Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura Appearance Day – Chaitanya Charan

To see notes, click here

Transcript

This is an AI-generated transcript and may contain some errors.
Take care. So, this is more as a saint.
This is more like a spiritual commander or spiritual warrior. So, Prabhupada. What did he inherit? What was his legacy? What were the challenges he faced? His umbilical cord came in the form of a janeva.
And this is all true. Once he had eaten a mango without offering it. He said, I will never eat a mango in my life.
So, all this is good. This is definitely inspiring. And this is important.
But, along with that, in his life, when he was a propagandist, he was not just a saint, he was a propagandist. And to propagate, how did he face the challenges? We will discuss that. So, now, in the history of Gaudiya Vaishnav, these three leaders, they come in modernity.
And before this, Baldev Vidyabhushan and others, they came in pre-modernity. So, in a way, when modernity came, the whole battlefield completely changed. For example, what happened in the First World War? Some countries were together and some were fighting.
But now, who is fighting whom has changed. In the Second World War, Russia and America were fighting Germany together. But when the Second World War ended, the Russian ally also became an enemy.
So, the territory always keeps changing. Maya is always in this world. Just like God takes avatar in different forms, similarly, Maya also takes avatar in different forms.
Because of Maya, there are different kinds of delusions. And to destroy and to implement the principles, this is the responsibility of Acharya. So, we will see now, that when Bhaktasiddhanta Shrakuvar was there, so, like now I am saying, he is a king.
He has a kingdom and then there are different kingdoms. So, like Shivaji Maharaj was the king of Aurangzeb here, he was the king of Bijapur here, he was here, he was there. And then he has to fight with everyone.
So, what is it like? We are going to see how this territory of Gaudiya Vaishnavas was there. So, apart from that, we are saying that it is like an intellectual territory. Like, which ideas were popular there and how to face them.
So, we are going to discuss about the four enemies, the four delusions. And at the end, if we get time, then we will see that Prabhupada ji, how was Prabhupada? How did Prabhupada ji behave with Bhaktasiddhanta Shrakuvar? Was he equal? And how was he different? Because the territory had changed, the time had changed, the enemies had changed. And what can we learn from that? What should we face today? We will see that a little bit.
So, at that time, there were four main enemies. One was Sahajiyism. In a way, it was in Gaudiya Vaishnavas only.
Because, it had become a superstition of Gaudiya Vaishnavas only. So, the other was, which was bigger than that, which was Mayavada. Now, Mayavada, it was in Vedic culture only, in a way.
And, Mayavada became very much mixed with the independent struggle. And, the independent struggle of our Acharyas, the struggle for independence, and what was the other side? We will see that also. And then, one was the Goswami system.
Actually, it will come in Sahajiyism, but we will keep it separately. And then, one more was Christianity. In Bengal, Christianity was very much propagated.
And, it was increasing from there. So, now, in a way, we can say that, now-a-days, when we propagate, we say westernisation. This is a big problem.
So, at that time, we see that, Bhaktishanath Thakur was hardly critical of westernisation. Today, west means America. At that time, west means UK.
But, west is the same. So, now, when Bhaktishanath Thakur came, what was there in Gaudiya Vaishnavism? We know that, before him, there was Bhaktivinoda Thakur. And, when Bhaktivinoda Thakur was there, then, the Gaudiya Vaishnavism, the Chaitanya Mahaprabhu’s legacy was coming, which was Gaudiya Vaishnav.
What had happened? In that, in a way, three types of people had come. One was the caste Goswamis. Caste Goswamis.
So, some of them were good people. But, this society, any institution, any tradition, cannot remain immune from the society. The effect of the society is on that.
So, in India, the caste system was very popular. So, this came in Gaudiya Vaishnavism also. So, that is why, the caste Goswamis used to say that, you, if you have not taken birth in our family, then, you are not Gaudiya Vaishnav.
You cannot teach Gaudiya Vaishnavism. You cannot give initiation to Gaudiya Vaishnavism. So, this was one type of Gaudiya Vaishnavism.
They were more caught in rituals. So, this was one type of Gaudiya Vaishnavism. Then, there was another type of Gaudiya Vaishnavism.
Which was Sahajiya. Now, in reality, the word Sahajiya originally, the meaning of Sahajiya is natural. So, when a book was written during Mahaprabhu’s time, it was in Bengali, that Ramananda Raya was a great Sahajiya devotee.
So, what does Sahajiya mean? It was a natural form of devotion. So, at that time, naturally, it had a positive meaning. But, slowly, it became a negative meaning.
That is, cheap. So, till the time of Mahaprabhu, it had become very popular. And, in that, God says, So, what does it mean? That we are learning something, and then we are being taught something.
So, we live in a society. So, it is necessary to connect with that society. So, now, we have to connect.
So, what happens? What is there in that society? If we give an example, let us take the example of software. Today, there are people in software. So, we have to connect with people.
But, sometimes, we take something from that society. And, this is not wrong. Now, when the lockdown was over, everyone used to work through Zoom.
So, we also started working through Zoom. Now, someone will say, there is no proof in the scriptures that you can do satsang through Zoom. So, we can say that the conversation between Krishna and Arjuna is being watched by Sanjay through Zoom.
It is a bit of a stretch. But, what is there? Now, the situation that we have to face, for that, we have to do what is necessary. So, what do we see? Satsang is important.
How is it happening? It is not that important. It has to be adjusted according to the time, place and circumstances. So, what has happened now? When Mahaprabhu came, we know that many of his biographies were written.
