthy of our attention), the foolish idea of considering Vaidhi-bhakti as an introductory or preparatory state for Raga-bhakti (Rupa describes them as two separate paths with separate goals). The idea that preaching is more important than bhajana is another apasiddhanta. The fundamental error of thinking that one can do without initiation (Bhaktisiddhanta never had it) and yet begin to give initiation oneself from mantras merely read from a book. The giving of the Surya-gayatri as part of initiation is wrong. The notion of Daiva-varnasrama is wrong. The completely fabricated guru-parampara promoted by IGM. Most of the members of that lineage never even met each other. One can go on and on. The worst thing about the works of IGM, however, arises from the fact that by participating in the Vaisnava Aparadha of the IGM texts and lectures, the power of the Holy Name is stymied. That is the only thing that can weaken the power of the Holy Name. So how does one advance in IGM? It is very difficult. A fortunate few have escaped the trap. But, most have either remained caged or have left altogether, a sad case of a hijacked and corrupted tradition used for personal, monetary enrichment. Enough of me on a soap-box. Next time: the conundrum of being accused of Vaisnava Aparadha for criticizing IGM. I am often the object of that accusation. Dear Nitai Dada, This statement is very strong: "The simple answer is that IGM books have been poisoned by Vaisnava Apardaha [...]" I was talking with one devotee in this regard and he asked me if there were concrete incidents (or statements in books) which prove that Sarasvati Thakura committed aparadhas against Vaisnavas? This is very sensitive topic, I am not interested in aparadha-katha, but how can it be proved? नमो नमः |
|
|
|
Post by Nityānanda dāsa on Apr 12, 2020 13:52:37 GMT -6
Radhe Radhe!
Seems to me that simply to create one's own philosophy and call it Gaudiya Vaishnavism is an offense, no? It is an offense to the guru-tattva because it's ignoring Him/Her/them (thus it's Nama aparadha as well). And that's clearly what Siddhanta Sarasvati did. He created 'siksa parampara' and an entire institution along with it, which further expanded into a world-wide institution.
Ironically both Siddhanta Sarasvati and Bhaktivedanta Swami liked to quote the verse, sruti smriti puranadi... I guess at least the latter may not have known that he was an example of establishing bhakti that ignores the "authorized Vedic literature."
Those are a couple of thoughts... there are so many other areas within ISKCON where the siddhanta is completely wrong. But I'll leave it at this for now.
We probably need to move this to a new or existing thread.
|
|
|
|
Post by narottamadasa on Apr 12, 2020 14:05:38 GMT -6
Radhe Radhe! Seems to me that simply to create one's own philosophy and call it Gaudiya Vaishnavism is an offense, no? It is an offense to the guru-tattva because it's ignoring Him/Her/them (thus it's Nama aparadha as well). And that's clearly what Siddhanta Sarasvati did. He created 'siksa parampara' and an entire institution along with it, which further expanded into a world-wide institution. Ironically both Siddhanta Sarasvati and Bhaktivedanta Swami liked to quote the verse, sruti smriti puranadi... I guess at least the latter may not have known that he was an example of establishing bhakti that ignores the "authorized Vedic literature." Those are a couple of thoughts... there are so many other areas within ISKCON where the siddhanta is completely wrong. But I'll leave it at this for now. We probably need to move this to a new or existing thread. Dear Nila Madhava Dada, Thank you for your response. The term aparadha has a very precise meaning in CV and we know some types of it: seva-aparadha, nama-aparadha, etc. On the other hand, we have such notion as "apasiddhanta." Can we make the following equation: apasiddhanta=aparadha? I am especially interested in BSST because according to on issue of Nitai-zine, we know that there was an incident between Vipin Vihari Goswami and BSST, yet how genuine those words are (sorry, I do not remember exactly the expression BSST had used when Bhaktivinoda left the house)? Indeed, there are strong statements done by BSST's disciples, we have records f their books and talks, but as far as documented aparadhas of BSST are concerned, has he ever made public statements against traditional Vaisnavas/Vaisnavism? गौर गौर! |
|
|
|
Post by Nityānanda dāsa on Apr 12, 2020 14:40:02 GMT -6
Dear Narottama Dasji,
Radhe Radhe! Yes, apasiddhanta = aparadha because again, if I'm consciously preaching/teaching apasiddhanta in the name of siddhanta, which is what 'Siddhanta' Sarasvati did, then that is acting against the guru/acharyas in the form of sastras and is thus Nama aparadha. Does that make sense?
