Bhaktivinoda Thakura’s contributions 2 – See the unity of purpose underlying the diversity of religions
Disclaimer: This transcript was generated using AI and may contain occasional errors or inaccuracies.
Hare Krishna. So on the occasion of Bhaktanath Thakur's disappearance day, let's look at his contributions to Gaudiya Vaishnavism. In the first part we discussed about how he envisioned a harmonization of faith and reason.
Now let's look at how he envisioned harmonization of different religions, not through assuming identity among all the religions, but through envisioning or comprehending their unity of purpose. So when prior to Bhaktanath Thakur, Gaudiya Vaishnavism had not had much interaction with faiths, with religions outside the Vedic tradition. Although Islam was there, but there was very little intellectual dialogue between Islam and Hinduism.
And therefore, the Islam was never really considered to be an intellectual competitor, because people who used to slaughter cows and eat meat, they were not considered to be high level at all. They're not considered to be intellectually equals in any way. When the Europeans came, although they had similar habits in terms of lifestyle, but they had science and technology and rationality, and they seemed not only intellectually equal, but intellectually superior.
And many Christian missionaries also came, and they were a part of the same Western culture. So when there were so many different ways of looking and thinking, so Christianity was one religion within the Vedic path itself, there are many different religions, Vaishnavism, Shaivism, like that. So what is the right way of understanding these different religions? So Bhaktanath Thakur's classic statement is how actually there are different ways of comprehending the divine.
And in Chaitanya Shiksha Amrit and in other books, he explains how there are peaks, if there is one huge mountain peak, and there are different people who are looking at that mountain peak from different directions, and they see the same peak, but because of their position, their different positions, they will see that same mountain peak differently. And because they see this mountain peak differently, therefore, accordingly, they come to different understandings. So he explains how there can be different levels of faith, or different kinds of conceptions, different kinds of faith people may have, because of various reasons.
So for example, one may have different kinds of understanding because one has faith in different prophets. So all of the prophets are themselves enlightened souls, but they speak according to time, place, and circumstance. So the way they speak, according to their cultural context, and the kind of prophet in whom one has faith, accordingly, one's religious conception will be shaped.
So because Mohammed's teachings were spoken in a different context from Jesus' teachings, and similarly, they are in a different context from what Vyasa has spoken, therefore, there will be difference in the understanding of the followers. Similarly, then there is also the issue of the kind of practice one is doing. So depending on the mode of worship that one has, one's faith will also be affected.
So a person who is worshipping Kali, and a person who is worshipping Krishna, who is worshipping Kali by killing animals, a person who is worshipping Krishna by offering Patram, Pushpam, Phalam, Toyam, that person's understanding will be different. It also depends on culture, the kind of environment a person grows in, accordingly, one's faith gets shaped. And similarly, one's own disposition.
So he gives the example that a hunter in a forest will, if he is told about the pure Bhagavata Dharma, he will not be able to relate with that easily. And he will have the idea that God must be the greatest hunter. And he thinks even if I attain heaven, in heaven I will do hunting, and there I will do expert hunting.
So one will not be able to get out of one's framework of cultural conceptions. And to get out of that framework, one needs a higher understanding. And that higher understanding comes by practice of the deeper core of one's spiritual practice or spiritual path.
So when one accesses that core and then practices accordingly, then one gets elevated progressively higher, higher, higher, upwards towards the supreme perfection. So at that time, there were other spiritual teachers, especially impersonalists who say that all paths lead to the same goal. Or actually, not just all paths lead to the same goal.
They say all paths are essentially the same. That was the idea. So Bhaktanath Thakur said, yes, ultimately, all paths are expressions of the same existential quest.
Wherever people are, they will get the question, who am I? What is the purpose of my life? But depending on their prophets, depending on their culture, depending on their psychology, depending on the practices that they adopt, like this, depending on the external variants, their conception will vary. And so, therefore, to simplistically say that all paths lead to the same goal is not exactly correct. Ultimately, all paths are meant for the progression of the individual on the spiritual express way.