So, when Bhaktivinod Thakur was there, he was not getting Chaitanya Charita Amrit. He had to search a lot to get it. But, it was not that people did not know about Chaitanya Mahaprabhu.
People knew a lot about Chaitanya Mahaprabhu. There was a lot of Kirtan, a lot of worship. But, Chaitanya Charita Amrit has a lot of spiritual knowledge, has a lot of theology.
And, the books like Chaitanya Bhagwat, Chaitanya Mangal, etc. are mostly stories. So, they were famous.
But, in Chaitanya Charita Amrit, the spiritual knowledge was lost. And, because of this, people used to think that the difference between devotion and sentimentality was very less. And then, what does sentimentality mean? There are different types of sentimentality.
So, when we talk about sentimentality, what can it be? A devotee was telling me, where was I? I was in Australia, in a temple. He said, when I meet devotees, when I was signing books, how did I meet you? He was telling me, when I came to the temple for the first time, I saw Krishna in DTS. Krishna blinked at me.
Krishna winked at me. Krishna winked at me. So, then I said, Krishna wants me to come here.
So, I started coming. Then I said, I am a little worried that Krishna winked at me the first time, and then he never winked at me again. So, what is sentimentality? In one way, this can be called sentimentality.
Now, can Krishna wink at you? Who is going to stop Krishna? Krishna can do anything he wants. But, I told him, if you get inspiration in bhakti, then it is fine. But your progress in bhakti will be due to your sadhana.
If you do Krishna miraculously, then it is good, but that will not make your progress. If you can get inspiration, then it is fine. So, what is sahajiyaism? Prabhupada says, it is sentimental ecstasy.
It can be some imagination. It is a little damaging, but it is not a big problem. Especially, if someone broadcasts it.
Someone says, Krishna winked at me. Krishna came in my dream. That is why I speak purely.
I have to do dandavat. So, if we consider it as a standard of devotion, then it becomes a bigger problem. It is an individual imagination.
It can be true also. But, if you get inspiration from it, then it is fine. But, what was the most dangerous thing in sahajiya? Actually, it started degrading.
What happened was, in our Vedic Shastras, the divinity and humanity, the boundary in this is very porous. What does porous mean? It is a very firm boundary. It is waterproof.
So, water does not go inside it. But, what does porous mean? A lot of things can come and go from inside. So, what happens is, we know that the God who comes here, is called Avatar.
But, apart from Avatar, there is one more thing which is called Aavesh. So, it has been told in Chaitanya Chartamut, that when Nakula Brahmachari used to speak, then the devotees used to think that Chaitanya Mahaprabhu is speaking through them. So, the idea of Aavesh is also there in Vedic Shastras.
Some people go to Devi’s temple, some people start dancing, some people start moving around. They say, this is Angadala. But, this is famous.
So, it is there in our Shastras. So, it is also there in Vaishnavism to some extent. But, it is not given much importance.
So, why did this Sahajiyism become so dangerous? Some, like Gaudiya Vaishnav, what they used to do is, when God used to perform Raas Nila, then people used to follow it. But, they did not just follow it. What did they say? They used to say, there is a person, he is a Mahant in a temple, there was a movie named Maharaja, in which he was described.
Like, there is a priest of a temple, he has come to a female temple He says, I can see that Krishna’s Aavesh has happened in me and Radha’s Aavesh has happened in you. And, if both of us perform it together, then it is the Leela of Radha-Krishna. And, if you do not perform it together, then you are interfering in the Leela of Radha-Krishna.
So, this is the perversion So, many unethical things were happening because of this. When Prabhupada used to say, this is not Raas Leela, it is Raaskal Leela, then such people should be called Raaskal. So, when this was happening, then Bhakti Siddhant Thakur Bhakti Siddhant Thakur did what? In our tradition, Bhakti Siddhant Thakur was a reformer.
Bhakti Siddhant Thakur was a revolutionary. Now, reformer and revolutionary, what is the difference between them? Now, suppose, we are in some building and that building says, oh, the paint here has gone, the wall here has become weak. The roof here, you will have to work on it again.
So, the reformer changes it little by little. The revolutionary comes and says, the building is so bad, destroy it, make a new building. So, Bhakti Siddhant Thakur wrote a book, described different unethical things.
But, what is it? Bhakti Siddhant Thakur was born in the family of Jati Goswami Gaudiya Vaishna. He was an outsider. He was born in a Shakta family.
And then, that Diksha he took from Bipin Govind Goswami. What happened with that? With that, in a way, he became an insider in the Gaudiya Vaishna tradition. Now, if someone has taken Diksha in ISKCON, he starts propagating ISKCON’s Siddhant.
So, now, everyone can do it on social media. But, if someone starts saying a lot of nonsense, ISKCON will give a statement that he or she doesn’t represent ISKCON. So, it can be said that Bhakti Siddhant Thakur was an outsider to some extent.
With Diksha, he became an insider. But still, because he was not born in the family of Jati Goswami, he did not get so much respect. So, the original caste was Goswami.
But still, that caste Goswami had power in that. So, what Bhakti Siddhant Thakur did? He created a whole new demographic. If, let’s say, there is an organisation, no one gets respect in that organisation.
So, someone propagates it and makes a new organisation. And that organisation becomes bigger than the previous one. So, what happens? Then, Bhakti Siddhant Thakur created the Bhadralok.
What does Bhadralok mean? At that time, there were educated people who were taking English education. But, the intelligent people were taking that education. So, those people who were the traditional caste Goswami, they were not able to propagate it.