राधे राधे!
|
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Apr 12, 2020 22:50:21 GMT -6
Radhe Radhe! Seems to me that simply to create one's own philosophy and call it Gaudiya Vaishnavism is an offense, no? It is an offense to the guru-tattva because it's ignoring Him/Her/them (thus it's Nama aparadha as well). And that's clearly what Siddhanta Sarasvati did. He created 'siksa parampara' and an entire institution along with it, which further expanded into a world-wide institution. Ironically both Siddhanta Sarasvati and Bhaktivedanta Swami liked to quote the verse, sruti smriti puranadi... I guess at least the latter may not have known that he was an example of establishing bhakti that ignores the "authorized Vedic literature." Those are a couple of thoughts... there are so many other areas within ISKCON where the siddhanta is completely wrong. But I'll leave it at this for now. We probably need to move this to a new or existing thread. Dear Nila Madhava Dada, Thank you for your response. The term aparadha has a very precise meaning in CV and we know some types of it: seva-aparadha, nama-aparadha, etc. On the other hand, we have such notion as "apasiddhanta." Can we make the following equation: apasiddhanta=aparadha? I am especially interested in BSST because according to on issue of Nitai-zine, we know that there was an incident between Vipin Vihari Goswami and BSST, yet how genuine those words are (sorry, I do not remember exactly the expression BSST had used when Bhaktivinoda left the house)? Indeed, there are strong statements done by BSST's disciples, we have records f their books and talks, but as far as documented aparadhas of BSST are concerned, has he ever made public statements against traditional Vaisnavas/Vaisnavism? गौर गौर! Greetings Narottamadasji, राधे राधे ! I am afraid I cannot answer this question concerning Bhaktisiddhanta. I have not read much of his writing. I think the only thing I may have read by him is his commentary on the Brahma-samhita years ago. My main concern was with my own (then) guru Bhaktivedanta whose Vaisnava aparadha is well known. The account I gave in one of my Nitai-zines of Bhaktisiddhanta's insult to his father's guru was probably gotten from BS's younger brother Lalitaprasada Thakur, with whom I met and spent some time. But at this point I don't clearly remember its source. Lalitaprasada was very critical of his brother as I may have described in other places. I have a collection of BS's writings in English which I can make available to you if you want to search them for Vaisnava-aparadha. There are many more in Bengali that are available on the internet or at archive.org. I am not interested in reading them. I have better things to do with my time. As far as I am concerned, BS's major aparadha is a namaparadha called Gurvavajna, disrespect for the guru. This can apply to individual gurus or to the principle of the guru. In that latter sense not surrendering to any guru by duly submitting to diksa is a form of Gurvavajna. Why are you concerned only with public statements of Vaisnava-aparadha? Is a private statement less egregious? Besides, I think we can agree that, judging from the behavior of his disciples he must have done so privately if not publicly. Otherwise, why would they think it acceptable to do themselves? And why if he was not in agreement with them did he not stop them? I have heard from my gurubhai Jagadish that Bhaktivedanta when he was near the end of his life told Dr. Kapoor that he was sorry for the many offenses he committed at the feet of other Vaisnavas, especially the Babas and the Gosvamins. Dr. Kapoor advised him to publicly apologize and ask for their forgivenness before it was too late. Bhaktivedanta agreed and said he was going to do. But he never did before he died. This Jagadish Das heard directly from Dr. Kapoor. राधे श्याम गौर! |
|
|
|
Post by Īśvaradāsa on Apr 12, 2020 23:32:12 GMT -6
I have heard from my gurubhai Jagadish that Bhaktivedanta when he was near the end of his life told Dr. Kapoor that he was sorry for the many offenses he committed at the feet of other Vaisnavas, especially the Babas and the Gosvamins. Dr. Kapoor advised him to publicly apologize and ask for their forgivenness before it was too late. Bhaktivedanta agreed and said he was going to do. But he never did before he died. This Jagadish Das heard directly from Dr. Kapoor. राधे श्याम गौर! Hi, Nitai राधे राधे You reminded me I saw that Jagadananda Das said something a few years ago in relation to this in this video: www.youtube.com/watch?v=RnSjK8c94MwIn short, he says that it was in Bhaktivedanta Swami's last will, although the GBC considered it more of a formality, so the assignment was given to him after his disappearance to go and make donations to different traditional temples and asrams, as well as to those of his godbrothers, and to offer apologies for offences committed during his preaching. That's how he first met Sri Lalita Prasad Thakur. The response of the Vaisnavas is what you would expect from them. |
|
|
|
Post by narottamadasa on Apr 13, 2020 5:30:38 GMT -6