And for that purpose, all paths need to be respected. So there is this famous quote of Bhaktanath Thakur. He says that if we go to a place where someone else, to a place where God is being worshipped in a way different from ours, and there we are, there we see people worshipping God accordingly, say we go to a church or a mosque, then what should one do? What should one do? He says one should stand there in a reverential mode.
And one should understand that here is my own beloved, my own worshipable Lord, who has manifested in a form different from mine, from the one which I am familiar with. And he is attracting people over here. So how merciful is my Lord that is manifesting in so many different ways to attract so many different people? So by thinking thus, we can, three things, we can respect the manifestation of God that is there.
Second is we can gain greater appreciation for the merciful nature of the Lord. And based on the greater appreciation, we can further be inspired to become more devoted to the Lord in the way in which we are familiar with Him. That means, rather than thinking that, okay, I have to adopt that path because God has manifested over there, or I have to destroy that path because that path is different from me, I understand that it is the same one Lord who has extended himself in various ways, and I become devoted to the path which I have been given.
I become more devoted by seeing the mercifulness of the Lord. So we see the unity of purpose underlying the diversity of religious forms. So by that, we can appreciate whichever religious form is there.
And he says, one should not have to, one doesn't have to create unnecessary conflicts. You know, people at different levels can practice and they will get gradually elevated from whatever level they are practicing. If they are open, surely, we can give them the highest understanding.
But the point is to recognize that all people, mama vartamanu vartante, anushya partha sarvasya. Krishna says that all people are on my path. So we encourage people to move forward on the spiritual expressway wherever they are.
And within the Gaurav Vishnu tradition, Bhaktunath Thakur is the first person who actually recognizes Jesus and Muhammad also to be Shaktyavish avatars. So Chaitanya Mahaprabhu does not use that word specifically. In the Chaitanya Charita Amrit, where there are two situations where there are dialogues between Chaitanya Mahaprabhu and Muslims.
So at that time, Chaitanya Mahaprabhu focuses on the essential principle and he basically converts both of them to Vaishnavism. But here, Bhaktunath Thakur doesn't focus on converting anyone. His focus is on encouraging people along the same existential path, same existential quest for the purpose and meaning of life.
And he, of course, he does not simplistically say that everything is same. He recognizes that the contemporary expressions of Islam that were there at his time were quite, or that had been there before the Britishers came in, they were quite destructive for the Prashtika Vedic tradition. But he differentiated the prevalent expressions of Islam from the original revelation of the Prophet Muhammad.
Similarly, by his own studies of Christianity, before he was introduced to Vaishnavism, Bhaktunath Thakur saw the harmony, saw the principle of devotion that was there even within the teachings of Jesus. And he appreciated that profusely. And in that way, he encouraged, he saw the commonality of purpose within various religious traditions and similarly within the Vedic tradition also.
So, Bhaktunath Thakur, at one time, there was a radical Hindu reformer who strongly criticized the worship of the Shaktas, where they use the five Ns, Mamsa, Madera, Maithuna, Mura, like that. And he said, this is such a terrible, reprehensible form of worship. That's what was the criticism that was done by this radical Hindu leader.
And Bhaktunath Thakur, what does he do? He doesn't think, oh, Shaktism is a competitor to Vaishnavism, good that Shaktism is criticized. No, he says that he actually, this particular Swami, actually that was Swami Dayan Saraswati of the Arya Samaj. So, he said that he seems to be a learned person, but he has not studied Shaktism very deeply.
And I had expected that my Shakta brothers will respond to this, but since they have not done so, so I feel duty bound to respond because we all belong to the same Vedic family. And then he explains how the Shakta, the form, the form of Shaktism or Shaivism, they are also meant for gradual elevation of people. So, we can see the broadness of outlook that is there in Bhaktunath Thakur that he is recognizing the validity and even the necessity of different levels of religious practices for people to become progressively elevated.
Of course, he himself champions Gaudiya Vaishnavism and explains, especially through the concept of Rasa, how that gives the highest understanding of God and the sweetest relationship with God. But that does not make him dismissive or derogatory towards other religious traditions. No, he appreciates them based on the underlying unity of purpose of elevating everyone.
And this is the broad compassion of a Vaishnava that elevate people from wherever they are in whatever way is best possible for them. Thank you. Hare Krishna.