So, for example, some people do Ritri Vasa, they go to engineering college, IIT, they were not able to propagate it. So, Bhakti Siddhant Thakur created a whole new demographic. And then, Bhakti Siddhant Thakur built on that demographic.
And then, when Bhakti Siddhant Thakur felt that he had sufficient people, then, what did he do? He challenged the caste Goswami. And, the Sahajiyaism was coming from the caste Goswami and some other people. But, this Sahajiyaism, giving more emphasis on Ritri Vasa was not a problem.
But, this Sahajiyaism was very dangerous. So, Bhakti Siddhant Thakur did 2-3 things What did he do? First, he said that we have a Shiksha Parampara. And, in this Shiksha Parampara, what did he do? Bhakti Siddhant Thakur Vipin Vighari Goswami, that was a strategic decision.
Because, he wanted authority in Gaudiya Vaishnavism, so that he could propagate it. But, in the debate of Brahmins and Vaishnavs, the one who was taking the side of Brahmins, the main person was Vipin Vighari Goswami. So, that is why, Bhakti Siddhant Thakur confronted him, defeated him.
Bhakti Siddhant Thakur said, he is my Guru. I cannot go directly against my Guru. But, Bhakti Siddhant Thakur went against him.
Defeated him. And then, the Shiksha Parampara that he told us, what happened with that? He completely sidelined Vipin Vighari Goswami. He said, yes, my father took initiation from Vipin Vighari Goswami.
But, his inspiration was not as much as it was from Jagannath Babaji. So, what Bhakti Siddhant Thakur did was, he created a parallel structure of authority. Going back, right to Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, through the great saintly Acharyas.
The stranglehold of Jati Goswamis on Gaudiya Vaishnavism, there was a stranglehold. Because of that, it was not able to be propagated. So, that stranglehold, he completely broke it.
So, what is the reason for that? We know that, when he went to Vrindavan, he closed all the temples, he did all the rituals. Stones were thrown at him. They tried to kill him.
He said, why would anyone do this? What was so powerful about him? So, what Bhakti Siddhant Thakur did was, he undercut all the authority structure of Gaudiya Vaishnavism. He completely broke it. So, what happened was, he lost his position, he was not getting donations, he was not getting followers.
So, because of that, he became very angry. But, why did he have to do this? Because, what happened was, in a way, Gaudiya Vaishnavism was throttled. It was not getting popular.
Because, he was saying, we will only give Diksha. And, he himself was not very inspiring, he himself was not doing much publicity. So, how will it spread? So, he undercut that authority.
And, what did he do next? Then, he was saying one thing, the real meaning of Gaudiya Vaishnavism is that, you should get Siddha Pranali. What is Siddha Pranali? It means that, your Guru will tell you who you are in Vrindavan. And then, you should live your life in that way.
And, your Sadhana will be like that. And, this Siddha Pranali, in Gaudiya Vaishnavism tradition, there is a detailed description of it. But, this Siddha Pranali, the whole method, now this is a very complicated subject, and I am saying this very simply.
So, this was the whole method of Siddha Pranali. What does Siddha Pranali mean? Siddha Pranali means that, our true form in the spiritual world, that Guru will tell us. And then, we will live our life in that way.
So, if there is a Gopi in the spiritual world, then, he will live his life like a Gopi. If there is a Gopa, then, he will live his life like a Gopa. So, this was being exploited very easily in Sahajiyaism.
For example, the thought of Avesh, that Krishna is in you, Radha is in me, Krishna is in me, Radha is in you. But, in reality, this Siddha Pranali was also being misused. So, what did Bhakti Siddhant Thakur say? That the path of Raag, is for our respect.
But, we will not follow it. So, in that way, the danger of Sahajiya, was completely avoided. Completely avoided.
And, to emphasise this, that how when we have to do Bhakti, then, we have to do Shuddhikaran in this world. Whatever is in the next world, we do not have to follow it. So, basically, what happens is that, the outsiders criticise us.
Outsiders means, what is it? A lot of people criticise us. So, what is that criticism? That we are going to do. We understand that, we are going to do it.
But, when the insiders, the people of our own tradition, criticise us, then, what happens? Then, there is more fear, there is more sorrow. So, the revolutionaries of Bhakti Siddhant Thakur, those who were in Gaudiya Vaishnavism, those things, because of which, Gaudiya Vaishnavism was not being recognised, because of which, Gaudiya Vaishnavism was collapsing, they also criticised it. So, this was, the most revolutionary thing was this.
Now, it was not like that, those who were apart from Bhakti Siddhant Saraswati, they were all polluted, they were all deviant, they were not like this. They were like this also. Some were honest, some were great saints.
But, those who were most influential, they were not allowing Gaudiya Vaishnavism to be propagated, or they were polluting it. So, this was an internal challenge. So, what did they do? They focused that, in Bhakti Rasamudra Sindhu, in Bhakti Rasamudra Sindhu, there are two types of characteristics of spiritual progress.
Some are imitable, and some are non-imitable. What does imitable mean? You can easily imitate them. If tears are coming from the eyes, then Bhakti Siddhant Saraswati says that, what is the value of tears of love? He says, the value of onions in the market.
Give some onions, tears will come from the eyes. And people will feel that, you have become a great devotee. So, the symptoms of ecstasy, the symptoms of ecstasy, we see in Chaitanya Charita Amrit, it has been emphasised a lot.
But if we see in ISKCON, they have not been emphasised at all. So, why has this transition happened? This is coming from Bhakti Siddhant Shakur. Because people imitate, that I am a great devotee.