Dear Nila Madhava Dada, Thank you for your response. The term aparadha has a very precise meaning in CV and we know some types of it: seva-aparadha, nama-aparadha, etc. On the other hand, we have such notion as "apasiddhanta." Can we make the following equation: apasiddhanta=aparadha? I am especially interested in BSST because according to on issue of Nitai-zine, we know that there was an incident between Vipin Vihari Goswami and BSST, yet how genuine those words are (sorry, I do not remember exactly the expression BSST had used when Bhaktivinoda left the house)? Indeed, there are strong statements done by BSST's disciples, we have records f their books and talks, but as far as documented aparadhas of BSST are concerned, has he ever made public statements against traditional Vaisnavas/Vaisnavism? गौर गौर! Greetings Narottamadasji, राधे राधे ! I am afraid I cannot answer this question concerning Bhaktisiddhanta. I have not read much of his writing. I think the only thing I may have read by him is his commentary on the Brahma-samhita years ago. My main concern was with my own (then) guru Bhaktivedanta whose Vaisnava aparadha is well known. The account I gave in one of my Nitai-zines of Bhaktisiddhanta's insult to his father's guru was probably gotten from BS's younger brother Lalitaprasada Thakur, with whom I met and spent some time. But at this point I don't clearly remember its source. Lalitaprasada was very critical of his brother as I may have described in other places. I have a collection of BS's writings in English which I can make available to you if you want to search them for Vaisnava-aparadha. There are many more in Bengali that are available on the internet or at archive.org. I am not interested in reading them. I have better things to do with my time. As far as I am concerned, BS's major aparadha is a namaparadha called Gurvavajna, disrespect for the guru. This can apply to individual gurus or to the principle of the guru. In that latter sense not surrendering to any guru by duly submitting to diksa is a form of Gurvavajna. Why are you concerned only with public statements of Vaisnava-aparadha? Is a private statement less egregious? Besides, I think we can agree that, judging from the behavior of his disciples he must have done so privately if not publicly. Otherwise, why would they think it acceptable to do themselves? And why if he was not in agreement with them did he not stop them? I have heard from my gurubhai Jagadish that Bhaktivedanta when he was near the end of his life told Dr. Kapoor that he was sorry for the many offenses he committed at the feet of other Vaisnavas, especially the Babas and the Gosvamins. Dr. Kapoor advised him to publicly apologize and ask for their forgivenness before it was too late. Bhaktivedanta agreed and said he was going to do. But he never did before he died. This Jagadish Das heard directly from Dr. Kapoor. राधे श्याम गौर! Dear Nitai Dada, Thank you for your comment. In reality, I am not in the pursuit of aparadhas committed by any Vaisnava. I just thought that if we consider someone to be an aparadhī, there should be some evidence and undeniable proof of that. Hence, public/open statements could be of some use. As far as guroravajna is concerned, if my reading of your zines is concerned, the final conclusion is that there is no concrete proof of whether BSST was or was not initiated by Gaura Kisora Dasa Babaji Maharaja. So, according to IGM, since BSST was initiated by him and was following Bhaktivinoda Thalura as well (who was duly initiated by Vipin Vihari Goswami), there is no place for such an aparadha. Is it correct if we take it in this perspective? You also considered guroravajna in a broader sense, if I understand properly, BSST did not accept the guru-pranali line of Gaura Kisora Dasa Babaji, which should be considered as guroravajna, right? And we are dealing here not with his sannyasa-diksa, which is a different subject matter. A different question in this regard is related to Lalita Prasada Thakura: on some photos he seems to wear an upavita, but Bhaktivinoda did not belong to any varna in which upanayana-samskara is done, so whom did he receive it from? Moreover, he did spend some time together with his brother at GM, how would he agree to be a member of a Vaisnava institution whose instigator is not duly initiated? Yes, there are many documented statements done by Bhaktivedanta Swami regarding his spiritual godbrothers and "sahajiyas", it is much easier to trace his words that one could consider to be aparadhic. Yet, I was more interested in the very origin of this attitude which seems to be his spiritual master. And the only statements related to BSST in this connection that deserve (do they?) to be analysed in order to relate them to the aparadha-issue are very rare and may be interpreted differently. For instance, here is what Bhaktivedanta Swami says during one talk that took place in 1971: "In Rādhā-kuṇḍa, sometime in 1934, my Guru Mahārāja was living, and he was discussing Upaniṣad. He was discussing Upaniṣad regularly. And the bābājīs... There are many bābājīs in Rādhā-kuṇḍa. First of all, they came, that "Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura has come, such a learned scholar and the establisher of Gauḍīya Maṭha." So out of curiosity they came. And when they saw that he was discussing Upaniṣad, gradually they stopped coming. So my Guru Mahārāja recommended that "These people are not living in Rādhā-kuṇḍa. They are living in Nāraka-kuṇḍa." I have heard it personally." Should it be considered as a conclusion done according to the specific-to-general approach which should not be practised by an acarya? And when we make a statement like "Everyone is suffering in the brahmanda," we act accordingly while there are still sadhus who do not really suffer since they benefit from ह्लादसंविदोः Is it an aparadha as well? On the other hand, someone could quote the following statement done by BSST in his Prakrta-rasa-sata-dusini: "Considering that Krsna’s Holy Name is different from His qualities, form and pastimes, the Prakrta-Sahajiyas minimize the chanting of krsna-nama and substitute such with invented novel practices, most notably siddha-pranali or ekadasa-bhava. It should also be noted that the ekadasa-bhava, which is sometimes force-fed to unqualified practitioners by unscrupulous gurus, is not to be confused with the ekadasa-bhava described in Jaiva-dharma, chapter 39, by Thakura Bhaktivinoda." In this case, the statement is presented as a strong generalisation. But, once again, do we consider it to be an aparadha? My intention is not to chercher la petite bête, but just in order to avoid committing aparadhas on our own, it seemed to me important to elucidate this question. Jaya Śrī Rādhe! |
|