And I am such a great devotee, I am getting ecstasy. So, whatever I say, you should do it. And then they do something unethical.
So, the non-imitable symptoms they say, these are venerable, they are respectable, but not for us. So, we will not take it as a measurement that who is a great devotee. What is non-imitable? avyarthakalatvam No one wastes time.
namagane sadaruchi, samutkantha He is always excited to do bhakti, he is excited for the service of God. When he has such a feeling, then what is it? No one can ignore this for a long time. So, when Prabhupada ji meets George Harrison, he says that, if you believe in Krishna, then see who is most addicted to Krishna.
He always talks about Kaul Krishna. So, in this way, Bhakti Siddhant Shakur combated the internal challenge. He basically rescued Gaudiya Vaishnavism from the power brokers, from the power structure of Gaudiya Vaishnavism.
So, this was a revolutionary work. Now, the second thing is that at that time, Mayavad had spread a lot. Now, what happens is that those who go towards the spiritual path, those who go towards spirituality, then one path is philosophical, the second path is religious.
So, those who go towards the religious path, they always start with an image. What does it mean? For example, when we go to a temple, this is an idol. So, that can be a deity, that can be a god, that can be a demigod, that image can also be a semi-god.
What does semi-god mean? Semi-god. That I am god. So, this can also be.
So, the ordinary people go towards the religious path. And the philosophical path normally starts with impersonalism. If someone comes after thinking about the spiritual path, he thinks that all these are just physical forms, and the truth should be non-sectarian.
For example, if a form comes, it becomes sectarian. So, the ordinary intelligent people go towards the impersonal path. So, what happened now? What did Bhaktivinod Thakur do? If we see, Bhaktivinod Thakur is here.
So, Bhaktivinod Thakur is here. the traditional Gaudiya audience, what does traditional Gaudiya audience mean? The ordinary people, who sing Gaur Nitai, who sing some bhajans, it was difficult to reach them, because they respect the Gaudiya audience. So, what did Bhaktivinod Thakur do for them? He wrote a lot of songs.
So, the Vaishno Geet that he wrote, it was popular at that time. It was the style of singing composition. He wrote in that style.
But, he gave philosophy in that. But, Bhaktivinod Thakur’s main outreach was Bhadralok people. His target audience was educated people.
Educated means those who speak English, those who have studied western philosophies. So, the Bhadralok people were the majority of them, because they studied in English, they used to read the interpretations of Vedic Shastras in English. And, in that, they used to criticise how there are so many deities.
And, so many deities used to confuse people. So, today, when I went to America, a devotee showed me how people have increased their national Indian pride. Because of Ram Mandir, India’s economic is rising.
So, there are Indian children in America. They are also trying to understand their own culture. So, he showed me that an American boy is asking an Indian boy, why do you worship so many gods? Why do you worship so many gods? So, this Indian boy said, we like to keep backups.
That, now, this is not right in the spiritual knowledge. But, the thing is, Krishna has to think and bring some defence. So, what happened was that Christianity was criticising Vedic Sanatana Dharma a lot.
And, according to the rituals, according to the rituals, a lot of bad things were happening. So, then, most of the people became impersonalists. Because, what happened was, British colonialists and Christian missionaries tried to leave Hinduism and become Christians.
But, what happened was, they did not leave Hinduism. But, what they did was, whatever they learned, with their rationality, they started reading Vedic scriptures again. They said, in reality, all these gods are different, but they are the form of Brahman.
So, you say, we have only one god. So, you are monotheistic. So, what the Mayavadis used to say, they used to say an evolution in Christianity.
First, there is atheism. Atheism means no god. Then, many gods.
And then, one god. So, no god, many gods. After that, one god.
So, what Christianity was doing was, we are at the top. So, what the Mayavadis did was, only god. There is nothing else.
There is not one god up there and here. There is only god and nothing else. Brahma Satya, Jagan Mithya.
So, what happened now is, the Mayavadis were showing like this. So, Mayavad became the main way at that time to try to counter western Christian missionary influence. And at that time, it happened that all the people, Hindu religion, either it is a ritual or it is Mayavad.
So, at that time, the Mayavadi teachers were also there. Now, this is not correct. So, it is not like that it is at the top.
But, this was their way. So, at that time, it became necessary for Bhakti Sahib Chakur to separate himself from the Mayavad. Because, the philosophical approach to spirituality also has devotion.
So, now, how it happens is, when many devotees say that now, Muslims are so fanatical, Christians are converting so much. We don’t criticise them, but we criticise the Mayavadis so much. So, are Mayavadis worse than them? So, when our Acharyas criticise someone, the criticism of Acharya is not necessarily based on how wrong an idea is.
But, how likely the idea is to take our audience wrong. Take our audience wrong. What does it mean? That, now, if here, in Bhagavatam class or in that celebration, if I criticise atheism here, is atheism wrong? Yes, it is really wrong.
But, are the people who have come here for this programme, is atheism going to affect them? Atheism is wrong. But, there is no need to criticise atheism here. Because, that is not likely to take devotees away.
But, if, suppose, there is a superstition, which says that it is based on Bhagavad Gita, Chaitanya Chaitanya Amrit, or it is based on Vedic Shastras, then, it is also possible that 90% of it is similar. But, the 10% which is different, from that, many people can get mislead. That is why, Acharya’s criticism is that, every Acharya is responding to the challenges and threats at that time.
So, what happened at that time? At that time, Mayavad became an existential threat Existential threat means its existence was not there. So, what happened? That is why, Bhakti Sahaj Thakur and later on, Bhakti Shila Prabhupada also criticised Mayavad a lot. Now, why did they criticise? I will tell you about two points in cultural context.
What happened was, the Christian missionaries were trying to convert a lot. And, the first British people who came here, they were colonialists. They just wanted to do business there.
And, they saw that Indians are very religious. So, they said that, we will not interfere in their religion. You do your religion, and we will do our business.
But, what happened? There were elections in Britain also. There were two parties in Britain. One party was rationalist, and the other was religious.
So, when the religious party won they said that India is such a big country. This is the place for our conversion. Before that, the second rationalist party did not give any opportunity to any Christian missionary to come to India.
So, what happened then? Those Christian missionaries used to live outside India, in Rampur, Burma, etc. And, from there, they used to come inside and go back after doing propaganda. Because, they did not have legal activity in India.
But, when the government changed, then what happened? Christians got a lot of support. And, earlier, they tried to destroy Hinduism by criticising it. But, they saw that it did not affect them much.
So, then, the feeling of God, of devotion, was very deep-rooted. So, what did they do? With direct criticism, they changed the whole strategy. What was indirect? They started a kind of humanitarian work.
What did humanitarian mean? It meant schools, hospitals, charitable trusts, Now, Mother Teresa, who has worked on the level of compassion, she has done a very good job. But, she was in Kolkata. But, she did not give a single statement that she has praised any Vedic culture.
She has never praised anything. Not at all. So, the humanitarian work that was for them, became a conversion strategy.
And, they started saying that this Sanatan Dharma, this Vedic Dharma, whatever you call it, this will never benefit you. Because, in this Sanatan Dharma, there was a Christian missionary who said that, out of all the ideas created by humans, the most evil one is the law of karma. Because, the law of karma is that, if you go down, you will be born again.
If you are poor, you will remain poor. So, the law of karma is the greatest killer of compassion. This was their criticism.
Now, this is not right. We see in our scriptures, there is Maharaj Shibi, Maharaj Rantidev. They are showing compassion at the physical level also.
But, what happened is that, with the help of humanitarian work. So, the Mayavadis wanted to stop this conversion. And, what did they start doing? They started saying that, you have to do all this.
The feeling of devotion, the feeling of devotion is that, in devotional service, there is a very big thing. In that, social service or humanitarian work also comes. Now, Prabhupada ji has started food for life.
In big temples, they give free food. So, devotional service is a culture. Social service also comes.
But, what happened is that, the Mayavadis started saying that, all these rituals and rituals are for the less intelligent people. The real truth is Vedanta. So, what did they start saying? That, the rituals and rituals are done by the less intelligent people.
So, the less intelligent people see God in the idol of the temple. The more intelligent people see God in the heart of the poor person. So, not only social service, but also humanitarian work.
In reality, humanitarian work is the best humanitarian work. The one who is serving the idols is the less intelligent one. The one who sees God in the heart of the people and serves them is the greatest.
So, what did the Mayavadis start saying? That, the devotional service is lower than the social service. The social service is actually more advanced spiritual service. So, you understand, they were attacking the roots of devotion.
So, because of this, the Mayavadis have made many statements that, one Bhagavad Gita is better than reading a youngster playing football on a football ground. Or, instead of giving water to a basil, give water to a brinjal. So, where did all this come from? They thought that, Hindus are so stuck in rituals that they are spending so much time, money and attention that our own people are not showing mercy to them.
And what is the reason for this? These people are converting to Christianity. So, we have to stop them. So, it is right to stop them.
But, for them, to criticise the devotional service and to call it inferior to social service, this was very dangerous. So, in such a situation, what did Bhaktisthanth Thakur do? He strongly criticised the Mayavadis. So, he said that, in reality, his statement was that, the bell of the temple is better than feeding thousands of people.
So, what is he doing by saying such a statement? Does this mean that, the thousands of people who are starving, let them be and don’t ring the bell in the temple? This is not his intention. His intention is that, don’t underestimate devotion. Devotion is also very important.
Devotion purifies the heart. When the heart is purified, a person becomes generous. A person becomes generous.
So, the criticism of the Mayavadis was necessary at that time. Because, he wanted to differentiate. The importance of devotion should be established.
And, in that way, what Bhaktisthanth Thakur did at that time, what happened now? The Mayavadi leaders, Mayavadi is a very big word. Mayavadi says that, everything is one. But, all Mayavadis are also not one.
They also have different ideologies. But, they all wanted independence. So, now, what Bhaktisthanth Thakur did was that, he was working in the British government.
And, the position he got from that, he was getting prestige and authority. At that time, he promoted Gaudiya Vaishnavism. So, our Gaudiya tradition in a way, it was not very anti-British.
So, what happened? Because, Mayavadis took the anti-British position. So, Gaudiya Vaishnav tradition, Bhaktisthanth Thakur also took the non-anti-British position. So, it was quite strategic.
So, for that time, he was establishing his separate identity. And, with the inspiration of Bhaktisthanth Thakur, he got a lot of publicity. So, Bhaktisthanth Thakur wrote a lot of books.
But, he did not make a mission. The mission he made, in a way, the last point, which I will elaborate on, because this is the most relevant for us. What is it? At that time, Christianity, Christianity was Catholic and Protestant.
In Britain, the majority were Protestants. So, in India, Protestants were more influential. So, what happened? The Christians were very organised.
And, they were promoting in an organised way and converting a lot of people. So, Bhaktisthanth Thakur gave a prototype of organisation. He told about a marketplace in Haryana.
He told about different hierarchies. So, he gave a vision of it. But, the implementation of it was done by Bhaktisthanth Thakur.
So, earlier, Vishwa Vaishnava and Rajya Sabha were the names of such organisations or groups. But, they were never very influential. So, in Gaudiya Vaishnava history, the Gaudiya Vaishnavism can be of two types.
One is organic. And, the other is organisational. So, from Bhaktisthanth Thakur, the organisational Gaudiya Vaishnavism started.
He established Gaudiya Math. Why did he establish it? Because he saw that the propaganda of absurdity is being propagated in an organised way. So, we have to counter it in an organised way.
So, the Bhadras, the educated people, who admired Bhaktisthanth Thakur, who used to read his books, Bhaktisthanth Thakur promoted it a lot. Now, there are many people, who will read Prabhupada’s books. But, what do I have to do? So, they will start chanting.
But, if I want to do something else, if there is a temple there, then I can serve here. I can propagate here. If people want engagement, then, an organisational structure is very helpful for that.
So, what does organisation do? In a way, if there is a high mountain, and from here, suppose there is an ocean, so, the water from the mountain is going towards the ocean. So, the ocean is God. Now, we are not merged in it, but we have a brain connection.
So, what happens is, we are far away from God, in the mountain of this material world. So, we all have a spiritual urge. But, our urge is a small trickle of water.
What does trickle mean? It is a small flow. So, I may have a spiritual urge, someone else may have a spiritual urge, someone else may have a spiritual urge. But, the small waves of water, waves, not trickle, the flow of water, it is very difficult to reach that small flow of water to the ocean.
But, all these flows of water come together. So, what happens? It becomes a river. And, it is very easy to reach So, when the river starts flowing, what happens while the river flows? The river makes a way for itself.
The way the river makes, the river, the river, this is Krishna Consciousness. And, the river bed, that is organisation. So, the flow of the river, very easily, very easily, for a long time, if there is a way for the river, then it becomes easy.
So, the organisation is not the river. The organisation is not devotion. The organisation is a facility The river bed is not the river.
The river bed is not going to reach the ocean. But, the place of the river, it can help the river to reach the ocean. It can help the river to reach the ocean.
So, some people can be like this. Their spiritual priorities are so powerful, that they themselves become a river and reach the ocean. But, most people cannot do like this.
So, that is why, it is necessary to be a river. And, it is necessary to meet in the river. And, for the river to move forward, the path of the river is necessary.
So, the organisation is a river bed. So, the devotional organisation Bhaktivinod Thakur, in the Gaudiya Vaishnava tradition, brought the organisation for the first time. It was an informal organisation.
But, there was no formal structure or effectiveness in it. So, what he did now, what happened with this, it became a very powerful preaching. So, the badras, the educated people, who never came to Gaudiya Vaishnava, they appreciated Bhaktivinod Thakur.
But, under Bhaktivinod Thakur, they became dedicated. They became dedicated. And then, that preaching spread a lot.
He made 64 centres in India, outside India, in Berlin, I think, there was a centre in Germany, there was a centre in the UK. And, the preaching was very effective at the level of an organisation. And, the preaching that he did, now, the organisation structure, the form, how did the Christian people make the organisation? Now, the organisation, the Akhada is an organisation.
A Math is also an organisation. But, what is it? A big organisation, a Sampradaya is also an organisation, but it does not have a formal structure. Now, Gaudiya Vaishnava is a Sampradaya.
But, Gaudiya Vaishnava is not a Sampradaya structure. It is a structure of Gaudiya Math, a structure of ISKCON. So, the formalisation that he did, what happened with that? The preaching became more effective.
But, now, from his own life, the organisation that is formed, it has a danger. And, that danger, he himself showed it at the end of his life. Now, what happened? Now, someone builds a big building.
Now, someone has built a building on the coastline of Bombay. So, what happens? Everyone wants a sea-facing apartment. It is prestigious.
We have such a sea-facing house. Now, in America, there are a lot of Indians. Indians are the wealthiest minority in America.
Indian people have more money than American people. American people have a lot of people and their average income is not that much. So, now, Indian people, a lot of people, build houses according to Vastu.
So, I went to Texas, Florida. So, there, they build houses there. So, those big houses, they used to say, our houses are Vastu compliant.
And, if they say, it is an east-facing house, then it becomes a premium cost. So, what I am saying is, according to time, what people value, that changes. So, when Bhaktivedanta Chakraborty built a beautiful temple, he was living there as a monk.
But, instead of fighting, who will get a Ganga-facing room? Hmm? So, it is good to see the Ganga. But, to see the Ganga, to get a room, you have to fight with each other. So, what happens? The riverbed, what does riverbed mean? It is an infrastructure.
Now, for the infrastructure, if someone starts fighting for resources, Bhaktivedanta Chakraborty, when he was there, he could see that this is happening. And, he was very sad about it. So, then he wrote a famous article about Putana.
For example, Putana came as Krishna’s nurse. But, what was its purpose? To give poison to Krishna. So, he used to say that the institution can be in the form of Yashoda or in the form of Putana.
So, if the institution becomes in the form of Putana, then what will happen? That institution will give poison to Krishna Bhavna. So, Prabhupada used to say that personal ambition is the great poison. If someone comes to Krishna Bhavna and he thinks that here, I am going to do everything according to my own ambition.
I have to make myself great. Now, everyone has an ambition. But, our ambition is to make Krishna great, not to make myself great.
So, what is the experiment of the institution? The organisation is an organisation that is entirely spiritual or it is nothing spiritual. These are both extremes. The institution is spiritual in everything.
No, we all are in different states of consciousness. And, here it is in the material world. The problems in the material world will come here also.
So, to consider it entirely divine or to say that it is all material, there is no divinity in it. These are both extremes. So, what is the organisation? It is a resource for spirituality.
What is this? It is a resource for spirituality. And, just now, I had asked a question to a devotee that Shri Shashtam Prabhupada had done a podcast. He had asked this question many times.
He had asked that his own Gurudev had started the Gaudiya Math. So, why did Shri Shashtam Prabhupada start a separate organisation? Why did Shri Shashtam Prabhupada not move forward the Gaudiya Math? So, what is the reason for this? Shri Shashtam Prabhupada had never intended to start a separate organisation. Shri Shashtam Prabhupada wanted to move forward the orders of his own Gurudev.
But, what happened? Three things happened. First of all, when Shri Shashtam Prabhupada left, the infighting increased. And, because of this, the name of Gaudiya Math was also defamed.
So, Shri Shashtam Prabhupada was a great disciple of Shri Shashtam Prabhupada. But, the name of Gaudiya Math was not so reputed. And, second thing was that none of the leaders of Gaudiya Math were ready to help Shri Shashtam Prabhupada.
In his dream, Shri Shashtam Prabhupada asked Shri Shashtam Prabhupada to take Sanyasa. Now, according to Shri Shashtam Prabhupada, we can believe that this is true. But, Shri Shashtam Prabhupada can be your Guru, your Kalpana, your Sahajiya.
But, this is true. So, Shri Shashtam Prabhupada wrote a letter to his Guru that he wants to take Sanyasa. His Guru said, Shri Shashtam Prabhupada said, forget Sanyasa, you have never stayed in an Ashram.
You first come and stay in our Ashram. We will see your discipline. We will see your discipline for 5-10 years and then we will talk about Sanyasa.
Shri Shashtam Prabhupada said, I don’t have 5-10 years. So, Shri Shashtam Prabhupada went to another Guru, Shri Keshav Maharaj. He said, Guru, you take Sanyasa.
So, Shri Shashtam Prabhupada went to America. So, he didn’t get any help from Gaudiya Math. Not only he didn’t get help, many times he faced obstacles.
So, Shri Shashtam Prabhupada’s mission was the same. But, because the leaders of Gaudiya Math, we don’t want to commit a crime against them, they were very dedicated. They were very dedicated.
But, the thing is, this is normal human psychology. If, let’s say, we have been propagating this for 20-25 years, and a devotee comes and propagates it in a year, he makes more followers than us. So, we get a little suspicious.
Are his followers really right? So, some of Shri Shashtam Prabhupada’s followers were non-living Brahmacharis, Sanyasis, who lived with him. Shri Shashtam Prabhupada met Shri Shashtam Prabhupada 8-10 times. So, Shri Shashtam Prabhupada had said a lot of good things about Shri Shashtam Prabhupada, but only a few times.
So, from Shri Shashtam Prabhupada’s point of view, Shri Shashtam Prabhupada felt that Shri Shashtam Prabhupada was an outsider. So, Shri Shashtam Prabhupada was a little insecure. So, what happened was, neither did Shri Shashtam Prabhupada get any support from Gaudiya Math, but he also faced opposition.
And, Gaudiya Math was also fragmented. So, Shri Shashtam Prabhupada continued the same mission. But, what happened was, he was stuck in legal complications.
That is why he did not use that name. The mission is the same, but the name is different. So, the organisation is a kind of body.
But the soul is Krishna Bhakti, that is Krishna Bhavna. So, the same soul is in Gaudiya Math, in Gaudiya Vishnavism, and the same soul is in ISKCON. So, this is spreading.
So, Shri Shashtam Prabhupada said, one last point I will make, the organisation which Shri Shashtam Prabhupada established, the legacy of Shri Shashtam Prabhupada can be said in one way, that what he propagated, it was extraordinary. In such a situation, once someone told Shri Shashtam Prabhupada, that Shri Shashtam Prabhupada, how did Shri Shashtam Prabhupada propagate? He propagated in Bengal, Shri Shashtam Prabhupada propagated in India, Shri Shashtam Prabhupada propagated in the whole world. That is why you are bigger than all of them.
Shri Shashtam Prabhupada said, don’t ever think like this. Whatever I have done, I have done it by their grace. I have done it by their grace, and the fathers, the parents, if the child becomes bigger than them, then they become happier.
So now, what Bhakti Sadhana Thakur has propagated, at that time, every time there is opposition in this world. If someone is dancing on a dancing stage, then one person dances well, and the other person dances better than him. So we will say, this other person is dancing very well.
The second is a better dancer. This is the truth. But later we come to know, the first person who was dancing, at that time, all the water on the dance floor was spilled.
And he was dancing while there was water. So, the floor, the dance of the other person was very good. But the situation in which the first person was dancing, that was very difficult.
So now, in the same way, what Bhakti Sadhana Thakur propagated, was probably one of the most difficult times to preach. Why was it a difficult time for preaching? Because at that time, most of India wanted independence. So all the awakened people wanted independence.
And when Bhakti Sadhana Thakur started around 1919, and till 1937, even before that, he was active, but his activity was not focused. So in 1937, when he was 18-19 years old, at that time, the Indian independence struggle was at its peak. In 1920-1930, there was an agitation.
But his legacy is still present. What did Bhakti Sadhana Thakur do? At that time, like I gave the example of the king in the beginning, he expanded the kingdom. He propagated what was propagated in Bengal all over the world.
He went beyond the world to propagate. But his legacy is not only moving ahead from ISKCON, but his legacy is another important one, that what should be the emphasis of Gaudiya Vaishnavism. So what was the emphasis before that? The path of Raga.
That was the emphasis. Now what did he do? He emphasised the teachings of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu. But Shri Prabhupada expanded it.
He emphasised Krishna’s teachings, the Gita. So the Gita, in the Gaudiya Vaishnav tradition, was not as important as that of Shri Prabhupada. Some Acharyas have commented on the Gita.
Our prominent Acharya Goswami, they didn’t consider Gita so important that it is necessary to comment on it. He has not written a commentary on the Gita. Chakravarti Pahad has written a commentary, but it is a very interesting commentary.
It is beautiful, but it is an interesting commentary. And Bhaktivaldi Vidyabhishan has written a commentary, because he had to establish the Gaudiya Vaishnav tradition on the basis of Prasthantara. That is why his Guru has written a commentary, but still he does not refer his Guru’s commentary.
Because, Chakravarti Pahad has written a commentary for those who accept the Gaudiya Vaishnav, who accept Krishna’s Bhakti. Baldev Vidyabhishan has written a commentary for Vedantic followers. So, he used to give a lecture on the basis of that Gita.
But, he used to say that we are the representatives of Mahaprabhu, presenting the message of love of God. But, what did Prabhupadaji do? He made it more universalised. The focus of Bhakti Saheb was in Bengal.
He was going out of Bengal. That is why, he focused a lot on the teachings of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu. But, what did Prabhupadaji see? More broad universal.
Prabhupadaji… There are many books, but Prabhupadaji… Okay, let’s put it this way. How Prashila Prabhupada has carried on Bhakti Saheb’s takul legacy. The Vedic teachings… The Vedic teachings Prabhupadaji gave us on the basis of Gita.
Vedic means basic Vedic philosophy. So, the Vaishnav teachings he gave us on the basis of Bhagavatam. And the Gaudiya Vaishnav teachings he gave us on the basis of Chaitanya Charita Amrit.
He gave it to Bhakti Saheb also. But, he gave a summary study of it. So, what did Prabhupadaji do? He wanted to reach a new demographic.
He wanted to reach the demographic of the whole world. So, what did he have to do? He had to tell them the basic spirituality. So, this was Prabhupadaji’s vision of preaching.
So, through Prashila Prabhupada, Bhakti Sudhansh Thakur’s legacy lives on. And what he has done, which is an extraordinary work. Prabhupadaji used to say that my spiritual master… I am never separated from my spiritual master.
He is always with me. Because he lives his life according to his instructions. And according to those instructions, what he did… In the year 1971, he went to America.
And the glory he got was extraordinary. It is not only his glory, but it is also the grace of Bhakti Sudhansh Thakur. And today, we can pray to Bhakti Sudhansh Thakur that whatever mission he has established, we have got the opportunity to participate in it.
So, we can be a part of it in a responsible way. I will summarise, and then we will offer a prayer. We will conclude.
So, what approach did we take today? Approach is not so much as a saint, but as a spiritual warrior. How he himself… His character is very extraordinary. But what does spiritual warrior mean? He has an area of Gaudiya Vaishnavism.
And there are different kings in different areas. So, we saw how he fought against it. So, we saw three things in it.
First was what problems were there in Gaudiya tradition. So, in Gaudiya tradition, there was a problem of Jati Goswami. There was a problem of Jati Goswami.
And there was a problem of Sahajiya. So, in challenging both of them, what happened? His father was a reformer, Bhaktivinod Thakur. But what was Bhaktivinod Thakur? He became a revolutionary.
So, the authority structure which was not being promoted by Gaudiya Vaishnavism, he completely undercut it. Second was Mayavad. What was Mayavad? It became an existential threat for Bhakti.
What did he say? That Bhakti is for less intelligent people. And social service is for more intelligent people. So, Bhaktivinod Thakur, Prabhupada ji, And his criticism was that criticism is based not on how wrong it is, but how likely it is to take potential followers wrong.
So, based on that, he decided. And lastly, we saw that to counter Christianity, he took organisation from it. In organisation, he was a pioneer in bringing formal organisational structure.
He did it for the first time. So, after this, we saw that organisation, it is fully spiritual or nothing spiritual. It is neither.
What is organisation? It is a resource. What is organisation? It is a river bed. But what is the river? The river is actually Krishna Chetna.
So, what did Srila Prabhupada ji do? Srila Prabhupada ji is taking forward the legacy of Bhaktivinod Thakur. It is the same legacy, but based on a different name. And how the Acharyas had different problems at that time, the challenges, how they fought against it, they understand.
So, there can be some problems in our life, there can be some challenges. To face them, we can also increase the intensity. Let us pray.
We can pray to Bhaktivinod Thakur that the way he with intelligence and dedication even after living as a saint, as a great propagator and warrior. So, we are also progressing in bhakti. We want to bring the qualities of a saint, but we also want to bring the qualities of a propagator and warrior.
So, we are blessed to serve a little in his movement, in the refuge of Prabhupada ji, in the refuge of our Guru. Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakur ki Jai! Srila Prabhupada ki Jai! Gaur Bhakta Vrinda ki Jai! Gaur Premanand ji